Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout FULL PACKET_2020-05-05DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA April 21, 2020 CLOSED SESSION MEETING IN AN EFFORT TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND PREVENT THE SPREAD OF COVID-19 (CORONAVIRUS), THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DECLARED A LOCAL EMERGENCY. CITY COUNCIL WILL MEET VIA TELECONFERENCE. THERE WILL BE NO IN -PERSON PUBLIC MEETING LOCATION. TO WATCH THE MEETING: LIVE STREAM AT SANTA-ANA.ORG/CITY-MEETINGS AND YOUTUBE; CABLE CHANNEL 3 (SPECTRUM) OR CHANNEL 99 (AT&T U- verse). TO PROVIDE COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS, SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS VIA EMAIL TO ECOMMENT@SANTA-ANA.ORG BY 5:00 P.M. ON COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY. TO PROVIDE A COMMENT AT THE TIME THE ITEM IS BEING DISCUSSED ON PUBLIC HEARING AND NON -AGENDA ITEMS, CALL: (669) 900-9128, MEETING ID: 315 965 149#. CLOSED SESSION MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL - APRIL 21, 2020 - 5:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor PULIDO Mayor Pulido called the closed session to order at 5:07 p.m joined the meeting at 5:34 p.m. COUNCILMEMBERS Presen# Mayor Pulido Mayor Pro Tern Villegas Councilmember Iglesias �OF Councilmember Penaloza Councilmember Sarmiento Councilmember Solorio Councilmember Bacerra COUNCILMEMBERS Absent: None STAFF Present. Councilmember Sarmiento DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 104-1 APRIL 212020 PUBLIC COMMENTS - In accordance with California Governor's Executive Order N-25- 20 regarding the Brown Act and guidance from the California Department of Public Health on gatherings, please note the following: Comments for Public Participation or for a specific item on the agenda will be accepted by email only. Comments will be viewable on the City Meetings web page. The City Clerk will announce a report in support of or opposition to an item. The deadline to submit your comments is Council meeting Tuesday, by 5:00 p.m. Please email your comments to ecomment@santa-ana.org Please state your name for the record, on the subject line of your email, state the following: "Public Comment for Agenda Item No. #" lorem CLOSED SESSION ITEMS - The Brown Act permits legislative bodies to discuss certain matters without members of the public present. The City Council finds, based on advice from the City Attorney, that discussion in open session of the following matters will prejudice the position of the City in existing and anticipated litigation: CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6(a): Agency Negotiators: Human Resources Executive Director, Steven Pham; Employee Organizations: Service Employees' International Union (SEIU) Part-time Civil Service Employees 2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: Address of Property: 3017 West 5th Street, APN: 198-291-08 Agency Negotiator: Kristine Ridge, City Manager Negotiating Parties: City of Garden Grove Under Negotiation: Price and terms related to the possible acquisition of real property. CLOSED SESSION REPORT - The City Attorney will report on any action(s) to be taken at the Regular Meeting which will begin immediately following the Closed Session Meeting. ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION AND CONVENE TO THE REGULAR OPEN SESSION. Mayor Pulido adjourned Closed Session meeting at 5:34 p.m. and convened to the Regular Open Session. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 O z _w APRIL 212020 REGULAR OPEN MEETING - 5:45 p.m. (Immediately following the Closed Session Meeting) Mayor Pulido adjourned the Closed Session at 5:34 p.m. and called the Regular Open Session to order at 5:52 p.m. COUNCILMEMBERS BACERRA, IGLESIAS, PE AND VILLEGAS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -MAYOR PULIDO SARMIENTO, SOLORIO, INVOCATION - VINCENT BARRINGER, POLICE CHAPLAIN CLOSED SESSION REPORT - The City Attorney will report items to be added to Consent Calendar Item 19A from the Closed Session meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS In accordance with California Governor's Executive Order N-25-20 regarding the Brown Act and guidance from the California Department of Public Health on gatherings, please note the following: Comments for Public Participation or for a specific item on the agenda will be accepted by email only. Comments will be viewable on the City Meetings web page. The City Clerk will announce a report in support of or opposition to an item. The deadline to submit your comments is Council meeting Tuesday, by 5:00 p.m. Please email your comments to ecomment@santa-ana.org Please state your name for the record, on the subject line of your email, state the following: "Public Comment for Agenda Item No. #" lorem DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 Off,-3 APRIL 212020 CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Approve staff recommendations on the following Consent Calendar items: Items 10A through 25L, with the exceptions of items, 22B, 25A, 25C, 25D and 251. Mayor Pulido abstained on Item 11A due to potential income conflict... Councilmember Sarmiento motioned to approve, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas. MOTION VOTE: ADMINISTRA IJll1►Lill 9�01 iNL3 Councilmember Sarmiento AYES: k1193*5 ABSTAI MINUTES FROM Council Office MOTION: Approved Minutes. SECOND: Mayor Pro Tern Villegas Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (7) None (0) None (0) G OF APRIL 7, 2020 — Clerk of the ORDINANCES/SECOND READING - In the event a Councilmember recorded an "abstention" before consideration of the following ordinance(s) on first reading, such abstention will also be reflected in the minutes for second reading. 11A. ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. NS-2987 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 41 (ZONING) OF THE SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE INCLUDING SECTIONS: 41-196 (ESTABLISHMENTS SELLING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES), 41-313.5 (PARKING LOTS AND PARKING STRUCTURES), 41- 324 (PARKING LOTS AND PARKING STRUCTURES), 41-766 (INTERPRETATION OF CHAPTER REGULATIONS), AND 41-1341 (DRIVE - THROUGH STANDARDS) OF THE SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE — Planning and Building Agency Placed on first reading at the April 7, 2020 City Council DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 O Q _4 APRIL 212020 meeting and approved by a vote of 6-0 (Pulido recused). Published in the Orange County Reporter on April 10, 2020. MOTION: Place ordinance on second reading and adopt. Mayor Pulido announced abstention on Item 11A - Second Reading Ordinance due to potential income conflict. This consent Item - Ordinance No. NS-2987 was approved. BOARDS / COMMISSIONS / COMMITTEES 13A. RECEIVE AND FILE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS BIANNUAL ATTENDANCE REPORT FOR JULY THROUGH DECEMBER 2019 - Clerk of the Council Office Receive and file Boards and Commissions Biannual Attendance Report. 2. Provide direction as necessary MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATION 1 IN 19A. CONFIRMATION OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION(S) — City Attorney's Office Item 19A considered after inquiry of Consent Calendar Public Comments. City Attorney Sonia Carvalho reported out Council discussed an unsolicited proposal for Closed Session Item 2, which was submitted to the City regarding potentially serving a Notice of Intent to the City of Garden Grove regarding the Willowick property. Closed Session Item 2 - Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: Address of Property: 3017 West 5th Street, APN: 198-291-08 Agency Negotiator: Kristine Ridge, City Manager Negotiating Parties: City of Garden Grove Under Negotiation: Price and terms related to the possible acquisition of real property. Motion to approve to thank the company and individual who submitted the proposal with no further response. moved by Councilmember Bacerra seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas. Councilmember Bacerra motioned to approve, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas. MOTION: Councilmember SECOND: Mayor Pro Tern Villegas Bacerra VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Bacerra (4) DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 O $, _5 APRIL 212020 NOES: Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio (3) ABSTAIN: None (0) ABSENT: None (0) 19C. RECEIVE AND FILE PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM QUARTERLY STATUS REPORT FOR JANUARY 2020 THROUGH MARCH 2O20 — Public Works Agency MOTION: Receive and file the Public Works Agency Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Quarterly Status Report for January 2020 through March 2020. BUDGETARY MATTERS 40 APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS 20A. APPROVE APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT AND AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF ORANGE FOR REGIONAL PLANNING UNDER THE WORKFORCE INNOVATION AND OPPORTUNITY ACT ($20,500) (NON -GENERAL FUND) - Community Development Agency Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-154 - Recognizing Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act grant funds from the County of Orange in the amount of $20,500 in revenue account and appropriating same to expenditure account. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the County of Orange to receive $20,500 for regional planning and coordination efforts under the federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, for a term of one year from April 21, 2020 to April 20, 2021, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-069 was approved. 20B. APPROVE AN APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT AND AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT FOR TENANT GOODWILL COMPENSATION FOR BRISTOL STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT - PHASE 3A (PROJECT NO. 136792 NON -GENERAL FUND) - Public Works Agency DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 O fj, _6 APRIL 212020 Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-144 - Recognizing the Fiscal Year 2018-19 appropriation of $200,000 in New Transportation Systems Improvement Area F funding of the New Transportation Systems Improvement Area F prior year fund balance and reappropriating the same amount into the New Transportation Systems Improvement Area F, Improvements Other Than Building expenditure account. 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with C.R. Manchandia DDS for compensation in the amount of $135,500 for loss of business goodwill related to the full real property acquisition of assessor's parcel number 405-274-10 in May 2017, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-070 was approved. SPECIFICATIONS - PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES 22A. AWARD A PURCHASE ORDER FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $50,890 TO CPACINC.COM FOR BARRACUDA BACKUP SERVER AND LOAD BALANCER (INTERNAL SERVICE FUND) (SPECIFICATION NO. 20-030) - Finance and Management Services Agency and Information Technology Department Authorize a one-time purchase and payment of purchase order to CPACInc.com for barracuda backup server, in an amount not to exceed $49,990, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. 2. Authorize a one-time purchase and payment of purchase order to CPACInc.com for barracuda load balancer, for an amount not to exceed $900, subject to non - substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. 22B. AWARD PURCHASE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $462,670 TO LOS ANGELES TRUCK CENTERS, LLC, FOR TWO CNG WATER TANK TRUCKS (SANITATION FUND) (SPECIFICATION NO. 20-020) - Finance and Management Services Agency and Public Works Agency MOTION: Authorize a one-time purchase and payment of a purchase order to Los Angeles Truck Center, LLC., for two CNG water tank trucks in the amount not to exceed $452,670, plus a contingency of $10,000, for a total amount not to exceed $462,670, to be funded by the Sanitation Enterprise Fund, subject to non - substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. Motion to adopt to authorize a one-time purchase and payment of a purchase order to Los Angeles Truck Center, LLC., for two CNG water tank trucks in the amount not to exceed $452,670, plus a contingency of $10,000, for a total amount not to exceed $462,670, to be funded by the Sanitation Enterprise Fund, subject to non -substantive DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U z _7 APRIL 212020 changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. moved by Councilmember Penaloza seconded by Councilmember Bacerra. Councilmember Penaloza motioned to adopt, seconded by Councilmember Bacerra. MOTION: Councilmember SECOND: Councilmember Bacerra Penaloza VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (6) NOES: Councilmember Iglesias (1) ABSTAIN: None (0) ABSENT: None (0) ow:Nk4k 22C. AWARD BLANKET ORDER CONTRACTS TO GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC. AND B&K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE FOR ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES, TOTAL AGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $500,000 (SPECIFICATION NO. 20-017) (NON -GENERAL FUND) - Finance and Management Services Agency and Public Works Agency MOTION: Award blanket order contracts to Graybar Electric Company, Inc. and B&K Electric Wholesale for electrical supplies for a two-year period beginning April 21, 2020, and expiring April 20, 2022, with provisions for three, one-year renewal options exercisable by the City Manager, in an annual aggregate amount not to exceed $100,000, for a total aggregate amount not to exceed $500,000, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. /_Tel:7AAdlIA►116-1 AGREEMENT WITH CARIBOU INDUSTRIES FOR THE THIRD STREET AND BROADWAY DEVELOPMENT — Community Development Agency MOTION: Authorize the Citv Manaaer to execute a first amendment to the second Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Caribou Industries to extend the term for a six-month period from May 6, 2020 to November 6, 2020 for the Third and Broadway development, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 O $ _8 APRIL 212020 Motion to approve as Amended to authorize the City Manager to execute a first amendment to the second Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Caribou Industries to extend the term for a six-month period from May 6, 2020 to November 6, 2020 and amend language in section two of agreement to read negotiation period may only be extended by approval of the City Council prior to October 23, 2020, for the Third and Broadway development, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-071). moved by Councilmember Bacerra seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. Councilmember Bacerra motioned to approve as amended, seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. MOTION VN11I=F Councilmember Bacerra AYES: NOES: It ABSTAIN: ABSENT: SECOND: Councilmember Penaloza Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (7) None (0) ' None (0) None (0) 25B. APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH COUNTY OF ORANGE SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY FOR A $1,677,928 VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND WORK EXPERIENCE PROGRAM GRANT (NON -GENERAL FUND) — Community Development Agency MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement recognizing $1,677,928 awarded to the City of Santa Ana, Santa Ana WORK Center by the County of Orange Social Services Agency for vocational training and work experience activities, effective July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2022, subject to non - substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-072 was approved. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 Olk_9 APRIL 212020 25C. ADOPT A SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT WITH THE SANTA ANA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING — Human Resources Department MOTION: Authorize with City Manager to execute a Side Letter agreement modifying the Memorandum of Understanding with the Santa Ana Management Association Memorandum of Understanding (SAMA) to include representation for Part -Time Civil Service job classifications (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). Motion to adopt Authorize with City Manager to execute a Side Letter agreement modifying the Memorandum of Understanding with the Santa Ana Management Association Memorandum of Understanding (SAMA) to include representation for Part - Time Civil Service job classifications (Agreement No. A-2020-073). moved by Councilmember Iglesias seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas. Councilmember Iglesias motioned to adopt, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas. MOTION: Councilmember Iglesias VOTE: AYES: SECOND: Mayor Pro Tern Villegas Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (7) None (0) ABSTAIN:, None (0) ABSENT: None (0) 25D. APPROVE A THREE-YEAR LEASE AGREEMENT WITH RICK KAGASOFF FOR WAREHOUSE SPACE IN THE AMOUNT OF $187,200 — Police Department MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute a three-year lease agreement with Rick Kagasoff for warehouse space, for the period of May 1, 2020 through April 30, 2023, in an amount not to exceed $187,200. This agreement includes the option for two -one year renewals following expiration of this lease, provided the annual lease increase does not exceed five percent, subject to non - substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). Mayor Pulido announced abstention on Item 25D due to past business with Rick Kagasoff. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 O4_ 1 O APRIL 212020 Councilmember Iglesias requested fund account to be included on the agenda. Motion to adopt Authorize the City Manager to execute a three-year lease agreement with Rick Kagasoff for warehouse space, for the period of May 1, 2020 through April 30, 2023, in an amount not to exceed $187,200. This agreement includes the option for two -one year renewals following expiration of this lease, provided the annual lease increase does not exceed five percent, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-074). moved by Councilmember Penaloza seconded by Councilmember Sarmiento. Councilmember Penaloza motioned to adopt, seconded by Councilmember Sarmiento. MOTION: Councilmember SECOND: Councilmember Sarmiento Penaloza VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (6) NOES: None (0) ABSTAIN: Mayor Pulido (1) ABSENT: None (0) 25E. APPROVE AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2,000,000 (NON -GENERAL FUND) — Public Works Agency MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with the contractors listed below to provide on -call engineering services for the three-year period beginning April 21, 2020, and ending on April 21, 2023, with a provision for one, two-year extension, for a total aggregate amount not to exceed $2,000,000 subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX): Tetra Tech, Inc. - Agreement No. A-2020-075-01 2. Michael Baker International, Inc. - Agreement No. A-2020-075-02 3. Psomas - Agreement No. A-2020-075-03 4. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. - Agreement No. A-2020-075-04 5. NV5, Inc. - Agreement No. A-2020-075-05 DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 O -1 1 APRIL 212020 6. Huitt-Zollars, Inc. - Agreement No. A-2020-075-06 7. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. - Agreement No. A-2020-075-07 8. TAIT & Associates, Inc. - Agreement No. A-2020-075-08 This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-075 was approved. 25F. APPROVE AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION SERVICES IN AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2,000,000 (NON -GENERAL FUND) — Public Works Agency MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with contractors listed below to provide on -call construction management and inspection services for the three-year period beginning April 21, 2020, and ending on April 21, 2023, with a provision for one, two-year extension, for a total aggregate amount not to exceed $2,000,000 subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX): NV5, Inc. - Agreement No. A-2020-076-01 2. Willdan Engineering - Agreement No. A-2020-076-02 3. Psomas - Agreement No. A-2020-076-03 4. Wallace and Associates Consulting, Inc.- Agreement No. A-2020-076-04 5. Michael Baker International, Inc. Agreement No. A-2020-076-05 6. AKM Consulting Engineers - Agreement No. A-2020-076-06 This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-076 was approved. 25G. APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT WITH PLACEWORKS FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE GENERAL PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ($91,948) — Planning and Building Agency and Public Works Agency MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the agreement with Placeworks in the amount of $91,948 for the General Plan and Environmental Impact Report for the City of Santa Ana and extend term through March 31, 2021, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney, to expand the scope to include additional Circulation Element analysis (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-077 was approved. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-12 APRIL 212020 25H. APPROVE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH OCEAN BLUE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. AND FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH UNITED STORM WATER, INC. FOR SPILL RESPONSE AND STORM DRAIN FACILITY CLEANING SERVICES (INCREASE OF $50,000 TO EACH CONTRACT) - Public Works Agency and Police Department Authorize the City Manager to execute a Fourth Amendment to the Agreement with Ocean Blue Environmental Services, Inc. to increase the annual expenditure amount for the one-year term ending June 19, 2020, by $50,000, and increase the annual expenditure amount for the one-year extension term ending June 19, 2021, by $50,000, for a total increase of $100,000, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A- 2020-XXX). 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute a First Amendment to the Agreement with United Storm Water, Inc. to increase the annual expenditure amount for the one- year term ending June 19, 2020, by $50,000, and increase the annual expenditure amount for the one-year extension term ending June 19, 2021, by $50,000, for a total increase of $100,000, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-078 and Agreement No. 2020-079 were approved. 251. APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH SANTA FE BUILDING MAINTENANCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $52,180.41 FOR ENHANCED COVID-19- RELATED JANITORIAL SERVICES FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT — Police Department •. MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the agreement with Santa Fe Building Maintenance for enhanced COVID-19 related janitorial services for the Police Administrative and Jail facilities, in an amount not to exceed $52,180.41, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). Motion to Adopt Authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the agreement with Santa Fe Building Maintenance for enhanced COVID-19 related janitorial services for the Police Administrative and Jail facilities, in an amount not to exceed $52,180.41, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-080). moved by Councilmember Iglesias seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas. Councilmember Iglesias motioned to adopt, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-13 APRIL 212020 MOTION: Councilmember SECOND: Mayor Pro Tern Villegas Iglesias VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (7) NOES: None (0) ABSTAIN: None (0) ABSENT: None (0) 25J. APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH RICHARDS WATSON & GERSHON APC FOR LEGAL SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $250,000 - City Attorney's Office MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the law firm of Richards Watson & Gershon APC ("RWG") for legal services for municipal advisory and litigation services including but not limited to elections work and employment matters, from June 1, 2020 until May 31, 2023, with an option to extend the term for a one-year period, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-081 as approved. 25K. APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN FOR SPECIALIZED LEGAL SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $500,000 (GENERAL FUND) - City Attorney's Office MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the legal services agreement with the law firm of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP ("BWS") to increase the agreement from $50,000 to $500,000 for litigation matters concerning the abatement of public nuisances for a two-year term with an optional one-year extension, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-082 as approved. 25L. APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP FOR SPECIALIZED LEGAL SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $350,000 - City Attorney's Office DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U }4_ 1 4 APRIL 212020 MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the law firm of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP ("BSF") for specialized legal services related to the matter entitled City of Santa Ana v. County of Orange et al., United States District Court Case No. 8:20-cv-00069-DOC (KESx), for a three (3)-year term, with an option to extend the agreement for up to two (2) one (1) year terms, in an amount not to exceed $350,000, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney (Agreement No. A-2020-XXX). This consent Item - Agreement No. 2020-083 as approved. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR BUSINESS CALENDAR ORDINANCES/FIRST READING 50A. PRESENT CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY OF'REFERENDUM PETITION CHALLENGING ORDINANCE NO. NS-2980; ADOPT RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE CERTIFICATE AS TO VERIFICATION OF SIGNATURES AND THE CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY; AND EITHER REPEAL ORDINANCE NO. NS-2980 OR DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION CALLING A GENERAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 3, 2020 OR CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION - Clerk of the Council Office Adopt a resolution accepting the certificate as to Verification of signatures from the Orange County Registrar of Voters and the certificate of sufficiency from the Clerk of the Council; and Select either Option 1, Option 2 or Option 3 below to either repeal Ordinance No. NS-2980 or call an election: OPTI Place ordinance on first reading and authorize publication of title. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. NS-2980 APPROVING AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2018-10 REZONING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2525 NORTH MAIN STREET FROM PROFESSIONAL (P) TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 93 (SD-93) (AA NO. 2018- 10) AND ADOPTING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 93 (SD-93) FOR SAID PROPERTY OPTION 2: DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-15 APRIL 212020 Direct staff to prepare a resolution calling for a general municipal election on November 3, 2020 for the submission of the question whether to approve Ordinance No. NS-2980; or C61i9[01►[c1I Direct staff to prepare a resolution calling for a special municipal election for the submission of the question whether to approve Ordinance No. NS-2980. Clerk of the Council, Daisy Gomez, reported out on eComments received for Item 50A. Councilmember Solorio abstained from Item 50A due to pending litigation. Motion to Adopt 1. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-028 ENTITLED: accepting the certificate as to verification of signatures from the Orange County Registrar of Voters and the certificate of sufficiency from the Clerk of the Council; and 2. Repeal Ordinance No. NS-2980 by placing Ordinance No. NS-2987 on first reading and authorize publication of title. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTAANA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. NS-2980 APPROVING AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2018-10 REZONING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2525 NORTH MAIN STREET FROM PROFESSIONAL (P) TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 93 (SD-93) (AA NO. 2018-10) AND ADOPTING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 93 (SD-93) FOR SAID PROPERTY moved by Councilmember Bacerra seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. Councilmember Bacerra motioned to adopt, seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. MOTION Councilmember SECOND: Councilmember Penaloza Bacerra AYES. , Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Bacerra (6) None (0) ABSTAIN: Councilmember Solorio (1) ABSENT: None (0) Clerk of the Council Daisy Gomez announced recorded vote for Item 50A as 6-0 (Councilmember Solorio abstained). DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U } _ 1 6 APRIL 212020 RESOLUTIONS 55A. ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE RELOCATION PLAN FOR THE LEGACY SQUARE PROJECT AT 609 NORTH SPURGEON STREET — Community Development Agency MOTION: Adopt a resolution. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE RELOCATION PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 609 N. SPURGEON STREET, SANTA ANA Motion to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-029 ENTITLED: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE RELOCATION PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 609 N. SPURGEON STREET, SANTA ANA moved by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. Mayor Pro Tern Villegas motioned to adopt, seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. MOTION: Mayor Pro SECOND: Councilmember Penaloza Tern Villegas VOTE: AYES: Nena ayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, ouncilmember Iglesias, Councilmember loza, Councilmember Solorio, ouncilmember Bacerra (6) one (0) one (0) ouncilmember Sarmiento (1) 55B. ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE FOR CONTINUATION OF PARTIALLY PAID TEMPORARY MILITARY LEAVE OF ABSENCE FOR CITY EMPLOYEES CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY WITH THE ARMED FORCES AND CONTINUATION OF BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES AND THEIR ELIGIBLE DEPENDENTS — Human Resources Department MOTION: Adopt a resolution. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA PROVIDING FOR CONTINUATION OF PARTIALLY PAID TEMPORARY MILITARY LEAVE OF ABSENCE FOR CITY EMPLOYEES CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY WITH THE ARMED FORCES AND CONTINUATION OF BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEE AND THEIR ELIGIBLE DEPENDENTS Motion to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-030 ENTITLED: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA PROVIDING FOR CONTINUATION DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-17 APRIL 212020 OF PARTIALLY PAID TEMPORARY MILITARY LEAVE OF ABSENCE FOR CITY EMPLOYEES CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY WITH THE ARMED FORCES AND CONTINUATION OF BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEE AND THEIR ELIGIBLE DEPENDENTS moved by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. Mayor Pro Tern Villegas motioned to adopt, seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. MOTION: Mayor Pro SECOND: Councilmember Penaloza Tern Villegas VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (6) NOES: None (0) ABSTAIN:. None (0) ABSENT:Councilmember Sarmiento (1) 55C. ADOPT A RESOLUTION FOR THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE 17TH STREET TRIANGLE PARK AND REST STOP IN THE AMOUNT OF $544,000 — Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Agency MOTION: Adopt a resolution. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE 17TH STREET TRIANGLE PARK AND REST STOP Motion to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-031 ENTITLED: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE 17TH STREET TRIANGLE PARK AND REST STOP (Agreement No. 2020-084) moved by Councilmember Solorio seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas. Councilmember Solorio motioned to adopt, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas. MOTION: Councilmember SECOND: Mayor Pro Tern Villegas Solorio VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-18 APRIL 212020 Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (7) NOES: None (0) ABSTAIN: None (0) ABSENT: None (0) 55D. ADOPT A RESOLUTION DECLARING CITY -OWNED PROPERTIES ACQUIRED FOR VARIOUS ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AS SURPLUS LAND AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CODE §54220 FOR THE SALE OF SURPLUS LAND (APNs 405-252- 22, 405-252-21, 405-272-21,405-272-18, 405-272-17, 405-272-16, 405-272-15, 405- 272-14, 405-272-13, 405-272-12, 402-272-11, 004-123-48, 004-123-52, 010-295-23, 010-295-22, 010-295-21, 010-295-20, 010-295-19, 010-295-18 010-295-17, 010-295- 16, 010-295-15, 010-295-14, 010-295-13, 109-345-20, 109-345-19, 109-345-18, 109- 345-17, 109-345-16, 109-345-15, 109-345-14, 109-345-13, 109-345-12, 109-345-11, 015-194-40,015-194-37 398-385-03 398-385-04, 398-385-05, 008-091-01, 008-091-13, 008-091-14, 008-091-02, 398-453-05, 398-453-06, 008-081-28, 008-081-26, 008-082- 29, 398-492-14, 007-203-24, 405-074-16, 405-074-17, 405-074-18, 405-074-19, 007- 302-21, 007-302-20, 007-302-19, 007-302-18, 007-302-17, 007-302-16, 007-302-15, 005-142-35, 005-142-58, 005-142-47) - Public Works Agency MOTION: Adopt a resolution. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DECLARING VARIOUS PROPERTIES AS SURPLUS LAND AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN THE SURPLUS LAND ACT, CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54220, ET SEQ., AS AMENDED ON JANUARY 1, 2020, FOR THEIR DISPOSITION Motion to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-032 ENTITLED: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DECLARING VARIOUS PROPERTIES AS SURPLUS LAND AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN THE SURPLUS LAND ACT, CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54220, ET SEQ., AS AMENDED ON JANUARY 1, 2020, FOR THEIR DISPOSITION moved by Councilmember Sarmiento seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. Councilmember Sarmiento motioned to adopt, seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. MOTION: Councilmember SECOND: Councilmember Penaloza Sarmiento DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-19 APRIL 212020 VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (7) NOES: None (0) ABSTAIN: None (0) ABSENT: None (0) 55E. ADOPT RESOLUTIONS AUTHORIZING GRANT FUNDING REQUESTS UNDER MEASURE M2 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,568,514 POTENTIAL NEW REVENUE — Public Works Agency MOTION: Adopt a resolution. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR FUNDING UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM Motion to adopt : RESOLUTION NO. 2020-035 ENTITLED: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR FUNDING UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM, RESOLUTION NO. 2020-036 ENTITLED: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR FUNDING UNDER THE REGIONAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PROGRAM, and RESOLUTION NO. 2020-037 ENTITLED: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR FUNDING UNDER THE REGIONAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PROGRAM moved by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. Vote for Item 55E taken after Item 75A. Mayor Pro Tern Villegas motioned to adopt, seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. MOTION: Mayor Pro SECOND: Councilmember Penaloza Tern Villegas DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 104-20 APRIL 212020 VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (7) NOES: None (0) ABSTAIN: None (0) ABSENT: None (0) REPORTS 44 65A. RECEIVE AND FILE UPDATED REVENUE ESTIMATES RELATED TO COVID- 19; AFFIRM HIRING FREEZE FOR ALL CITY POSITIONS; APPROVE APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT TO TRANSFER MONIES FROM THE REFUSE FUND TO THE GENERAL FUND; DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A DRAFT BUDGET FOR FY 2020-21 UTILIZING ONE-TIME FUNDING; PROVIDE PRELIMINARY BUDGET DIRECTION; AND DIRECT STAFF TO PROVIDE A FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS RELATED TO ISSUANCE OF A PENSION OBLIGATION BOND - Finance and Management Services Agency 2. Executive Director Kathryn provided a brief presentation. Council discussion ensued. Receive and file report relating to updated FY 2019- 20 General Fund revenue estimates. Affirm the hiring freeze for all City vacant positions as �f March 23, 2020. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-155 - Transferring $6.6 million of General Fund revenue from the Refuse Enterprise fund to the General Fund during the current fiscal year. Direct staff to prepare a draft budget for FY 2020-21 to include the use of the Economic Uncertainty Reserve in the General Fund. Direct Staff to return with a feasibility analysis for issuing Pension Obligation Bonds to reduce the cost of the existing CalPERS Unfunded Actuarial Liability (UAL). Downs of Finance and Management Services Agency DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 104-21 APRIL 212020 Motion to adopt 1. Receive and file report relating to updated FY 2019-20 General Fund revenue estimates.2. Affirm the hiring freeze for all City vacant positions as of March 23, 2020.3. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-155 - Transferring $6.6 million of General Fund revenue from the Refuse Enterprise fund to the General Fund during the current fiscal year.4. Direct staff to prepare a draft budget for FY 2020-21 to include the use of the Economic Uncertainty Reserve in the General Fund.5. Direct Staff to return with a feasibility analysis for issuing Pension Obligation Bonds to reduce the cost of the existing CalPERS Unfunded Actuarial Liability (UAL). moved by Mayor Pro Tern Villeaas seconded by Councilmember Sarmiento. Mayor Pro Tern Villegas motioned to adopt, seconded by Councilmember Sarmiento. MOTION: Mayor Pro SECOND: Councilmember Sarmiento Tern Villegas VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (6) NOES:,Sarmiento, Councilmember Iglesias (1) ABSTAIN: ABSENT: AdlffllmftS 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS None (0) None (0) khhN PUBLIC COMMENTS - PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO COMMENT BY CALLING: (669) 900-9128, MEETING ID: 315 965 149#. DIAL *9 TO LET US KNOW THAT YOU WANT TO SPEAK. 75A. PUBLIC HEARING -ADOPT A RESOLUTION FOR ADDENDUM TO CERTIFIED EIR NO. 1999-01, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2020-01 AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2020-02 FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA MIXED -USE TOWER LOCATED AT 1109 NORTH BROADWAY - Planning and Building Agency Planning Commission approved recommended action on April 2, 2020 by a vote of 6-0 (Phan abstained). Legal Notice published in the Orange County Reporter on April 10, 2020 and notices mailed on said date. Adopt a resolution. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA PROJECT (SCH NO. 99101047) FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA MIXED - DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4_22 APRIL 212020 USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND RE -ADOPTION OF A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 2. Adopt a resolution. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2020-01 AMENDING THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA LAND USE ELEMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1109 NORTH BROADWAY 3. Place ordinance on first reading and authorize publication of title. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 75 (SD-75) TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES AND TO APPROVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT AT 1109 NORTH BROADWAY City Manager Kristine Ridge introduced Item 75A. Executive Director of Planning and Building Agency Minh Thai provided a brief presentation. Mayor Pulido opened the public hearing at 7:57 p.m. Claudia Alvarez spoke in support of One Broadway Plaza project. Connie Major spoke in opposition of the project as it is now. Ernesto Medrano with the Los Angeles/Orange Counties Building and Construction Trades Council in support of the project. Ray Afusia, business representative for Sprinkler Fittesr UA Local 709, spoke in support of the project. Doug Robbins, business representative for Painters and Allied Trades, spoke in support of the project. Doug Mangione, business representative of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, spoke in support of the project. Hart Keeble with Ironworkers Local 416 spoke in support of the project. Alfonso Ruiz, resident and member of Local 5 Insulators Union, spoke in support of the project. LuisAndres Perez, Political Director for UA Local 582 for Plumbers, Steamfitters, Welders and Apprentices, spoke in support of the project. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-23 APRIL 212020 Paul Moreno, Business Agent with Ironworkers Local 433, spoke in support of the project. Dale Helving, resident of Santa Ana, thanked council for their vote on Item 50A; and spoke on the affordable housing component, development agreement and Environmental Impact Report as it pertains to Item 75A. Gilbert Davila, President of the Orange County Labor Federation, spoke in support of the project. John Hanna, with the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters, spoke in support of the project. Jeff Dickman, resident of the Historic French Park Neighborhood, in spoke in opposition to the conversion of the office units to apartment units. Erica Gonzalez, resident, business owner, and community organizer, spoke in opposition of the project. Mayor Pulido closed the public hearing after last speaker Erica Gonzalez. Council discussion ensued. Councilmember Bacerra requests to include a condition clearly indicating when the developer is to perform the mitigating studies. The initial neighborhood traffic study to occur when developer pulls building permits and the follow- up study is to occur at 90% occupancy, both of which will be included in the mutual declaration.. Mayor Pro Tern Villegas thanked the Planning Commission for adding the Logan Neighborhood to be part of the mitigating studies. Councilmember Penaloza inquired about outreach, expressed concern with traffic, and inquired about the mitigation fund. Requested a commitment to include barriers to restrict traffic into the neighborhoods. Taig Higgins Principal Civil Manager with Public Works Agency, spoke on the cost of the study for the seven neighborhoods. City Attorney Sonia Carvalho spoke on the difference of a voter approved initiative (laws initiated by the public) versus a referendum, where the underlying ordinances or laws are adopted by the council and then subject to a vote of the people. She further added, that in reviewing the changes before the council tonight, the city has the authority to move forward with the changes being proposed. Developer Mike Harrah addressed concern's regarding his project and his commitment to the city. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 104-24 APRIL 212020 Councilmember Solorio spoke in support of the project. Councilmember Iglesias expressed concern with expired Environmental Impact Report; and requests to delay vote after additional community input is received. Councilmember Penaloza requests to have strict limitations on construction traffic and noise, along with construction times, as part of the building permit. Minh Thai, Executive Director of Planning and Building Agency, informed council they place a condition to require a traffic plan for construction and incorporate it as part of the mutual declaration that is being proposed for council to consider. Councilmember Sarmiento is supportive of the project, but wants to ensure there is fairness. Opined that since concessions are going to be made or when there are changes in departures from what was previously approved, then there should be an instrument to negotiate fairly on behalf of the residents and the City with the applicant to be on an equal footing. A development agreement can include both mitigation measures along with the affordable housing component. City Attorney Sonia Carvalho noted that negotiation of affordable housing would best be done via a development agreement. In addition, requested direction from council on how they would like to see the performance measures documented and guaranteed, and identify items council would like to see negotiated. Councilmember Sarmiento, noted colleagues spoke on the mitigation efforts and how they would be documented; however, with the regards to affordable housing, the applicant is to include the units he represented at the Sunshine meeting or that the affordable in lieu fee be fixed at 15% irrespective of what happens with the Housing Opportunity Ordinance in the future. Councilmember Bacerra requested two conditions. The first, regarding the timing of the traffic studies as they relate to when they are conducted are to be included in the Mutual Declaration of Acknowledgement Acceptance of Approval Conditions. This would be an additional condition to clarify that there will be two traffic studies done for each neighborhood: the first one when permits are being pulled and the second to be performed at 90% occupancy. The second condition, is to change the word in condition number four from "and" to "including". Councilmember Solorio, noted that via an Ad Hoc Committee, the In Lieu fees and Housing Opportunity Ordinance have been considered and requests that staff bring to council in the next meeting or two. Councilmember Iglesias, made a substitute motion, however, failed for a lack of a second. Mayor Pulido spoke in support of the amended motion. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-25 APRIL 212020 Applicant, Mike Harrah, confirmed his commitment to pay a fixed $15/square foot. Motion to adopt as amended 1. Adopting RESOLUTION 2020-033 ENTITLED: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA PROJECT (SCH NO. 99101047) FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND RE -ADOPTION OF A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 2. Adopting RESOLUTION 2020-034 ENTITLED: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2020-01 AMENDING THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA LAND USE ELEMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1109 NORTH BROADWAY 3. Place amended ordinance on first reading and authorize publication of title. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 75 (SD- 75) TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES AND TO APPROVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT AT 1109 NORTH BROADWAY with the following amendments: 1) to include the timing of the traffic studies, as they relate to when they are conducted, to be a part of the Mutual Declaration of Acknowledgement and Acceptance of Approval Conditions (the first one when permits are being pulled and the second to be performed at 90% occupancy) for each neighborhood, 2) to change the word under condition number four from "and" to "including", and 3) that the Affordable Housing In Lie fee to remain $15.00 per square footage. moved by Mayor Pro Tern Villegas seconded by Councilmember Solorio. Mayor Pro Tern Villegas motioned to adopt as amended, seconded by Councilmember Solorio. r TION: Mayor Pro SECOND: Councilmember Solorio Tern - Villegas VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pulido, Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (6) NOES: Councilmember Iglesias (1) ABSTAIN: None (0) ABSENT: None (0) DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-26 APRIL 212020 PUBLIC COMMENTS - PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO COMMENT BY CALLING: (669) 900-9128, MEETING ID: 315 965 149#. DIAL *9 TO LET US KNOW THAT YOU WANT TO SPEAK. 75B. PUBLIC HEARING -ADOPT COVID-19 RESPONSE FUNDING PLAN; AUTHORIZE APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN; APPROVE A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2019 - 2020 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN; APPROVE AMENDMENT TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN; APPROVE APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS FOR $6,486,644 IN FEDERAL AND STATE GRANT FUNDS - Community Development Agency Legal Notice published in the Orange County Register, La Opinion, and Ngoi Viet on April 17, 2020. Mayor Pulido abstained from Item 75B due to prior business with Castulo de la Rocha, director for Altamed. Executive Director of Community Development Steven Mendoza provided a brief presentation. Council discussion ensued. Mayor Pro Tern Villegas opened the public hearing at 10:01 p.m. Clerk of the Council, Daisy Gomez, reported out on eComments received for Item 75B. Kayleigh Levitt spoke in support of an Emergency Rental Relief Fund and expressed concern with the pre -requisites. Nathaniel Green spoke in support of Item 75B and requested that the rent freeze and eviction moratorium remain in effect for at least six months after all the shelter -in -place orders are lifted. Maria Ceja spoke in favor of a rental relief fund, expressed concern with the pre -requisites needed to qualify, and in favor of a rent -freeze extension. Santa Ana renter spoke in support of a 6-month rent -freeze extension after the shelter - in -place orders are lifted and expressed concern with the pre -requisites needed to qualify. Carla Juarez spoke in support of helping Santa Ana tenants, and in favor to extend the rent -freeze for six months. Mayor Pro Tern Villegas closed the Public Hearing at 10:14 p.m. City Manager Kristine Ridge spoke on parameters to qualify, extension of an eviction, a moratorium or a rent freeze, and Code Enforcement contact information. Council discussion ensued. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U -27 APRIL 212020 Adopt a plan for the allocation, administration and implementation of $6,486,644 in federal and state funding to respond to the coronavirus ("COVID-19") pandemic including $1,385,224 in Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program COVID-19 Funds, $3,374,017 in Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Funds, and $1,727,403 in Emergency Solutions Grant Coronavirus Funds, subject to adjustment by the City Manager as needed in response to shifting needs and priorities so long as the amount of funds does not exceed the amount available ("COVID-19 Response Funding Plan"). 2. Direct the City Attorney to finalize and authorize the City Manager to enter into negotiations, execute agreements, and approve any other required actions necessary with various service providers, contractors, and subrecipients, who will implement the COVID-19 Response Funding Plan, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. 2020- XXX). 3. Approve a Substantial Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2019 — 2020 Annual Action Plan in order to allocate and program $3,374,017 in Community Development Block Grant-Coronavirus Funds, and $1,727,403 in Emergency Solutions Grant Coronavirus Funds to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the coronavirus, and authorize its submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 4. Approve an Amendment to the Citizen Participation Plan to allow for a 5-day public comment period, and authorize its submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 5. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-151- Recognizing Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program grant funds from the State of California, Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency for COVID-19 response in the amount of $1,385,224 in revenue account and appropriating same to expenditure account. 6. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-152- Recognizing Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for COVID-19 response in the amount of $3,374,017 in revenue account and appropriating same to expenditure account. 7. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-153- Recognizing Emergency Solutions Grant Coronavirus funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for COVID-19 response in the amount of $1,727,403 in revenue account and appropriating same to expenditure. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U -28 APRIL 212020 Motion to adopt 1. Adopt a plan for the allocation, administration and implementation of $6,486,644 in federal and state funding to respond to the coronavirus ("COVID-19") pandemic including $1,385,224 in Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program COVID-19 Funds, $3,374,017 in Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Funds, and $1,727,403 in Emergency Solutions Grant Coronavirus Funds, subject to adjustment by the City Manager as needed in response to shifting needs and priorities so long as the amount of funds does not exceed the amount available ("COVID-19 Response Funding Plan").2. Direct the City Attorney to finalize and authorize the City Manager to enter into negotiations, execute agreements, and approve any other required actions necessary with various service providers, contractors, and subrecipients, who will implement the COVID-19 Response Funding Plan, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. 2020-085).3. Approve a Substantial Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2019 — 2020 Annual Action Plan in order to allocate and program $3,374,017 in Community Development Block Grant-Coronavirus Funds, and $1,727,403 in Emergency Solutions Grant Coronavirus Funds to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the coronavirus, and authorize its submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.4. Approve an Amendment to the Citizen Participation Plan to allow for a 5-day public comment period, and authorize its submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.5. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-151- Recognizing Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program grant funds from the State of California, Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency for COVID-19 response in the amount of $1,385,224 in revenue account and appropriating same to expenditure account.6. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-152- Recognizing Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for COVID-19 response in the amount of $3,374,017 in revenue account and appropriating same to expenditure account.7. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes). APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2020-153- Recognizing Emergency Solutions Grant Coronavirus funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for COVID-19 response in the amount of $1,727,403 in revenue account and appropriating same to expenditure. moved by Councilmember Sarmiento seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. Councilmember Sarmiento motioned to adopt, seconded by Councilmember Penaloza. MOTION: Councilmember SECOND: Councilmember Penaloza Sarmiento VOTE: AYES: Mayor Pro Tern Villegas, Councilmember Iglesias, Councilmember Penaloza, Councilmember Sarmiento, Councilmember Solorio, Councilmember Bacerra (6) NOES: None (0) DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U4-29 APRIL 212020 ABSTAIN: Mayor Pulido (1) ABSENT: None (0) COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS - Pursuant to Santa Ana Charter Section 411, any member of the City Council may place items on the City Council Agenda to be considered by the City Council. Only action available to City Council is to provide direction to City Manager. 85A. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO DIRECT STAFF TO EXPLORE WAIVER OF LATE FEES FOR OTHER MISCELLANEOUS FEES - Councilmember Iglesias Request to waive dog license fees. '40111�w . City Manager will address without returning to council. COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON -AGENDA ITEMS WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO COMMENT BY CALLING: (669) 900-9128, MEETING ID: 315 965 149#. DIAL *9 TO LET US KNOW THAT YOU WANT TO SPEAK. Clerk of the Council reported out on non -agenda eComments received. Connie Major spoke on Item 25A regarding street scape design, expressed concern regarding traffic construction related to Item 75A and requests speed bumps to be placed, and provided history of community involvement with developer in 1979, for a proposed high-rise in what is now known as the Washington Square Neighborhood. Gary Hendricks spoke regarding the 2525 N. Main property. 0117:WO]IWadU_1OI/_TMA09Y 161J4JllA0110 City Manager Ridge Kristine made community announcements. 90B. CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS Councilmember Solorio made community announcements. Councilmember Penaloza made community announcements. Councilmember Iglesias made community announcements. Councilmember Bacerra made community announcements. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U 30_3O APRIL 212020 Councilmember Sarmiento made community announcements. Mayor Pro Tern Villegas made community announcements. Mayor Pulido made community announcements. ADJOURNMENT - Mayor Pulido adjourned the City Council meeting at 10:56 p.m. Future Agenda Items 1. Commercial and Medicinal Cannabis Regulation Amendments and Updates ►a Disposition and Development Agreement DDA) for the Third and Broadway Development Project IN DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 U -3 1 APRIL 212020 Eel VQ1►Mil ►[y:801611►6�:1:1:13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTAANA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. NS-2980 APPROVING AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2018-10 REZONING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2525 NORTH MAIN STREET FROM PROFESSIONAL (P) TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 93 (SD-93) (AA NO. 2018- 10) AND ADOPTING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 93 (SD-93) FOR SAID PROPERTY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS 17i11X61TIT& l Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. WHEREAS, on January 21, 2020, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana approved Amendment Application No. 2018-10 with AC 2525 Main ("Applicant"), LLC by Ordinance No. NS-2980, approving the Addington Multi -Family Residential Project ("Project"), to be constructed on property located at 2525 North Main Street in Santa Ana, California ("Project Site"); and B. WHEREAS, the Project entails, among other things, (1) demolition of the existing 81,172 square foot vacant two-story office building and 442- space surface parking lot on the Project Site; (2) redevelopment of the 5.93-acre site with 444,534 square feet of total development, including 277,281 square feet of residential buildings that would provide 256 for - rent multi -family residential units and a 167,253 square foot central parking structure and a 284 space surface level parking lot with residential and commercial parking; (3) a Development Agreement No. 2018-01 between the City of Santa Ana ("City") and Applicant; (4) a General Plan Amendment No. 2018-06, which would change the Project Site's existing land use designation of Professional & Administration Office (PAO) to District Center (DC); and (5) an Amendment Application No. 2018-10, which would change the zoning of the Project Site from Professional (P) to Specific Development No. 93 (SD-93) designation; and C. WHEREAS, on February 24, 2020, proponent, Dale Helvig submitted a referendum petition to the Clerk of the Council's Office containing approximately 19,160 signatures seeking to require the City Council to reconsider Ordinance No. NS-2980; and Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 1 of 3 11 A-1 D. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. NS-2980 is a legislative act which is subject to referendum pursuant to the provisions of the California Constitution, the Santa Ana City Charter, and the Elections Code of the State of California; and E. WHEREAS, the City Elections Official heretofore delivered her certificate of sufficiency to the City Council finding and determining that said referendum petition contained the requisite number of valid signatures to require the City Council to reconsider Ordinance No. NS-2980 pursuant to Section 9240 and 9114 of the Elections Code of the State of California; and F. WHEREAS, based upon the certification of said referendum petition, the effective date of Ordinance No. NS-2980 was suspended and the City Council was required to reconsider Ordinance No. NS-2980 pursuant to Sections 9237 and 9241 of the Elections Code of the State of California; and G. WHEREAS, in accordance with the referendum petition and the provisions of Section 9241 of the Elections Code of the State of California, the City Council desires to repeal Ordinance No. NS-2980. SECTION 2. The Santa Ana City Council hereby finds, determines and declares that Ordinance No. NS-2980 is hereby, repealed in its entirety and shall be of no further force or effect. SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance for any reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. ADOPTED this day of , 2020. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 2 of 3 11 A-2 /_1» 061 I IM-Ma CO 161 V d41 Sonia R. Carvalho City Attorney By: A. R� Laura A. Rossini Acting Chief Assistant City Attorney AYES Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, Daisy Gomez, Clerk of the Council do hereby attest to and certify the attached Ordinance NS-XXXX to be the original ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on .2020. Date Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 3 of 3 Daisy Gomez Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 11 A-3 Ordinance presented at April 21, 2020 Council Meeting LS 3.23.20 ORDINANCE NO. NS-XXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 75 (SD- 75) TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES AND TO APPROVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT AT 1109 NORTH BROADWAY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. On July 6, 2004, the City Council approved the Specific Development No. 75 zoning designation to allow the development of a 37-story office and commercial office tower at 1109 North Broadway. B. The Specific Development No. 75 (SD-75) zoning became effective on April 5, 2005, after a citywide referendum to overturn the City's approval was defeated. C. Over the past 16 years, the developer has made several attempts to construct the entitled office tower. Due to various economic conditions and constraints, the tower has yet to be built. D. In January 2020, the developer submitted a revised plan that would reduce the overall office square footage in the tower and replace it with residential units. E. The proposed amendment would allow up to 415 residential units within the tower and adopt a series of residential development standards for the project. F. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding this ordinance on March 30, 2020, which was adjourned to April 2, 2020. At the April 2, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the amended ordinance with added conditions to the SD-75 document requiring a project labor agreement be approved for the project, added the Logan Neighborhood to the list of neighborhoods requiring a Traffic Mitigation Plan and increased the fee for the Traffic Mitigation Plans from $200,000 to $300,000 per neighborhood, and required park fees collected from the project be spent within the district that the site is located within. Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 1 of 3 11 B-1 G. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this ordinance on April 21, 2020, and has considered all testimony presented thereto. Section 2. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15164, lead agencies are required to prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions to the project are necessary, but none of the conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR are present. The City Council has reviewed and considered the 2004 EIR and the 2020 Addendum, and finds that these documents taken together contain a complete and accurate reporting of all of the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed development. The City Council further finds that the 2020 Addendum has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The City Council further finds and determines that the Addendum reflects the City's independent judgment. Section 3. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, authorized volunteers, and instrumentalities thereof, harmless from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative dispute resolution procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and such other procedures), judgments, orders, and decisions (collectively "Actions"), brought against the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, any action of, or any permit or approval issued by the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City) for or concerning the project, whether such Actions are brought under the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivision Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure sections 1085 or 1094.5, or any other federal, state or local constitution, statute, law, ordinance, charter, rule, regulation, or any decision of a court of competent jurisdiction. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City's defense, and that Applicant shall reimburse the City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate with Applicant in the defense of the Action. Section 4. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the amendments to Specific Development No. 75 (SD-75), attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 2 of 3 11 B-2 court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. ADOPTED this day of 12020. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho City Attorney By:� Lisa Storck Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers 1►[����:7X.y�►���Z.1iR.71I 11 Oi1T-M CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, DAISY GOMEZ, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify that the attached Ordinance No. NS-XXXX to be the original ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on , 2020, and that said ordinance was published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 3 of 3 11 B-3 One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District (SD-75) Ir11.1Mel 0K.1►rr:11►rK SECTION 1. Applicability of Ordinance SECTION 2. Purpose SECTION 3. Goals, Objectives and Policies SECTION 4. Permitted Improvements SECTION 5. Permitted Uses SECTION 6. Conditionally Permitted Uses SECTION 7. Development Standards 1. Floor Area Ratio 2. Parcel Size 3. Building Envelopes 4. Office Tower a. General Requirements b. Building Setbacks c. Building Height d. Screening e. Elevations f. Signs 5. Parking Structure a. General Requirements b. Building Setbacks c. Building Height d. Screening e. Elevations f. Landscaping g. Signs 6. Parking and Circulation 7. Plaza Design 8. Public Art 9. Residential 11 B-4 One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District (SD-75) SECTION 1 APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE The specific development zoning district, as authorized by Chapter 41, Division 26, of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, is specifically subject to the regulations contained in this ordinance for the express purpose of establishing use district regulations. All other applicable chapters, articles and sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code shall apply unless expressly waived or superseded by this ordinance. Use district regulations established in Chapter 41, Article III, of the Santa Ana Municipal Code for zoning districts other than the SD zoning district may be incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2 PURPOSE The Specific Development No. 75 (SD-75) use district regulations are hereby established for the express purpose of protecting the health, safety and general welfare of the City by encouraging the use of innovative planning concepts and principles and promoting and enhancing the value of properties and encourage orderly development. The SD-75 regulations will establish a professional district that will exclusively entitle a 37-story, 518,003 square foot office and residential tower at the northeast corner of Tenth Street and Broadway with a historic setting further north along Broadway to Washington Avenue. This area will be primarily a professional office district with support services and eating establishments. SECTION 3 GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES The One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District is located within the midtown area of the City. The One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District encompasses a large established city block bounded by Washington Avenue to the north, Tenth Street to the south, Sycamore Street to the east and Broadway to the west. The One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District maintains a historic character along the northwest portion of the district, with a number of buildings dating from the early years of development in Santa Ana. The project site is surrounded by the Civic/Professional, Financial, and the Community Specialty Retail zones of the Midtown Specific Plan. The One Broadway Plaza mixed -use tower is intended to be a major landmark in the midtown section of the City of Santa Ana. In addition, the various activities planned for this site will result in the project becoming a 11 B-5 node, or place of activity. The objectives of the One Broadway Plaza specific development plan include the following: • A landmark office and residential project along Broadway at the center of the Midtown Specific Plan. • Maintain the existing streetscape pattern including sidewalk design, mature palm trees and historic light fixtures. • Maintain the scale and character established by the existing historic structures along the north end of the district. • Maintain large open setbacks adjacent to Broadway. • Encourage revitalization of existing properties for a variety of professional office and similar uses. • Enhance the pedestrian experience through the development of new plaza areas and water features at the intersection of Sycamore Street and Tenth Street and Broadway and Tenth Street. SECTION 4 PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS Improvements permitted on the project site include either one of the following: 1. An iconic tower of no less than 493 feet tall, approximately 37 stories, 518,300 square feet of building area with a destination restaurant at the top two levels of the tower. a. The project site shall be no less than 4.339 acres b. A nine level (one subterranean and eight above grade), 78- foot-high parking structure, with a minimum of 2,463 parking spaces. c. The renovation and rehabilitation of four existing structures located to the north of the office tower. The structures are those addressed as 1103, 1111, 1115-17 and 1211 North Broadway. 2. All other permitted improvements shall comply with the Midtown Specific Plan, Chapter 7, Broadway Corridor District, Development Standards. SECTION 5 PERMITTED USES The category of permitted land uses to be included within the project include: Professional and business offices, banks and similar financial institutions, service and commercial retail uses and restaurants, and residential apartments. If a use is for any reason omitted from those 11 B-6 specified as permissible, or if an ambiguity arises concerning the classification of a particular use, the determination shall be at the discretion of the Planning Manager. Professional, business and administrative offices and services, including but not limited to employment agencies, advertising agencies, escrow agencies, accountants, insurance, attorneys, architects, engineers, planners and other similar uses. 2. Banks, finance, insurance and real estate offices. 3. Service and commercial retail uses which shall be limited to: a. Bookstores b. Stationery shops c. Gift stores d. Dry cleaner e. Hair salon f. Travel agent g. Copy center h. Mail/postal center i. Tailor j. Shoe repair k. Art supply I. Office supply 4. Cafes and restaurants, except fast food and/or take out restaurants 5. Florists 6. Pharmacies 7. Day care facilities 8. Museums, libraries and galleries 9. Artists' studios iGMJi RIIIi n"Il Siy6i 04ii09FiM SECTION 6 CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES The following uses are permitted upon the approval of a conditional use permit in accordance with the Santa Ana Municipal code: Nightclubs, bars and indoor entertainment uses whether freestanding or part of another permitted or conditionally permitted use, except adult entertainment businesses 11 B-7 2. Establishments selling or serving alcoholic beverages 3. Coffee houses 4. Banquet facilities 5. Uses open after midnight to 5:00 a.m. 6. Helipads 7. Fast food and/or take out restaurants SECTION 7 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District is intended to allow the development of a landmark mixed -use office and residential tower and affiliated parking garage while maintaining some of the historic structures located on the northwest side of the district. The following general development standards are applicable to this project: Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) The required floor area ratio for the project site shall be 2.9, or 530,487 square feet of development. The FAR is calculated by dividing the total square footage of the building plus the existing structures to remain by the total square footage of the project site. Consistent with the General Plan, the parking structure is not included in the FAR calculation. This FAR includes the proposed tower (518,003 square feet) and the structures that will remain on the project site (12,484 square feet). The FAR for the existing structures shall remain at 0.5 or less. 2. Parcel Size The One Broadway Plaza parcel size shall be 4.339 acres. Subdivision of the parcel is not permitted. 3. Building Envelopes Height and yard areas established for the existing structures and the mixed -use tower define the permitted building envelopes in the One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District. With the exceptions of the tower and parking structure, all buildings shall maintain a lower scale character no taller than 35 feet or 3-stories, whichever is less. 4. Mixed -Use Tower The basic form, size and location of the tower as illustrated in the applicant's plans are hereby approved. In order to address certain outstanding details, however, revised plans conforming with Section 11 B-8 7-4-e-iii of this ordinance shall be submitted to and be approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of any building permits. a. General Requirements i. The structure shall remain consistent with the approved site plan as shown in Exhibit 1. b. Building Setbacks Setbacks at ground level are established to enhance pedestrian space throughout the district, create compatible relationships between existing and future building street elevations and recognize opportunities to create new open space resources, such as plazas, pedestrian ways and landscaped areas. The front yard is one of the most important characteristics of Broadway and maintenance of these landscaped open spaces is crucial to preserving the streetscape. Major setback conditions are discussed below by street: i. Broadway: The One Broadway Plaza structure shall maintain a building setback of 20 feet. This setback area may include hardscape as shown on the approved plaza plan. For existing buildings, a setback of 20 feet shall be maintained. The existing structure at 1111 North Broadway shall maintain a minimum setback of 15 feet. ii. Tenth Street: A 12-foot building setback shall be required for the structure. Hardscape, landscape and water features shall be provided in the required setback as shown on the applicant's Landscape Plan dated February 4, 2004 (Exhibit 2). iii. Washington Avenue: The 15-foot landscaped setback for the existing structure shall be maintained. c. Building Height The approved height for the structure is approximately 493 feet. Modifications to the structure's approved building height or number of stories, which represent either an increase or decrease, shall not be allowed. The existing buildings along Broadway shall maintain their existing height and shall not exceed 35 feet. 11 B-9 d. Screening All appurtenances shall be located outside any required setback and shall be screened from view. e. Elevations i. Exterior elevations shall incorporate a translucent, non - reflective glass in a blueish tone consistent with the materials board sample provided by the applicant and as approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. ii. The structural system of the building shall be visible from the exterior elevations consistent with the plans approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. iii. Incorporate an arcade or ground level "skirt" to provide a transition between the tower and pedestrian level. Plans satisfying this requirement shall be submitted to and must be approved by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of any building permit. 5. Parking Structure The basic form, size and location of the parking structure as illustrated in the applicant's plans are hereby approved. In order to address certain outstanding details, however, revised parking structure plans shall be submitted to and be approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of any building permits. The revised plans shall comply with the following: a. General Requirements i. No parking areas above or below grade shall encroach into required setbacks. ii. Subterranean levels shall use offset sloping ramps to allow for open and unobstructed visibility for floor surveillance. iii. The parking structure shall maintain a minimum vertical clearance of 11 feet on the street level, with the exception of the entry at Sycamore Street. The entry area shall maintain a vertical clearance of 21 feet to facilitate the loading and unloading function as well as allow trash truck access. iv. On all other levels, the parking structure shall maintain a minimum vertical clearance of eight feet, two inches. 11 B-10 v. Glare from the parking structure lighting shall not be visible from the plaza level or any public right-of-way. vi. The ceiling of all parking levels shall be painted white and be maintained to improve illumination and enhance safety within the parking structure. vii. The parking structure shall be completed, shall have been finaled by the Building Division and be fully operational prior to any occupancy of any building or use, or portion thereof, for which the structure provides parking. viii. The parking structure shall contain a minimum of 2,463 parking spaces, which are allocated as follows: a) 600 spaces for the office tower b) 934 spaces for the residential component, including 830 for the apartments (2 spaces per unit) plus 104 spaces for guest parking (25 spaces per unit) c) 50 spaces for ground level retail uses (10,000 square feet) d) 180 spaces for restaurant uses (18,000 square feet) e) 29 spaces for offices uses within existing buildings (9,627 square feet) f) 29 spaces for restaurant uses within existing buildings (2,857 square feet) g) 30 spaces to replace parking displaced on Sycamore Street h) 100 spaces to replace parking displaced on Main Street i) 110 spaces to replace existing surface parking lot for 1200 N. Main Street j) 12 spaces to replace existing surface parking lot for 1111 N. Broadway k) The remaining 389 parking spaces may be used for other uses in the area b. Building Setbacks Broadway: The minimum required setback for the parking structure is 124 feet as measured from the property line. ii. Washington Avenue: A landscaped setback of 15 feet shall be required. 11B-11 iii. Sycamore Street: There shall be no setback requirement. iv. Tenth Street: The minimum required setback is 145 feet as measured from the property line to the entrance to the parking structure. c. Building Height The maximum allowable height of the parking structure is 78 feet. d. Screening All appurtenances shall be located outside any required setback and shall be screened from view. e. Elevations The north and east elevations shall incorporate architectural cues and proportions found along Main Street to create an architectural screen as a visual enhancement to the existing commercial corridor. ii. Exterior walls shall exhibit horizontal rather that sloping design elements. iii. The exterior of the parking structure shall be painted a soft, earth tone color as approved by the Planning Division. Brighter and darker colors, including dark green, shall be prohibited. iv. Decorative grillwork or landscape materials shall be placed between wall and floor of the higher parking level. v. Elevators shall be located so they are visible to the public. The elevator cabs shall have glass facing the public view. vi. The parking structure shall comply with the Santa Ana Municipal Code sections pertaining to the Police Department's Security requirements, including parking lot lighting levels. vii. The parking structure shall comply with the Santa Ana Police Department's parking structure design guidelines. 11 B-12 f. Landscaping: i. Landscaping planters incorporated into the parking structure shall have a minimum planter dimension of 4-feet wide and 4- feet deep. An internal drainage system and waterproofing of the planters shall be provided along with an automatic drip - type irrigation system. ii. A trellis shall be incorporated into the north and west building elevations where blank walls occur on the structure. The trellis material shall be constructed of decorative and durable materials and shall cover a minimum of 60 percent of the blank wall. The trellis details shall be included in the project landscape plan and be approved prior to building permit issuance. iii. Canary Island Pines, Deodar Cedars and River She -Oaks shall be planted along the Broadway and Washington Avenue elevations. The trees shall be planted at a minimum of 30 feet on center as shown on a landscape plan to be approved by the City's Landscape Development Associate prior to the issuance of building permits for the parking structure. The landscape plan shall be fully implemented prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy. iv. The size of the trees to screen the parking structure along Washington Avenue and Broadway shall be a minimum 120- inch box tree. g. Signs i. All signage shall comply with the Santa Ana Municipal Code. ii. Prior to issuance of any sign permits or certificates of occupancy for any building or portion thereof, a comprehensive sign program for the entire site, including directional signs and graphics for the parking structure, shall be submitted to and be approved by the Planning Commission. 6. Parking/Circulation A student drop-off area shall be created in the parking lot of 920 North Main Street for the exclusive use of the Orange County High School of the Arts. The minimum standards for this function include: 11Br13 a. Prior to issuance of any building permits, construct a raised center median on Main Street per a Street Improvement Plan to be approved by the Public Works Agency. b. Prior to issuance of any building permits, construct a two-way drop-off zone. Each lane shall have a minimum width of 18 feet. A yellow line approximately one foot in width shall be painted to separate the two drive-thru lanes. The plans shall be submitted to the Planning Division and Public Works Agency for approval. c. Prior to issuance of any building permits, install a hedge and 36- inch tall fence to direct students towards the Main Street and Sycamore Street public sidewalks in order to avoid illegal pedestrian crosswalk movements onto Tenth Street. d. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the removal of the existing parking stalls and meters on Main Street consistent with the mitigation measures contained in the Final EIR. e. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the restriping of Main Street to provide three northbound and two southbound travel lanes. f. All loading zone areas must provide a minimum 6-inch raised curb around the perimeter of each area. g. The proposed roundabout and water feature details must be included as part of the Plaza Plan referenced in Section 7-7 of this ordinance. Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy, all water feature and roundabout improvements must be completed. h. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, close off the existing curb and gutter serving the trash collection area between 1200 South Main Street and the OCHSA. The curb and gutter shall be replaced with a new curb, gutter and sidewalk. i. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the left turn ingress (Sycamore Street - southbound) into the school drop-off zone. j. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note wheel chair accessibility ramps at the Broadway egress exit. 11R-14 k. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the replacement of the painted striped "No Access Zone" to be replaced with a raised median barrier with decorative pavement for the eastern and western portions of Tenth Street. I. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the modifications of the signals at the Main/Washington, Main/Tenth, Washington/Sycamore, Broadway/Washington and Broadway/Tenth intersections. m. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, install a raised median at the Broadway egress as determined by the Public Works Agency. 7. Plaza Design Prior to issuance of any building permits, a detailed Plaza Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission. a. The overall plaza design theme shall incorporate a minimum of three major pedestrian -level water features and two water elements adjacent to the proposed building. b. The plaza landscape palette must include a minimum of four (4) tree species, to be approved by the Landscape Development Associate prior to the issuance of any building permit. The minimum established size for palm trees shall be 30 feet brown trunk height. Non -palm tree species shall be a minimum of 20 feet in height and 60-inch box. c. Land uses such as retail, office or other services shall be incorporated within the plaza level pursuant to the approved site plan. Exterior kiosks, carts or other temporary outdoor uses are not allowed unless specifically submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission. d. The plaza shall incorporate seating, benches and landscaping to provide visual interest and additional amenities within the plaza. e. Pedestrian amenities shall be provided such as lighting, planters, drinking fountains, unit pavers, and bicycle racks. f. The color and appearance of the plaza furniture products and other elements must complement the overall plaza design and tower architecture. 11EW5 g. Benches and pedestrian seating shall be made of a durable material such as concrete or painted iron and be designed to minimize effects from vandalism, skateboarding and weather. h. Trash receptacles should be located in high -activity areas, such as plazas and other public open spaces. The style shall be compatible with other plaza furnishings. i. Bike racks shall be provided at key activity locations on the plaza level. j. All street furniture surfaces, pedestrian -level walls and amenities shall incorporate graffiti resistant coatings. k. Soft as well as hard surfaced areas shall be incorporated into the Plaza Plan. Plaza area paving shall consist of unit pavers. I. One linear foot of seating shall be provided for every 60 square feet of plaza area. Seating may include benches, low seating walls, steps, planter edges or fountains. The seating shall be designed to discourage sleeping. m. Lighting height in the plaza area should be at a pedestrian scale. A range between 16 feet and 22 feet in the plaza area should be fully illuminated from dusk until dawn. The overall lighting shall be maintained at one -foot candle and incorporate other pedestrian - oriented lights, such as lighted bollards. Uplighting of trees and other site features is also required. n. The required Plaza Plan shall include adequate provisions for the on -going maintenance of all plaza and roundabout improvements. o. The required Plaza Plan shall include design details, materials and provisions for the on -going maintenance for all interior public areas within the office tower, including but not limited to the ground floor and basement area lobbies. 8. Public Art a. Public art valued at one percent of the office tower valuation is required. The cost of any water feature or portion thereof shall not be included for purposes of complying with the public art requirement. Public art may be comprised of multiple art pieces, however, at least one such art piece shall be placed at the southwest corner of the project site adjacent to Broadway and Tenth Street. The public art should invite participation and interaction, inspire, add local meaning, interpret the community by revealing its culture or history, and/or capture or reinforce the 11EW6 unique character of the new place. A comprehensive Public Art Plan indicating compliance with this requirement, and which proposes specific pieces of art for specific locations or applications, shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval prior to issuance of any building permits. All public art approved by the Planning Commission in the Public Art Plan shall be completely installed prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy for the project. b. Art should be sited to complement features such as plaza or architectural components so that the art is an integral part of the One Broadway Plaza development site. c. Public art should be constructed using durable materials and finishes including but not limited to stone or metal. d. No art piece provided pursuant to the public art requirement, including an art piece such as a mural that may be proposed on the south elevation of the parking structure at the Sycamore Street entrance, shall include advertising of any type, including but not limited to products, services or businesses. e. All public art provided pursuant to the public art requirement shall be properly maintained at all times, be free of any graffiti and shall not incorporate any flashing or distracting form of illumination. f. All art pieces approved and installed pursuant to the Public Art Plan shall remain on the project site and may not be removed without the approval of the Planning Commission. 9. Residential a. Provide the dimensions of the tower on the site plan to ensure consistency with the approved (2005) plans. b. Revise the site plan to accurately depict the existing pick-up and drop-off area for the Orange County School of the Arts. c. The site plan shows painted medians at the Sycamore Street entrance. Coordinate with the Public Works Agency on this alteration to the approved site plan. d. A minimum of 200,000 net square feet shall be devoted to office uses, with the remaining square footage dedicated to residential. 11BA7 e. A minimum of two parking spaces per unit are required. Further, the residential parking must be located behind security gates to separate residential and commercial parking. f. Please verify that the scale of the plans is accurate. g. A maximum of 80 percent of the project can consist of studio and one -bedroom units, with a minimum of 20 percent of the units needing to be two and three -bedroom units. h. The minimum unit size of any unit shall be 500 square feet. i. A washer and dryer shall be provided within each unit. j. In -unit bulk storage spaces of at least 100 cubic feet per unit with a minimum dimension of 3 feet in each direction shall be provided. k. Recessed entry's that are a minimum of eight inches shall be provided. The recessed entries shall also include decorative molding around the recess to further define the entry. I. Interior hallway corridors that are a minimum width of 5-feet shall be provided. m. Prior to submittal into building plan check, submit a Trash Disposal Plan for review. The Plan shall depict how trash removal will be accomplished for the residential units. If a chute system will be utilized, show the maximum travel distances within each floor from unit entries to the nearest elevator and trash chute. n. Depict the mail and storage area(s). Mail/storage areas shall be located adjacent to residential lobbies and elevators for convenience access. o. Revise Sheet A-4 to correctly identify the activity occurring on the floor (Lounge/Food Court). p. Identify on plans where public water meters are proposed, as well as rooms or areas where any/all private utility meters will be located. q. Prior to submittal into building plan check, submit an Elevator Plan for the project. Separate elevator access and egress shall be provided for each component (residential and office). r. Prior to submittal into building plan check, submit a Residential Amenity Plan for review. The plan shall depict common amenities such as a Club Room/Library and a Business Center, and interior amenities such as appliances, kitchen cabinet finishes and bathroom finishes. At a minimum, the cabinetry shall be stain grade and counter tops shall be made of granite or similar stone material. s. The Lounge area shall incorporate a commercial kitchen that will be made available to residents of the tower. t. Storage facilities at a rate of 256 cubic feet per unit shall be provided u. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided and designed per the City's residential and office standards. 11Br19 Updated Ordinance (highlighted text added from discussion at April 21, 2020 Council Meeting) LS 3.23.20 ORDINANCE NO. NS-XXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 75 (SD- 75) TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES AND TO APPROVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT AT 1109 NORTH BROADWAY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. On July 6, 2004, the City Council approved the Specific Development No. 75 zoning designation to allow the development of a 37-story office and commercial office tower at 1109 North Broadway. B. The Specific Development No. 75 (SD-75) zoning became effective on April 5, 2005, after a citywide referendum to overturn the City's approval was defeated. C. Over the past 16 years, the developer has made several attempts to construct the entitled office tower. Due to various economic conditions and constraints, the tower has yet to be built. D. In January 2020, the developer submitted a revised plan that would reduce the overall office square footage in the tower and replace it with residential units. E. The proposed amendment would allow up to 415 residential units within the tower and adopt a series of residential development standards for the project. F. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding this ordinance on March 30, 2020, which was adjourned to April 2, 2020. At the April 2, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the amended ordinance with added conditions to the SD-75 document requiring a project labor agreement be approved for the project, added the Logan Neighborhood to the list of neighborhoods requiring a Traffic Mitigation Plan and increased the fee for the Traffic Mitigation Plans from $200,000 to $300,000 per neighborhood, and required park fees collected from the project be spent within the district that the site is located within. G. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this ordinance on April 21, 2020, and has considered all testimony presented thereto. At such meeting, #35272v2 Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 1 of 3 11 B-20 the City Council approved the ordinance with additional terms, which include: payment of the inclusionary housing in -lieu fee at the rate it existed on April 21, 2020 ($15.00 per square footage of habitable living space) to be paid at the time of permit issuance, Traffic Study timelines/triggers, and the submittal of a Construction Traffic Mitigation and Routing Plan. Such additional terms are included in the Mutual Declaration of Acknowledgement and Acceptance of Approval Conditions that shall be signed by the developer and property owner and recorded against the development property. Section 2. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15164, lead agencies are required to prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions to the project are necessary, but none of the conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR are present. The City Council has reviewed and considered the 2004 EIR and the 2020 Addendum, and finds that these documents taken together contain a complete and accurate reporting of all of the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed development. The City Council further finds that the 2020 Addendum has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The City Council further finds and determines that the Addendum reflects the City's independent judgment. Section 3. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, authorized volunteers, and instrumentalities thereof, harmless from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative dispute resolution procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and such other procedures), judgments, orders, and decisions (collectively "Actions"), brought against the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, any action of, or any permit or approval issued by the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City) for or concerning the project, whether such Actions are brought under the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivision Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure sections 1085 or 1094.5, or any other federal, state or local constitution, statute, law, ordinance, charter, rule, regulation, or any decision of a court of competent jurisdiction. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City's defense, and that Applicant shall reimburse the City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate with Applicant in the defense of the Action. Section 4. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the amendments to Specific Development No. 75 (SD-75), attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. #35272v2 Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 2 of 3 11 B-21 Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. ADOPTED this day of 12020. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho City Attorney Lisa Storck Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, DAISY GOMEZ, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify that the attached Ordinance No. NS-XXXX to be the original ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on , 2020, and that said ordinance was published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana #35272v2 Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 3 of 3 11 B-22 One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District (SD-75) Ir11.1Mel 0K.1►rr:11►rK SECTION 1. Applicability of Ordinance SECTION 2. Purpose SECTION 3. Goals, Objectives and Policies SECTION 4. Permitted Improvements SECTION 5. Permitted Uses SECTION 6. Conditionally Permitted Uses SECTION 7. Development Standards 1. Floor Area Ratio 2. Parcel Size 3. Building Envelopes 4. Office Tower a. General Requirements b. Building Setbacks c. Building Height d. Screening e. Elevations f. Signs 5. Parking Structure a. General Requirements b. Building Setbacks c. Building Height d. Screening e. Elevations f. Landscaping g. Signs 6. Parking and Circulation 7. Plaza Design 8. Public Art 9. Residential 11 B-23 One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District (SD-75) SECTION 1 APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE The specific development zoning district, as authorized by Chapter 41, Division 26, of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, is specifically subject to the regulations contained in this ordinance for the express purpose of establishing use district regulations. All other applicable chapters, articles and sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code shall apply unless expressly waived or superseded by this ordinance. Use district regulations established in Chapter 41, Article III, of the Santa Ana Municipal Code for zoning districts other than the SD zoning district may be incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2 PURPOSE The Specific Development No. 75 (SD-75) use district regulations are hereby established for the express purpose of protecting the health, safety and general welfare of the City by encouraging the use of innovative planning concepts and principles and promoting and enhancing the value of properties and encourage orderly development. The SD-75 regulations will establish a professional district that will exclusively entitle a 37-story, 518,003 square foot office and residential tower at the northeast corner of Tenth Street and Broadway with a historic setting further north along Broadway to Washington Avenue. This area will be primarily a professional office district with support services and eating establishments. SECTION 3 GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES The One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District is located within the midtown area of the City. The One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District encompasses a large established city block bounded by Washington Avenue to the north, Tenth Street to the south, Sycamore Street to the east and Broadway to the west. The One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District maintains a historic character along the northwest portion of the district, with a number of buildings dating from the early years of development in Santa Ana. The project site is surrounded by the Civic/Professional, Financial, and the Community Specialty Retail zones of the Midtown Specific Plan. The One Broadway Plaza mixed -use tower is intended to be a major landmark in the midtown section of the City of Santa Ana. In addition, the various activities planned for this site will result in the project becoming a 11 B-24 node, or place of activity. The objectives of the One Broadway Plaza specific development plan include the following: • A landmark office and residential project along Broadway at the center of the Midtown Specific Plan. • Maintain the existing streetscape pattern including sidewalk design, mature palm trees and historic light fixtures. • Maintain the scale and character established by the existing historic structures along the north end of the district. • Maintain large open setbacks adjacent to Broadway. • Encourage revitalization of existing properties for a variety of professional office and similar uses. • Enhance the pedestrian experience through the development of new plaza areas and water features at the intersection of Sycamore Street and Tenth Street and Broadway and Tenth Street. SECTION 4 PERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS Improvements permitted on the project site include either one of the following: 1. An iconic tower of no less than 493 feet tall, approximately 37 stories, 518,300 square feet of building area with a destination restaurant at the top two levels of the tower. a. The project site shall be no less than 4.339 acres b. A nine level (one subterranean and eight above grade), 78- foot-high parking structure, with a minimum of 2,463 parking spaces. c. The renovation and rehabilitation of four existing structures located to the north of the office tower. The structures are those addressed as 1103, 1111, 1115-17 and 1211 North Broadway. 2. All other permitted improvements shall comply with the Midtown Specific Plan, Chapter 7, Broadway Corridor District, Development Standards. SECTION 5 PERMITTED USES The category of permitted land uses to be included within the project include: Professional and business offices, banks and similar financial institutions, service and commercial retail uses and restaurants, and residential apartments. If a use is for any reason omitted from those 11 B-25 specified as permissible, or if an ambiguity arises concerning the classification of a particular use, the determination shall be at the discretion of the Planning Manager. Professional, business and administrative offices and services, including but not limited to employment agencies, advertising agencies, escrow agencies, accountants, insurance, attorneys, architects, engineers, planners and other similar uses. 2. Banks, finance, insurance and real estate offices. 3. Service and commercial retail uses which shall be limited to: a. Bookstores b. Stationery shops c. Gift stores d. Dry cleaner e. Hair salon f. Travel agent g. Copy center h. Mail/postal center i. Tailor j. Shoe repair k. Art supply I. Office supply 4. Cafes and restaurants, except fast food and/or take out restaurants 5. Florists 6. Pharmacies 7. Day care facilities 8. Museums, libraries and galleries 9. Artists' studios iGMJi RIIIi n"Il Siy6i 04ii09FiM SECTION 6 CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES The following uses are permitted upon the approval of a conditional use permit in accordance with the Santa Ana Municipal code: Nightclubs, bars and indoor entertainment uses whether freestanding or part of another permitted or conditionally permitted use, except adult entertainment businesses 11 B-26 2. Establishments selling or serving alcoholic beverages 3. Coffee houses 4. Banquet facilities 5. Uses open after midnight to 5:00 a.m. 6. Helipads 7. Fast food and/or take out restaurants SECTION 7 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District is intended to allow the development of a landmark mixed -use office and residential tower and affiliated parking garage while maintaining some of the historic structures located on the northwest side of the district. The following general development standards are applicable to this project: Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) The required floor area ratio for the project site shall be 2.9, or 530,487 square feet of development. The FAR is calculated by dividing the total square footage of the building plus the existing structures to remain by the total square footage of the project site. Consistent with the General Plan, the parking structure is not included in the FAR calculation. This FAR includes the proposed tower (518,003 square feet) and the structures that will remain on the project site (12,484 square feet). The FAR for the existing structures shall remain at 0.5 or less. 2. Parcel Size The One Broadway Plaza parcel size shall be 4.339 acres. Subdivision of the parcel is not permitted. 3. Building Envelopes Height and yard areas established for the existing structures and the mixed -use tower define the permitted building envelopes in the One Broadway Plaza Specific Development District. With the exceptions of the tower and parking structure, all buildings shall maintain a lower scale character no taller than 35 feet or 3-stories, whichever is less. 4. Mixed -Use Tower The basic form, size and location of the tower as illustrated in the applicant's plans are hereby approved. In order to address certain outstanding details, however, revised plans conforming with Section 11 B-27 7-4-e-iii of this ordinance shall be submitted to and be approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of any building permits. a. General Requirements i. The structure shall remain consistent with the approved site plan as shown in Exhibit 1. b. Building Setbacks Setbacks at ground level are established to enhance pedestrian space throughout the district, create compatible relationships between existing and future building street elevations and recognize opportunities to create new open space resources, such as plazas, pedestrian ways and landscaped areas. The front yard is one of the most important characteristics of Broadway and maintenance of these landscaped open spaces is crucial to preserving the streetscape. Major setback conditions are discussed below by street: i. Broadway: The One Broadway Plaza structure shall maintain a building setback of 20 feet. This setback area may include hardscape as shown on the approved plaza plan. For existing buildings, a setback of 20 feet shall be maintained. The existing structure at 1111 North Broadway shall maintain a minimum setback of 15 feet. ii. Tenth Street: A 12-foot building setback shall be required for the structure. Hardscape, landscape and water features shall be provided in the required setback as shown on the applicant's Landscape Plan dated February 4, 2004 (Exhibit 2). iii. Washington Avenue: The 15-foot landscaped setback for the existing structure shall be maintained. c. Building Height The approved height for the structure is approximately 493 feet. Modifications to the structure's approved building height or number of stories, which represent either an increase or decrease, shall not be allowed. The existing buildings along Broadway shall maintain their existing height and shall not exceed 35 feet. 11 B-28 d. Screening All appurtenances shall be located outside any required setback and shall be screened from view. e. Elevations i. Exterior elevations shall incorporate a translucent, non - reflective glass in a blueish tone consistent with the materials board sample provided by the applicant and as approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. ii. The structural system of the building shall be visible from the exterior elevations consistent with the plans approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. iii. Incorporate an arcade or ground level "skirt" to provide a transition between the tower and pedestrian level. Plans satisfying this requirement shall be submitted to and must be approved by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of any building permit. 5. Parking Structure The basic form, size and location of the parking structure as illustrated in the applicant's plans are hereby approved. In order to address certain outstanding details, however, revised parking structure plans shall be submitted to and be approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of any building permits. The revised plans shall comply with the following: a. General Requirements i. No parking areas above or below grade shall encroach into required setbacks. ii. Subterranean levels shall use offset sloping ramps to allow for open and unobstructed visibility for floor surveillance. iii. The parking structure shall maintain a minimum vertical clearance of 11 feet on the street level, with the exception of the entry at Sycamore Street. The entry area shall maintain a vertical clearance of 21 feet to facilitate the loading and unloading function as well as allow trash truck access. iv. On all other levels, the parking structure shall maintain a minimum vertical clearance of eight feet, two inches. 11 B-29 v. Glare from the parking structure lighting shall not be visible from the plaza level or any public right-of-way. vi. The ceiling of all parking levels shall be painted white and be maintained to improve illumination and enhance safety within the parking structure. vii. The parking structure shall be completed, shall have been finaled by the Building Division and be fully operational prior to any occupancy of any building or use, or portion thereof, for which the structure provides parking. viii. The parking structure shall contain a minimum of 2,463 parking spaces, which are allocated as follows: a) 600 spaces for the office tower b) 934 spaces for the residential component, including 830 for the apartments (2 spaces per unit) plus 104 spaces for guest parking (25 spaces per unit) c) 50 spaces for ground level retail uses (10,000 square feet) d) 180 spaces for restaurant uses (18,000 square feet) e) 29 spaces for offices uses within existing buildings (9,627 square feet) f) 29 spaces for restaurant uses within existing buildings (2,857 square feet) g) 30 spaces to replace parking displaced on Sycamore Street h) 100 spaces to replace parking displaced on Main Street i) 110 spaces to replace existing surface parking lot for 1200 N. Main Street j) 12 spaces to replace existing surface parking lot for 1111 N. Broadway k) The remaining 389 parking spaces may be used for other uses in the area b. Building Setbacks Broadway: The minimum required setback for the parking structure is 124 feet as measured from the property line. ii. Washington Avenue: A landscaped setback of 15 feet shall be required. 11 B-30 iii. Sycamore Street: There shall be no setback requirement. iv. Tenth Street: The minimum required setback is 145 feet as measured from the property line to the entrance to the parking structure. c. Building Height The maximum allowable height of the parking structure is 78 feet. d. Screening All appurtenances shall be located outside any required setback and shall be screened from view. e. Elevations The north and east elevations shall incorporate architectural cues and proportions found along Main Street to create an architectural screen as a visual enhancement to the existing commercial corridor. ii. Exterior walls shall exhibit horizontal rather that sloping design elements. iii. The exterior of the parking structure shall be painted a soft, earth tone color as approved by the Planning Division. Brighter and darker colors, including dark green, shall be prohibited. iv. Decorative grillwork or landscape materials shall be placed between wall and floor of the higher parking level. v. Elevators shall be located so they are visible to the public. The elevator cabs shall have glass facing the public view. vi. The parking structure shall comply with the Santa Ana Municipal Code sections pertaining to the Police Department's Security requirements, including parking lot lighting levels. vii. The parking structure shall comply with the Santa Ana Police Department's parking structure design guidelines. 11 B-31 f. Landscaping: i. Landscaping planters incorporated into the parking structure shall have a minimum planter dimension of 4-feet wide and 4- feet deep. An internal drainage system and waterproofing of the planters shall be provided along with an automatic drip - type irrigation system. ii. A trellis shall be incorporated into the north and west building elevations where blank walls occur on the structure. The trellis material shall be constructed of decorative and durable materials and shall cover a minimum of 60 percent of the blank wall. The trellis details shall be included in the project landscape plan and be approved prior to building permit issuance. iii. Canary Island Pines, Deodar Cedars and River She -Oaks shall be planted along the Broadway and Washington Avenue elevations. The trees shall be planted at a minimum of 30 feet on center as shown on a landscape plan to be approved by the City's Landscape Development Associate prior to the issuance of building permits for the parking structure. The landscape plan shall be fully implemented prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy. iv. The size of the trees to screen the parking structure along Washington Avenue and Broadway shall be a minimum 120- inch box tree. g. Signs i. All signage shall comply with the Santa Ana Municipal Code. ii. Prior to issuance of any sign permits or certificates of occupancy for any building or portion thereof, a comprehensive sign program for the entire site, including directional signs and graphics for the parking structure, shall be submitted to and be approved by the Planning Commission. 6. Parking/Circulation A student drop-off area shall be created in the parking lot of 920 North Main Street for the exclusive use of the Orange County High School of the Arts. The minimum standards for this function include: 11 Br32 a. Prior to issuance of any building permits, construct a raised center median on Main Street per a Street Improvement Plan to be approved by the Public Works Agency. b. Prior to issuance of any building permits, construct a two-way drop-off zone. Each lane shall have a minimum width of 18 feet. A yellow line approximately one foot in width shall be painted to separate the two drive-thru lanes. The plans shall be submitted to the Planning Division and Public Works Agency for approval. c. Prior to issuance of any building permits, install a hedge and 36- inch tall fence to direct students towards the Main Street and Sycamore Street public sidewalks in order to avoid illegal pedestrian crosswalk movements onto Tenth Street. d. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the removal of the existing parking stalls and meters on Main Street consistent with the mitigation measures contained in the Final EIR. e. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the restriping of Main Street to provide three northbound and two southbound travel lanes. f. All loading zone areas must provide a minimum 6-inch raised curb around the perimeter of each area. g. The proposed roundabout and water feature details must be included as part of the Plaza Plan referenced in Section 7-7 of this ordinance. Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy, all water feature and roundabout improvements must be completed. h. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, close off the existing curb and gutter serving the trash collection area between 1200 South Main Street and the OCHSA. The curb and gutter shall be replaced with a new curb, gutter and sidewalk. i. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the left turn ingress (Sycamore Street - southbound) into the school drop-off zone. j. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note wheel chair accessibility ramps at the Broadway egress exit. 11 Bt-33 k. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the replacement of the painted striped "No Access Zone" to be replaced with a raised median barrier with decorative pavement for the eastern and western portions of Tenth Street. I. Prior to submittal into building plan check, revise the site plan to depict and note the modifications of the signals at the Main/Washington, Main/Tenth, Washington/Sycamore, Broadway/Washington and Broadway/Tenth intersections. m. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, install a raised median at the Broadway egress as determined by the Public Works Agency. 7. Plaza Design Prior to issuance of any building permits, a detailed Plaza Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission. a. The overall plaza design theme shall incorporate a minimum of three major pedestrian -level water features and two water elements adjacent to the proposed building. b. The plaza landscape palette must include a minimum of four (4) tree species, to be approved by the Landscape Development Associate prior to the issuance of any building permit. The minimum established size for palm trees shall be 30 feet brown trunk height. Non -palm tree species shall be a minimum of 20 feet in height and 60-inch box. c. Land uses such as retail, office or other services shall be incorporated within the plaza level pursuant to the approved site plan. Exterior kiosks, carts or other temporary outdoor uses are not allowed unless specifically submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission. d. The plaza shall incorporate seating, benches and landscaping to provide visual interest and additional amenities within the plaza. e. Pedestrian amenities shall be provided such as lighting, planters, drinking fountains, unit pavers, and bicycle racks. f. The color and appearance of the plaza furniture products and other elements must complement the overall plaza design and tower architecture. 11 BL-34 g. Benches and pedestrian seating shall be made of a durable material such as concrete or painted iron and be designed to minimize effects from vandalism, skateboarding and weather. h. Trash receptacles should be located in high -activity areas, such as plazas and other public open spaces. The style shall be compatible with other plaza furnishings. i. Bike racks shall be provided at key activity locations on the plaza level. j. All street furniture surfaces, pedestrian -level walls and amenities shall incorporate graffiti resistant coatings. k. Soft as well as hard surfaced areas shall be incorporated into the Plaza Plan. Plaza area paving shall consist of unit pavers. I. One linear foot of seating shall be provided for every 60 square feet of plaza area. Seating may include benches, low seating walls, steps, planter edges or fountains. The seating shall be designed to discourage sleeping. m. Lighting height in the plaza area should be at a pedestrian scale. A range between 16 feet and 22 feet in the plaza area should be fully illuminated from dusk until dawn. The overall lighting shall be maintained at one -foot candle and incorporate other pedestrian - oriented lights, such as lighted bollards. Uplighting of trees and other site features is also required. n. The required Plaza Plan shall include adequate provisions for the on -going maintenance of all plaza and roundabout improvements. o. The required Plaza Plan shall include design details, materials and provisions for the on -going maintenance for all interior public areas within the office tower, including but not limited to the ground floor and basement area lobbies. 8. Public Art a. Public art valued at one percent of the office tower valuation is required. The cost of any water feature or portion thereof shall not be included for purposes of complying with the public art requirement. Public art may be comprised of multiple art pieces, however, at least one such art piece shall be placed at the southwest corner of the project site adjacent to Broadway and Tenth Street. The public art should invite participation and interaction, inspire, add local meaning, interpret the community by revealing its culture or history, and/or capture or reinforce the 11 B-35 unique character of the new place. A comprehensive Public Art Plan indicating compliance with this requirement, and which proposes specific pieces of art for specific locations or applications, shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval prior to issuance of any building permits. All public art approved by the Planning Commission in the Public Art Plan shall be completely installed prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy for the project. b. Art should be sited to complement features such as plaza or architectural components so that the art is an integral part of the One Broadway Plaza development site. c. Public art should be constructed using durable materials and finishes including but not limited to stone or metal. d. No art piece provided pursuant to the public art requirement, including an art piece such as a mural that may be proposed on the south elevation of the parking structure at the Sycamore Street entrance, shall include advertising of any type, including but not limited to products, services or businesses. e. All public art provided pursuant to the public art requirement shall be properly maintained at all times, be free of any graffiti and shall not incorporate any flashing or distracting form of illumination. f. All art pieces approved and installed pursuant to the Public Art Plan shall remain on the project site and may not be removed without the approval of the Planning Commission. 9. Residential a. Provide the dimensions of the tower on the site plan to ensure consistency with the approved (2005) plans. b. Revise the site plan to accurately depict the existing pick-up and drop-off area for the Orange County School of the Arts. c. The site plan shows painted medians at the Sycamore Street entrance. Coordinate with the Public Works Agency on this alteration to the approved site plan. d. A minimum of 200,000 net square feet shall be devoted to office uses, with the remaining square footage dedicated to residential. e. A minimum of two parking spaces per unit are required. Further, the residential parking must be located behind security gates to separate residential and commercial parking. f. Please verify that the scale of the plans is accurate. g. A maximum of 80 percent of the project can consist of studio and one -bedroom units, with a minimum of 20 percent of the units needing to be two and three -bedroom units. h. The minimum unit size of any unit shall be 500 square feet. i. A washer and dryer shall be provided within each unit. j. In -unit bulk storage spaces of at least 100 cubic feet per unit with a minimum dimension of 3 feet in each direction shall be provided. k. Recessed entry's that are a minimum of eight inches shall be provided. The recessed entries shall also include decorative molding around the recess to further define the entry. I. Interior hallway corridors that are a minimum width of 5-feet shall be provided. m. Prior to submittal into building plan check, submit a Trash Disposal Plan for review. The Plan shall depict how trash removal will be accomplished for the residential units. If a chute system will be utilized, show the maximum travel distances within each floor from unit entries to the nearest elevator and trash chute. n. Depict the mail and storage area(s). Mail/storage areas shall be located adjacent to residential lobbies and elevators for convenience access. o. Revise Sheet A-4 to correctly identify the activity occurring on the floor (Lounge/Food Court). p. Identify on plans where public water meters are proposed, as well as rooms or areas where any/all private utility meters will be located. q. Prior to submittal into building plan check, submit an Elevator Plan for the project. Separate elevator access and egress shall be provided for each component (residential and office). 11 E637 r. Prior to submittal into building plan check, submit a Residential Amenity Plan for review. The plan shall depict common amenities such as a Club Room/Library and a Business Center, and interior amenities such as appliances, kitchen cabinet finishes and bathroom finishes. At a minimum, the cabinetry shall be stain grade and counter tops shall be made of granite or similar stone material. s. The Lounge area shall incorporate a commercial kitchen that will be made available to residents of the tower. t. Storage facilities at a rate of 256 cubic feet per unit shall be provided u. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided and designed per the City's residential and office standards. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE RECEIVE AND FILE QUARTERLY REPORT FOR HOUSING DIVISION PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES JANUARY 2020-MARCH 2O20 CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 111 Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2ntl Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO /s/Kristine Ridge FILE NUMBER CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION Receive and file the Quarterly Report for Housing Division Projects and Activities for the period of January 2020-March 2020. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING COMMISSION ACTION All commission meetings were canceled for the month of April 2020 due to the COVID-19 local emergency and closure of City Hall. DISCUSSION This report for the quarter ending on March 31, 2020 provides statistics for all of the affordable housing projects and activities for the Housing Division. The report is divided into four sections: Loan Activity, Loan Portfolio Management and Monitoring, Affordable Housing Funds and Commitments, and Development Projects. Loan Activity Applications The Housing Division offers several different programs including down payment assistance for first- time homebuyers and rehabilitation loans for mobile homes, single-family, multi -family, and historic homes. Inquiries are received from the public and applications are mailed out, received and approved for these programs on a continual basis. Table 1 shows the number of inquiries, applications sent out, received and approved by type for the quarter and for the total fiscal year. Table 1: Applications Sent Out, Received & Approved Program Inquiries Applications Sent Out Applications Received Applications Approved Q3 Total FY Q3 Total FY Q3 Total FY Q3 Total FY Single -Family Rehabilitation 0 28 4 25 4 7 4 4 Mobile Home Rehabilitation 5 12 2 2 2 5 2 2 Multi -Family Rehabilitation 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Historic Home Restoration 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Homeownership/ DPAP 11 203 8 165 6 13 3 6 19C-1 Quarterly Report for Housing Division May 5, 2020 Page 2 The number of applications received is typically lower than the number of applications sent out in any given period due to the stringent program guidelines for eligibility regulated by the federal government, which makes it difficult for most applicants to qualify. Due to the coronavirus (COVID- 19), application processing for the Down Payment Assistance Program, Single -Family and Mobile Home Rehabilitation Program are currently on hold. There are currently nine applications for the Single -Family Rehabilitation Program and four applications for the Mobile Home Rehabilitation Program. Rehabilitation Loan Underwritinq and Approval Progress During this quarter, three (3) home rehabilitation loans were funded this quarter including two mobile homes and one single-family. Rehabilitation Program Construction Progress During this phase, homeowners receiving rehabilitation loans are guided through an open selection of contractors to complete the work on their homes. Each homeowner is given a list of contractors that have been screened by staff for license and insurance requirements. However, homeowners are allowed to select any contractor that meets these same requirements. Staff assists the homeowners with the evaluation of bids and selection of a contractor. Staff also monitors the construction work, approves payments to contractors, and tracks expenditures to ensure compliance with the loan agreement and program guidelines. During this quarter, no rehabilitation of single-family homes or mobile homes were completed. Down Payment Assistance Loan Program (DPAP) Progress For the Down Payment Assistance Loan Program, staff evaluates applicant eligibility and oversees underwriting to ensure compliance with program guidelines and requirements established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). During this quarter, staff conducted one (1) down payment assistance workshop in February. One new down payment assistance application was pending loan packet and escrow information. Loan Portfolio Management & Monitoring The Housing Division is responsible for managing the residential loan portfolio which includes all of the loans entered into by the City and Housing Authority acting as the Housing Successor Agency. The information below is from the second quarter. The third quarter updates will be provided once staffing is returned to full capacity after COVID-19. As of the end of the second quarter, the principal balance was $136,950,890. This is comprised of 371 loans of which 345 are deferred or residual receipt payment loans. As shown in Table 2, the loan portfolio generated $565,429 in payments of principal and interest during the second quarter. The amount of residual receipts payments changes every quarter and is often higher at the end of the year. Table 2: Portfolio Revenue Funding Source HOME CDBG Redevelopment NSP CalHOME Loan Payoffs $29,568 $0 $11,962 $0 Residual Receipts Payments $212,499 $0 $285,434 $0 $0 Amortized Loan Payments $834 $7,392 $17,741 $0 $0 Total For Q2 $242,900 $7,392 $303,175 $11,962 $0 19C-2 Quarterly Report for Housing Division May 5, 2020 Page 3 Monitoring As part of the requirements for these funds, staff must monitor the owner -occupancy of single- family homes that have received loans, and the building code compliance of units in rental projects with long-term affordability covenants. During this quarter, 70 owner -occupancy recertification letters were mailed and 53 were returned and processed. This number includes letters sent from previous months. On -site compliance monitoring of the tenant files was not conducted this quarter due to COVID-19. Prior to all inspections being put on -hold due to COVID-19, staff conducted building code compliance inspections for 113 units on seven (7) properties which represents a sampling of 36% of the total units in the properties. Regulations require that only a sample of units be selected for inspection. Staff also inspects the grounds and common areas such as laundry rooms to ensure they also meet municipal code requirements. The grounds, common areas and all of the inspected units were found to be in compliance at the time of initial inspection. Available Funds and Land Assets for Affordable Housing Development Projects The City of Santa Ana and the Housing Authority acting as the Housing Successor Agency manages multiple sources of local, state and federal funds to promote and facilitate the development of affordable housing as well as land assets held by the Housing Authority. Exhibit 1 provides a summary of the funds available as of March 31, 2020. Exhibit 2 provides a summary of available land assets. Housing Opportunity Ordinance On -Site Development: Since 2011, a total of 33 units have been developed on -site as a result of the Ordinance, including 23 ownership units for -sale and 10 rental units: Units Built On -Site Ownership Rental TOTAL 23 10 33 In -Lieu Fees Generated. - All in -lieu fees, penalties and other monies collected pursuant to the Housing Opportunity Ordinance, including interest, are deposited into the Inclusionary Housing Fund. Since inception, the Inclusionary Housing Fund has generated $17,872,871 to be used for the development of housing affordable to low- and moderate -income households, with a reasonable amount spent on administrative or related expenses associated with the administration of the Housing Opportunity Ordinance. These fees were generated from a total of 12 projects that opted to pay the in -lieu fee instead of building units on -site. If those 12 projects had instead built the inclusionary housing units on -site, a total of 409 affordable housing units would have been created. Affordable Housing Units under Construction / Pre -Development with In -Lieu Fees: A total of 203 units are under construction / pre -development with an investment of in -lieu fees generated. This includes a $4,775,000 loan of in -lieu fees to develop 57 units of affordable housing at the Santa Ana Arts Collective; a $1.3 million loan of in -lieu fees to develop 51 units of affordable 19C-3 Quarterly Report for Housing Division May 5, 2020 Page 4 housing at the Tiny Tim Plaza project; a pre -loan commitment of $3,170,547 to develop 93 units of affordable housing at the Legacy Square project; and a commitment of $231,494 to develop two affordable homeownership units by Habitat for Humanity at 416 Vance Street and 826 N Lacy Street. Units Under Construction / Pre -Development with In -Lieu Fees Project # of Units Santa Ana Arts Collective 57 Legacy Square 93 Tiny Tim Plaza 51 416 Vance Street & 826 N. Lacy Street 2 TOTAL 203 This report reflects the status of funds and projects for the period ending March 31, 2020. Request for Proposals — RFP #19-063 for Affordable Housing Development The City of Santa Ana and the Housing Authority of the City of Santa Ana issued a new Request for Proposals (RFP # 19-063) on July 8, 2019 for the development of affordable housing in the City. Following the issuance of this RFP and a deliberative selection and review process followed by the City, on February 19, 2020, the Community Redevelopment and Housing Commission recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a pre -commitment letter with Community Development Partners and Mercy House Community Housing Development Organization for $3,904,341 in affordable housing funds consisting of $1,514,113 in Inclusionary Housing funds, $2,003,705 in HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds and $386,523 in Rental Rehabilitation Program funds for the development of the Westview House affordable housing project located at 2530 and 2534 Westminster Avenue, Santa Ana, CA 92701, (APNs 198- 132-21 and 198-132-23). Affordable Housing Development Projects There are four (4) affordable housing developments under construction and five (5) affordable housing projects in pre -development. An existing affordable housing development (Cornerstone Apartments) is also being rehabilitated. Below are brief summaries for the nine (9) projects under construction / pre -development and the tenth project under rehabilitation. Exhibit 3 provides a development timeline for the larger development projects. Projects under Construction Santa Ana Arts Collective (1666 N. Main Street) Developer Meta Housing Corporation Acquisition, adaptive reuse and new construction project comprised of 57 Description affordable rental units designated for professional artists of all disciplines, and 1 manager's unit. Permanent supportive housing for 15 units will be funded by MHSA/SNHP funds from the County of Orange. Inclusionary Housing ($4,775,000), HOME Investment Partnership City Funds Program (HOME) ($2,627,631), Community Development Block Grant CDBG $500,000 19C-4 Quarterly Report for Housing Division May 5, 2020 Page 5 The project received a Temporary Partial Certificate of Occupancy at the end of December 2019. Construction is 93% complete and anticipated to Update lease up in May 2020. The contractor is completing the courtyard, playground, and window work. All 15 MHSA units have been leased up. The developer is continuing lease up efforts and has leased up 46 out of 56 units. Santa Ana Veterans Villaqe (3312 W. First Street) Developer Jamboree Housing Corporation New construction of an affordable multifamily apartment complex consisting Description of 75 units of permanent supportive housing with wrap -around supportive services for HUD -Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) eligible homeless veterans and 1 manager's unit. City Funds Seventy-five (75) HUD-VASH Project -Based Vouchers, HOME-CHDO $477,345.90 Construction is approximately 90% complete. The project is set to be completed and occupied by the end of April 2020. Contractor is forming and pouring gutters with landscape and onsite paving work to begin this week. Update All unit and common area furniture and appliances are scheduled to be installed by the end of next week. The construction team is taking all safety precautions onsite by practicing social distancing and wearing protective gear. All units and common area spaces will receive a more thorough secondary clean prior to resident move -ins. Aqua Housing (317 E. 17th Street) Developer Community Development Partners with Mercy House as the service provider Acquisition, demolition and new construction of a former motel yielding 56 units of affordable permanent supportive housing with wrap -around Description supportive services for chronically homeless individuals and 1 manager's unit. 28 of the 56 units will be funded by MHSA/SNHP funds from the County of Orange. City Funds Fifty-six (56) Project -Based Vouchers (PBVs) Construction is now approximately 34% complete. Framing is complete on the rear residential building (segment C) and windows and roof have been Update installed. The podium deck has been poured for segments A & B and framing will commence this week. Safety measures are in place at the job site with PPE and social distancing being enforced for all workers. 19C-5 Quarterly Report for Housing Division May 5, 2020 Page 6 Tiny Tim Plaza (2239 West 5th Street) Developer Community Development Partners New construction of an affordable multifamily apartment complex consisting Description of 50 units of rental housing serving very -low and extremely -low income families, and 1 manager's unit. City Funds Inclusionary Housing ($1,300,000), Housing Successor Agency $4, 700, 000 The project is currently under construction, including framing and trades above the podium deck, at 27% complete. The retail renovations have Update been permitted, and construction is to begin in April. Owner and management are beginning marketing and lease -up plans in anticipation of occupancy at the end of 2020. Projects in Pre -Development Crossroads at Washington (1126 and 1146 E. Washington Avenue) Developer Related Companies of California with A Community of Friends (ACOF) as the service provider New construction of a 100% affordable multifamily apartment complex Descri tion p consisting of 85 units of rental housing and 1 manager's unit. All units will be affordable to households earning less than 30% AMI of which 43 units will be set -aside for permanent supportive housing. HOME Investment Partnerships Program ($3,007,489), Neighborhood City Funds Stabilization Program ($963,951), sixty-five (65) year ground lease agreement for 1126 and 1146 E. Washington Avenue (Appraised Value as of September 22, 2019: $4,108,136 The Project received its entitlements on February 24, 2020. The Project received a formal commitment for the 43 Project Based Vouchers from the Orange County Housing Authority on March 5, 2020. In February, the City and County approved the 65 year Ground Lease, Option Agreement for the Ground Lease, Joint Powers Agreement and Quitclaims associated with the Update JPA. The documents were approved by City Council on February 18. The Option Agreement was executed shortly afterwards. Following these approvals, the developer submitted a 9% Tax Credit application for the TCAC 9% Application 1st Round on March 9 and is awaiting the official results. Preliminary results show that the developer will not be awarded funding in the 1st Round and therefore will need to submit another 9% Tax Credit application for the 2"d Round on July 1, 2020. FX Residences (801, 809, 809 % East Santa Ana Boulevard) Developer HomeAid Orange County, Inc. with Mercy House as the service provider Description New construction of an affordable multifamily apartment complex consisting of 16 units of permanent supportive housing, and 1 manager's unit. 19C-6 Quarterly Report for Housing Division May 5, 2020 Page 7 City Funds Housing Successor Agency ($1,069,947), three (3) HUD-VASH PBVs, 99- year ground lease agreement for 801 E. Santa Ana Blvd. (Appraised Value as of Oct 25, 2018: $788,000 The developer submitted revised drawings to the City of Santa Ana on March 10, 2020. The developer and Public Works staff met several times to resolve critical design issues before the second submittal package could Update be completed. HomeAid Orange County is in ongoing communication with state HCD and CAL HFA. Both entities will coordinate the disbursement of capital funds to be used for the permanent financing of the project. On March 28, HomeAid Orange County applied to the Orange County Housing Finance Trust for additional gap funding. Habitat for Humanity (416 Vance Street & 826 N. Lacy Street) Developer Habitat for Humanity of Orange County Description New construction of two single-family detached homes for homeownership serving households up to 120% AMI. Inclusionary Housing ($231,494) and 99-year ground lease agreement for City Funds 416 Vance Street and 826 N. Lacy Street (Appraised Value as of Oct 25, 2018: $578,000 The developer submitted architectural drawings to Jeff Dickman of the Historic French Park Committee. They are currently under review by the committee. The developer is currently finalizing the grading/engineering Update plans and preparing for submittal. They are also working with SCE to abandon an easement that currently exists between the two parcels. After they have substantial approval from the French Park Committee on the architecture, the developer will enter the structural design phase and complete the construction drawings for submittal. Legacy Square (609 North Spurgeon Street) Developer National Community Renaissance with Mercy House as the service provider New construction of a 100% affordable multifamily apartment complex Description consisting of 92 units of rental housing and 1 manager's unit. All units will be affordable to households earning less than 60 /o AMI of which 33 units will be set -aside for permanent supportive housing. City Funds Inclusionary Housing ($3,170,547) and eight (8) HUD-VASH PBVs The developer applied for Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) funding on February 11. AHSC scoring letters will be mailed in early May and awards announced on June 25. The developer Update anticipates applying for 4% tax credits and tax exempt bonds on May 15. The developer was awarded a total of $6,013,134 for 16 No Place Like Home (NPLH) units - $3,135,262 for capital and $2,887,872 for the capitalized operating subsidy reserve. 19C-7 Quarterly Report for Housing Division May 5, 2020 Page 8 North Harbor Village (1108 N. Harbor) Developer Jamboree Housing Corporation New construction of a 100% affordable multifamily apartment complex Description consisting of 89 permanent supportive housing studio units for homeless veterans. City Funds Eight -nine (89) HUD-VASH PBVs and CDBG ($1,687,047) Multifamily Housing Program (MHP) funding awards were announced in late December and the developer did not receive an MHP grant due to extraordinary competition across the state. The developer submitted an application to the Veterans Housing and Homelessness Prevention (VHHP) Program on February 13, 2020. The developer also resubmitted an MHP application on March 3, 2020 for the second round as an alternative Update financing strategy. Additionally, the developer applied on March 25, 2020 to the Orange County Housing Finance Trust fund for additional financing. The developer believes that the VHHP application combined with funding from the OCHFT is the most obtainable financing strategy. If the developer is successful, they will submit a 4% tax credit application on August 21, 2020. If awarded tax credits, construction would then likely begin early to late Q1 2021. Existing Projects under Rehabilitation Cornerstone Apartments (805, 810, 815, 816, 825, 835 and 904 S. Minnie Street) Developer Jamboree Housing Description Rehabilitation of a 126-unit affordable housing project originally built in 1961. City Funds HOME Investment Partnerships Program ($5,128,152) and Housing Successor Agency $2,054,327 in existing affordable housing loans Ten (10) existing HOME Program loans and thirty-three (33) existing Housing Successor Agency loans were consolidated into two (2) Amended and Restated Loan Agreements in order to enable the project to re - syndicate and resubordinate existing affordable housing loans to a new Update senior loan. Construction work started in October 2019 and is currently 59 percent complete. Interior unit work has currently been put on hold due to COVID-19. Exterior work is continuing as planned. The completion date for the project was originally the end of June 2020. Due to the circumstances, it is difficult to ascertain the exact completion date, but the developer is targeting July 2020 if possible. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This report support's the City's efforts to meet Goal #5 - Community Health, Livability, Engagement & Sustainability, Objective #3 (facilitate diverse housing opportunities and support efforts to preserve and improve the livability of Santa Ana neighborhoods). 19C-8 Quarterly Report for Housing Division May 5, 2020 Page 9 FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Exhibits: 1. Available Funds for Affordable Housing Development Projects 2. Available Land Assets for Affordable Housing Development 3. Project Timelines 19C-9 EXHIBIT 1 Available Funds for Affordable Housing Development Projects As of February 29, 2020 Housing Successor Agency (Housing Authority) $3,755,047 Cash on Hand ($85,227) First Street Apartments Loan' ($24,766) First Street Apartments Project Costs ($1,069,947) Frances Xavier Residence Project Pre -Commitment Loan 2 ($250,000) Administrative Costs Allowance 3 ($2,325,107) Administrative Costs Allowance for Future Fiscal Years 4 ($0) Available Funds Inclusionary Housing Funds $7,357,220 Cash on Hand ($31,965) Santa Ana Arts Collective Project Costs' ($280,000) Down Payment Assistance Program 6 ($21,240) Interim Emergency Homeless Shelter Agreement ($3,170,547) Legacy Square Project Pre -Commitment Loan 8 ($231,494) Lacy Street Project Pre -Commitment Loan 9 ($57,635) Tiny Tim Plaza Project Costs 10 ($1,514,113) Westview House Project Pre -Commitment Loan " ($90,000) WISEPlace' Steps to Independence Program Agreement 12 ($284,630) Administrative Costs Allowance (CDA/PBA) $1,675,597 Available Funds HOME Program $5,208,089 Funds to Drawdown ($3,007,489) Crossroads at Washington Pre -Commitment Loan " ($2,003,705) Westview House Project Pre -Commitment Loan $196,895 Available Funds to Drawdown CDBG Program (Acquisition/Rehabilitation Projects Only) $721,567 Funds to Drawdown ($1,687,047) North Harbor Village Project Pre -Commitment Loan 14 $0 Available Funds to Drawdown NSP Program (Abandoned, Foreclosed or Vacant Properties Only) $1,352,054 Funds to Drawdown ($963,951) Crossroads at Washington Pre -Commitment Loan ($96,395) Crossroads at Washington Project Costs ($291,708) Transfer to CDBG in FY 20/21 $0 Available Funds to Drawdown Rental Rehabilitation Grant Program $387,276 Cash on Hand 15 ($386,523) Westview House Project Pre -Commitment Loan 11 $753 Available Funds $1,873,245 Total Available Funds 1 Approved by Housing Autdortty on January 16,2013.96%of loan paid on Mamh13,201810%remaining to be paid upon completion of construction. Approved by Housing Autdortty on January 15,2019. The Housing Successor Agency relies on avdoabie cash to fund the monitoring and compliance functions related to the former Rededelopment Agencys housing loans Funds to beset aside for compliance and monitoring requirements due to uncertainty ofNtrlre repayment redounds. Protect costs only;$43M In l Cans approved by City Council paid on July'26 2017. ° dead CCC originally approved by City Council on March 6, 2018 Three loans paid through end of October '2➢19. Approved by CRy CCund on September 13, 2018 Agmementwhd MCTyHouse LMgq Centers, Inc for spruces through December2619. a Approved by City Counc�Mousing Autdontty on January 15,2019. Approved by CRy Cound oJousing Autdontty on March 5, 2019. 10 Probst costs only $6 OM In loans approved by City Council/Housing Authority and paid on May 2,2019. Approved by City Council on April 7,2020 12 Approved by City Council on April 7,2020 19C-10 W:c11:111INA AVAILABLE LAND ASSETS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (1) 302 E. Twenty -Second Street a. APN:003-122-25 b. Lot Size: 27,817sf c. Current Zoning: R1 Single -Family Residence, which allows one house per lot. d. Parcel was acquired 10/30/2002 using Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund - 20% Set Aside. e. Previous Use: Purchased from Cal Trans. It was a remnant parcel from the freeway widening project. The site was vacant and undeveloped at the time it was acquired. f. General Plan: Low Density Residential, which allows single-family residences and ancillary uses. g. Maximum du/ac: Seven units per acre. h. Site Condition / Environmental Conditions: Property is irregular in shape, is below the minimum lot size for a residential lot, and will most likely require the approval of several variances from the zoning code in order to facilitate a residential unit. 19C-11 ON0011:3k963 Current Affordable Housing Development Project Timelines Project Recently Completed First Street Apartments - 1440 E. First St Oct-15 Developer Submitted Request for Funds to CDA Apr-16 Planning Entitlements Approved Jun-17 Awarded Successor Agency Funds Jun-17 Relocation Plan Approved Sep-17 9% Low -Income Housing Tax Credits Awarded Jan-18 Final Housing Authority Loan Approved Mar-18 Close of Escrow Mar-18 Construction Initiated Sept-19 Construction Completion Oct-19 Occupancy Projects Under Construction Santa Ana Arts Collective - 1666 N. Main St Jun-15 RFP Issued Nov-15 Approved HOME/CDBG Funds Mar-16 Submitted Application for AHSC (Cap & Trade Funds) Sep-16 Awarded AHSC (Cap & Trade) Funds Nov-16 9% Low -Income Housing Tax Credits Awarded Dec-16 Relocation Plan Approved Jul-17 Final Loan Approved/ Close of Escrow Jul-17 Planning Entitlements Approved Jul-17 Building Permits Pulled/Construction Initiated Mar-20 Anticipated Construction Completion Santa Ana Veterans Village - 3312 W. First St Dec-16 RFP Issued for PBVs Apr-17 Approved HUD VASH PBVs Jun-17 Awarded HOME CHDO Funds Jun-17 Planning Entitlements Approved Jan-18 Awarded County Special Needs Housing Funds Feb-18 Submittal of 9% Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Application Jun-18 Award of 9% Low -Income Housing Tax Credits Dec-18 Close of Escrow Feb-19 Construction Initiated Mar-20 Anticipated Construction Completion Page 1 of 5 19C-12 ON0011:3111963 Aqua Housing - 317 E. 17th St Dec-16 RFP Issued for PBVs Apr-17 Approved PBVs Jun-17 Planning Entitlements Approved Jun-17 Approved Additional PBVs Jan-18 Awarded County Special Needs Housing Funds Jan-18 Submitted Application for HCD Infill Infrastructure Funds Jun-18 Award of HCD Infill Infrastructure Funds Aug-18 Submittal of 4% Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Application Oct-18 Allocation of 4% Low -Income Housing Tax Credits Apr-19 Close of Escrow June-19 Construction Initiated Tiny Tim Plaza - 2223 W. Sth St Dec-16 Developer Submitted Request for Funds to CDA Jun-17 Awarded City and Housing Successor Agency Funds Jan-18 Planning Entitlements Approved Jul-18 Submittal of 9% Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Application Oct-18 Award of 9% Low -Income Housing Tax Credits May-19 Anticipated Close of Escrow June-19 Construction Initiated Projects in Pre -Development The Crossroads at Washington - 1126 and 1146 E. Washington Ave. Aug-19 Submitted PSH Application to County Oct-19 Submitted for Planning Entitlements Oct-19 Community Meeting Nov-19 Approval of Joint Powers Agreement, Option to Ground Lease, Voucher Resolution and Cooperation Agreement, and Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) Agreement, and Density Bonus Dec-19 NEPA EA City Approval —City of Santa Ana Submits NEPA EA to HUD Feb-20 PSH Funds and Voucher Approval from County Board of Supervisors Feb-20 Planning Entitlements Approved Mar-20 TCAC9%Application —1"Round 2020 May-20 Assuming a 1' Round 2020 TCAC 9% Award Allocation, start Design Development Drawings Jun-20 TCAC 9% Award Allocation Jul-20 Submit for 1" Plan Check Dec-20 I City Issues Permit Ready Letter Dec-20 Construction Loan Closing Dec-20 Start of Construction Page 2 of 5 19C-13 O:/:ILyk9c3 Feb-22 Construction Complete Jul-22 Full Occupancy Mar-19 North Harbor Village - 1108 N. Harbor Start of Design Development Mar-19 Applied to FHLBSF for AHP Financing ($890,000) Mar-19 Award of VASH Vouchers & City Loan by City Council (89 Vouchers and $1,687,047) Mar-19 Start Environmental Approval Process with City of Santa Ana (CEQA/NEPA) Mar-19 Applied for Home Depot Grant ($500,000) Jun-19 CEQA/NEPAApproval— Cityof Santa Ana Jun-19 AHP Award Date ($890,000) Aug-20 Applied to HCD for MHP Funding ($13,316,412) Dec-19 Notified Project Did Not Receive MHP Funding Jan-20 Home Depot Grant Award Date Feb-20 First Submittal for Architectural Review Feb-20 Apply to HCD for VHHP Funding ($7,943,883) Feb-20 Apply for OCHTF Financing (If Necessary) Mar-20 Reapply for MHP —2"d Round (If Necessary) Apr-20 Arch. Review Comments Received from City May-20 I Receive Ministerial Approvals for Design May-20 Receive AHAP Contract Jul-20 Apply for TCAC 9% Sep-20 TCAC Allocation Oct-20 Start Construction Documents for Rehab Oct-20 Submit First Plan Check Dec-20 Receipt of First Plan Check Comments Dec-20 Submit Second Plan Check Jan-21 Receipt of Second Plan Check Comments Jan-21 Submit Third Plan Check Feb-21 Receipt of Permit Ready Mar-21 Construction Loan Closing Mar-21 Start of Construction Jan-22 Construction Complete Jan-22 Start of Lease Up May-22 Full Occupancy Page 3 of 5 19C-14 O:/:ILyk9c3 FX Residences - 801, 809, 809 1/2 E. Santa Ana Boulevard Jan-19 Council Approval for Land Lease and Project Funding Jan-19 Submittal of Application for NPLH Funding Feb-19 Confirm with City Staff That Project Site Can Yield Additional Units Under Existing Zoning Mar-19 Revise Conceptual Drawings for additional 5 units (17 total units, up from the original 12 units) Mar-19 SNHP Funding Application Submitted to County Apr-19 City Staff to Review Revised Conceptual Design Apr-19 Begin Development Agreement May-19 Board of Supervisors Meeting for SNHP Funding Jul-19 Execute Development Agreement Jul-19 Formal Awards Letters for NPLH Funding To Be Issued Aug-19 Initial Planning Submittal Sept-19 Sunshine Ordinance Meeting May-20 Planning Commission Meeting (ministerial approval of density bonus) July-20 City Council Meeting (ministerial approval of density bonus) Aug-20 Begin Construction Docs Dec-20 Approval of Grading Plans Dec-20 Begin Construction (Grading, Weather Permitting) Feb -22 Completion of Construction Habitat for Humanity - 416 Vance Street & 826 N. Lacy Street May-20 DDA signed June-20 Prepare Grading Plans July -20 Submit Grading/Improvements Jan-20 Prepare Architectural Plans June-20 Submit Architectural Plans Oct-20 Grading Permit Issued Nov-20 Commence Grading Dec-20 Building Permits Issued Jan-21 Begin Construction Dec-21 Anticipated Construction Completion Jan-22 Certificate of Occupancy/Closings Page 4 of 5 19C-15 O:/:ILyk9c3 Legacy Square - 609 North Spurgeon Street Aug-18 Santa Ana CDA Funding Application Dec-18 Applied for NPLH and SNHP Funds Jan-19 Santa Ana Funding Award Feb-19 Planning Entitlements Approved Feb-19 Applied for Round 4 AHSC Funding May-19 Award of SNHP Funds July-19 Applied for Round 1 MHP Nov-19 Applied for State 4% tax credits Jan-20 Construction Drawings (8-12 weeks) Feb-20 Apply for Round 5 AHSC Funding May-20 Apply for 4%Tax Credits May-20 Plan Check (12-16 weeks) Jun-20 Award of AHSC Funds July-20 Award of 4%Tax credits July-20 Award of Tax -Exempt Bonds May-20 Plan Check (12-16 weeks) Sep-20 Building Permit Issuance Dec-20 Construction Closing/Syndication Jan-21 Begin Construction (18 months) Jun-22 Construction Complete Aug-22 100% Fully Leased (2 months) Page 5 of 5 19C-16 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE: APPROVE AN APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT RECOGNIZING $10,000, AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE PROPERTIES AND EASEMENTS, REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR PROJECT COSTS RELATED TO THE SR-55 WIDENING PROJECT, AND APPROVE STAFF TO PROCEED WITH A 'CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK' DELIVERY METHOD FOR WATER RELOCATION PROJECTS (NON -GENERAL FUND) /s/Kristine Ridge CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1" Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2111 Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a Cooperative Agreement with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to acquire City properties and easements, and reimburse the City up to $100,000 from the execution of the contract until June 30, 2025 for actual costs of services related to the State Route 55 Improvement Project, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. 2. Approve an appropriation adjustment recognizing $10,000 in funds from OCTA, as outlined in the cooperative agreement for the State Route 55 Improvement Project, into the Measure M OCTA Transitway Project Fund revenue account and appropriating the same into the Measure M OCTA Transitway Project Fund expenditure account. 3. Approve an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement Program to add SR- 55 Widening Project to include design funds in the amount of $10,000. 4. Authorize the City Manager to execute three utility reimbursement agreements, COSA- 1101/1103, COSA-1115, and COSA-1117, with the Orange County Transportation Authority for water relocation project costs related to the State Route 55 widening project from the execution of the contract until June 30, 2025, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. 20A-1 Approve Cooperative Agreements with OCTA to Acquire Properties and Easements and Reimburse City for Project Costs Related to SR-55 Widening Project May 5, 2020 Page 2 5. Approve the use of a `Construction Manager at Risk' Delivery Method for the associated pipeline replacement and pressure reducing station relocation projects. DISCUSSION The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is the lead agency for the proposed State Route 55 (SR-55) freeway -widening project from Interstate 405 to Interstate 5 (Exhibit 1). The Project will add general purpose and high -occupancy vehicle lanes in each direction between 1-405 and 1-5, and will also add auxiliary lanes between interchanges to reduce traffic congestion and improve mobility. In order to move forward with the proposed widening, OCTA needs to acquire City properties and easements. A summary of the key provisions of the cooperative agreement that governs the acquisitions is below. • The term of the cooperative agreement (Exhibit 2) is from the execution of the agreement through June 30, 2025 which is approximately the end of Project construction. • OCTA is the funding agency and shall lead the design for the Project. • Caltrans shall lead the construction with OCTA and City's support. • OCTA shall lead the right-of-way effort and obtain all necessary property rights for the Project. • OCTA shall acquire property rights of privately -owned properties to accommodate the relocation of the City's Pressure Regulating Station (PRS) (Exhibit 3). • City will convey property rights needed at the City's PRS property for implementation of the Project. • Portions of City right-of-way along Pullman Street, Dyer Road, Warner Avenue, Ritchey Street, and McFadden Avenue will be acquired for State Highway purposes through the Streets and Highways Code 83 and 233 (Exhibit 4). • City will allow a permanent easement for the undergrounding of Southern California Edison's facilities along Pullman Street (Exhibit 5). • OCTA shall lead the public awareness campaign. • City's participation ensures input on City infrastructure through meetings and design reviews, construction inspection of City -owned facilities, and overall collaboration. • Consistent with OCTA's practice on major capital projects, OCTA agrees to compensate the City for its participation on the Project. • The cost of the City's participation in the Project will be covered as a Project cost following federal guidelines. Additionally, the City of Santa Ana's existing water infrastructure, consisting of a 16" pipeline in Ritchey Street, 24" and 12" pipelines crossing the SR-55 freeway and a pressure regulating station near Warner Avenue, must be relocated and reconstructed. The proposed utility relocations are already under design with the goal of beginning construction at the beginning of 2021 to remain on schedule with the freeway -widening work. The work involved to relocate the utilities is quite extensive and requires obtaining easements and performing jack and bore construction techniques below the freeway. Total project construction costs are estimated at $6,600,000. 20A-2 Approve Cooperative Agreements with OCTA to Acquire Properties and Easements and Reimburse City for Project Costs Related to SR-55 Widening Project May 5, 2020 Page 3 The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and OCTA require that an individual Utility Agreement be executed for each identified relocation (Exhibit 6). In this case, three Utility Agreements are required, one for Ritchey Street, one for the freeway crossing and one for the pressure regulating station. The Utility Agreements will allow the City to recuperate all costs associated with the relocation projects including staff and consultant time spent in planning, design and construction phases dating back to July 27, 2018. The proposed project relocations must be complete by December 2021 to allow the freeway widening work to proceed on schedule. The proposed facility relocations are extensive and will require special construction methods. In an effort to expedite project delivery time and achieve operational efficiencies, staff is seeking approval to utilize the 'Construction Manager at Risk' (CMAR) project delivery method. The CMAR project delivery method differs from the traditional design -bid -build model the City typically employs for construction projects; the CMAR method allows the City to hire a construction manager, via a competitive process, while the project is still in the design phase. In the design phase, the selected construction manager will work with the City's Water Resources design team to identify risks, provide cost projections, and refine the project schedule. After selection of a construction contractor, the CMAR will provide construction planning, phasing, and scheduling for the duration of the project. Should this method be employed, staff will return to the City Council for approval prior to awarding a CMAR contract for the proposed water relocation projects. Additionally, and consistent with OCTA's practice on major capital projects, OCTA agrees to compensate the City for its participation on the Project. The cost of the City's participation in the Project will be covered as a Project cost following federal guidelines. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #6 - Community Facilities & Infrastructure, Objective #1 (establish and maintain a Community Investment Plan for all City assets), Strategy G (develop and implement the City's Capital Improvement Program in coordination with the Community Investment and Deferred Maintenance Plans). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT There is no environmental impact associated with this action. FISCAL IMPACT The total project costs for the three utility relocation projects are estimated at $6,600,000, which will initially be incurred by the Water Utility Capital Construction Fund. The relocation of these utilities is necessary to accommodate OCTA's SR-55 Widening Project. OCTA will pay the City on a reimbursement basis the actual and necessary costs to complete the three utility relocation projects. Expenditures on these projects will not be realized until construction contracts are awarded by Council in the future. Staff will program construction costs into the FY 2020-21 and 2021-22 Capital Improvement Program, and in the associated Water Capital Construction Budgets (Account No. 06617647-66301). Approval of Cooperative Agreement C-0-2201 and the associated Utility Agreements will allow the City to recover all eligible costs incurred in the Water Capital Fund to facilitate the relocation of the utilities. 20A-3 Approve Cooperative Agreements with OCTA to Acquire Properties and Easements and Reimburse City for Project Costs Related to SR-55 Widening Project May 5, 2020 Page 4 Approval of the requested Appropriation Adjustment will recognize $10,000, a portion of the agreed OCTA reimbursement amount of $100,000, into the Measure M OCTA Transitway Project Fund revenue account (No. 03217002-52040) and appropriate $10,000 into the Measure M OCTA Transitway Project Fund expenditure account (No. 03217661-66220) (Exhibit 7). Staff will program the remaining amount of $90,000 in the FY 2020-21 Capital Improvement Program. Appropriated funds will be available for expenditure in FY 2019-20 as follows: Fiscal Year Accounting Unit -Account # Fund Description Accounting Unit, Account Description Amount FY 2019-20 Measure M Street OCTA Transitway 03217661-66220 Project, Improvements $10,000 May - June Construction Other Than Building Total: $10,000 NS/EWG/JG/KN/HG Exhibits: 1. Location Map 2. Cooperative Agreement 3. City Property Acquired by OCTA 4. City Public Right -of -Way for State Highway Purposes 5. Pullman Street— Existing and Proposed SCE Easements 6. Utility Agreements 7. FY 19-20 CIP Project Worksheet 20A-4 EXHIBIT 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP <s,N APPROVE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS WITH ORANGE COUNTY 2ANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE PROPERTIES AND EASEMENT Al REIMBURSE CITY FOR PROJECT COSTS RELATED TO THE SR-55 WIDENING PROJECT AND APPROVE STAFF TO PROCEED WITH A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK DELIVERY METHOD FOR THESE PROJECTS (NONGENE� j�U) {STRATEGIC P�� 6, 1} 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 EXHIBIT 2 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 BETWEEN ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY AND CITY OF SANTA ANA FOR STATE ROUTE 55 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT THIS COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), is effective this day of 2020 ("Effective Date"), by and between the Orange County Transportation Authority, 550 South Main Street, P.O. Box 14184, Orange California 92863-1584, a public corporation of the State of California (hereinafter referred to as "AUTHORITY') and the City of Santa Ana, 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, California 92701, (hereinafter referred to as "CITY'), each individually known as "Party" and collectively known as the "Parties". RECITALS WHEREAS, AUTHORITY, in cooperation and partnership with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is proposing to reduce congestion and improve lane continuity through the State Route 55 (SR-55) corridor with improvements to mainline on SR-55 between Interstate 405 (1-405) and Interstate 5 (1-5); and WHEREAS, the improvements are generally defined as the addition of one High -Occupancy - Vehicle (HOV) lane and one general purpose lane from 1-405 to 1-5, replacement of existing auxiliary lanes, addition of new auxiliary lanes at specific locations, and other additional geometric improvements (hereinafter referred to as "PROJECT"); and WHEREAS, this Cooperative Agreement defines the specific terms, conditions, and funding responsibilities between the AUTHORITY and CITY for completion of final design and construction associated with PROJECT; and WHEREAS, AUTHORITY is the sponsor and the primary funding agency for PROJECT; and �44 6bf 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 WHEREAS, AUTHORITY has contracted with WKE, Inc. to develop the plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) and construction support for the PROJECT; and and WHEREAS, AUTHORITY is the lead agency for right-of-way (ROW) acquisition for PROJECT; WHEREAS, PROJECT is located within and adjacent to the Caltrans right-of-way in the cities of Santa Ana, Irvine, and Tustin (Exhibit A, "Project Location Map"); and WHEREAS, PROJECT shall require ROW acquisitions that will impactthe CITY -owned Pressure Reducing Station (PRS); and WHEREAS, PROJECT shall require ROW acquisitions of privately -owned properties to accommodate the relocation of the CITY's PRS; and WHEREAS, CITY will convey City -owned property rights needed by AUTHORITY for implementation of PROJECT; and WHEREAS, PROJECT shall require utility relocations associated with CITY's PRS; and WHEREAS, CITY will execute the utility agreements for the relocation of the CITY's PRS infrastructure consisting of a 16" waterline in Ritchey Street, a 24" and 12" waterlines crossing the SR-55 and the pressure regulating station near Warner Avenue; and WHEREAS, PROJECT shall require a permanent easement for Southern California Edison (SCE) that will impact Pullman Street and require the undergrounding of SCE's facilities along Pullman Street; and WHEREAS, PROJECT requires portions of CITY right-of-way along Pullman Street, Dyer Road, Warner Avenue, Ritchey Street, and McFadden Avenue for State Highway purposes without compensation pursuant to Streets and Highways Code 83 and 233; and WHEREAS, the CITY will provide staff resources for coordination and inspection services, (hereinafter referred to as "CITY SERVICES") as required for PROJECT; and WHEREAS, CITY's City Council approved this Agreement on 2020. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually understood and agreed by AUTHORITY and CITY as follows: 27of13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ARTICLE 1. COMPLETE AGREEMENT A. This Agreement, including any attachments incorporated herein and made applicable by reference, constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the term(s) and condition(s) of this Agreement between AUTHORITY and CITY and it supersedes all prior representations, understandings, and communications. The invalidity in whole or in part of any term or condition of this Agreement shall not affect the validity of other term(s) or condition(s) of this Agreement. The above referenced Recitals are true and correct and incorporated by reference herein. B. AUTHORITY's failure to insist on any instance(s) of CITY's performance of any term(s) or condition(s) of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of AUTHORITY's right to such performance or to future performance of such term(s) or condition(s), and CITYs obligation in respect thereto shall continue in full force and effect. Changes to any portion of this Agreement shall not be binding upon AUTHORITY except when specifically confirmed in writing by an authorized representative of AUTHORITY by way of a written amendment to this Agreement and issued in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. C. CITY's failure to insist on any instance(s) of AUTHORITY's performance of any term(s) or condition(s) of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of CITY's right to such performance or to future performance of such term(s) or condition(s), and AUTHORITY's obligation in respect thereto shall continue in full force and effect. Changes to any portion of this Agreement shall not be binding upon CITY except when specifically confirmed in writing by an authorized representative of CITY by way of a written amendment to this Agreement and issued in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. ARTICLE 2. SCOPE OF AGREEMENT This Agreement specifies the roles and responsibilities of the Parties as they pertain to the subjects and projects addressed herein. Both AUTHORITY and CITY agree that each will cooperate and coordinate with the other in all activities covered by this Agreement and any other supplemental agreements that may be required to facilitate purposes thereof. 23'of13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ARTICLE 3. RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORITY AUTHORITY agrees to the following responsibilities for PROJECT: A. To be the sponsor and funding agency, and to manage and administer the PS&E contract for PROJECT. B. To perform right-of-way acquisition and right-of-way certification for PROJECT. C. To require Caltrans' contractor (hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR') to obtain a no -fee encroachment permit from CITY prior to commencing construction of PROJECT. Provided all conditions of such permit have been fulfilled, the permits shall authorize CONTRACTOR to commence work within CITY right-of-way, or areas which affect CITY facilities. D. To implement a public awareness campaign during PROJECT that advises CITY, local businesses, residents, elected officials, motorists, and media, of construction status, street detours, and ramp and freeway closures, if and where applicable. E. To acquire a portion of CITY -owned property currently utilized by the CITY's PRS and acquire temporary property rights to perform construction activities in connection with PROJECT. Acquisition of property rights for both permanent and temporary use by AUTHORITY shall be addressed through a property acquisition agreement and performed in accordance with federal and state acquisition requirements. F. To acquire a portion of the adjacent privately -owned property and acquire temporary property rights to perform construction activities to accommodate the relocation of the CITY's PRS. The property acquisition costs for a portion of the adjacent property shall be deemed a PROJECT cost and not the responsibility of CITY. G. To acquire permanent utility easement rights on privately -owned property located on the eastern side of the SR-55 and to acquire temporary property rights to perform construction activities to accommodate for the relocation of the CITY -owned utilities related to the PRS. The acquisition costs of the permanent easement and temporary construction rights shall be deemed a PROJECT cost and not the responsibility of CITY. 29of13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 H. To acquire permanent utility easement rights within Pullman Street between Dyer Road and Warner Avenue to allow for the undergrounding of SCE's communication, distribution and future transmission facilities. Acquisition of the permanent utility easement rights for use by SCE shall be addressed through a property acquisition agreement and performed in accordance with federal and state acquisition requirements. I. To acquire portions of CITY right-of-way for State Highway purposes through the Streets and Highways Code 83 and 233. J. To ensure the proposed acquisitions are consistent with the approved PROJECT plans. K. To reimburse CITY for actual costs, within 30 days from receipt of an acceptable invoice, which is complete, properly prepared and complies with the requirements of Article 6, REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT, below. L. AUTHORITY's reimbursement for CITY SERVICES shall not exceed the maximum amount in compliance with Article 8, MAXIMUM OBLIGATION. ARTICLE 4. RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY CITY agrees to the following responsibilities for PROJECT: A. To collaborate and cooperate with AUTHORITY during the development of the final design and construction of PROJECT. B. To collaborate, cooperate, and agree to the necessary property rights for construction of PROJECT, relocation of the CITY's PRS with connecting waterlines, relocation of SCE's communication, distribution and future transmission facilities within Pullman Street, and relocation of CITY -owned facilities onto privately -owned adjacent property and the utility relocation located on privately -owned property on the eastern side of the SR-55. C. CITY shall not object to the conveyance or acquisition of necessary property rights needed by AUTHORITY for implementation of PROJECT. D. CITY shall not object to the conveyance or acquisition of necessary property rights needed for SCE's communication. distribution and future transmission facilities within Pullman Street. 20P ija a Q 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 E. To make necessary efforts to coordinate and cooperate with AUTHORITY, its agents, and contractors, to meet or exceed PROJECT schedule criteria as identified by AUTHORITY. F. To provide CITY SERVICES for PROJECT as mutually agreed by CITY and AUTHORITY, including but not limited to: 1. Attend and participate in meetings to provide a forum to discuss and resolve CITY's concerns and issues 2. Perform design reviews 3. Provide construction inspection services of CITY -owned facilities G. To make available to AUTHORITY all necessary CITY regulations, policies, procedures, manuals, standard plans, and specifications required for the construction of PROJECT when requested by AUTHORITY. H. To allow for undergrounding of transmission, distribution, and communication facilities in Pullman Street. I. Upon award of a construction contract by Caltrans, CITY shall make reasonable efforts and devote reasonable resources for the issuance of encroachment permits, and other necessary permits, if applicable, to CONTRACTOR at no fee, and upon CONTRACTOR's compliance with permit requirements, to not cause delay to PROJECT's construction schedule. Such permits shall authorize CONTRACTOR to commence work within CITY right-of-way, or areas which affect CITY facilities. J. To submit monthly invoices to AUTHORITY for work completed and actual costs incurred by CITY for CITY SERVICES, pursuant to Article 6, REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT. CITY shall submitfinal invoice no laterthan ninety (90) days afterfinal acceptance of PROJECT. Any costs in excess of the amounts specified herein shall not be incurred without a written amendment to this Agreement. II I II 20P ija e S df 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ARTICLE 5. MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF BOTH PARTIES Parties agree to the following mutual responsibilities regarding the PROJECT: A. AUTHORITY and CITY shall enter into Caltrans Standard Utility Agreements to allow for the AUTHORITY to reimburse the CITY for eligible PROJECT cost for the relocation of the CITY - owned PRS facility and related CITY -owned utilities. B. AUTHORITY and CITY agree the just compensation amount for the acquisition of the necessary property rights from the CITY -owned property utilized by the PRS, shall be waived by City as being fully offset by the PROJECT costs and just compensation to be incurred by Authority in acquiring the necessary property rights in favor of CITY on the adjacent privately -owned property and on privately -owned property located on the eastern side of the SR-55, to accommodate the relocation of the PRS and related utilities taken as a whole, the Parties agree that such exchange of consideration is determined not to be a gift of public funds by either Party. For such a determination the amount of just compensation shall be established by independent appraisal in accordance with AUTHORITY and state policies and procedures. ARTICLE 6. REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT In order for CITY to be reimbursed for incurred costs relative to PROJECT, CITY agrees: A. To prepare and submit to AUTHORITY a monthly invoice with supporting documentation. CITY's invoice shall include allowable PROJECT costs incurred and paid for by CITY. The invoice submitted by CITY shall be signed by an authorized agent who can duly certify the accuracy of the included information. B. The invoice shall be submitted on CITY's letterhead. C. The invoice shall be submitted by CITY, and in duplicate, to AUTHORITY's Accounts Payable Office. Each invoice shall include the following information: 1. Agreement Number C-0-2201; 2. The time period covered by the invoice; 3. Progress Report which includes a detailed description of the progress of PROJECT; 4. Such other information as requested by AUTHORITY; 20P ija a 79 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 / 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 D. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 expenses. 5. Invoice Certification signed by an authorized representative of CITY; Certification statement shall be as follows "I hereby certify that invoice(s) dated _for the period covering _to_ are true, complete and correct statements of reimbursable costs and progress. The backup information included with the invoices is true, complete and correct in all material aspects. All payments due and owing to subcontractors and suppliers have been made, if applicable. Timely payments will be made to subcontractors and suppliers from proceeds of the payment covered by the certification, if applicable. The invoices do not include any amounts which (Insert Name of the firm) intends to withhold or retain from a subcontractor or supplier unless so identified on the invoices, if applicable." To consult with AUTHORITY's Project Managerfor questions regarding non -reimbursable ARTICLE 7. DELEGATED AUTHORITY The actions required to be taken by CITY in the implementation of this Agreement are delegated to the Director of Public Works or designee (Director), who shall be CITY's representative in all matters pertaining to this Agreement. The Director shall be authorized to, among other things, accept offers for acquisition in accordance with the terms herein, sign all escrow documents, including minor modifications that do not materially alter the terms or financial obligations of the CITY, accept and convey deeds on behalf of CITY, and authorize issuance of checks or invoices in accordance with this Agreement. The actions required to be taken by AUTHORITY in the implementation of this Agreement are delegated to AUTHORITY's Chief Executive Officer or designee. ARTICLE 8. MAXIMUM OBLIGATION Notwithstanding any provisions of this Agreement to the contrary, AUTHORITY and CITY mutually agree that AUTHORITY's maximum cumulative payment obligation hereunder shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00), unless agreed to and amended by both Parties. 20P ija a 84 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ARTICLE 9. AUDIT AND INSPECTION AUTHORITY and CITY shall maintain a complete set of records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Upon reasonable notice, CITY shall permit the authorized representatives of the AUTHORITY to inspect and audit all work, materials, payroll, books, accounts, and other data and records of CITY for a period of four (4) years after final payment, or until any on -going audit is completed. For purposes of audit, the date of completion of this Agreement shall be the date of AUTHORITY's payment of CITY's final billing (so noted on the invoice) under this Agreement. AUTHORITY shall have the right to reproduce any such books, records, and accounts. The above provision with respect to audits shall extend to and/or be included in contracts with CITY's contractor or consultant. ARTICLE 10. INDEMNIFICATION A. To the fullest extent permitted bylaw, CITY shall defend (at CITY's sole cost and expense with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to AUTHORITY), indemnify, protect, and hold harmless AUTHORITY, its officers, directors, employees, and agents (collectively the "Indemnified Parties'), from and against any and all liabilities, actions, suits, claims, demands, losses, costs, judgments, arbitration awards, settlements, damages, demands, orders, penalties, and expenses including legal costs and attorney fees (collectively "Claims"), including but not limited to Claims arising from injuries to or death of persons (CITY's employees included), for damage to property, including property owned by AUTHORITY, or from any violation of any federal, state, or local law or ordinance, alleged to be caused by the negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of CITY, its officers, directors, employees or agents in connection with or arising out of the performance of this Agreement. B. To the fullest extent permitted by law, AUTHORITY shall defend (at AUTHORITY's sole cost and expense with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to CITY), indemnify, protect, and hold harmless CITY, its officers, directors, employees, and agents (collectively the "Indemnified Parties"), from and against any and all liabilities, actions, suits, claims, demands, losses, costs, judgments, arbitration awards, settlements, damages, demands, orders, penalties, and expenses including legal costs and 20P ija a% 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 attorney fees (collectively "Claims"), including but not limited to Claims arising from injuries to or death of persons (AUTHORITY's employees included), for damage to property, including property owned by CITY, or from any violation of any federal, state, or local law or ordinance, alleged to be caused by the negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of AUTHORITY, its officers, directors, employees or agents in connection with or arising out of the performance of this Agreement. C. The indemnification and defense obligations of this Agreement shall survive its expiration or termination. ARTICLE 11. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS A. Term of Agreement: The term of this Agreement shall be in full force and effect through June 30, 2025. B. Termination: In the event either Party defaults in the performance of their obligations under this Agreement or breaches any of the provisions of this Agreement, the non -defaulting Party shall have the option to terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the other Party. C. Termination for Convenience: Either Party may terminate this Agreement for its convenience by providing thirty (30) days prior written notice of its intent to terminate for convenience to the other Party. D. Compliance with All Laws: AUTHORITY and CITY shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, statues, ordinances and regulations of any governmental authority having jurisdiction over the PROJECT. E. Legal Authority: AUTHORITY and CITY hereto consent that they are authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said Parties and that, by so executing this Agreement, the Parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement. F. Severability: If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement is held to be invalid, void or otherwise unenforceable, to any extent, by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and each term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 2�e 10§f 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 G. Counterparts of Agreement: This Agreement may be executed and delivered in any number of counterparts, each of which, when executed and delivered shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute the same agreement. Facsimile signatures will be permitted. H. Force Maieure: Either Party shall be excused from performing its obligations under this Agreement during the time and to the extent that it is prevented from performing by an unforeseeable cause beyond its control, including but not limited to; any incidence of fire, flood; acts of God; commandeering of material, products, plants orfacilities bythe federal, state or local government; national fuel shortage; or a material act or omission by the other Party; when satisfactory evidence of such cause is presented to the other Party, and provided further that such nonperformance is unforeseeable, beyond the control and is not due to the fault or negligence of the Party not performing. I. Assignment: Neither this Agreement, nor any of the Parties' rights, obligations, duties, or authority hereunder may be assigned in whole or in part by either Party without the prior written consent of the other Party in its sole and absolute discretion. Any such attempt of assignment shall be deemed void and of no force and effect. Consent to one assignment shall not be deemed consent to any subsequent assignment, nor the waiver of any right to consent to such subsequent assignment. J. Governing Law: The laws of the State of California and applicable local and federal laws, regulations and guidelines shall govern this Agreement. K. Litigation fees: In the event that either Party to this Agreement shall commence any legal or equitable action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs of suit, including reasonable costs and attorney's fees as determined by the court. i 2�e 11§f 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 L. Notices: Any notices, requests, or demands made between the Parties pursuant to this Agreement are to be directed as follows: To CITY To AUTHORITY City of Santa Ana Orange County Transportation Authority Public Works Department 550 South Main Street 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-21 P.O. Box 14184 Santa Ana, California 92701 Orange, CA 92863-1584 Attention: Mr. Nabil Saba Attention: Megan Bornman Public Works Executive Director Contract Administrator Tel: (714) 647-5662 Tel: (714) 560-5064 Email: nsaba(cDsanta-ana.org Email: mbornman(cDocta.net CC: Ross Lew, P.E., Program Manager Tel: (714) 560-5775 Email: rlew@octa.net 2�e 127cf 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement No. C-0-2201 to be executed on the date of the last signature below. CITY OF SANTA ANA ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY By: Kristine Ridge City Manager Date: APPROVAL RECOMMENDED: By: Mr. Nabil Saba Public Works Executive Director Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM By. lam. An M. Funk Assistant City Attorney Date: April 13, 2020 ATTEST By: Daisy Gomez Clerk of the Council Date: By: Meena Katakia Manager, Capital Projects Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: James M. Donich General Counsel Date: 2�e 134f 13 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 A20 1 22 23 24 25 26 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement No. C-0-2201 to be executed on the date of the last signature below. CITY OF SANTA ANA ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Bv: Kristine Ridge City Manager Date: APPROVAL RECOMMENDED: By: Mr. Nabil Saba Public Works Executive Director Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM By: John M. Funk Assistant City Attorney Date: ATTEST By: Daisy Gomez Clerk of the Council Date: Bv: Meena Katakia Manager, Capital Projects Date: APPROVED AS TO Ge ral Counsel o� Date: 2�e 13`bf 13 AGREEMENT NO. C-0-2201 Exhibit A Project Location Map 20A-20 0 / 0 2 U W Z fn O O LL W QLL<� -/ F�U)(if of —wO d W O p i U U 0 z of Q D d F m Q W Z�Q� l/d z I� OU QWJD w W 0O�� ZW��J� OU)ZFWof of Z > of(7 > Z j w Z CL Q>O0 U_ Lo 0I� �U)LoZZ i W F(rQ U) F -- QQ l/d --- W W W Z U 2' Wd2OW� of 0 0 a C9ofOUof M/a -wm w w 0 2' U) Q CY Q W U W U / d Q Q U F O w w w yDm WEEU OO�w D D a ZJ ZJ w o f oNa00°'w x aQ F=O> > o w = N OaWE aQOof ofdcoDjO Oow_:wU r)U cv lo vU it ad Q M Q O uw¢�my U'a00,,cc' 0- O o 0 o J o az w '>� "e c° II M VI VI VI J U Ow Z asaw Zm L�N c uwo�+o(D Q wn¢ E 000wwm EY< wwwawwwaaw � tOm>tOU x x I. J U9 y7I tO . E C D — l U Q I N Z._ 0 0 �{ C7 m X w �p/;//sue- I 'I II'pilei I � ✓ �. I I_ I � 1 1 s,✓ i II I 1 I ' I k � i I IA' I G— ow o 0 LL ^ m I r ul m w w P _ 0Uwo aU)U)mo a¢�ax w a � 4�2i m I ti I z�u'�> azw¢w E �OZpoZ� 21 W w Y ao 0 �% a ¢z zz ¢ C,wza ¢ Jill I Fuw) �� yI I I I I I II II z�Q�w gwrn��Q wwwzUw z w W,OF�0-U w'o m r _ wwow L I w U ,lo'O II ---------- O wF, I o 0 �O�w ;rr;) III 111111 -�_r ;i I �I,�II III �I awwci QQom _ w —� V 0f I - r� I I o00 „!� �' IIII � IIIIII�I6 _.y p O Y T \ d 0 1 In mow_L Ctoo U mYL w z J ¢E� Q +� I _ . - \l-d\If V� \ z � v z z j o Z LL O O / DWOLLW 0 F W �/X OUr fOWO C �� aWOLL o O 0 --m¢W j w z F W o< o � ' W~OWD / � aw \\ �Waue) z <u OW , ZW WQzW 'J� WFO�FF W W W Z U y - w m = O ME-D� WWo�a 0 a Z U Ur-U) -CIF• —83: �� -- 0O�w m W U ���� ' - �Qoo — W a w w i m� oao , Loa° o o o o m z o 0 0 o w o o o Q as a aax LL `� mi )i N -0000 Q 0 m X W 20A-23 w a O Z i i i yD� Z N oQoOU N ono �L N aO " o a J N L a-LNv UUOat >LNNC0 ++ALL OC+UU Loc+O O 0NEy p DLNL+ N -UO3, L L+OOL 00Eco LLZ.-ON II I 1 I I 0 I � 10 � 2 00LLa0 0 Q I-- 0 �Uj0 O O Tz d W 2' W zz Of CL C ✓� <ma �HgZw jC �a>, C Z W C !' IoQwY� H Ofn i� / I I I I / I I I I y II I I I 1 I I wzoa� z2(DQWm I a W Z Z O OQW ; ;Z Z�aZCL a��U,- zE-(D z W O U W of W U Q 11wwx Ow W a X d �O OX1.- (1)W� adpZfn W w i 2'FOF- P5:g< a('1Wx IWUXH a 11 O O w I w W R I-- O Wx OW W I O W 1 ¢ a W I Ia I x W M0138 33S - 3NIl H31tlW l a / z lil III I hall III II II III W Z � I III �I I II all Illl I l l l l b Om¢Z� I J wawsv I I _I' � I II Il III II I l I v"i�w�uw I �I '' I I Il Ill II Il I ' z •� � l -'-�_�a �I. , � II I�� II Il I a � o� Il � � III II I,ml� IIWI I 111 a � ma II � I I II IhI� III I 3 oz wa 333,1' I 111 I 11� a it I II y lil Il�il I 1 _ II Il IIla, I 00 z o i II Il II II l �0<<� I o� III II II Ij II Il - I I II II I II Il I o ILLI w D C v m z N a 000 m Z w �n z0 wL�m a J w vE W 0) ¢ W U U n o U LnZ Z V d+ N Q Q O �w �wa W u'nu N] N C 0- O OOO Q U •>L ^�0 www000 O w+ 0 U a W o c. o a a w w w l w N EY Q x oN =0>0, aaainw W -w0s ♦I I m 0 0 E c D U WZ.-ON I I — I D 313813 1HOdM311 1 II 33S - 31111 H01tlW O U_ C� W O Q 0<C)Of LL of IF— Z F Z z c) p 00 U LL Q IF—Q J of W F of d p � z z Of d w ( F of O O O w O Z F of 0_F m OOF-w 2 w=wof X Fa W ZCID cnw <F2wofw O w F do_z �QQLL O z w Q O= 2i w F W w Q W ofw0} Q z 0- of w w Q O J rW z w <F-w� 0- d of O Q' LLr2) Q C) a_ of / w V O = Q of aCJFQ U Q 1�— 1 O� Q Q MCFADDEN Ave NIisn i �o k1Ik VNd d1NVS J0 /dIS i 1® >,vS m.c zmo, Oao m ono �L E O��E o 0 ¢�j L O Oro- a+smo ooao + c 0 LO}OU LOC}O O IODY + p L N L+ -0>Op � L ¢ OOEI 2 A-26 Iw I oVNTY� 2% Z 3 �M O W Z W LL W O OQF F F Frnm MO U jO LL U) U) 'o co,O S mm F m m¢w mQ� OQw E I._.. wZOpZ� //...Z WmY t'o l W WC�ZW9� on Z W WFQWZ Z _.. Z'Q�U' oo _ F O,nZ?(7 W , _.WWwZU� wm=ow� m O�F- Ov ¢M�Dm wm >wowU ~z �dWO a¢mQ 0� U �O3: O oU F w M�wo Q QOm Mm m 2 X w H Z w 2 W U) Q W W U U) 0 Z H W i I� #'G it pA III' Y'I, �I I ^?V OFa O F w 1, 1 C9 —o w a k Owz xFa p{ a i I F „� QWz ... .... w o_ Z a _ :: ::: ,---- �, a U, t aow� t 31 U�,� a 1� j lily OUzw awO z z I LL it U III � l � i 7................ Lys < 41 ° Q) wmaZ f 'll� waxO a li II �O�rn� o Z o OUwO UUOOOz i 4AV 31031 V (WD u a a ¢ -- - - 4Z< xw O O n O—LLx— �� o UD O a 4 � OzawLLm wzOo- r' �gaw w n r waow w u30 II a r w O I a �LL I �o II I- ---- — - - w - Y --ter— ----- ,1.-=u=— wa Un a w z� I �o xN Y... w� 1 '0 � mZ iil- --- 0 jao u Owl l-_ ajN r" ry ii ICI I II 1 I I o a w kU it'i..1 try III IIII_ 1 _ _.1. . LO H 00 x X w �✓�5='6''seE'/�'". ICI I l 1 I I I.I I I I II pp 'I I II I l I I - r i r 1 ' W 0FQ }ow �C9 al DMCZ b xQ� r_.......... o ¢WOE J ODU� - F(n�LL II a QOwJ a of w�mUU¢ rnw oUzw a I I ............. iill; II I � fD�UW I-QU' I„ ZO Z Qwaw x zU a I -MI- Z, CWI - o U o W w Bntl 3193N21tl0 __ — O -- - - o d wwowz J �U)aa¢ wm�Wo �oW2l< g`I Z<o ou wzwax`. v F gaW W WQg wno} -- _ ¢ ¢ w W O F > ---------- - ~ W ... w,wr�n -----—'�`�e ->>If_ d It (.9 w o Ua z J ' U o z Ww w O W ww� JIB d0� Qo� U 7-7 m H m 2 X W EXHIBIT 6 ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Page 1 of 5 UTILITY AGREEMENT RW 13-05 (REV 12/2016) DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE Project ID 12 Orange SR-55 6.4/10.2 1200020328 E.A. OJ340 FEDERAL AID NUMBER OWNER'S PLAN NUMBER STPLN-6071 129 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION On the project ® YES ❑ NO On the Utilities ® YES ❑ NO UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1101/1103 DATE Pursuant to Cooperative Agreement Number C-7-1936 (Cooperative Agreement), the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is partnering with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in a project that proposes to widen State Route 55 (SR-55) between Interstate 405 and Interstate 5 (SR-55 Improvement Project). Per the Cooperative Agreement OCTA is the lead agency for Right of Way Acquisition and Utility relocations. The SR-55 Improvement Project proposes to reduce traffic congestion, improve mobility as well as traffic operations to an existing four mile stretch of SR-55. City of Santa Ana- Public Works Agency 220 S. Daisy Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92703 Hereinafter referred to as "OWNER", owns and maintains water facilities in the City of Santa Ana within the limits of OCTA's project which requires relocation of 12" and 24" water mains crossing 55 freeway at approximately sta: 452+00 to accommodate OCTA's project It is hereby mutually agreed that: ViVel [7:`t07-I=1Biel 01=1 In accordance with Notice to Owner No. COSA-1101/1103 dated March 9, 2020 OWNER shall relocate existing 12" and 24" water mains crossing 55 freeway at approximately sta: 452+00. All work shall be performed substantially in accordance with OWNER's Plan No. DWG: C-202 dated July 7, 2019 consisting of 1 sheet, a copy of which is on file in the OCTA office at 550 S. Main Street, Orange, CA 92863-1584. Deviations from the OWNER's plan described above initiated by either the OCTA or the OWNER, shall be agreed upon by both parties hereto under a Revised Notice to Owner. Such Revised Notices to Owner, approved by the OCTA and agreed to/acknowledged by the OWNER, will constitute an approved revision of the OWNER's plan described above and are hereby made a part hereof. No work under said deviation shall commence prior to written execution by the OWNER of the Revised Notice to Owner. Changes in the scope of the work will require an amendment to this Agreement in addition to the revised Notice to Owner. II. LIABILITY FOR WORK Existing facilities are located in their present position pursuant to rights superior to those of OCTA and will be relocated at OCTA expense. ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For alternate format information, contact the Forms Management Unit at (916L445 33�T6Y 711, or write to Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814. UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 2 of 5 I I =4 a;Iol 7 Pll_10103 X01ATiVel all UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1101/1103 OWNER agrees to cause the herein described work to be performed by a contract with the lowest qualified bidder, selected pursuant to a valid competitive bidding procedure, and to furnish or cause to be furnished all necessary labor, materials, tools, and equipment required therefore, and to prosecute said work diligently to completion. Use of personnel requiring lodging and meal 'per diem' expenses shall not exceed the per diem expense amounts allowed under the California Department of Human Resources travel expense guidelines. Accounting Form FA-1301 is to be completed and submitted for all non-OCTA personnel travel per diem. Owner shall also include an explanation why local employee or contract labor is not considered adequate for the relocation work proposed. Work performed by OWNER's contractor is a public work under the definition of Labor Code Section 1720(a) and is therefore subject to prevailing wage requirements. Work performed directly by OWNER's employees falls within the exception of Labor Code Section 1720(a)(1) and does not constitute a public work under Section 1720(a)(2) and is not subject to prevailing wages. OWNER shall verify compliance with this requirement in the administration of its contracts referenced above. IV. PAYMENT FOR WORK The OCTA shall pay its share of the actual and necessary cost of the herein described work within 45 days after receipt of OWNER's itemized bill, signed by a responsible official of OWNER's organization and prepared on OWNER's letterhead, compiled on the basis of the actual and necessary cost and expense. The OWNER shall maintain records of the actual costs incurred and charged or allocated to the project in accordance with recognized accounting principles. It is understood and agreed that OCTA will not pay for any betterment or increase in capacity of OWNER's facilities in the new location and that OWNER shall give credit OCTA for the accrued depreciation for the replaced facilities and for the salvage value of any material or parts salvaged and retained or sold by OWNER. Not more frequently than once a month, but at least quarterly, OWNER will prepare and submit detailed itemized progress bills for costs incurred not to exceed OWNER's recorded costs as of the billing date less estimated credits applicable to completed work. Payment of progress bills not to exceed the amount of this Agreement may be made under the terms of this Agreement. Payment of progress bills which exceed the amount of this Agreement may be made after receipt and approval by OCTA of documentation supporting the cost increase and after an Amendment to this Agreement has been executed by the parties to this Agreement. The OWNER shall submit a final bill to OCTA within 360 days after the completion of the work described in Section I above. If OCTA has not received a final bill within 360 days after notification of completion of OWNER's work described in Section I of this Agreement, and OCTA has delivered to OWNER fully executed Director's Deeds, Consents to Common Use or Joint Use Agreements for OWNER's facilities (if required), OCTA will provide written notification to OWNER of its intent to close its file within 30 days. OWNER hereby acknowledges, to the extent allowed by law, that all remaining costs will be deemed to have been abandoned. If OCTA processes a final bill for payment more than 360 days after notification of completion of OWNER's work, payment of the late bill may be subject to allocation and/or approval by the OCTA Board of Directors. The final billing shall be in the form of a detailed itemized statement of the total costs charged to the project, less the credits provided for in this Agreement, and less any amounts covered by progress billings. However, OCTA shall not pay final bills which exceed the estimated cost of this Agreement without documentation of the reasoy�fprt=ease of said cost from the OWNER and approval of UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 3 of 5 UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1101/1103 documentation by OCTA. Except, if the final bill exceeds the OWNER's estimated costs solely as the result of a revised Notice to Owner as provided for in Section I, a copy of said revised Notice to Owner shall suffice as documentation. In either case, payment of the amount over the estimated cost of this Agreement may be subject to allocation and/or approval by the OCTA Board of Directors. In any event if the final bill exceeds 125% of the estimated cost of this Agreement, an Amended Agreement shall be executed by the parties to this Agreement prior to the payment of the OWNER's final bill. Any and all increases in costs that are the direct result of deviations from the work described in Section I of this Agreement, shall have the prior concurrence of OCTA. Detailed records from which the billing is compiled shall be retained by the OWNER for a period of three years from the date of the final payment and will be available for audit by OCTA and or Federal auditors. In performing work under this Agreement, OWNER agrees to comply with the Uniform System of Accounts for Public Utilities found at 18 CFR, Parts 101, 201, et al., to the extent they are applicable to OWNER doing work on the project that is the subject of this agreement, the contract cost principles and procedures as set forth in 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Subpart E, Part 31, et seq., 23 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 645 and 2CFR, Part 200, et al. If a subsequent OCTA and/or Federal audit determines payments to be unallowable, OWNER agrees to reimburse AGENCY upon receipt of AGENCY billing. If OWNER is subject to repayment due to failure by OCTA to comply with applicable laws, regulations, and ordinances, then OCTA will ensure that OWNER is compensated for actual cost in performing work under this agreement. V. GENERAL CONDITIONS All costs accrued by OWNER as a result of OCTA's request of July 27, 2018 to review, study and/or prepare relocation plans and estimates for the project associated with this Agreement may be billed pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If OCTA's project which precipitated this Agreement is canceled or modified so as to eliminate the necessity of work by OWNER, OCTA will notify OWNER in writing and OCTA reserves the right to terminate this Agreement by Amendment. The Amendment shall provide mutually acceptable terms and conditions for terminating the Agreement. All obligations of OCTA under the terms of this Agreement are subject to the acceptance of the Agreement by OCTA Board of Directors or the Delegated Authority (as applicable), the passage of the annual Budget Act by the State Legislature, and the allocation of those funds by the California Transportation Commission. OWNER shall submit a Notice of Completion to the OCTA within 30 days of the completion of the work described herein. Such Director's Easement Deeds as deemed necessary by the OCTA will be delivered to OWNER, conveying new rights of way for portions of the facilities relocated under this Agreement, over available OCTA owned property outside the limits of the highway right of way. OCTA's liability for the new rights of way will be at the proration shown for the relocation work involved under this Agreement. It is understood that said highway is a Federal aid highway and accordingly, 23 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 645 is hereby incorporated into this Agreement. In addition, the provisions of 23 CFR 635.410, Buy America, are also incorporated into this agreement. The Buy America requirements are further specified in Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21s' Century (MAP-21), section 1518, 23 CFR 635.410 requires that all manufacturing processes have occurred in the United States for steel and iron products (including the application of coatings) installed on a project receiving funding from the FHWA. 20A-31 UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 4 of 5 UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1101/1103 OWNER understands and acknowledges that this project is subject to the requirements of the Buy America law (23 U.S.C., Section 313) and applicable regulations, including 23 CFR 635.410 and FHWA guidance, and will demonstrate Buy America compliance by collecting written certification(s) from the vendor(s) or by collecting written certification(s) from the manufacturer(s) mill test report (MTR). All documents obtained to demonstrate Buy America compliance will be held by the OWNER for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment to the OWNER and will be made available to STATE or FHWA upon request. One set of copies of all documents obtained to demonstrate Buy America compliance will be attached to, and submitted with, the final invoice. This does not include products for which waivers have been granted under 23 CFR 635.410 or other applicable provisions or excluded material cited in the Department's guidelines for the implementation of Buy America requirements for utility relocations issued on December 3, 2013. OCTA further acknowledges that OWNER, in complying with the Buy America Rule, is expressly relying upon the instructions and guidance (collectively, "Guidance") issued by Caltrans and its representatives concerning the Buy America Rule requirements for utility relocations within the State of California. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, OWNER shall not be deemed in breach of this Agreement for any violations of the Buy America Rule if OWNER's actions are in compliance with the Guidance. THE ESTIMATED COST TO OCTA FOR THE ABOVE DESCRIBED WORK IS $2,000,000.00 Signatures on Following Page 20A-32 UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 5 of 5 UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1101/1103 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above parties have executed this Agreement the day and year above written. OWNER: CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVED By: Kristine Ridge City Manager Date: ATTEST: By: Daisy Gomez Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: '�4 %. -f. L VJohn M. Funk Assistant City Attorney :7xKNLA/G1►1�]q�77i7:71G1,�:7i]9G1� By: Nabil Saba Executive Director Public Works Agency ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, a public entity I-ANN1. 00:191 IN James G. Beil, P.E. Executive Director, Capital Programs Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: 0 James M. Donich General Counsel 20A-33 ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 1 of 5 RW 13-05 (REV 12/2016) DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE Project ID 12 Orange SR-55 6.4/10.2 1200020328 E.A. OJ340 FEDERAL AID NUMBER OWNER'S PLAN NUMBER STPLN-6071 129 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION On the project ® YES ❑ NO On the Utilities ® YES ❑ NO UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1115 DATE Pursuant to Cooperative Agreement Number C-7-1936 (Cooperative Agreement), the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is partnering with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in a project that proposes to widen State Route 55 (SR-55) between Interstate 405 and Interstate 5 (SR-55 Improvement Project). Per the Cooperative Agreement OCTA is the lead agency for Right of Way Acquisition and Utility relocations. The SR-55 Improvement Project proposes to reduce traffic congestion, improve mobility as well as traffic operations to an existing four mile stretch of SR-55. City of Santa Ana- Public Works Agency 220 S. Daisy Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92703 Hereinafter referred to as "OWNER", owns and maintains water facilities in the City of Santa Ana within the limits of OCTA's project which requires relocation of a 16" water main located within Ritchey Street to accommodate OCTA's project It is hereby mutually agreed that: ViVel [7:`t07-I=1Biel 01=1 In accordance with Notice to Owner No. COSA-1115 dated March 9, 2020, OWNER shall relocate existing 16" water main located within Ritchey Street. All work shall be performed substantially in accordance with OWNER's Plan No. DWG: C-203,204,205,206 dated July 7, 2019 consisting of 4 sheets, a copy of which is on file in the OCTA office at 550 S. Main Street, Orange, CA 92863-1584. Deviations from the OWNER's plan described above initiated by either the OCTA or the OWNER, shall be agreed upon by both parties hereto under a Revised Notice to Owner. Such Revised Notices to Owner, approved by the OCTA and agreed to/acknowledged by the OWNER, will constitute an approved revision of the OWNER's plan described above and are hereby made a part hereof. No work under said deviation shall commence prior to written execution by the OWNER of the Revised Notice to Owner. Changes in the scope of the work will require an amendment to this Agreement in addition to the revised Notice to Owner. II. LIABILITY FOR WORK Existing facilities are located in their present position pursuant to rights superior to those of OCTA and will be relocated at OCTA expense. ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For alternate format information, contact the Forms Management Unit at (916L445 33�T4Y 711, or write to Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814. UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 2 of 5 I I =4 a;Iol 7 Pll_10103 X01ATiVel all UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1115 OWNER agrees to cause the herein described work to be performed by a contract with the lowest qualified bidder, selected pursuant to a valid competitive bidding procedure, and to furnish or cause to be furnished all necessary labor, materials, tools, and equipment required therefore, and to prosecute said work diligently to completion. Use of personnel requiring lodging and meal 'per diem' expenses shall not exceed the per diem expense amounts allowed under the California Department of Human Resources travel expense guidelines. Accounting Form FA-1301 is to be completed and submitted for all non-OCTA personnel travel per diem. Owner shall also include an explanation why local employee or contract labor is not considered adequate for the relocation work proposed. Work performed by OWNER's contractor is a public work under the definition of Labor Code Section 1720(a) and is therefore subject to prevailing wage requirements. Work performed directly by OWNER's employees falls within the exception of Labor Code Section 1720(a)(1) and does not constitute a public work under Section 1720(a)(2) and is not subject to prevailing wages. OWNER shall verify compliance with this requirement in the administration of its contracts referenced above. IV. PAYMENT FOR WORK The OCTA shall pay its share of the actual and necessary cost of the herein described work within 45 days after receipt of OWNER's itemized bill, signed by a responsible official of OWNER's organization and prepared on OWNER's letterhead, compiled on the basis of the actual and necessary cost and expense. The OWNER shall maintain records of the actual costs incurred and charged or allocated to the project in accordance with recognized accounting principles. It is understood and agreed that OCTA will not pay for any betterment or increase in capacity of OWNER's facilities in the new location and that OWNER shall give credit OCTA for the accrued depreciation for the replaced facilities and for the salvage value of any material or parts salvaged and retained or sold by OWNER. Not more frequently than once a month, but at least quarterly, OWNER will prepare and submit detailed itemized progress bills for costs incurred not to exceed OWNER's recorded costs as of the billing date less estimated credits applicable to completed work. Payment of progress bills not to exceed the amount of this Agreement may be made under the terms of this Agreement. Payment of progress bills which exceed the amount of this Agreement may be made after receipt and approval by OCTA of documentation supporting the cost increase and after an Amendment to this Agreement has been executed by the parties to this Agreement. The OWNER shall submit a final bill to OCTA within 360 days after the completion of the work described in Section I above. If OCTA has not received a final bill within 360 days after notification of completion of OWNER's work described in Section I of this Agreement, and OCTA has delivered to OWNER fully executed Director's Deeds, Consents to Common Use or Joint Use Agreements for OWNER's facilities (if required), OCTA will provide written notification to OWNER of its intent to close its file within 30 days. OWNER hereby acknowledges, to the extent allowed by law, that all remaining costs will be deemed to have been abandoned. If OCTA processes a final bill for payment more than 360 days after notification of completion of OWNER's work, payment of the late bill may be subject to allocation and/or approval by the OCTA Board of Directors. The final billing shall be in the form of a detailed itemized statement of the total costs charged to the project, less the credits provided for in this Agreement, and less any amounts covered by progress billings. However, OCTA shall not pay final bills which exceed the estimated cost of this Agreement without documentation of the reason for the increase of said cost from the OWNER and approval of documentation by OCTA. Except, if�fipaI I"Iexceeds the OWNER's estimated costs solely as the UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 3 of 5 UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1115 result of a revised Notice to Owner as provided for in Section I, a copy of said revised Notice to Owner shall suffice as documentation. In either case, payment of the amount over the estimated cost of this Agreement may be subject to allocation and/or approval by the OCTA Board of Directors. In any event if the final bill exceeds 125% of the estimated cost of this Agreement, an Amended Agreement shall be executed by the parties to this Agreement prior to the payment of the OWNER's final bill. Any and all increases in costs that are the direct result of deviations from the work described in Section I of this Agreement, shall have the prior concurrence of OCTA. Detailed records from which the billing is compiled shall be retained by the OWNER for a period of three years from the date of the final payment and will be available for audit by OCTA and or Federal auditors. In performing work under this Agreement, OWNER agrees to comply with the Uniform System of Accounts for Public Utilities found at 18 CFR, Parts 101, 201, et al., to the extent they are applicable to OWNER doing work on the project that is the subject of this agreement, the contract cost principles and procedures as set forth in 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Subpart E, Part 31, et seq., 23 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 645 and 2CFR, Part 200, et al. If a subsequent OCTA and/or Federal audit determines payments to be unallowable, OWNER agrees to reimburse AGENCY upon receipt of AGENCY billing. If OWNER is subject to repayment due to failure by OCTA to comply with applicable laws, regulations, and ordinances, then OCTA will ensure that OWNER is compensated for actual cost in performing work under this agreement. V. GENERAL CONDITIONS All costs accrued by OWNER as a result of OCTA's request of July 27, 2018 to review, study and/or prepare relocation plans and estimates for the project associated with this Agreement may be billed pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If OCTA's project which precipitated this Agreement is canceled or modified so as to eliminate the necessity of work by OWNER, OCTA will notify OWNER in writing and OCTA reserves the right to terminate this Agreement by Amendment. The Amendment shall provide mutually acceptable terms and conditions for terminating the Agreement. All obligations of OCTA under the terms of this Agreement are subject to the acceptance of the Agreement by OCTA Board of Directors or the Delegated Authority (as applicable), the passage of the annual Budget Act by the State Legislature, and the allocation of those funds by the California Transportation Commission. OWNER shall submit a Notice of Completion to the OCTA within 30 days of the completion of the work described herein. It is understood that said highway is a Federal aid highway and accordingly, 23 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 645 is hereby incorporated into this Agreement. In addition, the provisions of 23 CFR 635.410, Buy America, are also incorporated into this agreement. The Buy America requirements are further specified in Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21s' Century (MAP-21), section 1518, 23 CFR 635.410 requires that all manufacturing processes have occurred in the United States for steel and iron products (including the application of coatings) installed on a project receiving funding from the FHWA. OWNER understands and acknowledges that this project is subject to the requirements of the Buy America law (23 U.S.C., Section 313) and applicable regulations, including 23 CFR 635.410 and FHWA guidance, and will demonstrate Buy America compliance by collecting written certification(s) from the vendor(s) or by collecting written certification(s) from the manufacturer(s) mill test report (MTR). 20A-36 UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 4 of 5 All documents obtained to demonstrate Buy period of three (3) years from the date of Tina STATE or FHWA upon request. UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1115 America compliance will be held by the OWNER for a I payment to the OWNER and will be made available to One set of copies of all documents obtained to demonstrate Buy America compliance will be attached to, and submitted with, the final invoice. This does not include products for which waivers have been granted under 23 CFR 635.410 or other applicable provisions or excluded material cited in the Department's guidelines for the implementation of Buy America requirements for utility relocations issued on December 3, 2013. OCTA further acknowledges that OWNER, in complying with the Buy America Rule, is expressly relying upon the instructions and guidance (collectively, "Guidance") issued by Caltrans and its representatives concerning the Buy America Rule requirements for utility relocations within the State of California. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, OWNER shall not be deemed in breach of this Agreement for any violations of the Buy America Rule if OWNER's actions are in compliance with the Guidance. THE ESTIMATED COST TO OCTA FOR THE ABOVE DESCRIBED WORK IS $2,200,000.00 Signatures on Following Page 20A-37 UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 5 of 5 UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1115 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above parties have executed this Agreement the day and year above written. OWNER: CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVED By: Kristine Ridge City Manager Date: A Daisy Gomez Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: '�4 'M,. -f-4_ ohn M. Funk Assistant City Attorney RECOMANDED FOR APPROVAL: By: Nabil Saba Executive Director Public Works Agency ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, a public entity APPROVED By: James G. Beil, P.E. Executive Director, Capital Programs Date: IN James M. Donich General Counsel 20A-38 ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 1 of 5 RW 13-05 (REV 12/2016) DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE Project ID 12 Orange SR-55 6.4/10.2 1200020328 E.A. OJ340 FEDERAL AID NUMBER OWNER'S PLAN NUMBER STPLN-6071 129 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION On the project ® YES ❑ NO UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1117 On the Utilities ® YES ❑ NO DATE Pursuant to Cooperative Agreement Number C-7-1936 (Cooperative Agreement), the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is partnering with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in a project that proposes to widen State Route 55 (SR-55) between Interstate 405 and Interstate 5 (SR-55 Improvement Project). Per the Cooperative Agreement OCTA is the lead agency for Right of Way Acquisition and Utility relocations. The SR-55 Improvement Project proposes to reduce traffic congestion, improve mobility as well as traffic operations to an existing four mile stretch of SR-55. City of Santa Ana- Public Works Agency 220 S. Daisy Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92703 Hereinafter referred to as "OWNER", owns and maintains water facilities in the City of Santa Ana within the limits of OCTA's project which requires relocation of the water control station on Ritchey Street, commonly referred to as SA-7 to accommodate OCTA's project It is hereby mutually agreed that: �rON] 0 24111111011 -I =1 Biel 01 =1 In accordance with Notice to Owner No. COSA-1117 dated March 9, 2020, OWNER shall relocate existing water regulation station on Ritchey Street. All work shall be performed substantially in accordance with OWNER's Plan No. DWG: 102 dated July 7, 2019 consisting of 1 sheet, a copy of which is on file in the OCTA office at 550 S. Main Street, Orange, CA 92863-1584. Deviations from the OWNER's plan described above initiated by either the OCTA or the OWNER, shall be agreed upon by both parties hereto under a Revised Notice to Owner. Such Revised Notices to Owner, approved by the OCTA and agreed to/acknowledged by the OWNER, will constitute an approved revision of the OWNER's plan described above and are hereby made a part hereof. No work under said deviation shall commence prior to written execution by the OWNER of the Revised Notice to Owner. Changes in the scope of the work will require an amendment to this Agreement in addition to the revised Notice to Owner. II. LIABILITY FOR WORK Existing facilities are located in their present position pursuant to rights superior to those of OCTA and will be relocated at OCTA expense. ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For alternate format information, contact the Forms Management Unit at (916L445 33�T6Y 711, or write to Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814. UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 2 of 5 I I =4 a;Iol 7 Pll_10103 X01ATiVel all UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1117 OWNER agrees to cause the herein described work to be performed by a contract with the lowest qualified bidder, selected pursuant to a valid competitive bidding procedure, and to furnish or cause to be furnished all necessary labor, materials, tools, and equipment required therefore, and to prosecute said work diligently to completion. Use of personnel requiring lodging and meal 'per diem' expenses shall not exceed the per diem expense amounts allowed under the California Department of Human Resources travel expense guidelines. Accounting Form FA-1301 is to be completed and submitted for all non-OCTA personnel travel per diem. Owner shall also include an explanation why local employee or contract labor is not considered adequate for the relocation work proposed. Work performed by OWNER's contractor is a public work under the definition of Labor Code Section 1720(a) and is therefore subject to prevailing wage requirements. Work performed directly by OWNER's employees falls within the exception of Labor Code Section 1720(a)(1) and does not constitute a public work under Section 1720(a)(2) and is not subject to prevailing wages. OWNER shall verify compliance with this requirement in the administration of its contracts referenced above. IV. PAYMENT FOR WORK The OCTA shall pay its share of the actual and necessary cost of the herein described work within 45 days after receipt of OWNER's itemized bill, signed by a responsible official of OWNER's organization and prepared on OWNER's letterhead, compiled on the basis of the actual and necessary cost and expense. The OWNER shall maintain records of the actual costs incurred and charged or allocated to the project in accordance with recognized accounting principles. It is understood and agreed that OCTA will not pay for any betterment or increase in capacity of OWNER's facilities in the new location and that OWNER shall give credit OCTA for the accrued depreciation for the replaced facilities and for the salvage value of any material or parts salvaged and retained or sold by OWNER. Not more frequently than once a month, but at least quarterly, OWNER will prepare and submit detailed itemized progress bills for costs incurred not to exceed OWNER's recorded costs as of the billing date less estimated credits applicable to completed work. Payment of progress bills not to exceed the amount of this Agreement may be made under the terms of this Agreement. Payment of progress bills which exceed the amount of this Agreement may be made after receipt and approval by OCTA of documentation supporting the cost increase and after an Amendment to this Agreement has been executed by the parties to this Agreement. The OWNER shall submit a final bill to OCTA within 360 days after the completion of the work described in Section I above. If OCTA has not received a final bill within 360 days after notification of completion of OWNER's work described in Section I of this Agreement, and OCTA has delivered to OWNER fully executed Director's Deeds, Consents to Common Use or Joint Use Agreements for OWNER's facilities (if required), OCTA will provide written notification to OWNER of its intent to close its file within 30 days. OWNER hereby acknowledges, to the extent allowed by law, that all remaining costs will be deemed to have been abandoned. If OCTA processes a final bill for payment more than 360 days after notification of completion of OWNER's work, payment of the late bill may be subject to allocation and/or approval by the OCTA Board of Directors. The final billing shall be in the form of a detailed itemized statement of the total costs charged to the project, less the credits provided for in this Agreement, and less any amounts covered by progress billings. However, OCTA shall not pay final bills which exceed the estimated cost of this Agreement without documentation of the reason for the increase of said cost from the OWNER and approval of documentation by OCTA. Except, if�fipaI bjjlAxceeds the OWNER's estimated costs solely as the UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 3 of 5 UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1117 result of a revised Notice to Owner as provided for in Section I, a copy of said revised Notice to Owner shall suffice as documentation. In either case, payment of the amount over the estimated cost of this Agreement may be subject to allocation and/or approval by the OCTA Board of Directors. In any event if the final bill exceeds 125% of the estimated cost of this Agreement, an Amended Agreement shall be executed by the parties to this Agreement prior to the payment of the OWNER's final bill. Any and all increases in costs that are the direct result of deviations from the work described in Section I of this Agreement, shall have the prior concurrence of OCTA. Detailed records from which the billing is compiled shall be retained by the OWNER for a period of three years from the date of the final payment and will be available for audit by OCTA and or Federal auditors. In performing work under this Agreement, OWNER agrees to comply with the Uniform System of Accounts for Public Utilities found at 18 CFR, Parts 101, 201, et al., to the extent they are applicable to OWNER doing work on the project that is the subject of this agreement, the contract cost principles and procedures as set forth in 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Subpart E, Part 31, et seq., 23 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 645 and 2CFR, Part 200, et al. If a subsequent OCTA and/or Federal audit determines payments to be unallowable, OWNER agrees to reimburse AGENCY upon receipt of AGENCY billing. If OWNER is subject to repayment due to failure by OCTA to comply with applicable laws, regulations, and ordinances, then OCTA will ensure that OWNER is compensated for actual cost in performing work under this agreement. V. GENERAL CONDITIONS All costs accrued by OWNER as a result of OCTA's request of July 27, 2018 to review, study and/or prepare relocation plans and estimates for the project associated with this Agreement may be billed pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If OCTA's project which precipitated this Agreement is canceled or modified so as to eliminate the necessity of work by OWNER, OCTA will notify OWNER in writing and OCTA reserves the right to terminate this Agreement by Amendment. The Amendment shall provide mutually acceptable terms and conditions for terminating the Agreement. All obligations of OCTA under the terms of this Agreement are subject to the acceptance of the Agreement by OCTA Board of Directors or the Delegated Authority (as applicable), the passage of the annual Budget Act by the State Legislature, and the allocation of those funds by the California Transportation Commission. OWNER shall submit a Notice of Completion to the OCTA within 30 days of the completion of the work described herein. Such Director's Easement Deeds as deemed necessary by the OCTA will be delivered to OWNER, conveying new rights of way for portions of the facilities relocated under this Agreement, over available OCTA owned property outside the limits of the highway right of way. OCTA's liability for the new rights of way will be at the proration shown for the relocation work involved under this Agreement. It is understood that said highway is a Federal aid highway and accordingly, 23 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 645 is hereby incorporated into this Agreement. In addition, the provisions of 23 CFR 635.410, Buy America, are also incorporated into this agreement. The Buy America requirements are further specified in Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21s' Century (MAP-21), section 1518, 23 CFR 635.410 requires that all manufacturing processes have occurred in the United States for steel and iron products (including the application of coatings) installed on a project receiving funding from the FHWA. 20A-41 UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 4 of 5 UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1117 OWNER understands and acknowledges that this project is subject to the requirements of the Buy America law (23 U.S.C., Section 313) and applicable regulations, including 23 CFR 635.410 and FHWA guidance, and will demonstrate Buy America compliance by collecting written certification(s) from the vendor(s) or by collecting written certification(s) from the manufacturer(s) mill test report (MTR). All documents obtained to demonstrate Buy America compliance will be held by the OWNER for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment to the OWNER and will be made available to STATE or FHWA upon request. One set of copies of all documents obtained to demonstrate Buy America compliance will be attached to, and submitted with, the final invoice. This does not include products for which waivers have been granted under 23 CFR 635.410 or other applicable provisions or excluded material cited in the Department's guidelines for the implementation of Buy America requirements for utility relocations issued on December 3, 2013. OCTA further acknowledges that OWNER, in complying with the Buy America Rule, is expressly relying upon the instructions and guidance (collectively, "Guidance") issued by Caltrans and its representatives concerning the Buy America Rule requirements for utility relocations within the State of California. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, OWNER shall not be deemed in breach of this Agreement for any violations of the Buy America Rule if OWNER's actions are in compliance with the Guidance. THE ESTIMATED COST TO OCTA FOR THE ABOVE DESCRIBED WORK IS $2,400,000.00 Signatures on Following Page 20A-42 UTILITY AGREEMENT Page 5 of 5 UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. COSA-1117 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above parties have executed this Agreement the day and year above written. OWNER: CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVED By: Kristine Ridge City Manager Date: A Daisy Gomez Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: n M. Funk Assistant City Attorney RECOMANDED FOR APPROVAL: By: Nabil Saba Executive Director Public Works Agency ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, a public entity APPROVED By: James G. Beil, P.E. Executive Director, Capital Programs Date: IN James M. Donich General Counsel 20A-43 I- F- m x X W W LU i a Y U® H P W LL za Q F W 9 j 0a C) Q F a c 0 ¢chi) m 3 Q�) ai O ` o a cio,�cma.c L p � Q w0 Gy O0 Q6), .O m x oa O � a N� L N Z QQU' N O 0m N-p U= p.� m W hm D.0 .m .O� Q U G~ C O y o O F o, Q) Ll? m rn Q °c' m LU 'ma N U a 0 ry U (0 p (0 .c m o cs)o� �Q aca EL ti w�-Q t �.G h N m N O � s Cl- ® ws W .� W p �_ F 11L N F N N ~ 2 Lo m LU � LU I o p C Q U) CL � N LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 fA N fA M y� W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a m Lu ® Z LL ® LU C9 D Q U a o F F ._ CC EL W ® N 0 0 N a Q N L T REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE: APPROVE AN APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT, AUTHORIZE A BUDGET REALLOCATION, AND AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO HYM ENGINEERING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $882,919, FOR THE HAZARD AVENUE BIKE LANES PROJECT WITH AN ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF $1,081,000 (PROJECT NO. 18-6903) (NON -GENERAL FUND) /s/Kristine Ridge CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1"Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2i1 Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO 1�1��►1�1i!1:7q:7 RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approve an appropriation adjustment recognizing $935,000 in Fiscal Year 2018-19 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) construction funds in the Select Street Construction, Federal Grant -Indirect revenue account and reappropriating the same amount in Fiscal Year 2019-20 Select Street Construction, Improvements Other Than Building expenditure account. 2. Authorize reallocation of $18,000 in unspent Measure M2 Local Fairshare funds from the Bike Lane Development Project (No. 19-6904) to the Hazard Avenue Protected and Class II Bike Lanes Project (No. 18-6903), to fulfill the City matching funds requirement. 3. Award a construction contract to HYM Engineering, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in accordance with the base bid in the amount of $882,919, for construction of Hazard Avenue Bike Lanes Project, for the term beginning on May 5, 2020 and ending upon project completion, and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney 4. Approve the Project Cost Analysis for a total estimated construction delivery cost of $1,081,000, which includes $882,919 for the construction contract; $109,741 for contract administration, inspection and testing; and a $88,340 project contingency for unanticipated or unforeseen work. DISCUSSION On August 8, 2016, the Orange County Transportation Authority Board of Directors approved a list of recommended projects to be funded by the 2016 Bicycle Corridor Improvement Program (BCIP) recommended projects, which included $1,035,000 for the Hazard Avenue Bike Lanes project. This project will install 0.65 miles of protected bike lanes and 0.45 miles of Class III bike route on 20B-1 Award Contract to HYM Engineering, Inc. for Hazard Avenue Protected and Class III Bike Lanes May 5, 2020 Page 2 Hazard Avenue from Euclid Avenue to Harbor Boulevard (Exhibit 1). This bicycle corridor passes through a mix of land uses, such as residential, schools, and parks. Grant funds in the amount of $100,000 were recognized in the Fiscal Year 2017-18 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which were used for Preliminary Engineering (Design) in FY 2017- 18, and $935,000 was recognized in the Fiscal Year 2018-19 CIP for Construction. However, spending authorization for the $935,000 in Construction funding was not received until August 2019. Staff is requesting City Council approval to recognize and reappropriate this grant allocation for expenditure in Fiscal Year 2019-20 to complete the bike lane project. Staff also seeks approval for the reallocation of $18,000 of Measure M2 Local Fairshare funds to meet the matching funds requirement of $146,000. Upon approval of the requested appropriation adjustment and reallocation, the total funds available for construction will be $1,081,000, which is comprised of $935,000 in grant funds, and $146,000 in the required local match. Public Outreach and Contractor Participation To provide an opportunity for local vendors to submit bids, a Notice Inviting Bids was advertised in the Orange County Register newspaper on February 5 and February 12, 2020. The project was also advertised in PlanetBids from February 5, 2020 through February 26, 2020. Bids were received electronically via PlanetBids, on February 26, 2020. A total of 382 vendors, including vendors in the City of Santa Ana, were notified of the project via PlanetBids. Thirty vendors requested bidding documents and two bids were received. No bids were received from Santa Ana contractors. Bid Results Summary RANK BIDDER'S NAME LOCATION BASE BID 1 HYM Engineering, Inc. Chino $882,919 2 Vido Samarzich, Inc. La Puente $898,549 Both bids were responsive with HYM Engineering, Inc. submitting the lowest responsible bid in the amount of $882,919 (Exhibit 2). Based on the bid analysis and a contractor's reference check, staff recommends awarding the construction contract to HYM Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $882,919 (Exhibit 3). Project Delivery To deliver a complete project, in addition to the construction contract, the estimated total project delivery cost includes construction administration, inspection, and testing, along with an allowance for contingencies to account for unexpected or unforeseen conditions. Construction administration and inspection includes construction management; implementation of the City's Community Workforce Agreement requirements; inspection of the Contractor's work to ensure contract compliance, workmanship, and quality; and material testing. As indicated in the Cost Analysis 20B-2 Award Contract to HYM Engineering, Inc. for Hazard Avenue Protected and Class III Bike Lanes May 5, 2020 Page 3 (Exhibit 4) and as summarized in the table below, the estimated total construction delivery cost of the project is $1,081,000. Project Item Grant Funds City Match Total Amount Construction Contract $781,648 $101,271 $882,919 Construction Administration, Inspection, and Testing $97,153 $12,588 $109,741 Contingencies $56,199 $32,141 $88,340 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION DELIVERY COST $935,000 $146,000 $1,081,000 STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #6 - Community Facilities & Infrastructure, Objective #1 (establish and maintain a Community Investment Plan for all City assets), Strategy B (equitably maintain existing streets and associated assets in a state of good repair so they are clean, safe, and aesthetically pleasing for all users), and Strategy G (develop and implement the City's Capital Improvement Program in coordination with the Community Investment Plan (e.g., neighborhood streets, traffic improvements, park facilities, bike master plan, etc.)). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the recommended actions are exempt from further review. Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. 2016-36 was filed for this project. FISCAL IMPACT As indicated in the Cost Analysis (Exhibit 4), the estimated total delivery cost of this project is $1,081,000, which includes construction contract, contract administration, inspection and testing, and project contingency. Approval of the Appropriation Adjustment will recognize $935,000 in Fiscal Year 2018-19 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) construction funds in the Select Street Construction, Federal Grant -Indirect revenue account (No. 05917002-52001) and reappropriate the same amount into the Select Street Construction, Improvements Other Than Building expenditure account (No. 05917660-66220). The reallocation of $18,000 in unspent Fiscal Year 2018-19 Measure M2 Local Fairshare funds will be available to fully fund the City's $146,000 matching funds requirement. r1- Award Contract to HYM Engineering, Inc. for Hazard Avenue Protected and Class III Bike Lanes May 5, 2020 Page 4 The following table summarizes the funds budgeted to deliver construction of this project: Fiscal Year Accounting Unit- Fund Description Accounting Unit, Amount Account # Account Descri tion EXISTING PROJECT BUDGET Measure M2 Local FY 2019-20 03217662-66220 Measure M-Street Fairshare, $128,000 (18-6903) Construction Improvements Other Than Building APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT— REAPPROPRIATION Select Street FY 2019-20 05917660-66220 Select Street Construction, $935,000 (18-6903) Construction Improvements Other Than Building PROJECT BUDGET REALLOCATION Measure M2 Local FY 2019-20 03217662-66220 Measure M-Street Fairshare, $18,000 (18-6903) Construction Improvements Other Than Building Total: $1,081,000 NS/MM/WEG Exhibits: 1. Location Map 2. Bid Proposal 3. Construction Contract 4. Cost Analysis City of Santa Ana Page 1 Hazard Avenue Protected Bike Lanes (18-6903 (CML 5963(182))), bidding on February 26, 2020 2:00 PM (Pacific) Printed 03/25/2020 EXHIBIT 2 Bid Results Bidder Details Vendor Name HYM Engineering, Inc. Address 1559 W. Commonwealth Ave. Fullerton, CA 92833 United States Respondee Abraham Jean Respondee Title President Phone 714-523-2372 Ext. Email ajeon@hymengineedng.com Vendar Type License # CA DIR Bid Detail Bid Format Electronic Submitted February 26, 2020 12:36:55 PM (Pacific) Delivery Method Bid Responsive Bid Status Submitted Confirmation # 203555 Ranking 0 Respondee Comment Buyer Comment Attachments File Title File Name File Type General General.pdf General Attachment Ownership Affidavit Ownership Affidavitpdf Ownership Affidavit (Notary Public) - REQ Original Hard Copy Submittal in Addition hid bond hid bond.pdf Bid Bond Guaranty (Notary Public) - REQ Original Hard Copy Submittal in Addition Non Collusion Non Collusion Affidavit.pdf Non -Collusion Affidavit (Notary Public) - REQ Original Hard Copy Submittal in Addition Line Items Type Item Cade UOM Qty Unit Price Line Total Comment Section 1 1 Mobilization LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 2 White Turn Lane Line ( Thin -mill) (COSA Detail 2) LF 295 $1.50 $442.50 3 12" White Thermoplastic Stop Bar/Limit Line (Thermoplastic) SF 180 $4.50 $810.00 120B-6 City of Santa Ana Page 2 Hazard Avenue Protected Bike Lanes (18-6903 (CML 5063(182))), bidding on February 26, 2020 2:00 PM (Pacific) Printed o3/25/2020 Bid Results Type Item Code UOM City Unit Price Line Total Comment 4 Double Yellow (Thin -mill) (COSA Detail 4) LF 655 $1.50 $982.50 5 Install Two way Left Turn Lane (COSA Detail 5) LF 5050 $1.50 $7,575.00 6 Furnish and Install 2" PVC conduit and Stub -Out per plan LF 150 $150.00 $22,500.00 7 6" White Bike Lane Line ( CT Detail 39) LF 6200 $1.25 $7,750.00 8 6" Dashed White Bike Lane Line ( CT Detail 39-A) SF 3370 $1.25 $4,212.50 9 Install 6" White Chevron or Diagonal Stripe LF 230 $3.00 $690.00 10 Install Street Legends and Arrows (Thermoplastic) EA 16 $90.00 $1,440.00 11 Remove Conflicting Striping (Grinding/Sandblasting) LF 11250 $1.25 $14,062.50 12 Remove Legend (Grinding/Sandblasting) EA 17 $80.00 $1,360.00 13 Bike Lane Legend (Detail "A") - Green MMA EA 34 $860.00 $29,240.00 14 Merging Area (Detail'B") - Green MMA SF 4000 $10.50 $42,000.00 15 Bike Sharrow Panel (Detail "C") (Green MMA) EA 20 $450.00 $9,000.00 16 Install Curb Marking LF 1394 $3.00 $4,182.00 17 Furnish and Install Type E Traffic Loop Detector (with DLC) EA 29 $280.00 $8,120.00 18 Furnish and Install Type D Traffic Loop Detector (with DLC) EA 13 $290.00 $3,770.00 19 Furnish and Install Type O Traffic Loop Detector (with DLC) EA 7 $350.00 $2,450.00 20B-7 City of Santa Ana Page 3 Hazard Avenue Protected Bike Lanes (18-6903 (CML 5063(182))), bidding on February 26, 2020 2:00 PM (Pacific) Printed o3/25/2020 Bid Results Type Item Code UOM Qty Unit Price Line Total Comment 20 Furnish and Install Raised Curb Median Island Treatment (per plan Detail "L") EA 4 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 21 12" White Thermoplastic Crosswalk Line, I V O.C. (Thermoplastic) SF 1370 $4.50 $6,165.00 22 Furnish and Install New Sign and Pole EA 27 $350.00 $9,450.00 23 Furnish and Install New Sign(s), only EA 26 $255.00 $6,630.00 24 Furnish and Install New Sign(s), hack -to -hack, only EA 17 $255.00 $4,335.00 25 Remove existing sign(s), only EA 12 $16.00 $192.00 26 Remove existing sign(s) and Pole EA 13 $30.00 $390.00 27 Cement Median Island (8" height Including Dowels) CY 482 $1,185.00 $571,170.00 28 Traffic Control LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 29 SWPPP NO. 1 LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 30 Labor Agreement Oversight LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Subtotal $882,919.00 Total $882,919.00 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) BID PROPOSAL TO: CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA FROM: HYM Engineering, Inc. REQUIREMENT: The undersigned bidder declares that they have carefully examined the location of the proposed work, that they have examined the Contract Documents in its entirety and hereby proposes to furnish all material and do all the work required to complete the said work in accordance with said plans (if any) and the specifications for the unit price(s) or lump sum(s) set forth in the following schedule: Item Description t Unit Unit Price Amount 1 Mobilization 1 LS $ �m, orce $ Si v� 2 White Turn Lane Line ( Thin -mill) 295 LF $ rr ,S D $ (COSA Detail 2) 3 12" White Thermoplastic Stop Bar/Limit 180 SF $ Y $ g`0• o Line (Thermoplastic) 4 Double Yellow (Thin -mill) (COSA Detail 655 LF $ $ p8 j Sr 5 Install Two way Leh Turn Lane (COSA 5050 LF $ / $ Detail5) 6 Furnish and Install 2" PVC conduit and 150 LF $ l� $22js� Stub -Out per plan 7 6" White Bike Lane Line (CT Detail 39) 6200 LF $ /f 8 6" Dashed White Bike Lane Line ( CT Detail 39-A) 3370 SF $ %, $ j' Wy, 9 install 6" White Chevron or Diagonal 230 LF $ 7l on $ 690 Stripe 10 Install Street Legends and Arrows 16 EA $ (Thermoplastic) I 1 Remove Conflicting Striping 11250 LF $ (Grinding/Sandblasting) 1 la Remove Legend (Grinding/Sandblasting) 17 EA $ go $ / a 12 Bike Lane Legend (Detail "A") - Green 34 EA $ bZa $ MMA 13 Merging Area (Detail `B") - Green MMA 4000 SF $ (0 S1% $ Irl—ciT ri7 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price Amount 14 Bike Sharrow Panel (Detail "C") (Green 20 EA $ $ C� MMA) 15 Install Curb Marking 1394 LF $ po $ �gZ 16a Furnish and Install Tyne E Traffic Loop 29 FA $ p� Detector (with DLC) lJ, 16b Furnish and Install Type D Traffic Loop 13 EA $ �r% $ Detector (with DLC) 16c Furnish and Install Type O Traffic Loop 7 EA $ $ ?z Detector (with DLC) 17 Furnish and Install Raised Curb Median Island Treatment (per plan Detail "L") 4 EA $ /� O $ oo a 18 12" White Thermoplastic Crosswalk Line, 1370 SF $ $ I I' O.C. (Thermoplastic) Y'5V 19 Furnish and Install New Sign and Pole 27 EA $ y� 5V $ 20 Furnish and Install New Sign(s), only 26 EA $ 2 $ 6 6 3O 21 Furnish and Install New Sign(s), back -to- 17 EA $ 'JCS $ 3 3S back, only 22 Remove existing sign(s), only 12 EA $ (_ $ �Z 23 Remove existing sign(s) and Pole 13 EA $ 3p $ 3�p 24 Cement Median Island (8" height, Including Dowels) 482 CY $ ! S i $ �/> f ��� 25 Traffic Control 1 LS $ / T coo $ po b 26 SWPPP NO. I 1 LS $ i� 0 p 1� r $ (/4 vo c� 27 Labor Agreement Oversight 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 TOTAL BASE BID $ 919 The lowest responsible bidder shall be selected based on the total base bid. The City reserves the right to award the Base Bid, and any, all, or none of the add -alternate bid items (if any). * The quantity for this bid item is shown for bid comparison only. This bid item shall not be subject to the "25%" limit as stated in Section 3-2 of the Standard Specifications. The actual CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) amount for this item will be dictated by the actual quantity used, and the Agency reserves the right to increase or decrease the quantity of this item accordingly. t This bid item is considered a Specialty Item per Section 2-3.2 of the Standard Specifications. TIME FOR COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES The undersigned bidder hereby proposes to complete the Work for the total base bid amount shown above, within number (80) working days after the commencement date stated in the Notice to Proceed. The liquidated damages amount, in lieu of the amount specified in Subsection 6-9 of the Standard Specifications, shall be $1,600 per calendar day. Name of Firm HYM Engineering, Inc. Signature of BIDDER Title President (If an individual, so state. If a firm or co -partnership, state the firm name and give the names of all individual co-partners composing the firm. If a corporation, state legal name of corporation, and names of President, Secretary, Treasurer and Manager, thereof.) rI: CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) BIDDER'S STATEMENT BIDDER understands and agrees that this Bid Proposal, Contract Documents and subsequent Construction Contract Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between BIDDER and the AGENCY only after it has been accepted by the City Council, endorsed by the Clerk of the Council with her signature and official seal noting hereon the action of approval of the Council, signed by the Public Works Agency Executive Director or his/her duly authorized agent, and signed by the City Attorney, denoting his approval of the form of this document, and its execution, and when it or an exact copy of it has been either delivered to BIDDER or deposited with the United States Postal Service properly addressed to the BIDDER with the correct postage affixed thereto. BIDDER further agrees that upon delivery (as defined above) of the accepted agreement he/she will furnish AGENCY all required bonds and certificate of liability insurance within ten (10) business days or the funds, check, draft, or BIDDERS bond substituted in lieu thereof accompanying this proposal shall become the property of the AGENCY and shall be considered as payment of damages due to the delay and other causes suffered by AGENCY because of the failure to furnish the necessary bonds and because it is distinctly agreed that the proof of damages actually suffered is difficult to ascertain; otherwise said funds, check, drafts, or BIDDER'S bond substituted in lieu thereof shall be returned to the undersigned. BIDDER understands that a bid is required for the entire work, the estimated quantities set forth in the bid schedule are solely for the purpose of comparing bids, and that final compensation under the contract will be based upon the actual quantities of work satisfactorily completed. The BIDDER also certifies that the bid is a balanced bid. In accordance with Section 7028.15 of the California Business and Professions Code, the undersigned certifies under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Name of Firm HYM Engineering, Inc. Signature of BIDDER Title President (If an individual, so state. If a firm or co -partnership, state the firm name and give the names of all individual co-partners composing the firm. If a corporation, state legal name of corporation, and names of President, Secretary, Treasurer and Manager, thereof.) PTP1; CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) CONTRACTOR'S LICENSING AND REGISTRATION STATEMENT The undersigned contractor, or corporate officer, declares under penalty of perjury that he/she and all his/her subcontractors are registered with the State of California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), and that the following is true and correct. Contractor's Name: HYM Engineering, Inc. Business Address: 1559 W. Commonwealth Ave. Fullerton, CA 92833 Business E-Mail Address: ajeon@hymengineering.com Telephone: 714-523-2372 State Contractor's License No. and Class: 918130, A, B License Expiration Date: 1 /31 /2021 State Dept. of Industrial Relations (DIR) Registration No.: 1000008232 State Dept. of Industrial Relations (DIR) Registration Expiration Date: Signed: Title: President 6/30/2021 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) PREVAILING WAGE COMPLIANCE AND MONITORING STATEMENT Contractor is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1720, et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16,000, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on "public works" and "maintenance" projects. Since the services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and since the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Contractor agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. City shall provide Contractor with a copy of the prevailing rates of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. Contractor shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Contractor's principal place of business and at the project site. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. The undersigned certifies that the foregoing is true and correct. Name of Firm HYM Engineering, Inc. Signature of BIDDER Title President (if an individual, so state) CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) OWNERSHIP AFFIDAVIT STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS: CITY OF SANTA ANA ) Abraham Jaewoo Jeon ,being duly sworn, deposes and says: ❑ INDIVIDUAL That he/she is the parry making the foregoing proposal: ❑ PARTNERSHIP That he/she is a member of the co -partnership firm designated as: and who has been and is duly vested with the authority to make and execute instruments for the co -partnership by: who constitute the other members of the co -partnership. ® CORPORATION Thathe is of., President a corporation which is making the foregoing proposal: ❑ JOINT VENTURE That he is of: one of the parties making the foregoing proposal as ajoint venture, and the he/she has been and is duly vested with the authority to execute instruments for an on behalf of the parties making said bid who are: that such a bid is genuine and not collusive or sham, and has not in any manner sought by collusion to secure any advantage against the City of Santa Ana or any person interested in the proposed contract, for himself or any other person. Signature of Bidder Subscribed and sworn to before me this 25 day of Feb. 2020 Signature of officer Administering Oath (Notary Public) HI80N KIM Notary Public • California •� - orange County E Commission t 22"196 My Comm. Expires Jul 18, 2023 P.PPliP CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) KNOW ALL PRESENT that, as BIDDER, and as SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the CITY OF SANTA ANA, as AGENCY, in the penal sum of Dollars ($ ), which is ten percent (10%) of the total amount bid by BIDDER to AGENCY for the above -stated project, for the payment of which sum, BIDDER and SURETY agree to be bound, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITIONS OF THIS OBLIGATION ARE SUCH that, whereas BIDDER is about to submit a bid to AGENCY for the above -stated project, if said bid is rejected, or if said bid is accepted and a contract is awarded and entered into by BIDDER in the manner and time specified, then this obligation shall be null and void, otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect in favor of AGENCY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have set their names, titles, hands, and seal this day of f 20_. // I BIDDER* UD ( OGtd� 11'1 101Al�tt i SURETY* Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 120. Signature: Notary Public in and for the County of State of * Provide BIDDER/ SURETY name, address, and telephone number and the name, title, address, and telephone number of authorized representative. r�- CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) LIST OF SUB -CONTRACTORS Section 4100 et. seq. of the Public Contract Code requires listing of all subcontractors with the bid for all subcontract work exceeding the following amount: o Streets, highways including bridge projects: '/z% of the bid or $10,000, whichever is greater o Buildings, parks, or other projects: '/2% of the bid Section 1725.5 of the Public Contract Code requires all Subcontractors be registered with the State Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). BIDDER proposes to subcontract certain portions of the work to the firms listed below: Name License DIR Reg Location Phone Type Of Amount Name License #/Exp. DIR Reg. #/Exp. License # _ Location _ Phone Type Of Work Amount $ Name License #/Exp, DIR Reg. #/Exp. License # _ Location _ Phone Type Of Work Amount $ Signature of Bidder Name "Pfv C",, License #/Exp. 317$6do DIR Reg. #/Exp. /00000! Location loom Phone — Type Of Work Amount $ / Name License #/Exp. DIR Reg. #/Exp. License # Location Phone Type Of Work Amount $ I16M"11 License #/Exp. DIR Reg. #/Exp. License # Location Phone Type Of Work Amount $ CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) The following are the names, addresses, and telephone numbers for THREE public agencies for which the BIDDER has performed similar work within the past three years. City of Anaheim / 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA Name and Address of Owner. David Sanchez / 714-765-5100 Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. $ 872,203.72 Improvement street and traffic signal improvement May. 2019 Contract Amount Type of Work Date Completed 2. City of Anaheim / 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA Name and Address of owner. Thomas Bekele / 714-765-4937 Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. $ 166.917.50 Street Intersection improvement Aug. 2019 Contract Amount Type of Work Date Completed 3. City of Whittier / 13230 Penn Street Whittier, CA 90602 Name and Address of owner. Isaac Bravo / (562)567-9518 Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. $ 309,409.00 Improve trail walkway and fences and shade structure Oct. 2019 Contract Amount Type of Work Date Completed The following are the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all brokers and sureties from whom BIDDER intends to procure insurance and bonds. AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY 7 MAIN: (714) 516-1232 Orange CA gP867 D AGENCY CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) ADDITIONAL REFERENCES The following are the names, addresses, and telephone numbers for THREE public agencies for which the BIDDER or Subcontractor has performed similar work in the past five years. County of Orange / 601 N Ross St, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Name and Address of Owner. Richard De Jong / (714) 667-4966 Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. $ 141 ,653.57 grading, CMU wall, steel structure and concrete July. 2019 Contract Amount Type of Work Date Completed 2. Caltransl2 / 6681 Marine Way, Irvine, CA 92618 Name and Address of owner. Dennis Yum / (714) 641-4730 Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. $ 484.935.00 Slope paving and Minor Concrete Work Aug. 2019 Contract Amount Type of Work Date Completed 3. Caltransl2 / 6681 Marine Way, Irvine, CA 92618 Name and Address of owner. Dennis Yum / (714) 641-4730 Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. $ 658,956.60 Slope paving, Rock Blanket and Minor Concrete Work Sep. 2019 Contract Amount Type of Work Date Completed The following are the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all brokers and sureties from whom BIDDER intends to procure insurance and bonds. AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY 801 S FIGUEROA STREET SUITE 700 CA 5UU1 CSBA — COMMERCIAL SURETY BOND AGENCY 1411 N. Batavia St., Suite 201 MAIN: (714) 516-1232 Orange. CA 92867 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) NON -COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT (Title 23 United States Code Section H 2 and Public Contract Code Section 7106) In conformance with Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and Public Contract Code 7106 the BIDDER declares that the bid is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or corporation; that the bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the BIDDER has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other BIDDER to put in a false or sham bid, and has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any BIDDER or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone shall refrain from bidding; that the BIDDER has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone to fix the bid price of the BIDDER or any other BIDDER, or to fix any overhead, profit, or cost element of the bid price, or of that of any other BIDDER, or to secure any advantage against the public body awarding the contract of anyone interested in the proposed contract; that all statements contained in the bid are true; and, further, that the BIDDER has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his or her bid price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid. Note: The above Non -collusion Affidavit is part of the Proposal. BIDDERS are cautioned that making a false certification may subject the certifier to criminal prosecution. Signed State of California County of Oranae Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this 25 day of Feb. , 202Q by Abraham Jaewoo Jeon , proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me NISON NIM 5 Notary Public -California Orange County Commission X 149l196 My Comm. Expires Jul 1L, 20T3 Notary Public Signature Notary Public Seal II M. 1 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) NON-DISCRIMINATION CERTIFICATE The undersigned contractor or corporate officer, during the performance of this contract, certifies as follows: The Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without, regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 2. The Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Contractor shall send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he/she has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided advising the said labor union or workers' representatives of the Contractor's commitments under this section, and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. 4. The Contractor shall comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and of the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. The Contractor shall furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his/her books, records, and accounts by the administering agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation, to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. 6. In the event of the Contractor's non-compliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of the said rules, regulations, or orders, the contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the Contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts or federally assisted construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Execution Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulations, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. I91' CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) The Contractor shall include the portion of the sentence immediately preceding paragraph (1) and the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (7) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontract or purchase order as the administering agency may direct as means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance; provided, however, that in the event the Contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the administering agency, the Contractor may request that the United States enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. 8. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1735, as added by Chapter 643 Stats. 1939, and as amended, no discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons upon public works because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicaps, mental condition, marital status, or sex of such persons, except as provided in Section 1420, and any contractor of public works violating this Section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a violation of the Chapter. Signed: Title: President Firm: HYM Engineering, Inc. Date: 2/26/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) STATEMENT REGARDING APPRENTICESHIP REQUIREMENTS The undersigned BIDDER is familiar with the requirements of Section 1777.5 of the State Labor Code regarding employment of apprentices, and understands that contractors on contracts exceeding $30,000 or 20 working days shall: 1. Apply to the joint apprenticeship committee administering the apprenticeship standards of the craft or trade in the area of the site of the public work for a certificate approving the contractor under the apprenticeship standards for the employment and training of apprentices in the area or industry affected. 2. Employ the number of apprentices or the ratio of apprentices to journeymen stipulated in the apprenticeship standards. 3. Contribute to the fund or funds in each craft or trade in which he/she employs journeymen or apprentices on the public work, in the same amount or upon the same basis and in the same manner as the other contractors, except contractors not signatory to the trust agreement shall pay a like amount to the California Apprenticeship Council. Signed: Title: President Firm: HYM Engineering, Inc. Date: 2/26/2020 rIJ- CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) STATEMENT REGARDING "ANTI -KICKBACK" REQUIREMENTS The undersigned is submitting this proposal for performing by contract the work required by these bid documents, agrees to comply with the Copeland "Anti -Kickback" Act (18 USC 74) as supplemented in the Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR, Part 3). This act provides that each contractor or subcontractor shall be prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed in the construction or repair of public work, to give up any part of the compensation to which he/she is otherwise entitled. Signed: Title: President Firm: HYM Engineering, Inc. Date: 2/26/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10162 OUESTIONNAIRE In conformance with Public Contract Code Section 10162, the BIDDER shall complete, under penalty of perjury, the following questionnaire: Has the BIDDER, any officer of the BIDDER, or any employee of the BIDDER who has a proprietary interest in the BIDDER, ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of a violation of law or a safety regulation? Yes No X If the answer is yes, explain the circumstances in the following space CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) BIDDER'S STATEMENT REGARDING REQUIRED FEDERAL CONTRACT PROVISIONS (FORM FHWA-1273) The undersigned, is submitting this proposal for performing by contract the work required by these bid documents, agrees to comply with the required Federal Contract Provision (Form FHWA- 1273) as shown in the appendix of the Special Provisions of this project. Signed Title President Firm HYM Engineering, Inc. Date 2/26/2020 I CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY CERTIFICATION The bidder HYM Engineering, Inc. proposed subcontractor Y ALC- (pups Cr, l�g1 hereby certifies that he has , has not x , participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to the equal opportunity clauses, as required by Executive Orders 10925, 11114, or 11246, and that, where required, he has filed with the Joint Reporting Committee, the Director of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, a Federal Government contracting or administering agency, or the former President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity, all reports due under the applicable filling requirements. Note: The above certification is required by the Equal Employment Opportunity Regulations of the Secretary of Labor (41 CFR 60-1.7(b) (1)), and must be submitted by bidders and proposed subcontractors only in connection with contracts and subcontracts which are subject to the equal opportunity clause. Contracts and subcontracts which are exempt from the equal opportunity clause are set forth in 41 CFR 60-1.5. (Generally only contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or under are exempt.) Currently, Standard Form 100 (EEO-1) is the only report required by the Executive Orders or their implementing regulations. Proposed prime contractors and subcontractors who have participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to the Executive Orders and have not filed the required reports should note that 41 CFR 60-1.7(b) (1) prevents the award of contracts and subcontracts unless such contractor submits a report covering the delinquent period or such other period specified by the Federal Highway Administration or by the Director, Office of Federal Contract Compliance, U.S. Department of Labor. Signed Title President Firm HYM Engineering, Inc. Date 2/26/2020 W,- CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10285.1 STATEMENT In conformance with Public Contract Code Section 10285.1 (Chapter 376, Stats. 1985), the bidder hereby declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the bidder has _ , has not x been convicted within the preceding three years of any offenses referred to in that section, including any charge of fraud, bribery, collusion, conspiracy, or any other act in violation of any state or Federal antitrust law in connection with the bidding upon, award of, or performance of, any public works contract, as defined in Public Contract Code Section 1101, with any public entity, as defined in Public Contract Code Section 1100, including the Regents of the University of California or the Trustees of the California State University. The term "bidder" is understood to include any partner, member, officer, director, responsible managing officer, or responsible managing employee thereof, as referred to in Section 10285.1. Note: The bidder must place a check mark after "has" or "has not" in one of the blank spaces provided. The above Statement is part of the Proposal. Signing this Proposal on the signature portion thereof shall also constitute signature of this Statement. Bidders are cautioned that making a false certification may subject the certifier to criminal prosecution. Signed Title President Firm HYM Engineering, Inc. Date 2/26/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10232 STATEMENT In conformance with Public Contract Code Section 10232, the Contractor, hereby states under penalty of perjury, that no more than one final unappealable finding of contempt of court by a federal court has been issued against the Contractor within the immediately preceding two year period because of the Contractor's failure to comply with an order of a federal court which orders the Contractor to comply with an order of the National Labor Relations Board. Note: The above Statement and Questionnaire are part of the Proposal. Signing this Proposal on the signature portion thereof shall also constitute signature of this Statement and Questionnaire. Bidders are cautioned that making a false certification may subject the certifier to criminal prosecution. Signed Title President Firm HYM Engineering, Inc. Date 2/26/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) TITLE 49, CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATION, PART 29 DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION CERTIFICATION The bidder under penalty of perjury, certifies that except as noted below, he/she or any person associated therewith in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer, manager: is not currently under suspension, debarment, voluntary exclusion, or determination of ineligibility by any federal agency; has not suspended, debarred, voluntarily excluded, or determined ineligible by any federal agency within past three years; has not been indicted, convicted, or had a civil judgment rendered against it by a court of competent jurisdiction in any matter involving fraud or official misconduct within the past 3 years. If there are any exceptions to this certification, insert the exceptions in the following space. Exceptions will not necessarily result in denial of award, but will be considered in determining bidder's responsibility. For any exception noted above, indicate below to whom it applies, initialing agency, and dates of action. Note: Providing false information may result in criminal prosecution or administrative sanctions. The above certification is part of the Proposal. Signing this Proposal on the signature portion thereof shall also constitute signature of this Certification. Signed Title President Fire, HYM Engineering, Inc. Date 2/26/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) NON -LOBBYING CERTIFICATION FOR FEDERAL AID CONTRACTS The prospective participant certifies, by signing and submitting this bid or proposal, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: (1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influence or attempting to influence an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. (2) If any funds other than Federal appropriate funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities," in accordance with its instructions. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. The prospective participant also agrees by submitting his or her bid or proposal that he or she shall require that the language of this certification be included in all lower tier subcontracts, which exceed $100,000 and that all such sub -recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. Signed Title President Firm HYM Engineering, Inc. Date 2/26/2020 • Standard Forni LLL may be obtained from Caltrans and FHWA offices. r�- CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES Apploredby ONa Complete this form to disclose lobbying activities pursuant to 31 U.S.G. 1352 034510W Mee reverse for cublic burden disclosure-1 C Type of Federal Action_ 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type - Fa a_ contract ®a. bidlotferlapplication ®a. initial filing b_ grant b. initial award b. material change c. cooperative agreement c. post -award For Material Change Only: d. loan year quarter e. ban guarantee dare of last report f, loan insurance 4_ Name and Address of Reporting Entity: 5. N Reporting Entily in No. 4 is a Subawardee, Enter Name EI prate ❑ swswaruea and Address of Prime: Tier , ifknown: N/A Congressional District, if known: Congressional District, if krlO 6. Federal DepartmenflAgency: 7. Federal Program NamelDescription: N/A N/A CFDA Number, if applicable: S_ Federal Action Number, if known: N/A 9. Award Amount, if known: N/A $ 10. a_ Name and Address of Lobbying Enffty b. Individuals Perforating Services (including address if (if individual• last name• fast name, ml): different from No. 10a) (last name, fast name, Ml): N/A N/A '�CarA Canaa luamn a SF4I" j"Rassfillm 1 t. Amount of Payment (check all that apply): 13. Type of Payment (check all Mat apply): s N/A ❑ actual ❑ w—1 ❑ a ratatner N/A 12. Font of Payment I check aA that apply} ❑ C. clNm Wca ❑ a ca m N/A Elon d cltngaut I- ❑ 0.1M1IINt: apedry: nature ❑ c. tladarretl value ❑ T. other: specry: 14. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be Performed and Datefs) of Service, including otbcer(s), employeefs), or Member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 11: N/A amm conll s X 15. Continuation SheetIs I IND 16_ "e�"'a�° say. r ram r .maea he m s u ac ..s hMT. Yip ama. d BbrNg dYap 6 . e1�Y � M f"t Signature: Print Name: Abraham Jeon Title: President wanr.n r h.,.ate"r c.p�...w.ry r r err P Telephone No_ 714-523-2372 Date:2 26 202 Federal Use Only: AullccUacW lava RepoaMal, sweat/ Farm uu- Pt . 7 W: , USMA CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION OF SF-LL, DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION OF SII DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES Tinto mscrosae mrrn shal be mnpleled by the rep«tlng emby, aTemLr s tlurardee or p Tne Federal rempenC at the Inalatl«i «receipt a a eorereei FemerJ aMo n, «a n lrnLage m a pnEv" fling, PX%t m Me 31 U.S.C. SeCUbn 1352. Tile ding or a iCrin Is requiredta eami payment« agrCLYalertlm nose palmenttr any lbbeyng entflyw. Irrlwang a almalplrig to tmuenue an dincerWM;IIDyeed any agency,. a Mffnber or Ca9. an amlCer a efirpmyeea COngms6,« an empldyeea a Membef Of CCngM In banEV• do MM a MWM Federal adorn. Use me SFLLtf. CdnbnllalmnSnM txradubdla rmvmadcntt the space an Me lbrrn Is rzdeq w Campiete as neat& Tat apply la bom Te Intaa like and nn8enal deinge nepnrt Rely m are nlplemeMrg gtklance pnbilmled by Me OIM1ce a Managetnent aM eudget mr adOnmlai Inmrnralan. 1. menliry ale 1Jpe a COIEretl Federd acaon mr r6ticd lobbying xdvtty o almbr Has been rmmred m a111nBlde ale burcpne m a cduvrd Federd agnrL 2. foerdly ere gams a the [Liles FetlHal admlL 3, genafy me apprgdae das[caacn a iNs report. tt t1Ys o a idloalp rep«[ cdused ay a rnaeedaotial¢ n ale IrrldrrnallIXr PreMiaely M1poled, 2mer action, yeaanm gierrerIn MTK119he vurlrKR omclezed. mar the data or melastprewousysubmmed rep«[by 11t6n artlng scary rot 1Ns oauded Fc[mr'a aa1LYl. a. Enter ale btI frame, address, cey. Stale am2p Mcea ale feponngenvty. Inonme Cagreseenia Distinct a innbn. Giect. are apprbpnalemassmratlm a ale lepaan9 erratytut decxF,a�arr n fb, a expeet6n De, a price «sabaaardrLaplen[.Ilyentnydleter a ale 6ioaarmdee, a g., fie nrat.wbawadee a In¢ p1h»e o. Te n6t ter. 5[tM#Y� [dame C1rt are rid Inlaetl m SmbCdntad6. 6cExjdrltb a16 O]nildw armada finder grave. 5. It Te crrpnlzylm ning tie nepon In h a drebes then eons ale N1 name. a i2ess, dly. siXe and zlp come a tie prl n Fer3era 1e0p1«IL lnW ude CtlngresNmat otsmct, a li n . 5. Enter the nine or the Federd agency mabngthe as or loan dbn nnnem brddde a< Mast one drgalliatlglall¢YHaMb'rdgenbyname. b Nbvm. Fm example, oepannnern Of Transpbraum, armed states Coast Ouam i. Enter ME Fecl"pidJ3nl namedr 006Cnpan Mr Me cawasFecie" adbn(tem 1 k 61[lV enw ME Ul Calamg a Federd Dolmobc Assonance SCFIMA nunbrf Jar grins, mopelatNe agreement; m &n and man caorvnlh r . 8. Enter ale Host 2ppmplato FederN manarying nizn a aMataxsr« the Federal acfon mmdacdm Hem 1 1p ¢. Request [ Proposal {RFP) n per, nwtawn mr am jlm6 [unmet; grant annourcemem nutrta . ME aontraa, grant, m man a m mm,,,, me appIw lmrtgroposatoorrbd rssrGbr asslgr d by ME Federal agency][dude preRxec, e.g.,'RFP-DE l' a. Fbf a CmMERa Federal adorn vnere here has OEM an aaad« loan CClnrtll tby me FEOeral agency, enter me Federal annnrn d are arvarmloan C«mabnenl for ale Prime enMy mefntlem n Hem a « S 10_ I,a) mla me NI name, admrms, dty. Stme, and alp c*ae a Bhe mbbyng entry, engaged by one repbtlrg enbq Imenaaeci in nem a m mfl 1 the ob'renm Feaera adorn. (b) F11h'i me NI names mme In&Almalts}pe nag seraccs, and Irrdtxle awl airiness it dbrerent rrorn 10(4 Enter Lab Name. FIR' Name arm! Uwe INbal Jul). 1[. MEErye hakdbwniame 4anpaar ME bentame 1pededmmeP a paes,= appry.ttMineenai" ige retem enze[eixinr.Hller Mypaynlannas been made (atTralt « vwe ce made {µanrreoJ. c[lert al boxes mix apply. it ors m a [simian dwge repdt sorer the mlmtlaave scant a palms[ made a planned m be [mile. 12_Checi, me app"natebor(es). GreCe all baaesMat apply. It palTMntis name a gn an m-mw conv0 bn. specdy the nature and valor ddie YI�[rld pay* 13. ChecR the appropriate boXee;l. Chefs an boxes Tan apply. IS duet, spedfy, n01ue. 14. Prnxwtlea spedllc afn detaleaomeeplpllona the sernces Tat me IPdmr16C tab pnafomreA, a WI. me OpeCRmm perxxm, and ate tlate(sj a any cerMice6 OnMy s) contacted pre ME Mineral, as , ernp aeglo). rid Mb [tie g bn o acTa ennraa wtta Fem3d OIIICL11s. menbry Ire fedNal oTkxa{s1 « ennpbyege) arrbctem «me driar;s.L unpldyegsl a Mrtmcerye) a cmxjefi6 that were eanlx[ed. 15. Ched wtrcglta « rid a SF-LLLA. Cidllnitalbn sheens} Is aaxyled. 18. The sonny rrg dtldal airdl sign anm dabs me noon, pdrm rtr Len name. sae. arm Wiepinne nunher Ao=cWq to the Papertort RedcabnAa as. anmendelt rim persons am regwWto resp" m a Oalleclmn a bso art oniess n[splays a Mom Wa t]dnrd Nntrb«. The vane Wel Catbd n=W mr 1Iils memmoMn cc la.sdn IS OMB no. m3/8-W16 Putim repwbtig brsden 1« Me caeedmn a idolmaaon a' l6tn'la emm "ffage 30 a nae6 Per Rspdn In4alOrlg ame Tar Rweang mebr[bimns. seamMg emsong mi;& d raes4 gang and maintaining the data rMcdem and completing aM reviewing Te cLr m of Irnpmmlon. Send (drrrnFTm F gaimi g ire burmen estimate « any airs mped a To Ebeecean a bROrTatlM, nPidmng iniggel a ns lbl mm[C1g no g n, lO Me Olace a maragementaW @ddjeL Palo r � PTMECt (d]a&dMfi), W36rVrgron, DC 20503. CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) EXHIBIT 15-G CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT DBE COMMITMENT 1. Local Agency: City of Santa Ana 2. Contract DBE Goal: 3. Project Description: Hazard Avenue Protected Bike Lanes 4. Project Location: n Euclid Street to Harbor Bc 5. Bidder's Name: HYM Enalneerinp Inc. 6. Prime Certified DBE: 0 7. Bid Amount: 8. Total Dollar Amount for ALL Subcontractors: 9. Total Number of ALL Subcontractors: z 10. Bid Item Number 11. Description of Work, Service, or Materials Supplied 12. DBE Certification Number 13. DBE Contact Information (Must be certified on the dale bids are opened) 14. DBE Dollar Amount 1119, 6~& work 38719 APAWMJ&u,,l (� 16& -rofpc Loop, 38033 ltj� -Jah ge4 01 714-,�04Ai A4 goo Local Agency to Complete this Section $ /� 21. Local Agency Contract Number: 22. Federal -Aid Project Number: CML 5063 (182) 23. Bid Opening Date: February 26, 2020 15. TOTAL CLAIMED DBE PARTICIPATION D2 .y 24. Contract Award Date: IMPORTANT: Identify all DBE firms being claimed for credit, regardless of tier. Names of the First Tier DBE Subcontractors and 25. Award Amount: _ their respective item(s) of work listed above must be consistent, where applicable with the names and Items of the work in the "Subcontractor List" submitted with your bid. Written confirmation of each listed DBE Is required. Local Agency certifies that all DBE certifications are valid and information on this form is complete and accurate. 2/26/2020 26. Local Agency Representative's Signature 27. Date 16. Preparer's Signature 17. Date Abraham Jeon 714-523-2372 28. Local Agency Representative's Name 29. Phone 18. Preparer's Name 19. Phone President 30. Local Agency Representative's Title 20. Preparer's Title DiSiRiou iON; i. ungmai - Local Agency 2. Copy - Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE). Fallure to submit to DLAE within 30 days of contract execution may result in de -obligation of federal funds on contract. 3. Include additional copy with award package. ADA Notice: For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For information call (916) 654- 6410 or TDD (916) 654-3880 or write Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95B14. 141 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) INSTRUCTIONS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT DBE COMMITMENT CONTRACTOR SECTION 1. Local Agency - Enter the name of the local agency that is administering the contract. 2. Contract DBE Goal - Enter the contract DBE goal percentage as it appears on the project advertisement. 3. Project Location - Enter the project location(s) as it appears on the project advertisement. 4. Project Description - Enter the project description as it appears on the project advertisement (Bridge Rehab, Seismic Rehab, Overlay, Widening, etc). 5. Bidder's Name - Enter the contractor's firm name. 6. Prime Certified DBE - Check box if prime contractor is a certified DBE. 7. Bid Amount - Enter the total contract bid dollar amount for the prime contractor. 8. Total Dollar Amount for ALL Subcontractors — Enter the total dollar amount for all subcontracted contractors. SUM = (DBEs + all Non -DBEs). Do not include the prime contractor information in this count. 9. Total number of ALL subcontractors — Enter the total number of all subcontracted contractors. SUM = (DBEs + all Non -DBEs). Do not include the prime contractor information in this count. 10. Bid Item Number - Enter bid item number for work, services, or materials supplied to be provided. 11. Description of Work, Services, or Materials Supplied - Enter description of work, services, or materials to be provided. Indicate all work to be performed by DBEs including work performed by the prime contractor's own forces, if the prime is a DBE. If 100% of the item is not to be performed or furnished by the DBE, describe the exact portion to be performed or furnished by the DBE. See LAPM Chapter 9 to determine how to count the participation of DBE firms. 12. DBE Certification Number - Enter the DBE's Certification Identification Number. All DBEs must be certified on the date bids are opened. 13. DBE Contact Information - Enter the name, address, and phone number of all DBE subcontracted contractors. Also, enter the prime contractor's name and phone number, if the prime is a DBE. 14. DBE Dollar Amount - Enter the subcontracted dollar amount of the work to be performed or service to be provided. Include the prime contractor if the prime is a DBE. See LAPM Chapter 9 for how to count full/partial participation. 15. Total Claimed DBE Participation - $: Enter the total dollar amounts entered in the "DBE Dollar Amount" column. %: Enter the total DBE participation claimed ("Total Claimed DBE Participation Dollars" divided by item "Bid Amount"). If the total % claimed is less than item "Contract DBE Goal," an adequately documented Good Faith Effort (GFE) is required (see Exhibit 15-H DBE Information - Good Faith Efforts of the LAPM). 16. Preparer's Signature - The person completing the DBE commitment form on behalf of the contractor's firm must sign their name. 17. Date - Enter the date the DBE commitment form is signed by the contractor's preparer. 18. Preparer's Name - Enter the name of the person preparing and signing the contractor's DBE commitment form. 19. Phone - Enter the area code and phone number of the person signing the contractor's DBE commitment form. 20. Preparer's Title - Enter the position/title of the person signing the contractor's DBE commitment form. LOCAL AGENCY SECTION 21. Local Agency Contract Number - Enter the Local Agency contract number or identifier. 22. Federal -Aid Project Number - Enter the Federal -Aid Project Number(s). 23. Bid Opening Date - Enter the date contract bids were opened. 24. Contract Award Date - Enter the date the contract was executed. 25. Award Amount — Enter the contract award amount as stated in the executed contract. 26. Local Agency Representative's Signature - The person completing this section of the form for the Local Agency must sign their name to certify that the information in this and the Contractor Section of this form is complete and accurate. 27. Date - Enter the date the DBE commitment form is signed by the Local Agency Representative. 28. Local Agency Representative's Name - Enter the name of the Local Agency Representative certifying the contractor's DBE commitment form. 29. Phone - Enter the area code and phone number of the person signing the contractor's DBE commitment form. 30. Local Agency Representative Title - Enter the position/title of the Local Agency Representative certifying the contractor's DBE commitment form. ? of A CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) EXHIBIT 15-H DBE INFORMATION — GOOD FAITH EFFORTS DBE INFORMATION - GOOD FAITH EFFORTS Federal -aid Project No. �CML 5063 (182) Bid Opening Date February 26, 2020 The City of Santa Ana established a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal of 16 % for this contract. The information provided herein shows the required good faith efforts to meet or exceed the DBE contract goal. Proposers or bidders submit the following information to document their good faith efforts within five (5) business days from bid opening. Proposers and bidders are recommended to submit the following information even if the Exhibit 10-01: Consultant Proposal DBE Commitments or Exhibit 15-G: Construction Contract DBE Commitment indicate that the proposer or bidder has met the DBE goal. This form protects the proposer's or bidder's eligibility for award of the contract if the administering agency determines that the bidder failed to meet the goal for various reasons, e.g., a DBE firm was not certified at bid opening, or the bidder made a mathematical error. The following items are listed in the Section entitled "Submission of DBE Commitment" of the Special Provisions, please attach additional sheets as needed: A. The names and dates of each publication in which a request for DBE participation for this project was placed by the bidder (please attach copies of advertisements or proofs of publication): Dates of B. The names and dates of written notices sent to certified DBEs soliciting bids for this project and the dates and methods used for following up initial solicitations to determine with certainty whether the DBEs were interested (please attach copies of solicitations, telephone records, fax confirmations, etc.): Names of DBEs Solicited Date of Initial Follow Up Methods and Dates Solicitation California Professional Engineering, Inc. 2/25/2020 email and phone 2/26/2020 Traffic Loops Crackfilling, Inc. email and phone /2020 tr - CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) C. The items of work made available to DBE firms including those unbundled contract work items into economically feasible units to facilitate DBE participation. It is the bidder's responsibility to demonstrate that sufficient work to facilitate DBE participation in order to met or exceed the DBE contract goal. Items of Work Bidder Normally Breakdown of Amount Percentage Performs Item (Y/N) Items ($) Of Contract Concrete Y 1,2}� z�� y�6���v 29y- i� E. F The names, addresses and phone numbers of rejected DBE firms, the reasons for the bidder's rejection of the DBEs, the firms selected for that work (please attach copies of quotes from the firms involved), and the price difference for each DBE if the selected firm is not a DBE: Names, addresses and phone numbers of rejected DBEs and the reasons for the bidder's rejection of the DBEs: jyobe- Names, addresses and phone numbers of firms selected for the work above: Efforts (e.g. in advertisements and solicitations) made to assist interested DBEs in obtaining information related to the plans, specifications and requirements for the work which was provided to DBEs: HYM sent email and send plan and specs. email again to know bidding status Efforts (e.g. in advertisements and solicitations) made to assist interested DBEs in obtaining bonding, lines of credit or insurance, necessary equipment, supplies, materials, or related assistance or services, excluding supplies and equipment the DBE subcontractor purchases or leases from the prime contractor or its affiliate: NnnP 0 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) H. The names of agencies, organizations or groups contacted to provide assistance in contacting, recruiting and using DBE firms (please attach copies of requests to agencies and any responses received, i.e., lists, Internet page download, etc.): Name of Method/Date of Results Agency/Organization Contact Caltrans District 12 Internet/2/25/2020 no need response b Qc2I12Q wA ran get H. Any additional data to support a demonstration of good faith efforts: NOTE: USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS OF PAPER IF NECESSARY. alikim-44 Rialjen'+�p p 2280 South Lilac Ave Bloomington Ca 92316 Phone: (909) 746-0356 Fax: (909) 746-0354 Contractors License No. 374600 DIR Registration No. 1000000306 A General Engineering C-13 Fence, Wire, wood C-32 Highway Improvement Quotation Union Contractor / No minority Status TO: For the intended use of the General Contractor Phone: ( ) Contact: Fax: ( ) - Current Date: 2/26/2020 BidDate: 2/26/2020 JobName: Hazard Ave Protected Bike Lanes Location: Santa Ana Bid#: 47003 0 Contract#: Job# Working Days: Liquidated Damages 02 White Turn Lane Line 295 LF 1.000 $295.00 03 12" White Thermo 180 SF 4.000 $720.00 04 Double Yellow Thermo 655 LF 1.000 $655.00 05 Two Way Left Turn Lane Thermo 5050 LF 1.000 $5,050.00 07 6" White Bike Lane Thermo 6200 LF 0.750 $4,650.00 08 6" Dashed Bike Lane Thermo 3370 LF 0.750 $2,527.50 09 Install 6" White Chevrons 230 LF 2.500 $575.00 10 Install Thermo Legends and Arrows 16 EA 85.000 $1,360,00 11 Remove Conflicting Striping 11250 LF 0.750 $8,437.50 11A Remove Legends 17 EA 75.000 $1,275.00 12 Bike Lane Legend Detail A Green MMA 34 EA 850.000 $28,900.00 13 Merging Area Detail B Green MMA 4000 SF 9.850 $39,400.00 14 Bike Sharrow Panel Green MMA Detail C 20 EA 425.000 $8,500.00 15 Curb Marking 1394 LF 2.250 $3,136.50 18 12" White Thermo 1370 SF 4.000 $5,480.00 19 Furnish & Install New Sign & Pole 27 EA 300.000 $8,100.00 20 Furnish & Instal New Sign Only 26 EA 205.000 $5,330.00 21 Furnish & Install New Signs Back to Back 17 EA 205.000 $3,485.00 22 Remove Existing Sign 12 EA 15.000 $180.00 23 Remove Existing Sign & Pole 13 EA 25.000 $325.00 Subtotal $128,381.50 Rialto Office 2280 South Lilac Ave Bloomington Ca 92316 Phone: (909) 746-0356 Fax: (909) 746-0354 Quotation Contractors License No. 374600 DIR Registration No. 1000000306 A General Engineering C-13 Fence, Wire, wood C-32 Highway Improvement Union Contractor / No minority Status . EXCLUDE: Maintenance of temporary delineation is. temporary paint, temporary tape, channelizers, etc... . ALL Bid items shall NOT be adjusted or removed without written/ or verbal permission. . EXCLUDE: Lead Compliance Plan . Retainage percentage on monthly progress payments to be no greater than the percentage retained by the Owner on its payment to the Contractor. If Owner reduces the retainage percentages on payments to the Contractor, the Contractor shall likewise reduce the retainage percentage on payment to Chrisp Company. Full retention to be released no later than thirty, (30) Days after completion of Chrisp Companys work. Excessive or delinquent retainage will be subject to the highest interest rate allowed by law. . Chrisp Company shall be reimbursed the full amount for bonds upon submission to General Contractor. Retention shall not be held from bond reimbursement. THIS QUOTATION IS BASED ON A STANDARD MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY WORKWEEK. ADDITIONAL COSTS WILL OCCUR FOR WORK PERFORMED ON WEEKENDS CHRISP COMPANY WILL USE EXISTING EMPLOYEE POOL TO PERFORM ALL WORK ON THIS PROJECT. IF THERE ARE ANY HIRING GOALS FOR THIS PROJECT THIS WILL BE EXCLUDED . General Contractor to Provide Clean Water Source At No Cost to Chrisp Company. Must be Located On Jobsite. Traffic Loops Crackfilling, Inc. 946 S. Emerald Street, Anaheim CA 92804 • Tel: (714) 520 4026 Fax: (714) 520 4027 License No. 652956 • Class C-10 & C-32 • SBE No. 0016691 • DBE & UDBE No. 38033 • Union Contractor DIR Registration No. 1000003794 • Expiration Date: 06/30/2022 Email Traffieloops@sbcglobal.net or Estimating@ticine-ca.com Date: 2/19/2020 Attn: Estimator Owner: City of Santa Ana Quotation Project: Hazard Avenue Protected Bike Lanes, Project No. 18-6903, Federal Project No. CML 5063(182) Bid Date: 02/26/2020 @ 2:00 PM BID ITEM DESCRIPTION CITY. UNIT UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL 6 Furnish and Install 2" PVC conduit and Stub -Out per plan 150 LF 72.00 10,800.00 17 Furnish and Install Type E Traffic Loop Detector 29 EA 375.00 10,875.00 18 Furnish and Install Type D Traffic Loop Detector 13 EA 450.00 5,850.00 19 Furnish and Install Type Q Traffic Loop Detector 7 EA 500.00 3,500.00 Quote is valid for 180 days from the date of this proposal. TOTAL BID AMOUNT: $ 31,025.00 -By accepting our quote you agree to the Terms & Conditions shown on Page 2. Our quote includes: 1- Lay out, saw cut, wash, blow, dry, seal, and megg 2- Loop saw cut shall be filled with Hot Melt Sealant 3- Insurance coverage up to $1 million, general aggregate up to $2 million, umbrella up to $2 million 4- One move -in (We charge $1,200.00 per additional move -in) 5- Traffic control for TLC operations only Our quote excludes: 1- General Excess Liability for $5 million (If needed, cost for extra protection is $3,000.00) 2- Bond fee (If required, Prime Contractor to pay bond rate of 2%), permit fee, utilities fee, advance sign posting of any kind, or notifying residents 3- Weekend work 4- Traffic control plans 5- Concrete, asphalt patch All inclusions and exclusions are to be incorporated into our contract. If either party becomes involved in litigation or arbitration arising out of this contract, the court or arbitration panel shall award attorney's fees and costs to the prevailing party. Please call Mai -Lan Nguyen at (714) 520-4026 if you have any questions or need more information. s � , Traffic Loops Crackfilling, Inc. 946 S. Emerald Street, Anaheim CA 92904 • Tel: (714) 520 4026 Fax: (714) 520 4027 General Terms and Conditions: -Quote is valid for 180 days from the date of this proposal. -In case of discrepancy between the unit price and the total set forth for a unit basis item, the unit price shall prevail.® -10 days notice required for scheduling. •24 hours notice required for rescheduling. -Site must be ready with cat -track, permanent striping, grinding, asphalt, approvals, etc. prior to loop installation. -Access to the job site must be furnished by Contractor, the general contractor, lessee or other party ordering work. -Additional charges may incur for the following: a) Site is not ready (for TLC's scope of work) the day of scheduled work or delays b) Extra move -ins c) When minimum move -in requirements are not met (if noted in quote) -All changes to the original scope of work or proposed extra work must be directed by the Contractor in writing prior to Traffic Loop Crackfilling, Inc. (TLC) before performing this work. No extra work or additional work will be performed without written authorization. -This quote will not be valid if there are any changes or deletions of any item post bid and will need revised pricing. -Total bid must be accepted (must use all line items) unless otherwise noted or agreed to. If you need revised pricing for only a portion of the work, contact Estimator. -TLC will not be impacted by Liquidated Damages assessed by the Contractor / Agency due to an inadequate amount of time to complete TLC operations. -Contractorto provide monthly progress payments for all completed work in accordance with the bid pricing schedule. Monthly payments must be received in full by TLC no later than 10 calendar days after the Contractor receives payment from Owner for our completed work. -Retention % is to be withheld only as per the Owner's requirements. -Contractor hereby agrees that time shall be of the essence In regard to all payments provided for herein, and if any payment is not made when due, Contractor agrees to pay all collection costs and expenses including costs of suit and any related attorney's fees and costs and also hereby waives the benefit of any statute of limitation that would prohibit an action of TLC to enforce the terms and conditions of this Contract including but not limited to any right to recovery of attorneys fees and costs. The laws of the State of California shall control all aspects of this contract except as to lien matters, which will be governed by the laws of the state where the subject property is located. -TLC requires a written contract, purchase order or signed quote prior to the start of work. -The language and terms used in this exhibit supersede any conflicting terms in the Subcontract Agreement. If you are the apparent low, please inform CPL within 48 horns. Long lead materials apply. CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING, INC. I Estimate Number Project Name: Hazard Ave Project #: 18-6903 Agency: CITY OF SANTA ANA Bid Due Date: 212612020 19062 San Jose Avenue, La Puente, CA 91748 License # 793907 Exp: 04/30/2021 Classifications: A, C-30, C-20 LSBE Certified LA County #54567 Exp: 11/30/2020 SBE Certified DGS #54567 Exp: 11/30/2020 SMBE/DBE/UDBE Certified Caltrans #31277 DIR #1000377609 Exp, 06/30/2020 Union Signatory Laborer's Local and IBEW Bid Due Time: 2:00 PM Conditions Set Forth: 1. Estimate based on one (1) mobilization unless noted otherwise. Additional mobilization at $3,500.00/ea. 2. If loop work: stubout must be existing & marked if not called out to be replaced per plans. Cat -tracking shall be approved prior. Should loop quantities be decreased, a minimum mobilization of $4,500.00 shall supersede. 3. One work day based on eight (8) standard consecutive work hours per day. At least 3-weeks notification required; subject to scheduling availability. 4. Quote valid for thirty (30) days. CPE reserves the right to revise our quotation as necessary. 5. Should HKA be the acting consultant/inspectors on behalf of the Agency, CPE reserves the right to withdraw our bid. CPE ispleasedtoprovide this esainatefor the intendeduseofthe Contractor(ofirrnish laborand/ormaterialin strict accordance with the plans andspce orations asfollows: Item # 6 16A 16B 16C Description: Furnish and install 2" PVC conduit and stub -out per plan Furnish and install type E traffic loop detector (with DLC) Furnish and install type D traffic loop detector (with DLC) Furnish and install type Q traffic loop detector (with DLC) UOM: I Qty: LF 150 EA 29 EA 13 EA 7 Unit Price: 100.00 265.00 275.00 300.00 Subtotal: 15,000.00 7,685.00 3,575.00 2,100.00 Exclusions: Bond & Bond Premium; Overtime and/or Nighttime Rates; All Permits; All Training Requirements; Signage; Lane Closure Request, Traffic Control, and TCP; Light Towers; CMS boards; Shoring; Water; Sidewalk & Surface Concrete; Regulatory Signs; Hauling Dirt, Debris, & Concrete Foundation Away; Handicap Ramps; Repaving Street; Repaving Potholes; Saw Cutting; USA Marking Removals; Irrigation Work; Dewatering; Striping; Survey; Fencing; Cold/Hot Mix; Temp. Asphalt; Inspection Fees; Testing; Temporary Loops; Temporary Signal; Compaction Testing, and/or High Voltage Line Conflicts, Unless Otherwise Noted Above. Standard Certificate of Insurance will be provided upon request. Any additional requirements will be billed at cost. Hot Mix Asphalt shall be provided by Contractor to CPE to backfill any potholes and/or excavations. If it is not provided and we utilize temporary Cold Mix, CPE will not be held liable for any claims that may derive from such pothole and/or excavated location. Terms: Unless other arrangements are made, payment is due & payable withinin 30 days upon completion; 1.5% monthly interest will apply thereafter. Bid based on entire bill of material and services and is inseparable unless written authorization is provided by CPE. Acceptance TOTAL: 20 B-43 Ph: (626) 810-1338 1 Fx: (626) 810-1322 I Email: estimatingOcpencrineerinctinc com $28,360.00 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) EXHIBIT 12-B BIDDER'S LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS (DBE AND NON -DBE) — PART I PART The bidder shall list all subcontractors (both DBE and non -DBE) in accordance with Section 2-1.054 of the Standard Specifications and per Title 49, Section 26.11 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This listing is required in addition to listing DBE Subcontractors elsewhere in the proposal. Photocopy this form for additional firms. Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 12-B Bidder's List of Subcontractors (DBE and NON -DBE) Exhibit 12-B Bidder's List of Subcontractor (DBE and Non -DBE) Part 1 As of March 1, 2015 Contractors (and sub-contmciors) wishing to bid on public works contracts shall be registered with the State Division of Industrial Relations and certified to bid on Public Works contracts. Please register at: https:/Iwww.dir.ca.gov/Public•Works/Contractor-Registration.html In accordance with Title 49, Section 26.11 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and Section 4104 of the Public Contract Code of the State of California, as amended, the following information is required for each sub -contractor who will perform work amounting to noon: than one half of one percent (0.5%) of the Total Base Bid or S10,000 (whichever is greater). Photocopy this form for additional items. Federal Project Number: Subcontractor Name and Location Line Item & Description Subcontract Amount percentage of Bid Item Sub- contracted Contractor License Number DBE ty/N) DBE Cert Number Annual Gross Receipts DIR Re Number Name: Traffic Loops Crackfilling, Ina - urns ns p PVC 1177n Furnish Btlnstaalll Type Ean Traffic Loop Detector 19-Furnish B Install Type ❑ Traffic Loop Detector 19-Furnish & Install Type D Traffic Loop Detector $31,025.00 700% 652966 V 38933 U < ItNlllon <$S rrdlllan City, State: y Anaheim, CA 1000003794 ❑ <$20 million El <$15 million of Firrti: fS. Name: 1 Mlllon City, State: <55 mllllon c$10 million LJ 1s million e of Firm: s. Name: <$15 ndl City, State: rNlgon llon L1 <510 million ❑ <$1S million e of 1171a rs. Name ❑ eSmllllon City, State: <SS million 410 million LJ 41S million Alta of Firm: rs. Name: ❑ <$a million City, State: <$5 million = <S30 million LJ <$i5mlllion e of Firm rs. Name: <S3 million City, State: LJ <$5 million ❑ <$10 mon <$1S million e of Firm: rs. 11 original -Local Agency File 21 Copy-DLAE w/ Award Package Page I of 2 .lamarr 2019 r 1 - - I I IN W6 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) EXHIBIT 12-B BIDDER'S LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS (DBE AND NON -DBE) - PART I PART The bidder shall list all subcontractors (both DBE and non -DBE) in accordance with Section 2-1.054 of the Standard Specifications and per Title 49, Section 26,11 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This listing is required in addition to listing DBE Subcontractors elsewhere in the proposal. Photocopy this form for additional firms. Local Assistance Procedures. Manual As of March 1, 2015 COuractrrs (and suh-cuittractars) wishing to bid on clanifiodlobid on.Publie Works contracts. Pleaseregisterar.htt s: wu 4104 of the Public Contract Code oftbe State of California, as amended, the 4 to mom Wan one half of one percent ofthe Tout Base Bid or S10,WO Federal Project Number: 5ubrontrartorNameand Location tine item & Description subcontract Amount Ptreentege of Old item Stub. tnttrtaeted Contractor thxnmNumber OBE {YfN) OBECert Number Annual Gross aeeeiptt GIO Re Number Name: r' rt Z?u' L C 31 Fl y �2$ 3�`k,rp Y N1400 d N/fit El<5l million <Sb milhnrr City, Stater 100=306 ❑ <5lomrnrnn . fL Aqe df Firm:irm,400m Namei. LJ $l million airy, state..❑ ... <$s million (,� z$io million <$i$ million Axe of Firm; rs. Naha: - Ll <$i million City, State: <$5 million <s10million _ [] 41Sm1l11on eof Pirrm n. Namw mt9fon ❑ty,state: 31 <$5 million 410million ❑ <$IS. million Age of Firm; rs. Name: .�'� ❑ <$1 million iaty,state: - million � di3tJ million sI c$ismlllloo e of Firm: • Name:.. City, stale 1S5 million ❑ <$10 million a$15 million Age of Firm: 'yrs. ursulriution: 1) uoginain.ocal++gemy File 2)CppyntAE w/Award Pacgage rim r r r ' I CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) PROMPT PAYMENT OF FUNDS WITHHELD TO SUBCONTRACTORS The undersigned, is submitting this proposal for performing by contract the work required by these bid documents, certify to comply with the following: The agency shall hold retainage from the prime contractor and shall make prompt and regular incremental acceptances of portions, as determined by the agency, of the contract work, and pay retainage to the prime contractor based on these acceptances. The prime contractor, or subcontractor, shall return all monies withheld in retention from a subcontractor within 30 days after receiving payment for work satisfactorily completed and accepted including incremental acceptances of portions of the contract work by the agency. Federal law (49CFR26.29) requires that any delay or postponement of payment over 30 days may take place only for good cause and with the agency's prior written approval. Any violation of this provision shall subject the violating prime contractor or subcontractor to the penalties, sanctions and other remedies specified in Section 7108.5 of the Business and Professions Code. These requirements shall not be construed to limit or impair any contractual, administrative, or judicial remedies otherwise available to the prime contractor or subcontractor in the event of a dispute involving late payment or nonpayment by the prime contractor, deficient subcontract performance, or noncompliance by a subcontractor. Signed ��— Title President Firm HYM Engineering, inc. Date CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) EXHIBIT 16-B — SUBCONTRACTING REQUEST Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 16-B CONTRACTORNAME HYM Engineering, Inc. COUNTY Orange ROUTE BUSINEss ADDRE9s 1559 W. Commonwealth Ave. CONTRACTNUMBER 18-6903 CITY AND STATE Fullerton, CA ZIP CODE 92833 FEDERAL -AID PRojECrNUMBER CML-5063 182 A, SUBCONTRACTOR B. BIDITEM C. PERCENTAGEOF D. SUB LISTED E, CERTIFIED F. DESCRIBE WORK G. DOLLAR AMOUNT (Narne,Bnsiness Addrm,Phone) NUMBERS) BID ITEM AT BIDTIME USE WHEN LESS TITAN BASEDONTHEBID SUBCONTRACTED 100% OF WORK IS AMOUNT SUBCON'fRAcrEE�D Yes No Y�7 Yes No p Yes No Yes No kl S P Cain 01� U�C Yes No Yes No qR w�. eoH11 //Q 1-4 Yes No Yes No /S /15 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ i{% 4 Yes No Yes No uY 1j ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Yes No Yes No ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I certify that: • The Standard Provisions for labor set forth in the contract apply to the subcontracted work. • If applicable, Form FHWA-1273 of the Special Provisions has been inserted in the subcontracts and should be incorporated in any lower -tier subcontract. Written contracts have been executed for the above noted subcontracted work. Contractor Signature Date /7 0 This section is to be completed by the resident engineer. 1. Total of bid items 2. Contractor must perform with own forces (line 1 X contract req. %) 3. Bid items previously subcontracted (taken from previously approved 16-11) 4. Bid items subcontracted (this request) 5. Total bid items subcontracted (line 3 plus 4) 6. Balance of work contractor to perform (line 1 minus 5) Approved RESIDENT ENGINEEIYS SIGNATURE DATE i opy utsmounon : Ongmai-contractor Copy- Resident Engineer Copy- OBEO- smallbusinessedvucate®dopt ca eov or fax to (916) 324-1949 Page 1 of 2 January 2018 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 16-B Subcontracting Request INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING SUBCONTRACTING REQUEST FORM All first -tier subcontractors must be included on a subcontractor request. Before subcontracting work starts, the contractor will submit an original CEM-1201 for approval according to the Standard Specifications. After approval, the RE returns the original to the contractor and complete the remaining distribution as listed on the bottom of the form. D. If subcontractor was listed at bid time per the Fair Practices Act, check yes, otherwise check no. E. If subcontractor is a certified DBE contractor, check yes, otherwise check no. F and G. When a portion of an item is subcontracted, describe the portion and show the percentage of the bid item and value. G. When an entire item is subcontracted, show the full bid item value. THIS FORM IS NOT TO BE USED FOR SUBSTITUTIONS OF SUBCONTRACTORS AND UDBE, DVBE OR SMALL BUSINESS ENTITIES. Page 2 of 2 January 2018 gum CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) The undersigned, is submitting this proposal for performing by contract the work required by these bid documents, certify to comply with the following: a. Contractor's Notification Promptly notify the Agency's Engineer if you find either of the following conditions: 1. Physical conditions differing materially from either of the following: • Contract documents • Job site examination 2. Physical conditions of an unusual nature, differing materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in the work provided for in the Contract Include details explaining the information you relied on and the material differences you discovered. If you fail to promptly notify the Engineer, you waive the differing site condition claim for the period between your discovery of the differing site condition and your notification to the Engineer. If you disturb the site after discovery and before the Engineer's investigation, you waive the differing site condition claim. b. Engineer's Investigation and Decision Upon your notification, the Engineer investigates job site conditions and: 1. Notifies you whether to resume affected work 2. Decides whether the condition differs materially and is cause for an adjustment of time, payment, or both Signed Title President Firm HYM Engineering, inc. Date 2/26/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) BIDDER'S CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE REGARDING "BUY AMERICA" REQUIREMENTS FOR STEEL OR MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS The undersigned, is submitting this proposal for performing by contract the work required by these bid documents, certify to comply with the "Buy America" requirements of Section 165 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 and as shown in the special provisions of this project. Signed Title Firm HYM Engineering, inc. Date 2/26/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) NEPA COMPLIANCE FOR FEDERAL AID CONTRACTS The undersigned, is submitting this proposal for performing by contract the work required by these bid documents, certify to comply with the Categorical Exemption/Categorical Exclusion Determination Form including and not limited to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements and environmental commitments found in the appendix of the Contract Documents of this project. Signed Title President Firm HYM Engineering, inc. Date 2/26/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FEDERAL PROJECT NO: CML-5063 (182) TMP COMPLIANCE FOR FEDERAL AID CONTRACTS The undersigned, is submitting this proposal for performing by contract the work required by these bid documents, certify to comply with the Traffic Management Plan (TMP) commitments found in the appendix of the Contract Documents of this project. Signed Title President Firm HYM Engineering, inc. Date 2/26/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA EXHIBIT 3 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 18-6903 HAZARD AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANES FROM EUCLID STREET TO HARBOR BLVD (CML-5063(182)) This CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT is made and entered into this 5s' day of May, 2020 by and between the City of Santa Ana, California, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "CITY"), and HYM Engineering, Inc. (hereinafter "CONTRACTOR"). WH`NESSETH: The CITY and the CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: 1. CONTRACTOR agrees to perform all the work and furnish all the materials at its own cost and expense necessary to construct and complete in a good and workmanlike manner and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of the CITY, the Hazard Avenue Protected Bike Lanes from Euclid Street to Harbor Blvd Project (hereinafter referred to as the "WORK OF IMPROVEMENT") identified in and in accordance with the Contract Documents prepared by the City's Public Works Agency and approved by the City Council. 2. The complete Construction Contract consists of the "Contract Documents" as defined by the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and which include the following: • Notice Inviting Bids • Information to Bidders • Bid Proposal • Bid Bond • Contract Form • Contract Bonds • General Provisions • Special Provisions • Technical Provisions and Project Plans • Community Workforce Agreement • Appendices In case of conflict between the Contract Documents, the precedence of documents shall be as established in the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. 3. CITY agrees to pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept in full payment to complete the WORK OF IMPROVEMENT the sum total amount not to exceed Eight Hundred Eighty-two Thousand Nine Hundred Nineteen Dollars and No Cents ($882,919.00), as set forth and identified in the BID PROPOSAL, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A." rev. 09/01/2017 20B-53 Page 1 of The BID PROPOSAL contains a schedule of unit price(s) or lump sum(s) based on approximate quantities only, and the City does not expressly or by implication agree that the actual amount of work will correspond therewith, but reserves the right to increase or decrease the amount of any class or portion of the work or to omit portions of the work as may be deemed necessary or advisable. 4. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the WORK OF IMPROVEMENT within the time specified in the Time for Completion of Improvements section of the BID PROPOSAL (Exhibit "A") including commencing construction within the timeframe therein specified after issuance of a Notice to Proceed. 5. The CONTRACTOR will pay, and will require all subcontractors to pay, all employees on the WORK OF IMPROVEMENT a salary or wage at least equal to the prevailing salary or wage established for such work as set forth in the wage determinations for this work in accordance with applicable State and Federal law. 6. If applicable, the CONTRACTOR shall adhere to the CITY'S Community Workforce Agreement (CWA), a pre -hire collective bargaining agreement, which establishes the labor relations policies and procedures for CONTRACTOR to follow in the crafts persons employed to complete the WORK OF IMPROVEMENT as more fully described in the CWA. The CWA may be found on the City's website at: http://www.santa-ana.org/pwa/documents/CWA.pd 7. CONTRACTOR shall, after award of this Contract, furnish two bonds to be approved by the CITY, one in the amount of One Hundred Percent (100%) of the Contract price, to guarantee the faithful performance of the work (Performance Bond), and one in the amount of One Hundred Percent (100%) of the Contract price to guarantee payment of all claims for labor and materials furnished (Payment Bond). This Contract shall not become effective until such bonds are supplied to and approved by the CITY. 8. CONTRACTOR shall, prior to the release of the performance and payment bonds or the retention payment, furnish a warranty performance and payment bond (Warranty Bond). Said Warranty Bond shall also be required as a condition of project acceptance. For projects up to Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000), the Warranty Bond amount shall be the greater of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) or Twenty Percent (20%) of the final contract price. For projects above Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000), the Warranty Bond amount shall be the greater of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) or Ten Percent (10%) of the final contract price. 9. CONTRACTOR shall, after award of this Contract, furnish Certificates of Liability Insurance and Worker's Compensation Insurance as outlined in the General Provisions, to be approved by the CITY. // 20 B-54 Page 2 of 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Construction Contract on the day and year first above written. ATTEST: DAISY GOMEZ Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM: SONIA R. CARVALHO City Attorney By:� •r r•—. �^^" J NFUNK Assistant City Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: NABIL SABA, PE Acting Executive Director Public Works Agency CITY OF SANTA ANA KRISTINE RIDGE City Manager CONTRACTOR: HYM Engineering, Inc. NAME: b Tem TITLE: 1 fttstofOj 20B-55 Page 3 of 3 COST ANALYSIS PROJECT 186903; HAZARD AVE PROTECTED & CLASS III BIKE LANES CML-5063(182) Construction Contract $882,919 Contract Administration $87,793 Inspection and Testing $21,948 Contingencies $88,340 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS :7iT _mxl $1,081,000 20B-56 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE: APPROVE AN APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT AND APPROVE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE PART-TIME CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES' UNIT, SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 721 (SEIU) (GENERAL FUND AND OTHER FUNDS) CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1" Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2i1 Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ [eZe1►II1►l1110111[01 /s/Kristine Ridge FILE NUMBER CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approve an Appropriation Adjustment transferring $10,980 from General Fund Non - Departmental into the appropriate General Fund Accounting Units noted in (Exhibit 1). 2. Authorize with City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Part -Time Civil Service Employees' Unit (PTCS), Service Employees International Union Local 721 (SEIU) for the period of July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2022, regarding wages and other terms and conditions of employment (Exhibit 2). DISCUSSION The City and the Part -Time Civil Service Employees' Unit, Service Employees International Union Local 721 (SEIU-PTCS) recently completed contract negotiations with a majority membership vote on March 5, 2020, resulting in a new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The provisions of the agreement include: 1. Term: Effective July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2022. 2. Salary: The agreement provides a cost of living adjustment effective in each pay period which includes July 1, 2019, July 1, 2020, and July 1, 2021. Classifications covered by this MOU shall receive a base salary increase of seven (7) salary rate ranges (approximately 3.5%). 20C-1 Agreement with SEIU PTCS 2019-2022 May 5, 2020 Page 2 The initial salary increase will be provided to those employees currently employed as of the date the MOU is adopted by Council and retroactively paid to the pay period including July 1, 2019. 3. Holiday Closure: The City and SEIU-PTCS have agreed to a mandatory City-wide winter holiday closure each year during the term of this MOU and shall sunset on June 30, 2022. This provision expires June 30, 2022, unless mutually agreed otherwise by the parties. 4. Health and Dental Allowances: The City will continue to provide a prorated monthly allowance of 75% of the City's contribution allotted to full-time SEIU represented employees for health and dental insurances based on coverage level selected by employee. The SEW full-time unit received increased towards health and dental allowances beginning January 1, 2020 and each January thereafter during the term of the MOU July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2021. The SEIU-PTCS will receive an indirect increase to these allowances due to the SEIU full-time unit increase. The increase cost is reflected in the fiscal impact section. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's effort to meet Goal #7 - Team Santa Ana, Objective #4 (establish employee compensation that attracts and retains a highly qualified workforce), Objective #5 (create a culture of innovation and efficiency within the organization), Objective #6 (provide a positive workplace environment that supports the health of its employees and celebrates its success), and Objective #7 (develop a culture of motivated and innovative leaders in the organization). FISCAL IMPACT During the three-year term of the agreement, the total cost increase for the bargaining unit is $31,992 (all funds), including the fiscal year 2019-2020 increase of $13,060 (Exhibit 1). Exhibits: 1. Fund Break-out — General Fund Accounting Units and Fund Categories 2. SEIU-PTCS MOU July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2022 20Ci-2 Department Community Development Finance Parks & Recreation Agency Police Department SEW PTCS EXHIBIT 1: FY 2019-20 GENERAL FUND Accounting Unit Number 01118811 01110120 01113220 01114402 Accounting Unit Name Fiscal Impact Homeless Services 2,838 Purchasing 4,192 Zoo 1,490 Human Resources 2,460 Additions Subtotal 10,980 TRANSFER FROM NON -DEPARTMENTAL TO ABOVE -REFERENCED GENERAL FUND ACCOUNTING UNITS General Fund Non -Departmental 0110515 General Non -Departmental (10,980) GENERAL FUND NET FISCAL IMPACT 0 FISCAL IMPACT AMOUNT NOTED BELOW WILL BE ABSORBED WITHIN EXISTING BUDGET Internal Service Fund Department Accounting Unit Number Accounting Unit Name Fiscal Impact Public Works Agency 10117605 Development Engineering 2,080 ADDITIONS GRAND TOTAL 13,060 20C-3 EXHIBIT 2 DULY 1, 2019 - NNE 30, 2022 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING CITY OF SANTA ANA AND PART-TIME CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNIT SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 721 W y 2019-2022 MOU Cityof Santa Ana & SEWPart-Time Civil Service Employ it Page 1 20C-4 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AND THE PART-TIME CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNIT SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 721 JULY 1, 2019 — JUNE, 30, 2022 Table of Contents ArticleI.......................................................................................................................................... 8 1.0 RECOGNITION.........................................................................................................1. 8 ArticleH................................................ ......................................................................................... 9 2.0 NON-DISCRIMINATION CLAUSE........................................................................... 9 ArticleIII.....................................................................................................................................10 3.0 ATTENDANCE AND HOUR LIMITS.....................................................................10 3.1 Attendance..................................................................................................................10 3.2 Hour Limits.................................................................................................................10 3.3 Hourly Conversion......................................................................................................1.0 ArticleIV.....................................................................................................................................11 4.0 SALARIES. ......................................................... I .............................. 4.1 Basic Compensation Plan ...........................................................................................11 4.2 Salary Schedule..........................................................................................................11 4.3 Salaries........................................................................................................................12 4.4 Application of Basic Compensation Plan ...................................................................12 4.5 Probation.....................................................................................................................12 4.6 Beginning Rates..........................................................................................................13 4.7 Service........................................................................................................................13 4.8 Advancement within Ranges......................................................................................14 4.9 Reduction in Salary Steps...........................................................................................15 4.10 Promotion...................................................................................................................15 4.11 Demotion....................................................................................................................15 Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employee^ Page 2019-2022 MOU City of C Z��/� 20C-5 4.12 Reallocation of Salary Rate Ranges........................................................................... 16 4.13 Request for Classification Review.............................................................................16 ArticleV .......................................................................................................................................18 5.0 ASSIGNMENT & OTHER SPECIAL PAY ADDITIVES........................................18 5.1 Assignment Pay Differential.......................................................................................18 5.2 Lead Pay.....................................................................................................................18 5.3 Bilingual Pay..............................................................................................................18 5.4 Shift Differential.........................................................................................................19 5.5 Standby Pay................................................................................................................ 20 5.6 Call Back Duty........................................................................................................... 21 5.7 Temporary Upgrade Assignment Pay......................................................................... 21 5.8 Authority for Assignments......................................................................................... 23 5.9 Career Development Incentives..................................................................................23 5.10 Jury Duty or Witness Leave.......................................................................................24 ArticleVI .....................................................................................................................................25 6.0 OVERTIME................................................................................................................25 6.1 General Policy for Overtime Work............................................................................. 25 6.2 Definition....................................................................................................................25 6.3 Computation of Forty (40) Hour Workweek..............................................................25 6.4 Compensation for Overtime....................................................................................... 26 6.5 Compensatory Time.................................................................................................... 26 6.6 No Effect on Other Benefits.......................................................................................27 6.7 Overtime Work to be Minimized................................................................................27 ArticleVU....................................................................................................................................28 7.0 HOLIDAYS................................................................................................................28 7.1 City Holidays.............................................................................................................. 28 7.2 Requirements..............................................................................................................29 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Un' Page 3 �nl 20C-6 2/4/w � 7] Use of 7lo�e-....-~~---..`~.~~-_..~.~~--^^^-~~.'~~~~' � 7.4 K4uxinunu/\counun{atiouof .-..'.',.-.-~..~.,^....'^..~`-^._. 7.5 Winter Holiday Ck,nure...^...--,~.~.~-.~~~-.~'..~'~^^'.^.,~.~.~. 2/ 34 8.0 `�/�C/�TI{)k|.....-^~'~~..~^~~...~'..~'^^.~-..-~~^.^..~-~^^~~. � 8.1 Purpose ~^^~^^~~`-^~-~^~^~~~~.^-^~^-~-^`-~-~~~^~~^^~--~^-^`^ 82 /�cu�ud..,.......~'--.-~..~...-.~-..—~-.~'~-~-..-~~,.-~.~.- � 8.3 Use ufVacation ........................... .............................................................................. vv � Kf\/uou�oo(�uob^{}ot~...^,...,...`.,~^~._,-.^,~^..°....~-.^.'~~.-^ 37 /kxtkcKe%��...,-.....~...~.^^^~..~...-^....-~^._~^.`-^--~^~^^~'~^^--^. � 9,0 OTHER LEAVES ()F ABSENCE .............................................................................. ov 9.1 Sick Leave -.-._.~-~^~,~-^.---...~^^~-^'~^^.^----^-"^`~~^^" V2 8cneuvuo�eu1Leave -.,...,,.~-~~..--~.-.-~^~~..~~~.._..-...... � V3K8�hmnLeave ..°.~.~~-~,~~...~.~.~~.~.--^'.~,..._-.-...~°- � 9.4 Eouoo�u�iouLeave ..~.~.~....-~.^.-^.^...~-.-`.~...~..,.-^-`~ � 9.5 Unauthorized Absence ................................................................................................ «^ 9.6 Authorized Absence Without Pay --Obor Tnou....~....~.'~~~_~..~..-ya 9.7 Authorized Absence Without Pay -- Long Term ...................................................... eo 9.8 lod^x�iu|Leave ..~.,.~.--~".^-.~.._-^-~~-^'--^-~^~^^^^~~-~~. � 9.9 Pregnancy Disability Leave ...................... ................................................................. 43 0J0Lcuvo.......~..-.^~^~^~-^~-~^~~...~~.~.^.~°~~,.~. � � ��«��le��^��~^^^��.''.^~~~����^^�^�^^��^^^�^�~^���~~�'^��^���^�~^^ 10.0 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE BENEFITS .................................................................... */ 18J Medical Health Insurance ........... ....~~~.~~.'~~^.,.'.~~..~.~.^.~..^~~4' 102 Dental Insurance ......................................... ~.,.-~-~~`^'_~-^,-~-_....... =" - 2O10'2022MOUCity ofSanta Ana &SE[UYar�TirueCb�lService nit Page 4 Im � ��«�� �»��K 10.3 Long -Term Disability Insurance................................................................................. 48 t0.4 Life Insurance.............................................................................................................48 10.5 Benefits Advisory Committee....................................................................................48 10.6 Retirement Health Savings (RHS) Plan ...................................................................... 48 10.7 Vision Insurance.........................................................................................................49 ArticleXI ..................................................................................................................................... 50 11.0 RETIREMENT........................................................................................................... 50 11.1 CaIPERS Retirement Plans......................................................................................... 50 11.2 Contributions.............................................................................................................. 50 11.3 CalPERS Benefit Options........................................................................................... 51 ArticleXII.................................................................................................................................... 53 12.0 TOOLS........................................................................................................................53 12.1 Personal Tools............................................................................................................ 53 12.2 Tool Allowance.......................................................................................................... 53 12.3 Lost or Stolen Tools.................................................................................................... 53 ArticleXIII.................................................................................................................................. 54 13.0 UNIFORMS................................................................................................................54 13.1 Uniforms.....................................................................................................................54 14.1 Central Safety C'ommittee...........................................................................................55 14.2 Safety Shoes................................................................................................................ 55 ArticleXV.................................................................................................................................... 56 15.0 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE..................................................................................... 56 15.1 Definition of a Grievance........................................................................................... 56 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SE[U Part -Time Civil Service Employe t Page 5 20Cm8 �uf% 15.2 Informal Process — First Step.................................................................................... 56 15.3 Formal Process............................................................................................................57 15.4 Reservation of Rights................................................................................................. 57 ArticleXVI...................................................................................................................................58 16.0 UNION RIGHTS........................................................................................................ 58 16.1 Union Representatives ................................................................................................58 16.2 Release Time.............................................................................................................. 58 16.3 Worksite Access......................................................................................................... 60 16.4 Use of Bulletin Boards................................................................................................ 61 16.5 Use of City Facilities.................................................................................................. 61 16.6 Payroll Deductions...................................................................................................... 61 16.7 Reporting Requirements............................................................................................. 63 16.8 New Employee Orientations....................................................................................... 63 ArticleXVII .................................................................................................................................65 17.0 CITY" RIGHTS............................................................................................................65 17.1 Management Rights....................................................................................................65 17.2 Meet and Confer on Impact........................................................................................ 66 ArticleWilI................................................ 18.0 ANTI -STRIKE CLAUSE ............ 18.1 Prohibited Conduct ...................... 18.2 Union Responsibility ................... ................................. 67 ............................ I ............. ... 67 .................................................. 67 ............................................................ I ...... I......... 67 ArticleXIX....................................................................................... 19.0 LAYOFFS....................................................................... 19.1 Notice of Layoff............................................................. 19.2 Order of Layoff............................................................... 19.3 Reemployment List ......................................................... ............................................ 68 ............................................ 68 ............................................ 68 ............................................ 68 ........ ...................... I............. 69 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees 20C-9 AD\ge 6 i ti /� U 19.4 Temporary Assignment.............................................................................................. 69 19.5 Contracting Out.......................................................................................................... 69 ArticleXX....................................................................................................................................70 20.0 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS...........................................................................70 20.1 Full -Time Eligible Lists.............................................................................................. 70 20.2 Joint Labor Management Teams................................................................................ 70 20.3 Perfonnance Appraisals..............................................................................................70 ArticleXXI................................................................................................................................... 71 21.0 FULL UNDERSTANDING, WAIVER & SEPARABILITY .................................... 71 21.1 Intent of Agreement. ................................................................................................... 71 21.2 Rules and Regulations................................................................................................ 71 21.3 Waiver of Bargaining............................................................ ...... 71 ............................... 21.4 Emergency Waiver Provision..................................................................................... 71 21.5 Separability Provision.................................................................................................72 Article XXII.................................................. 22.0 TERM OF MOU .......................... EXECUTION OF THE NEW AGREEMENT...... ExhibitA ....................................................... ................................................................... 73 ................................................................... 73 .............................................. 74 .... 75 u2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employee ni Page 7 v 20C-10�� ARTICLE I 1.0 RECOGNITION 1.1 Pursuant to the provisions of the Meyers-blilias-Brown Act, Government Code §3500, et seq., the City of Santa Ana (hereinafter called the "City") has recognized the Service Employees International Union, Local 721 (hereinafter called the "Union" or "SEIU') as the recognized representative of the bargaining unit which includes part-time civil service personnel employed by the Ciry in classifications listed in Exhibit A of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). 1.2 During the term of this MOU, no substantive issue of representation shall be raised contrary to this MOU, except as provided in the City's Employer -Employee Relations Resolution (EERR) No. 81-75. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees it Page 8 (^ 20C-11 ARTICLE Il 2.0 NON-DISCRIMINATION CLAUSE 2.1 The City and the Union agree they shall not discriminate against any employee because of political affiliation, union activities, union membership, race, color, sex, age, national origin or alienage, sexual orientation, political or religious opinions or affiliations, religious creed, ancestry, physical disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, natural hair and hair styles associated with race, gender, gender identity, gender expression, military or veteran status, and other protected classifications as defined by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FF.HA). 2.2 The City and the Union shall reopen any provision(s) of this MOU for the purpose of complying with any order of a Federal or State agency or court of competent jurisdiction, if a modification or change in any provision(s) of this MOU is required to remain in compliance with State or Federal anti -discrimination laws. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees 20C-12 rt Page 9 ` 0 ARTICLE III 3.0 ATTENDANCE AND HOUR LIMITS 3.1 Attendance Employees covered by this MOU shall be in attendance at their work during hours prescribed by the Department Head or his/her designee(s) and shall not absent themselves without approval of the Department Head or his/her designee(s). 3.2 Hour Limits Persons appointed to a part-time civil service position work an average of twenty (20) to thirty-nine (39) hours per week. Pay periods for part-time civil service employees run from the eleventh (1111) of the month, through the twenty-fifth (251) of the same month, and from the twenty-sixth (26") of the month through the tenth (10 h) of the following month. 3.3 Hourly Conversion Whenever reference is made to a required number of days, months, or years for frill -time civil service employees in this MOU, an equivalent number of hours shall be substituted to satisfy an equivalent requirement for part-time civil service employees as defined in Section 3.2 of this MOU. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit ge 20C-13 ARTICLE IV 4.0 SALARIES 4.1 Basic Compensation Plan There is an established basic compensation plan for all part-time civil service personnel who are now employed or will in the future be employed in any of the designated classifications of employment represented by the Union as listed in this MOU and/or its exhibits. 4.2 Salary Schedule A. The basic salary and wage schedule, as periodically updated and published by the City, provides various salary rate ranges, each comprised of six (6) steps or rates of pay. The respective rate ranges are identified by a three (3) digit number The steps within each range are identified by the letters "AA" and "A" through "E" inclusive, with Step "AA" being the lowest step in the range. Step "AA" is the normal beginning pay rate. Step "A" is an automatic step increase after the completion of one thousand and forty (1040) hours in the next lower step. It is also an optional hiring rate. Steps "B" and "C" are an automatic step increase after the completion of two thousand and eighty (2080) hours in the next lower step. They are also an optional hiring rate. Step "D" is an automatic step increase after the completion of two thousand and eighty (2080) hours in the next lower step. It is the maximum hiring rate. Step "E" is a performance based step increase which an employee may be eligible to receive after the completion of three thousand, one hundred and twenty (3120 hours in Step "D". Specific provisions governing advancement within salary rate ranges for part-time civil service employees are set forth in Section 4.8 of this MOU. B. During the term of this MOU, it is the City's intent to eliminate the salary matrix and create a salary schedule. The parties acknowledge and agree that elimination of the salary matrix and implementation of the salary schedule is a meet and confer 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit it 20C-14 0 ov issue. Once the City is ready to move forward with elimination of the salary matrix and creation of the salary schedule, it will provide its proposal to the Union and the parties agree to promptly meet and confer on the issue. No changes will be made until the negotiations process has been completed. The parties acknowledge that such a change will require modification to language in several provisions of this MOU. 4.3 Salaries The base salary rate of each employee and classification shall be increased as follows: A. Effective in the pay period including July- 1, 2019 — A base salary increase of seven (7) salary rate ranges, which is approximately three and one-half percent (3.5%). This salary increase shall be provided to those employees who are currently employed as of the date the MOU is approved by the City Council. B. Effective in the pay period including July 1, 2020 — A base salary increase of seven (7) salary rate ranges, which is approximately three and one-half percent (3.5%). C. Effective in the pay period including July 1, 2021 — A base salary increase of seven (7) salary rate ranges, which is approximately three and one-half percent (3.5%). 4.4 Application of Basic Compensation Plan The salary rate ranges contained in Section 4.2 of this article and the City's salary schedule are monthly salary rate ranges; however, all employees working in classifications of employment covered by this MOU shall be compensated at an hourly rate. The regular rate of pay shall be computed as provided for by the Fair Labor Standards Act (ELSA). Any hourly rate of pay, defined as the regular hourly rate of pay, shall be computed by dividing the monthly salary rate by one hundred and seventy-three point thirty-three (173.33). In determining the hourly rate as herein provided, computation shall be made to the nearest whole cent and a computation resulting in an even one-half cent ($0.005) shal I fix the rate at the next higher whole cent. 4.5 Probation A. The probationary period shall be two thousand and eighty (2080) hours, which is the hourly equivalent of one (1) year from the date of appointment from an open eligible list (new hire) or a reappointment eligible list (rehire). B. The probationary period shall be one thousand and forty (1040) hours for employees who are promoted within the unit, which is the hourly equivalent of six 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Uni Page 12 0\� 20C-15 (6) months from the date of appointment from a promotional eligible list. 4.6 Beginning Rates A new employee shall be paid the rate shown as Step "AA" in the salary rate range allocated to the classification of employment for which he/she has been hired. In special instances where such new employee possesses unique and exceptional educational training and/or experience qualifications, the Department Head, under whom the employee will serve, may submit a written request and justification to the City Manager for authorization to place such new employee on Step "A," "B," "C," or "D" within the allocated salary rate range for the classification in which he/she is being hired. if approved, such new employee shall be assigned to a salary step upon the commencement of his/her service in the classification of employment to which the salary rate range applies and such assignment having once been made shall remain in effect until the said employee shall be entitled to advance to the next salary step in accordance with the further provisions of this article. 4.7 Service The word "service" as used in this MOU shall be deemed to mean continuous, full-time service, or an equivalent number of hours, in the classification in which the employee is being considered for salary advancement, service in a higher classification, or service in a classification allocated to the same salary rate range and having generally similar duties and requirements. For the purpose of this MOU, an equivalent number of hours shall mean the following: • Two thousand and eighty (2080) hours for one (1) year. • One thousand and forty (1040) hours for six (6) months. Employees hired after the lust (I:t) work day of the month shall not be credited with "time in service" for that month when determining the length of service required for salary step advancement. A lapse of service by an employee for a period of time longer than thirty (30) calendar days by reason of resignation, quit [i.e. less than two (2) weeks' notice], or discharge, shall serve to eliminate the accumulated length of service time of such employee for the purposes of this MOU, and such employee reentering the service of the City shall be considered as a new employee, except when he/she is being or will be reappointed within one (1) year and placed in the same salary step in the appropriate salary rate as he/she was at the time of termination of employment. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employee, ! R age 13 V 20C-16 "Resignation, quit, or discharge" for purposes of this section shall mean separating from a Part -Time Civil Service City position in an unrelated classification outside the career ladder. 4.8 Advancement within Ranges A. Length of Service Advancements After the salary of an employee has been first established, such employee shall be advanced from Step "AA" to Step "A," from Step "A" to Step "B," from Step "B" to Step "C," or from Step "C" to Step "D," whichever is the next higher step to that on which the employee has been previously paid. Each advancement shall be effective the first (Vday of the month following the date of completion of the length of service required for the advancement, as provided in Section 4.2 and the salary schedule. B. Merit Advancement An employee shall be considered for advancement from Step "D" to Step "E" upon the completion of the required length of service as provided in Section 4.2 and the salary schedule. The effective date of such merit increase, if granted, shall be on the first (1 `') day of the month following the completion of such required length of service. Advancement to Step "E" may be granted only for continued meritorious and efficient service and continued improvement by the employee in the efficient performance of the duties of his/her position. Such merit advancement shall require the following: 1. Human Resources shall keep on file in the office of the Executive Director of Human Resources, a copy of each performance appraisal report required to be made on the employee by the Civil Service Rules and Regulations and/or the City Manager during the period of service time of such employee subsequent to his/her last salary advancement. 2. The Department Head, at least twenty (20) calendar days prior to the anticipated completion of such employee's required length of service, shall file with the City Manager a statement recommending the granting or denial of the merit increase and supporting such a recommendation with specific reasons therefore. The employee shall be notified by the Department Head as to such recommendations and of the reasons therefore. 3. No advancement in salary above Step "D" shall become effective until approved by the City Manager, except when placement on a salary step above 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees U Page 14 20C-17 Step "D" results from promotion under the provisions of Section 4.10 of this article. C. Length of Service Required When Advancement Denied When an employee has not been approved for advancement to merit Step "E," he/she may be reconsidered for such advancement after the completion of five hundred and twenty (520) hours of additional service and shall be reconsidered for such advancement after the completion of one thousand and forty (1040) hours of additional service. This reconsideration shall follow the same steps and shall be subject to the same actions as provided in subparagraph B of this section. 4.9 Reduction in Salami Steps Subject to the provisions in this section, any employee who is being paid at merit Step "E" may be reduced to Step "D" of the appropriate salary range, upon the recommendation of the Department Head, and the approval of the City Manager. The procedure for such reduction shall follow the same procedure as outlined for merit advancements in Section 4.8 above. An employee reduced to Step "D" may be considered for re -advancement under the same provisions as contained in Section 4.9C above. 4.10 Promotion When an employee is promoted to a position in a higher classification from a position in a lower classification in the same occupational career ladder, he/she shall be reassigned to Step "AA" in the appropriate salary rate range for the higher classification; provided, however, that if the base salary step currently being paid such employee is already equal to or higher than said Step "AA, ' he/she will be placed in the lowest step in the appropriate salary rate range as will grant that employee a minimum increase of one (1) salary step, approximately five percent (5.0%) over his/her current base salary step, inclusive of lead pay, and exclusive of any other assignment or special pay additive or additives such as bilingual pay, shift differential, special skill pay or the like, except when placement at"E" step will not be sufficient to provide a one salary step, approximately five percent (5.0%) increase. 4.11 Demotion When an employee is demoted to a position in a lower classification, his/ her salary rate shall be fixed in the appropriate salary rate range for the lower classification in accordance with the following provisions: 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unite Page 15 %„ 1 20Ci-18 A. The salary rate shall be reduced by at least one (1) salary step, which is approximately five percent (5.0%). B. The new salary rate must be within the appropriate salary rate range. C. The new salary rate shall not be higher than the salary step to which the employee would have been entitled had his/her service time in the higher classification been spent in the lower classification. D. If the salary rate recommended by the Department Head is lower than the maximum step permissible under Subsection C above, such recommendation shalt be considered a reduction in pay in addition to the demotion and shall be handled in accordance with the provisions for salary reductions in Section 4.9 above. 4.12 Reallocation of Salary Rate Ranges Any employee who is employed in a classification which is reallocated to a different salary rate range from that previously assigned shall be retained in the same salary step in the new salary rate range as he/she had previously held in the prior rate range and shall retain credit for length of service in such step towards advancement to the next higher step. 4.13 Request for Classification Review A. Any employee who, for a continuous period exceeding one (1) year, believes he/she is regularly and consistently performing duties and/or responsibilities not in conformance with their classification concept, or duties and/or responsibilities of another classification, may request a classification review of their position through their supervisor to the Department Head. The employee must submit their request on a form specified by the Executive Director of Human Resources, outlining in writing how they believe their current duties and/or responsibilities differ from thei r classification concept. B. The Department Head will review the employee's submitted request and within sixty (60) calendar days will make one (1) of the following determinations: 1. Will support the employee's request. a. If the Department Head supports the employee's request for a classification review, he/she shall forward the request to the Executive Director of Human Resources along with justification for support of the employee's request. b. The Department Head shall notify the employee that his/her request has been submitted to the Executive Director of Human Resources. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Un/4� ' e 16 nj C� 20C-19 2. Will not support the employee's request. a. If the Department Head does not support the employee's request for a classification review, he/she shall notify the employee of this decision in writing and set forth the basis for the decision. b. If the Department Head does not support the employee's request, but agrees that some of the duties and/or responsibilities being performed by the employee are those of a higher level City classification, he/she can do the following: Return the employee to performance of the duties and/or responsibilities of their proper classification. • Eliminate the higher duties and/or responsibilities being performed by the employee, for which the City has agreed are those for which it shall provide higher compensation. C. Any employee request for classification review approved by the Department Head shall be forwarded to the Executive Director of Human Resources. The Executive Director of Human Resources shall confirm receipt of the request in writing to the employee. Within sixty (60) calendar days of receipt of the request, the Executive Director of Human Resources shall notify the employee and Department Head of the decision as to whether a study will be conducted. if the Executive Director of Human Resources determines that a study is appropriate, the Executive Director of Human Resources shall so notify the employee and the Department Head in writing and shall provide the employee and Department Head with an approximate start date for the study. D. Determinations of the employee's Department Head and the Executive Director of Human Resources are not final. An appeal to the City Manager or his/her representative shall be presented within fifteen (15) working days of the notification of the findings by the Executive Director of Human Resources. The City Manager's decision is final. This process is not subject to the grievance provisions of this MOU, E. All studies and study findings shall require City Manager approval before proceeding. All recommendations resulting from study findings require the approval of the City Council and shall be implemented in accordance with the City's Civil Service rules. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit / e 17 e 20C-20 �uf� ARTICLE V 5.0 ASSIGNMENT & OTHER SPECIAL PAY ADDITIVES 5.1 Assignment Pay Differential Any full-time employee, in an SEIU represented bargaining unit, receiving assignment pay differential (in accordance with Article V of the full-time employees unit MOU) who moves into this bargaining unit during the term of this MOU will continue to receive assignment pay differential if the employee continues performing the job duties for which the assignment pay differential was originally given. 5.2 Lead Pay An incumbent who is regularly and continuously assigned to lead a functional unit which includes two (2) or more part-time positions in the same, equivalent, or lower classifications as the incumbent may be compensated for said duties upon mutual agreement of the City and SEIU and approval of the Department Head and the Executive Director of Human Resources. This compensation shall be referred to as lead pay and shall be set at a rate ten (10) salary rate ranges, which is approximately five percent (5.0%) above his/her then current base monthly salary step. 5.3 Bilingual Pay An employee who is assigned by a Department Head or his/her designee to a position requiring bilingual capability in both English and any other language or in sign language, shall be paid a monthly assignment pay differential in accordance with the criteria and amounts set forth below: A. Certification Certification by the Executive Director of Human Resources as having satisfactorily demonstrated conversational fluency in both languages for any position requiring bilingual capacity. There shall be periodic recertification of such bilingual capability. B. Primary Bilingual Assignments Assigned positions where it has been determined by the Department Head that bilingual proficiency is essential to carry out duties and responsibilities of a critical and/or emergency nature without ready access to backup assistance, or positions where bilingual public contact is a major, essential or integral element of the work being performed, shall be designated as Primary Bilingual Assignments. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Uni e 18 20C-21 ��� A qualified incumbent of such position shalt be paid a prorated amount based on one hundred and seventy-five dollars ($175.00) per one hundred and seventy-three point thirty-three (173.33) hours above his/her current base salary step for each full month of such assignment. C. Secondary Bilingual Assignments Assigned positions where it has been determined by a Department Head that regular and frequent bilingual usage is necessary to the performance of duties, but not a major, essential or integral element of the work, shall be designated as Secondary Bilingual Assignments. A qualified incumbent of such position shall be paid a prorated amount based on forty dollars ($40.00) per one hundred and seventy-three point thirty-three (173.33) hours above his/her base salary step for each full month of such assignment. D. Limits on Assignments The number of bilingual assignments shall be no larger than the requirements of the department, as determined by the Department Head and the City Manager. 5.4 Shift Differential A. Night Shift Differential An employee who is continuously and regularly assigned to a schedule of work which requires that he/she actually work a minimum of four and one-half (4.5) hours between the hours of 5:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M., shall be paid a shift differential for his/her entire work shift at a rate set ten (10) salary rate ranges, which is approximately five percent (5.0%) higher than his/her then current base salary step. B. Early Morning Street Crew Differential A Street Maintenance employee who is assigned to traffic painting or downtown cleanup crews who is continuously and regularly assigned to a work schedule which requires that he/she actually work at least fifty percent (50%) of his/her normal daily work shift between the hours of 1:00 A.M, and 7:00 A.M., shall be paid a shift differential for his/her entire work shift at a rate set ten (10) salary rate ranges, which is approximately five percent (5.0%) higher than his/her then current base salary step. 2019-2022 NtOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees 20C-22 19 �u\`J 4A 5.5 Standby Pay A. Standby Defined An employee who is released from active duty, but is required by his/her department to leave notice where he/she can be reached and be available to return to active duty at any time other than his/her regularly scheduled working hours, shall be said to be on standby duty. B. Requirements of Standby Employees in the unit may be required to be on standby for many different reasons. Being on standby means that the employee is required to: Be accessible by phone, email or text; Promptly return to work after being called, emailed or texted; Remain fit for duty and able to respond. Employees are not permitted to drink alcohol while on standby duty. Employees on standby shall receive a cell phone from the City and will be required to respond to the call or text as quickly as possible. Upon responding to the call or text, the employee will be instructed as to whether he/she is required to return to work and will be informed of the location to which he/she must respond. Response time will generally be the employee's normal commute time to the City and the minimal time necessary for the employee to get ready to return to work. C. Compensation Rates for Standby 1. Weekly Rate Each employee shall receive two hundred dollars ($200.00) per week when assigned to be on standby duty. 2. Daily Rate Employees who trade days, or partial days, will have that time deducted from their pay on a prorated daily or hourly rate. Employees who cover the day or hours shall be paid at the prorated rate. All trades must be approved by the Supervisor or Manager. 3. in addition to Standby Pay, if an employee is able to handle the incident by phone or other electronic means without reporting to duty, he/she shall be entitled to overtime pay at the rate of fifteen (15) minutes or actual time spent per incident, whichever is greater, paid at time and one-half (1.5) per incident. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees U age 20 lu 20C-23 D. Assignment to Standby Duty Water Production staff shall be required to serve on standby duty. The City's preference shall be to accomplish the above through volunteers; however, qualified employees may be directed to be on standby duty if the number of volunteers is insufficient. Additional standby programs may be implemented with the approval of the Department Head and City Manager. 5.6 Call Back Duty Any employee who is recalled to active duty from off duty, shall be entitled to overtime pay at the rate of one and one-half (1.5) times the base hourly pay rate for time actually worked after reporting to the place of duty, or three (3) hours pay at the base rate of pay, whichever is greater. 5.7 Temporary Uparade Assignment Pay In order to provide an equitable method of compensating employees who are temporarily assigned to a vacant, full-time, budgeted, higher -level position the following shall apply: A. General Guidelines 1. Temporary upgrade (TUG) assignments shall be limited to the temporary filling of vacant, full-time, budgeted positions due to the termination, promotion or authorized long-term absence of the incumbent. A temporarily vacant position need not be a position without an incumbent. 2. Each such assignment maybe terminated at anytime, but in no event shall such assignment continue beyond one hundred and eighty (180) days or nine hundred and sixty (960) hours each fiscal year, whichever comes first. Prior to recommending to the City Manager that a pay differential for a TUG assignment be granted, the Department Head shall make the following determinations: a. The duties and responsibilities of the position to be filled are of such nature that they cannot remain unassigned pending the return to duty of the absent incumbent or preparation of an eligible list whichever is applicable. b. It is not practical to assign the duties of the vacant position to any other employee(s) in the same or higher classification. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit P 21 y. �N 20C-24 2rGSlZO J 4. The City Manager or his/her designee must give written approval of all TUG assignments involving an increase in pay for the appointee. B. Eligibility 1. With the exception of those described in Section 5.713(3) below, regular, part- time civil service employees shall receive TUG assignment pay if the following criteria are met: a. The work assumed encompasses the majority of the typical duties and responsibilities of the vacated position. b. To qualify for TUG assignment pay, employees must serve in an acting capacity in the higher level classification for ten (10) consecutively scheduled working days of six (6) hours each. c. [n computing qualifying service rendered, normally granted holidays will be included in computing actual duty days. d. Employees must requalify for a TUG if the employee has not worked in this specific TUG assignment for a period of eighteen (18) consecutive months. The employee shall only be considered to work in a higher classification if such work is duly and specifically authorized by the employee's Department Head. 2. Whenever practicable, the appointing authority shall rotate TUG assigtunents among all qualified employees. 3. Employees in the following categories shall not be assigned to TUG work unless specifically authorized by the City Manager: a. Non -permanent employees (probationary, part-time, seasonal, etc.). b. Employees performing work above their regular classification in a training capacity. c. Part-time civil service employees. C. Pa ment 1. On the eleventh (l la') consecutively scheduled working day an employee has been serving in a TUG assignment, and for each additional consecutively scheduled working day the employee so serves, he/she shall receive the beginning rate (Step "AA") assigned to the higher classification or the lowest rate in that range which is at least ten (10) salary rate ranges, or approximately 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees i Page 22 Im 20C-25 Z/ZC-('7,0 five percent (5.0%) higher than the current base salary rate he/she normally receives (inclusive of lead pay and exclusive of any other assignment or special pay additive), whichever is greater, except when placement at Step "E" will not be sufficient to provide the ten (10) salary rate range increase. If an employee has worked ten (10) consecutive days during the term of this MOU in a higher classification, the employee shall thereafter receive TUG pay for each day the employee is assigned to work in the higher classification during the term of this MOU. 2. Assignment or special pay additives, such as bilingual pay, shift differential, special skill pay, etc., paid to an employee prior to becoming eligible for TUG assignment pay, will not be considered in computing the amount of higher pay to which he/she is entitled in this section above, unless the special circumstances upon which said additive is based are also applicable to the TUG assignment and the employee otherwise meets the criteria established for such pay differential. 3. TUG assignments which entail moving an employee into a classification represented by a bargaining unit other than that which represents his/her permanent classification shall not include any change in fringe benefits for the affected employee. 4. While working in a TUG assignment, an employee will continue to accrue, and have recorded, general, special or normal salary step increases in the employee's permanent position; however, such salary increases will be paid only to maintain the minimum five percent (5.0%) differential above the salary to which an employee is entitled in his/her permanent position. 5.8 Authority for Assignments All assignments of personnel to positions set forth in Sections 5.1 through 5.5 above shall be made or revoked at the discretion of the Department Head. 5.9 Career Development Incentives Any full-time employee, in an SEIU represented bargaining unit, receiving career development incentive pay (in accordance with Article V of the full-time employees unit MOU) who moves into this bargaining unit during the term of this MOU will continue to receive career development incentive pay if the employee continues performing the job duties for which the career development incentive pay was originally given. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SFlU Part -Time Civil Service Fmployees Unit P 23 ,- 20C-26 9-Izf%10 5.10 Jury Duty or Witness Leave A. When an on -duty employee is called to serve as a juror or non-party witness in any court action, he/she shall be allowed to leave for the time actually required for such service, not to exceed six (6) hours per day, without loss of pay. Each on -duty employee called for such service shall present his/her Department Head the jury summons or subpoena calling him/her to such service and shall pay into the City Treasury the fees collected for such service, excluding any reimbursement for mileage expenses. If an employee is called to serve on jury duty during a normal day off or on a City holiday, then the jury duty shall be considered the same as having occurred during the employee's regular day off work; therefore, the employee will receive no added compensation. 2019-2022 MOIL City of Santa Ana & SEiU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit Page 24 20C-27 ARTICLE VI 6.0 OVERTIME 6.1 General Policy for Overtime Work When it shall be determined to be in the public interest for employees to perform overtime work, or in an emergency situation, the City Manager, the Department Head, or a duly authorized designee, may require an employee to perform overtime work. Employees are required to obtain supervisor authorization before working overtime. 62 Defurition A. Overtime work is defined as authorized or required time worked in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek. B. A workweek is a fixed and regularly recurring period of one hundred and sixty- eight (168) consecutive hours, consisting of seven (7) consecutive twenty-four (24) hour periods. C. The workweek for each employee is designated by the appointing authority. An employee's work schedule within the workweek shall not be changed for the purpose of avoiding payment of overtime; however, nothing shall abridge management's right to establish and change work schedules and assignments in accordance with Article XX - City Rights. D. Work on any regularly scheduled non -work day of which there shall be two (2) per week, if work on any regularly scheduled non -work day is worked at management's direction. 6.3 Computation of Forty (40) Hour Workweek In computing the forty (40) hour workweek, the following type of work hours in a paid status shall be included in the computation: • Actual hours worked • Jury/witness leave • Bereavement leave Any combination of the hours in this section, in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek, shall entitle the employee to overtime. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit e 21 (� v 20C-28 y/�s/� u Any paid time off during the workweek for vacation leave, sick leave, holiday leave, compensatory time off, Chapter Chair/President's Leave, Union Business Leave, and all unpaid leave (including furlough days) shall not be counted towards the hours worked in a workweek for the computation of payment for overtime. unless the hours in excess of forty (40) hours in a workweek (including the above listed time) are worked by the employee at the requirement of his/her supervisor or by management. 6.4 Compensation for Overtime The City's preferred method by which overtime shall be compensated is by monetary payment, at one and one-half (1.5) times the employee's regular rate of pay, subject to the provisions of Section 6.5. 6.5 Compensatory Time A. Overtime Conversion to Compensatory Time Should the Department Head determine that the best interests of the City will be served thereby, his/her designee may permit an employee to be compensated for overtime work by earning compensatory time off at the rate of one and one-half (1.5) hours for each overtime hour worked. B. Maximum Accumulation of Compensatory Time Employees shall have the option to earn up to a maximum of eighty (80) hours of compensatory time off. C. Use of Compensatory Time 1. Since compensatory time is earned atone and one-half (1.5) hours for each hour of overtime worked, eighty (80) hours of compensatory time equates to fifty- three point thirty-three (53.33) hours of overtime worked. 2. Such compensatory time off shall be taken at the discretion of the employee, when requested at least seventy-two (72) hours in advance, subject to the operational needs and staffing requirements of the department. 3. If the Department Head or his/her designee subsequently denies the requested compensatory time off, the employee and department will mutually agree on a future date within one (1) year when the employee can use the paid compensatory time off. If the requested compensatory time off is not used within that one (1) year, such compensatory time may be paid off in cash. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unnage 26 20C-29 4. Compensatory time off may be taken in increments as small as one-half (0.5) hour. 5. Compensatory time off may not be granted or taken in advance of the overtime work for which the time off compensates. Before compensatory time off may be taken, the overtime worked must have been recorded on official payroll records at or about the time the overtime work was performed. In the absence of such recording, no compensatory time off in excess of compensatory hours already banked will be permitted. D. Cash -Out of Compensatory Time Upon an employee's appointment to a position in which overtime may not be earned (FLEA exempt) or upon an employee's separation from employment, he/she shall be paid for all compensatory time accumulated prior to such promotion or separation from service. 6.6 No Effect on Other Benefits Overtime work shall not apply to the earning of employee benefits (retirement, holidays, vacation accrual, sick leave accrual, and employee insurance benefits), toward the completion of probationary period, or to progression within a salary rate range. 6.7 Overtime Work to be Minimized To the extent that he/she is reasonably able to do so, the Department Head or his/her designee shall arrange work programs to minimize overtime work. Necessary overtime work shall be apportioned among employees of like classification and assignment. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit P 27 �ti 7-IX� r� 20C-30 2/ �w ARTICLE VII 7.0 HOLIDAYS 7.1 City Holidays A. City paid holidays observed by the City are as follows: o January 1 — New Year's Day. o Third (3rd) Monday in January — In observance of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Birthday. o Third (31) Monday in February — In observance of Presidents' Day. o Last Monday in May — In commemoration of Memorial Day. o July 4'^ — In observance of Independence Day. o First (1 ") Monday in September — In observance of Labor Day. o November I I' — In observance of Veteran's Day. o Fourth (0) Thursday in November — In observance of Thanksgiving Day. o The Friday immediately following Thanksgiving Day. o Last working day before Christmas Day, unless Christmas Day falls on Thursday, in which instance, the day following Christmas Day shall be observed in lieu thereof. o December 25' In observance of Christmas Day. o One (1) Floating Holiday — Any workday selected by the employee with prior permission of the employee's supervisor. o Every day proclaimed by the Mayor of the City as a holiday for City employees. o Any holiday which falls on a Sunday will be observed on the following Monday. o Any holiday which falls on a Saturday will be observed on the Friday preceding the holiday. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit e 28 ���QYrI 20C-31 2/z`' Holiday Pay/Credit Each City holiday shall be paid/credited at the rate of six (6) hours per holiday. C. Floatin Holiday oliday The floating holiday shall be credited to each employee's holiday bank in January of each year. D. Each employee shall receive no less than a total of seventy-two (72) hours of paid holidays per calendar year. 7.2 Requirements A. Employees, including those separating from service, must be in a paid status on their workday both preceding the holiday and after the holiday in order to receive pay or credit for the holidays provided in Section 7.1 above. B. A newly appointed employee must complete six (6) months of continuous service in order to earn the Floating Holiday listed in Section 7.1 above. Such employees can then use the Floating Holiday as early as the pay period following the completion of six (6) months in a paid status. 7.3 Use of Holiday Time Holiday time may be taken in increments of one-half (0.5) hour. 7.4 Maximum Accumulation of Holiday Holiday benefits may not be carried over from one (1) calendar year to the next. If an employee has any holiday leave remaining at the end of the calendar year it will be forfeited at the end of that calendar year. 7.5 Winter Holiday Closure A. mandatory Closure City Hall and all other City departments (with the exception of the Police Department, Santa Ana Zoo, and select employees in Fleet Services Division of the Public Works Department) shall be closed for a mandatory winter holiday closure each year during the term of this MOU. Subject to consultation with the Union, the City Manager may exclude other 2019-2022 MDU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit Page 29 U� �! IDS// vvK 20C-32 V/L>��O worksites, departments/agencies, positions, classifications, and/or individuals from the mandatory closure. B. Dates of Closures 1. 2019 a. The closure shall run from Tuesday, December 24, 2019 through Wednesday, January 1, 2020. b. City Hall shall re -open on Thursday, January 2, 2020 and employees scheduled to work on that day shall return to work. c. Employees shall observe the three (3) City paid holidays provided in Section 7.1 on: • Tuesday, December 24, 2019 (Last work day before Christmas Day) • Wednesday, December 25, 2019 (Christmas Day) • Wednesday, January 1, 2020 (New Year's Day) d. The City shall be dark on Friday, December 27, 2019. 2. 2020 a. The closure shall run from Thursday, December 24, 2020 through Friday, January 1, 2021. b. City Hall shall re -open on Monday, January 4, 2021 and employees scheduled to work on that day shall return to work. c. Employees shall observe the three (3) City paid holidays provided in Section 7.1 on: • Thursday, December 24, 2020 (Last work day before Christmas Day) • Friday, December 25, 2020 (Christmas Day) o Employees whose regular day off is on Friday, December 25 may receive floating holiday hours for Christmas Day 2020, which may be used to cover an additional regular day required by the closure. • Friday, January t, 2021 (New Year's Day) 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit / ag 30 t 20C-33 21z�� o Employees whose regular day off is on Friday, January 1s` may receive floating holiday hours for New Year's Day 2021, which may be used to cover an additional regular day required by the 2020 closure. d. The City shall be dark on Friday, December 25, 2020, 3. 2021 a. The closure shall run from Friday, December 24, 2021 through Friday, December 31, 2021. b. City Hall shall re -open on Monday, January 3, 2022 and employees scheduled to work on that day shall return to work. c. Employees shall observe the three (3) City paid holidays provided in Section 7.1 on: • Friday, December 24, 2021 (Last work day before Christmas Day) Employees whose regular day off is on Friday, December 241 may receive floating holiday hours for Christmas Eve 2021, which may be used to cover an additional regular day required by the closure. • Monday*, December 27, 2021 (Christmas Day) ` Since December 25" falls on a Saturday in 2021 and Friday, December 24, 2021 is already a City observed holiday, the City shall observe the Christmas Day holiday in 2021 on the preceding Monday, December 27, 2021 instead. • Friday, December 31, 2021 (New Year's Day) o Employees whose regular day off is on Friday December 31" may receive floating holiday hours for New Year's Day 2022, which may be used to cover an additional regular day required by the 2021 closure. d. The City shall be dark on Friday, December 24, 2021. C. Additional Days Off during a Closure 1. Employees will need to choose from the options in this subsection to cover any additional regularly scheduled work days which are not City observed holidays. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit e 31 20C-34 ZgzS w 2. Employees may use any of the following accrued leaves they have available to cover any additional day(s) off which may be required by the closure: • Vacation • Compensatory 'rime off • Holiday 3. Employees are not permitted to use sick leave for a holiday closure day unless he/she produces a physician's certification for each day reported as sick leave. This additional certification is not required for employees with approved advance sick leave usage due to FMLA/CFRA/PDL (or any other protected leave). 4. Employees shall have the option of not using paid leave for any, or all, holiday closure day(s) and taking the day(s) off as an absence without pay. D. Standby Assignments during a Closure An employee assigned to standby while using leave for the holiday closure shall receive the additional prorated hourly rate per hour, as per Section 5.5(C)(2), for each regularly scheduled work hour (i.e., during those hours of the day which cut across his/her regular work hours) he/she is using paid leave for, but is still assigned to standby. Such employee shall still adhere to the provisions of Section 7.5C to cover their regular shift while remaining in standby mode and available for callback. However, if an employee is recalled during their regular work hours, the time spent on the recall shall be deducted from the paid leave for that day. For example: An employee regularly scheduled to work 6:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. on one (1) of the clays during the closure uses nine ('9) hours of accrued vacation to cover that day. !f that employee is recalled from 8:00 a. m. - 10: 00 a.m. on that same day, he/she will onlv have seven (7) hours of vacation deducted from his/her vacation accrual for that day. E. Callbacks during a Closure An employee who is recalled to active duty on one of the winter holiday closure days, regardless if recalled during his/her regularly scheduled work hours, of outside of his/her regularly scheduled work hours, or whether he/she has used paid leave during the defined FLSA workweek, shall be paid at the callback rates defined in Section 5.6. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Page 32 CAI % 20C-35 Z(�� Sunset Clause This provision shall expire on June 30, 2022 and no additional mandatory winter holiday closures may be implemented after the 2021 winter holiday closure, unless mutually agreed to otherwise by the parties. OJ City of Santa Ana & SETU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit, -,age 33 0 20C-36 �lys�zo ARTICLE XIII 8.0 VACATION 8.1 Purpose It is the policy of the City to grant employees vacation leave in order to provide them with a break in their regular work schedule and this purpose will be used as a guide in the administration of the provisions of this article. 8.2 Accrual &M 11 Employees shall accrue vacation on a monthly basis each calendar year, based on completed years of service, as set forth in the following table: Completed Service in ears Annual Accrual in hours Monthly Accrual Rate in hours 1-3 72 6.0 4-5 90 7.5 6 93 7.75 7 96 8.0 8 99 8.25 9 102 8.5 10 105 8.75 11 108 9.0 12 t I 1 9.25 13 114 9.5 l4 117 9.75 15 120 10.0 16 126 10.5 17 132 11.0 18 138 11.5 19 144 12.0 20 150 12.5 Prorated Accrual in Year One An employee who has completed less than one (1) year of service during the calendar year shall receive a proportionate fraction in accordance with the amount of service to his/her credit during the year; provided, however, no employee shall be entitled to, or receive payment for, any vacation until he/she has completed six (6) months of continuous service. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit Page 34 q 20C-37 VI, ZJ C. Effect of Extended Sick Leave on Vacation Accrual Absence on sick leave or unpaid leave for a period in excess of fifteen (15) consecutive calendar days shall not be considered as service time for vacation accrual purposes. D. Impact of Promotion or Transfer on Vacation Accrual In the event a unit employee accepts another City position outside of this bargaining unit, their length of service in this unit will be used in determining eligibility for vacation accrual. Length of service in this unit will be calculated at a rate ofpoint seventy-five (0.75) per each year of full-time service. 8.3 Use of Vacation A. Use of Vacation in First Year On or after the first (I ') day of the month following completion of six (6) months of continuous service, an employee may be allowed to take all or a proportionate fraction of his/her earned vacation, subject to scheduling approval of the employee's supervisor. B. Rate of Usage Vacation time off may be taken in increments as small as one-half (0.5) hour, ecith fractional usage rounded upward to the next higher multiple of one-half (0.5) hour. C. Time of Usage The time at which an employee shall take his/her vacation shall be determined by the Department Head, with due regard for the wishes of the employee and particular regard for operational needs. 8.4 Computation of Vacation A. Holidays during Vacation In computing vacation, each City observed holiday that occurs during the vacation, and that falls on a day which the employee would have worked had he/she not been on vacation, shall be deducted from the computation so that one (1) additional day of vacation shall be allowed to the employee. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit P 35 CO 20C-38 Z(a(zo B. Sick Leave during Vacation Should an employee suffer a sickness or injury while on authorized vacation, each full day of such sick leave, when confirmed by a physician's statement and approval of the Department Head, may be deducted from the computation of vacation expended and charged against the employee's accumulated sick leave as available. 8.5 Vacation Cash -Out A. Annual Buy Back 1. Through December 31, 2020 Employees shall have the option to receive cash for banked vacation leave, as follows: Y July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020: Up to thirty-six (36) hours. July 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020: Up to eighteen (18) hours. 2. Effective January 1 2021 and continuing every year thereafter a. If an employee wants to cash -out unused vacation leave they accrued during the calendar year, they must make an irrevocable election by December 15'h of the prior calendar year (i.e. by December 15, 2020 for a cash -out in calendar year 2021). b. The irrevocable election must indicate the amount of vacation hours the employee intends to cash -out during that next calendar year. The number of hours to be cashed -out can not exceed the total number of hours the employee will accrue during that same calendar year, or a maximum of one hundred (100) hours, wh chever is the lesser amount. c. Once the election form is submitted to Human Resources, the amount of hours to be cashed -out can not be changed for that calendar year. d. Employees may submit a request for cash -out up to two times (2X) per year — for payment in the pay period which includes July 1 and/or December 15. e. In the event an employee's vacation leave balance (on either pay period when he/she can elect to cash -out) is less than the amount of hours the employee had previously elected to cash -out (in the prior calendar year), the employee will only receive payment for the amount of accumulated vacation leave remaining at the time of the cash -out in either July or 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Uni ge 36 ff ^ 20C-39 December. If an employee makes an irrevocable election to cash -out vacation in the following calendar year and uses vacation leave during that subsequent calendar year, the vacation leave used will first come from vacation leave the employee had earned (if any) prior to January I" of the calendar year the employee had elected to cash -out. The use of such earned, but unused, vacation leave accumulated from previous calendar years shall not result in a reduction in the amount of vacation hours the employee is eligible to cash - out. B. Separation from Service Per Labor Code §227.3, the parties agree that an employee who leaves City employment prior to completing six (6) months of service shall not receive any payment for vacation. Employees with at least six (6) months of service upon separation from service shall be paid for all accumulated, but unused, vacation leave. C . Rate of Payment Payments shall be made based on the employee's base rate at the time of the payment. 8.6 Maximum Accumulation A. The maximum vacation an employee may accumulate is what he/she could earn based on his/her completed years of service. B. No employee may accumulate, or carry over from one (1) calendar year to the next, more than a total of two (2) years' of earned vacation. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit e 37 �yL 20C-40 �zs�� ARTICLE IX 9.0 OTHER LEAVES OF ABSENCE 9.1 Sick Leave A. Definition Except as otherwise provided below, sick leave shall be deemed to mean absence from duty of an employee because of illness, injury, medical, or dental appointment that prevents the employee from performing the duties of his/her position and shall be deemed to include time in quarantine resulting from exposure to a contagious disease. The City provides paid sick leave to eligible employees upon verbal or written request, within the parameters of the law, for the following purposes: Diagnosis, care, or treatment of an existing health condition, or preventative care of an employee or an employee's qualified family member; Specified purposes for an employee who is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking. B. Accrual Each employee shall cam six (6) hours of sick leave per month, for a total maximum annual accrual of seventy-two (72) hours per calendar year. C. Use of Sick Leave 1. Authorization for Use Use of sick leave shall be authorized as follows: a. Sick leave is not a right which an employee may use at his/her discretion, but shall be allowed only in cases of necessity and actual sickness and disability, as authorized in this article. b. When an accepted industrial illness or injury has caused an employee's absence, for which benefits are required under the State Workers' Compensation Insurance and Safety Act, paid sick leave at the prorated amount based on hours worked will be allowed such employee during the first three ('3) consecutive days of the statutory waiting period. If the employee does not have sufficient accumulated sick leave at the commencement of such industrial illness or injury, they will be advanced 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees age 38ov 1 20C-41 sick leave for this purpose. Subsequently, the City will deduct an equal amount previously advanced from any sick leave accrued by the employee until the total amount is recovered. If the employee terminates before recovery of all advanced sick leave, the City will deduct the unrecovered cost of sick leave from such terminated employee's final paycheck, to the extent possible. If the workers' compensation related illness or injury continues past the initial three (3) consecutive days, the employee will have the three (3) sick days used re -credited back to his/her account. Paid sick leave at the prorated amount will continue until the fourth (4") day when the City pays the employee workers' compensation benefits for such illness or injury. c. The City may authorize employees to use sick leave, vacation, or compensatory time for approved workers' compensation medical appointments as specified herein. The City may authorize use of such leave for City approved medical appointments whenever such appointments cannot be secured outside the employee's regular workday, and salary continuation or workers' compensation benefits are not available. D. Limit Sick leave accrual will be capped at four hundred (400) hours. Sick leave usage shall be charged in minimum increments of a half (0.5) hour. Fractional usage under a half (0.5) hour shall be rounded up to the next higher multiple of a half (0.5) hour. E. Extended Use The City Manager may grant medical leave of up to six (6) months without pay to an employee who has exhausted all of his/her accumulated sick leave if a licensed physician indicates that the employee will be sufficiently recovered to return to his/her employment within a six (6) month period. Prior to the expiration of the additional time, the employee may return to his/her position provided that the employee has a medical certificate from a licensed physician stating that the employee is able to return to work and perform all the duties of his/her position without work restrictions. In addition to the above, the City Manager may grant an additional extension not to exceed a total of one (1) year without pay. Extension by Use of Accrued Compensatory Time Off and/or Vacation After an employee's sick leave has been exhausted, he/she may be granted permission to use any unused accumulated compensatory time off benefits and then any unused accumulated vacation leave. 1. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana F. ; i lJ Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unirwyr 20C-42 ?,[Weo G. Notification of Use An employee taking sick leave shall notify his/her immediate supervisor prior to the time he/she is scheduled to report for duty, or as otherwise established by departmental regulations. When the absence is for more than three (3) consecutive working days, upon return to work the employee must present to his/her Department Head a physician's certificate stating that the employee could not report to work because of such illness or injury, and advising that the employee is sufficiently recovered to safely return to work. Such certificate shall be forwarded to the Executive Director of Human Resources. Upon written request by a Department Head or designee, a physician's certificate, or other satisfactory written evidence of the need for qualified sick leave usage, may be required after an absence of any duration less than three (3) days. Such written notice shall be approved by the Department head or designee and the stated reason therefore. H. Denial No employee shall be entitled to sick leave with pay while absent from duty because of sickness or injury purposely self-inflicted or caused by willful misconduct; or because of sickness or injury sustained while engaged in employment, other than employment by the City, for monetary gain or other compensation, or due to other reasons resulting from engaging in any business or activity for the purpose of personal monetary gain or other compensation. Personal Necessity Leave Each employee shall be afforded the opportunity to use up to thirty-six (36) hours of sick leave per calendar year, on a non -cumulative basis, as personal necessity leave. 1. Fan -lily Sick Leave a. Personal necessity leave may be used to attend to an illness of a family member. b. A "family member" means any of the following: • A child, which for purposes of this article means a biological, adopted, or foster child, stepchild, legal ward, or a child to whom the employee stands in loco parentis. This definition of a child is applicable regardless of age or dependency status. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unitl,/n/ 40 20C-43 9.2 • A biological, adoptive, or foster parent, stepparent, or legal guardian of an employee or the employee's spouse or registered domestic partner, or a person who stood in loco parentis when the employee was a minor child. • A spouse • A registered domestic partner • A grandparent • A grandchild • A sibling c. A "household member" means": Any member of the employee's household related by blood or marriage; any other relative of the employee by blood or marriage, where it can be established by the employee that the employee's presence is required to handle emergency arrangements and/or other matters. 2. Personal necessity leave may also be used, as follows: • To attend to a serious accident to members of the employee's immediate family • Childbirth • To cope with imminent danger to the employee's family, home, or other valuable property • When the existence of external circumstances beyond the employee's control make it impossible for him/her to report for duty • Attend to medical or dental appointments for members of the employee's household or family member as defined above. Bereavement Leave A. An employee shall be granted up to three (3) working days, of six (6) hours each, per incident of paid bereavement leave in case of death of a member of the employee's immediate family. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit Vg`e"J1 20C-44 B. "hnmediate family" as used in this section is limited to: 1. Any member of the employee's household related by blood or marriage; 2. A parent, parent -in-law, stepparent, spouse, registered domestic partner, child, stepchild, brother, stepbrother, sister, stepsister, grandparent, grandparent -in- law, or grandchild of the employee, regardless of residence; 3. Subject to the discretion of the Executive Director of Human Resources, any other relative of the employee by blood or by marriage where it can be established by the employee that as a result of such relative's death, the employee's presence is required to handle funeral arrangements and/or matters of estate. C. Upon request, an employee may use up to twelve (12) additional hours of leave charged to their Personal Necessity Leave balance when authorized by the Department Head. 9.3 Military Leave A. Proof of Orders and Reinstatements An employee shall be granted military leave if he/she furnishes the Executive Director of Human Resources satisfactory proof of his'her order to report for duty. Upon return and upon showing of proof of actual service pursuant to such orders, he/she will be reinstated as provided by law and in Section 143 of the City's Civil Service Rules and Regulations. B. Temporary Leave Members of the reserve forces of the United States or the National Guard granted temporary leave when ordered to duty, will be granted leave with pay not to exceed thirty (30) working days in each calendar year after the hourly equivalent of one (1) year of service with the City upon presenting satisfactory proof of orders to and from such temporary active duties. 9.4 Examination Leave Employees participating in examinations conducted during their normal working hours for positions in the competitive service of the City will be granted leave with pay for the time actually required without loss of any accrued paid leave. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit 42 20C 45 r 9.5 Unauthorized Absence Unauthorized absence from duty for any duration of time may be considered cause for dismissal. Absence from duty without leave for five (5) consecutive working days shall be deemed a resignation from service; provided, however, if the employee returns to work and provides an explanation for such absence which his/her Department Head fords satisfactory, the Department Head may restore the employee to his/her position, with the City Manager's approval. 9.6 Authorized Absence Without Pay-- Short Term Absence without pay not to exceed five (5) consecutive work days, may be authorized by the Department Head. Absence without pay up to fifteen (15) calendar days may be authorized by the Department Head with the approval of the City Manager. Such an absence may be authorized only if in the judgment of the Department Head it serves the best interest of the City. 9.7 Authorized Absence Without Pay — Lone Term Upon receipt of a written request from an employee having permanent status and recommendation of approval by the Department Head, the City Manager with recommendation from the Executive Director of Human Resources may grant a leave of absence without pay for up to six (6) months. Additionally, the City Manager with recommendation from the Executive Director of Human Resources may grant an unpaid leave of absence extension of up to one (1) year. An employee returning to duty with the City from such leave of absence shall inform the Department Head and the Executive Director of Human Resources of his/her intention at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the expiration of the leave of absence, or a shorter period if less than six (6) months is taken. Upon receipt of such notice, the Department Head will take steps necessary to restore the employee to his/her former position. 9.8 Industrial Leave Any period of time during which an employee is required to be absent from his/her position by reason of an industrial injury or industrial illness for which he/she is entitled to receive compensation shall not be considered a break in continuous service for the purpose of his/her right to salary adjustments or to the accrual of vacation and seniority. 9.9 Pregnancy Disability Leave Employees may take an unpaid leave of absence during pregnancy disability consistent with the Pregnancy Disability Law (PDL). Family bfedical Leave Act (FMLA) and/or 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit 20C-46 California Family Rights Act (CFRA). A pregnant employee is entitled to a reasonable leave of absence without pay for any temporary disability resulting from pregnancy, miscarriage, childbirth or recovery there from. Such reasonable leave of absence shall not exceed four (4) months. However, an employee may be granted up to an additional two (2) months of leave, at the discretion of the City Manager with recommendation from the Executive Director of Human Resources, for a total of up to six (6) months in which to recover from the disability. As with all other temporary disabilities, a physician's certificate is required to verify the extent and duration of the temporary disability. An employee who plans to take a pregnancy leave must give a reasonable notice of at least four (4) weeks before the commencement of the leave and include the estimated duration of the leave. The City will continue to contribute towards the employee's health insurance coverage in accordance with state and federal legislation. The employee will be required to pay a cash premium to continue coverage while on a leave of absence without pay. 9.10 Catastrophic Leave In order to assist employees otherwise granted a leave of absence without pay by the City Manager due to a catastrophic, non -industrial medical condition or injury, the City shall maintain a Catastrophic Leave Donation Program. Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter City policies and procedures as provided in the Charter or ordinances of the City or other provisions of this MOLL with regard to granting unpaid leaves of absence. For the purposes of this program, a "catastrophic" condition shall mean any significant personal tragedy such as a life -threatening illness or severe non -industrial illness or injury lasting more than two (2) weeks, which requires the employee to need personal time off beyond the amount of leave time he/she has accrued. Maternity leave or elective surgery, absent significant unplanned complications preventing the employee's return to work, are not considered catastrophic. The Catastrophic Leave Donation Program shall cover the uncompensated time prior to the employee's becoming eligible for the Long -Term Disability benefits. A. Guidelines It shall be understood that all donations under this procedure are voluntary and subject to taxation for the recipient. 1. Employees may donate vacation, compensatory time, or one (1) floating 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit 20C-47 44.. z�(� Q holiday to the eligible employee. In no event shall sick leave be donated. 2. Employees shall be provided a two (2) week period to submit donations. Donations received after this two (2) week period shall not be processed. The two (2) week period for each case shall be designated by the Department Head or his/her designee. 3. Donations shall be for a minimum of two (2) hours and a maximum of six (6) hours per donor. All donations must be made in two (2) hour increments, except for floating holiday donations must be for six (6) hours. 4. Any authorization of donations not made in accordance with the procedures outlined in Section 9.1 OC(2) will not be processed. 5. All donations shall be irrevocable. 6. In the event the recipient returns to work before leave donations have been exhausted, any balance on the books shall be accrued by the recipient and designated as sick leave and may be used pursuant to Article 9. Eligibility Employees shall be eligible for catastrophic leave donations if the following criteria are met: 1. When it is reasonably foreseeable that all accumulated time on the books, such as sick leave, compensatory time, holiday and vacation, will be exhausted and the employee's absence will continue past the time when the employee will be on paid status. 2. The employee's Department Head, or his/her designee, must approve a written request for donations accompanied by a medical statement from the employee's attending physician. The attending physicians statement must verify the employee's need for an extended medical leave and an estimate of the time the employee will be unable to work. C. Procedure 1. Upon receipt of a valid request for donations from an eligible employee, the Department Head or his/her designee shall post a notice within forty-eight (48) hours of receipt of the eligible employee's need for donations via email and on bulletin boards accessible to employees. No confidential medical information shall be included in the posted notice. 2. Employees wishing to donate time to an eligible employee must sign his/her authorization of the transfer of such donated time and provide: 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit a 45 20C-48 • His/her name, department name, and employee number; • The number of hours of compensatory, holiday or vacation time to be donated, within the limitations of Section 9. tOA(3); • The name, department and employee number of the recipient; • A statement indicating that the donor understands such donation of time is irrevocable. 3. At the close of the donation period, the department shall verify that each donating employee has accrued vacation, holiday, and/or compensatory time balances sufficient to cover the designated donation. The department shall submit all approved donation authorizations for an eligible employee at one time for processing. No donation authorizations for the eligible employee will be processed after this period. However, employees who receive donations under this procedure and who exhaust all donated hours may request an additional donation period subject to the provisions of Section 9.1 OA. The City shall add the donated time to the recipient's sick leave account. In no event shall the total time credited to an employee's sick leave balance exceed four hundred (400) hours, pursuant to Section 9.1D. _019-2022 MOT ON of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Uni ge 46 0 o-4 ,�o�n 20C-49 212�1� ARTICLE X 10.0 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE BENEFITS 10.1 Medical Health Insurance A. Health Plans The City contracts with the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) for the provision of health insurance per the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA). The City shall make contributions toward the payment of medical health insurance premiums for employees and their eligible dependents enrolled in a medical health insurance plan offered through CalPERS. The City may choose to offer new medical health plans, other than CalPERS, if they will provide substantially similar or improved coverage and benefits. B. Contributions I . The City's monthly contribution for medical health insurance shall be based on the plan coverage chosen by the employee. The City shall contribute seventy- five percent (75%) of the City's contribution allotted to full-time SEIU represented employees for health insurance premium costs for up to the family (employee and all dependents) coverage. This amount is inclusive of the CalPERS statutory minimum amount which CalPERS determines and publishes each year. 2. Any contribution necessary to maintain benefits under said medical health plans in excess ofthe amounts set forth above shall be borne entirely by the employee. C. Medical Waiver Option An employee who has primary coverage under another noo-City sponsored group medical health plan and voluntarily waives, in writing, their City paid medical health insurance coverage shall receive a cash payment each month in an amount equal to seventy-five percent (75%) of the amount allotted to full-time SEIU represented employees on a medical waiver, which is based on the monthly premium for the City's lowest cost single "employee only" medical health plan. If an employee opts out of medical insurance, he/she must be able to demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that he/she has minimum essential coverage, as defined by 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit e 47 04k F? J 20C-50 z(Z5 � N the Affordable Care Act (ACA), through another source other than coverage in the individual market (whether or not obtained through Covered California). 10.2 Dentallnsurance A. The City offers two (2) types of dental insurance plans. One (1) is a Dental Health Maintenance Organization (DHMO) plan and one (1) is a Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plan. B. The City's monthly contribution for dental insurance shall be based on the plan coverage chosen by the employee. The City shall contribute seventy-five percent ('75%) of the City's contribution allotted to frill -time SEW represented employees for dental insurance premium costs for up to the family (employee and all dependents) coverage. C. Any contribution necessary to maintain benefits under said dental plans in excess of the amounts set forth above shall be home entirely by the employee. 10.3 Long -Term Disability Insurance The City shall allow employees, for the term of this MOLT, to participate in any aspect of the plan offered to the City at the City rate. The cost for this benefit shall be home by the employee. 10.4 Life Insurance The City shall allow employees, for the term of this MOU, to participate in any aspect of the plan offered to the City at the City rate. The cost for this benefit shall be home by the employee. 10.5 Benefits Advisory Committee When there is a need to discuss matters relating to employee insurance benefits and the City believes it would be beneficial to involve a Benefits Advisory Committee (BAC), each party (the Union and the City) shall have an equal number of representatives on such a committee to meet as necessary. t0.6 Retirement Health Savings (RHS) Plan Employees participate in the ICMA-RC "Vantage Care" RHS Plan subject to the following: � l 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Un' ge 48 (-_(1 I SAY r ( �P � 20C-51 �rlI v One and one-half percent (1.50%) will be deducted from each employee's base pay and deposited into his/her individual RHS account each pay period. This contribution shall be made on a pre-tax basis. 2. Upon an employee's termination of employment, the cash value of thaw eligible sick leave balances will be deposited into the individual's RHS account, based on the guidelines in the RIIS Plan adoption agreement, to provide the employee and his/her designated eligible dependents, if any, with benefits under any health insurance program including, but not limited to, the program maintained by the City. 3. Upon retirement, the balance of an employee's accumulated, but unused sick leave, after eligible RHS payments are made, will be converted into Ca1PERS Service Credit per Section 11.3A and Government Code §20965. 10.7 Vision hnsurance A. The City shall offer employees a vision insurance plan. R. For employees who choose vision coverage, all premium costs shall be paid by the employee through a pre-tax payroll deduction. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit ge 49 kL 20C-52 f, a1a ARTICLE XI 11.0 RETIREMENT 11.1 CalPERS Retirement Plans A. The terms of the existing miscellaneous plan contract between the City and CaIPERS govern retirement benefits for employees are incorporated by reference herein. B. The California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) went into effect on January 1, 2013. Based on consideration of various eligibility factors, PEPRA defines each employee as either a "classic" or "new" member of CAPERS. 1. "Classic" Members An employee who qualifies as a "classic" member receives a retirement benefil formula of 2.7% n 55, with no social security coverage. The final average compensation period for a "classic" member is the single highest consecutive twelve (12) months (Government Code §20042). 2. 'New" Members An employee defined as a "new" member (Government Code §7522.20a) receives a retirement benefit formula of 2% n 62. The final average compensation period for a "new" member is the highest average compensation earned during any consecutive thirty-six (36) month period (Government Code §7522.32a). 11.2 Contributions The City shall continue to make contributions to CalPERS on behalf of each individual employee as follows: A. City Contributions 1. "Classic" Members The City shall continue to pay each employee's member contribution and report it to CalPERS as compensation eamable [Government Code §20636(C)(4)]. This contribution is known as the Employer Paid Member Contribution (EPMC), which is equal to eight percent (8.0%) of compensation earnable. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees U Page 50 c 20C-53 z/ �� Such payments are not increases in base salary and no salary rate range applicable to any employee shall be changed or deemed to have been changed by reason thereof. As a result, the City will not treat these payments as ordinary income and, thus will not withhold Federal or State income tax from said payments. The City has received an opinion or ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) confirming that these payments are deferred compcnsation, not ordinary income. 2. "New" Members As required by PEPRA, the City shall participate in equal cost sharing by paying fifty percent (50%) of the normal cost, as established by CaIPERS in its annual valuation report. B. Employee Contributions 1. "Classic" Members The employee contribution rate shall be eight percent (8.0%) of compensation eamable. All employee contributions are paid towards the employer portion of the City's CalPERS contribution. This payment shall be paid in accordance with Government Code §20516(f) as cost sharing. 2. "New" Members As required by PEPRA, the employee contribution rate shall be fifty percent (50%) of the normal cost, as rounded to the nearest quarter of a percent by CaIPERS in its annual valuation. C. Pre -Taxable Benefit To the extent permitted by CatPERS and IRS regulations, the City shall make any employee contributions as a pre-tax deduction. 11.3 CaIPERS Benefit Options The City contracts with CaIPERS to provide the following additional optional benefits: A. Credit for Unused Sick Leave (Government Code 420965) Upon retirement, an employee may have accumulated, but unused, sick leave converted to additional service credit at the rate of 0.004 years of service credit for every eight (8) hours of unused sick leave, up to a maximum of sixteen hundred (1600) hours. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit 51 J�v 20C-54 ZfIs W The City must report only those days of unused sick leave that were accrued by the employee during the normal course of employment. This section applies to CaIPERS members whose effective date of retirement is within four (4) months of separation from employment. B. Military Service Credit as Public Service (Government Code §21024) An employee may elect to purchase up to four (4) years of service credit for any continuous active military, Reserve Forces, National Guard or merchant marine service prior to employment. The employee must contribute an amount equal to the contribution for current and prior service that the employee and the employer would have made with respect to that period of service. C. Pre -Retirement Death Benefits L Optional Settlement 2W Death Benefit (Government Code §21548) The spouse of a deceased employee, who is eligible to retire from service at the time of death, may elect to receive a Pre -Retirement Optional Settlement 3IY Death Benefit. The benefit is a monthly allowance equal to the amount the employee would have received if they had retired from service on the date of death and elected Optional Settlement Z, the highest monthly allowance an employee can leave a spouse. 2. Fourth Level 1959 Survivors Benefit (Government Code &21574) D. Post -Retirement Death Benefits Post -Retirement Survivor's Allowance (PRSA) for continuation of benefits even after remarriage (Government Code §21624, 21626 and 21628). E. Cost of LivingAllowance(COLA) (Government Code §21329) Up to a maximum of a two percent (2.0%) COLA as determined by CalPERS each year. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees 52 20C-55 �fzsI'�o ARTICLE XII 12.0 TOOLS 12.1 Personal Tools Employees in designated classifications may be required to provide their own personal tools which are ordinarily used in their trade. In the event a classification in this unit is so designated, the classification shall be eligible to receive the tool allowance provided in Section 12.2 below. 12.2 Tool Allowance The City will provide at least one (1) vendor account for each employee who has at least one (1) year of service in an eligible classification listed in Section 12.1 above. These employees shall be allowed up to nine hundred dollars ($900) per fiscal year in order to purchase tools which, in the sole determination of their manager, are necessary for the performance of such employee's job duties. 12.3 Lost or Stolen Tools The City shall bear no liability or responsibility in replacing lost or stolen tools, except as provided in this article. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit PxCFS3q,'� �.y 20C-56 ARTICLE XIII 13.0 UNIFORMS 13.1 Uniforms A. Uniform Maintenance 1. All employees who are required by the City to wear a uniform while on duty shall continue to be provided seven (7) sets of clean uniforms every two (2) weeks at no cost to the employees. 2. All fieldlyard maintenance, custodial and equipment repair employees shall be provided with eleven (11) clean sets every two (2) weeks at no cost to the employee. 3. Any employee who wishes to be provided with one(]) or more additional clean sets per week, above the amounts specified in this section, will be required to pay the extra cost incurred for such additional set(s). B. All Police Records Personnel and the Senior Office Assistants assigned to the traffic window shall be provided three (3) sets of uniforms and one (1) sweater. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana 9, SEIIJ Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit 54 20C-57 2(i�� 14.1 14.2 ARTICLE XIV 14.0 SAFETY Central Safety Committee Employees are eligible to serve on the City's Central Safety Committee; however, in no case shall the total number of SEIU represented employees from SEIU bargaining units exceed two (2) representatives and two (2) alternates. Safety Shoes A. The City agrees to pay up to two hundred dollars ($200) per fiscal year, to each employee required to wear safety shoes/boots, for the purchase and/or repair of approved safety shoes/boots. The option of purchase and/or repair shall be at the sole discretion of each employee. The employee may purchase their safety shoes/boots from either a City approved vendor or any outside vendor of their choice. B. All safety shoes/boots purchased under this program must have steel reinforced toes, insteps and bear the official stamp of approval from the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). C. If a particular classification is designated by the City's Risk Manager as requiring its incumbents to wear safety shoes/boots, then it will be mandatory for all incumbents of that classification to wear the type of safety shoes/boots (boot or low -quarter) deemed to be appropriate by the Department Head. Some exemptions may be allowed, on a case -by -case basis, depending on the type and amount of exposure to hazardous conditions in a particular position and subject to the approval or disapproval of the City's Risk Manager. D. The procedure necessary to be followed for the implementation and operation of this program shall be in accordance with the existing policies and procedures as previously established by the City. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time CNril Service Employees Unit /gage 55 20C-58 z(2� 15.0 15.1 Definition of a Grievance ARTICLE XV GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE A grievance shall be defined as a timely complaint by an employee, or group of employees, or the Union concerning the interpretation or application of specific provisions of this MOIL, or of the rules and regulations governing personnel practices or working conditions of the City, except, however, those matters specifically assigned to the jurisdiction of the City Personnel Board by those provisions of the City Charter and the Civil Service Rules and Regulations. 15.2 Informal Process — First Step A. An employee and/or his/her designated representative must first attempt to resolve the grievance on an informal basis through discussion with his her immediate supervisor without undue delay, but in no case, beyond a period of fifteen (15) working days after the occurrence of the alleged incident giving rise to the grievance, or when the grievant knew or should have reasonably become aware of the facts giving rise to the grievance. B. Every effort shall be made to find an acceptable solution to the grievance through this informal means at the most immediate level of supervision. C. In order that this informal procedure may be responsive, both parties involved shall expedite this process. If, within fifteen (15) working days a mutually acceptable solution has not been reached at the informal level, the employee and/or the employee's designated representative shall then set forth the grievance in writing, indicate the specific MOU provision, rule or regulation allegedly violated, the nature of the action desired, sign it, and submit it in duplicate to the employee's Department Head. At this point, the grievance review process becomes formal. Should the grievant fail to file a written grievance, and in the manner specified above, within fifteen (15) working days after first discussing the grievance with the employee's immediate supervisor, the grievance shall be barred and waived. D. Any resolution of the grievance at the informal stage by any person other than a middle manager or above shall not become precedence or be used to establish past practice regarding implementation, interpretation, or application of this MOU. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit 20C-59 Pag 56 A %r 7, 15.3 Formal Process A. Second Step — Department Head Review The Department Head or his/her designated representative shall meet with the employee and/or the employee's designated representative within fifteen (15) working days after the grievance has been submitted to the Department Head. If the Union is filing the grievance itself, it may start the grievance procedure at this step, but must do so within the same time limit as provided for in Step One above. The Department Head, or his/her designated representative, shall review the grievance and may afftrrn, reverse or modify the disposition made at the First Step and shall deliver his/her answer to the employee and/or the employee's designated representative within ten (10) working days after said meeting. B. Third Step — City Manager Review If the grievance is not satisfactorily resolved at the Second Step, the employee and/or the employee's representative (or the Union itself) may submit the grievance in writing to the City Manager or his/her designated representative within thirty (30) calendar days of being informed of the disposition made at the Second Step. Failure of the grievant and/or his/her designated representative to take this action will constitute a waiver and bar to the grievance, and the grievance will be considered settled on the basis of the disposition made at the Second Step. The City Manager or his/her designated representative shall meet with the employee and/or the employee's designated representative (or the chosen union representative if filed by the Union itself) within fifteen (15) working days after submission of the grievance. The City Manager, or his/her designated representative, after careful review, may affirm, reverse, or modify the disposition made at the Second Step and his/her decision shall be delivered in writing, to the employee and/or the employee's designated representative within fifteen (15) working days after said meeting. A copy of the written grievance to the City Manager, or his/her duly authorized representative, and of the City Manager's or his/her representative's written decision, shall be maintained in the Human Resources Department. The decision of the City Manager shall be the final and binding administrative decision on behalf of the City. 15.4 Reservation of Rights After the procedures set forth in this article has been exhausted, the grievant, the Union, and the City shall have all rights and remedies to pursue said grievance under the law. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Uni Pa e 57 n o �4-1 ,� ern 20C-60 211 ARTICI.E XVI 16.0 UNION RIGHTS 16.1 Union Representatives A. The Union shall have the right to appoint/elect a reasonable number of employee representatives who are recognized by the City as union officers, worksite leaders, or stewards. B. One (1) worksite leader/steward shall be recognized by the City. C. The City's Employee Relations Manager shall be provided with a list of the names and classification titles of the Union's officers, worksite leaders, stewards, and other union representatives. The Union agrees to inform the City in writing of any changes in said list within ten (10) calendar days of date of change. 16.2 Release Time A. Grievances During the term of this MOU, the City agrees to grant a reasonable amount of City time, without loss of pay or benefits, to enable the union officers, worksite leaders, and stewards to assist other bargaining unit employees in processing grievances under the Article 15. Union officers, worksite leaders, and stewards shall make advance arrangement with their supervisors prior to absenting themselves for such purpose. The union officers, worksite leaders, and stewards shall be required by the City to record and report to their supervisors the work time spent in assisting other bargaining unit employees pursuant to this provision of the MOU. Any unauthorized or unapproved time used by a union officer, worksite leader, or steward to investigate, discuss, process or meet in conjunction with pursuing a grievance or complaint shall be charged to that employee's vacation or comp time leave bank. The Union shall limit the number of union officers, worksite leaders, or stewards who participate in the investigation or appear at hearings on City time to one (1) representative and one (1) Chapter Board member. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit Pa 58 20C-61 Izo B. Union Business Leave In addition to the above time, union officers, worksite leaders, and stewards shall be granted thirty-two (32) hours of release time per fiscal year. This leave is cumulative, meaning the total amount of hours allowed each fiscal year is to be shared by all eligible employees in the unit and is not an individual annual allotment of hours for each employee. The purpose of this additional thirty-two (32) hours per fiscal year shall be to enable the union officers, worksite leaders, and stewards to participate in union activities which may include conventions, seminars and meetings that are otherwise not covered by this MOU. Such time shall be paid by the Union who will reimburse the City for the hours used by employees of the unit. Such union officers, worksite leaders, or stewards shall provide at least forty-eight (48) hours' advance notice and make arrangements with their supervisors prior to absenting themselves for such purposes. The union officers, worksite leaders, and stewards shall be required by the City to record and report to their supervisors on the work time spent on Union business. Any unauthorized or unapproved time used by a union officer, worksite leader, or steward to conduct union business shall be charged to that employee's vacation or comp time leave bank. Time spent by the Union's Chapter Chair/President, officers, worksite leaders, or stewards on Chapter Chair/President's Leave and/or Union Business Leave, under this section, shall not be considered time worked for computation of overtime according to the FLSA. C. Chapter Chair/President's Leave In the event the Chapter Chair/President is elected from this bargaining unit, then all rights and privileges pertaining to Chapter Chair/President's Leave, as set forth in the SEIU represented full-time employee's MOU with the City, shall apply- D. Meet and Confer 1. in the event that the Union is formally meeting and conferring with representatives of the City on matters within the scope of representation during regular City business hours, a reasonable number of union officers, employee representatives, or other union officials shall be allowed reasonable time off without loss of compensation or other benefits. 2. Such union officers and employee representatives shall not leave their duty/work station or assignment without the prior knowledge of their supervisor 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEfU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit/re 59 S 20C-62 �zs�w or manager. 3. Such meetings are subject to scheduling in a manner consistent with City operating needs and work schedules. E. Release Time Process 1. Release of employees for Union Business Leave shall be done on the same basis as employees who are released from duty for vacation leave, except that requests for Union Business Leave shall not unreasonably interfere with the operation of the City department and shall be approved by the employee's Department Head. 2. The Department Head shall not unreasonably withhold permission to utilize Chapter Chair/President's Leave and/or Union Business Leave from any employee who has been duly authorized by the Union to take such leave. 3. Release time used under this section must be appropriately coded into the City's payroll system each pay period, so that it can be properly tracked by the City. The City shall provide separate payroll codes for the different types of release time. 16.3 Worksite Access A. Union officers, worksite leaders, stewards and/or union staff shall be permitted to visit break and lunch areas designated by the City, before or after work, or during designated lunch periods for the purpose of discussing union business, provided that arrangements are made in advance with the manager responsible for the worksite. B. Such visits shall not disrupt the work of City employees, interfere with the normal operations of the department, or with established safety and security requirements. Where any such problems arise, the Union and the City will agree on an alternate meeting/conference facility for the purpose of providing a place for the Union to hold a meeting before or after work, or during lunch periods. If the alternate meeting site is a City facilit}' during non -working hours, its scheduling and use shall be governed in accordance with regulations pertaining to the use of public meeting rooms at City facilities. C. Solicitations of membership and all activities concerned with the internal management of the Union, such as collecting dues, holding membership meetings, preparation of petitions, preparation of proposals, campaigning for office, conducting elections and distributing literature, shall not be conducted during working hours. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees 20C-63 ]p`t�age 60 ,,Y oN Z�Z � D. Employees may voluntarily perform those duties assigned to them by the Union, but in no event shall they have the right to interfere with the performance of work of any other employee or interfere with City operations. 16.4 Use of Bulletin Boards Space shall be made available to the Union on the City's existing employee bulletin boards for the purpose of posting notices pertaining to Union business, subject to the following conditions: A. Materials posted by the Union shall not include campaign material on municipal election matters, including elections for City Council, other City positions, or other municipal political matters. B. Material posted shall not be derogatory to the City, City employees or other employee organizations. C. All materials shall be dated, identify the Union and bear the signature of the authorized representative(s) of the Union validating the posting. D. The City reserves the right to determine what reasonable portion of employee bulletin boards are to be allocated to union materials. E. If the Union does not abide by these provisions, it will forfeit its right to have materials posted on the City's employee bulletin boards. The Union shall not be permitted to post any material that is prohibited by State law or the City Charter. t6.5 Use of City Facilities The City shalt allow the Union to conduct meetings in the City's public meeting rooms during non -working hours provided such meetings are scheduled in accordance with regulations governing the use of public meeting rooms at City facilities. The Union shall not be permitted to use City facilities to discuss or present any matter that is prohibited by State taw or the City Charter. 16.6 Payroll Deductions A. Union Deductions The City shall make deductions on a regular basis each pay period from the pay of each employee who voluntarily authorizes such union deductions in writing. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit 20C-64 The City shall provide a separate payroll code for this deduction. B. Remittance of Funds The Union shall provide the City with an authorized deduction report each pay period which includes a list of the employees who have authorized union deductions and the amount of such deductions. The City shall make the applicable deductions from the employee's paychecks and electronically remit such funds to the Union via Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) following their deduction. The City shall also send an itemized report, in Excel format, to the Union at duesisseiu721.org. The report shall include a list of all union members in the bargaining unit and include the following information on each union member: first name, last name, employee identification number, employment status (i.e. active or on an unpaid leave of absence), base salary earned in the pay period, salary step, total hours in a paid status for the pay period, and the amount remitted on behalf of the employee. The remittance of funds and itemized report shall be sent to the Union semi- monthly. C. Maintenance of Dues Payroll Deduction Any employee who has authorized union dues deductions on the effective date of this MOU, or at any time subsequent to the effective date of this MOU, shall continue to have such dues deduction made by the City during the term of this MOU; provided, however, that any employee may revoke such dues deductions in the last twelve ( l2) months of this MOU during the twenty-one (21) calendar day period preceding the employee's date of hire anniversary, by notifying the Union of their revocation of union dues deductions. Such notification shall be in writing and contain the following information: employee name, employee identification number, job classification, department name, bargaining unit, and name of the employer from which such dues deductions are to be cancelled. Upon request, the Union will inform the union member of his/her dues deduction revocation date. The Union will provide the City with the appropriate documentation to process these dues revocations within ten (10) business days after the close of the withdrawal period. D. Indemnification The Union shall indemnify and hold the City, its officers and employees, harmless from any and all claims, demands, suits, or any other action arising from this section. In no event shall the City be required to pay from its own funds, union dues which the employee was obligated to pay, but failed to pay, regardless of the 2019-2022 h10U City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees 20C-65 i r �ti �o Lr � reasons. 16.7 Reporting Requirements The City agrees to provide the Union with an updated employee list every sixty (60) days, which includes the following information on each employee: first name, last name, employee identification number, date of hire, bargaining unit (i.e. part-time civil service employees unit), job classification, change in employment status (i.e. separated from service, retired, promoted, demoted, etc.), effective date of change in employment status, physical home address, home mailing address (if different), home phone number, personal cell phone number, personal email address (if known), work location, work phone number, salary step, and current rate of pay. The City shall send these reports, in Excel format, to the Union at dues@seiu721.org. An employee shall retain his/her right to opt -out of providing personal information to the Union. 16.8 New Employee Orientations The City shall notify the Union of all new employees entering the bargaining unit and provide the information listed in Section 16.7 on each new employee no later than thirty (30) days of hire or by the first pay period of the month Following hire. For the purpose of this section, new employees shall be defined to include any employee whose classification is in the bargaining unit, including but not limited to employees entering the unit through new hire, accretion, promotion, or demotion. Each new employee shall be scheduled to attend an orientation. The City shall provide the Union with no less than ten (10) calendar days' advance written notice of the date, time and location of the orientation. The City may provide shorter notice only in a specific instance where there is an urgent need critical to the City's operations that was not reasonably foreseeable. Such notice shall be sent to the Union via an email to membership otuseiu721.org, the designated SEIU Worksite Organizer, and the Chapter President. The notice shall also include the new employee's name, employee identification number (if assigned yet), and job title. After receiving notice of each employee orientation, the Union will inform Human Resources as to whether an SE[U representative will or will not attend. If an SEIU representative will not be able to attend the scheduled employee orientation, the Union may deliver union related documents contained within an envelope or welcome packet for each new employee for Human Resources staff to hand to the new employee at the orientation. The City will not discuss or answer questions related to these documents other than to inform the new employee that they are from the union that exclusively represents his/her classification. In addition, the employee will be informed that if he/she 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees Un' Page 63 � nlQ 20C-66 'ASS has any questions regarding the documents and'or union, he/she should contact his/her union representative. If the Union informs the City that an SEIU representative will attend the employee orientation, the City agrees to provide each new employee with up to thirty (30) minutes, while remaining on paid duty time, to meet with his/her union representative during the orientation. No management representative shall be present during the Union's presentation of the employee orientation. In the event the union representative providing the orientation is an employee of the City (i.e. Chapter President, union officer, worksite leader, or steward), he/she shall also be provided with up to thirty (30) minutes of paid release time in which to conduct the union's portion of the orientation. No more than one (1) City employee at a time shall be released to conduct the Union's presentation during the orientation. If the City begins to provide an online on -boarding process, the Union shall have the right to incorporate up to a thirty (30) minute video and/or PowerPoint presentation and a link to the SEIU Local 721 website into that online orientation. The Union would still reserve all other rights in this section, including but not limited to the scheduling of an in -person thirty (30) minute meeting with the new employee and his/her union representative while remaining on paid duty time. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit ge 64 0 20C-67 ARTICLE XVII 17.0 CITY RIGHTS 17.1 Management Rights the City reserves, retains, and is vested with, solely and exclusively, all rights of management which have not been expressly abridged by specific provision of this MOU or by law to manage the City, as such rights existed prior to the execution of this MOU. The sole and exclusive rights of management, as they are not abridged by this MOU or by law, shall include but not be limited to the following rights: A. To manage the City generally and to determine the issues of policy. B. To determine the existence or nonexistence of facts which are the basis of the management decision. C. To determine the necessity of organization of any service or activity conducted by the City and expand or diminish services. D. To determine the nature, manner, means, and technology, and extent of services to be provided to the public. E. To determine methods of financing. To determine types of equipment or technology to be used. G. To determine and/or change the facilities, methods, technology, means, and size of the workforce by which the City operations are to be conducted. H. To determine and change the number of locations, relocations, and types of operations, processes, and materials to be used in carrying out all City functions, including but not limited to the right to contract for or subcontract any work or operation of the City. To assign work to and schedule employees in accordance with requirements as determined by the City, and to establish and change work schedules and assignments. J. To relieve employees from duties for lack of work or similar non -disciplinary reason, subject to the provisions of the City Charter, Municipal Code, Federal and State law and this MOU. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit LS(w 20C-68 K. To establish and modify productivity and performance programs and standards. L. To discharge, suspend, demote, or otherwise discipline employees for proper cause in accordance with the provisions set forth in the City Charter and Santa Ana Municipal Code. M. To determine job classifications and to reclassify employees. N. To hire, transfer, promote and demote employees for nun -disciplinary reasons in accordance with this MOU. O. To determine policies, procedures, and standards for selection, training and promotion of employees. P. To establish employee performance standards including but not limited to quality and quantity standards and to require compliance of such standards. Q. To maintain order and efficiency in its facilities and operations. R. To establish and disseminate and/or modify rules and regulations to maintain order and safety in the City which are not in violation with this MOU, S. To take any and all necessary action to carry out the mission of the City in emergencies. 17.2 Meet and Confer on Impact Except in emergencies, or where the City is required to make changes in its operations because of the requirements of law, whenever the contemplated exercise of management's rights shall impact on a significant number of employees of the bargaining unit, the City agrees to meet and confer in good faith with representatives of the Union regarding the impact of the contemplated exercise of such rights prior to exercising such rights, unless the matter of the exercise of such rights is provided for in Uvs MOU. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees U Page 66 ,.y .� `r^ 0e, 20C-69 2�� ARTICLE XVIII 18.0 ANTI -STRIKE CLAUSE 18.1 Prohibited Conduct A. The Union, its officers, agents, representatives, and/or members agree that during the term of this MOU, they will not cause or condone any unlawful strike, walkout, slowdown, sick-out, or any other unlawful job action by withholding or refusing to perform services. B. There shall be no lockouts by the City during the term of this MOU. C. Any employee who participates in any conduct prohibited in Subsection A above shall be subject to suspension, demotion or dismissal by the appointing authority without right of appeal to the Personnel Board in accordance with City Charter Section 1014. 18.2 Union Responsibility In the event that the Union, its officers, agents, representatives, or members engage in any of the conduct prohibited in Section 18.1 A above, the Union shall immediately instruct any persons engaging in such conduct that their conduct is in violation of this MOU and unlawful and they must immediately cease engaging in the prohibited conduct and return to work. G)"� 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIIJ Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit e 67 lz;vx 20C-70 2( ARTICLE XIX 19.0 LAYOFFS 19.1 Notice of Lavoff It is the hope of the City not to separate any employees) from employment because of a reduction in workforce during the term of this MOU. However, circumstances arising during the term of this MOU may require such separation(s). In that event, the City will provide reasonable notice to the Union of the details of the separation(s) in order to meet and exchange information, opinions and proposals regarding the consequence(s) of the separation(s) on the employee(s). This provision is not intended to be a waiver of any other rights the parties may have under this MOU. 19.2 Order of Lavoff A. The principles of seniority (length of service) shall govern layoffs as described herein, except in the event that more than one ( l) employee has the same seniority date, in which case performance also shall be considered. The City's determination of performance shall not be arbitrary or capricious in nature. B. Any dispute over the application of the principles outlined in this article shall be subject to the grievance procedure. C. Classification seniority is defined as length of service in the classification, and shall begin on the first date worked by the employee in that classification. Whenever a position within a classification is to be eliminated, resulting in the layoff of an employee, seniority shall govern the order of layoff. The employee with the lowest seniority in the affected classification shall be laid off first. D. In lieu of layoff, an employee may elect to work in a lower classification, in which he/she has served, providing that classification is within the same job family/career ladder. In that event, the employee's length of service in the next lower classification,AiR be added to his/her length of service in the affected classification, and said combined seniority shall be used to bump down into the next lower classification. This method of combining seniority shall be applied to subsequent lower classifications. E. In the event of a reduction in force, part-time non -civil service employees in any City office, agency or department shall be laid off prior to laying off part-time civil service employees as above defined. Wherever possible, part-time civil service employees in the classification shall be laid off prior to full-time employees in the 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employeys�'Unihl Page 68 20C-71 �� (,,,0 same classification. 19.3 Reemployment List The reemployment list shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of its establishment. Reemployment shall be in reverse order of layoffs. 19.4 Temporary Assignment An employee who is laid off from part-time civil service employment pursuant to this article, may be granted a temporary appointment to a vacant part-time civil service position in any classification for which there is no eligible list and for which said employee meets the minimum qualifications established for the classification and possesses the requisite knowledge, skills and abilities to satisfactorily perform the work of the classification. Such temporary appointment will be terminated upon the establishment of a new eligible list for the classification or one (1) year following the initial day of such temporary appointment, whichever occurs first. 19.5 Contracting Out If it is decided to contract out work currently being performed by employees of this bargaining unit, the City shall provide the Union with reasonable notice of the decision; meet and confer with the Union over the impact of the decision; will seriously consider reasonable alternatives provided by the Union; and if any bargaining unit employee is laid off as a result of the decision, the City shall make a reasonable effort to place said employee with the contracting company. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit Page 69J, 20C-72 �(�� ARTICLE XX 20.0 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 20.1 Full -Time Eligible Lists Part-time civil service employees, upon their written request, shall be placed on the full- time transfer eligible list for the classification in which they are employed. The City will submit the names of employees wishing to convert to a full-time position for consideration to any department hiring for vacancies in the classification. Certification from that list shall be in accordance with all existing Civil Service rules. 20.2 Joint Labor Management Teams The City and the Union agree to form Joint Labor Management teams for the purpose of exploring issues of mutual concern, including discussion onjob family/career ladders. Each team shall be comprised of an equal number of labor and management employees and shall be chaired by the Employee Relations Manager. In no case shall the activity of a team create a delay or hindrance to the ongoing operation of the City. The City and the Union shall hold a meeting upon the City's or Union's written request to meet. 2 0. 3 Performance Appraisals Non -probationary performance appraisals not completed within six (6) months of the due date shall be stayed and the employee shall next become subject to evaluation upon the end of the evaluation period next following. Provided that merit advance performance appraisals shall be completed in accordance with Section 4.8 — Advancement within Ranges. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employee j Page 70 y 20C-73 ARTICLE XXI 21.0 FULL UNDERSTANDING, WAIVER & SEPARABILITY 21.1 Intent of Agreement It is understood and agreed that the parties to this MOU are subject to all current and future applicable Federal and California laws, the City of Santa Ana Charter and Municipal Code, as well as the City's EERR (l181-75). The provisions of this MOU shall supersede all prior agreements and MOU's, or contrary salary and/or personnel rules and regulations or administrative codes, provisions of the City, oral or written, express or implied between the parties, and shall govern the entire relationship and shall be the sole source of any and all rights which may be asserted hereunder. This MOU is not intended to conflict with Federal or State law or the City Charter. 21.2 Rules and Regulations Notwithstanding the above mentioned language, City personnel rules and regulations and departmental rules and regulations exist. These rules and regulations shall be continued to the extent they do not breach specific provisions of this MOU. Such rules and regulations may, from time to time, be changed by the City. if these changes affect wages, hours, and/or other terms and conditions of employment, the City shall meet and confer with the Union; provided, further, however, no provision of the rules and regulations shall be changed to breach specific provisions of this MOU. 21.3 Waiver of Bargaining Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, this MOU fully and completely incorporates the understanding of the parties regarding the provisions contained in this MOU. Neither party shall, during the term of this MOU, demand any change to the MOLL, except that nothing shall prohibit the parties from changing the terms of the MOU by mutual agreement and in writing signed by the parties. 21.4 Emergency Waiver Provision In the event of circumstances beyond the control of the City, such as acts of God, fire, flood, insurrection, civil disorder, national emergency, or similar circumstances, provisions of this MOU or the Personnel Rules or Resolutions of the City, which restrict the C ity's ability to respond to these emergencies, shall be suspended for the duration of such emergency. After the emergency is declared over, this MOU will be reinstated 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees U ge 71 yu� to 20C-74 OKI 21.5 immediately. The Union shall have the right to meet and confer with the City regarding the impact on employees of the suspension of the provisions in the MOU during the course of the emergency. Separability Provision Should any provision of this MOU be found to be inoperative, void, or invalid by state or federal law, or by a court of competent jurisdiction, all other provisions of this MOU shall remain in full force and effect for the duration of this MOU, provided that if any such affected provisions invalidate or void any benefits of employees covered hereunder, the parties shall forthwith commence negotiations to replace the invalidated benefits with benefits of comparable value. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Employees 20C-75 Page 72 f n) 'vmk L 22.1 ARTICLE XXII 22.0 TERM OF MOU The term of this MOU shall be from July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2022. 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees 20C-76 Pge 73 �10 �V\\ EXECUTION OF THE NEW AGREEMENT this MOL' was ratified by a simple majority vote of unit employees who arc in part-time civil service classifications represented b1 the Union. 111is Mot t%as appruved by a vote of the City Council ofthe City of Santa Ana. Following its execution by the Parties hercm. the Ciq Council shall implement its terms uud conditions by appropriate lawful action. In witness thereof, the panics hereto have caused this agreement to be executed this 5" day of May ?0 o PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT WENDY A. THOMAs, C/IfEF NEGm7ATOR i SF_lU LOCAL 721 i jl,.tz TERRI EGGERS i UNIT RF.PRF_SENTATIVE MIGUEL A. PuuDO MAYOR KRISTINE RIDGE EXF.CLMVE DIRECMR OF HUMAN RESOURCES ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: 7 k Daisy Gomez. Clerk orthe Conrail Peter J. Boo Liebert Cass 4 Whitmore LEGAL COUNSEL FOR CITY OF SANTA ANA 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEIU Part -Time Civil Service Employees Unit Page 74 20C-77 Exhibit A LIST OF REPRESENTED PART-TIME CIVIL SERVICE CLASSIFICATIONS Assistant Buyer Office Assistant Park Maintenance Aide Secretary Senior Community Development Analyst 2019-2022 MOU City of Santa Ana & SEW Part -Time Civil Service Empl 20C-78 ��` Page 75 20C-79 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE AMEND THE BLANKET ORDER CONTRACT AWARD FOR DESKTOP COMPUTERS, LAPTOPS, MOBILE DEVICES & RELATED EQUIPMENT IN AN ANNUAL AGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $600,000 (SPECIFICATION NO. 18-074) (GENERAL FUND AND OTHER FUNDS) /s/Kristine CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: _••e• 91 ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1s'Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2n'Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION Amend the contracts for desktop computers, laptops, mobile devices and related equipment to increase the annual agreement amount by an additional $200,000, for a revised annual aggregate amount not to exceed $600,000 subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney, with the following vendors: Vendor Location 2nd Gear. LLC Costa Mesa. CA Dell Computer Corp. Austin, TX DISCUSSION On November 20, 2018, at the conclusion of a competitive bidding process, the City entered into one-year aggregate agreements, with 2nd Gear, LLC and Dell Computer Group, with provisions for four one-year renewal options, to provide Dell desktop computers, laptops, mobile tablets and related equipment. The original contracts were awarded in an annual aggregate amount not to exceed $400,000 and the first renewal option has been exercised. The City of Santa Ana's Information Technology Department has identified 786 older PCs citywide that are still running the Windows 7 operating system. Widows 7 has reached its end of life and is no longer supported by Microsoft. Consumers with PCs running windows 7 will no longer receive technical assistance, software patches and security updates from Microsoft. In the event that a new security vulnerability or software bug is uncovered in Windows 7, Microsoft is no longer obliged to release any sort of patch to fix the issue on the unsupported operating system. This is a vulnerability that could put the City of Santa Ana in danger from cyberattacks, such as hacking, ransomware and other malware. 22A-1 Contract Award for Desktop Computers, Laptops, Mobility Devices and Related Equipment May 5, 2020 Page 2 The project effort to upgrade nearly half of the City's computers is large and complex and will require the use of multiple phases. FY 2019-20 will include Phase I, replacing 272 computers Citywide. Phase II will begin FY 2020-21 replacing the remaining 514 units. Due to COVID-19 pandemic, there is an urgent need for City staff and public officials to telecommute and conduct public meetings and other city business remotely. Reports show more than 100 City staff are doing their jobs remotely every day, resulting in a large demand for mobile computing needs. To meet City demand, unforeseen procurements were required, reducing the initial planned aggregate amount. Dell computers have been the standard for desktop and laptop computers for the City since 2007 when they were selected after comparing their offerings to other competitors. Standardizing equipment provides the benefits for next -generation office environments while simplifying technical support issues, it is essential to maintain staff computer equipment. Computers, laptops and mobile devices are purchased and deployed on an as -needed basis by the information Technology Department, preventing a proliferation of aging, obsolete, out -of -warranty, unsupported, and incompatible systems. Starting in 2019, Dell computers and interactive displays have also been used to outfit the City's smart conference rooms. Five conference rooms in City Hall have been retrofitted using this new technology. This has also reduced the initial planned aggregate amount. Santa Ana Ordinance No. NS -2312 authorizes the City to purchase against contracts from any public agency utilizing a competitive bid process. The Western States Contracting Alliance (WSCA) establishes California Multi -State Cooperative Agreements for Commodities, IT Goods and Services, and Telecommunication Goods and Services. WSCA agreements are available to all State of California governmental entities that expend public funds for the acquisition of goods and services. Dell Computer Corporation is a manufacturer offering WSCA pricing. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of these item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #6 - Community Facilities & Infrastructure, Objective #1 (establish and maintain a Community Investment Plan for all City assets). FISCAL IMPACT Funds for the duration of the contract period will be included in various departmental Miscellaneous Operating Expense account (no. 63001). 22A-2 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE: AMEND THE FISCAL YEAR 2019-20 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO VIDO SAMARZICH, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $398,700 FOR THE LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS PHASE II PROJECT, ESTIMATED DELIVERY COST: $405,490 (PROJECT NO 20-7548) (NON -GENERAL FUND) /s/Kristine Ridge CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1" Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2ntl Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO I�U�►l�1�1:3q:7 1. Approve an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement Program adding the Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements Phase II Project with a budget of $405,490 in reprogrammed Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding (Exhibit 1). 2. Award a construction contract to Vido Samarzich, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in accordance with the base bid, in the amount of $398,700, for construction of the Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements Phase II Project, for the term beginning May 5, 2020 and ending upon project completion, and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney. 3. Approve the Project Cost Analysis for a total estimated construction delivery cost of $405,490, which includes $398,700 for the construction contract, $6,790 for contract administration, inspection and testing, paid with Community Development Block Grant funding. DISCUSSION On June 18, 2019, Council approved the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The $2,150,323 CDBG allocation for the Public Works Agency included $995,595 for the installation of curb ramps that are compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) at various locations in the City of Santa Ana. The Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements Phase I Project (No. 20-7535) has been completed, leaving a remaining balance of $405,490 for additional locations. The reprogramming of the remaining CDBG funds was approved by City Council on February 4, 2020 for the additional ADA 23A-1 Award Contract to Vido Samarzich, Inc. for Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements Phase II May 5, 2020 Page 2 curb ramps. Staff intends to install new curb ramps and repair damaged sidewalks near Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Martin R. Heninger, Monte Vista, Edison, and Thorpe elementary schools; and areas of Lathrop, Fitz, and Willard intermediate schools. (Exhibit 2). The bid documents for the additional locations of the improvements reference Project Number 20-7535 but staff has determined the need for a new project number. Since the improvements for the two phases are in different locations, Phase II is now assigned project number 20-7548. Public Outreach and Contractor Participation To provide an opportunity for local vendors to submit bids, a Notice Inviting Bids was advertised in the Orange County Register on March 6 and 13, 2020, and bids were received electronically via the City's web -based electronic bidding system, PlanetBids, on March 27, 2020. Through the PlanetBids online portal, vendors may register to receive notifications on all current and future City projects, as well as download contract documents, receive project updates, and submit bids electronically. A total of 147 vendors, including five located in the City of Santa Ana, were notified of the project via PlanetBids. Twenty-six vendors requested bidding documents and three bids were received, none from a Santa Ana contractor. Bid Results Summary RANK BIDDER'S NAME LOCATION BASE BID 1 Vido Samarzich, Inc. Rancho Cucamonga $398,700 2 Hardy & Harper, Inc. Lake Forest $454,000 3 EBS General Engineering Inc. Corona $549,700 All three bids received were deemed responsive. Vido Samarzich, Inc. submitted the lowest responsive bid in the amount of $398,700 (Exhibit 3). Based on the bid analysis and a contractor's reference check, staff recommends awarding the construction contract to Vido Samarzich, Inc., in the amount bid (Exhibit 4). Project Delivery In order to deliver a complete project, in addition to the construction contract awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, the estimated total construction delivery cost of the project includes construction administration, inspection, and testing, along with an allowance for contingencies to account for unexpected or unforeseen conditions. Construction administration and inspection includes construction management; implementation of the City's Community Workforce Agreement requirements; inspection of the Contractor's work to ensure contract compliance, workmanship, 23A-2 Award Contract to Vido Samarzich, Inc. for Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements Phase II May 5, 2020 Page 3 and quality; and material testing. As indicated in the Cost Analysis (Exhibit 5) and as summarized in the table below, the estimated total construction delivery cost of the project is $405,490. Construction Contract 1 $398,700 Construction Administration, Inspection, and Testing $6,790 Contingencies $0 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION DELIVERY COST $405,490 Project funds will cover all staffing costs for delivery of this capital project. No additional or separate funding will be used. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #6 - Community Facilities & Infrastructure, Objective #1 (establish and maintain a Community Investment Plan for all City assets), Strategy B (equitably maintain existing streets and associated assets in a state of good repair so they are clean, safe, and aesthetically pleasing for all users).; and Strategy G (develop and implement the City's Capital Improvement Program in coordination with the Community Investment (e.g., neighborhood streets, traffic improvements, etc.). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the recommended actions are exempt from further review. Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. ER-2019-57 was filed for the project. FISCAL IMPACT As indicated in the Cost Analysis, the estimated total construction delivery cost of the project is $405,490, which includes construction contract, contract administration, inspection and testing. The funds necessary for the additional ADA curb ramps were originally appropriated by City Council as part of the FY 19/20 budget adoption of the CDBG capital improvement projects and the funds are currently available. With the approval of the amendment to the FY 2019-20 CIP, the $405,490 of reprogrammed CDBG funds will be available in the new capital project, Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements Phase II Project (No. 20-7548). The following table summarizes the funds available to deliver construction of this project. Accounting Unit — Accounting Unit - Account Fiscal Year Account No. Fund Description No. Description Amount Project No. 13518783-66220 Community CDBG Programs - FY 2019-20 (20-7548) Development Improvements Other Than $405,490 Block Grant Buildings Total $405,490 23A-3 Award Contract to Vido Samarzich, Inc. for Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements Phase II May 5, 2020 Page 4 NS/WEG/MO Exhibits: 1. Amend FY 2019-20 CIP Project Sheet 2. Location Map 3. Bid 4. Construction Contract 5. Cost Analysis 23A-4 \!k) (\/( 11IA )■®r \ a \§() LU LU It §»)¥!) ( } \ 3 k \ \)) re § # u e e. \ \\ (\ o) 0 u E E 0 ) ) ) ) d � » [ § � » [ [ [ ) ) 010 10 [ 2loolo k S k ƒ ) 0,) 0 .2 \ / ) ( §co a \ CL 2 / m B \ : 1WOOMI11.11M SANTA ANA Project No.20-7548 PWA Local Street Curb Ramp Improvement PUBLIC KS AGENCY (Phase II) Project 23A-6 City of Santa Ana Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements (Phase II) (20-7535), bidding on March 27. 2020 2:00 PM (Pacific) Bid Results Bidder Details Vendor Name Vido Samarzich, Inc. Address 6829 Billings Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 United States Respondee Vido L Samarzich Respondee Title Vice President Phone 909-987-6377 Ext. Email vidosam@yahoo.com Vendar Type CADIR License # 433210 CA DIR Bid Detail Bid Format Electronic Submitted March 26, 2020 5:57:42 PM (Pacific) Delivery Method Bid Responsive Bid Status Submitted Confirmation # 205183 Ranking 0 Respondee Comment Buyer Comment Attachments File Title General Forms Ownership Affidavit Bid Bond Non Collusion Affidavit Line Items Type Item Cade 11oM Section 1 1 Remove and Construct PCC Curb Ramp SF 2 Remove and Construct PCC Sidewalk (T=4") SF 3 Remove and Construct PCC Curb & Gutter (A-2-6) LF File Name General Attachment Local Street Curb Ramp.pdf Ownership Affidavit Ad 1.pdf Bid Bond.pdf Non Collusion Affidavit Ad 1.pdf Qty Unit Price 16800 $19.50 1100 700 $11.00 $70.00 Page 1 Printed 03/30/2020 EXHIBIT 3 File Type General Forms Ownership Affidavit (Notary Public) - REQ Original Hard Copy Submittal in Addition Bid Bond Guaranty (Notary Public) - REQ Original Hard Copy Submittal in Addition Non -Collusion Affidavit (Notary Public) - REQ Original Hard Copy Submittal in Addition Line Total Comment $327,600.00 $12,100.00 $49,000.00 P1�9f8 mile . City of Santa Ana Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements (Phase II) j20-7535), bidding on March 27. 2020 2:00 PM jPacific) Page 2 Printed 03/30/220 Bid Results Type Item Code UOM 4 Labor Agreement Oversight LS Oty Unit Price 1 $10,000.00 Subtotal Total Line Total Comment $10,000.00 $398,700.00 $398,700.00 PI2 TiIW CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) BID PROPOSAL TO: CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA FROM: Vido Samarzich, Inc. REQUIREMENT: The undersigned bidder declares that they have carefully examined the location of the proposed work, that they have examined the Contract Documents in its entirety and hereby proposes to furnish all material and do all the work required to complete the said work in accordance with said plans (if any) and the specifications for the unit price(s) or lump sum(s) set forth in the following schedule: Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price Amount 1 Remove and Construct PCC Curb Ramp 16,800 SF $ 19. SO $ '3 %71600,00 2 Remove and Construct PCC Sidewalk (T=4") 1,100 SF $ 11. 00 $ I Ob 12 00, 3 Remove and Construct PCC Curb & Gutter (A-2-6) 700 LF $ io. ob $ y 91000. ob 4 Labor Agreement Oversight I LS $10,000 $10,000 TOTAL BASE BID $ 3 9 81 7 00 . o 0 The lowest responsible bidder shall be selected based on the total base bid. The City reserves the right to award the Base Bid, and any, all, or none of the add -alternate bid items (if any). TIME FOR COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES The undersigned bidder hereby proposes to complete the Work for the total base bid amount shown above, within eighty (80) working days after the commencement date stated in the Notice to Proceed. The liquidated damages amount, in lieu of the amount specified in Subsection 6-9 of the Standard Specifications, shall be $500 per calendar day. Name of Firm Signature of BE Title Vice President (If an individual, so state. If a firm or co -partnership, state the firm name and give the names of all individual co-partners composing the firm. If a corporation, state legal name of corporation, and names of President, Secretary, Treasurer and Manager, thereof.) Corporation: Vido Samarzich, Inc President: Vido Samarzich Vice President: Vl1ii�doff��L. Samarzich Secretary: Monika Samarzich L X_§ CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) BIDDER'S STATEMENT BIDDER understands and agrees that this Bid Proposal, Contract Documents and subsequent Construction Contract Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between BIDDER and the AGENCY only after it has been accepted by the City Council, endorsed by the Clerk of the Council with her signature and official seal noting hereon the action of approval of the Council, signed by the Public Works Agency Executive Director or his/her duly authorized agent, and signed by the City Attorney, denoting his approval of the form of this document, and its execution, and when it or an exact copy of it has been either delivered to BIDDER or deposited with the United States Postal Service properly addressed to the BIDDER with the correct postage affixed thereto. BIDDER further agrees that upon delivery (as defined above) of the accepted agreement he/she will furnish AGENCY all required bonds and certificate of liability insurance within ten (10) business days or the funds, check, draft, or BIDDERS bond substituted in lieu thereof accompanying this proposal shall become the property of the AGENCY and shall be considered as payment of damages due to the delay and other causes suffered by AGENCY because of the failure to furnish the necessary bonds and because it is distinctly agreed that the proof of damages actually suffered is difficult to ascertain; otherwise said funds, check, drafts, or BIDDER'S bond substituted in lieu thereof shall be returned to the undersigned. BIDDER understands that a bid is required for the entire work, the estimated quantities set forth in the bid schedule are solely for the purpose of comparing bids, and that final compensation under the contract will be based upon the actual quantities of work satisfactorily completed. The BIDDER also certifies that the bid is a balanced bid. In accordance with Section 7028.15 of the California Business and Professions Code, the undersigned certifies under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Name of Firm Signature ofBl] Title Vice President (If an individual, so state. If a firm or co -partnership, state the firm name and give the names of all individual co-partners composing the firm. If a corporation, state legal name of corporation, and names of President, Secretary, Treasurer and Manager, thereof.) Corporation: Vido Samarzich, Inc. President: Vido Samarzich Vice President: Vido L. Samarzich Secretary: Monika Samarzich i+ � CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE 11) CONTRACTOR'S LICENSING AND REGISTRATION STATEMENT The undersigned contractor, or corporate officer, declares under penalty of perjury that he/she and all his/her subcontractors are registered with the State of California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), and that the following is true and correct. Contractor's Name: Vldo Sarnarzlch, Inc. Business Address: 6829 Billings Place, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 Business E-Mail Address: vidosam@yahoo.com Telephone: (909) 987-6377 State Contractor's License No. and Class: 433210 Class A License Expiration Date: 12/31 /2020 State Dept. of Industrial Relations (DIR) Registration No.: 1000013213 State Dept. of In ustrial Relations (DIR) Registration ExpationjDate: Signed: Title: Vice President 06/30/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) PREVAILING WAGE COMPLIANCE AND MONITORING STATEMENT Contractor is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1720, et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16,000, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on "public works" and "maintenance" projects. Since the services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and since the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Contractor agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. City shall provide Contractor with a copy of the prevailing rates of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. Contractor shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Contractor's principal place of business and at the project site. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. The undersigned certifies that the foregoing is true and correct. Name of Firm VidoSamarzicb,Inc, Signature of BIDDER Title Vice President (if an individual, so state) CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE Ii) OWNERSHIP AFFIDAVIT STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS: CITY OF SANTA ANA ) Vido L. Samarzieh being duly sworn, deposes and says: ❑ INDIVIDUAL That he/she is the party making the foregoing proposal: ❑ PARTNERSHIP That he/she is a member of the co -partnership firm designated as: and who has been and is duly vested with the authority to make and execute instruments for the co -partnership by: who constitute the other members of the co -partnership. 0 CORPORATION That he is of Vido Samarzich Inc a corporation which is making the foregoing proposal: ❑ JOINT VENTURE That he is of one of the parties making the foregoing proposal as a joint venture, and the he/she has been and is duly vested with the authority to execute instruments for an on behalf of the parties making said bid who are: that such a bid is genuine and not collusive or sham, and has not in any manner sought by collusion to secure any advantage against the City of Santa Ana or any person interested in the proposeinttcfor himself or any other person. Signature o i der Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of Signature of officer Administering Oath (Notary Public) 20 rrF A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of LOS ANGELES Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this 24TH day of MARCH 20 20, by VIDO L. SAMARZICH proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me. 19NNHMM xwrexr 3La DESMrNDG. �xunnunnnlmaly DESMOG. WARREN 6 COMM. 02190534 x 'g ,y Notary Public. California 'o Riverside County - i Myy Comm. Expires Apr. 9, Y027 e iunnnx Comm. (Seal) Signature 23A-14 Bond No.: VIDSA-2084 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) KNOW ALL PRESENT that, Vido Samarzich, Inc. as BIDDER, and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland as SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the CITY OF SANTA ANA, as AGENCY, in the penal sum of _ Ten Percent Of The Total Amount Bid Dollars ($ 10% Of Bid ), which is ten percent (10%) of the total amount bid by BIDDER to AGENCY for the above -stated project, for the payment of which sum, BIDDER and SURETY agree to be bound, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITIONS OF THIS OBLIGATION ARE SUCH that, whereas BIDDER is about to submit a bid to AGENCY for the above -stated project, if said bid is rejected, or if said bid is accepted and a contract is awarded and entered into by BIDDER in the manner and time specified, then this obligation shall be null and void, otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect in favor of AGENCY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have set their names, titles, hands, and seal this 10th day of March 2020. 6829 Billings Place BIDDER* Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 Vido Sa/arzic�, Inc. Telephone: (909) 987-6377 SURETY* 777 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 3900 Fidelity0017 and D osit Company of Maryland Los Angeles, 19 935-1 4,P p Y ry Telephone: (8191235-13t18 Matthew R. bobyns , Attorney -in -Fact Subscribed and sworn to before me 20— Signature: Notary Public in and for the County of , State of this day of Provide BIDDER/ SURETY name, address, and telephone number and the name, title, address, and telephone number of authorized representative. P-6 of P-15 23A-15 ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY COLONIAL AMERICAN CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That the ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation of the State of New York, the COLONIAL AMERICAN CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, a corporation of the State of Illinois, and the FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND a corporation of the State of Illinois (herein collectively called the "Companies"), by Robert D. Murray, Vice President, in pursuance of authority granted by Article V, Section 8, of the By -Laws of said Companies, which are set forth on the reverse side hereof and arc hereby certified to be in full force and effect on the date hereof, do hereby nominate, constitute, and appoint Randy SPOHN, Ashley M. SPOHN, Matthew R. DOBYNS and Hamilton KENNEY, all of Santa Ana, California, EACH, its true and lawful agent and Attorney -in -Fact, to make, execute, seal and deliver, for, and on its behalf as surety, and as its act and deed: any and all bonds and undertakings, and the execution of such bonds or undertakings in pursuance of these presents, shall be as binding upon said Companies, as fully and amply, to all intents and purposes, as if they had been duly executed and acknowledged by the regularly elected officers of the ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY at its office in New York, New York., the regularly elected officers of the COLONIAL AMERICAN CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY at its office in Owings Mills, Maryland., and the regularly elected officers of the FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND at its office in Owings Mills, Maryland., in their own proper persons. The said Vice President does hereby certify that the extract set forth on the reverse side hereof is a true copy of Article V, Section 8, of the By -Laws of said Companies, and is now in force. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Vice -President has hereunto subscribed his/her names and affixed the Corporate Seals of the said ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, COLONIAL AMERICAN CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, and FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, this 20th day of September, A.D. 2019. ATTEST: ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY COLONIAL AMERICAN CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND By: Robert D, Murray Vice President By. Dawn E. Brown Secretary State of Maryland County of Baltimore On this 20th day of Septunber, A.D. 2019, before the subscriber, a Notary Public of the State of Maryland, duly commissioned and qualified, Robert D. Murray, Vice President and Dawn E. Drown, Secretary of the Companies, to me personally known to be the individuals and officers described in and who executed the preceding instrument, and acknowledged the execution of same, and being by me duly swom, deposeth and saith, that he/she is die said officer of the Company aforesaid, and that the seals affixed in the preceding instrument are the Corporate Seals of said Companies, and that the said Corporate Seats and the signature as such officer were duly affixed and subscribed to the said instrument by the authority and direction of the said Corporations. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Official Seal the day and year first above written. y, n )IynY 4,,i14Ar�� offxl 5, s 7Nla f1P.,```` Constance A. Dunn, Notary Public mai � rnUntnn`� My Cmmnission Expires: July 9, 2023 23A-16 EXTRACT FROM BY-LAWS OF THE COMPANIES "Article V, Section 8, Attornevs-in-Fact. The Chief Executive Officer, toe President, or any Executive Vice President or Vice President may, by written instrument under the attested corporate seal, appoint attorneys -in -fact with authority to execute bonds, policies, recognizanees, stipulations, undertakings, or other like instruments on behalf of the Company, and may authorize any officer or any such attorney -in -fact to affix the corporate seal thereto; and may with or without cause modify of revoke any such appointment or authority at any time." CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned, Vice President of the ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, the COLONIAL AMERICAN CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, and the FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, do hereby certify that the foregoing Power of Attorney is still in full force and effect on the date of this certificate; and I do further certify [hat Article V, Section 8, of the By -Laws of the Companies is still in force. This Power of Attorney and Certificate may be signed by facsimile under and by authority of the following resolution of the Board of Directors of the ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY at a meeting duly called and held on the 15th day of December 1998. RESOLVED: "That the signature of the President or a Vice President and the attesting signature of a Secretary or an Assistant Secretary and the Seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile on any Power of Attorney... Any such Power or any certificate thereof bearing such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Company." This Power of Attorney and Certificate may be signed by facsimile under and by authority of the following resolution of the Board of Directors of the COLONIAL AMERICAN CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY at a meeting duly called and held on the 5th day of May, 1994, and the following resolution of the Board of Directors of the FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND at a meeting duly called and held on the 1 Oth day of May, 1990. RESOLVED: "That the facsimile or mechanically reproduced seal of the company and facsimile or mechanically reproduced signature of any Vicc-President, Secretary, or Assistant Secretary of the Compuny, whether made heretofore or hereafter, wherever appearing upon a certified copy of any power of attorney issued by the Company, shall be valid and binding upon the Company with the same force and effect as though manually affixed. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and allixed the corporate seals of the said Companies, this 10th day of March 2020. _ (\ BAL Brian M. Hodges, Vice President TO REPORT A CLAIM WITH REGARD TO A SURETY BOND, PLEASE SUBMIT A COMPLETE DESCRIPTIOI OF THE CLAIM INCLUDING THE PRINCIPAL ON THE BOND, THE BOND NUMBER, AND YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION TO: Zurich Surety Claims 1299 Zurich Way Schaumburg, IL 60196.1056 www.reuottsfel aims(&,zurichna.com 800-626-4577 23A-17 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of CALIFORNIA County of ORANGE On March 10th, 2020 before me, ASHLEY MARIE SPOHN, NOTARY PUBLIC, personally appeared MATTHEW R. DOBYNS ® who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personH whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity (i , and that by his/her/their signatures) on the - - - -- -- --- - d - - - - • instrument the personH, or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) ASHLEY MARIE SPOHN acted, executed the instrument. COMM. # 2188665 NOTARY P CONIA - ORANGE COUNTY ro I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of 01comm. explr;:,GAir.27,2n21 P California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. r Sig at re of Notary OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT ❑ INDIVIDUAL ❑ CORPORATE OFFICER ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED _ ® ATTORNEY -IN -FACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR ❑ OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES) A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of LOS ANGELES Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this 12TH day of MARCH 20 20, by VIDO L. SAMARZICH proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personKwho appeared before me. J�IIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIIIINIIIIIIIIININIIIIIIIIIII�r -_ DESMOND G. WARREN g$ - � COMM. #2190534 Nolary Public-C81Nemla Riverside CouXly My Cam: Expires Apr. 9, 2021 No IIWINIIXXIWNWWWINXNIIWIIIIIIIINIIIIIIW (Seal) Signature Q4 23A-19 CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) LIST OF SUB -CONTRACTORS Section 4100 et. seq. of the Public Contract Code requires listing of all subcontractors with the bid for all subcontract work exceeding the following amount: o Streets, highways including bridge projects: '/,% of the bid or $10,000, whichever is greater o Buildings, parks, or other projects: '/a% of the bid Section 1725.5 of the Public Contract Code requires all Subcontractors be registered with the State Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). BIDDER proposes to subcontract certain portions of the work to the firms listed below: Name License #/Exp. DIR Reg. #/Exp. Location Phone Type Of Work Amount $ Name License #/Exp. DIR Reg. #/Exp. License # _ Location _ Phone Type Of Work Amount $ W LWARNbIl Name License #/Exp. DIR Reg. #/Exp. License # Location Phone Type Of Work Amount— I - J (Y $ Signature of BVidir Name License #/Exp. DIR Reg. #/Exp. Location Phone Type Of Work Amount $ Name License #/Exp. DIR Reg. #/Exp. License # Location Phone Type Of Work Amount $ Name License #/Exp. DIR Reg. #/Exp. License # _ Location _ Phone Type Of Work Amount $ � b CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 ADDENDUM NO. ONE LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) The following are the names, addresses, and telephone numbers for THREE public agencies for which the BIDDER has performed similar work within the past three years. 1. SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION Name and Address of Owner. Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. Contract Amount Type of Work 2. SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION Name and Address of owner. Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. Contract Amount Type of Work 3. SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION Name and Address of owner. Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. Contract Amount Type of Work Date Completed Date Completed Date Completed The following are the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all brokers and sureties from whom BIDDER intends to procure insurance and bonds. Surety = Zurich - Fidelity Deposit Company of Maryland 777 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 3900 Los Angeles CA - (619) 235-1388 Broker = R S Bonding & Insurance Agency Inc. 1633 E. 4th Ave, Ste. 228, Santa Ana CA 92701 - (714) 541-4700 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 ADDENDUM NO. ONE LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) ADDITIONAL REFERENCES The following are the names, addresses, and telephone numbers for THREE public agencies for which the BIDDER or Subcontractor has performed similar work in the past five years. ATTACHED INFORMATION Name and Address of Owner. Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. Contract Amount Type of Work Date Completed 2. SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION Name and Address of owner. Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. Contract Amount Type of Work 3. SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION Name and Address of owner. Name and Telephone Number of person familiar with project. Contract Amount Type of Work Date Completed Date Completed The following are the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all brokers and sureties from whom BIDDER intends to procure insurance and bonds. Surety = Zurich - Fidelity Deposit Company of Maryland 777 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 3900, Los Angeles, CA - (619) 235-1388 Broker = R S Bonding & Insurance Agency, Inc. 1633 E. 4th Ave, Ste. 228, Santa Ana, CA 92701 - (714) 541-4700 23HP-Z`2- VIDO SAMARZICH, INC. General Engineering Contractor No. 433210 A 6829 BILLINGS PLACE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91701 COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION PROJECT REFERENCES 1. Project Name: Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements Owner: City of Santa Ana Phone Number: (714) 552-5336 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Gerardo Lechuga Contract Amount: $495,000.00 Date of Completion: 2019 2. Project Name: 3`d Ave Pavement Rehabilitation and Water Improvements Owner: City of Upland Phone Number: (909) 291-2946 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Bob Critchfield Contract Amount: $2,800,000.00 Date of Completion: 2019 3. Project Name: 91h Street Pavement Rehabilitation and Water Improvements Owner: City of Upland Phone Number: (909) 291-2946 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Bob Critchfield Contract Amount: $2,600,000.00 Date of Completion: 2019 4. Project Name: La Palma Ave Sidewalk Improvements Owner: City of Anaheim Phone Number: (714) 765-5052 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Joel Jordan Contract Amount: $479,000.00 Date of Completion: 2019 5. Project Name: Wilshire Avenue Bicycle Blvd Improvements Owner: City of Fullerton Phone Number: (714) 738-6853 Engineer/Contact: Mr. David Grantham Contract Amount: $2,100,000.00 Date of Completion: 2019 Pare I oC6 23A-23 TELEPHONE 909-987-6377 FAX 909-987-8988 VIDO SAMARZICH, INC. General Engineering Contractor No. 433210 A 6829 BILLINGS PLACE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAUFORNIA 91701 TELEPHONE 909-987-6377 FAX 909-987-8988 6. Project Name: FY 17-18 ADA Access Ramp Improvements at Various Locations Owner: City of Rancho Cucamonga Phone Number: (909) 774-4070 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Romeo David Contract Amount: $975,000.00 Date of Completion: 2018 7. Project Name: Wilshire Avenue Water and Sewer Improvement Project Owner: City of Fullerton Phone Number: (714) 738-6895 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Gar Huang Contract Amount: $550,000.00 Date of Completion: 2018 8. Project Name: Elm/Malden Area Street, Sewer and Water Improvements Owner: City of Fullerton Phone Number: (714) 773-0049 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Joseph Hernandez Contract Amount: $2,200,000.00 Date of Completion: 2018 9. Project Name: Anaheim Hills Road Water Main Replacement Owner: City of Anaheim Phone Number: (714) 863-8020 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Luis Tapia Contract Amount: $600,000.00 Date of Completion: 2018 10. Project Name: CDBG ADA Wheelchair Access Ramp Replacement at Various Locations Owner: City of Orange Phone Number: (714) 744-5566 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Matthew Lorenzen Contract Amount: $204,300.00 Date of Completion: 2018 11. Project Name: 2017 Citywide Curb Ramp Improvements Owner: City of Laguna Beach Phone Number: (949) 497-0741 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Tri Nguyen Contract Amount: $285,000.00 Completion Date: 2017 Page 2 of 6 23A-24 VIDO SAMARZICH, INC. General Engineering Contractor No. 433210 A 6829 BILLINGS PLACE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91701 12. Project Name: Safe Routes to School Improvements, Phase 3 Owner: City of Glendale Phone Number: (818) 402-0225 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Gary Edsall Contract Amount: $908,000.00 Date of Completion: 2017 13. Project Name: Heim Ave at Canal St Storm Drain Improvements Owner: City of Orange Phone Number: (714) 744-5566 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Matthew Lorenzen Contract Amount: $99,000.00 Date of Completion: 2017 14. Project Name: Citywide Sidewalk Repair Project FY 15-16 Owner: City of Santa Monica Phone Number: (951) 522-4505 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Craig Wheeler Contract Amount: $878,000.00 Date of Completion: 2017 15. Project Name: FY 16/17 Curb Access Ramp Installation Project Owner: City of Huntington Beach Phone Number: (714) 536-5259 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Joe Fuentes Contract Amount: $679,000.00 Date of Completion: 2017 16. Project Name: Comstock Avenue Water Main Improvements Owner: City of Whittier Phone Number: (562) 567-9302 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Carl Hassel Contract Amount: $578,000.00 Date of Completion: 2017 17. Project Name: Monterey Road Street Improvements Owner: City of South Pasadena Phone Number: (626) 590-0570 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Alex Chou Contract Amount: $1,550,000.00 Date of Completion: 2017 Page 3 of 6 23A-25 TELEPHONE 909-987-6377 FAX 909-987-8988 VIDO SAMARZICH, INC. General Engineering Contractor No. 433210 A 6829 BILLINGS PLACE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91701 18. Project Name: Fletcher Avenue Reconstruction Owner: City of South Pasadena Phone Number: (702) 204-4025 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Mark Peterson Contract Amount: $878,000.00 Date of Completion: 2016 19. Project Name: Patterson Street Reconstruction Owner: City of Fullerton Phone Number: (714) 732-9060 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Pete Acosta Contract Amount: $675,000.00 Date of Completion: 2016 20. Project Name: Magnolia/Bolsa Intersection Widening Owner: City of Westminster Phone Number: (714) 548-3464 Engineer/Contact: Ms. Theresa Tran Contract Amount: $975,000.00 Date of Completion: 2016 21. Project Name: 2015 Water Main Improvements Owner: City of Westminster Phone Number: (714) 548-3456 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Tuan Pham Contract Amount: $1,100,000.00 Date of Completion: 2016 22. Project Name: Red Hill Lake Modernization Owner: City of Rancho Cucamonga Phone Number: (909) 477-2740 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Romeo David Contract Amount: $300,000.00 Date of Completion: 2016 23. Project Name: 2015 Concrete Improvements Owner: City of Inglewood Phone Number: (714) 468-7319 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Hunter Nguyen Contract Amount: $425,000.00 Date of Completion: 2015 Page 4 of 6 23A-26 TELEPHONE 909-987-6377 FAX 909-987-8988 VIDO SAMARZICH, INC. General Engineering Contractor No, 433210 A 6829 BILLINGS PLACE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91701 TELEPHONE 909-987-6377 FAX 909-987-8988 24. Project Name: El Centro Avenue Rehabilitation Owner: City of South Pasadena Phone Number: (626) 590-0570 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Alex Chou Contract Amount: $1,100,000.00 Date of Completion: 2015 25. Project Name: Concrete Bus Pads Owner: City of Rancho Cucamonga Phone Number: (714) 548-3456 Engineer/Contact: Curt Billings Contract Amount: $175,000.00 Date of Completion: 2015 26. Project Name: ADA Wheelchair Ramps Owner: City of Orange Phone Number: (714) 744-5566 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Matthew Lorenzen Contract Amount: $275,000.00 Date of Completion: 2015 27. Project Name: 2014 Water Improvement Owner: City of Westminster Phone Number: (714) 548-3456 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Tuan Pham Contract Amount: $1,100,000.00 Date of Completion: 2015 28. Project Name: ADA Sidewalk Improvement Owner: City of Artesia Phone Number: (951) 314-6984 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Chuck Burkhardt Contract Amount: $200,000.00 Date of Completion: 2014 29. Project Name: YLHS Park Bryant Cross Feeder Pipeline Owner: Yorba Linda Water District Phone Number: (714) 701-3104 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Joe Polimino Contract Amount: $675,000.00 Date of Completion: 2013 Page 5 of 6 23A-27 VIDO SAMARZICH, INC. General Engineering Contractor No. 433210 A 6829 BILLINGS PLACE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91701 30. Project Name: County Road Storm Drain Owner: City of Pomona Phone Number: (909) 322-7471 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Dave Barron Contract Amount: $570,000.00 Date of Completion: 2013 31. Project Name: Adams Square Park Owner: City of Glendale Phone Number: (818) 548-2864 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Hagop Kassabian Contract Amount: $1,100,000.00 Date of Completion: 2010 32. Project Name: Various Public Work Purchase Orders and Contracts 2000-2013 Owner: City of Pasadena Phone Number: (626) 484-5640 Engineer/Contact: Mr. Dale Torstenbo - dtorstenbo@cityofpasadena.net Contract Amount: $2,500,000.00 Date of Completion: 2000-2013 33. Project Name: Misc Park Improvements From 2000-2010 Owner: City of Glendale Engineer/Contact: George Balteria— (951) 201-2710 Peter Vierheilig — pvierheilig@ci.glendale.ca.us Contract Amount: $3,500,000.00 Date of Completion: 2000-2010 Page 6 of 6 23A-28 TELEPHONE 909-987-6377 FAX 909-987-8988 CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) NON -COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT (Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and Public Contract Code Section 7106) In conformance with Title 23 United States Code Section H 2 and Public Contract Code 7106 the BIDDER declares that the bid is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or corporation; that the bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the BIDDER has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other BIDDER to put in a false or sham bid, and has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any BIDDER or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone shall refrain from bidding; that the BIDDER has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone to fix the bid price of the BIDDER or any other BIDDER, or to fix any overhead, profit, or cost element of the bid price, or of that of any other BIDDER, or to secure any advantage against the public body awarding the contract of anyone interested in the proposed contract; that all statements contained in the bid are true; and, further, that the BIDDER has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his or her bid price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid. Note: The above Non -collusion Affidavit is part of the Proposal. BIDDERS are cauyioned that making a false certification may subject the certifier to criminal Signed I 12M Lif // State of California County of Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this day of , 20_, by , proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me 54F A4�C-paiED Notary Public Signature Notary Public Seal A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of LOS ANGELES Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this 24TH day of MARCH , 20 20, by VIDO L. SAMARZICH proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me. JIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIn11111O Nllllllm111111111111111111111111�' DESMON, 0G.2 WARREN € COMM. Public- U34 �y Notery Public- Cali/ornle Riverside County My Comm. Expires Apr. 9, 3021 E Ye. HMNININIINXNMMNIMpM11111111111111111111111111R (Seal) Signature 23A-30 CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) NON-DISCRIMINATION CERTIFICATE The undersigned contractor or corporate officer, during the performance of this contract, certifies as follows: I. The Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without, regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 2. The Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 3. The Contractor shall send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he/she has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided advising the said labor union or workers' representatives of the Contractor's commitments under this section, and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. 4. The Contractor shall comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and of the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. 5. The Contractor shall furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his/her books, records, and accounts by the administering agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation, to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. 6. In the event of the Contractor's non-compliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of the said rules, regulations, or orders, the contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the Contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts or federally assisted construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Execution Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulations, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. ZM I'M CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) 7. The Contractor shall include the portion of the sentence immediately preceding paragraph (1) and the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (7) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontract or purchase order as the administering agency may direct as means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance; provided, however, that in the event the Contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the administering agency, the Contractor may request that the United States enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. 8. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1735, as added by Chapter 643 Stats. 1939, and as amended, no discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons upon public works because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicaps, mental condition, marital status, or sex of such persons, except as provided in Section 1420, and any contractor of public works violating this Section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a violation of the apt Signed: — VIVO L. - /4r a Title: Vice President Firm: Vido Samarzich, Inc. Date: 03/23/2020 CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) STATEMENT REGARDING APPRENTICESHIP REQUIREMENTS The undersigned BIDDER is familiar with the requirements of Section 1777.5 of the State Labor Code regarding employment of apprentices, and understands that contractors on contracts exceeding $30,000 or 20 working days shall: Apply to the joint apprenticeship committee administering the apprenticeship standards of the craft or trade in the area of the site of the public work for a certificate approving the contractor under the apprenticeship standards for the employment and training of apprentices in the area or industry affected. 2. Employ the number of apprentices or the ratio of apprentices to journeymen stipulated in the apprenticeship standards. 3. Contribute to the fund or funds in each craft or trade in which he/she employs journeymen or apprentices on the public work, in the same amount or upon the same basis and in the same manner as the o er contractors, except contractors not signatory to the trust agreement shall pay a like amo nt to tVe California Apprenticeship Council. Signed: V,4�4 Y )E — V 10 D L. Title: Vice President Firm: Vido Samarzich, Inc. Date: 03/23/2020 2�X4 CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) STATEMENT REGARDING "ANTI -KICKBACK" REQUIREMENTS The undersigned is submitting this proposal for performing by contract the work required by these bid documents, agrees to comply with the Copeland "Anti -Kickback" Act (18 USC 74) as supplemented in the Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR, Part 3). This act provides that each contractor or subcontractor shall be prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed in the construction or repair of public work, to give up any part of the compensation to which he/she is otherwise entitled. Signed: �AA UI��IM L. -C!l�,Artzr Title: Vice President Firm: Vido Samarzich, Inc. Date: 03/23/2020 MAL':�4 CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10162 OUESTIONNAIRE In conformance with Public Contract Code Section 10162, the BIDDER shall complete, under penalty of perjury, the following questionnaire: Has the BIDDER, any officer of the BIDDER, or any employee of the BIDDER who has a proprietary interest in the BIDDER, ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of a violation of law or a safety regulation? Yes No If the answer is yes, explain the circumstances in the following space 23A f 35 CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDENDUM NO. ONE PROPOSAL PROJECT NO.: 20-7535 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) STATEMENT REGARDING COMMUNITY WORKFORCE AGREEMENT (CWA) This is to certify that the undersigned BIDDER, and subcontractors, have read and understood the CWA entered into by and between the City of Santa Ana, the Los Angeles/Orange Counties Building and Construction Trades Council, and the signatory Craft Councils and Local Unions, effective as of September 1", 2017. The CWA is available at http://www.santa-ana.org/pwa/documents/CWA.pdf. The undersigned BIDDER hereby agrees to comply with all terms and conditions of the CWA, and is capable of completing construction of the project continuously, and without interruptions or delays. If awarded any work covered by the CWA, BIDDER will also be required to sign the Letter of Assent that appears as Attachment A to the CWA. Signed: I IJ 41J- On L. SA*7 w Title: Vice President Title: Vido Samarzich, Inc. Date: 03/23/2020 l%#A-P3'6 'nLce�SelM eou`� SAMVigN�s'is5 \�\W ANEW WAY TO SIGN IN - If you already have No Login �f i a SAM account, use your SAM email for login.gov. n rruom mngoY6RA®s1R Wgin.gov FAQs m U.BRT: SAMgov will he dawn for..rhMnled maintenonrr SntNaago3/I4/2wo fr. S:oo AM W e:oo PM Search Results Current Search Terme: Vido Samarzichr Inc. - 'Total recordsa Result Page: I Yonr search for Vido Samarzich, Inc." returned the following results... annry Vido sa.aaraen, Inc. DUNS: 026496266 Has Active Exclusion?: No Expiration Date: 01/09/2021 Purposeof Registredon: Al Awards Result Page: I Save PDF Export Results Pdnt Sort by Relevance Order by Desrsntlinfj W Stank: Active P CAGE Code: 7UGR2 View Delalls DODAAC: Debt Subjectto Offset?: No Searnh Records Dieclehners FAPHS.gov Data ALeesS Accessibility CSA.gev/IAG Check Status Privacy Policy GSAguv About USAgov Help Save PDF Export Results Print ,ivnu I„III, ,nu , II 'I'I III III III .AI. I I\I N11 INS, I. lid: Ilr'I ,. 'I ,lir.l I,'J It\I'II�I11 IxlNmrl,mg-rill ulrl.ell,vli% Aw rr MM1lw1 lu do'IPI111uIp III,III"IIIIIiI.,,lYmlr^I l`I, vv'Illinll_ 23A-37 We us. cookies for marketing and advertising purperas, and to provide the best experience on ourwebsrte. By continuing to browse the sae, you agree to our use of cookies. See our Privacy policy and Cookie policy to learn more about how we use cookies and your choices regarding the use of cookies, O Finance Sales &Mal Third Party Risk &Compliance. Government Small Business D-UN-S Number Data Cloud nUMI I I10,1S.Ia"ILi 3x6iuu.N-s NllmaeelooxUP Dun & Bradstreet D-U-N-SI' Number Lookup Lookup a partne's .ori,pany or find your company's D-U-N-S Number. Search For Other company Business Name Business Phone Business Name' Vida Samarsich, Inc. Street &Suite 6829 Billings Pl Suite City & Zip Code Rancho. Cucamonga 91701 State & Country* California U.S. 5aamh 1 Search Results Sea your company listed below? You can have your D-U-N-S Number emaded to you of-view/update your company information. If you don't see your company's name in the search results, search again or request a new D-U-N-Sr Number by clicking the link at the bottom of the screen. VIDO SAMARZICH, INC. 6829 Bi11'mgs Pl,Rancho Cucam^^g CA 9171 Single Ative EurnI D U.NS Nuri Location Vmn I Ed, Company InlmIn t �u 9Wpu] V7 (866) 990-5845 CONTACT US 23A-38 EXHIBIT I City of Santa Ana Section 3 Contract Clause These Clauses are to be inserted in all contracts Various A. The work to be performed under this contract number 20-7535 by and between the City of Santa Ana, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Vido Samarzich, Inc. _, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor", is subject to the requirements of Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended 12U.S.C. 1701u (section 3). The purpose of Section 3 is to ensure that employment and other economic opportunities generated HUD assistance or HUD -assisted projects covered by Section 3, shall, to the greatest extent feasible, be directed to low -and very low-income persons. B. The parties to this contract agree to comply with HUD's regulations in 24 CFR Part 135, which implement Section 3. As evidenced by their execution of this contract, the parties to this contract certify that they are under no contractual or other constraint that would prevent them from complying with the Part 135 regulations. C. The contractor agrees to send to each labor organization or representative of workers with which the Contractor has an agreement or other understanding, if any, a notice advising the labor organization or workers' representative of the Contractor's commitments under this Section 3 clause, and will post copies of the notice in conspicuous places at the work site where both employees and applicants for training and employment positions can see the notice. The notice shall describe the Section 3 preference, shall set forth minimum number and job titles subject to hire, availability of apprenticeship and training positions, the qualifications for each; and the name and location of the person(s) taking applications for each of the positions; and the anticipated date the work shall begin. D. The Contractor agrees to include a Section 3 clause in every subcontract subject to compliance with regulations in 24 CFR Part 135, and agrees to take appropriate action, upon a finding that the subcontractor is in violation of the regulations in 24 CFR part 135. The Contractor will not subcontract with any subcontractor where the Contractor has notice or knowledge that the subcontractor has been found in violation of the regulations in 24 CFR Part 135. E. The Contractor will certify that any vacant employment positions, including training positions, that are filled (1) after the Con tractor is se lected but before the contract is executed, and (2) with persons other than those to whom the regulations of 24 CFR part 135 require employment opportunities to be dir ected, were not to circumvent the Contractor's obligations under 24 CFR part 135. F. Noncompliance with regulations in 24 CFR Part 135 may result in sanctions, termination of this contract for default, and debarment or suspension from future HUD assisted projects. The Contractor by this signature affixed hereto declares under penalty of p erjury: Contractor has read City requirements and accepts all its requirements contained therein for all of his/her operations within the City of Santa Ana. J/1 Vido L. Samarzich - Vice President 03/27/2020 Signature of o ractor Print Name and Title Date 433210 Class A 026486266 Contractor License Number & Designation Federal DUNS Number 23A-39 EXHIBIT 2 City of Santa Ana Section 3 New Hire Calculation Form Project Name: Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements (Phase II) Project Location: Various locations in the city of Santa Ana Street City State Zip Contractor Name: Vldo Samarzich, Inc. Contractor Contact: Vldo Samarzich Contractor Telephone Number: (909) 987-6377 Contractor Email Address:vidosam@yahoo.com Section 3 Resident Hiring Goals 1 Trade/Craft I Number of New Hires WA Total Number of New Hires: 0 1 Total number of Section 3 resident new hires necessary to comply with contract: -4/ J03/27/2020 SignatureofC tr ctor Date 0 23A-40 104,4 11,1111�;3 Contractor's Section 3 Affirmative Action Plan 20-7535 - Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements (Phase II) Project Number and Title The undersigned contractor agrees to implement the following affirmative action steps directed at increasing the utilization of lower income residents and business concerns located within the County of Orange. Take affirmative action to ensure that employees or applicants for employment or training are not discriminated against because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. 2. Send a notice of the contractor's Section 3 commitment to each labor organization or representative of workers and post a copy of the notice at a conspicuous place available to employees and applicants for employment or training. 3. To the greatest extent feasible, make a good faith effort to recruit for employment or training lower income residents from the County, and to award contracts to business concerns which are located in or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the County through use of: local advertising media, signs placed at the project site and notification to community organizations and public or private institutions operating within or serving the project area such as Service Employment and Redevelopment (SER), Opportunities Industrialization Center (OIC), Urban League, Contracted Employment Program, U.S. Employment Service, Chamber of Commerce, labor unions, trade associations and business concerns. 4. Maintain a file of all low-income area residents who applied for employment or training either on their own or on referral from any source, and the action taken with respect to each area resident. 5. Maintain a file of all business concerns located in the County who submitted a bid for work on the project, and the action taken with respect to each bid. 6. Maintain records, including copies of correspondence, memoranda, etc., which document that affirmative action steps have been taken. 7. Incorporate the Se ction 3 clause provisions in a II subcontracts, and r equire subcontractor(s) to submit a Section 3 Affirmative Action Plan. Vido Samarzich, Inc. Company Name 6829 Billings Place, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 Address: Street, City, State, Zip 026486266 DUNS Number W - I - /J Signature of C tractor Vido L. Samarzich Printed Name Vice President Title 23A-41 EXHIBIT 9 City of Santa Ana Section 3 Contract Award Consideration Bidder's Name: Vido Samarzich, Inc. Please check the numbered statement that is applicable to your business: My business qualifies as a Section 3 business concern: If you have checked statement NUMBER I please read the attached Section 3 Business Concern Preference - Bidding Requirements. (Please check the applicable qualification for statement number 1) 51 % owned by Section 3 residents; or Permanent, full-time employees include at least 30% Section 3 residents; or Will subcontract more than 25% of the dollar award of all subcontracts to be awarded to business concern(s) that meet either of the two preceding qualifications. Note: You are required to list all subcontractors and owner -operators in your bid statement. 2. V My business does not qualify as a Section 3 business concern. Note: Section 3 business concern definitions are located in this project's Contract Documents & Specifications Manual wi in the section titled Section 3 Economic Opportunities Plan. ZA/i 03/27/2020 Signature of si ess Owner Date Vido L. Samarzich Print Name 23A-42 EXHIBIT 12 CITY OF SANTA ANA WOMEN OWNED/MINORITYBUSINESS OWNED ENTERPRISES (W/MBE) GOOD FAITH EFFORTS Project Name: Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements Phase 11 Project Number: 20-7535 Project Location: I Santa Ana CA Pursuant to 24 CFR Part 85 § 85.36 (e) of Code of Federal Regulations, contractor must take all necessary affirmative steps to assu re that minority business firms, women's business enterprises and labor surplus firms are used whenever possible. Contractor shall submit the following information to demonstrate that a goof faith effort has been made to comply with the above section of the Code of Federal Regulations. Submittal of this form, in and of itself, may not provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate that goof faith effort was made. Documentation such as copies of advertisement, letters of solicitation, telephone logs, rejected quotes, etc. shou ld accompany this form. 1. The names and dates of advertisement of each newspaper, trade paper, and minority -focus paper in which a request for W/MBE participation for this project was placed by the bidder: Names of Newspaper Date of Advertisement o m PC PAi-C P"s rr10N-►Nty 79A* 7WOW 3 bz caMft-I&JGE NE05 POLY foev5 VreNAC 3 ,z t-p 2. The names and dates of written notices sent to W/MBE soliciting bids for this project and methods used for following up initial solicitation to determine with certainty whether the W/MBE were interested. Names of W/MBE Solicited Dates of Solicitation Follow-up Methods and Dates CAC.+:ogrJ14 6kkwcorj& Sfkcl&IA S is 'AD FA)eEo 'S— Cj9wor PAnTiuAOIL LINDYS 4DLo l LJ9,J1rJ & 3 iz cAr+NOT p4fn - 004te P F a CUT"-)& utuca — G9r/ A 7t�iP/}Tf 3. The items of work which the bidder made available to W/MBE firms, including, where appropriate, any breaking down of the contracts into economically feasible units to facilitate W/MBE participation, andthe information furnished to W/MBE such as plans, specifications, and requirements for the work. items of Work:—rJ&vcK t4 b 1 G IL1 nlD1,-J & Breakdown of Items: I Information Furnished: P«NS/ SpBG$ sac,ion35Pacs.DOC 23A-43 EXHIBIT 12 (cont.) 4. Efforts made to assist W/MBE in obtaining bonding, lines of credit or insurance, and any technical assistance related to the plans, specifications and requirements for the work which was provided to W/MBE: u>r+s7 s f.-s PAQVPPCP 5. Any additional data to support a demonstration of good faith effort, such as contracts with W/MBE assistance agencies: I declare under penalty ofperjury that the foregoing information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the City of Santa Ana and/or the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development may verify the information provided herein in connection with W/MBE compliance evaluation/audit activities and that failure to fully and truthfully�e� mp�ete this form may result in economic or other sanctions. Signature: Name: do L. S&ndrzich Title: Vice President Date: 03/27/2020 Name of Contractor/Subcontractor: Vido Samarzich, Inc. Contractor/Subcontractor Identification Number: 433210 Address (Street, City, State, Zip): 6829 Billings Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 Business Racial/Ethnic/Gender Code: Circle the numeric code which indicates the racial/ethnic/gender character of the owner(s) and controller(s) of 51 % of the business. When 5 1 % or more is not owned and controlled by any single racial/ethnicity/gender category, circle the code which seems most appropriate. C1White Americans 2 = Black Americans 3 = Native Americans Woman Owned Business: Circle One: Yes or 4 = Hispanic Americans 5 = Asian/Pacific Americans 6 = Hasidic Jews F COCS\PROPSVCS\HUDFORMS%MBU5804AMB-SectionMpec DOC 23A-44 EXHIBIT 15 NONCOLLUSION AFFIDAVIT (Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and Public Contract Code Section 7106) To the City of Santa Ana DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS In accordance with Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and Pahl is Contract Code 7106, the bidder declares that the bid is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or corporation; that the bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the bidder has not directly or indirectly induced or sol icited any other bidder to put in a fal se or sham bid, and has not di rectly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any bidder or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone shall refrain from bidding; that the bidder has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone to fix the bid price of the bidder or any other bidder, or to fix any overhead, profit, or cost element of the bid price, or of that of any other bidder, or to secure any advantage against the public body awarding the contract of anyone interested in the proposed contract; that all statements contained in the bid are true; and, further, that the bidder has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his or her bid price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid. Vido Samarzich, Inc. Name of Contractor 6829 Billings Place, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 Add ss /j di -Vice President ignature n Title 03/27/2020 Date F.%DOCSiPROPSVCSPUDFORMS\MBU5BO4AMB- Sedon3Spece.DOC 23A-45 EXHIBIT 16 FEDERAL LOBBYIST REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION Name of Firm: Vldo Samarzlch, Inc. Date: 03/27/2020 Address: 6829 Billings Place, Rancho Cucamonga State: California zip Code: 91701 Telephone: (909) 987-6377 Acting on behalf of the above -named firm as its Authorized Official, I make the following Certification to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Community Development Commission, County of Los Angeles: 1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid, by or on behalf of the above -named firm to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of C ongress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in co nnection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, and any extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification thereof; and 2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee or any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the above -named firm shall complete and submit Standard Form—LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying" in accordance with its instructions; and 3) The above -named firm shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all sub -awards at all tiers (including subcontracts, sub -grants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all sub -recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into the transaction imposed by Section 1352 Title 31 U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. Authorized Official: Name: Vldo L. am rzl 'h Title: Signature: IL L _ Date: kz Vice President 03/27/2020 F'%DOCS\PROPSVCSIHUDFORMS%MBU5B04AMB- Secticn3Spe. DOC 23A-46 EXHIBIT 17 CERTIFICATION OF UNDERSTANDING AND AUTHORIZATION ProjectName: Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements (Phase II) Project Number: 20-7535 This is to certify that the principals and the authorized payroll officer, below, have read and understand the labor standards clauses pertaining to the subject project. The following person(s) is designated as the payroll officer for the undersigned and is authorized to sign the Statement of Compliance, which will accompany our weekly certified payroll reports for this project: Desmond Warre Pay 10 is 's Name Payroll k0KCs Signature Vido Salrnar7,icb, Inc. Contractor u coi ra or by Signature Vido L. Samarzich Printed Name Vice President Title 03/27/2020 Date 433210 Contractor/Subcontractor License No. 026486266 DUNS Number F\DOCSIPROPSVCS\HUDFORMSIMBU5BO4AMB- Sedion3Specs. DOC 23A-41 CITY OF SANTA ANA EXHIBIT 4 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 20-7548 LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE H) PROJECT This CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT is made and entered into this 5s' day of May, 2020 by and between the City of Santa Ana, California, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "CITY"), and Vido Samarzich, Inc. (hereinafter "CONTRACTOR"). WITNESSETH: The CITY and the CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: 1. CONTRACTOR agrees to perform all the work and furnish all the materials at its own cost and expense necessary to construct and complete in a good and workmanlike manner and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of the CITY, the Local Street Curb Ramp Improvements (Phase II) Project (hereinafter referred to as the "WORK OF IMPROVEMENT") identified in and in accordance with the Contract Documents prepared by the City's Public Works Agency and approved by the City Council. 2. The complete Construction Contract consists of the "Contract Documents" as defined by the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and which include the following: • Notice Inviting Bids • Information to Bidders • Bid Proposal • Bid Bond • Contract Form • Contract Bonds • General Provisions • Special Provisions • Technical Provisions and Project Plans • Community Workforce Agreement • Appendices In case of conflict between the Contract Documents, the precedence of documents shall be as established in the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. 3. CITY agrees to pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept in full payment to complete the WORK OF IMPROVEMENT the sum total amount not to exceed Three Hundred Ninety-eight Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($398,700.00), as set forth and identified in the BID PROPOSAL, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A." The BID PROPOSAL contains a schedule of unit price(s) or lump sum(s) based on approximate quantities only, and the City does not expressly or by implication agree that the actual amount of work will correspond therewith, but reserves the right to increase or decrease the amount of any class or portion of the work or to omit portions of the work as may be deemed necessary or advisable. rev. 09/01/2017 23A-48 Page 1 of 3 4. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the WORK OF IMPROVEMENT within the time specified in the Time for Completion of Improvements section of the BID PROPOSAL (Exhibit "A") including commencing construction within the timeframe therein specified after issuance of a Notice to Proceed. 5. The CONTRACTOR will pay, and will require all subcontractors to pay, all employees on the WORK OF IMPROVEMENT a salary or wage at least equal to the prevailing salary or wage established for such work as set forth in the wage determinations for this work in accordance with applicable State and Federal law. 6. If applicable, the CONTRACTOR shall adhere to the CITY'S Community Workforce Agreement (CWA), a pre -hire collective bargaining agreement, which establishes the labor relations policies and procedures for CONTRACTOR to follow in the crafts persons employed to complete the WORK OF IMPROVEMENT as more fully described in the CWA. The CWA may be found on the City's website at: http://www.santa-ana.or&/pwa/documents/CWA.pdf 7. CONTRACTOR shall, after award of this Contract, furnish two bonds to be approved by the CITY, one in the amount of One Hundred Percent (100%) of the Contract price, to guarantee the faithful performance of the work (Performance Bond), and one in the amount of One Hundred Percent (100%) of the Contract price to guarantee payment of all claims for labor and materials furnished (Payment Bond). This Contract shall not become effective until such bonds are supplied to and approved by the CITY. 8. CONTRACTOR shall, prior to the release of the performance and payment bonds or the retention payment, furnish a warranty performance and payment bond (Warranty Bond). Said Warranty Bond shall also be required as a condition of project acceptance. For projects up to Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000), the Warranty Bond amount shall be the greater of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) or Twenty Percent (20%) of the final contract price. For projects above Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000), the Warranty Bond amount shall be the greater of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) or Ten Percent (10%) of the final contract price. 9. CONTRACTOR shall, after award of this Contract, furnish Certificates of Liability Insurance and Worker's Compensation Insurance as outlined in the General Provisions, to be approved by the CITY. // 23A-49 Page 2 of 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Construction Contract on the day and year first above written. ATTEST: DAISY GOMEZ Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM: SONIA R. CARVALHO City Attorney By; "�'. -f.,& J FUNK Assistant City Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: NABIL SABA, PE Acting Executive Director Public Works Agency CITY OF SANTA ANA KRISTINE RIDGE City Manager CONTRACTOR: Vido Samarzich, Inc. I 44 NAME: TITLE: V I DO L. S4 I K z B C-H Vjr-E P2CSlflENT` 23A-50 Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT 5 COST ANALYSIS CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT NO. 20-7548: LOCAL STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II) Construction Contract $ 398,700 Contract Administration, Inspection and Testing $ 6,790 Contingencies $ - TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS $ 405,490 23A-51 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION IMIII walfiellill,[•310J11=I =1111I1,lei •7e%9:9 MAY 5, 2020 TITLE: AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF A CHANGE ORDER TO INCREASE THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH R.J. NOBLE (PROJECT NO. 19-6941) BY $952,978 TO PERFORM ADDITIONAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS, FOR A NEW ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT DELIVERY COST OF $1,985,538 (PROJECT NOS.19-6941, 19-6617) (GENERAL FUND) /s/Kristine Ridge CITY MANAGER APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1" Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2" ° Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For rK•�rnutn�.;rc. FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION Authorize the issuance of a change order to increase the existing construction contract with R.J. Noble (Project No. 19-6941) to perform additional street improvements in the amount of $952,978, for a new total not to exceed $1,986,338, to be completed by June 30, 2020, subject to non - substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. DISCUSSION Every year, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) determines whether a local jurisdiction is eligible to receive Measure M funding, which is the half -cent sales tax for transportation improvements in Orange County, by confirming certain eligibility requirements are satisfied. Measure M funds are intended to augment, rather than replace, existing transportation expenditures; therefore, local jurisdictions are required to utilize General Funds for maintenance, construction and other transportation -related expenditures. Each fiscal year, OCTA sets a benchmark amount local jurisdictions must spend. The Fiscal Year 2019-20 MOE benchmark requirement for the City of Santa Ana is close to $8 million. To ensure the benchmark is met, a Maintenance of Effort certification must be submitted. The City has used Measure M funding to complete a variety of capital projects throughout the City and is currently eligible to receive close to $20 million. Along with submittal of the MOE certification, this year, the City will be undergoing an MOE compliance audit in the fall of 2020. Currently, the City has made over $8 million in MOE eligible expenditures. In order to confidently meet the benchmark and maintain access to Measure M funds, an additional amount of MOE work is proposed to be completed this fiscal year. The City's Pavement Management System has identified several locations and high -priority roads in need of 23B-1 Approve Increase of Contingency Funds to Existing Construction Contract May 5, 2020 Page 2 rehabilitation including Ramona Street, Olive Street, and residential streets surrounding the Memorial Park area (Exhibit 2). Staff recommends carrying out eligible street improvements in the amount of $952,000 to meet the requirement. Staff considered several contractors currently working on City construction projects to gauge their ability to complete the above work by June 30, 2020. When choosing which contract to add funds and accommodate the proposed work, key considerations included favorable unit prices in order to leverage the most cost effective work, continued compliance with the Community Workforce Agreement, the location of their current projects, and a contractor's ability to complete their current projects in a timely manner. Staff seeks approval to add monies to the existing contract with R.J. Noble Company (Project No. 19-6941) to deliver the street improvement projects by the end of the fiscal year, and confidently meet the MOE requirement. Not doing so will jeopardize close to $20 million in future funding. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #6 - Community Facilities & Infrastructure, Objective #1 (establish and maintain a Community Investment Plan for all City assets), Strategy C (invest resources and technology to extend the service life of existing infrastructure to protect the City's investment and support a high quality of life standard). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the recommended action is exempt from further review. FISCAL IMPACT Funds are budgeted and available in the following accounts: Accounting Unit — Accounting Unit -Account No. Fiscal Year Account No. Fund Description Description Amount Project No. ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION DELIVERY COST FY 2019-20 05917665-66220 Select Street HUTA Gas Tax-RMRA-Improvement $958,000 19-6941 Construction Other Than Building FY 2019-20 22317660-66220 Local Drainage Public Work Strom Drain Construction- $75,360 19-6617 Area III Improvement Other Than Building ADDITIONAL FUNDS 01117620-66220 Public Works Traffic & Transportation FY 2019-20 (19-6941) General Fund Engineering, Improvements Other $952,978 Than Building New Project Cost $1,986,338 NS:PG Exhibits: 1. Cost Analysis — Project 19-6941 & 19-6617 2. Location Map 23B-2 RJ EXHIBIT 1 COST ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 19-6941 & 19-6617: ALTON REHABILITATION FROM RAITT TO BRISTOL AND ALTON DRAINAGE REPAIR AT D-03 CHANNEL EXPENDITURE CATEGORY ORIGINAL AMOUNT CHANGE NEW TOTAL Construction Contract $843,301 $843,301 Construction Administration $40,789 $40,789 Inspection and Testing $65,000 $65,000 Contingencies $84.270 $952,978 $1.037,248 TOTAL $1,033,360 $952,978 $1,986,338 23B-3 EXHIBIT 2 SANTA ANA PWA LOCATION MAP POBLICV KSM.ENCY 23B-4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE: APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENTS WITH MIKE PRLICH AND SONS, PAULUS ENGINEERING, INC., AND TE ROBERTS, INC. FOR EMERGENCY ON -CALL SEWER AND WATER SYSTEM REPAIR SERVICES TO INCREASE TOTAL ANNUAL AMOUNT BY $250,000, WITH A TOTAL AGGREGATE AGREEMENT INCREASE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,250,000 (RFP NO. 19-032) (NON -GENERAL FUND) /s/Kristine Ridge CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1s' Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2i1 Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ rK•�►nutn�.ic. FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION Authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the agreements with Mike Prlich and Sons, Paulus Engineering, Inc., and TE Roberts, Inc. to provide on -call emergency sewer and water system repair services for the three-year period beginning August 20, 2019, and expiring August 19, 2022, with a provision for one two-year extension exercisable by the City Manager and City Attorney, by increasing the total aggregate annual amount by $250,000, for a total aggregate agreement increase amount not to exceed $1,250,000, subject to nonsubstantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. DISCUSSION On August 20, 2019, the City Council approved agreements with Mike Prlich and Sons, Paulus Engineering, Inc., and TE Roberts, Inc. for a three-year period from August 20, 2019 to August 19, 2022, with a two-year renewal option, to assist the Public Works Agency — Water Resources Division with emergency sewer and water infrastructure repairs. These services include repairing pipelines, tanks, pumps at various utility facilities, and performing site restoration as directed by staff to prevent system outages, maintain services during an emergency, and restore services to normal operating conditions. During the previous eight months, Water Resources Division staff has utilized these contractors for water main pipe repair work and the original aggregate annual spending limit of $500,000, for the term of the agreement, will be reached soon. Staff recommends increasing the total aggregate annual spending limit by $250,000, providing a new aggregate annual spending limit of $750,000, which will allow the Water Resources Division to continue utilizing these contractors for emergency repair services as needed. The new aggregate annual spending limit of $750,000 increases the total not to exceed amount for the lifetime of the agreement by $1,250,000 for a new not -to -exceed amount of $3,750,000 (Exhibits 1, 2 and 3). 25A-1 Amend Agreements for Emergency On -Call Sewer and Water System Repair Services May 5, 2020 Page 2 STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #6 - Community Facilities & Infrastructure, Objective #1 (establish and maintain a Community Investment Plan for all assets). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS There is no environmental impact associated with this action. FISCAL IMPACT The current agreements approve expenditures for Fiscal Year 2019-20 of $500,000 as an annual aggregate amount. The requested amendment will increase the annual aggregate amount for the agreements by $250,000 to $750,000 in FY 2019-20 and for the lifetime of the agreements. Funds are budgeted in the FY 2019-20 Water Systems Maintenance Account (No. 06017641-62300), and Sanitary Sewer Service Account (No. 05617640-62300) and will be included in proposed budgets for future years as follows: Fiscal Year Accounting Unit— Fund Accounting Unit, Account Description Amount Account # Description Contract 3-Year Term 06017641-62300 Water Water Systems Maintenance, $375,000 FY 19-20 Contract Services -Professional 05617640-62300 Sewer Sanitary Sewer Service, Contract $375,000 Services -Professional 06017641-62300 Water Water Systems Maintenance, $375,000 FY 20-21 Contract Services -Professional 05617640-62300 Sewer Sanitary Sewer Service, Contract $375,000 Services -Professional 06017641-62300 Water Water Systems Maintenance, $375,000 FY 21-22 Contract Services -Professional 05617640-62300 Sewer Sanitary Sewer Service, Contract $375,000 Services -Professional Renewal Op tion 2-Year Term 06017641-62300 Water Water Systems Maintenance, $375,000 FY 22-23 Contract Services -Professional 05617640-62300 Sewer Sanitary Sewer Service, Contract $375,000 Services -Professional 06017641-62300 Water Water Systems Maintenance, $375,000 FY 23-24 Contract Services -Professional 05617640-62300 Sewer Sanitary Sewer Service, Contract $375,000 Services -Professional TOTAL AMOUNT: $3,750,000 NS/CB/RR Exhibits: 1. Amendment with Mike Prlich & Sons, Inc. 2. Amendment with Paulus Engineering, Inc. 3. Amendment with TE Roberts, Inc. 25A-2 EXHIBIT 1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ON -CALL EMERGENCY WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM REPAIR SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT to the above -referenced agreement is entered into on May 5, 2020, by and between Mike Prlich and Sons, Inc. ("Contractor"), and the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California ("City"). RECITALS A. The parties entered into Agreement No. A-2019-142-01, dated August 20, 2019, by which Contractor agreed to provide on -call emergency water and sewer system repair services for the City's Public Works Agency ("Agreement"). B. The term of the Agreement is for three years, and the Agreement remains in effect through August 19, 2022, with provision for extension. C. The parties now wish to amend the Agreement to increase the shared aggregate amount to be expended under the Agreement and two related agreements. The Parties therefore agree: 1. Section 2.a, Compensation, is amended to read in its entirety: "City neither warrants nor guarantees any minimum or maximum compensation to Contractor under this Agreement. Contractor shall be paid only for actual services performed under this Agreement at the rates and charges identified in Exhibit B. Contractor is one of three contractors selected to provide services on an as -needed basis under REP No. 19-032. The annual compensation for services provided by all contractors selected under REP No. 19-032 shall not exceed the shared aggregate amount of $750,000 during the term of this agreement, including any extension periods." 2. Except as modified by this First Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this First Amendment to the Agreement on the date and year first written above. ATTEST CITY OF SANTA ANA Daisy Gomez Kristine Ridge Clerk of the Council City Manager - signatures continue on next page - Page 1 of 2 25A-3 APPROVED AS TO FORM Sonia R. Carvalho City Attorney By: /1" -f�L J n M. Funk Assistant City Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Nabil Saba Executive Director Public Works Agency CONTRACTOR Name: MICHAELA. PRLICH Title: PRESIDENT Page 2 of 2 MIKE PRLICH AND SONS, INC. 5103 ELTON STREET BALDWIN PARK, CA 91706 25A-4 EXHIBIT 2 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ON -CALL EMERGENCY WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM REPAIR SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT to the above -referenced agreement is entered into on May 5, 2020, by and between Paulus Engineering, Inc. ("Contractor"), and the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California ("City"). RECITALS A. The parties entered into Agreement No. A-2019-142-02, dated August 20, 2019, by which Contractor agreed to provide on -call emergency water and sewer system repair services for the City's Public Works Agency ("Agreement"). B. The term of the Agreement is for three years, and the Agreement remains in effect through August 19, 2022, with provision for extension. C. The parties now wish to amend the Agreement to increase the shared aggregate amount to be expended under the Agreement and two related agreements. The Parties therefore agree: 1. Section 2.a, Compensation, is amended to read in its entirety: "City neither warrants nor guarantees any minimum or maximum compensation to Contractor under this Agreement. Contractor shall be paid only for actual services performed under this Agreement at the rates and charges identified in Exhibit B. Contractor is one of three contractors selected to provide services on an as -needed basis under REP No. 19-032. The annual compensation for services provided by all contractors selected under REP No. 19-032 shall not exceed the shared aggregate amount of $750,000 during the term of this agreement, including any extension periods." 2. Except as modified by this First Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this First Amendment to the Agreement on the date and year first written above. ATTEST CITY OF SANTA ANA Daisy Gomez Kristine Ridge Clerk of the Council City Manager - signatures continue on next page - Page 1 of 2 25A-5 APPROVED AS TO FORM CONTRACTOR Sonia R. Carvalho City Attorney By: f� J n M. Funk Assistant City Attorney Title: YES P►q42,1r FOR APPROVAL Nabil Saba Executive Director Public Works Agency Page 2 of 2 25A-6 EXHIBIT 3 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ON -CALL EMERGENCY WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM REPAIR SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT to the above -referenced agreement is entered into on May 5, 2020, by and between T.E. Roberts, Inc. ("Contractor"), and the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California ("City"). RECITALS A. The parties entered into Agreement No. A-2019-142-03, dated August 20, 2019, by which Contractor agreed to provide on -call emergency water and sewer system repair services for the City's Public Works Agency ("Agreement"). B. The term of the Agreement is for three years, and the Agreement remains in effect through August 19, 2022, with provision for extension. C. The parties now wish to amend the Agreement to increase the shared aggregate amount to be expended under the Agreement and two related agreements. The Parties therefore agree: 1. Section 2.a, Compensation, is amended to read in its entirety: "City neither warrants nor guarantees any minimum or maximum compensation to Contractor under this Agreement. Contractor shall be paid only for actual services performed under this Agreement at the rates and charges identified in Exhibit B. Contractor is one of three contractors selected to provide services on an as -needed basis under REP No. 19-032. The annual compensation for services provided by all contractors selected under REP No. 19-032 shall not exceed the shared aggregate amount of $750,000 during the term of this agreement, including any extension periods." 2. Except as modified by this First Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this First Amendment to the Agreement on the date and year first written above. ATTEST CITY OF SANTA ANA Daisy Gomez Kristine Ridge Clerk of the Council City Manager - signatures continue on next page - Page 1 of 2 25A-7 APPROVED AS TO FORM Sonia R. Carvalho City Attorney By 14 7)(." JUn M.Funk Assistant City Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Nabil Saba Executive Director Public Works Agency CONTRACTOR Name: Timo-f'hy RobevtS Title: Pre s t d evi Page 2 of 2 25A-8 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE APPROVE MUNICIPAL FACILITIES LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 111 Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2ntl Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO /s/Kristine Ridge FILE NUMBER CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC for the use of certain City facilities for a ten-year period beginning May 15, 2020, and expiring May 14, 2030, with a provision for two five-year extensions, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. DISCUSSION In response to telecommunications advancements and increased consumer demand for network data capacity, wireless providers have increasingly sought to place small cell antennas and equipment on existing infrastructure located within the public right-of-way. Typically, a small cell antenna is attached to a streetlight or utility pole, or placed mid -span on wires between utility poles. Wireless providers place these small cells in locations that are densely populated in order to provide additional network capacity, such as in downtown areas and around heavily used traffic corridors. The small cell antennas are also deployed in areas that cannot be effectively served by a traditional macro cell. New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC seeks to enter into an agreement (Exhibit 1) with the City for the installation of small cell antennas on City -owned street lights. This will increase network and data capacity for their subscribers in the areas surrounding the antennas. The agreement only applies to wireless telecommunications installations on City facilities in the public right-of-way. Installations on City facilities not in the public right-of-way (such as cell antennas placed on water facilities or within parks, etc.), will continue to require separate agreements. An application fee of $1,741.79 will be collected for each City -owned facility licensed under this agreement during FY 2019-20, and anticipated revenues were recognized during the March 17, 2020 City Council meeting. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #3 - Economic Development, Objective #3 (promote a solutions -based customer focus in all efforts to facilitate development and investment in the community), Strategy C (explore opportunities to encourage a business friendly environment within the city). 25B-1 Approve Municipal Facilities License Agreement May 5, 2020 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT There is no environmental impact associated with this action. FISCAL IMPACT The Public Works Agency expects to enter into Municipal Facilities License Agreements with three wireless carriers, of which New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC is the second. Anticipated combined revenues for the three agreements, in the amount of $50,000, were recognized during the March 17, 2020 City Council meeting in Public Works Revenues, Small Cell Application Fee for City Facilities revenue account (no. 01117002-53740) and appropriated into the Public Works City Facilities License Agreement, Contract Services — Professional expenditure account (no. 01117605-62300) for expenditure in Fiscal Year 2019-20. NS:yv Exhibit: 1. New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC Agreement 25B-2 i:a:u 3rmi MUNICIPAL FACILITIES LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF SANTA ANA AND NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC February 27, 2020 Nabil Saba Acting Executive Director Public Works Agency 25B-3 TABLE OF CONTENTS RECITALS..................................................................................................... 3 AGREEMENT...................................................................................................3 DEFINITIONS........................................................................................3 TERM; SUPPLEMENT TERM......................................................................4 REPRESENTATION CONCERNING SERVICES; TERMINATION WITHOUTCAUSE..................................................................................5 SCOPEOF AGREEMENT..........................................................................5 COMPENSATION....................................................................................7 CONSTRUCTION.....................................................................................9 INDEMNIFICATION AND WAIVER...........................................................14 PERFORMANCEBOND..........................................................................15 INSURANCE........................................................................................16 NOTICES.............................................................................................18 DEFAULT; CURE; REMEDIES..................................................................18 ASSIGNMENT AND CUSTOMER EQUIPMENT...........................................19 RECORDS; AUDITS...............................................................................20 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS..............................................................20 EXHIBITS...............................................................................................A & B Page 2 of 23 25B-4 MUNICIPAL FACILITIES LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS MUNICIPAL FACILITIES LICENSE AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is dated as of May 15, 2020 (the date fully executed by all parties, referred to herein as "Effective Date"), and entered into by and between the City of Santa Ana, a California municipal corporation (the "Licensor"), and New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Licensee"). Recitals A. WHEREAS, the Licensor is the owner of certain Municipal Facilities (as defined in Section 1.7, below) located in the Public Rights -of -Way (as defined in Section 1,5 below) of the City of Santa Ana, California ("City"); and B. WHEREAS, Licensee is authorized to conduct business as a telephone corporation or wireless carrier in the State of California; and C. WHEREAS, Licensee desires to use space on certain of the Licensor's Municipal Facilities in the Public Rights -of -Way for construction, operation and maintenance of its Equipment (as defined in Section 1.1, below); and D. WHEREAS, Licensor is willing to allow Licensee to use and physically occupy portions of the Municipal Facilities for its Equipment in the Public Rights -of -Way subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Agreement NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to the following covenants, terms, and conditions: 1. DEFiNMONS. The following definitions shall apply generally to the provisions of this Agreement: 1.1 "Equipment" means the antennas, equipment, utilities and fiber optic cables, wires, and related equipment, whether referred to individually or collectively, to be installed on a Municipal Facility and operated by Licensee under a particular Supplement. 1.2 "Hazardous Substance" means any substance, chemical or waste that is identified as hazardous or toxic in any applicable federal, state or local law or regulation, including, but not limited to, petroleum products and asbestos. 1.3 "Services" means the transmission and reception of communications signals for the provision of personal wireless services and mobile data services, and the installation, construction, modification, maintenance, operation, repair, replacement and upgrade of the Equipment to provide such services. Page 3 of 23 25B-5 1.4 "Laws" means any and all applicable statutes, codes, constitutions, ordinances, resolutions, regulations, judicial decisions, rules, tariffs, administrative orders, court orders, or other requirements of the Licensor or other governmental agency having joint or several jurisdiction over the parties to this Agreement as such laws may be amended from time to time. 1.5 "Public Right(s)-of-Way" or "ROW" has the same meaning as Section 33-231(q) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code. 1.6 "Make -Ready Work" means the work required on or in a Municipal Facility to create space for the Equipment, and/or replacing and/or reinforcing the existing Municipal Facility to accommodate Equipment including, but not limited to, rearrangement or transfer of existing Equipment and the facilities of other entities, and Municipal Facility relocation and replacement. 1.7 "Municipal Facility(ies)" means Licensor -owned property in the ROW, including street lights (excluding double and single king poles), traffic control structures (excluding traffic signal poles), banners, street furniture, bus stops, billboards, or other poles, lighting fixtures, or electroliers located within the ROW, and may refer to such facilities in the singular or plural, as appropriate to the context in which used. The term includes Replacement Facilities referred to in Section 4.1.3. 1.8 "Person" means and includes any individual, partnership of any kind, corporation, limited liability company, association, joint venture or other organization, however formed, as well as trustees, heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, or any combination of such persons. 1.9 "PUC" means the California Public Utilities Commission 1.10 "License Fee" and "Alternate License Fee" have the meanings assigned to them in Section 5 of this Agreement. 1.11 "Transfer" means any transaction in which the rights and/or obligations held by Licensee under this Agreement or a Supplement are transferred, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part to a party other than Licensee. 1.12 "Supplement' shall mean each separate authorization, granted by Licensor to Licensee with regard to a specific Equipment installation, the form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, which shall be subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2. TERM; SUPPLEMENT TERM. 2.1 Term. The initial term of this Agreement shall be for a period of ten (10) years (the "Initial Term"), commencing on the Effective Date and ending on the tenth (l Oth) anniversary thereof, unless sooner terminated as stated herein. Provided that Licensee is not in default of the Agreement following written notice and the expiration of any applicable cure period, or not in default of ten (10) or more Supplements following written notice and expiration of the applicable cure period (unless the Supplement defaults are cured before the renewal commencement period or Licensee has a plan to cure such Supplement defaults within one hundred twenty (120) days of the renewal commencement period), this Agreement shall be automatically renewed for two (2) successive five (5) year renewal terms (each, a "Renewal Term"), unless either party gives the Page 4 of 23 r other party written notice of the intent not to renew this Agreement not more than twelve (12) and not less than ten (10) months prior to the expiration of the Initial Term or any Renewal Term, as applicable. The Initial Term and all Renewal Terms shall be collectively referred to herein as the "Term." Any holding over after the termination or expiration of the Term shall constitute a default by Licensee, notwithstanding that Licensor may elect to accept one or more payments of fees from Licensee. 2.2 Supplement Term. Unless otherwise specified in a Supplement, the initial term for each particular Supplement shall begin on its effective date ("Supplement Effective Date") and shall end upon the expiration of the Initial Term, or the Renewal Term, if validly exercised, of this Agreement, unless such individual Supplement is earlier terminated or this Agreement is extended or terminated, as provided for herein (the "Supplement Term"). All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be in effect during the Supplement Term. The expiration or termination of the Agreement under Section 2.1 shall immediately terminate all Supplements. Any holding over after the expiration of the Supplement Term shall constitute a default by Licensee, notwithstanding that Licensor may elect to accept one or more payments of fees from Licensee. 3. REPRESENTATION CONCERNING SERVICES; TERMINATION WITHOUT CAUSE. Licensee represents, warrants and covenants that its Equipment installed pursuant to this Agreement and each Supplement will be utilized solely for providing the Services, and Licensee is not authorized to and shall not use its Equipment to offer or provide any other services not specified herein without Licensor consent. At any time that Licensee ceases to operate as a provider of Services under Federal or state law, the Licensor shall have the option, in its sole discretion and upon six (6) months' written notice to Licensee, to terminate this Agreement and to require the removal of Licensee's Equipment from the ROW and from Municipal Facilities, including the cost of any site remediation, at no cost to the Licensor, without any liability to Licensee related directly or indirectly to such termination. 4. SCOPE OF AGREEMENT. Licensee may only use Municipal Facilities pursuant to an approved Supplement. Any and all rights expressly granted to Licensee under this Agreement shall be exercised at Licensee's sole cost and expense, and shall be subject to the restrictions and conditions set forth herein. 4.1 Attachment to Municipal Facilities. Subject to the conditions herein, the Licensor hereby authorizes and permits Licensee to locate, place, attach, install, operate, maintain, control, remove, reattach, reinstall, relocate, and replace Equipment on identified Municipal Facilities located in the ROW for the purpose of providing Services. 4.1.1 Licensee will submit to the authorized representative of the Licensor an application substantially in the form of Exhibit B ("Application") hereto including a proposed design for any proposed Equipment installations that identifies both the Equipment and the Municipal Facilities Licensee proposes to use. One Application is required per Municipal Facility. 4.1.2 Licensor may approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an Application in its sole discretion, provided however, Licensor shall not unreasonably delay its decision. Any approved Equipment shall be included as part of the applicable Supplement. Page 5 of 23 25B-7 4.1.3 If Licensee submits an Application to use a Municipal Facility that is structurally inadequate to accommodate its proposed Equipment, Licensor may permit the replacement of the Municipal Facility (a "Replacement Facility") with one that is acceptable to and approved by the Licensor as part of the applicable Supplement. Any Replacement Facility shall be installed, maintained, repaired, and/or replaced in accordance with Section 6 of this Agreement. 4.1.4 Unmetered electricity unless otherwise approved. Licensee shall be solely responsible for obtaining and maintaining the provision of electricity to the Equipment, including, but not limited to, making payments to electric utilities and installation of separate electric meters, if necessary. Licensee shall secure unmetered electricity services and shall not incorporate a meter box in its Equipment design unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works or required by the servicing utility company. 4.2 Additional Authority. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit in any way Licensee's obligation to obtain any additional required regulatory approvals from any City department, board or commission or other governmental agency that has regulatory authority over the Licensee's proposed activities involving use of the Municipal Facilities in the ROW. 4.3 No Interference. Licensee acknowledges and agrees that the primary purpose of the Municipal Facilities is to serve the Licensor and the public. Licensee in the performance and exercise of its rights and obligations under this Agreement shall not interfere in any manner with Licensor's own services or the existence and operation of any and all Public Rights -of -Way, sanitary sewers, water mains, storm drains, gas mains, poles, aerial and underground electrical and telephone wires, traffic signals, communication facilities owned by the Licensor, electroliers, cable television, location monitoring services, public safety and other then existing telecommunications equipment, utility, or municipal property, without the express written approval of the owner or owners of the affected property or properties, except as permitted by applicable laws or this Agreement. If such interference should occur, Licensee shall discontinue using the Equipment, methodology or technology that causes the interference until such time as Licensee takes corrective measures to eliminate such interference. In the event that such interference does not cease promptly, Licensee acknowledges that continuing interference may cause irreparable injury and harm, and therefore, in addition to any other remedies, and without limitation of any other remedy, Licensor shall be entitled to seek temporary and permanent injunctions against the breach of this Subsection. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Licensor agrees to work in good faith with Licensee to resolve any interference to or by Licensee. 4.4 Permits; Default. In addition to any other remedies available hereunder, whenever Licensee is in default of this Agreement or an applicable Supplement, after notice and applicable cure periods, Licensor may deny further encroachment, excavation or similar permits for work in connection with installations under this Agreement until such time as Licensee cures all of its defaults. 4.5 Compliance with Laws. Licensee shall comply with all applicable laws in the exercise and performance of its rights and obligations under this Agreement. Page 6 of 23 r 4.6 Non -Exclusive Use Rights. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, any and all rights expressly or impliedly granted to Licensee under this Agreement shall be non-exclusive, and shall be subject and subordinate to (1) the continuing right of the Licensor to use, and to allow any other person or persons to use, any and all parts of the ROW or Municipal Facilities, exclusively or concurrently with any other person or persons, and (2) the public easement for streets and any and all other deeds, easements, dedications, conditions, covenants, restrictions, encumbrances and claims of title (collectively, "Encumbrances") which may affect the ROW or Municipal Facilities now or at any time during the term of this Agreement, including, without limitation any Encumbrances granted, created or allowed by the Licensor at any time. 4.7 In any situation where Licensee has a choice of attaching its equipment to either Municipal Facilities or third -party -owned poles in the public rights -of -way, Licensee shall in good faith consider attaching to Municipal Facilities, provided that the Municipal Facility in question is substantially similar to third -party owned poles (i.e., it provides the same functionality, fulfills the same need and can be made available within the same time frame) and the total cost of installing and maintaining the Equipment on the Municipal Facility in question is the same or less than on the available alternative third -party owned pole. 5. COMPENSATION. Licensee shall be solely responsible for the payment of all fees in connection with Licensee's performance under this Agreement, including those set forth below. 5.1 Application Fee. Each application for a Supplement shall be accompanied by a non-refundable application fee ("Application Fee") in the amount fixed by Licensor's Miscellaneous Fees Schedule that is in effect at the time the application for a Supplement is made to Licensor. 5.2 License Fees. 5.2.1 Licensee acknowledges that the FCC has adopted a Declaratory Ruling (FCC 18-133) that relates to the compensation which went into effect on January 14, 2019 but that Declaratory Ruling is currently the subject of litigation. Paragraphs 5.2.2, 5.2.3 and 5.2.4 govern the payment of compensation and how it may be impacted by the Declaratory Ruling and the resolution of related litigation during the Initial Term and any Renewal Terms. 5.2.2 During any period in which the FCC Declaratory Ruling (FCC 18-133) is in effect and during any period in which the Alternate License Fee provisions in paragraph 5.2.3 are not applicable, the Licensee shall pay a License Fee as described in this paragraph. Licensee shall pay to the Licensor the base amount of two hundred and seventy dollars ($270.00) per year for each location covered by a Supplement ("License Fee"). The base amount of the License Fee under all Supplements shall be subject to an annual adjustment of three percent (3%) applied on each anniversary of the Effective Date. Any new Supplements entered into during a given year shall commence at the License Fee, as adjusted by this Section to reflect the then -current rate. There shall be no refunds of License Fees paid due to the termination or expiration of the Agreement for any reason. Page 7 of 23 25B-9 5.2.3 Alternate License Fee. In the event the relevant provisions of the FCC Declaratory Ruling cease to be effective, (for example, because they are stayed after having gone into effect, or they are vacated or invalidated and have not been replaced by the FCC with an alternative provision setting a specific amount as License Fee), the Licensee shall automatically and immediately be obligated to pay the Alternate License Fee as described in this paragraph and paragraph 5.2.4, if applicable. For each location covered by a Supplement, Licensee shall pay to the Licensor an Alternate License Fee in the base amount of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500) per year ("Alternate License Fee"). The base amount of the Alternate License Fee shall be subject to an annual adjustment of three percent (3%) applied on each anniversary of the Effective Date. There shall be no refunds of Alternate License Fee paid due to the termination or expiration of the Agreement for any reason. 5.2.4 The Licensor agrees that irrespective of whether the relevant provisions of the FCC Declaratory Ruling (FCC 18-133) cease to be effective, no Alternate License Fee shall be due for any periods during which the relevant provisions of the FCC Declaratory Ruling were in effect. However, if Licensee has paid License Fee pursuant to the provisions of Section 5.2.2 above for a year, and the relevant provisions of the FCC Declaratory Ruling subsequently cease to be effective during the same year, the Licensee shall pay the difference between the License Fee and the Alternate License Fee for the period from the date the relevant provisions of the FCC Declaratory Ruling ceased to be effective, until the next anniversary of the Effective Date of this Agreement ("License Fee Adjustment"). Such License Fee Adjustment shall be paid to Licensor on the next anniversary of the Effective Date of this Agreement. 5.3 Payment. 5.3.1 Licensee shall make the first payment of License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) under any Supplement within forty-five (45) days of the Supplement Effective Date. The amount of the first payment of License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) for any Supplement shall be prorated to cover the period from the Supplement Effective Date of the applicable Supplement to the next anniversary of the Effective Date of this Agreement. Thereafter, License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) shall be paid in advance for each Municipal Facility used on or before each anniversary of the Effective Date. Acceptance by Licensor of any payment of the License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) shall not be deemed a waiver by Licensor of any breach of this Agreement occurring prior thereto, nor will the acceptance by Licensor of any such payment preclude Licensor from later establishing that a greater amount was actually due or from collecting any balance that is due. As a prerequisite to the payment of License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable), Licensor hereby agrees to provide to Licensee certain documentation (the "License Documentation") evidencing Licensor's interest in, and right to receive payments under, this Agreement, including without limitation: (i) a complete and fully executed Internal Revenue Service Form W-9, or equivalent, in a form acceptable to Licensee, for any party to whom License Fee payments are to be made pursuant to this Agreement; and (ii) other documentation requested by Licensee in Licensee's reasonable discretion. From time to time during the Term of this Agreement and within thirty (30) days of a written request from Licensee, Licensor agrees to provide updated License Documentation in a form reasonably acceptable to Licensee. Page 8 of 23 25B-10 5.3.2 The License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) shall be paid by check made payable to the City and mailed or delivered to the City of Santa Ana, Public Works Agency — Administrative Services, P.O. Box 1988, M-21, Santa Ana, CA 92702. The place and time of payment may be changed at any time by Licensor upon thirty (30) days' written notice to Licensee. Mailed payments shall be deemed paid upon the date such payment is officially postmarked by the United States Postal Service. If postmarks are illegible to read, the payment shall be deemed paid upon actual receipt. Licensee assumes all risk of loss and responsibility for late payment charges if payments are made by mail. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon agreement of the parties, Licensee may pay the License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) by electronic funds transfer and if agreed, the Licensor will provide to Licensee bank routing information for such purpose upon request of Licensee. 5.4 Delinquent Payment. A ten percent (10%) late fee shall be added to the License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) if not received by Licensor within thirty (30) calendar days after the due date. In addition, all unpaid fee shall accrue interest on the amount due at the rate of ten percent (10%) per annum accruing as of the first day following the expiration of the foregoing 30-day period until paid in full. All late charges and interest payments shall become License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) under this Agreement. 5.5 Additional Remedies. The late fee set forth in Section 5.4 above is not exclusive, and does not preclude the Licensor from pursuing any other or additional remedies in the event that payments become overdue by more than 30 days. 6. CONSTRUCTION. Licensee shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local codes related to the construction, installation, operation, maintenance, and control of Licensee's Equipment installed on Municipal Facilities, including the installation of Replacement Facilities where authorized. Except as provided in Section 6.7, Licensee shall not attach, install, maintain, or operate any Equipment on Municipal Facilities without the prior written approval of an authorized representative of the Licensor for each location as evidenced in a signed Supplement. Licensee shall keep the Municipal Facilities free and clear from any liens arising out of any work performed, material furnished or obligations incurred by or for Licensee. 6.1 Installation and Operation. Within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of each installation or other times upon request by Licensor, not to exceed once annually, Licensee must furnish to Licensor a current list and map that identifies the exact location of the Equipment in or on the Municipal Facility. That information must be provided in a format established by the Licensor and that is compatible with Licenser's information technology, including but not limited to ESRI compatible GIS shapefiles. 6.2 Design Standards. The Equipment and any Replacement Facility shall comply with the standards and guidelines for wireless facilities in the public right-of-way established by the Director of Public Works pursuant to Section 33-234 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code. All future Supplements, Supplement renewals, and modifications to existing Equipment shall be subject to such updated standards. 6.3 Obtaining Required Permits. Licensee acknowledges that in addition to a signed Supplement, each installation of Equipment and maintenance shall also be subject to then -current Page 9 of 23 25B-11 City permitting requirements as set out in the City's Municipal Code. Licensee agrees to comply with the current applicable ordinances regarding such installations and maintenance as well as any future regulations that may be adopted by the City respecting such installations and maintenance. Licensee shall apply for the appropriate permits and pay any standard and customary permit fees. 6.4 Make Ready 6.4.1 Make Ready Work and Costs. (a) Licensee shall bear responsibility for all Make -Ready work. If Licensee or a Person other than Licensor or Licensee acting on Licensee's behalf would have to rearrange or adjust any of its facilities in order to accommodate a new Equipment, Licensee shall be responsible, at Licensee's sole expense, to coordinate such activity. Licensee shall be responsible for directly paying such other Person for its charges for the same. (b) The Equipment shall be conditioned on the completion of all Make - Ready Work needed to establish full compliance with NESC, and with Licensor's regulatory rules and engineering standards; provided, however, that Licensee shall not be responsible for any third - party or Licensor costs necessary to correct third party or Licensor attachments that are non- compliant at the time of Licensee's Application. If Licensee is requested by another Person, in comparable circumstances, to relocate or adjust any Equipment to accommodate that Person's facilities, subject to Licensor's written approval of such relocation, Licensee shall reasonably cooperate with such request. 6.4.2 Notification of Completion of Installation. Within twenty (20) business days of completing the installation of Equipment on each Municipal Facility, Licensee shall notify Licensor of such completion. 6.5 Replacement Facilities 6.5.1 Ownership of Replacement Facilities Licensor shall own any approved Replacement Facility. Where needed, Licensee shall cooperate with Licensor to transfer ownership and any associated manufacturers' warranties of any Replacement Facility from Licensee to Licensor. 6.5.2 Replacement Facility Provision. Licensee shall be responsible for providing and installing any approved Replacement Facility. 6.6 Damage, Maintenance & Repair. 6.6.1 Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense and to the satisfaction of the Licensor: (a) remove, repair or replace any of its Equipment that is damaged or becomes detached; and/or (b) repair any damage to ROW, Municipal Facilities, or other property, whether public or private, caused by Licensee, its agents, employees or contractors in their actions relating to attachment, operation, repair or maintenance of Equipment. Licensee shall complete such removal, Page 10 of 23 25B-12 repair, or replacement within thirty (30) days' of written notice, unless time is extended by Licensor in writing, in its discretion, because Licensee has demonstrated that more time is required for the repairs. 6.6.2 For every ten (10) Municipal Facilities in use by Licensee, Licensee shall provide Licensor one (1) Replacement Facility for storage by Licensee free of charge, up to a maximum of five (5) Replacement Facilities ("Spare Facilities'). Licensee shall retrieve all Spare Facilities within sixty (60) days of the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. 6.6.3 Licensor shall install, replace, and maintain the Municipal Facilities and Replacement Facilities authorized to be used by Licensee pursuant to any Supplement in good condition in accordance with Licensor's standard maintenance requirements. Such maintenance of Municipal Facilities and Replacement Facilities shall be at Licensor's sole cost and expense, except to the extent this Agreement provides otherwise. If a Municipal Facility or Replacement Facility with Licensee Equipment on it needs to be cleared from the ROW (for example, due to an accident), Licensor shall perform or cause to be performed that work. If Licensee does not remove, repair, replace, or otherwise remediate damage to its Equipment, a Replacement Facility, or to the ROW, Municipal Facilities or other property as required in this Section, the Licensor shall have the option to perform or cause to be performed such removal, repair, or replacement on behalf of Licensee and shall charge Licensee for the actual costs incurred by the Licensor. If such damage causes a public health or safety emergency, as reasonably determined by the Licensor, the Licensor may immediately perform reasonable and necessary repair or removal work on behalf of Licensee and will notify Licensee as soon as practicable; provided, such repair work shall not include any technical work on Licensee's Equipment. Licensor shall have no obligation to maintain or safeguard the Equipment. 6.6.4 Upon the receipt of a written demand for payment accompanied by supporting documentation for payment by the Licensor pursuant to this Section, Licensee shall within forty-five (45) days of such receipt reimburse the Licensor for such costs. 6.7 Change in Equipment. If Licensee desires to install Equipment which is different in any material way from the then -existing and approved Equipment, then Licensee shall first obtain the written approval for the use and installation of such Equipment from an authorized representative of the Licensor. Any such approval shall take the form of an amendment to the applicable Supplement. In addition to any other submittal requirements, and if requested by Licensor, Licensee shall provide "load" (structural) calculations for Equipment changes. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Licensee may maintain, repair, and make like -kind replacements or modifications to any Equipment that do not increase the size, height, and weight of the Equipment or exceed the structural capacity of the Municipal Facility as established in an approved Supplement without requiring additional Applications or Supplements. 6.8 Relocation and Displacement of Equipment. 6.8.1 This Agreement creates no right in Licensee to receive any relocation assistance or payment for any reason under the Relocation Assistance Act, the Uniform Relocation Assistance Act or under any existing or future law upon any termination of tenancy. Page 11 of 23 25B-13 6.8.2 Licensee understands and acknowledges that Licensor may require Licensee to relocate one or more of its Equipment installations. Licensee shall at Licensor's direction and upon one hundred twenty (120) days' prior written notice to Licensee, relocate such Equipment at Licensee's sole cost and expense whenever Licensor reasonably determines that the relocation is needed for any of the following purposes: (a) if required for the construction, modification, completion, repair, relocation, or maintenance of a Licensor or other public agency project; (b) because the Equipment is interfering with or adversely affecting proper operation of Licensor -owned Municipal Facilities; or (c) to protect or preserve the public health or safety. In any such case, Licensor shall use reasonable efforts to afford Licensee a reasonably equivalent alternate location. If Licensee shall fail to relocate any Equipment as requested by the Licensor within the one hundred twenty (120) days, Licensor shall be entitled to remove or relocate the Equipment at Licensee's sole cost and expense, without further notice to Licensee. Licensee shall pay to the Licensor actual costs and expenses incurred by the Licensor in performing any removal work and any storage of Licensee's property after removal within thirty (30) days of the date of a written demand for this payment from the Licensor. 6.8.3 To the extent the Licensor has actual knowledge thereof, the Licensor will attempt promptly to inform Licensee of the displacement or removal of any Municipal Facility on which any Equipment is located. 6.9 Unauthorized Equipment. If Licensor discovers any Equipment has been installed on Municipal Facilities without authorization pursuant to a Supplement, Licensor may send an invoice to Licensee for a sum equal to five (5) times the then -current License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) as compensation for the unauthorized attachments, and, within sixty (60) days from the date of such invoice, Licensee shall (i) pay the invoiced amount to Licensor and submit an Application for the unauthorized Equipment, or (ii) produce documentation showing Licensor's prior approval of the Equipment identified in the invoice. If, in accordance with this Section, Licensee fails to pay all fees and submit the Application or submit documentation satisfactorily showing Licensor's prior approval within sixty (60) days of Licensor's invoice, Licensor may remove the unauthorized Equipment at Licensee's expense. If Licensor removes such unauthorized Equipment, such Equipment shall become the property of Licensor, who shall have sole rights over such Equipment's disposition. Licensor's removal of unauthorized Equipment shall not release Licensee from its obligation to pay those invoiced fees accruing pursuant to this Section. 6.10 Termination of a Supplement. 6.10.1 Licensee shall have the right to terminate any Supplement on thirty (30) days' notice to Licensor. In the event of such termination, removal of Equipment associated with the terminated Supplement shall be governed by Section 6.11 below and Licensor shall retain any License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable) paid. 6.10.2 Licensor shall have the right to terminate any Supplement in the following circumstances: (a) if, after installation, Licensor determines the covered Equipment has been inoperative or abandoned for sixty (60) consecutive days, and Licensee does not provide an adequate explanation or commence to cure within thirty (30) days following notice; (b) if Licensee's operation under a particular Supplement is deemed by Licensor to endanger or pose a Page 12 of 23 25B-14 threat to the public health, safety or welfare or interfere with the normal day-to-day operation of any Licensor department or service; or (c) Licensor is mandated by law, a court order or decision, or the federal, state, or local government to take certain actions that will cause or require the removal of any Equipment. 6.11 Removal of Equipment. Within sixty (60) days after the expiration or earlier termination of a Supplement, Licensee shall promptly, safely and carefully remove the Equipment covered by the terminated or expired Supplement from the applicable Municipal Facility and ROW. Within sixty (60) days after the expiration or earlier termination of the Agreement, Licensee shall promptly, safely and carefully remove all Equipment from all the applicable Municipal Facilities and ROW. If Licensee fails to complete this removal work pursuant to this Section, then the Licensor, upon written notice to Licensee, shall have the right at the Licensor's sole election, but not the obligation, to perform this removal work and charge Licensee for the actual costs and expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable administrative costs. Licensee shall pay to the Licensor actual costs and expenses incurred by the Licensor in performing any removal work and any storage of Licensee's property after removal within thirty (30) days of the date of a written demand for this payment from the Licensor. After the Licensor receives the reimbursement payment from Licensee for the removal work performed by the Licensor, the Licensor shall promptly make available to Licensee the property belonging to Licensee and removed by the Licensor pursuant to this Section at no liability to the Licensor. If the Licensor does not receive reimbursement payment from Licensee within such thirty (30) days, or if Licensor does not elect to remove such items at the Licensor's cost after Licensee's failure to so remove pursuant to this Section, or if Licensee does not remove Licensee's property within thirty (30) days of such property having been made available by the Licensor after Licensee's payment of removal reimbursement as described above, any items of Licensee's property remaining on or about the ROW, Municipal Facilities, or stored by the Licensor after the Licensor's removal thereof may, at the Licensor's option, be deemed abandoned and the Licensor may dispose of such property in any manner by allowed for by Law. Alternatively, the Licensor may elect to take title to abandoned property, and Licensee shall submit to the Licensor an instrument satisfactory to the Licensor transferring to the Licensor the ownership of such property. The provisions of this Section shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. 6.12 Risk of Loss. Licensee acknowledges and agrees that Licensee, subject to the terms of this Agreement bears all risks of loss or damage or relocation or replacement of its Equipment and materials installed in the ROW or on Municipal Facilities pursuant to this Agreement from any cause, and the Licensor shall not be liable for any cost of replacement or of repair to damaged Equipment, including, without limitation, damage caused by the Licensor's removal of the Equipment, except to the extent that such loss or damage was caused by the willful misconduct or negligence of the Licensor, including, without limitation, each of its elected officials, department directors, managers, officers, agents, employees, and contractors, subject to the limitation of liability provided in Section 7.3 below. 6.13 Hazardous Substances. Licensee agrees that Licensee, its contractors, subcontractors, and agents, will not use, generate, store, produce, transport, or dispose any Hazardous Substance on, under, about or within the area of a ROW or Municipal Facility in violation of any Law. Except to the extent of the gross negligence or intentional misconduct of Licensor, Licensee will pay, indemnify, defend, and hold Licensor harmless against and to the Page 13 of 23 25B-15 extent of any loss or liability incurred by reason of any Hazardous Substance produced, disposed of, or used by Licensee pursuant to this Agreement. Licensee will ensure that any on -site or off - site storage, treatment, transportation, disposal or other handling of any Hazardous Substance will be performed by persons who are properly trained, authorized, licensed and otherwise permitted to perform those services. 6.14 Inspection. On an annual basis, Licensor will conduct regular safety inspections and oversight of Equipment on Municipal Facilities. Licensee shall have the right to be present at and observe any such inspections. Licensee shall pay Licensor for its reasonable costs for such safety inspections and oversight ("Annual Small Cell Compliance Inspection and Program Oversight Fee"), in the amount fixed by Licensor's Miscellaneous Fees Schedule that is in effect at the time such payment is due. Licensee shall pay Licensor this fee together with every payment of the License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable), and the fee shall be subject to the same adjustments and proration as the License Fee (or Alternate License Fee, if applicable). 6.15 Access. Licensee shall have access to the Equipment for non -emergency purposes, between the hours of 7:00 am and 5:00 pm weekdays (excluding holidays), unless a required permit further limits the access hours. Prior to Licensee accessing its Equipment, Licensee shall provide email notice, at least 24 hours in advance, to the Licensor at the following email address: smallcells@santa-ana.org. In the event of an emergency at any time, Licensee will, if time permits, attempt to provide prior telephonic notice to the Licensor at the following telephone number: (714) 647-3380. It is responsibility of Licensee to coordinate its access with other users of the same Municipal Facility. 7. INDEMNIFICATION AND WAIVER. Licensee agrees to indemnify, defend, protect, and hold harmless the Licensor, its council members, officers, employees, agents and contractors from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, including pole warranty invalidation, damages, liabilities, fines, charges, penalties, administrative and judicial proceedings and orders, judgments, and all costs and expenses incurred in connection therewith, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs of defense (collectively, the "Losses") to the extent arising from, resulting from or caused by Licensee's activities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement, except to the extent arising from or caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of the Licensor, its council members, officers, employees, agents, or contractors. Licensee's obligation to indemnify and hold harmless excludes only such claim, loss or liability that is due to the negligence or willful misconduct of Licensor. 7.1 Waiver of Claims. Licensee waives any and all claims, demands, causes of action, and rights it may assert against the Licensor on account of any loss, damage, or injury to any Equipment or any loss or degradation of the Services as a result of any event or occurrence which is beyond the reasonable control of the Licensor. 7.2 Waiver of Subrogation. Licensee hereby waives and releases any and all rights of action for negligence against Licensor which may hereafter arise on account of damage to Equipment, Municipal Facilities or to the ROW, resulting from any fire, or other casualty of the kind covered by standard fire insurance policies with extended coverage or self-insurance, regardless of whether or not, or in what amounts, such insurance is now or hereafter carried by the Licensee. This waiver and release shall apply between the parties and they shall also apply to any claims under or through either party as a result of any asserted right of subrogation. All such Page 14 of 23 25B-16 policies of insurance obtained by Licensee concerning the Municipal Facilities, Equipment or the ROW shall waive the insurer's right of subrogation against the Licensor. Licensee shall include Licensor as joint loss payee on its self -insured property coverage in full satisfaction of the requirement to provide waiver of subrogation endorsement. 7.3 Limitation on Consequential Damages. Neither party shall be liable to the other, or any of their respective agents, representatives, employees for any lost revenue, lost profits, loss of technology, rights or services, incidental, punitive, indirect, special or consequential damages, loss of data, or interruption or loss of use of service, even if advised of the possibility of such damages, whether under theory of contract, tort (including negligence), strict liability or otherwise. 8. PERFORMANCE BOND. In order to secure the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, Licensee will provide the following security instrument to the Licensor: 8.1 Performance Bond. Prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement, Licensee must provide a performance bond running to the Licensor according to this Section 8.1. The amount of the Bond shall be based on the number of attachments in the following amounts: Number of Municipal Facilities Required Security 1-50 $50,000 51-100 $75,000 101-300 $100,000 301-1000 $150,000 Greater than 1000 $200,000 The performance bond is conditioned upon the faithful performance by Licensee of all the terms and conditions of this Agreement and upon the further condition that if Licensee fails to comply with any terms or conditions governing this Agreement, there shall be recoverable jointly and severally from the principal and surety of the bond any damage or loss suffered by the Licensor as a result, including the full amount of any compensation, indemnification, or costs of removal or abandonment of Licensee's property, plus costs and reasonable attorneys' fees up to the full amount of the performance bond. Licensee will keep the performance bond in place during the term of this Agreement. This bond shall also fulfill the requirements of Section 33-240(c)(7) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code or any similar successor code provision, but only as pertaining to Licensee's Equipment on Municipal Facilities. 8.2 Assessment of the Bond. Upon Licensee's failure to pay the Licensor any amount owing under this Agreement, the performance bond may be assessed by the Licensor for purposes including, but not limited to: (a) Reimbursement of costs home by the Licensor to correct violations of the Agreement not corrected by Licensee, after Licensor provides notice and a reasonable opportunity to cure such violations. This shall include but not be limited to removal of Equipment. Page 15 of 23 25B-17 (b) To provide monetary remedies or to satisfy damages assessed against Licensee due to a material breach of this Agreement. 8.3 Restoration of the Bond. Licensee must deposit a sum of money or a replacement instrument sufficient to restore the performance bond to its original amount within 30 days after written notice from the Licensor that any amount has been recovered from the performance bond. Failure to restore the bond to its full amount within thirty (30) days will constitute a material breach of this Agreement. Licensee will be relieved of the foregoing requirement to replenish the bond during the pendency of an appeal from the Licensor's decision to draw on the performance bond. 8.4 Required Endorsement. The performance bond is subject to the approval of the Licensor and must contain the following endorsement: "This bond may not be canceled until sixty (60) days after receipt by the Licensor, by registered mail, return receipt requested, of a written notice of intent to cancel or not to renew. " 8.5 Reservation of Licensor Rights. The rights reserved by the Licensor with respect to the performance bond are in addition to all other rights and remedies the Licensor may have under this Agreement or any other law. 8.6 Admitted Surety Insurer. The surety supplying the bond shall be an "admitted surety insurer", as defined in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 995.120 and authorized to do business in the State of California. 8.7 Cash Deposit. In lieu of obtaining a performance bond, Licensee shall have the right to instead deposit a cash deposit with Licensor securing Licensee's obligations under this Agreement. 9. INSURANCE. Licensee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this Agreement insurances of the types and in the amounts specified by Licensor not more than once each five (5) years and with sixty (60) days' written notice to Licensee, or if not specified, the amounts in this Section 9: Commercial General Liability insurance per ISO form CG 0001 (or its equivalent) with a limit of two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage and five million dollars ($5,000,000) general aggregate including premises - operations, contractual liability, personal injury and products completed operations; and Commercial Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned non -owned and hired vehicles with a limit of one million dollars ($1,000,000) each accident for bodily injury and property damage. As respects this Agreement, the Commercial General Liability insurance policy shall include the Licensor, its council members, officers, and employees as additional insured as respects any covered liability caused, in whole or part, by Licensee's performance of work under this Agreement. Coverage shall be in an occurrence form and in accordance with the limits and provisions specified herein. Upon receipt of notice from its insurer, Licensee shall use its best efforts to provide the Licensor with thirty (30) days prior written notice of cancellation of any required coverage that is not replaced. Licensee shall be responsible for notifying the Licensor of such change or cancellation. Page 16 of 23 25B-18 9.1 Filing of Certificates and Endorsements. Prior to the commencement of any work pursuant to this Agreement, Licensee shall file with the Licensor the required certificate(s) of insurance with blanket additional insured endorsements, which shall state the following: (a) the policy number; name of insurance company; name and address of the agent or authorized representative; name and address of insured; project name; policy expiration date; and specific coverage amounts; (b) that Licensee's Commercial General Liability insurance policy is primary as respects any other valid or collectible insurance that the Licensor may possess, including any self -insured retentions the Licensor may have; and any other insurance the Licensor does possess shall be considered excess insurance only and shall not be required to contribute with this insurance; and (c) that Licensee's Commercial General Liability insurance policy waives any right of recovery the insurance company may have against the Licensor. The certificate(s) of insurance with endorsements and notices shall be mailed to the Licensor at the address specified in Section 10 below. 9.2 Workers' Compensation Insurance. Licensee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this Agreement statutory workers' compensation and employer's liability insurance in an amount not less than the amount required by statute and shall furnish the Licensor with a certificate showing proof of such coverage. 9.3 Insurer Criteria. Any insurance provider of Licensee shall be eligible to do business in the State of California and shall carry a minimum rating assigned by A.M. Best & Company's Key Rating Guide of "A-" Overall and a Financial Size Category of "VIL" 9.4 Severability of Interest. "Severability of interest" or "separation of insureds" clauses shall be made a part of the Commercial General Liability and Commercial Automobile Liability policies. 9.5 Self -Insurance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Licensee shall have the right to self -insure the coverages required in Section 9. In the event Licensee elects to self -insure its obligation to include Licensor as an additional insured, the following provisions shall apply (in addition to those set forth in this Agreement): (i) Licensee or its parent company shall have and continuously maintain a tangible net worth of at least one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000.00); (ii) Licensee continuously maintains appropriate loss reserves for the amount of its self-insurance obligations under this Section 9, which reserves are annually approved by Ernst & Young, or any successor auditing company; (iii) Licensee shall undertake the defense of any self -insured claim for which a defense and/or coverage would have been available from the insurance company, including a defense of Licensor, at Licensee's sole cost and expense, with counsel selected by Licensee and reasonably acceptable to Licensor; (iv) Licensee shall use its own funds to pay any claim or replace property or otherwise provide the funding which would have been available from insurance proceeds but for Licensee's election to self -insure; (v) Licensee shall pay any and all amounts due in lieu of insurance proceeds which would have been payable if Licensee had carried the insurance policies, which amounts shall be treated as insurance Page 17 of 23 25B-19 proceeds for all purposes under this Agreement; and (vi) All amounts which Licensee pays or is required to pay and all loss or damages resulting flour risks for which Licensee has elected to self - insure shall not limit Licensee's indemnification obligations set forth in this Agreement. 10. NOTICES. 10.1 Method and Delivery of Notices. All notices which shall or maybe given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered personally or transmitted (a) through the United States mail, by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid; or (b) by means of prepaid overnight delivery service, addressed as follows: If to the Licensor: CITY OF SANTA ANA, CA Public Works Agency 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-22 Santa Ana, CA, 92701 Attn: Executive Director If'to Licensee: NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC Attn: Tower Asset Group — Lease Administration Re: Municipal Facilities License Agreement (Santa Ana, CA) 1025 Lenox Park Blvd NE, 3rd Floor Atlanta, GA 30319 With a copy to: NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC Attn: AT&T Legal Dept. - Network Operations Re: Municipal Facilities License Agreement (Santa Ana, CA) 208 S. Akard Street Dallas, TX 75202-4206 10.2 Date of Notices; Changing Notice Address. Notices shall be deemed given upon receipt in the case of personal delivery, three days after deposit in the mail, or the next business day in the case of overnight delivery. Either party may from time to time designate any other address for this purpose by written notice to the other party delivered in the manner set forth above. 11. DEFAULT; CURE; REMEDIES. 11.1 Licensee Default and Notification. This Agreement is granted upon each and every condition herein and each of the conditions is a material and essential condition to the granting of this Agreement. Except for causes beyond the reasonable control of Licensee, if Licensee fails to comply with any of the conditions and obligations imposed hereunder, and if such failure continues for more than thirty (30) days after written demand from the Licensor to commence the correction of such noncompliance on the part of Licensee, the Licensor shall have the right to revoke and terminate this Agreement, if such failure is in relation to the Agreement as whole, or any individual Supplement, if such failure is in connection solely with such Supplement, in addition to any other rights or remedies set forth in this Agreement or provided by law. 11.2 Cure Period. if the nature of the violation is such that it cannot be fally cured within thirty (30) days due to circumstances not wider Licensee's control, the period of time in which Licensee must cure the violation shall be extended for such additional time reasonably necessary to complete the cure, provided that: (a) Licensee has promptly begun to cure; and (b) Page 18 of 23 25B-20 Licensee is diligently pursuing its efforts to cure, The Licensor may not maintain any action or effect any remedies for default against Licensee unless and until Licensee has failed to cure the breach within the time periods provided in these Sections 11.1 and 11.2. 11.3 Licensor Default. If Licensor breaches any covenant or obligation of Licensor under this Agreement in any manner and if Licensor fails to commence to cure such breach within thirty (30) days after receiving written notice from Licensee specifying the violation (or if Licensor fails thereafter to diligently prosecute the cure to completion), then Licensee may enforce any and all of its rights and/or remedies provided under this Agreement or by law or it may (although it shall not be obligated to) cure Licenser's breach and/or perform Licensor's obligations (on Licensor's behalf and at Licensor's expense) and require Licensor to reimburse to Licensee all reasonable costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) incuurred in connection with such cure and/or performance. 12. ASSIGNMENT AND CUSTOMER EQUIPMENT. This Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the successors and assigns of the parties. 12.1 Licensee shall not assign this Agreement or its rights or obligations to any firm, corporation, individual, or other entity, without the prior written consent of Licensor. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Licensee may assign or transfer the rights and privileges granted herein to any parent or subsidiary of Licensee, to an entity with or into which Licensee may merge or consolidate, to an entity which Licensee is controlled by, or is under common control with such entity, or to any purchaser of all or substantially all of the assets of Licensee with prior notice to Licensor but without the requirement for Licensor approval, so long as the successor provides written confirmation to Licensor that it is then fully liable to the Licensor for compliance with all terms and conditions of this Agreement. The Licensee shall reimburse the Licensor for all direct and indirect costs and expenses reasonably incurred by the Licensor in considering a request to transfer or assign this Agreement. 12.2 Licensee need not own all components of Equipment subject to this Agreement, and may permit its customers to maintain ownership of Equipment components. However, (1) all Equipment must be wholly under the control and management of Licensee; and Licensee shall be liable for all acts or omissions, and all harms associated with the Equipment whether the same are its acts or omissions, or the acts or omissions of the owner of the Equipment; and (2) Licensee acknowledges and agrees that no rights of ownership in Equipment by Licensee's customers shall permit any such customer to enter upon, or use the any portion of the Municipal Facilities or the Equipment, in any other manner or at any other place, including to add to, or modify or install Equipment, which shall be Licensee's sole responsibility. Further, Licensee may not install Equipment it does not own on Municipal Facilities, unless the entity for on whose behalf the Equipment has been installed aelmowledges and agrees, in a form acceptable to the Licensor: that the Licensor has not granted it a consent to be in the ROW for any purpose; that it is bound by Licensee's representations, obligations and duties hereunder; that it shall have no rights or claims against the Licensor of any sort related to the Equipment or Mtuiicipal Facilities; that its Equipment may be subject to taxes, fees or assessments as provided in the Laws or the Agreement, and that Licensor may treat any Equipment owned by such entity as if it were owned by Licensee for all purposes (including, but not limited to, removal and relocation); and that the Equipment may only Page 19 of 23 25B-21 be used for the purposes and uses permitted herein. Such acknowledgement may be provided for all Equipment on Municipal Facilities, and need not be provided separately, site by site. 13. RECORDS; AUDITS. 13.1 Records Required by Code. Licensee will maintain complete records pursuant to all applicable Laws. 13.2 Additional Records. The Licensor may require such additional reasonable non - confidential information, records, and documents from Licensee from time to time as are appropriate in order to reasonably monitor compliance with the terms of this Agreement. 13.3 Production of Records. Licensee shall provide such records within twenty (20) business days of a request by the Licensor for production of the same unless additional time is reasonably needed by Licensee, in which case, Licensee shall have such reasonable time as needed for the production of the same. If any person other than Licensee maintains records on Licensee's behalf, Licensee shall be responsible for making such records available to the Licensor for auditing purposes pursuant to this Section. 13.4 Public Records. Licensee acknowledges that information submitted to Licensor may be open to public inspection and copying under California law. 14. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. The provisions that follow shall apply generally to the obligations of the parties under this Agreement. 14.1 Waiver of Breach. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver or a continuing waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or any other provision of this Agreement. 14.2 Contacting Licensee. Licensee shall be available to the staff employees of any Licensor department having jurisdiction over Licensee's activities 24 hours a day, seven days a week, regarding problems or complaints resulting from the attachment, installation, operation, maintenance, or removal of the Equipment. The Licensor may contact by telephone the Licensee's network control center operator at telephone number 1-800-638-2822. 14.3 Governing Law; Jurisdiction. This Agreement shall be governed and construed by and in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without reference to its conflicts of law principles. If suit is brought by a party to this Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of Orange County, California. 14.4 Change Of Law. During the Initial Term, in the event that any legislative, regulatory, judicial, or other action ("New Law") affects the rights or obligations of the Parties or any term of this Agreement, the Parties agree that the Agreement shall nonetheless remain in effect until the end of the Initial Term unless mutually agreed to in writing by the Parties. If any such New Law becomes effective, at either 'Party's request, the Parties can meet and confer in good faith on whether any modification to this Agreernent is warranted to reflect the New Law. Page 20 of 23 25B-22 14.5 Force Majeure. Except for payment of amounts due, neither Party shall have any liability for its delays or its failure of performance due to: fire, explosion, pest damage, power failures, strikes or labor disputes, acts of God, the elements, war, civil disturbances, acts of civil or military authorities or the public enemy, inability to secure raw materials, transportation facilities, fuel or energy shortages, or other causes reasonably beyond its control, whether or not similar to the foregoing. 14.6 Attorneys' Fees. Should any dispute arising out of this Agreement lead to litigation, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs of suit, including (without limitation) reasonable attorneys' fees. 14.7 "AS IS" condition of Municipal Facilities. Municipal Facilities licensed to Licensee pursuant to this Agreement are licensed to and accepted by Licensee "as is" and with all faults. The Licensor makes no representation or warranty of any kind as to the present or future condition of or suitability of the Municipal Facilities for Licensee's use and disclaims any and all warranties express or implied with respect to the physical, structural, or environmental condition of the Municipal Facilities and the merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Licensee is solely responsible for investigation and determination of the condition and suitability of any Municipal Facility for Licensee's intended use. 14.8 Representations and Warranties. Each of the parties to this Agreement represents and warrants that it has the fall right, power, legal capacity, and authority to enter into and perform the party's respective obligations hereunder and that such obligations shall be binding upon such party without the requirement of the approval or consent of any other person or entity in connection herewith, except as provided in Section 4.2 above. This Agreement shall not be revocable or terminable except as expressly permitted herein. 14.9 Amendment of Agreement. This Agreement may not be amended except pursuant to a written instrument signed by both parties. 14.10 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire uuiderstanding between the parties with respect to the subject matter herein. There are no representations, agreements, or understandings (whether oral or written) between or among the parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement which are not fully expressed herein. In witness whereof, and in order to bind themselves legally to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the duly authorized representatives of the parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. 14.11 Non -Exclusive Remedies. No provision in this Agreement made for the purpose of securing enforcement of the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed In exclusive remedy or to afford the exclusive procedure for the enforcement of said terms and conditions, but the remedies herein provided are deemed to be cumulative. 14.12 No Third -Party Beneficiaries. It is not intended by any of the provisions of this Agreement to create for the public, or any member thereof, a third -party beneficiary right or remedy, or to authorize anyone to maintain a suit for personal injuries or property damage pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. The duties, obligations, and responsibilities of the Licensor with respect to third parties shall remain as imposed by state law. Page 21 of 23 25B-23 14.13 Construction of Agreement. The terms and provisions of this Agreement shall not be construed strictly in favor of or against either party, regardless of which party drafted any of its provisions. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the fair meaning of its terms. 14.14 Effect of Acceptance. Licensee (a) accepts and agrees to comply with this Agreement and all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations; (b) agrees that this Agreement was entered into pursuant to processes and procedures consistent with applicable law; and (c) agrees that it will not raise any claim to the contrary or allege in any claim or proceeding against the Licensor that at the time of acceptance of this Agreement any provision, condition or terns of this Agreement was unreasonable or arbitrary, or that at the time of the acceptance of this Agreement any such provision, condition or term was void or unlawful or that the Licensor had no power or authority to make or enforce any such provision, condition or term. 14.15 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence with regard to the performance of all of Licensee's obligations under this Agreement. 14.16 Taxes. Licensee shall be responsible for payment of all fees and taxes charged in connection with the right, title, and interest in and construction, installation, maintenance, and operation of Equipment for the purposes set forth herein. 14.17 Tax Notice. Licensor hereby provides notice pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 107.6, and Licensee acknowledges that this Agreement may create a possessory interest and Licensee may be subject to property taxes levied on such interest, as described in California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 107.6. Licensee shall pay directly to the appropriate authority, when due, all real and personal property taxes, fees and assessments, assessed against the area licensed and the Equipment. 14.18 Counterparts. This Agreement (and any Supplement) maybe executed in multiple counterparts, including by electronic means, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all such counterparts once assembled together shall constituted one integrated instrument. [Signature page to follow] Page 22 of 23 25B-24 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be legally executed in duplicate effective as of the Effective Date as defined in the introductory paragraph to this Agreement. ATTEST: DAISY GOMEZ Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM SONIA R. CARVALHO, City Attorney BY: ,"'• -f.'O' jc44N M.FUNK Assistant City Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL NABIL SABA Acting Executive Director Public Works Agency Exhibits: Exhibit A — Supplement Exhibit B — Application Licensor: CITY OF SANTA ANA KRISTINE RIDGE City Manager _Licensee: New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: AT&T Mobility Corporation Its: Manager BY: NAME: Christopher Edwards TITLE: Director Access - Construction & Engineering Page 23 of 23 25B-25 EXHIBIT A FORM OF SUPPLEMENT This Supplement ("Supplement'), is approved by Licensor this day of 20 (the date executed by all parties, referred herein as "Supplement Effective Date"). 1. Supplement. Licensee has submitted an application for approval to use a Municipal Facility pursuant to that certain Municipal Facility License Agreement between Licensor and Licensee dated 20_ ("Agreement'). Licensor has reviewed the application and grants approval subject to the terms of this Supplement. All of the terms and conditions of the Agreement are incorporated hereby by reference and made a part hereof without the necessity of repeating or attaching the Agreement. In the event of a contradiction, modification or inconsistency between the terms of the Agreement and this Supplement, the terms of this Supplement shall govern. Capitalized terms used in this Supplement shall have the same meaning described for them in the Agreement unless otherwise indicated herein. IF THE SUPPLEMENT IS NOT COUNTER -SIGNED BY LICENSEE AND RETURNED TO LICENSOR WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER LICENSOR HAS GRANTED APPROVAL, THE SUPPLEMENT SHALL BE VOID AND OF NO LEGAL EFFECT. IF LICENSEE STILL WANTS TO USE THE MUNICIPAL FACILITY, LICENSEE WILL BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A NEW APPLICATION AND ASSOCIATED FEES. 2. Licensed Area Description and Location. Licensee shall have the right to use the space on the specific Municipal Facility (the "Licensed Area") depicted in Attachment 1 attached hereto to install Equipment as further listed in Attachment 2 attached hereto. 3. Equipment. The Equipment to be installed at the Licensed Area is described and depicted in Attachment 1. 4. Term. The term of this Supplement shall commence on the Supplement Effective Date and continue for the life of the Agreement, as described in Paragraph 2 of the Agreement. 5. License Fee/Alternate License Fee. The initial fee for this Supplement shall be as follows per year: . This fee is subject to annual increase as provided in the Agreement, and is payable in accordance with the Agreement. 6. Performance Bond. The Performance Bond [circle one] is / is not covered by existing performance bond. If not covered by existing performance bond, a bond is required pursuant to Section 8 of the Agreement. 7. Miscellaneous. [Signature page follows] A-1 25B-26 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Supplement to be legally executed in duplicate, effective upon execution by both parties. Accepted: Licensor: CITY OF SANTA ANA, CA By:_ Name Title: Date: Licensee: By: Name: Title: Date: Attachments: Attachment I — Licensed Area Attachment 2 — Equipment List and Description A-2 25B-27 Attachment 1 Licensed Area [site plan showing licensed area of applicable Municipal Facility and showing proposed Equipment installation] A-3 25B-28 Equipment List and Description Attachment 2 A-4 25B-29 EXHIBIT B APPLICATION TO USE MUNICIPAL FACILITY Applicant: Date: Licensee: Application/License#: Type of Municipal Facilitystructure Alteration Required Small Ce6 Equipment Heights (provide both (1) the overall height of pole with added facilities; and (2) the height of individual facilities Sman Ce6 and Base Equipment Weights Small Cell And Be" Equipment Dimensions Location of An Y Additional Equipment [street light] [Pole [Installed on Pole, specify [traffic light] Reinforcement] attachment height, weight [other, [Pole and dimensions] spec] Replacement] [Installed on/in Ground [None] (Vault), specific dimensions] [Other Location] [Not Applicable/Needed] APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING AS APPLICABLE: • Site plan and engineering design and specifications for installation of Equipment, including the location of radios, antenna facilities, transmitters, equipment shelters, cables, conduit, point of demarcation, backhaul solution, electrical distribution panel, electric meter, and electrical conduit and cabling. Where applicable, the design documents should include specifications on design, pole modification, and ADA compliance. Also indicate whether unmetered electricity is available at the site. • Include a load bearing study that determines whether the pole requires reinforcement or replacement in order to accommodate attachment of proposed Equipment. • If the proposed installation will require reinforcement or replacement of an existing pole, provide applicable design and specification drawings. • The number, size, type and proximity to the facilities of all communications conduit(s) and cables to be installed. • Description of the utility services required to support the facilities to be installed. • List of the contractors and subcontractors, and their contact information, authorized to work on the project. • A check for the applicable Application Fee made payable to the City of Santa Ana (refer to Section 5.1 of the Municipal Facilities License Agreement). APPLICANT SIGNATURE: PRINT NAME: TITLE: B-1 25B-30 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE 0 ORDINANCE FIRST READING: APPROVE THE TRANSFER OF THE PARKING OPERATIONS PROGRAM FROM THE FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY /s/Kristine Ridge CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1s' Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ Wis]►111►111101i[W FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt an ordinance to approve the transfer of the Parking Operations Program (off-street parking facilities and on -street parking meters) from the Finance and Management Services Agency (FMSA) to the Community Development Agency (CDA) effective July 1, 2020. DISCUSSION As part of the 2011 Budget Act, and in order to protect funding for core public services at the local level, the Legislature approved ABX126, the dissolution of the state's 400 plus Redevelopment Agencys (RDA). After a period of litigation, RDAs were officially dissolved as of February 1, 2012. The dissolution of the former City of Santa Ana Redevelopment Agency (RDA) resulted in the reduced staffing levels and the ability to perform core functions by the Community Development Agency (CDA). Thus, the City's Parking Operations were not considered a core function for CDA and were subsequently transferred to the Finance and Management Services Agency (FMSA). Eight years after the dissolution of the RDA, CDA has had the opportunity to reinstate their agency's staffing levels, and now has the ability to re -assume the management of the Parking Operations Program. The Parking Operations Program includes four (4) City -owned off-street parking structures and one (1) surface lot, and off-street parking meters. The transfer of the Parking Operations Program from FMSA to CDA, if approved, would be effective as of July 1, 2020. Santa Ana's downtown parking system consist of roughly 3,185 municipaly-owned parking spaces; of these spaces, 1,245 are on -street metered spaces. Downtown on -street meters are designed for short-term parking, and long-term and overflow parking is available through five (5) parking facilities with 1,989 spaces located Downtown. Four (4) facilities are multi -level parking structures that accommodate both transient and monthly patrons and a surface lot that accommodates solely transient patrons. Parking structures are correspondingly priced to encourage long-term use. 50A-1 Adopt Ordinance to Approve Parking Operations Program Transfer May 5, 2020 Page 2 To ensure budget sustainability, the Parking Operations have enacted recent cost -saving measures such as reduction of operating expenses for its garages; increase in parking rates for both garages and meters; and reallocation of pension expenditures. These measures were enacted while balancing the needs of the patrons who frequent the Downtown Area with the implementation of grace period for customers who utilize City -Owned Parking Garages. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's effort to meet Goal #3 - Economic Development, Objective #4 (continue to pursue objectives that shape downtown Santa Ana into a thriving, culturally divers, shopping, dinning, and entertainment destination.), Stategy #B (create a comprehensive program manage parking that includes innovative strategies to provide parking, create revenue and enhance accessibility in the downtown). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Exhibits: 1. Proposed Ordinance 2. Santa Ana Parking Facilities Map 3. Parking Meter District Map AG:WH 50A-2 ORDINANCE NO. NS-XXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AMENDING CHAPTER 36, ARTICLE IV OF THE SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING REGULATIONS TO TRANSFER THE PARKING OPERATIONS PROGRAM TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows: A. The City Council has determined that a parking meter system is justified to defray the cost of installation, operation, and control, as well as the costs of other parking management related activities; and B. Planned new development and expansion in Downtown Santa Ana together with the Orange County Street Car Project currently under construction in Santa Ana are likely to increase traffic and parking demand and reduce the number of available on -street parking spaces; and C. The City has designated on -street parking spaces with parking meters in order to regulate and manage traffic circulation and parking availability; and D. The location of and hours for parking directly impact traffic and parking circulation patterns, traffic congestion and other traffic hazards, and parking availability; and E. The City Council is authorized pursuant to section 2508 of the California Vehicle Code, to set parking hours and parking zones; and F. The City Council may determine the City agency which shall be vested with the administrative duties and authority to administer the City's parking meter system and related parking meter system regulations; and G. Based on the foregoing, it is necessary to amend various sections of the Code in order to transfer administrative authority for the City's Parking Operations Program from the Finance and Management Services Agency to the Community Development Agency to better coordinate, control, and regulate traffic and parking circulation within the City's parking district in keeping with the City's community development efforts to improve the City's transportation network in order to promote a more sustainable transportation system; to ensure adequate parking availability for residents, workers, and visitors; to prevent traffic congestion and hazardous traffic conditions; and to promote compliance and facilitate more efficient and effective notice and enforcement, all of which will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare. Ordinance No. NS-XXX Page 1 of 4 y 1 W J SECTION 2. The adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and a Notice of Exemption will be filed if this ordinance is adopted. SECTION 3. Section 36-399 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code is hereby amended such that it reads as follows: Sec. 36-399. - Hours. (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this section, the provisions of this article relating to the operation of parking meters shall be effective only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday of each week, except such parking limitations shall not be operative on any legal holiday. Further limitations of the hours of operation shall be effective only when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are affixed to specific parking meters. (b) In the following parking meter zones effective parking hours shall be as follows: (1) Willard Zone. The provisions of this article relating to the operation of parking meters shall be effective only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of each week, except such parking limitations shall not be operative on any legal holiday. Further limitations of the hours of operation shall be effective only when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are affixed to specific parking meters. (2) Midtown Zone. The provisions of this article relating to the operation of parking meters shall be effective only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday of each week, except such parking limitations shall not be operative on any legal holiday. Further limitations of the hours of operation shall be effective only when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are affixed to specific parking meters. (3) Downtown Zone. The provisions of this article relating to the operation of parking meters shall be effective only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday of each week, except such parking limitations shall not be operative on any legal holiday. Further limitations of the hours of operation shall be effective only when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are affixed to specific parking meters. (c) Legal holiday shall be defined as those legal holidays observed by city employees as identified in section 9-135 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code. Ordinance No. NS-XXX Page 2 of 4 (d) The executive director of the r^^^^^ and maRageRqeRt community development agency or designee is authorized to place signs or markings, on or immediately adjacent to parking meters, prohibiting parking in excess of twelve (12) minutes, fifteen (15) minutes, twenty-four minutes (24), thirty (30) minutes, one (1) hour, two (2) hours, three (3) hours or four (4) hours on any portion of any street within such parking meter district zone, for any time period up to and including twenty-four (24) hours per day. Such restrictions may be limited so as not to apply on specified days. SECTION 4. Section 36-421 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code is hereby added such that it reads as follows: Sec. 36-421. Change in reference. (a) Wherever the language of any section, subsection, provision, or clause contained in Chapter 36 of this Code shall mention the finance and management services lRity deve'^�gency, such section, subsection, provision, or clause shall mean the F^^^^^ ^^^' MARagemeRt & community development agency. (b) Wherever the language of any section, subsection, provision, or clause contained in Chapter 36 of this Code shall mention the executive director of the finance and management services ^^..,..,,,^;t„ develglame^t agency, such section, subsection, provision. or clause shall mean the executive director of the fn,nne and management se^„^es community development agency. (c) Wherever the language of any section, subsection, provision, or clause contained in Chapter 36 of this Code shall mention the treasury and customer services manager^nwntmwn development rnanag^•, such section, subsection, provision, or clause shall mean the executive director of the communitv development aaencv or his or her clesicinettFeasuFy and a ,sterne.r SECTION 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The city council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance after its adoption by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana shall first be effective July 1, 2020. H H Ordinance No. NS-XXX Page 3 of 4 ADOPTED this day of , 2020. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney By: v Ryan O.I Assistant AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, Daisy Gomez, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify that the attached Ordinance No. NS- to be the original ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on, and that said ordinance was published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana. Date: Ordinance No. NS-XXX Page 4 of 4 Daisy Gomez Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana y 1 M City of Santa Ana Downtown Parking Facilities Current Hours of Operation & Rates W SANTA ANA BLVD Inn tp Vy 5TH ST z W 4TH ST ]IF O f � Lw __.._ _ _. _ ZND ST _ Public Parking (City Owned)' GARAGE A 13rd & BROADWAY/ ARTIST VILLAGE (3 Levels-440 Spaces) Hours: Mon & Tues SAM—SPM; Wed thru Sat SAM—Midnight; Sun 10AM-6:30PM Daily Rates: 2-Hour Grace Period, and thereafter $.75 (For 30 Minutes) $1.50 Per Hour $10.00 Daily Maximum Monthly Rates: $50.00 (Unreserved) & $60.00 (Reserved) GARAGE C 13rd & BIRCH (5 Levels-400 Spaces) Automated Parking Facility —Operational 24/7 (No Overnight Parking) Daily Rates: 2-Hour Grace Period, and thereafter $.75 (For 30 Minutes) $1.50 Per Hour $10.00 Daily Maximum Monthly Rates: $50.00 (Unreserved) & $60.00 (Reserved) C= I4AV :IIIhdK SANTA ANA BLVD C F � =I STH ST L, E 4TH ST ICPk iW'1. N�i't YK�f ?• �� 'q" E 3RD ST Z wr x W 2 W 2 ND ST Z E IST ST GARAGE B 15th & SPURGEON/ EAST END (4 Levels-700 Spaces) Automated Parking Facility —Operational 24/7 (No Overnight Parking) Daily Rates: 2-Hour Grace Period, and thereafter $.75 (For 30 Minutes) $1.50 Per Hour $10.00 Daily Maximum Monthly Rates: $50.00 (Unreserved) & $60.00 (Reserved) GARAGE D 15th & MAIN (7 Levels-400 Spaces) Automated Parking Facility —Operational 24/7 (No Overnight Parking) Daily Rates: 2-Hour Grace Period, and thereafter $.75 (For 30 Minutes) $1.50 Per Hour $10.00 Daily Maximum Monthly Rates: $50.00 (Unreserved) & $60.00 (Reserved) LOT 1 13rd & BUSH LOT (49 Spaces) Hours: SAM-6PM, 2 hour maximum; 6PM-10PM, 3 hour maximum; Mon. -Sun. Daily Rates: $2.00 per hour y llm EXHIBIT 3 City of Santa Ana Parking Meter District Rates and Hours of Operations Locations Rate Hours T�� $1.00/Hour 8AM-8PM (M-F) $1.00/Hour 8AM-8PM (M-Sat.) $2.00/Hour 8AM-IOPM (M-Sun.) F l y � L o Y n 6ISIihhNA BLV9 IiHfii r� REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE: APPROVE AN APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT, APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH EMERGENCY PLANNING CONSULTANTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $74,000, AND ADOPT RESOLUTION ACCEPTING HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM (HMGP) FUNDS /s/Kristine Ridge CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: UT100 ffeAWW ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1s' Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO Ia1Ia►1,1111iLTA 1 01.4 RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to act on behalf of the City of Santa Ana for the purpose of obtaining and utilizing federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funds for hazard mitigation planning, provided by the US Department of Homeland Security and sub - granted through the State of California. 2. Approve an appropriation adjustment recognizing up to $74,000 in Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funds in revenue account (no. 12814002-52001), and appropriating same to expenditure account (no. 12814416 - 62300). 3. Authorize the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with a provision for a one-year extension to Emergency Planning Consultants, for the period of July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2022, for preparation of a Hazard Mitigation Plan, in an amount not to exceed $74,000, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. DISCUSSION As a result of wildfire and debris flow disasters that occurred in California in December 2017 (DR- 4353), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) made several hundred million dollars available to the State of California (State) under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), a competitive grant designed to mitigate the impacts of natural disasters before they occur. As a result, the State is making this funding available to individual jurisdictions for the purpose of developing Local Hazard Mitigation Plans and mitigation projects. A Local Hazard Mitigation Plan will identify the primary natural hazards that may impact the City, such as earthquakes, floods or droughts, and estimates the losses that could be expected to occur, such as injuries, deaths, property damage or economic loss. The Plan then identifies and prioritizes projects that can be performed beforehand to mitigate the expected losses, which may include seismic retrofitting of buildings, improvements to storm drain or flood control infrastructure, strengthening other critical infrastructure, or improvements to building codes or other regulatory 55A-1 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program May 5, 2020 Page 2 protections. Once a Hazard Mitigation Plan is reviewed and approved by the State and FEMA and formally adopted by the City, the City will then become eligible to apply for hazard mitigation funding to complete the mitigation projects identified in the plan. The City applied for HMGP funding to hire a contractor to assist the City in researching, drafting and submitting a plan, and was awarded up to $105,000 for this purpose. The City is required to match this funding in a 75/25 split, but can fulfill its share with the cost of City staff time devoted to the planning effort, requiring no cash match from City funds. On January 14, 2020, the City released a Request for Proposals (RFP 19-134) for a planning consultant and received proposals from seven firms: Emergency Planning Consultants, Engineering Solutions Services, Hagerty Consulting, Interwest Consulting, Michael Baker International, Stantec Consulting and Witt O'Brien's LLC. An evaluation committee consisting of representatives from the Police Department, Planning & Building Agency, Public Works Agency, and the Risk Management Division reviewed and rated the proposals based on evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP. The results were: Vendor Score Out of 100 Emergency Planning Consultants 88 Michael Baker International 70 Witt O'Brien's LLC 66.5 Stantec Consulting 64.25 Interwest Consulting 63.87 Hagerty Consulting 56.62 Engineering Solutions Services 56.25 Emergency Planning Consultants (EPC) was the most responsive and capable proposer. EPC demonstrated the most experience in developing new Hazard Mitigation Plans for cities and other local governments within southern California, demonstrated significant experience in developing hazard mitigation guidance and regulation at the state and federal levels, and demonstrated significant experience coordinating the city planning and emergency management functions. EPC also proposed the lowest price, well within the available grant funds. The City desires to award a two-year contract, with an optional one-year extension, to Emergency Planning Consultants, in an amount not to exceed $74,000. The timeline for development of the plan includes one year to research and draft the plan and one year for State and FEMA review and approval of the plan, although this timeline may be delayed by the current emergency response to the COVID-19 disease outbreak. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of these items assists the City in meeting Goal #1 - Community Safety, Objective #2 (broaden communications, information sharing and community awareness of public safety activities), Strategy D (expand community awareness of public safety activities, programs and services that focus on risk reduction (smoke alarms, water safety, pedestrian safety, fire safety/prevention)); and Goal #6 - Community Facilities and Infrastructure, Objective #1 (establish and maintain a Community Investment Plan for all City assets), Strategy C (invest resources and 55A-2 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program May 5, 2020 Page 3 technology to extend the service life of existing infrastructure to protect the City's investment and support high quality of life standard). FISCAL IMPACT The appropriation adjustment will recognize up to $74,000 in HMGP Grant funds in revenue account (no. 12814002-52001), and appropriate same to expenditure account (no. 12814416 - 62300). Staff time of City staff working on the plan fulfills the requirement for matching funds. Funds for this agreement will be budgeted in the HMGP Grant contact services account (no. 12814416 — 62300) for fiscal year 2020-21. Exhibits: 1. Resolution 2. Agreement with Emergency Planning Consultants 55A-3 Exhibit I STATE OF CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Cal OES IDNo: 059-69000 CAL FINS 130 DESIGNATION OF SUBRECIPIENT'S AGENT RESOLUTION Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and Pre -Disaster Mitigation Program BE IT RESOLVED BY THE City Council OF THE City of Santa Ana (Governing Body) (Name of Applicant) THAT City Manager OR (Title of AuWonzed Agent) OR (Title of Autbonzed Agent) (Title of Autborized Agent) is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the City of Santa Ana , a public entity (Name of Subrecipient) established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it with the California Governor's Office of Emergency Service. for the purpose of obtaining certain federal financial assistance under Public Law 93-288 as amended by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, and/or state financial assistance under the California Disaster Assistance Act. THAT the Citv of Santa Ana a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, (Name of Subrecipient) hereby authorizes its agent(s) to provide to the California Governor's Office of Emergency Service for all matters pertaining to such state disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required. Please check the appropriate box below: ❑ This is a universal resolution and is effective for all open and futures Disasters/Grants up to three (3) years following the date of approval below. This is a Disaster/Grant specific resolution and is effective for only Disaster/Grant name/number(s) DR-4353-020-45 Passed and approved this 5th day of 2020 (Name and Title of Governing Body Representative) (Name and Title of Governing Body Representative) (Name and Title of Governing Body Representative) CERTIFICATION 1, Daisy Gomez duly appointed and Clerk of the Council (Name) (Title) the City of Santa Ana do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a (Name of Applicant) Resolution passed and approved by the City Council (Governing Body) on the 5th day of May . 20 20 . (Signature) the City of Santa Ana (Name of Applicant) Clerk of the Council (Title) Cal OES 130(Rev.03/278/17) UNA STATE OF CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA GOVERNORS OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICE CAL OES 130-INSTRUCTIONS Cal OES Form 130 Instructions A new Designation of Applicant's Agent Resolution is required if the previously submitted document is older than three (3) years from the last date of Board/Council approval. When completing the Cal OES Form 130, Subrecipients should fill in the blanks on page 1. The blanks are to be filled in as follows: Resolution Section: Governing Body: This is the individual or group responsible for appointing and approving the Authorized Agents. Examples include: Board of Directors, City Council, Board of Supervisors, etc. Name of Subrecipient: This is the official name of the non-profitagency, city, county or special district that has applied for the grant Examples include: City of Sacramento; Sacramento County; or Los Angeles Unified School District. Authorized Agent: These are the individuals that are authorized by the Governing Body to engage with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the California Governor's Office of Emergency Service regarding grants applied for by the subrecipient. There are two ways of completing this section: Titles Only: If the Governing Body so chooses, the titles of the Authorized Agents should be entered here, not their names. This allows the document to remain valid if an Authorized Agent leaves the position and is replaced by another individual. If "Titles Only" is the chosen method, this document must be accompanied by a cover letter naming the Authorized Agents by name and title. This cover letter can be completed by any authorized person within the agency (e.g.; City Clerk, the Authorized Agent, Secretary to the Director) and does not require the Governing Body's signature. 2. Names and Titles: If the Governing Body so chooses, the names and titles of the Authorized Agents should be listed. A new Cal OES Form 130 will be required if any of the Authorized Agents are replaced, leave the position listed on the document or their title changes. Governing Body Representative: These are the names and titles of the approving board members. Examples include: Chairman of the Board, Superintendent, etc. The names and titles cannot be one of the designated Authorized Agents. Name and Title: This is the individual that was in attendance and recorded the Resolution creation and approval. Examples include: City Clerk, Secretary to the Board of Directors, County Clerk, etc. This person cannot be one of the designated Authorized Agents to eliminate "Self Certification." Cat OES 130 (Rev.03/28/17 page' 55A-5 This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution. ADOPTED this _ day of May, 2020. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R.�� fC��arvalho, City Attorney By: Tamara Bogosian Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers: C�7�:71rI�N7_�r�i7y_��r��r_�r[�7►I_1►1�Z�7:7[ell►/_\��rt'1 I, DAISY GOMEZ, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify that the attached Resolution No. 2020-XXX to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on May _, 2020. Date: Daisy Gomez, Clerk of the Council #372790 Resolution No. 2020-XXX y Exhibit 2 AGREEMENT WITH EMERGENCY PLANNING CONSULTANTS TO PROVIDE A HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this 5s' day of May, 2020 by and between Carolyn J. Harshman, an individual dba Emergency Planning Consultants ("Consultant"), and the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California ("City"). RECITALS A. On January 14, 2020, the City issued a Request for Proposal ("RFP") No. 19-134 seeking consultants to provide local hazard mitigation plan preparation services for the Santa Ana Police Department ("Department"). B. Consultant submitted a timely response to the Department which was selected and Consultant is able and willing to provide such services to the City. C. In undertaking the performance of this Agreement, Consultant represents that it is knowledgeable in its field and that any services performed by Consultant under this Agreement will be performed in compliance with such standards as may reasonably be expected from a professional consulting firm in the field. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual and respective promises, and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES Consultant shall perform during the term of this Agreement, the tasks and obligations including all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidental customary work required to fully and adequately complete the services described and set forth in Consultant's updated proposal dated March 11, 2020, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference. 2. COMPENSATION a. City agrees to pay, and Consultant agrees to accept as total payment for its services for City, the rates and charges identified in Exhibit A. The total amount to be expended during the term of this Agreement shall not exceed $74,000. b. Payment by City shall be made within forty-five (45) days following receipt of proper invoice evidencing work performed, subject to City accounting procedures. Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standards of performance set forth in the Recitals which may reasonably be expected by City. 3. TERM This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 2020 and continue for a two (2) year term until June 30, 2022 with the option for the City to grant up to a one (1) year renewal, exercisable by a Page 1 of 8 #19793v1 55A-7 writing by the City Manager and the City Attorney, unless terminated earlier in accordance with Section 15, below. 4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Consultant shall, during the entire term of this Agreement, be construed to be an independent Consultant and not an employee of the City. This Agreement is not intended nor shall it be construed to create an employer -employee relationship, a joint venture relationship, or to allow the City to exercise discretion or control over the professional manner in which Consultant performs the services which are the subject matter of this Agreement; however, the services to be provided by Consultant shall be provided in a manner consistent with all applicable standards and regulations governing such services. Consultant shall pay all salaries and wages, employer's social security taxes, unemployment insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be responsible for all applicable withholding taxes. 6 111110D1I'M1I111]DLL/_V IDIN/_\16` This Agreement creates a non-exclusive and perpetual license for City to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual property embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement ("Documents & Data"). Consultant shall require all subcontractors to agree in writing that City is granted a non-exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subcontractor prepares under this Agreement. Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to license any and all Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were provided to Consultant by the City. City shall not be limited in any way in its use of the Documents and Data at any time, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at City's sole risk. 6. INSURANCE Prior to undertaking performance of work under this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain and shall require its subcontractors, if any, to obtain and maintain insurance as described below: a. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance naming the City, its officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives as additional insured(s) and shall include, but not be limited to protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom and damage to property, resulting from any act or occurrence arising out of Contractor's operations in the performance of this Agreement, including, without limitation, acts involving vehicles. The amounts of insurance shall be not less than the following: single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and property damage, in the total amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence, with $2,000,000 in the aggregate. Such insurance shall (a) name the City, its officers, employees, agents, Page 2 of 8 #19793v1 55A-8 and representatives as additionalinsured(s); (b) be primary and not contributory with respect to insurance or self-insurance programs maintained by the City; and (c) contain standard separation of insureds provisions. b. Business automobile liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non -owned automobiles. C. Worker's Compensation Insurance. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code, Contractor, if Consultant has any employees, is required to be insured against liability for worker's compensation or to undertake self- insurance. Prior to commencing the performance of the work under this Agreement, Consultant agrees to obtain and maintain any employer's liability insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 per accident. d. If Consultant is or employs a licensed professional such as an architect or engineer: Professional liability (errors and omissions) insurance, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per claim with $2,000,000 in the aggregate. e. The following requirements apply to the insurance to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this section: i. Consultant shall maintain all insurance required above in full force and effect for the entire period covered by this Agreement. ii. Certificates of insurance shall be furnished to the City upon execution of this Agreement and shall be approved by the City. iii. Certificates and policies shall state that the policies shall not be canceled or reduced in coverage or changed in any other material aspect without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City. iv. Where the amounts or coverage provided by the certificates of insurance provides coverage greater than those listed by this Agreement, the amounts provided by the certificates of insurance shall be incorporated by reference into the Agreement. V. Consultant shall supply City with a fully executed additional insured endorsement. I. If Consultant fails or refuses to produce or maintain the insurance required by this section or fails or refuses to furnish the City with required proof that insurance has been procured and is in force and paid for, the City shall have the right, at the City's election, to forthwith terminate this Agreement. Such termination shall not affect Contractor's right to be paid for its time and materials expended prior to notification of termination. Consultant waives the right to receive compensation and agrees to indemnify the City for any work performed prior to approval of insurance by the City. INDEMNIFICATION Consultant agrees to defend, and shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees, contractors, special counsel, and representatives from liability: (1) for personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief arising out of claims for Page 3 of 8 #19793v1 55A-9 personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage, which may arise from the negligent operations of the Contractor, its subcontractors, agents, employees, or other persons acting on its behalf which relates to the services described in section I of this Agreement; and (2) from any claim that personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief is due by reason of the terms of or effects arising from this Agreement. This indemnity and hold harmless agreement applies to all claims for damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the events referred to in this Section or by reason of the terms of, or effects, arising from this Agreement. The Consultant further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and pay all costs for the defense of the City, including fees and costs for special counsel to be selected by the City, regarding any action by a third party challenging the validity of this Agreement, or asserting that personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief due to personal or property rights arises by reason of the terms of, or effects arising from this Agreement. City may make all reasonable decisions with respect to its representation in any legal proceeding. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent Contractor's services are subject to Civil Code Section 2782.8, the above indemnity shall be limited, to the extent required by Civil Code Section 2782.8, to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor. 8. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNIFICATION Consultant shall defend and indemnify the City, its officers, agents, representatives, and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright infringement, including costs, contained in the work product or documents provided by Consultant to the City pursuant to this Agreement. 9. RECORDS Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement and any services, expenditures, and disbursements charged to the City for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and invoices shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of the City to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement during regular business hours. Consultant shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. 10. CONFIDENTIALITY If Consultant receives from the City information which due to the nature of such information is reasonably understood to be confidential and/or proprietary, Consultant agrees that it shall not use or disclose such information except in the performance of this Agreement, and further agrees to exercise the same degree of care it uses to protect its own information of like importance, but in no event less than reasonable care. "Confidential Information" shall include all nonpublic information. Confidential information includes not only written information, but also Page 4 of 8 #19793v1 55A-10 information transferred orally, visually, electronically, or by other means. Confidential information disclosed to either party by any subsidiary and/or agent of the other party is covered by this Agreement. The foregoing obligations of non-use and nondisclosure shall not apply to any information that (a) has been disclosed in publicly available sources; (b) is, through no fault of the Consultant disclosed in a publicly available source; (c) is in rightful possession of the Consultant without an obligation of confidentiality; (d) is required to be disclosed by operation of law; or (e) is independently developed by the Consultant without reference to information disclosed by the City. 11. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CLAUSE Consultant covenants that it presently has no interests and shall not have interests, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with performance of services specified under this Agreement. 12. NON-DISCRLVIINATION Provider shall not discriminate because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, gender, medical conditions, genetic information, or military and veteran status, age, national origin, ancestry, or disability, as defined and prohibited by applicable law, in the recruitment, selection, teaching, training, utilization, promotion, termination or other employment related activities or any services provided under this Agreement. Provider affirms that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. 13. EXCLUSIVITY AND AMENDMENT This Agreement represents the complete and exclusive statement between the City and Contractor, and supersedes any and all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and any attachments hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail. This Agreement may not be modified except by written instrument signed by the City and by an authorized representative of Contractor. The parties agree that any terms or conditions of any purchase order or other instrument that are inconsistent with, or in addition to, the terms and conditions hereof, shall not bind or obligate Consultant or the City. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which is not embodied herein. 14. ASSIGNMENT Inasmuch as this Agreement is intended to secure the specialized services of Contractor, Consultant may not assign, transfer, delegate, or subcontract any interest herein without the prior written consent of the City and any such assignment, transfer, delegation or subcontract without the City's prior written consent shall be considered null and void. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit the City's ability to have any of the services which are the subject to this Agreement performed by City personnel or by other Contractors retained by City. Page 5 of 8 #19793v1 55A-11 15. TERNIINATION This Agreement may be terminated by the City upon thirty (30) days written notice of termination. In such event, Consultant shall be entitled to receive and the City shall pay Consultant compensation for all services performed by Consultant prior to receipt of such notice of termination, subject to the following conditions: a. As a condition of such payment, the Executive Director may require Consultant to deliver to the City all work product(s) completed as of such date, and in such case such work product shall be the property of the City unless prohibited by law, and Consultant consents to the City's use thereof for such purposes as the City deems appropriate. b. Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standard of performance specified in the Recitals of this Agreement. 16. WAIVER No waiver of breach, failure of any condition, or any right or remedy contained in or granted by the provisions of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing and signed by the party waiving the breach, failure, right or remedy. No waiver of any breach, failure or right, or remedy shall be deemed a waiver of any other breach, failure, right or remedy, whether or not similar, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver unless the writing so specifies. 17. JURISDICTION - VENUE This Agreement has been executed and delivered in the State of California and the validity, interpretation, performance, and enforcement of any of the clauses of this Agreement shall be determined and governed by the laws of the State of California. Both parties further agree that Orange County, California, shall be the venue for any action or proceeding that may be brought or arise out of, in connection with or by reason of this Agreement. 18. PROEESSIONAL LICENSES Consultant shall, throughout the term of this Agreement, maintain all necessary licenses, permits, approvals, waivers, and exemptions necessary for the provision of the services hereunder and required by the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, the City of Santa Ana and all other governmental agencies. Consultant shall notify the City immediately and in writing of its inability to obtain or maintain such permits, licenses, approvals, waivers, and exemptions. Said inability shall be cause for termination of this Agreement. 19. NOTICE Any notice, tender, demand, delivery, or other communication pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be properly given if delivered in person or mailed by first class or certified mail, postage prepaid, or sent by fax or other telegraphic communication in Page 6 of 8 #19793v1 55A-12 the manner provided in this Section, to the following persons: To City: Clerk of the City Council City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-30) P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, CA 92702-1988 Fax: 714- 647-6956 With courtesy copies to: Chief of Police City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-97) P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, California 92702 Fax:714-245-8007 To Contractor: Carolyn J. Harshman President Emergency Planning Consultants 3665 Ethan Allen Avenue San Diego, CA 92117 Fax:858-483-2862 A party may change its address by giving notice in writing to the other party. Thereafter, any communication shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. If sent by mail, communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given three (3) days after it has been deposited in the United States mail, duly registered or certified, with postage prepaid, and addressed as set forth above. If sent by fax, communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given twenty-four (24) hours after the time set forth on the transmission report issued by the transmitting facsimile machine, addressed as set forth above. For purposes of calculating these time frames, weekends, federal, state, County or City holidays shall be excluded. 20. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS a. Each undersigned represents and warrants that its signature herein below has the power, authority and right to bind their respective parties to each of the terms of this Agreement, and shall indemnify City fully, including reasonable costs and attorney's fees, for any injuries or damages to City in the event that such authority or power is not, in fact, held by the signatory or is withdrawn. b. All Exhibits referenced herein and attached hereto shall be incorporated as if fully set forth in the body of this Agreement. Page 7 of 8 #19793v1 55A-13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the date and year first above written. ATTEST: Daisy Gomez Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM: SONIA R. CARVALHO City Attorney %c�tr� Seg�a�c� By: Tamara Bogosian Assistant City Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: David Valentin Chief of Police CITY OF SANTA ANA Kristine Ridge City Manager EMERGENCY PLANNING CONSULTANTS: Carolyn J. Harshman President Page 8 of 8 #19793v1 55A-14 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES 55A-15 Exhibit A 1ILP60, Emergency Planning Consultants March 11, 2020 This is an updated proposal in response to the Request for Proposal (RFP) for development of a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) for the City of Santa Ana. It also reflects a conversation with the City's Emergency Operations Coordination Mr. Stephen Rhyner. Emergency Planning Consultants (EPC) has written more than 110 FEMA-approved hazard mitigation plans as well as additional now in the plan writing and review phase. Additionally, EPC updated the City of Santa Ana's Emergency Operations Plan approximately 10 years ago. Hazard mitigation planning has been at the very core of "recovery planning" for decades but the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 elevated the importance of developing pre - disaster mitigation activities. Mitigation activities includes projects, programs, and plans that assist with minimizing or eliminating threats associated with hazards. Since the passage of DMA 2000 there have been numerous case studies proving that the steps taken ahead to minimize and/or eliminate risks has greatly reduced damages and loss of life. Like wearing a seat belt in a car, mitigation has revolutionized disaster outcomes. Whether thought of as "insurance" or a "good investment", there is no doubt that mitigation is the right thing to do. If that's not enough incentive, federal regulations require public jurisdictions to maintain a FEMA-approved HMP in order to be eligible for post -disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds. Additionally, recently there has been considerable discussion among other federal agencies about the future need for HMPs to qualify for other types of post -disaster funding. EPC maintains the outstanding qualifications required to conduct hazard research and mapping, facilitate a robust planning process, actively encourage public involvement, negotiate with the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) during the formal review process, and garner adoption by the City of Santa Ana City Council. EPC President Carolyn Harshman has enjoyed two careers: City Planning and Emergency Management. Both careers required continued improvement in professional skills of research, data collection, mapping, stakeholder involvement and community outreach, technical writing, public speaking, training design and delivery. Without a doubt, Emergency Planning Consultants is the subject matter expert in the field of hazard mitigation in California #36221v2 1 55A-16 Exhibit A having written more plans (150 to date with some in formal review) and the most FEMA- approved plan (110 to date). This proposal is valid for a period of one year and is signed by the sole proprietor of Emergency Planning Consultants. All services will be provided and/or managed out of EPC headquarters located at 3665 Ethan Allen Avenue, San Diego, CA 92117, (858) 483-4626, office, epc(a-)pacbell.net. EPC has no issues with any of the content of the RFP, Scope of Work, agreement, or insurance requirements. Respectfully, Carolyn J. Harshman, CEM Owner and President Emergency Planning Consultants epcapacbell.net www.carolynharshman.com Attachments: Proposal, Resume, RFP Attachments A-D #36221v2 2 55A-17 Exhibit A Scope of Services At present, the City of Santa Ana is not in compliance with DMA 2000 and therefore not eligible to complete for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds which are made available to jurisdictions within the declared area following a Presidential Disaster Declaration. In order to accomplish eligibility, a FEMA-approved Hazard Mitigation Plan must be developed that accomplishes the following: The intent of DMA 2000 is three -fold: a) To gather hazard, vulnerability, and mitigation information from the local level for use in state -level planning; b) To ensure that state and local hazard mitigation planning is coordinated to the greatest extent practical; and c) To ensure that local jurisdictions are made aware of the hazards and vulnerabilities within their jurisdiction and to develop strategies to reduce those vulnerabilities. In order to meet all of those objectives, FEMA developed a "checklist" for use by the State and Federal reviewers. The Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA Review Tool) includes the following tasks: ➢ Element A: Planning Process ➢ Element B: Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment ➢ Element C: Mitigation Strategy ➢ Element D: Plan Review, Evaluation, and Implementation ➢ Element E: Plan Adoption (by City Council) It's important to note that it is especially important to hire a firm with an extensive history of preparing FEMA-approved Hazard Mitigation Plans. Without adequate experience, it would not be unusual to spend as much time in the "Cal OES and FEMA review phase" as in preparing the actual plan. EPC prepares approvable plans and in the event a Cal OES or FEMA reviewer disagrees, knows how to discuss the difference in interpretation to gain approval. Specific strategies for accomplishing Element A-E are discussed below in Methodology and Quality Control. Methodology and Quality Control Preparation of the Hazard Mitigation Plan will incorporate all of the federal requirements relating to local hazard mitigation plans. EPC's hazard mitigation planning approach has been perfected since 2005 when the federal government first required plans for local jurisdictions. Since that time great effort and time has gone into tracking the changes of "interpretations" by the regulatory agencies of the DMA 2000 legislation. Without publishing updates to the originating legislation, FEMA instead has published guidelines (see below) and has amended the FEMA Review Tool used to judge the adequacy of plans. Understanding all the changes in interpretation is critical to writing a plan that can go through the state and FEMA reviewers with only minor revisions. State and FEMA have both made significant staffing changes over the past year resulting in more consistent reviews and fewer unjustified requested changes. Recently, FEMA review staff have worked closely with state review staff to better understand the requirements in order to streamline the review process. With so many FEMA approved #36221v2 3 55A-18 Exhibit A plans, obviously EPC clearly understands both the regulations and "interpretations" so goes into the review process as aligned as possible. All said, the key to a successful review is to be absolutely certain that every required component is clearly marked in the plan and on the FEMA Review Tool. Nothing can replace EPC's years of experience and track record at facilitating and writing FEMA-approved Hazard Mitigation Plans. This experience has also prepared us for any unexpected challenges with other aspects of the planning process — Planning Team Meetings, community outreach, and participating in the adoption meeting. EPC prides itself on working closely with the jurisdiction's Point of Contact to bend and adjust to the content, format, and scheduling needs. Hazard Mitigation Planning Process Preparation of the Hazard Mitigation Plan will be completed in compliance with the requirements of the federal government Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000), FEMA's Local Multi -Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance published July 2008, the Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide published in October 2011, and the Local Mitigation Planning Handbook published March 2013. Building on those Local Mitigation materials and other FEMA mitigation "how-to guides", the Plan Review Guide following methodology will be utilized: OcloLtr 1,:011 Planning Tools have been developed by EPC that FEMA will significantly decrease the amount of jurisdictional staff time required for completion of the HMP. EPC developed these tools during preparation of the 2014 update to the County of Los Angeles All - Hazards Mitigation Plan. County of orange 0 Risk and Vulnerability Assessment includes & preparing the Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment, and Vulnerability Analysis portion of the Hazard Mitigation Plan. Orange county Fire Authority EPC will build off of the Risk Assessment in the 2015 County pwp of Orange and Orange County Fire Authority Hazard Mitigation Plan as well as the 2018 State of California Multi - Hazard Mitigation Plan. Additionally, the City of Santa Ana General Plan — Safety Element and Emergency Operations Plan will be reviewed for hazard and risk -related information as well as history of previous occurrences. EPC also Local Hazard Miniptlo Plan November maintains a broad range of resources for information 2015 regarding historical disasters. The EPC Team will base its research on the hazards on those as identified in the California Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan. During the first Planning Team meeting, the hazards will be discussed, and EPC will provide recommendations on a final hazards list. The Risk Assessment in the HMP will include hazard -specific chapters #36221v2 4 55A-19 Exhibit A including EPC-produced hazard maps showing location of critical and essential facilities and HAZUS-MH (see below). Community Profile will be developed for the project area. More than just demographics and organizational structure, the Profile will reflect the history and unique characteristics of the community. Mapping resources within the jurisdiction will be utilized by EPC to assist the reader in understanding the location and vulnerability to hazards. Additionally, EPC will produce any other maps necessary to properly explain the location of hazards as they relate to critical and essential facilities. Also, see below for a discussion on HAZUS-MH. HAZUS-MH (Hazards United States — Multi -Hazard) is software produced by FEMA designed to estimate loss projections for earthquake, hurricane, flooding, and tsunami. EPC will provide nine HAZUS-MH Level 2 maps and reports — 6 earthquake scenarios and 3 flood scenario including Prado Dam inundation. The scenarios will be selected by the Planning Team. HAZUS-MH utilizes data from the most recent U.S. Census. That information is overlaid with a hazard scenario (e.g. Newport -Inglewood Fault). In the case of an earthquake scenario, the HAZUS-MH output is a map showing shaking intensities along with a very detailed report on impacts to people, structures, infrastructure, and utilities. A sample HAZUS-MH flood map prepared by EPC is shown below: St l City of Montebello 000,00, Whittier Dam Failure Law„2,1 ' 11.5 Fml — Ciq Bwntlary #36221v2 5 55A-20 Exhibit A Capability Assessment includes a list of the programs (budgets, facility improvement plans), policies, and personnel available to each of the participating jurisdictions to complete the Mitigation Strategy. Mitigation Strategy is the comprehensive list of each existing and future mitigation action item for the jurisdiction. The Planning Team members will be relied on to identify the jurisdiction's ongoing mitigation action (e.g. tree trimming before a storm, etc.) while ideas for the future will be drawn from the General Plan -Safety Element and Capital Improvement Program along with ideas from the Planning Team members. During this brainstorming process, members will be encouraged to think through the various hazards and come up with projects and programs that could be funded through HMGP and other pre- and post - disaster funding mechanisms. EPC Tools will facilitate this process. FEMA regulations, each of the mitigation action items will include a description of the action item, identification of coordinating department, timeline, priority, cost, benefit, goals accomplished, impacts to new and existing structures, and planning tools for implementation. EPC will present simple tools for ranking cost and benefit. The resulting Mitigation Actions Matrix is the very core of the mitigation planning process and will include action planning tools to be used by the Planning Team during the implementation process. Community Outreach will be discussed at the first Planning Team Meeting. In order to comply with FEMA requirements, it is critical that individuals and organizations outside of the Planning Team have access to the Plan during the "plan writing process". o Numerous methods including social media will be utilized to announce the availability of the Second Draft Plan and the opportunity to provide input. In addition to encouraging participation in contributing to the Second Draft Plan, EPC will provide the following community outreach tools: • Distribution of EPC-produced handouts sharing mitigation techniques available to residents and businesses. #36221v2 6 55A-21 Exhibit A 11 r E A R T H Q U A K E - MINIMIZE OR ELIMINATE THREATS ASSOCIATED WITH HAZARDS - ❑ Anchor plates, expansion anchors, ❑ Rolecfive coaling on wintlows and homing anchors to secure ❑ Upgraded gas line connectors roofs to wales, walls at comers, and ❑ SNopdownwoterheolers walls to foundations ❑ Secure heavy turaiture and ..It Gasandwaterautomalicshut-offs hangings (INSERT CONTACT INFORMATION HERE) • Links to hazard information allowing home and business owners to identify specific hazards impacting their own properties (State of California's MyHazards). Planning Team The Planning Team will consist of representatives from the City as well any contracted providers of service. As participants are selected, it's important to keep in mind that hazard mitigation focuses on regulatory controls as well as construction and maintenance of buildings and infrastructure. EPC will provide agendas, handouts, minutes, and PowerPoints for each meeting. EPC President Carolyn Harshman will facilitate each of the meetings. o Planning Team Meeting #1 (2 hours) • The purpose of the first meeting is to provide a general overview of the project, timeline, gather pertinent documents, confirm roles and membership of the Planning Team, review the concepts and standards contained in the DMA 2000 regulations and FEMA Review Tool, #36221v2 55A-22 Exhibit A discuss availability of mapping resources, and discuss opportunities for public participation. • Initial review of hazards. o Planning Team Meeting #2 (2 hours) • The purpose of the second meeting is to review best practices in hazard mitigation and examine opportunities to integrate the mitigation plan with the City's existing development policies included in the General Plan and other regulatory documents. o Planning Team Meeting #3 (2 hours) • The purpose of the second meeting is to begin work on the Mitigation Strategy. This will involve capturing existing mitigation activities along with developing mitigation action items for the future. EPC will work in advance of the meeting to review the General Plan -Safety Element, Annual Budget, and Capital Improvement Program in order to capture any already identified mitigation -related projects. o Planning Team Meeting #4 (2 hours) • The purpose of the third meeting is to continue to develop new mitigation action items. During the meeting EPC will distribute a planning tool that contains a comprehensive list of mitigation actions from a wide variety of jurisdictional plans. The use of this comprehensive list will assist and expedite the Planning Team's process of identifying existing and future mitigation actions. o Planning Team Meeting #5 (2 hours) • Review of the First Draft Plan will be preceded by advance distribution of the document to the Planning Team via the City's Point of Contact. The meeting will provide an opportunity for the Planning Team to share comments and corrections to the document. Also, this meeting will include a discussion on preparations and logistics for conducting the public participation process and soliciting input from the general public and external agencies during the distribution of the Second Draft Plan. General Public and External Agency Input FEMA requires the Second Draft Plan be made available to the general public and external agencies (e.g. adjoining jurisdictions, servicing special districts, etc.). EPC recommends posting the Second Draft Plan on the City's website and using existing notification methods perhaps including a newsletter or other means to inform the general public of the Plan's availability. As for the external agencies, EPC will provide email content for distribution to the various agencies (not yet including Cal OES and FEMA) including a link to the posting of the Second Draft Plan. All information gathered will be included in the Third Draft Plan. Finalization will include sending an electronic copy of the Third Draft to the Point of Contact along with a cover letter and completed FEMA Review Tool for submission to Cal OES. Following any DMA 2000-justified revisions by EPC, Cal OES will forward the Plan to FEMA for review and issuance of an Approval #36221v2 8 55A-23 Exhibit A Pending Adoption. As with the review by Cal OES, EPC will complete any DMA 2000-justified revisions while being certain to protect the City from unfair and unjustified revisions. EPC guarantees the HMP will receive an Approval Pending Adoption. Upon receipt of the Approval Pending Adoption letter from FEMA, the Final Draft Plan will be scheduled for presentation to the City Council for adoption. EPC will prepare a staff report and resolution. EPC President Carolyn Harshman will be available for the presentation to the City Council should that be desired. Following the meeting, proof of adoption will be forwarded to FEMA. FEMA will then send an email and letter of Final Approval which will be incorporated into the Final Plan. EPC will continue to lead the planning process until the Final Approval is received from FEMA, proof of adoption by the decision maker body is submitted to FEMA, and said documents are incorporated into the Final Plan. #36221v2 9 55A-24 Me rev W �• x x x xx x x x x x x x x x x �� • x x x x x x x x x x x xx x �• xx x c mo c N p Q O O c m d o 0 w c a 0 N N w O O_ ¢ p N IL 2 a) p — w wLL O UN L\.�-., .0. -0 N C CUJ '6 d N r+ ❑ m 'p c f0 w d 0 " m ¢ A a O m c a0i ... '� E m0 > p- oV'p�E N L.L N N ::. ❑ O O'u 0 O N cl ¢ r +0+ d 10 C N> O U .pcl N y> N N L.L L U m> d w N O m N Q 0 •�O LL NU H � d N N.� > 7 7 N'6a �'�6 N 7d �� o m a a)¢" a)pd s p❑ c¢ p ¢w LL wQ C 0) m2�� mT a-p m mo `�wUO w DH� 0 xk NM it i N. It a 0) a) � U C� a) w w a) m a) a) c mT 7 mo aa) O H '-' a) � Q O m0 (0 ` f0 U C C :r C :r C :r C :r E ..+ '� O a) a) ..+ —> E N C> m N a) N C N C p a) a) a) a) p C N O Q E a) U . w w a) 0 0 a7 a) .• A a) a) a) a) a) a) O 0 :, C U a) O 7 O a) N LL O a) a) 0 a CL a w a m U w¢ c9 a Q U U w o c 0 55A-25 Exhibit A Entity and Personnel Experience Emergency Planning Consultants offers a full range of emergency management professional services including plans, training, and exercises to various forms of government. A complete listing of clients and services is included later in the Qualifications section. Emergency Planning Consultants was established in 1997 through the City of San Diego and filing for a "Doing Business As" through the County of San Diego. EPC's only employee is owner and sole proprietor, Carolyn J. Harshman. As needed, EPC tasks independent contractors to provide services including hazard research, mapping, graphics, and document design. The company's location is in San Diego, California. Ms. Harshman maintains a Certified Emergency Manager designation that requires 5- year updates through the International Association of Emergency Managers, a non- profit professional association. The EPC Project Team selected for this project is the perfect balance of subject matter expertise, background, and local knowledge. Following are introductions to the EPC Team members. Name: Carolyn J. Harshman, CEM Education: Master of Public Administration Professional Affiliations: International Association of Emergency Managers, California Emergency Services Association, National Hazard Mitigation Association Professional Licenses and Certifications: Certified Emergency Manager Carolyn Harshman, CEM is the Owner and President of Emergency Planning Consultants and will serve as the Project Manager and Principal Planner. Preparing a Hazard Mitigation Plan requires subject matter expertise in the areas of emergency response planning, hazard mitigation planning, mapping, and land use planning. With backgrounds in both land use planning and emergency management, Ms. Harshman is the right fit for facilitating the planning project. Ms. Harshman will serve as the Project Manager to the designee at the City of Santa Ana and maintains responsibility for all aspects of the contracted services. Monthly status updates will be provided. Invoices will be submitted according to the terms of the contract. As Principal Planner, Ms. Harshman will lead the project by facilitating and participating at all Planning Team meetings and the City Council. She will serve as the principal author and maintain quality control over the document at all times. Ms. Harshman will also manage relationships and contributions from EPC independent contractors, ensuring quality control and continuous improvement by conducting weekly meetings with the EPC Team. Prior to working in the field of emergency management, Ms. Harshman enjoyed a combined 20-year career as a city, regional, and redevelopment planner for the County of San Diego, City of San Diego, and Southeastern Economic Development #36221v2 11 55A-26 Exhibit A Corporation. In her role as a land use planner Ms. Harshman prepared General Plan Amendments, Community Plans, Zoning Ordinance revisions, and conducted hundreds of community meetings. As a local government staff member for so many years, Carolyn is very familiar with the organization, roles, and responsibilities of government entities. Ms. Harshman began work in the field of emergency management in 1984 when she was hired as a hazard planner for the County of San Diego's Office of Emergency Services. There she updated the County's Emergency Operations Plan and also served as the Hazards Officer. Responding to requests from other jurisdictions to provide consulting services, Carolyn began part-time work as a consultant in 1986 writing Multi -Hazard Functional Plans and providing mandated trainings. In 1996, she ended her career with local government and established Emergency Planning Consultants. Ms. Harshman has been a member of FEMA's Emergency Management Institute's Planning Advisory Board since 2005, involved in each update to the Emergency Planning Course (G235). Also, she taught FEMA's pilot deliveries for the Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 course. The revised CPG 101 regulations provide guidance on styles and content for emergency operations plans, placing emphasis on engaging the "whole community" — including those with access and functional needs, children, and those with household pets and service animals. Carolyn has completed and teaches FEMA Master Trainer Program courses as well as a variety of other courses at the Emergency Management Institute, California Specialized Training Institute, and as an adjunct instructor at a variety of educational facilities. Ms. Harshman holds a Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree from San Diego State University and is a Certified Emergency Manager (CEM), as conferred by the International Association of Emergency Managers. Actively engaged in professional development, Ms. Harshman was in FEMA's first cohort of the National Emergency Management Executive Academy. Ms. Harshman is an active leader in the International Association of Emergency Managers, serving as Chair of the Conference Committee from 2006-2011, Chair of the Leadership Symposium from 2011-2013, Chair of the Membership & Marketing Committee from 2014-2016, President of IAEM- USA Region 9 (California, Arizona, Nevada, Hawaii, and Pacific Territories) and presently Second Vice President for IAEM-USA. Name: Alex Fritzler Education: Bachelor of Arts — Business Administration Professional Affiliations: California Emergency Services Association Alex Fritzler is an Independent Contractor and will serve as the Lead Research and Mapping Analyst. He will be responsible for hazard and demographic research, writing, technical services, graphics, data analysis, and mapping services in support to the EPC Team. Alex has assisted with the preparation of more than thirty local government hazard mitigation plans since joining EPC in 2010. #36221v2 12 55A-27 Exhibit A Name: Zoe Schumacher Education: Master of Arts — Geography Professional Affiliations: Urban and Regional Information Systems Association Zoe Schumacher is an Independent Contractor and will serve as the GIS Analyst. Ms. Schumacher has over 15 years of extensive experience with ESRI ArcMap suite of software, and extensions including Spatial and 3D Analyst, ArcSDE, ArcGIS Server. She conducts aerial interpretations and utilization of GIS to identify high -value ecosystems. Ms. Schumacher is trained and well -versed in the use of HAZUS-MH - FEMA's natural disaster loss projection software. She has served as EPC's GIS Analyst since 2017. EPC Qualifications Following is EPC's List of Clients and Projects. EPC began work on Hazard Mitigation Plans in 2005 when FEMA first required the development of plans. #36221v2 13 55A-28 Exhibit A PlanningEmergency Consultants Client and•. Sco a of Work Federal Government Federal Emergency Management Course design and deliveries for FEMA's Emergency Agency FEMA) Management Institute National Disaster Preparedness Course design and deliveries of Advanced Disaster Training Center (NDPTC-University of Recovery Course, Leveraging Tools for Conducting Hawaii) Damage Assessments, Coastal Community Resilience, Community Planning for Disaster Recovery State Governments California Office of Emergency Services: Multi -Hazard Functional Plan Template, California Specialized Training Institute: Course deliveries Indiana Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) Template, Facilitated completion of CEMP for 15 Indiana Counties Missouri HSEEP agro-terrorism functional exercise, HSEEP regional WMD exercises New Hampshire State Operations Plan, EOC Standard Operating Procedures Hawaii Department of Education: Grant writing - Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools Grant (2008), State Civil Defense: Course and exercise deliveries City . County Governments City of Anaheim Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Bellflower Hazard Mitigation, Grant Writing, Update Hazard Mitigation, Update General Plan Safety Element and Technical Background Report, Update Emergency Operations Plan City of Bradbury Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Buena Park Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Emergency Operations Plan City of Carlsbad Emergency Operations Plan, EOC Trainings and Exercises, Full -Scale Active Shooter Exercise (multi -jurisdictional law enforcement event City of Carson Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Cerritos Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Chula Vista Pre -Disaster Recovery Plan #36221v2 14 55A-29 Exhibit A City of Claremont Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan, Continuity of 0 erations Plan City of Coachella EOC Tabletop Exercise City of Compton Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Covina Hazard Mitigation Plan, Emergency Operations Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Duarte Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of El Monte Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of El Segundo Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Glendora Hazard Mitigation Plan, SEMS EOC Course City of Hawaiian Gardens Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Hermosa Beach Hazard Mitigation Plan, Emergency Operations Plan, EOC Trainings and Exercises, Update Emergency Operations Plan City of Hesperia EOC Trainin s and Functional Exercise City of Huntington Park Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Indio Incident Command System 300 and 400 Training Courses, EOC Section -Specific Training City of Irwindale Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of La Habra Heights Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of La Mirada Hazard Mitigation Plan City of La Puente Update Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Emergency Operations Plan, EOC Training City of Lakewood Update Emergency Operations Plan City of Lomita Update Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Emergency Operations Plan City of Long Beach Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Emergency Operations Plan, Continuity of Operations Plan City of Lynwood Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Manhattan Beach Hazard Mitigation Plan, Emergency Operations Plan, EOC Training and Exercises City of Palos Verdes Estates Emergency Operations Plan, Continuity of Operations Plan, Training and Exercises #36221v2 15 55A-30 Exhibit A City of Rancho Cucamonga Emergency Operations Plan, Continuity of Operations Plan, Continuity of Government Plan, EOC Training and Exercises City of Rancho Palos Verdes Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, Emergency Operations Plan, EOC Trainings and Exercises, Update Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, Continuity of Operations Plan, Update Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Rolling Hills Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Rolling Hills Estates Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Multi - Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Multi - Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Rosemead Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Santa Ana Update Emergency Operations Plan City of Santa Fe Springs Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Sierra Madre Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Signal Hill Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of South El Monte Hazard Mitigation Plan City of South Gate Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Twentynine Palms Update Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Upland Emergency Operations Plan, EOC Training and Exercises, EOC Design City of Vernon Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Walnut, Mt. San Antonio Hazard Mitigation Plan Community College District, Walnut Valley Unified School District City of Whittier Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan County of San Bernardino Exercise Evaluator, EOC Course deliveries, SEMS Introduction Online Course County of San Diego Multi -Hazard Functional Plan, Emergency Management Contracted Services County of Los Angeles Update Hazard Mitigation Plan, Emergency Management Contracted Services Town of Yucca Valley Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan #36221v2 16 55A-31 Exhibit A Educational Chula Vista Elementary School District Hazard Mitigation Plan, District Emergency Operations Plan, Site Emergency Plans, Needs & Capabilities Assessment, District Hazard Analysis, Risk/Vulnerability Assessments, Site Exercises Covina -Valley Unified School District Hazard Mitigation Plan, District Hazard Analysis, Needs & Capability Assessment East Whittier City Elementary School Hazard Mitigation Plan District El Camino Community College District Comprehensive Emergency Management Program - Hazard Mitigation Plan, District Emergency Operations Plan, Site Emergency Plans, Needs & Capabilities Assessment, District Hazard Analysis, Risk/Vulnerability Assessments, Site Trainin s and Exercises El Segundo Unified School District Hazard Mitigation Plan Granite School District (Salt Lake City, Hazard Mitigation Plan Utah Little Lake City Elementary School Hazard Mitigation Plan District Los Angeles Unified School District Update Hazard Mitigation Plan Los Nietos Elementary School District Hazard Mitigation Plan Morongo Unified School District Comprehensive Emergency Management Program — District Emergency Operations Plan, Site Emergency Plans, Site Assessments, EOC and Site Training and Exercises, Hazard Mitigation Plan Palomar Community College District Comprehensive Emergency Management Program - District Emergency Operations Plan, Site Emergency Plans, EOC and Site Training and Exercises Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan District San Diego Community College District Comprehensive Emergency Management Program - Hazard Mitigation Plan, District Emergency Operations Plan, Site Emergency Plans, EOC and Site Trainings and Exercises, Risk/Vulnerability Assessments #36221v2 17 55A-32 Exhibit A San Diego Unified School District Comprehensive Emergency Management Program - Hazard Mitigation Plan, District Emergency Operations Plan, Site Emergency Plans, Needs & Capabilities Assessment, District Hazard Analysis, Risk/Vulnerability Assessments, 200 Site Functional Exercises, EOC Functional Exercises, Full -Scale Active Shooter Exercise, EOC Section -Specific Training and Tabletop Exercise Santa Clara County Office of Education Comprehensive Emergency Management Program - District Emergency Operations Plan, Site Emergency Plans, District Hazard Analysis, Site Safety Assessments, EOC Trainings, Site Command Team Trainings, EOC Tabletop Exercises Sonoma County Office of Education Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan including SCOE and 40 School Districts South Whittier School District Hazard Mitigation Plan Southwestern Community College District Emergency Operations Plan, Site Emergency Plans, District District Hazard Analysis, EOC Trainings, Site Command Team Trainings, EOC Tabletop Exercises, Grant Writing, Hazard Mitigation Plan Whittier City School District Hazard Mitigation Plan Whittier Union High School District Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan San Bernardino Community College Update Hazard Mitigation Plan District Utility and Transit Providers Antelope Valley Transit Authority Hazard Mitigation Plan, EOC/Field Functional Exercise, Security and Emergency Preparedness Plan, EOC/Field Functional Exercise, ICS and EOC Training Cucamonga Valley Water District Hazard Mitigation Plan, Risk and Resilience Assessment, Update Emergency Response Plan Jurupa Community Services District Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan, Risk and Resilience Assessment Los Angeles County Metropolitan Hazard Mitigation Plan Transportation Or anizabon Metro Omnitrans Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update System Security Emergency Response Preparedness Plan, Update Emergency Procedures, Deliver ICS Trainings, Exercises, Update Hazard Mitigation Plan Non-ProfitOrganizations The Old Globe Theatre Site Emergency Response Plan #36221v2 18 55A-33 Exhibit A Attachment: Harshman Resume Carolyn J. Harshman, MPA, CEM 3665 Ethan Allen Avenue San Diego, CA 92117 Telephone: (858) 483-4626 Fax: (858) 483-2862 E-Mail: epc@pacbell.net Web: tatata.carolunharshman.com CARoLYNJ. HARstmIAN, MPA, CEM EDUCATION MASTER OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY, 1977 BACHELOR OF ARTS, PSYCHOLOGY, SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY, 1974 CERTIFICATION Certified Emergency Manager (CEM), International Association of Emergency Managers EXPERIENCE President (1984 to Present), Emergency Planning Consultants, San Diego, California. Consulting contracts include the Federal Emergency Management Agency (subject matter expert/trainer), U.S. Department of Homeland Security - FEMA (training development and delivery); U.S. Department of Defense - Center for Excellence in Disaster Management & Humanitarian Assistance (training); National Disaster Preparedness Training Center (recovery course developer and faculty); State of Hawaii (training and exercises); State of California (Multi - Hazard Functional Plan template); State of New Hampshire (emergency operations plan/standard operating procedures and guidelines); State of Indiana (grant administration, local CEMP courses, project management tools, and development of county CEMP & hazard analysis documents); State of Missouri (HSEEP agroterrorism functional exercise, HSEEP regional WMD exercises); State of Wyoming (training and exercises); State of Nebraska (training and exercises); County of Los Angeles (all -hazard mitigation plan); County of San Diego (multi -hazard functional plan); County of San Bernardino (training and #3622lv2 19 55A-34 Exhibit A exercises); City of Long Beach (hazard mitigation plan, emergency operations plan); City of Anaheim (hazard mitigation plan); City of Oakland (catastrophic plans); City of Carlsbad (comprehensive program of plans, training, and exercises); City of Chula Vista (pre -disaster recovery & reconstruction plan); City of Bellflower (hazard mitigation plan, emergency operations plans, general plan safety element); City of Upland (comprehensive program of plans, training, and exercises); City of Rancho Cucamonga (comprehensive program of plans, training, and exercises); City of Rancho Palos Verdes (comprehensive program of plans, training, and exercises); City of Santa Ana (emergency operations plan); City of Buena Park (hazard mitigation plan, emergency operations plans); Los Angeles Unified School District (hazard mitigation plan); San Diego Unified School District (comprehensive program of plans, training, exercises, and REMS grant administration); San Diego Community College District (comprehensive program of plans, training, and exercises); Chula Vista Elementary School District (comprehensive program of plans, training, and exercises); Hawaii Department of Education (REMS grant writing, consulting); Santa Clara Office of Education (comprehensive program of plans, training, and exercises); Southwestern Community College District (comprehensive program of plans, training, and exercises) and numerous other local governments, school districts, and other government organizations. Training services have included California SEMS Introduction and EOC courses; ICS 100, 200, 300, 400, 402, 800; NIMS 700; and a wide variety of FEMA courses. Exercise services have included full- scale/field exercises (8), functional exercises (250), and tabletops (1,500). Faculty (1984 to Present), National University, FEMA's Emergency Management Institute, University of Hawaii, San Diego State University, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, California State Fire Marshal, California Specialized Training Institute. Senior Projects Manager (1995 to 1996), Southeastern Economic Development Corporation, San Diego, California. Management of Projects & Development Division for City of San Diego's Redevelopment Agency. Director of Training & Development (1987 to 1995), City of San Diego, San Diego, California. Management of organizational effectiveness and training programs for City Planning Department and the Building Inspection Department. City Planner (1985 to 1987), City of San Diego Planning Department, San Diego, California. Operations Officer (1982 to 1985), County of San Diego Office of Disaster Preparedness, San Diego, California. Project Manager on County's Emergency Operations Plan, Hazard Analysis, Dam Evacuation Plans, Drought Plan, and #36221v2 20 55A-35 Exhibit A Damage Assessment Process. Public Information Officer and Exercise Officer. Operational responsibilities included Emergency Operations Center activations. Regional Land Use Planner (1977 to 1982), County of San Diego Department of Planning and Land Use, San Diego, California. SPECIAL RECOGNITION National StormReady Board, U.S. National Weather Service, Member, 2008- present FEMA Emergency Management Institute Advisory Group on Emergency Planning, 2005-present National Emergency Management Executive Academy, First Cadre, 2012-2013 International Association of Emergency Managers (IAEM), Member, 1996- present IAEM-USA Second Vice President 2019-2020 IAEM-USA Region 9 President 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019 Membership & Marketing Chair 2014, 2015 Leadership Symposium Chair 2012, 2013 Conference Committee Chair 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 California State Representative 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 Speaker, 1998 Annual Conference Topic: Standardized Emergency Management System 101 Topic: Grassroots Recovery - The Recovery Task Force Speaker, 1997 Annual Conference Topic: Creative Financing Techniques for Hazard Mitigation Speaker, 2012 Annual Conference Topic: Recovery & Reconstruction Planning - Avoiding the Rush to Normalcy Speaker, 2016 Annual Conference Topic: Demystifying Pre -Disaster Recovery Planning Speaker, 2017 Annual Conference Topic: Force Multiplier - Enlisting Property Owners in Hazard Mitigation Speaker, 2018 Annual Conference Topic: Will You Win or Lose at the Game of Debris Management? California Emergency Services Association (CESA), Member, 2000-present Webinar Speaker, March 2015 Topic: Optimizing Opportunities for Mitigation Speaker, October 2015 #36221v2 21 55A-36 Exhibit A Topic: Demystifying Pre -Disaster Recovery Planning Speaker, 2018 Annual Conference Topic: Will You Win or Lose at the Game of Debris Management? National Hazard Mitigation Association (NHMA), Member, 2017-present #3622lv2 22 55A-37 Exhibit A Attachment A - Proposers Statement and Proposal Item Pricing (a C I TY OF SANTA ARA ATTACHMENT A PROPOSERS CERTIFICATION AND PROPOSAL ITEM PRICING Certification - I certify that I have read, understand and agree to the terms and conditions of this Request for Proposals. I have examined the Scope of Services (Exhibit A) and am familiar with the scope of wok I am familiar with all the existing conditions and limitation that may impact work requests. understand and agree that I am responsible for reporting any enors, omissions or discrepancies to the City for clarification prior to the submission of my proposal. Proposal Item Price - Pricing shall be based on the scope of services described in Exhibit A Cost proposal shal I include a project lump sun price for the full services as set forth in Exhibit A Proposers will include in their proposal a basis or explanation for the proposed price. The City shall riot provide reimbursement for business or travel -related expenses; therefore, such costs must be absorbed in the lump sum fee structure. Price for Scope of Services (as specified in Exhibit A) $ 74.000.00 Carolyn J. Harshman 858-483-4626, 858-483-2862 LEGAL NAME OF COMPANY PHONE AND FAX NUMBERS 3665 Ethan Allen Avenue, San Oiego, CA 92117 BUSINESS ADDRESS Carolyn J. Harshman President PRINTED NAME OF AUTHORIZED AGENT TITLE � VA_ March 11, 2020 epc[ pacbell.net SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT DATE E-MAIL ADDRESS 27-0204294 FEDERAL ID NUMBER (IF APPLICABLE) CONTRACTOR LICENSE NUMBER (IF APPLICABLE} #36221v2 23 55A-38 Exhibit A Attachment B — References M CrTY OF SANTA A MA :IF OFFEROR'S REFERENCES List and describe fully e*e cantra M. perfomled by your firm or entity which dernansuate your ability to pratiiceve siacies, equipment or services included in the scope of the proposal speacatipa-.s. Attach additional graces if sec: ired. The City reserves the right to oardact each of the references listed for additional i^farmada- regarding yaur entl) s qualifibations. cuv_mer Narne: City of Bellflower CORW naM Ltal: Joel Hockman kAres®: 16000 Gvic Center IDnve Phone Number. 582-925-0124 Contact Amourl: IS224.000 FaC6lmlle Number. Unknown Year 2018 oeserquon of serves provrtfeo: Hazard Mitigation Plan, Update General Plan -Safety Element, d Emergency Operatons Plan RetarEM ce cusmer Name: Grcv of Long Beach Long Beach, CA 90809 conics Irmmduar Reggie Harrison Phone Number. 582-b70-8251 FaC6lmlle N6lmber UnkfldNm Contact Amourt: 5144.601) Year: 261E DEwff ruon orservleea pfoameo: Hazard Mitigation Plan. Emergency Operations Plan, Continuity of Operations Plan ReTere n C9 Customer Narne: City of Buieraa Park Address: 0650 Beech Boulevard Srl3 i F.19Ti IiU�7=:iI'.f � � � i t Canlab Maddual: Doug Bradowski Phone Number. 714-562-3652 FaC6lmlle Number Unknown Year: 2018 oescVuon or mvies pfuwwo: Hazard Mitigation Plan. Emergency Operations Plan #36221v2 24 55A-39 Exhibit A Attachment C — Proposers Statement CRY OF SANTAANA ATTAC HIMENT C PROPOSER'SSTATEMENT Proposer understaac's and agrees lhatthis written RFP (or awry part thereof specifically desigeated and accepted bythe CityofSanta Anon hereinafter City)shall constitrte the entire agreement belw nproposer and the City only after rt has been accepted by the Cily Ceunc>4 endorsed by the Clerk of the Courcti with her signature and official seal n sting hereonthe action ofapproval ofhe Council, signed bythe Executive Di eotor or h& duly authorized agent and sppecd by the City Attanney, denoting his approval of the firm of tr6 docwnent and its exeattion, and when it a an exact copy of it has been either dekoewed in proposer or deposited with the United States Pascal Service property addressed to the proposer with the cawrecl. pDgage affmLd dhereta. Proposer further agrees that upon de" (as defined above) cf the accepted agreement helshe will fumishCityal requiredbondsand oeaifimbeoriabiity sesurance within ben (10) days (e chiding Saurdays, Sundays and Cityslegal holdays),orthefunds. check, draft orprapasers band substiuted'nieulhereof aecompan}ng this proposal slraM became the property of tine City and shall be considered as paymentof damages due to lhedelay and other cawies sldfered by Cityr because of the failureto fumish the necessary bonds and because it is distinuftly agreed tea the proof of damages actually suffered by City is rid uffi to ascertain; othenrwise said fulls, dreck drafts, or propose0s bond serhstituted in lien thereof shall be retitmed to the undersigned. Proposer undersUrds teat a proposal 6 requred far the entire work, teat dre estimated quantities set forth in lheRFF 5dx4duleam sokiyforthe purpose orcompahieg pxopasals, and thatfinal rwmpe^salion under the carmacl. wil be based uponthe actual quantities of work samiaaraoriy completed_ All ierrns contained in the the certification of wrictscamiration: !Ya, ar*•d :ta required insurance outifncafes are to be incorporated by reference into this agree,. a_7 specifically @5 partofthb RFP. ErmrErdity Emergency Planning Cansufants . _ Fi,yy;, -.. Carol I Harsh man Signed and Printed Name %.eJ yin Tile President 17am February4, 2020 #36221v2 25 55A-40 Exhibit A Attachment D - Certification of Nondiscrimination by Contractor CITY OF SANTA ANA ATTACHMENT Q CERTIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION BY CONTRACTOR The andersgned contractor or corporate officer, durixg the performance of this contract, cer rates as Idiom: The contractor steal I not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because ci race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without, regard to their race, color. religion. sex_ or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to. the following: employment, upgrading-, demo6cnr or transfer, recruitment or recruitrnent advertising, layoff ortermination; rates of pay orother forms of compensation; and selection for h ai ling, including apprenticeship. The contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment. rwtices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this rtmcfiscrirrination clause. 2. The contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employeesplaced by or on behalf of contractor, state that all qualified applicants mll receive consideration for erWicymerdwithout regard to race: rxilor, religion, sex, or Waal origin. 3. The contractor shall send to each labor union or representat;ve of w+orlers VAth which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided a&Asirxg the saki dabor union or m6are reWessr7raiives of the contracices arum is under this secilon, and shal I post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. 4. The contractor shall comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24,1965, and of the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor.. 5. The contractor shall furnish all inforrmation and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by rules, regu6afions, and orders of the Secretary of Labor. or pursuant thereto, and voll permit access to haTier books, records, and accounts by the administering agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation, to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. 6. In the event of the contractctas rw=rroiarce with the nrxWisedmina.ulon clauses of this contract or with any of the said rules, regulaWns. or orders, the contract may be canceled. terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the contractor may be declared ineligible forfurther government contracts or federally assisted crostructioNservices contracts in accordance with procedures authmmd it Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965,ud such otEier sariciiom may be imposed and remedies iwoked as provided- in Exemlive Order 11246 of 5eptember24, 1965, orby rule, regulations, ororder afthe Secretary of Labor, Gras ottiemse provided by law_ 7. The caxrtractcr shall include the portion of the sentence immediately preced" paragraph 1 and the provisions of paragraphs 1 through 7 it every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions wit be binding upon each subcontract or prrchase order asthe administering agency may direct as mars of enforcing such provisions. indudrrxg sanctions for noncornp lance, provided, however, that in the event the contractor becomes involved in. or is threatened vft, litigation by a subcontractor or vender as a result of such direction by the administering agency, the oontractor may request that the Limited States enter into such #36221v2 26 55A-41 Exhibit A CRY OF SANTA ANA litigabon to protect the interests of the United States. B. Pursuant to California Labor Code Sedion 1735, as added by Chaplcr E43 Siam 1039, and as amended, no d saiminabon shall be made in the ernployrnent of persons because of race, religious creed, color nationaf origin, ancestry, physical handicaps, mental corndition, marital status, or sex of such persons, except as provided in Section 1424, and any contractor violating this section is subject to all the penabas unposedfara %DlAon of the chapter. Consultants Signed and Printed Name_ n� a� Carolyn I Harshman n._ President February 4, 2020 #36221v2 27 55A-42 EXHIBIT B COMPENSATION Fee Proposal including hourly rates if applicable 55A-43 Exhibit B Attachment A — Proposers Statement and Proposal Item Pricing CITY DE SANTA ANA ATTACHMENT A PROPOSERS CERTIHCATION AND PROPOSAL ITEM PRICING Certification - I certify that I have react, understand and agree to the terms and conditions of this Request for Proposals. I have examined the Scrape of Services (Exhibit A) and am familiar :vith the scapeofworlc I am familiar voth all the exist ng condiffuns and Ii MR2110n that may impact work requests. understand and agree that t am responsible for reporting any errors, omissions or discrepancies to the City for clarification prior to the submission of my proposal. Proposal Item Price - Pricing shall he based on the scope of semces described in Exhibit A Cost proposal shall include a project lump srm price frs the full services asset forth in Exhibit. A Proposers will include in their propel a basis or explanation for the proposed price. The {city shall not provide reintbursemeritfar business or travel-relaed expenses; therefore, such costs must be absorbed in the lump sum fee structure. Price for Scope of Services. (as specified In Exhibit.. A) S 74,000.00 Carolyn J_ Harshman 858-483-4626, 858-d83-2862 LEGAL NAME OF COMPANY PHONE AND FAX NUMBERS 3665 Ethan Allen Avenue, San Diego, CA 92117 BUSINESS ADDIRESS Carolyn J. Harshman President PRINTED NAME OF AUTHORIZED AGENT TITLE March 11, 2020 epcc@rpacbell.net SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT DATE E-MAILADDRESS 27-0204294 FEDERAL ID NUMBER (IF APPLICABLE) CONTRACTOR LICENSE NUMBER. (IF APPLICABLE.) 21 55A-44 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE: DISCUSS EXECUTIVE ORDERS ISSUED PURSUANT TO DECLARATION OF LOCAL COVID-19 EMERGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 2020-016 AND CONSIDER AFFIRMING, AMENDING, EXTENDING OR RESCINDING ORDER RELATED TO TEMPORARY FREEZE ON RESIDENTIAL RENT INCREASES /s/ Kristine Rida CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: _••e• 91 ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1s' Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION Review the City's three Executive Orders adopted in response to the COVID-19 emergency and discuss whether to affirm, amend, extend or rescind that portion of Executive Order No. 2-2020, imposing a temporary prohibition on residential rent increases. DISCUSSION On April 23, 2020, an Orange County -based coalition of the California Apartment Association sent a letter to the City of Santa Ana asking the City Council to rescind sections of Executive Order No. 2- 2020 (Exhibit 1). Background On March 4, 2020, California Governor Newsom declared a state of emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the state prepare for broader spread of COVID-19. On March 17, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-016, proclaiming the existence of a local emergency to ensure the availability of mutual aid and an effective City response to the novel coronavirus ("COVI D-1 9"). Resolution No 2020-016 granted broad administrative and legislative authority to the City's Director of Emergency Services, the City Manager, to promulgate orders and regulations necessary for the protection of life and property and to implement preventative measures to protect and preserve the residents of the City. Acting upon this authority the City Manager has issued three Executive Orders as summarized below: Summary of Executive Orders The first Executive Order, Order No. 1-2020 (Order No.1) imposes a temporary moratorium on evictions for the non-payment of rent by residential and commercial tenants. Order No. 1 has been clarified through Frequently Asked Questions ("FAQs") to explain that it does not prohibit charging rent and it does not require the forgiveness of rent. Order No. 1 also imposes a temporary suspension on residential and commercial foreclosures, suspends the discontinuation of water service for those 60A-1 Discuss Executive Orders Issued Pursuant to Declaration of Local COVID-19 Emergency May 5, 2020 Page 2 who cannot pay their water and sewer bills, prohibits late fees for non-payment and provides protections against certain parking violations. The effective periods for these regulations are set forth in Exhibit 2. Executive Order No 2-2020 (Order No. 2) does the following: (1) extends the effective dates of various land use approvals, such as conditional use permits and temporary display permits; (2) extends administrative hearing dates and appeal deadlines; (3) authorizes relocation of business operations to accommodate homeless shelters or emergency housing facilities; and (4) prohibits rent increases for residential tenants. The effective periods for these regulations are set forth in Exhibit 2. The temporary rent freeze is effective through May 31, 2020 or to a later date if there are any statewide orders issued that place a freeze on rent increases for a longer period of time. Executive Order No. 3-2020 (Order No. 3) requires employees to wear face coverings if they are providing essential services and it strongly encourages retail and business operators serving the public to require customers to wear face coverings. Order No. 3 is effective through May 31, 2020, unless extended by the City. The City circulated public notices related to each Executive Order and has placed FAQs, sample letters, and information related to these Executive Orders on the City's COVID-19 information website (www.santa-ana.org/covid19). Community Development Agency and Code Enforcement staff have also disseminated information on who to contact to answer questions or take complaints regarding violations of the regulations. Summary of Temporary Measure to Prohibit Rent Increases on Residential Properties Order No. 2 provides various protections to Santa Ana residents and businesses, including a temporary, residential rent freeze. Prior to issuing Order No. 2, staff researched whether other cities had adopted similar prohibitions. The research revealed that at the time, at least five cities had adopted rent freezes and several others were considering similar measures (Exhibit 3). While Santa Ana might be the only charter city without a rent control ordinance to impose the temporary rent freeze, Order No. 2 contained strong findings to support the protection of Santa Ana residents who pay rent to landlords. The temporary rent prohibition is not a rent control ordinance, it does not include any of the far-ranging regulations of a rent control ordinance, and it is temporary in nature. Furthermore, at the time it was issued, it was consistent with the California Apartment Association's position as communicated to its members as advice not to increase rents through May 31, 2020: CAA continues to urge property owners across the state to abide by its Safe at Home Guidelines by committing to the following through May 31, 2020: Freeze rents on all residents & pledge to not issue any rent increases. Halt evictions on renters affected by COVID-19, absent extraordinary circumstances. Waive late fees for residents who pay rent after the rent due date because they have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and related government actions. Offer flexible payment plans for residents who cannot pay rent by the due date. Direct renters to available resources to assist with food, health, and financial assistance. Communicate with residents proactively that you are available to assist them and want to work with them to ensure they remain housed. California Apartment Association Communications Opposing Temporary Rent Increases 60A-2 Discuss Executive Orders Issued Pursuant to Declaration of Local COVID-19 Emergency May 5, 2020 Page 3 Shortly after the issuance of Order No. 2, Victor Cao of the California Apartment Association contacted City officials asking for clarification in some cases and seeking a repeal of the prohibition in other cases. The Manufactured Housing Education Trust also contacted City staff with concerns about the prohibition would impact its members. On April 17, 2020, Mr. Cao indicated that he would work with his coalition group and ask everyone to be patient while staff provided clarification and tried to understand how Santa Ana businesses would be impacted. On April 20, 2020, the City Manager responded to the coalition with additional information and on April 22, 2020, shared the FAQS with the group. On April 23, 2020, the City received a letter calling the City's temporary prohibition on rent increases a rent control measure and asking the City to revise it. The California Apartment Association's website on the other hand suggests CAA is taking a more aggressive legal approach: "The California Apartment Association has challenged the city of Santa Ana and Contra Costa County for violating the Costa Hawkins Rental Housing Act" (April 23, 2020 CAA Website: https://caanet.org/caa-challenges-local-governments-over-violating-costa-hawkins/). The City Council, in responding to the letter, may consider one of the following two options: Option No. 1: The City may maintain that its prohibition is a temporary measure only, valid until May 31, 2020, and that the extraordinary circumstances of COVID-19, together with the impacts in Santa Ana, require the measure. The intent was to impose the prohibition through May 31, 2020 and to extend it only if the State of California adopted a similar measure. The City Council might also ask the CAA and its coalition members to allow staff to speak to those property owners who intended to increase rents prior to May 31, 2020, so the City might better understand the consequences to specific property owners and how regulations might be balanced to protect renters and landlords alike. Option No. 2: The City Council may rescind that portion of Order No. 2 pertaining to the temporary prohibition on rent increases. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's effort to meet Goal #3 - Community Health, Livability, Engagement & Sustainability, Objective #4 (support neighborhood vitality and livability). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Exhibits: 1. Letter from California Apartment Association Coalition 2. Summary of Effective Periods of Executive Orders 3. Summary of Cities with Rent Freeze Provisions 60A-3 MHeT MIMU M.�med13nu5ingN�ucaYt�ti�l a ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS COUNCIL April 23, 2020 The Honorable Miguel Pulido City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Western Manufactured Housing Communities CM BIH RE: OPPOSITION TO RENT CONTROL EXECUTIVE ORDER Mayor Pulido and Members of City Council: On behalf of a coalition of business and property rights organizations, we request revisions to sections of City of Santa Ana Executive Order No. 2-2020 that affects rental housing providers. We recognize that the City is taking swift and bold action to contain COVID-19, however we are deeply concerned that city policy is being crafted hastily and without any regard to the consequences it has on taxpaying property owners. Throughout the COVID-19 crisis, our members worked to their best of ability to provide tenant relief programs, direct residents to community resources, and make charitable monetary and in -kind contributions to provide aid to those in need. The City's actions are well -intended, but far from perfect having curtailed the rights of property owners and compromising the public process. City Executive Order No. 2-2020 prohibits residential landlords from increasing rent for all tenants for the duration of the Governor's Executive Order N-28-20, which is effectively rent control. We firmly believe that rent control is not the appropriate solution during the pandemic. In addition to ongoing expenses like mortgage payments, housing providers need the flexibility to have tenants who can pay their rent in order to subsidize tenants who are unable to pay rent. A consequence of the rent control, an entire rental community is in jeopardy of becoming insolvent and eventually foreclosed on. There are several issues at hand such as the (1) cascading effect government regulation has on taxpaying property owners, (2) the City's nonconformance with state law, and (3) lack of consistency with the City's Charter. To be clear, we are challenging the cty's rent freeze and not the eviction moratorium. We 60A-4 continue to work closely with state and local officials in keeping residents housed. As such, we request very specific remedies to our concerns. 1. GOVERNMENTS' SHORT-TERM RESPONSE OF COVID-19 DOES NOT CONSIDER IMPACTS ON HOUSING PROVIDERS 'There are several voluntary initiatives (Safe at Home guidelines) and existing regulations that provide stable pricing in the housing industry during this crisis. Unfortunately, hasty government responses to COVID-19 have resulted in prioritizing tenants and banks over taxpaying property owners. It is widely known that an overwhelming amount of rental housing providers are "mom and pop" (independent rental owners) and they do not have the cash nor credit to defer their expenses for more than a month. Rental housing providers remain ineligible for mortgage relief and federal aid (CARES Act), while they still have ongoing expenses with devastating consequences as shown below: Mortgage payments Property Taxes Insurance Utilities Employees and contractors Maintenance and supplies Security property Tax liens Loss of personal income and life savings Tarnished credit reports Deferral of capital improvements Inability to pay employees Breach of contract with contractors The cascading effects of nonpayment of rent are further summarized by the LA Times Editorial Board: It's not just renters. Landlords need help, too. As written, the City's rent freeze applies to all tenants regardless of their ability to pay (i.e. means - testing). Minor revenue balancing efforts within reason are needed to keep businesses solvent. While foreclosures are banned at the moment, there is little relief for rental housing providers. In fact, federal relief only applies to 27,000 rental housing properties out of approximately 22.7 million nationwide .2 Many lenders continue to demand payment and foreclosures will only become an eventuality. We request that City Council revise the order to allow housing providers the reasonable flexibility to rebalance their property mix. 2. THE CITY'S RENT CONTROL ORDER VIOLATES STATE LAW The City's Executive Order 2-2020 is not in conformance with state law or executive orders issued by the Governor of California. The City cites the authority to enact rent control through Executive Order N-28- 20. While it authorizes local government to impose substantive limitations on residential or commercial evictions, no such authority exists in the order to regulate rental rates. The Costa -Hawkins Rental Housing Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 1954.50, et. seq.) limits the ability of local governments to regulate rents in the following ways: Single family homes, condominium units, and housing built after February 1, 1995 are exempt from local rent controls (see Cal. Civ. Code § 1954.52); Rental property owners have the right, known as vacancy de -control, to set the initial rent following vacancy (see Cal. Civ. Code § 1954.53). ' The LA Times Editorial Board, "Los Angeles Times," Los Angeles Times, April 15, 2020, https://www.latimes. com/opinion/story/2020-04-15/coronavirus-landlord-renter-bailout. 2 "FHFA Moves to Provide Eviction Suspension Relief for Renters in Multifamily Properties," Public Affairs (Federal Housing Finance Agency, March 23, 2020), https://www.fhfa.gov/Media/PublicAffairs/Pages/FHFA-Moves-to-Provide-Eviction-Suspension-Relief-for- Renters-i n-Mu Itifam i I y-Properties. asp x) 60A-5 In addition, the Mobilehome Residency Law (Cal. Civ. Code § 798, et seq.) restricts the ability of local governments to regulate space rents in the following ways: • Mobilehome spaces initially held out for rent after January 1, 1990 are exempt from local rent controls (see Cal Civ. Code § 798.45); • Long term leases that meet specified criteria are exempt from local rent controls (see Cal. Civ. Code § 798.17); • Specified fees must be permitted to be passed through (see Civ. Code § 798.49). We strongly encourage the City to modify or clarify its executive order similar to cities across the state that have imposed rent freezes. All other California cities (e.g. Los Angeles, Glendale, Oakland, et al.) have narrowly tailored their rent freezes on eligible housing and continue to recognize a constitutional right to a fair return. In the case of Los Angeles, the "city attorney's office... that such a sweeping ban would interfere with private contractual rights and was not likely to survive in court."' The City Attorney argued that "unless a California law known as Costa -Hawkins was suspended, the city couldn't stop rent increases in apartments that aren't covered by the Rent Stabilization Ordinance. If the city pushed forward anyway, [Assistant City Attorney] Michaelson wrote that the move would likely be enjoined by a court through a temporary restraining order." In all cases, eligible housing units are only those already subject to rent control. In contrast, the City's guidance documents do not adequately address the conflicts with state law, makes arbitrary exemptions, and provides no legal justification for the adoption of the order. 3. THE MANNER OF APPROVAL VIOLATES CITY CHARTER AND PUBLIC OVERSIGHT We contend that the rent control order is in breach of the City's Charter and the manner of approval violates the principles of good governance. While the city manager has the authority to implement emergency orders, all orders are ultimately subject to ratification by the City Council. Our concern is that policymaking is hidden from public oversight and that housing providers may be unknowingly in violation because of the absence of public deliberation. It appears that city policy has been crafted and implemented without public oversight. The City's haste has caused it to be in nonconformance with state law and in violation its own policies and procedures. Under existing city law, the city manager has the power, as the director of emergency services, to "make and issue rules, regulations, orders or directives on matters reasonably necessary to the protection of life and property as affected by such emergency".' However, that power is subject to the caveat that "provided such rules and regulations or suspensions are confirmed by the city council at the earliest practicable time" [emphasis added]. Section 700 of the Charter states, "the City Council by ordinance may assign additional functions or duties to offices, departments, or other agencies established by this charter, but shall not discontinue or assign to any other office, department, or other agency any function or duty assigned by this charter to a particular office, department, or agency." Taken together with Section 407 of the Charter, which states "the determination of all matters of policy shall be vested in the City Council." The Charter makes clear that policy making is vested with the City Council and that responsibility cannot be delegated. We respectfully request that the public process be restored and for the City abide by its own procedures. For these reasons, our coalition requests revisions to the City's Executive Order 2-2020 at the earliest possible time. We also request that the City reach out and allow housing providers to participate in discussions related to housing policy. 3 Emily Alpert Reyes, "L.A. Council Members Balk at Broader Ban on Evictions amid Coronavirus, Citing Legal Worries," Los Angeles Times, April 22, 2020, https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-22/la-city-council-balks-at-broader-ban-on- evictions-amid-coronavirus) 4 Sec. 2-402(C)(2)(5)(a) Respectfully, A 4 Victor Cao Vice President of Public Affairs California Apartment Association � Vickie Talley Executive Director Manufactured Housing Educational Trust Adam Wood Director of Government Affairs Building Industry Association of Orange County OWN Rachel Rolnicki Vice President, Government Affairs Orange County Business Council cc: Ms. Kristine Ridge, City Manager Ms. Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney ;�; ,N loeiov Bill Christensen Vice President of Government Relations Apartment Association of Orange County Julie Paule Regional Representative, Orange County Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association C Carolyn Icr President & CEO Orange County Taxpayers Association 60A-7 tj \ \ \ } \ \ \ } \ \ 517moo Cities Adopting Rent Freezes c Property owners shall not increase rents on occupied rental units subjecttothe Los Only ten ants subject to the City's rent City of Los Angeles Angeles Rent Stabilization Grain sure. (Public Order U user City of Los Angeles Em argent, Authority (issue stabilization ordinance. Date: March 30, 2020)) In pertinent part, "To provide relief and protection to Glendale residents during this unprecedented emergency as intended by the Glendale City Council in its enactment of Resolution No. 20,33, a rent increase City of Glendale freeze is hereby issued, effective imm ediatelry g regardless of when the rent increase notice was seetl, All residential tenants. whereby all rents for residential tenants will remain the same rate as the date of this Order, and during the pendency of the local emergency." (Glendale Public Order No. 2O20,O5 Under City of Glentlale Emergency Authority (Issue Date: March 25, 2020)) For rental units regulated by Oakland Municipal Code 9.22.010 et sea, any notice of rent increase in excess of the CPI Rent Adjustor eft, as defined in Oakland Municipal Code Section 8.22.020, shall be void antl unenforceable if the notice is served or has an effective date during the Local Em ergenry, unless required to Only residential tenants regulated under provide a fair return. Any notice of rent increase served during the Local Em ergenry shall include the following City of Oakland statemen t in bol d un den in ed 12-point for t'During th e Local Emerg envy declared by th e Oty of Oakland in the Oakland lust Cause for Eviction Ordinance and the Oakland Rent response to the COVI D-19 pandemic, your rent may not be increased in excess of the CPI Rent Adjustment Adjustment Ordinance. (3.5%until June 30,2020), unless required for the landlord to obtain a fair return. You in ay contact the Rent Adjustment Program at (510) 239-3721 for additional information and referrals." (Eviction Moratorium Emergency Ordinance (Adopted March 25, 2020)) Only residential tenants with "Substantial decrease In household or busideSS indoor "M oratorium on Rent l fcreases; Affected Residential Tenants. During the term of this Ordinace,a Landlord City of Concord shall not increase Rent for Affected Residential Tenants."(Urgency Ordinance No. 2U3) related to COVID-19 antl that have provided notice of inability to pay to landlord. "Landlords shall not increase rents on occupied rental units subject to the West Hollywood Rent Stabilization Ordinance (WHIM C Title 17) beginning on April 6, 2020 through sixty days after the expiration of the local City of West H ollywood(Discussed emergency period. This ordinance suspends any conflicting provision of Title 17 of the West H ollywood Only residents subject to the City's rent April 6, 2O2O: U fclear if adopted) Municipal Code. Any landlord seeking an exception to this rule may apply for an individual rent adj nAment stabilization ordinance. through the rent adjustment process set forth in WHMC Chapter 17." if necessary to provide a just and reasonable return and to maintain net operating income." (Urgency Ordinance (see April6, 2020 agenda)) City of Eureka "U mil after May 31,2020, no landlord in ay endeavor to raise rent. "(Emergent, Ordinance (BILL NO. 978-C.S.)) All residential tenants. 60A-9 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE DISCUSS THE ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT COMMISSIONER'S ORDER TO RELEASE INDIVIDUALS WITH PRIOR SEXUAL ASSAULT CONVICTIONS EARLY AND INTO THE COMMUNITY /s/Kristine CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1 s' Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2ntl Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO RECOMMENDED ACTION Discuss the Orange County Superior Court commissioner's order to release individuals with prior sexual assault convictions early and into the community and provide direction to staff. DISCUSSION On April 28, 2020 Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer issued a community warning (Exhibit 1) regarding the early release of seven high risk registered sex offenders (Luis Joel Ramirez (27), James Franklin Bowling (50), Rudy William Grajeda Magdaleno (39), Calvin Curtis Coleman (52), Kyle Albert Winton (40), Jose Adrian Oregel (46), Mario Ernesto Sandoval (45)) who have been released from jail months early despite being charged with cutting off their GPS monitors or otherwise tampering with the tracking devices to render them inoperable. Since April 7, 2020, these individuals have been released as a result of rulings by appointed Orange County Superior Court Commissioner Joseph Dane. This action was taken by the Orange County Superior Court and was not related to the action taken by the Orange County Sheriffs Department to reduce the population at the Orange County Jail to limit the spread of COVID-19 Members of the City Council have expressed a desire to discuss this item at a public meeting and to consider options that the City Council may direct staff to implement in response to the above - mentioned court ruling. At this time, staff seeks feedback and direction from the City Council. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's effort to meet Goal #1 - Community Safety, Objective #4 (broaden communications, information sharing and community awareness of public safety activities). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Exhibit: 1. April 28, 2020 Press Release from Orange County District Attorney's Office L. 1 OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA TODD SPITZER I Y01:4 1515141) (_%1 ;1:7 4 4;T;M 4 Date:April 28, 2020 PRESS RELEASE Kimberly Edds Public Information Officer Office: 714-347-8405, Cell: 714-504-1917 media@da.ocgov.com Orange County District Attorney Issues Community Warning Regarding Release of Registered Sex Offenders With jailpopulation at historic low, there is no reason to release dangerous criminals back into our communities SANTA ANA, Calif. — The Orange County District Attorney's Office is issuing a warning to county residents about seven high risk registered sex offenders who have been released from jail months early despite being charged with cutting off their GPS monitors or otherwise tampering with the tracking devices to render them inoperable. Many of the registered sex offenders who were released early spent just days behind bars instead of the six months required by law for registered sex offenders who violate parole by removing or disabling GPS monitors. The sex offenders are monitored by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), which submitted the parole violations to the court. Since April 7, 2020 seven registered sex offenders — with crimes ranging from indecent exposure and sexual battery to child molestation — have been released as a result of rulings by appointed Court Commissioner Joseph Dane. One of the registered sex offenders, convicted of sexual battery, was released on April 7, 2020 after Commissioner Dane sentenced him 20 days credit time served and ordered him to report to parole. Just two weeks later — on April 24, 2020 - he appeared in court on another parole violation and Commissioner Dane again released him after sentencing him to 16 days credit time served. Sheriff Don Barnes reported to the Orange County Board of Supervisors today the population in the Orange County jail system has been reduced by nearly 45% since March 7 and there is no overcrowding issue. Sheriff Barnes assured that proper steps, including social distancing, masks, and quarantining of new inmates, are in place. "These /ands of high -risk sex offenders are the most dangerous kind ofo7minal and the most likely to re -offend. They are doing everything they can to avoid detection by the parole officers assigned to monitor them so they can potentially commi additional sex offenses These are not the kind ofpeople who should be getting a breakAid Orange County District Attomey Todd Spitzer. 'As a state legislator, I was the author and founder of the State ofCalifomia Sex Offender Management Board and the author ofMegan Y Law on the Intem4 which a0ows the public to see where these sex offenders are so that they can protect themselves and their families. Ris not the Courts responsibility to control the jail population by releasing these dangerous criminals back into our communities The residents of Orange County deserve6ft t2 peace of mind that registered sex offenders are being held accountable and notjust let out the front door ofa jail by a court commissioner who refuses to follow the law" As a result of these dangerous decisions to not follow the law, the Orange County District Attorney's Office will not stipulate to appear in front of Commissioner Dane on parole violations involving registered sex offenders. These seven registered sex offenders were released prior to the minimum 180-day sentence required by law for removing or disabling a GPS monitor. WARNING: Do not contact, confront, or attempt to apprehend. The purpose of the release of the information & to allow members of the public to protect themselves and their dMldren from sex offenders (Penal Code section 290.45 (a)(1)) Any use of this information other than for the stated purpose is unlawful. Luis Joel Ramirez - 27 Last known address: Costa Mesa Selected criminal history: sexual battery, assault with a deadly weapon, resisting a peace officer, burglary and possessing a leaded cane, a deadly weapon Four parole violations since 2019 Released 4/7/2020 after serving 20 days credit time served on a parole violation for cutting off his GPS despite 180 day minimum sentence. Released 4/24/2020 after serving 16 days credit time served on a parole violation for failing to report to parole. James Franklin Bowling - 50 Last known address: Orange Selected criminal history: lewd conduct in a public place, repeated convictions for failing to register as a sex offender, repeated convictions for sex offender on school grounds, possession of controlled substance and paraphernalia Two parole violations since February 2020. Released 4/9/2020 after serving 14 days credit time served on a parole violation for failing to charge GPS monitor despite 180 day minimum sentence. Ordered to report to parole. He does not report. �. 1 Rudy William Grajeda Magdaleno - 39 Last known address: Anaheim Selected criminal history: child molestation, indecent exposure, assault, battery, criminal threats, inflicting injury on an elder adult Five parole violations since 2017 Released 4/13/2020 after serving 142 days credit time served on a parole violation for failing to charge GPS monitor despite 180 day minimum sentence. He is ordered to report to parole. He does not report. Calvin Curtis Coleman - 52 Last known address: Santa Ana Selected criminal history: lewd conduct in a public place Three parole violations since 2019 Released 4/13/2020 after serving 18 days credit time served on a parole violation after failing to charge GPS monitor despite 180 day minimum sentence and ordered to report to parole. Kyle Albert Winton - 40 Last known address: Mission Viejo Selected criminal history: annoy/molest a child, criminal threats to cause great bodily injury or death, resisting a peace officer, DUI and hit and run with property damage One parole violation. Released 4/17/2020 after serving 10 days credit time served on a parole violation after failing to charge GPS monitor despite 180 day minimum sentence and ordered to report to parole. He does not report. �. 1 Jose Adrian Oregel - 46 Last known address: Santa Ana Selected criminal history: Unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, oral copulation of a person under the age of 18, great bodily injury, second striker Six parole violations since June 2019 Released 4/22/2020 after serving 18 days credit time served a parole violation for failing to charge GPS monitor despite 180 day minimum sentence and ordered to report to parole. Z� • Mario Ernesto Sandoval - 45 Last known address: Stanton Selected criminal history: sexual battery, touching for sexual arousal, indecent exposure, assault on a peace officer, assault One parole violation in 2020 Sandoval failed to charge his GPS device as required by law, and was unaccounted for one third of the time he was out of custody Released 4/22/2020 after serving 16 credit time served on a parole violation for failing to report to charge GPS monitor despite 180 day minimum sentence and ordered to report to parole. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 5, 2020 TITLE PUBLIC HEARING —APPROVE THE 2020-2024 FIVE—YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN, 2020-2021 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, AND ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE AND AUTHORIZE SUBMISSION TO HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT /s/Kristine Ridge CITY MANAGER CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: _•-e• 9 ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1" Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2ntl Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For ,K•�►nl►tr».ic•� FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approve the 2020-2024 Five -Year Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. 2. Authorize the submission of the 2020-2024 Five -Year Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION All commission meetings were canceled for the month of April 2020 due to the COVID-19 local emergency and closure of City Hall. DISCUSSION Every five years, the City of Santa Ana (City) must submit its Five -Year Consolidated Plan to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to receive funding for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), the HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and the Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) programs (Exhibit 1). These federal funds provide for affordable and supportive housing, community development programs, public services and economic opportunities for the community. In general, the Five -Year Consolidated Plan describes how the City will invest and allocate these limited federal funds for and on behalf of the community. The Five -Year Consolidated Plan also includes the first Annual Action Plan for July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021 (e.g. the Plan for the first year of the Five -Year Plan). As part of this planning process, the federal regulations for the Consolidated Plan also requires that grantees conduct an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (Exhibit 2). To develop the 2020-2024 Five -Year Consolidated Plan and 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, staff conducted extensive outreach and engagement to the community for three months from October 2019 to 75A-1 Public Hearing — 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing May 5, 2020 Page 2 December 2019. To develop the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, staff worked with a consortium of other cities across Orange County who entered into a contract with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law to complete this analysis for Orange County. All three planning documents are described in detail below. 2020-2024 Five -Year Consolidated Plan The 2020-2024 Five -Year Consolidated Plan is the City of Santa Ana's Strategic Plan for the investment of annual allocations of CDBG, HOME and ESG funds from HUD during the five year period covered by the Consolidated Plan beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2025. The Five -Year Consolidated Plan (Plan) outlines the overall strategy that the City intends to carry out over the next five years and identifies the objectives and outcomes to be accomplished with that strategy. In consideration of finite grant resources, the Strategic Plan within the Consolidated Plan outlines the areas and population segments with the greatest level of need for a particular program or activity and intends to invest grant resources in high leverage opportunities where data suggests that the City will be able to maximize the impact of every dollar. The Strategic Plan identifies the City's priority needs, including the rationale for establishing allocation priorities and specific measurable goals to be addressed during the five-year period covered by the Consolidated Plan through activities to be implemented as part of the five Annual Action Plans using CDBG, HOME, and ESG Program funds. The Consolidated Plan also contains a Needs Assessment and Market Analysis that provide insight into the different levels of need in the community and the market in which grant -funded programs will be implemented. The Needs Assessment incorporates national data from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates and the 2011-2015 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy data, in addition to HUD program, State of California, and local/ regional data sets. Based on the Needs Assessment and Market Analysis, the Strategic Plan identifies six high priority needs to be addressed using the City's CDBG, HOME and ESG Program funds. The six priority needs for the City includes: • Expand the supply of affordable housing • Preserve the supply of affordable housing • Access to and supply of public services • Increase access to and supply of homeless services and facilities • Promote economic opportunity • Improve City public facilities and infrastructure The City of Santa Ana anticipates that it will continue to receive CDBG, HOME, and ESG funding during the duration of this Consolidated Plan cycle. When accounting for program income and prior year resources, the City anticipates that it will have the following funding to target to its strategic goals and priorities over the next five years: • CDBG: $30,123,118 • HOME: $ 9,093,495 • ESG: $ 2,504,870 The summary of goals for 2020-2024 to be achieved through the Strategic Plan is provided in the following table: 75A-2 Public Hearing — 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing May 5, 2020 Page 3 Goal Name Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator Affordable Housing Expand the supply of HOME: Rental Unit Constructed: 40 units Development, affordable housing; $8,184,145 constructed Rental Unit Rehabbed: Maintenance, Preserve the supply of CDBG: 60 units rehabilitated Homeowner & Preservation affordable housing $7,730,780 Unit Rehabbed: 40 units rehabilitated Homeowner Unit Constructed: 10 units constructed Down payment Assistance: 12 households Code Enforcement Preserve the supply of CDBG: Housing Code Enforcement/ affordable housing $4,317,237 Foreclosed Property Care: 15,000 Housing Units Public Service Access to and supply of CDBG: Public Service activities other than Programs public services $4,342,894 Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 10,000 persons Homeless Services Increase access to and ESG: Tenant -based rental assistance/ and Facilities supply of homeless $2,317,005 Rapid Rehousing: 150 services and facilities households assisted Homeless Person Overnight Shelter: 1,000 persons assisted Overnight/Emergency Shelter/Transitional Housing Beds Added: 50 Beds Homelessness Prevention: 175 Persons Assisted Housing for Homeless added: 400 housing units Economic Promote economic CDBG: Businesses Assisted: 25 Development opportunity $301,231 Programs Public Facilities Improve City public CDBG: Public Facility or Infrastructure & Infrastructure facilities and $7,630,780 Activities other than Low/Moderate infrastructure Income Housing Benefit: 10,000 persons Program Administration All CDBG: & Fair Housing $5,790,525 Services HOME: 1,818,870 ESG: $187,865 75A-3 Public Hearing — 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing May 5, 2020 Page 4 Affordable Housing Development, Maintenance, and Preservation Provide funding for the acquisition, construction, rehabilitation and provision of affordable rental and ownership housing. Code Enforcement Support code enforcement activities to ensure residential properties are safe and suitable for habitation. Public Service Programs Working with local and regional nonprofits and service providers, Santa Ana will provide funding to ensure the provision of critical services and activities to low- and moderate -income residents and special needs populations throughout the City. Homeless Services and Facilities Working together with local and regional stakeholders, Santa Ana will continue to promote the implementation of a cohesive and coordinated homeless system. In doing so, Santa Ana will invest in projects that ensure that homeless households from all sub -populations are supported to return to permanent housing as quickly as possible; receive strength -based services that emphasize recovery, as needed; receive only what they need to be returned to housing quickly and to be as self-reliant as possible; and are assisted in preventing homeless from occurring in the first place. If and when necessary, Santa Ana will use HUD funding to address urgent issues and conditions impacting the health and safety of homeless residents and those at risk of becoming homeless. Economic Development Programs Support workforce training and development and business assistance via training, technical assistance and general support to microbusinesses operating in Santa Ana. Public Facilities and Infrastructure In collaboration with other city agencies, rehabilitate public facilities and streets to increase ADA accessibility, improve facilities and infrastructure to better meet the needs of residents, and implement measures to mitigate and reduce vandalism and graffiti. Program Administration and Fair Housing Services Ensure the management of a compliant and efficient HUD programs and provide funding to promote the implementation of fair housing services and activities throughout the City. The goals are aspirational in nature and subject to adjustment dependent on funding from HUD, city resources and staff capacity. Staff reports out on our progress to achieve the goals each year through the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report submitted to City Council after every fiscal year. Annual Action Plan for FY 2020 — 2021 75A-4 Public Hearing — 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing May 5, 2020 Page 5 The Consolidated Plan includes the first of five Annual Action Plans during the five-year period covered by the Consolidated Plan. The Annual Action Plan describes the intended use of the City's entitlement grants specifically for Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2021. For FY 2020-2021, the City will receive $5,735,518 in CDBG, $500,947 in ESG and $1,818,699 in HOME Program funds from HUD. In addition, the City will re -program $976,731 of prior year CDBG resources. For FY 2020- 2021, the City plans to expend current HUD allocations, estimated program income, and reprogrammed federal funds as follows: 2020 CDBG Program General Activity Funding Amount CDBG Program Administration & Fair Housing $1,147,103 Public Facility Improvements, Streets & Parks $2,150,000 Housing Rehabilitation — Multi -Family $1,687,047 Code Enforcement - Enforcement of Housing & Municipal Building Codes $ 800,000 Non-profit Public Services $ 855,173 New Business Start -Up - Micro Enterprise Program $ 72,926 TOTALI $6,712,249 2020 HOME Program General Activity Funding Amount HOME Program Administration $ 181,870 HOME CHDO Set -Aside $ 272,805 Affordable Housing Development and Rehabilitation $1,264,024 Single -Family and Mobile Home Rehabilitation Programs $ 100,000 TOTALI $1,818,699 2020 ESG Program General Activity Funding Amount ESG Program Administration $ 37,571 Homelessness Street Outreach $ 51,880 Homeless Emergency Shelter $ 221,468 Homeless Prevention $ 25,000 Rapid Re -housing $ 150,000 ESG Data Collection Management $ 15,028 TOTAILI $ 500,947 Outreach and Engagement To develop the 2020-2024 Five -Year Consolidated Plan and 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, in accordance with the City's adopted Citizen Participation Plan staff conducted extensive outreach and engagement to the community for three months from October 2019 to December 2019 through surveys, community meetings and public hearings. Efforts were made to encourage participation by low- and moderate -income persons, particularly those living in slum and blighted areas and in areas where HUD funds are proposed to be used, and by residents of predominantly low- and 75A-5 Public Hearing — 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing May 5, 2020 Page 6 moderate -income neighborhoods. The City also made efforts to encourage the participation of minorities and non-English speaking persons, as well as persons with disabilities. The consultation process included representatives of the Continuum of Care, Santa Ana Housing Authority, and other specified groups who completed surveys, provided local data and assisted the City to ensure practical coordination of strategies to maximize impact and to avoid duplication of effort. Specifically, the City held five community workshops, two public hearings, and released a resident/stakeholder survey in English and Spanish from October 1, 2019 to December 30, 2019. In an effort to broaden engagement, the City facilitated five community workshops at various times, dates, and locations across the City with translation services available in Spanish and Vietnamese. The five workshops were held at City Council Chambers, Willard Elementary School, Santa Ana Senior Center, Delhi Community Center, and a second time in City Council Chambers with the Community Redevelopment and Housing Commission. To promote the survey, community workshops and first public hearing, the City published a series of advertisements including English/Spanish flyers, two Nixles, and a public notice. The City invited regional planning organizations, state agencies and adjacent units of local government to participate in the City's surveys and community meetings. Additionally, Santa Ana conducted email outreach to all adjacent units of local government to share in the identification of regional housing and community development needs. The City received input from 245 residents and stakeholders via the survey including 241 in English and 4 in Spanish. The survey provided an opportunity for input on priority needs related to housing, public services, public facilities, and other services in the community. A summary of the survey results, flyer, and community workshop presentation is included in the Consolidated Plan as Appendix I. Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice The federal regulations for the Consolidated Plan require that grantees conduct an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI), take appropriate actions to overcome the effects of impediments identified through that Analysis, and maintain records reflecting the Analysis and actions. An Al is a document that analyzes local and regional policies, procedures, and practices within a community that may limit a person's ability to choose their residence free from discrimination, and addresses actions that may be taken to overcome these discriminatory housing policies, procedures, and practices. While the requirement to complete an Al must be fulfilled by individual grantees, HUD encourages regional collaboration for this planning effort. In Orange County, 22 entitlement cities (Aliso Viejo, Anaheim, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Laguna Niguel, La Habra, La Palma, Lake Forest, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach, Orange, Rancho Santa Margarita, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Santa Ana, Tustin and Westminster) and 12 cities contracted with the County of Orange (City of Brea, Cypress, Dana Point, Laguna Beach, Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, Los Alamitos, Placentia, Seal Beach, Stanton, Villa Park, Yorba Linda) elected to prepare a regional Al. The 22 entitlement cities and 12 cities contracted with the County of Orange entered into an agreement with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (Lawyers' Committee) to complete the regional Al. The benefit of a regional Al is that it allows for a broader perspective on issues that may be impacting housing choice and/or mobility within the region as well as potential solutions and/or strategies. The regional Al provides an overview of laws, regulations, conditions or other possible obstacles that may affect an individual or a household's access to housing in a community. It also presents local and regional 75A-6 Public Hearing — 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing May 5, 2020 Page 7 demographic profiles, assesses the extent of housing needs among specific groups, identifies existing barriers or impediments that may limit housing choice, and proposes actions to overcome those barriers. To prepare the regional Al on behalf of the region, the Lawyers' Committee conducted a broad array of outreach and engagement through community meetings, focus groups, and public hearings. The Lawyers' Committee reached out to tenants, property owners, homeowners, fair housing organizations, civil rights and advocacy organizations, legal services providers, social services providers, housing developers, and industry groups to hear directly about fair housing issues affecting residents of Orange County. Specifically, beginning in October 2019, the Lawyers' Committee held meetings with individual stakeholders throughout the County. In January and February 2020, evening community meetings were held in Mission Viejo, Westminster/Garden Grove, Santa Ana, and Fullerton. Also in February, the Lawyers' Committee held a focus group with a wide array of nonprofit organizations and government officials. Additional presentations and meetings were held with City Councils and various city staff members. Geographically specific community meetings were held across Orange County, including the South, West, Central, and North parts of the County. Additional outreach was conducted for members of protected classes, including the Latino and Vietnamese communities. All community meetings had translation services available if requested in Spanish and Vietnamese. In addition, all meetings were held in locations accessible to people with mobility issues. Next Steps HUD regulations require a 30-day public review and comment period for the draft 2020-2024 Five - Year Consolidated Plan, the Annual Action Plan and the Al. On March 20, 2020, the drafts were posted to the City's webpage and a public notice was published in the Orange County Register, La Opinion, and Nguoi Viet newspapers, that the draft Plan and Al were available for review beginning March 20, 2020, and that a public hearing would be held on April 22, 2020 at the Community Redevelopment and Housing Commission (CRHC) regular meeting. The 30-day public comment period concluded on April 20, 2020, at 4:OOPM. Due to COVID-19, all CRHC meetings have been canceled, so a public notice was re -published in the same newspapers on April 16, 2020 notifying the public that the draft Plan and Al was still available for review and that a public hearing would be held on May 5, 2020 at a virtual City Council meeting. In accordance with the federal regulations, all neighboring jurisdictions were also informed of the drafts' availability for review. All comments received, including all funding recommendations made by the City Council, will be included in the final documents which will be submitted to HUD no later than May 15, 2020. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this Item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #5 - Community Health, Livability, Engagement & Sustainability, Objective #1 (establish a comprehensive community engagement initiative to expand access to information and create opportunities for stakeholders to play active role in discussing public policy and setting priorities). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. 75A-7 Public Hearing — 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing May 5, 2020 Page 8 Exhibits: 1. Draft 2020-2024 Five -Year Consolidated Plan and FY 20-21 Action Plan 2. Draft Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice 75A-8 EXHIBIT 1 The City of Santa Ana Community Development Agency 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN JULY 1, 2020 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2025 2020 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN JULY 1, 2020 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2021 Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-9 This page intentionally left blank. 'N Consolidated Plan C9e\0l/Je\01le1 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-10 EXECUTIVESUMMARY...........................................................................................................................................5 ES-05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY-91.200(c), 91.220(B)........................................................................................................5 THEPROCESS.......................................................................................................................................................11 PR-05 LEAD & RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES-91.200(B)......................................................................................................... 11 PR-10 CONSULTATION-91.100, 91.200(B), 91.215(L).................................................................................................. 12 PR-15 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION-91.105........................................................................................................................ 37 NEEDSASSESSMENT............................................................................................................................................40 NA-05 OVERVIEW....................................................................................................................................................... 40 NA-10 HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT - 91.205 (A, B,C)..................................................................................................... 42 NA-15 DISPROPORTIONATELY GREATER NEED: HOUSING PROBLEMS — 91.205 (B)(2)............................................................. 51 NA-20 DISPROPORTIONATELY GREATER NEED: SEVERE HOUSING PROBLEMS— 91.205(13)(2).................................................. 55 NA-25 DISPROPORTIONATELY GREATER NEED: HOUSING COST BURDENS — 91.205 (B)(2)...................................................... 58 NA-30 DISPROPORTIONATELY GREATER NEED: DISCUSSION — 91.205(B)(2) ......................................................................... 60 NA-35 PUBLIC HOUSING — 91.205(B) ............................................................................................................................64 NA-40 HOMELESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT — 91.205(c) ........................................................................................................ 68 NA-45 NON -HOMELESS SPECIAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT - 91.205 (B,D).................................................................................. 75 NA-50 NON -HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS —91.215(F)............................................................................. 78 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS...............................................................................................................................so MA-05 OVERVIEW...................................................................................................................................................... 80 MA-10 NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS — 91.210(A)&(B)(2) ................................................................................................ 81 MA-15 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS: COST OF HOUSING - 91.210(A)................................................................................. 85 MA-20 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS: CONDITION OF HOUSING — 91.210(A)........................................................................ 88 MA-25 PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING — 91.210(B)....................................................................................................... 91 MA-30 HOMELESS FACILITIES AND SERVICES — 91.210(C).................................................................................................. 93 MA-35 SPECIAL NEEDS FACILITIES AND SERVICES — 91.210(D) ............................................................................................ 97 MA-40 BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING — 91.210(E)................................................................................................. 99 MA-45 NON -HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSETS — 91.215 (F)......................................................................... 100 MA-50 NEEDS AND MARKET ANALYSIS DISCUSSION........................................................................................................ 108 MA-60 BROADBAND NEEDS OF HOUSING OCCUPIED BY LOW -AND MODERATE -INCOME HOUSEHOLDS - 91.210(A)(4), 91.310(A)(2)...........................................................................................................................................................110 MA-65 HAZARD MITIGATION-91.210(A)(5), 91.310(A)(3)..........................................................................................112 STRATEGICPLAN................................................................................................................................................113 SP-05 OVERVIEW...................................................................................................................................................... 113 SP-10 GEOGRAPHIC PRIORITIES-91.215(A)(1)............................................................................................................ 115 SP-25 PRIORITY NEEDS- 91.215(A)(2)........................................................................................................................ 116 SP-30 INFLUENCE OF MARKET CONDITIONS-91.215 (B)................................................................................................ 122 SP-35 ANTICIPATED RESOURCES - 91.215(A)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2).................................................................................... 123 SP-40 INSTITUTIONAL DELIVERY STRUCTURE—91.215(K)................................................................................................ 127 SP-45 GOALS SUMMARY— 91.215(A)(4).....................................................................................................................130 SP-50 PUBLIC HOUSING ACCESSIBILITY AND INVOLVEMENT-91.215(C)............................................................................. 133 SP-55 BARRIERSTO AFFORDABLE HOUSING — 91.215(H) .................................................................................................. 134 SP-60 HOMELESSNESS STRATEGY-91.215(D).............................................................................................................. 135 Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-11 SP-65 LEAD BASED PAINT HAZARDS-91.215(1)............................................................................................................. 137 SP-70 ANTI -POVERTY STRATEGY — 91.215(J)................................................................................................................ 138 SP-80 MONITORING — 91.230....................................................................................................................................139 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN 140 AP-15 EXPECTED RESOURCES-91.220(C)(1,2)............................................................................................................140 AP-20 ANNUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES — 91.220(C)(3)................................................................................................. 144 AP-35 PROJECTS — 91.220(D) ....................................................................................................................................146 AP-38 PROJECT SUMMARY......................................................................................................................................... 147 AP-50 GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION — 91.220(F) ............................................................................................................ 156 AP-55 AFFORDABLE HOUSING—91.220(G).................................................................................................................. 158 AP-60 PUBLIC HOUSING—91.220(H)..........................................................................................................................159 AP-65 HOMELESS AND OTHER SPECIAL NEEDS ACTIVITIES — 91.220(1)............................................................................... 160 AP-75 BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING — 91.220(J).................................................................................................. 162 AP-85 OTHER ACTIONS — 91.220(K)............................................................................................................................163 AP-90 PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS— 91.220(L)(1,2,4)....................................................................................... 165 APPENDICES I. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT RESOURCESAND MATERIALS Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-12 Executive Summary ES-05 Executive Summary - 91.200(c), 91.220(b) 1. Introduction The 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan is the City of Santa Ana's Strategic Plan for the investment of annual allocations of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) during the five year period covered by the Consolidated Plan beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2025. These grant programs are consistent with HUD's national strategy to provide decent housing opportunities, a suitable living environment and economic opportunities —particularly for low - and moderate -income people. In consideration of finite grant resources, the Strategic Plan within this Consolidated Plan outlines the areas and population segments with the greatest level of need for a particular program or activity and intends to invest grant resources in high leverage opportunities where data suggests that the City will be able to maximize the impact of every dollar. The Strategic Plan identifies the City's priority needs, including the rationale for establishing allocation priorities and specific measurable goals to be addressed during the five year period covered by the Consolidated Plan through activities to be implemented as part of the five Annual Action Plans using CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds. This Consolidated Plan also contains a Needs Assessment and Market Analysis that provide insight into the different levels of need in the community and the market in which grant -funded programs will be implemented. The Needs Assessment incorporates national data from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates and the 2011-2015 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, in addition to HUD program, State of California, and local/ regional data sets. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 created the CDBG Program. The primary objective of the CDBG program is the development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing, a suitable living environment, and expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low- -and moderate -income. The CDBG regulations require that each activity meet one of the following national objectives: • Benefit low- and moderate -income persons; • Aid in the prevention or elimination of slums and blight; or • Meet other community development needs having a particular urgency. Each year, the City certifies with the submission of its Annual Action Plan that it has given maximum feasible priority to activities, which meet the first and second objectives above. Additionally, the City Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 5 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-13 certifies that no less than 70 percent of the CDBG funds received, over a three-year certification period, will be designed to benefit low- and moderate -income persons. HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program The Cranston -Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act created the HOME program to give states and local governments a flexible funding source to use —often in partnership with local nonprofit groups —to fund a wide range of activities including building, buying, and/or rehabilitating affordable housing for rent or homeownership or providing direct rental assistance to low-income people. HOME is a federal block grant to local governments with the sole purpose of creating affordable housing opportunities for low- income households. ESG / Regional Homeless Continuum of Care The ESG program provides grantees with resources to be used within the context of the Consolidated Plan and the regional Continuum of Care (CoQ strategyto address homelessness. Eligible ESG activities include: • Street outreach: Outreach to unsheltered homeless individuals and families to connect them with emergency shelter, housing or critical services; • Emergency shelter: Major rehabilitation, conversion or renovation of a building to be used as emergency shelter for homeless persons; essential services such as case management, childcare, education services, employment and job training; shelter operations such as maintenance, rent, repair, security, fuel, insurance, utilities, relocation and furnishings; • Homelessness prevention: Housing relocation and stabilization services and short -and/or medium - term rental assistance to prevent homelessness if annual income is 30% or less of AMI and assistance is necessary to regain stability in current permanent housing or move into other permanent housing; and • Rapid re -housing: Housing relocation and stabilization services and short -and/or medium -term rental assistance to help individuals or families living in shelters or in places not meant for human habitation move into permanent housing and achieve stability. ESG funds include a 1:1 match requirement and must be fully expended within 24 months. In administering the ESG program, the City will align with the Orange County Continuum of Care. Orange County's homeless system of care is comprised of a network of public, private, faith -based, for - profit, and non-profit service providers who utilize several federal, state and local resources to provide services for homeless people. Hundreds of agencies throughout the County provide programs ranging from feeding the homeless on the street to creating permanent supportive housing opportunities. These services are available to homeless families with children, and single men and women. The County's non- profit community also serves special needs populations, such as victims of domestic violence, veterans, the disabled and youth. 2020 Program Year Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 6 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-14 In addition to the Consolidated Plan, this document includes the first year's Annual Action Plan. For the 2020 program year, the City will receive $5,735,518 of CDBG, $500,947 of ESG and $1,818,699 of HOME funds from HUD. In addition, the City will re -program $1,004,222 of prior year CDBG resources. The 2020 funding will be allocated to the following projects: 2020 CDBG PROGRAM Public Service CDBG Public Service Program $855,173 Capital Projects CDBG Economic Development $72,926 Library Improvements $700,000 Parks and Public Facility Improvements $1,434,364 Neighborhood Sponsored Improvements $50,000 Housing and Code Enforcement Projects CDBG Housing Program $1,687,047 CDBG Code Enforcement $800,000 Program Administration Projects CDBG Program Administration $1,080,230 Fair Housing Services $60,000 IZ�YI�IGCi7�iI�JtiZh:L1��i Housing Projects HOME Rehabilitation $100,000 Affordable Housing Development and Rehabilitation $1,264,024 CHDO Housing Projects $272,805 Program Administration Projects HOME Program Administration $181,870 2020 ESG PROGRAM Homeless Projects Homeless Services and Facility Activities $500,947 2. Summary of the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan Needs Assessment Overview HUD's Community Planning and Development (CPD) Outcome Performance Measurement Framework classifies objectives in three categories: decent housing, a suitable living environment, and economic opportunity. Based on the Needs Assessment and Market Analysis, the Strategic Plan identifies six high Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 7 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-15 priority needs to be addressed through the implementation of activities aligned with seven Strategic Plan goals. The priority needs for Santa Ana include: • Expand the supply of affordable housing • Preserve the supply of affordable housing • Access to and supply of public services • Increase access to and supply of homeless services and facilities • Promote economic opportunity • Improve City public facilities and infrastructure Consistent with HUD's national goals for HUD CPD programs to provide decent housing opportunities, maintain a suitable living environment and expand economic opportunities for low- and moderate -income residents, the priority needs listed above will be addressed over the next five years through the implementation of HUD funded activities aligned with the following seven measurable Strategic Plan goals: • Affordable Housing Development, Maintenance, and Preservation • Code Enforcement • Public Service Programs • Homeless Services and Facilities • Economic Development Program • Public Facilities and Infrastructure • Program Administration and Fair Housing Services 3. Evaluation of past performance The investment of HUD resources during the 2015-2019 program years was a catalyst for positive change in the community. Together with other federal, state and local investments, HUD resources allowed the City and its partners to: • Developed new and rehabilitated existing affordable housing throughout the City • Provided assistance to homeless individuals and families through street outreach, rapid rehousing, homeless prevention services, and expanding the number and types of emergency and transitional shelter beds in the City • Targeted public service programming to youth, families, seniors, victims of domestic violence and other special needs populations • Rehabilitate and improve community spaces, parks, and facilities to improve ADA accessibility and enhance public use • Completed street and sidewalk improvements Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 8 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-16 While the City and local partners were able to successfully implement the activities listed above during the last five years, there were insufficient resources to fully address the level of need identified in the last Consolidated Plan. 4. Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process Subsequent to the enactment of the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009, HUD revised the Consolidated Plan regulations at 24 CFR Part 91 to emphasize the importance of citizen participation and consultation in the development of the Consolidated Plan. HUD strengthened the consultation process with requirements for consultation with the CoC, Public Housing Authorities (PHA), business leaders, civic leaders, and public or private agencies that address housing, health, social service, victim services, employment, or education needs of low-income individuals and families, homeless individuals and families, youth and/or other persons with special needs. Together with the analytic capabilities of the eCon Plan Suite, these requirements created the conditions necessary to implement a collaborative, data -driven and place -based planning process that includes a robust level of citizen participation and consultation. The City adopted a new Citizen Participation Plan in September 2019 that reflects regulatory changes and process improvements. In accordance with the City's adopted Citizen Participation Plan, the City facilitated citizen participation through surveys, community meetings and public hearings. Efforts were made to encourage participation by low- and moderate -income persons, particularly those living in slum and blighted areas and in areas where HUD funds are proposed to be used, and by residents of predominantly low- and moderate -income neighborhoods. The City also made efforts to encourage the participation of minorities and non-English speaking persons, as well as persons with disabilities. The consultation process included representatives of the CoC, PHA, and other specified groups who completed surveys, provided local data and assisted the City to ensure practical coordination of strategies to maximize impact and to avoid duplication of effort. S. Summary of public comments Through the City's five community workshops, two public hearings, and a resident/ stakeholder survey, the City received a range of input and feedbackto assist in identifying priority needs, community strengths and opportunities to more efficiently and target funding. At the community workshops and public hearings, the City provided an overview of the Consolidated Plan process and received input on priority needs and concerns within the community. The City received input from 245 residents and stakeholders via the survey. The survey provided an opportunity for input on priority needs related to housing, public services, public facilities, and other services in the community. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 9 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-17 Additionally, the City conducted stakeholder interviews with key stakeholders and service providers operating in the City related to homeless facilities and services. 6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them All comments and views received by the City in the development of the Consolidated Plan were accepted and taken into consideration in the development of the Consolidated Plan. 7. Summary Examination of HUD -provided 2011-2015 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates and the 2011-2015 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, in addition to local data, as well as consultation with citizens and stakeholders revealed six high priority needs to be addressed through the investment of CDBG, ESG and HOME funds over the five year period of the Consolidated Plan. The investment of CDBG, ESG and HOME funds in eligible activities shall be guided principally by the goals of the Strategic Plan. Projects in the Action Plan conform with one of the Strategic Plan strategies and the associated action -oriented, measurable goals in order to receive consideration for CDBG, ESG or HOME funds. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 10 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-1 8 The Process PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies - 91.200(b) 1. Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source. CDBG Administrator HOME Administrator ESG Administrator Narrative SANTA ANA SANTA ANA K-1101111 FeVe10 F-11 Table 1- Responsible Agencies Community Development Agency Community Development Agency Community Development Agency The City of Santa Ana Community Development Agency isthe lead agencyfor overseeingthe development of the Consolidated Plan. This Department is also responsible for the preparation of the Annual Action Plan, Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) and CDBG, HOME, and ESG program administrations. The City of Santa Ana was supported by MDG Associates, Inc. in the development of the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan. Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information: David Flores Community Development Analyst Community Development Agency dfIoresC@santa-ana.org 714-647-6561 Consolidated Plan Ma01111 UIVa0 F-11 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-1 9 PR-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(I) 1. Introduction The City of Santa Ana consulted with representatives from multiple agencies, groups, and organizations involved in the development of affordable housing, creation of job opportunities for low- and moderate - income residents, and/or provision of services to children, elderly persons, persons with disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, and homeless persons. To facilitate this consultation, the City solicited feedback through the following methods: • Stakeholder/resident surveys • Individual stakeholder consultations • Community meetings • Public hearings • 30-day public comment period • Receipt of written comments To gather the greatest breadth and depth of information, the City consulted with a wide variety of agencies, groups and organizations concerning the housing, community and economic development needs of the community. Each of the agencies, groups or organizations consulted is represented below. The input received from these consultation partners helped establish and inform the objectives and goals described in the Strategic Plan. Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction's activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(I)). The City recognizes the importance of careful coordination and alignment among various service providers to maximize the effectiveness of the CDBG program. As a result, during the development of this Consolidated Plan, the City consulted with organizations that provide assisted housing, health services and other community -focused programs. Outreach efforts included surveys including specific questions associated with coordination, invitations to community meetings and follow-up phone interviews where appropriate. The Cityfurther recognizesthe importance of continued coordination and alignment duringthe upcoming five-year planning period with these organizations and agencies. The City will strengthen relationships and alignment among these organizations in the implementation of the NOFA process for CDBG funds and through technical assistance provided to subrecipients of CDBG funds each year. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 12 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-20 Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness Orange County's homeless Continuum of Care (CoC) is comprised of a network of public, private, faith - based, for -profit, and non-profit service providers who utilize several federal, state and local resources to provide services and facilities for homeless people. The region's municipalities, including the City of Santa Ana, also provide resources for services that assist the homeless and those at -risk of becoming homeless. Non-profit service and facility providers play a critical role in the current CoC system and in addressing homeless needs within Santa Ana. These organizations provide a range of services throughout the County ranging from job training to creating permanent supportive housing opportunities. These services are available to homeless individuals and households. The CoC guides the development of homeless strategies and the implementation of programs to end homelessness throughout the region. In conducting the City's Needs Assessment, Santa Ana carefully reviewed the CoC's current strategy and planning documents to ensure coordination in goals and objectives. Additionally, the City provided a questionnaire to the CoC as well as key service providers operating in Santa Ana to identify the CoC's perceived needs in the county and its objectives to address the needs of different homeless persons populations, specifically chronically homeless families and individuals, families with children, veterans, unaccompanied youth and persons at risk of homelessness. The City will continue to actively work with the CoC as well as its partners throughout the County to coordinate on the planning and implementation of homeless services and programming. Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS In the development of the Consolidated Plan, the City of Santa Ana consulted with numerous housing, social service, and homeless service providers whose work intersects with the goal of reducing and ending homelessness in Orange County and/ or Santa Ana. This consultation provided input on allocation methodologies and approach for ESG programs. The City of Santa Ana regularly coordinates with the Orange County CoC to align performance standards, evaluate outcomes of current initiatives, coordination program policies and procedures related to program design and HMIS administration. 2. Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 13 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-21 I Agency/Group/Organization Santa Ana Housing Authority Agency/Group/Organization Type Public Housing Housing What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Need Assessment by Consultation? Public Housing How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach, Agency/Group/Organization consulted data validation, and the web -based survey. and what are the anticipated outcomes Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the of the consultation or areas for stakeholder and the City to be an active participant improved coordination? in housing and community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 2 Agency/Group/Organization ALBI Agency/Group/Organization Type Services -Children What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 3 Agency/Group/Organization Regional Center of Orange County Agency/Group/Organization Type Services -Persons with Disabilities Regional Organization What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 14 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-22 How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, San to Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 4 Agency/Group/Organization HIV Planning Council Agency/Group/Organization Type Services -Persons with HIV/AIDS What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? HOPWA Strategy How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 5 Agency/Group/Organization America on Track Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Children What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 6 Agency/Group/Organization Orange County CoC Agency/Group/Organization Type Services -homeless Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 15 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-23 What section of the Plan was addressed Homelessness Strategy by Consultation? Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs -Veterans Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach, Agency/Group/Organization consulted data validation, and the web -based survey. and what are the anticipated outcomes Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the of the consultation or areas for stakeholder and the City to be an active participant improved coordination? in housing and community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 7 Agency/Group/Organization Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce Agency/Group/Organization Type Business and Civic Leaders What section of the Plan was addressed Economic Development by Consultation? Market Analysis How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach, Agency/Group/Organization consulted phone interview and the web -based survey. and what are the anticipated outcomes Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the of the consultation or areas for stakeholder and the City to be an active participant improved coordination? in housing and community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 8 Agency/Group/Organization The GREEN Foundation Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Health Services — Education What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 16 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-24 How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 9 Agency/Group/Organization Habitat for Humanity of OC Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Housing Housing What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Needs Assessment by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by participation in Agency/Group/Organization consulted a community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines and what are the anticipated outcomes of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 10 Agency/Group/Organization Community Health Initiative Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Health What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by participation in Agency/Group/Organization consulted a community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines and what are the anticipated outcomes of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 11 Agency/Group/Organization Latino Health Access Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Health What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 17 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-25 How was the The organization was consulted by participation in Agency/Group/Organization consulted a community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines and what are the anticipated outcomes of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 12 Agency/Group/Organization Neighborworks of Orange County Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Housing Housing What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Needs Assessment by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 13 Agency/Group/Organization Orange County Labor Foundation Agency/Group/Organization Type Regional Organization Services — Employment What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? Market Analysis Economic Development How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 14 Agency/Group/Organization Greater Light Family Church Agency/Group/Organization Type Other Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 18 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-26 What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development Needs by Consultation? Anti -Poverty Strategy How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 15 Agency/Group/Organization The Kennedy Commission Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Housing Housing What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Needs Assessment by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 16 Agency/Group/Organization Second Baptist Church of Santa Ana Agency/Group/Organization Type Other What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development Needs by Consultation? Anti -Poverty Strategy How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 19 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-27 17 Agency/Group/Organization HUMAN OPTIONS, INC. Agency/Group/Organization Type Services -Children Services -Elderly Persons Services -Persons with Disabilities Services -Persons with HIV/AIDS Services -Victims of Domestic Violence Services -homeless Services -Employment What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless by Consultation? Homeless Needs - Families with children Public Services How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 18 Agency/Group/Organization Community Legal Aid — Southern California Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Fair Housing Services —Victims Services - Housing What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 19 Agency/Group/Organization Heritage Museum of Orange County Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Children Services - Education What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 20 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-2 V How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 20 Agency/Group/Organization Chispa OC Agency/Group/Organization Type Civic Leader What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? Housing Needs Assessment How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 21 Agency/Group/Organization YMCA Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Children What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 22 Agency/Group/Organization Community Action Partnership of Orange County Agency/Group/Organization Type Regional Organization What section of the Plan was addressed Anti -Poverty Strategy by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 21 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-29 23 Agency/Group/Organization WISE PLACE Agency/Group/Organization Type Services -Victims of Domestic Violence Services - Homeless What section of the Plan was addressed Homelessness Strategy by Consultation? Homeless Needs — Families with Children Homeless Needs — Chronically Homeless How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach, Agency/Group/Organization consulted phone interview and the web -based survey. Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened and what are the anticipated outcomes or preserved lines of communication between the of the consultation or areas for stakeholder and the City to be an active participant improved coordination? in housing and community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 24 Agency/Group/Organization CSU - Fullerton Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Education Business Leaders What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development Meeting by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by participation in a Agency/Group/Organization consulted community/ stakeholder meeting. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community 25 Agency/Group/Organization Santa Ana Downtown Inc. Agency/Group/Organization Type Business Leaders What section of the Plan was addressed Market Analysis by Consultation? Economic Development Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 22 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-30 How was the The organization was consulted by phone Agency/Group/Organization consulted interview. Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of communication and what are the anticipated outcomes between the stakeholder and the City to be an of the consultation or areas for active participant in housing and community improved coordination? development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 26 Agency/Group/Organization Mercy House Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Homeless What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Strategy by Consultation? Homeless Needs — Veterans Homeless Needs — Chronically Homeless Homeless Needs — Unaccompanied Youth Homeless Needs — Families with Children How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines and what are the anticipated outcomes of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 27 Agency/Group/Organization City Net Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Homeless What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Strategy by Consultation? Homeless Needs — Veterans Homeless Needs — Chronically Homeless Homeless Needs — Unaccompanied Youth Homeless Needs — Families with Children Non -Homeless Special Needs Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 23 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-31 How was the The organization was consulted by phone Agency/Group/Organization consulted interview. Through this consultation, Santa and what are the anticipated outcomes Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the stakeholder and the City to be an of the consultation or areas for active participant in housing and community improved coordination? development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 28 Agency/Group/Organization Orange County Emergency Management Agency/Group/Organization Type Agency — Emergency Management Agency — Managing Flood Prone Areas What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach. Agency/Group/Organization consulted Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened and what are the anticipated outcomes or preserved lines of communication between the stakeholder and the City to be an active participant of the consultation or areas for in housing and community development planning improved coordination? in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 29 Agency/Group/Organization Boy's and Girl's Club of Central Orange Coast Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Children What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. Agency/Group/Organization Building Healthy Communities Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 24 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-32 30 Agency/Group/Organization Type Planning — Organization Services — Health What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Needs Assessment by Consultation? Lead -based Paint Strategy Non -Housing Community Development How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 31 Agency/Group/Organization CASA of Orange County Agency/Group/Organization Type Foster Care Agency/Facility Services — Children Child Welfare Agency What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Strategy by Consultation? Homeless Needs — Unaccompanied Youth Non -Homeless Special Needs How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines and what are the anticipated outcomes of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 32 Agency/Group/Organization Charitable Ventures of Orange County Agency/Group/Organization Type Regional Organization What section of the Plan was addressed Market Analysis by Consultation? Anti -Poverty Strategy Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 25 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-33 How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines and what are the anticipated outcomes of communication between the stakeholder and of the consultation or areas for the City to be an active participant in housing and improved coordination? community development planning in the jurisdiction. Santa Ana sought specific input, feedback, and recommendations related to the topics highlighted above from this stakeholder. 33 Agency/Group/Organization Com-Link Agency/Group/Organization Type Civic Leader What section of the Plan was addressed Anti -Poverty Strategy by Consultation? Housing Needs Assessment How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this consultation, and what are the anticipated outcomes Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the City improved coordination? to be an active participant in housing and community development 34 Agency/Group/Organization Delhi Center Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Elderly Persons Services — Health Services — Education What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Needs Assessment by Consultation? Non -Homeless Special Needs How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this consultation, and what are the anticipated outcomes Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the City improved coordination? to be an active participant in housing and community development 35 Agency/Group/Organization Fair Housing Council of Orange County Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Fair Housing Regional Organization Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 26 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-34 What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Needs Assessment by Consultation? Market Analysis Anti -Poverty Strategy Lead -based Paint Strategy How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 36 Agency/Group/Organization Goodwill Tierney Center Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Veterans Services — Homeless What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Needs — Veterans by Consultation? Homeless Needs — Chronically Homeless How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 37 Agency/Group/Organization Interval House Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Homeless Services — Victims Services — Domestic Violence What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Needs — Families with Children by Consultation? Homelessness Strategy How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 38 Agency/Group/Organization I Kid Works Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Education Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 27 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-35 What section of the Plan was addressed Economic Development; by Consultation? Non -Housing Community Development How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this consultation, and what are the anticipated outcomes Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the City improved coordination? to be an active participant in housing and community development 39 Agency/Group/Organization Lutheran Social Services of Southern California Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Housing Services — Homeless Services — Health Services — Employment Services — Education What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Needs Assessment by Consultation? Economic Development Anti -Poverty Strategy How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 40 Agency/Group/Organization Mental Health Agency of Orange County Agency/Group/Organization Type Health Agency Services — Health Services — Persons with Disabilities Publicly Funded Institution What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Needs Assessment by Consultation? Non -Housing Community Development Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 28 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-36 How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 41 Agency/Group/Organization Neutral Ground Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Children Services — Education What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development Needs by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 42 Agency/Group/Organization OC Partnership Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Homeless What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Needs — Chronically Homeless by Consultation? Homeless Needs — Families with Children Homeless Needs — Veterans Homeless Needs — Unaccompanied Youth How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 43 Agency/Group/Organization OneOC Agency/Group/Organization Type Regional Organization What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 29 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-37 How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 44 Agency/Group/Organization Orange County Business Council Agency/Group/Organization Type Business Leaders What section of the Plan was addressed Economic Development by Consultation? Market Analysis How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 45 Agency/Group/Organization Orange County Children's Therapeutic Art Center Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Children Services — Persons with Disabilities What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 46 Agency/Group/Organization Orange County Health Care Agency Agency/Group/Organization Type Heath Agency Publicly Funded Institution What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? Lead -based Paint Strategy Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 30 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-38 How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 47 Agency/Group/Organization Orange County Social Services Agency Agency/Group/Organization Type Child Welfare Agency What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless — Unaccompanied Youth by Consultation? Lead -based Paint Strategy Non -Housing Community Development How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 48 Agency/Group/Organization Orange County Water District Agency/Group/Organization Type Agency — Management of Public Land or Water Resources What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 49 Agency/Group/Organization Public Law Center Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Housing Services —Victims Services — Fair Housing What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 31 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-39 How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 50 Agency/Group/Organization Santa Ana Police Department Agency/Group/Organization Type Agency — Emergency Management What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 51 Agency/Group/Organization Santa Ana Senior Center Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Elderly What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 52 Agency/Group/Organization Santa Ana Workforce Investment Board Agency/Group/Organization Type Planning Organization Services — Employment What section of the Plan was addressed Economic Development by Consultation? Market Analysis Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 32 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-40 How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 53 Agency/Group/Organization Second Chance Orange County Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Persons with Disabilities Services — Health What section of the Plan was addressed Housing Needs Assessment by Consultation? Anti -Poverty Strategy How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 54 Agency/Group/Organization Small Business Development Center Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Employment What section of the Plan was addressed Economic Development by Consultation? Market Analysis How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 55 Agency/Group/Organization Taller San Jose Hope Builders Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Employment What section of the Plan was addressed Economic Development by Consultation? Market Analysis Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 33 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-41 How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 56 Agency/Group/Organization Templo Calvario CDC Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Education What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 57 Agency/Group/Organization VAMC Agency/Group/Organization Type Services — Homeless What section of the Plan was addressed Homeless Needs — Veterans by Consultation? How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development 58 Agency/Group/Organization The Cambodian Family Agency/Group/Organization Type Services —Immigrant Families What section of the Plan was addressed Non -Housing Community Development Needs by Consultation? Housing Needs Assessment How was the The organization was consulted by email outreach Agency/Group/Organization consulted and the web -based survey. Through this and what are the anticipated outcomes consultation, Santa Ana opened or preserved lines of of the consultation or areas for communication between the stakeholder and the improved coordination? City to be an active participant in housing and community development Table 2—Agencies, groups, organizations who participated Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 34 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-42 Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting The City maintains a list of agencies, organizations and other stakeholders that have expressed an interest in City's CDBG program and invited representatives from each entity to participate at multiple points in the planning process. All agencies were strongly encouraged to attend meetings and participate in surveys. Any agency or organization that was not consulted and would like to be included in the City's list of stakeholders, the agency or organization may contact the Community Development Department at the contact information provided for this Consolidated Plan. Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan CEDS Orange County Community Both the CEDS and Strategic Investment Board Plan identify a goal of improving economic opportunities for low - and moderate -income residents 2019 CoC Funding Application Orange County CoC The CoC application identifies a strategy to continue to address homelessness through a coordinated and aligned approach 10 Year Plan to End Orange County CoC Both the 10-Year Plan and Homelessness Consolidated Plan emphasize a comprehensive and coordinated approach to address homelessness Housing Element Santa Ana Both the Housing Element and Consolidated Plan establish a goal of increasing the supply and availability of affordable housing options throughout the City 5-year Strategic Plan Santa Ana Housing Authority In line with the Consolidated Plan, the Housing Authority has established goals to increase the supply of affordable housing and to affirmatively further access to fair housing Table 3 — Other local / regional / federal planning efforts Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(1)) Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 35 OMB control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-43 The City invited regional planning organizations, state agencies and adjacent units of local government to participate in the City's surveys and community meetings. Additionally, Santa Ana conducted email outreach to all adjacent units of local government to share in the identification of regional housing and community development needs. Throughout the implementation of the Consolidated Plan process, the City of Santa Ana consults and coordinates activities with local units of government and monitors state programs and regulations to leverage local HUD funding. Consolidated Plan C9e\0l/Je\01le1 MI OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-44 N O ri 14 Cl C O Q. '_u t ca a c d N v LM !'I a 0 bD c a bD Y Y N T Y .. u I 1 II I C fa a v N N v O c u° 75A-45 ®Q(V�� s (� `_<�` \\\/\/kaj ) .a 0{) ))\\/�\Qj � /CL �\/\\/k:0Mto CL -7ECLQj 2) /\/%��#/}a(372* e=£2 0 < U _:{§\ )}� \0\X , CL Q�,_ �a{®§)[ <m E< ■§� { «f Qj (/ \\w �EQj 0) § -- 2\k,ƒ)/}\2/{yƒf0 o /\�))/\/kU/o c (/)/ƒ2\ u ,= aa�-ueEQ:t w!)$%=[ _ �e - e;El2[(/}R(7\)ƒ)/}/\§) to aj to tio Qj _)2\) Qj )} _ƒ }7ƒ\E0 | \% \\\\\\ \\\z\\ z z M! z z \ ca» E/ Qj to to __)ƒ 0 7;±) \\ \\\\E \)z z CD ! « txo { _- I )J r m � B 75A- § F N O_ C L c t m 0 > m N N "O ,r v E E a � ' O a EL UU N O O O E U N N_ O' E "O N .0 >Qj-c V to 3 M H uu m Y to M W C a H N to tlU Y C Y L � N N L oa L Y E O N . Y C M QJ O C v Qj c C 00 t Z a m ef f0 aCL N L N IU m a 3 Z Q V O O to tlU Y E to Y E N L N L a -o -o L Y E N >- L Y E N O ui y O. .Y m N Oaj O O\ v u "6 O O m .O .- O E i p in L C C i in L L Z a m W a N Z d m K a Y f0 N • • • • • • • • • • • c m N u ` E o '2 m E a = a u a N u ii i f .. 75A-47 Needs Assessment NA-05 Overview Needs Assessment Overview The Needs Assessment examines needs related to affordable housing, special needs housing, community development and homelessness for the City of Santa Ana. The Needs Assessment includes the following sections: • Housing Needs Assessment • Disproportionately Greater Need • Public Housing • Homeless Needs Assessment • Non -Homeless Special Needs Assessment • Non -Housing Community Development Needs The Needs Assessment identifies those needs with the highest priorities which form the basis for the Strategic Plan section and the programs and projects to be administered. Most of the data tables in this section are populated with default data from the 2011- 2015 American Community Survey (ACS) and the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) datasets. CHAS datasets are developed for HUD by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the ACS. In addition to these data sources, the Needs Assessment is supplemented by more current data to provide context around the significant growth experienced by the region in recent years. The housing portion of the needs assessment focuses largely on households experiencing a housing problem. HUD defines housing problems as: • Units lacking complete kitchen facilities; • Units lacking complete bathroom facilities; • Housing cost burden of more than 30 percent of the household income (for renters, housing costs include rent paid by the tenant plus utilities and for owners, housing costs include mortgage payments, taxes, insurance, and utilities); and • Overcrowding which is defined as more than one person per room, not including bathrooms, porches, foyers, halls, or half -rooms. Two of the three housing and community development entitlement programs, CDBG and HOME, operate under federally established income limits. Santa Ana is a direct recipient of both CDBG and HOME funds. The program income limits are based on median family income, with adjustments based on family size for Santa Ana. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 40 OMB control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-48 In general, very -low income refers to gross household incomes at or below 30 percent of the area median income (AMI); low-income refers to incomes between 31 and 50 percent of AMI; moderate -income refers to incomes between 51 and 80 percent of AMI. The CDBG and HOME programs target low- and moderate - income beneficiaries. HOME rental activities can benefit those with household incomes of up to 60 percent of AMI. ESG activities benefit individuals and households at or below 30% of AMI who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. The following figure provides the current (FY 2019) income limits for the Orange County area. These limits are updated annually by HUD. Figure 1— HUD Income Limits (2019) Data Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 41 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-49 NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 91.205 (a,b,c) Summary of Housing Needs The City of Santa Ana's population grew by 3% from the 2009 to 2015 ACS 5-year estimates. Since 2015, the population has continued to increase. Accordingto the California Department of Finance, Santa Ana's 2019 population is estimated to be 337,716. Santa Ana's median income has declined slightly from the 2009 ACS estimates to $52,253. This is more than $20,000 below the County's median income of $76,509. This is especially notable given that the cost of housing has risen significantly in the City, despite the lack of a corresponding increase in household income. 78% of the residents of Santa Ana identify as being Hispanic or Latino. 10% of residents identify as being Asian (not Hispanic/Latino) and 9%of residents identify as being Caucasian (not Hispanic/Latino). Santa Ana is significantly younger than Orange County as a whole as Santa Ana's median age is 30.2 compared to 37.1 in the County. Similarly, 12.8%of the county is 65 years and over compared to 7.7% in Santa Ana. The average household in Santa Ana contains 4.4 members. Forowners, the average household is slightly larger (4.46 members) compared to renter -occupied households (4.35 members). 71% of all households earn less than 80%AMI.Of all households within the City, 43%are small family (2-4 members) households and 32% are large family (5 or more members). 28% of all households include one household member 62 years or older. Of these households, 67% earn less than 80% AM I. 28% of all households also contain at least one child aged 6 or younger. Of these households, 84% earn less than 80% AM I When evaluating housing needs and problems, the Consolidated Plan considers households that are cost burdened (pay more than 30% of income for housing costs), overcrowded (more than 1 person/ room), and lack complete plumbing/kitchen facilities. Of all households earning less than 100% AM], 57% experience at least one of these housing problems. This is most pronounced (71%) for households that earn less than 50%AMI. Renters below 100%AMI are more likely to experience a housing problem (65%) than owners (43%) in the same income range. Population 324,528 333,270 3% Households 75,715 74,755 -1% Median Income $54,521.00 $52,253.00 -4% Table 5 - Housing Needs Assessment Demographics Data Source: 2005-2009 ACS (Base Year), 2011-2015 ACS (Most Recent Year) Consolidated Plan SANTAANA 42 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-50 Number of Households Table Total Households 17,890 16,480 18,395 7,075 14,920 Small Family Households 7,170 7,175 8,020 2,865 6,715 Large Family Households 5,395 5,475 6,540 2,380 3,795 Household contains at least one 2,785 3,135 3,420 1,655 3,260 person 62-74 years of age Household contains at least one 1,965 1,495 1,290 610 1,285 person age 75 or older Households with one or more 6,480 5,550 5,565 1,700 1,555 children 6 years old or younger Table 6 - Total Households Table Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Housing Needs Summary Tables 1. Housing Problems (Households with one of the listed needs) 0-30% >50- >80- Total 0-30% Total AMI 50% 50% 80% 100% AMI 50% 50% 80% 80% 00 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Substandard 280 120 50 40 490 30 20 40 25 115 Housing - Lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities Severely 3,530 2,295 1,670 350 7,845 240 370 775 325 1,710 Overcrowded - With >1.51 people per room (and complete kitchen and plumbing) Overcrowded - 2,760 2,920 2,245 505 8,430 260 885 1,735 625 3,505 With 1.01-1.5 people per room (and Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 43 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-51 none of the above problems) Housing cost burden greater than 50% of income (and none of the above problems) Housing cost burden greater than 30% of income (and none of the above problems) Zero/negative Income (and none of the above problems) 5,060 1,875 205 0 7,140 2,080 1,470 975 180 4,705 865 2,880 2,615 225 6,585 370 1,050 2,375 850 4,645 325 0 0 0 325 140 0 0 0 140 Table 7 - Housing Problems Table Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS 2. Housing Problems 2 (Households with one or more Severe Housing Problems: Lacks kitchen or complete plumbing, severe overcrowding, severe cost burden) 0-MI 50% 80% >80- Total 0-30% 50% 80% 00 Total AMI 50% 80% 100% AMI 50% 80% 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Having 1 or 11,630 7,215 4,170 895 23,910 2,610 2,745 3,525 1,155 10,035 more of four housing problems Having none of 1,900 3,525 5,095 1,780 12,300 1,285 2,990 5,610 3,245 13,130 four housing problems Household has 325 0 0 0 325 140 0 0 0 140 negative income, but none ofthe d=1W1 Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 44 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-52 other housing problems Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS 3. Cost Burden > 30% Table 8 - Housing Problems 2 0- Total 0-30% AMIMI 50% 50% 80% 80% AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 5,800 4,365 1,630 11,795 760 Large Related 4,155 2,735 889 7,779 820 Elderly 1,300 560 174 2,034 960 Other 1,015 965 895 2,875 319 Total need by 12,270 8,625 3,588 24,483 2,859 income Table 9 - Cost Burden > 30% Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS 4. Cost Burden > 50% AMI AMI 80% AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 4,600 1,140 145 Large Related 3,190 775 4 Elderly 880 335 29 Other 930 385 30 Total need by 9,600 2,635 208 income >30- >50- 50% 80% AMI AMI 1,215 1,795 1,280 1,575 680 490 200 460 3,375 4,320 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% AMI AMI AMI 3,770 3,675 2,130 979 10,554 5,885 700 805 490 1,995 3,969 695 615 200 1,510 1,244 730 395 205 1,330 1,345 315 130 195 640 12,443 2,440 1,945 1,090 5,475 Table 10 - Cost Burden > 50% Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA AS 45 OM B Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-53 ui admd Mild %of ELI Households With Severe Cost Burden 0-3710% 3710-55 07% ® 55o7-70.15% ' 1o.15A508% >85. 18% Source: HUD-CPD MAPS of Extremely Low -Income HHs with Severe Cost Burden Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Estimates 11.y Ul odusd Mild Map Legend x %of LI Households With severe Coat Burden 03279% 3279-0189% 4789-61.36% 613 7698% ' >7698% Source: HUD-CPD MAPS of Low -Income HHs with Severe Cost Burden Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Estimates Figure 2—Share Figure 3—Share Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 46 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-54 01 oama'ana %of MI Households With Severe Cost Burden 02604% 2604-3821% ® 36.21-4970% 49 7"4.42% >0442% Source: HUD-CPD MAPS Figure 4 — Share of Moderate -Income HHs with Severe Cost Burden Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Estimates 5. Crowding (More than one person per room) 0-30% >30- >50- >80- Total 0- >30- >so- >80- Total AMI 50% 80% 100% 30% 50% 80% 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Single family 5,630 3,890 2,675 465 12,660 300 765 1,150 420 2,635 households Multiple, 740 1,300 1,175 390 3,605 200 485 1,320 535 2,540 unrelated family households Other, non- 15 105 90 14 224 0 10 35 0 45 family households Total need by 6,385 5,295 3,940 869 16,489 500 1,260 2,505 955 5,220 income Table 11— Crowding Information —1/2 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) C9d0II1FJ901le1 75A-55 EVA 0-30% AMI Households with 5,620 15,770 7,570 Children Present >30-50% AMI 4,265 >50-80% AMI 3,210 0-30% AMI 860 Table 12 — Crowding Information — 2/2 >30-50% AMI 1,285 >50-80% AMI 2,355 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Describe the number and type of single person households in need of housing assistance. According to the 2011-2015 ACS estimates, 13% (9,693) of all households in Santa Ana are occupied by a single person. Of single person households, 43% are owner -occupied units and 57% are rental units. The median income for single person households is $29,517. In 2019, the HUD very low-income (50% of median family income) threshold for single person households in Orange County is $41,550. This HUD figure is more than 40%greaterthan the median income for single person households in Santa Ana. While the total share of low- or moderate -income single -person households in Santa Ana cannot be extrapolated, given this 40% difference, it is evident that a sizeable majority of single person households within the city are low- or moderate -income households and are more likely to require some form of housing assistance. Additionally, of the single -person households in Santa Ana, 41% (3,962) are 65 years or older. Elderly households are more likely to require services and assistance, especially those living alone who can less easily rely on other members of the household to assist with key services. Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance who are disabled or victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking. Domestic Violence Domestic violence, assault and stalking are not always reported. According to the 2018 National Crime Victimization Survey, only 47% of all domestic violence events were reported to the police. The California Department of Justice Criminal Justice Statistics Center maintains data on the number of domestic violence calls byjurisdiction. In 2018, there were 3,155 domestic violence calls for assistance in Santa Ana. 31% (990) of the calls reported that a weapon was involved in the incident. At a minimum, it can be assumed that each of these calls indicated a need for assistance and thus it can be assumed that at least 3,155 households require assistance. Applying the ratio that 53% of all domestic violence events were not reported to the police, this estimate can be increased to 5,952 households. According to the Orange County Continuum of Care's 2019 Point in Time Count, 356 unsheltered individuals (9.59%) had experienced and/ or were fleeing domestic violence. Within shelters, 8.54% of the residents (185 individuals) had experienced and/ or were fleeing domestic violence. Disability Within the City of Santa Ana, 8.9%of all residents have at least one disability. Of all residents 65 years old or older, 39% live with a disability. Of those with a disability, 26% live below the federal poverty level. Consolidated Plan SANTAANA 48 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-56 Comparatively, 22% of residents without a disability live below the federal poverty level. This greater share of disabled individuals living below the poverty level indicates they are more likely in need of assistance in identifying affordable, accessible housing. What are the most common housing problems? HUD defines housing problems as a household 1) not having complete kitchen facilities, 2) not having complete bathroom facilities, 3) paying more than 30% of gross income for housing costs, or 4) having more than 1 person/ room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens). Of all households within Santa Ana earning less than 100%AMI, 57%experience at least one housing problem. At this income range, 65% or rental households and 43% of owner households experience at least one housing problem. Of all households earning up to 80% AMI, 35,037 households (66%) are cost burdened. This share is predominately comprised of renter households (24,483). Of these rental households, more than half (53%) of all small family households (2-4 persons) are cost burdened. Further, 45% of all large rental families (5+ persons) at this income range are cost burdened. A smaller overall share (38% or 19,885 households) earning less than 80% AMI experience overcrowding. However, of those experiencing overcrowding, 79%are rental households. Just over 1% of all households earning less than 100%AMI experience substandard kitchen or bathroom facilities. Are any populations/household types more affected than others by these problems? As indicated above, rental households are much more likely to experience housing problems than owner households. Of all households in Santa Ana, 71% earn less than 80% AMI. When analyzing this share by household type, 70% of small family households, 74% of large family households, 67% of households with one member aged 62 or older, and 84% of households with a child 6 years or younger earned less than 80% AMI. Describe the characteristics and needs of Low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered 91.205(c)/91.305(c)). Also discuss the needs of formerly homeless families and individuals who are receiving rapid re -housing assistance and are nearing the termination of that assistance The most prevalent indicator of risk for low-income individuals and households with children are severe cost burden (paying more than 50% of income for housing) and severe overcrowding (more than 1.5 persons/ room). The ACS and CHAS data do not aggregate housing problem data to allow a calculation of households that experience either or both severe cost burden and severe crowding. However, we are able to calculate Consolidated Plan SANTAANA 49 OMB control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-57 from Table 7 above that there are at least 16,920 unique households living below 50% AMI who experience either severe housing cost burden or severe overcrowding. Of these households, 6,435 experience severe overcrowding and 10,485 experience severe cost burden. In Santa Ana, 12,443 renter households and 4,385 owner households below 50% AMI are severely cost burdened. Of these severely cost burdened households, 12,520 are small or large family households who may have children present. While not as many, there are 6,600 households below 50% AMI that are severely overcrowded. This consists 5,045 households that are family households. The vast majority of these family households are renters (4,710) compared to owners (335). Individuals and families whose rental assistance has or will be terminating soon are at risk of not being able to find affordable, size -appropriate housing units. As noted in the market analysis, the cost of housing has increased significantly over the past 5 years and the supply of units affordable to families at or below 50% AMI does not match the demand. If a jurisdiction provides estimates of the at -risk population(s), it should also include a description of the operational definition of the at -risk group and the methodology used to generate the estimates: Santa Ana does not maintain unique definitions or estimates of at -risk populations. The City uses the estimates and definitions that HUD provides for cost burden and overcrowding to identify at -risk populations and subpopulations within the community. Specify particular housing characteristics that have been linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness The greatest housing characteristic that is linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness is housing cost burden/ cost of housing and share of overcrowding. Consolidated Plan SANTAANA 50 OMB control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-58 NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems — 91.205 (b)(2) Introduction Sections NA-15, NA-20, and NA-25 of the Needs Assessment assesses the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole. A disproportionately greater need exists when a certain race/ethnicity experiences a housing problem at a greater rate (10 percentage points or more) than the income level as a whole. For example, when evaluating 0-30%AMI households, if 50%of the households experience a housing problem, but 60% or more of a particular race/ethnicity experiences a housing problem, that racial or ethnic group has a disproportionately greater need. Housing problems include: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities: Household lacks a sink with piped water, a range or stove, or a refrigerator. 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities: Household lacks hot and cold piped water, a flush toilet and a bathtub or shower. 3. Overcrowding: A household is considered to be overcrowded if there are more than 1 person per room. 4. Cost burden: A household is considered cost burdened if the household pays more than 30 percent of its total gross income for housing costs. For renters, housing costs include rent paid by the tenant plus utilities. For owners, housing costs include mortgage payment, taxes, insurance, and utilities. According to the 2011-2015 ACS five-year estimates, only 0.1% of the population in Santa Ana is American Indian/Alaska Native and 0.2% of the population is Pacific Islander. Given the low share of these populations, the estimates from the ACS and CHAS datasets for specific income levels present data with relatively large margins of error. As such, these populations are included in the analysis, but should be evaluated recognizing the larger margin of errors. Consolidated Plan SANTAANA 51 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-59 0%-30% of Area Median Income Jurisdiction as a whole 15,475 1,950 465 White 1,185 230 85 Black / African American 95 15 0 Asian 1,790 685 115 American Indian, Alaska Native 10 0 0 Pacific Islander 40 0 15 Hispanic 12,260 970 250 Table 13 - Disproportionally Greater Need 0 - 30%AMI Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% 30%-50% of Area Median Income Jurisdiction as a whole 13,900 2,580 0 White 1,185 670 0 Black / African American 185 19 0 Asian 1,365 350 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 4 39 0 Pacific Islander 40 0 0 Hispanic 11,055 1,465 0 Table 14 - Disproportionally Greater Need 30 - 50% AM Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 52 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-60 50%-80% of Area Median Income Jurisdiction as a whole 12,685 5,710 0 White 1,520 1,275 0 Black / African American 125 155 0 Asian 1,235 745 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 44 4 0 Pacific Islander 8 25 0 Hispanic 9,620 3,485 0 Table 15 - Disproportionally Greater Need 50 - 80%AMI Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% 80%-100%of Area Median Income Jurisdiction as a whole 3,130 3,945 0 White 475 955 0 Black / African American 65 120 0 Asian 285 625 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 0 10 0 Pacific Islander 10 0 0 Hispanic 2,265 2,190 0 Table 16 - Disproportionally Greater Need 80 - 100%AMI Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% Discussion 0-30% AMI Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 53 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-61 86.5% of all households at the 0-30% AMI range experience at least one housing problem. All American Indian/Alaska Native households (10) at this income level experience a housing problem — resulting in a disproportionately greater need. 30-50% AMI 84.3% of all households at the 30-50% AMI range experience at least one housing problem. All Pacific Islander households (40) at this income level experience a housing problem — resulting in a disproportionately greater need. 50-80% AMI 69.0% of all households at the 50-80% AMI range experience at least one housing problem. 91.7% of American Indian/Alaska Native households (44) at this income level experience a housing problem — resulting in a disproportionately greater need. 80-100% AMI 44.2% of all households at the 80-100% AMI range experience at least one housing problem. All Pacific Islander households (10) at this income level experience a housing problem — resulting in a disproportionately greater need. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 54 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-62 NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems — 91.205 (b)(2) Introduction A disproportionately greater need exists when a certain race/ethnicity experiences a housing problem at a greater rate (10 percentage points or more) than the income level as a whole. For example, when evaluating 0-30% AMI households, if 50% of the households experience a housing problem, but 60% or more of a particular race/ethnicity experiences a housing problem, that racial or ethnic group has a disproportionately greater need. Severe housing problems include: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities: Household lacks a sink with piped water, a range or stove, or a refrigerator. 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities: Household lacks hot and cold piped water, a flush toilet and a bathtub or shower. 3. Severe overcrowding: A household is considered to be severely overcrowded if there are more than 1.5 people per room. 4. Severe cost burden: A household is considered severely cost burdened if the household pays more than 50 percent of its total gross income for housing costs. For renters, housing costs include rent paid by the tenant plus utilities. For owners, housing costs include mortgage payment, taxes, insurance, and utilities. According to the 2011-2015 ACS five-year estimates, only 0.1% of the population in Santa Ana is American Indian/Alaska Native and 0.2% of the population is Pacific Islander. Given the low share of these populations, the estimates from the ACS and CHAS datasets for specific income levels present data with relatively large margins of error. As such, these populations are included in the analysis, but should be evaluated recognizing the larger margin of errors. 0%-30% of Area Median Income Jurisdiction as a whole 3,185 White 1,125 290 85 Black / African American 70 44 0 Asian 1,350 1,120 115 American Indian, Alaska Native E 4 4 0 Pacific Islander 40 0 15 Hispanic 11,570 1,665 250 Table 17 — Severe Housing Problems 0 - 30% AM Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 55 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-63 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% 30%-50% of Area Median Income Jurisdiction as a whole 9,960 6,515 0 White 780 1,075 0 Black / African American 140 65 0 Asian 855 865 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 4 39 0 Pacific Islander 40 0 0 Hispanic i 8,125 4,395 0 Table 18 — Severe Housing Problems 30 - 50%AMI Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% 50%-80% of Area Median Income Jurisdiction as a whole 7,695 10,705 0 White 465 2,330 0 Black / African American 75 210 0 Asian 570 1,410 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 0 50 0 Pacific Islander 4 35 0 Hispanic 6,535'�� 6,570 0 Table 19 — Severe Housing Problems 50 - 80% AM Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 56 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-64 80%-100%of Area Median Income White 115 1,310 0 Black / African American 0 185 0 Asian 185 725 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 0 10 0 Pacific Islander 0 10 0 Hispanic 1,735 2,715 0 Table 20—Severe Housing Problems g0 - 100%AMI Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% Discussion 0-30% AMI 79.6% of all households at the 0-30% AMI range experience at least one severe housing problem. No race/ethnicity experiences a disproportionately greater need. 30-50% AMI 60.5% of all households at the 30-50% AMI range experience at least one severe housing problem. All Pacific Islander households (40) at this income level experience a housing problem — resulting in a disproportionately greater need. 50-80% AMI 41.8% of all households at the 50-80% AMI range experience at least one severe housing problem. No race/ethnicity experiences a disproportionately greater need. 80-100% AMI 29% of all households at the 80-100%AMI range experience at least one severe housing problem. 39% of Hispanic/Latino households experience at least one severe housing problem, resulting in a disproportionately greater need. Consolidated Plan C7e10lrJe101la 6VA OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-65 NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens — 91.205 (b)(2) Introduction: A disproportionately greater need exists when a certain race/ethnicity are cost burdened at a greater rate (10 percentage points or more) than the population as a whole. For example, if 50% of the households are cost burdened, but 60% or more of a particular race/ethnicity are cost burdened, that racial or ethnic group has a disproportionately greater level of cost burden. Cost burden is defined as: 1. Cost burden: A household is considered cost burdened if the household pays more than 30 percent of its total gross income for housing costs. For renters, housing costs include rent paid by the tenant plus utilities. For owners, housing costs include mortgage payment, taxes, insurance, and utilities. 2. Severe cost burden: A household is considered severely cost burdened if the household pays more than 50 percent of its total gross income for housing costs. For renters, housing costs include rent paid by the tenant plus utilities. For owners, housing costs include mortgage payment, taxes, insurance, and utilities. According to the 2011-2015 ACS five-year estimates, only 0.1% of the population in Santa Ana is American Indian/Alaska Native and 0.2% of the population is Pacific Islander. Given the low share of these populations, the estimates from the ACS and CHAS datasets for specific income levels present data with relatively large margins of error. As such, these populations are included in the analysis, but should be evaluated recognizing the larger margin of errors. Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction as a whole 36,470 19,560 18,190 530 White 7,565 2,515 2,220 100 Black / African 620 260 250 0 American Asian 5,070 2,275 2,140 115 American Indian, Alaska 100 49 4 0 Native Pacific Islander 50 45 50 15 Hispanic �jffillllll 22,735 14,225 13,425 300 Table 21—Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens AMI Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Cost Burdened 26.4% (19,560) of all households in Santa Ana are cost burdened. No race/ethnicity are disproportionately cost burdened. Severely Cost Burdened Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-66 61.1 24.5% (18,190) of all households in Santa Ana are severely cost burdened. 34% (50) of Pacific Islander households are severely cost burdened, resulting in a disproportionately greater share. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 59 OMB control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-67 NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion — 91.205(b)(2) Are there any Income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category as a whole? As documented in the previous screens, the following groups have disproportionately greater needs: Housing Problems 0-30% AM I • American Indian/ Alaskan Native 30-50%AMI • Pacific Islander 50-80% AM I • American Indian/Alaskan Native 80-100%AMI • Pacific Islander Severe Housing Proj 0-30% AM I • none 30-50% AM I • Pacific Islands 50-80% AM I none 80-100% AMI • Hispanic/Latino Housing Cost Burden Cost Burdened • none Severely Cost Burdened • Pacific Islander Consolidated Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) M-a0llr-Mana 75A-68 As noted in the introduction, according to the 2011-2015 ACS five-year estimates, only 0.1% of the population in Santa Ana is American Indian/Alaska Native and 0.2% of the population is Pacific Islander. Given the low share of these populations, the estimates from the ACS and CHAS datasets for specific income levels present data with relatively large margins of error. As such, these populations are included in the analysis, but should be evaluated recognizing the larger margin of error. If they have needs not identified above, what are those needs? The greatest need of those experiencing disproportionately greater needs is access to affordable housing. This need aligns with the needs of all low- and moderate -income households within Santa Ana. Are any of those racial or ethnic groups located in specific areas or neighborhoods in your community? Within the City of Santa Ana, Hispanic/ Latino residents comprise the majority in nearly all Census tracts in the City (as estimated by the 2011-2015 ACS). As indicated in the map below, the greatest share of Hispanic/ Latino residents is in the central area of the City, bound by Warner Ave to the south and McFadden Ave to the north. In looking at areas with the lowest median household income, where households are more likely to experience housing problems, these areas are primarily concentrated in the east -central Census tracts in the City. The maps below indicate racial/ ethnic concentration of the three largest race/ethnic populations (Asian, White, and Hispanic) throughout the City. .ay or aanra Tana Map Legend Asian alone (nm Manassas) OE.93% 6 91P.10% ' 171631.02% 31.02-51 50a >51.59% Source: HUD-CPD MAPS Figure 5 — Share of Asian Population in Santa Ana Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Estimates Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 61 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-69 .av or aanra Tana Persons or Hispanic Origin 0-13.22% 13 22 28.18% 28184780% ® 4780-71.50% s7t50% Source: HUD-CPD MAPS Figure 6 —Share of Hispanic/ Latino Population in Santa Ana Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Estimates ,ny or aanca Ana Map Legend Wnita alone (not Hispanic) 017.87% 17 87-38.27% ® 38 27-M 33% 58.3 76,57% 176.57% Source: HUDi MAPS Figure 7 —Share of White Population in Santa Ana Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Estimates Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 62 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-70 Data Source: Consolidated Plan ,11Y OT Jana Ana Map Leg" Median Household Income N $0-$45.610.01 lb $45em01-$68.02101 W8.021 01-$94,49901 $94,480.01-$133.295 01 >$133,29501 Source: HUD-CPD MAPS Figure 8 —Median Household Income 2011-2015 ACS Estimates 0-110hr_M_NnA rz) OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-71 i 00 O O O O O v o c m * w E y _�: u E u m n`n s G m w o u y 0 LL'c a o j c o a` w > ° E > a 0 m m E °. w o c LL c c c+i Q _ u V1 ; N m m Om o a 0 Q N= N V 00 N O co W Y y C m m r Y a o C m ~ Y c m m F N N m 0 a x W � ho m E i 10 u'1 1� a z 0 ti u c M m m m pQ O O O 0 0 C 0 W u C 0 c i a = % LL E O o 0 0 0 0 u a 7 c y = m z O V O O O O O 2 Y = 9 O C W w C C C c O N E u w a o 01 m u � � U a v E o_ m ° 7! u N O d C a d E ry .� a^ �_ w c a E � a G c .Y Oto O .a m � W N <o N m O p O +t+. V�f > Z V .i C H ? N u Q N= N a Y N N N N -O f0 '� C q N N N O w F x Q> Q> Q> u a c m a a 01 m a O c u C 75A-72 M O O N I� c-I O O O O f IT pMi O O Z M 1� rl � O O O O O o O O O O O O f _ v u N v ° V f0 _o u txo C p_ a = Y VI v N c E � 2 p u O Y — � E 0 M 2 CL o a w O EE V .5 0 y m p aj D: V to N M O O W m m w � s u 3 j C 0 0 0 0 O O O O m m d m O w W a a 'E m ^ y O N 0 0 O O N m _ i m •t+ C Nm O 0 N 1� N tf1 V1 � O V 0 C f0 vOi C f0 �Y � F a c F m 0 0 0 0 0 o a E i w a _ , a � . N O m oo v oITI -� rn o m a � rn O o 0 0 O o 1 Ell v c i c � m i c O O O O O O 1 i E 0 0 0 0 0 0 m v c m u a 'O m a y � H u c .0 � U � W Q 1 O C u C 2 Q u a Y � u m y0. C = t Y V L C m M Q Q Z d Q * p .. 75A-73 M Ln O N Ln U! a� @ w 'o u u 3 j C O O T O m vO Op E u m @ w O a LL c D a m u 0 N j ya C m ''r C a 0 Via;= ut i W 0 � O � H j O O @ r W O Y i V u C U �1= Y a m N E m c m 2 R 75A-74 Section 504 Needs Assessment: Describe the needs of public housing tenants and applicants on the waiting list for accessible units: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in any program or activity that is conducted by federal agencies or that receives financial assistance from a federal agency. A housing provider may not deny or refuse to sell or rent to a person with a disability and may not impose application or qualification criteria, rental fees or sales prices and rental or sales terms or conditions that are different than those required of or provided to persons who are not disabled. Further, housing providers may not require persons with disabilities to live only on certain floors, or to all live in one section of the housing. Housing providers may not refuse to make repairs, and may not limit or deny someone with a disability access to recreational and other public and common use facilities, parking privileges, cleaning or janitorial services or any services which are made available to other residents. The City of Santa Ana does not have public housing. However, table 23 shows that there is a significant demand for accessible units in the City of Santa Ana with 1,793 disabled families requesting accessibility features. Most immediate needs of residents of Public Housing and Housing Choice voucher holders The most immediate housing needs of Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher Holders with respect to accessibility issues appears to be for additional accessible units. The increasing number of elderly and younger disabled persons creates additional need for accessible units. In broader terms, these households often need jobs or improved job skills as well as support services, such as access to day care, health care, and transportation to improve their employment situation and prospects. How do these needs compare to the housing needs of the population at large These needs are similar to those faced by most low-income households in the City. However, these needs are often exacerbated by having fewer resources and lower income levels than the population at large. Discussion The SAHA does not own or operate public housing, providing only Housing Choice Vouchers, i.e., Section 8 rental assistance. Consolidated Plan SANTAANA 67 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-75 V C � O C LL O 'Y f0 � 0 Y O O Q U in u E o L y. N L c } 0 3 ar C Z Y C w V O i � N U/ O � N J `- O' ry v E C O j U O N N Y N � � Y W C N O i V L O C Q � 2 Q � Y J O � 5 C Y c v�i v v E v o N L Q in O 4% Y v � E c o v y f0 � J w c O C w Q � � L O � N � U) U) Y C y0 C 0 hq � C C O U (p Q V D 3 0 ri 0 00 kD m 00 m Q Z Q I Z N Ln 01 r, m m 75A-76 O rn n 00 N 00 'i W o O a` c O m a 0 a 00 cn m c-I -:t Ol W W O S m Q m Y C t0 N N I w a c F 'o E r QD O c l� 00 00 0 m 0 N O u T 0 u° ovn c N N C i O y V > Ln a F- 0 0 M m w N O fV N M a -I c-I N O .ti N tG t0 Ol LM m m M a v Ln m e-I N n .-i .••I a•-i Y O d N L 7 a s �. v 7 s Y 3 QjN d a u m •O u a N d s T O s Y— 3 L v u O u a N N s � m T O s 3 75A-77 N m N G1 IZ m N rn lO cn Ln O m m Ln n m - m a/ C t V Z v v V C t a E w m > u u > V c d _ S N m 0 T u_ ^ a c N yo — u aJ U _ 0a c_ i 7 a O u GJ Q r OM m 7 Q Li N Qj GJ C s T d E Ou u 7 I_ M d aJ b3a c 7 O U C > O a .. a O Y V a O O L GJ v OOJ n bA C n fo n aj a m N aJ aJ O > = U O L t U s .£ L v V O M aJ m L " O 0 aJaj ♦ a a M >, Y w" al a GJ a O a N O C .� M a/ M H Ctxo M y > u ^ v E x y c O U ai O E a w O c CZ aJ m v a O N QJ a 4 M L u aJ v N d uNi y a/ E r- L s u t Y 3 N C E O � X aJ a E O aJ a O Q T t = O U aJ OZ m on 3 O DA Q v O O = 7 co +.+ a Q aJ aJ 0 °° o s f M C)p y a o E c O uv c ° O u c ar m n O c ¢ i a ¢ Z v x ai a C a O t 0 0 a Q " ro ,t '- 0 y aJ E s 3 ? U aJ r ^ y � aJ o ¢ 3 n aJ 7 = 75A-78 > v O u L .n •� N m v � N L � � V O > .mac O CL r C O O E N � N m m i N m � Y N N W L R J + O w O O 0 T bD b C m Q N O ^ CL u O c bn Q O > tio Y N p N � W _ L O L u N d C > O a) E T > b O bD N Q T L N C � N O N C N +L 7 L E O O O N ~ L fb vi to N O O O N 'O O O vN O u O c O N N W L E a . O N O C E O 7 � O L N C - + L m U N d - U X O Q -C N ^ V C a N C C 0 N N E (u E ° .a = bn E aO Q i N U CL N bD O bA 2 0 N N i > > U bD C N 7 O L rl n C f0 CL 01 N 0 c O V 75A-79 Unsheltered (optional) 333 123 74 Nature and Extent of Homelessness: (Optional) White 2,103 Black/African American 435 Asian 95 American Indian or Alaska 112 Native Pacific Islander Hispanic/Latino Non-Hispanic/Non-Latino 1,773 2,607 Table - 28 - Race/Ethnicity - Orange County Homeless Population Data Source: Orange County CoC 2019 Point in Time Count Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance for families with children and the families of veterans. Within Santa Ana, 106 individuals who were members of homeless families were counted in the 2019 Point in Time count. Of these individuals, 35 were unsheltered and 71 were residing in a shelter at the time of the Point in Time count. Throughout the County, the greatest share of households with children experiencing homelessness were households with children between the ages 6-12.Of the 244 unsheltered children, 163 were school aged children. Of these 163 school aged children, 97%were enrolled in school. The majority of households with children experiencing homelessness were single mother households (76% of all sheltered families were single mother households and 52% of all unsheltered families were single mother households). Consolidated Plan A-110lrJe101la rfa OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-80 Describe the Nature and Extent of Homelessness by Racial and Ethnic Group. In considering race/ ethnicity data of individuals who were assisted at the Link shelter, 518 unduplicated individuals were served in 2019. The nature of those served by race/ethnicity is summarized below: American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian Black or African American Multiple races Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander White 35 7% 7 1% 66 13% 20 4% 9 2% 381 74% Total 518 Table — 29 — Santa Ana Homeless Race Data Source: Link Homeless Shelter Data (2019) CountEthnicity of Percent �- Non-Hispanic/Non- 237 46% Latino Total =0916M 518 Table — 30 — Santa Ana Homeless Ethnicity Data Source: Link Homeless Shelter Data (2019) Compared to the population as a whole, the share of African -American homeless households and non- Hispanic/Latino households exceeds the shares for Santa Ana's population as a whole. Describe the Nature and Extent of Unsheltered and Sheltered Homelessness. Of the 3,714 adults who are unsheltered, 52% meetthe definition of chronic homelessness.* Additionally, nearly33%of those unsheltered adultsface substance use issues. 31% experience physical disabilities and 26% have mental health issues. Nearly 10% have experienced domestic violence. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANAA 73 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-81 Of the 2,166 adults who are sheltered, 26% meet the definition of chronic homelessness. 27% of these adults face substance use issues. Of sheltered adults, 15% have a physical disability and 31% have mental health issues. 8.5% of the sheltered adults have experienced domestic violence. •A person with a disabling condition who has been living in a place not meant for human habitation continuously for one year or on at least four occasions (totaling at least 12 months) over the past three years. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 74 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-82 NA-45 Non -Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.205 (b,d) Introduction: Non -homeless special needs populations require a variety of support services in order to remain stable and out of the homeless systems/cycle. Through 2-1-1 and other service providers working in Santa Ana and across Orange County, the City of Santa Ana refers special needs populations to multiple to providers to seek targeted assistance. Special Needs populations are served by many organizations. Describe the characteristics of special needs populations in your community: Disabled When comparing the share of Santa Ana residents with disabilities to Orange County, La Habra has a slightly higher disability rate of 8.9%to 8.3% in Orange County. In looking at disability type within the City, the most prevalent disability is individuals living with ambulatory disabilities. Ambulatory disability is defined bythe US Census as someone having difficulty walking or ascending/descending stairs. The second most common disability is independent living difficulty. These individuals have difficulty doing activities and errands alone due to a physical, mental or emotional problem. Hearing Vision Cognitive Ambulatory Self -Care Independent Living Difficulty Data Source: ACS 2011-2015 Estimates 1.9% 2.4% 3.5% 1.7% 2.9% 3.2% 3.7% 4.4% 1.8% 2% 3.6% 4.2% Table — 31 —Disability Type Those living with a disability are more likely to live below the federal poverty level. Of those with a disability in Santa Ana, 26% live below the federal poverty level and 30% living between 100 — 200% of the poverty level. For comparison, only 22%of non -disabled residents live below the poverty level in Santa Ana. Santa Ana, CA Orange County, Poverty Status With = Without With Without Disability Disability Disability Disability <100% Poverty Level 26% 22% 18% 12% 100 - 149% of Poverty Level 15% 17% 12% 8% 150 - 199% Poverty Level 15% 15% 10% 8% Table — 32 — Disability Type and Poverty Data Source: ACS 2011-2015 Estimates Consolidated Plan AM01lrJe101la V0 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-83 Elderly Older community members require special consideration as they are more likely to live on a fixed income and have a greater need for accessible housing, health care, and transportation. Santa Ana, compared to Orange County, is a relatively younger city. According to the 2011-2015 ACS estimates, within Santa Ana, 7.7% of the population is 65 or older compared to 12.8% in Orange County. However, when comparing to the 2006-2010 ACS estimates, the share of population 65+ in Orange County increased by 20% (from 6.4% of residents). Of residents 65 years or older, 33% live with a disability, the most common of which are self - care and independent living difficulties. Limited English Proficiency According to the 2011-2015 ACS estimates, 21% (15,857) households in Santa Ana are limited English speaking households. This is more than double the rate of limited English-speaking households in Orange County (9%). According to the Consolidated Plan stakeholder survey conducted by the City, stakeholders rated limited English-speaking households as one of the subpopulations whose demand for services has most increased. Within Santa Ana, 13%of native-born households have limited English proficiency and 73%of all foreign - born households have limited English proficiency. The median household income of foreign -born households is $49,260 while the median household income for native born households is $61,551. While the median household income is lower for foreign born households, the median household size is nearly two persons larger for foreign born households compared to native born households (5.02 persons/ household versus 3.09 persons/ household). HUD's very -low income limit for 5-person households is $59,350, which is more than $10,000 over the median household income for foreign born households. Thus, we can assume that the majority of foreign -born households (73% of whom have limited English proficiency) live below 50% of AMI and likely have a much greater need for housing and social service assistance. What are the housing and supportive service needs of these populations and how are these needs determined? Special needs populations in Santa Ana are more likely to be extremely low- or low-income households and thus have a greater need for affordable housing. Further, through input from residents and community stakeholders, special needs populations have a greater need for public services, access to public facilities, affordable housing and access to fair housing. Specific needs include access to housing, transportation, job training programs, childcare, access to basic services, and other needs as identified by community -based service providers. Discuss the size and characteristics of the population with HIV/AIDS and their families within the Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area: The Orange County Health Care Agency gathers and analyzes data related to the prevalence of HIV/AIDS within county. According to the agency's 2018 HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, 6,369 persons were known Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 76 OMB control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-84 to be living with HIV/AIDS in Orange County. Using the Center for Disease Control's (CDC) assumed rate that the diagnosis rate is 87.7% (that is 12.3% of the population is living with HIV/AIDS, but has not yet been diagnosed), the total estimate of persons living with HIV/AIDS in Orange County is 7,262. In 2018, 280 cases were diagnosed in Orange County, a decline of 20 diagnosed cases from 2017. Since 2009, the transmission rate has decreased by 46% from a rate of 8.2 to that of 4.4 in 2018. Of those known to be living with HIV/AIDS in Orange County, 86.7% are men, 11.8%are women and 1.5% are transgender male to female. 48% of those diagnosed identify as Hispanic/Latino, 36% identify as White, 8% identify as Asian and 6% identify as Black/ African American. According to the CoC's 2019 Point in Time Count, 67 unsheltered and 39 sheltered individuals are diagnosed with HIV/AIDS. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 77 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-85 NA-50 Non -Housing Community Development Needs — 91.215 (f) Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Facilities: Within Santa Ana, there are a number of public facility needs. According to a survey of residents and stakeholders, the five highest rated public facility needs were: 1. Homeless Emergency Shelters 2. Parks 3. Community Facilities (e.g. neighborhood or senior centers) 4. Emergency Service Facilities (e.g. fire or other emergency facilities) 5. Youth Centers Through community and stakeholder meetings, participants stressed the importance of new and/ or rehabilitated facilities to serve neighborhoods and/ or target populations (e.g. homeless shelters, youth centers, and senior centers). How were these needs determined? The needs identified for public facilities in the City were determined through community and stakeholder meetings, resident and stakeholder responses from the Consolidated Plan Survey, and interviews with stakeholders in the community. Within the Consolidated Plan, priority is given to facilities that primarily benefit low- income beneficiaries, particularly those with critically needed renovation or demonstrated need for expansion to accommodate the needs of low-income residents. Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Improvements: Within Santa Ana, there are a number of public improvement needs. According to a survey of residents and stakeholders, the five highest rated public improvement needs are: 1. Park improvements 2. Broadband/High speed internet access 3. Flood drainage improvements 4. Street/Alley improvements 5. Demolition/Clearance of blighted properties/structures How were these needs determined? The needs identified for public improvements in the City were determined through community and stakeholder meetings, resident and stakeholder responses from the Consolidated Plan Survey, and interviews with stakeholders in the community. Within the Consolidated Plan, priority is given to improvements that primarily benefit low- income beneficiaries, particularly those identified as critical needs within the City. Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Services: Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 78 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-86 Public service activities are consistently ranked as a high priority by residents and other stakeholders. Pursuant to CDBG regulations, only 15 percent of the City's annual grant allocation (plus 15 percent of prioryear program income) can be used for public service -type activities. The City proposes to focus funds on lower -income households in order to establish, improve, and expand existing public services, such as: mental health services, services for domestic violence victims, services for the homeless and persons with special needs, and youth and senior services. As part of the community survey, respondents were asked to identify the groups needing the most assistance in the community. The top five groups identified are: 1. Chronically homeless individuals and families 2. Families experiencing homeless 3. Low-income families with children 4. Elderly residents 5. Persons with mental illness To effectively target programming and services to the populations, the City partners with local non-profit agencies and the regional Continuum of Care to provide targeted services to those communities. The City is cognizant of the importance of the provision of homeless services and will support programs that contribute to the regional Continuum of Care's framework of service. How were these needs determined? The needs identified for public services in the City were determined through community and stakeholder meetings, resident and stakeholder responses from the Consolidated Plan Survey, and interviews with stakeholders in the community. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 79 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-87 Housing Market Analysis MA-05 Overview Housing Market Analysis Overview: As part of the Consolidated Plan requirements, Santa Ana must complete a market analysis. The market analysis consists of the following sections: • Cost/Condition/Supply of Housing • Public Housing Supply • Homeless and Special Needs Facilities/ Services • Non -Housing Community Development Conditions (including economic conditions, access to broadband, and hazard mitigation) Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 80 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-88 MA-10 Number of Housing Units — 91.210(a)&(b)(2) Introduction According to the 2011-2015 ACS data, 62% of Santa Ana's housing stock consists of properties with 4 or fewer units. 52% of all units within Santa Ana are single household properties. Multi -family housing (5+ units) consists of 33% of the housing stock in Santa Ana. 75%of the City's ownership housing consists of family -sized units (3 or more bedrooms) compared to only 22% of rental units in the city. The greatest share (40%) of rental properties have 2 bedrooms. All residential properties by number of units 1-unit detached structure 35,225 46% 1-unit, attached structure 4,835 6% 2-4 units 7,715 10% 5-19 units 12,205 16% 20 or more units 13,040 17% Mobile Home, boat, RV, van, etc. 4,175 5% Total 77,195 1000/0 Table 33 — Residential Properties by Unit Number Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Unit Size by Tenure Renters Number % Number ====EMA % No bedroom 485 1% 2,690 7% 1 bedroom 1,060 3% 12,870 31% 2 bedrooms 7,025 21% 16,375 40% 3 or more bedrooms 25,150 75% 9,105 22% Total 33,720 1000/0 41,040 1000/0 Table 34— Unit Size by Tenure Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Describe the number and targeting (income level/type of family served) of units assisted with federal, state, and local programs. Family Housing First Street Apartments 68 69 60% AMI 2901 N. Bristol 55 274 40%AMI 638-642 E. Adams 6 6 60%AMI Consolidated Plan SANTA ANAA 81 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-89 300-301 N. Jackson 4 7 50%AMI 2009 W. Myrtle 6 6 80%AMI 405 S. Raitt St. 6 10 50%AMI 201 N. Raitt St. 2 6 80% AM Town Square 22 22 40-60%AMI Town Square 18 18 40-60%AMI 3524 W. Washington 6 8 50%AMI Wakeham Grant 132 133 40-60%AMI NineteenOl 10 264 80%AMI W. Carriage 1 1 50%AMI W. Carriage 1 1 W. Carriage 1 1 809 S. Diamond 1 1 2760 W. Segerstrom 1 1 1705 S. Spruce 1 1 1001 Stevens 2 2 1725 W. Third, #B 1 1 Courtyards - WBBB 5 5 30-50%AMI Courtyards - WBBB 5 5 Courtyards - WBBB 5 5 Courtyards - WBBB 35 36 1410-1412 Durant 37 38 40-60%AMI Andalucia Apartments 69 70 50-110%AMI 326 S. Garnsey 25 26 50%AMI 703 N. Lacy 26 26 30-50%AMI Cornerstone Village 201 201 80%AMI Wilshire -Minnie 143 144 40-60%AMI 702 S. Raitt 8 8 30-50%AMI 834 S. Raitt 11 11 50%-AMI 1501 N. Ross 24 24 60%AMI Garden Court 41 84 40%AMI Depot at Santiago 69 70 30-60%AMI 901 E. Sixth St. 24 24 30-80%AMI Townsend 39 40 50%-AMI 650 N. Lacy Street 73 74 30-50%AMI 631 N. Lacy and 680 N. Garfield 39 40 Consolidated Plan SANTA ANAA 82 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-90 Santiago Villas 89 89 50%-80%AMI 200 S. Sycamore 58 58 60%AMI Permanent (Homeless) Housing 1115 N. Bush 2 2 40%AMI 1101 N. French 1 1 50%AMI 1025 N. Spurgeon 4 4 50%AMI The Orchard 71 72 60%AMI Vista del Rio 40 41 30-50%AMI WISE Place 19 19 N/A Regina House 3 3 40%AMI San Miguel Residence 9 9 80%AMI 1115 N. Bush 2 2 40%AMI 1101 N. French 1 1 50%AMI Table - 35 - Supply of Affordable Housing Data Source: City of Santa Ana Provide an assessment of units expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory for any reason, such as expiration of Section 8 contracts. • Senior, 50% Section 8 199 198 1010 BarrioCivic Center Family; 50% Section 8 8 6 2021 Mod/Rehab Family; 80% RDA 20% S.A. 6 6 2022 BarrioCivic Center Family; 80% RDA 20% S.A. 6 2 2022 BarrioCivic Center Family; 60% RDA 20% S.A. 12 6 2023 Consolidated Plan SANTA ANAA 83 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-91 Family; 50% Section 8 54 54 renewing annually (2034) Senior; 80% LMSA 236(j)(1) 200 198 renewing annually (2032) Senior, 50% Section 8 199 198 renewing annually (2038) Senior; 50% Section 8 199 198 renewing M&t. annually (2021) Table — 36 — Units at Risk of Expiring Data Source: City of Santa Ana The table above indicates all developments and units at risk of expiring within the next five years. For those projects that renew annually, the overall expiration date is noted in parentheses. Excluding the three annual renewals that currently expire between 2032 and 2038, the City of Santa Ana is at risk of losing 416 affordable units in the next five years, including 198 units in 2020 from Flower Park Plaza. The City is working closely with property owners, HUD, and the State to identify strategies to extend the affordability periods of these developments. Does the availability of housing units meet the needs of the population? Within Santa Ana, the current type and size of housing units does not meet the needs the population. According to the 2011-2015 CHAS data, there are 12,445 large family renter households in Santa Ana. These households consist of five or more members and would require 3 or more bedrooms to avoid experiencing overcrowding. Within the rental market, there are only 9,105 units with three or more bedrooms. Further, of these 3- bedroom rental units, it can be assumed that some are occupied by unrelated households (roommate housing) and thus there are even fewer available for large families seeking suitably sized rental housing. Describe the need for specific types of housing: There is a greater need for family rental housing in Santa Ana as summarized above. The following section expands on this need by examining the cost of rental housing within the City. Consolidated Plan C7e10lrJe101fa OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-92 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.210(a) Introduction A critical factor in evaluating a city's housing market is the cost of housing and, even more importantly, if the housing is affordable to households living there. High housing costs result in more households experiencing housing cost burden (paying more than 30%) or overcrowding. The data below provides a summary of housing costs as reported by households through the American Community Survey. However, in looking at more current housing sales and rental market data —the cost of housing has risen tremendously over the past five years. According to Zumper, a rental listing aggregator, average rents for studios, 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom, and 3-bedroom all rose from December 2014 to January 2020 and significantly exceeded the median contract rent as reported by the ACS 2011-2015 estimates documented in the Cost of Housing table below. Similarly, owner -occupied housing costs have also increased over the past five years. According to Zillow, from October 2014 to October 2019, the median sales price rose from $384,800 to $527,400 (an increase of 37%), far outpacing the ACS estimates for median home value. Cost of Housing Studio $1,060 $1,399 1W 32% 1-bedroom $1,350 $1,682 25% 2-bedroom $1,798 $2,148 19% 3-bedroom $2,500 $2,800 12% Table — 37 — Average Rents Data Source: Zumper Research (accessed 1/31/2020) Median Home Value Median Contract Rent 1,121 Table 38 — Cost of Housing Data Source: 2005-2009 ACS (Base Year), 2011-2015 ACS (Most Recent Year) Less than $500 $500-999 $1,000-1,499 $1,500-1,999 $2,000 or more Total Consolidated Plan C7e101rJel01ra 2,470 9,985 18,200 7,625 2,765 41,045 1,228 6.0% 24.3% 44.4% 18.6% 6.7 % 100.0% OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-93 Table 39 - Rent Paid Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Housing Affordability 2,025 50% HAMFI 6,660 2,355 80% HAMFI 100% HAMFI _ 30,415 No Data Total � 39,100 Table 40 —Housing Affordability Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Monthly Rent Fair Market Rent High HOME Rent Low HOME Rent $1,415 $1,331 $1,038 Data Source: HUD FMR and HOME Rents $1,632 $2,037 $1,428 $1,714 $1,113 $1,336 Table 41— Monthly Rent Is there sufficient housing for households at all income levels? $2,862 $1,972 $1,543 7,470 12,615 22,440 $3,304 $2,180 $1,721 No, according to the housing affordability table above, there are only 8,685 rental units available to renter households earning 50% AMI or below, but as documented in the needs assessment, there are 24,595 households estimated to have incomes below 50% AMI. This creates a minimum gap of nearly 16,000 households (15,910) who do not have sufficient housing at this income level. Further, this data does not take into account households earning more than 50% AK who many be renting a unit that would be affordable to lower income tenants or the quality and size of the units. A smaller gap exists for homeowner households, as according to the needs assessment there are 18,905 owner households earning less than 80%AMI. However, as noted above, there are only 9,805 owner -occupied units available to such households, creating a gap of 9,100 households. How is affordability of housing likely to change considering changes to home values and/or rents? Home values and rents are anticipated to continue to increase throughout Orange County as housing demand continues to increase throughout the region and within the City of Santa Ana. As the increases in housing costs continue to outpace the production of new housing and the availability of affordable housing within the city, more households will be cost burdened and there will be greater strains put on low- and moderate -income renters, potential homebuyers and current homeowners. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANAA 86 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-94 How do HOME rents / Fair Market Rent compare to Area Median Rent? How might this impact your strategy to produce or preserve affordable housing? According to the data aggregated by Zumper, current average rents by unit type mirror the Fair Market Rent values and far exceed the HOME rental rates. In general, this indicates an overall need for additional affordable housing as well as the preservation of existing affordable housing. As noted in the previous section, the need for large family rental housing is especially acute as there are a limited number of larger rental units and the cost of rental units has increased by 12%over the past five years. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 87 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-95 MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing — 91.210(a) Introduction Assessing housing conditions in the City provides the basis for developing strategies to maintain and preserve the quality of the housing stock. The ACS defines a "selected condition" as owner- or renter - occupied housing units having at least one of the following conditions: 1) lacking complete plumbing facilities; 2) lacking complete kitchen facilities; 3) more than one occupant per room; and 4) selected monthly housing costs greater than 30% of household income. Based on the definition of selected conditions, the table below shows that 52% of owner -occupied households in the City have at least one selected condition and 77% of all renter -occupied households in the City have at least one selected condition. Definitions Substandard housing is housing that does not meet the minimum standards contained in the State Housing Code (i.e., does not provide shelter, endangers health, safety or well-being of occupants). A substandard condition is one that affects the health and safety of a resident's habitability. As defined by California Health and Safety Code, a substandard condition exists to the extent that it endangers the health and safety of its occupants orthe public. Following is a list of substandard conditions: • Inadequate sanitation • Structural hazards • Any nuisance that endangers the health and safety of the occupants orthe public • All substandard plumbing, wiring, and/or mechanical equipment, unless it conformed to all applicable laws in effect at the time of installation and has been maintained in a good and safe condition • Faulty weather protection • The use of construction materials not allowed or approved bythe health and safety code • Fire, health and safety hazards (as determined by the appropriate fire or health official) • Lack of, or inadequate fire -resistive construction orfire-extinguishing systems as required by the health and safety code, unless the construction and/or systems conformed to all applicable laws in effect at the time of construction and/or installation and adequately maintained • Inadequate structural resistance to horizontal forces • Buildings or portions thereof occupied for living, sleeping, cooking, or dining purposes that were not designed or intended to be used for such occupancies • Inadequate maintenance that causes a building or any portion thereof to be declared unsafe Standard housing condition in the City of Santa Ana is defined as housing that meets the minimum standards contained in the California State health and Safety codes. For the purposes of the CDBG program, a unit in substandard condition is considered suitable for rehabilitation provided thatthe unit is structurally sound and the cost of rehabilitation is considered economically warranted. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 88 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-96 Condition of Units With one selected Condition With two selected Conditions With three selected Conditions With four selected Conditions No selected Conditions Total Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Year Unit Built 2000 or later 1980-1999 1950-1979 Before 1950 MIM Total Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Risk of Lead -Based Paint Hazard Number % 14,990 44% 2,425 7% 4 0% 0 0% 16,300 48% 33,719 99% Table 42 - Condition of Units Number % 1,270 4% 3,385 10% 23,780 71% 5,285 16% 33,720 1010/0 Table 43 — Year Unit Built Number 20,370 10,985 190 0 9,490 41,035 Number 1,170 8,595 26,810 4,460 41,035 50% 27% 0% 0% 23% 100% Number % Number % Total Number of Units Built Before 1980 29,065 86% 31,270 76% Housing Units build before 1980 with children present 4,780 14% 1,210 3% Table 44— Risk of Lead -Based Paint Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS (Total Units) 2011-2015 CHAS (Units with Children present) Vacant Units Vacant Units Abandoned Vacant Units REO Properties Abandoned REO Properties n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Table 45 - Vacant Units Need for Owner and Rental Rehabilitation See note See note See note See note Within the City of Santa Ana, the housing stock is relatively old with 16%of all owner -occupied units and 11% of all rental -occupied units built before 1950.76%of all rental units and 87%of all owner units were built before 1980. Housing that is often 30+ years old requires some form of moderate or major Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 89 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-97 rehabilitation. In a local non-profit focused consultation session, participants indicated that housing rehabilitation was the second highest housing service needs in the community. Estimated Number of Housing Units Occupied by Low or Moderate Income Families with LBP Hazards Lead -based paint and varnishes were used in housing until 1978 and are still assumed to be present in the home unless the house has been fully remediated by a certified contractor. Children age 6 and younger are at the highest risk for physical and mental damage from lead poisoning. Within Santa Ana, more than 60,000 housing units were constructed before 1980 (used as a proxy for 1978), accounting for 87% of the ownership housing stock and 76%of the rental stock. However, when evaluating the number of units with children aged 6 or younger, only an estimated 5,990 units are occupied by such households. According to the Needs Assessment, there are 23,340 households in Santa Ana with children age 6 and younger. Thus, 26%of households with young children are assumed to live in housing units that may contain lead -based paint. 75% of all families with young children have incomes between 0-80% AML While the share of low- and moderate -income households is more likely to be in older housing stock in need of rehabilitation, even conservatively applying this share of 75% to the total number of units built before 1980 with young children present (5,990), we can estimate that 4,493 households are potentially at risk of living with lead - based paint hazards. However, it is important to note that this data does not necessarily reflect households in which young children visit frequently such as grandparents, informal day care centers, or other family members and friends and thus the risk is likely even greater. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 90 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-98 do do 0 0 a 0 0 2 2 L vmi o O Y C > O E C a O H °n cco C. m 4= O C H a L LL a a o w L m a O u O u ^ > w O_ a O 7 T Y a Q O O O i % � a {n a C a O d T > a a O LO m c m D a a c b° O w 0 w > = y ° o LO m ° a � t a m Q 00 E `^ L m am O N 0 O 0 L H % d u Q Q K m u t� V - txo 7 u o O N o y O � 2 'N co a a o l N C cc '^ a a � C H � C m V m c � T c U O .. a O Y N Q ±' bA C C � N y O VI Y O ^ ^ L L O 2 C U a m E Ma o a a` E > m `° .`^. a s C T - Z C U m O N J m m a L m ca Y O > O a m a H¢ O F E W a Q O_ O a a m a a m O z 75A-99 Describe the restoration and revitalization needs of public housing units in the jurisdiction: There are no public housing units in Santa Ana. HQS standards are used for the inspection of all voucher units. Describe the public housing agency's strategy for improving the living environment of low- and moderate -income families residing in public housing: Not applicable. Discussion: SAHA is well -positioned to maintain and expand the supply of affordable housing units in the City of Santa Ana. The City of Santa Ana has coordinated with public agencies, private entities, and community residents through the City of Santa Ana's Neighborhood Initiatives Program (NIP). This assists more than 60 neighborhood associations in Santa Ana by providing a conduit for two-way communication between residents and the City to further understand and meet the needs of residents. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 92 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-100 U V QJ a L O L O Qi c QJ m c w 4C1 C O L QJ L Y L O L Y QJ L m m L O a E QJ Y m Q a Q N L V L O QJ O a C a m E Q ar L 'u > C Q W 01 h u G Ql IOI Ql W OU C 0 O L C QJ C m E v a c Y C �m E C m O QJ O E > 75 QJ U N c to C L C N L 3 Qi u m Q c c c Car C QJ T to m V C m a V U O L O N an m W m L O Q: N m Qj L N C� C c m a .0 t m a E fu to 0 a vi u i ar Q1 t O a a to C c C m a E O m Aa 5w. 75A-101 N a \ \ N d u 0 O 0 cE i > O 00 N a 3 7J y Co Z C =y 7 c L L L i u a) .-i d .3 f0 L W O a LO w v m c a E a 0 w w m > c Q a D o w c o o v aL � � r 00 \ > w t N C (0 N O V 0 O Y C W C O S N O N a o L 0 W � N 0 n O S o C � 41 N N y E O O E x ,0 O O Y d � 0 U ~ o � � 0 C "> a O Q Q 2 O w > S C N n O a m " L o N O C C o Y_ O a 'O 2' d m C C U �n LL L L t C O O Ol O OJ NC U a O 0 0 u O W m U U O O 2 2 » y F d .�i I II I I .�i 75A-102 Describe mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services to the extent those services are use to complement services targeted to homeless persons At the state level, the primary programs for assisting families in poverty are CalWORKs, Cal Fresh, and Medi-Cal. These programs provide clients with employment assistance, discounted food, medical care, child care, and cash payments to meet basic needs such as housing and transportation. Within Santa Ana, a number of mainstream service providers complement services targeted specifically to homeless residents or those imminently at risk of becoming homeless. Veterans Services • VA Community Resource and Referral • Center OC Battle Buddy Bridge • Veterans Service Office • Volunteers of America • 1736 Family Crisis Center Soup Kitchens/Food Pantries • Southwest Community Center Community Health Clinics • Serve the People • UCI Medical Center —Medical Clinic Employment and Legal Services • Legal Aid Society of Orange County • Public Law Center Behavioral and Mental Health • OC Health Care Agency Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Services • Acacia (Outpatient Methadone Services) List and describe services and facilities that meet the needs of homeless persons, particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth. If the services and facilities are listed on screen SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure or screen MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services, describe how these facilities and services specifically address the needs of these populations. Homeless facilities in Santa Ana include the following: Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 95 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-103 • Cold Weather Armory Shelter: Cold weather homeless shelter for individuals and families • Courtyard Shelter: Year round emergency shelter with supportive services. • The Link: Year round emergency shelter for all population types. • Hospitality House: Year round emergency shelter for men with supportive services • SAFEplace@WISEplace: Low barrier shelter for women with supportive services Additionally, a number of providers operate a series of transitional and permanent housing programs and other services to support formerly homeless men, women, families, veterans, disabled and youth residents throughout Orange County. A complete list of all current services provided in Orange County is maintained by 2-1-1 OC and available via phone or online (https://www.21loc.org/get-help/21loc-can- hel p/search-for-resou rces.htm I ). Since December 2018, the City of Santa Ana has utilized Quality of Life teams — multi -disciplinary teams consisting of police officers, social workers, public works, parks and recreation and other city and service provider agencies. These teams conduct street outreach and engagement with homeless individuals and families throughout the City. Through outreach, the teams provide recommendations and assistance in identifying potential shelter and/ or other housing opportunities as well as ensure compliance with local laws and regulations. Between May and December 2019, the Quality of Life teams have conducted outreach with 3,287 individuals and assisted 209 to relocate to the Link or Courtyard shelters. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 96 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-104 MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services — 91.210(d) Introduction Special needs populations consist of persons who are not homeless but due to various reasons are in need of services and supportive housing. Persons with special needs include, but are not limited to, the elderly, frail elderly, severe mentally ill, developmentally disabled, physically disabled, persons with alcohol or other drug addictions, persons with HIV/AIDS and victims of domestic violence. The City of Santa Ana considers using CDBG and ESG resources to serve special needs populations in the community. HUD defines elderly as a person who is 62 years of age or older. A frail elderly person is an elderly person who is unable to perform at least three activities of daily living including eating, bathing, or home management activities. Generally, elderly persons have lower incomes than the population at large. HUD defines a disabled person as having a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits major life activities. The obstacle to independent living for these adults is not only their disability, but also the lack of financial resources. Additionally, persons with disabilities have high dependency on supportive services and may require accessibility modifications to accommodate their unique conditions. Drug abuse or substance abuse is defined as the use of chemical substances that lead to an increased risk of problems and an inability to control the use of the substance. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 70,237 drug overdose deaths in the United States in 2017 and that of those deaths, 47,600 involved opioids. According to the CDC, the national 'opioid epidemic' began in the 1990s with increased prescribing of opioids such as Methadone, Oxycodone, and Hydrocodone. Beginning in 2010, CDC reported rapid increases in overdose deaths involving heroin. The third wave began in 2013 with increases in overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids such as the illicitly manufactured fentanyl, often found in combination with heroin, counterfeit pills, and cocaine. Although California was among 10 states with the lowest drug overdose mortality in each year from 2014-2017, the proliferation of fentanyl is a significant and relatively new issue requiring increased public awareness and services. Human Immunodeficiency Virus infection (HIV) is a virus that weakens one's immune system by destroying important cells that fight diseases and infection. Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is the final stage of the HIV infection. Including the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons with alcohol or other drug addictions, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, public housing residents and any other categories the jurisdiction may specify, and describe their supportive housing needs As documented in the needs assessment, special needs populations have lower incomes than the population as a whole and demonstrate a greater need for supportive services and housing assistance. Fair Housing Assistance: Special needs populations may face discrimination when seeking new housing or in facing pressure from landlords or lending institutions. Providing services associated with fair housing (including education and advocacy activities) Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 97 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-105 Affordable, accessible housing: Special needs populations comprise a disproportionate share of the low - and moderate -income population within La Habra and, as such, have a greater need for affordable housing — including accessible housing for elderly and disabled households. Accessible public facilities: Elderly and disabled individuals require public facilities and services to be ADA compliant to enable them to effectively access services and programs throughout the City. Public services: Special needs populations require supportive services such as transportation, education, senior services, childcare and basic needs. Describe programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental and physical health institutions receive appropriate supportive housing Within Orange County, several service providers operate county -wide services to provide mental and physical health counseling and supportive services. The Mental Health Association of Orange County provides transition support to individuals with mental health challenges and issues. Support includes identifying supportive housing as well as community resources and other services to meet the individual's needs. The Dayle Macintosh Program provides transition support in Orange County to people with disabilities who reside in long-term institutions and have a desire to live independently. Clients are paired with a transition coordinator who helps identify supportive housing as well as other needs and services to enable the individual to successfully live independently. For entitlement/consortia grantees: Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. (91.220(2)) Through the City's public service activities, the City will prioritize funding to address supportive service needs of vulnerable and special needs populations in the City, including (elderly, youth, disabled, victims of domestic violence). These activities will fund a range of services includingjob training, legal assistance, supportive services, victim intervention, health care, and basic services and needs. The City will continue to prioritize the preservation and expansion of affordable housingthrough the City. In PY2020, Santa Ana anticipates that it will allocate over $3.6M to support and promote affordable housing within the City. This housing will serve a range of low- and moderate -income residents, including those with special needs. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 98 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-106 MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing — 91.210(e) Negative Effects of Public Policies on Affordable Housing and Residential Investment A barrier to affordable housing is a public policy or nongovernmental condition that constrains the development or rehabilitation of affordable housing. Barriers can include land use controls, property taxes, state prevailing wage requirements, environmental protection, cost of land and availability of monetary resources. Barriers to affordable housing are distinguished from impediments to fair housing choice in the sense that barriers are lawful and impediments to fair housing choice are usually unlawful. The greatest barrier to affordable housing in the City is a limited supply of resources and available land to support the development and preservation of affordable housing within the City. The City works closely with non -governmental, state and federal agencies to identify potential funding streams and resources, butfederal, state, and local policies and sources do not generate enough funding and revenue to subsidize affordable housing sufficient to meet the needs in Santa Ana and throughout Southern California. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 99 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2O18) 75A-107 Q M Y E w w m Y y L Y C Ln^ O V Y m C O C m0 O E O1 O 00 Y Q E O U c tioO vi Ln of v Y c N O C .N Q N Z C R1 U Ul 'n �i E i CO m v00 N m C -02 O vOi m m O "0 i fl_ ' 3 Y � L C _ � � aj t to U Y N Q C Y L L N J f0 L 10 Q >QJ c^-I tun 41 Y IQ C 3 O i Y s Q N N ~ 2 u s V C N UJ C a -I 00 G O > N O '� O E O p_ u +t+ N Y "O p E OJ N N h (u N Y Y E N Y Q 0 t m N Q O O w M C v Y 3 O to C L O -p > E c m ,� N C (u C 'E O t ~ C Q C a Y 0) ~O Y N 1J Y N UJ MN p N p .- C N 0 L O C L N N N T 10 t"O c O o 00 m C � E O Q Y m� CO Q T O > O_ Y Ln N-a +O+ Q O Z O O i N O OJ o N Q m Q C O h u O "O 01 = v N O V .Mm.... C N -p L Y i O '^ N Y {n M m Y Y L N N ar V U Ol L Y o 3 c N _p f0 o f to o' o m °J v E +• VI a E O L Y v�i 0 Q c^ c m E v v a E o Q H v a, Ica u cw .� v T 41 T v c L O Ui N E Ul U 0 S O O to s 0 u N j Q O to m b0 i O Q �` U p J N N Y 10 Y N W t O T N E L Y m 7 W Y o; ,Y N �° 3 Y v C O O to o1 U p N 0 u Yv� "O N " Q i OJ U In .--i m Qto J C s O v �-' l0 N "�O y� C to 0] N c \ L T? N > E v 0 Y o - 3 a a l7 N Qj O C C Y O O N Y OL N iJ Z N N u to N m m yi -0 E �N'a_J ay vO No "Y 0 N/? aC O OL O N 'O > iN aj Y u i N C Q Q Q U u0. Q Q rin r w O Ln Ln m od � L O Ln I� rl N V7 m ti w n ti 5w. 75A-108 M V M m O N N 0 � m w m n w m O m mm N n w w O m w m m w�o m 6 0 rl o rri m rvi n w ti Y a m V m n .N-i m O N n N lw0 w m O m O N w V 01 Ln C. 1p V O m N lf7 N� y 7 W �O N d 1 a m' v u .2 v N Y v v V 0 GO N w tio p c O m a1 f0 v c N V v m L O v Vl C v O m v 'Y O Z c E v v v r O ai O N vI 'in a i O m in COL v UO _ u ._ _ '� m c c o w O a ii c a H i H N A 0 Ia C f0 a v v N O c U .. 75A-109 Labor Force Total Population in the Civilian Labor Force Civilian Employed Population 16 years and over Unemployment Rate Unemployment Rate for Ages 16-24 Unemployment Rate for Ages 25-65 Table 49 - Labor Force Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Management, business and financial Farming, fisheries and forestry occupations Service Sales and office Construction, extraction, maintenance and repair Production, transportation and material moving Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Travel Time < 30 Minutes 30-59 Minutes 60 or More Minutes Total Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Education: Table 50 — Occupations by Sector 94,905 42,800 9,010 146,715 Table 51 - Travel Time Educational Attainment by Employment Status (Population 16 and Older) Civilian Employed Unemployed 165,135 151,690 8.15 19.01 5.41 17,875 8,545 20,680 36,305 16,970 13,815 65 29% 6% 100% Not in Labor Force Less than high school graduate 51,240 3,765 20,455 Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 102 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-110 High school graduate (includes 29,320 2,150 8,730 equivalency) Some college or Associate's degree 26,980 2,350 6,415 Bachelor's degree or higher 15,965 985 2,670 Table 52 - Educational Attainment by Employment Status Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Educational Attainment by Age 18-24 yrs 25-34 yrs 35-44 yrs 45-65 yrs 65+ yrs Less than 9th grade 1,400 7,710 13,180 24,490 10,610 9th to 12th grade, no diploma 6,515 8,915 11,100 10,060 2,690 High school graduate, GED, or 12,520 15,350 11,315 13,535 4,395 alternative Some college, no degree 15,935 11,405 6,465 9,560 3,355 Associate's degree 1,710 2,915 2,310 3,085 1,160 Bachelor's degree 2,090 6,165 3,345 4,610 2,285 Graduate or professional degree 340 1,820 1,730 1,945 1,030 Table 53- Educational Attainment by Age Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Educational Attainment -Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Less than high school graduate 19,847 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 24,626 Some college or Associate's degree 30,529 Bachelor's degree 41,293 Graduate or professional degree 58,571 Table 54 - Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction? The four largest job sectors for jobs within Santa Ana (share of jobs column) are Manufacturing (14%), Arts, Entertainment, Accommodations (14%), Education and Health Care Services (13%), and Retail Trade (12%). According to the City's 2019 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), the ten largest employers in Santa Ana are listed in the table below: Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 103 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-111 County of Orange 20,197 12.9% Santa Ana Unified School 5,000 3.2% District Santa Ana College 3,346 2.1% KPC Healthcare 1,748 1.1% First American Title Co. 1,631 1.0% City of Santa Ana 1,439 0.9% US Postal Service 1,172 0.8% Superior Court (Orange 763 0.5% County) Aluminum Precision Products 710 0.5% Johnson&Johnson 600 0.4% Table 55 — Largest Employers in Santa Ana Data Source: Santa Ana 2019 CAM Describe the workforce and infrastructure needs of the business community: The City of Santa Ana is located in a metro area that includes more than 40 colleges, universities, community colleges and other technical training areas. As such, the labor force is relatively skilled and able to meet the needs of employers. However, as expanded upon below, due to the extremely low unemployment rate in the City and region, employers are having an increasing challenging time in finding employees who have the adequate skills (technical and soft) to continue to meet the needs of growing businesses. Through a strong transit network and provision of utilities (including broadband), and other infrastructures, current businesses operating in the City have limited infrastructure needs. Describe any major changes that may have an economic impact, such as planned local or regional public or private sector investments or initiatives that have affected or may affect job and business growth opportunities during the planning period. Describe any needs for workforce development, business support or infrastructure these changes may create. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 104 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-112 The largest investment taking place within the City of Santa Ana is the installation of the Orange County Streetcar. The streetcar line, when completed will connect the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center with Garden Grove via a 4.15 mile route with nine intermediary stops. The route will primarily travel on Santa Ana Blvd, with a looped route for arriving and departing cars on Fourth Street and Santa Ana Blvd in downtown. The project is anticipated to be completed in 2022. Construction began in 2018 and is scheduled to be completed in 2022. During this time, there will be (and has been) significant construction activities throughout downtown. While the project is committed to not closing any businesses during the duration of the construction period, there will be detours and potential temporary closures during construction. During construction, Orange County Transit Authority is providing several forms of marketing assistance to local businesses. However, several stakeholders in the community indicated that businesses in the downtown were experiencing disruptions and decreased sales during peak construction activities. Once this project is complete, it will create an opportunity to increase foot traffic within the downtown area. More broadly, Santa Ana continues to be directly impacted by the Orange County and metro-region's economic conditions and changes. Three primary trends that are impacting the region's economy were identified in the Orange County's 2019-2023 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) that will continue to impact the region's economy in near future: 1. Technological advances, such as social media, e-commerce, and automation, are currently disrupting many traditional industries. 2. A surging housing market representing tremendous economic growth while simultaneously creating affordability concerns for many residents. 3. Near record -low unemployment rates and significant employment growth in traditional and emerging industry sectors. How do the skills and education of the current workforce correspond to employment opportunities in the jurisdiction? Located in a region with a significant number of universities, colleges and othertraining programs, there are multiple services and options to ensure that the workforce's skillset is current and meets the needs and demands of current and future businesses within the City. Through these services, there is a consistent need in keeping the workforce's skillset relevant to current industry demands. With the extremely low unemployment rate, several stakeholders noted that some businesses (especially those requiring more skilled labor) indicate a challenge in identifying potential applicants who meet the current skills required fora position. As such, stakeholders recommended ensuring that employers were aware of training services and programs (including those described below) to better enable employers to identify qualified employees. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 105 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-113 Describe any current workforce training initiatives, including those supported by Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations. Describe how these efforts will support the jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan. The Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce, Santa Ana Business Council and Downtown Business Inc. represent and support businesses and entrepreneurs throughout the City via training, coordinated events and advocacy. The Santa Ana Chamber provides training with funding via the State's Employment Training Panel. This includes a range of continuing education courses for businesses to provide to employees focused on quality management and business skills. The Orange County Small Business Development Center (SBDC) serves over 3,000 businesses per year. SBDC focuses on assisting businesses to grow and thrive through a blend of training and technical assistance. Services include training, access to resources, and one-on-one consulting services related to business development and operations. Santa Ana College's Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs include 35 areas of study with offerings totaling 59 degree options and 101 certificates. All of the CTE programs are developed and designed to meet the needs of the local labor market. The Orange County Development Board (OCDB) administers One Stop Centers, job training programs, and a database of approved training programs within Orange County. OCDB provides a range of supportive services including job application preparation, access to job boards/posting, general training and specialized programs. OCDB also funds programs within the Orange County Youth Center that provide occupational training as well as placed internships with local businesses for youth between the ages of 18-24. Does your jurisdiction participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)? Yes, Santa Ana participates in the Orange County CEDS. If so, what economic development initiatives are you undertaking that may be coordinated with the Consolidated Plan? If not, describe other local/regional plans or initiatives that impact economic growth. One of the five goals of the 2019 — 2023 CEDS Strategy is to focus on residents living in areas that are characterized by below average per capita incomes and above average levels of unemployment. As of 2018, ten Census tracts in Santa Ana met this threshold, consisting with 18.8% of the City's population. The County is structuring a regionally focused program to focus on job training and improved access to livable wage jobs for residents in this region. On a parallel track, the City is focused on supporting low - and moderate -income residents receive training for and support in accessing livable wagejobs in the City. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 106 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-114 Other regional initiatives identified in the CEDS will have a direct impact on Santa Ana's economy. These goals include: • Providing world class education, career, and workforce opportunities to address the skills gap • Promoting key priority clusters throughout the county • Improving Orange County's economic competitiveness in a global economy • Developing state of the art public infrastructure to improve job access and economic growth Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 107 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-115 MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion Are there areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration") As noted in the needs assessment, more than half of all households earning below 100%AMI experience at least one housing problem (most commonly housing cost burden). These households experiencing problems are located throughout the City and are not concentrated in a single neighborhood or geography. Are there any areas in the jurisdiction where racial or ethnic minorities or low-income families are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration") This plan uses HUD's definition of Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP) to define areas where low-income racial or ethnic minorities are concentrated. R/ECAPs are defined as areas with a non -white population of 50 percent or more and 40 percent or more of individuals living at or below the poverty line (or three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metro area). The map below identifies three such areas: airy or aanca Ana Map Legend Poverty Rate IJ 0-9 2 1 % Poverty h 9.21-17.64%Poverty lb 17.64-28A7% Poverty bl 28.17-43.00% Poverty >43.06% Poverty QR/ECAP Source: HUD-CPD MAPS Figure 9 — Poverty Rate and R/ECAP Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Estimates Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 108 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-116 Individually, the plan defines low-income areas as Census tracts in which at least 40% of the individuals within the tract are living at or below the poverty line. There are two such Census tracts in Santa Ana that meet this definition. They are the two R/ECAP tracts identified above in the central/east portion of the City. The plan defines areas of minority concentration as areas in which the share of the minority population is more than 20 percentage points that of the City's total minority population (78.2%). Within Santa Ana, eight Census tracts have minority populations that are 98% orgreater. This includes Census tracts abutting Grand Avenue on the eastern side of the City and tracts adjacent to Raitt Street south of downtown. What are the characteristics of the market in these areas/neighborhoods? In each of these three tracts, the population is predominately Hispanic/Latino (greater than 90%). All three tracts display high levels of housing cost burden for the overall population (ranging between 63 — 70% of all households). Are there any community assets in these areas/neighborhoods? Each neighborhood throughoutthe City of Santa Ana contains its own unique community assets including open space, trails, recreational areas, schools, job centers, retail and restaurants. Are there other strategic opportunities in any of these areas? There are no readily apparent strategic opportunities to be addressed with CDBG funds specific to any of these neighborhoods. The City will continue to fund and target HUD resources to meet community needs and leverage other funding resources. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 109 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-117 MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate -Income Households - 91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2) Describe the need for broadband wiring and connections for households, including low- and moderate -income households and neighborhoods. Throughout the City of Santa Ana, residents have consistent and multiple options to access broadband, high-speed internet. For broadband download speeds of 25 megabytes per second (mbps), 100% of residents are serviced by at least three internet service providers. For download speeds of 100 mbps, 71% of residents are serviced by two internet service providers and 28% of residents are serviced by one provider. According to broadbandnow, the average download speed in Santa Ana is 46.78 mbps which is 65% faster than the average internet speed in California. Number of Fixed Residential Broadband Providers F—I I I I I I 0 1 2 3 4 6 12 or more Figure 10— Broadband Provider Availability Data Source: FCC Broadband Provider Coverage (Dec. 2018) Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 110 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-118 Of those who participated in the community outreach survey, 87% indicated that they had access to broadband internet. Santa Ana complies with HUD's Narrowing the Digital Divide Through Installation of Broadband Infrastructure in HUD -Funded New Construction and Substantial Rehabilitation of Multifamily Rental Housing (81 FR 92626) rule (effective January 19, 2017). Through this rule, all new HUD -funded multi- family construction or substantial rehabilitation has included broadband infrastructure including cables, fiber optics, wiring and wireless connectivity to ensure that each unit has the infrastructure to achieve at least 25 mbps download and 3 mbps upload speeds. Describe the need for increased competition by having more than one broadband Internet service provider serve the jurisdiction. Throughout the city, residents are serviced by two, oftentimes at least three internet service providers who offer high speed internet. The three primary service providers in Santa Ana are Spectrum, ATT and Earthlink. While broadband is available through multiple providers, residents who participated in the community outreach survey, identified that access to broadband was the highest public infrastructure need in Santa Ana. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 111 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-119 MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3) Describe the jurisdiction's increased natural hazard risks associated with climate change. Climate change has increased the prevalence and severity of natural hazard risks including drought, flash floods/storms, and extreme heat events in Santa Ana. To help counter the impact of these risks, the city adopted its Climate Action Plan in 2015 and complies with CAL Green building standards. Through both of these initiatives, the City promotes multiple strategies to mitigate the impact of climate -related hazards by promoting green building, reducing water usage/ storm water runoff, improving weatherization of residential properties, and promoting alternative transportation and permeable pavement and landscaping. Two small areas of the city (west of Harbor Blvd. and the area immediately adjacent to Santiago Creek) are located within a 100-yearfloodplain and at a greater risk for experiencing flooding events. Describe the vulnerability to these risks of housing occupied by low- and moderate -income households based on an analysis of data, findings, and methods. Low- and moderate -income residents and special needs populations are especially vulnerable to the risks of climate -related hazard risks. The residences of low- and moderate -income households are more often in worse condition and thus are more susceptible to external weather conditions such as extreme heat. Likewise, elderly residents are at a greater risk to weather conditions such as extreme heat. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 112 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-120 Strategic Plan SP-05 Overview Strategic Plan Overview The Strategic Plan is a guide forthe City of Santa Ana to establish its housing and community development priorities, objectives and strategies for the investment of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) over the next five years, beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2025. The priority needs and goals established in this Strategic Plan (Plan) are based on analysis of information including the results of the City's Consolidated Plan Needs Assessment Survey, community meetings, and housing and community development data elements required by HUD in the online Consolidated Plan system (the eCon Planning Suite) from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates and the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) covering the same time period. Additional sources of information used to identify needs and establish priorities were obtained through consultation with local nonprofit agencies involved in the development of affordable housing and the delivery of public services to children, families, elderly persons and persons with special needs throughout the community. In consideration of community input and available data, the six priority needs listed below are established as part of this Plan. • Expand the supply of affordable housing • Preserve the supply of affordable housing • Access to and supply of public services • Increase access to and supply of homeless services and facilities • Promote economic opportunity • Improve City public facilities and infrastructure Consistent with HUD's national goals for HUD CPD programs to provide decent housing opportunities, maintain a suitable living environment and expand economic opportunities for low- and moderate -income residents, the priority needs listed above will be addressed over the next five years through the implementation of HUD funded activities aligned with the following seven measurable Strategic Plan goals: • Affordable Housing Development, Maintenance, and Preservation • Code Enforcement • Public Service Programs • Homeless Services and Facilities • Economic Development Program • Public Facilities and Infrastructure • Program Administration and Fair Housing Services Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 113 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-121 Historically, the City of Santa Ana has used the HUD programs to fund nonprofit agencies that provide direct services to City of Santa Ana residents. Overthe next five years, the City will continue this emphasis and will also use these resources to support City sponsored programs and activities that support the goals and objectives of this Plan. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 114 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-122 SP-10 Geographic Priorities — 91.215 (a)(1) Geographic Area Citywide Santa Ana will allocate resources No designation as NRSA or local across City based on need and target area eligibility Table 27 - Geographic Priority Areas General Allocation Priorities The City will continue to prioritize CDBG, HOME and ESG activities throughout the City as long as the project locations and households meetthe requirements of respective programs. Whenever possible, the City looks to leverage existing housing and community development investments and prioritize programs to best meet the needs of the City and residents. i.04 i.04 I 99; Consolidated Plan City of Santa Ana e� 21 Figure 11—CDBG Low -Mod Census Block Groups C_► _ :►e low OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-123 SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.215(a)(2) Priority Needs 1 Priority Need Expand the supply of affordable housing Name Priority Level High Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Geographic Citywide Areas Affected Associated Affordable Housing Development and Preservation Goals Description Throughout the City of Santa Ana, rental and homeownership costs continue to rise, creating increased pressure on low- and moderate -income residents to be able to afford safe and suitable housing. As noted in the needs assessment, 66% of all households earning less than 80%experience housing cost burden (paying more than 30% of income for housing costs). As housing costs will continue to rise, the rate of cost burden will continue to increase and more low- and moderate -income households will no longer be able to afford to live in Santa Ana. One element of this problem is a limited supply of affordable housing within Santa Ana. The City will prioritize using HUD resources to promote the acquisition, construction, and/ or rehabilitation of new affordable housing units that will serve low- and moderate -income residents as well as special needs populations throughout the City. Basis for The need for additional affordable housing was documented in stakeholder/ Relative resident workshops, the community needs survey, and an analysis of federal and Priority local data sources. Due to rising housing costs, low vacancy rates, and low fair market rent values, solely relying on demand -based housing solutions (e.g. TBRA and/ or down payment assistance) will not adequately address the housing needs within Santa Ana. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 116 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-124 Priority Need Preserve the supply of affordable housing Name Priority Level High 2 Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Geographic Citywide Areas Affected Associated Affordable Housing Development, Maintenance and Preservation Goals Description Throughout the City of Santa Ana, rental and homeownership costs continue to rise, creating increased pressure on low- and moderate -income residents to be able to afford safe and suitable housing. As noted in the needs assessment, 66% of all households earning less than 80%experience housing cost burden (paying more than 30% of income for housing costs). As housing costs will continue to rise, the rate of cost burden will continue to increase and more low- and moderate -income households will no longer be able to afford to live in Santa Ana. In addition to increasing the supply of affordable housing (as noted in the prior need), Santa Ana will strive to preserve existing affordable housing units within the City. In the next five years, 231 currently affordable housing units are at -risk of converting to market -rate units. An additional 652 affordable units are renewed annually. The City will prioritize using Federal resources to fund rehabilitation or other mechanisms to extend the affordability covenants of these units. Basis for The need for additional affordable housing was documented in stakeholder/ Relative resident workshops, the community needs survey, and an analysis of federal and Priority local data sources. Preserving affordable housing is a cost-effective solution to acquiring, constructing or rehabilitating new affordable housing as generally the marginal cost of preserving a unit is significantly lower than creating a new affordable unit. As such, the City will prioritize this need as a component of maintaining and ensuring affordable, accessible housing units within the City of Santa Ana. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 117 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-125 3 Priority Need Access to and supply of public services Name Priority Level High Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Elderly Frail Elderly Youth Geographic Citywide Areas Affected Associated Public Service Programs Goals Description Many challenges are faced by the City's vulnerable populations (including low - and moderate -income residents as well as special needs populations) and they do not have regular access to critical services and programs such as youth programming, job training, transportation, legal services, fair housing services, senior programming, medical care, and other social services. The provision of such programs and services will better enable and support low- income and vulnerable populations living in Santa Ana. Basis for At resident and stakeholder workshops, meeting participants ranked improved Relative and expanded public services as a high priority need. Additionally, through the Priority community needs survey, residents indicated a high need for a range of public services to address key gaps and special needs populations within the City. The quantitative data discussed in the Needs and Assessment and Market Analysis also serve as a strong basis for making public services a priority need. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 118 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-126 4 Priority Need Increase access to and supply of homeless services and facilities Name Priority Level High Population Extremely Low Persons with Mental Disabilities Persons with Physical Disabilities Persons with Developmental Disabilities Persons with Alcohol or Other Addictions Persons with HIV/AIDS and their Families Victims of Domestic Violence Victims of Human Trafficking Veterans Geographic Citywide Areas Affected Associated Homeless Services and Facilities Goals Description According to the 2019 Point in Time Count, there were 1,769 homeless individuals in Santa Ana, 830 of whom were unsheltered. The prevalence of homelessness in Orange County and Santa Ana correlates with the rising cost of housing, which has created more housing instability and the likelihood that a household disruption such as an unanticipated medical cost, job loss or change or other event can cause homelessness. As such, the need for comprehensive homeless services, programming and facilities is a critical need within the City. This need includes early intervention homeless prevention, increasing the supply of emergency and transitional shelter options, permanent housing solutions, and the provision of critical services to those who are at -risk of becoming homeless, currently homeless, or recently homeless. Basis for In community meetings, surveys, and stakeholder meetings, the need for Relative comprehensive homeless programs was consistently ranked as one of the City's Priority greatest needs. This need was supported by data provided in the County's 2019 Point in Time Count, as well as data maintained by the City and presented in the City's homeless dashboard. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 119 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-127 5 Priority Need Promote Economic Opportunity Name Priority Level High Population Extremely Low Low Moderate Non -housing Community Development Geographic Citywide Areas Affected Associated Economic Development Programs Goals Description To increase the supply and access of livable wage jobs within the City for low - and moderate -income residents, Santa Ana will support micro entrepreneurs to grow and expand businesses throughout the City. The City will prioritize growing industries in the City such as hospitality, light manufacturing and technology to promote job training and job growth. By addressing this need, the City will ensure that employees have the requisite skillset to succeed and businesses are well suited to effectively grow and expand operations. Basis for In consultation with economic development providers in the City as well as Relative input through the community needs survey, job training, connecting employers Priority with qualified employees, and business support/ assistance were identified as high needs in the City. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 120 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-128 6 Priority Need Improve City public facilities and infrastructure Name Priority Level High Population Non -housing Community Development Geographic Citywide Areas Affected Associated Public Facilities and Infrastructure Goals Description Santa Ana has a continuing need to maintain and enhance existing public facilities and infrastructures such as community centers, parks, streets, sidewalks, alleys, and otherfacilities and infrastructure in the City. These needs include ensuring that public facilities are ADA accessible to ensure access for all residents. Basis for In consultation with city staff as well as in community meetings and community Relative survey results, the need for maintaining and improving public facilities and Priority infrastructure was identified as a high need. Table 56 — Priority Needs Summary Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 121 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-129 SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions — 91.215 (b) Influence of Market Conditions Affordable Market Characteristics that will influence Housing Type the use of funds available for housing type Tenant Based High market -rate rents in most Santa Ana neighborhoods, combined with Fair Rental Assistance Market Rents below current market rents, limit the ability to use HOME funds (TBRA) for tenant- based rental assistance. Housing Choice vouchers administered by Santa Ana Housing Authority will continue to be a critical resource for low- income families and individuals and TBRA program will continue to be used as a complement to critical programs (such as rapid rehousing for homeless residents), but will not be a primary affordable housing approach within the City. TBRA for Non- See TBRA above. Homeless Special Needs New Unit As documented in the Needs Assessment and Market Analysis, the need for Production affordable housing is high throughout Santa Ana. The City will continue to use its HOME resources to serve as leverage for the development and construction of new affordable housing throughout the City. Rehabilitation The City will invest CDBG and HOME funds in the Housing Rehabilitation Program as a cost effective means of preserving the supply of homeowner and multi -family rental housing. Rehabilitation programs will also enable the City to prioritize the preservation of older housing stock that is at a greater risk of falling into disrepair. Acquisition, The City will continue to use HUD resources to prioritize the preservation of including existing affordable housing in the City. As documented in the Market Analysis, preservation more than 200 affordable units are at risk of expiring in the next five years. When possible, the City will use HOME resources and other federal and local resources to prioritize the preservation of these units. Preserving existing affordable housing is critical to maintaining a robust affordable housing stock in the City. Table 28 — Influence of Market Conditions Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 122 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-130 N rl N N N a -I Q1 m N 1-1 N aT-I V1 1 GJ u L 3 O y0 i r ^L^ 'u Y Q Ln m d a M ai c a � o� In on c c 3 o o y W W O � � y O N y > fO Ip a= v 3 t y L' y C fO L � y a � y aj C fO a fl- =5 U y W � VI T W += au c v ro t y W 0 0 u U O co v 0 U aj N N > T u O v' Q O a N O 7 � C N C O O U U C in 3 'E 'y y � . y c O m O fl_ � C N O ro y W U '� O y U C U moon p U U QO m m � y � > y n % O W O � y T u N U s— O F a y 00 Ln c m m N C3) 00 ~ O O Q O m � In N p O L') U 2 w • • • 75A-131 B d B § k \ | (_ [> 7==\z o / K c \;f\(i\ E,/=\/� (a _ /{}}�\{}n 3(/)[//-000u (D11 -—l>ƒ\=�\iin rDM /} � (_rD '0 _»; ,�-/ °^ ;\w _m 2 ( ) \ J }Q !LO 3 > o &3o \ \ ®\\ Ch to \ \ \°00 3m m to 70M< {\/�{{( 0\ 0*\\ —\rD '0\ — /e; c 0 FF= 0 0 z}3 !` (\}}\/* _ �\ _ (�}\\ \ \� \} �0 0 75A.122 O 3 O 3 0 d w fD rl 'o O! 3 O 0 s fD 0 c n fD O D, s m rD Dl N O 3 Q rD rD f2 3 S rD d 3 N v v 0 N rD 2 n S fD c S n < O M 7 rD Q w 3 Q O O -a rD < O n N rD Q S 7 S fD c 1 N Q n O 3 .s S N .s 3 w a m c rD !Z .s O v a a z fD N N S rD 3 rD fD Q to G 3 O n 0 W S O K m oa d m C 3 2 C fD m a n fD 0 C fD O Dl fD fD S fD 0 Dl O .�i S fD n s m n N 0 on 3 m rD M S n oa J O C v rD 3 M' rD 3 rD 3 M 3 0 c n 3 O f3D rD Dl O M S fD rD rD m 0- 0 M S fD n O 3 3 c rF M rD m I 0 rD 3 O K N O 75A-133 75A-134 SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure — 91.215(k) Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its consolidated plan including private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions. Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Role Geographic Area Type Served Santa Ana Government Homelessness Jurisdiction Non -homeless special needs Ownership Planning Rental neighborhood improvements public facilities public services Santa Ana CoC CoC Homelessness Santa Ana Housing Government Public Housing Jurisdiction Authority Orange County Fair Non -Profit Public Services; Region Housing Council Planning The Link Non -Profit Homelessness Region WISEPlace Non -Profit Homelessness Region MercyHouse Non -Profit Homelessness Region 2-1-1 Non -Profit Non -Housing Region Community Development; Public Services Santa Ana Chamber of Private Industry Non -Housing Jurisdiction Commerce Community Development; Economic Development Table 29 - Institutional Delivery Structure Assess of Strengths and Gaps in the Institutional Delivery System The institutional delivery system in Santa Ana is high -functioning and collaborative, particularly the relationship between city departments and the nonprofit sector comprised of a network of capable nonprofit organizations operating in Santa Ana and throughout Orange County that are delivering a full range of services to residents. Affordable housing development and preservation activities will be carried out by the Housing Department of the Community Development Agency in partnership with housing developers and contractors. The Planning and Building Agency will support code enforcement activities. Public service activities will be carried out by nonprofit organizations with support and oversight from the Community Development Agency as necessary to achieve the Strategic Plan goals. The Community Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 127 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-135 Development, Public Works and Planning and Building Agencies will work together with contractors to implement public facilities and improvement projects. The greatest challenge in the City's institutional delivery system is the breadth and diversity of need and exceeds the amount of available of funding to completely address all needs within the community. Consequently, even high priority needs cannot be fully funded. Further, due to the scale of need within the community — nonprofit service providers are also operating at maximum capacity. As a result, non- profit leadership has less time to dedicate to coordination and alignment with other partner agencies and organizations to strategically target needs. During this Consolidated Plan cycle, the Community Development Agency will strive to increase the efficiency of collaboration and coordination among different providers operating in the City and throughout the region. Availability of services targeted to homeless persons and persons with HIV and mainstream services Homelessness Prevention Services Available in the Community Targeted to I Homeless Targeted to People with HIV Homelessness Prevention Services Counseling/Advocacy X X X Legal Assistance X X X Mortgage Assistance X X X Rental Assistance X X X Utilities Assistance X X X Street Outreach Services Law Enforcement X X X Mobile Clinics X X X Other Street Outreach Services X X X Supportive Services Alcohol & Drug Abuse X X X Child Care X X X Education X X X Employment and Employment Training X X X Healthcare X X X HIV/AIDS X I X X Life Skills X X X Mental Health Counseling X X X Transportation X X X Other Other Table 30 - Homeless Prevention Services Summary Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 128 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-136 Describe how the service delivery system including, but not limited to, the services listed above meet the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) The City of Santa Ana's ESG and CDBG public service programs implemented by local nonprofit service providers may include activities focused on the provision of services to address the needs of homeless persons, particularly chronically homeless individuals, families with children, veterans and their families and unaccompanied youth. Homelessness prevention and supportive services for special needs populations are included among the priority needs in this Strategic Plan and activities serving these populations may be funded as part of the Annual Action Plan each year. Describe the strengths and gaps of the service delivery system for special needs population and persons experiencing homelessness, including, but not limited to, the services listed above Santa Ana has established successful partnerships among public and private sector entities in Orange County providing services for the homeless and other special needs populations. Communication and cooperation between the Community Development Agency and the partner agencies and organizations that administer activities is strong. The Homeless team within the Community Development Agency works closely with these organizations to improve regulatory compliance, monitoring, cooperation and partnerships among agencies and technical capacity of organizations involved in project delivery. Starting in early 2018, Santa Ana piloted Quality of Life Teams (QOLTs). QOLTs multi -disciplinary are comprised of representatives of different city departments and non-profit agencies to provide more holistic support and assistance to homeless individuals within Santa Ana. The teams collaboratively work with and triage homeless individuals to assist them identify and access critical services, resources, or emergency shelter. The implementation of these teams have allowed for a more collaborative and complete response to the needs of homeless individuals within the City. The City of Santa Ana coordinates regularly with the Orange County Continuum of Care and regional service providers and shelters to ensure that the City's resources and funding is in line with regional and state funding to address homelessness in Santa Ana and throughout Orange County. Provide a summary of the strategy for overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system for carrying out a strategy to address priority needs To address the lack of resources necessary to fully support local programs in Santa Ana for special needs populations and persons experiencing homelessness, the City prioritizes services for population segments with the greatest level of need for a particular program or activity and intends to invest grant resources in high leverage opportunities where data suggests that the City and its partners will be able to maximize the impact of every dollar. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 129 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-137 ci fm Ln ei N ei 01 i E 3 O Ln q* a Ln O a m in Y a O C O L= C C~ a v a m C J vwi U t'i " 'h h Q w V N v a L O C w w U m w c O m.� r w u E o z, J w m w mJ u E C m w > x° O J E m N .O C a N ` O w E w a a U Y= w m°° L> h¢ 4 m N t= a y U w :-' m c �n N m w E a C o C o C 'n w n Y c q -o `� w O o 5 E v 16 owc w wouvw m6b C C W a C a W c o w Lbq cO E DiO J a m L x° v w m — o x E o c 3 J o w v 2 ❑o x 3 ~ 2 O E c m a rca 1 J = 0 a Y G m O n N' O N O O 06 0 'O n m M I� H' n ti 0 r, O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ O vOi vOi a O �. C ], C= y w >coa� '> a�i > r � >• r � � u o 'a _� w. V Y J w m Z a0 v .�° v w u a " c o c E w m a O a 0¢ O m L m a 0 w c Q w w w w w w w a .0 U U V U U U U y w C w C yp w a w E w '� E z J c E N v� J c E J c E wc v c 2 m 2 E o w x° E o x° E o m u G `O J G `o J c v c E> E E> E> ¢ S ¢ S Z N Z U❑ S Z U❑ Z U❑¢ m N N N N N N N W} O O O O O O O m O O O O O O N} N c ^ c m m w E m m w m u E 'u u `� J Wot mC w a !a^On xm jp 0 O ` U w 'U 7 o wGa ° o L O°m a en E w o a x ❑ C O�J u w a s w x �n w u w❑ a a a71 5 w a¢ ai �n � w a O A 75A-138 i to Y N N C N h h tD Q "O O }' O C "O OJ > Y GJ m C Q bA 11 N C "O Q N N C M E aj N C Qj aJ 0 -0 aJ O-p > a M y O c C aC_J O E O Nto i "O U f OQ O f > OJ �O w N O M N O to O O �' O Cl ry � Y C V1 u C N Y C , m'�p (u y -0 N > yO CN Lp Q C N m > O uC uNOuC"O O E __ O O O m N c a N t Y E O Cl "O 3 "O H L E .0 Y �+ C m L m N N O 1 0 i Y N _ � Y h 01 to C N v� N M fl "O N h N Y_ Y O N C 1 ai Q p }L+� v VI "O OJ VI N CV E - N p' '' O d O N fl OO i W L VI OO ' Y bn Y N C C = f0 Y 47, i V O Y NLL NC G - NN�n M E "O O >> "O GJ O O C O i uN pQj C wC Vh tNEo "EOC> w NJ i Uj N -=Cl CQj Oc i >iJ CCN Y -0 Cl bhH0 V M c OJ L C N Ci h io N "O O c O f O O_ to O Qj CN CN1 Li = O 3 -ui >ON "O cE .Y O O i u N C C O -OO N 'in u C E u i Q �+ �' �_' M O Y 'C in f0 UJ O O O N OJ m N m m p p u C O M > L O" � OU p 0 u �' O C O Y CL ,Y_ O Y O V 0 E Y f0 N C +m C OV iJ O YO t w O fl Y N m N i �"� M UJ E N IO�n Q C to N O C V O O C O 'O vi OJ N u 3 O_ to L O i C N L w O u CJ O bn m C Cl UJ O N C1 � L c O E N E E CJ L N N C N C C n C N i-0 E C an � Y L m m Y GJ VI N C L O m m N O v $ 0 c 3 v c s Y w Y t uYo o t '4 m= N m E 3 '�, t 0 �-N O. N E N E N p u O Q i C Q i w O OJ > iJ "O N O_ = O N E CL O O G! i C f0 j p C E � f0 m - N W fl C .N 7 O Y � � C d Q w m m E Y Ol in LL C m E v m c M O` N a c y O m M E a w w c x u u " aJ > Y v GJ y C ` VJ - Q ro ,� N u_ LL E Z m 'O W LY CJ E p Y 0 u 3 y 0 O 0 u A o u C7 Q u a x w a' a` vi .. 75A-139 N L Ln c-I m ch m w 5 O x T L d C w G/ H f0 Co C 0 s B f0 m f0 A 75A-140 SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement — 91.215(c) Need to Increase the Number of Accessible Units (if Required by a Section 504 Voluntary Compliance Agreement) N/A, The City of Santa Ana does not have a Section 504 Voluntary Compliance Agreement. Activities to Increase Resident Involvements SAHA encourages residents of Santa Ana to play a significant role in the preparation of the Consolidated Plan. This is done through presentations at community meetings, online communication, public notices, and public hearings. A broad citizen participation process was implemented with traditional and electronic communication being used to notify the community of ongoing planning efforts. The City of Santa Ana has coordinated with public agencies, private entities, and community residents through the City of Santa Ana's Neighborhood Initiatives Program (NIP). This assists more than 60 neighborhood associations in Santa Ana by providing a conduit for two-way communication between residents and the City. Is the public housing agency designated as troubled under 24 CFR part 902? No. The Housing Authority is not designated as troubled. Plan to remove the 'troubled' designation N/A, the Housing Authority does not currently have the "troubled" designation. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 133 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-141 SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing — 91.215(h) Barriers to Affordable Housing A barrier to affordable housing is a public policy or nongovernmental condition that constrains the development or rehabilitation of affordable housing. Barriers can include land use controls, property taxes, state prevailing wage requirements, environmental protection, cost of land and availability of monetary resources. Barriers to affordable housing are distinguished from impediments to fair housing choice in the sense that barriers are lawful and impediments to fair housing choice are usually unlawful. The greatest barrier to affordable housing in the City is a limited supply of resources and available land to support the development and preservation of affordable housing within the City. The City works closely with non -governmental, state and federal agencies to identify potential funding streams and resources, but these programs do not provide adequate funding to meet all housing demands within the City. Strategy to Remove or Ameliorate the Barriers to Affordable Housing The City will continue to actively fund the development and preservation of affordable housing as well as identify opportunities to leverage and utilize additional state, local, or non -governmental funding resources to develop and preserve additional housing throughout the City. Through the City's compliance with AB 1486 (Surplus Lands Act) as well as a constant monitoring of state land made available through Executive Order N-06-19, the City will look to identify potential parcels of underutilized land that can be leveraged for potential affordable housing development. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 134 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-142 SP-60 Homelessness Strategy — 91.215(d) The needs of individuals experiencing homelessness and persons with special needs are complex and require a wide range of specialized services. Numerous agencies are typically involved in the care of these individuals, providing distinct services such as housing, mental health counseling, employment training, and case management services. A number of activities and services are funded to help the needs of individuals experiencing homelessness and other special needs populations. Overall, these services address the high priority of reducing homelessness and the threat of becoming homeless, as well as providing necessary supportive services. Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs Through this Strategic Plan, the City of Santa Ana will continue to prioritize support and assistance to homeless persons and those at imminent risk of becoming homeless. Through HUD and non -HUD resources, the City will continue to: 1. Prioritize street outreach through Quality of Life Teams 2. Preserve existing and increase the supply of permanent supportive housing 3. Preserve existing and increase the supply of affordable housing 4. Provide housing services and assistance to special needs populations 5. Improve critical services to low-income and special needs populations 6. Coordinate services within the City as well as regionally in collaboration with the Continuum of Care 7. Collaborate with all communities in Orange County to address homelessness with coordinated, regional approaches Addressing the emergency and transitional housing needs of homeless persons The County of Orange operates a year-round emergency shelter in the Civic Center of Santa Ana that provides safe sleep and emergency shelter for over 400 individuals each night, and food and supportive services for over 600 individuals on a daily basis. The ESG funded HEART outreach team, City Net and Illumination Foundation organizations provide outreach and engagement services in and around the shelter as well as other locations in the City. The County also runs an emergency cold -weather shelter in Santa Ana during the winter for approximately 200 individuals. In addition to these shelters, the one year actions will address the needs of individuals who are homeless that includes unaccompanied women, victims of domestic violence, chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth. The range of services include emergency shelter, transitional housing and permanent supportive housing. ESG funds will provide assistance for street outreach services, homeless prevention and rapid re -housing. Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 135 OMB Control No:2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-143 individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again. The City supports a number of programs to assist low-income individuals and families to avoid becoming homeless, including Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers. Other support services, such as job and training assistance, food assistance, and counseling are also available to help individuals recover from homelessness and to avoid becoming homeless. The City works closely with the Continuum of Care who provides oversight for the Vulnerability Index - Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI-SPDAT) to prioritize the most vulnerable chronically homeless individuals. Case management services are offered in all programs to help prevent individuals from falling back into homelessness. In addition, the Housing Authority of the City of Santa Ana has recently been awarded VASH project -based vouchers for permanent supportive housing for Veterans experiencing homelessness. These 100 vouchers are in addition to the current Vouchers with two projects already in the pipeline. An RFP will be released shortly for these additional vouchers. Help low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low- income individuals and families who are likelyto become homeless after being discharged from a publicly funded institution or system of care, or who are receiving assistance from public and private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education or youth needs The goals listed above will help these individuals and families to avoid becoming homelessness. The ESG program will fund homelessness prevention programs including utility and security deposit assistance as well as rental assistance. The HEART program, funded by ESG provides bus tickets for individuals interested in returning to their home; often following a release from a correctional facility. Additionally, the County of Orange is equipped to serve people discharged from publicly funded institutions or systems of care such as health care facilities or correction programs Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 136 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-144 SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards — 91.215(i) Actions to address LBP hazards and increase access to housing without LBP hazards The Residential Lead Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (Title X) emphasizes prevention of childhood lead poisoning through housing -based approaches. This strategy requires the Cityto implement programs that protect children living in older housing from lead hazards. Overall, the City has a relatively older housing stock, with 60,335 of the City's 74,755 total housing units (80.7%) built before 1980 according to ACS data. These units have the potential to contain lead -based paint. In these units, the best way to have reasonable assurance that lead -based paint hazards are not present is to have the painted surfaces tested. According to the standard lead paint testing costs, a typical lead -based paint screening survey costs approximately $450. To reduce lead -based paint hazards, the City of Santa Ana takes the following actions: • Monitorthe lead -poisoning data maintained bythe Orange County Department of Health Services (OCDHS). According to the State of California Department of Public Health, there were 75 incidents of Orange County children with blood lead levels greater than 9.5 micrograms per deciliter in 2015. This includes 66 children under the age of 6, and 9 children between the ages of 6 and 21. • Educate residents on the health hazards of lead -based paint through the use of brochures and encourage screening children for elevated blood -lead levels. • Disseminate brochures about lead hazards through organizations such as the Fair Housing Foundation and the City's Building Department. How are the actions listed above related to the extent of lead poisoning and hazards? Overtime, the actions listed above will promote greater awareness of the hazards of lead -based paint to children and will also address unsafe housing conditions in pre-1978 units where children may potentially be exposed to lead -based paint hazards. How are the actions listed above integrated into housing policies and procedures? When implementing a residential rehabilitation program, the City disseminates brochures provided bythe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to all applicants as part of the transmittal of the program application. Any unit receiving assistance through the program that was built priorto January 1, 1978 will be tested for lead -based paint. If lead -based paint is present, appropriate abatement procedures are implemented as part of the rehabilitation contract consistent with the requirements of 24 CFR Part 35. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 137 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-145 SP-70 Anti -Poverty Strategy — 91.215(j) Jurisdiction Goals, Programs and Policies for reducing the number of Poverty -Level Families Similarto other communities in Orange County and across the nation, poverty continues to be a significant challenge. According to the 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, there are 72,074 (22.1%) Santa Ana residents living in poverty. By educational attainment, the greatest share of those living below the poverty line are those with less than a high school degree (24.8%). Of the workforce, 21.4% of those who worked part-time or for part of the year were below the poverty line and more than 30% of those who did not work at all lived below the poverty line In an effort to meaningfully address this challenge, all goals of the 2020 - 2024 Strategic Plan are aligned to support activities that promote the availability of affordable housing and provide essential services that directly benefit low- and moderate -income residents. In the implementation of the Plan, the City will prioritize funding for activities that most effectively address the Plan goals over the next five years. This strategy will emphasize using CDBG funds to help individuals and families rise out of poverty to long-term self-sufficiency. Through these programs, as well as other housing, community development, economic development, and social services funded with other federal, state, local and non -governmental resources, the City will strive to reduce the absolute number and relative share of residents living below the poverty line. How are the Jurisdiction poverty reducing goals, programs, and policies coordinated with this affordable housing plan Santa Ana is a high housing cost area and, as noted in the Market Analysis, has continued to see a rapid increase in housing costs (both rental and homeownership) while incomes have not increased at the same rate. Data collected by the National Low -Income Housing Coalition in the 2019 Out of Reach Report indicates that the median wage needed to afford a two -bedroom apartment in Orange County is $81,480. A minimum wage earner must work 131 hours per week to afford that same two -bedroom unit. Even if a household can earn the necessary amount for rent, many families do not have safety -net resources such as savings or local family to support them through a financial crisis. A job loss, sudden illness or rent increase can often push the family beyond their financial limits and result in the loss of their home. National funding limitations on affordable housing development, preservation, and Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers has resulted in long wait lists and limitations in the number of households that can be assisted within the City. This consequently creates a gap of those households in need of assistance and the availability of the assistance. Through the goals set forth in this Consolidated Plan, the Citywill continue to target programs and services to benefit low- and moderate -income residents and households and reduce the number of those living near or below the poverty level. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 138 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-146 SP-80 Monitoring — 91.230 Describe the standards and procedures that the jurisdiction will use to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements To ensure that HUD funds are used efficiently and in compliance with applicable regulations, the City provides technical assistance to all subrecipients at the beginning of each program year and monitors subrecipients throughout the program year. Technical Assistance To enhance compliance with federal program regulations, the City provides an annual Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) workshop to review the Plan goals, program requirements and available resources with potential applicants. Subsequent to the approval of the Annual Action Plan, a mandatorysubrecipient workshop is held to review program regulations in detail, to provide useful forms and resources for documenting compliance and to review the City's compliance procedures and requirements. Additionally, individualized technical assistance is provided on an as -needed basis throughout a program year. Activity Monitoring All activities are monitored, beginning with a detailed review upon receipt of an application to determine eligibility, conformance with a National Objective and conformance with a Plan goal. This review also examines the proposed use of funds, eligibility of the service area, eligibility of the intended beneficiaries and likelihood of compliance with other federal requirements such as the National Environmental Policy Act, the System for Award Management (SAM) debarment list, prevailing wage, Minority and Women Business Enterprise, Section 3 and federal acquisition and relocation regulations, as applicable. Subrecipients are required to submit an audit and other documentation to establish their capacity, and any findings noted in the audit are reviewed with the applicant. Eligible applications are then considered for funding. Once funded, desk monitoring includes ongoing review of required quarterly performance reports. For CDBG public service activities, an on -site monitoring is conducted once every two (2) years, or more frequently as needed to ensure compliance. These reviews include both a fiscal and programmatic review of the subrecipient's activities. The reviews determine if the subrecipient is complying with the program regulations and City contract. Areas routinely reviewed include overall administration, financial systems, appropriateness of program expenditures, program delivery, client eligibility determination and documentation, reporting systems, and achievement toward achieving contractual goals. Following the monitoring visit, a written report is provided delineating the results of the review and any findings of non-compliance and the required corrective action. Subrecipients normally have 30 days to provide the City with corrective actions taken to address any noted findings. Individualized technical assistance is provided, as noted above, as soon as compliance concerns are identified. For CDBG capital projects, monitoring also includes compliance with regulatory agreement requirements Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 139 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-147 a oa a, m ' �a a � •o w c � u 3 O t a V W W O L C ♦+ O N V M a] M a — a 3 l0 c m L cT C y m a � bA ♦+ C a] O O u o w C O Ur a N VI T ai a U O ai m t O w w " w �a aj Ou i a O = 7 w C7 aj co N a ai om a ai ai > T u O m W 'i O 0a O ai m V N c ai ai a O aJ u uu O N ' E N — ai 3 zj v N a Ql m oL Q O V L m O m u m m L 7 Q E a] •u '�O , 00 VI Q O no c-I c c M oo mm� 3 �y Y� to y Qi DD -a C Q to to O i� ♦+ aJ y/} L} ai Q � G LL 'O 0 aJ O 0 O � ai U a o m . . . E V 75A-148 C N N N N -p C N N f0 N C r "> C Q +L+ r OO C Q Y r V L to Q �- O C 'Y m O "O C f0 O N N v" C m Q E0C Q 00 C CL Q O CN1 N VO = O O N vry C _C O C Q E q to O O- L W Q jU-00 O m U O w C O U O YOC UJ E m C N>p C> >"O E ONN L 'i E O N 0 OJ Q 0 N O v 4 O p LL L C f0 "O L Y p LL-0 L O_ N L Y p LL L L p Y Y N L w c v m N O n co co v 0 =to O to 0 V ^ O O- E m E N O W Q Q w O N n N N N N 01 n n W a� /! M N C F n N ID r y} ati L Yf 4f � N Gl A T u O = O O Q a Y C O N E m 5 O O O N .a m C CL W C W cn M m O N � c M 00 N O Q n co N Q V1 N N to Y L T Q 4J L O CO N N to Qj N L L C ��' W= C L Y C V V C N v c C c Y C E u m ar v M C O a L Y QJ N C fO C p N UJ to N E U C o ar L Y L "O _ N L p Y Y N p L LL .Y O. E E C O L O C GJ iJ EO V T L j L Q N, N 0CL L V O C C O O_ N C H C T Y L Y N C O A L N N N N> C O p Q E i C O] O ,Y bfl L Q OJ O N p" f0 N E V O to N (Q ry m pu N C E O �+ O C N Q O Y N C Y C O O' Qj 2' i a u Z u o" � N f0 f0 f6 u N N N LL N N N N LL LL LL E � co CWC G O in W d Lb M V 5w. 75A-149 0 t L O Q E Qj O v v r T c E E O u ai s Y W O V v v C v t Y O v v E Q Y C cu Y O C Y C E v Y c v C C fa 'u v s a s Qj v E to O V Y_ u v L H u N 0 O to ai t bD C v s N O .0 u O v to c to 12 Qj N .. 75A-150 If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan The Santa Ana Housing Authority owns the parcel at 302 E. Twenty -Second Street. This parcel is approximately 27,817 square feet in size. It is currently zoned R1 for single family residences, which allows one house per lot. The vacant, undeveloped lot was purchased from CalTrans and was a remnant parcel from a freeway -widening project. The property is irregular in shape and belowthe minimum lot size for a residential lot. The City and Housing Authority are currently assessing the necessary variances and other approvals necessary to support development on this lot. In addition, Santa Ana will comply with new State requirements under AB1486 and AB1255 to inventory and support developers to access and utilize surplus municipal and state land for the construction of affordable housing. If such sites are identified, the City will consider the use of HUD or other resources to assist with site preparation. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 143 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-151 M v H O O m c N w u O C 'O ?'' O vwi v� 0 H w w CO O Q � C Y O ~ L LL C w m L m in L t j m �n O w O Q p in C 2 O! w UI C N O W u w j M O! W M W� ,0,, O a .N w Lw �n 't'i C L V1 ri m E O c c c -o O +� a+ ` L C L¢ C Ui W w O a C O O w m` w W w y_ u O C N QO h �! a+ u u LM W= m N a a oo c u E o O o l7 p 'E 'E m + O w i E 0 M x 0 3 cu E E cp Cm M0 Cm w 3 O x O E a m w m� J m x°x° a's OM O m O m l�0 C m W t0 O O L ONi W V G 0 W r .-1 p LL S u u u w u u u 2 y T w T 0 O u u '^ a u u p m o w o rma>w ym m a m �'�:. m.E i7 4 m't'i H +• v 6B LO w v M° Z O� w a y= v w o e w� E a c c a v p c �. m c m 0 a m o 'w^ m= u a Z �' a E -gyp E a a- Zw x Z O r v Z O u p w c o c a E m c— w O L +, m a O L Q vi �n _ m L m a 0 _ .,_. ._ Q w w w w w w w V U U U U U U Z' Wbo T w c w w T w s W E Z 0 c E 0 E o c E eoio x° m x° E o v = c c o= E E E o u `o 0 N `o 0 c m c E> E c E c E w o o o a o o w o 0 o w o o — Q x Q x z � Z U❑ 2 Z V C Z V C Q L W w } 0 O O O O O O N N N N I N N N L O O O O O O O Y w VI T 0 N O N O N O N O N O N O N u Y c ''' C ' •Y .N 73 E E yE aY o O o M= m mx°z Mm O ° w m w ° m m 5 "L °a w Q x atJ u w a s x v, LL a a LL a Q a2J �n v o p � O 75A-152 Y O C L i H N OJ u_ O -0 O -0 cuY 7 ' txo OJ L OJc Y C i L L f0 L OJ — O O a y� L OJ E E aj Y OJ OJ N v v o aJ L C 0) O c °° p a O L > L aj -Q u Q_ Y m Q_ Q > UJ O 3 QJ C C u toY 0J O CL Y Y N VI Q" m_ a Y O bC0 v o C Q 0J "O C O Qj 1 O h OJ U C L an 0 0J C OD O N Y E — C O -0 O u0 C Q N t Y E O C-N ' m "O O 0 LO Y Y C L.YQ -Q f 0 C O mH L OHJ YvJ C 4J Q- O 'O NY = 0110 1 a O Cl 72 O +�+ 0J fl c i (u v�i 00 m C] 'Y } Y m O Oc CL L C L 0) 0J W i 0J L L 0J CL E "O .> E 00 O- 0J O v� OJ H > "O 0J Q U Q C "O O Y V 0J i i _ O E N = iJ V OJ C j0J OJ V > V an C N OJO L Y OJ O L L L OJ C L i 0J C H b0 p C H Y in 0J VI 0J C1 E VI 0J Y V M L 0J N C in v� L C C- O N O Q MY i 4J 1-0 CL 0 O _ pEO LOfc0 V Nc CM OLJ OJ ="O O C N O C 0 M 0J u 0J O to Q C w '� V an Y �� C Q i— Y O '2 1J O O � c C Ecu N 0J by E -Q C L O L +-' bD V iJ f10 L f0 O C OJ Y C L C 0J C O CL Y V 0J C 0J Y m QJ E OJ O IU = •gin 'p L 1 L > O O Q O C "O U L C u L 0J O L 0J v�i O O 0J 3 fl v=i N C2 OD a UJ O O_ N C 0p C E Jp E E 0J L 0J N N C C Q i V O 01 E E Y C O Y 0J VI f0 O m OJ C C C 3 Y IV c M> 3 2 Qj w N C QJ �o C Y C UJ Q C 0J C Ju 'O 4Jto w E 2 t C L L 01 �'.i Y C. "O L 41 1J O u O Q i C Q i 0J O 0J > i O_ in 0J •rN+ CL CL vYi CL 01 C i C f0 j p C j E C O N W 'N/� u E C O 0. N N L ' Y f0 > Y L �n N f0 — f0 W Cl m C O Y � y O .� 0 0 O n LL C o C 'y� M y 0 6 O C t0 = 0 C a Y w c o E w 2 > m Ol x u u u N O C v E 0 w u Q Z N W N u�i CJ E LL E Y LY u y O L U C 0 'aO O O .O O C7 Q� u 3 a x w a a vi u .. 75A-153 AP-35 Projects — 91.220(d) Introduction During Program Year 2020, the City of Santa Ana will prioritize and fund the projects listed below. Projects # Project Name 1 CDBG Program Administration 2 CDBG Fair Housing 3 CDBG Code Enforcement 4 CDBG Economic Development 5 CDBG Library Improvements 6 CDBG Parks and Public Facilities Improvements 7 CDBG Neighborhood Sponsored Improvements 8 CDBG Housing Rehabilitation 9 CDBG Public Services 10 ESG-PY20 — Homeless Activities 11 HOME Program Administration 12 HOME SF Rehabilitation 13 HOME Affordable Housing 14 HOME CHDO Table 66— Project Information Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs Santa Ana uses a place -based strategy during the planning period. The geographic distribution of funding is predicated somewhat on the nature of the activity to be funded. It is the City's intent to fund activities in the areas most directly affected by the needs of low-income residents and those with other special needs. The Annual Action Plan directs investment geographically to an area benefit neighborhood. The City will continue to work closely with its partners to identify and overcome any obstacles to address the needs of underserved populations. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 146 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-154 � 2 § � 00 m § M 0 CL \�\0 m to to / \\�\ \ { \ ) 0 — 0-0 CL Qj �£ & ( �c: (\) }% )\ ) / Qj CL 12 2E, ) -- % -jj Qj Qj to ( Qj c to � Qj — /( � Qj - 0CL \mLn \ { ) — \ ) ƒ t\ /k k \ R S _ Q _ ) ± { / ( \ \ }) # f { < / } \ % & m ) f 7 7 ( ! { } \ f 5 2 ( f 2 \ ( �$ CL })\�_ 7 2 f « 7 ( m. m\ 2 w $ 2|. § n � \ ¢ \ } / \ \ \ \ 3 i ) \ $ , ; A G) ) A A w 0 2 )2 B � � 75A.155 O b0 C N 0 p Y C E O N C C L t 0 O N O C OJ bfl U t O Y N O N Y N Q Y bD N T C t co C N Y O c m O O O s -0 O s V N U U L b9 O Q C to C m O L N N L N N m bn C H 0 f0 C 'Q UM O Y u c,�, O Y u CLY y E > c Y C C M 0 v > o n bfl c N Y >_ CJ OJ E p U 0 Y c 0 v _47, uto M i+ f0 to f0 N 0 O w bn y0, -O _� v V O E> d N N C7 m c O t 0 w u V L O U Q OJ _ L 2Y b0 '� u OL c O L LL Y Q c -0 4% N c L Q V `3 N c E m-' GJ v c O N L , �E v u O O O Ntxo O YU C O N > Lc O U E b0 Y N by Y O i O N O V 2'E N Y cu O p Gl O>', E N OJ N ' H Q it "O +L+ -Ep O N YO i+ V L T O m 'Q N N L L L E N c O T c p w 3 U }+ U N N N 'in _ .N E N N O C Q Q E E N -0 -0 O p -0 N E O bD O —_ u E s C c� C w Y ar N o u° C r 3 C E w- NO 0 W V wN O 0O "0 O 0lu "0 � L u w > a ^ (D O v O mu O M i M O a U :EC 0. m l0 O Ln U d V U C O U d U N w M Lo M H d U Y CL LPN C• C Y Er-V1 c a 2 c a t m u m u — y m a 3 Q C 0 y m a 3 -Q C 0 G N _N N O '0 y Y N E N a N •Y_ M C O i+ Q' _Q 'L N Y_ > (U N Q Q 'L > N C N L N N u E N 0 L C N L N N u E Q m a+ N Q C Q m (U Q Q r N C. p Q N y a Q Y C_ W C Q .Q d Z Q Q i/ `N4 C Y L Y- d i -6 Z .0 Y Q fO G Y Q cC Y Q V Q Y N .V i, Q m C i/ m CC Y Q U Q OD LY '� E 0 U C Q •O bA Ib N C N 00 L w C i+ O V C ry O C Fa- W O w J a a H 0 Z lL C F W O W J a a M V 5w. 75A-156 Y VI n � C L VI fL0 Y � Y 9 J to N O v O O N v� Ol u vO O N c 'Y aj O O N �p O O Y Q Q Y OJ .LjN u7 E O v E N O Q CL C p CL y N V w C Y G0 C toc Y :EN N O N c Y V N VI V 41 C O L U1 p Y VI c N L C)LN OpJ -sY0 M C.. a U v U p O -p� O �y 11J Y N CN vYi 1J O N N m E O] 1J ILO Op J O] to?. a u Y � m -0O] ra L c L `-^ -p L L Y C o p u c 3 Y w c Qj Qj u c c w a :EI`"O m = Y Y O_ W =� � C f0 C C Cc C YU m Y _ L VI Y E i OJ u v�i M '� to 'O CL Qj O U N Q p > fl' N O OJ m O- LO O O OL c E E " C,-0 YO � >p O "O C,Ol r+ OU OJ > Y YmCL ? N i+ U U OJ n �'' f0 N > Y Y .O Y N E ' 3 o o m O O `u O] C U O >O C E U. \ i l7 -00 m O O m 0 m O E O Y vYi N m O] CL m C 'h c w o H° H o UU c a u w aL Lo In 0. u Lo d Y � d Y 'a y ++ C m V L m 3 O m m ) E ydj a W 'a � L m C L O Y O' •L u Y > N 10 CL a C N t vi N U E m O. L C N C Z 'O f6 Q Q bA .p 0 N N p 0 Q .E C V1 C t1 y, L Y N r Ln C1 N In N m £ w E i+ C y N In -a m a c 0 m m m o O N O O _ O GJ (7 Z LL O �- W O w J a M Z LL F V In .. 75A-157 a3 v c a O Y ° C Y aj Qj O ° E N Y O T Y N N L c m a c c a ar a c c h p m m L N Q i C p Q c V Y aJ 0 U Q O Q V N 0) Y > Qj V Y E Q C m L Y C m OL 3 OL C C 0 W h w Q 00 Q -0 C C Y m C c « 3 c 0 v `" v -0 m to of j cu ua. ar 3 N h x C U CL aJ c aJ u VI IU a aJ E L o Y VI c N na v E o aJ L ° N aJ CL N Y > O m a O "N O OL Ymc w n- w DH m C_ ahLJ° u _ m L o t E E p E Qj toY 1 i m E C u 0 >_ U b0 CY 61 C Y °U Y Qj �0 Y C Y �n fa VI ° Y aJ VI C m ° Y '^ Lo N N 0 'V aJ Y T C 0 aJ V m y al L C aJ v� Y to N Y Y OL LL _ N Y Y fl' m Y "O Q V 0 L N > N C_ N 0 N fL0 p aJ m C c _ m w C aJ aJ L aJ C N 0-0 Cm ° j C N d N c U E C ° O �" Oa O N C E a V > Q E E ° v° N CLO m m "O a C Y (7 t 0 v0 N C_ au al i U u u E y '~ L CL U t U m O aJ m ci Y N 3 m C �+ C aJ aJ u m N M CM co ° N N M \ CL E 0 c O N \ C O O Q O \ O E of3 u c a u u c � ri a u u c m d V d Y � N C- _ C a C a > m u — u y m 3 c 0 y m 3 -a C 0 a a 0 CL N v y a E 0 a N vY y m C CL •u Y VI m C CL •u > LO w i aJ E ° L 0! Y LO L w aJ E L ° i L 0 r a! C. C u Q m m i Q c O m 0 r w C- C u Q m m i s'0 •E C Q 7 Q a+ N -_ a! C Z m Y C N u V1 c CL .� m E Y C N V Y N E �- E C ar m £ �- E c °J m a C EF m ar W O J a a` Q Z l C W O w J a a` F (7 2 rL. � n i .. 75A-158 T Y C C 1 O c O N h O C E t O_ m c N O m c h0 > 2> O Q d Y c Y Q N C GJ 00 U fL0 L O T m N N L C to 0 s m �° r 3 0 '� to c- h 3 Q j .Y OJ c 00 O = O 00 +_+ C c "O u 0 0 -a v = L N N E O Y b0 c O C Cv V Q VI > Y cu O C OV 19 'a c H N V r O N C m L 3 0 E on v o c Q N 3 °Y v o ac 0 _ 10 O 0 v c � Ip h0 E E y, N c a Y ai v c 'x va c acJ v 3 c 4J — 3 N Z N' L O > m O_ C 0 O O �O Y w T �n m Y Y N OD m c VI E c Y 3 O V N 'E V' J9 m O O bD m w CDL o aJ c Y aJ L a N "O m O o N 3 +..� Q 0 v o N U E> �° aJ 0 y c v s` m s L cr C Y "O O "O U OJ O O "O Ou OV m N O O O QQj 0 w Y O 0 N Y > (0 c O O Y OO in NN GJ wL O V QN CL OL0 c Cc O QN V O i O E IV to b HNc a) -0 O N 3 c U i0 3 _O O Y N m "O = N Y s N 'ti m 3 N ,CO lf7 V? N O �n O UJ �i .--I 1A Y N O Y C UJ c u GJ 7 3 .Y Y L QJ c V _ G _ c Y c Q o uVLU n d U L aQu u r�o OJ Y CL LP VI GJ •" d Lr- VI Y Y '> a .> a m u m — u N_ m 3 C y M 3 C a -a E a+0 O C N a -a N O m c Y u ' � m0C. ad d u > '.uN c ° a 0 a rE °E a a m J m CL CL ba •E C .CL Y m Y 0 V Y L H c a fO E Y a E° E m w m m a ° o°Ja E .° E m c 7 N m m w O O m OL m O N 7 N eo uYi w O u m LL Q W O J d d (7 Z LL Q W O J 6 00 .. 75A-159 Y O m > O � C O U m N C :i+ y 00 OJ N _ 0 O OJ U Q .0 O O- C u m O U NJ Y C J � T m .N a U tO (UOJ 5 3 °' O > tT a c E m i N E J O p cU J u m O ` O -0 i (U t -0 U N 11U m Y Y tl0 m J O) N E > O t T O N i OJ s E p c Qj u O C _ o0 CO O Y a) > '] '0 "O J O Y' OJ J C h U N L m Y h () U o nr E w �° -0c p_ a N U O L O > O "�O m s O. V OJ C J E O L N O E x Eto C T E +-' OJ Q N a+ U T O C 0> C y C .4 .� E U N OJ 00 N v OJ s C J N V ar C ar E J 0: -0 OJ U a 3 E m° L u v< E a y`m N_ -0 Qj i Y Y h h O O Y u hO c U i h 12 -0O" y J U12 hai 02 ar -p c c O 0E , v v OUC E m U O CL m a(D m L a O O O hOC cu C E _ 1OJ 0 -0 NOU0 Qj m J NO TJmu m m N 12 "p 'O >� a a OJ a) a aJ C OJ a c p CL u J 0 ' J E C a CN � > N 5 "O "O U OJ-p CCT 0 C O aUOJ ONd v O O E > N uEv OJ N 0 a o c Qj -0" " O O- 0 0 O O " O 0C O E > U N u a O 0 O (n Y 4J Y Q N O G > V VI \ O U •Y C u 41 (0 Ou O ? L C C W u 0 \ u 00 L \ i0 N N C V1 \ O U c a Q n H v Lo n U H O Q v uCL V m w c x LP � w .O a 'r � > v y N a 2O y yC v C m aL+ a u '> y t N E m O d C CJ L 0 O` W u E m O COL Z L Q O m Y Ol fl- C Q m i a Q biJ Q c y w O Z a Q Y C Yc OJ .O Ol �n f0 N Ol 00 C G m G r m C C OJ Ol 00 _H -� m O OJ N c o ` +' O G m m O O1 Ol a` h Q Z LL h w o w a a h 0 Z 0 i 75A-160 m Q n > W E Y "O Ja C C aJ v L L 0a � t Y Q to i O W > O L O Y Qj O Q aJ C L a L ry Qj 0 O H Q 0 'Y > O v -0O m —' v T -0a L a -Q m m m as L C N O m w w G O to al a j c aJ a O m E U aj a u 'i a U N CL aJ Q O L L i (U N 47, 'i _ to OQj N O m jJ'p O C_ VI VI C C Y V s aJ O Y C O O O a VI > 0a "0 O L a O O O i aaj a •txo O co W Ln p >aJ OK O m "OO I'r rl O m fl C O C C m o J( lf a v'WO aCJ 'C �O vi m, w O w O L C QJ O ry al i Y O , N O C O O O c a` L aJ a` o '" Oo 'O VI -O = O �° VM CL Y 0 VI (J �" Y Q Q Q Q V G VI �_ al Y aJO Vcc1 ry bo Q 0) O F+ U aJ O G -O 0a U - L 00 �--I vJ vJ a1 K Q 2 O .--I O C= aJ i O E L > CL L E O ) N O aJ l7 N Y Jn IU v • • • • • • E m N p O p (v m m = m O a) w w vLi c m c H c 13, x w �o CL LP � a a Y C a m — u a 3 o £ m � a ^ as v v a 0) aL+ Q. aJ aJ H aJ u G m O. i aJ p m a+ aJ CL C Q N ` G p IA bbCL Y a O C :0 .0 Y al 0a fO �' G fa Y �•• 0 Y A aJ C UQ al aJ 0a _H VI 'a '6 iJ Y aJ ca M' G C N w�n LL C f- W O w J (7 Z LL 0 H .—I .—I 5w. 75A-161 O v > > Y ar LJ V C�C C � C � O C � O Y Y a Y _ vi M C C Z Y N N O tl0 to O L `1 L al 5 n L d 75 h p m s w u O L v O u tla v S Y C T C O aJ E C to OQj O aJ L O '� O C N O i O � Q O O Q C C N Y �/1 > 0 Q w Q "O W iJ aJ U aJ W it in aQj "O -O o '" c " c° +L+ Qj O N aj Y aJ 0 a C L -0a C C_ YO N T L N N O Y to E N -Yp •� 0O j to c aJ O m O N E T N O m i m }' tla Y L Y L N C aJvj C aj Y p aJ C aJ Y C N O -O CN (u 1. "O Q"0 O O u "O N O OC t: N > -0w O Yt > j° CNL o ccu o cYY cc ' CL O S O c C_ O > C O w "O C N aJ O c C_ -p _ O -0 -p C_tla C - T p '^ O C_ T i N uYij T O '^ UU L+a+J aJ CL N O O 7 u="O _"Oo WO H -(gypiUQj Q >o _ 2 Qj o O a vOO Z Z a` u x c Q a x H Y �o Ln Q u W S c Q a LP aw N.L - Y -0Y C a � C a > u u y N 3 C O y M 3 -a C O a v 0 CL N v y a E 0 a N v y A m `O aJ E O i N LO L a! E O i L +n r a! C- C u Q 0 N i Q C p R N r aJ p- C u Q N f0 i Q N -_ N •E C Q 7 Q a+ N -_ w C Z m Y N U C G •+n fC6 Y C N V Y N +n E '�' E C a! bL E 4T E C N V N aJ C V `M n1 a! J a a` Q Z lL C W O w J a a` Fja- (7 2 N m i 5w. 75A-162 c O o m O O i Y O m O O m E o E m ° "m' to °p o > O p aJ s Y 0 -p O O Y N >> p M N m Y C O u 0 u C c Q m "O w O c iJ .•• h o m E= .N c .N Q O T O O = O .N O N� Y O O U 00 m aJ i m aJ aJ aJ O �^ O c c pu T -0 MT O .0 aCL p Y c = a = c a` 3 r a N Y v C "O 30 C Y m "O aJ p _ O> Y O p L O c V L U JZ �_' Q Oi Y a U O_ "O aJ E U aJ m e H v 3 c o m aJ w o v_ 3> abb m O Y L r= ac ro t LJ to aJ yT, u m m aJ aJ �n Y Hp O p cr v Y O_ O ,> m = aJ t L O aJ t O Y Qj 3 N N Y aJ m Y a M _ L o U N m a v i d -0 m m (V m U Q T c N p H Q T aJ C aJ Y Qj fl_ "O O 10 O aJ .pp O vj O w Y '� aJ O Q aJ H m Y O > aJ m N C m O m m j aJ 1 4-p p N aJ w u O c O O N s O N O V L aJ 'Y O T O. �n aJ ba C 2' CL O — m aJ O C C O_ U_ p H fl N _ C 3 cLa v > o o�0 3 3 v o (D fl Qj Y O O _ >� m Y m U aJ Y N C .-I p 3 L O * t QJ T L aJ 2 U L V, w O T O N Y W W m N to 'T N W H m W W N aJ �n = f0 2 O O > U O iJ 2 1 10 O p U O m O O \ L u s r u 0 0 0 s s u t m H m H H xCL aJ Y VJ al Y_ CL LP VJ •� •>_ c r c a y- m 3 c O y- m 3 c O a a E r H d a 'iOr v a o E r ar d a m C CL •V •i y m C d •U > C aJ Y L 0 LO a! u aJ E m L G " C a! Y L VJ N V O N .. aJ d C Q m ` d O Y w d C Q a c aJ _ aJ •E Zgx .Y c aJ __ aJ C m Y E '.° Y u as N N 0 C •� Y m E Y oa E m c •� oa v u £ .° E m c 7 N m V�'i w O m m O N 7 aJ m N w O u m LL H W O w J d d H (7 Z LL c h W O w J d V ti i .. 75A-163 AP-50 Geographic Distribution — 91.220(f) Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed HUD resources will be prioritized throughout the City with the primary objective of meeting the needs of low- and moderate -income residents in the City. When evaluating potential projects and programs, the City will ensure that projects are structured to prioritize areas where there is a higher concentration of low- and moderate -income residents. The map below indicates Census block groups in which at least 51% of the residents are low- or moderate -income residents. The City will prioritize funding in these block groups. A detailed description of minority and low-income concentration is provided in the Consolidated Plan in the MA-50 section. 88 99 LLpr Glty of Santa Ana ,0 "a e�uewe u NORTH Figure 12—CDBG Low -Mod Census Block Groups i.04 A4 Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 156 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-164 Geographic Distribution Target Area Percentage of Funds Citywide 100% Table 33 - Geographic Distribution Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically The City of Santa Ana does not use specific target areas to guide the allocation of funding. The City prioritizes funding that meets community needs and complies with HUD regulations/ requirements. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 157 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-165 AP-55 Affordable Housing — 91.220(g) Introduction The Annual Action Plan specifies goals for the number of homeless, non -homeless, and special needs households to be provided affordable housing within the program year. The plan also indicates the number of affordable housing units that will be provided by program type, including rental assistance, production of new units, rehabilitation of existing units, or acquisition of existing units. For the purpose of this section, the term "affordable housing" is defined in the HOME regulations at 24 CFR 92.252 for rental housing and 24 CFR 92.254 for homeownership. The City of Santa Ana does not prioritize specific housing programs for special needs populations but serves these populations through all housing programs. One Year Goals for the Number of Households to be Supported Homeless 80 Non -Homeless 36 Special -Needs Total 106 Table 69 - One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Requirement One Year Goals for the Number of Households Supported Through Rental Assistance The Production of New Units 82 Rehab of Existing Units 31 Acquisition of Existing Units 3 Total 106 Table 70 - One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Type Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 158 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-166 AP-60 Public Housing — 91.220(h) Introduction The Santa Ana Housing Authority administers 1,793 Housing Choice Vouchers and does not own or operate and public housing units. The Santa Ana Housing Authority was consulted duringthis consolidated planning process. It is the intention of the Authority to continue to provide safe, attractive affordable housing to its HCV clients. Actions planned during the next year to address the needs to public housing Not applicable, the City of Santa Ana does not manage public housing developments. Actions to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership SAHA increases resident involvement through resident involvement in presentations at community meetings, online communication, public notices, and public hearings. A broad citizen participation process is maintained with traditional and electronic communication being used to notify the community of ongoing planning efforts. The City of Santa Ana maintains coordination with public agencies, private entities, and community residents through the City of Santa Ana's Neighborhood Initiatives Program (NIP). This assists more than 60 neighborhood associations in Santa Ana by providing a conduit for two-way communication between residents and the City. Grant funding is administered to increase housing availability and accessibility to residents to encourage greater participation in homeownership. If the PHA is designated as troubled, describe the manner in which financial assistance will be provided or other assistance Not applicable. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 159 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-167 AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities — 91.220(i) Introduction The needs of individuals experiencing homelessness and persons with special needs are complex and require a wide range of specialized services. Numerous agencies are typically involved in the care of these individuals, providing distinct services such as housing, mental health counseling, employment training, and case management services. A number of activities and services are funded to help the needs of individuals experiencing homelessness and other special needs populations. Overall, these services address the high priority of reducing homelessness and the threat of becoming homeless, as well as providing necessary supportive services. Describe the jurisdictions one-year goals and actions for reducing and ending homelessness including: Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs Through this Action Plan, the City of Santa Ana will continue to prioritize support and assistance to homeless persons and those at imminent risk of becoming homeless. Through HUD and non -HUD resources, the City will continue to: 1. Prioritize street outreach through Quality of Life Teams 2. Preserve existing and increase the supply of permanent supportive housing 3. Preserve existing and increase the supply of affordable housing 4. Provide housing services and assistance to special needs populations 5. Improve critical services to low-income and special needs populations 6. Coordinate services within the City as well as regionally in collaboration with the Continuum of Care 7. Collaborate with all communities in Orange County to address homelessness with coordinated, regional approaches Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons The County of Orange operates a year-round emergency shelter in the Civic Center of Santa Ana that provides safe sleep and emergency shelter for over 400 individuals each night, and food and supportive services for over 600 individuals on a daily basis. The ESG funded HEART outreach team, City Net and Illumination Foundation organizations provide outreach and engagement services in and around the shelter as well as other locations in the City. The County also runs an emergency cold -weather shelter in Santa Ana during the winter for approximately 200 individuals. In addition to these shelters, the one year actions will address the needs of individuals who are homeless that includes unaccompanied women, victims of domestic violence, chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth. The range of services include emergency shelter, Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 160 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-168 transitional housing and permanent supportive housing. ESG funds will provide assistance for street outreach services, homeless prevention and rapid re -housing. Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again The City supports a number of programs to assist low-income individuals and families to avoid becoming homeless, including Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers. Other support services, such as job and training assistance, food assistance, and counseling are also available to help individuals recover from homelessness and to avoid becoming homeless. The City works closely with the Continuum of Care who provides oversight for the Vulnerability Index - Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI-SPDAT) to prioritize the most vulnerable chronically homeless individuals. Case management services are offered in all programs to help prevent individuals from falling back into homelessness. In addition, the Housing Authority of the City of Santa Ana has recently been awarded VASH project -based vouchers for permanent supportive housing for Veterans experiencing homelessness. These 100 vouchers are in addition to the current Vouchers with two projects already in the pipeline. An RFP will be released shortly for these additional vouchers. Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low- income individuals and families and those who are: being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); or, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs The goals listed above will help these individuals and families to avoid becoming homelessness. The ESG program will fund homelessness prevention programs including utility and security deposit assistance as well as rental assistance. The HEART program, funded by ESG provides bus tickets for individuals interested in returning to their home; often following a release from a correctional facility. Additionally, the Countyof Orange is equipped to serve people discharged from publiclyfunded institutions orsystems of care such as health care facilities or correction programs Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 161 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-169 AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing — 91.220(j) Introduction: The City evaluated barriers and constraints to the development of affordable housing as a critical component of the Housing Element. The California Department of Housing and Community has certified Santa Ana's Housing Element. In addition, the City of Santa Ana is currently updating its Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice to ensure the City is affirmatively furthering fair housing for all residents of Santa Ana. Actions it planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment Santa Ana will continue to actively fund the development and preservation of affordable housing as well as identify opportunities to leverage and utilize additional state, local, or non -governmental funding resources to develop and preserve additional housing throughout the City. Through the City's compliance with AB 1486 (Surplus Lands Act) as well as a constant monitoring of state land made available through Executive Order N-06-19, the City will look to identify potential parcels of underutilized land that can be leveraged for potential affordable housing development. Santa Ana is currently participating in the update to the County's Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice for the period of 2020 - 2024. Through this process, the City has identified a set of city - specific and regional goals and approaches to address barriers to affordable housing and affirmatively furtherfair housing in the City. The City will continue to workto meetingthe goals and objectives setforth in the Analysis of Impediments update. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 162 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-170 AP-85 Other Actions — 91.220(k) Introduction: The City of Santa Ana will undertake a range of activities targeted to address the needs of the City's low - and moderate -income and underserved individuals and households. Underserved individuals includes elderly, persons with a disability, youth, homeless, veterans, victims of domestic violence, and extremely low-income households. The City will continue to prioritize a holistic and targeted approach to address homelessness in the City through dedicated City staff, the continued use of Quality of Life Teams, and a close partnership with local and regional organizations and stakeholders. Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs To effectively address the obstacles to meeting the needs of underserved individuals, the City will work closely with its network of local and regional partners and nonprofits to continually identify the most pressing needs and barriers to effectively delivering public services, housing and other programs. Building off this input, the City will prioritize public and social service programs that most align with the needs of these populations. The City will rely on its partners to assist in communication and messaging to ensure that underserved households are able to access and utilize these programs and services. Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing To foster and maintain affordable housing in the City, Santa Ana will focus on programs and activities that support the development and preservation of affordable housing activities. Wherever possible, the City will work to leverage additional resources (including other federal, state, and local resources) to more effectively and efficiently foster and maintain affordable housing. Activities include: • Construction of new rental and homeownership units • Rehabilitation and/or preservation of existing rental units • Homeowner rehabilitation programs for low- and moderate -income households Actions planned to reduce lead -based paint hazards To address and reduce the problems caused by exposure to lead -based paint, the City has implemented a lad paint hazard identification and notification process as part of its housing programs. This process been designed to comply with HUD's lead -based paint hazard regulations (Title X) which became effective in September 2000 and was implemented in Santa Ana in January 2002. All owner -occupied housing units rehabilitated or constructed priorto 1979 are inspected for lead -based paint hazards. If the inspection finds potential lead -based paint hazards, the subject property is tested — the average cost pertest is $450. The procedures to comply with Title X has added approximately 30 days to the typical housing rehabilitation project. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 163 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-171 Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty -level families The underlying objective of this Consolidated Plan is focused on reducing the number of families and households in poverty and lesseningthe impact of povertyon those households. The City will take a multi- faceted approach to reduce the number of poverty -level families located within the City and improve the quality of life for extremely low-income households in the City. 1. Partner with and leverage local job training programs focused on supporting residents prepare for and access living wage job opportunities. 2. Through the City's housing programs, it will reduce the number of cost burdened households living in the City, allowing them to allocate personal resources to other critical household needs. 3. Public services will be targeted to address critical needs of low-income and vulnerable residents through the provision of programming, transportation, education, childcare and other key needs that are identified by the City and its stakeholders. Services such as these are components to assist individuals to be better suited to secure and retain living wage employment. 4. Homeless assistance, including prevention, will provide critical services to extremely low-income households in need of immediate assistance and support to be better suited and able to take steps to identify sustainable housing and employment options. 5. Improving public facilities eliminates existing facilities and infrastructure that negatively impacts residential neighborhoods. Actions planned to develop institutional structure To continue to develop the institutional structure among the City, nonprofit stakeholders and other local and regional stakeholders, the City will regularly communicate and coordinate program objectives, services and activities with all stakeholders. The City will work to expand the coordination and communication among partners through invitations to participate in the Consolidated and Action Plan process as well as workingto create synergies and partnerships between different service providers during the implementation of programs and activities. Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies Through the ESG program, the City will continue to partner closely with neighboring jurisdictions as well as service and housing providers operating in the City and County. The City will continue to strive to encourage a unified approach to the development and delivery of housing and social service programs to effectively address the needs of homeless and extremely low-income households in the community. In the coming year, the City will continue to build off these successes to integrate additional service and housing providers into this coordinated partnership. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 164 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-172 AP-90 Program Specific Requirements — 91.220(1)(1,2,4) Introduction: In the implementation of programs and activities under the 2020 Annual Action Plan, the City of Santa Ana will follow all HUD regulations concerning the program elements of the CDBG, HOME, and ESG programs. Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(I)(1) Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out. 1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed 2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan 3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements 4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan. 5. The amount of income from float -funded activities Total Program Income Other CDBG Requirements $275,035 $0 $0 1,170,493 $0 $1,445,528 1. The amount of urgent need activities 0 The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that 100% benefit persons of lowand moderate income. Overall Benefit —a consecutive (consecutive period of one, two, or three years maybe used to determine that a minimum period of 3 overall benefit of 70% of CDBG funds is used to benefit persons of low and years) moderate income. Specify the years that include this Action Plan. HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(I)(2) 1. A description of other forms of investment being used beyond those identified in Section 92.205 is as follows: The City of Santa Ana does not use HOME funds in any other manner other than those described in Section 92.205(b). 2. A description of the guidelines that will be used for resale or recapture of HOME funds when used for homebuyer activities as required in 92.254, is as follows: The City incorporates recapture requirement into written agreements and long-term affordability covenants as required by 24 CFR 92.254. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 165 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-173 The recapture provision ensures that all or a portion of the City's HOME assistance to homebuyers or home owners is recaptured if the housing does not continue to bethe principal residence of the family for the duration of the applicable period of affordability. In establishing this provision, the City is subject to the limitation that when the recapture requirement is triggered by a sale (voluntary or involuntary) of the housing unit, and there are no net proceeds or the net proceeds are insufficient to repay the HOME investment due, the City can only recapture a portion of the net proceeds, if any. The net proceeds are the sales price minus superior loan repayment (otherthan HOME funds), capital improvements, and any closing costs. The recapture provisions are based on the period of time that the homebuyer has resided in the property as their primary residence. These provisions comply with HUD's affordability period requirements: Assistance under $15,000: 5-year affordability period Assistance between $15,000 - $40,000: 10-year affordability period Assistance over $40,000: 15-year affordability period In the event of a mortgage default, the City has the right of first refusal before foreclosure and may use additional HOME funds to acquire the housing in order to preserve the housing's affordability. However, notwithstanding a foreclosure situation, the City intends to recapture all or some of its HOME funds invested during or at the end of the established affordability period, if practicable. Recaptured HOME funds consist of loan payments (including interest) and/ora loan payoff, upon sale if the assisted owner is no longer residing in the assisted residence or for any other breaches of the agreement with the City. Recaptured funds may be used for any HOME eligible activity. These recaptured funds are identified in the City's accounting system by a unique recaptured revenue object number. Any recaptured funds will be used by the City before any additional HOME funds. 3. A description of the guidelines for resale or recapture that ensures the affordability of units acquired with HOME funds? See 24 CFR 92.254(a)(4) are as follows: See above. 4. Plans for using HOME funds to refinance existing debt secured by multifamily housing that is rehabilitated with HOME funds along with a description of the refinancing guidelines required that will be used under 24 CFR 92.206(b), are as follows: N/A — the City will not be using HOME funds for this activity. If the City elects to refinance existing debt, it will provide its policies and procedures as part of an amendment to its Action Plan. Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 166 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-174 Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Reference 91.220(1)(4) 1. Include written standards for providing ESG assistance (may include as attachment) ESG funds will be used for eligible activities under five program components: street outreach, emergency shelter, homelessness prevention, rapid re -housing assistance, and Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) costs, as well as allowable administrative costs and activities. ESG applications go through an open and transparent proposal process. The Community Development Agency is responsible for ensuring that the ESG program is implemented in accordance with all Federal rules and regulations. 2. If the Continuum of Care has established centralized or coordinated assessment system that meets HUD requirements, describe that centralized or coordinated assessment system. Orange County, in collaboration with the CoC and other ESG entitlement jurisdictions including the City of Santa Ana will utilize assessment and evaluation instruments developed in consultation with the HIMIS lead agency and previously funded HPRP grantees. The County ensures ongoing coordination of program design and eligibly standards. The City will provide funding for the administration of the HMIS data entry system. 3. Identify the process for making sub -awards and describe how the ESG allocation available to private nonprofit organizations (including community and faith -based organizations). On November 7, 2019, the City of Anaheim released a combined ESG Request for Proposals (RFP) in partnership with the City of Santa Ana and City of Garden Grove to support the Orange County Continuum of Care's goal to end homelessness. This RFP was marketed to nonprofit organizations (including community and faith -based organizations) operating throughout Orange County. To minimize duplication of effort in the application process, Garden Grove accepted applications until December 10, 2019, with supplemental applications and requirements for both Santa Ana and Anaheim. The RFP included four possible one-year renewals. Should the OC Collaborative determine to exercise these annual renewals past the end of FY 20-21, an RFP will not be released. Current subrecipients awarded funding in FY 20-21 will be required to submit a new budget and program summary. New forms and information will be provided by the Collaborative at that time. In addition, the Collaborative reserves the right to redistribute funding and/or issue a new RFP at its discretion 4. If the jurisdiction is unable to meet the homeless participation requirement in 24 CFR 576.405(a), the jurisdiction must specify its plan for reaching out to and consulting with homeless or formerly homeless individuals in considering policies and funding decisions regarding facilities and services funded under ESG. The City consults and works with the County and CoC homeless services staff as well as local homeless service providers, advocacy groups, facilities and other stakeholders in determining its strategic approach, policies and funding decisions. A previously homeless individual participated on the ESG funding review panel. Individuals who were previously homeless provide assistance in outreach and engagement services and provide feedback to Staff. In addition, the CoC's strategy reflects the participation of all 34 cities in Orange County as well as individuals who are homeless or previously homeless, schools, and a host of other organizations and stakeholders. 5. Describe performance standards for evaluating ESG. The City utilizes the HUD Monitoring ESG handbookto monitor each program's performance to ensure Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 167 OMB control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-175 that goals are on track and funds are used for eligible activities. On a quarterly basis, invoices are reviewed to ensure program compliance. In addition, the quarterly financial invoices are monitored by City Accounting staff. On -site monitoring of non-profit organizations is done by staff and by consultants for both program and financial records on an as -needed basis, or at least every three years. The City works closely with the CoC and other ESG jurisdictions in the County to standardize processes and approaches as much as possible. Appendix Consolidated Plan SANTA ANA 168 OMB Control No: 2506-0117(exp. 06/30/2018) 75A-176 Appendix E• Community Engagement Resources and Materials 75A-177 �Rl � �7••: �7'7 — I Attend a Community Meeting The City is preparing the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grants. Residents and stakeholders are invited to attend a Community Meeting and/or complete a brief survey (see QR Code) to provide their opinion about current housing, community, and economic development needs. October 9, 2019;12:00 pm City Council Chamber 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 October 24, 2019; 6:30 pm Willard School Multi -purpose Room 1342 N. Ross Santa Ana, CA 92706 November 9, 2019; 9:30 am Santa Ana Senior Center 424 W. Third Street Santa Ana, CA 92701 November 19, 2019; 6:30 pm Delhi Community Center 505 E. Central Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92707 December 10, 2019;10:00 am City Hall, Ross Annex Room 1600 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Public Hearing: December 18, 2019; 4:30 p.m. City Council Chamber 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Attend a Community Meeting The City is preparing the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grants. Residents and stakeholders are invited to attend a Community Meeting and/or complete a brief survey (see QR Code) to provide their opinion about current housing, community, and economic development needs. October 9, 2019;12:00 pm City Council Chamber 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 October 24, 2019; 6:30 pm Willard School Multi -purpose Room 1342 N. Ross Santa Ana, CA 92706 November 9, 2019; 9:30 am Santa Ana Senior Center 424 W. Third Street Santa Ana, CA 92701 November 19, 2019; 6:30 pm Delhi Community Center 505 E. Central Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92707 December 10, 2019;10:00 am City Hall, Ross Annex Room 1600 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Public Hearing: December 18, 2019; 4:30 p.m. City Council Chamber 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92 Results The City of Santa Ana conducted a survey to obtain input from community residents and stakeholders regarding affordable housing, community development, economic development, and other needs of City residents. This survey informs the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan that will be submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in May 2020. The Consolidated Plan allows Santa Ana to utilize the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) funds, and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Programs to enhance the quality of life for residents. The resident survey consisted of up to 34 questions that asked residents to rate the level of need in the City of Santa Ana for additional or improved facilities, housing, infrastructure, or services, and asked residents to answer questions related to fair housing issues. The survey was published in English and in Spanish using Microsoft Forms. The City received 245 responses, including 241 in English and four in Spanish. The survey results for each question are included below. The responses to open- ended questions were lightly edited for readability, formatting, and removal of duplicate answers such as "none" or "N/A". Unintelligible responses, responses containing personally -identifiable information, and responses containing inappropriate language were removed. City of Santa Ana 1 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-179 Resident Survey Results - Il��u• m a I� �I[ J r r - 1111, IIIIIIUI� F` ltL--f rl! .T }■ �7'SlI11IIIii� .--7.'1LII�.IIL`.�l ,� I�/I AI 1�1 L ! M tM1IIILr1II�lt Ll ltfl�^ n• �I� -'[ift2fiil ihlitURtIa11 _ ^�`- +r�t�. nlli atyivllr,illll • � t'��!r!a .a J Lie Results 1. Please indicate the zip code within which you live or for your business/organization address More Details 70 • 92706 37 6D • 92705 64 so • 92703 29 40 • 92701 51 30 • 92704 43 m ihilli 92707 53 • 92705 64 10 0 2. Which of the following best describes you or your role in the community More Details Homeowner 119 Renter 58 • Business Owner 11 Affordable Housing Developer 1 Nonprofit Organization 17 Advocate 8 120 Chamber of Commerce 1 100 Consultant 0 Contractor/Developer 1 60 Elected Official i Faith -based Organization 0 40 Financial institution 0 2` • Homeless/unhoused 2 0 Landlord/Property Manager 3 Legal services provider/Lawyer 0 Local Government 6 Real Estate Professional 2 Other 15 City of Santa Ana 3 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-181 Resident Survey Results Results 3. Has your organization or local government department ever received or been assisted by grants or loans from the following programs? Please select all that apply More Details Community Development Blo... 11 Emergency Solutions Grant (E... 2 HOME Investment Partnership... 2 • Housing Opportunities for Per... 1 4. Has demand for your agency's services changed over the past 12 months? More Details Increase 19 1 Decrease 0 No change 2 City of Santa Ana M 75A-182 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 5. If increased, which population group are you serving more often? Select all that apply More Details ID chronically homeless persons... 8 Elderly (65t years old) 6 0 Families experiencing homeles... 9 Families with young children (... 9 • LGBTQIA 3 Non -English speakers 10 Persons exiting an institutions... 5 g Persons with HlV/AIDS 1 $ Persons with mental illness 6 6 Persons with mobility disabiliti... 3 5 A 0 Persons with sensory disabilities 2 3 Persons with substance use di... 7 2 0 Recent immigrants 6 ,. p._ Survivors of domestic valence... 5 • Teenagers (needing after-scho... 10 veterans 8 Youth (18 - 25) experiencing In 7 Youth exiting the foster system 3 • Other 4 6, For your agency, what are the main challenges (both internal and external) in providing services to clients? (For example, lack of funding, staff turnover, lack of community partners, etc.) Open -Ended Responses to Question 6: 1. Lack of funding 2. Absolutely lack of funding and having the working capital to accept State and Federal grants that do fund higher amounts. Having 3-4 months of operating expenses to start and waiting for many months to begin to get reimbursed stops many from expanding or even applying. 3. Lack of funding for rental assistance and moving costs, lack of funding for direct service staff members, lack of housing. 4. Lack of funding to offer more services to the youth. 5. Lack of funding for staffing, capacity building and operational expenses. City of Santa Ana 5 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-183 Resident Survey Results Results 6. Funding, employer partners. 7. Lack of sustainable multi -year funding. 8. Lack of funding 9. Funding 10. Lack of resources to refer them out to and lack of affordable housing to find for them. 1 1 . Funding to support and develop youth programs 12. Lack of available land; emphasis on rental instead of ownership 13. Lack of funding, recent public charge ruling, complexities of CalOptima provider networks, access to care 14. Lack of funding creates gaps in services which then increases staff turnover. Our CDBG participants fear providing low income verification status due to being undocumented or feeling that doing so will prevent or interrupt governmental aid. 15.Affordable housing 16.Serving all the Title 1 Schools with our program. 17. Not enough staff for the demand. 18. Lack of funding and access to land for the creation of affordable home ownership 19. Lack of funding, staff turnover, and lack of municipal support 7. Were you consulted during the previous Consolidated Plan cycle in 2015? more Details Yes 0 No a Not sure 13 4L% City of Santa Ana 51 75A-184 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results g. Please select the top five barriers to community Mae Details • Absentee landlords 32 Access for persons with disabi... 19 I• Affordable housing is in poor... 105 • Affordable housing is not in a... 106 Affordable housing is too far f._ 25 Affordable housing is too far f.- 11 Community resistance to new... 40 • Down payments, mortgage fe... 81 Finding available units 65 Housing discrimination 20 Housing maintenance is too e... 19 Immigration status 20 • Individual credit score is too I... 27 • tack of available land to build ... 26 Lack of cash for move -in depo... 84 Lack of on -site services (e.g. c... 21 Lack of public transportation 16 • tack of steady household into... 45 Landlords do not accept 5ecti... 27 Mental health condition 29 Mortgage, taxes and home ins... 64 Prior eviction, criminal record,... 12 • Rents ate too expensive 141 • Substance use disorder/chemi... 29 Utilities are too expensive 29 I• Employment(Unemployment 38 City of Santa Ana .c .c ac K 2 and maintaining I 75A-185 ble and safe housing in our 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results g. Please select the top five barriers to economic development in our community More Deta,ls Access to 4-year cc ege progr... 49 Access to community college... 32 Access tojob skills and retrain... % Access to vocational training a... 69 Banks won't lend to individual... 43 -' Crime, violence and/or gang a... 164 K-12 education 63 Lack of employment opportun... 83 -- Major employer closed down ... 27 Ez New/availablejobs don't pay... 114 6c 4C le No banks or credit unions loc.. 8 Omer structural economic issu... 60 zc 1 1 1 1 Preschool/Early childhood edu... 40 Substance abuse problems 84 Predatory lending 39 Other 36 1 10. Please identify the top five barriers to affordable housing development in our community Affordable Housing Barriers 0% 20% 4G% 60% BC% 101- Community opposition Complexity of funding Cost of development Cost of supportive services a Homebuyers unafforda bility 1 Lack of developable land �.. Lack of development resources L Local land use policies (e.g. zoning] r Renter unaffordability State laws and regulations w IIIIIIIII City of Santa Ana a 1st choice n 2nd choice 3rd choice 04th choice 11115th cl-oicm ■ bth choice 111117th choice ■ 8th choice 09th choice ■last choice F1 75A-186 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 1 1, Of the following groups, please select the top five needing assistance in our community More Deta':1 Chron,ca'. y home.ess persons... 143 Elderly (65+ years old) 101 • Families experiencing homeless... 140 • Families with young Children (... 114 Individuals experiencing home... 70 LGBTQIA persons 20 Non -English speakers 41 persons exiting an institution... 24 Persons with HIV/AIDS 5 Persons with developmental cl... 22 persons with mental illness 84 Persons with mobility disabiliti... 15 Persx rs with sensory disabilities 5 Persons with substance use di... 48 Recent immigrants 33 Survivors of domestic vio.ence... 57 Teeragers(reeding after-scho... 74 Veterars 50 Youth (18 - 25) experiencing h... 79 Youth exiting the foster system 47 Non U.S. Citizens 34 Other 10 City of Santa Ana .K E 75A-187 ■ 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 12. What are the greatest needs for homeowners and prospective homebuyers in our community? Homebuyer Needs 0% 20% 40% 60% 90% IDO% Housing rehabilitation Affordable mortgage and closing cost - assistance Affordable homes for sale - Accessibility improvements for persons with disabilities Foreclosure prevention assistance _ Homebuyer education ■ 1st choice is 2nd choice 3rd choice 0-4th choice 05th choice ■ 6th choice 13. What are the greatest needs for renters in our community? Renter Needs 0:A 2c% 40% e0% 90% 100% Eviction prevention/rental assistance - mergency (short-term) rental assistance Housing rase management assistance Long-term rents l assistance Securitydeposit/utilityassistance tlst choice s2nd choice 3rd choice 04th choice 05th choice City of Santa Ana 10 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75AOO —1 00 Resident Survey Results Results 14. What are the greatest needs for individuals facing homelessness in our community? Homeless Needs 0% 29DA Affordable housing with services for chronically hemeless persons Rental assistance for persons experiencing homelessness Emergency shelters Preventing people from losing their housing Re-entry services and housing for persons exiting an institution ie.g. prison, hospital) 40%% 60% 80% 100% ■lst choice a2nd choice 3rd choice 04thchoice ■5thchoice 15, What types of affordable housing are most needed in our community? Affordable Housing Types (With Services) A 20% 40% 64% SO% 100% Services for families with children _ Services for elderly 155+years oldl Services for people with substance use disorder/chemical dependency Services for people with developmental disabilities Sericesfor peoplewith mental illness Servicesfor peopfewith mobility and ■ sensory disabilities 11111st choice 10 2nd choice 3rd choice ■ 4th choice ■ 5th choice ■ 6th choice City of Santa Ana 75A-189 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 16. What types of affordable housing programs are most needed in our community? Affordable Housing Programs 0% 20% 40% 50% 30% 100% Home buyer assistance (e.g. first-time - homebeyer] Rental assistance le.g. help paying rent) _ Affordable housing preservation - Homeless shelters and transitional housing Housing rehabilitation ■lst choice ■2nd choice 3rd choice 04th Choice w5th ch oice 17. Considering the specific needs listed above, please rank the following categories of housing assistance needs Housing Assistance Needs 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Affordable housing assistance Rental housing and rental assistance Owner -occupied housing and homeownership assistance Homelessnessprevention assistance ■1st choice 2ndchoice ■3rdchoice 11114thchoice City of Santa Ana 12 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-190 Resident Survey Results Results 18. What types of public services are most needed in our community? Public Services 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100`� Family se€vices and youth programs Food/nutrition programs Workforce development — Tenantservices >� 1 Crime prevention �I ■ Domestic violenceservices Graffiti clean-up program Neighborhood clean-up program >• 5eniorservices Substance abuseservices a ■ ■ 1st choice • 2nd choice 3rd choice 04th choice ■ 5th choice ■6thchoice 07thchoice ■Sthchoice ■9thchoice ■Lastchoice 19, What types of economic development programs are most needed in our community? Economic Development Programs 0% 20% 40% 60% 800A 100% Small business lendingand training progra ms Historic preservation Direct economic development a ssistence to for -profit entities Downtown or 'Main Street' revitalization - City of Santa Ana ■ 1st choice 2nd choice ■ 3rd choice ■ 4th choice 13 75A-191 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 20. What types of public infrastructure are most needed in our community? Public Infrastructure 0°! 20% 40%. Park improvements 1 Street lighting RmeilAlley improvements. Sidewalk improvements Demolition and clearance 8roadbandfHigh-speed internet access Disability accessibility Improvements Flood drainage improvements S eV12rsystems Improvements [e.g. pipes) "dater systems improvements (e.g. wells) 50°% 9090 iGe:" ■ 1st choice ■ 2nd choice 3rd choice ■ 4th choice 05th choice 05thchoice ■70hchoice 11118thchoice 1114thciaGice ■Lastchoice 1. What types of public facilities are most needed in our community? Public Facilities 0% 20% 40% 50% 90% ire`.; Childcare centers Libraries a Youth centers Parks Health carefacilities Community facilities (e.g. seniorcituens:.. 1_ Fire protection and emergency response...® Transportatlonfaclllties/terminals a Homeless emergency shelters � � City of Santa Ana ■ 1st choice a 2nd chore 3rd choice 04th choice ■ 5th choice ■ Gth choice ■ 7th choice ■Sth choice ■ Last choice 14 75A-192 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 22. What types of business and job services are most needed in our community? Business Services D•% 20% 40% 6D% 96% _U -. Employment training Soh creationlretention Smallhusiness loans/grants Startup businessassistance _ crnmercialfacadeimprovements - 115tchoice 2ndchcice 11113rdchoice 14thchoice 05thchoice 23. Do you have broadband internet access at home? h4ore De'.alls yes 198 , No 24 City of Santa Ana 15 75A-193 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 24. Considering the specific projects listed above, please rank the following categories of community development needs in our community Community Development Needs 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Affordable housing Economic development Public services Public infrastructure Public facilities ■ 1st choice 2nd choice ■ 3rd choice ■ 4th choice ■5th choice 25. The Emergency Solutions Grants Program (ESG) provides funding from the federal government to address homelessness. What kind of assistance could best help our community reduce homelessness? Homelessness Assistance 0% 20M 40% 60% 613% 100% Homelessnesspredention (e.g. housing assistance for families at risk) Re -housing homeless households Emergency shelters cmeiess Management Information System . -data collection (HMIs) Street outreach City of Santa Ana ■ 1st choice 2nd choice ■ 3rd choice ■ 4th choice ■ 5th choice 16 75A-194 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results zb, The HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) provides funding from the federal government to invest in affordable housing for low income individuals and families. Which of the following HOME -related activities are most needed in our community? HOME -related Activities 0% 20% 40°DA 60% e0% 100% Convert existing buildingsto affordable . - rental housing Construct new affordable rental apartments Provide rental a ssistance to individuals and families Assist first time homebuyers Assist current homeowners with repairs and rehabilitation ■ 1st choice 2nd choice ■ 3rd choice ■ 4th choice ■ 5th choice 27. What is the most important thing the City could do to assist you, your family, or the individuals you serve, to live in a safe and affordable home near good schools and jobs? Open -Ended Responses to Question 27: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. First, the city needs to either build or convert existing buildings into 100% affordable homes for individuals and families. There needs to be a less restrictive measurement tool to determine eligibility for affordable housing. Making sure the non -profits that have funds for affordable housing are following rules and regulations. Enable our first responders to do their jobs and be respected for what they do. Crime prevention, youth programs to give our children hope. Permanent Affordable Housing and transitional shelters focusing on women. Create more affordable housing options in the community or rent to own options for non -citizens given that there is a big immigrants population in Santa Ana Stop crime and fix corruption in the police department. Do something about the homeless problem. Civic center now has fencing all around it so now the homeless are in our neighborhoods and in front of businesses. It is too scary to even go up to the door of a business due to homeless. City of Santa Ana 17 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-195 Resident Survey Results Results E IN7 12 13 14 15 16 17 IN 19 20 21 Help our community with good paying jobs and maintain safe environment for our families. Keep law and order, keep yards clean, and the city clean so that it attracts families and decent citizens. I seldom hear anyone say they want to live in Santa Ana because of the reputation it has. Orange County, Fountain Valley, Tustin, Irvine, are desirable areas to live, we should be as well. I know we have nice areas but very expensive. Orange County, in general, and Santa Ana, in particular, need a much improved public transportation system. Santa Ana is also in dire need of improved K-12 public education, whether from traditional public schools or from public charter schools. The City of Oakland has several initiatives that deal with education including private foundations that fund innovative programs designed to assist under -served students in achieving success while in school and provide college scholarship money to encourage college attendance. Rehouse people experiencing homelessness. Develop affordable housing. Increase park and trees for a walkable community. Protect our parks and public spaces from the homeless and crime (gangs). Improve police response time Find a solution to moving homeless to shelters. Fiduciary, financial fiscal budgeting. Provide financial assistance. More community policing, a coalition to get the drugs and gangs out of Santa Ana. Get the pan handlers, and mentally ill/drug addicts that are homeless in a medical facility for treatment, basic service needs, and shelter. Prevent and catch those committing crimes in Santa Ana. Communicate to the parents in various languages to teach their children to have good values, ethics, morals, courtesy, keep their city clean and be in the know as to what their teenagers/kids are doing at all times. Provide the necessary shelters, food and health facilities along with arrest with high bail for the drug dealers that are servicing the homeless on the streets due to drug addiction. Use money to build libraries, book mobiles, health centers, and provide programs for affordable housing. Address the vacant buildings and lots in our area. It attracts illegal activity and increases crime in the area. Our city parks should also be looked at. Many parks in our community are very run down. Our children play sports in these parks and parents are afraid for their safety. We need better lighting, restroom facilities and all around clean up for our parks. Rent control, affordable housing. Invest in affordable housing solutions that include a broad range of funding such as assistance with security deposits, furnishings, property owner engagement and housing navigation. City of Santa Ana 18 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-196 Resident Survey Results Results 22. Invest in programs and services that ensure youth and young adults as adequately skilled to secure and retain quality jobs that provide a sustainable wage. 23. Find housing and care for our homeless living on the street. Prioritize co-op or individually owned affordable housing (as a means to stabilize housing costs). Continue to work on school quality and higher education access. Maintain infrastructure of our aging city. 24. End homelessness. Reduce crime. Provide help for mentally ill. 25. Free Tax Preparation Service 26. Provide more Permanent Supportive Housing units for the chronically homeless and invest in the mental health and other wraparound supportive services that are needed to keep those individuals stably housed. 27. Increase public safety, reduce crime (violent and non-violent), shut down repeat offending businesses where prostitution, drugs, and fights take place. People and businesses will invest their money where they feel safe and secure. 28. Stop allowing more dispensaries into our city. The voters approved a tax increase - so put that money to use and clean up our homeless population, clean up the messes that are left daily, clean up the graffiti in our neighborhoods and invest in our youth to make a positive change to our city -so many of our teens have access to substances -partner with SAUSD to provide prevention awareness to our children. Create PSAs to post on our billboards about anti -drugs, anti-vaping, etc. With allowing so many dispensaries to invade our city we are sending the message to our residents that it is ok to engage in substance abuse. 29. Improve storm drains. Stop urban flooding in downtown Santa Ana area. 30. Personally, as a renter, I'd eventually like first-time homeowner assistance to buy a home in a safe neighborhood with good school ratings. 31. Provide resources that empower individuals and teach them how to self advocate and self sustain. Reward people who are working hard and need support but can't get ahead. Don't forget about healthcare and education. 32. Cleaner city, junk/debris removal, community policing, make housing more affordable. 33. Ensure the security of all our neighborhoods with increases police presence and improved look of business and residential areas. Additionally, help develop empty lots into thriving business areas, improve the parks (e.g., new grass, plants, workout areas, security), improve uniformity and consistency of business signage, and ensure good traffic flow. City of Santa Ana 19 75A-197 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 34. Converting existing buildings to low-income housing would be the most cost effective for the city. Also, consider more funding for Section 8 housing. 35. Make housing options more affordable for a low income or even middle- class family. Housing is too expensive for families. 36. Reduce and repeal taxes. 37. Make sure the city is clean and keep up with gang prevention. 38. Cleaned streets, clean rail roads, well -kept green spaces, a clean neighborhood generates community pride, which then can lead to more families accessing safe places like parks and bike trails which then reduces stress levels which then impacts the wellbeing of families and individuals which then can reduce or prevent child abuse, domestic violence and other types of trauma. 39. Pay more attention to what the residents needs are before making any new plans. 40. More green space. 41. As a teenager it would really help if we build more parks and skateable elements in this community to use as recreation. 42. The City of Santa Ana can help my family and me by educating my parents about homeowner responsibilities and can add more lights to the streets to make us feel safe. 43. Well personally I think a new park or skate park would help since there are many overweight people. 44. Providing more affordable housing. Not building more housing, but making it affordable for the community to buy and rent apartments and homes. 45. 1 would want more parks 46. Create affordable homes for those who can pay rent. 47. Create more senior and affordable housing in safe areas 48. Stop crime and gang activities. 49. 1) Please get the drug addicts and the mentally ill housed, and not sleeping in local doorways, roaming the streets tweaking and breaking windows. My Lacy neighborhood was much safer in 2014 when I moved here. 2) Make the planning and permit system less arbitrary, nightmarish and time-consuming. 50. Clean up sidewalks and streets. More street lighting. More teachers, counselors, extracurricular activities for youth. More affordable rent for individuals from Santa Ana. Support for homeowners from Santa Ana. There should be some sort of program that provides housing assistance for individuals who live and work in Santa Ana. 51. More affordable housing. As a new millennial, there is no place for us to live. Apartments are expensive. People are moving out of the county. We need to be able to provide jobs to young people, youth spend a lot of City of Santa Ana 20 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-198 Resident Survey Results Results money and it would stay in our community. If people see futures here it would make our community thrive. 52. Safer environment 53. Improve public transportation 54. Move existing police forces out in public view for at least 6 hours of their daily shifts. 55. We need quicker service from the police department on non -emergency calls. Sometimes we wait hours or no officer shows up. An increase in code enforcement inspectors would enhance the neighborhoods as they would be able to quickly address the complaint. There would be less "blight" if we had more inspectors. On -going "customer service" training for SAPID and code enforcement to enhance the relationship between city and the community. 56. Daily parking enforcement and police enforcement to help manage parking issues that led to road rage and city code violators. Police enforcement to combat loitering of homeless and drug use. A better reporting system for homes that we know are being used as drug homes and bringing the crime to the neighborhood. 57. Affordable housing 58. Safety is a big concern. Many people steal packages in front of the doors and they are doing this as a job. Because, same people keep stealing packages. Also, at the night, some people are checking car doors and if it's open, they steal everything in car. They do this every night as a job too. If your car's door is open a night, next morning you see that everything is gone. One incident might be small crime but people are doing this regularly, we should take caution. The city put more cameras in the street and help officers to find criminals. 59. Fix the streets and put more police in my area. I'm on the border of Costa Mesa / Santa Ana and there is ZERO police presence. Streets are in need of serious repair. Do something about the hit and runs. I get notices constantly about hit and runs. Why can't we find those people? Put cameras at crosswalks? 60. Let the police do their job to fight crime and drug use in our city. Criminalk need to be put in jail and kept there. Get rid of the mentally ill/drug addicted homeless people plaguing our city. Our city is not safe with these people so densely populated in our area. Just because we live in a more affordable part of Orange County does not mean we deserve to see, live and interact with these potentially dangerous people on a daily basis. These people are negatively impacting our community and businesses. 61. Stop spending all our money on raises for police. Start spending on teachers and schools and better infrastructure. 62. Increased police presence City of Santa Ana 21 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-199 Resident Survey Results Results 63. Improve infrastructure and lighting 64. Enforce the anti -camping rules, and change legislation so that homeless individuals, including those with mental illness or chemical dependency, can only be given two choices: 1) go to a shelter appropriate for their situation, or 2) go to jail. 65. Get rid of the homeless people 66. Get a hold of crime. It will be the number one reason I'll move to another city 67. The most important thing the city can do is to help the homeless in this community. Most of our problems stem from this. 68. Firstly, the parking situation in high density housing is bad and almost non- existent. Secondly, the city needs to paint curbs at fire hydrants and crosswalks to aid in better parking and public safety." 69. Have police patrol more often/ reduce crime 70. Have stronger business backgrounds for city government employees. 71. Provide better education with higher standards with quality teachers more after school programs including city sports for male and female. Reduce crime. Reduce gangs with more visible police. 72. Have other cities share their space. Too many people in the 28 Square miles of city of Santa Ana. 73. Remove sanctuary status and keep criminals in jail for more than three misdemeanor crimes. 74. Decrease the property taxes, these are by far the highest expense in my household and I spend nearly all of my income to pay these taxes. 75. The City could re -pave the badly damaged street at Alton and Bristol going toward Bear street. The worst nightmare of a street for the past 30 years, it has never been fixed. I have lived in the Republic tract of homes since 1985 and it has been patched and re patched and is still undriveable. We have new 9.25% taxes and still the bad streets in and around South Santa Ana. 76. Think about what we can do to help people as a community. 77. Improve schools, poor schools are the main reason we are looking at moving out of Santa Ana. 78. Keep parks clean and safe. More family friendly city sponsored events 79. Enforce trespassing laws and be tough on crime. Hundreds of transients/homeless are trespassing and squatting along the railroad tracks, doing drugs, and committing crimes. 80. Congestion Management. Currently most of Santa Ana's poverty-stricken neighborhoods are forced to live close together in homes/apartments. I know that it is common for a 3-bedroom single family home to house 2+ families at once. Having multiple families in small spaces creates tension in neighborhoods. Some of the obvious tensions are parking issues --where apartment residents park in residential neighborhoods to the dismay of City of Santa Ana 22 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-200 Resident Survey Results Results 81 82 83 84 85 m :: 1 92 93 94 95 homeowners there. The City needs a way to house the growing families in the city (high-rise apartments) and a way to transport all the adults to and from work safely and efficiently (better bus system/light rail?). We need more space in the City and if we cannot build out we must build up. increase the availability of affordable housing, food security programs, affordable childcare assistance, stop racist zoning policies. The most important thing is to prevent gang crimes and drug trafficking in order to keep our community safe. And the way the City could assist is with assistance in housing. That the children and youth of Santa Ana are safe, educated and given the proper skills and encouragement to prosper in the working world. I believe that is very important to improve crime prevention and gang activity. Don't build homeless shelters. The majority of homeless people are perfectly ok living on the streets. FIX the local parks. Invest in our future which is the children, make more youth sports available and affordable. Give the youth a safe place to practice. Madison park is terrible with all the hypes. Memorial park is the same. I can't think of any park where homelessness and drug use is not present. How is that supposed to help kids out? Root out the gangs, the drug dealers, the bad people and provide them with ways to be good people. Apportion a set percentage of units in every apartment community for homeless people. Improve transportation within the city. For example in DC, there is a bus that comes every 20 minutes to transport locals and visitors around the downtown area. This will reduce smog, reduce traffic, save money on gas and cars, and increase happiness of residents. Make the schools not terrible Affordable housing and resources for youth. Help with lower interests on repairs and maintenance loan assistance requirements. Spend the money budgeted for these services instead of "saving" and stashing in the rainy -day fund halfway through the fiscal year. This is not fiscally responsible for any city to save funds that are earmarked for public services and development. Stop the density in Santa Ana. Take care of the Santa Ana residents that have been here for decades. Tackle the parking and the lack of affordable homes. Drug rehab programs and services for persons with mental illness so that I feel safe taking my kids to the park a block from our house. Currently, there are regularly homeless bathing in the restrooms, drug users strung out all over the park, and used needles in the playground sand. City of Santa Ana 23 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-201 Resident Survey Results Results 96. Gang clean up and mental ill, drug addicts on the streets. It is scary to go outside my home. It is not safe on these streets. 97. Decrease crime and provide assistance to medium income families not just low income. 98. Provide funding to repair my home and to add a bedroom and bathroom. 99. Re -zone to allow for high density housing next to areas that are traditionally occupied by single family residential. Provide education to NIMBY's so they know what parking is required and how office buildings are not as in demand as housing and how residential actually has less impact on traffic than office space. 100. Invest in rehabilitating run down homes and get rid of properties managed by slum lords who do the minimal to their properties because the rents are low. 101. Reasonable affordable homes to purchase, reasonable rent. 102. Better parking and enforce single family homes. No room for rent properties, make apartments provide more parking for tenants so they don't park in single family neighborhoods. 103. Increase affordable housing. 104. I am retired and live in the Tustin school district. I own a modest home in Monterey Villas. The most important thing the city can do is address the homeless problem. A well-rounded approach: Shelters; Transitional homes; Low coast housing; Mental health services; and yes Law Enforcement when needed. 105. Rent control by new Law. 106. Fight crime. 107. Support with affordable housing and or rental assistance. After the ICE raids that happened back in July, my mother and 5 siblings lost their dad. They have been struggling with making their monthly rent payments on their own. We have been trying to find support programs in the community, but almost everything is closed or unable. It's been hard to have a sustainable livelihood for both my own family and my mom and siblings. 108. Reduce over -crowding. Reduce illegal immigration. Revitalize bad neighborhoods. Help foster people and programs that create opportunity. 109. Reduce corruption. We need to end overcrowding apartments, we need to assist young adolescents to get out of substance abuse, we need to put tougher fines on people doing graffiti. We need to stop corrupt people selling people's identity for years and the police have not done anything about it. We need to provide assistance programs for new homeowners and have all of our city look like north of 1 7th street. 110. Provide more after school services and programs for children of working parents. Make it easier on the parents who pay taxes and don't qualify for City of Santa Ana 24 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-202 Resident Survey Results Results anything. It will allow the children of working parents to have something to do while the parents are at work. 1 1 1. Get the homeless into permanent supportive housing and off the streets 112. Keeping homeless individuals off our parks, sidewalks, train tracks, etc. Children or adults can no longer walk around and feel safe. Individuals waiting to take a bus to work, school, etc. have to stand up and wait because the bus benches have been taken over by homeless individuals. 113. Better police coverage 114. Crime prevention 115. Housing first homebuyers down payment 116. Housing 1 1 7. Fix up our median and plant trees which we have not done in 6 years 118. Crime prevention 119. Use federal housing programs to construct affordable workforce home ownership. Rental assistance is a band -aid and will not have any long term success if people cannot own a stable homes. 120. Make affordable housing more readily available and build more public spaces for the community to use. 121. My personal situation and those that I know and have heard from around me consists of "making too much money" to qualify to certain programs but not having enough to afford something decent for my mom and I. She isn't quite a senior yet but she is currently couch surfing because she doesn't have much income coming in from her SSI (has loans to pay off) and I can't afford a place to move in with her. 122. Provide homeownership assistance. Preventing displacement from new construction and providing new street parking enforcement. 123. Find a solution for the homeless problem. 124. Improve our school districts from scores of 1-3's and give us some decent and safe parks. I come from Culver City and the lack of these types of services for one of the biggest cities in OC with now the highest sales tax is disappointing. 125. Homelessness has increased because of lack of affordable housing as well as drug abuse. Have more law enforcement to be present on street being faster to reply to calls of crime, theft, homelessness. Things get stolen here and we could get faster help and prevention. 126. Aser mas apartamentos cercas 127. Arreglar las Bias de tren por la macfadden 128. Enforcement of the laws. 129. We need to educate our youth about personal finance so they can manage their money and invest. I believe that by lowering the rent in homes, our community will reduce the stress that surfaces when bills are due. By providing free transportation to children K-12, we will be able to minimize the traffic we experience on a daily basis. City of Santa Ana 25 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-203 Resident Survey Results Results 130. Santa Ana can be a pioneer in providing affordable housing for single parents, but also a rent control ordinance so residents can be in their homes. please think of our extremely low income families. 131. 1 think the city should give permits to homeowners for them to be allowed to park. My parents are homeowners and I live with them. I park my car on the sidewalk and many people that live in the apartments come park their car in front of my house. They park their car and get picked up in another car. I have tried to get a permit for my street and my street doesn't qualify. This is frustrating because I go to work, school and I'm not home till 10/1 1 pm and I have to look for parking at night. The parking issue needs to get fixed. I don't believe that a street should qualify under what the cities standards are for it. If we want to be able to get a permit just to have a space to park we should be able to. As well, I think streets in Santa Ana should get fixed. I have seen change, but some streets that are really bad aren't even being worked on. 132. Build or improve affordable Housing. Offer or add more local Public transportation. Build bigger Shelters facilities for Homeless people and offer them Training for jobs to be able to reinsert them back to society. 133. Safety and economic development 134. Clear out Homelessness near residential areas. Don't allow lunch trucks near residential areas. Help clean the neighborhoods. 135. Strong analysis of capabilities and commitment of housing developers. Strong oversight of management entities actions to maintain rental properties, such as strong code enforcement. Large well -trained homeowners and renters rights board to prevent homelessness. Neighborhood Libraries. Job retraining programs. 136. Help people like my wife and I be able to have our own home, rental or owning. 137. Inexpensive transportation. Cheaper marketing rates. More community watch. Better pays& schedule. 138. invest in youth, reduce police funding and divert it to youth and community services. update low income housing requirements to actual salaries that reflects reality of residents, 139. invest in youth, reduce police funding and divert it to youth and community services. update low income housing requirements to actual salaries that reflects reality of residents, 140. We often throw our money to address issues right away instead of taking time to tackle the root causes of those issues. When I think of the top issues affecting Santa Ana right now, I think about lack of affordable housing, crime/gangs, and small businesses. I think the most important thing is to work with existing non profits/community groups, current Small business owners, and our youth to move forward with improvements. Looking inwards at our beautiful community to find the solutions, not hiring outside City of Santa Ana 26 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-204 Resident Survey Results Results developers to come in. How do we do this? invest in the schools, connect SAUSD & GGUSD students with community centers, by doing so, they will be proud of where they grew up and hopefully invest in an education locally or come back to work in Santa Ana. invest in job training, like my parents, they do not speak English or have a college degree. The jobs they can acquire are so limited. They often have to take low-level jobs in neighboring cities to make ends meet. invest in small businesses. It's hard to have pride in Santa Ana when all you see are large corporations/outside developers. I'd enjoy spending my money in Santa Ana supporting small businesses. everywhere you look you see fast food and large chain developers. I would love to see more small businesses thrive. 141. Reuse of abandoned buildings 142. Fix your homeless problem. I understand most of them have Mental issues but that does not discard them from threatening me or verbally abuse me. I dislike that this has traumatized me and I bet others have suffered some type of attack of a homeless person. Forget about me I would hate to see this happen to a younger one or a female. What happens if the person doesn't speak Spanish and something even worse happens. 143. Listen to the communities, (with large grains of salt), trust your people do things right, patience, a grand plan that touches all, from the homeless junkie to the CEO of the largest developer and everyone in between. Get the City excited, use the power of team work and passion to see thru the challenges, and to bring as many people on board as possible. And most importantly, any NIMBYs have to be listened to, and addressed, and be a part of the solution; they can have some but not all, because we *all* have to make sacrifices for things to change and get better- fast change is overwhelming but slow progress is heartening. Santa Ana may not be perfect, but it's better than it's been in decades. 144. Rent Control 145. Provide safe affordable transportation infrastructure (i.e., on -street bicycle lanes and improvements to traffic signal operations to assure safe passage of slower moving bicycles and pedestrians). 146. Clean the homeless encampments especially close to the schools. 147. Police our community for safety. 148. More disabled -friendly buildings (apartments, sidewalks, elevators), more - way more affordable housing & more street lights throughout the neighborhoods. 149. Get Homeless and drugs off the street 150. Strong code enforcement including a parking program. The City is overpopulated and has too many cars on streets. Quality of life issues. 151. Preserve the neighborhoods we have, manage the density and provide more open space. City of Santa Ana 27 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-205 Resident Survey Results Results 152. Stop giving away the extra parcels of land to developers and instead use that land for affordable housing locations. 153. Treat housing as the human right that it is, and take it as a moral imperative to ensure that people can obtain and maintain stable housing. 154. Stop gang activity. And do what Irvine and Tustin do. 155. Provide a safe and clean community. 156. Increase police patrol in all areas. 157. Hire workers to clean the neighborhood. 40 hours a week. To maintain the city clean. Reach out to programs to help and volunteer for maintaining our streets clean. 158. Empower local residents to work together in design groups to make the improvements needed within their neighborhoods everything from designing how street repairs should be done to lighting and other improvements. Listen to residents. Be accountable to action by setting benchmarks, goals, and language that the city has already adopted relating to livability, sustainability, youth engagement and other pressing concerns, including justice, equity, and diversity. 159. Don't let zoning changes get rid of/ruin single family home neighborhoods 160. Find a way to get the drug addicts and alcoholics that are everywhere here in Santa Ana, out of the public way, offer rehab or issue legal citations and such to those who defy the laws 161. Solve and/or be PROACTIVE with the homelessness problems. Affordable housing. City of Santa Ana NEEDS to work with Pacific Railroad to PREVENT the "villages" of drug addicts and thieves living on the railroad tracks. Those people lurk in to our neighborhoods at night to steal and it's a very scary place at night. 162. 1 believe the city needs to invest more in the youth, provide free/affordable recreational activities for children and youth. The city needs to create more green -open spaces for families to spend quality time. Also, the businesses should reflect the residents of this city, not outsiders coming in, with no history of Santa Ana. So many families have very few spaces to go shopping, spend a day walking around, and spending time with their families. More money would come into the city if our businesses were inclusive and were for our community by the community. We are missing out on so much potential and talent in the city. 163. partnership with local non -profits that support families in our community. 164. Affordable family homes 165. Better manage the upkeep of our streets, parks and other infrastructure. 166. Provide more opportunities for affordable housing and more programs for first time buyers, to current Santa Ana residents and Santa Ana school district graduates. City of Santa Ana K1 75A-206 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 167. Clean up the homeless situation, invest in our youth, increase crime prevention efforts. 168. The primary issues affecting our community is substance abuse and drug addiction. 169. Improve lighting at park to prevent homeless hanging out during the day 170. Keep us informed and listen to everyone. 171. Focus on programs for youth - everything from sports programs to keep them busy, to life skills courses for high schoolers, foster kids in transition, new immigrants. Create beds for homeless citizens, and programs to transition them to long-term housing. Provide housing programs for the mentally ill and addicted that include therapy and support for their issues. Provide community outreach or volunteer opportunities that connect residents with the homeless in the community in order to humanize the situation. 172. Public transportation 173. The most important thing that the city can do to assist my family is more police patrol. 174. Make housing affordable 175. Public help services 176. 1 think what the city could do to assist the individuals I serve or my family to live in a safe and affordable home near good schools and jobs is to make sure that the graffiti is being cleaned up and law enforcement interacting with the community. 177. Make the streets look like Irvine. Clean and well paved please 178. One important thing the City could do is by helping in cleaning up graffiti, mainly because gangs are the ones who write the graffiti and it causes people to be scared 179. We having parking problems at my street when my family come to visit us there too many apartments around our home, they park on our streets. 180. Making housing affordable 181. Streetlights, cheaper housing. 182. Provide services for the transients and homeless people with mental health services and care would assist my family to live in a safe city. Thank you. 183. 1 want to be able to say that I live in Santa Ana with pride. Unfortunately that's not the case. I was born and raised in the city of Santa Ana. I pursued an education and currently hold a Master's degree to better my life and my family. One of my goals was to live and work in Santa Ana and help rebuild it. I attained a job as a teacher and purchased my home here; however, the more I see the more I want to leave. I wanted to improve my home and make it beautiful to not only enhance my life but also my community, yet it seems that I am working against the current. Police officers don't come out and acknowledge complaints and City of Santa Ana 29 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-207 Resident Survey Results Results constantly say they have better things to do. And now the homeless shelter is coming near my home which will make it a homeless destination. I fear for the safety of my children since this will bring people who are either ex convicts or mentally ill. This was the coup de gras for me. I will not tolerate bringing up my kids around this. If the city wants to keep residents that are hard-working and dedicated to their homes they should give them priority and not of those of ill repute which most commonly are homeless. The infrastructure of the city is an embarrassment. I can't believe there's not even proper sidewalks near schools were students are forced to walk on the street in this day and age. Even more disheartening is the fact that it is extremely populated and the city Council continues to encourage further housing developments that will absolutely constrict flow in all respects. This has been done without first addressing the current problems of infrastructure. 184. Police response time improved 185. Building more affordable and middle -income housing, including apartments, condos, townhomes, and fourplexes. 186. Keep it in Santa Ana. Graduated with a masters degree ready to implement good work but unable to be fully independent as I'm still living with parents. It has raised concern that a large number of residents (millennials) cannot afford to live on their own and live in a up to code residence. 187. For my family and community it's the graffiti, gang members and homeless. 188. Resolve homelessness, reduce the amount of people living in homes to solve parking issues, enforce laws, focus in our youth to prevent gangs, drugs, homeless 189. Have money available. 190. Rent control & affordable housing 191. Fix the homelessness problem. 192. The city needs improvement on providing services for the underserved youth, whom grow up with very little opportunities, and find violence and street crime as an alternative. 193. Make the area nicer and provide shelters to the homeless. 194. Help current homeowners remodel and keep their homes 195. Property taxes to go down. Mortgage payments are too expensive for area we live in. 196. Population control. Need a better way to really count on the number of people who live in the city. It will help better understand the improvements needed whether it's for housing, parking, and/or traffic. 197. Listen to the public. 198. Toughest crime laws, too much assaults and crimes with guns. City of Santa Ana 30 75A-208 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 199. Crime prevention. Reduce the amount of people allowed to live in a single house. 200. Take care of the homeless issue in Santa Ana. It stems from lack of education, lack of good parenting, low self-esteem, low ambition, low self was worth, low wages, lack of affordable housing, lack of job career training, and drug abuse. 201. Financial help. 202. Ayuda financiera 28. If the above questions did not mention a community facility or service that you believe should be discussed, please enter your suggestion below Open -Ended Responses to Question 28: 1. We need to change the way we reach families with children ages 0-to-5. By addressing their childcare, healthcare, and educational needs, we can help transform the lives of these children early on. This prevention measure can help us ensure that children are equipped with the tools to thrive at a young age, and therefore change the trajectory of their lives. This is an approach that can help prevent homelessness and achieve economic and academic opportunities in the long term. 2. What happened with the redevelopment loans and properties of the city why aren't they listed on the 5-year plan. 3. access and support for faith -based programs and houses of worship 4. Permanent Affordable Housing and transitional shelters focusing on women. 5. Change prop 47, 57, and 109 that is one reason we had crooks running all around our city. Committing a lot of crimes that don't get reported. 6. This city needs more senior & community centers, the ones we have are in bad condition. We need another large library and bookmobiles. 7. Upgrade your network infrastructure and cybersecurity to protect it from being held ransom and shutting down the city. Where will all of the retiring baby boomers afford to live in this city? One old 55+ community is not enough. When will the AMG 2222 E. First Street Apartments be completed? 8. Sexual Abuse Survivors 9. It would be good to include these topics in the different community events by providing flyers to the residents, making videos that touch on these topics and send out periodically, partner with the schools and the City of Santa Ana 31 75A-209 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results police dept to help inform. This can be done at the parks, community centers, libraries and by utilizing social media too. 10. See my comments above regarding arresting the drug dealers and providing temporary housing, food and health facilities. Also, the City should be cooperating with ICE to remove illegals and in particular regard deport those who are criminals. 11. With a population of over 330,000 one main library and a 2nd location on Newhope is not sufficient to serve the people of Santa Ana. We need to have a library in every Ward of the city, and we need to bring Book Mobiles back and working with the SAUSD. Additionally, we need to stop selling our precious land to developers and reserve some of that land for open space parks. We need to plan to have parks in the future. 12. Public parks need to be assessed. Recreational leagues are struggling in keeping families involved in extracurricular activities because of fear of safety. Residents are choosing to venture to outside cities to get their children to participate in activities in a safe environment. 13. Socialized medicine 14. Community health clinic with visiting nurses in each neighborhood. They could connect with frail seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals struggling to care for themselves - those at risk of homelessness. 15. Free Tax Preparation Service 16. Permanent Supportive Housing 17. We really need more libraries, they are knowledge centers and provide safe environment for kids. Provide services for the kids of today who will become adults of tomorrow who will rent, buy, invest in Santa Ana. 18. Stop allowing dispensaries in our city. 19. Improve storm drains. Stop urban flooding in downtown Santa Ana area. According to my colleague who is an I.E. resident, downtown SA is a sandbag city in winter. 20. Homelessness in large is due to drug addiction and mental health illness. Not enough is done to get people clean and off the streets. Housing alone won't solve homelessness. 21. The City should pass a retrofit ordinance similar to that passed by other cities (e.g., L.A., Santa Monica, West Hollywood, etc.) to require earthquake retrofit of buildings vulnerable to collapse in an earthquake (unreinforced masonry, older wood, and older concrete buildings) to protect our community's housing stock and business continuity. 22. 1 felt the survey covered the main issues, housing is just too expensive for low income individuals and families, especially single parent households. 23. Affordable Housing/HUD Community Meetings (access to meetings or IMPORTANT INFORMATION about everyday life in your community. For example information regarding recent crime trend information to keep your family aware and safe, sharing names of companies or programs City of Santa Ana 32 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-21 0 Resident Survey Results Results 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 19YA 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 that can assist with medical care, affordable housing, food needs, school/children activities available, voting on local measures). Transparency and honesty regarding any situations or issues that will directly affect citizens. Ways to learn about local laws or rules or to vote on or pitch ideas for fair new laws. A center for English literacy and basic financial education so our predominantly Hispanic population can become informed investors and participants in the larger culture. Without these two basic tools, the decline will continue. LGBTQ centers and outreach. safe space for youth to be active and healthy like skate parks. More spaces for youths. Youth Centers, keep youth active in the community. Youth facilities affordable housing for seniors I think the CDBG funds should be used to replace the oldest sections of the sewer system, which everyone knows is a disaster waiting to happen. A community facility for youth would be great. There should be more support for children and teenagers. If they are better educated, they would have more opportunities to succeed and support the success of Santa Ana for future generations. Jobs: Santa Ana Youth Program. Mental Health Resource Center for Santa Ana residents. Affordable Housing in Santa Ana. Funding to parks and the library. Reduction of police budget to go to youth services. Community safeness Improve public transportation Develop an award/reward system to get capable citizens from in front of their TV's into helping with the above problems. Train leaders for programs to involve allot more people Libraries and senior centers in 92704. We need to bring back mental institutions. Most of the homeless I see on a daily basis are sick and need to be institutionalized for help. Drug users should also be held accountable and kept in prison for the crimes they commit to support their drug habit. More parking options for areas around high density neighborhoods. Places for homeless people to go during the day. More resources for LGBT+ youth and seniors. Expanded parks and recreation activities in city parks Require all county services regarding homelessness to relocate to county property that is not inside our city limits. Then other cities can not bring their homeless to our city under the guise of utilizing county facilities. Crime prevention crime prevention crime prevention City of Santa Ana 33 75A-211 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 43. 1 have received my ballot for Ward 4 election, but unfortunately we residents are not informed about our Wards and what is going on in them and what issues are being addressed. A quarterly newsletter mailed to the residents would keep us better informed. 44. Improve parks and lighting 45. Focus on keeping the city clean, graffiti removal, trash in the city, parks and public restrooms clean. Neighborhood police response time can be better 46. Increase police force and city code inspectors 47. Improve public transportation, especially the OCTA and train systems. Many OCTA buses are infrequent, departing once an hour, compared with metro cities like San Francisco that have public transportation every 15 minutes. Add to that the fact that most buses are late, and the hour - delay between services makes passengers miss their transfer to other buses, delaying their commute by 1 or 2 hours. This creates a high risk of being late to work or school, making OCTA less popular and people decide to use other services like Uber over OCTA. 48. Modern and clean park rental facilities available for rent. Clean up and demolish unused land and abandoned buildings. 49. More social workers should be placed in existing community facilities to service the youth and families. 50. A family and youth center is needed in the city 51. After school centers/Programs were not mentioned. These programs are essential for every child to stay away from crime and gang violence. Not only that but staff encourage these children to be creative, build character and leave a positive impact in their community. 52. N/A 53. Locker facilities for the homeless to keep their belongings. 54. In order to bring down the rent prices, we need more housing units. The more units we have, the rental price will go down. Lack of good and safe housing is scarce. The only thing available are unsafe and not maintained. 55. More teachers and fewer administrators 56. Fund shelters for the homeless 57. We need open spaces and single-family homes. Stop the density in Santa Ana. 58. Supervisors in the community centers need to be educated on working with the other groups within the community. 59. Encouraging/incentivizing homeowners to maintain their properties well and better advertising for job training/employment services/career betterment programs would be helpful. 60. Institutions for mentally criminally insane. 3 strikes law for mentally insane , homeless. It is just not safe and having to protect residents at Casa Pacific City of Santa Ana 34 75A-212 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 61 2VA 2%] 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 1 .1, has become threatening towards my wellbeing. These people on the streets need to be locked up in a mental institution. We need more local parks for our youth. More affordable athletic programs - no child in Santa Ana should be denied baseball, basketball, football etc. because of their inability to pay Please provide more permanent supportive housing with wrap around services! Parking in single family home Neighborhoods, no vending trucks in residential neighborhoods Better public transportation See item 22 Free trash pickup. There's too much trash on the sidewalk. Promote churches We need services all over the city to help the homeless off the streets and make our city more presentable. Fine and dramatic arts center. Classes for all ages. Establish a fine arts center with lots of affordable classes - for kids and adults - after school and evening classes Cambodian center - needs to help Hispanic community and not clear what they do? Training on how people can avoid drugs etc. include how to climb out of homelessness hate and discrimination prevention Aser algo para retirar los homeless de la comunidad para que alga mas seguridad Nunca resuelven nada Families are being displaced and less number of students are enrolling in our district. Think of our families from a community perspective and think with our privileges. thank you. Public Transportations offering only 1 % of public needs. Homeless living in the public Parks. There's no decent Shelters to treat them like humans - being. Anyone can be homeless overnight doesn't mean should sleep in the street we're in USA the best country in the world we should be the leaders in prosperity if we have been able to feed the hungry overseas we can do it in our local cities we have to manage our funds much better to eliminate the Homeless problems to improve our Public trans. Build more affordable housing. More funds for SAPID to hire more officers Help Santa Ana have safe neighborhoods. Community centers should be facilities that inspire and assist youth and families to find the opportunities that are available in the world Child day care at schools or nearby warehouse jobs the city should focus on sustainability City of Santa Ana 35 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-213 Resident Survey Results Results 83. the city should focus on sustainability 84. More youth centers. Where the students can learn, parents can also feel included. 85. "The biggest issue right now for most is probably the homeless, because they are the most visible sign of 'blight'. The homeless also create chaos and whatnot for businesses and individuals, and the city services/staff. Small, semi -permanent emergency facilities at key points in the city would greatly assist the homeless as well as everyone else. Not so much a place to sleep as a place to shower, clean up, use the facilities (since most businesses won't allow them to). Possibly even small food banks or'take- out' counters. And this last part is going to sound a bit crazy, but for the truly mentally ill, a 'park' that is situated for their illness, in which they cannot move past the park boundaries, but can live as they please, while remaining somewhat safe and away from common people (who ignore them at best anyway). This *has* to be a better solution than letting them run amok and dealing with every situation across the city, as opposed to it being in a centralized park, with all that they would need, including medical services. When the Great Recession hit, many people like my mom were 'shaken out' of the economy like fleas- and if you didn't have the technical chops to survive in what became a very intense employment context, they ended up on the streets- having lived in OC since 1981, I'd never in my life seen so many 40+ (and heartbreakingly, even older) aged people on the streets. If it wasn't for me, my mom would have been one of those people, by virtue of economic factors and her own. Small assistance would help some of these folks. 86. Library services need to be increased 87. Per Safe Mobility Santa Ana report: 'Traffic signals are not preventing pedestrian and bicycle involved collisions at our larger intersections. More than 1 /3 of all collisions occur at traffic signals despite only 9% of the city's intersections being signalized." Fix this problem to encourage affordable transportation (the 2nd largest household expenditure after rent or mortgage payment). 88. "5yr strategic plan and the sunshine ordinance." 89. Housing Assistance 90. Get on the street and see all the people in the street asking for money with a cardboard sign and sleeping in a cardboard house. They need help 91. More park space and community enrichment programs 92. more parks 93. We need book mobiles to fill in the gaps for the lack of libraries in our city. 94. Emphasizing safer, more environmentally friendly forms of transportation lie not cars). Sidewalks that are safe for all (children, disabled, elderly), protected bike lines, low-cost and high -frequency public transportation. City of Santa Ana 36 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-214 Resident Survey Results Results Devoting less public space to cars in general, freeing up space for other community purposes and de -prioritizing those who are wealthy enough to afford cars over those who can't. 95. Incentive the reporting of major crimes by offering financial rewards. That can be funded with funds saved by drug testing welfare participants. 96. Community clean up, street and parkway. Maintenance to create pride in the community. 97. Education for mothers of young children and daycare 98. There needs to be a large community common like a convention center for the city of Santa Ana. A place for community to think together. 99. I'd like to see an arts center with community classes, similar to the Irvine Fine Arts Center 100. Downtown Santa Ana is not working. No matter how many trolleys, street cars the city brings in, it is not functioning. So many of the local families stopped shopping there and it lost it's magic. 101. Diversity and Inclusion programs 102. Address real problems that result in our streets and parks being overrun by homeless vagrants and not fixate on housing capacity. Real problems are drug dependence, mental illness, lifestyle preference (choose to live on street with no responsibility), temporary financial setbacks. [Affordable] housing capacity is far from the (very far from) the real problem. 103. Early childhood education infant and pre-K low income opportunities 104. A guy written up in the La Times (homeless Yale grad) thinks homeless need a place to wash clothes, iron a shirt, make a copy of a resume. It seems like that could happen faster than the establishment of shelters, etc. and fill a critical need. We have a lot of people living in their cars around here, and they deserve some immediate mercy. 105. More benefits for the homeless 106. Renting is two high 107. Train tracks on the streets are danger to the cars because it's not really safe to drive over, most people don't see the tracks and drive too fast or to slow and they might cause accidents 108. Mental health outreach and service for transient and homeless population in the city 109. Having city programs which include opportunities to join girl/boy scouts or sports is in shambles in Santa Ana. I have to drive to Costa Mesa to find those better opportunities for my kids and that's a shame. 110. Madison Park needs a community center. The park needs a lot of work. 1 1 1 . A community center for all ages. 112. Community outreach programs for teens. 113. After -school programs should serve the kids and should pay those who give their time actively teaching or instructing the kids. Principals and the business owners who run these programs shouldn't see profit coming from City of Santa Ana 37 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-215 Resident Survey Results Results these programs and any funds should be invested in the programs/instructors directly. For example, MPNA-GREEN received funding this year but did not help fund their after -school programs by purchasing materials, paying instructors etc. As they directly stated to a parent, they did not care about how many students were in a class, they just needed the class to run so they'd get funding for their business. 114. Mental health and substance abuse programs to help the homeless. 115. Banks are getting out of control. That's why families share a home. After all that then we have issues with the parking. 116. Community housing and job placement are key in lifting the drug addicted homeless. City of Santa Ana WI 75A-216 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 29. What do you consider to be the most effective community development activities in the City during the past 5-10 years? Open -Ended Responses to Question 29: 1. Nothing when rules and regulation aren't being enforced 2. expansion of homeless services 3. Permanent Affordable Housing and transitional shelters focusing on women. 4. The youth and summer programing have been extremely beneficial to the youth in the community. 5. The graffiti removable people 6. Strategic plan the city currently has. 7. Addressing homelessness at the Civic Center. 8. housing for lower income and a veterans housing 9. Youth Programs. 10. Infrastructure -widening Harbor Blvd, replacing old sewers, main water lines. Timing of traffic lights. Using soaker hoses instead of water sprinklers. Safe routes to school. Santa Ana Business Advisory Committee. 11. Social emotional learning & restorative justice 12. Periodic crackdown on gangs and arrests of drug dealers. 13. The annual 5k is about the best thing I've seen the city implement in the past 5 to 10 years. The attempt at bike lanes is nice but not good enough as it's a hodgepodge and doesn't provide a sufficient trail to ride bikes. 14. Fourth street revamp has brought upon new business to the City of Santa Ana. 15. Empowerment Zone 16. Focus on education. Support of Santa Ana's neighborhood groups. 17. Free Tax Preparation Service 18. Homeless services, youth development programs like High School Inc., and financial stability programs like Orange County United Way's SparkPoint OC. 19. City beautification project, public art, public spaces, community events throughout the city and not just in main economic areas. Art has transformed some of the worst neighborhoods in the world whether it be murals or brightly colored homes. Art creates community where there was none before. 20. Cleaning up Bristol street -but the streetcar idea is a waste of money. 21. Youth programs 22. 4th Street Market. 23. The improvement of the downtown area and the areas around the train station. City of Santa Ana 39 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-21 7 Resident Survey Results Results 24. Santa Ana Housing Authority rent assistance thru the Section 8 program. The City of Santa Ana has built some affordable housing units and are planning more near the train station. 25. 1 honestly don't know any community development activities that have taken place in my city in the past 5-10 years. 26. Outside investment for redevelopment and upper middle-class housing units, which brings with it the need for services that produce jobs for the predominantly low -skill worker pool in our community. 27. DTSA improvements. 28. New green spaces for the community to enjoy. 29. reconstruction of the roads and sidewalks. 30. No, I didn't see any improvements. 31. Parks and Proper lighting. 32. parks 33. The Arts District and the downtown restaurant scene are the vibrant center of interest in Santa Ana. (The artist lofts were a great idea, but were too expensive for actual local artists.) 34. Not sure. Please provide options in future surveys. 35. None. Meeting happening without much community involvement. Only when neighborhood association are invited. But there are other Spanish immigrant families that are not included in the process. 36. Safe city 37. Improving roads (adding round-abouts) 38. the move of homeless away from the government buildings. Now develop services and housing for them. 39. Bristol street enhancements 40. To be honest nothing. I have yet to find something useful and safe in my community to use with my kids not even the local park in the neighborhood is safe 41. Arts in the downtown area 42. Cleaning up downtown to help spur new businesses and entertainment for the area. 43. Head start, community groups like Kid Smart, after school programs for kids, LGBT+ Pride, moving homeless out of civic center and building new shelter. 44. Increased police interaction with residents. Crime reduction, including gang suppression. 45. The gentrification of Downtown Santa Ana. The mixed -use multi -story buildings near the train station. Suing other OC cities to build their own homeless facilities. Widening Bristol street and making it more aesthetically pleasing. 46. 1 don't know what they are. I've lived here for two years. 47. "Homeless shelter activities. City SA App. DTSA Arts and food courts" City of Santa Ana 40 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-218 Resident Survey Results Results 48. Have not seen much improvement- our neighborhood still requesting light signal for over 20 years! 49. 1 can't speak to effectiveness because it hasn't been completed yet, but the OC Street Car seems to be a promising improvement to public transportation and traffic decongestion. 50. Santa Ana 5K 51. Economic development and better education. 52. Building Unaffordable housing. 53. We have great community centers 54. Revamping DTSA with bars and restaurants. This brings money in. Effective community development in the city is what brings people in to buy things and does not cost the city as much. We need to improve transportation and parking. 55. Downtown improvements 56. Revitalization of DTSA. Increasing community events around art, culture, and health. Moving the homeless camp out of the civic center and development of new temporary and permanent shelters (still a long way to go). 57. 1 don't think the new development has been effective at all. All the density has compromised the City of Santa Ana. 58. Cleaning up and redeveloping Bristol Street and Santa Ana College. 59. new housing 60. Renovation of Willard Intermediate into track and field and accessible playground for our children 61. Affordable Housing 62. Community activities and Housing assistance for low income families has been a blessing to our family. 63. Downtown improvement 64. You got me with this one. - I have lived in Santa Ana for six years. 65. Street construction 66. Affordable housing units, but people don't hear about them very easily. 67. Bristol street widening. 68. Sports for the youth, after school programs to help young kids stay away from the streets where the gangs will consume them. 69. The Art Walk. Small festivals downtown. 70. 1 can't say that I see any visible results of any City effort at all. Businesses look really run down, streets are full of potholes, etc. any improvements are the result of private effort, not the city. Where is the money going? I don't see it. 71. Parks, recreational centers. 72. Homelessness 73. Lower affordable housing 74. New schools and parks City of Santa Ana 41 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-219 Resident Survey Results Results 75. Finally stand up to the homeless who pooped on our streets etc. and develop a program to help those who really want to be helped 76. affordable housing but we need more! 77. Street improvements and park renovations. 78. Keeping cost of living/rent/mortgages low so people can be a part of the community without worrying about a place to live. Everything else will follow. Also restrict help/housing opportunities from investors so families can get a chance to buy their own home instead of those merely looking to invest. 79. non-profit youth empowerment programs stemming from the Building Healthy Communities funded by the California Endowment fund. 80. New schools? 81. DT Santa Ana improvements 82. Programas de ingles desarollos comunitarios parkes publicos programas de entretenimiento 83. Closes de ingles, de nutricion 84. The 5 year strategic city plan and sunshine ordinance. 85. Not sure what activities the city provides. 86. The 5K and the women march 87. To little comparing to al taxes we pay every year 88. Keep kids and teens in sports and have them participate in after school activities! Don't make it difficult! 89. Neighborhood groups that meet and are more than moderately supported by the City both financially and staffing that assists in their organization that is sustainable. 90. "Be respectful to others. Maintain city clean such as not littering. Drive safely. Mind your own business. Make report of any conducts not prohibited" 91. community garden program 92. community garden program 93. Some of the Santa Ana owned small businesses in downtown / 4th street. I enjoy going there more knowing some of the shops are resident owned (ex. La Vegana Mexicana - my favorite). Use of the myCityApp - the Santa Ana app is so helpful and accessible. I can report any issues I see and there's a quick timely response from gov't about how we are addressing it (ex. graffiti removal). more of this please! More community organizing groups working together (ex. Resilience OC, The Cambodian Family, Latino Health Access, LGBT OC etc.). I enjoy seeing these groups working on issues and engaging with our youth. My family immigrated here from Vietnam and we were section 8 renters, and ultimately bought a home. We've stayed in Santa Ana our whole time in America. I'd say that the homebuyer experience for my parents was not easy, but they did feel that they could navigate gov't processes and go to community City of Santa Ana 42 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-220 Resident Survey Results Results workshops about homebuying. I think we do a good job doing educational outreach to first time homebuyers. 94. Park cleanups 95. None. Every project has had no use. Widening Bristol was a waste of time and money it all bottle necks by In n Out before you get to 17th downtown Santa Ana will always look cruddy and this light rail is going to be a failed project. 96. Housing, housing, housing. Also, business redevelopment areas (although, the traffic snarls, ugh). We could use another college. 97. "Youth Civic Programs. Workforce programs" 98. Class IV bike lanes and safe riding training programs. 99. Provide more childcare for working parents. 100. Parks and Food Banks 101. Homelessness 102. 1 have lived in the city my whole life (40+ years) and the only change I've seen is the downtown development. Nothing else of note. 103. Revitalization of the downtown and Artist Village, it brought income and new residents to the City. It has provided much needed positive press for the City. 104. The creation of BIDs for the Downtown area 105. It's nice (and very overdue) that homelessness is being taken more seriously, although the emphasis needs to be on the larger humane concerns and addressing the root causes of homelessness, rather punitively punishing them, or treating them like a cosmetic problem. 106. Park improvements 107. Santa Ana college offering free tuition to incoming new students. Will help families save money on education. 108. The work on the issue of homelessness has made the largest moves within the city of any other activity, thanks to Judge Carter and local activists and the ACLU and Homelessness Taskforce who really got the ball rolling. 109. 1 don't know - I haven't seen much "community development" recently. A lot of infrastructure needs repair and rehabilitation, there are a lot of rundown apartments that never seem to get improved, etc. 110. Our community needs more access to create their small business or more well -paying jobs IN Santa Ana. 1 1 1 . Homeless assistant program in our city. 112. The restructuring of Downtown Santa Ana. 113. Downtown rehabilitation 114. The main street revitalization has been impressive. 115. Open forum meetings, but need to be held at a time when all can attend. 116. The redevelopment of downtown has probably been the most visible; the community gardens are a great idea, but they need more City of Santa Ana 43 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-221 Resident Survey Results Results investment/structure/programming. Pacific Electric Park and the Roosevelt Walker Center are nice additions. 117. Affordable housing 118. How they have been more helpful with children 119. Affordable housing 120. Rental housing 121. Non -government, Community organized events 122. The most effective community development was street lighting and the streets look a bit more safe because of the many more and new bright lights for when it is night 123. 1 would have to say the bike lanes throughout the city 124. 1 am very happy that downtown Santa Ana is currently going through renovations. The previous shops there were an embarrassment to the city and now things are improving, yet downtown still needs places for entertainment and shopping there are two US standards. 125. New affordable housing 126. The economic revitalization of DTSA has been great but we need to also focus on helping long-time businesses stay in areas that are economically improved. 127. New parks and community center. 128. Adding more funding to libraries and Rec classes. The more we focus in our youth the less we will spend later 129. Job training 130. Community events have been very beneficial to the city. Creating a sense of unity can be very beneficial for lots of communities in Santa Ana. 131. All the improvements made, economic and structural 132. New parks and recreation centers and few marathons and bike walks. 133. Graffiti removal is a huge plus! 134. Downtown revitalization. 135. creating more children and parents programs during and after school. 136. I'm not familiar with the efforts of the City to help the homeless. 30. Do you think there are gaps in the housing, economic development, or community development services offered by the City? If so, what are they? Open -Ended Responses to Question 30: 1. There is so much to be done in each sector. Housing -take the empty parcels in the city and build affordable housing. Economic development - create pathways for those individuals that don't have the right to work status in the United States. They are a large part of the population living in City of Santa Ana 44 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-222 Resident Survey Results Results 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. II IN 9. 10 11 12 13 the city and not enough is being done to help them obtain economic stability through either worker cooperatives, small business models, or other gig economies. Community development services -the City can also help fund childcare centers that are pillars of education for children ages 0-t o-5. Yes, there is gaps because the public has no knowledge of how affordable housing works and how are the rents being calculated Permanent Affordable Housing and transitional shelters focusing on women. The city needs to focus less on the renovations of downtown and more on renovating buildings not in use to make them affordable housing options for chronic homeless people. No, I work a full time and part time job for many, many years sometimes you have to work more than you'd like to keep the mortgage, bills etc. paid. I believe the city does enough. I think the city spends a lot of its budget and other resources on providing emergency services and services for the poor and homeless. I think the city should try to achieve a better balance between these important needs and providing services for those in more affluent neighborhoods, e.g., a senior center that contains activities that better interest middle and high -middle income residents. Yes, there is insufficient supportive housing for chronically homeless households. Most definitely, people that live in SA have to work out of the city, rent is so high that many have to work 2 jobs just to pay the rent. Seniors are being neglected and the city isn't prepared for the silver tsunami. Lack of information. Absolutely, too much effort and assistance to developers and luxury apartments. We need affordable housing. Yes Where to begin? The homeless living on the streets buy their drugs from criminals. Arrest the drug dealers in full cooperation with ICE. The people on the streets have terrible skin and other infections. Some finally get into the hospital and get the mersa, sepsis, infected boils, decayed teeth pulled and other serious diseases taken care of. The homeless need medical care every day on the streets. Reportedly, the homeless can get methadone and alternative meds to heroin, but have to be at a dispensing location at 7 am to 8 am which is not generally possible. Take the methadone to the homeless on the streets. Use medical students or newly licensed medical professionals and give them significant payments against their student loans. Absolutely. City of Santa Ana 45 75A-223 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 14. Finding affordable homes in the City of Santa Ana has been a struggle. Affordable homes are in run down, high crime neighborhoods. Any decent home in a well -established neighborhood is hard to come by and when found get taken quickly or leads to a bidding war. Rental properties in a good community are rare to none. 15. Yes, the government funding is very restrictive. Please allow for more flexibility and less reporting. Trust the organizations that you fund to be good stewards of the money and base funding on overall outcomes. 16. "A dedicated liaison to keep the needs of persons needing county services before the county would help. (The biggest gaps in services are at the county level.). Housing for community college students. More emphasis on science and technology education " 17. Low income housing is run down. Housing upgrades & safety are important. 18. Free Tax Preparation Service 19. Yes. More Permanent Supportive Housing and affordable housing units are needed. More mental health services and providers are needed. 20. Yes. The City often sits as a beacon on a hill. This survey and live community events will hopefully help the City understand what is happening at the ground level. Get out into the community and stay out there whether or not you think it's working. People know you're there even if they don't show. 21. These agencies do not seem to communicate or work with each other that well. Typical large institution problem. 22. Yes, there should be more done to help combat homelessness. 23. Yes 24. Not sure 25. YesH Not enough assistance for documented working families. 26. Yes, there is not enough crime prevention and not enough emergency shelters and management of the homeless in our community. Additionally, we have many empty lots needing development into businesses, but we need more "mom and pop" small businesses to keep and improve the character of our community rather than just big businesses and franchises. 27. We need more landlords that are willing to rent to Section 8 housing recipients. Participants need more time than just one month to find these tenants that are willing to take Section 8 renters. 28. Yes, I feel there is no fighting chance for younger people or lower income/poverty stricken families. The rich stay rich and the poor get poorer and any type of assistance program I've ever personally reached out to even just seeking answers or references/information about anything has always been impossible. Nobody ever wants to even hear the citizens out and allows them to lose their homes and their jobs and their transportation. City of Santa Ana 46 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-224 Resident Survey Results Results 29. There should be more focus on assisting homeowners with the maintenance and renovation of existing owner -occupied residences. If not, we will be likely to sell without renovating, leaving for a new home further inland or AZ or TX. That would leave behind an increased inventory of subpar housing, reduced assessments, and declining property values. 30. more affordable housing is needed 31. Continue on the path you're taking. 32. Yes. Limited mental health services for uninsured or limited insured adults. 33. yes, it mostly has to deal with the cost and affordability. not many residents in the city are able to afford to these services. 34. yes, more spaces for youth such as parks and skate parks that are safe. 35. Yes, housing is not affordable. It is being built but is not in the budget of the local people. 36. Developments don't really address low-income families. 37. lack of senior and affordable housing 38. I'm not sure I know all of that the City offers. 39. Yes! We don't prioritize services for youth, there is no youth budget that provides services to help young people have opportunism to succeed. 40. Yes, affordable housing and assistance is lacking for low income people 41. Housing with the correct services for the residents that obtain the housing, not some general help. 42. There are gaps due to a lack of advertisement of the city services available 43. I think there needs to be more gentrification and cleanup of many of the Santa Ana neighborhoods. If the city could clean up Santa Ana there would be more interest and demand of people moving here which would help current homeowners. Santa Ana is in the center of OC and geographically it is a good area. 44. Housing First solutions for homeless individuals, unregulated rehab houses, nowhere for homeless to go during the day, except libraries. Too many raises for police and unfunded pension liabilities. Not enough music education and community music experiences for people of all ages. 45. The biggest gaps are between the city's quest for higher tax revenues and its inability to budget adequate funds for homelessness, marijuana elimination, public transportation (light rail) between north, central and south Santa Ana, and infrastructure improvements (surface paving, pothole repair, street widening, signal controls, etc.). 46. I receive a quarterly newspaper from Tustin showing the improvements and projects the city is working on. I think Santa Ana should send information to its residents as well. It would be helpful to know what the city is doing without having to go to a website or city meetings. 47. High housing prices City of Santa Ana 47 75A-225 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 48. "Senior services -mainly transportation/ medical or other. City encouragement for continued new business development. Neighborhood police involvement" 49. Yes the "bad" areas are still bad! There is an increase in robbery and misdemeanor crime also high density housing development will increase traffic! 50. Not enough community events and clean, safe public spaces 51. We require more outreach to reduce crime and incentives for developers to invest in the City, which will create more jobs. 52. Yes! Houses are not affordable and are not being sold. Any newly developed homes are sold right away to people that don't even live in the community but just purchase the lots to rent/lease. This is very destructive since actual residents are unable to own property at an affordable price. 53. Build affordable RV parks for the homeless people who have bought old RVs to live in. 54. Not enough staffed shelters for the homeless, our veterans, the elderly, and the mentally ill. 55. Gaps in housing and economic development. New apartments are being built, but the price they are renting is too high for a single working professional. 56. Need more housing units downtown (at least 500 more units) 57. The people that live in Santa Ana and have lived in Santa Ana for decades do not care about economic development, we need affordable places to live and raise families. 58. Yes, there are many low income immigrant families who cannot qualify for any assistance. 59. Yes. Land use zoning is an issue. Planning committee is a joke. They are content with status quo and lack vision and motivation to expand housing and commercial opportunities. 60. We need more single family homes. Stop the density. 61. Lack of communication, sustainability and lack of oversight abatement of laws. 62. Drug rehab services and mental health (for severely mentally ill). 63. housing needs more help. funding, housing available. etc. 64. Yes there are gaps. Not enough affordable housing and not enough support from City staff. I have been waiting over 1 year for paperwork. The city leadership needs to walk the local neighborhoods and take heed at the repairs of existing homes and cracks in our sidewalks and holes in our streets 65. providing of more permanent supportive housing with wrap around services! City of Santa Ana 75A-226 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 66. Yes, there is not enough affordable housing, potential owner trying to get businesses going in Santa Ana cannot because too much red tape. 67. Transitional housing for the homeless. 68. Yes, resources are not made readily available or accessible to the people that need it the most. 69. Yes, illegal immigration sanctuary policies hurts the city. We should help the homeless people on hard times, but not tolerate the criminal homeless (drug addicts and thieves). Porch piracy is out of control. The trash pirates are annoying. 70. Yes I believe we have a huge gap in the economic development within our community. Take for example the homes north of 17th St., the streets, sidewalk and homes are more presentable but as soon as you leave this paradise you enter the sad but true reality of Santa Ana that has been forgotten. Why do the rest of good residents have to suffer of the home the can afford on other sections of the city but have to live next to crime, hearing gun shots at night, seeing the helicopter daily because of a new crime, loud neighbors with no respect for others by having loud music. 71. Lots - based on the choices on some of the questions above, economic development seems to equal a giveaway of taxpayer dollars to private businesses. I do not support that. For housing, the city should start implementing strict rules on rental housing - licensing, upkeep, etc. the condition of rental housing in this city is shameful, and landlords know they can get away with it. The city does not exercise the power it has to effect change. 72. 1 believe the older community centers must be updated. Children, families enjoy the activities offered by most community centers but they lack a lot of things. I live by Memorial Park and our center is not in very good shape. 73. Yes affordable housing 74. Minimum wage earners don't qualify 75. Yes 76. No, the state, county and city have funds for homeless but it never seems to be spend. They sooner pay lawyers to fight the laws rather then helping people 77. Yes i believe so, lack and diversion of funds. 78. Yes, affordable ownership inventory 79. City is no longer affordable to live in. Job that pay well enough to live in the City are far and/or outside of the City. 80. Yes. Mentioned above. 81. YES, SA has built too many luxury apartments in small areas which adds to the severe density of our community. 82. Obviously. Something isn't getting done. A lot of talk but short on action. 83. Central Santa Ana has poor housing standards that are not kept up. 84. Que las rentas sean de bajos recursos City of Santa Ana 49 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-227 Resident Survey Results Results 85. Si , closes de ingles 86. Yes,help current homeowners fix up our homes. 87. I'm sure there are gaps but haven't been able to participate in the services that the city offers. 88. Yes. People want to remain in Santa Ana and city officials and staff are not protecting tenants and residents. 89. Same as above 90. Yes, you have to make minimum wage to get any sort assistance. 91. You assist in the development of housing, but then walk away and do not continue oversight. Small startup business should have support in how to achieve reasonable goals and fee waivers which diminish as goals are achieved. Neighborhood organizations need to have MORE assistance in noticing of meetings in a more timely manner and mailing out agendas at least 7 to 10 days before the meetings. 92. Absolutely. Housing specifically. How can a two, full time income household still not be able to afford to rent a one bedroom house on our own? 93. 1 have yet not found no economic housing that I can afford 94. not much help for renters, protection for renters, consequences for landlords who keep apartments in bad conditions 95. not much help for renters, protection for renters, consequences for landlords who keep apartments in bad conditions 96. HOUSING - my family was ultimately pushed out of Section 8 housing because the rent kept increasing on us year after year. It was hard for us to stay. I can't imagine how this could be for other renters. There needs to be more regulations and help for Section 8 home renters. If they are like my family, they are most likely very low-income. There needs to be more outreach to these families about what their rights are. Not knowing English can be very difficult to navigate and understand what renters' rights are. Please do more outreach in Spanish, Vietnamese, Khmer, Hmong 97. Development - My mom owned a nail salon on Main Street and I was proud to see her try to open a business in Santa Ana, our hometown. She struggled a bit to keep it open because she did not speak enough Spanish to connect with the clientele. I am wondering what are some incentives or things we can do to encourage Santa Ana residents to invest and open up small businesses? Even though my mom sold her shop, I could potentially see her getting support to hire staff who spoke Spanish to make the services more accessible. Can we give incentives to small business owners? Vouchers? loans? 98. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - gap in reentry services for people who are homeless. 99. Community services - need to service all citizens/community members, not just one group City of Santa Ana 50 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-228 Resident Survey Results Results 100. Hm. I'm not sure I'm smart enough to spot these... 101. Yes. Affordable housing and strategic partnerships for youth workforce development. 102. Yes, housing needs a lot more services offered for the homeless population keeps increasing. A lot of people are not staying in shelters due to safety reasons (mainly sanitation). 103. Give to the needy 104. There will always be GAPS. Residents and business owners lack pride of ownership and basic respect for the community. So many poorly maintained properties are a blight. 105. No on housing, the City is just dense. Economic development- City needs to embrace and be supportive of all socioeconomic groups, not just low income and not just Latino. I am Anglo and middle class and I feel very discriminated and left out of the city. 106. yes, of course there are gaps. The down payment assistance program needs to be adjusted and allow for more income per person. 107. A more serious, forward -thinking, and long term approach to the climate crisis. 108. Investigating fraud in the welfare system 109. There are too many people here, too much burden, no availability 110. They should extend the income requirements 111. The rent on apartments are going up every 6 months and it is heavily affecting low income families 112. Yes, there are many gaps one being that the city does not understand what economic development and community development mean. They do not know how to build pipelines and they don't know how to create accountability structures, asset map or connect the dots. Poor communication with the community. They still do all their financing manually. Poor leadership by career politicians rather than folks with a desire to accomplish real change within this radically diverse community of almost 400,000 people. Don't know how to make a plan and keep it! 113. Housing - the City needs to use its authority and power to make landlords maintain rental properties. And educate and support renters when faced with unscrupulous landlords. Community development - more libraries, we need an arts center, more pools and open year round. 114. Yes, no shelters or housing available at an affordable rate for a someone with severe physical disability. 115. Yes. The units go to artists, even if they are outsiders, that is unfair. The units need to go to families who grew up here, or have been living here for years. 116. Yes, there're gaps in affordable housing. City's planners are too interested in their own profits businesses including elected officials. 117. Yes. Housing is outrages, it takes two or more families to pay the rent City of Santa Ana 51 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-229 Resident Survey Results Results 118. Community development should provide a wider range of services to youth, specifically after school programs that can also serve as child care. 119. Yes. It seems like little investment is being made in publicizing events and activities. I often find out about things the day of, and community classes are not well -advertised, which makes them poorly attended, which sends the message that people don't want classes, when the reality is they don't know about them. 120. Identify more locations to build affordable housing 121. Yes because some people really need it and aren't being benefited 122. No there are no gaps 123. Substance abuse 124. I think there are gaps offered by the City for example housing I feel that they don't consider everyone when it comes to housing and the life circumstances they are in. 125. Lack of priorities. The City of Santa Ana is more than just investments in revitalization of downtown. This includes the trolly project which should be scrapped. 126. No, I don't think so 127. Not sure 128. Yes, because there is 129. I'm not sure 130. Why are Santa Ana's notable events and festivals pushed out of the downtown area and relocated next to the bowl on flower? 131. Please refer to the previous statements 132. Yes, we need to provide services teaching our community about financial literacy. 133. Education. Jobs are not paying enough to pay rent. 134. I don't know. 135. No answer 136. I'm not sure I can answer this one, but I do believe housing could be much better. 137. Unsure 138. Yes, need more focus on small businesses developing. 139. Many young people with careers can't afford housing. 140. There must be or we wouldn't be seeing this surge in homelessness in the past 2 years. City of Santa Ana 52 75A-230 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 31. What are the high priority housing, economic development or community development needs for the City in the next 5 years? Why? Open -Ended Responses to Question 31: 1. Why build more affordable housing or any type of housing if it's only helping the people outside of the Santa Ana. 2. homeless prevention and services for the senior homeless community which will triple by 2025 3. Permanent Affordable Housing and transitional shelters focusing on women. 4. Not sure, depends population I would think 5. Better public transportation, better park management, road and traffic management improvements, effectively dealing with the homeless issue by spreading housing and care throughout the county. 6. Supportive housing for chronically homeless households. Homelessness continues to increase in Santa Ana. 7. Affordable housing, manufacturing jobs and on -site labor training incentives. 8. More places to live. 9. Homeless shelters for families and more good paying jobs. We are the 2nd largest populated city in the county with less revenue than Anaheim. Human dignity. It is morally wrong for families or anyone not to have a safe place to live. 10. Real affordable housing, section 8, and rent control. 1 1 . Many are shopping outside Santa Ana because of the unsafe, dirty, and not enough of nice places to shop at. Many shopping plazas and or buildings need to be updated and need better lighting, security, and or better -quality businesses. 12. See above. 13. We need to approve the Toll Brothers build at First American Title. We need to approve the build at the 3rd Street Parking Structure because we need the additional retail and hotel tourism tax. We should be doing everything possible to get the YMCA built up for future use with the local performing arts school and not give it away to Caribou Industries. I really wish Caribou would build something and that the city would stop letting the company tie up all the projects to no avail. 14. "Addressing overcrowding and dealing with homelessness. This leads to the increase in crimes being seen in the city" 15. Vacant lots and buildings need to be addressed. Vacant buildings can be turned into affordable housing units or community centers. City of Santa Ana 53 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-231 Resident Survey Results Results 16. Make it affordable for me to buy a house that is cheaper than my rent, thank you 17. Permanent supportive housing, affordable housing, job training and expansion of employment opportunities. 18. Connect homeless persons with the county for housing and appropriate services. Stabilize housing costs for low income residents. Foster higher paying job growth. 19. Free Tax Preparation Service 20. Housing for the chronic and non -chronic homeless. 21. Do not displace existing residents, whatever programs or policies that need to be implemented to achieve this goal should be made priority. Gentrification is inevitable (given that SA is probably one of the most affordable cities in OC) but it is happening at lighting pace and pushing longtime residents out. Our diverse residents give the city the culture and appeal that people appreciate and want to be a part of. 22. Lower homelessness 23. Improve storm drains. Stop urban flooding in downtown Santa Ana area. 24. Combatting homelessness and creating more affordable housing. 25. Health and wealth education 26. Increased crime prevention, homeless shelters, affordable housing, business development, and earthquake retrofit protection of our existing housing stock and businesses. 27. Homeless shelters with laundry facilities, trash pickup, portable public toilets and showers are needed since we are a sanctuary city. This will serve the homeless as well as people with substance abuse problems, mentally challenged, prison releases and disadvantaged youth within all categories. 28. Clean, safe, AFFORDABLE housing opportunities/units! Community parks or libraries etc. that is comfortable, free, accessible, secure. 29. English literacy. Attract outside investment and redevelopment. Stricter enforcement of gangs and vagrants which are actually connected by human and drug trafficking. It's not a secret. Both groups are unique health and safety hazards which not only endanger simple things like walking through the struggling Main St. district, scaring away businesses (current and potential) from laying down roots, and keeping away affluent customers/diners that USED TO visit from surrounding cities, to the detriment of our local businesses and workers. 30. Affordable housing for the general population, rapid -rehousing for the homeless population with wraparound services, 31. Bring in some boutique hotels downtown. Continue building the arts culture. 32. Addressing homelessness within CalWorks families in the welfare to work program. These families have developed patterns of homelessness and City of Santa Ana 54 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-232 Resident Survey Results Results due to lack or limited income they are unable to afford high rents in the city or find jobs due to their identified crises. 33. have these services be accessible to everyone. 34. No more empty lots. 35. Working on affordable housing for people and making it accessible to those with low income. Community lighting because of how dark it gets during the night and makes people feel unsafe. 36. Affordable housing because there are many people who can't afford to pay rent. 37. affordable housing for seniors 38. "Parking in residential and downtown areas is very difficult, mainly due to overcrowded units. All building of low-income housing should plan for double the usual cars per unit. Also, business permits in mixed -use neighborhoods like mine have not taken the shortage of parking into account." 39. More housing! Demolish unlivable housing. Encourage renters to become homeowners and offer the support to pay their mortgage. Stop pushing out Latinx stores. Give them money to make improvements. They serve the Santa Ana population. 40. Youth jobs so that youth are busy and working and sustain their families and communities. 41. Rezoning and public transportation 42. Programs and services for all levels of homeless to include rehab, education, job training. Look at the programs at the Orange county rescue mission. 43. "Increase the number of police officers, community crime prevention/education, and greater access/visibility (e.g., coffee with a cop) to SAPID, community service agencies (city council members), as well as to SAUSD administrators/school board members. These agencies and the individuals representing them need to hear from the community and see what is going on in the city they serve. When the perceptions of Santa Ana change then we can experience greater growth and development. " 44. There is too much housing in the community causing overcrowding 45. New housing would be good. Because, many job opportunities are exist in Santa Ana but it doesn't have enough houses in the city. 46. Homelessness should be the number 1 priority 47. More crime prevention and moving the homeless along or returning them to the city they came from. More gentrification and cleanup of the city. I think this could entice business to invest and move to Santa Ana which will attract new homebuyers and increase the home values for all. 48. Affordable housing. City of Santa Ana 55 75A-233 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 49. Higher minimum wage, stop people from losing homes, support for foster kids aging out, people returning from prison, and elderly housing. 50. Great need for mixed development of housing, jobs, parks and transportation. Infrastructure improvements are not keeping up with obsolescence. 51. Retain historic nature of neighborhoods, avoid high density apartment development 52. Build more mixed -use buildings in industrial and business zoned areas. Do not allow the development of high-rise living communities in or directly adjacent to single-family neighborhoods. Shut down ALL non -licensed pot shops. Find solutions for the homelessness problem. 53. Stimulate business in the city which will bring jobs. Work on underlying problems of violence, gangs, drug addiction, graffiti, and increase job training and opportunities for youth. Help clean up areas of the city which are degraded and degrade the community. 54. Improve streets and sidewalks for a nicer community 55. "Continue this effort of asking the residents of SA what they want! It's a good start. We need after school day care / child activities -sports so parents can work. SA needs to be business friendly which it isn't. Provide community events for all residents —many are always focused on low income or are in certain areas of SA. We have no real shopping areas -no "Tustin Marketplace" or Gathering locations for concerts etc." 56. City of Santa Ana is out of space to accommodate any more people. 57. Increase policing, less new housing development but improvement in affordable housing/ rental living conditions 58. Decrease property taxes. Provide better homeowner mortgage assistance than loans that require 20% downpayment (often requiring people to carry $100K to $200K of cash in their pockets). 59. Reduce parking as a development issue in neighborhoods. 60. More green open spaces in place of abandoned or unused buildings 61. We need a private -public partnership with developers to create public facilities, public spaces, and jobs for the community. Additionally, we have to be tougher on crime. 62. Build family homes or condominiums for low income or assistance need families that are affordable and actually functional, not dilapidated or unsafe as has been the case for the last decade. 63. The community needs our streets repaired. Our community needs new led lights. Our Alleys are a mess. 64. Homes for everyone who is homeless. 65. We need more affordable housing to reduce rent prices. Economically, the more units we have, the less they will rent for. Creating incentives for landowners to rent low can be a way to help reduce rent prices. 66. More housing of all kinds City of Santa Ana 56 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-234 Resident Survey Results Results 67. Safe apartment structures for families 68. Increasing family housing and establishing long term shelter for homeless. Because what we have isn't enough. 69. Stop the density in Santa Ana without parking all over the city. 70. Smart land development used. Parking. Density. 71. Deal with the homelessness. Get people clean. Encourage employment. So, our city is safe. 72. Affordable Housing for everyone. 73. Affordable housing for all 74. All forms of housing such as market rate high density, perm supportive, and affordable housing. We need more housing in the limited space available. 75. Affordable housing, affordable medical coverage and affordable living. 76. Parking in horrible in the city 77. Affordable apartments and homeless shelters. 78. 1 don't go into "Santa Ana" for fear of crime and the homeless, I live on the Tustin, Santa Ana border. I do all my shopping, recreational spending, and general living in Tustin. Santa Ana needs to make me feel safe, and wanted within its borders. 79. Homeless folks are a problem. There should be more shelters with maybe some kind of bus service, dropping them off in the night, so they feel like they are "going home" after a day of hanging out in public areas. 80. Yes, affordable housing. 81. Instead of trying to control rent and home prices, create training/vocational programs that can help people get higher paying jobs. 82. We need to bring these apartments that are old and overcrowded down to the ground where the gangs form or gather. Generate new apartments or new homes and begin to push gangs out. Assure that apartments are not overcrowded and that will reduce congestion on the streets. It needs to be done. 83. "Housing - establish strict rules for landlords regarding licensing units, minimum standards of upkeep. Require community approval (close neighbors) for any new housing or commercial development. Finally, please kill the once and never future 42 story tower that has been "In the works" on Broadway for the last 20 years - the residents don't want it. 84. Fix the aging infrastructure - streets, sidewalks, parks, water and sewers. Add more traffic deterrents that help decrease the use of our streets as thoroughfares from one city to the next. One-way streets, no entry access at intersections, etc." 85. 1 don't believe there will ever be such thing as rent control, but something has to happen in order to help families stay off the streets. Parking is a mess even in communities with only homes because so many people live City of Santa Ana 57 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-235 Resident Survey Results Results in one home. Out of control. I hope this issue can be addressed in order help everyone out. 86. Again affordable housing 87. Housing community an economic 88. job training and affordable housing programs 89. Affordable housing and public spaces go hand in hand. The more affordable housing available near public open spaces, the better off the community will be and thrive. 90. Housing. It will solve many of the problems we are seeing today. 91. Develop affordable homeownership, not rental units. 92. Deal with homeless, traffic and parking problems. 93. Affordable housing like condos and homes for first time buyers 94. When providing affordable housing/shelters to make sure they keep the community safe and clean. Otherwise there will be resentment and residents fleeing. A housing is being built by us and we are happy about these services but truly worry about increased crime/theft, especially since theft/crime seems higher the past 2 years. 95. Desaroyo de vivienda porque las rentas son muy caras 96. Que ahiga programas economicos 97. Jobs, education and public safety. 98. Keeping the street safe for cars. To prevent car tires from getting damaged because of the street holes or just bumpy pavement. 99. We need more stable rents and more affordable housing. We need more open spaces, more parks. 100. 1 think housing needs to be more affordable. Santa Ana is mainly a Hispanic city. The residents aren't making enough money to buy a house. So, what ends up happening 2 to 3 families live in an apartment or rent a house. This isn't right a lot of people work very hard and want to own a home, but I think housing is not affordable at all. 101. Better Free Homeless Facilities with job rehab / training and, learning facilities and complete Free Medicals for Homeless people's - add New Public Transportations inner -City. 102. Clean the city up and make it enticing for the people that live here to want to stay. Make the taxes worth it. 103. Affordable housing. Especially with accessible living standards. 104. Better job pays. More job opportunities. Marketing 105. affordable housing because rent keeps getting increased due to gentrification, assistance for first time home buyers with resources and funds 106. affordable housing because rent keeps getting increased due to gentrification, assistance for first time home buyers with resources and funds 107. Attract businesses to the city to fill the vacant commercial spaces City of Santa Ana 58 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-236 Resident Survey Results Results 108. Affordable housing, emergency shelters, emergency assistance. 109. Affordable housing, Youth and community development need to be more connected 110. EV charging stations, including on -street for EV car sharing. This will reduce vehicle ownership per household and relieve the City from the burdensome permit parking problems. It will create curb space for more striped bicycle lanes and enable a healthier population of active transportation users. 1 1 1. Provide services for existing homeowners like rehabilitation assistance. 112. Affordable housing to prevent more homelessness in families, the elderly, and the sick. 113. Addict and homeless 114. The homeless must be dealt with forcefully, most do not want to go to shelters or programs because of drug use. Loitering, trespass, and vagrancy ARE crime. The must be diverted to stop redundancy. 115. Not just supporting low income and homeless. The city needs new stakeholders who want to be here and to grow businesses. The City needs a balance of both. If there is too much focus on just low income and homelessness that is all the City will be. There will not be new taxes brought by taxes, property values will drop, and revenues form property tax will fall. 116. Addressing homelessness, lack of affordable housing, environmental sustainability, inequality, historic racial and class inequality being perpetuated in the criminal justice system. 117. With more crime we need more law enforcement. 118. The city needs to consider a clean, crime reduced environment where people want to live. 119. More homeowners 120. Rent Assistant or first-time buyer's assistants. It would help economically the families to afford a place to live in with the raise of rent and the raise of food too. 121. Housing needs to be created for 5 sectors for the housing insecure, workforce large family housing units, young professionals and people moving out on their own, and for those who are professionals have their career and family and for seniors. There need to be over 40,000 new housing units just to retain the young adults going away to college to come back to their city to work when they finish college. This means there need to be housing for young professionals, 1 and 2 bedroom apartments that are affordable with starting wage positions. There need to be multifamily housing for the families that currently live within the city so that there is not the impaction that currently exists because the units are not built for families. This housing needs to accommodate a flourishing workforce. The city needs to rethink recreation in its parks because what is City of Santa Ana 59 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-237 Resident Survey Results Results currently happening is not working. History tells us that education is a key factor in economic development, Economic development needs to focus on building pipelines that address the following problems: Education and Workforce Challenges such as The mismatch of graduates and jobs, Lack of STEM education throughout our District which assures no alignment with relevant careers that afford a living wage after school, High school dropout rates, Highschool pregnancy, Workforce lacking motivation, soft skills that need to be taught, Employers don't communicate with educators, educators are out of touch with the workforce outside the walls of the High school, High school counselors and educators then are out of touch and teach from this place, Preparation for jobs rather than lifelong careers, Students are bored with school what is taught isn't relevant to life, Lack of broadband, No communication between K-12 and parents. With 56,000 students and one of the largest districts and a population with a median age of 27 and the two biggest industries in the city being education and government, we need to at least get these to industries right and they need to be top of the line and cutting edge. An insufficient education system, governmental structure or legal system are much more detrimental to society than anything else. These factors are crucial for economic prosperity. Pipelines will help to create alignments that we need to build solid and intentional pipelines for our youth in education which takes a kind of vision that is currently lacking in both the District and City. Solutions include: Bringing together key education and workforce stakeholders in your community or region to identify what is working really well and to address the greatest opportunities and challenges facing the community. This moves your community from silos that do not communicate well to a network and system that is much more effective. 1. Taking a strategic approach to education and workforce development in your community, driven by data that reflects the real world, as well as insights and anecdotal evidence from the stakeholders. 2. Viewing your local economy and education and workforce pipeline from a new economy approach and identifying the most promising economic sectors and strategies to lay the groundwork for the future of your community. This often entails using technology and the internet in new ways to overcome distance and other barriers. 3. Identifying focus areas that have the great need or great potential for development, learning from other communities, tapping resources in and out of the community and becoming a national model for education and workforce preparation. A city's population should not rise above 500,000, The prevailing economic mentality in the city values most highly those actions that are "economic," at the expense of people and the environment. Economic thinking puts a price tag on things priceless, like our humanity and our home. Change has to evolve over time — it's not possible to rush it City of Santa Ana 60 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-238 Resident Survey Results Results this is what smart growth is all about. We have not even looked at the business sector. 122. Improve the availability of affordable housing WITHOUT ruining existing neighborhood's continuity. Resist efforts to become the county dumping ground for homeless shelters and homelessness. 123. Set up a housing case management program to increase success rates securing affordable housing and maintaining it. 124. AFFORDABLE rents and AFFORDABLE home prices are needed. 125. Invest in youth, support the creation of small businesses for Santa Ana residents, not outsiders, and more affordable housing. 126. job creation and employment training. 127. Affordable Family homes, Economic development? What happened to the building of One Broadway construction? It was to provide many jobs, and it's literally a pile of dirt, and has been over five years. 128. Careful update of the city's land use plan vs. piecemeal rezoning at the whim of the then -current development issue. 129. New affordable housing opportunities for first time buyers. 130. Addressing the homeless crisis, providing affordable housing, providing better activities for teenage children after school 131. Housing is first and second would be transportation. Families need a safe, affordable places to live and they need access to reliable transportation to get to/from work and to other important family services such as doctors, schools, etc. 132. Them actually providing the help for some people 133. Get rid of homeless because it gives our city a bad name 134. Affordable housing 135. I believe we need more shelters for the homeless and that includes homeless veterans in the next 5 years because if we take this as one of our high priority it will benefit both our community and the homeless. Our community will look better and the homeless will have a place to stay and make a life. 136. Housing ownership 137. We need more affordable housing because the rest is getting really high 138. Being able to buy my first home 139. Cheaper housing because most people can't afford a lot and they're a lot of people living in one house most of the time because they don't have anywhere to go or rent because it's expensive and most are homeless and we need at least housing for them to live in like a shelter but more of a home then a shelter because shelters can do so much to a homeless person 140. Parking will be a high priority especially inn residential neighborhoods. There is less available parking in high density neighborhoods and parking tickets are on the rise. This is a high priority need for the city City of Santa Ana 61 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-239 Resident Survey Results Results 141. Improve commercial properties down main street and give residents beautiful places to shop and dine. 142. Ensuring housing affordability and building middle -income housing such as condos and townhomes. 143. Affordable housing, rent control, retaining residents to not move out, park improvements, and community centers. 144. The safety. 145. Less luxury apartments and more affordable ones. Enforce laws/codes. Parking is horrible. People shouldn't be living in closets, garages, and living rooms. 146. Prevent homelessness, why? Because it's the biggest need right now. 147. Providing housing for underserved families, whom suffer from financial hardship, and have to live in areas that are not safe for their children. 148. More shelters for the homeless and overall better housing 149. Allow to build on your own land without being over charged for permits and planning approvals 150. More affordable housing. Not apartments! Actual houses. Something you can own. 151. Historic preservation, because once we lose our historical sites we lose the benefit they can provide. 152. Street parking in home owner neighborhoods have been taking away from renters from other areas. Rental apartments are not providing enough parking spaces . 153. Homelessness 154. Community housing and education for the homeless. Better schools and education for children so they don't wind up drug addicted and homeless. City of Santa Ana 62 75A-240 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 32. What actions do you believe the City should take to enhance the livability of residential neighborhoods, encourage the development and preservation of decent affordable housing options, and promote business attraction/retention and workforce development? Open -Ended Responses to Question 32: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 12 13 14 15 Make sure that landlord that have received loans form the city are tearing their tenants with respect and aren't being used for person gain Stop the gangs and the crime, reduce corruption in police. Law enforcement, vocational training for young adults plumbing, electrical, welding, construction. Give housing incentives. See answers to 25 and 26. Support the development of supportive housing and affordable housing. No opt -out of affordable housing requirements for housing developers. Acknowledge the neighborhood Stop focusing on county and city employees and shift the focus to actual Santa Ana residents. Decrease crime, homelessness, drugs, increase security, cleaner city, better lighting, update plazas, better options for shopping. Don't build apartment buildings in residential neighborhoods and reduce homeless and drug addicts in them. The city needs to stop accepting the in lieu fees from developers for Affordable Housing and should instead make the developers build the affordable housing as part of their build. We wait 5 years for a build to be completed, and in turn, the affordable housing gets built 3 years after that .... why accept in lieu fees when the people who need affordable housing need it today, not 8 years down the road. Need more police officers to help with community policing and dealing with crimes that happen due lack of a police presence Assist small businesses so that they can grow and create more jobs for our community. More police patrol to defer criminal activity. Rent control "Partner with the county to direct mental health care and support for the homeless persons in our city. Partner with landlords of substandard ADU's to make them more livable, providing a subsidy in exchange for a below - market -rate housing contract." Lay down the law. Uphold the law. Provide a clean and healthy space. Provide HIGH QUALITY education to every child enrolled at EVERY Santa Ana school. The zip code or income of a child or neighborhood should NOT influence the type of education they receive. EVERY child enrolled in City of Santa Ana 63 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-241 Resident Survey Results Results kindergarten should receive a child savings account matched by a corporate or federal fund. 17. Free Tax Preparation Service 18. Address the homelessness crisis. City beautification projects. Economic development opportunities. 19. Create and preserve affordable housing with the structures already existing. Provide incentives to property owners to renovate properties to clean and affordable housing. Mandate a generous percent of new development to affordable units. Promote business attraction by making the licensing, inspection, zoning processes more affordable, streamlined and timely. 20. Change our image. Focus on reducing crime and rebranding Santa Ana. Show positive stories in the OC Register and other media -we are predominantly featured for negative stories. Look at what other successful cities around us do and use their best practices. 21. Improve the infrastructure and safety of downtown to attract homebuyers and business owners. 22. Improve rundown buildings, prevent youth from joining gangs and provide resources to communities so they thrive and get out of poverty. 23. Develop a vision statement of what we want our community to be (e.g., A resilient community that honors our past while innovating toward the future and helping our community members achieve a life of well-being together), develop a global strategy to achieve, and detail the local objectives to achieve that goal. All with experts helping develop the plan with local input. The City of LA recently developed a resilient strategy and this seems a great idea for our community to develop soon as well. 24. 1 think the city of Santa Ana is doing a lot for all that live here, the answer is, of course, more low-income housing. But it all takes money and it is a slow process. Santa Ana is to be commended for the care it shows to its citizens. 25. 1 have many many ideas on multiple specific topics or situations my generation or my community might be facing today but I've named a few in my answers to the questions asked above. 26. Help those who are in owner -occupied homes to stay there. Renovation assistance. Crime prevention. Beautification/Maintenance requirements. I don't want cars covered in tarps parked on my street. Nor do I want houses whose roofs are a series of tarps either (which are likely to be worthy of red -tags, which we are unbelievably lax in enforcing). Santa Ana needs to protect its middle class. 27. Parking solutions, building more affordable housing, re -housing the homeless population with supportive services City of Santa Ana 75A-242 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 28. Add more parks. Perhaps tear down blighted buildings and replace them with public gardens or green space. Seek out cutting edge startup businesses. 29. For affordable housing units to be time limited (perhaps up to 5-1 Oyrs per family) while families are in affordable housing units families are connected and followed up with community workers that can set financial goals and address family needs for family to exit affordable housing and be able to prep for permanent housing (like purchasing their own home). 30. Bring on more awareness to all of these developments to the people so that are more aware of the situation and can be bring in their thoughts to aid in the development of these services needed in the city. 31. Coming up with a plan and then sharing with people. 32. Take in more public consideration but continue to make decisions based on what they interpret. 33. Make affordable housing 34. assist with the permits and building of granny flats on existing home properties 35. 1) Greater neighborhood policing 2) Teen employment / centers 3) City replacement of dead trees on parkways" 36. All of the things already mentioned in this survey. 37. More parks, free rec services, jobs for undocumented people. Youth mental health resources. 38. Improve public transportation 39. Restructure the police, fire, city employees work to focus on helping all manner of residents to become part of our community. 40. Know the population and their needs 41. We need to become more like surrounding cities such as Irvine 42. Safe and clean streets, less homelessness, more parks and attractive opportunities for high tech companies to move in Santa Ana instead of Irvine or anywhere else. 43. 1 live in a fairly safe area since I'm on the border of Costa Mesa by South Coast Plaza but I am afraid to go deeper into Santa Ana due to the homelessness and gang activity. Neighborhoods are run down and need a face lift but homeowners can't afford to upgrade their homes so I would suggest homeowner assistance to help update their homes. 44. Crime prevention & enforcing laws. Help the homeless that want help and find a way to move the mentally ill into medical facilities. Offer the drug addicted help and options. If they refuse, they need to move along or be put in jail. We need to clean up Santa Ana to attract businesses, investments, and higher standard of living. City of Santa Ana 65 75A-243 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 45. Better parking, community centers, libraries, schools, rent control, free or very low cost community college job training, business license streamlining. 46. Apply for federal and state grants with specific targets for how the money will be spent. Use eminent domain to rid the city of dilapidated buildings and free up new development opportunities in a focused and well - planned redevelopment program. Until this city rids itself of the enormous homeless burden, there will be very minimal incentive for business and workforce development or influx of revenue generators. 47. 1 think the city should hire better -qualified professionals who know how to solve those problems, then present those specific solutions to the residents, rather than putting out blanket surveys that don't really have actionable solutions. 48. "Increase employees in Code Enforcement. Make starting a business in SA less cumbersome." 49. Reduce crime 50. As a County seat SA does not have a positive reputation. SA is known for its drugs, gangs, and poor quality of school education. And highest taxes. I live in SA but do not shop in SA -how sad. I'm afraid to go out at night in SA. We need more transparency and a mayor and staff speaking to the people regularly. 51. In reference to promoting business attraction I believe new business owners should be treated like new students in an institution where there are programs and tools that are handed to them in order to help them succeed. Now it's the student's responsibility to take it upon themselves and use the tools and resources to succeed but the focus here is retention and that can be a way to build a strong community among new business owners. A new cohort can be established every year and the cohort can also work as a community of business owners and create a relationship and another resource for themselves. 52. Remove the sanctuary status, increase police force, remove landlords that promote drug and substance abuse housing. 53. Santa Ana badly needs more police resources. Last time I called 91 1, 1 reported a home robbery and I waited over 90 minutes for police response. Other times I have reported trespassing and drug activity in empty houses, and police arrive several hours later, allowing the suspects more than enough time to leave the scene. We need faster response time. 54. Separate pedestrian, bike and vehicle lanes. 55. Use public funds to create clean and open green spaces where residents can come together, exercise, have public sponsored events 56. Create development agreements with developers who have visions for livable and safe neighborhoods. City of Santa Ana 66 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results 75A-244 Results 57. Reduce crime, especially gang violence, domestic violence, child abuse, rape, elderly abuse, theft, assault and disorderly drivers/hit and runs. A special emphasis on the last one because there have been so many accidents as of late where pedestrians are left to die after being struck or cars are crashing into homes or businesses. 58. More patrols in neighborhoods. Way too many vagabonds are roaming the streets of even safer neighborhoods and stealing stuff from people's front yards, porches, etc. 59. Mandatory recycling for multiuse housing (apartment buildings especially). 60. Invest in better transportation around the city; revamp old apartments so they can be livable; more studio and 1 bedroom options for working professionals. Walking distance to grocery stores, bars, convenience stores is a huge plus. 61. Eliminate or liberalize zoning and allow developers to build more units with a set percentage dedicated to the affordable housing program. Reduce onsite parking requirements near public transit facilities. Crack down on commercial vehicles parking on the street overnight. 62. Get homeless people off the streets and help those living on the streets that are dealing substance abuse. These people walk through our neighborhoods scoping out what they can steal at night or whose car they can break into. 63. Support public safety and invest in infrastructure and capital improvements to report transportation roadways and update community areas like parks and rec centers. 64. You need to work for us residents that have been here for generations. Get rid of the homeless that have no ties to Santa Ana, clean the streets, fix the dry areas that are supposed to be green, lower our taxes, but most importantly stop the density. 65. Sustainability on municipal laws and enforced them don't just passed and approved. 66. Deal with the homelessness. Deal with substance abuse issues. Encourage employment and technical/trade programs/training. Clean up business centers. Encourage residents to manage and take pride in neighborhoods. 67. Clean up the streets. 68. Embrace the Mexican American community and their perspective culture 69. More police presence in neighborhoods to deter crime and graffiti. Better street maintenance. More permanent supportive housing for those who are homeless. 70. Single family homes not room for rent properties City of Santa Ana 67 75A-245 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 71 72 73 74 75 76 VAN F:? 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 I have a nice place to live that I own outright. I am retired and comfortable. The biggest challenge Santa Ana has, is to make me feel welcome, and not stray to where I feel comfortable -- Tustin. Clean neighborhoods Affordable housing, workforce training programs, youth services, education k-12 Get rid of the thieves. The water and trash pickup costs have skyrocketed over the last 20 years when compared to electricity and gas. Why is that? The parking permits are not that effective; there is really no enforcement. As mentioned our city needs a facelift and we need to get rid of gangs and old apartments and have the owners of these building pay for violating codes not met on a monthly basis. We need to have home owners make sure their front yards are decent looking and not abandoned making it a hazard to the public. Our buildings need a facelift so business can grow and not be ashamed to be part of this city. More affordable educational programs for service positions and vocational careers. See above - reduce traffic, establish permit parking in all residential neighborhoods, establish and enforce rental property upkeep, Make Code Enforcement much more efficient and effective; repair aging concrete streets with new concrete (not patchwork), repair sidewalks. Plant more parkway trees. Establish mini parks. Do not allow apartment buildings in single family neighborhoods! No food and produce trucks parking in residential neighborhoods to sell their wares. I don't know what can be done but I have noticed that a lot of businesses have left our city because of the high rent fees and homeless people surrounding every area here. It is very upsetting. Fix the homeless problem Vocational schools Help the people that live there not just the people that work or come for entertainment. we need more crime, drug prevention and civics programs Clean up unkept areas of the city. Demolish structures in poor conditions and create more open spaces. "Reduce the cost of parking permits so homeowners are more willing to sign permit requests. Develop creative parking options for neighborhoods with overparking. Assist homeowners with low re- development/improvement loans to upgrade dilapidated homes. " Stop homeowners from renting out rooms to multiple families in a single family residence and limit vehicle parking for such residences. Eliminate homelessness in the area and take charge of other cities sending us their homeless like Irvine Safety, trees/landscaping, more housing, positive community events City of Santa Ana 68 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-246 Resident Survey Results Results 88. Tomar mas inesiactiva para mejorar todo tipo de problemas lomas prontoposible 89. rentas bajas 90. Public Safety 91. We should all be motivated and encouraged in keeping our homes looking nice and healthy. 92. Time and time again, people want to stay here in SA, but the rents are too high. 93. 1 think it should focus on affordable housing. Everything in the economy is increasing so if housing can be affordable that would help the residents. 94. Better Funds Management .Eliminate unnecessary Bureaucracies and regulations - make building permits fees more affordable for homeowners and builders. 95. 1 am supportive of helping those in need, but I believe there needs to be an equal focus on incentivizing new businesses to come to SA as well as housing that encourages middle class families to live in SA. 96. Clean it up. Make it Safe. Offer free surveillance cameras for the outside. Don't make us feel we are burden when we need something from the Police Department. We pay the most taxes, show us. We should have a better city than the surrounding ones. 97. Sidewalks need to be fixed. And more suitable for those who are disabled. Give us more affordable housing options. 98. Have more people work instead of being home getting help from the government. That's why the city should have more help for those that need childcare or transportation or anything that can help them be motive. 99. require local businesses to hire locally from within the city, the city could host programs to help folks get jobs and help people with their resumes and interviewing skills, more open community meetings, let public comment at city meetings go first because people have to go home to get ready for the next day and cannot wait until the end 100. require local businesses to hire locally from within the city, the city could host programs to help folks get jobs and help people with their resumes and interviewing skills, more open community meetings, let public comment at city meetings go first because people have to go home to get ready for the next day and cannot wait until the end 101. 1 think we often throw our money to make our community look better, but there is not a lot of investment in addressing the root causes. On the surface, we have lots of graffiti and worn down buildings that make our communities not look so great. The root causes for that could be poverty, and homeowners/landlords not investing in the upkeep of homes. 102. We are a large immigrant population, and that needs to be acknowledged when making these changes. Our politicians/government City of Santa Ana 69 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results 75A-247 Results workers don't always reflect Santa Ana residents. We need to invest in young people who will ultimately grow into potential politicians, gov't workers, teachers, homeowners, renters, and small business entrepreneurs. When I left for college, many of my friends did not want to come back to Santa Ana or chose to move away. I think if we had more community organizations to work with us when we were younger, we would have a lot more pride and empowerment to address and improve our community issues. 103. 1 think non -profits struggle with lack of funding. Can our local gov't work more closely with these non -profits so we don't reinvent solutions but work together?" 104. Street lighting, code enforcement, tree trimming 105. More safety 106. Help people in general have pride in their community- not so much pride that they become Ned Flanders, but more than Homer Simpson. 107. Youth and community/economic development need to be more interconnected 108. Bicycle infrastructure, including smart sensors at traffic signals, to improve vulnerable road user safety; bicycle friendly business districts; EV charging stations. 109. Jobs, crime prevention, education, childcare. 110. More shelters: family only, women only, men only based. 111. Help all 112. Clean up the city and provide a strong infrastructure. There are too many run down, overcrowded apartments complexes in the city- Myrtle, Townsend, Highland, Standard, Sullivan... they are eye sores 113. Support the Arts, Develop parks and make it a city for all groups. 114. Increasing density is necessary. If done in a truly community -oriented way (rather than just pushing up property values for gentrifiers), it can build neighborhoods that are safer, more affordable, better for public health, and more environmentally sustainable. 115. Enforcement of laws. Reducing gang violence and activity. 116. Clean, maintain, police, reduce and clean up homeless problem 117. Police activity 118. Help with homelessness. A shelter to help them get back on track. It would help if the city invested in hiring people to clean the streets daily. 119. There are 64 neighborhoods in the city which need an organizing strategy to become effective this is the first step. Organizing the 64 neighborhoods. While there are a number of groups that are organized and part of groups like Com-Link and Connect to Council, some of which have a nonprofit status like Floral Park this is not the case of the majority of our neighborhoods. Effective communication for the city can only be achieved through organized neighborhoods, business districts etc. We City of Santa Ana 70 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-248 Resident Survey Results Results have 2 BID groups in the city covering one Downtown Area other cities like Long Beach have 9 or 10 business districts New York has over 70. Besides the organization of neighborhoods, we need the organization of our Business Districts and Neighborhoods, we need community design centers that communicate with planning to fix areas that need fixing. Before you can encourage development, preserve affordable housing options and promote business attraction/retention and workforce development you need to have communication with all your constituents across the city this can be done by organizing the neighborhoods and the business districts. Once this is done the city will start to be able to make better assessments of what is needed within each neighborhood and district for it improvement in all the above stated areas. 120. To enhance livability, give Code Enforcement some teeth and start enforcing our codes (need more inspectors and need follow-through on citations). Crack down on absentee landlords who don't maintain their properties. Work more closely with neighborhoods to understand what they want in terms of neighborhood improvements - vintage lights, concrete streets, permit parking, etc. don't have such high hurdles to "get things done" with the City. Develop more parks. Advocate on the federal level to get Section 8 vouchers for all who qualify - this is the only program that if you qualify, you don't automatically get help but get put on awaiting list. Advocate for fairer tax treatment of renters as compared to the tax advantage (federal welfare) that homeowners receive. Pass city laws to require landlords to get permits for rental units - enact standards similar to Section 8 for all rental housing, require rental unit inspections, back up tenants who are faced with eviction. Get more decent grocery stores in here. Limit corner markets and liquor stores. Outlaw billboards - they really make our city look bad. 121. Stop spending such an exorbitant amount of money on the SAPID and I best it in homelessness prevention and housing subsidies. 122. Solve and/or be PROACTIVE with the homelessness problems. Affordable housing. City of Santa Ana NEEDS to work with Pacific Railroad to PREVENT the "villages" of drug addicts and thieves living on the railroad tracks. Those people lurk in to our neighborhoods at night to steal and it's a very scary place at night. 123. Use the money wisely and on the real needs of the community. 124. Enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods. 125. Repair the roads; assure that enforced city zoning enhances, the neighborhoods (not harm them); make an effort to attract desired businesses that enhance Santa Ana and provide local jobs without further increasing residential density. 126. Provide former Santa Ana school district graduates and current residents promotional/incentive programs for opening small businesses and buying City of Santa Ana 71 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-249 Resident Survey Results Results homes within the communities they grew up in. Provide more inner community events such as picnics and neighborhood meeting events within the nearby elementary schools. Provide current homeowners with home repair/preservation seminars. 127. Consider appropriate parking numbers when approving development plans. 128. Continue to raise the standards and the safety of living in Santa Ana. 129. Spend more dollars on community services than policing. Force developers to keep their commitments to affordable housing units. Require adequate parking at all new units - low income residents don't usually work near home these days, so a car is essential. 130. Consider the importance of affordable homeownership. This provides stability in a community and a consistent level of housing payments that won't be going up as would often occur in rental situations. With those rental increases, families are in jeopardy of becoming homeless. 131. More safety 132. Build more housing 133. Better and affordable housing 134. Fix roads. Assist families in owning housing property whether it's a condo or home. 135. 1 think the community should work together to make affordable housing possible 136. Parking 137. Cheaper housing, saver roads, give more money to the poor then the rich 138. Address transient/homeless population and rent control 139. Do not bring the homeless shelter to Santa Ana. And currently enforce the law. 140. Fixing our current streets, sidewalks, and parks will make the City more livable and enjoyable. 141. Help young adults with affordable housing. It is too expensive to live here! Jobs are not paying well. It discourages many to have interest in the city. 142. Get people involved. 143. Fix the homelessness problem. 144. Encourage educational workshops aimed at youth. They are the future. 145. Promote more fun family engagement events. 146. Community gardens and city-wide clean-ups of parks. 147. Rebuild parks, make it cheaper to add a home on the historic registry and help large and small business relocation and development. 148. Take Control of the amount renters charge to people for housing and make sure that they are providing all services needed to the renters. 149. Neighborhood cleanup programs. Get residents involved and supply the necessary materials to clean up and take pride in the neighborhood. City of Santa Ana 72 75A-250 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 33. If you would like to receive updates regarding the Consolidated Plan process, please provide your email address or other contact information below Note: Personal contact information omitted for privacy. 34. Please provide any additional comments below Open -Ended Responses to Question 34: 1. When the public ask for information don't treat them as ignorant people 2. Permanent Affordable Housing and transitional shelters focusing on women. 3. Local businesses are suffering in Downtown, with all the construction. The City should be helping them with marketing and other assistance so they don't suffer. Stop making it difficult for developers who are trying to make improvement or open a business! 4. Use GIS, like Pasadena. https://wwvv.youtube.com/watch?v=Gd kB5TxEb8 - https://ww v.esri.com/en-us/industries/government/overview - Thank you for your service and hard work. 5. We don't need luxury apartments or overpriced bourgeois restaurants and bars. Focus on creating more green space and affordable housing. 6. What is the County of Orange and the City of Santa Ana doing to collect money from the "tax" imposed by the County Recorder commencing January 1, 2019 at the rate of a minimum of $75 per recording. No good transparency on that money so hopefully it has not been directed to the State's General Fund like it did in 2012 when K. Harris, J. Brown and K. Porter let J. Brown simply take the money out of the special fund created for the struggling homeowners. They took or allowed the money to be unlawfully taken to "fill holes in the state's budget". In 2014, organizations representing the struggling homeowners sued J. Brown and others. They went to trial in 2015 and won as the money should not been taken by J. Brown. Brown kept losing until his appeal to the CA Supreme Court resulted in another loss. He was not entitled to money earmarked for struggling homeowners. Just watch the money and follow it to be sure it goes where it is supposed to go. 7. The City needs to change their downtown parking to 24/7 access and it would collect a lot more in parking revenue. It also needs to improve the street lighting and it should run strings of lights up and down Calle Cuatro to really make it stand out. We need to hire park rangers as our children City of Santa Ana 73 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-251 Resident Survey Results Results aren't safe at some of these parks because there aren't park rangers to enforce the safety. 8. Take out of the police budget 9. This survey is way too long, I lost interest after the 4th question. 10.A program to acquire the land beneath mobile home parks and create a community coop would go a long way to stabilizing housing costs for vulnerable residents who rely on the parks for affordable housing. 11 . Free Tax Preparation Service 12. Downtown urban flooding in wintertime has become much more severe in the recent years. Sandbags on every front door is not a good sight. The city's image would never be reputable if such outdated practice still exists in the county seat of the OC. 13.Our community needs a Chief Resilience Officer if we do not already have one. 14.Thank you, Santa Ana, for all that you do. 15.Thank you for giving me an opportunity to take this survey. It was very interesting and I appreciated the chance to speak my mind and feel like my voice was actually heard. I'm very grateful. 16.Please utilize funding to strengthen the middle-class homeowner. We are the key to success for local businesses and for their workers. Also create incentives for outside investors to build here! Be practical. Do the math. "Gentrification" is not an economic term. Without renewal and some replacement of portions of the city, those decrying development will be out of work. We have some ideal models like Irvine and Tustin to glean knowledge and experience from. We need to reinvent ourselves in Santa Ana. As an American of Mexican descent, I would love to be a town that values and showcases that culture, but I don't think it's prudent to exclude our Asian, Black, or White brothers and sisters to do it. We must be more culturally inclusive, which also creates a marketable cultural vibe that is attractive to investors, retailers, and the like. Easy answers, but tough choices politically. Sadly, we've answered economic problems with politics. Let's be smarter than that moving forward. Thank you. 17.Thank you. I tried to be thoughtful in my responses, but some of my opinions were really only from a less educated position. 18. Consider the voices of everyone and to be open minded to every option and opinion of the people of the city of Santa Ana. 19.1 want to see changes in the community such as greener spaces. 20.We need more green spaces and affordable housing. 21 .the need for more senior and affordable housing is desperate and much can be done by adding single units to existing housing properties assistance with the process and building is necessary 22.1 was both in Santa Ana. I currently live and work in Santa Ana. I love this city, and I want to see it improve. Our biggest issues are homelessness and City of Santa Ana 74 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 75A-252 Resident Survey Results Results housing. I want to know what the City plans to do, and I want to be a part of it. Thanks for caring. 23.Santa Ana must fund its own municipal fiber optic network that provides internet access to everyone 24.1 would like to thank you for affordable houses. I bought ones. Now, I am living very close to my workplace and it makes my life much easier. Like I can dedicate more time to my family. 25.1 love what has been done as it relates to the arts in the downtown area but I'm still afraid to go there at night. Not sure what to do about that but would love to be able to spend more time there and feel safe. Lack of street repair is my biggest complaint as well as homelessness. 26.1'm sorry if my answers seem harsh but I am fed up with the crazy/drug addicted people infesting our area. Help those that want and will take the help and move along those that don't. My wife and I have lived in Santa Ana for over 7 years and we are now in the process of selling our house and moving. There have been a lot of strides made to deal with the homeless/drug addicted and we appreciate the city's efforts. But in the end, we don't feel safe living and raising our son in this city. 27. More funding for Music and Arts in schools. STEAM programs. 28.1 have lived in Santa Ana for 40 years and so far it has been mostly talk and very little action on the key issues addressed above. The city, unfortunately, is still perceived by non-residents and outside citizens as an old urban barrio. If downtown looked like Hutton Centre, that perception might change. 29.1 hope to attend some informational meetings. 30.As a community, we just want our neighborhoods to be safe and well maintained. There are too many potholes, cracked sidewalks, not enough lighting down some streets at night. The streets always flood in the rain. Make the city a place we all want to live and keep it affordable. All my friends who would love to be homeowners are moving to the inland where housing is cheaper. Potential homeowners consistently say not to bother looking in Santa Ana because the housing is too expensive and even renters can't find an affordable place to live in our city. 31. People make mistakes. Remind them of it but not in a condescending way. 32.Some stuff I don't understand from here and it would be nice to offer information on some of the answers 33. W e do not want more density, more bars in our downtown, housing for homeless, halfway houses, and higher taxes. 34.Sustain ability 35.1 would like any new information regarding affordable housing and Senior housing. City of Santa Ana 75 75A-253 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 36.1 would love for the city to invest for a shot spotter and the program for the police, so response will be quicker, and priorities are being set in the right order! 37.Thanks for reaching out with this questionnaire. 38. Let's rebuild Santa Ana and enough is enough. 39.Thank you for reaching out and providing this thought provoking and educational survey. 40.please stop the diversion of funds 41 .espero que ayuden a la comunidad 42."Homeowners want higher equity in our homes so how can the city do to help with that 43.Safety, Jobs and Education. We pay a lot in property taxes and sales taxes we deserve way better. Thank You. 44.Thank you for taking the time to create this survey. Please take the time to share and resolve these issues. 45.Thanks for the opportunity to express my personal opinion. 46.School improvement, more law enforcement, new business incentives. 47. Make Santa Ana safe and clean! Make us want to stay! Don't push us out! 48.1 live in the 92707 area which is not bad at all. I've lived in the 92703, and I can say it's way more overpopulated there and more dangerous. 49.Y'all really need to find a way to make this place safer. 50.Thanks for offering a forum to be a loudmouth citizen. 51 .There needs to be more focus on informal educational opportunities and training. Youth development needs to be interconnected with community and economic development in order for there to be impactful and meaningful planning for a sustainable future 52.As someone who was previously homeless earlier this year, I had to go to Anaheim to get better help than Santa Ana (my home city) could provide to me. 53.The City must address parking. 54.Gang activity is a major issue in the city. People are calling the police for help and are not getting any response. 55.My great grandfather homesteaded in the Delhi Barrio in 1901. My grandfather was born and die in the very same room of that home. The home is still in our family to date. Santa Ana is where my roots are and I hope and pray that it becomes the once BEAUTIFUL classy city is used to be. Thank you for reaching out to the community for input. 56. Consider the community first and not money or greed. 57.Share this with more people 58. W e don't need more funding towards our police. Please divest funds from SAPID and repurpose use of the Santa Ana Jail City of Santa Ana 75A-254 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results Results 59.1 love Santa Ana and raising my family here and work here to provide a living for them. Please make it a priority to have Santa Ana a bright safe future for them 60. Please do the right thing and stand up for us no more pushing the problems under the rug it's time to act now -this is the time. 61 . W e need skatepark and with water fountain we need water fountain in every park 62.Survey too long, many will not finish 63. Fix the homelessness problem. 64.Santa Ana is growing. Our streets are becoming more and more populated. 65.The homelessness in Santa Ana is in dire need of affordable housing. One family alone cannot afford a 2 bedroom apartment in Santa Ana. The residents are moving out of OC because there is no affordable housing. To rent an apartment in Santa Ana a person must make twice the months' rent in income otherwise they don't qualify. This requirement is absurd. Families have to sleep on top of each other to have a place to sleep. This situation is sad and is heartbreaking. If the state of California didn't pass that bill on rent control. The city of Santa Ana should make it a new law. Families are sleeping with small children in their cars. This is sad and so wrong. End of Survey City of Santa Ana 77 75A-255 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Resident Survey Results U' a 0 c c 0% Z o E 0$ z O v V 0 w V O u C G H O z N V M W tD 0 M M O L < W `ti '� ci �' ci cic `ti w � N O O N a N a E O N aVT+ N m t00 N / iJ cc ccz 0 m W O Co N W W mC o ccCoz O co O V V 9 > O C > C W 0 0 Z Z W v 3 c z O F- z i W W O z J a G W Q c J O V) z O O H z CWC G W a LL O H J z Q z O J z O ® ,HOW A Y I 0 0 c O c U L D L VI O D E fu L O 0 N Q a-+ m C m L L O +: z rrE N Q L J 1O N ^ � L O LU 2 E E Q m i J D U in O Q 'O v, L z L tD ro = — O m 4-1� O m U Ln D w a o U Q ° 0 O N N a-+ N 0 VI fa Q w Q wC -r— O E Q \ 5 r O U } cn cn w c E 0 T .0 E E 0 V T m a v a 75A-260 V / Z W Z /0 L5L L 0 U RE a v a 75A-261 c V U " M1. o pD C Y C C � d w L U U W J lM1 y 0 E mu E O OOD 3 o m u a v s v O oD u '�.' C O .n m n w p. o E v E J rv. v O u W v v J — 0 0 E (p J =_ W m 0 0 OD Z E 'y m Q 3 Co o a v F ,� v WD Z Y W 3 U W C j _ m w V) w W m Q m S w D C. W t U W O 2i of K S F a 75A-262 E � _0 Q _0 � w o U Q > 4� U D a) Z < .R Ln q Q ƒ (D) O0 7 �0 m Z o 3 CL Q) 7 Z ; Q % ./ r — ( o Z{ � Q 0 �r 7 / _ S /=kk-E ) '\±'�kLn z ƒƒ ) _ — ` k / R� ; § CO:; — � _ k / 5 .g § � / \ / \ \ I r / _ R 7 \ z ) cr § � Ln ^ cr- cr c \ E E / § \ 2 ) a) u § E E \ \ R cr 9 / \ \ \ \ { E _ § k ( E _ & & / Ln 2 \ ƒ \ - § § \ / ) § U t [ 7 / 7 § \ \ ( co cr) / Lu S ƒ \ 75A- §2 +, c w E a D }� L N cr W _ U Li C: U C: L (6 U N 4-1 D E E 0 0 m 4-1 L L 2 U U (6 LL LU C 0 J 4 N a QE *' 4-1U oC LL. o c C N o U U : E ro L 0 0 in o C: D _ L L O W V C ate+ O E • •� �� uvl E 0 0 T E e 0 V m W ti v 75A-264 LU \U_ LU V / Z 5D L 0 U 0 E (6 L 0 L N E �L U +� c .l '9 00 N U a� N 0 fa L 0 Q 0 .fie 40 a 75A-265 Z LU LU O L�U/ LL Z' to J a- N N L a-+ N 0 a-+ C N E > 0 L Q E L 0 +, c w E a� > 0 L Q E (6 N N 0 a-+ C N E N > 0 L Q E 4-1 L m i 0 +, c w E a� 0 L Q E N U U Q CLO W.Ct, 75A-266 L U C: \ N t N c U E L N p L o 2 2 Z ro a • <4C LU U N U L - v \ L /� LO N N W c U N 7 Ln „ 0 w m N U U w z L in v 4-1 J Y c Q ° U p° cn � V U w •�� in •�Cc 75A-267 C) O 0- m D O 0 n (D 3 (D D r-r s N w W, W n C:. m EL- a).D c ov _0 (A O h D v D 0- 0 7 (D Q r O r+ v 7 Q r un rn G 75A-268 w 4-1 Q) E 0 Q E w A� SOON w V / W 'Z vMI 0 +, c Q) E a� 0 L Q E (u fu U- fu U L E E 0 U 0 +, C (6 ILn V 0 J D m ro E Ln a 75A-269 0 4, C (1) 75A-270 (1) to > c 4� to D •� D L O Q Q O 4 w O E � U .O - 0 C J Q _ w <A H J U Q LL V W Z tro L 'o VI L r) D v O 0M N ME to _ 0 a- W o 0 E E O qA 2LL pp fa o c L Qw O r o C: c p[ 0 2 cn in v 0<C <c V ate+ Q F I C 75A-271 li ^A W N Z N W •N � �a o to � a a 0 }, c� dA 2 a) E E o Y � n O w cn U E `n H � X v � �, U Ln a w a a zv Z a v a 75A-272 Q W LL U L.LO- O0 � � U �z(D Qwz 2� z- aLuo CL_ 2 0 ƒ c c E g E _ u 0 / / 0 a / .2 w \ \ \ ° U_ R ® u 0 $ \ O \ ) .% / '0 ƒ \ 2 0 u ' S U / U E u m 0/ > > u c Z \ \ .c \ 0 k / o e V) V) U .g § ® % $ \ § � = O u p 5 ® § / § 'a 2 E 7 < u I f $ 'e LL- .@ 0 » 2 \ \ k CL 3 @ k 2 / a)§ I • E Ln w /� a)�// £/ 0 f 0 u S x _ /® \ �7\ \7 D $ \ $ f � E \ , LU ƒ § f -0 / / / / t e u \ \ / ƒ ' � E E u / E > \ E �a).0 ƒ / O \ $ toV) < % 0 4-° @ § / \ 3 / % 0. � / / V / � ) m / V) a)2 o ¥ S < 0 \ \ / \ � / Z }| / f E /§ƒ f 0 <! + e < E a + 4 + \ \ ( 75A- 74 i u / E 7 C: # m E g f ƒ 0 / 2 4-o E E 0 # u 7 # 0 /� k � § � k # # ± 2 u 2 o ƒ 7 u ± @ �4 �2� E fu o 0 a t E: m w M E a % U 2 @ { m J 2� �a)E R m � k 2 fu o Z_ a4-1 x N a) g ) 4-1 0 C: o E M 2 '\ E E m + m, 0 '§ D ƒ ./ § 0 \| u Q fa # U , o q Li-< ! $ 75A- 75 w 0 2 U Z 0 2 Z = .l 0 D O l4— v) O U 0 U s C: U (6 OA Q C D U U O O s L O O T (6 ++ 4- C � N (6 L (6 (6 L V! O L Ln O N `- U_ b.0 O C s 'c: U OA C O 7 � O � s. b.0 U c C: (6 U C • Q I U C a 75A-276 W, � � Q Z Q LL O w a_ O U (A E R : _ Z k 0 0 U 0� Q2 ® . =a \ } § } _0 �` »2 k | - _ / j / ) § § t Q t \0UbDu - % \ a E E ) } § >_% 0 51 co 0 \ . k 0 } C_ - � E �-> � § / = 7 , E z \�\@® 5 E = E & ) 38§&f © * _ o / �020 ƒ_\\CL ' 7 Q z % _ o - 4 / - E E (� § \ § ƒ \ / / / ) 3 $ $ 2 2 � . . . . . 75A- 77 lil -r. M 91 -r. 2 i Y D O V (1) UO c Lo i O Q 0 O i U c 3 0 O o — V O GO bO t • c N .N O Oo 3 7 � O O co 2 2 w LL LiLn c-I Ln O N rn M Q N V W O 0 Ol C w Q Ln Lo C � f0 (n u v bD a Ln N E O_ M O N f0 i d C C N 7 u • U ORl .� I E V .a U W 75A-278 EXHIBIT 2 ORANGE COUNTY ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING E CHOICE FIRST DRAFT SANTA ANA T HE G O L D E N Cl FOUNDED 1869 T Y PREPARED BY ORANGE COUNTY, CITY OF SANTA ANA, AND THE LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW March 19, 2020 75A-280 Orange County Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Table of Contents I. Cover Sheet II. Executive Summary....................................................................................3 M. Community Participation Process.................................................................8 IV . Assessment of Past Goals and Actions............................................................9 V . Fair Housing Analysis A. Demographic Summary.....................................................................33 B. General Issues i. Segregation/Integration..............................................................95 ii. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs)....... 131 iii. Disparities in Access to Opportunity...........................................139 iv. Disproportionate Housing Needs................................................172 C. Publicly Supported Housing Analysis...................................................215 D. Disability and Access Analysis............................................................242 E. Fair Housing Enforcement, Outreach Capacity, and Resources Analysis ....... 268 VI. Fair Housing Goals and Priorities...............................................................274 VII. Publicly Supported Housing Appendix.........................................................279 VIII. Glossary.............................................................................................298 IX. Contributing Factors Appendix...................................................................305 75A-281 H. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Orange County's Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) is a thorough examination of structural barriers to fair housing choice and access to opportunity for members of historically marginalized groups protected from discrimination by the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA). The AFH also outlines fair housing priorities and goals to overcome fair housing issues. In addition, the AFH lays out meaningful strategies that can be implemented to achieve progress towards the County's obligation to affirmatively furthering fair housing. The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (Lawyers' Committee), in consultation with Orange County and Santa Ana and with input from a wide range of stakeholders through a community participation process, prepared this Al. To provide a foundation for the conclusions and recommendations presented in this Al, the Lawyers' Committee reviewed and analyzed: • Data from the U.S. Census Bureau and other sources about the demographic, housing, economic, and educational landscape of the County, nearby communities, and the broader Region; • Various County planning document and ordinances; • Data reflecting housing discrimination complaints; • The input of a broad range of stakeholders that deal with the realities of the housing market and the lives of members of protected classes in Orange County. The Al draws from these sources to conduct an analysis of fair housing issues such as patterns of integration and segregation of members of protected classes, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty regionally, disparities in access to opportunity for protected classes, and disproportionate housing needs. The analysis also examines publicly supported housing in the city as well as fair housing issues for persons with disabilities. Private and public fair housing enforcement, outreach capacity, and resources are evaluated as well. The Al identifies contributing factors to fair housing issues and steps that should be taken to overcome these barriers. Overview of Orange County According to U.S. Census data, the population of Orange County have changed considerably from 1990 to present day. The population has grown from just over 2.4 million in 1990 to nearly 3.2 million people today. The demographics of the County have undergone even more dramatic shifts over this time period: the white population has gone from 76.2% in 1990 to 57.8% in 2010 Census, with corresponding increases in Hispanic (from 13.5% to 21.2%) and Asian (from 8.6% to 18.3%) populations in that same time period. These trends represent accelerations of the broader Los - Angeles -Long Beach -Anaheim, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area (the Region). In the Region, white population percentage has declined from 45.9% percent to under 31.6%, with substantial increases in the percentages of Hispanic (from 34.7% to 44.4%) and Asian (from 10.2% to 16%) from the 1990 to 2010 Censuses. 75A-282 Within both Orange County and the broader Region, most racial or ethnic minority groups experience higher rates of housing problems, including but not limited to severe housing cost burden, than do non -Hispanic White households. In Orange County, Hispanic households are most likely to experience severe housing cost burden; in the Region, it is Black households. There are 194,569 households in Orange County experiencing severe housing cost burden. 104,196 of these households are families. However, there are only 429 Project -Based Section 8 units and 33 Other Multifamily units with more than one bedroom capable of housing these families. Housing Choice Vouchers are the most utilized form of publicly supported housing for families, with 2,286 multi -bedroom units accessed. Large family households are also disproportionately affected by housing problems as compared with non -family households. Some focus groups have communicated that regulations and cost issues can make Orange County too expensive for families. The high percentage of 0-1 bedroom units in publicly supported housing and the low percentage of households with children in publicly supported housing support this observation. The federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act provide Orange County residents with some protections from displacement and work to increase the supply of affordable housing. In addition, many jurisdictions within Orange County have worked diligently to provide access to fair housing through anti -housing discrimination work, creating housing opportunities designed to enhance resident mobility, providing zoning flexibility where necessary, and working to reduce hate crimes. Even so, these protections and incentives are not enough to fully stem the loss of affordable housing and meet the housing needs of low- and moderate -income residents. Contributing Factors to Fair Housing Issues The AFH includes a discussion and analysis of the following contributing factors to fair housing issues: 1. Access to financial services 2. Access for persons with disabilities to proficient schools 3. Access to publicly supported housing for persons with disabilities 4. Access to transportation for persons with disabilities 5. Admissions and occupancy policies and procedures, including preferences in publicly supported housing 6. Availability of affordable units in a range of sizes 7. Availability, type, frequency, and reliability of public transportation 8. Community opposition 9. Deteriorated and abandoned properties 10. Displacement of and/or lack of housing support for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking 11. Displacement of residents due to economic pressures 12. Impediments to mobility 13. Inaccessible public or private infrastructure s, 75A-283 14. Inaccessible government facilities or services 15. Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing costs 16. Lack of affordable, accessible housing in a range of unit sizes 17. Lack of affordable in -home or community -based supportive services 18. Lack of affordable, integrated housing for individuals who need supportive service,, 19. Lack of assistance for housing accessibility modifications 20. Lack of assistance for transitioning from institutional settings to integrated housing 21. Lack of community revitalization strategies 22. Lack of local private fair housing outreach and enforcement 23. Lack of local public fair housing enforcement 24. Lack of local or regional cooperation 25. Lack of meaningful language access for individuals with limited English proficiency 26. Lack of private investment in specific neighborhoods 27. Lack of public investment in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities 28. Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations 29. Lack of state or local fair housing laws 30. Land use and zoning laws 31. Lending discrimination 32. Location of accessible housing 33. Location of employers 34. Location of environmental health hazards 35. Location of proficient schools and school assignment policies 36. Location and type of affordable housing 37. Loss of affordable housing 38. Occupancy codes and restrictions 39. Private discrimination 40. Quality of affordable housing information programs 41. Regulatory barriers to providing housing and supportive services for persons with disabilities 42. Siting selection policies, practices, and decisions for publicly supported housing, including discretionary aspects of Qualified Allocation Plans and other programs 43. Source of income discrimination 44. State or local laws, policies, or practices that discourage individuals with disabilities from living in apartments, family homes, supportive housing and other integrated settings 45. Unresolved violations of fair housing or civil rights law Proposed Goals and Strategies To address the contributing factors described above, the Al plan proposes the following goals and actions: Regional Goals and Strategies Goal 1: Increase the supply of affordable housing in high opportunity areas. 75A-284 Strategies: 1. Explore the creation of a new countywide affordable housing bond. 2. Provide low -interest loans to single-family homeowners and grants to homeowners with household incomes of up to 120% of the Area Median Income to develop accessory dwelling units with affordability restriction on their property. 3. Review existing zoning policies and explore zoning changes to facilitate the development of affordable housing. 4. Align zoning codes to conform to recent California affordable housing legislation. Goal 2: Prevent displacement of low- and moderate -income residents with protected characteristics, including Hispanic residents, Vietnamese residents, seniors, and people with disabilities. Strategies: 1. Explore piloting a Right to Counsel Program to ensure legal representation for tenants in landlord -tenant proceedings, including those involving the application of new laws like A.B. 1482. Goal 3: Increase community integration for persons with disabilities. Strategies: 1. Conduct targeted outreach and provide tenant application assistance and support to persons with disabilities, including individuals transitioning from institutional settings and individuals who are at risk of institutionalization. As part of that assistance, maintain a database of housing that is accessible to persons with disabilities. 2. Consider adopting the accessibility standards adopted by the City of Los Angeles, which require at least 15% of all new units in city -supported LIHTC projects to be ADA- accessible with at least 4% of total units to be accessible for persons with hearing and/or vision disabilities. Goal 4: Ensure equal access to housing for persons with protected characteristics, who are disproportionately likely to be lower -income and to experience homelessness. Strategies: 1. Reduce barriers to accessing rental housing by eliminating application fees for voucher holders and encouraging landlords to follow HUD's guidance on the use of criminal backgrounds in screening tenants. 2. Incorporate a fair housing equity analysis into the review of significant rezoning proposals and specific plans. Goal 5: Expand access to opportunity for protected classes. 6 75A-285 Strategies: 1. Explore the voluntary adoption of Small Area Fair Market Rents or exception payment standards in order to increase access to higher opportunity areas for Housing Choice Voucher holders. 2. Explore the creation of a mobility counseling program that informs Housing Choice Voucher holders about their residential options in higher opportunity areas and provides holistic supports to voucher holders seeking to move to higher opportunity areas. 3. Study and make recommendations to improve and expand Orange County's public transportation to ensure that members of protected classes can access jobs in job centers in Anaheim, Santa Ana, and Irvine. 4. Increase support for fair housing enforcement, education, and outreach. Santa Ana Proposed Goals and Strategies 1. Review and amend Santa Ana's inclusionary housing ordinance to increase its effectiveness. 2. Evaluate the creation of a motel conversion ordinance to increase the supply of permanent supportive housing similar to the City of Anaheim and Los Angeles. 3. Review Santa Ana's density bonus ordinance and explore adding a density bonus for transit -oriented development (TOD) similar to the City of Los Angeles. 4. Explore establishing a dedicated source of local funding for a Right to Counsel program for residents of Santa Ana to ensure that they have access to legal representation during eviction proceedings similar to the City of New York. 5. Continue to invest in local eviction prevention strategies to reduce the number of homeless individuals and families in Santa Ana. The AFH lays out a series of achievable action steps that will help both Orange County and Santa Ana to not only meet its obligation to affirmatively fair housing but to continue to be a model for equity and inclusion in the Region. 75A-286 III. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PROCESS 1. Describe outreach activities undertaken to encourage and broaden meaningful community participation in the AI process, including the types of outreach activities and dates ofpublic hearings or meetings. Identify media outlets used and include a description of efforts made to reach the public, including those representing populations that are typically underrepresented in the planning process such as persons who reside in areas identified as RIECAPs, persons who are limited English proficient (LEP), and persons with disabilities. Briefly explain how these communications were designed to reach the broadest audience possible. For PHAs, identify your meetings with the Resident Advisory Board. In order to ensure that the analysis contained in an AI truly reflects conditions in a community and that the goals and strategies are targeted and feasible, the participation of a wide range of stakeholders is of critical importance. A broad array of outreach was conducted through community meetings, focus groups, and public hearings. In preparing this AI, the Lawyers' Committee reached out to tenants, landlords, homeowners, fair housing organizations, civil rights and advocacy organizations, legal services provers, social services providers, housing developers, and industry groups to hear directly about fair housing issues affecting residents of Orange County. Beginning in October, 2019, the Lawyers' Committee held meetings with individual stakeholders throughout the County. In January and February 2020, evening community meetings were held in Mission Viejo, Westminster/Garden Grove, Santa Ana, and Fullerton. Also in February, the Lawyers' Committee held a focus group with a wide array of nonprofit organizations and government officials. Additional presentations and meetings were held with City Councils and various city staff members. Geographically specific community meetings were held across Orange County, including the South, West, Central, and North parts of the County. Additional outreach was conducted for members of protected classes, including the Latino and Vietnamese communities. All community meetings had translation services available if requested in Spanish and Vietnamese. In addition, all meetings were held in locations accessible to people with mobility issues. The Executive Summary of the AI will be translated into Spanish and Vietnamese. Public hearings will be held in throughout the County in March and April. All written comments received during the 30-day public comment period will be reviewed and either incorporated into the final AI or addressed as to why they were not incorporated in the Community Participation section. 8 75A-287 IV. ASSESSMENT OF PAST GOALS, ACTIONS AND STRATEGIES a. Indicate what fair housing goals were selected by program participant(s) in recent Analyses of Impediments, Assessments of Fair Housing, or other relevant planning documents. City of Aliso Viejo Housing Discrimination • The City of Aliso Viejo contracted with the Fair Housing Foundation to conduct fair housing outreach and education to renters, homebuyers, lenders, and property managers. Unfair Lending • The City contracted with the Fair Housing Foundation to identify lenders and transmit findings to HUD and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Discriminatory Advertising • The City contracted with the Fair Housing Foundation to support efforts to identify online discriminatory advertising and request that Craigslist and the OC register publish fair housing and reasonable accommodation notices. Hate Crimes • The City contracted with the Fair Housing Foundation to prepare a Hate Crime Victims Resource Directory. City of Anaheim Housing_ Discrimination • The City allocated CDBG funds to the Fair Housing Foundation (FHF) to provide fair housing services to the Anaheim residents and operators of rental properties. These services include holding tenant and landlord workshops, counseling, and resolving any housing issues and allegations of discrimination Reasonable Accommodations • In June of 2018, the City's Planning and Building Department amended its fee schedule and removed the reasonable accommodations application fee. Zoning • Community Development and Planning staff will continue its review of AB 222 and AB 744 and plan to incorporate the necessary standards and provisions into the next zoning code update. 9 75A-288 City of Buena Park Housing Discrimination • The Fair Housing Foundation (FHF) conducted 4 tenant, 4 landlord and 4 property manager training. • FHF participated in the Buena Park Collaborative, North Orange County Chamber of Conference, Annual Super Senior Saturday, Buena Park School District Annual Kinder Faire, and the inaugural Open House and Resource Fair. • FHF addressed 602 "Housing" issues during the report period. The most common issues were notices, habitability, rent increases, security deposits, lease terms, and rights and responsibilities. Racial and Ethnic Segregation • FHF provided fair housing literature in both English and Spanish. • PSAs were aired on the City's cable station. • Participated in quarterly OCHA (PHA) Housing Advisory Committee meetings. • The City does not offer homebuyer assistance programs. Reasonable Accommodations • FHF provided fair housing related serves to 490 unduplicated households from tenants, landlords and managers, and property owners. 33 fair housing allegations were received by FHF. Protected classes included race (8), familial status (1), and mental and physical disability (22). 22 allegations were resolved — I I cases were opened and 2 are pending. No evidence was found in 4 cases to sustain allegations; however, 4 cases were opened and ultimately resolved via conciliation. FHF conducted 3 landlord and 3 certified property managers trainings. FHF developed an "Accommodation & Modification 101 Workshop" for housing providers that covers the legal parameters that housing providers need to know in order to make an informed decision when addressing accommodation & modification requests. Unfair Lending The City no longer offers homebuyer assistance. FHF utilizes the City's quarterly magazine to promote housing rehabilitation programs. The magazine is distributed to each housing unit city-wide. Density Bonus Incentives • The City's Zoning code was amended to comply with current state density bonus law during prior report period. City of Costa Mesa During the report period the City took the following actions in an effort to overcome the impediments to fair housing choice identified in the AI: 10 75A-289 Housing Discrimination • Fair housing services was provided to 902 Costa Mesa households dealing with general housing issues and allegations of discrimination. Over 669 issues, disputes, and/or inquires were addressed. The majority of general housing issues addressed by the FHF included notices, habitability issues, security deposits, and rent increases. • 65 housing discrimination inquiries were received by the FHF: 9 based on physical or mental disability, 8 related to race, 2 related to national origin, 2 related to gender, 1 related to sexual orientation, and 5 related to familial status. 45 were counseled/resolved, and 15 cases were opened. Investigations found no evidence of discrimination in 9 cases; 2 were inconclusive; and in 4 cases the allegations were sustained and the investigation is pending for 2 cases and resolved for 2 cases. • The City worked closely with the FHF to provide certified fair housing training for housing industry realtors and property managers — 7 workshops were conducted during the report period. Additionally, 7 tenant and 7 landlord workshops were conducted in Costa Mesa. Racial and Ethnic Segregation • Literature related to fair housing were distributed at these events, at City Hall, community centers, and community events. Literature was provided to the community in English, Spanish and Vietnamese. City staff distributed large numbers of this literature in target neighborhoods in conjunction with other neighborhood improvement efforts. Reasonable Accommodations FHF developed an "Accommodation & Modification 101 Workshop" for housing providers that covers the legal parameters that housing providers need to know in order to make an informed decision when addressing accommodation and modification requests. Unfair Lending • The City does not offer homebuyer assistance. Housing Rehab programs are marketed citywide in English and Spanish. Density Bonus Incentive • The City's Zone Codes are compliant with current State density bonus laws. City of Fountain Valley Housing Discrimination • Fair housing outreach and training, general counseling and referrals, and testing/audits provided by Fair Housing Council of Orange County (FHCOC). Racial and Ethnic Segregation • Fair housing services, education/outreach, and testing in areas of racial/ethnic concentrations provided by FHCOC. • Grants, rebates and loans are available to low-income, owner -occupied households for repair and rehabilitation through the City's Home Improvement Program. 11 75A-290 • The zoning code was updated in 2018 to remain consistent with the California density bonuslaw. • The city and FHCOC provide fair housing and neighborhood improvement program information in multiple languages. • Housing rehabilitation programs are marketed to low income households which include areas of racial/ethnic concentration Reasonable Accommodations • Fair housing education and information on reasonable modifications/accommodations are provided to apartment managers and homeowners association by FHCOC. Discriminatory Advertising • FHCOC periodically monitors local newspapers and online media outlets to identify potentially discriminatory housing advertisements. Unfair Lending • Housing rehabilitation programs are marketed to low income households which include high minority concentrations and limited English speaking proficiency areas. Zoning • Fountain Valley's Zoning Code was updated in 2016 to treat transitional and supportive housing as a residential use, subject to the same standards as other residential uses of the same type in the same zone. Density Bonus hicentives • Fountain Valley's Zoning Code was updated in 2018 to continually remain consistent with State density bonus law. City of Garden Grove Housing Discrimination • In partnership with the Fair Housing Foundation, the City conducted multi -faceted fair housing outreach to tenants, landlords, property owners, realtors, and property management companies. Methods of outreach included workshops, informational booths at community events, presentations to community groups, staff trainings, and distribution of multi-lingual fair housing literature. • Conducted focused outreach and education to small property owners/landlords on fair housing, and race, reasonable accommodation and familial status issues in particular. Conducted property manager trainings on a regular basis, targeting managers of smaller properties, and promoted fair housing certificate training. • Provided general counseling and referrals to address tenant -landlord issues and provided periodic tenant -landlord walk-in clinics at City Hall and other community locations. 12 75A-291 Racial and Ethnic Segregation • Coordinated with the Fair Housing Foundation to focus fair housing services, education/outreach, and/or additional testing in identified areas of racial/ethnic concentrations. • Offered a variety of housing opportunities to enhance mobility among residents of all races and ethnicities. Facilitate the provision of affordable housing throughout the community through: 1) available financial assistance; 2) flexible development standards; 3) density bonuses; and 4) other zoning tools. • Promoted equal access to information on the availability of affordable housing by providing information in multiple languages, and through methods that have proven successful in outreaching to the community, particularly those hard -to -reach groups. • Affirmatively marketed first-time homebuyer and/or housing rehabilitation programs to low- and moderate -income areas, and areas of racial/ethnic concentration. • Worked collaboratively with local housing authorities to ensure affirmative fair marketing plans and de -concentration policies were implemented. Reasonable Accommodations • In partnership with the Fair Housing Foundation, continued to provide fair housing education and information to apartment managers and homeowner associations on why denial of reasonable modifications/accommodations is unlawful. Discriminatory Advertising • In partnership with the Fair Housing Foundation, periodically monitored local newspapers and online media outlets to identify potentially discriminatory housing advertisements. • Took steps to encourage the Orange County Register to publish a Fair Housing Notice and a "no pets" disclaimer that indicates rental housing owners must provide reasonable accommodations, including "service animals" and "companion animals" for disabled persons. Hate Crimes • Continued to coordinate with various City and County housing, building and safety, health and sanitation, law enforcement and legal aid offices to offer support services for victims of hate crimes or other violent crimes — inclusive of housing resources. Unfair Lending • In partnership with the Fair Housing Foundation, identified potential issues regarding redlining, predatory lending and other illegal lending activities. In addition, the City reviewed agreements annually to make sure that increased and comprehensive services are being provided, and that education and outreach efforts are expanded and affirmatively marketed in low and moderate income and racial concentrated areas. • Collaborated with local lenders and supported lenders' efforts to work with community groups to help minority households purchase their homes. Ensured that minority groups have access and knowledge of City programs, supportive services, and provide for networking opportunities with these groups. 13 75A-292 • Coordinated with local lenders to expand outreach efforts to first time homebuyers in minority neighborhoods. • Affirmatively marketed first-time homebuyer and/or housing rehabilitation programs in neighborhoods with high denial rates, high minority population concentrations and limited English-speaking proficiency to help increase loan approval rates. Housing for Persons with Disabilities The City has adopted formal policies and procedures in the Municipal Code to reasonably accommodate the housing needs of disabled residents. Zoning Regulations • The City has an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) ordinance that allows for the production in all residential zones. • Single -Room Occupancy Housing: the City has specific provisions for SROs in our Zoning Ordinances and has clarified in our Housing Elements how SROs are provided for under other zoning classifications. • Transitional/Supportive Housing: the City has ordinances and development standards that allow transitional and supportive housing in the manner prescribed by State law, regulated as a residential use and subject to the same permitting and standards as similar residential uses of the same type in the same zone. Density Bonus hicentives The City is amending the Zoning Code to reflect current State density bonus law. City of Huntington Beach Housing Discrimination • The City's Code Enforcement staff provides fair housing information and referrals to tenants in the field. Racial and Ethnic Segregation • The City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance allows for developers to be eligible for reduced City fees if projects exceed the minimum (10%) inclusionary requirements on -site. • In early 2020, the City established an Affordable Housing Overlay within the Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan that allows for ministerial (by -right) project approval and other development incentives for projects providing a minimum of 20% of the total units affordable to lower income households on -site. • Since 2016, the City has approved four density bonus projects. • In fiscal year 2015/16, the City established a tenant based rental assistance program (TBRA); program assistance includes security deposit and rental assistance paid directly to the landlord as well as housing relocation and stabilization services, case managements, outreach, housing search and placement, legal services, and financial management/credit repair. 14 75A-293 Density Bonus Incentives • The City of Huntington Beach has not updated its zoning code to reflect current state regarding density bonus. However, practically speaking, the City has implemented the state law regarding density bonus. Since 2016, the City has received four density bonus requests; all four projects were approved. All four projects were reviewed for compliance with state density bonus law (including the two that have not been incorporated into the City's zoning code). City of Irvine Housing Discrimination • The City provided general housing services to address tenant- landlord issues. • The City provided fair housing education services in Irvine, including informational booths at community events, overview presentations to community -based organizations, resident associations and government agencies and more detailed workshops tailored to specific audiences such as housing consumers or housing providers. • The City and its fair housing provider, Fair Housing Foundation, investigated all allegations of housing discrimination to determine if discrimination has occurred and continue advising complainants of their rights and options under the law. Discriminatory Advertising • The City monitored local newspapers and online media outlets periodically to identify potentially discriminatory housing advertisements. When identified, contact the individual or firm and provide fair housing education with the goal of eliminating this practice. • The City, through its fair housing provider, provided fair housing education services in Irvine, including the Certificate Management Training Certificate Management training classes for property owners, managers, management companies and real estate professionals. Reasonable Accommodations • The City provided fair housing education workshops such as the "Accommodation and Modification 101 Workshop" to Irvine housing providers on an annual basis. • The City provided access to Certificate Management classes for rental property owners and managers from Irvine on an annual basis. Hate Crimes • Continue to monitor FBI data to determine if there are actions that may be taken by the City or its fair housing service provider to address potential discrimination linked to the bias motivations of hate crimes. Continue to coordinate with various City and County housing, building and safety, health and sanitation, law enforcement and legal aid offices to maintain a comprehensive referral list of support services for victims of hate crimes or other violent crimes — inclusive of housing resources. 15 75A-294 Unfair Lending • The City monitors Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data to determine if there are significant shifts in the approval rates for applicants of different race or ethnicities from year to year. • The City provided/participated in homebuyer workshops in Irvine or the Orange County region to educate potential homebuyers on their rights under the Fair Housing Act with respect to lenders and fair lending practices. City of La Habra Housing Discrimination • La Habra worked with the Fair Housing Foundation (FHF) and previously worked with Fair Housing Council of Orange County to provide education and outreach activities, trainings to owners and managers, general counseling and referrals, and tenant -landlord walk-in clinics. Racial and Ethnic Segregation • La Habra has a grant/loan program available for low-income residents to receive assistance in the rehabilitation of owner -occupied properties. • La Habra's Zone Codes allow for use of density bonus in order to encourage developers to include units with restricted rents or reduced sales prices for low and moderate -income households. La Habra along with the Fair Housing Council of Orange County (2015) and the Fair Housing Foundation (2016-current) provides information in both English and Spanish. La Habra also provides bilingual pay to employees that speak other non-English languages. Finally, La Habra has a contract with Links Sign Language & Interpreting Service to provide translation service for languages in which bilingual staff cannot provide in house including American Sign Language. La Habra participates in the Cities Advisory Committee hosted by Orange County Housing Authority to discuss housing issues and housing choice vouchers within the County. Although La Habra does not have a down payment assistance program, residents are referred to NeighborWorks of Orange County for down payment assistance. La Habra also hosted a homebuyer education workshop with NeighborWorks of Orange County to provide education and training to first-time homebuyers, lenders and realtors. These workshops are marketed to areas of racial/ethnic concentrations within La Habra. Reasonable Accommodations • La Habra worked with Fair Housing Council of Orange County and now the Fair Housing Foundation to conduct seminars on reasonable accommodation. n=during Fiscal Year 2015 to provide these services. During Fiscal Year 2016 until current, Fair Housing Foundation provides these services for La Habra. 16 75A-295 Discriminatory Advertising • La Habra worked with both Fair Housing Council of Orange County and the Fair Housing Foundation to monitor local newspapers and online media outlets to identify potentially discriminatory housing advertisements. Unfair Lending • La Habra worked with NeighborWorks of Orange County to market first-time homebuyers counseling and other programs. NeighborWorks also provides lender trainings so that lenders make loans available to minorities and limited English-speaking persons. Density Bonus Incentives • La Habra's Density Bonus Ordinance was updated in 2010, and per City Attorney, the City's Ordinance remains consistent with State density bonus law. City of Lake Forest Fair Housing Education • Regionally, FHCOC conducted/participated in 467 education and outreach activities. Individuals were made aware of fair housing laws and services — 78 of these activities took place in Lake Forest. • Regionally, 32 training sessions were provided for rental property owners/managers, and 9 fair housing seminars were conducted with the Apartment Association of Orange County. • 63 fair housing workshops for housing consumers & providers were held throughout Orange County including 3 landlord & 5 tenant workshops in Lake Forest Fair Housing Enforcement • Regionally, FHCOC received 373 allegations of housing discrimination and opened 179 cases. 11 allegations and 4 case involved Lake Forest. On a regional basis, FHCOC also conducted 403 paired, on -site, systemic tests for discriminatory rental housing practices, with 18 occurring in Lake Forest. • Housing Dispute Evaluation & Resolution — on a regional basis, FHCOC assisted 7,664 unduplicated households address 24,786 issues, disputes or inquires including 314 unduplicated households involving 983 issues from Lake Forest. Reasonable Accommodations • On a regional basis, 53 inquiries regarding reasonable accommodations and modifications were received by FHCOC — 1 from Lake Forest. • 4 landlord & 6 tenant fair housing workshops were held in Lake Forest. Topics covered included information regarding reasonable modifications/accommodations. Web -based Outreach • FHCOC's multi -language website has an online housing discrimination complaint - reporting tool that generates. The City has a link to the FHCOC website where residents can access this information. 17 75A-296 Monitoring Advertising • A limited number of Orange County rentals listed on Craigslist were monitored by FHCOC. Discriminatory ads were flagged and FHCOC informed the poster of possible discriminatory content. FHCOC also brought ads to the attention of Craigslist or referred the ad to FHCOC's investigators for possible action. Other on-line sites (OC Register, LA Times) were sporadically monitored. Problematic postings indicated restrictions regarding children under the age of 18 or improper preference for seniors for housing that did not appear qualified as housing for persons age 55 and over. Unfair Lending • Monitor Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data — analysis of 2008 HMDA data was included in the 2010-2015 Regional Al. Although subsequent data was available, lack of resources prevented FHCOC from updating the analysis. Analyses of HMDA data from 2008 to 2013, and other mortgage lending practices, were included in the 2016 Multi -Jurisdictional AI, in which Lake Forest was a participant. Racial and Ethnic Segregation • FHCOC produced and disseminated written fair housing related materials in English, Spanish and Vietnamese to the City of Lake Forest. Materials were placed in public areas of City Hall. FHCOC also took specific outreach efforts to immigrant populations in low- income neighborhoods. • Under its Fair Housing Initiatives Program grant, FHCOC targeted fair housing services to the disabled, minority groups, and limited English proficiency immigrants. • Through its foreclosure prevention activities FHCOC assisted individuals with limited English proficiency. City of Mission Viejo During the report period the City took the following actions in an effort to overcome the impediments to fair housing choice identified in the AI: • The City's website provides links to the City's fair housing provider. • The City continued to collaborate with the Fair Housing Foundation (FHF) to ensure comprehensive fair housing outreach is carried out in the community and to affirmatively market services: o Fair housing services was provided to 229 Mission Viejo households dealing with general housing issues and allegations of discrimination. 0 10 housing discrimination inquiries were received by the FHF. 4 inquires alleged discrimination based on a physical disability, 1 based on a mental disability, 1 based on race, 3 based on national origin, and I based on gender discrimination. 8 cases were counseled and resolved, but 2 cases were opened. Upon further investigation, 2 case were closed due to a lack of evidence. With respect to general housing issues addressed by the FHF, the majority of housing issues related rights and responsibilities, notices, and habitability issues. lu 75A-297 o The City worked closely with the FHF to provide certified fair housing training for housing industry realtors and property managers — 6 workshops were conducted during the report period. Additionally, 10 tenant and 10 landlord workshops were conducted in Mission Viejo. Additionally, four Fair Housing Walk-in Clinics were held in the City during the report period. Literature related to fair housing were distributed at these events, at City Hall, community centers, and community events. Literature was provided to the community in English and Spanish. o Due to the loss of significant revenue (e.g., redevelopment) and continued reductions in HUD funding, the City did not have the opportunity to collaborate with local lenders to target marketing efforts and services in Low- and Moderate - Income areas of the City. The consultant preparing the updated multi jurisdictional AI provided technical assistance to cities that had identified public sector impediments such as: — Family definition inconsistent with fair housing laws; — Lack of a definition of disability; — Lack of a reasonable accommodation procedure; - Lack of zoning regulations for special needs housing; — Lack of a fair housing discussion in zoning and planning documents. City of Rancho Santa Margarita Fair Housing Outreach and Education • FHCOC participated in 467 region -wide education and outreach activities, reaching a culturally and ethnically diverse audience. 1 was held in RSM. Additionally, 32 training sessions were provided for rental property owners/managers, and 9 fair housing seminars were conducted in cooperation with the Apartment Association of Orange County. Fair Housing Enforcement • On a regional basis, FHCOC staff received 363 allegations of housing discrimination and opened 179 cases — 6 allegations and 4 cases involved housing in RSM. Regionally, FHCOC also conducted 360 paired, on -site, systemic tests for discriminatory rental housing practices, with 6 occurring in RSM. Housing Dispute Evaluation & Resolution • On a regional basis, services provided by FHCOC included assisting approximately 7,665 unduplicated households address over 24,740 issues, disputes and/or inquires. Of these, 188 unduplicated households were from Rancho Santa Margarita. Racial and Ethnic Segregation • Regionally, literature regarding fair housing was distributed in English, Spanish & Vietnamese. FHCOC's website has an online housing discrimination complaint reporting tool that generates an email to FHCOC. It is also used for other, non-discrimination, housing -related issues. RSM has a link to the FHCOC website where residents can access this information. 19 75A-298 • The City does not offer homebuyer assistance programs. Housing rehabilitation programs are advertised citywide. • City attended quarterly meetings the OCHA to discuss a variety of housing issues and assisted housing policies — FHCOC staff also attends quarterly meetings. Reasonable Accommodations • On a regional basis, 53 inquiries regarding reasonable accommodations and modifications were received by FHCOC that resulted in casework beyond basic counseling, including 1 from RSM. 8 households received accommodations. FHCOC assisted those denied an accommodation by filing an administrative housing discrimination complaint with the HUD Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. None of these cases involved RSM residents or properties. • 1 fair housing workshop was held in RSM. Topics covered included information regarding reasonable modifications/accommodations. Web -based Outreach • FHCOC's multi -language website currently has an on-line housing discrimination complaint -reporting tool that generates an email to FHCOC. The City of Rancho Santa Margarita has a link to the FHCOC website where residents can access this information. Monitoring On-line Advertising • As permitted by staffmg limitations, Orange County rentals listed on Craigslist were monitored by FHCOC for discriminatory content. Discriminatory advertisements were flagged and brought to the attention of Craigslist. Some ads were referred to FHCOC's investigators for possible enforcement action. Other on-line rental sites (e.g., OC Register, LA Times) were intermittently monitored. Without exception, problematic postings indicated restrictions regarding children under the age of 18 or improper preference for `older adults' for housing opportunities that did not appear qualify as housing for individuals age 55 plus. Unfair Lending • FHCOC reports that ongoing monitoring of Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data continues to be infeasible due to limited resources. Analysis of updated HMDA data from 2008 to 2013, as well as other mortgage lending practices, was included part of the 16 Orange County Cities Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (2015), in which the City of RSM was a participant. • Presently, the City of RSM does not offer homebuyer assistance programs; however, program staff provides referrals to the Orange County Affordable Housing Clearinghouse and NeighborWorks Orange County. • FHCOC continued efforts to promote housing affordability within Orange County. It provided services and outreach to organizations involved in the creation and preservation of affordable housing. These groups included the Kennedy Commission, Mental Health Association of Orange County, AIDS Services Foundation, Affordable Housing 20 75A-299 Clearinghouse, Jamboree Housing Corporation, Orange County Congregations Community Organizations, and Orange County Community Housing Corporation. Density Bonus Incentives • City Planning staff has confirmed that current zoning code is consistent with current State density bonus law. City of San Clemente Housing Discrimination • The Fair Housing Foundation (FIIF) provided fair housing services to 261 San Clemente households, most of whom were Hispanic. Issues included housing discrimination, notices received, habitability issues, security deposit disputes, and lease terms. • 5 housing discrimination inquiries were received and investigated, 4 related to physical or mental disability discrimination and 1 related to marital status. 2 were resolved, 2 cases were opened and then resolved. • FHF provided 4 property management trainings, 4 landlord trainings, 3 tenant workshops, and 4 walk-in clinics. • FHF participated in 11 community events. Racial and Ethnic Segregation • FHF provided fair housing literature in both English and Spanish. • PSAs were aired on the City's cable station. • Participated in quarterly OCHA (PHA) Housing Advisory Committee meetings. Reasonable Accommodations • FHF conducted 3 landlord and 3 certified property managers trainings. City- of Santa Ana Housing Discrimination In partnership with the Orange County Fair Housing Council, Inc., the City conducted multi -faceted fair housing outreach to tenants, landlords, property owners, realtors, and property management companies on an annual basis. Methods of outreach included workshops, informational booths, presentations to civic leaders and community groups, staff trainings, and distribution of multi-lingual fair housing literature. o The City contracted with the Orange County Fair Housing Council for up to $60,000 per year from 2015-2019 to conduct this outreach. The funds came from the City's administrative funds for the implementation of the CDBG Program. The City conducted focused outreach to small property owners/ landlords; conducted property manager trainings on an annual basis and promoted fair housing certificate training. 21 75A-300 o The City held an annual property manager training in February or March of each year. o The City sent information on fair housing to property owners and managers who participate in the Housing Choice Voucher Program. o In August of each year, the City provided an annual mandatory training on fair housing for all employees in the City's Housing Division in partnership with the Orange County Fair Housing Council. • The City provided tenant counseling and referrals to address specific tenant -landlord issues. o Fair Housing programs and resources were included in all voucher issuance briefings and reasonable accommodation tracking logs updated. Communication was maintained with the Orange County Fair Housing Council, Public Law Center, and Legal Aid, to ensure proper referrals for anyone alleging discrimination. o A new DVD on Fair Housing was implemented for all voucher issuance meetings. Racial and Ethnic Segregation • The City coordinated with the Orange County Fair Housing Council to focus fair housing services, education/outreach, and additional testing in areas of racial/ethnic concentrations. o In addition to its fair housing services funded by the City, the Orange County Fair Housing Council, engaged in additional work to affirmatively further fair housing through its HUD Fair Housing Initiative Program (FHIP) enforcement and education and outreach grants. o The City provided an annual mandatory training on fair housing for all employees in the City's Housing Division in partnership with the Orange County Fair Housing Council. • The City offered a variety of housing opportunities to enhance mobility among residents of all races and ethnicities. The City facilitated the provision of affordable housing throughout the community through: 1) the provision of financial assistance; 2) approving flexible development standards; 3) approving density bonuses; and 4) other zoning tools. o In regards to the provision of financial assistance, the City provided rental assistance through the Housing Choice Voucher Program. Specifically: • The City administered over $30 million per year in funding from HUD for the Housing Choice Voucher Program. The City also administered additional funding and vouchers as discussed below. • In FY 2018, SAHA received an award of 75 HUD -Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Project -Based Vouchers (HUD-VASH PBVs) under PIH Notice 2016-11. Following the award, SAHA issued an REP and awarded the 75 HUD-VASH PBVs to Jamboree Housing for the development of Santa Ana Veterans Village. The Santa Ana Veterans Village is the development of 75 permanent supportive housing units in the City of Santa Ana for homeless veterans. The project includes an investment of 75 HUD -Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) Project -Based Vouchers from the Santa Ana Housing Authority and $477,345 in HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds. The 62,248 square foot development will provide 70 one -bedroom units and 6 two -bedroom units (of which one will be a manager's unit) serving HUD-VASH eligible 22 75A-301 residents earning at or below 30% of the Area Median Income. All residents will receive wrap -around supportive services from the Department of Veterans Affairs and Step Up on Second as the service provider. Following the execution of the PBV HAP Contract with Jamboree for this project, the Annual Contributions Contract for SAHA was increased from 2,699 to 2,774. • On October 9, 2017, SAHA submitted a Registration of Interest for one hundred (100) HUD-VASH vouchers in response to PIH Notice 2017-17. In FY 2019, SAHA, received an award of 100 HUD -Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Project -Based Vouchers (HUD-VASH PBVs) under PIH Notice 2017-17 and an additional award of 105 HUD-VASH tenant - based vouchers under PIH Notice 2018-07. Following the award of HUD- VASH PBVs under PIH Notice 2017-17, SAHA issued an RFP and committed the 100 HUD-VASH PBVs to three affordable housing projects including: 8 HUD-VASH PBVs committed to National CORE for the development of the Legacy Square project which will include 93 total units of which 33 will be permanent supportive housing; 3 HUD-VASH PBVs committed to HomeAid Orange County for the development of the FX Residences project which will include 11 units of permanent supportive housing; and 89 HUD-VASH PBVs committed to Jamboree Housing for the rehabilitation of the North Harbor Village project to create 89 permanent supportive housing units for qualified and eligible homeless veterans. In September 2018, SAHA also received an award of 50 Mainstream Vouchers following a competitive application process under 2017 Mainstream Voucher Program NOFA FR-6100-N-43. • In November 2019, SAHA received an additional award of seventy (70) Mainstream Vouchers following a competitive application process under the Mainstream Voucher Program NOFA FR-6300-N-43. In November 2019, SAHA also received an award of twenty-five (25) Foster Youth to Independence Tenant -Protection Vouchers following a competitive application process under Notice PIH 2O19 -20. In regards to financial assistance, flexible development standards, density bonuses; and other zoning tools, the City approved various forms of financial assistance (Housing Successor Agency, CDBG, HOME, Project -Based Vouchers, Inclusionary Housing Funds) and variances to development standards and density bonus agreements for the following affordable housing projects: First Street A artrnents 1440 E. First Street Developer AMCAL Multi -Housing, LLC. Demolition and new construction of an affordable multifamily apartment Description complex consisting of 68 units of rental housing serving very -low and extremely -low income families, and 1 manager's unit. City Funds Housing Successor Agency ($8,522,740) 23 75A-302 Santa Ana Arts Collective (1666 N. Main Street) Developer Meta Housing Corporation Acquisition, adaptive reuse and new construction project comprised of 57 Description affordable rental units designated for professional artists of all disciplines, and 1 manager's unit. Permanent supportive housing for 15 units will be funded by MHSA/SNHP funds from the County of Orange. Inclusionary Housing ($4,775,000), HOME Investment Partnership Program City Funds (HOME) ($2,627,631), Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) ($500,000) Santa Ana Veterans Village (3312 W. First Street) Developer Jamboree Housing Corporation New construction of an affordable multifamily apartment complex consisting Description of 75 units of permanent supportive housing with wrap -around supportive services for HUD -Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) eligible homeless veterans and 1 manager's unit. City Funds Seventy-five (75) HUD-VASH Project -Based Vouchers, HOME-CHDO ($477,345.90) Aqua Housing (317 E. 17th Street) Developer Community Development Partners with Mercy House as the service provider Acquisition, demolition and new construction of a former motel yielding 56 units of affordable permanent supportive housing with wrap -around Description supportive services for chronically homeless individuals and 1 manager's unit. 28 of the 56 units will be funded by MHSA/SNHP funds from the County of Orange. City Funds Fifty-six (56) Project -Based Vouchers (PBVs) Tiny Tim Plaza (2239 West 5th Street) Developer Community Development Partners New construction of an affordable multifamily apartment complex consisting Description of 50 units of rental housing serving very -low and extremely -low income families, and 1 manager's unit. City Funds Inclusionary Housing ($1,300,000), Housing Successor Agency ($4,700,000) Crossroads at Washington (1126 and 1146 E. Washington Avenue) Developer Related Companies of California with A Community of Friends (ACOF) as the service provider Description New construction of a 100% affordable multifamily apartment complex consisting of 85 units of rental housing and 1 manager's unit. All units will be 24 75A-303 affordable to households earning less than 30% AMI of which 43 units will be set -aside for permanent supportive housing. HOME hivestment Partnerships Program ($3,007,489), Neighborhood City Funds Stabilization Program ($963,951), sixty-two (62) year ground lease agreement for 1126 and 1146 E. Washington Avenue (Appraised Value as of September 22, 2019: $4,108,136) Legacy Square (609 North Spurgeon Street) Developer National Community Renaissance with Mercy House as the service provider New construction of a 100% affordable multifamily apartment complex Description consisting of 92 units of rental housing and 1 manager's unit. All units will be affordable to households earning less than 60 /o AMI of which 33 units will be set -aside for permanent supportive housing. City Funds Inclusionary Housing ($3,170,547) and eight (8) HUD-VASH PBVs In addition, the City also approved a Density Bonus Agreement for each of the following affordable housing projects: o Villa Court Senior Apartments — a 418-unit affordable rental project at 2222 East First Street. o First Point I and II - a 552-unit affordable rental project at 2110, 2114, and 2020 East First Street o First American — a 220-unit residential project which will include 11 affordable units at 114 and 117 East Fifth Street. o A Density Bonus Agreement was also approved for the Legacy Square project mentioned above — a 92-unit affordable rental project at 609 North Spurgeon Street. • The City promoted equal access to information on the availability of affordable housing by providing information in multiple languages, and through methods that have proven successful in outreaching to the community, particularly those hard -to -reach groups. o The City provided this information in the office, on it's website and in informational materials provided to residents. • The City affirmatively marketed first-time homebuyer and/or housing rehabilitation programs to low- and moderate -income areas, and areas of racial/ethnic concentration. o The City held a first-time homebuyer workshop on a quarterly basis and promoted the information widely to all residents in the City. • The City worked collaboratively with local housing authorities to ensure affirmative fair marketing plans and de -concentration policies are implemented. o The City convened a quarterly meeting of local housing authorities to discuss efforts and initiatives to reduce homelessness. Reasonable Accommodations • Through the Orange County Fair Housing Council, Inc., the City continued to provide fair housing education and information to apartment managers and homeowner associations on why denial of necessary reasonable modifications/accommodations is unlawful. 25 75A-304 o The City held an annual property manager training in February or March of each year. o The City sent information on fair housing to property owners and managers who participate in the Housing Choice Voucher Program. o The City provided an annual mandatory training on fair housing for all employees in the City's Housing Division in partnership with the Orange County Fair Housing Council. o Through its HUD Fair Housing Initiative Program (FHIP) grant Orange County Fair Housing Council actively assists disabled persons in requesting and obtaining reasonable accommodations or modifications. Discriminatory Advertising • Through a contract with the Orange County Fair Housing Council, the City periodically monitored local print publications and online platforms to identify potentially discriminatory housing advertisements. When identified, the Orange County Fair Housing Council contacted the individual or firm and provided fair housing education or took appropriate enforcement action. Hate Crimes • The City monitored FBI data to determine if any hate crimes are housing -related and if there are actions that may be taken by the City. The Orange County Fair Housing Council was available to address any possible issues of housing discrimination linked to the bias motivations of hate crimes. • The City coordinated with various City and County housing, building and safety, health and sanitation, law enforcement and legal aid offices to maintain a comprehensive referral list of support services for victims of hate crimes or other violent crimes —inclusive of housing resources. o For FY 2016, the Santa Ana Housing Authority (SAHA): • Updated the definition of the Violence Against Women Act to include sexual assault. • Coordinated with the County of Orange Domestic Violence office for referrals and to ensure applicants and participants are informed on all available services. • Provided information on VAWA in regards to owner/tenant responsibilities and evictions to all program applicants and participants and also mailed to all owners. • SAHA's HCV Administrative Plan details restrictions on terminating assistance for victims of domestic violence, as well as guidelines on terminating assistance for perpetrators of domestic violence. • SAHA discussed VAWA with staff at least once annually. o For FY 2017, FY 2018, FY 2019, and FY 2020, SAHA: • In accordance with the Violence against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (VAWA 2013), SAHA implemented an Emergency Transfer Plan for Victims of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, or Stalking. 26 75A-305 • Implemented HUD-5380 Notice of Occupancy Rights under the Violence Against Women Act, HUD-5382, Certification of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, or Stalking, and Alternate Documentation, and HUD-5383 Emergency Transfer Request for Certain Victims of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, or Stalking. • Coordinated with the County of Orange Domestic Violence office for referrals and to ensure applicants and participants are informed on all available services. • Provided information on VAWA in regards to owner/tenant responsibilities and evictions to all program applicants and participants; e-mailed the information to all owners. • SAHA trained staff on VAWA at least once annually. Staff also proactively provided information on VAWA to any program participant or applicant who may show any evidence that information on VAWA is needed. Unfair Lending • As resources permitted, the City monitored HMDA data annually using the 2013 HMDA analysis as a benchmark. • The City, through its contract with the Orange County Fair Housing Council, had access to resources to identify and/or address any potential issues regarding redlining, predatory lending and other illegal lending activities. Through HUD -funded enforcement activities, Orange County Fair Housing Council has engaged in regional paired pre -application testing to uncover possibly discriminatory mortgage lending practices. In addition, the city reviewed their agreements annually to make sure that increased and comprehensive services are being provided, and that education and outreach efforts are expanded and affirmatively marketed in low and moderate income and racial concentrated areas. • The City ensured that minority groups have access and knowledge of City programs, supportive services by providing information as widely as possible to the community in multiple languages. • The City coordinate with local lenders to expand outreach efforts to first time homebuyers in minority neighborhoods by providing quarterly workshops to first time homebuyers in partnership with NeighborWorks Orange County. • The City affirmatively marketed first-time homebuyer and/or housing rehabilitation programs in neighborhoods with high denial rates, high minority population concentrations and limited English speaking proficiency to help increase loan approval rates by providing quarterly workshops to first time homebuyers in partnership with NeighborWorks Orange County and providing information as widely as possible to the community in multiple languages. Zoning Codes • The City complied with current State density bonus law even though the municipal code was not updated to reflect current State law for the following projects: o Villa Court Senior Apartments — a 418-unit affordable rental project at 2222 East First Street. 27 75A-306 o First Point I and II — a 552-unit affordable rental project at 2110, 2114, and 2020 East First Street o First American — a 220-unit residential project which will include 11 affordable units at 114 and 117 East Fifth Street. o Legacy Square — a 92-unit affordable rental project at 609 North Spurgeon Street. City of Tustin Housing Discrimination • Although the 2015-2020 Al documentation refers to the Fair Housing Council of OC to provide fair housing assistance, the City of Tustin contracts with the Fair Housing Foundation to provide such services. During the 2018-2019 Fiscal Year, the Fair Housing Foundation assisted the City of Tustin with combatting housing discrimination through managing twelve (12) allegation cases and one (1) discrimination case for Tustin residents, providing services to those individuals throughout the case management process. They also provided ample fair housing education and outreach to further prevent discrimination, assisting 127 Tustin landlords/tenants who were provided with either landlord/tenant counseling, mediation, UD assistance, and/or referral services during the last fiscal year. Overall, the Fair Housing Foundation's outreach efforts assisted 672 individuals within City of Tustin limits during the 2018-2019 Fiscal Year. Discriminatory Advertising • The City of Tustin partners with the Fair Housing Foundation to address issues such as discriminatory advertising. As allowed by resources, FHF reviews advertising for Orange County rentals and Los Angeles County rentals listed in media such as The Orange County Register, La Opinion, Los Angeles Sentinel, local weekly newspapers, Craigslist and The Penny Saver for discriminatory content. Potential discriminatory advertisements were referred for further investigation and possible enforcement action. Reasonable Accommodations Similarly, the City of Tustin has actively contracted and engaged with the Fair Housing Foundation to provide educational services to owners and managers of apartment complexes on why this practice is unlawful. The Fair Housing Foundation partners with a wide variety of agencies, notably the Tustin Effective Apartment Managers (TEAM) group to provide resources and services directed to affirmatively furthering fair housing. The Fair Housing Foundation has also implemented the "Accommodation & Modification 101 Workshop" to continue strengthening the bonds between the Fair Housing Foundation and housing providers, and to continue to provide education on their fair housing rights. The housing providers who attended this workshop stated that they had a better understanding and a greater sense of knowledge and confidence in knowing the difference in identifying a reasonable an unreasonable accommodation or modification request. As a result of this workshop, housing providers have a better understanding of their responsibilities and disabled residents or rental home seekers will most likely benefit from having requests reviewed and evaluated in a fair manner. 28 75A-307 Hate Crimes • The Fair Housing Foundation has not received notification of any hate crimes within the City of Tustin during the recent reporting period. When the Fair Housing Foundation is contacted by a victim of a hate crime occurring at their place of residence, the Fair Housing Foundation refers them to the O.C. Human Relations Commission, and assists with their fair housing complaint. The Fair Housing Foundation assists by counseling, completing an intake, opening a case, and investigating the allegation(s). Unfair Lending • As part of its outreach efforts the Fair Housing Foundation informs individuals and organizations of its services, which include housing counseling for individuals seeking to become ready for a home purchase. The Fair Housing Foundation participates in numerous education and/or outreach activities, reaching a culturally and ethnically diverse audience, in Cities of Costa Mesa, Mission Viejo, San Clemente, and Tustin) which they inform participants of fair housing laws and of their counseling services Cities of Costa Mesa, Mission Viejo, San Clemente, and Tustin Housing Page Website • The Cities of Tustin, San Clemente, Costa Mesa, and Mission Viejo have updated their websites to provide information regarding education opportunities and links to the Fair Housing Foundation (FHF). Information was also provided in Spanish in Costa Mesa. The FHF has reported that during this Consolidated Plan period, 17,754 hits to their website have been received, and as of current, they have 187 Facebook, and 65 Twitter followers. Expand Marketing of Fair Housing Services to Protected Classes • FHF has provided fair housing trainings throughout the sub -region and currently provides trainings for landlords, managers, realtors, and other housing providers on a regular basis. The FIIF regularly reaches out to real estate boards, property owner associations, and offers fair housing trainings for their members. The general types of trainings conducted for housing providers are: o Landlord Workshops - A two-hour training geared toward property owners and managers that covers the Federal and State Fair Housing Laws, the rental process, selection criteria, rental agreements, rules and regulations, obligations and guidelines regarding late fees, security deposits, rent increases, and termination. The training also covers specific concerns regarding families with children, occupancy standards and reasonable accommodations and modifications. o Certificate Management Trainings — A four-hour intensive training geared towards property owners, managers, management companies and real estate professionals that covers a detailed overview of the Fair Housing Laws, general guidelines, families with children, lead disclosure, occupancy limits, reasonable regulations of facilities, people with disabilities, sexual harassment, advertising guidelines, prohibited practice and hate crimes. A question and answer session follows the training. 29 75A-308 o Disability Policy Workshop- A two-hour training geared towards housing providers, which covers the basics of what needs to be addressed in a property's disability policy. The training discusses property accessibility, reasonable accommodations and modifications, accessibility policies, and disability discrimination. Collaborate with Fair Housing Provider and Include Testing/Audits in the Contract • Through counseling and case management, the Fair Housing Foundation has identified that in addition to complaints on familial status, more prevalent in the sub -region are complaints regarding disability, specifically in the form of denying reasonable accommodations for prospective tenants with physical disabilities. While provisions for audit services were not always available to address this issue, the Fair Housing Foundation did open nearly 100 bonafide discrimination cases within the sub -region since 2010 which were investigated through on -site testing, document review, and surveys. Most complainants were in place tenants, of lower income, and Latino. • When there was provision for audits and testing, or when the number of cases opened and investigated fell short of the annual performance goal, the FHF conducted discrimination and educational audits and workshops to address the most common concerns found in the housing industry. For Mission Viejo specifically, the FHF conducted 7 audits on physical disability and reasonable accommodations and concluded that one of the seven audits had evidence to support the discrimination allegation. • Educational audits were conducted by randomly selecting housing providers and asking them to complete questionnaires based on the three most alleged protective classes: Disability, Race, and Familial Status. Of the 15 housing providers who participated in the educational audit, most were knowledgeable in all areas of the questionnaire. • The Fair Housing Foundation held several Accommodation & Modification 101 workshops for housing providers. The workshop covered the following topics: o Overview of protected classifications o Definition of disability, life activities, and impairments o Modifications and accommodations o Examples of common accommodations and modifications o Important data needed o verification forms o Approval notices o Denial of request for accommodations/modifications o Construction requirements and accessibility o Hoarding Collaborate with other Fair Housing and Legal Services Organizations Due to a lack of funding, the four cities in the sub -region did not have an opportunity to collaborate with the Orange County Human Relations, the Public Law Center, Legal Aid Society, or the Center Orange County. However, the cities contracted with the Fair Housing Foundation to provide education and outreach to both housing providers and consumers in their cities. A component of these services is providing referrals, when necessary, to these organizations, as well as to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and HUD. 30 75A-309 Increase Education and Outreach Efforts Related to the Homebuying Process • Due to the loss of significant revenue (e.g., redevelopment) and continued reductions in HUD funding, three of the four cities in the sub -region did not carry out any education or outreach efforts related to home buying or down payment assistance. In past years, education and outreach efforts had been conducted in conjunction with the City's redevelopment -funded homebuyer assistance program. The City of Tustin, however, did provide education to 46 households that received down payment assistance from nonfederal funds since 2010. Undertake Affirmative Marketing • Each city's ability to fund and hence, affirmatively market, affordable housing programs, such as a first-time homebuyer or housing rehabilitation program has been limited due to the elimination of Redevelopment Agencies in California which provided leverage funding for these programs. Continual annual reductions in HOME entitlement funds, also make it challenging to effectively administer these programs. However, the sub -region had these accomplishments to report for Action 6: o Costa Mesa affirmatively marketed their HOME -funded owner -occupied rehabilitation program and assisted 108 households of diverse ethnicity, age, size, and physical ability since 2010. o Since 2010, Mission Viejo affirmatively marketed their owner -occupied rehabilitation program and was successful at funding 62 loans and grants to eligible households. o Since 1994, the City of San Clemente has marketed and operated a CDBG-funded single- family rehabilitation loan program. The program, offering up to $15,000 to owners for home improvements, is advertised in the City's quarterly magazine, which is mailed to over 31,000 residents and businesses in the city, and is publicly noticed in the city's local newspaper. o The City of Tustin assumed responsibility for marketing 262 affordable rental units at Tustin Legacy to low- and moderate -income households. Tustin also collaborates with the Orange County Housing Authority to provide 347 senior, disabled, and lower income households with housing assistance vouchers through the County's Section 8 program. Collaborate or Expand Fair Housing Education Efforts with Various Property Management Companies, Mobile Home Parks, and Homeowner Associations • Each city in the sub -region contracts with the Fair Housing Foundation to offer a comprehensive fair housing program to their residents. FEE provides fair housing trainings throughout the City and currently provides trainings for landlords, managers, realtors, and other housing providers on a regular basis. There are several types of trainings offered including landlord workshops, Certificate Management Training Seminars and Realtor trainings. o Landlord Workshops - A two-hour training geared toward property owners and managers that covers the Federal and State Fair Housing Laws, the rental process, selection criteria, rental agreements, rules & regulations, obligations & guidelines regarding late fees, security deposits, rent increase, termination, etc. The training also 31 75A-310 covers specific concerns regarding families with children, occupancy standards and reasonable accommodations and modifications. o Certificate Management Trainings —A four-hour intensive training geared towards property owners, managers, management companies and real estate professionals that covers a detailed overview of the Fair Housing Laws, general guidelines, families with children, lead disclosure, occupancy limits, reasonable regulations of facilities, people with disabilities, sexual harassment, advertising guidelines, prohibited practice and hate crimes. This training also includes a "What would you do?" session with specific Fair Housing scenarios discussed in a group forum. o Realtor Trainings — A four-hour training geared towards Realtors that covers a summary of the Fair Housing Laws, general guidelines, policies and practices, equal treatment needs and examples and guidelines to showing properties. • Additionally, the FHF has conducted and continues to offer a Fair Housing 101 and Reasonable Accommodations and Modifications workshops, and conducts educational surveys and audits in the areas of the most common protected classes: Disability, Familial Status, and Race. ,2 75A-311 M. Fair Housing Analvsis A. Demographic Summary This Demographic Summary provides an overview of data concerning race and ethnicity, sex, familial status, disability status, limited English proficiency, national origin, and age. The data included reflects the composition of the Los Angeles -Long Beach -Anaheim Region, Orange County itself, and twenty-two jurisdictions within it. 1. Describe demographic patterns in the jurisdiction and region, and describe trends overtime (since 1990). Orange County is located in Southern California, just south of Los Angeles, with some of the county touching the Pacific Ocean. The county has a plurality white population, with sizable Hispanic and Asian populations. Table 1.1: Demographics, Orange County (Orange County, CA CDBG, ESG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Begot n Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 1,306,398 41.40% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 49,560 1.57% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 1,079,172 34.20% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Is., Non - Hispanic 624,373 19.78% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 6,584 0.21% 25,102 0.20% Two+Races, Non -Hispanic 15,367 2.71% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 1,174 0.21% 30,960 0.24% #1 country oforigin Mexico 345,637 11.21% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Vietnam 146,672 4.75% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Korea 65,579 2.13% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Philippines 53,707 1.74% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 33,226 1.01% Korea 224,370 1.85% 46 country of origin India 31,063 1.01% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Iran 27,718 1.01% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin Taiwan 22,918 0.90% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin El Salvador 17,785 0.58% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country oforigin Canada 14,179 0.46% India 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Spanish 30,862 5.69% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Korean 9,810 1.81% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Vietnamese 9,411 1.73% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Chinese 5,868 1.08% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% 0 LEP Language Persian 2,230 0.41% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Tagalog 2,146 0.40% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% 33 75A-312 47 LEP Language Japanese 1,167 0.22% Persian 41,051 0.34% 78 LEP Language Arabic 1,054 0.19% Ja anese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Urdu 644 0.12% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Russian 587 0.11% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 81,297 2.59% 81,297 2.59% Vision difficulty 51,196 1.63% 51,196 1.63% Cognitive difficulty 99,317 3.16% 99,317 3.16% Ambulatory difficulty 133,232 4.24% 133,232 4.24% Self -care difficulty 61,615 1.96% 61,615 1.96% Independent living difficulty 104,705 3.34% 104,705 3.34% Male 274,258 48.38% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 292,676 51.62% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 132,454 23.36% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 349,144 61.58% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 85,336 15.05% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 65,179 44.98% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Orange County has a plurality non -Hispanic White population (41.400/o), with large populations of Hispanics (34.20%) and non -Hispanic Asians (19.78%). Black residents comprise only 1.57% of the population, and the non -Hispanic Native American population is 0.21%. The percentage of multi -race non - Hispanic population is 2.71%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.21%. National Origin The most common country of origin within the County is Mexico, with 11.21% of the county population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most countries of origin are, in order, Vietnam, Korea, Philippines, China excluding Hong Kong & Taiwan, India, Iran, Taiwan, El Salvador, and Canada. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in the County with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Korean, Vietnamese, Chinese, Persian, Tagalog, Japanese, Arabic, Urdu, and Russian. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by county residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex County residents are 49.33% male and 50.67% female. 34 75A-313 Age The majority of county residents are between 18-64, with 61.58% of residents falling in this group. 23.36% of county residents are under 18, and 15.05% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 44.98% of the total county population. Table 1.2: Demographic Trends, Orange County 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 333,978 76.15% 343,270 65.91% 327,498 57.77% Black, Non - Hispanic 5,751 1.31% 9,452 1.81% 11,226 1.98% Hispanic 59,040 13.46% 92,933 17.84% 119,893 21.15% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 37,583 8.57% 68,197 13.09% 103,614 18.28% Native American, Non -Hispanic 1,445 0.33% 3,462 0.66% 3,137 0.55% National Origin Foreign-bom 69,203 15.77% 106,966 20.54% 127,864 22.55% LEP Limited English Proficiency 36,786 8.38% 59,765 11.48% 68,436 12.07% Sex Male 213,945 48.75% 251,328 48.27% 274,258 48.38% Female 224,946 51.25% 269,332 51.73% 292,676 51.62% Age Under 18 98,846 22.52% 132,717 25.49% 132,454 23.36% 18-64 281,911 64.23% 317,214 60.93% 349,144 61.58% 65+ 58,135 13.25% 70,729 13.58% 85,336 15.05% Family Type Families with children 51,109 44.18% 51,615 48.55% 65,179 44.98% ,� 75A-314 Table 2.1: Demographics, Aliso Viejo Two+ Other. #1 cot #2 cot #3 cot #4 cot #5 cot #6 cot #7 cou #8 cou #9 cou #1 LEP #2 LEP #3 LEP #4 LEP #5 LEP #6 LEP #9 LEP Non - of origi of origi of origi of origi of origi of origi of origi of origi of origi (Aliso Viejo, Orange County) Jurisdiction 30,503 60.17% 856 1.69% 8,932 17.62% 7831 15.45% 218 0.43% 2274 4.49% (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA Re ion # % 4,056,820 31.62% 859,086 6.70% 5,700,860 44.44% 1,888,969 14.72% 25,102 0.20% 267.038 2.08% Mexico 1,530 13.90% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% Iran 1,308 11.89% Philippines 288,529 2.38% Philippines 894 8.12% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% Korea 870 7.91% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% Vietnam 749 6.81% Korea 224,370 1.85% India 738 6.71% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% China, excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan 562 5.11% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% Canada 290 2.64% Iran 133,596 1.10% Taiwan 252 2.29% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% Peru 1 233 1 2.12% India 79,608 0.66% Spanish or Spanish Creole 943 2.04% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% Korean 545 1.18% Chinese 239,576 1.98% Persian 524 1.14% Korean 156,343 1.29% Vietnamese 339 0.74% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% Tagalog 133 0.29% Armenian 87,201 0.72% Japanese 127 0.28% Ta alo 86,691 0.72% Other Asian languages 83 0.18% Persian 41,051 0.34% Russian 77 0.17% Japanese 32,457 0.27% French (incl. Patois, Cajun) 69 0.15% Russian 28,358 0.23% Other Pacific Island 61 Hearing difficulty 914 1.8% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 503 1.0% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 1,140 2.4% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 1,148 2.4% 641,347 5.34% ,6 75A-315 Self -care difficulty 669 1.4% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 913 2.4% 496,105 4.13% Male 23,780 46.94% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 26,881 53.06% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 12,868 25.40% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 33,682 66.49% 8,274,594 64.50 o 65+ 4,111 8.11% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 13,010 69.7% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Aliso Viejo has a majority White population (53.850/o), with significant populations of Hispanic (17.62%) and Asian or Pacific Islander (15.45%) residents as well. Black and Native American populations are extremely low in the city, at 1.69% and 0.43% respectively. National Origin The most common countries of origin for foreign -born residents in the city are Mexico, at 13.90% and Iran, at 11.89%. The remaining most common countries for foreign -born residents, in order, are the Philippines, Korea, Vietnam, India, China excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan, Canada, Taiwan, and Peru. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Aliso Viejo with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish or Spanish Creole. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Korean, Persian, Vietnamese, Tagalog, Japanese, other Asian Languages, Russian, French, and Other Pacific Island Languages. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Aliso Viejo residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, cognitive difficulty, independent living difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Aliso Viejo residents are 46.94%male and 53.06%female. Age The majority of Aliso Viejo residents are between 18-64, with 66.49% of residents falling in this group. 25.40% of city residents are under 18, and 8.11% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 69.7%of Aliso Viejo's population. 37 75A-316 Table 3.1: Demographics, Anaheim (Anaheim, CA CDBG, HOME, ESG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re ion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 87,991 25.21% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 7,843 2.25% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 187,931 53.85% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 57,829 16.57% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 401 0.11% 25,102 0.20°/0 Two+Races, Non -Hispanic 6,137 1.82% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 623 0.18% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Mexico 68,225 19.55% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Vietnam 13,233 3.79% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Philippines 8,968 2.57% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Korea 5,674 1.63% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin India 2,725 0.78% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Guatemala 2,674 0.77% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin El Salvador 2,646 0.76% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% 48 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 1,788 0.51% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Iran 1,313 0.38% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin I Taiwan 1 1,001 0.29% 1 India 1 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Spanish 63,760 20.31% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Vietnamese 7,273 2.32% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3LEP Language Korean 4,117 1.31% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Tagalog 2,591 0.83% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Chinese 2,390 0.76% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Arabic 1,276 0.41% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Persian 644 0.21% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Other Indic Language 533 0.17% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Gu azati 481 0.15% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Other Indo- European Language 479 0.15% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 7,308 2.11% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 4,967 1.43% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficul 11,360 3.27% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 15,684 4.52% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 7,324 2.11% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 12,332 3.55% 496,105 4.13% 38 75A-317 Male 168,317 49.85% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 169,326 50.15% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 92,481 27.39% 92,481 27.39% 18-64 213,574 63.25% 213,574 63.25% 65+ 31,589 9.36% 31,589 9.36% Families with children 38,282 51.43% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Anaheim has a majority Hispanic population (53.850/o), with large populations of non -Hispanic Whites (25.21%) and non -Hispanic Asian residents (16.57%). This represents a much larger Hispanic population than the county as a whole (34.20%). Black residents comprise 2.25% of the population, and the non - Hispanic Native American population is 0.11%. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 1.82%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.18%. National Origin The most common country of origin for those in Anaheim is Mexico, with 19.55% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin are, in order, Vietnam, Philippines, Korea, India, Guatemala, El Salvador, China excluding Hong Kong & Taiwan, Iran, and Taiwan. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Anaheim with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Vietnamese, Korean. Tagalog, Chinese, Arabic, Persian, other Indic Languages, Gujarati, and Other Indo-European Languages. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Anaheim residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, self -care difficulty, hearing difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Anaheim residents are 49.85% male and 50.15% female. Age The majority of Anaheim residents are between 18-64, with 63.25% of residents falling in this group. 27.39% of city residents are under 18, and 9.36% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 51.43% of Anaheim's population. ,9 75A-318 Table 3.2: Demographic Trends, Anaheim 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 151,166 56.06% 117,551 35.85% 93,266 27.62% Black, Non - Hispanic 6,098 2.26% 8,791 2.68% 9,222 2.73% Hispanic 86,359 32.03% 153,420 46.78% 177,540 52.58% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 24,457 9.07% 43,642 13.31% 55,306 16.38% Native American, Non -Hispanic 975 0.36% 2,007 0.61% 1,532 0.45% National Origin Foreign -born 76,795 28.49% 123,353 37.62% 127,512 37.77% LEP Limited English Proficiency 56,117 20.82% 93,273 28.45% 92,680 27.45% Sex Male 136,823 50.75% 164,072 50.04% 168,317 49.85% Female 132,766 49.25% 163,809 49.96% 169,326 50.15% Age Under 18 70,689 26.22% 101,574 30.98% 92,481 27.39% 18-64 176,977 1 65.65% 199,651 1 60.89% 1 213,574 63.25% 65+ 21,923 8.13% 26,656 8.13% 31,589 9.36% Family Type Families with children 32,321 50.08% 37,351 57.02% 38,282 51.43% Table 4.1: Demographics, Buena Park (Buena Park, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re 'on Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 20,670 24.90% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 2,685 3.23% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 33,180 39.97% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 24,447 29.45% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 201 0.24% 25,102 0.20% 40 75A-319 Two+ Races, Non -Hispanic 1,794 2.24% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 135 0.17% 30,960 0.24% #1 country oforigin Mexico 9,682 11.66% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Korea 6,168 7.43% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Philippines 4,998 6.02% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin India 1,585 1.91% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country oforigin Vietnam 1,163 1.40% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Peru 623 0.75% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Thailand 499 0.60% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin El Salvador 436 0.53% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Taiwan 369 0.44% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Afghanistan 368 0.44% India 79,608 0.66% #1 LEP Language Spanish 11,829 15.49% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Korean 6,120 8.01% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Tagalog 1,848 2.42% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Chinese 749 0.98% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Vietnamese 499 0.65% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Other Indic Language 410 0.54% Ta aloa 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Thai 409 0.54% Persian 41,051 0.34% 0 LEP Language Gujarati 380 0.50% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Other Pacific Island Language 276 0.36% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Urdu 213 0.28% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 2,403 2.90% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 1,387 1.68% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 2,290 2.77% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 4,242 5.13% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 1,843 2.23% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 21793 3.38% 496,105 4.13% Male 39,425 49.25% 6,328,434 F9.33% Female 40,622 50.75% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 20,320 25.39% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 51,322 64.11% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 8,404 10.50% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 8,916 46.83% 1,388,564 47.84% 41 75A-320 Race and Ethnicity Buena Park has a plurality Hispanic population (39.97%), with large populations of non -Hispanic Asian residents (29.45%) and non -Hispanic Whites (24.90%). Black residents comprise 3.23%of the population, and non -Hispanic Native American population is 0.24%. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 2.24%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.17%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Buena Park residents is Mexico, with 11.66% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin are, in order, Korea, Philippines, India, Vietnam, Peru, Thailand, El Salvador, Taiwan, and Afghanistan. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Buena Park with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Korean, Tagalog, Chinese, Vietnamese, Other Indic Languages, Thai, Gujarati, Other Pacific Island Languages, and Urdu. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Buena Park residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, hearing difficulty, cognitive difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Buena Park residents are 49.25% male and 50.75% female. Age The majority of Buena Park residents are between 18-64, with 64.11% of residents falling in this group. 25.39% of city residents are under 18, and 10.50% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 46.83% of Buena Park's population. Table 4.2: Demographic Trends, Buena Park 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 39,286 58.15% 29,077 37.27% 21,298 26.61% Black, Non - Hispanic 1,774 2.63% 3,290 4.22% 31272 4.09% Hispanic 16,909 25.03% 26,955 34.55% 32,288 40.34% 42 75A-321 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 9,116 13.49% 17,392 22.29% 22,574 28.20% Native American, Non -Hispanic 327 0.48% 642 0.82% 431 0.54% National Origin Foreign -born 15,358 22.79% 26,072 33.42% 29,903 37.36% LEP Limited English Proficiency 9,978 14.80% 17,635 22.61% 20,822 26.01% Sex Male 33,549 49.78% 38,549 49.42% 39,425 49.25% Female 33,852 50.22% 39,460 50.58% 40,622 50.75% Age Under 18 17,690 26.25% 23,458 30.07% 20,320 25.39% 18-64 44,385 65.85% 47,533 60.93% 51,322 64.11% 65+ 5,325 7.90% 7,018 9.00% 8,404 10.50% Family Type Families with children 8,496 49.42% 8,540 53.860% 8,916 46.83% Table 51: Demographics, Costa Mesa (Costa Mesa, CA CDBG, HOME) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Regoion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 55,764 49.38% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 1,790 1.59% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 41,201 36.48% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 10,613 9.40% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 208 0.18% 25,102 0.20% Two+Races, Non -Hispanic 2,725 2.48% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 246 0.22% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Mexico 14,995 13.28% Mexico 14,995 13.28% #2 country of origin El Salvador 1,418 1.26% El Salvador 1,418 1.26% #3 country of origin Vietnam 1,351 1.20% Vietnam 1,351 1.20% #4 country of origin Philippines 1,219 1.08% Philippines 1,219 1.08% #5 country of origin Japan 954 0.84% Ja an 954 0.84% #6 country oforigin Guatemala 684 0.61% Guatemala 684 0.61% #7 country of origin Iran 620 0.55% Iran 620 0.55% 43 75A-322 #8 country of origin Canada 566 0.50% Canada 566 0.50% #9 country of origin India 501 0.44% India 501 0.44% #10 country of origin Korea 477 0.42% Korea 477 0.42% #1LEPLanguage Spanish 12,486 12.05% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% 42 LEP Language Vietnamese 835 0.81% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Japanese 444 0.43% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Chinese 292 0.28% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Tagalog 205 0.20% Annenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Korean 184 0.18% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% 47 LEP Language Other Pacific Island Language 122 0.12% Persian 41,051 0.34% 48 LEP Language Cambodian 107 0.10% Ja anew 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Arabic 97 0.09°/u Russian 1 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language German 82 0.08% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 2,462 2.19% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 1,967 1.75% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 3,899 3.47% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 4,401 3.91% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 1,737 1.54% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 3,278 2.91% 496,105 4.13% Male 55,886 50.87% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 53,971 49.13% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 23,729 21.60% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 75,989 69.17% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 10,139 9.23% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 11,152 48.03% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Costa Mesa has a near -majority White population (49.380/o), with a large population of Hispanic residents (36.48%) and a sizable population of non -Hispanic Asian residents (9.40%). Black residents comprise 1.59% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native American population is 0.18%. The percentage of multi - race non -Hispanic population is 2.48%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.22%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Costa Mesa residents is Mexico, with 13.28% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin are, in order, El Salvador, Vietnam, Philippines, Japan, Guatemala, Iran, Canada, India, and Korea. 44 75A-323 Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Costa Mesa with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Vietnamese, Japanese, Chinese, Tagalog, Korean, Other Pacific Island Languages, Cambodian, Arabic, and German. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Costa Mesa residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, cognitive difficulty, independent living difficulty, hearing difficulty, vision difficulty, and self -care difficulty. Sex Costa Mesa residents are 50.87% male and 49.13% female. Age The majority of Costa Mesa residents are between 18-64, with 69.17% of residents falling in this group. 21.60% of city residents are under 18, and 9.23% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 48.03% of Costa Mesa's population. Table 5.2: Demographic Trends, Costa Mesa 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 70,120 72.26% 62,285 56.96% 56,901 51.80% Black, Non - Hispanic 1,142 1.18% 1,653 1.51% 1,879 1.71% Hispanic 19,300 19.89% 34,569 31.61% 39,405 35.87% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 6,024 6.21% 9,204 8.42% 10,680 9.72% Native American, Non -Hispanic 331 0.34% 771 0.71% 673 0.61% National Origin Foreign -born 20,844 21.50% 31,702 28.98% 29,598 26.94% LEP Limited English Proficiency 12,652 13.05% 21,813 19.94% 17,533 15.96% Sex Male 49,424 1 50.97% 55,859 1 51.07% 1 55,886 50.87% 45 75A-324 Female 47,542 49.03% 53,518 48.93% 53,971 49.13% Age Under 18 18,841 19.43% 25,930 23.71% 23,729 21.60% 18-64 70,221 72.42% 74,185 67.83% 75,989 69.17% 65+ 7,905 8.15% 9,261 8.47% 10,139 9.23% Family Type Families with children 9,631 43.63% 10,809 50.61% 11,152 48.03% Table 6.1: Demographics, Fountain Valley (Fountain Valley, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim CA) Re 'on Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 26,433 46.67% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 256 0.45% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 9418 16.63% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 18,565 32.78% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non -Hi 69 0.12% 25,102 0.20% Two+Races, Non-Hianic 1,601 2.88% 267,038 F 2.080% Other, Non -Hispanic 113 0.20% 30,960 0.24% #1 country oforigin Vietnam 7,556 13.34% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Mexico 1,490 2.63% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Taiwan 696 1.23% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Korea 566 1.00% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin Philippines 521 0.92% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Japan 485 0.86% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Egypt 454 0.80% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin China, excl. Hong Kong and Taiwan 408 0.72% Iran 133,596 1.10% 49 country of origin India 402 0.71% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Canada 341 0.60% India 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Vietnamese 4,989 9.32% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Chinese 1,337 2.50% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Spanish 1,251 2.34% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Korean 361 0.67% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Langua e Japanese 225 0.42% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Arabic 203 0.38% Ta alog 86,691 0.72% 47 LEP Language Tagalog 182 0.34% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Persian 111 0.21% Japanese 32,457 0.27% 46 75A-325 #9 LEP Language Armenian 1 78 1 0.15% 1 Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language German 71 0.13% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 1,842 3.26% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 685 1.21% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 2,394 4.24% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory diffrcul 3,093 5.48% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 1,266 2.24% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 21261 4.01% 496,105 4.13% Male 27,076 48.76% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 28,451 51.24% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 11,794 21.24% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 34,068 61.35% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 9,664 17.40% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 5,656 39.90% 1,388,564 1 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Fountain Valley has a near -majority White population (46.670/o), with a large population of non -Hispanic Asian residents (32.78%) and a sizable population of Hispanic residents (16.63%). This represents a large increase in the percentage of non -Hispanic Asian residents as compared to Orange County overall (19.78%) and a large decrease in the percentage of Hispanic residents as compared to the County (34.20%). Black residents comprise 1.57% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.21% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 2.71%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.21%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Fountain Valley residents is Mexico, with 11.21% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin are, in order, Vietnam, Korea, Philippines, China (excluding Hong Kong & Taiwan), India, Iran, Taiwan, El Salvador, and Canada. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Fountain Valley with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Vietnamese — different than the County's most prominent LEP language (Spanish). The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Chinese, Spanish, Korean, Japanese, Arabic, Tagalog, Persian, Armenian, and German. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Fountain Valley residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, cognitive difficulty, independent living difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. 47 75A-326 Sex Fountain Valley residents are 48.76%male and 51.24% female. Age The majority of Fountain Valley residents are between 18-64, with 61.3 5% of residents falling in this group. 21.24% of city residents are under 18, and 17.40% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 39.90% of Fountain Valley's population. Table 6.2: Demographic Trends, Fountain Valley 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 38,801 71.93% 31,386 57.39% 26,642 47.98% Black, Non - Hispanic 508 0.94% 731 1.34% 692 1.25% Hispanic 4,884 9.05% 6,490 11.87% 8,071 14.54% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 9,405 17.43% 15,167 27.73% 19,632 35.36% Native American, Non -Hispanic 257 0.48% 434 0.79% 350 0.63% National Origin Forei -bom 10,915 20.20% 15,516 28.37% 16,514 29.74% LEP Limited English Proficiency 5,757 10.65% 9,813 17.94% 9,881 17.80% Sex Male 26,814 49.63% 26,709 48.84% 27,076 48.76% Female 27,215 50.37% 27,980 51.16% 28,451 51.24% Age Under 18 12,767 23.63% 13,344 24.40% 11,794 21.24% 18-64 37,304 69.04% 34,958 63.92% 34,068 61.35% 65+ 3,958 7.33% 6,387 11.68% 9,664 17.40% Family Type Families with children 6,674 47.04% 6,185 43.95% 5,656 39.90% W. 75A-327 Table 7.1: Demographics, Fullerton (Fullerton, CA CDBG, HOME) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re ion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 46145 32.97% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 3800 2.71% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 50957 36.40% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 34692 24.78% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 203 0.15% 25,102 0.20°/0 Two+Races, Non -Hispanic 2,959 2.18% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 232 0.17% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Mexico 14,379 10.27% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Korea 11,208 8.01% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Philippines 2,344 1.67% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin India 1,993 1.42% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 1,836 1.31% Korea 224,370 1.85% 46 country of origin Vietnam 1,475 1.05% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Taiwan 1,105 0.79% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% 48 country of origin El Salvador 629 0.45% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Canada 494 0.35% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Japan 473 0.34% India 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Spanish 13,340 10.42% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Korean 7,394 5.78% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Chinese 2,134 1.67% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Vietnamese 828 0.65% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Japanese 375 0.29% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Tagalog 372 0.29% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Gujarati 351 0.27% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Arabic 228 0.18% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Other Asian Language 227 0.18% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Other Indo- European Language 204 0.16% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 3,344 2.40% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 2,406 1.73% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficul 4,478 3.22% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 6,425 4.62% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 2,683 1.93% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 4.992 3.59% 496,105 4.13% 49 75A-328 Male 66,653 49.10% 66,653 49.10% Female 69,094 50.90% 69,094 50.90% Under 18 31,953 23.54% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 87,901 64.75% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 15,893 11.71% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 14,582 46.37% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Fullerton has a plurality Hispanic population (36.400/o), with a large population of Whites (32.97%) and non -Hispanic Asian residents (24.78%). Black residents comprise 2.71% of the population, and non - Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.15% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 2.18%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.17%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Fullerton residents is Mexico, with 10.27% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin are, in order, Korea, Philippines, India, China (excluding Hong Kong & Taiwan), Vietnam, Taiwan, El Salvador, Canada, and Japan. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Fullerton with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Korean, Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese, Tagalog, Gujarati, Arabic, Other Asian Languages, and Other Indo-European Languages. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Fullerton residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Fullerton residents are 49.10% male and 50.90% female. Age The majority of Fullerton residents are between 18-64, with 64.75% of residents falling in this group. 23.54% of city residents are under 18, and 11.71% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 46.37% of Fullerton's population. 50 75A-329 Table 7.2: Demographic Trends, Fullerton 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 73,647 65.17% 62,021 49.24% 52,356 38.57% Black, Non - Hispanic 2,273 2.01% 3,060 2.43% 3,330 2.45% Hispanic 23,894 21.14% 38,323 30.43% 47,235 34.80% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 12,608 11.16% 20,690 16.43% 31,810 23.43% Native American, Non -Hispanic 364 0.32% 927 0.74% 707 0.52% National Origin Foreign -born 25,948 22.98% 35,894 28.49% 39,906 29.40% LEP Limited English Proficiency 16,188 14.33% 24,576 19.50% 25,536 18.81% Sex Male 56,379 49.92% 62,453 49.57% 66,653 49.10% Female 56,554 50.08% 63,542 50.43% 69,094 50.90% Age Under 18 25,569 22.64% 32,955 26.16% 31,953 23.54% 18-64 75,660 1 67.00% 78,816 1 62.55% 1 87,901 64.75% 65+ 11,703 10.36% 14,224 11.29% 15,893 11.71% Family Type Families with children 12,505 44.91% 11,097 48.22% 14,582 46.37% Table 8.1: Demographics, Garden Grove (Garden Grove, CA CDBG, HOME, ESG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Region Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 36,168 20.69% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 1,607 0.92% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 63,059 36.07% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 69,872 39.97% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 514 0.29% 25,102 0.20% 51 75A-330 Two+ Races, Non -Hispanic 2,881 1.66% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 235 0.14% 30,960 0.24% #1 country oforigin Vietnam 39,624 22.67% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country oforigin Mexico 21,168 12.11% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Korea 3,408 1.95% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Philippines 2,743 1.57% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin El Salvador 1,169 0.67% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Guatemala 780 0.45% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Peru 650 0.37% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 594 0.34% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Cambodia 466 0.27% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Egypt 406 0.23% India 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Vietnamese 28,226 17.39% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Spanish 19,752 12.17% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Korean 2,897 1.78% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Chinese 1,795 1.11% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Tagalog 380 0.23% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Cambodian 294 0.18% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Other Pacific Island Language 288 0.18% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Arabic 256 0.16% Ja anese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Ja anese 237 0.15% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Hmon 162 0.10% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 5,132 2.95% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 3,044 1.75% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 6,805 3.91% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 8,226 4.73% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 3,996 2.30% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 7,328 4.21% 496,105 4.13% Male 86,373 49.85% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 86,888 50.15% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 44,233 25.53% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 110,100 63.55% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 18,928 10.92% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 18,046 47.97% 1,388,564 47.84% 75A-331 Race and Ethnicity Garden Grove has a plurality non -Hispanic Asian population (39.97%), with a large population of Hispanics (36.07%) and Whites (20.69%). This represents a large increase in the percentage of non -Hispanic Asian residents as compared to Orange County overall (19.78%). Black residents comprise 0.92% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.29% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 1.66%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.14%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Garden Grove residents is Vietnam, with 22.67% of the city population comprised of residents from Vietnam. This is distinct from the most common country of origin for Orange County overall (Mexico). The remaining most common countries of origin in Garden Grove are, in order, Mexico, Korea, Philippines, El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru, China (excluding Hong Kong & Taiwan), Cambodia, and Egypt. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Garden Grove with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Vietnamese. This is distinct from the most common LEP language in the broader county (Spanish). The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Spanish, Korean, Chinese, Tagalog, Cambodian, Other Pacific Island Languages, Arabic, Japanese, and Hmong. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Garden Grove residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Garden Grove residents are 49.85% male and 50.15% female. Age The majority of Garden Grove residents are between 18-64, with 63.55% of residents falling in this group. 25.53% of city residents are under 18, and 10.92% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 47.97% of Garden Grove's population. Table 8.2: Demographic Trends, Garden Grove 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnkit # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 79,750 54.42% 54,141 32.25% 38,900 22.45% 53 75A-332 Black, Non - Hispanic 2,145 1.46% 2,474 1.47% 2,376 1.37% Hispanic 34,492 23.54% 55,487 33.06% 64,694 37.34% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 29,209 19.93% 53,793 32.05% 66,272 38.25% Native American, Non -Hispanic 631 0.43% 1,107 0.66% 725 0.42% National Origin Foreign -born 44,669 30.48% 72,339 43.10% 74,749 43.14% LEP Limited English Proficiency 32,715 22.32% 57,735 34.40% 56,658 32.70% Sex Male 74,265 50.67% 84,033 50.06% 86,373 49.85% Female 72,300 49.33% 83,818 49.94% 86,888 50.15% Age Under 18 38,170 26.04% 48,566 28.93% 44,233 25.53% 18-64 95,383 65.08% 1 103,249 61.51% 1 110,100 63.55% 65+ 13,013 8.88% 16,038 9.55% 18,928 10.92% Family Type Families with children 17,177 48.90% 19,501 53.21% 18,046 47.97% Table 9.1: Demographics, Huntington Beach (Huntington Beach, CA CDBG, HOME) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Regoion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 126,453 63.10% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 2,510 1.25% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 38,773 19.35% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 24,069 12.01% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non -Hi 721 0.36% 25,102 0.20% Two+Races, Non-Hispan! 6,008 3.15% 267,038 2.08°/u Other, Non -Hispanic 392 0.21% 30,960 1 0.24% #1 country of origin Mexico 7,734 3.86% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% 42 country of origin Vietnam 5,826 2.91% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Philippines 2,006 1.00% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% 44 country of origin Canada 1,248 0.62% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% 54 75A-333 #5 country of origin Egypt 1,159 0.58% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong and Taiwan 1,140 0.57% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% 47 country of origin Japan 1,135 0.57% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% 48 country of origin Korea 1,061 0.53% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin India 664 0.33% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Taiwan 638 0.32% India 79,608 0.66% #I LEP Language Spanish 7,526 4.10% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Vietnamese 2,822 1.54% Chinese 239,576 1.98% 0 LEP Language Chinese 1,518 0.83% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Korean 741 0.40% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Arabic 730 0.40% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Japanese 533 0.29% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% 47 LEP Language Tagalog 270 0.15% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Portuguese 206 0.11% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Other Indo- European Language 200 0.11% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Thai 150 1 0.08% 1 Arabic 1 23,275 1 0.19% Hearing difficulty 5,818 2.91% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 3,392 1.70% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 7,239 3.62% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 9,226 4.61% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 3,952 1.98% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 61816 3.41% 496,105 4.13% Male 94,733 49.60% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 96,243 50.40% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 39,353 20.61% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 124,400 65.14% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 27,224 14.26% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 20,083 41.45% 1,388,564 1 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Huntington Beach has a majority White population (63.10%) and sizable populations of Hispanics (19.35%) and non -Hispanic Asians (12.01%). This represents a large increase in the percentage of White residents as compared to Orange County overall (41.40%). Black residents comprise 1.25% of the population, and non - Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.36% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 3.15%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.21%. 55 75A-334 National Origin The most common country of origin for Huntington Beach residents is Mexico, with 3.86% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in Huntington Beach are, in order, Vietnam, Philippines, Canada, Egypt, China (excluding Hong Kong & Taiwan), Japan, Korea, India, and Taiwan. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Huntington Beach with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Vietnamese, Chinese, Korean, Arabic, Japanese, Tagalog, Portuguese, Other Indo-European Languages, and Thai. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Huntington Beach residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, cognitive difficulty, independent living difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Huntington Beach residents are 49.60% male and 50.40% female. Age The majority of Huntington Beach residents are between 18-64, with 65.14% of residents falling in this group. 20.61% of city residents are under 18, and 14.26% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 41.45% of Huntington Beach's population. Table 9.2: Demographic Trends, Huntington Beach 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 144,453 79.16% 137,054 71.80% 127,955 67.00% Black, Non- Hispamc 1,602 0.88% 1,905 1.00% 2,377 1.24% Hispamc 20,522 11.25% 27,945 14.64% 32,552 17.05% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 14,732 8.07% 20,786 10.89% 25,886 13.55% Native American, Non -Hispanic 898 0.49% 1,925 1.01% 1,669 0.87% National Origin 56 75A-335 Foreign -born 27,066 14.84% 32,414 16.99% 30,902 16.18% LEP Limited English Proficiency 13,562 7.43% 18,168 9.52% 15,869 8.31% Sex Male 91,952 50.40% 95,767 50.18% 94,733 49.60% Female 90,486 49.60% 95,063 49.82% 96,243 50.40% Age Under 18 37,779 20.71% 43,525 22.81% 39,353 20.61% 18-64 129,499 70.98% 127,288 66.70% 124,400 65.14% 65+ 15,160 8.31% 20,017 10.49% 27,224 14.26% Family Type Families with children 20,283 43.80% 19,930 44.46% 20,083 41.45% Table 101: Demographics, Irvine (Irvine, CA CDBG, HOME) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re 'on Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 107,202 41.73% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 4,714 1.84% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 25,025 9.74% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 107,337 41.79% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 221 0.09% 25,102 0.20% Two+ Races, Non -Hispanic 9,526 4.50% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 544 0.26% 30,960 0.24% #1 country oforigin Korea 14,066 5.48% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 13,021 5.07% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin India 9,749 3.80% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Iran 9,518 3.71% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin Taiwan 8,648 3.37% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Vietnam 4,945 1.93% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Phili fines 4,792 1.87% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% 48 country of origin Japan 4,752 1.85% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Mexico 2,956 1.15% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Hong Kong 1,977 0.77% India 79,608 0.66% 57 75A-336 #1LEP Language Chinese 8,033 3.83% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Korean 6,701 3.19% Chinese 239,576 1.98% 43 LEP Language Persian 3,404 1.62% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Spanish 2,522 1.20% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Vietnamese 2,033 0.97% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Japanese 1,947 0.93% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Arabic 875 0.42% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Other Indic Lan ua e 715 0.34% Japanese 32,457 0.27% 49 LEP Language Other Asian Language 578 0.28% Russian 28,358 0.23% 410 LEP Language Russian 545 0.26% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 4,154 1.62% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 2,032 0.79% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 5,481 2.14% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 6,719 2.62% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 3,527 1.37% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 5,713 2.23% 496,105 4.13% Male 103,034 48.71% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 108,498 51.29% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 45,857 21.68% 45,857 21.68% 18-64 146,753 69.38% 146,753 69.38% 65+ 18,922 8.95% 18,922 8.95% Families with children 25,573 49.80% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Irvine has a plurality non -Hispanic Asian population (41.79%) with a large population of White residents (41.73%) and a relatively small population of Hispanic residents (9.74%) as compared to the county (over 34%). Black residents comprise 1.84% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.09% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 4.50%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.26%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Irvine residents is Korea, with 5.48% of the city population comprised of residents from Korea. This is distinct from the County, for which the most common country of origin is Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in Irvine are, in order, China (excluding Hong Kong & Tibet), India, Iran, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, Japan, Mexico, and Hong Kong. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Irvine with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Chinese — distinct from the most common language spoken by those with LEP in the County (Spanish). The 58 75A-337 remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Korean, Persian, Spanish, Vietnamese, Japanese, Arabic, Other Indic Languages, Other Asian Languages, and Russian. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Irvine residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Irvine residents are 48.71% male and 51.29% female. Age The majority of Irvine residents are between 18-64, with 69.38% of residents falling in this group. 21.68% of city residents are under 18, and 8.95% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 49.80% of Irvine's population. Table 10.2: Demographic Trends, Irvine 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 92,181 73.19% 85,972 57.41% 96,467 45.60% Black, Non - Hispanic 3,263 2.59% 2,573 1.72% 4,514 2.13% Hispanic 9,685 7.69% 12,271 8.19% 20,401 9.64% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 20,256 16.08% 46,268 30.90% 88,674 41.92% Native American, Non -Hispanic 316 0.25% 618 0.41% 755 0.36% National Origin Foreign-bom 26,301 20.88% 47,114 31.46% 67,886 32.09% LEP Limited English Proficiency 11,047 8.77% 21,335 14.25% 28,611 13.53% Sex Male 62,975 50.00% 73,019 48.77% 103,034 48.71% Female 62,976 50.00% 76,715 51.23% 108,498 51.29% 59 75A-338 Age Under 18 30,335 24.08% 36,552 24.41% 45,857 21.68% 18-64 88,663 70.40% 102,353 68.36% 146,753 69.38% 65+ 6,952 5.52% 10,830 7.23% 18,922 8.95% Family Type Families with children 17,137 1 55.14% 1 16,168 1 52.72% 1 25,573 1 49.80% Table 111: Demographics, La Habra a Habra, CA CDBG Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Regoion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 15,817 25.53% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 676 1.09% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 36,975 59.67% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 7,514 12.13% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 96 0.15% 25,102 0.20% Two+ Races, Non -Hispanic 969 1.61% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 90 0.15% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Mexico 10,133 16.35% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Korea 2,248 3.63% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Philippines 1,379 2.23% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Guatemala 365 0.59% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong and Taiwan 334 0.54% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Indonesia 263 0.42% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin India 233 0.38% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin El Salvador 228 0.37% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 county of origin Taiwan 220 0.36% Taiwan 87,643 0.72°/0 #10 country of origin Nicazagua 199 0.32% India 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Spanish 11,038 19.59% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% 42 LEP Language Korean 1,241 2.20% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Chinese 245 0.43% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Tagalog 156 0.28% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Vietnamese 105 0.19% Armenian 87,201 0.72% 46 LEP Language Persian 102 0.18% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Hindi 98 0.17% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Other Pacific Island Language 41 0.07% Japanese 32,457 0.27% Mo1 75A-339 #9 LEP Language Russian 1 41 1 0.07% 1 Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Arabic 38 0.07% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 1,803 2.92% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 1,044 1.69% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 2,272 3.68% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficul 3,659 5.93% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 1,530 2.48% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 21354 3.81% 496,105 4.13% Male 29,680 49.24% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 30,594 50.76% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 16,021 26.58% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 37,554 62.31% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 6,700 11.12% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 6,885 47.85% 1,388,564 1 47.84% Race and Ethnicity La Habra is majority Hispanic (59.67%) with a large population of Whites (25.53%) and non -Hispanic Asian residents (12.13%). This is a significantly larger Hispanic population percentage than the County as a whole (34.20%). Black residents comprise 1.09% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.15% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 1.61%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.15%. National Origin The most common country of origin for La Habra residents is Mexico, with 16.35% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in La Habra are, in order, Korea, Philippines, Guatemala, China (excluding Hong Kong & Tibet), Indonesia, India, El Salvador, Taiwan, and Nicaragua. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in La Habra with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Korean, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Persian, Hindi, Other Pacific Island Languages, Russian, and Arabic. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by La Habra residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex La Habra residents are 49.24% male and 50.76% female. 61 75A-340 Age The majority of La Habra residents are between 18-64, with 62.31% of residents falling in this group. 26.58% of city residents are under 18, and 11.12% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 47.85% of La Habra's population. Table 11.2: Demographic Trends, La Habra 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 31,691 60.04% 24,513 41.17% 18,331 30.41% Black, Non - Hispanic 422 0.80% 941 1.58% 995 1.65% Hispanic 17,408 32.98% 28,525 47.91% 33,528 55.63% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 2,959 5.61% 4,782 8.03% 6,943 11.52% Native American, Non -Hispanic 201 0.38% 374 0.63% 325 0.54% National Origin Foreign -born 10,852 20.55% 16,382 27.53% 17,238 28.60% LEP Limited English Proficiency 7,693 14.57% 12,530 21.06% 13,172 21.85% Sex Male 26,272 49.75% 29,148 48.99% 29,680 49.24% Female 26,539 50.25% 30,349 51.01% 30,594 50.76% Age Under 18 13,363 25.30% 17,662 29.69% 16,021 26.58% 18-64 33,885 64.16% 35,363 59.44% 37,554 62.31% 65+ 5,563 10.53% 6,472 10.88% 6,700 11.12% Family Type Families with children 6,424 47.32% 6,353 54.73% 6,885 47.85% 62 75A-341 Table 12.1: Demographics, La Palma (La Palma, Orange County) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re ion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 4,179 26.43% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 833 5.27% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 2,781 17.59% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 7398 46.78% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 83 0.52% 25,102 0.20°/0 Two+Races, Non -Hispanic 529 3.35% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 11 0.07% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Korea 1,292 24.53% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin India 803 15.25% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Philippines 592 11.24% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Mexico 532 10.10% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin Vietnam 499 9.47% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Taiwan 430 g 16% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin China, excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan 191 3.63% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin Pakistan 152 2.89% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Cambodia 67 1.27% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Romania 1 63 1.20% 1 India 79,608 0.66% #I LEP Language Korean 1,115 7.42% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole 675 4.49% Chinese 239,576 1.98% 0 LEP Language Chinese 490 3.26% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language African languages 191 1.27% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Tagalog 161 1.07% Armenian 87,201 0.72% 46 LEP Language Vietnamese 109 0.73% Ta alog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Gujarati 90 0.60% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Japanese 78 0.52% Japanese 32,457 0.27% 0 LEP Language Arabic 74 0.49% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Other Indic languages 69 0.46% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 421 2.7% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 262 1.7% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficul 476 3.1% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 825 5.4% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 496 3.3% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 547 4.2% 496,105 4.13% G, 75A-342 Male 7,673 48.54% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 8,135 51.46% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 2,866 18.13% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 10,101 63.90% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 2,841 17.97% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 3,999 81.5% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity La Palma has a high Asian or Pacific Islander population at 46.78%of the population. White residents make up 26.43% of the population, Hispanic residents are 17.59%, Black residents are 5.27%, and Native Americans are 0.52%. National Origin The most common countries of origin for foreign -born residents in the city are Korea, at 24.53%, and India, at 15.25%. The remaining most common countries for foreign -born residents, in order, are the Philippines, Mexico, Vietnam, Taiwan, China excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan, Pakistan, Cambodia, and Romania. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in La Palma with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Korean. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Spanish or Spanish Creole, Chinese, African languages, Tagalog, Vietmanese, Gujurati, Japanese, Arabic, and Other Indic Languages. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by La Palma residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, self -care difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex La Palma residents are 48.54% male and 51.46% female. Age The majority of La Palma residents are between 18-64, with 63.90% of residents falling in this group. 18.13% of city residents are under 18, and 17.97% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 81.5% of La Palma's population. 64 75A-343 Table 13.1: Demographics, Laguna Niguel (Laguna Niguel, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re ion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 43,496 66.48% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 1,238 1.89% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 11,021 16.84% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 6,613 10.11% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 74 0.11% 25,102 0.20°/0 Two+Races, Non -Hispanic 2,176 3.42% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 119 0.19% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Iran 2,065 3.16% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Mexico 1,785 2.73% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 865 1.32% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Philippines 786 1.20% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin El Salvador 693 1.06% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Taiwan 629 0.96% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Canada 583 0.89% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% 48 country of origin Korea 438 0.67% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Egypt 407 0.62% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Germany 320 0.49% India 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Spanish 2,022 3.36% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Persian 994 1.65% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Chinese 503 0.84% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Vietnamese 194 0.32% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Korean 185 0.31% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language French 145 0.24% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Japanese 79 0.13% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Other Slavic Language 70 0.12% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Ta alo 59 0.10% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language I Russian 1 57 1 0.09% 1 Arabic 1 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 1,815 2.78% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 807 1.23% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 1,965 3.00% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 1,943 2.97% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 938 1.43% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 1,910 2.92% 496,105 4.13% Male 30,893 48.50% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 32,803 51.50% 6,500,403 50.67% 65 75A-344 Under 18 14,428 22.65% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 41,100 64.53% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 8,168 12.82% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 7,796 1 44.73% 1,388,564 1 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Laguna Niguel is majority White (66.48%) with sizable minority populations of Hispanics (16.84%) and non -Hispanic Asian residents (10.110/o) This is a significantly larger White population than the county as a whole (41.40%). Black residents comprise 1.89% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.11% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 3.42%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.19%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Laguna Niguel residents is Iran, with 3.16% of the city population comprised of residents from Iran. This is distinct from the most common country of origin for county residents overall (Mexico). The remaining most common countries of origin in Laguna Niguel are, in order, Mexico, China (excluding Hong Kong & Taiwan), Philippines, El Salvador, Taiwan, Canada, Korea, Egypt, and Germany. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Laguna Niguel with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Persian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, French, Japanese, Other Slavic Languages, Tagalog, and Russian. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Laguna Niguel residents is cognitive difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, ambulatory difficulty, independent living difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Laguna Niguel residents are 48.50% male and 51.50% female. Age The majority of Laguna Niguel residents are between 18-64, with 64.53% of residents falling in this group. 22.65% of city residents are under 18, and 12.82% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 44.73% of Laguna Niguel's population. 66 75A-345 Table 13.2: Demographic Trends, Laguna Niguel 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 37,998 83.58% 49,243 77.33% 46,192 72.52% Black, Non - Hispanic 517 1.14% 936 1.47% 966 1.52% Hispanic 3,422 7.53% 6,591 10.35% 8,842 13.88% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 3,364 7.40% 5,875 9.23% 7,203 11.31% Native American, Non -Hispanic 93 0.20% 310 0.49% 331 0.52% National Origin Foreign-bom 6,198 13.60% 11,286 17.67% 13,355 20.97% LEP Limited English Proficiency 2,169 4.76% 4,238 6.64% 4,317 6.78% Sex Male 22,303 48.94% 31,200 48.85% 30,893 48.50% Female 23,269 51.06% 32,665 51.15% 32,803 51.50% Age Under 18 10,922 23.97% 17,408 27.26% 14,428 22.65% 18-64 31,371 68.84% 41,029 64.24% 1 41,100 64.53% 65+ 3,280 7.20% 5,429 8.50% 8,168 12.82% Family Type Families with children 6,218 48.60% 7,957 53.94% 7,796 44.73% Table 14.1: Demographics, Lake Forest (Lake Forest, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re 'on Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 44,160 53.98% 44160 53.98% Black, Non -Hispanic 1,476 1.80% 1476 1.80% Hispanic 20,057 24.52% 20057 24.52% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 12,740 15.57% 12740 15.57% Native American, Non-Hisp. 361 0.44% 361 0.44% 67 75A-346 Two+ Races, Non -Hispanic 2,393 3.09% 2,393 3.09% Other, Non -Hispanic 184 0.24% 184 0.24% #1 country oforigin Mexico 4,765 5.82% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Philippines 2,714 3.32% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Vietnam 1,117 1.37% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin India 1,055 1.29% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin Iran 753 0.92% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Korea 739 0.90% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin El Salvador 704 0.86% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong and Taiwan 576 0.70% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Canada 509 0.62% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Guatemala 485 0.59% India 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Spanish 5,074 6.89% Spanish 5,074 6.89% #2 LEP Language Vietnamese 684 0.93% Vietnamese 684 0.93% #3 LEP Language Chinese 483 0.66% Chinese 483 0.66% #4 LEP Language Tagalog 428 0.58% Tagalog 428 0.58% #5 LEP Language Korean 396 0.54% Korean 396 0.54% #6 LEP Language Persian 385 0.52% Persian 385 0.52% #7 LEP Language Japanese 236 0.32% Japanese 236 0.32% #8 LEP Language Other Pacific Island Language 205 0.28% Other Pacific Island Lan u e 205 0.28% #9 LEP Language Arabic 145 0.20% Arabic 145 0.20% #10 LEP Language Scandinavian Language 96 0.13% Scandinavian Language 96 0.130% Hearing difficulty 2,141 2.62% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 715 0.88% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 2,001 2.45% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 2,705 3.31% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 1,371 1.68% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 2,451 3.00% 496,105 4.13% Male 38,359 49.58% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 39,011 50.42% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 19,017 24.58% 19,017 24.58% 18-64 51,306 66.31% 51,306 66.31% 65+ 7,047 9.11% 7,047 9.11% Families with children 9,581 48.85% 1,388,564 47.84% 68 75A-347 Race and Ethnicity Lake Forest is majority White (53.98%) with sizable minority populations of Hispanics (24.52%) and non - Hispanic Asian residents (15.57%) This is a moderately larger White population than the county as a whole (41.40%). Blackresidents comprise 1.80%of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.44% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 3.09%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.24%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Lake Forest residents is Mexico, with 5.82% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in Lake Forest are, in order, Philippines, Vietnam, India, Iran, Korea, El Salvador, China (excluding Hong Kong & Taiwan), Canada, and Guatemala. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Lake Forest with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Vietnamese, Chinese, Tagalog, Korean, Persian, Japanese, Other Pacific Island Languages, Arabic, and Scandinavian Languages. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Lake Forest residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, hearing difficulty, cognitive difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Lake Forest residents are 49.58% male and 50.42% female. Age The majority of Lake Forest residents are between 18-64, with 66.31% of residents falling in this group. 24.58% of city residents are under 18, and 9.11% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 48.85% of Laguna Niguel's population. Table 14.2: Demographic Trends, Lake Forest 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 42,174 78.97% 50,433 67.52% 43,702 56.48% Black, Non - Hispanic 908 1.70% 1,596 2.14% 1,566 2.02% M11 75A-348 Hispanic 5,491 10.28% 12,968 17.36% 19,165 24.77% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 4,560 8.54% 8,665 11.60% 12,232 15.81% Native American, Non -Hispanic 178 0.33% 451 0.60% 481 0.62% National Origin Foreign -born 7,305 13.69% 14,986 20.06% 17,450 22.55% LEP Limited English Proficiency 3,511 6.58% 7,915 10.59% 8,219 10.62% Sex Male 26,304 49.29% 36,511 48.87% 38,359 49.58% Female 27,061 50.71% 38,202 51.13% 39,011 50.42% Age Under 18 13,865 25.98% 21,344 28.57% 19,017 24.58% 18-64 35,856 67.19% 47,998 64.24% 51,306 66.31% 65+ 3,643 6.83% 5,372 7.19% 7,047 9.11% Family Type Families with children 7,705 1 53.68% 10,230 56.68% 9,581 48.85% Table 15.1: Demographics, Mission Viejo (Mission Viejo, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re 'on Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 64,552 66.87% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 1,312 1.36% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 16,350 16.94% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 10,253 10.62% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 201 0.21% 25,102 0.20% Two+ Races, Non -Hispanic 3,108 3.36% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 185 0.20% 30,960 0.24% 41 country oforigin Mexico 3,664 3.80% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% 42 county of origin Iran 2,599 2.69% Phili fines 288,529 2.38% 43 countryof origin Phil i fines 1,653 1.71% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 county of origin Vietnam 972 1.01% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% 70 75A-349 45 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 690 0.71% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Korea 640 0.66% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Taiwan 581 0.60% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin Canada 562 0.58% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin India 374 0.39% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin El Salvador 341 0.35% India 79,608 0.66% #I LEP Language Spanish 2,626 2.93% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% 42 LEP Language Persian 1,187 1.33% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Chinese 635 0.71% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Vietnamese 408 0.46% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Arabic 264 0.30% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Korean 196 0.22% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Japanese 184 0.21% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Tagalog 112 0.13% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Other Pacific Island Language 95 0.11% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language I Russian 1 78 1 0.09% 1 Arabic 1 23,275 1 0.19% Hearing difficulty 3,325 3.46% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 1,719 1.79% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 3,474 3.61% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 5,015 5.22% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 2,574 2.68% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 31937 4.10% 496,105 4.13% Male 45,368 49.01% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 47,192 50.99% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 21,375 23.09% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 58,357 63.05% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 12,828 13.86% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 10,884 44.01% 1,388,564 1 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Mission Viejo is majority White (66.87%) with sizable minority populations of Hispanics (16.94%) and non -Hispanic Asian residents (10.62%) This is a significantly larger White population than the county as a whole (41.40%). Black residents comprise 1.36% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.21% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 3.36%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.20%. it 75A-350 National Origin The most common country of origin for Mission Viejo residents is Mexico, with 3.80% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in Mission Viejo are, in order, Iran, Philippines, Vietnam, China (excluding Hong Kong & Taiwan), Korea, Taiwan, Canada, India, and El Salvador. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Mission Viejo with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Persian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Arabic, Korean, Japanese, Tagalog, Other Pacific Island Languages, and Russian. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Mission Viejo residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Mission Viejo residents are 49.01%male and 50.99%female. Age The majority of Mission Viejo residents are between 18-64, with 63.05% of residents falling in this group. 23.09% of city residents are under 18, and 13.86% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 44.01% of Mission Viejo's population. Table 15.2: Demographic Trends, Mission Viejo 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 67,490 83.86% 69,945 75.84% 63,297 68.38% Black, Non - Hispanic 759 0.94% 1,331 1.44% 1,638 1.77% Hispanic 6,583 8.18% 11,246 12.19% 16,286 17.60% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 5,327 6.62% 8,512 9.23% 10,597 11.45% Native American, Non -Hispanic 198 0.25% 507 0.55% 475 0.51% National Origin Foreign -born 10,815 13.44°/u 15,120 1 16.39% 16,427 17.75% 72 75A-351 LEP Limited English Proficiency 4,189 5.21% 6,072 6.58% 6,250 6.75% Sex Male 39,987 49.69% 44,952 48.73% 45,368 49.01% Female 40,480 50.31% 47,294 51.27% 47,192 50.99% Age Under 18 22,602 28.09% 26,099 28.29% 21,375 23.09% 18-64 51,800 64.37% 56,701 61.47% 58,357 63.05% 65+ 6,065 7.54% 9,446 10.24% 12,828 13.86% Family Type Families with children 11,971 53.71% 11,488 51.77% 10,884 44.01% 7; 75A-352 Table 17.1: Demographics, Orange (City) (Orange, CA CDBG, HOME) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re ion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 63,146 45.01% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 2,025 1.44% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 55,293 39.41% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 16,243 11.58% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 292 0.21% 25,102 0.20°/0 Two+Races, Non -Hispanic 2,692 1.92% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 258 0.18% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Mexico 16,969 12.10% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Vietnam 2,596 1.85% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Philippines 2,298 1.64% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Korea 1,039 0.74% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin India 986 0.70% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Guatemala 758 0.54% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Taiwan 682 0.49% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin Iran 640 0.46% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong and Taiwan 558 0.40% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin I El Salvador 1 526 1 0.37% 1 India 1 79,608 1 0.66% #1LEP Language Spanish 18,642 14.45% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Vietnamese 2,048 1.59% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Korean 1,149 0.89% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Chinese 779 0.60% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Tagalog 313 0.24% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Arabic 264 0.20% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Japanese 205 0.16% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Gujarati 193 0.15% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Cambodian 192 0.15% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language I Persian 1 185 1 0.14% 1 Arabic 1 23,275 1 0.19% Hearing difficulty 2,921 2.14% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 1,841 1.35% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 4,106 3.01% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 5,357 3.93% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 2,762 2.02% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 4,334 3.18% 496,105 4.13% Male 68,542 50.29% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 67,753 49.71% 6,500,403 50.67% 74 75A-353 Under 18 31,745 23.29% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 89,676 65.80% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 14,874 10.91% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 14,250 1 45.66% 1,388,564 1 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Orange has a plurality of White residents (45.01%) with significant minority populations of Hispanics (39.41%) and non -Hispanic Asian residents (11.58%). Black residents comprise 1.44% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.21% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non - Hispanic population is 1.92%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.18%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Orange residents is Mexico, with 12.10% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in Orange are, in order, Vietnam, Philippines, Korea, India, Guatemala, Taiwan, Iran, China (excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan), and El Salvador. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Orange with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Vietnamese, Korean, Chinese, Tagalog, Arabic, Japanese, Gujarati, Cambodian, and Persian. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Orange residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Orange residents are 50.29%male and 49.71% female. Age The majority of Orange residents are between 18-64, with 65.80% of residents falling in this group. 23.29% of city residents are under 18, and 10.91% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 45.66% of Orange's population. 7� 75A-354 Table 17.2: Demographic Trends, Orange (City) 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 76,480 67.86% 71,105 54.48% 63,698 46.74% Black, Non - Hispanic 1,411 1.25% 2,258 1.73% 2,478 1.82% Hispanic 26,031 23.10% 42,446 32.52% 52,480 38.50% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 8,193 7.27% 13,081 10.02% 16,512 12.11% Native American, Non -Hispanic 421 0.37% 840 0.64% 793 0.58% National Origin Foreign -born 22,772 20.22% 33,137 25.40% 35,300 25.90% LEP Limited English Proficiency 15,638 13.88% 22,812 17.49% 24,965 18.32% Sex Male 56,489 50.15% 64,927 49.77% 68,542 50.29% Female 56,148 49.85% 65,535 50.23% 67,753 49.71% Age Under 18 27,188 24.14% 35,677 27.35% 31,745 23.29% 18-64 75,361 1 66.91% 81,767 1 62.67% 1 89,676 65.80% 65+ 10,089 8.96% 13,018 9.98% 14,874 10.91% Family Type 76,480 67.86% 71,105 54.48% 63,698 46.74% Families with children 1,411 1.25% 2,258 1.73% 2,478 1.82% Table 18.1: Demographics, Rancho Santa Margarita (Rancho Santa Margarita, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re 'on Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 31,096 63.36% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 1,210 2.47% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 9,604 19.57% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 5,137 10.47% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 0 0.00% 25,102 0.20% 76 75A-355 Two+ Races, Non -Hispanic 1,604 3.31% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 97 0.20% 30,960 0.24% #1 country oforigin Mexico 1,379 2.81% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Philippines 901 1.84% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin El Salvador 475 0.97% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Iran 446 0.91% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong and Taiwan 439 0.89% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin India 356 0.73% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Vietnam 345 0.70% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin Germany 263 0.54% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Korea 232 0.47% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Argentina 208 0.42% India 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Spanish 2,183 4.80% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Vietnamese 224 0.49% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Korean 223 0.49% Korean 156,343 1.29% 44 LEP Language Arabic 192 0.42% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% 0 LEP Language Tagalog 190 0.42% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Persian 187 0.41% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% 0 LEP Language Chinese 155 0.34% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Japanese 87 0.19% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Other Slavic Language 54 0.12% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language German 42 0.09% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 677 1.38% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 442 0.90% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 838 1.71% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 1,108 2.26% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 477 0.97% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 715 1.46% 496,105 4.13% Male 23,681 48.81% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 24,839 51.19% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 13,719 28.27% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 31,402 64.72% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 3,399 7.01% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 7,256 56.76% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Rancho Santa Margarita is majority White (63.36%) with significant minority populations of Hispanics (19.57%) and non -Hispanic Asian residents (10.47%). This is a significantly larger White population than 77 75A-356 the county as a whole (41.40%). Black residents comprise 2.47% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 3.31%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.20%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Rancho Santa Margarita residents is Mexico, with 2.81% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in Rancho Santa Margarita are, in order, Philippines, El Salvador, Iran, China (excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan), India, Vietnam, Germany, Korea, and Argentina. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Rancho Santa Margarita with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Vietnamese, Korean, Arabic, Tagalog, Persian, Chinese, Japanese, Other Slavic Languages, and German. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Rancho Santa Margarita residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, cognitive difficulty, independent living difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Rancho Santa Margarita residents are 48.81% male and 51.19% female. Age The majority of Rancho Santa Margarita residents are between 18-64, with 64.72% of residents falling in this group. 28.27% of city residents are under 18, and 7.01% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 56.76% of Rancho Santa Margarita's population. 78 75A-357 Table 18.2: Demographic Trends, Rancho Santa Margarita 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 9,721 80.59% 35,728 74.82% 32,644 67.28% Black, Non - Hispanic 147 1.22% 1,014 2.12% 1,111 2.29% Hispanic 1,183 9.81% 6,019 12.60% 8,850 18.24% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 932 7.73% 4,350 9.11% 5,521 11.38% Native American, Non -Hispanic 43 0.36% 325 0.68% 270 0.56% National Origin Foreign -born 1,753 14.49% 6,404 13.40% 7,746 15.97% LEP Limited English Proficiency 653 5.40% 2,595 5.43% 2,723 5.61% Sex Male 6,055 50.06% 23,527 49.21% 23,681 48.81% Female 6,041 49.94% 24,281 50.79% 24,839 51.19% Age Under 18 3,118 25.78% 15,827 33.10% 13,719 28.27% 18-64 8,519 70.43% 29,814 62.36% 31,402 64.72% 65+ 459 3.79% 2,168 4.53% 3,399 7.01% Family Type Families with children 1,819 54.54% 7,149 64.49% 7,256 56.76% Table 19.1: Demographics, San Clemente (San Clemente, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re 'on Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 47,747 73.20% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 433 0.66% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 11,665 17.88% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 2,940 4.51% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 75 0.11% 25,102 0.20% 79 75A-358 Two+ Races, Non -Hispanic 1,551 2.49% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 89 0.14% 30,960 0.24% #1 country oforigin Mexico 2,877 4.41% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Canada 400 0.61% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin Iran 363 0.56% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Philippines 321 0.49% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin Germany 264 0.40% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin England 202 0.31% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Colombia 198 0.30% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin Korea 179 0.27% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin India 175 0.27% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Poland 162 0.25% India 79,608 0.66% #1 LEP Language Spanish 2,672 4.47% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Vietnamese 103 0.17% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Tagalog 91 0.15% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Korean 83 0.14% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Persian 74 0.12% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Japanese 60 0.10% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Chinese 53 0.09% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Greek 34 0.06% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language I Thai 1 34 1 0.06% 1 Russian 1 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Other Pacific Island Language 17 0.03% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 1,950 3.01% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 783 1.21% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 1,581 2.44% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficul 2,060 3.18% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 929 1.43% 312,961 2.60% Independent livindifficulty 1,675 2.59% 496,105 4.13% Male 31,315 50.27% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 30,980 49.73% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 14,972 24.03% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 39,094 62.76% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 8,228 13.21% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 7,482 45.56% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity San Clemente is majority White (73.20%) with a significant minority population of Hispanics (17.88%). This is a significantly larger White population than the county as a whole (41.40%). Black residents RN 75A-359 comprise 0.66% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.11% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 2.49%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.14%. National Origin The most common country of origin for San Clemente residents is Mexico, with 4.41% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in San Clemente are, in order, Canada, Iran, Philippines, Germany, England, Colombia, Korea, India, and Poland. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in San Clemente with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Vietnamese, Tagalog, Korean, Persian, Japanese, Chinese, Greek, Thai, and Other Pacific Island Languages. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by San Clemente residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, hearing difficulty, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex San Clemente residents are 50.27% male and 49.73% female. Age The majority of San Clemente residents are between 18-64, with 62.76% of residents falling in this group. 24.03% of city residents are under 18, and 13.21% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 45.56% of San Clemente's population. Table 19.2: Demographic Trends, San Clemente 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 35,093 83.45% 40,022 78.55% 47,349 76.01% Black, Non - Hispanic 250 0.59% 442 0.87% 577 0.93% Hispanic 5,435E25 % 8,028 15.76% 1Q 518 16.88% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 1,0740 1,802 3.54% 3,236 M. 75A-360 Native American, Non -Hispanic 140 0.33% 419 0.82% 488 0.78% National Origin Foreign -born 5,069 12.11% 6,797 13.34% 7,605 12.21% LEP Limited English Proficiency 2,552 6.09% 3,666 7.20% 2,694 4.32% Sex Male 21,017 50.19% 26,076 51.18% 31,315 50.27% Female 20,856 49.81% 24,871 48.82% 30,980 49.73% Age Under 18 9,037 21.58% 12,640 24.81% 14,972 24.03% 18-64 27,570 65.84% 31,879 62.57% 39,094 62.76% 65+ 5,267 12.58% 6,428 12.62% 8,228 13.21% Family Type Families with children 4,973 43.73% 4,960 45.52% 7,482 45.56% Table 20.1: Demographics, San Juan Capistrano (San Juan Capistrano, Orange Coun Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re 'on Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 20,600 57.30% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 32 0.09% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 13,073 36.37% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 1186 3.30% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 140 0.39% 25,102 0.20% Two+Races, Non -Hispanic 595 1.66% 267, 338 2.080% Other, Non -Hispanic 322 0.90% 30,960 0.24% #1 country oforigin Mexico 5,627 68.92% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% 42 country of origin Canada 272 3.33% Philippines 288,529 2.38% 43 country of origin England 271 3.32% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Peru 191 2.34% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin Iran 150 1.84% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin Cuba 149 1.82% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Philippines 147 1.80% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% 82 75A-361 48 country of origin China, excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan 142 1.74% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin India 126 1.54% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% 410 country of origin Poland 119 1.46% India 79,608 0.66% #I LEP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole: 5,935 17.65% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% 42 LEP Language Persian: 143 0.43% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Chinese: 102 0.30% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Other Indic lan ua es: 54 0.16% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Vietnamese: 48 0.14% Armenian 87,201 0.72% 46 LEP Language German: 33 0.10% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Japanese: 32 0.10% Persian 41,051 0.34% 48 LEP Language Russian: 29 0.09% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Mon- Khmer, Cambodian: 29 0.09% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Tagalog: 28 0.08% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 1,181 3.3% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 744 2.1% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 1,134 3.4% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 2,144 6.4% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 1,251 3.7% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 1,653 6.0% 496,105 4.13% Male 48.03% 11.0% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 51.97% 9.4% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 8,381 23.35% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 20,925 58.29% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 6,593 18.37% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 8,839 72.3% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity San Juan Capistrano is a majority White city, with 57.30% of residents being White. 0.09% of residents are Black, 36.37% Hispanic, 3.30% Asian or Pacific Islander, and 0.39% Native American. National Origin The most common countries of origin for foreign -born residents in the city is Mexico, at 68.92%. The remaining most common countries for foreign -born residents, in order, are Canada, England, Peru, Iran, Cuba, the Philippines, China, excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan, India, and Poland. 83 75A-362 Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in San Juan Capistrano with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish or Spanish Creole. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Persian, Chinese, other Indic languages, Vietnamese, German, Japanese, Russian, Mon-Khmer Cambodian, and Tagalog. Disability The most common types of disability experienced by San Juan Capistrano residents in order are ambulatory, independent living, self -care, cognitive, hearing, and vision. Sex San Juan Capistrano residents are 48.03% male and 51.97% female. Age The majority of residents are between 18-64, with 58.29% of residents falling in this group. 23.35% of city residents are under 18, and 18.37% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 72.3% of the population. Table 21.1: Demographics, Santa Ana (Santa Ana, CA CDBG, HOME, ESG) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re 'on Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 31,499 9.42% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 2,716 0.81% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 258,449 77.27% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 38,872 11.62% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 430 0.13% 25,102 0.20% Two+ Races, Non -Hispanic 2,184 0.68% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 377 0.12% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Mexico 108,270 32.37% Mexico 108,270 32.37% #2 country of origin Vietnam 20,391 6.10% Vietnam 20,391 6.10% 43 country of origin El Salvador 6,021 1.80% El Salvador 6,021 1.80% #4 country oforigin Guatemala 3,153 0.94% Guatemala 3,153 0.94% #5 country of origin Philippines 2,234 0.67% Philippines 2,234 0.67% #6 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong and Taiwan 1,215 0.36% China excl. Hong Kong and Taiwan 1,215 0.36% #7 country of origin Cambodia 1,211 0.36% Cambodia 1,211 0.36% #8 country of origin Korea 740 0.220% 1 Korea 740 0.22% 84 75A-363 #9 country of origin Honduras 707 0.21% Honduras 707 0.21% #10 country of origin Peru 494 0.15% Peru 494 0.15% #I LEP Language Spanish 123,215 41.06% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Vietnamese 13,682 4.56% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Chinese 984 0.33% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Tagalog 676 0.23% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Cambodian 618 0.21% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Laotian 327 0.11% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% 0 LEP Language Korean 284 0.09% Persian 41,051 0.34% 48 LEP Language Japanese 224 0.07% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Other Indic Language 222 0.07% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Other Pacific Island Language 171 0.06% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 6,745 2.04% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 9,075 2.74% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 9,177 2.77% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 11,321 3.42% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 5,603 1.69% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 9,146 2.76% 496,105 4.13% Male 164,857 51.05% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 158,082 48.95% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 99,297 30.75% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 201,647 62.44% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 21,995 6.81% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 34,031 57.04% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Santa Ana is majority Hispanic (77.27%) with a significant minority population of non -Hispanic Asian residents (11.62%). This is a significantly larger Hispanic population than the county as a whole (34.20%). Black residents comprise 0.81 % of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.13% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 0.68%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.12%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Santa Ana residents is Mexico, with 32.37% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in Santa Ana are, in order, Vietnam, El Salvador, Guatemala, Philippines, China (excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan), Cambodia, Korea, Honduras, and Peru. 85 75A-364 Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Santa Ana with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Vietnamese, Chinese, Tagalog, Cambodian, Laotian, Korean, Japanese, Other Indic Languages, and Other Pacific Island Languages. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Santa Ana residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, cognitive difficulty, independent living difficulty, vision difficulty, hearing difficulty, and self -care difficulty. Sex Santa Ana residents are 51.05% male and 48.95% female. Age The majority of Santa Ana residents are between 18-64, with 62.44% of residents falling in this group. 30.75% of city residents are under 18, and 6.81% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 57.04% of Santa Ana's population. Table 21.2: Demographic Trends, Santa Ana 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 68,937 23.58% 42,837 12.74% 30,994 9.60% Black, Non - Hispanic 6,272 2.15% 4,817 1.43% 3,662 1.13% Hispanic 189,758 64.92% 254,995 75.81% 251,792 77.97% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 26,112 8.93% 31,510 9.37% 35,171 10.89% Native American, Non -Hispanic 671 0.23% 1,333 0.40% 891 0.28% National Origin Forei -bom 148,116 50.69% 178,689 53.13% 159,506 49.39% LEP Limited English Proficiency 125,596 42.98% 155,759 46.310% 147,471 45.67% M 75A-365 Sex Male 155,301 53.15% 174,039 51.75% 164,857 51.05% Female 136,895 46.85% 162,299 48.25% 158,082 48.95% Age Under 18 89,063 1 30.48% 118,041 1 35.10% 1 99,297 30.75% 18-64 186,981 63.99% 200,328 59.56% 201,647 62.44% 65+ 16,151 5.53% 17,969 5.34% 21,995 6.81% Family Type Families with children 32,142 58.43% 1 35,540 64.63% 34,031 57.04% Table 22: Demographics, Tustin Tustin, CA CDBG Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Regoion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 24,289 30.36% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 1,926 2.41% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 32,982 41.22% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 17,542 21.93% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 418 0.52% 25,102 0.20% Two+Races, Non -His anic 1,949 2.62o/u 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 169 0.23% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Mexico 11,270 14.09% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Vietnam 2,115 2.64% Philippines 288,529 2.38% #3 country of origin India 2,048 2.56% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin Philippines 1,677 2.10% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country oforigin Korea 1,446 1.81% Korea 224,370 1.85% #6 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 1,250 1.56% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Taiwan 1,040 1.30% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% #8 country of origin Iran 507 0.63% Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Guatemala 405 0.51% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Canada 339 0.42% India 79,608 0.66% #1 LEP Language Spanish 10,333 14.60% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Vietnamese 1,665 2.35% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Korean 844 1.19% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Chinese 816 1.15% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% M. 75A-366 45 LEP Language Tagalog 400 0.57% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Other Indic Lan u e 285 0.40% Ta alo 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Hindi 218 0.31% Persian 41,051 0.34% 0 LEP Language Persian 216 0.31% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Other Asian Lan u e 183 0.26% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Arabic 165 0.23% Arabic 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 1,749 2.19% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 1,216 1.52% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 2,308 2.89% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 2,894 3.63% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 1,162 1.46% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 21353 2.95% 496,105 4.13% Male 36,263 48.83% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 37,995 51.17% 6,500,403 50.67% Under 18 19,341 26.05% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 48,704 65.59% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 6,213 8.37% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 9,226 52.64% 1,388,564 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Tustin is majority Hispanic (41.22%) with a significant minority population of White residents (30.36%) and non -Hispanic Asian residents (21.93%). Black residents comprise 2.41% of the population, and non - Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.52% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 2.62%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.23%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Tustin residents is Mexico, with 14.09% of the city population comprised of residents from Mexico. The remaining most common countries of origin in Tustin are, in order, Vietnam, India, Philippines, Korea, China (excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan), Taiwan, Iran, Guatemala, and Canada. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Tustin with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Spanish. The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Vietnamese, Korean, Chinese, Tagalog, Other Indic Language, Hindi, Persian, Other Asian Language, and Arabic. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Tustin residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, vision difficulty, and self -care difficulty. 88 75A-367 Sex Tustin residents are 48.83% male and 51.17% female. Age The majority of Tustin residents are between 18-64, with 65.59%of residents falling in this group. 26.05% of city residents are under 18, and 8.37% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 47.84% of Tustin's population. Table 22.2: Demographic Trends, Tustin 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - His amc 33,203 64.04% 29,936 45.70% 26,741 36.01% Black, Non - Hispanic 2,546 4.91% 2,001 3.05% 1,879 2.53% Hispamc 10,687 20.61% 22,177 33.85% 28,873 38.88% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 5,105 9.85% 10,452 15.95% 16,240 21.87% Native American, Non -Hispanic 197 0.38% 401 0.61% 314 0.42% National Origin Forei -bom 11,250 21.67% 21,580 32.92% 24,470 32.95% LEP Limited English Proficiency 6,814 13.13% 13,970 21.31% 14,937 20.12% Sex Male 26,403 50.87% 32,163 49.07% 36,263 48.83% Female 25,502 49.13% 33,386 50.93% 37,995 51.17% Age Under 18 12,604 24.28% 17,885 27.28% 19,341 26.05% 18-64 35,509 68.41% 42,998 65.60% 48,704 65.59% 65+ 3,792 7.31% 4,665 7.12% 6,213 8.37% Family Type Families with children 6,634 51.65% 8,043 53.99% 9,226 52.64% M 75A-368 Table 23.1: Demographics, Westminster (Westminster, CA CDBG, HOME) Jurisdiction (Los Angeles — Long Beach — Anaheim, CA) Re ion Race/Ethnicity # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 22,450 24.46% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non -Hispanic 797 0.87% 859,086 6.70% Hispanic 21,783 23.73% 5,700,860 44.44% Asian/Pacific Island, Non - Hispanic 43,957 47.89% 1,888,969 14.72% Native American, Non-Hisp. 384 0.42% 25,102 0.20°/0 Two+Races, Non -Hispanic 1,858 2.07% 267,038 2.08% Other, Non -Hispanic 121 0.13% 30,960 0.24% #1 country of origin Vietnam 26,801 29.20% Mexico 1,735,902 14.34% #2 country of origin Mexico 7,184 7.83% Philippines 288,529 2.38% 43 country of origin Philippines 906 0.99% El Salvador 279,381 2.31% #4 country of origin China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 467 0.51% Vietnam 234,251 1.93% #5 country of origin Egypt 428 0.47% Korea 224,370 1.85% 46 country of origin Cambodia 379 0.41% Guatemala 188,854 1.56% #7 country of origin Peru 294 0.32% China excl. Hong Kong & Taiwan 174,424 1.44% 48 country of origin Laos 277 0.30°/u Iran 133,596 1.10% #9 country of origin Taiwan 273 0.30% Taiwan 87,643 0.72% #10 country of origin Korea 254 0.28% India 79,608 0.66% #1LEP Language Vietnamese 22,514 26.32% Spanish 2,033,088 16.79% #2 LEP Language Spanish 6,446 7.53% Chinese 239,576 1.98% #3 LEP Language Chinese 1,026 1.20% Korean 156,343 1.29% #4 LEP Language Korean 234 0.27% Vietnamese 147,472 1.22% #5 LEP Language Cambodian 223 0.26% Armenian 87,201 0.72% #6 LEP Language Tagalog 213 0.25% Tagalog 86,691 0.72% #7 LEP Language Laotian 202 0.24% Persian 41,051 0.34% #8 LEP Language Japanese 154 0.18% Japanese 32,457 0.27% #9 LEP Language Arabic 147 0.17% Russian 28,358 0.23% #10 LEP Language Armenian 1 77 1 0.09% 1 Arabic 1 23,275 0.19% Hearing difficulty 3,399 3.71% 303,390 2.52% Vision difficulty 1,959 2.14% 227,927 1.90% Cognitive difficulty 5,517 6.02% 445,175 3.70% Ambulatory difficulty 6,308 6.89% 641,347 5.34% Self -care difficulty 2,964 3.24% 312,961 2.60% Independent living difficulty 51665 6.19% 496,105 4.13% Male 44,523 49.57% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 45,295 50.43% 6,500,403 50.67% go] 75A-369 Under 18 21,014 23.40% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 56,236 62.61% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 12,568 13.99% 1,415,376 11.03% Families with children 9,079 1 44.54% 1,388,564 1 47.84% Race and Ethnicity Westminster is majority non -Hispanic Asian residents (47.89%) with a significant minority population of White residents (24.46%) and Hispanic residents (23.73%). This is a significantly higher percentage of non - Hispanic Asian residents than Orange County overall (19.78%). Black residents comprise 0.87% of the population, and non -Hispanic Native Americans comprise 0.42% of the population. The percentage of multi -race non -Hispanic population is 2.07%, and the other non -Hispanic population is 0.13%. National Origin The most common country of origin for Westminster residents is Vietnam, with 29.20% of the city population comprised of residents from Vietnam. This is distinct from the most common country of origin for all Orange County residents (Mexico). The remaining most common countries of origin in Westminster are, in order, Mexico, Philippines, China (excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan), Egypt, Cambodia, Peru, Laos, Taiwan, and Korea. Limited English Proficiency The most commonly spoken language for those in Westminster with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is Vietnamese. This is distinct from the most common LEP language overall in Orange County (Spanish). The remaining most common languages for those with LEP are, in order, Spanish, Chinese, Korean, Cambodian, Tagalog, Laotian, Japanese, Arabic, and Armenian. Disability The most common type of disability experienced by Westminster residents is ambulatory difficulty. The remaining most common disabilities are, in order of prevalence, independent living difficulty, cognitive difficulty, hearing difficulty, self -care difficulty, and vision difficulty. Sex Westminster residents are 49.57%male and 50.43%female. Age The majority of Westminster residents are between 18-64, with 62.61% of residents falling in this group. 23.40% of city residents are under 18, and 13.99% are 65 or older. Familial Status Families with children constitute 44.54% of Westminster's population. 91 75A-370 Table 23.2: Demographic Trends, Westminster 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicity # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 45,552 57.77% 32,550 36.89% 23,627 26.31% Black, Non - Hispanic 775 0.98% 985 1.12% 1,047 1.17% Hispanic 15,131 19.19% 19,678 22.30% 21,709 24.17% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 16,918 21.45% 33,809 38.32% 42,829 47.68% Native American, Non -Hispanic 357 0.45% 756 0.86% 454 0.51% National Origin Foreign-bom 22,718 28.86% 37,094 42.04% 39,808 44.32% LEP Limited English Proficiency 16,594 21.08% 28,427 32.22% 30,447 33.90% Sex Male 40,162 51.03% 44,216 50.11% 44,523 49.57% Female 38,546 48.97% 44,019 49.89% 45,295 50.43% Age Under 18 19,745 25.09% 23,821 27.00% 21,014 23.40% 18-64 51,871 65.90% 54,970 62.30% 56,236 62.61% 65+ 7,093 9.01% 9,443 10.70% 12,568 13.99% Family Type Families with children 9,049 46.90% 9,753 49.37% 9,079 44.54% Los Angeles — Lone Beach — Anaheim, CA Region Religion The most common religious group is Roman Catholic. Approximately 797,473 County residents identify as Roman Catholic, which is 26.49% of the total population. The second most common is nondenominational, which accounts for 122,205 residents, or 4.06% of the total population. Southern Baptist Convention and Mormon account for 2.30% and 2.22% of the population respectively. The remaining religions, which account for less than 1% of the total county population, are Assemblies of God, Buddhism, Muslim, Presbyterian, Lutheran, and Church of Christ. 92 75A-371 Table 24: Demographic Trends, Region 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Race/Ethnicit # % # % # % White, Non - Hispanic 5,166,768 45.86% 4,417,595 35.72% 4,056,820 31.62% Black, Non - Hispanic 971,105 8.62% 1,001,103 8.10% 932,431 7.27% Hispanic 3,914,001 34.74% 5,117,049 41.38% 5,700,862 44.44% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 1,146,691 10.18% 1,651,006 13.35% 2,046,118 15.95% Native American, Non -Hispanic 36,210 0.32% 66,029 0.53% 54,362 0.42% National Origin Foreign-bom 3,469,567 30.80% 4,299,323 34.77% 4,380,850 34.15% LEP Limited English Proficiency 2,430,630 21.57% 3,132,663 25.33% 3,053,077 23.80% Sex Male 5,626,077 49.94% 6,107,286 49.39% 6,328,434 49.33% Female 5,640,051 50.06% 6,258,058 50.61% 6,500,403 50.67% Age Under 18 2,911,031 25.84% 3,518,245 28.45% 3,138,867 24.47% 18-64 7,280,517 64.62% 7,641,369 61.80% 8,274,594 64.50% 65+ 1,074,580 9.54% 1,205,730 9.75% 1,415,376 11.03% Family Type Families with children 1 1,318,473 1 50.20% 1,143,222 1 53.64% 1 1,388,564 1 47.84% Over time, the non -Hispanic white population has dropped over time since 1990 both measured both by percentage change and overall population decline. The white population has dropped by 21.48% since 1990, and has decreased by 1,109,948 people over that span. The white population has gone from representing 45.86% of the region's population to representing 31.62% of the region's population. By contrast, the Hispanic population in Orange County has grown significantly: 1,786,859 more people identify as Hispanic currently as compared to 1990, and Hispanic residents now represent 44.44% of the region's population, up from 34.74% in 1990. The Asian, non -Hispanic population has also increased over this time period, albeit at a slower pace than the Hispanic population: 237,963 more residents are non -Hispanic Asians, and their proportion of the region's population has increased from 10.18% to 14.72% today. The Black 93 75A-372 population has decreased slightly (from 8.62% to 6.700/o), while the Native American population has remained relatively flat (0.32% to 0.20%). The percentage of population with LEP has seen an increase of approximately 2%. The percentage of the population that are families with children has decreased slightly, by approximately 2.5% since 1990. The population of residents under 18 has remained essentially constant. The population of residents from 18-64 has also remained basically constant, while the percentage of those over 65 years of age has increased slightly (by approximately 1.5%). 94 75A-373 A. General Issues Segregation/Integration 1. Analysis a. Describe and compare segregation levels in the jurisdiction and region. Identify the racial/ethnic groups that experience the highest levels of segregation. Dissimilarity Index Value Level of Segregation Dissimilarity Index Value (0-100) 0-40 Low Segregation 41-54 Moderate Segregation 55-100 High Segregation The tables below reflect the Dissimilarity Indices for each jurisdiction. The Dissimilarity Index measures the percentage of a certain group's population that would have to move to a different census tract in order to be evenly distributed within a city or metropolitan area in relation to another group. The higher the Dissimilarity Index, the higher the extent of the segregation. Overall, Orange County experiences moderate levels of segregation, with significant variances in some individual jurisdictions. The Non-White/White value is 44.71, Black/White 46.98, Hispanic/White 52.82, and Asian or Pacific Islander/White 43.19. These values have all increased sharply since 2010, though values had remained consistent from 2000 and 2010. Jurisdictional values tend to indicate low levels of segregation in comparison to the county as a whole, but this is due to the spatial distribution of populations across different jurisdictions rather than within different jurisdictions. Areas in central Orange County have the highest Dissimilarity Index values for their populations. Orange City, Santa Ana and Tustin are particularly affected. The Black/White index value for the city of Orange is 42.35, as opposed to a 22.63 Non-White/White index value. Neighboring Santa Ana has a 50.58 Non-White/White index value, and Tustin 48.19. Hispanic residents are affected in Santa Ana, with Dissimilarity Index value of 52.62, and Black and Hispanic residents are especially segregated with values of 66.02 and 57.43, respectively. These measures are especially relevant because Hispanic residents are more concentrated in Anaheim and Santa Ana, compared to the rest of the county. Black residents face consistently high Dissimilarity Index values, especially compared to Non- White/White or other populations' index values. They experience higher levels of segregation in La Habra, Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, Orange and Santa Ana, and especially high levels in Newport Beach and Tustin, at 67.68 and 66.02, respectively. This is not represented in county- wide Dissimilarity Index values likely due to Black residents being comparatively more evenly distributed throughout the county than in individual jurisdictions. 95 75A-374 Hispanic residents also face somewhat high Dissimilarity Index values, though values in individual jurisdictions are typically below the 40.00 threshold. Noticeable differences are evident in Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Santa Ana, and Tustin, which have relatively high levels of segregation. In Santa Ana and Tustin, Dissimilarity Index values for Hispanic residents in relation to White residents are 52.62 and 57.43 respectively. Dissimilarity Index values for Asian or Pacific Islander residents vary. Some jurisdictions have lower values, and others higher. In Garden Grove, values for Asian or Pacific Islanders are higher than for other groups. Table 1 Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Orange County Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 30.38 34.71 33.58 44.71 Non-White/White 32.60 33.63 32.27 46.98 Black/White 36.13 41.08 38.18 52.82 Hispanic/White 32.58 34.31 34.82 43.19 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 1 Table 2: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Ahso Viejo Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index Current Non-White/White 13.03 Black/White 50.89 Hispanic/White 22.57 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 14.98 96 75A-375 Table 3: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Anaheim Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 29.37 31.67 31.72 31.70 Non-White/White 22.24 26.01 27.90 39.71 Black/White 38.81 40.34 38.84 38.40 Hispanic/White 13.26 17.36 21.59 25.16 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 4: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Buena Park Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 18.17 22.07 21.40 23.51 Non-White/White 21.76 23.51 25.25 42.66 Black/White 26.64 33.21 30.85 36.71 Hispanic/White 11.56 13.87 16.44 15.49 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 5: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Costa Mesa Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 29.76 36.82 34.36 35.80 Non-White/White 30.21 27.11 27.72 44.23 Black/White 34.42 45.28 41.93 42.06 Hispanic/White 30.34 31.93 30.60 42.65 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 97 75A-376 Table 6: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Fountain Valley Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 14.25 22.27 23.54 34.00 Non-White/White 27.24 27.57 26.28 39.71 Black/White 21.64 28.33 29.59 42.15 Hispanic/White 13.85 22.12 23.58 33.68 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 7: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Fullerton Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 25.53 31.15 30.52 29.76 Non-White/White 30.59 31.83 26.53 28.59 Black/White 33.72 39.98 38.28 35.96 Hispanic/White 30.41 33.48 35.24 33.56 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 8: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Garden Grove Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 25.06 31.79 32.16 34.93 Non-White/White 22.18 23.11 23.45 35.03 Black/White 27.67 32.64 33.20 36.26 Hispanic/White 27.45 34.98 33.98 38.21 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 98 75A-377 Table 9: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Huntington Beach Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 21.11 23.44 21.58 25.52 Non-White/White 21.45 19.99 24.21 37.58 Black/White 28.10 33.37 30.09 28.86 Hispanic/White 22.86 20.11 18.25 26.26 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 10: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Irvine Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 16.50 21.56 18.01 19.24 Non-White/White 43.00 27.84 19.37 39.54 Black/White 21.99 22.81 17.89 26.58 Hispanic/White 18.18 22.57 18.73 73.67 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 11: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for La Habra Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 28.16 26.70 24.12 25.08 Non-White/White 12.56 13.23 19.35 40.12 Black/White 33.91 30.92 28.56 30.22 Hispanic/White 40.47 38.68 36.53 27.99 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 12: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for La Palma Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index Current 9.67 Non-White/White 17.98 Black/White 1.93 Hispanic/White 13.62 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 13: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for La una Niguel Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 9.17 12.98 16.34 20.29 Non-White/White 13.82 22.75 16.24 45.64 Black/White 99 75A-378 13.34 20.76 22.79 27.18 Hispanic/White 13.37 12.68 13.82 18.94 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 14: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Lake Forest Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 9.39 15.38 17.28 19.97 Non-White/White 12.43 12.16 9.52 26.59 Black/White 15.72 26.10 27.63 30.04 Hispanic/White 8.84 11.06 13.46 17.18 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 15: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Mission Viejo Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 13.67 15.18 15.75 29.15 Non-White/White 18.03 20.63 16.83 43.54 Black/White 12.26 18.75 20.96 20.00 Hispanic/White 20.00 16.83 13.98 16.84 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 100 75A-379 Table 16: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for range City Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 23.79 24.21 22.68 22.63 Non-White/White 24.12 24.45 24.72 42.35 Black/White 30.24 29.79 26.90 27.94 Hispanic/White 19.54 22.34 22.70 27.55 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 17: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Rancho Santa Margarita Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 5.43 12.26 14.07 18.27 Non-White/White 7.18 12.64 13.35 23.56 Black/White 5.73 19.52 23.13 24.53 Hispanic/White 6.70 8.56 9.55 17.95 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 101 75A-380 Table 18: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for San Clemente Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 21.89 25.93 16.76 17.23 Non-White/White 13.86 19.08 14.93 37.45 Black/White 27.16 32.90 23.71 21.95 Hispanic/White 14.66 14.76 16.56 27.33 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 20: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Santa Ana Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 47.73 49.25 46.51 50.58 Non-White/White 36.60 28.03 25.25 42.30 Black/White 53.07 53.60 50.02 52.62 Hispanic/White 43.05 46.79 46.94 43.95 Asian or Pacific Islander/White Table 21: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicity for Tustin Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 26.33 36.73 32.93 48.19 Non-White/White 42.49 35.11 29.03 66.02 Black/White 31.14 48.19 42.55 57.43 Hispanic/White 19.20 17.74 19.76 28.73 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 102 75A-381 Table 22: Dissimilarity Index Values by Race and Ethnicitv for Westminster Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current 24.58 28.05 31.59 11.95 Non-White/White 11.56 14.18 17.62 35.61 Black/White 30.31 29.74 31.83 9.64 Hispanic/White 23.15 29.73 34.65 16.31 Asian or Pacific Islander/White b. Explain how these segregation levels have changed over time (since 1990). In addition to the Dissimilarity Index, social scientists also use the Isolation and Exposure Indices to measure segregation. These indices, when taken together, capture the neighborhood demographics experienced, on average, by members of a particular racial or ethnic groups within a cty or metropolitan area. The Isolation Index measures what percentage of the census tract in which a person of a certain racial identity lives is comprised of other persons of that same racial/ethnic group. Values for the Isolation Index range from 0 to 100. The Exposure Index is a group's exposure to all racial groups. Values for the Exposure Index also range from 0 to 100. A larger value means that the average group member lives in a census tract with a higher percentage of people from another group. Table 23 Isolation Index Values by Race and Ethnicity, Orange County Isolation Index Current White/White 55.16 Black/Black 3.32 Hispanic/Hispanic 52.81 Asian/Asian 31.84 Table 24: Aliso Vieio Isolation Index Current White/White 62.94 Black/Black 3.97 Hispanic/Hispanic 19.52 Asian/Asian 16.32 Table 25: Anaheim Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 78.8 62.1 44.9 37.1 35.8 Black/Black 1.8 3.1 3.6 3.6 3.61 Hispanic/Hispanic 28.6 44.8 58.2 61.7 59.25 Asian/Asian 4.4 10.8 16.5 20 22.66 103 75A-382 Table 26: Buena Park Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 76.3 60.3 42.2 31.8 27.37 Black/Black 1.6 3.1 4.7 4.6 5.08 Hispanic/Hispanic 20 29 40.1 45.2 49.04 Asian/Asian 5.2 15.1 24.5 31.6 34.19 Table 27: Costa Mesa Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 84.1 74.8 64.6 59.7 57.38 Black/Black 1.6 1.8 2 2.1 3.18 Hispanic/Hispanic 14.9 29.3 47.7 49.2 45.35 Asian/Asian 6.4 9.7 12.7 14.3 22.27 Table 28: Fountain Valley Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 83.9 73.4 60.6 52.4 45.93 Black/Black 0.8 1.2 1.7 1.5 0.75 Hispanic/Hispanic 7.1 9.2 12.4 15.1 29.93 Asian/Asian 7.6 18.6 30.7 38.8 42.97 Table 29: Fullerton Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 81 68.4 55.9 45.6 40.27 Black/Black 2.8 3 3.1 3 3.19 Hispanic/Hispanic 24.8 33.3 43.7 47.8 47.56 Asian/Asian 7 21 31.4 41 38.19 Table 30: Garden Grove Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 80.4 59 42 34.3 32.11 Black/Black 1.1 1.7 1.8 1.5 2.54 Hispanic/Hispanic 25.4 30.4 39.4 43.4 44.37 Asian/Asian 7.5 24.6 39.8 45.4 45.88 Table 31: Huntington Beach Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 85.4 80.5 74.4 69.8 63.99 Black/Black 1 1.1 1.2 1.7 2.68 Hispanic/Hispanic 9.5 18.3 26.7 26.9 27.39 Asian/Asian 5.9 9.7 12.6 14.8 21.32 104 75A-383 Table 32: Irvine Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 84.3 74.5 59.2 47 46.09 Black/Black 3.6 4.4 2.2 2.5 3.19 Hispanic/Hispanic 7.1 7 8 10.4 15.57 Asian/Asian 8.4 19.4 35.1 44.6 41.54 Table 33: La Habra Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 76.6 64.7 46.5 34.7 35.40 Black/Black 0.4 1 1.8 2 1.79 Hispanic/Hispanic 31.2 41.9 55.4 62.7 62.64 Asian/Asian 2.8 5.8 15.4 22.5 18.18 Table 34: Laguna Niguel Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 92.7 83.2 77.9 73.4 68.74 Black/Black 0.4 1.4 1.8 1.7 3.98 Hispanic/Hispanic 4.4 8.4 12.2 16.7 20.88 Asian/Asian 2.2 8.2 9.8 12.3 11.02 Table 35: Lake Forest Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White n/a n/a 67.9 59.3 54.69 Black/Black n/a n/a 2.4 2.2 2.95 Hispanic/Hispanic n/a n/a 23.1 30.7 32.32 Asian/Asian n/a n/a 11.6 16.2 17.49 Table 36: Mission Viejo Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 89.8 85.2 76.8 70.1 67.55 Black/Black 0.8 1 1.8 2 3.11 Hispanic/Hispanic 5.9 8.2 15.6 20.8 21.55 Asian/Asian 3.4 7 10.2 12.5 12.48 Table 37: Orange (City) Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 82.9 70.3 58.5 50.4 52.18 Black/Black 1.4 1.8 2.3 2.2 2.71 Hispanic/Hispanic 17 30.6 39.7 43.9 44.99 105 75A-384 Asian/Asian 13.7 110.2 113.6 115.9 14.10 Table 38: Rancho Santa M8CQ8Cita Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White n/a 78.3 74.9 68 67.91 Black/Black n/a 1.4 2.3 2.4 2.28 Hispanic/Hispanic n/a 11.6 15.1 21.9 21.90 Asian/Asian n/a 8.2 9.6 11.9 10.65 Table 39: San Clemente Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 88.4 84.5 80.4 77.1 75.50 Black/Black 1.2 0.7 1 1 1.62 Hispanic/Hispanic 10 19.3 25.8 22.4 23.44 Asian/Asian 1.7 2.9 4.1 6.1 6.16 Table 40: Santa Ana Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 58.9 41.7 28.4 20.6 25.46 Black/Black 7.7 3.5 2.4 1.8 2.16 Hispanic/Hispanic 58.5 74.6 81.4 82.4 82.04 Asian/Asian 7 17.7 22.1 25.9 16.90 Table 41: Tustin Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 83.7 66.3 54.3 43.2 52.44 Black/Black 6.1 9.9 3.6 2.7 4.84 Hispanic/Hispanic 10.2 27 51.3 51.9 56.10 Asian/Asian 4.4 12.1 19.6 26.7 19.86 Table 42: Westminster Isolation Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current White/White 78.2 60.7 43.2 34.3 16.61 Black/Black 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.3 0.78 Hispanic/Hispanic 14.5 24.8 26 28.6 28.35 Asian/Asian 9.5 25.9 45.8 55.4 57.40 Isolation values for different populations vary widely across the county and individual jurisdictions. Values for White residents are generally higher than for other residents, likely due to the larger number of White residents overall. In Orange County, White residents have an Isolation Index value of 55.16, Black residents 3.32, Hispanic residents 52.81, and Asian residents 31.84. Values for the county are sometimes higher than values in individual jurisdictions for White, 106 75A-385 Hispanic, and Asian residents, again likely due to higher segregation across jurisdictions rather than within them. Isolation values have generally decreased for White residents over time, increased for Hispanic and Asian residents, and remained low for Black residents. There are notable exceptions, however. White residents have especially high Isolation values in Aliso Viejo, Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, Mission Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita, and San Clemente. While some of those cities have lower non-White populations, Lake Forest's significant Hispanic population suggests that White residents are disproportionately isolated. San Clemente has the highest White Isolation index value at 75.5. Buena Park has the lowest at 27.37. Isolation index values for Black residents are uniformly low. Values are in the single digits, due to the low Black population across the county. These values have remained low and fairly consistent since the 1980s, with no noticeable exceptions. Hispanic residents have experienced the highest Isolation Index value change over the last few decades. This is partly due to the increasing size of the population in the county. Certain areas have exceptionally high Hispanic Isolation Index values, however including La Habra at 62.64 and Santa Ana with 82.04. Table 43 Exposure Index Values for Orange County Exposure Index Current Black/White 38.76 Hispanic/White 27.47 Asian/White 35.78 White/Black 1.47 Hispanic/Black 1.56 Asian/Black 1.64 White/Hispanic 22.69 Black/Hispanic 34.09 Asian/Hispanic 27.54 White/Asian 17.10 Black/Asian 20.66 Hispanic/Asian 15.93 Table 44: Anaheim Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 76.7 57.2 36.7 27.8 25.38 Hispanic/White 65.9 45.4 27.3 21.2 20.8 Asian/White 78.7 61.6 41 31.4 28.44 White/Black 1.1 2.4 2.8 2.9 2.03 Hispanic/Black 1 2.2 2.6 2.7 2.09 107 75A-386 Asian/Black 1.2 2.5 3.2 3.2 2.12 White/Hispanic 14.8 25.2 35.6 40.7 40.09 Black/Hispanic 15.8 29.7 43.1 49.9 50.48 Asian/Hispanic 14.2 24.6 37.8 44.8 44.5 White/Asian 3.9 9.8 15.2 18.6 19.66 Black/Asian 4.1 9.4 15.1 18.1 18.31 Hispanic/Asian 3.1 7.1 10.7 13.8 15.96 Table 45: Buena Park Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 70.7 55.1 35.3 25.5 20.09 Hispanic/White 72.8 54.7 33 24.4 20.39 Asian/White 73.7 58.7 39.4 28.6 25.83 White/Black 1 2.2 3.8 3.7 3.01 Hispanic/Black 1.2 2.6 4.4 4.3 4.15 Asian/Black 1.2 2.4 4 3.8 3.12 White/Hispanic 17.1 22.9 29 34.6 34.98 Black/Hispanic 20.5 27.1 36.4 42.2 47.49 Asian/Hispanic 17.7 23.1 30.5 35.3 34.03 White/Asian 4.1 13.8 23.4 29.2 31.53 Black/Asian 5 14 22 27 25.39 Hispanic/Asian 4.2 13 20.6 25.4 24.21 Table 46: Costa Mesa Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 83.3 71.4 57.2 51.6 48.14 Hispanic/White 78.6 63.2 42.6 40.2 39.24 Asian/White 81.4 69.5 57.2 52.7 43.84 White/Black 0.6 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.49 Hispanic/Black 0.6 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.23 Asian/Black 0.6 1.3 1.9 2.1 2.21 White/Hispanic 9.7 17.6 23.8 27.8 25.99 Black/Hispanic 9.8 19.4 28.9 33.3 26.41 Asian/Hispanic 10.2 19.1 26.7 30 28.27 White/Asian 4.2 6 8.5 9.9 11.69 Black/Asian 4 7 10.5 12.1 19.1 Hispanic/Asian 4.3 5.9 7.1 8.2 11.38 Table 47: Fountain Valley Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 12010 1Current Black/White 83.5 70.8 54.9 147 140.9 Hispanic/White 83.4 171.6 55.4 146.4 129.3 fS� ..3 75A-387 Asian/White 83.3 71.8 55.2 45.9 32.95 White/Black 0.7 0.9 1.3 1.2 0.47 Hispanic/Black 0.7 1.1 1.6 1.4 0.47 Asian/Black 0.7 0.9 1.4 1.2 0.35 White/Hispanic 6.8 8 10.1 12.4 16.67 Black/Hispanic 7 9.6 12.7 15.1 23.22 Asian/Hispanic 6.8 8.1 11 13.3 21.16 White/Asian 7 17.2 26.3 33.2 33.5 Black/Asian 7 17.8 29.1 35.5 31.29 Hispanic/Asian 1 7 1 17.4 128.8 36.2 37.8 Table 48: Fullerton Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 73.3 59.5 44.7 37.3 32.48 Hispanic/White 67.9 54.6 40 33 29.88 Asian/White 78.6 60.7 44.3 33.9 30.48 White/Black 1.5 1.9 2.2 2.4 2.39 Hispanic/Black 2.1 2.6 2.8 2.7 2.76 Asian/Black 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.1 2.17 White/Hispanic 11.6 18.1 24.8 29.7 31.92 Black/Hispanic 18.1 26.4 35.6 37.8 40.13 Asian/Hispanic 11.3 16.1 21 22.4 25.69 White/Asian 4.4 11.2 15.7 21.5 21.94 Black/Asian 4.1 11.2 15.2 21.1 21.26 Hispanic/Asian 3.7 9 12 15.8 17.3 Table 49: Garden Grove Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 77 53 32.7 23.4 28.9 Hispanic/White 66.7 48.2 27.9 19.2 17.18 Asian/White 77 50.5 27.6 18.9 17.02 White/Black 0.8 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.48 Hispanic/Black 0.8 1.4 1.5 1.3 0.92 Asian/Black 0.9 1.4 1.4 1.3 0.89 White/Hispanic 11.5 20.7 27.8 31.3 31.25 Black/Hispanic 13.8 23.7 33 36.9 32.61 Asian/Hispanic 12.7 22.9 30.2 33.9 34.42 White/Asian 5.6 18.4 27.6 32.4 32.34 Black/Asian 6.2 21 31.4 37.7 32.74 Hispanic/Asian 5.4 19.4 30.2 35.6 35.94 109 75A-388 Table 50: Huntington Beach Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 83.9 77.5 69.4 64.5 59.11 Hispanic/White 82.9 71.8 60.4 57.7 52.89 Asian/White 83.4 77.2 70.9 66.3 54.76 White/Black 0.7 0.9 1 1.2 1.26 Hispanic/Black 0.8 1 1.1 1.4 1.3 Asian/Black 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.21 White/Hispanic 7.7 10.2 12.3 14.6 17.18 Black/Hispanic 8.6 12.8 16.1 18.8 19.87 Asian/Hispanic 8.2 11.7 13.8 16.5 18.84 White/Asian 4.7 7.8 10.7 13.2 13.44 Black/Asian 4.8 7.9 11.7 13.9 13.99 Hispanic/Asian 5 8.3 10.3 13 14.24 Table 51: Irvine Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 76.8 70 54.1 43.9 39.74 Hispanic/White 81.2 71.9 55.2 44 42.26 Asian/White 81.7 72.1 53.8 43.4 41.17 White/Black 1.3 1.6 1.6 2.1 1.57 Hispanic/Black 2 2.2 1.9 2.3 1.72 Asian/Black 1.8 1.7 1.8 2.2 1.83 White/Hispanic 5.8 6.1 7.1 8.6 10.98 Black/Hispanic 8.3 7.9 8.2 9.9 11.29 Asian/Hispanic 6.7 6.5 7.6 9.2 10.48 White/Asian 7.3 17.4 30.3 41.3 36.5 Black/Asian 9.6 17.2 33.6 43 41.09 Hispanic/Asian 8.4 18.7 33 42.6 35.75 Table 52: La Habra Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 75.6 63.3 42.5 30.8 30.02 Hispanic/White 65.7 53.6 36.6 27.4 25.8 Asian/White 77.6 63.8 43.5 32.1 34.55 White/Black 0.3 0.9 1.7 1.7 1.09 Hispanic/Black 0.3 0.8 1.6 1.6 1.09 Asian/Black 0.4 0.9 1.8 2.1 0.96 White/Hispanic 19.7 29.8 43.4 51.9 48.56 Black/Hispanic 20.2 30.9 47.1 53.6 56.34 Asian/Hispanic 17.9 29 38.1 42.5 44.47 White/Asian 2.2 4 7 10.8 12.95 110 75A-389 Black/Asian 12.6 14.3 17.4 112.8 9.89 Hispanic/Asian 1 1.7 13.3 15.2 17.6 8.86 Table 53: Laguna Ni uel Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 92.4 82.4 75.5 70.9 59.48 Hispanic/White 92.4 82.6 75.1 69.4 62.18 Asian/White 92.1 82.7 76.6 71.2 65.29 White/Black 0.4 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.64 Hispanic/Black 0.4 1.4 1.7 1.6 2.3 Asian/Black 0.4 1.3 1.4 1.6 2.11 White/Hispanic 4.2 7.7 10.1 13.3 15.5 Black/Hispanic 4.3 8.4 11.9 15.1 20.84 Asian/Hispanic 4.4 7.6 10.6 14.2 16.95 White/Asian 2 7.5 9.1 11.1 9.62 Black/Asian 2.1 7.5 9.1 11.6 11.33 Hispanic/Asian 2.1 7.4 9.3 11.5 10.03 Table 54: Lake Forest Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White n/a n/a 67.3 58.3 52.72 Hispanic/White n/a n/a 62.4 52 47.67 Asian/White n/a n/a 66.5 57.4 52.56 White/Black n/a n/a 2.1 2 2.01 Hispanic/Black n/a n/a 2 1.9 2.01 Asian/Black n/a n/a 2.2 2 1.87 White/Hispanic n/a n/a 17.4 22.4 23.84 Black/Hispanic n/a n/a 17.4 23 26.34 Asian/Hispanic n/a n/a 18.4 23.5 24 White/Asian n/a n/a 11.2 15.5 15.36 Black/Asian n/a n/a 11.5 15.6 14.3 Hispanic/Asian n/a n/a 11.2 14.7 14.02 Table 55: Mission Viejo Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 88.9 83.9 73.6 67.4 67.06 Hispanic/White 89.1 84.3 72 65 61.99 Asian/White 88.6 83.8 74.5 68 65.26 White/Black 0.7 0.9 1.4 1.7 1.62 Hispanic/Black 0.7 1 1.6 1.9 1.46 111 75A-390 Asian/Black 0.7 1 1.6 1.8 1.47 White/Hispanic 5.6 7.6 11.5 16 15.89 Black/Hispanic 5.9 8.2 13.5 18.3 15.45 Asian/Hispanic 6 7.9 12.4 17 16.76 White/Asian 2.8 6 9 11.4 10.9 Black/Asian 3.2 6.5 9.8 11.4 10.12 Hispanic/Asian 3.1 6.2 9.4 11.5 10.92 Table 56: Orange (City) Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 79 35.2 51.7 43.3 43.93 Hispanic/White 76.8 60.6 48 42.2 42.34 Asian/White 81.1 67.4 54.7 47.5 48.65 White/Black 0.9 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.09 Hispanic/Black 1.1 1.4 1.8 1.9 1.28 Asian/Black 0.9 1.2 1.8 1.9 1.16 White/Hispanic 11.6 20.4 28.3 34.4 33.22 Black/Hispanic 14.8 25.2 34 40.5 40.53 Asian/Hispanic 12.9 20.8 28.8 34 33.15 White/Asian 3.2 7.6 10.4 12.8 10.58 Black/Asian 3.2 7.5 10.8 13.2 10.22 Hispanic/Asian 3.4 7 9.3 11.2 9.19 Table 57: Rancho Santa Margarita Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White n/a 78.3 73.2 66 66.49 Hispanic/White n/a 78.3 72.1 63.6 62.68 Asian/White n/a 78.3 74 66.6 65.32 White/Black n/a 1.4 2.1 2.3 1.73 Hispanic/Black n/a 1.4 2.3 2.4 1.63 Asian/Black n/a 1.4 2.2 2.4 1.9 White/Hispanic n/a 11.6 12.6 17.7 16.66 Black/Hispanic n/a 11.6 14 19.3 16.6 Asian/Hispanic n/a 11.6 13 18.4 17.99 White/Asian n/a 8.2 9.2 11.3 9.43 Black/Asian n/a 8.1 9.3 11.5 10.51 Hispanic/Asian n/a 8.2 9.2 11.2 9.77 Table 58: San Clemente Exposure Index 11980 11990 12000 12010 Current Black/White 85.5 82.3 75.9 75.3 766 35 112 75A-391 Hispanic/White 86 77.1 68.6 70.8 68.96 Asian/White 87.1 83.6 79.3 76.4 74.08 White/Black 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.75 Hispanic/Black 1.1 0.6 1 0.9 0.63 Asian/Black 1 0.6 0.9 1 0.76 White/Hispanic 8.2 11.9 13.9 15.7 15.89 Black/Hispanic 10.4 13.8 18.2 17 14.78 Asian/Hispanic 9 12.4 14.5 15.5 14.98 White/Asian 1 1.5 1 2.6 3.7 1 5.4 4.29 Black/Asian 1 1.6 1 2.8 13.8 1 5.7 1445 Hispanic/Asian 1 1.6 1 2.5 1 3.3 1 4.9 3.77 Table 59: Santa Ana Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 38.2 27.1 19.5 14.5 15.73 Hispanic/White 30.8 15.8 9.3 7.5 8.57 Asian/White 46.2 27.4 15.4 11.1 13.25 White/Black 3.3 2.6 2.3 1.8 1.29 Hispanic/Black 4 2 1.3 1 0.83 Asian/Black 4.8 2.4 1.6 1.2 0.96 White/Hispanic 30.8 44.4 56.7 63.9 60.58 Black/Hispanic 45.6 59.1 66.7 71.8 71.44 Asian/Hispanic 39.2 52.2 60.1 61.5 67.45 White/Asian 4.9 10.8 11.8 13.2 10.72 Black/Asian 5.9 9.9 10.6 11.4 9.44 Hispanic/Asian 4.2 7.3 7.5 8.7 7.72 Table 60: Tustin Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 78 57 40.3 32.5 20.01 Hispanic/White 81.4 56.6 30.8 26.3 23.47 Asian/White 83 62.7 48.9 37.2 39.02 White/Black 2.4 4.9 2.8 2.3 1.36 Hispanic/Black 3 6.3 3.5 2.7 3.49 Asian/Black 2.6 4.6 2.9 2.4 2.56 White/Hispanic 8.5 18.5 23.5 30 25.32 Black/Hispanic 10.2 24 39 42.8 55.54 Asian/Hispanic 8.6 20.1 27.2 33.1 34.8 White/Asian 4 9.8 17.9 23.8 17.08 Black/Asian 4 8.4 15.6 21.4 16.51 Hispanic/Asian 3.9 9.6 13.1 18.5 14.12 113 75A-392 Table 61: Westminster Exposure Index 1980 1990 2000 2010 Current Black/White 78.8 57.8 38.6 29.6 17.19 Hispanic/White 74.1 52 33.4 24.5 16.4 Asian/White 75 53.8 31.1 21.4 15.21 White/Black 0.7 1 1.2 1.3 0.45 Hispanic/Black 0.6 1 1.1 1.2 0.51 Asian/Black 0.6 1 1 1 0.36 White/Hispanic 11.5 17.3 20 22.6 27.06 Black/Hispanic 11.4 18.7 21.8 25.7 31.71 Asian/Hispanic 12.9 18.8 20.9 21.7 24.54 White/Asian 7.7 20.5 34.1 41.1 53.04 Black/Asian 7.1 21.9 37 42.6 47.49 Hispanic/Asian 8.5 21.6 38.2 45.1 51.88 Exposure Index values are for the most part consistent with proportions of populations in individual jurisdictions. While Non-White/White exposure values are decreasing, exposure to Hispanic and Asian populations is increasing, and to the Black population is remaining the same. Exposure to White residents is exceptionally high in Mission Viejo and San Clemente. Areas with high Hispanic populations have high exposure to Hispanic residents as well, as seen in Santa Ana, but less so in Lake Forest, indicating higher levels of segregation. c. Identify areas in the jurisdiction and region with relatively high segregation and integration by race%thnicity, national origin, or LEP group, and indicate the predominant groups living in each area. 114 75A-393 Race/Ethnicity 75A-394 viap L: xaeei>>Jcnn►eay, cencrai orange county, ca -� ;r • w 1: arl f t - yy �. ♦ r V�, �,� .�,r�w , t¢� r � t iy • :�..• r i t w•1 i i s P /'a.afq" ,Warn.; use r •V•i r•1 r�.:.x eu. d�iu. t..' ,r�..-n. {: •t �,y �• n.j•ii Y,-}:. •: f.f�i"" Y�" .P. �• `t` . t r . r ��: • mot. Y..• =:4 .t'„rG •r.:.••t• •..tr ..i •j. `• t � °} •.y+: °'.Y�?!q.M1 ape• ti•a.msuesn ntrt ..• :i. Legend �.t r' f s !r n43J;__ • N-veamexmo. Amevicen lnduW •Sti�w .r : ''•'•L• Pac5cisl.de. � - - T • � 6° .. , fliFame • _ i�. .. Map 2.1: Hispanic Origin, Central Orange County CPD Maps - Persons of Hispanic Origin Ma¢h 16. 202D 19B,M9 Overnae 1 HisPankO.i9in O 13P 2818% _ >71 M% — --I I o8032,3 T2 — PCT=23_14lSUYo m.as .��. �2. neWmr.rn�rn, ra �r� 116 75A-395 Map 3: Race/Ethnicity, South Orange County, CA • py 1\efa... E: ♦ \t 1 •���• NmreAmeocmo•Ameucn dmlian w 4 •� I +*m� ti ..1. • �. ''�� A �� + \ Y�y l • • ��iia'�.�. 2n5�3sla.ae. :'i: ... '\,,`viY'o '+d`..°•e ""'s f9'C x:•n�e }5';!f�r { r i n.: ,nwre oaui •• �\az :.•yes .wc xx_voom •.dnn v"�ro ^��'. � ��"'°�x �� ��•; •. � � ' �. °�.fyF" Ct y_�,\� . Lam. • ♦Y'�' . . Clear patterns of segregation both across and within jurisdictions are visible in the above maps. In general, White residents tend to reside towards the outer edges of the county, while Hispanic and sometimes Asian residents are found more in the center of the county. La Habra, Anaheim, Buena Park, Santa Ana, Tustin, and parts of Costa Mesa have higher concentrations of Hispanic residents, while Fullerton, Westminster, Garden Grove, and Anaheim have higher populations of Asian residents. In areas with high Hispanic or Asian populations are present, segregation within a jurisdiction is more visible. For example, Hispanic residents are found more in northern Anaheim, southern Costa Mesa, eastern Tustin, northern Huntington Beach, southeastern Lake Forest, and northwestern San Juan Capistrano. Asian residents are more heavily concentrated in Garden Grove, northern Fullerton, eastern Westminster, and northwestern Irvine. Integration More integrated areas of the County include the city of Orange, Fountain Valley, and Mission Viejo. 117 75A-396 National Origin Map 4: National Origin, North Orange County, CA N®mlOogm ]Ce:-a9 Pewm Poil•ft'°^ Korea Yw^ Legend NT d I C.m: • • • S va. qqq 1 • •� f•: ..jam i 1 . .,tti • (Y .. � • • M� ♦• .; . e sent ( y5 s •� 1 .y Map 5: National Origin, North Orange County, CA NaucrialOugm 1 Qot=iO Lav .\gemxo • F]Sakahr fwdr • Wzsmila 1la:�llvgdvm _I% ce i �Y r• • S e • 118 75A-397 � �>rfSt � ceco o: iNanonai "rigin, t:entrai "range county, %—A 4 i•.. Ik, f.yt� .' r •.'Ptl • , �junrwa\\eii p�•. •y �♦ r •� � r I' s • • 4 r.y� v NmulOvgv. llbt=50 • l'smtm FTiFppwer [ �a YW^ • diuq vu]uhu6]1v�ylGvysuJ Surwv r� Map 7: National Origin, Central Orange County, CA Nati®al Oagm 1Wt=`A )m 14im • QSaka� Gwo-wE. IIvW Aiugdnm >r.�ssnwc • 119 75A-398 Map 8: National Origin, South Orange County, CA t �4 1 . 2t•. • r♦ t r NmmlOuym i l}oe=50 pieum RuG�wn Fm�u ja' • ¢w.. menwug [ioag xmg ma Taimu rum Map 9: National Origin, South Orange County, CA YU "ate 'fir - . •} �Yh a y* — �; r. - • ,' 4 • ,' o.ewce ca vrve�ecx •• t .. -vn te'an"xc'enrraeno L/ N¢um:LLOvgm PWAXYIX'I • •�... • ]Dnt=SQ o !m maw ¢vaginae • 05ak�do. Yn • C�.emila 1'_0 75A-399 There are some clear patterns of settlement based on national origin in Orange County. The maps above show the largest populations of foreign national origins in both the county overall and in individual jurisdictions. These maps were formed using the top five largest foreign born populations in each jurisdiction, but due to the high levels of overlap across jurisdictions, 12 populations total are represented. In northern Orange County, there is a high Korean population in La Habra and Fullerton. A very large Vietnamese population exists in the area stretching from Garden Grove into Westminster, and a Filipino population is most populous in Buena Park and Anaheim. Anaheim, along with Santa Ana, also contains a large Mexican population, stretching into south Costa Mesa. Mexican residents are similarly scattered throughout central Orange County, though less are present in Irvine. Irvine has significant populations of all represented populations, and higher numbers of residents from the United Kingdom in particular. Mexican residents are especially present in the area bordering Lake Forest, Mission Viejo and Laguna Hills, and central San Juan Capistrano. d. Consider and describe the location of owner and renter occupied housing in the jurisdiction and region in determining whether such housing is located in segregated or integrated areas, and describe trends over time. Map 10: North Orange County, Housing Tenure 121 75A-400 Map 11: Central Orange County, Housing Tenure E71 -4,-W -BI-TO - TI-80 - Bt-90 -91-,00 V A Map 12: South Orange County, Housing Tenure 122 75A-401 Housing tenure varies widely across the county. Northern and more rural areas of the county tend to have less renters, as compared to more populous areas towards the center of the county. Anaheim, Santa Ana, Costa Mesa, Seal Beach, and Irvine tend to have much more renters than average. Some of these areas have high populations of Hispanic residents specifically, including Anaheim and Santa Ana. Irvine has a high population of students, which may explain the higher percentages of renters in that city too. e. Discuss how patterns of segregation have changed over time (since 1990). 123 75A-402 Maps 13 & 14: Race/Ethnicity in 1990 HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool KK? ✓ a°`-v,to i .r- °G r r • . r c Legend rtr 1 y ry �' IIIIIIII p . � Jurisdiction N dal fF / . e• : .I - .. _ Region Ion e 1• � + 4af - p Demographics 1990 ,,Lt ti +q t p rer-i•,+ - s �' i ,v i i. Y • IOae-1W IT., _ While, Non -Hispanic •r ? ;• L: _ a'+l +�E e:" 'A' e^,` ""f• •r Black Non-Hispanle �'• •q.Native American, Non- • K �Y Hispanic r . • • - e J AslanNaciOc Islander, Non- `" f4 91 Hispanic w- t--E • r A�'^ Hispanic TRACT PVIECAP /'��` 1 APFHT011bS Name: Map 2 - Race/Ethnicity Trends Description: Past race/ethnlcley, dot density map for Junadichmn and Region with RVECAPs J prediction: Orange County (CDBG, HOME, ESG) Region: Las Angeles -Lang Beach-Anahelm, CA HUD -Provided Data Winston: AFFHTOOO4 HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool '�� a r i'o •- v Legend J��II II r �'� P e r u e s • p � 9 1 4 N IIIIIIII x� ri++lii'x � 14 r 4i • _ h � 5 • '; p, • .. - Region .a l p ,•. Demographics 1990 IDO I Dot White, Non -Hispanic Black, Non.Hispanic LLi -•r', f It.,rn it, ..Native American, Non- 9.1 AsialMPacitic Islander, Non - Hispanic • 14Hispanic -- L•,ro- r.ltli'ual - TRACT Ce l WECAP 4 Off ��F s,ran APFHT9004 End, HERE, NITS n D t reateu.3H/2Q20 mama: Map 2 - Race/Ethniclty Trentls Description: Past reca/etnnlclty dot density map for Jurlsdlcllon and Region with FEEGAPs Jurisdiction: Orange County (CDBG, HOME, ESG) Region: Los Angeles -Lang Beach-Anahsim, CA HUD-Proeltled Data Waudon: AFFHT0004 124 75A-403 Maps 15 & 16: Race/Ethnicity in 2000 HUD Affirmatively Further€ng Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool l pia y,tGg I nor. r✓!i:4r, sa 1'1.f'fe :r S • `. "'- - � Le9anrl P 1IIiII� 1 t; , 4 � e � Jariatlldlen llll xt+ ra r9tA.o��.., 4 Region •e`er Demographic,2000 I Pal-75 r r W `4ie Y _ White, Non -Hispanic Blacr ® r�, -��iT�ti s tiro•' 2 '4'F,. b ro I •� Native "arlHon-Hear, Nc •.,• ^ Nshve Ametican, Non- ' 6 - 'Ss Hispanic 4Jbt I t ' r a } :j AsiaNPaci to hosntler, Non - Hispanic Lse� .. A.. A: ' r't }.-l. �� • Hispank TRACT one a.- !i•.YTT ~� G rMe fl/ECAP AFFHT00D41 E1 HERE NP ¢ >4 �'• } t T D r ceatetl'.D 1/202D Name: Map 2 - Raca/E[hnicity Tmntls Description: Past raceivahnicity dot density map for Jurisdiction and Region with WEGAPs Jimatlldlon: Orange County (CDBG, HOME, E9G) Region: Los Angeles -Long Beach -Anaheim, CA HUD -Provided Data Version: AFFHT00W HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool - .• y Legend n S v - Jurisdiction ... IS r ti 4 fi. ��� �` i• ""1A - t PT F°I . a e _ mni . Region 4 v Q Demographice 2Da0 r e 1 out - 75 9 4- " y _ White, Non -Hispanic •• LEI Ir-r� .4 3 t f 11 r, ,'P. Black, Non -Hispanic Native American, Non - ;a �t�+4 Hispanic += �Aslan/PacillcWarner, Non- • z Hispanic Hispanic TRACT WECAP AEFHT0004 I Esn, HERE, NES Name: Map 2 - Race/Ethnicgy Trends Description: Past recaiethnlclty, dot density map tar Jurisdiction and Region with NEGAPS Jurisdiction: Orange County (CDBG, HOME, FSG( Reglono Los Angeles -Long Beach-Anshaim, CA NDD-Provided Data Version: AFFHT0004 125 75A-404 Maps 17 & 18: Race/Ethnicity in 2010 Legend {<+.'t•:..h•" ;„fir-;,i,e '•r"`':.Jurisdiction ,,,�•A7 - Region •• ,} Dem09raphip201g ":. Wits, Non-Hlspan Is Black, Non -Hispanic .,•y Berl American,Nor. }9• t�.r Hispanic ;• . AslaN wlrfllc Islander, Non- „ �-Hispanic • Hispank .% 2.P TRACT R/EDAP Description: Past mce/ethniclty dot density map far Jurisdiction and Region with WECAPs Jurisdiction: Orange County )CDBG, HOME, ESG) Region: Los Angelee-Long Beach -Anaheim, CA HUD -Provided Data Versbn: AFFHTC004 HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Legend ythi JS�I(. .7 { o r �S Y z amI n Junstllctlon �.�h t Y. et %• 4 e I •, r T . � .r• t d.. � �' ray 1 per'' I AFFHT0l I EsR, HERE, NPS D to cre Name: Map 2 - Race/Ethnicity Trends Description: Past raca/elhniciry dot density map for Jurisdiction and Region with WECAPs Jurisdiction: Orange County iCOBG, HOME, ESG) Region: Los Angeles -Long Beach-Anahelm, CA HIID-Provided Data Veraton: AFFHT0004 126 Region Demographics 2010 1 Dot =75 White, Non-Hispanlc Black, Non -Hispanic 7.I Native American, Non - Hispanic +.1 Aslan/Pacdle Islander, Non - Hispanic ^1R Hispanic TRACT RfECAP 75A-405 The main trends present in residential patterns in the County are in Asian and Hispanic populations. Asian and Hispanic populations were small but significant in 1990, and for the most part constrained to certain sections of the Central part of the County. This was mostly in the vicinity of Garden Grove and Westminster. By the 2000s, the Hispanic population began growing more rapidly in Anaheim, and Hispanic and Asian populations grew more rapidly into other northern parts of the county, including in Buena Park and Fullerton. There are fewer visible changes in residential patterns from 2000 to 2010. Additional Information Beyond the HUD provided data, provide additional relevant information, if any, about segregation in the jurisdiction and region affecting groups with other protected characteristics. HUD does not provide and the Census Bureau does not collect data concerning religious affiliation, but religion remains a prohibited basis for discrimination under the Fair Housing Act. Although the data discussed above with respect to national origin and LEP status can provide some insight into residential patterns with respect to religious given correlations between language, national origin, and religion, the resulting picture is merely a rough proxy. It is also a proxy that does not genuinely capture minority religious communities whose members are less likely to be recent immigrants. The tables below, from USC's Center for Religion and Civic Culture, indicates the number of each type of religious center located in the county's jurisdictions. These numbers roughly correlate to residential patterns based on race/ethnicity and national origin. Areas with higher numbers of Buddhist or Hindu centers, including Anaheim, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, and Irvine, indicate more Asian or Pacific Islander residents or residents of Asian descent in those jurisdictions. 127 75A-406 Table 65.1: Religious Centers, Orange County Religious Center ALISO VIEJO ANAHEIM BUENA PARK COSTA MESA FOUNTAIN VALLEY FULLERTON BUDDHIST 25 1 8 5 1 CATHOLIC 22 3 2 4 11 CHRISTIAN- OTHER 1 42 10 26 10 28 HINDU 16 3 2 5 JEWISH 2 12 2 3 3 4 MUSLIM 8 1 1 7 ORTHODOX 9 2 5 OTHER 37 4 23 4 13 OTHER-INDIA 9 7 2 OTHER- INTERRELIGIOU S 1 1 OTHER- JAPANESE 5 3 PENTCOSTAL 1 PROTESTANT 12 452 143 177 70 266 Grand Total 15 628 173 245 100 343 Table 65.2: Religious Centers, Orange County Religious Center GARDEN GROVE HUNTINGTON BEACH IRVINE LA HABRA LA PALMA LAGUNA NIGUEL BUDDHIST 46 1 4 CATHOLIC 4 18 8 3 2 CHRISTIAN- OTHER 33 20 19 6 8 HINDU 2 3 JEWISH 2 5 16 1 2 MUSLIM 3 1 1 ORTHODOX 5 9 2 OTHER 17 4 18 9 3 OTHER-INDIA 3 OTHER- INTERRELIGIOU S OTHER- JAPANESE PENTCOSTAL PROTESTANT 301 180 150 124 16 39 Grand Total 413 232 228 144 17 54 128 75A-407 Table 65.3: Religious Centers, Orange County Religious Center LAKE FOREST MISSION VIEJO NEWPORT BEACH ORANGE RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA BUDDHIST 2 1 CATHOLIC 7 27 1 CHRISTIAN- OTHER 5 13 20 19 5 HINDU 1 1 2 JEWISH 6 9 2 1 MUSLIM 1 2 ORTHODOX 1 OTHER 2 15 13 14 OTHER-INDIA 2 OTHER- INTERRELIGIOUS 1 1 OTHER- JAPANESE 5 PENTCOSTAL PROTESTANT 16 64 51 263 13 Grand Total 25 102 104 335 20 Table 65.4: Religious Centers, Orange County Religious Center SAN CLEMENTE SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO TUSTIN WESTMINSTER BUDDHIST 23 CATHOLIC 4 5 6 6 CHRISTIAN-OTHER 8 8 13 16 HINDU 2 JEWISH 6 5 MUSLIM 1 1 ORTHODOX 2 OTHER 1 11 6 8 OTHER-INDIA 2 2 OTHER- INTERRELIGIOUS OTHER-JAPANESE PENTCOSTAL PROTESTANT 157 152 198 1 150 Grand Total 170 178 1 136 1209 129 75A-408 Contributing Factors of Segregation Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and Region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of segregation. Please see the Appendix for the following Contributing Factors to Segregation: • Community opposition • Displacement of residents due to economic pressures • Lack of community revitalization strategies • Lack of private investment in specific neighborhoods • Lack of public investment in specific, neighborhoods, including services and amenities • Lack of local or regional cooperation • Land use and zoning laws • Lending discrimination • Location and type of affordable housing • Loss of affordable housing • Occupancy codes and restrictions • Private discrimination • Source of income discrimination • Lack of public investment in specific, neighborhoods, including services and amenities 130 75A-409 i. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) R/ECAPs are geographic areas with significant concentrations of poverty and minority populations. HUD has developed a census -tract based definition of R/ECAPs. In terms of racial or ethnic concentration, R/ECAPs are areas with a non-White population of 50 percent or more. With regards to poverty, R/ECAPs are census tracts in which 40 percent or more of individuals are living at or below the poverty limit or that have a poverty rate three times the average poverty rate for the metropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower. Where one lives has a substantial effect on mental and physical health, education, crime levels, and economic opportunity. Urban areas that are more residentially segregated by race and income tend to have lower levels of upward economic mobility than other areas. Research has found that racial inequality is thus amplified by residential segregation. Concentrated poverty is also associated with higher crime rates and worse health outcomes. However, these areas may also offer some opportunities as well. Individuals may actively choose to settle in neighborhoods containing R/ECAPs due to proximity to job centers and access to public services. Ethnic enclaves in particular may help immigrants build a sense of community and adapt to life in the U.S. The businesses, social networks, and institutions in ethnic enclaves may help immigrants preserve their cultural identities while providing a variety of services that allow them to establish themselves in their new homes. Overall, identifying R/ECAPs is important in order to better understand entrenched patterns of segregation and poverty. a) Identify any RIECAPs or groupings of RECAP tracts within the jurisdiction and Region. 131 75A-410 Map 1: R/ECAPs in Orange County iegend Race/Ethnicity 1 Dot = 75 • White Black • Na1Me American or American l ndan • Asian Pacific Islander • Hispanic • V V• A.A.CQZiT(A SORgS'LLV OAy ��`b•.• 3 f �tl 132 75A-411 '•• •`. .. t • •:tee RA MAAGARJL[A f �'' b ` .t. • •• ••I �•i.•r.. n . •t • •• • r • •. .x .t. . There are four R/ECAPs in Orange County, two of which are found in Santa Ana, two of which are found in Irvine. The two R/ECAPs found in Santa Ana are predominantly Hispanic and found close to the Santa Ana Freeway. The northernmost RECAP is located along North Spurgeon Street, while the more southern RECAP is found along South Standard Avenue. The R/ECAPs found in Irvine are adjacent to each other and located on the campus of University of California, Irvine, making it likely that they qualify as R/ECAPs due to the high proportions of students. These R/ECAPs have a much more diverse group of residents, with some White, Asian or Pacific Islander, Hispanic and Black residents. b) Describe and identify the predominant protected classes residing in R/ECAPs in the jurisdiction and Region. How do these demographics of the RIECAPs compare with the demographics of the jurisdiction and Region? Table 1 - RECAP Demographics Jurisdiction RECAP Race/Ethnicity # % Total Population in R/ECAPs 33458 White, Non -Hispanic 7858 23.49% Black, Non -Hispanic 7858 1.63% Hispanic 48.50% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 79300 23.70% Native American, Non -Hispanic 48 0.14% RECAP Family Type Total Families in R/ECAPs 7848 Families with children 2529 32.22% RECAP National Origin Total Population in R/ECAPs #1 country of origin Mexico 5782 17.28% #2 country of origin China, excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan 1387 4.15% #3 country of origin Korea 520 1.55% #4 country of origin El Salvador 464 1.39% 133 75A-412 #5 country of origin India 459 1.37% #6 country of origin Iran 395 1.18% #7 country of origin Saudi Arabia 219 0.65% #8 country of origin Russia 195 0.58% #9 country of origin Cambodia 192 0.57% #10 country of origin Taiwan 187 0.56% Note 1: 10 most populous groups at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level, and are thus labeled separately. Note 2: Data Sources: Decennial Census; ACS Note 3: Refer to the Data Documentation for details (www.hudexchange.info/resource/4848/afth-data-doclypentationj These R/ECAPs primarily contain Asian or Pacific Islander or Hispanic residents. 23.49% of residents are White, 1.63% are Black, 48.50% are Hispanic, 23.70% are Asian or Pacific Islander, and 0.14% are Native American. 32.22% of households are families with children (they are likely located primarily in the Santa Ana R/ECAPs). The most populous countries of origin, in order, are Mexico at 17.28% of the total population, China, excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan at 4.15%, Korea at 1.55%, El Salvador at 1.39%, India at 1.37%, Iran at 1.18%, Saudi Arabia at 0.65%, Russia at 0.58%, Cambodia at 0.57%, and Taiwan at 0.56%. c) Describe how R/ECAPs have changed overtime in the jurisdiction and the Region (since 1990). 134 75A-413 Map 2: R/ECAPs 1990, Orange County HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool a< �'(•'- ■�-�F•-i{yYa' ta� u 2y T. Legend j� �.'.. A� Y ��, � r '. �. 1. h Ju❑risdiction n Region Demographics 1990 1 Dot=16 • y;, P' tr, - �T�,.:.� White, Nan -Hispanic q•.• •• {� Black, Non -Hispanic 0 Native American Non- u..: Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander, Non- v 4 [: Hispanic ti t tr Hispanic TRACT 'a RIECAP AFFHT00©4 Esri HER - ♦Y !�RiY �•�y `• /mate created : 3f15Y2020 Name: Map 2 - RacelEthnieity Trends Description: Past racedethnicity dot density map for Jurisdiction and Region with RIECAPs Jurisdiction: Orange County (CDBG. HOME, ESG) Region: Los Angeles -Lang Beach Anaheim, CA HUD -Provided Data Version: AFFHTDO04 In 1990, one RECAP was present in Orange County, along E La Palma Ave in Yorba Linda. This RECAP had a low population, with 82 total residents. 47.56% of the population was Hispanic, 8.54% was Asian, and the remainder were White. 135 75A-414 Map 3: R/ECAPs 2000, Orange County HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Legend { I ~° )�.r r i 1..ed.-J'1�y�i' •'° r N Jurisdiction it d^� 0 � 4.: ♦ ���-� 1,4 Region +�!! ; U f a t+ Dm eographi.2000 .:�. �.r•y ° i s 1 Dot = 75 °• ° +y� f"• `White, Non -Hispanic !�:�O Black, Non -Hispanic +r Native American. Non- jr ,° ,�?. Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander, Nan- ' y%[ tx w� � %�'� Hispanic T. - .*ak Hispanic it .. •'nt'r c e.if 'O ,`. TRACT 05•�o YY a. _ '..r ,. RiECAP AFFHT00041 Earl, HERE NP3p�y�yyi»'��e Date Great 1 OsU Name: Map 2 - RacefEthnlcity, Trends Description: Past racelelhnicity dot density map for Jurisdiction and Region with RfECAPs Jurisdiction: Orange County (CDBG. HOME, ESG) Region: Los Angeles -Long Beach Anaheim, CA HUDProvidedData Version AFFHT0004 By 2000, the RECAP present in Orange County had shifted slightly to the West, in the area between E Orangethorpe Ave and E Frontera St. This RECAP remained sparsely populated, with 302 residents, 19.21 % of which were White, 0.99% were Native American, 4.64% Asian or Pacific Islander, and 75.17% Hispanic. The original RECAP had a larger Hispanic population than before, and a shrinking White population. Another RECAP appeared in the northernmost portion of the University of California, Irvine campus, likely due to the presence of students. The RECAP had 2672 residents, which were 34.73% White, 1.57% Black, 0.41% Native American, 53.41% Asian or Pacific Islander, and 7.49% Hispanic. 136 75A-415 Map 4: R/ECAPs 2010, Orange County HUD Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Y .:,ti • ,'� : .S .. Legend .•_ a . ' • Jurisdiction v a : ^ ,•.�_ a Region •.'mot;'. �• �i•°':i a Demographics2010 White, Non -Hispanic Black, Non -Hispanic ry Native American, Non- . it Hispanic F '�a Asian/Pacific Islander, Non -Hispanic Hispanic �'• .` v TRACT RIECAP AFFHTODp41 Es ri, HERE, NP Gatecr-at u020 Name: Map 2 - Race/Ethnicity Trends Description: Past racelelhnicity dot density map for Jurisdiction and Region with PfECAPs Jurisdiction: Orange County (CDBG. HOME, ESG) Region: Los Angeles -Lang Beach Anaheim, CA HUD -Provided Data Version: AFFHT0004 By 2010, the RECAP in Santa Ana was no longer present. The high level of fluctuation in this RECAP indicates that the area hovers around the 40% poverty threshold to qualify as a RECAP. The second RECAP, which appeared on the University of California, Irvine campus is again likely caused by the presence of diverse students, though increasing poverty is also likely a factor. All the areas with R/ECAPs in the maps above once again were present in the most current map of R/ECAPs, suggesting that these will be continued areas for concern in the future. Contributing Factors of R/ECAPs Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and Region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of R/ECAPs. Please see the Appendix for the following Contributing Factors to R/ECAPs: • Community opposition • Deteriorated and abandoned properties • Displacement of residents due to economic pressures • Lack of community revitalization strategies • Lack of local or regional cooperation • Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods 137 75A-416 • Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities • Land use and zoning laws • Location and type of affordable housing • Loss of affordable housing • Occupancy codes and restrictions • Private discrimination • Source of income discrimination 138 75A-417 iii. Disnarities in Access to ODDortuni The following section describes locational differences and disparities experienced by different groups in accessing key features of opportunity: educational quality, economic factors, transportation, and environmental health. Access to neighborhoods with high levels of opportunity is made more difficult due to discrimination and when there is not a sufficient range and supply of housing in such neighborhoods. In addition, the continuing legacy of discrimination and segregation can impact the availability of quality infrastructure, educational resources, environmental protections, and economic drivers, all of which can create disparities in access to opportunity. Three opportunity indices (economic, educational, and environmental) use data assembled by the California Fair Housing Task Force on behalf of the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) for the 2020 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map'. The Economic Opportunity Index is a composite of four indicators depicting elements of neighborhood socio-economic character. The Environmental Opportunity Index reflects indicators from the exposures and environmental effects subcomponents of the "pollution burden" domain of CalEnviroScreen 3.0. The Educational Opportunity Index is a composite of four educational indicators capturing information on student proficiency, graduation rates, and student poverty. All indices range from 0 to 100, reflecting percentiles scaled to census tracts in Orange County5, and with higher values indicating higher levels of opportunity. The two transportation indicators (transit trips and low transportation cost) analyzed below employ data from version 3.0 of the Location Affordability Index (LAI)6. The transit trips index measures how often low-income families in a neighborhood use public transportation. The index ranges from 0 to 100, with higher values indicating a higher likelihood that residents in a neighborhood utilize public transit. The low transportation cost index measures cost of transportation and proximity to public transportation by neighborhood. It too varies from 0 to 100, and higher scores point to lower transportation costs in that neighborhood. 1. Educational Opportunities 1. For the protected class groups) HUD has provided data, describe any disparities in access to education in the jurisdiction and region. Countywide, there are disparities across racial/ethnic groups in access to educational opportunities as measured by the index. Across all tracts in Orange County, non -Hispanic Whites exhibit the highest exposure to educational opportunity (index score of about 59) and non -Hispanic Asians second -highest (53). Hispanics have the lowest access to these opportunities (31), with non - Hispanic Blacks in between (46). Several jurisdictions score highly (index values at or above 60) on educational opportunity across all racial categories. These cities include Aliso Viejo, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Laguna Niguel, La Palma, Mission Viejo, and Rancho Santa Margarita. Other jurisdictions obtain low scores on the index. San Juan Capistrano has low educational opportunity, scoring below 10 on the index for all races/ethnicities. San Clemente, Anaheim, and Santa Ana fare similarly poorly, although non -Hispanic Whites score higher (39) than other race/ethnic groups in that city. Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, Orange City, La Habra 139 75A-418 and Westminster are other cities that struggle with educational opportunity, all with scores in the 30s to 40s on the composite education index. Finally, a few cities have educational opportunity patterns that mirror those of Orange County overall. Non -Hispanic Whites in Fountain Valley have high exposure to educational opportunity (scores of about 60), whereas Hispanics in the city do not (30). In both Fullerton and Tustin, Non - Hispanic Whites and Asians have much higher access than do Blacks and Hispanics. 2. For the protected class group(s) HUD has provided data, describe how the disparities in access to education relate to residential livingpatterns in the jurisdiction and region. Jurisdictions that score low on the education opportunity index exhibit different residential patterns. For instance, Santa Ana has high concentrations of Hispanics and a very light presence of any other racial or ethnic group. Anaheim also has high concentrations of Hispanics in the low - opportunity western neighborhoods of the city, but Whites and Asian/Pacific Islanders also appear to reside in those tracts (although at lower densities). The high opportunity eastern Anaheim neighborhoods are almost exclusively White. Garden Grove, Westminster, Buena Park and La Habra are examples of cities with low educational opportunity and that have a noticeable mix of Hispanics, Asians and Whites. Costa Mesa, San Juan Capistrano and San Clemente are low opportunity jurisdictions with high densities of Whites (although San Juan Capistrano and Costa Mesa have important Hispanic populations as well). Jurisdictions with the highest educational opportunity also appear to have primarily large concentrations of non -Hispanic Whites and Asian/Pacific Islanders. Irvine, Aliso Viejo and Huntington Beach are good examples of cities with large populations of those two groups. Other high opportunity cities, by contrast appear more segregated and more heavily populated by non - Hispanic Whites. Rancho Santa Margarita and Mission Viejo are two examples of such places. 2. Environmental Opportunities 1. For the protected class group(s) HUD has provided data, describe any disparities in access to environmental opportunity in the jurisdiction and region. Countywide, there are disparities across racial/ethnic groups in access to environmental opportunities, measured as lower exposure to and effects from pollution. Across all tracts in Orange County, non -Hispanic Whites exhibit the highest access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods (index score of about 54). All other racial/ethnic groups obtain lower index scores in the 40s: Hispanics score lowest at 41, followed by non -Hispanic Blacks (45), non -Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander (47), and non -Hispanic Native American (48). Several jurisdictions score especially highly on environmental opportunity across all racial categories. Laguna Niguel, Aliso Viejo, Mission Viejo, and Rancho Santa Margarita all have index scores in the 70s to 90s for all racial and ethnic groups. Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach also have higher access to environmental health, scoring in the 50s to low-70s on the index. Other cities are low -scoring across the board. Orange City, La Habra, and Fullerton are the least environmentally healthy, with index scores in the 20s. Anaheim, Buena Park, Irvine, Santa Ana, and Westminster also have low access to environmental opportunity, scoring in the 30s to 40s on the index. 140 75A-419 Other cities have disparate environmental scores between races. One such jurisdiction is Costa Mesa, in which Hispanics, non -Hispanic Whites, and non -Hispanic Native Americans score the highest (50s), while non -Hispanic Blacks (44) and non -Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islanders (35) score lower. Another such city is Tustin, with non -Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics scoring the lowest (20s/30s) and non -Hispanic Whites the highest (55). 2. For the protected class group(s) HUD has provided data, describe how the disparities in access to environmental opportunity relate to residential living patterns in the jurisdiction and region. Jurisdictions with the highest environmental opportunity appear to have primarily large concentrations of non -Hispanic Whites and Asian/Pacific Islanders. Laguna Niguel, Aliso Viejo, Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach are good examples of cities with large populations of those two groups. Other high opportunity cities, by contrast appear more segregated and more heavily populated by non -Hispanic Whites. Rancho Santa Margarita and Mission Viejo are two examples of such places. Lower -scoring cities exhibit a diversity of residential patterns. For example, Orange (city) has concentrations of both Hispanics and non -Hispanic Whites. Similarly, Fullerton has concentrations of Hispanic neighborhoods as well as non -Hispanic Whites and Asian/Pacific Islanders. Anaheim and La Habra follow a similar pattern. By contrast, Santa Ana is a city with low environmental quality that is characterized almost exclusively by dense concentrations of Hispanics. b. Economic Opportunities 1. For the protected class groups HUD has provided data, describe any disparities in access to economic opportunity by protected class groups in the jurisdiction and region In Orange County, there are significant disparities in access to economic opportunity. Non - Hispanic White residents have the greatest access to economic opportunity. Asian and Pacific Islander residents (49), Native Americans (46), and Black residents (46) have lower index scores in the high to mid-40s. Hispanic residents (32) have the lowest access to economic opportunity of all racial and ethnic groups in Orange County. Among residents living below the poverty line, there are significant disparities between groups. White residents have the highest economic opportunity score (30) followed by Black residents (27) and Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (23). Poor Native Americans and Hispanic residents have the lowest economic opportunity scores (19). There are major disparities in economic opportunity scores across racial/ethnic groups in other cities in the County. Generally, Asian and White residents tend to have the highest index scores in these cities. For instance, Tustin has very high scores for non -Hispanic White residents (77) as well as Asian residents (67) but Black and Hispanic residents have significantly lower scores (in the 40s). In Fullerton, Asian residents have the highest score (64) while Black residents have a score of 44 and Hispanic residents have a score of 37. In Santa Ana, White residents have the highest score (41) while Hispanics have the lowest (18). Costa Mesa has relatively high access to economic opportunity for all groups (high 50s to high 60s) but Hispanic residents have a 141 75A-420 significantly lower score (42). In La Habra, economic opportunity scores are relatively low for all groups (30s and 40s) but White residents have significantly higher scores than other racial/ethnic groups. Other jurisdictions with relatively large disparities by protected class groups include Anaheim, Buena Park, Fountain Valley, Lake Forest, and Orange City. In these cities, Hispanic residents have significantly lower access to economic opportunity than other racial/ethnic groups. A number of jurisdictions have relatively little disparity between groups. There are high economic opportunity scores for all racial and ethnic groups in Aliso Viejo and Irvine (high 60s to low 70s), although there are large disparities across racial/ethnic groups for the population living below the poverty line in Irvine. La Palma also has relatively high opportunity and little variation in scores between groups (index values ranging from 60 to 66). Huntington Beach, Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, and Rancho Santa Margarita have moderate economic opportunity scores for all racial/ethnic groups (scores from the mid 40s to mid 50s). San Clemente has moderately low economic opportunity scores with little difference between groups (scores ranging from 40-46). There is low access to economic opportunity for all racial and ethnic groups in Garden Grove (index scores range from 9-25) and Westminster (scores in the 10s). 2. For the protected class groups HUD has provided data, describe how disparities in access to employment relate to residential living patterns in the jurisdiction and region Economic Opportunity Index scores are generally lower in North Orange County than in South Orange County. Scores are especially low in Westminster, Garden Grove, and much of Santa Ana and Anaheim. Scores are generally high in much of Irvine, La Palma, and Tustin and along the coast from Newport Beach to Laguna Niguel as well as in unincorporated areas near the eastern border with Riverside County. Areas in Orange County with the highest index scores tend to have large concentrations of non - Hispanic and Asian residents. By contrast, areas with the highest concentration of Hispanic residents tend to have lower economic index scores. Cities such as Fullerton and Costa Mesa are examples of localities with segregated living patterns and significant disparities between racial and ethnic groups. Neighborhoods in these cities with higher Hispanic populations score lower than neighborhoods that are heavily populated by non -Hispanic and Asian residents. c. Transportation 1. For the protected class groups HUD has provided data, describe any disparities in access to transportation related to costs and access to public transit in the jurisdiction and region. As previously mentioned, higher scores on the low transportation cost index indicate greater access to low cost transportation. When analyzing Orange County as a whole, non -Hispanic Whites have the lowest scores (34). Asians and Pacific Islanders as well as Native Americans have a score of 38. Black residents have a score of 39 while Hispanic residents have the highest score (42). Regionally, low transportation cost index scores are similar for all racial and ethnic groups. Non- 142 75A-421 Hispanic Whites and Native Americans both have a score of 19, Asians/Pacific Islanders as well as Hispanics have a score of 20, and Black residents have a score of 21. There are no significant disparities between racial/ethnic groups in the low transportation cost index in most jurisdictions in Orange County. Index scores are in the 20s for all groups in Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, and San Clemente. Scores are in the low to mid 30s for all racial/ethnic groups in Buena Park, Lake Forest, La Palma, Orange City. Scores are in the high 30s to low 40s for all groups in Aliso Viejo, Anaheim, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Irvine, Huntington Beach, La Habra. Scores are moderate (in the high 40s to low 50s) across groups in Costa Mesa, Santa Ana, and Westminster. In both Tustin and Rancho Santa Margarita, White and Asian residents have significantly lower scores on the low transportation cost index compared to Black and Hispanic residents. These patterns are similar to those of Orange County overall. Transit index scores do not vary significantly by racial or ethnic group in most jurisdictions in Orange County. Scores are moderate for all groups in Santa Ana with every group having a score in the low 50s. Scores are moderately low (30s to 40s) across the board in Anaheim, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, La Habra, La Palma, Orange City, and Westminster. Transit use is extremely low (scores of 3 and lower) for all groups in Aliso Viejo, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, Mission Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita, San Clemente, and San Juan Capistrano. There is also little difference in transit index scores by racial or ethnic group in Los Angeles County with all groups scoring in the low 20s. There is a significant disparity between groups in Tustin and Countywide. Hispanics in Tustin have the highest transit index scores (64) followed closely by African Americans (60). Asian and White residents have significantly lower scores (49 and 42 respectively). Countywide, Hispanics have the highest transit index score (41) while non -Hispanic Whites have a significantly lower score (27) than other racial and ethnic groups. 2. For the protected class groups HUD has provided data, describe how disparities in access to transportation related to residential living patterns in the jurisdiction and region Low transportation cost index scores as well as transit index scores are generally higher in North Orange County than in South Orange County. Scores are generally higher in jurisdictions with greater levels of density. Generally, North Orange County cities have a variety of residential living patterns with varying levels of density. Additionally, some jurisdictions have highly segregated living patterns while others have a mix of multiple racial and ethnic groups across neighborhoods. Jurisdictions and neighborhoods with greater concentrations of non -Hispanic White residents tend to have lower transit index scores and transportation cost index scores. South Orange County has a greater concentration of non-White Hispanic residents and has lower levels of transit service than North Orange County. This pattern likely contributes to disparities in transportation cost index and transit index scores between non -Hispanic Whites and other racial and ethnic groups in South Orange County jurisdictions and countywide. 143 75A-422 I. Patterns in Disparities in Access to Opportunity 1. For the protected class groups HUD has provided data, identify and discuss any overarching patterns of access to opportunity and exposure to adverse community factors. Include how these patterns compare to patterns of segregation, integration, and R/FCAPs. Describe these patterns for the jurisdiction and region Generally, access to opportunity is highest for non -Hispanic Whites and Asians/Pacific Islanders in Orange County. By contrast, access to opportunity is generally lower for Black residents than for non -Hispanic Whites and Asians and access is lowest for Hispanics. Metrics are lower on average in census tracts with more of each of these groups. Geographically, access to economic, environmental, and educational opportunity is generally lowest in portions of North Orange County. Anaheim, Garden Grove, Santa Ana, and Westminster all have relatively low scores across various dimensions of opportunity. Access to opportunity is also low in San Juan Capistrano. However, access to transportation is generally better in North Orange County than in South Orange County. 144 75A-423 Maps and Tables Appendix: Table 1: Index Values, Aliso Viejo "Environment "Economic "Educational al Opportunity Aliso Viejo Opp Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - 72.30550385 83.83909607 Hispanic Black, Non - 66.52386475 85.23960114 Hispanic Hispanic 65.70877838 85.67479706 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 71.44657135 87.03471375 Hispanic Native American, 66.95543671 85.84021759 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - 72 1219101 76.88407898 Hispanic Black, Non - 73.1000061 82.69999695 Hispanic Hispanic 67.39414215 84.66527557 Asian or Pacific 67.48900604 85.0457077 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 73.30000305 88 Non -Hispanic Table 2: Index Values, Anaheim "Economic Opportunity Anaheim Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 43.93139267 Black, Non - Hispanic 30.85617065 Hispanic 24.94393539 Asian or Pacific 35.78163528 "Environment "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 72.71175385 37.90481567 2.982049465 71.72485352 43.27718735 3.305222511 69.67499542 43.99542999 3.4930861 72.0605011 38.21439362 3.052240849 72.0728302 44.31396484 3.418583393 7 N 76.13404083 40.00963593 3.032668829 66.6000061 30.55382347 2.297693729 75.61569214 42.99341965 3.097574472 69.90343475 44.67321396 3.799084425 66.19999695 30.19909286 2.297693729 al "Educational "Low Opportunity Opportunity Transportatio Index" Index" n Cost Index" Transit Index 38.43595505 39.49500275 35.00980759 38.28310013 43.77084732 24.11480904 41.09883118 42.81028366 35.08900452 16.60894966 42.32661819 45.37927628 45.57190704 28.93398666 38.00388718 40.76144028 145 75A-424 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, Non -Hispanic 31.95301437 39.92325211 Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 31.62712288 41.38234711 Black, Non - Hispanic 21.08607101 37.48281479 Hispanic 18.12784386 35.43183517 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 31.28238106 50.9586525 Native American, Non -Hispanic 19.2225132 23.75654411 Table 3: Index Values, Buena Park "Environment "Economic al Opportunity Opportunity Buena Park Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 46.83927917 44.0955658 Black, Non - Hispanic 32.80804825 33.55254364 Hispanic 28.33981895 29.21013069 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 47.61252594 39.32788467 Native American, Non -Hispanic 40.82292938 40.50382233 Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 40.31472397 40.72068405 Black, Non - Hispanic 25.9830513 38.49584198 Hispanic 17.92495918 21.97593117 Asian or Pacific 41.90719986 39.55010986 25.63920212 40.02379227 43.23343277 26.39390373 40.36358643 42.55496979 15.80590439 42.93815613 42.37175751 11.7365303 44.72396088 48.39587402 23.88062859 39.64730453 41.40625763 28.95340347 40.15534973 44.56227112 "Educational "Low Opportunity Transportatio Index" n Cost Index" Transit Index 42.70969772 33.90605164 37.46681976 34.25307465 36.66135025 37.74475479 30.79724121 37.55573654 37.4323349 42.41317368 34.37330246 37.90651321 38.02802658 34.82195663 37.10214996 37.29474258 36.05626297 37.11514664 35.70261765 40.10052872 24.49638939 39.0867157 39.26160431 146 35.59976578 38.47552109 37.56377792 37.79622269 75A-425 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, Non -Hispanic 81.6641922 33.69506073 49.20370483 31.88211632 37.17000198 Table 4: Index Values, Costa Mesa "Environment "Economic al "Educational "Low Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Transportatio Costa Mesa Index" Index" Index" n Cost Index" Transit Index Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 67.58622742 55.52037811 38.89334488 47.27882385 43.22631836 Black, Non - Hispanic 60.21097183 43.73588943 35.36569214 51.47803497 47.67166901 Hispanic 41.75721741 52.17251968 29.46787262 49.68540573 45.92378235 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 62.83917236 34.57889412 37.24597931 51.76671982 49.81667328 Native American, Non -Hispanic 57.93167114 57.8879776 36.08298874 49.50308228 45.41753769 Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 59.96794891 54.49015427 36.67170334 49.62751389 44.84539795 Black, Non - Hispanic 69.71747589 15.24660206 44.42038727 60.94523239 57.05648804 Hispanic 30.79871941 51.77633667 27.76061058 50.66155243 45.77159119 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 65.26630402 45.6599617 37.13913345 51.9749794 47.06335831 Native American, Non -Hispanic 47.94121552 40.6466217 39.73918915 44.072155 50.18476486 147 75A-426 Table 5: Index Values, Fountain Valley "Environment "Economic al Fountain Opportunity Opportunity Valley Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 60.60261536 64.15343475 Black, Non - Hispanic 53.71952438 56.91206741 Hispanic 41.24127579 59.6288147 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 44.98392868 58.26979065 Native American, Non -Hispanic 52.49386597 69.90551758 Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 64.17408752 71.23667908 Black, Non - Hispanic 64.10958862 65.91918182 Hispanic 31.28120613 67.20317078 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - Hispanic 44.84921646 49.497612 Native American, Non -Hispanic 18 72.09999847 Table 6: Index Values, Fullerton Fullerton Total Population White, Non - Hispanic Black, Non - Hispanic Hispanic Asian or Pacific "Educational "Low Opportunity Transportatio Index" n Cost Index" Transit Index 58.0732193 34.88885498 39.57632446 44.76111221 39.96112061 40.72764587 33.37312698 39.45233154 41.81933975 41.64525986 37.5691185 40.36569451 47.91042709 36.09816742 39.42101669 61.07992172 32.63380432 39.16001511 73.40000153 42.57266617 40.4589119 28.9899292 39.14260483 41.5614624 36.71788025 40.1937294 40.57577133 6.900000095 39.88677597 43.88391495 "Economic "Environment "Educational Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 55.78549576 26.03284073 58.12939072 38.56270599 43.93449402 23.39889526 50.62736893 43.17352676 37.14920425 20.28424263 43.05700684 41.48886108 64.09486389 25.70118332 65.7769165 35.43569183 148 MA 36.36819077 39.78337097 39.47481537 35.37657928 75A-427 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 42.6170578 22.90802765 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 42.62480927 23.49648094 Black, Non - Hispanic 26.27262497 20.02443314 Hispanic 29.84314728 19.52399254 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 57.70301437 27.73388481 Hispanic Native American, 43.26682663 22.70192337 Non -Hispanic Table 7: Index Values, Garden Grove "Economic Garden Grove Opportunity Index" 48.14080048 41.21947534 38.35867691 50.72012711 45.41986847 40.98034668 37.49615479 50.76286316 44.32195663 38.35726547 43.06222916 41.15517044 64.75909424 42.01194 39.39395523 51.35336685 38.76887131 34.99217987 "Environment "Educational al Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Total Population - White, Non - Hispanic Hispan 36.39666367 47.3960228 Black, Non - Hispanic 27 92678833 47.87880325 Hispanic 22.90080643 47.05417633 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 23.95595741 49.54003143 Hispanic Native American, 27.66724777 46.53165817 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 30.0959301 47.71313477 Black,Non- Hspanic Hispa 27 44144821 54.79440689 Hispanic 18.94665909 46.0896759 Asian or 22.66533279 47.17929077 Pacific "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 40.38077927 36.63133621 39.78887558 33.18390274 41.15602112 41.82769394 29.86315918 41.03567505 42.94892883 35.30280304 40.51235199 40.41277313 34.10087204 41.22572708 41.86322403 35.78342056 39.06194305 41.55861664 33.70690918 39.97136688 38.74142075 26.74869919 43.83759689 44.6900177 37.85955429 40.4188385 39.69983673 149 75A-428 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 18.80149269 38.3007431 27.1022377 48.05475616 43.73262405 Non -Hispanic Table 8: Index Values, Huntington Beach "Environment "Economic "Educational "Low Huntington al Opportunity Opportunity Transportatio Transit Index Beach Opportunity Index" Index" n Cost Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 64 58568573 71.44684601 Black, Non - Hispanic 55.74852371 61.43478394 Hispanic 48.91268921 56.34483719 Asian or Pacific 55.79597092 58.89957809 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 59.45223999 69.95332336 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 63.94906235 71.72304535 Black, Non - Hispanic 46.80564499 57.03628922 Hispanic 37.6064682 48.60849762 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 55.28670883 58.22230911 Hispanic Native American, 63.99184036 89.20612335 Non -Hispanic 69.54529572 37.66327667 35.70833206 59.94100952 40.57863235 36.41617966 59.14129257 42.3997879 36.54937363 60.11377335 38.13786316 35.30189133 66.42298126 39.55618668 36.38960266 68.93916321 40.83568192 37.38664627 63.21209335 44.36582947 38.40356827 55.68051147 45.98036194 37.06981277 58.15016174 42.73658752 36.3033371 79.1040802 25.95944023 33.74476242 150 75A-429 Table 9: Index Values, Irvine "Environment "Economic "Educational al Irvine Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 73.63127136 39.08622742 Black, Non - Hispanic 70.55041504 36.09516525 Hispanic 68.2244339 34.8563385 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 73.3141861 38.35515213 Hispanic Native American, 68.81182861 37.30687332 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 62.00982285 41.2605896 Black, Non - Hispanic 78.47797394 30.86845207 Hispanic 45.06617737 43.96442032 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 50.49572372 45.72290802 Hispanic Native American, 34.17985535 56.2374115 Non -Hispanic "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 81.49776459 36.18370819 35.191082 81.03330994 39.19680023 37.68433762 75.89785004 37.90677261 35.78848267 85.66765594 37.19092941 37.06846237 78.0866394 37.68278122 34.32770157 ■ 81.79143524 41.65803909 85.13333893 36.81203842 84.95259094 44.5932579 40.29730606 36.52822113 42.19712067 87.87575531 44.2512207 42.13927078 91.07769775 53.02960205 50.96051407 Table 10: Index Values, Los Angeles County "Environment Los Angeles "Economic "Educational O Opportunity Opportunity County Index„ Opportunity Index" Index" Total Population White, Non- 65.67538452 Hispanic Black Non- 40.16342545 Hispanic Hispanic 36.33623123 Asian or 57.39865494 Pacific 55.94469833 67.478302 53.13132858 45.2298851 49.95420074 33.42098999 38.80290604 61.21666336 151 75A-430 "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 18.965065 21.0825634 21.05691338 24.56006813 19.82450485 23.3633194 20.27166367 23.09456062 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 45.30443192 51.25786972 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 57.50989532 51.78505325 Black, Non - Hispanic 31.36289787 50.94706726 Hispanic 31.3007412 42.91162491 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 50.03251266 47.77090454 Hispanic Native American, 34.06453323 48.27433014 Non -Hispanic Table 11: Index Values, Laguna Niguel 49.35198593 19.37051392 21.6207428 59.31045151 23.57732391 25.74990845 26.02533722 23.28333092 27.20900345 31.26461411 22.65198517 26.92627716 55.55622864 24.86695862 28.33756065 35.94702911 22.76408005 26.06622124 nvironment "Economic al "Educational Laguna Opportunity Opportunity Niguel Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 51.88405609 94.96172333 Black, Non - Hispanic 49.20069885 94.27303314 Hispanic 46.48111725 94.03167725 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 51.05093765 94.28031921 Hispanic Native American, 52.94462585 95.30413055 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 48.66943741 93.59718323 Black, Non - an Hispanic 61.86949158 94.28262329 Hispanic 47.95252228 94.91544342 Asian or 42.89958572 90.35707855 Pacific 69.4879303 "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" ■ ■ 26.46920204 2.232567787 70.40055847 27.88728714 2.385162592 69.29504395 29.60008812 2.543926477 70.32914734 28.43764305 2.466272593 70.03966522 27.89173698 2.296560049 70.38157654 27.90661812 2.297754049 58.08516693 32.82440567 2.653566122 73.69073486 29.40856171 2.452992439 72.27500153 34.07725906 2.88683486 152 75A-431 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Non -Hispanic Table 12: Index Values, La Habra "Environment "Economic "Educational "Low al La Habra Opportunity Opportunity Transportatio Transit Index Index" Opportunity Index" n Cost Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - 40.55103683 27.87729454 48.14756012 35.66272736 35.27762604 Hispanic Black Non - 35.30363846 29.53260612 45.65385437 39.55151749 35.42910004 Hispanic an Hispanic 32.31658936 27.45372391 44.28807068 38.3514595 34.83366394 Asian or Pacific 39.38534927 24.85019112 49.1582222 37.03078079 37.28299713 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 38.17602921 30.35684967 47.53630066 35.54092407 33.94094467 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - 40.29798126 29.05448341 48.00325012 35.98387527 34.38015747 Hispanic Black Non - 31.18307686 28.36153793 45.95999908 39.51876068 36.60215759 Hispanic an Hispanic 27.1908226 25.55690002 41.80315781 39.25904846 35.26225281 Asian or Pacific 32.04285431 28.29251671 42.60680389 37.83418655 36.04021072 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 24.10000038 11.80000019 38 44.92282867 41.23970032 Non -Hispanic 153 75A-432 Table 13: Index Values, La Palma "Environment "Economic "Educational al La Palma Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 60.54538345 52.2887764 Black, Non - Hispanic 62.44117737 50.76352692 Hispanic 60.14683151 53.11293411 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 59.61754608 54.71827316 Hispanic Native American, 66.49090576 44.5484848 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 56.16556168 58.63651657 Black, Non- Hispanic 62 52.13999939 Hispanic 62.43789673 49.73848724 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 57.32141113 57.53029633 Hispanic Native American, 59.40000153 51.29999924 Non -Hispanic "Low Transportafio Transit Index n Cost Index" 74.90605927 31.26264191 33.98268509 79.34926605 30.94960976 32.45330429 76.4289093 31.19957161 33.79656219 80.94405365 30.98505211 33.03434372 74.41212463 31.03777504 32.16746521 78.42116547 31.26299286 34.6687851 83.30000305 30.76098061 31.77929115 74.32682037 31.21320152 33.49207687 80.26992798 31.11726379 33.91407013 62.90000153 31.94073486 36.83267593 Table 14: Index Values, Lake Forest "Economic "Environment "Educational Lake Forest Opportunity al Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non- 52.10555649 Hispanic Black Non- 49.18192673 Hispanic Hispanic 39.65441513 Asian or 51.61265182 Pacific "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 54.81097412 60.88927078 31.83229065 3.096983671 55.03483963 61.46455765 34.36283493 3.168195009 43.67831039 53.05497742 35.60156631 3.339822292 53.55771637 59.62294769 32.0095787 2.971857309 154 75A-433 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 45.60740662 53.91375732 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 42.87811661 48.27126312 Black, Non - Hispanic 58.93999863 62.13200378 Hispanic 23.69203186 17.86175346 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 34.96779251 36.78378296 Hispanic Native American, 6.400000095 10.10000038 Non -Hispanic Table 15: Index Values, Mission Viejo 59.4603157 34.44470978 3.268085241 56.19835281 35.24717331 3.274830103 49.3239975 28.69176102 3.198252678 43.00056839 33.14248276 3.199719906 52.04999924 39.137043 3.588968277 39.90000153 50.44693375 4.321035862 "Environment "Economic "Educational al Mission Viejo Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 54.71001434 80.4629364 Black, Non - Hispanic 53.97848892 77.18696594 Hispanic 49.20601654 77.96643066 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 56.29401779 79.96483612 Hispanic Native American, 52.15392685 77.70209503 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 52.77148438 79.52762604 Black, Non - Hispanic 47.77692413 72.13846588 Hispanic 41.74552917 75.55897522 Asian or 50.18946457 76.0255127 Pacific "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 68.59661865 20.06777954 2.14685297 69.5125351 22.50149727 2.178300142 69.57389832 24.251894 2.186423779 69.64553833 20.08021736 2.172489405 68.03507996 20.00351524 2.125685453 68.10930634 20.6295166 60.4153862 73.74349976 75.70388031 155 75A-434 30.359375 27.94129181 27.29961014 2.147603989 2.514009476 2.138385296 2.231768131 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, N/A N/A N/A Non -Hispanic Table 16: Index Values, Orange City "Environment "Economic "Educational al Orange City Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 59.93873978 24.79452133 Black, Non - Hispanic 54.84865952 18.7726078 Hispanic 47.76997757 19.34976578 Asian or Pacific 61.62908554 28.02267647 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 52.82477188 20.58942604 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 53.57085419 17.67649841 Black, Non - Hispanic 35.50442505 12.76637173 Hispanic 41.78118134 23.23805237 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 61.44256592 21.8933773 Hispanic Native American, 31.33373451 10.93734932 Non -Hispanic N/A N/A "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 42.08477402 31.92243958 36.35044479 35.12828445 37.30315018 39.30299377 33.2277832 36.87007141 38.43082809 45.12159348 31.81376266 35.78025818 36.06827545 34.44309235 37.73715973 33.95972061 36.44538879 39.62675095 29.51858521 37.15558624 28.86623383 32.39267731 36.83862305 39.01893616 41.95364761 37.79168701 37.63070297 20.50963974 41.80668259 43.29630661 156 75A-435 Table 17: Index Values, Orange County nvironment "Economic al ',Educational Orange g Opportunity Opportunity County Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 59.36914825 53.88697052 Black, Non - Hispanic 45.8503685 45.21717072 Hispanic 31.86008644 41.02077866 Asian or Pacific 49.36313629 46.78428268 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 46.39406204 48.79929352 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 51.70472336 51.01126099 Black, Non - Hispanic 36.25161743 40.4234581 Hispanic 22.65623665 39.02124786 Asian or Pacific 38.94393158 46.38044739 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 35.89070892 38.62186813 Non -Hispanic "Low Transportafio Transit Index n Cost Index" 1 58.6191597 33.84046555 27.43986702 45.6352005 39.68424606 36.21459579 30.86243248 41.80742645 41.28927612 52.50125504 37.48302841 36.11438751 45.07330704 37.47456741 33.02807617 52.13442612 39.18977356 32.26565933 37.29018794 40.77672958 35.60103607 23.81145287 45.65877533 46.35126877 48.32249832 41.97251129 39.51419449 40.92134476 40.15331268 40.17951965 Table 18: Index Values, Rancho Santa Margarita "Economic Environment Educational Rancho Santa Opportunity al Opportunity Margarita Index„ Opportunity Index" Index" Total Population White, Non- 55.31455231 Hispanic Black, Non- 48.5736618 Hispanic Hispanic 46.87901688 Asian or 52.71126556 Pacific "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" IN 77.42084503 74.73116302 22.26515198 1.739218593 78.66453552 79.68223572 76.4618454 72.82685852 71.21639252 74.23796082 157 75A-436 29.90576553 31.94477654 25.72115326 2.138027906 2.276622057 1.882683992 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 52.11122513 76.42857361 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 46.90814972 80.66777802 Black, Non- N/A N/A Hispanic Hispanic 37.29422379 94.92796326 Asian or Pacific 60.54124069 82.12485504 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, N/A N/A Non -Hispanic Table 19: Index Values, San Clemente 73.22245026 27.17526817 1.988348365 70.89245605 30.65854645 2.180054665 N/A N/A N/A 66.2130661 40.81872559 2.736426592 78.08983612 16.653265 N/A "Environment "Economic "Educational al San Clemente Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 43.86069107 53.53229904 Black, Non - Hispanic 44 58891678 53.67986298 Hispanic 40.03211212 58.22519684 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 46.24467087 51.4276619 Hispanic Native American, 41.8181076 55.99135971 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 40.29958344 52.50610733 Black, Non - Hispanic 21.60899544 46.30582047 Hispanic 38.13341522 59.1672554 Asian or 36.40293121 78.38371277 Pacific N/A N/A "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 26.15826035 20.86557388 1.323781729 26.91267014 20.62924576 1.308523178 23.51825714 25.35934067 1.459569693 27.82583618 19.14149284 1.219676495 26.10987663 23.12410355 1.460949898 22.75804329 23.32270622 1.429345369 12.44285679 22.93115044 1.561009169 19.66854095 25.5105629 1.351897478 26.14299583 19.77955627 0.901919305 158 75A-437 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 40.5885949 56.44565201 26.93206596 15.30980492 0.906552672 Non -Hispanic Table 20: Index Values, San Juan Capistrano "Environment San Juan "Economic al "Educational "Low Opportunity Opportunity Transportatio Transit Index Capistrano Index" Opportunity Index" n Cost Index" Index" Total Population White, Non- 24.8559227 40.60459518 3.96122098 28.67803192 2.159676313 Hispanic Black, Non - Hispanic 17.48586845 44.83804321 Hispanic 9.223362923 51.43849182 Asian or Pacific 24.93882942 43.21843719 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 12.91760635 49.70633698 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 24.2220974 38.93087769 Black, Non - Hispanic 53.59999847 39.20000076 Hispanic 8.015656471 53.10263824 Asian or Pacific 8.699999809 32.79999924 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, N/A N/A Non -Hispanic 4.980434895 30.27136993 2.118023157 6.480751991 31.45836258 1.975713015 4.463120461 27.79998398 2.022916555 6.045070648 30.53370857 1.976489902 3.655807257 29.47362709 2.26116538 2.900000095 17.58180046 1.543227077 6.83494997 31.40584183 1.918851495 2.900000095 37.69218826 2.949278355 N/A 159 N/A N/A 75A-438 Table 21: Index Values, Santa Ana "Environment "Economic "Educational al Santa Ana Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - Hispanic 40.84465027 33.96951294 Black, Non- 29.20541 38.66877747 Hispanic Hispanic 18.03375626 41.18429947 Asian or Pacific 25.11046028 46.18630219 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 25.56700134 38.30905533 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 31.77580452 34.26587677 Black Non - Hispanic 25.08537483 23.57221222 an Hispanic 14.87970352 41.16586304 Asian or Pacific 25.55044937 45.79997253 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 16.78843117 43.75597 Non -Hispanic Table 22: Index Values, Tustin "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 24.41191101 47.15653229 52.06034851 19.36479187 48.0304451 54.12454987 15.26601601 46.74744034 54.8878212 18.69794273 47.20291138 54.19437576 17.4342041 45.30844498 52.30129623 19.81741333 48.76362228 52.66421127 20.0210247 50.08654785 50.39803314 15.27909194 50.43182755 57.66402054 17.13907242 48.1301918 52.26394272 12.58059692 42.92389297 57.04358673 "Environment "Economic "Educational al Tustin Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non- 77 3833313 Hispanic Black, Non- 49.5615654 Hispanic Hispanic 42.9604187 Asian or 67.04686737 Pacific "Low Transportatio Transit Index n Cost Index" 55.53118134 57.9779892 37.03637695 41.61579132 33.86757278 33.26813889 54.51399994 60.01934433 28.64287949 27.41756248 56.88419342 63.88144684 46.94258499 49.78988266 44.89656067 48.62200546 160 75A-439 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, 63.12244797 43.92755127 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - Hispanic 57.39323807 42.8909874 Black, Non- Hispanic 36.90000153 22.5 Hispanic 32.15452576 17.71869659 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 42.37282944 30.59916115 Hispanic Native American, 26.20000076 13.69999981 Non -Hispanic Table 23: Index Values, Westminster 47.4581604 43.06391144 49.6460228 38.77998352 47.96840286 52.79444885 25.10000038 55.18679047 64.45001994 18.61776543 65.68024445 74.0960083 25.81988907 55.87603378 61.07912064 14.19999981 65.00455475 66.8004303 "Environment "Economic "Educational al Westminster Opportunity Opportunity Opportunity Index" Index" Index" Total Population White, Non - 13.81653023 42.93841171 35.6662941 Hispanic Black, Non - 10.56679821 38.13873291 32.76600647 Hispanic Hispanic 11.77696323 40.45322037 32.86334991 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non - 14.33915138 46.11770248 35.44109344 Hispanic Native American, 15.28125 44.0395813 36.25625229 Non -Hispanic Population below federal poverty line White, Non - 15.20829582 44.93229675 37.83362961 Hispanic Black, Non - 8.191836357 21.56734848 37.28163528 Hispanic Hispanic 10.51876068 37.48429489 28.36954689 Asian or Pacific 12.96408653 44.58031464 32.6651535 161 "Low Transportatio n Cost Index" 44.7712059 45.53092575 44.28075409 Transit Index 37.7172699 37.15086365 36.86459732 44.00982666 37.56019592 43.3792572 37.29174042 45.77521515 38.73999023 40.71427536 43.8158226 33.28907013 36.38402557 37.62247467 75A-440 Islander, Non - Hispanic Native American, Non -Hispanic 25.30000114 48.70000076 52.20000076 45.22904587 41.23970032 lap 1: Economic Opportunity Index, North Orange County 162 75A-441 2 EconomicOpportunity Index, South 41� \� .. . .d,f«. . 2 . G 75A- 42 Map 3: Educational Opportunity Index, North Orange County sa Ee,.aInmo Cnuniy Ins Angeles County /rl lQ .: ,,%y •� i e { Rirersitl County ' N[aelipaik 4Vii1R �� Npl-HyNnq P6CC 1 1 N[AJHy]nq NdN4Mrtlkil '�' _ $�. Y� aS"r f ' Nm'1E9nkPSlan PadAc 6Nnls 1' °•� u r �" l � Eee-arcnai Q�nay In x to X 10.1 - m f/X 21.1-30 40 d0.1-91 S .� �.l eayl.•:2 _ W.1-sa W.1 Io- y _ ro.1-aa 1 Nn� 164 75A-443 4: Educational Opportunity Index, South �AAZ' e �fll;I VIM +� ��� ±. ♦fir �. S'*R: 0 :. B6 SFv '' 4 4- 165 75A-444 Map 5: Environmental Opportunity Index, North Orange County 166 75A-445 1 6: Environmental O 1 Dot M ' Nm-Hapank HTRe Nm-H=P�k 96[k NtlIJiEPd11q NdM±/MefMdP Xk�¢nlc ' Nmi%pank AaW PadACKN�ga Environmenmi oppowniry M.. 0 ,0 ,0,.. i - _ _ W.,-,nn Nome Index, South Orange County 167 75A-446 Rirer C.umy 7: Transportation Cost Index, North Oran Los Angeles Ceumy I9M=1W Nmaepane wn� rvm-Hwa�a mor rvm��expanc Nazx.vnev Ha�c Nm-NEpanCASWi PatlAc 6iliitla Transpoelation Ind. n-10 10 i-m ma-m 30.1- W tl1-31 311-® w.1-m W.1-10A N.. -` sen ee.neva�no ca.nry pppyyy •``��' j � •J � wVt I h."1... n 1 s 168 75A-447 . `mrersiee cm.nry 8: Transportation Cost Index, South Orange County i�l�x1 n T y �•.4v�• O • M �, �. e J i L vx s A ,yc'� Tfti. rim-�pan�ervazw.vnenran 4i q. ,� k ' to • . nrcVJnK ,� , .��'"0� _� 4..• - } 1. 5� �f.� xm lBpuiY:PSLn vaancrw�a� -, nsaoRoorvc�i�al,. a £�• » _ � J J R �'aano5�1'� . �nn"Ycm.mry Nooae 169 75A-448 Map 9: Transit Trips Index, North Orange County Los Angeles Coumy 1 Dal-1W - Nm-Hapank HAIR Nm Hs t9Gk rvmriispanlc rvawexnemm� - rva�e Nm Hap MS PatlACGNM Tran iffnp Intl o-lo m:i-m -ao i-m _ w.v imo rvooao 4.i San GffUNino Count -s 4 '6. yk• •�yMv r,-1Se •' d 170 75A-449 Rir.,Mi County ?k i 10: Transit Tri Index, South Orange County IDns=1CC N. Fllu bMl@ N. AWft M6 k N. A,.an N�•eNnNkan HN,,W N. Hap Pslan PaM. LNMg -ransir Lips Intlas 9-10 10.1-N Jl.l-ID 311-w M.1-M WW.1-IO T.1-W m1-Ioo t N. n 171 75A-450 San DiegoL ny Rrvenide Lounty iv. Disproportionate Housing Needs Which groups (by race%thnicity and family status) experience higher rates of housing cost burden, overcrowding, or substandard housing when compared to other groups? Which groups also experience higher rates ofsevere housing burdens when compared to other groups? Across Orange County, many residents face high rates of housing problems, severe housing problems, and severe housing cost burden. The four HUD -designated housing problems include when a "l) housing unit lacks complete kitchen facilities; 2) housing unit lacks complete plumbing facilities; 3) household is overcrowded; and 4) household is cost burdened"'. Households are considered to have a housing problem if they experience at least one of the above. This analysis also considers what HUD designates as severe housing problems, which are a lack of kitchen or plumbing, more than one person per room, or cost burden greater than 50%. ' https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/ep/CHAS/bg_chas.html 172 75A-451 Housing Problems Table 1: Housing Problems, Orange County Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 206,658 540,773 38.22% Black, Non -Hispanic 8,074 16,719 48.29% Hispanic 152,740 241,841 63.16% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 84,193 186,038 45.26% Native American, Non -Hispanic 1063 2,179 48.78% Total 452,728 987,550 45.84% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 228740 576690 39.66% Family households, 5+ people 95050 145028 65.54% Non -family households 138270 273662 50.53% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 104324 540,773 19.29% Black, Non -Hispanic 4816 16,719 28.81% Hispanic 107752 241,841 44.55% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 50205 186,038 26.99% Native American, Non -Hispanic 544 2,179 24.97% Total 267,641 1 987,550 1 27.10% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe JurisdictionMd Housing Cost Burden Race/Ethnicity # with severe # households %with severe cost burden cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 93564 540,773 17.30% Black, Non -Hispanic 3774 16,719 22.57% Hispanic 59920 241,841 24.78% 173 75A-452 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 36879 186,038 19.82% Native American, Non -Hispanic 1 432 1 2,179 19.83% Total 194,569 1 987,550 19.70% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 79610 576690 13.80% Family households, 5+ people 24586 145028 16.95% Non -family households 39386 273662 14.39% Table 2: Housing Problems, Aliso Viejo Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 4,840 12,570 38.50% Black, Non -Hispanic 235 380 61.84% Hispanic 930 2,120 43.87% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 995 2,830 35.16% Native American, Non -Hispanic 20 70 28.57% Total 7,020 17,970 1 39.07% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 3955 11390 34.72% Family households, 5+ people 705 1420 49.65% Non -family households 2635 5605 47.01% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 2075 12,570 16.51% 174 75A-453 Black, Non -Hispanic 140 380 36.84% Hispanic 400 2,120 18.87% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 425 2,830 15.02% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 70 0.00% Total 3,040 17.970 16.92% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 1840 12,570 14.64% Black, Non -Hispanic 140 380 36.84% Hispanic 225 2,120 10.61% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 350 2,830 12.37% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 70 0.00% Total 2,555 17,970 14.22% Household Type and Size I ]W Family households, <5 people 1010 11390 8.87% Family households, 5+ people 150 1420 10.56% Non -family households 730 5605 13.02% Table 3: Housing Problems, Anaheim Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Jurisdiction Needs Households experiencing any of # with problems # households %with 4 housing problems problems 175 75A-454 Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 15,085 36,390 41.45% Black, Non -Hispanic 1,409 2,688 52.42% Hispanic 28,175 41,509 67.88% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 8,305 17,464 47.55% Native American, Non -Hispanic 105 170 61.76% Total 53,079 98,221 54.04% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 24720 53980 45.79% Family households, 5+ people 15450 20740 74.49% Non -family households 13885 24384 56.94% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems #households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 9425 36,390 23.15% Black, Non -Hispanic 993 2,688 36.94% Hispanic 20590 41,509 49.60% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 5065 17,464 29.00% Native American, Non -Hispanic 85 170 50.00% Total 35,158 98,221 35.79% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden IF Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 7210 36,390 19.81% Black, Non -Hispanic 810 2,688 30.13% Hispanic 11330 41,509 27.30% 176 75A-455 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic "90 17,464 18.84% Native American, Non -Hispanic 50 170 29.41% Total 22.690 98,221 23.10% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 9845 53980 18.24% Family households, 5+ people 4225 20740 20.37% Non -family households 4050 24384 16.61% Table 4: Housing Problems, Buena Park Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 2,500 7,540 33.16% Black, Non -Hispanic 455 835 54.49% Hispanic 4,725 7,705 61.32% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 3,505 6,830 51.32% Native American, Non -Hispanic 80 99 80.81% Total 11,265 1 23,009 48.96% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 6340 14230 44.55% Family households, 5+ people 3060 4930 62.07% Non -family households 2045 3910 52.30% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 1125 7,540 14.92% Black, Non -Hispanic 300 835 35.93% Hispanic 3050 7,705 39.58% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 2070 6,830 30.31% 177 75A-456 Native American, Non -Hispanic 50 99 50.51% Total 6,595 23,009 28.66% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 955 7,540 12.67% Black, Non -Hispanic 255 835 30.54% Hispanic 1780 7,705 23.10% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1515 6,830 22.18% Native American, Non -Hispanic 50 99 50.51% Total 4,555 23,009 19.80% Household Type and Size 0 AP Family households, <5 people 2445 14230 17.18% Family households, 5+ people 770 4930 15.62% Non -family households 569 3910 14.55% Table 5: Housing Problems, Costa Mesa Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 10,055 25,230 39.85% Black, Non -Hispanic 320 695 46.04% Hispanic 6,820 10,105 67.49% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1,670 3,870 43.15% Native American, Non -Hispanic 25 70 35.71% Total 18,890 39,970 47.26% Household Type and Size 178 75A-457 Family households, <5 people 8775 20195 43.45% Family households, 5+ people 3175 4175 76.05% Non -family households 7325 15975 45.85% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 5335 25,230 21.15% Black, Non -Hispanic 200 695 28.78% Hispanic 4650 10,105 46.02% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 804 3,870 20.78% Native American, Non -Hispanic 15 70 21.43% Total 11,004 1 39,970 27.53% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burdeu Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 4905 25,230 19.44% Black, Non -Hispanic 125 695 17.99% Hispanic 2960 10,105 29.29% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 610 3,870 15.76% Native American, Non -Hispanic 15 70 21.43% Total 8,615 39,970 21.55% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 3460 20195 17.13% Family households, 5+ people 904 4175 21.65% Non -family households 2650 15975 16.59% Table 6: Housing Problems, Fountain Valley Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Jurisdiction Needs Households experiencing any of # with problems # households %with 4 housing problems problems 179 75A-458 Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 3,910 10,405 37.58% Black, Non -Hispanic 75 175 42.86% Hispanic 1,290 2,174 59.34% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 2,425 5,785 41.92% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 55 0.00% Total 7,700 18,594 41.41% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 4625 12275 37.68% Family households, 5+ people 1110 2200 50.45% Non -family households 2150 4325 49.71% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 1860 10,405 17.88% Black, Non -Hispanic 25 175 14.29% Hispanic 585 2,174 26.91% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1419 5,785 24.53% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 55 0.00% Total 3,889 18,594 20.92% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 1630 10,405 15.67% Black, Non -Hispanic 25 175 14.29% Hispanic 350 2,174 16.10% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1105 5,785 19.10% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 55 1 0.00% Total 3,110 18,594 1 16.73% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 1 1245 1 12275 1 10.14% Family households, 5+ people 1 250 1 2200 1 11.36% 180 75A-459 Non -family households 1 629 1 4325 1 14.54% Table 7: Housine Problems, Fullerton Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 7,960 20,005 39.79% Black, Non -Hispanic 655 1,448 45.23% Hispanic 7,620 11,890 64.09% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 5,085 10,615 47.90% Native American, Non -Hispanic 20 90 22.22% Total 21,340 44,048 48.45% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 10595 25185 42.07% Family households, 5+ people 4450 6275 70.92% Non -family households 6925 12920 53.60% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 4320 20,005 21.59% Black, Non -Hispanic 433 1,448 29.90% Hispanic 5250 11,890 44.15% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 3125 10,615 29.44% Native American, Non -Hispanic 20 90 22.22% Total 13,148 44,048 29.85% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households % with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 3665 20,005 18.32% Black, Non -Hispanic 375 1,448 25.90% Hispanic 2950 11,890 24.81% 181 75A-460 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 2495 10,615 23.50% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 90 1 0.00% Total 9,485 44,048 1 21.53% Household Type and Size AOL .A6 Family households, <5 people 3695 25185 14.67% Family households, 5+ people 1029 6275 16.40% Non -family households 2664 12920 20.62% Table 8: Housing Problems, Garden Grove Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs IN] Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 5,055 14,255 35.46% Black, Non -Hispanic 287 592 48.48% Hispanic 8,945 13,550 66.01% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 10,303 18,418 55.94% Native American, Non -Hispanic 130 148 87.84% Total 24,720 46,963 52.64% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 12495 26390 47.35% Family households, 5+ people 7515 10735 70.00% Non -family households 5059 9854 51.34% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 2645 14,255 18.55% 182 75A-461 Black, Non -Hispanic 173 592 29.22% Hispanic 6540 13,550 48.27% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 6775 18,418 36.78% Native American, Non -Hispanic 85 148 57.43% Total 16,218 46,963 34.53% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 2135 14,255 14.98% Black, Non -Hispanic 145 592 24.49% Hispanic 3435 13,550 25.35% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 4685 18,418 25.44% Native American, Non -Hispanic 85 148 57.43% Total 10,485 46,963 22.33% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 4950 26390 18.76% Family households, 5+ people 1945 10735 18.12% Non -family households 1450 9854 14.71% Table 9: Housing Problems, Huntington Beach Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Jurisdiction Needs Households experiencing any of # with problems # households %with 4 housing problems problems Race/Ethnicity 183 75A-462 White, Non -Hispanic 19,865 53,650 37.03% Black, Non -Hispanic 344 753 45.68% Hispanic 5,500 10,855 50.67% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 3,089 8,114 38.07% Native American, Non -Hispanic 74 274 27.01% Total 28,872 73,646 39.20% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 15230 43760 34.80% Family households, 5+ people 3035 5995 50.63% Non -family households 11235 24905 45.11% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 9745 53,650 18.16% Black, Non -Hispanic 179 753 23.77% Hispanic 3570 10,855 32.89% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1669 8,114 20.57% Native American, Non -Hispanic 55 274 20.07% Total 15,218 73,646 20.66% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 9030 53,650 16.83% Black, Non -Hispanic 139 753 18.46% Hispanic 2580 10,855 23.77% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1475 8,114 18.18% Native American, Non -Hispanic 45 274 16.42% Total 13,269 73,646 1 18.02% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 5195 43760 11.87% Family households, 5+ people 899 5995 15.00°/u Non -family households 3245 24905 13.03% 184 75A-463 Table 10: Housing Problems, Irvine Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 18,555 45,505 40.78% Black, Non -Hispanic 865 1,795 48.19% Hispanic 3,310 6,790 48.75% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 13,955 33,220 42.01% Native American, Non -Hispanic 65 130 50.00% Total 36,750 87,440 42.03% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 20175 52685 38.29% Family households, 5+ people 3630 6270 57.89% Non -family households 14279 28074 50.86% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 9085 45,505 19.96% Black, Non -Hispanic 570 1,795 31.75% Hispanic 1805 6,790 26.58% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 7850 33,220 23.63% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 130 7.69% Total 19,320 87,440 22.10% 185 75A-464 Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 7700 45,505 16.92% Black, Non -Hispanic 315 1,795 17.55% Hispanic 1510 6,790 22.24% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 6110 33,220 18.39% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 130 7.69% Total 15,645 Household Type and Size 1W 87,440 17.89% Family households, <5 people 6605 52685 12.54% Family households, 5+ people 1055 6270 16.83% Non -family households 5460 28074 19.45% Table 11: Housing Problems, La Habra Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 2,910 7,363 39.52% Black, Non -Hispanic 144 304 47.37% Hispanic 4,800 8,870 54.11% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 965 2,260 42.70% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 10 100.00% Total 8,8291 18,8071 46.95% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 4335 10875 39.86% Mr, 75A-465 Family households, 5+ people 2325 3285 70.78% Non -family households 2240 4600 48.70% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 1630 7,363 22.14% Black, Non -Hispanic 59 304 19.41% Hispanic 3285 8,870 37.03% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 700 2,260 30.97% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 10 100.00% Total 5,684 18,807 30.22% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 1240 7,363 16.84% Black, Non -Hispanic 55 304 18.09% Hispanic 1765 8,870 19.90% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 485 2,260 21.46% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 10 100.00% Total 3,555 18,807 18.90% Household Type and Size L 100ron" Family households, <5 people 1640 10875 15.08% Family households, 5+ people 465 3285 14.16% Non -family households 555 46001 12.07% Table 12: Housing Problems, La Palma Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Jurisdiction Needs Households experiencing any of # with problems # households %with 4 housing problems problems Race/Ethnicity 187 75A-466 White, Non -Hispanic 430 1,619 26.56% Black, Non -Hispanic 150 370 40.54% Hispanic 320 709 45.13% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 810 2,148 37.71% Native American, Non -Hispanic 30 30 100.00% Total 1,7401 4,876 35.68% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 1015 3220 31.52% Family households, 5+ people 340 765 44.44% Non -family households 435 930 46.77% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 210 1,619 12.97% Black, Non -Hispanic 75 370 20.27% Hispanic 239 709 33.71% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 434 2,148 20.20% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 30 0.00% Total 958 1 4,8761 19.65% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 140 1,619 8.65% Black, Non -Hispanic 70 370 18.92% Hispanic 175 709 24.68% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 340 2,148 15.83% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 30 0.00% Total 725 4,876 14.87% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 325 3220 10.09% Family households, 5+ people 160 765 20.920M Non -family households 75 930 8.06% IM: 75A-467 Table 13: Housing Problems, Laguna Niguel Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 7,480 18,280 40.92% Black, Non -Hispanic 145 395 36.71% Hispanic 2,010 3,210 62.62% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 835 2,350 35.53% Native American, Non -Hispanic 65 85 76.47% Total 10,535 1 24,320 43.32% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 6000 15965 37.58% Family households, 5+ people 815 1680 48.51% Non -family households 3975 6930 57.36% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 3445 18,280 18.85% Black, Non -Hispanic 65 395 16.46% Hispanic 1210 3,210 37.69% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 390 2,350 16.60% Native American, Non -Hispanic 15 85 17.65% Total 5,125 24,320 21.07% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Jurisdiction Housing Cost Burden Race/Ethnicity # with severe # households %with severe cost burden cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 3310 18,280 18.11% Black, Non -Hispanic 35 395 8.86% Hispanic 905 3,210 28.19% ME 75A-468 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 325 2,350 13.83% Native American, Non -Hispanic 1 15 1 85 1 17.65% Total 4,590 1 24,320 18.87% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 1745 15965 10.93% Family households, 5+ people 265 1680 15.77% Non -family households 900 6930 12.99% Table 14: Housing Problems, Lake Forest Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 6,230 18,240 34.16% Black, Non -Hispanic 235 535 43.93% Hispanic 2,700 4,370 61.78% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1,310 3,870 33.85% Native American, Non -Hispanic 15 19 78.95% Total 10,490 27,034 38.80% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 5800 17525 33.10% Family households, 5+ people 1640 3165 51.82% Non -family households 3340 6660 50.15% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 2740 18,240 15.02% 190 75A-469 Black, Non -Hispanic 135 535 25.23% Hispanic 1855 4,370 42.45% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 660 3,870 17.05% Native American, Non -Hispanic 15 19 78.95% Total 5,405 27,034 19.99% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Barden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 2395 18,240 13.13% Black, Non -Hispanic 100 515 18.69% Hispanic 1340 4,370 30.66% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 435 3,870 11.24% Native American, Non -Hispanic 15 19 78.95% Total 4,285 27,034 15.85% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 1825 17525 10.41% Family households, 5+ people 445 3165 14.06% Non -family households 804 6660 12.07% Table 15: Housing Problems, Mission Viejo Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Jurisdiction Needs Households experiencing any of # with problems # households %with 4 housing problems problems Race/Ethnicity 191 75A-470 White, Non -Hispanic 8,690 25,265 34.40% Black, Non -Hispanic 199 389 51.16% Hispanic 2,105 4,099 51.35% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 955 3,050 31.31% Native American, Non -Hispanic 20 30 66.67% Total 11,969 32,833 36.45% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 7265 22375 32.47% Family households, 5+ people 950 3305 28.74% Non -family households 4055 7870 51.52% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 3779 25,265 14.96% Black, Non -Hispanic 79 389 20.31% Hispanic 995 4,099 24.27% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 465 3,050 15.25% Native American, Non -Hispanic 20 30 66.67% Total 5,338 32,833 16.26% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction MPA Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 3505 25,265 13.87% Black, Non -Hispanic 60 389 15.42% Hispanic 865 4,099 21.10% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 335 3,050 10.98% Native American, Non -Hispanic 20 30 66.67% Total 4,785 32,833 14.57% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 1770 22375 7.91% Family households, 5+ people 245 3305 7.41% Non -family households 725 7870 192 75A-471 Table 16: Housing Problems, Orange (City) Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 8,845 24,095 36.71% Black, Non -Hispanic 365 530 68.87% Hispanic 7,255 12,030 60.31% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1,810 4,979 36.35% Native American, Non -Hispanic 45 75 60.00% Total 18,320 41,709 43.92% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 8815 23870 36.93% Family households, 5+ people 4080 6705 60.85% Non -family households 5800 11369 51.02% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 4580 24,095 19.01% Black, Non -Hispanic 235 530 44.34% Hispanic 5105 12,030 42.44% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1130 4,979 22.70% Native American, Non -Hispanic 4 75 5.33% Total 11,054 1 41,709 1 26.50% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden 19, 75A-472 Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 4155 24,095 17.24% Black, Non -Hispanic 195 530 36.79% Hispanic 2935 12,030 24.40% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 795 4,979 15.97% Native American, Non -Hispanic 4 75 5.33% Total 8,084 Household Type and Size MW23870 41,709 19.38% Family households, <5 people 13.18% Family households, 5+ people 1105 6705 16.48% Non -family households 2185 11369 19.22% Table 17: Housing Problems, Rancho Santa Margarita Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 4,505 11,890 37.89% Black, Non -Hispanic 140 285 49.12% Hispanic 1,629 2,674 60.92% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 565 1,855 30.46% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 0 #DIV/0! Total 6,839 16,7041 40.94% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 4000 11285 35.45% Family households, 5+ people 745 1720 1 43.31% 194 75A-473 Non -family households 2250 3975 56.60% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems #households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 2000 11,890 16.82% Black, Non -Hispanic 84 285 29.47% Hispanic 720 2,674 26.93% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 175 1,855 9.43% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 0 #DIV/0! Total 2,979 1 16,7041 17.83% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 1860 11,890 15.64% Black, Non -Hispanic 85 285 29.82% Hispanic 500 2,674 18.70% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 130 1,855 7.01% Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 0 #DIV/0! Total 2,575 16,704 15.42% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 1220 11285 10.81% Family households, 5+ people 140 17201 8.14% Non -family households 570 3975 114.34% Table 18: Housing Problems San Clemente Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Jurisdiction Needs Households experiencing any of # with problems # households %with 4 housing problems problems Race/Ethnicity 195 75A-474 White, Non -Hispanic 7,940 19,490 40.74% Black, Non -Hispanic 30 125 24.00% Hispanic 2,005 3,264 61.43% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 310 970 31.96% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 20 50.00% Total 10,295 23,869 43.13% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 5670 14590 38.86% Family households, 5+ people 1240 2445 50.72% Non -family households 3689 7229 51.03% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households V %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 4055 19,490 20.81% Black, Non -Hispanic 20 125 16.00% Hispanic 1375 3,264 42.13% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 145 970 14.95% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 20 50.00% Total 5,605 1 23,869 23.48% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden or Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden JurisdictionWd Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 3685 19,490 18.91% Black, Non -Hispanic 20 125 16.00% Hispanic 960 3,264 29.41% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 95 970 9.79% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 20 1 50.00% Total 4,770 1 23,869 19.98% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 1855 14590 12.71% Family households, 5+ people 405 2445 1 16.56% Non -family households 1149 72291 15.89% 196 75A-475 Table 19: Housing Problems, San Juan Capistrano Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 3,805 8,630 44.09% Black, Non -Hispanic 0 0 #DIV/0! Hispanic 1,915 2,725 70.28% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 115 340 33.82% Native American, Non -Hispanic 30 80 37.50% Total 5,865 11,775 49.81% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 2945 6970 42.25% Family households, 5+ people 1425 1925 74.03% Non -family households 1590 2915 54.55% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 2070 8.630 23.99% Black, Non -Hispanic 0 0 #DIV/0! Hispanic 1650 2,725 60.55% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 70 340 20.59% Native American, Non -Hispanic 30 80 37.50% Total 3,820 11.775 32.44% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden 197 75A-476 Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 2015 8,630 23.35% Black, Non -Hispanic 0 0 #DIV/0! Hispanic 1070 2,725 39.27% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 65 340 19.12% Native American, Non -Hispanic 30 80 37.50% Total 3,180 11,775 27.01% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 1100 6970 15.78% Family households, 5+ people 555 1925 28.83% Non -family households 275 2915 9.43°/u Table 20: Housing Problems, Santa Ana Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 4,650 12,430 37.41% Black, Non -Hispanic 435 899 48.39% Hispanic 36,965 50,935 72.57% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 5,440 9,959 54.62% Native American, Non -Hispanic 63 128 49.22% Total 47,553 74,351 63.96% 198 75A-477 Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 18765 34015 55.17% Family households, 5+ people 22140 27010 81.97% Non -family households 7055 13590 51.91% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households 11 %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 2495 12,430 20.07% Black, Non -Hispanic 234 899 26.03% Hispanic 29395 50,935 57.71% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 3450 9,959 34.64% Native American, Non -Hispanic 8 128 6.25% Total 35,582 74,351 47.86% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity # with severe cost burden # households %with severe cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 2130 12,430 17.14% Black, Non -Hispanic 195 899 21.69% Hispanic 12800 50,935 25.13% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 2155 9,959 21.64% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 128 7.81% Total 17,290 74,351 23.25% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 8010 34015 23.55% Family households, 5+ people 4990 27010 18.47% 199 75A-478 Non -family households I 1809 I 13590 I 13.31% Table 21: Housim! Problems, Tustin Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs Jurisdiction Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems # with problems # households %with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 4,465 10,495 42.54% Black, Non -Hispanic 380 609 62.40% Hispanic 5,485 7,705 71.19% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 2,644 6,089 43.42% Native American, Non -Hispanic 60 120 50.00% Total 13,034 25,018 1 52.10% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 6690 14315 46.73% Family households, 5+ people 2840 3775 75.23% Non -family households 3825 7465 51.24% Households experiencing any of 4 Severe Housing Problems # with severe problems # households %with severe problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 2085 10,495 19.87% Black, Non -Hispanic 205 609 33.66% Hispanic 3915 7,705 50.81% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 1519 6,089 24.95% Native American, Non -Hispanic 10 120 8.33% Total 7,734 25,018 1 30.91% Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Jurisdiction Housing Cost Burden Race/Ethnicity # with severe # households % with severe cost burden cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 1840 10,495 17.53% Black, Non -Hispanic 170 609 27.91% Hispanic 1975 7,705 25.63% 200 75A-479 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 969 6,089 15.91% Native American, Non -Hispanic 1 0 1 1201 0.00% Total 1 4,954 1 25,018 1 19.80% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 2300 14315 16.07% Family households, 5+ people 589 3775 15.60% Non -family households 1025 7465 13.73% A few trends are immediately clear in housing needs in Orange County. The housing problems data displayed in the charts above include houses that have 1 of 4 housing problems by race/ethnicity and family type, 1 of 4 severe housing problems by race/ethnicity, and severe housing cost burden by race/ethnicity and family type. Overall, across the County, Black and Hispanic residents are more likely to face all of these housing problems, with varying rates across different jurisdictions. Some figures in the data above may be inaccurate depending on the number of households of a particular group in a jurisdiction. For example, 0 Black households are written in San Juan Capistrano. It may be that this figure was lower than the margin of error, so figures with low or no households should carry less weight in indicating frequency of problems. However, the County data overall gives an idea of housing needs for smaller populations. In the County, 45.84% of residents overall face 1 of 4 housing problems. White and Asian or Pacific Islander residents have slightly lower rates of housing problems, at 38.22% and 45.26% respectively, while Black residents have a slightly higher rate of 48.29%. Hispanic residents have the highest rates at 63.16% countywide. Native American residents have a rate similar to the average at 48.74%, but the low populations of Native American residents across jurisdictions may lead to misleading data (which is why they are not as frequently discussed here). Housing problems are found in differing rates across family types, with 39.66% for families of 5 or less, 65.59% for families of 5 or more, and 50.53% for non -family households. Housing problems occur more frequently in more populated areas of the County, including in Anaheim and Santa Ana in particular. There are some more obvious discrepancies in rates of housing problems across different demographic groups. Black residents in Aliso Viejo experience housing problems at a rate of 61.84%, in Orange (city) at 68.87%, in Tustin at 62.40%, and in Buena Park at 54.49%. Hispanic residents experience rates of housing problems that are high overall, but significantly higher in southern Orange County, at 72.57% in Santa Ana, 71.19% in Tustin, and 70.28% in San Juan Capistrano. Asian residents generally experience average or lower rates of housing problems, with exceptions in Garden Grove and Santa Ana, where they experience housing problems at rates of 55.94% and 54.62% respectively. Rates of severe housing problems are overall lower than housing problems at 27.10%, but more drastic discrepancies exist compared to the white population. White residents face severe housing problems at a rate of 19.29%. Black residents experience them at a rate of 28.81%, Hispanic residents at 44.55%, 201 75A-480 Asian or Pacific Islander residents at 26.99%, and Native American residents at 24.97%. Rates of severe housing problems are especially high in parts of north and south Orange County, including Anaheim, Buena Park, Garden Grove, Orange, San Juan Capistrano, and Santa Ana. Black residents experience severe housing problems at rates of 36.84% in Aliso Viejo and 44.34% in Orange (city). Hispanic residents face severe housing problems at significantly high rates of 49.60% in Anaheim, 60.55% in San Juan Capistrano, and 50.81% in Tustin, but also higher than average in Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, La Habra, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, Orange and San Clemente. Asian residents face noticeably high rates of severe housing problems in Garden Grove, at 36.78%. Severe housing cost burden is a large but not as frequent problem for residents in Orange County. The average rate of residents experiencing severe housing cost burden is 19.70% across the county. Overall, White residents have a rate of 17.30%, Black residents 22.57%, Hispanic residents 24.78%, Asian American or Pacific Islander residents 19.82%, and Native American residents 19.83%. Families of 5 or less have a rate of 13.8%, families of 5 or more 16.95%, and non -family households 14.39%. Discrepancies across race/ethnicity or family type are much lower than for housing problems or severe housing problems in the County. Black and Hispanic residents still face higher than average rates of severe housing cost burdens in some individual jurisdictions, however. In Orange (city), Black residents experience severe housing cost burden at a rate of 36.79%. Hispanic residents experience rates of housing cost burden at 30.66% in Lake Forest, and 39.27% in San Juan Capistrano. Table 17: Percentage of Overcrowded Households by Race or Ethnicity, 2013-2017 American Community Survey Geography White, Non- Hispanic Black Native American Asian American or Pacific Islander Hispanic Orange County, California 1.95% 6.52% 11.38% 7.76% 25.72% Aliso Viejo city, California 1.47% 0.00% 0.00% 2.79% 7.47% Anaheim city, California 3.20% 5.94% 27.51% 9.81% 29.07% Buena Park city, California 4.33% 8.11% 17.03% 7.17% 23.11% Costa Mesa city, California 2.70% 9.01% 16.30% 7.20% 25.16% Fountain Valley city, California 1.93% 0.00% 0.00% 6.46% 15.37% Fullerton city, California 2.63% 4.20% 23.42% 6.42% 23.52% Garden Grove city, California 3.46% 9.69% 15.77% 12.23% 30.05% Huntington Beach city, California 1.50% 6.45% 0.00% 3.16% 14.59% 202 75A-481 Irvine city, California 4.21% 11.78% 0.00% 6.79% 6.30% Laguna Niguel city, California 0.67% 2.91% 0.00% 1.52% 13.74% La Habra city, California 3.86% 0.00% 5.30% 11.84% 22.09% Lake Forest city, California 1.95% 8.93% 17.17% 4.68% 16.52% La Palma city, California 1.70% 0.00% 0.00% 6.63% 14.91% Mission Viejo city, California 0.72% 5.35% 0.00% 3.76% 6.30% Orange city, California 1.67% 11.81% 5.02% 8.05% 21.46% Rancho Santa Margarita city, California 1.40% 0.00% 0.00% 1.50% 8.33% San Clemente city, California 1.36% 0.00% 0.00% 3.52% 18.12% San Juan Capistrano city, California 0.11% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 26.44% Santa Ana city, California 3.88% 7.82% 26.59% 14.75% 42.93% Tustin city, California 1.35% 10.52% 4.35% 7.35% 28.28% The tables above indicate overcrowdedness in the County and its jurisdictions. Some of these numbers are inaccurate, due to low populations in a given jurisdiction (especially for Black or Native American residents). In the County, White residents experience an overcrowdedness rate of 1.95%, Black residents 6.52%, Native American residents 11.38%, Asian American or Pacific Islander residents 7.76%, and Hispanic residents 25.72%. Hispanic residents face especially high rates of overcrowdedness. This is especially true in Anaheim and Santa Ana, where their overcrowdedness rates are 29.07% and 42.93%, respectively. Which areas in the jurisdiction and Region experience the greatest housing burdens? Which of these areas align with segregated areas, integrated areas, or R/ECAPs and what are the predominant race%thnicity or national origin groups in such areas? 203 75A-482 Map 1: Housing Problems in North Orange County, Race 1Dot =150 • White e - R raq• m r = A ♦, •♦ •• i. Legend Black • Percenfageof Houses WAh Housing Problems • NativeAmerican orAmerican Indian.+ it i�r+t4 "� ••d0ir�r' 0 0-20 • Asian a aentr • • ��!�_ ♦•K•� - 21 -40 44 Pacific Islander • '��• ' 4 ' • �•' +• ��" • •�'d =�� _ 51 • Hispanic • • « r • r ;7 •a •' +♦• it ♦ g'' r ♦ • }s o -8g •/'•��, (S� " are+1•�'�•+ • • • •• • •!_� 81-100 Of �f,� ��aettA �°V_"aHiiEA'.. •• os • •e. • ♦ d i • � �'; •'•�.. • Si' -e471T' • :� 4• $ • t+ ¢pp '.• 3,♦ •r;b• • ' !'. ! • e Ar " • a •• • d • ,•� y �f } as In RB F�LLES O\fi r• t '+t `� •fie i•if�•� `r` � q• •LL\: A� • .^y�„ • �. tr6_ ♦ Ay,rr+ .l�•r dlt k;;.... .�. ll ;.o 3F mA. •s ��ry'^•a4y�>}' yH- �` • �w ' e ° ? N+• Li PAIlHA aI�NA PA@S •' �••I a • N N ANaiiBui 4di�=♦i •_ " oe. czPasss �-u.Ln rags • � yr 'l •• r r 0 N SIANTO• 4C • ♦+ •• •+e� I.69 i�aamnc �• e UAANGH a • • l �� r•�S �i"s .y�•. •, 0IL N GE cc yy • • ®� SUYTA uvAI 1. :y� � • •. • r a • Ii . a .•+ s • • • w 1 tia• 'ai • • •• HL�NTINGTON EHACfi a>sv �� I`J A�� .. hr �•� "^ �PocrvTww vALu.f � • � H ® • �r cosrA nu+sA,'u _ _ ur`< • .Mf. 204 75A-483 Map 2: Housing Problems in Central Orange County, Race 205 75A-484 Map 3: Housing Problems in South Orange County, Race ♦ 2 s w. 40 . Legend Percentage of Houses with Housing Problems 0 0-20 ® 21-40 -41-60 -61-80 - 81 - 100 a • a a P •. • A • � , s • ww • • c i a • • 1 „ t • • i grow` i 206 75A-485 • • 4 f � • .ay � •cr ♦ • m 1 dot = 150 • White Black , • NativeAnnerican 6rAnnerican Indian ° • Asian Pacific Islander Hispanic Map 4: Housing Problems in North Orange County, National Origin - • Vietnam g�aa Philippines Percentageot Houseswkih Housing PmhRems - _ ' India 0 0-20 . Korea 021-40 Japan 41 - 60 China, including Hong Kong and Taiwan M 61 - 80 •• -81-100 r .zA ruaxA - PaFar - ¢2'rTFRI'ON ") -'.r . ` r I`OR AIIN-DA PL NTU =NAPAR%. P LAPALR� �� Id A o • r • ((��C� �� � e r • �Pj ANAi-I6A1 _- . .t �.. ORANGE GARI3FN GRS ORIN GE CO • ° r A . \FE 3T14IDVSTER ' �8a4`cx" It • • ' S4NTA ANA •• • ar• •'• r• • w•w' E n r '.,TL ='TLC ri • rELi\'TL\GTOti HE.4CI-I�`-• l "'z �FOi\: 1 . • j.}2 • ' 4LN { {I l Fl 1 • � • 6 { ° IR{ LSE { COTi 1[E•A O"•.' { La xr FORE_T 207 75A-486 Map 5: Housing Problems in Central Orange County, National Origin LOi .?Ll\[PSOi • Vietnam Philippines • India • Korea Japan • China, including Hong Kong and Taiwan Peroentageot goaseswah Honsing ProbEems D o-20 �21-40 _ 41 - 50 61 - so -81-100 FO441T—T L�TALN�FALLE6'. HLITLVGIO! HP 9GH e 208 75A-487 l.LIi05 IE70 H UGH .. LkGI\ANIG=L Ili\\poQ I Map 6: Housing Problems in South Orange County, National Origin 209 75A-488 Map 7: Housing Problems in North Orange County, National Origin 210 75A-489 Map 8: Housing Problems in Central Orange County, National Origin 1 Dot = 25 Iran • Mexico • El Salvador Canada • Guatemala United Kingdom Legend Pereentagaof Houses Wth Housing 13mblems CIO-20 o 271-40 41-60 E-00 - 81 - 100 211 r c� 75A-490 Map 9: Housing Problems in South Orange County, National Origin 212 75A-491 Patterns in housing problems described earlier are present in the maps above. While housing problems are generally evenly dispersed throughout the County, there are some exceptions, which tend to have higher numbers of Hispanic residents. This is seen in the high number of Hispanic residents in Anaheim and Santa Ana, both of which have slightly higher percentages of housing problems. In Central Orange County, west Fountain Valley also has higher percentages of households with housing problems in areas with higher numbers of Hispanic residents. The same is the case for Hispanic residents in San Juan Capistrano, Lake Forest and Laguna Woods. While the charts above suggested that Black residents similarly had higher rates of housing problems than White and Asian residents, those patterns are more difficult to view in maps due to the lower population of Black residents overall. Asian or Pacific Islander residents generally live in areas with fewer housing problems, with one notable exception. Garden Grove, which has slightly higher rates of housing problems than its surroundings, also has a noticeably high population of Asian or Pacific Islander residents. These patterns are further explained by national origin maps. Map 4 shows that high numbers of Vietnamese residents are found in Garden Grove, which does have slightly higher rates of housing problems. Filipino residents in the areas between Buena Park and Anaheim, similarly reside in areas with higher rates of housing problems. The same holds for Filipino residents in Lake Forest and Laguna Hills, as seen in Map 6. Mexican residents have the most noticeable pattern of living in areas with higher rates of housing problems. Mexican residents in Santa Ana, Anaheim, Costa Mesa, and San Juan Capistrano live in areas with higher rates of housing problems, as seen in Maps 7,8and 9. Additional Information Beyond the HUD provided data, provide additional relevant information, if any, about disproportionate housing needs in the jurisdiction and Region affecting groups with other protected characteristics. The program participant may also describe other information relevant to its assessment of disproportionate housing needs. For PHAs, such information may include a PHA's overriding housing needs analysis. Homelessness Contributing Factors of Disproportionate Housing Needs Please see the Appendix for the following Contributing Factors to Disproportionate Housing Needs: • Availability of affordable units in a range of sizes • Displacement of residents due to economic pressures • Displacement of and/or lack of housing support for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking • Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing costs • Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods 213 75A-492 • Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities • Land use and zoning laws • Lending discrimination • Loss of affordable housing • Source of income discrimination 214 75A-493 C. Publicly Supported Housing Analysis 1. Analysis a. Publicly Supported Housing Demographics The Publicly Supported Housing section analyzes federally funded affordable housing and other types of affordable housing, to determine whether the level of need is being met and whether patterns of affordable housing siting concentrate minorities in low opportunity areas, among other things. In Orange County, each category of publicly supported housing (public housing, Project - Based Section 8, Other Multifamily Housing, Housing Choice Vouchers, and LIHTC units) is represented, although that representation varies greatly depending on the individual municipality. Affordable housing (including LIHTC) makes up 5% or less of the total housing stock in all but six of the entitlement jurisdictions in this analysis (Anaheim, Garden Grove, Irvine, La Palma, Santa Ana, and Westminster; incomplete data is available for Buena Park, which likely counts among these as well). In each of these jurisdictions, LIHTC and Housing Choice Voucher units tend to predominate, and there is no Public Housing at all, indicating an overall preference for private housing development. Overall, it is clear that the amount of publicly supported housing available in Orange County does not rise to meet the level of need, although progress is being made. Table 1: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Orange County Housing Units # % 219,058 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 429 0.20% Project -based Section 8 33 0.02% Other Multifamily 2 ,286 1.04% HCV Program 2,110 0.96% LIHTC Table 2: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Aliso Viejo Housing Units # 19,786 Total housing units 128 0.65% LIHTC Table 3: Publicly Supported Housinu Units by Program Cateuory, Anaheim Housing Units # % Total housing units 103,787 215 75A-494 N/a N/a Public Housing 279 0.27% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 5 ,089 4.90% HCV Program 3,017 2.91% LIHTC Table 4: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Buena Park Housing Units # % 24,741 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 110 0.44% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 762 3.08% HCV Program 185 0.75% LIHTC Table 5: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Costa Mesa Housing Units # 41,933 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 110 0.26% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 604 1.44% HCV Program 266 0.63% LIHTC Table 6: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Fountain Valley Housing Units # % 19,050 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 71 0.37% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 216 75A-495 502 2.64% HCV Program 154 0.81% LIHTC Table 7: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Fullerton Housing Units # % 47,991 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 101 0.21% Project -based Section 8 48 0.10% Other Multifamily 715 1.49% HCV Program 858 1.79% LIHTC Table 8: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Garden Grove Housing Units # 48,499 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 225 0.46% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 2 ,681 5.53% HCV Program 671 1.38% LIHTC Table 9: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Huntington Beach Housing Units # % 78,583 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 377 0.48% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 976 1.24% HCV Program 607 0.77% LIHTC Table 10: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Irvine 217 75A-496 Housing Units # % 83,616 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 717 0.86% Project -based Section 8 23 0.03% Other Multifamily 1 ,146 1.37% HCV Program 2,329 2.79 LIHTC Table 11: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, La Habra Housing Units # 19,932 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 148 0.74% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 178 0.89% HCV Program Table 12: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, La Palma Housing Units # % 5,039 - Total housing units 304 6.03% LIHTC Table 13: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Laguna Niguel Housing Units # 25,565 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 156 0.61% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 102 0.40% HCV Program 218 75A-497 Table 14: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Lake Forest Housing Units # 27,044 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing N/a N/a Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 275 1.02% HCV Program 187 0.69% LIHTC Table 15: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Mission Viejo Housing Units Total housing units 34,177 Public Housing N/a N/a Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 226 0.66% LIHTC 296 0.87% Table 16: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Newport Beach Housing Units # % 44,242 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 100 0.23% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 139 0.31% HCV Program 205 0.46% LIHTC Table 17: Publicly Supported ousing Units by Program Catego , Orange(City) Housing Units # % Total housing units 45,363 219 75A-498 N/a N/a Public Housing 197 0.43% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 642 1.42% HCV Program 964 2.13% LIHTC Table 18: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Rancho Santa Margarita Housing Units it M Total housing units 17,408 - Public Housing N/a N/a Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 138 0.79% Table 19: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, San Clemente Housing Units # % 25,556 - Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 72 0.28% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamil 123 0.48% HCV Program 393 1.54% LIHTC Table 20: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, San Juan Capistrano Housing Units # % 12,905 Total housing units 215 1.67% LIHTC Table 21: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Santa Ana Units I # I % 220 75A-499 76,075 - Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 801 1.05% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 2 ,773 3.65% HCV Program 1,092 1.44% LIHTC Table 22: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Tustin Housing Units # 26,633 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 100 0.38% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 524 1.97% HCV Program 672 2.52% LIHTC Table 23: Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category, Westminster Housing Units # 27,695 Total housing units N/a N/a Public Housing 97 0.35% Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 2 ,169 7.83% HCV Program 439 1.59% LIHTC LIHTC According to the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, there are 175 Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) developments in Orange County, some of which are designated for specific populations. These developments include 15,092 low-income units, with 2 reserved for At -Risk populations, 79 for large families, 30 Non -Targeted, 46 for Seniors, 8 for Special Needs 221 75A-500 populations, 4 Single Room Occupancy (SRO), and 6 which are not categorized. There are no active LIIITC developments in La Habra, Laguna Niguel, or Rancho Santa Margarita. Are certain racial/ethnic groups more likely to be residing in one program category of publicly supported housing than other program categories (public housing project - based Section 8, Other Multifamily Assisted developments, and Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) in the jurisdiction? Please note: rows for which all values are zero or n/a have been deleted for space Table 24: Pub cly Supported Hou in2 Demographics Orange County Orange Asian or Pacific County White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Project -Based 164 40.80 9 2.24% 88 21.80 138 34.33% Section 8 % Other 22 95.65% 0 0.00% 1 4.35% 0 0.00% Multifamily 35.96 18.34 HCV Program 808 156 6.94% 412 866 38.54% 25.12 30.11 LII4TC 1352 %Total 254 4.72% 1621 991 18.41% 140,530 67.71 2,907 1.40% 30,185 14.54 29,767 14.34% Households % 61.62 19.18 0-30% of AMI 14,094 259 1.13% 4,388 3,541 15.48% 50.78 19.94 0-50% of AMI 23,293 503 1.10% 9,148 6,728 14.67% 56.98 18.57 0-80% of AMI 43,952 926 1.20% 14,322 11,131 14.43% Asian or Pacific Region White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 62.56 Public Housing 683 6.99% 2,627 26.90% 6,110 344 3.52% Project -Based 9,154 23.80 6,942 18.10% 10,365 27.02 11,753 30.64% Section 8 222 75A-501 Other 1,707 33. 8 465 9.09% 1,094 21.39 1,839 35.96% Multifamily % HCV Program N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a Total 1,766,510 41.80 333,08 7.88% 1,405,07 33.25 629,34 14.89% Households % 0 0 % 9 29.59 41.95 105,31 0-30% of AMI 215,775 % 86,225 11.83% 305,885 % 4 14.44% 26.07 135,74 44.60 175,81 0-50% of AMI 343,565 % 0 10.30% 587,685 % 4 13.34% 28.77 195,15 44.09 272,54 0-80% of AMI 590,895 % 5 9.50% 905,370 % 9 13.27% Table 25: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Aliso Viejo 2 Asian or Pacific Aliso Viejo White Black His anic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % LIHTC 239 75.39% 22 6.94% 91 28.71% 15 4.73% Table 26: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Anaheim Anaheim White Black Hisl oanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Project -Based Section 8 60 22.22% 19 7.04% 50 18.52% 141 52.22% HCV Program 1,328 27.62% 412 8.57% 1,849 38.46% 1,210 25.17% LIHTC 2029 23.08% 506 5.76% 4720 53.70% 792 9.01% Total Households 38,125 38.49% 3,014 3.04% 39,630 40.01% 16,470 16.63% 0-30% of AMI 5,245 28.95% 755 4.17% 8,675 47.88% 3,070 16.94% 0-50% of AMI 8,870 25.76% 1,305 3.79% 17,310 50.28% 5,005 14.54% 2 HUD -provided demographic data for residents of publicly supported housing in Aliso Viejo was not available, but data from CTAC reflecting the demographics of LIHTC residents is reflected above. 223 75A-502 0-80% of AMI 15,335 28.28% 1 1,845 3.40% 26,855 49.52% 7,835 14.45% Table 27: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Buena Park Asian or Pacific Buena Park White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 16 13.91% 1 0.87% 4 3.48% 94 81.74% Project -Based Section 8 194 25.80% 167 22.21% 229 30.45% 161 21.41% HCV Program 287 21.91% 135 10.31% 374 28.55% 306 23.36% LH4TC 7,755 33.70% 1,120 4.87% 7,060 30.68% 6,669 28.98% Total Households 740 21.76% 200 5.88% 1,270 37.35% 1,160 34.12% 0-30% of AMI 1,645 23.40% 285 4.05% 2,885 41.04% 1,864 26.51% 0-50% of AMI 3,015 26.03% 570 4.92% 4,435 8.2 38% 3,084 26.62% 0 -80% of AMI Table 28: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Costa Mesa Asian or Pacific Costa Mesa White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 78 72.22% 0 0.00% 16 14.81% 14 12.96% Project -Based Section 8 377 60.32% 18 2.88% 107 17.12% 122 19.52% HCV Program 174 52.73% 7 2.12% 34 10.30% 58 17.58% LIHTC 25,410 62.60% 509 1.25% 9,730 23.97% 4,021 9.91% Total Households 3,010 50.00% 140 2.33% 2,140 35.55% 600 9.97% 0-30% of AMI 4,980 44.19% 165 1.46% 4,225 37.49% 1,102 9.78% 0-50% of AMI 8,995 48.10% 290 1.55% 6,530 34.92% 1,897 10.14% 0-80% of AMI 224 75A-503 Table 29: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Fountain Valley Asian or Pacific Fountain Valley White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 10 14.93% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 57 85.07% Project -Based Section 8 107 20.66% 3 0.58% 37 7.14% 369 71.24% HCV Program 98 49.00% 1 0.50% 24 12.00% 92 46.00% LIHTC 10,548 56.47% 255 1.37% 2,194 11.75% 5,339 28.58% Total Households 1,044 48.45% 0 0.00% 215 9.98% 849 39.40% 0-30% of AMI 1,649 41.29% 25 0.63% 519 12.99% 1,354 33.90% 0-50% of AMI 3,388 47.27% 125 1.74% 1,059 14.77% 2,084 29.07% 0 -80% of AMI Table 30: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Fullerton Asian or Pacific Fullerton White Black His anic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 9 8.91% 0 0.00% 1 0.99% 91 90.10% Project -Based Section 8 35 76.09% 3 6.52% 6 13.04% 2 4.35% Other Multifamily 308 43.08% 88 12.31% 235 32.87% 81 11.33% HCV Program 919 35.02% 77 2.93% 1212 46.19% 197 7.51% LIHTC 20,560 46.53% 1,338 3.03% 11,365 25.72% 9,904 22.41% Total Households 2,625 35.02% 254 3.39% 2,490 33.22% 1,835 24.48% 0-30% of AMI 4,560 34.43% 364 2.75% 4,465 33.71% 2,985 22.54% 0-50% of AMI 7,445 36.45% 544 2.66% 6,935 33.95% 4,420 21.64% 0 -80% of AMI 22; 75A-504 Table 31: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Garden Grove Asian or Pacific Garden Grove White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 11 4.91% 2 0.89% 2 0.89% 209 93.30% Project -Based Section 8 140 5.14% 33 1.21% 243 8.92% 2,303 84.51% HCV Program 192 11.15% 29 1.68% 431 25.03% 552 32.06% LIHTC 14,423 31.41% 549 1.20% 13,059 28.44% 17,061 37.16% Total Households 1,685 18.36% 195 2.12% 2,744 29.89% 4,409 48.03% 0-30% of AMI 2,920 18.20% 230 1.43% 5,164 32.19% 6,964 43.41% 0-50% of AMI 5,765 22.38% 335 1.30% 8,594 33.36% 10,128 39.32% 0-80% of AMI Table 32: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Huntington Beach Asian or Pacific Huntington Beach White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 150 39.68% 4 1.06% 41 10.85% 182 48.15% Project -Based Section 8 448 43.92% 35 3.43% 163 15.98% 370 36.27% HCV Program 580 53.51% 50 4.61% 356 32.84% 45 4.15% LIHTC 54,285 73.20% 558 0.75% 10,165 13.71% 7,589 10.23% Total Households 5,115 65.03% 4 0.05% 1,565 19.90% 1,075 13.67% 0-30% of AMI 8,815 57.45% 43 0.28% 3,075 20.04% 1,725 11.24% 0-50% of AMI 17,035 61.80% 108 0.39% 5,505 19.97% 2,960 10.74% 0-80% of AMI 226 75A-505 Table 33: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Irvine Asian or Irvine White Black Hispanic Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 433 60.99% 20 2.82% 39 5.49% 217 30.56% Project -Based Section 8 12 52.17% 6 26.09% 0 0.00% 5 21.74% Other Multifamily 588 49.45% 212 17.83% 195 16.40% 191 16.06% HCV Program 1176 25.79% 175 3.84% 568 12.46% 614 13.46% LIHTC 42,999 53.05% 1,485 1.83% 6,714 8.28% 27,793 34.29% Total Households 5,079 46.30% 245 2.23% 895 8.16% 4,155 37.88% 0-30% of AMI 7,409 44.73% 465 2.81% 1,665 10.05% 5,460 32.96% 0-50% of AMI 12,664 48.96% 575 2.22% 2,524 9.76% 8,339 32.24% 0-80% of AMI Table 34: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, La Habra Asian or Pacific La Habra White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 46 31.72% 0 0.00% 51 35.17% 48 33.10% Project -Based Section 8 41 24.85% 4 2.42% 113 68.48% 7 4.24% HCV Program 7,415 39.82% 430 2.31% 8,895 47.77% 1,565 8.40% Total Households 1,015 34.00% 75 2.51% 1,590 53.27% 255 8.54% 0-30% of AMI 1,645 27.51% 160 2.68% 3,415 57.11% 410 6.86% 0-50% of AMI 3,315 33.60% 205 2.08% 5,305 53.78% 650 6.59% 0-80% of AMI 2,-, 75A-506 Table 35: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, La Palma Asian or Pacific La Palma White Black His anic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 144 15.62% 35 3.80% 156 16.92% 454 49.24% LH3TC Table 36: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Laguna Niguel Asian or Pacific Laguna Niguel White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 122 82.99% 3 2.04% 12 8.16% 10 6.80% Project -Based Section 8 81 79.41% 5 4.90% 11 10.78% 4 3.92% HCV Program 18,550 76.09% 410 1.68% 2,575 10.56% 2,085 8.55% Total Households 1,435 68.99% 55 2.64% 235 11.30% 210 10.10% 0-30% of AMI 2,150 52.83% 100 2.46% 485 11.92% 320 7.86% 0-50% of AMI 4,325 59.00% 155 2.11% 1,015 13.85% 600 8.19% 0-80% of AMI Table 37: Publicly Supported Housing Demo ra hics, Lake Forest Asian or Pacific Lake Forest White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 170 62.04% 36 13.14% 48 17.52% 20 7.30% HCV Program 38 7.45% 38 7.45% 188 36.86% 28 5.49% LH3TC 17,714 65.95% 560 2.08% 4,310 16.05% 3,539 13.18% Total Households 'As with Aliso Viejo, HUD -provided demographic data for residents of publicly supported housing was not available for La Palma. 228 75A-507 1,129 56.17% 25 1.24% 510 25.37% 319 15.87% 0-30% of AMI 1,954 44.16% 105 2.37% 1,125 25.42% 599 13.54% 0-50% of AMI 4,144 49.57% 235 2.81% 2,135 25.54% 1,134 13.56% 0-80% of AMI Table 38: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Mission Viejo Asian or Pacific Mission Viejo White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 166 73.45% 20 8.85% 28 12.39% 12 5.31% HCV Program 201 44.47% 4 0.88% 112 24.78% 47 10.40% LIHTC 25,645 77.02% 585 1.76% 3,739 11.23% 2,504 7.52% Total Households 1,935 75.73% 45 1.76% 365 14.29% 124 4.85% 0-30% of AMI 3,295 58.84% 70 1.25% 920 16.43% 314 5.61% 0-50% of AMI 6,680 64.11% 270 2.59% 1,635 15.69% 719 6.90% 0-80% of AMI Table 39: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Newport Beach Asian or Pacific Newport Beach White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 85 87.63% 0 0.00% 3 3.09% 9 9.28% Project -Based Section 8 99 70.21% 14 9.93% 15 10.64% 13 9.22% HCV Program 238 59.20% 8 1.99% 147 36.57% 12 2.99% LH3TC 32,490 84.94% 135 0.35% 2,485 6.50% 2,477 6.48% Total Households 3,130 78.54% 0 0.00% 400 10.04% 404 10.14% 0-30% of AMI 4,940 70.07% 0 0.00% 730 10.35% 653 9.26% 0-50% of AMI 8,355 74.90% 40 0.36% 1,030 9.23% 893 8.01% 0-80% of AMI 229 75A-508 Table 40: Publicly SUPPorted Housing Demo ra hics, Orange (City) Asian or Pacific Orange(City) White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 89 49.17% 2 1.10% 76 41.99% 13 7.18% Project -Based Section 8 221 35.25% 44 7.02% 218 34.77% 144 22.97% HCV Program 943 39.03% 47 1.95% 1347 55.75% 104 4.30% LIHTC 24,840 57.94% 430 1.00% 11,370 26.52% 5,535 12.91% Total Households 2,880 50.79% 50 0.88% 1,880 33.16% 740 13.05% 0-30% of AMI 4,290 41.67% 65 0.63% 3,785 36.77% 1,270 12.34% 0-50% of AMI 8,130 45.70% 200 1.12% 6,635 37.30% 1,800 10.12% 0-80% of AMI Table 41: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Rancho Santa Margarita Rancho Santa Asian or Pacific Margarita White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 90 64.29% 20 14.29% 22 15.71% 8 5.71% HCV Program 11,575 70.36% 228 1.39% 2,580 15.68% 1,800 10.94% Total Households 735 68.37% 24 2.23% 265 24.65% 30 2.79% 0-30% of AMI 1,060 48.07% 64 2.90% 570 25.85% 130 5.90% 0-50% of AMI 2,595 57.10% 114 2.51% 1,110 24.42% 290 6.38% 0-80% of AMI Table 42: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, San Clemente San Clemente White Black His anic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % 230 75A-509 56 78.87% 0 0.00% 10 14.08% 5 7.04% Project -Based Section 8 98 78.40% 4 3.20% 20 16.00% 3 2.40% HCV Program 592 59.80% 13 1.31% 432 43.64% 34 3.43% LIHTC 19,935 82.43% 130 0.54% 2,658 10.99% 880 3.64% Total Households 1,795 72.38% 35 1.41% 364 14.68% 125 5.04% 0-30% of AMI 3,080 62.41% 35 0.71% 843 17.08% 190 3.85% 0-50% of AMI 5,730 69.29% 55 0.67% 1,358 16.42% 270 3.26% 0-80% of AMI Table 43: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, San Juan Capistrano Asian or Pacific San Clemente White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % 207 81.50% 3 1.18% 30 11.81% 5 1.97% LIHTC Table 44: Publicly Supl oorted Housing Demo ra hics, Santa Ana Asian or Pacific Santa Ana White Black His anic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 45 5.70% 7 0.89% 195 24.68% 496 62.78% Project -Based Section 8 181 10.20% 49 2.76% 557 31.38% 986 55.55% HCV Program 1659 48.24% 44 1.28% 2990 86.94% 88 2.56% LIHTC 12,725 17.47% 1,299 1.78% 48,985 67.26% 9,002 12.36% Total Households 1,370 9.10% 140 0.93% 11,260 74.77% 2,155 14.31% 0-30% of AMI 2,635 8.81% 310 1.04% 22,620 75.66% 3,594 12.02% 0-50% of AMI 4 As with Aliso Viejo and La Palma, HUD -provided demographic data for residents of publicly supported housing in San Juan Capistrano was not available. 231 75A-510 5,370 1 11.10% 685 1.42% 35,940 74.29% 5,523 11.42% 0-80% of AMI Table 45: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Tustin Asian or Pacific Tustin White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 29 28.71% 0 0.00% 12 11.88% 60 59.41% Project -Based Section 8 181 34.74% 82 15.74% 194 37.24% 62 11.90% HCV Program 480 24.33% 85 4.31% 1052 53.32% 223 11.30% LIHTC 10,755 43.06% 693 2.77% 7,365 29.49% 5,633 22.55% Total Households 1,115 35.07% 104 3.27% 1,385 43.57% 494 15.54% 0-30% of AMI 2,075 31.64% 189 2.88% 2,995 45.66% 974 14.85% 0-50% of AMI 3,635 32.59% 318 2.85% 5,125 45.95% 1,684 15.10% 0 -80% of AMI Table 46: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Westminster Asian or Pacific Westminster White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % 2 2.08% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 94 97.921 Project -Based Section 8 146 6.33% 17 0.74% 93 4.03% 2,044 88.56% HCV Program 104 15.16% 18 2.62% 118 17.20% 400 58.31% LIHTC 9,604 35.42% 190 0.70% 5,115 18.86% 11,769 43.40% Total Households 1,429 23.80% 25 0.42% 1,080 17.99% 3,445 57.37% 0-30% of AMI 2,359 21.85% 35 0.32% 2,115 19.59% 5,820 53.91% 0-50% of AMI 3,859 24.49% 90 0.57% 3,460 21.96% 7,684 48.77% 0-80% of AMI 232 75A-511 In Project -Based Section 8 developments, the majority racial/ethnic group in every entitlement jurisdiction is either White or Asian American and Pacific Islander. In San Clemente, Newport Beach, Laguna Niguel, and Costa Mesa, White residents make up a supermajority, while in Irvine they make up a majority and in Orange (City) and Orange County they make up a plurality. In La Habra, Hispanics make up a plurality, but Asian American or Pacific Islanders and White residents trail them by 2 and 4 points, respectively. Asian American or Pacific Islanders make up a supermajority in Buena Park, Fountain Valley, Garden Grove, and Westminster, a majority in Anaheim, Santa Ana, and Tustin, and a plurality in Huntington Beach. In Other Multifamily Housing, White residents make up a majority in Irvine and a supermajority in Fullerton and Orange County. By far, Housing Choice Voucher households are the most evenly distributed across racial/ethnic groups. Asian American or Pacific Islanders make up a supermajority of HCV units in Westminster, Fountain Valley, and Garden Grove, and a majority in Santa Ana. They also make up a plurality in Orange County, followed closely by White residents. White residents make up a supermajority in Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, San Clemente, and Newport Beach, a majority in Lake Forest, Rancho Santa Margarita, and Costa Mesa, and a plurality in Fullerton, Huntington Beach, Irvine, and Orange (City, followed closely by Hispanics). Hispanics make up a plurality of HCV residents in Anaheim, Buena Park, and Tustin, and a majority of residents in La Habra. LIHTC developments are also quite diverse, with Hispanics predominating in Anaheim, Buena Park, Fullerton, Lake Forest, Orange (City), Santa Ana, and Tustin, and Asian American or Pacific Islanders predominating in Garden Grove, La Palma, and Westminster, and bringing up a close second in Fountain Valley; the other cities have predominantly -White LIHTC demographics. ii. Compare the racial/ethnic demographics of each program category of publicly supported housing for the jurisdiction to the demographics of the same program category in the region. In the region, there are several important differences in occupancy between various types of publicly supported housing. Firstly, there is Public Housing in the region, which is predominantly Hispanic, with Black residents making up the next highest share (at a rate that far outstrips the general population). Project -Based Section 8 Housing in the region is fairly evenly spread out across racial/ethnic group, with the largest group (Asian American or Pacific Islanders) making up only 31%. Other Multifamily units are less diverse, and split fairly evenly between White (33%) and Asian American or Pacific Islander (36%) residents, with Hispanic (21%) and Black (9%) residents trailing farther behind. Housing Choice Voucher and LIHTC data are not available at the regional level. iii. Compare the demographics, in terms of protected class, of residents of each program category ofpublicly supported housing (public housing project -based Section 8, Other Multifamily Assisted developments, and HCI) to the population in general, and persons who meet the income eligibility requirements for the relevant program category of publicly supported housing in the jurisdiction and region. Include in the comparison, a description of whether there is a higher or lower proportion of groups based on protected class. In comparison to the demographics of the Urban County and each of the entitlement cities, White residents tend to be either proportionally represented in Project -Based Section 8 and Other 213 75A-512 Multifamily housing and to be either proportionally represented or underrepresented among Housing Choice Voucher holders, including when controlling for household income. Data for LIHTC does not offer an apples -to -apples comparison because the state does not disaggregate White, Hispanic residents from White, Non -Hispanic residents. Meanwhile, Hispanics tend to be underrepresented in Project -Based Section 8 developments and among Housing Choice Voucher holders and to be participate in the LIHTC program proportion to their share of the income -eligible population. This may result from eligibility rules for Project -Based Section 8 and the Housing Choice Voucher program that exclude undocumented immigrants. By contrast, the LIHTC program does not bar undocumented immigrants. Asian American or Pacific Islanders tend to be either proportionally represented or overrepresented across types of publicly supported housing, with the greatest overrepresentation in Project -Based Section 8 developments. Black residents make up a disproportionate share of Housing Choice Voucher holders but participate in other programs in proportion to their share of the income -eligible population. There are a few cities with somewhat more stark contrasts between the income -eligible population and the occupancy of particular types of publicly supported housing. In Anaheim, Black residents make up a disproportionate share of occupants of all types of publicly supported housing, not just of Housing Choice Voucher holders. In Buena Park, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, and Westminster, the proportion of Project -Based Section 8 residents that is Asian or Pacific Islander is particularly extreme. In Costa Mesa, White residents are highly overrepresented in Project -Based Section 8 housing. In Fullerton, White residents are highly overrepresented in Other Multifamily housing. In La Habra, Hispanic residents are slightly overrepresented among Housing Choice Voucher holders despite being underrepresented in most places. In Laguna Niguel, White residents are strongly overrepresented in both types of publicly supported housing that are present. In the city of Orange, unlike in most cities, Asian or Pacific Islander residents are underrepresented among residents of Project -Based Section 8 housing. b. Publicly Supported Housing Location and Occupancy i. Describe patterns in the geographic location ofpublicly supported housing by program category (public housing project -based Section 8, Other Multifamily Assisted developments, HCV, and LIHTQ in relation to previously discussed segregated areas and R/ECAPs in the jurisdiction and region. Map 1: Publicly Supported Housing and Race/Ethnicity There are four R/ECAPs in Orange County, and only one LIHTC development located within one of them. Overall, publicly supported housing in the County is far more likely to be concentrated in the northernmost part, nearer to Los Angeles, than in the southern part. Developments are concentrated along the main thoroughfare of Highway 5, and are particularly prevalent in Anaheim, Santa Ana, and Irvine. It should be noted that there is a particularly high concentration of Housing Choice Voucher use in the Garden Grove -Westminster area, which does not seem to have a particularly high concentration of hard units of publicly supported housing. These areas correspond with areas of high Hispanic and Asian American or Pacific Islander segregation and concentration. In the broader region, Public Housing is concentrated in the cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles and particularly in South LA and East LA. There is also some public housing in West Hollywood 2,4 75A-513 as well as in the eastern Los Angeles County cities of Baldwin Park and La Puente. With the exception of West Hollywood, these tend to be areas of concentrated Black and/or Hispanic population. In South LA, East LA, and Long Beach, there is a significant overlap between the location of Public Housing developments and R/ECAPs. Other Multifamily developments are proportionally concentrated in Los Angeles County as opposed to Orange County but are well integrated throughout Los Angeles County. There is a significant number of Other Multifamily developments in communities with West LA and the San Fernando Valley that tend to have relatively little publicly supported housing overall. The part of the region (outside of Orange County) with the least Other Multifamily housing is actually the predominantly Hispanic far eastern portion of Los Angeles County. Project -Based Section 8 developments are also relatively integrated throughout the region, albeit with a slightly higher concentration in Los Angeles County than in Orange County. LIHTC developments are relatively integrated throughout the region but with some concentration near Downtown LA. Downtown LA is fairly segregated and has a concentration of R/ECAPs but is also subject to the most intense gentrification pressures in the region. Housing Choice Voucher utilization is concentrated in South LA and adjacent communities like Westmont, in Norwalk in southeastern Los Angeles County, in Lancaster and Palmdale in northeastern Los Angeles County, and in Anaheim and Westminster within Orange County. There is some overlap with the location of R/ECAPs although the pattern is not as pronounced as for Public Housing. Areas with concentrations of voucher holders in Los Angeles County are especially likely to be areas of Black population concentration. i. Describe patterns in the geographic location for publicly supported housing that primarily serves families with children, elderly persons, or persons with disabilities in relation to previously discussed segregated areas or R/ECAPs in the jurisdiction and region. Families with children Non -Targeted and Large Family developments are the most plentiful in the County, and are most often concentrated in diverse, metropolitan pockets of the County. However, families with children are more likely to occupy LIHTC units or use a Housing Choice Voucher than to reside in Other Multifamily or Project -Based Section 8 units. In the broader region, publicly supported housing for families with children across categories is comparatively likely to be located in RECAP areas than in more integrated areas or predominantly White areas. Elderly In terms of elderly populations, a significant proportion of Project -Based Section 8 units house elderly residents. Additionally, in Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, and San Juan Capistrano, all publicly supported housing is either specifically reserved for seniors or records 90-100% elderly residents in their statistics. Each of these communities are near the coast, driving up the cost of real estate. San Juan Capistrano and Costa Mesa are more heavily White and Hispanic, while Fountain Valley is more diverse and have a more significant Asian American or Pacific Islander population. In the broader region, publicly supported housing for elderly residents across categories is comparatively likely to be located in non -RECAP areas. Persons with disabilities In terms of residents with disabilities, there are LH3TC developments specifically reserved for people with special needs in the Urban County (Jackson Aisle Apartments), Anaheim (Avenida 215 75A-514 Villas, Casa Alegre, Diamond Aisle Apartments), Fullerton (Fullerton Heights), Huntington Beach (Pacific Sun Apartments), and Santa Ana (Guest House, Vista Del Rio). Additionally, the percentage of people with disabilities occupying Other Multifamily units in the Urban County, Fullerton, and Irvine is very high compared to the rest of the County. In the broader region, publicly supported housing for persons with disabilities across categories is comparatively likely to be located in non -RECAP areas. ii. How does the demographic composition of occupants ofpublicly supported housing in RECAPS compare to the demographic composition of occupants ofpublicly supported housing outside ofRIECAPs in the jurisdiction and region? Only jurisdictions which contain R/ECAPs have been pasted below. Rows with only 0 and/or N/A values have been deleted for space Table 48: Irvine %Asian % Total # or Families units % % % Pacific with % %with a Irvine (occupied) White Black Hispanic Islander children Elderly disability Project -based Section 8 98 60.00% 2.00% 9.00% 29.00% 16.83% 68.32% 6.93% RECAP tracts Non RECAP 619 61.15% 2.95% 4.92% 30.82% 14.04% 60.45% 14.04% tracts Other Multifamily N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a RECAP tracts Non R/ECAP 22 52.17% 26.09% 0.00% 21.74% 0.00% 50.00% 70.83% tracts HCV Program 18 85.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 0.00% 56.52% 43.48% RECAP tracts Non R/ECAP 955 48.79% 18.08% 16.65% 16.20% 34.88% 36.00% 22.48% tracts There are only four R/ECAPs in Orange County, and they are all located in Irvine or Santa Ana. However, there is only one publicly supported housing development located within one of those R/ECAPs - Wakeham Grant Apartments (LIHTC), in Santa Ana. The data presented by HUD is outdated, as it does not identify the same exact R/ECAPs as this analysis, but it is nevertheless presented as it may give insight into former R/ECAPs which exhibit similar characteristics. Using the former Irvine R/ECAPs, the occupancy of Project -Based Section 8 units was remarkably similar both within and outside those tracts, with the exception of residents with a disability, who were more plentiful outside of R/ECAPs. With regard to the Housing Choice Voucher Program, the results were markedly different. Surprisingly, the proportion of all voucher holders that were White within RECAPS was nearly double that outside of R/ECAPs. This is likely an aberration 216 75A-515 resulting from the extremely small number of voucher holders in R/ECAPs in Irvine. The percentages of elderly and disabled residents, which often coincide, were similarly high. Table 49: Santa Ana Total # %Asian Families units % % % or Pacific with % %with a Santa Ana (occupied) White Black Hispanic Islander children Elderly disability Project -based Section 8 N/a N/a 0.00% N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a RECAP tracts Non R/ECAP 790 5.70% 0.89% 24.68% 62.78% 3.60% 92.31% 14.64% tracts HCV Program 130 6.02% 3.61% 26.51% 63.86% 22.35% 47.06% 25.889/o RECAP tracts Non R/ECAP 2,512 10.40% 2.72% 31.62% 55.14% 25.97% 50.88% 21.17% tracts LUITC 126 8.83% 1.42% 84.33% 5.98% N/A N/A N/A RECAP tracts Non R/ECAP 966 52.72% 1.26% 87.24% 2.17% N/A N/A N/A tracts Like the analysis of Irvine above, the HUD tables provided here are outdated and utilize old R/ECAPs, but they are nevertheless useful in comparing tracts with similar characteristics. The LIHTC data is accurate, however, and reflects the only publicly supported housing development within a RECAP — Wakeham Grant Apartments. The outdated data on Housing Choice Vouchers shows a general tendency for the demographic composition of voucher holders to be quite similar inside and outside R/ECAPs, with a slight tendency toward higher Asian American or Pacific Islander representation in R/ECAPs. The LIHTC demographics tell a similar story. It should be noted that LIHTC demographic information has been self -reported to the California state treasurer, and does not always match the way HUD reports demographics, especially when it comes to race versus ethnicity. This might account for the extremely high co -incidence of White and Hispanic residents. Overall, it seems there is not much difference within and outside R/ECAPs for LIHTC units in Santa Ana. Do any developments of public housing, properties converted under the RAD, and LIHTC developments have a significantly different demographic composition, in terms ofprotected class, than other developments of the same category for the jurisdiction? Describe how these developments differ. See Tables in Appendix 237 75A-516 In Westminster, the Royale Apartments stand out for having a plurality -Hispanic population, while every other LIHTC development has a strong majority of Asian American or Pacific Islander residents. In Orange (City), Casa Ramon stands out as the only Project -Based Section 8 development with a supermajority-Hispanic population, while the others are majority -White. In Newport Beach, Lange Drive Family and Newport Veterans Housing stand out for their majority - Hispanic and large Black populations, respectively, compared to the other far larger developments in the city which are supermajority-White. In Irvine, The Parklands stands out among Project - Based Section 8 developments for its large Asian American or Pacific Islander population, compared to all the other developments which are predominantly White. Similarly, four LIHTC developments have large Asian populations (The Arbor at Woodbury, Montecito Vista Apartment Homes, Doria Apartment Homes Phase I, Anesi Apartments) compared to the other predominantly -White developments. In Huntington Beach, the two Project -Based Section 8 developments are polar opposites, with one 60% White while the other is 63% Asian. Meanwhile, most of the LIHTC developments in Huntington Beach are predominantly White, while Hermosa Vista Apartments is predominantly Hispanic. hi Garden Grove, Briar Crest+Rosecrest Apartments and Malabar Apartments stand out at LIHTC developments with large Hispanic populations, while the other developments are predominantly Asian American or Pacific Islander. In Fullerton, Ventana Senior Apartments stands out for its large Asian American or Pacific Islander population, while every other LIHTC development is predominantly White or Hispanic. hi Buena Park, Park Landing Apartments and Emerald Gardens Apartments stand out for their large White and Hispanic populations, respectively, compared to the other LIHTC developments which are predominantly Asian American or Pacific Islander. The Project -Based Section 8 developments are markedly different as well, with 73% White residents at Newport House and 9 1 % Asian American or Pacific Islander residents at Casa Santa Maria. hi Orange County, Continental Gardens Apartments and Tara Village Apartments stand out for their large Asian American or Pacific Islander populations, while the rest of the LIHTC developments are predominantly White or Hispanic. Provide additional relevant information, if any, about occupancy, by protected class, in other types of publicly supported housing for the jurisdiction and region. Effective January 2020, the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, a statewide rent gouging law, restricts rent increases to 5% plus the local rate of inflation per year. As of January 2020, the rate of inflation in the region was 3.1%. Additionally, San Juan Capistrano has a Mobile Home Rent Control Ordinance, working to preserve access to one of the more robust sources of unsubsidized affordable housing. However, cutting in the opposite direction, Ellis Act evictions of rent - controlled units have the potential to undermine any positive influence that rent control laws may have on the affordable housing landscape. Data about Ellis Act evictions in the area is not widely available, so it is difficult to estimate the effect they may have. In October 2019, Governor Newsom signed into law SB 329, prohibiting discrimination in housing based on source of income statewide. San Clemente, Irvine, Huntington Beach, and Newport Beach all have inclusionary zoning programs. The Anaheim Housing Authority implements the Affordable Housing Program, which 238 75A-517 consists of multifamily apartment complexes that include affordable units.5 These units maintain rents at levels below regular market rent rates through agreements with the City, but is not a mandatory program. People on the Interest List are notified as affordable units become available. The Orange County Housing Authority maintains a similar list of deed -restricted units.6 In addition to these housing authorities, several cities maintain similar lists of deed -restricted units. i. Compare the demographics of occupants of developments in the jurisdiction, for each category ofpublicly supported housing (public housing project -based Section 8, Other Multifamily Assisted developments, properties converted under RAD, and LIHTQ to the demographic composition of the areas in which they are located For the jurisdiction, describe whether developments that are primarily occupied by one race%thnicity are located in areas occupied largely by the same race%thnicity. Describe any differences for housing that primarily serves families with children, elderly persons, or persons with disabilities. See table in appendix There is quite a bit of inconsistency when comparing the individual demographics of publicly supported housing developments to the census tracts where they are located. In the Urban County, for example, the tracts tend to be predominantly White, but the developments themselves are far more likely to be majority -Hispanic or majority -Asian American or Pacific Islander. In Anaheim, the developments are consistently located in majority -Hispanic tracts, but the developments themselves do not always mirror those demographics. In Buena Park, on the other hand, the developments tend to be mostly Asian American or Pacific Islander, while located in mostly Hispanic tracts. Similarly, Costa Mesa's developments are located in Hispanic tracts, but the developments are predominantly Asian American or Pacific Islander. Fountain Valley and Fullerton both stand out, with their singular Project -Based Section 8 developments being supermajority Asian American or Pacific Islander, but located in majority -White tracts. In Garden Grove, nearly every LH3TC has an inverse relationship between its tract and development population, with majority -Hispanic developments located in Asian American or Pacific Islander tracts, and vice versa. Huntington Beach has two specific standouts in Huntington Villa Yorba, which is majority -Asian American or Pacific Islander in a White tract, and Hermosa Vista Apartments, majority -Hispanic in a White tract. In Irvine, several Project -Based Section 8 developments are predominantly White while located in Asian American or Pacific Islander tracts; for LIHTC developments this trend holds. In La Habra, Casa El Centro Apartments is predominantly Asian American or Pacific Islander, while located in a Hispanic tract. Newport Beach is home to Newport Veterans Housing, which is 15% Black (far greater than the general Black population) in a White tract. In Orange (City), the Project -Based Section 8 development Casa Ramon is predominantly Hispanic, while located in a White tract. Meanwhile, Casa Del Rio is predominantly -White but located in a Hispanic tract. Nearly every tract containing a LIHTC development is predominantly- 5 https://www.anaheim.net/770/Affordable-Housing 6 http://Www.ochousing.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=39906 219 75A-518 Hispanic, while several of the developments' populations are mostly White. In San Clemente, there are three LIHTC developments that are predominantly -Hispanic but are located in White tracts. In San Juan Capistrano, all three LIHTC developments (each restricted to seniors), have predominantly -White populations in Hispanic tracts. In Santa Ana, every development is located in a Hispanic tract, but there are four predominantly -Asian American or Pacific Islander developments and one predominantly -White development. In Tustin, the only Project -Based Section 8 development is predominantly -Asian American or Pacific Islander in a White tract, and every LIHTC development is predominantly -Asian American or Pacific Islander, but located in a White or Hispanic tract. In Westminster, every tract is predominantly -Asian American or Pacific Islander, but the Royales Apartments are predominantly Hispanic. C. Disparities in Access to Opportunity Describe any disparities in access to opportunity for residents of publicly supported housing in the jurisdiction and region, including within different program categories (public housing, project -based Section 8, Other Multifamily Assisted Developments, HCV, and LIHTC) and between types (housing primarily serving families with children, elderly persons, and persons with disabilities) ofpublicly supported housing. Disparities in access to opportunity, when compared to publicly supported housing, cut in conflicting directions. School proficiency, for instance, is very good in the Urban County, along the coast, in the southern part of the County, and on the northeast edge; this cuts out most of the more urban areas, where publicly supported housing is concentrated. Job proximity is far more variable, although with a general tendency to be located along the main thoroughfares — the same as publicly supported housing. The entire County has good low transportation cost index scores, with slightly better scores in the northern part of the County where most of the publicly supported housing is clustered. Environmental health is very poor overall, but better to the south, where there is far less publicly supported housing. Contributing Factors of Publicly Supported Housing Location and Occupancy Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of fair housing issues related to publicly supported housing, including Segregation, RIECAPs, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs. For each contributing factor that is significant, note which fair housing issue(s) the selected contributing factor relates to. Please see the Appendix for the following Contributing Factors to Publicly Supported Housing Location and Occupancy: • Admissions and occupancy policies and procedures, including preferences in publicly supported housing • Community opposition • Displacement of residents due to economic pressures 240 75A-519 • Displacement of and/or lack of housing support for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking • Impediments to mobility • Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing costs • Lack of meaningful language access for individuals with limited English proficiency • Lack of local or regional cooperation • Lack of private investment in specific neighborhoods • Lack of public investment in specific neighborhoods, including services and amenities • Land use and zoning laws • Loss of affordable housing • Occupancy codes and restrictions • Quality of affordable housing information programs • Siting selection policies, practices, and decisions for publicly supported housing, including discretionary aspects of Qualified Allocation Plans and other programs • Source of income discrimination 241 75A-520 D. Disability and Access Population Profile Map 1: Disability by Type, North Orange County e. P •• s. V •y naeip SUeu y a, •j •' ' . � 4.0 t 242 75A-521 Map 1: Disability by Type, Central Orange County u • =e c •p ,b sIR.•4 I ••�•. R �K uaaw�q swvus o, oo�=zs 24, 75A-522 Map 1: Disability by Type, South Orange County e co 's "aAiAy 54Yv O 1 QUt= I5 • 244 75A-523 Table 4: Disability by Type, Orange County, Region Orange County Region Disability Type # % # % Hearing Difficulty 81,297 2.59% 333,537 2.53% Vision Difficulty 51,196 1.63% 247,670 1.88% Cognitive Difficulty 99,317 3.16% 480,601 3.65% Ambulatory Difficulty 133,232 4.240%/ 677,592 5.14% Self -Care Difficulty 61,615 1.96% 327,895 2.49% Independent Living Difficulty 104,705 3.34% 526,534 4.00% Table 5: Aliso Viejo Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 914 1.80% Vision Difficulty 503 0.99% Cognitive Difficulty 1,140 2.25% Ambulatory Difficulty 1,148 2.27% Self -Care Difficulty 669 1.32% Independent Living Difficulty 913 1.80% Table 6: Anaheim Disability Type # % HearingDifficulty 7,308 2.11% Vision Difficulty 4,967 1.43% Cognitive Difficulty 11,360 3.27% Ambulatory Difficulty 15,684 4.52% Self -Care Difficulty 7,324 2.11% Independent Living Difficulty 12,332 Table 7: Buena Park Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 2,403 2.90% Vision Difficulty 1,387 1.68% Cognitive Difficulty 2,290 2.77% Ambulatory Difficulty 4,242 5.13% Self -Care Difficulty 1,843 2.23% Independent Living Difficulty 2,793 3.38% Table 8: Costa Mesa Disability Type # I %. Hearing Difficulty 2,462 2.19% Vision Difficulty 1,967 1.75% 245 75A-524 Cognitive Difficulty 3,899 3.47% Ambulatory Difficulty 4,401 3.91% Self -Care Difficulty 1,737 1.54% Independent Living Difficulty 3,278 2.91% Table 9: Fountain Valley Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 1,842 3.26% Vision Difficulty 685 1.21% Cognitive Difficulty 2,394 4.24% Ambulatory Difficulty 3,093 5.48% Self -Care Difficulty 1,266 2.24% Independent Living Difficulty 2,261 Table 10: Fullerton Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 3,344 2.40% Vision Difficulty 2,406 1.73% Cognitive Difficulty 4,478 3.22% Ambulatory Difficulty 6,425 4.62% Self -Care Difficulty 2,683 1.93% Independent Living Difficulty 4,992 3.59% Table 11: Garden Grove Disability Type # % HearingDifficulty 5,132 2.95% Vision Difficulty 3,044 1.75% Cognitive Difficulty 6,805 3.91% Ambulatory Difficulty 8,226 4.73% Self -Care Difficulty 3,996 2.30% Independent Living Difficulty 7,328 4.21% Table 12: Huntington Beach Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 5,818 2.91% Vision Difficulty 3,392 1.70% Cognitive Difficulty 7,239 3.62% Ambulatory Difficulty 9,226 4.61% Self -Care Difficulty 3,952 1.98% Independent Living Difficulty 6,816 3.41% 246 75A-525 Table 13: Irvine Disability Type # % HearingDifficulty 4,154 1.62% Vision Difficulty 2,032 0.79% Cognitive Difficulty 5,481 2.14% Ambulatory Difficulty 6,719 2.62% Self -Care Difficulty 3,527 1.37% Independent Living Difficulty 5,713 Table 14: La Habra Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 1,803 2.92% Vision Difficulty 1,044 1.69% Cognitive Difficulty 2,272 3.68% Ambulatory Difficulty 3,659 5.93% Self -Care Difficulty 1,530 2.48% Independent Living Difficulty 2,354 3.81% Table 15: La Palma Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 421 2.66% Vision Difficulty 262 1.66% Cognitive Difficulty 476 3.01% Ambulatory Difficulty 825 5.22% Self -Care Difficulty 496 3.14% Independent Living Difficulty 547 Table 16: Laguna Ni gel Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 1,815 2.78% Vision Difficulty 807 1.23% Cognitive Difficulty 1,965 3.00% Ambulatory Difficulty 1,943 2.97% Self -Care Difficulty 938 1.43% Independent Living Difficulty 1,910 2.92% Table 17: Lake Forest Disability Type # % Rearing Difficulty 2,141 2.62% Vision Difficulty 715 0.88% Cognitive Difficulty 2,001 2.45% Ambulatory Difficulty 2,705 3.31% 247 75A-526 Self -Care Difficulty 1 1,371 1.68% Independent Living Difficulty 1 2,451 3.00% Table 18: Mission Viejo Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 3,325 3.46% Vision Difficulty 1,719 1.79% Cognitive Difficulty 3,474 3.61% Ambulatory Difficulty 5,015 5.22% Self -Care Difficulty 2,574 2.68% Independent Living Difficulty 3,937 4.10% Table 19: Newport Beach Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 2,487 2 87% Vision Difficulty 1,341 1.55% Cognitive Difficulty 2,265 2.62% Ambulatory Difficulty 3,243 3.75% Self -Care Difficulty 1,330 1.54% Independent Living Difficulty 2,619 3.03% Table 20: Orange (City) Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 2,921 2.14% Vision Difficulty 1,841 1.35% Cognitive Difficulty 4,106 3.01% Ambulatory Difficulty 5,357 3.93% Self -Care Difficulty 2,762 2.02% Independent Living Difficulty 4,334 3.18% Table 21: Rancho Santa Margarita Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 677 1.38% Vision Difficulty 442 0.90% Cognitive Difficulty 838 1.71% Ambulatory Difficulty 1,108 2.26% Self -Care Difficulty 477 0.97% Independent Living Difficulty 715 Table 22: San Clemente Disability Type # Hearing Difficulty 1,950 3.01% 248 75A-527 Vision Difficulty 783 1.21% Cognitive Difficulty 1,581 2.44% Ambulatory Difficulty 2,060 3.18% Self -Care Difficulty 929 1.43% Independent Living Difficulty 1,675 2.59% Table 23: San Juan Capistrano Disability Type # % HearingDiffrculty 1,181 3.29% Vision Difficulty 744 2.07% Cognitive Difficulty 1,134 3.16% Ambulatory Difficulty 2,144 5.97% Self -Care Difficulty 1,251 3.48% Independent Living Difficulty 1,653 Table 24: Santa Ana Disability Type # % Hearing Difficulty 6,745 2.04% Vision Difficulty 9,075 2.74% Cognitive Difficulty 9,177 2.77% Ambulatory Difficulty 11,321 3.42% Self -Care Difficulty 5,603 1.69% Independent Living Difficulty 9,146 2.76% Table 25: Tustin Disability Type # Hearing Difficulty 1,749 2.19% Vision Difficulty 1,216 1.52% Cognitive Difficulty 2,308 2.89% Ambulatory Difficulty 2,894 3.63% Self -Care Difficulty 1,162 1.46% Independent Living Difficulty 2,353 Table 26: Westminster Disability Type # % HearingDifficulty 3,399 3.71% Vision Difficulty 1,959 2.14% Cognitive Difficulty 5,517 6.02% Ambulatory Difficulty 6,308 6.89% Self -Care Difficulty 2,964 3.24% Independent Living Difficulty 5,665 6.19% 249 75A-528 How are people with disabilities geographically dispersed or concentrated in the jurisdiction and region, including RIECAPs and other segregated areas identified in previous sections? ACS Disability Information According to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, 81,297 residents of Orange County have hearing disabilities, which represents 2.59% of the county's population; 51,196 residents (1.63%) have vision disabilities; 99,317 residents (3.16%) have cognitive disabilities; 133,232 residents (4.24%) have ambulatory disabilities; 61,615 residents (1.96%) have self -care disabilities; and 104,705 residents (3.34) have independent living disabilities. Across the cities collaborating on this Analysis, concentrations of persons with particular types of disabilities vary widely. In Aliso Viejo, Irvine, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, Rancho Santa Margarita, San Clemente, Santa Ana, and Tustin, concentrations of persons with various types of disabilities are generally lower than they are countywide. In Anaheim, Buena Park, Fountain Valley, Garden Grove, La Habra, Mission Viejo, San Juan Capistrano, and Westminster, concentrations of persons with various types of disabilities are generally higher than they are countywide. In Costa Mesa, Fullerton, Huntington Beach, La Palma, Newport Beach, and Orange, concentrations of persons with various types of disabilities are generally similar to countywide levels. There are partial exceptions to these overall trends. For example, in Santa Ana, a higher proportion of residents have vision disabilities than is the case countywide despite concentrations of persons with other types of disabilities being lower. Additionally, although some cities have much lower or much higher concentrations of residents with particular types of disabilities, differences in others are more modest. For example, concentrations of persons with various types of disabilities in Westminster are much higher than in Mission Viejo, another city that has higher concentrations of persons with various types of disabilities than Orange County as a whole. Communities with higher concentrations of persons with disabilities are somewhat more likely to be located in the more racially and ethnically diverse northern portion of the county than they are in the southern portion of the county. Six out of the eight cities that have higher concentrations of persons with disabilities across most types of disabilities are located in the northern part of the county. At the same time, the two exceptions to this trend —Mission Viejo and San Juan Capistrano — are notable in that they are both majority -White cities. Additionally, diverse cities in northern Orange County, like Santa Ana and Tustin, have relatively low concentrations of persons with disabilities. This may stem in part from the fact that these communities have relatively youthful populations and disability status is highly correlated with age. There is no overlap between areas of concentration of persons with disabilities and R/ECAPs. 17.1% of people with disabilities have incomes below the poverty line, as opposed to 11.7% of individuals without disabilities. Although a breakdown of poverty status by type of disability is not available through the American Community Survey (ACS), it is clear that the need for affordable housing is greater among people with disabilities than it is among people without disabilities. Another indicator of disability and limited income are the number of people receiving Supplemental Social Security (SSI) which is limited to people with disabilities. According to the 2013-2017 ACS, 44,540 of households receive SSI (4.3% of total households), which is such a 250 75A-529 small subsidy that all of the recipients are extremely low-income. Not all SSI recipients have the types of disabilities that necessitate accessible units. The broader region, which includes Los Angeles County in addition to Orange County, has higher concentrations of persons with all types of disabilities than Orange County with one exception. The percentage of persons with hearing disabilities is marginally higher in Orange County than in the broader region. Within Los Angeles County, persons with disabilities are relatively concentrated in downtown Los Angeles, in the western portions of South Los Angeles, and in the eastern portion of the San Fernando Valley. These areas generally have low concentrations of White residents. The western portion of South Los Angeles is the most heavily Black part of the region. By contrast, West Los Angeles and Southeast Los Angeles and the adjoining Gateway Cities have relatively low concentrations of persons with disabilities. The former area is disproportionately White while the latter area is heavily Hispanic and also has a very young population. Describe whether these geographic patterns vary for people with each type of disability or for people with disabilities in different age ranges for the jurisdiction and region. In addition to the broader patterns described above, there are some other patterns of concentration based on both type of disability and disability status by age. Garden Grove has higher concentrations of persons with self -care and independent living disabilities, as well as higher concentrations of elderly persons with disabilities. La Habra has elevated concentrations of persons with ambulatory disabilities while Laguna Niguel has lower concentrations of persons with ambulatory disabilities. All categories of disabilities become more prevalent as individuals age, with the number of people in Orange County 65 and over (131,765) with a disability nearly matches the amount of people under 65 (139,497) with a disability. Housing Accessibility Describe whether the jurisdiction and region have sufficient affordable, accessible housing in a range of unit sizes. Accessibility Requirement for Federally -Funded Housing HUD's implementation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (24 CFR Part 8) requires that federally financed housing developments have five percent (5%) of total units be accessible to individuals with mobility disabilities and an additional two percent (2%) of total units be accessible to individuals with sensory disabilities. It requires that each property, including site and common areas, meet the Federal Uniform Accessibility Standards (UFAS) or HUD's Alternative Accessibility Standard. In Orange County, there are 104 Other Multifamily Housing and 4,090 Project -Based Section 8 units that are subject to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 81 people with disabilities reside in Multifamily Housing, and 549 reside in Project -Based Section 8 units. At this time, we do not know how many accessible units are in public housing or among Project Based Section 8 units. The HOME Partnership Program is a grant of federal funds for housing, therefore, these units are 251 75A-530 subject to Section 504. HUD regularly publishes Performance Snapshots of HOME program participants' activities overtime. Of HOME program participants in Orange County, Anaheim has produced 16 Section 504 compliant units, Costa Mesa has produced four Section 504 compliant units, Fullerton has produced three Section 504 compliant units, Garden Grove has not produced any Section 504 compliant units, Huntington Beach has produced seven Section 504 compliant units, Irvine has produced 123 Section 504 compliant units, Orange County has produced 27 Section 504 compliant units, Orange has produced three Section 504 compliant units, Santa Ana has produced 16 Section 504 compliant units, and Westminster has produced one Section 504 compliant unit. This data suggests that the City of Irvine's success in creating affordable, accessible housing might provide valuable lessons for other jurisdictions in Orange County. Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Units According to the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAC)'s LIHTC database, there are 158 LIHTC developments currently in service. In these 158 developments, there are 16,201 affordable units. All of these developments were put into service after 1991, meaning that they have all been built according to 1991 Fair Housing Act accessibility requirements. LIHTC developments are categorized as non -targeted, large family, senior, SRO, special needs, and at risk. Non -targeted: 32; Large family: 70; Senior: 44; SRO: 4; special needs: 6; at risk: 2; 158 total. Within Orange County, LIHTC developments are not evenly distributed as there are far fewer in the southern portion of Orange County with entire cities such as Rancho Santa Margarita, Mission Viejo, and Lake Forest not having any LIHTC developments. Communities in central and northern Orange County have higher concentrations of LIHTC developments, including in Anaheim, Irvine, and Santa Ana. In 2015, CTCAC has issued guidance stating that the accessibility requirements of the California Building Code (CBC) for public housing (Chapter 1113) apply to LIHTC developments. Chapter 11B is the California equivalent of the 2010 ADA Standards. Section 1.9.1.2.1. of the CBC states that the accessibility requirements apply to "any building, structure, facility, complex ...used by the general public." Facilities made available to the public, included privately owned buildings. CTAC has expanded the requirement so that 10% of total units in a LIHTC development must be accessible to people with mobility disabilities and that 4% be accessible to people with sensory (hearing/vison) disabilities. Also, effective 2015, CTCAC required that 50% of total units in a new construction project and 25% of all units in a rehabilitation project located on an accessible path will be mobility accessible units in accordance with CBC Chapter 1113. CTAC also provides incentives for developers to include additional accessible units through its Qualified Allocation Plan. LIHTC units comprise an important segment of the supply of affordable, accessible units in Orange County. Housing Choice Vouchers 5,045 people with disabilities reside in units assisted with Housing Choice Vouchers in Orange County, but this does not represent a proxy for actual affordable, accessible units. Rather, Housing Choice Vouchers are a mechanism for bringing otherwise unaffordable housing, which may or may not be accessible, within reach of low-income people with disabilities. Unless another source 252 75A-531 of federal financial assistance is present, units assisted with Housing Choice Vouchers are not subject to Section 504 although participating landlords remain subject to the Fair Housing Act's duty to provide reasonable accommodations and to allow tenants to make reasonable modifications at their own expense. Fair Housing Amendments Act Units The Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (FHAA) covers all multifamily buildings of four or more units that were first occupied on or after March 13, 1991 — not just affordable housing developments. The FHAA added protections for people with disabilities and prescribed certain basic accessibility standards, such as one building entrance must be accessible; there must be an accessible route throughout the development, and public rooms and common rooms must be accessible to people with disabilities. Although these accessibility requirements are not as intensive as those of Section 504, they were a first step in opening many apartment developments to people with disabilities regardless of income level. The FHAA was also very helpful for middle - income and upper -income people with disabilities also need accessible housing. It is important to note that FHAA units are not the same as accessible units under Section 504 or ADA Title II. Therefore, utilizing FHAA units as a proxy for the number of accessible housing units available or required under Section 504 or ADA Title H does not produce an accurate count. Although they are not fully accessible, these units are an important source of housing for people with disabilities who do not need a mobility or hearing/vision unit. In Orange County, 39,047 units in structures with 5 or more units have been built from 2000 to the present. Additionally, 81,362 units in structures with 5 or more units were built from 1980 through 1999. If it is assumed that 45% of such units were constructed from 1991 through 1999, then there would be an additional 36,613 units in multifamily housing that was subject to the design and construction requirements of the Fair Housing Act at the time of its construction. Combined with the total built from 2000 to the present, that totals a potential 75,660 units in structures covered by the Fair Housing Act's design and construction standards. Affordable, Accessible Units in a Range of Sizes Data breaking down affordable, accessible units by number of bedrooms is not available for private housing. For Publicly Supported Housing, a supermajority (74.67%) of Project -Based Section 8 units are 0-1 bedroom units, as are Other Multifamily units (84.54%, the other 15% having 2 bedrooms). A plurality of Housing Choice Vouchers are also limited to 0-1 bedroom units (43.97%). 5,561 households or 26.20% of Housing Choice Voucher occupants are also households with children, the highest of any category of publicly supported housing (followed by Project - Based Section 8, with 9.62%). It appears that affordable, accessible units that can accommodate families with children or individuals with live-in aides are extremely limited in Orange County. Although data reflecting the percentage of families with children that include children with disabilities is not available, about 2.9% of all children in the County have a disability. If children with disabilities are evenly distributed across families with children, about 9,500 families in the County include a child with a disability. 2 75A-532 Summary The supply of affordable, accessible units in Orange County is insufficient to meet the need. In the County, some 81,297 residents have hearing difficulty, 51,196 residents have vision difficulty, and 133,232 residents have ambulatory difficulty, potentially requiring the use of accessible units. Meanwhile, by the most generous, over -inclusive measures, there may be roughly 75,660 units that have been produced subject to the Fair Housing Act's design and construction standards and approximately 4,000 units within developments that must include accessible units subject to Section 504. There is, without question, some overlap between these two categories, some of these units are likely non -compliant, and some accessible units are occupied by individuals who do not have disabilities. Describe the areas where affordable, accessible housing units are located in the jurisdiction and region. Do they align with R/ECAPs or other areas that are segregated? Relying on the discussion of Publicly Supported Housing to guide the assessment of which types of housing are most likely to be affordable and accessible, such housing is highly concentrated in the central and northern portions of the county. In particular, units are concentrated in Anaheim, Garden Grove, Irvine, and Santa Ana. Additionally, accessible housing is most likely to be located in places with newer construction and many units, thus conforming to the Fair Housing Act's accessibility standards. Areas with newer construction include the central and southern portions of the county. This market activity suggests the potential of inclusionary housing to increase the supply of affordable, accessible housing for persons with disabilities in areas where there relatively little such housing currently exists. 2;4 75A-533 Map 4: Median Year Structure Built by Census Tract, Orange County Beach n Le4ead Riverside Vears W 1,946-1,962 1,963-1,970 d1971-19 O1,9w - 1,991 1,992-2,010 Boundams No legend M urrieta To what extent are people with different disabilities able to access and live in the different categories ofpublicly supported housing in the jurisdiction and region? Table 27: Disability by Publicly Supported Housing Program Category, Orange County Orange County People with a Disability # % Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 31 7.47% Other Multifamily 24 72.73% HCV Program 610 25.33% Region Public Housing 1,407 14.32% � 5 s 75A-534 5,013 12.71% Project -Based Section 8 869 15.62% Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program Table 28: Anaheim People with a Disability N/a N/a Public Housing 60 21.82% Project -Based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 1,100 22.32% HCV Program Table 29: Buena Park People with a Disability N/a N/a Public Housing 15 12.71% Project -Based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 165 21.07% HCV Program Table 30: Costa Mesa People with a Disability N/a N/a Public Housing 6 5.36% Project -Based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 192 29.40% HCV Program Table 31: Fountain Valley People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 14 20.59% Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 157 29.40% 2�6 75A-535 Table 32: Fullerton People with a Disability # % _ N/a N/a Public Housing 4 3.92% Project -Based Section 8 40 80.00% Other Multifamily 203 26.68% HCV Program Table 33: Garden Grove People with a Disability # % N/a N/a Public Housing 4 1.76% Project -Based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 516 18.46% HCV Program Table 34: Huntington Beach People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 50 13.19% Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 270 25.64% Table 35: Irvine People with a Disability N/a N/a Public Housing 95 13.05% Project -Based Section 8 17 70.83% Other Multifamily 286 23.08% HCV Program Table 36: La Habra People with a Disability # I % Public Housing N/a I N/a Project -Based Section 8 61 4.08% 75A-536 Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 34 17.62% Table 37: Laguna Niguel People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 45 29.61% Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 44 40.00% Table 38: Lake Forest People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 95 32.20% Table 39: Mission Viejo People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 92 37.86% Table 40: Newport Beach People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 3 3.03% Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 42 27.81% Table 41: Orange (City) People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 71 36.98% Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 167 24.52% 8 75A-537 Table 42: Rancho Santa Margarita People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 56 37.84% Table 43: San Clemente People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 11 15.07% Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 52 39.10% Table 44: Santa Ana People with a Disability N/a N/a Public Housing 118 14.64% Project -Based Section 8 N/a N/a Other Multifamily 397 21.39% HCV Program Table 45: Tustin People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 11 10.68% Other Multifamily N/a N/a HCV Program 108 19.82% Table 46: Westminster People with a Disability Public Housing N/a N/a Project -Based Section 8 5 5.10% Other Multifamily N/a N/a 259 75A-538 459 19.60% HCV Program In Orange County, according to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 11.1% of the civilian noninstitutionalized population has a disability. As the tables above reflect, the proportion of people with disabilities with Housing Choice Vouchers exceeds the overall population concentration of people with disabilities. For other programs, the data is more idiosyncratic with disproportionately low concentrations of persons with disabilities in Project - Based Section 8 and Other Multifamily housing in some cities and disproportionately high concentrations in others. This inconsistency likely results from the differing natures of individual developments that fall under those umbrellas, with some supportive housing — including Section 202 and Section 811 housing — encompassed in Other Multifamily housing and many age - restricted Project -Based Section 8 developments.7 The table below shows that the extremely low- income population, which is eligible for publicly supported housing across a range of programs, contains a much higher proportion of persons with disabilities than does the population as a whole. Table 47: Percentage of the population that is income eligible (0-30% ANI) and has a disability, Oran$e County Type of Percentage Number of Disability of Cost- People in Eligible Cost - Population Eligible Population with a Disability Hearing or 9.97% 20,220 Vision Ambulatory 13.80% 27,990 Cognitive 8.97% 18,195 Self -Care or 12.02% 24,375 Independent Living No 55.23% 111,985 Disability Total 202,765 Integration of People with Disabilities Living in Institutions and Other Segregated Settings To what extent do people with disabilities in or from the jurisdiction or region reside in segregated or integrated settings? Up until a wave of policy reforms and court decisions in the 1960s and 1970s, states, including California, primarily housed people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and 7 Elderly individuals are significantly more likely to have disabilities than non -elderly individuals. 260 75A-539 individuals with psychiatric disabilities in large state -run institutions. In California, institutions for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities are called developmental centers, and institutions for people with psychiatric disabilities are called state hospitals. Within these institutions, people with disabilities have had few opportunities for meaningful interaction with individuals without disabilities, limited access to education and employment, and a lack of individual autonomy. The transition away from housing people with disabilities in institutional settings and toward providing housing and services in home and community -based settings accelerated with the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1991 and the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in Olmstead v. L.C. in 1999. In Olmstead, the Supreme Court held that, under the regulations of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) implementing Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if a state or local government provides supportive services to people with disabilities, it must do so in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of a person with a disability and consistent with their informed choice. This obligation is not absolute and is subject to the ADA defense that providing services in a more integrated setting would constitute afundamental alteration of the state or local government's programs. The transition from widespread institutionalization to community integration has not always been linear, and concepts of what comprises a home and community -based setting have evolved over time. Although it is clear that developmental centers and state hospitals are segregated settings and that an individual's own house or apartment in a development where the vast majority of residents are individuals without disabilities is an integrated setting, significant ambiguities remain. Nursing homes and intermediate care facilities are clearly segregated though not to the same degree as state institutions. Group homes fall somewhere between truly integrated supported housing and such segregated settings, and the degree of integration present in group homes often corresponds to their size. Below, this assessment includes detailed information about the degree to which people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and individuals with psychiatric disabilities reside in integrated or segregated settings. The selection of these two areas of focus does not mean that people with other types of disabilities are never subject to segregation. Although the State of California did not operate analogous institutions on the same scale for people with ambulatory or sensory disabilities, for example, many people with disabilities of varying types face segregation in nursing homes. Data concerning people with various disabilities residing in nursing homes is not as available as data relating specifically to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and people with psychiatric disabilities. Table 48: Performance of Regional Center of Orange Countv, December 2018 Dec. 2018 Performance Fewer More More Fewer Fewer Reports consumers live children adults children adults in live with live in live in live in developmental families home large large centers settings facilities facilities (more (more than 6 than 6 people) people) State Average 0.12% 99.38% 80.20% 0.04% 2.31% 261 75A-540 Regional Center of Orange 0.26% 99.32% 77.45% 0.03% 2.93% County In California, a system of regional centers is responsible for coordinating the delivery of supportive services primarily to individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The regional centers serve individuals with intellectual disabilities, individuals with autism spectrum disorder, individuals with epilepsy, and cerebral palsy. These disabilities may be co-occurring. Individuals with intellectual disabilities and individuals with mild/moderate intellectual disability and individuals with autism spectrum disorder make up the lion's share of consumers. All data regarding the regional centers is drawn from their annual performance reports. On an annual basis, regional centers report to the California Department of Developmental Services on their performance in relation to benchmarks for achieving community integration of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. As reflected in the table above, the Regional Center of Orange County closely tracks the statewide average data though individuals with developmental disabilities in Orange County are slightly more segregated than statewide. The Fairview Developmental Center was the primary institution serving the region but is now in the process of closing. Psychiatric Disabilities In Orange County, Behavioral Health Services (part of the County Health Agency) is responsible for coordinating the provision of supportive services for people with psychiatric disabilities. The Department provides Full Service Partnership programs to allow for the provision of supportive services that facilitate community integration for Children, Transitional Age Youth, Adults, and Older Adults. Data regarding participation in the Full Service Partnership by individuals is not available. As a result of Proposition 63, a successful 2004 statewide ballot initiative, funding is available for permanent supportive housing for people with psychiatric disabilities through the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA). The Department operates its No Place Like Home, Special Needs Housing, and Mortgage Assistance Programs to increase access to community -based housing for persons with psychiatric disabilities. Describe the range of options for people with disabilities to access affordable housing and supportive services in the jurisdiction and region. There are four housing authorities operating within Orange County: Orange County Housing Authority, Anaheim Housing Authority, Garden Grove Housing Authority, and the Housing Authority of the City of Santa Ana. One of the easiest ways for people with disabilities to access affordable housing is for the local housing authorities to implement disability preferences in their HCV programs. The housing authorities for Anaheim and Garden Grove administer preferences that provide a significant advantage in admissions to persons with disabilities. The housing authority for the county has a preference that is weighted relatively lightly in comparison to other factors while Santa Ana's housing authority does not have a preference. Preferences for homeless 262 75A-541 individuals and for veterans may significantly overlap with persons with disabilities and thereby reduce concerns about the weakness of existing disability preferences. Supportive services are primarily provided through programs administered by the Regional Center of Orange County and the Orange County Behavioral Health Department. Additionally, particularly for individuals with types of disabilities other than intellectual and developmental disabilities and psychiatric disabilities, services may be available through a range of health care providers, paid by Medi-Cal, Medicare, or private insurance, or through nursing homes. Payment for supportive services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities is typically structured as Home and Community -Based Services Medicaid Waivers. These Waivers pay for a wide variety of services necessary to empower individuals to maintain stable residence in home and community -based services. There are, however, only as many Waivers available as there is funding from the federal government and the State of California. Disparities in Access to Opportunity To what extent are people with disabilities able to access the following in the jurisdiction and region? Identify major barriers faced concerning: i. Government services and facilities This Analysis did not reveal any specific barriers that persons with disabilities face in accessing government services and facilities. ii. Public infrastructure (e.g., sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, pedestrian signals) This Analysis did not reveal any specific barriers persons with disabilities face in accessing public infrastructure. iii. Transportation The relative lack of public transportation, particularly in the southern and coastal portions of the county, disproportionately burdens persons with disabilities who are more likely to rely on public transportation than are individuals who do not have disabilities. iv. Proficient schools and educational programs This Analysis did not reveal current systemic policies and practices that contribute to educational disparities for students with disabilities in Orange County; however, data shows that, although suspension rates are lower in Orange County than statewide, students with disabilities still face suspension at twice the rate of other students. v.Jobs Data in the table below from the Regional Center of Orange County shows that persons with developmental disabilities obtain earned income at higher rates than individuals with 263 75A-542 developmental disabilities statewide but that rate is still very low in comparison to the proportion of all adults with earned income. Table 49: Employment Metrics for Adults with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities by Regional Center Regional Center Percentage Percentage of of Adults Consumers with with Earned Integrated Income Employment as a Goal in their Individual Program Plan State Average 17% 27% Regional Center 21% 30% of Orange County Describe the processes that exist in the jurisdiction and region for people with disabilities to request and obtain reasonable accommodations and accessibility modifications to address the barriers discussed above. i. Government services and facilities Government websites generally have accessibility information on them regarding the accessibility of the websites themselves, but there is not clear, public information regarding how individuals can request accommodations. ii. Public infrastructure (e.g., sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, pedestrian signals) There is no clear, public information regarding how individuals with disabilities can request accommodations relating to public infrastructure. iii. Transportation By contrast, the Orange County Transportation Authority and Metrolinkhave clear, easily findable information about their accommodation and modification policies. iv. Proficient schools and educational programs School districts are more disparate in how they display information relating to their accommodation policies, with some making that information easy to find but others not. 264 75A-543 v.Jobs This Analysis did not reveal information suggesting patterns in how major employers do or do not provide required accommodations in Orange County. Describe any difficulties in achieving homeownership experienced by people with disabilities and by people with different types of disabilities in the jurisdiction and region. Persons with disabilities in Orange County are less able to access homeownership than individuals who do not have disabilities, primarily because of the high cost of homeownership and relative differences in income between persons with disabilities and individuals who do not have disabilities. This pattern is slightly undercut by the prevalence of elderly homeowners with disabilities that began in old age. Many of these individuals earned relatively high incomes prior to the onset of their disabilities. Disproportionate Housing Needs Describe any disproportionate housing needs experienced by people with disabilities and by people with certain types of disabilities in the jurisdiction and region. Table 50: Residents experiencing 1 or more housing problems by Disability Type, Orange County Disability Type Has 1 or Total Percent more housing problems Hearing or 43,325 93,875 46.15% Vision Ambulatory 52,675 106,370 49.52% Cognitive 39,405 72,515 54.34% Self -Care or 46,695 90370 51.67% Independent Living CHAS data does not disaggregate data relating to persons with disabilities experiencing overcrowding, incomplete plumbing and kitchen facilities, and cost burden. However, it does disaggregate persons experiencing one or more of those housing problems by type of disability (although it groups together hearing and vision, and self -care and independent living disabilities). The data above indicate that people with disabilities experience very high rates of housing problems, clustering around 50%, and there are no serious differences across the different 265 75A-544 disability types. Although it is not possible to disaggregate the individual housing problems by disability, given the age distribution of people with disabilities, it would seem to be unlikely that people with disabilities are disproportionately subject to overcrowding. Just 2.1% of households with elderly heads of household are overcrowded while 5.3% of households with nonelderly heads of household are overcrowded. By contrast, in light of the relatively low earnings of people with disabilities, it is likely that people with disabilities are disproportionately subject to cost burden and severe cost burden. Additional Information Beyond the HUD provided data, provide additional relevant information, if any, about disability and access issues in the jurisdiction and region including those affecting people with disabilities with other protected characteristics. This Assessment has made extensive use of local data throughout the Disability and Access section. The sources of data other than HUD -provided data are noted where appropriate. The program participant may also describe other information relevant to its assessment of disability and access issues. The discussion above provides a comprehensive overview of information relevant to this Analysis. Disability and Access Issues Contributing Factors Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of disability and access issues and the fair housing issues, which are Segregation, R/ECAPs, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs. For each contributing factor, note which fair housing issues) the selected contributing factor relates to. • Access for persons with disabilities to proficient schools • Access to publicly supported housing for persons with disabilities • Access to transportation for persons with disabilities • Inaccessible government facilities or services • Inaccessible public or private infrastructure • Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing costs • Lack of affordable in -home or community -based supportive services • Lack of affordable, accessible housing in range of unit sizes • Lack of affordable, integrated housing for individuals who need supportive services • Lack of assistance for housing accessibility modifications • Lack of assistance for transitioning from institutional settings to integrated housing • Lack of local or regional cooperation • Land use and zoning laws • Lending discrimination • Location of accessible housing 266 75A-545 • Loss of affordable housing • Occupancy codes and restrictions • Regulatory barriers to providing housing and supportive services for persons with disabilities • Source of income discrimination • State or local laws, policies, or practices that discourage individuals with disabilities from living in apartments, family homes, supportive housing and other integrated settings ?6i 75A-546 Fair Housing Enforcement, Outreach Capacity and Resources List and summarize any of the following that have not been resolved: • A charge or letter of finding from HUD concerning a violation of a civil rights -related law; • A cause determination from a substantially equivalent state or local fair housing agency concerning a violation of a state or local fair housing law; • Any voluntary compliance agreements, conciliation agreements, or settlement agreements entered into with HUD or the Department of Justice; • A letter of findings issued by or lawsuit filed or joined by the Department of Justice alleging a pattern or practice or systemic violation of a fair housing or civil rights law; • A claim under the False Claims Act related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, or civil rights generally, including an alleged failure to affirmatively further fair housing; • Pending administrative complaints or lawsuits against the locality alleging fair housing violations or discrimination. Watts v. City of Newport Beach, 790 Fed.Appx. 853 (9th Cir. 2019): The City of Newport Beach was recently sued by a young woman who alleged excessive force, unlawful entry, and unlawful arrest. Upon the decline of her card for a taxi fare, the driver called the police, who threatened to take Watts to jail if she could not produce additional funds to pay. She asked to go to her apartment to get another form of payment, and officers escorted her. When she objected to their entry into her apartment to retrieve the funds, they handcuffed her to the point of injury to her wrists, kicked her legs out from under her, pushed her head into a wall, and took her to jail overnight. The 9"' Circuit ruled affirmed that officers were not covered by qualified immunity for unlawful arrest and unlawful entry, but that they were covered for the excessive force claim. A. K. H by and through Landeros v. City of Tustin, 837 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 2016): In 2014, the city of Tustin was sued by the family of a minor who was shot and killed by a Tustin police officer. The city moved for summary judgement based on qualified immunity. The district court denied that motion. On appeal, the 9th Circuit affirmed the lower court decision, holding that the shooting violated the 4th Amendment, and that the officer was not covered by qualified immunity. Describe any state or local fair housing laws. What characteristics are protected under each law? California Laws The State Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) enforces California laws that provide protection and monetary relief to victims of unlawful housing practices. The Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Government Code Section 12955 et seq.) prohibits discrimination and harassment in housing practices, including: • Advertising 0M 75A-547 • Application and selection process • Unlawful evictions • Terms and conditions of tenancy • Privileges of occupancy • Mortgage loans and insurance • Public and private land use practices (zoning_ • Unlawful restrictive covenants The following categories are protected by FEHA: • Race or color • Ancestry or national origin • Sex, including Gender, Gender Identity, and Gender Expression • Marital status • Source of income • Sexual orientation • Familial status (households with children under 18 years of age) • Religion • Mental/physical disability • Medical condition • Age • Genetic information In addition, FEHA contains similar reasonable accommodations, reasonable modifications, and accessibility provisions as the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act. FEHA explicitly provides that violations can be proven through evidence of the unjustified disparate impact of challenged actions and inactions and establishes the burden -shifting framework that courts and the Department of Fair Employment and Housing must use in evaluating disparate impact claims. The Unruh Civil Rights Act provides protection from discrimination by all business establishments in California, including housing and accommodations, because of age, ancestry, color, disability, national origin, race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation. While the Unruh Civil Rights Act specifically lists "sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, and medical condition" as protected classes, the California Supreme Court has held that protections under the Unruh Act are not necessarily restricted to these characteristics. In practice, this has meant that the law protects against arbitrary discrimination, including discrimination on the basis of personal appearance. Furthermore, the Ralph Civil Rights Act (California Civil Code Section 51.7) forbids acts of violence or threats of violence because of a person's race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, political affiliation, or position in a labor dispute. Hate violence can include: verbal or written threats; physical assault or attempted assault; and graffiti, vandalism, or property damage. 269 75A-548 The Bane Civil Rights Act (California Civil Code Section 52.1) provides another layer of protection for fair housing choice by protecting all people in California from interference by force or threat of force with an individual's constitutional or statutory rights, including a right to equal access to housing. The Bane Act also includes criminal penalties for hate crimes; however, convictions under the Act may not be imposed for speech alone unless that speech itself threatened violence. Finally, California Civil Code Section 1940.3 prohibits landlords from questioning potential residents about their immigration or citizenship status. In addition, this law forbids local jurisdictions from passing laws that direct landlords to make inquiries about a person's citizenship or immigration status. In addition to these acts, Government Code Sections 11135, 65008, and 65580-65589.8 prohibit discrimination in programs funded by the State and in any land use decisions. Specifically, recent changes to Sections 65580-65589.8 require local jurisdictions to address the provision of housing options for special needs groups, including: • Housing for persons with disabilities (SB 520) • Housing for homeless persons, including emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing (SB 2) • Housing for extremely low income households, including single -room occupancy units (AB 2634) • Housing for persons with developmental disabilities (SB 812) Jurisdiction -Specific Laws Buena Park As part of the zoning code, the city of Buena Park describes specific procedures for reasonable accommodations in land use, zoning regulations, rules, policies, practices and procedures through the completion of a Fair Housing Accommodation Request form. Costa Mesa As part of the zoning code, the city of Costa Mesa allows for reasonable accommodations in land use and zoning regulations. Irvine The Irvine Municipal Code prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status or physical handicap of any individual in the realms of employment, real estate transactions, and educational institutions. Regarding housing, it is prohibits discrimination in financial transactions, advertising, or give differential treatment and terms. 270 75A-549 La Palma La Palma specifically provides for reasonable accommodations for person with disabilities in "land use, zoning and building regulations, policies, practices and procedures of the City."s Newport Beach Newport Beach requires provision of reasonable accommodation during the permit review process for new development. Orange The city of Orange provides for reasonable accommodations in the application of land use and zoning laws for those with disabilities. Rancho Santa Margarita Rancho Santa Margarita allows for reasonable accommodations in the application of land use and zoning laws for those with disabilities. %anta Ana The Santa Ana municipal code allows for modification of land use or zoning regulations if necessary to provide a reasonable accommodation to persons with disabilities. Tustin Tustin allows for reasonable accommodations in the land use and zoning process for developers of housing for persons with disabilities. Westminster Westminster allows for reasonable accommodations in land use and zoning when necessary to accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities. Additional Information Provide additional relevant information, if any, about fair housing enforcement, outreach capacity, and resources in the jurisdiction and region. California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) DFEH accepts, investigates, conciliates, mediates, and prosecutes complaints under FEHA, the Disabled Persons Act, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and the Ralph Civil Rights Act. DFEH investigates complaints of employment and housing discrimination based on race, sex, including gender, gender identity, and gender expression, religious creed, color, national origin, familiar status, medical condition (cured cancer only), ancestry, physical or mental disability, marital 'httVS7HIibrary.municode.com/ca/la Palma/codes/code of ordinances?node1d—000R CH44ZO ARTVPEPLCE D IV 15REACRE 271 75A-550 status, or age (over 40 only), and sexual orientation, DFEH established a program in May 2003 for mediating housing discrimination complaints, which is among the largest fair housing mediation program in the nation to be developed under HUD's Partnership Initiative with state fair housing enforcement agencies. The program provides California's tenants, landlords, and property owners and managers with a means of resolving housing discrimination cases in a fair, confidential, and cost-effective manner. Key features of the program are: 1) it is free of charge to the parties; and 2) mediation takes place within the first 30 days of the filing of the complaint, often avoiding the financial and emotional costs associated with a full DFEH investigation and potential litigation. Fair Housing Council of Orange County Founded in 1965, the Fair Housing Council of Orange County is a non-profit operating throughout the county with a mission of ensuring access to housing and preserving human rights. The council provides a variety of services including community outreach and education, homebuyer education, mortgage default counseling, landlord -tenant mediation, and limited low-cost advocacy. Their services are provided in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese. In addition to these client services, the Fair Housing Council investigates claims of housing discrimination and assists with referrals to DFEH. The Council may also occasionally assist with or be part of litigation challenging housing practices. Fair Housing Foundation The Fair Housing Foundation serves parts of Los Angeles County and several cities in Orange County. Of the jurisdictions included in this analysis, the following are covered by the Fair Housing Foundation's service area: Anaheim, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, La Habra, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach, Orange (city), San Clemente, Tustin, and Westminster. The Foundation provides landlord -tenant counseling and mediation, rental housing counseling, and community outreach and education. In addition, the Foundation screens fair housing complaints, investigates through testing, and will engage in conciliation or mediation efforts or refer the complaints to the appropriate administrative agencies where appropriate. The Foundation contracts with several of the jurisdictions in this analysis to conduct their local fair housing activities. Community Legal Aid SoCal Community Legal Aid SoCal is a holistic legal services provider serving low-income people Orange County and Southeast Los Angeles County. Overall, community legal aid provides direct representation, as well as engaging in policy advocacy and impact litigation. The advocates in the housing program provide legal assistance across a broad range of fair housing issues, including "eviction, federally or otherwise publicly subsidized housing, substandard housing, landord/tenant issues, homeownership issues, homeowners association issues mobile homes, housing discrimination, an predatory lending practices."9 The main office is located in Santa Ana, with 9 https://www.communitylegaIsocal.org/programs-services/area-of-law/housing/ 272 75A-551 additional offices in Norwalk, Anaheim, and Compton. Across four offices, the organization has 100 staff members and 30 attorneys. Like other Legal Aid offices, Community Legal Aid SoCal is funded by the Legal Services Corporation, which carries restrictions against representing undocumented clients. Fair Housing Enforcement, Outreach Capacity, and Resources Contributing Factors Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the lack of fair housing enforcement, outreach capacity, and resources and the severity of fair housing issues, which are Segregation, R/ECAPs, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs. For each significant contributing factor, note which fair housing issue(s) the selected contributing factor impacts. • Lack of local private fair housing outreach and enforcement • Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations • Lack of state or local fair housing laws ?i, 75A-552 VI. Fair Housing Goals and Priorities If implemented, the goals and strategies below will serve as an effective basis for affirmatively furthering fair housing by reducing patterns of segregation, mitigating displacement, addressing disproportionate housing needs, and increasing access to opportunity for members of protected classes. The first six overarching goals below, multiple of which have several strategies listed for implementation, are cross jurisdictional goals. Orange County and the participating jurisdictions all have a role to play in implementing those goals. Following those goals, this section includes individual goals for Orange County, the participating jurisdictions, and the housing authorities that may not be applicable to other jurisdictions because they respond to local circumstances. Cross -Jurisdictional Goals I. Goal #1: Increase the supply of affordable housing in high opportunity areas. Orange County's high and rapidly rising housing costs, along with the unequal distribution of affordable housing across its communities, are the primary driver of most fair housing issues for members of protected classes in the area. Hispanic residents, Vietnamese residents, and persons with disabilities experience these problems most acutely. Many households are rent burdened, and some households pay more than 50% of their incomes towards rent. In many high opportunity areas, current payment standards are far too low for families with housing choice vouchers to move to these areas. Additionally, there has been vocal community opposition to affordable housing throughout the county. These data reflect a need to expand the both the supply and geographical diversity of affordable housing. a. Explore the creation of a new countywide affordable housing bond. The State of California has approved several measures to issue bonds for affordable housing. Los Angeles is in the process of implementing a $1.2 billion bond measure HHH that is expected to create between 8,000-10,000 units of affordable housing. Orange County could also issue its own bonds to meet the widening gap for affordable rental housing through a ballot initiative. b. Provide low -interest loans to single-family homeowners and grants to homeowners with household incomes of up to 120% of the Area Median Income to develop accessory dwelling units with affordability restriction on their property. In 2019, the California Legislature passed AB 68 and AB 881 which permit the placement of two accessory dwelling units (ADUs), including one 'Junior ADU," on a lot with an existing or proposed single-family home statewide. Due to high construction costs and high demand, the small size of ADUs is not sufficient to ensure that they will be affordable by design. Instead, local governments will need to provide financial assistance in order to incentivize homeowners to make their ADUs affordable. Because it can be difficult for homeowners to access bank financing to build ADUs, there is likely to be demand for such incentives among homeowners. As a condition of receiving assistance, jurisdictions should also require homeowners to attend fair housing training and to maintain records that facilitate audits of their compliance with non-discrimination laws. Individual homeowners who do not have experience as landlords may have less knowledge 274 75A-553 of the law than established landlords and may also be more likely to act upon their implicit biases in renting units. c. Review existing zoning policies and explore zoning changes to facilitate the development of affordable housing. In several jurisdictions in Orange County, the prevalence of single-family residential zoning makes it harder to develop housing that would disproportionately serve members of protected classes. Many cities across the country are increasing higher density zoning near transit. Increased higher density zoning near transit in high opportunity areas, coupled with an affordable housing set -aside, would provide additional mixed -income rental housing. d. Align zoning codes to conform to recent California affordable housing legislation. California passed several affordable housing bills that became effective on January 1, 2020. Examples include as AB 1763, which expands existing density bonus law for 100% affordable housing projects to include unlimited density around transit hubs with an additional three stories or 33 feet of height, and AB 68, which allows two ADUs on a single lot, as well as multiple ADUs on multifamily lots with limited design requirement that cities can impose and an approval process of 60 days. This and other legislation necessitate changes to each jurisdiction's zoning code. II. Goal 2: Prevent displacement of low- and moderate -income residents with protected characteristics, including Hispanic residents, Vietnamese residents, seniors, and people with disabilities. a. Explore piloting a Right to Counsel Program to ensure legal representation for tenants in landlord -tenant proceedings, including those involving the application of new laws like A.B. 1482. Thousands of residents in the county are displaced annually due to evictions. According to legal services and fair housing organizations, many evictions occur because tenants do not understand their rights and/or their obligations. It is estimated that only a small percentage of tenants facing eviction have legal representation, and those without representation almost always are evicted, regardless of a viable defense. Recently, other high cost cities such as New York, San Francisco, Philadelphia, and soon Los Angeles have guaranteed a right to counsel at eviction hearings. New York, which was the first city to have a right to counsel program, has seen a 30% reduction in evictions. There are several legal providers in the county such as Community Legal Aid SoCal and Public Law Center that are well -positioned to serve low-income tenants with financial support. Although there would be an up -front investment, legal representation is less costly than serving homeless families. III. Goal 3: Increase community integration for persons with disabilities a. Conduct targeted outreach and provide tenant application assistance and support to persons with disabilities, including individuals transitioning from institutional settings and individuals who are at risk of institutionalization. As part of that assistance, maintain a database of housing that is accessible to persons with disabilities. 275 75A-554 Lack of access to housing is the largest remaining impediment to full community integration for persons with disabilities in the county. Stakeholders expressed frustration with the lack of information on accessible affordable housing units and are required to call individual landlords to obtain this information. b. Consider adopting the accessibility standards adopted by the City of Los Angeles, which require at least 15% of all new units in city -supported LIHTC projects to be ADA- accessible with at least 4% of total units to be accessible for persons with hearing and/or vision disabilities. In order to align with the Voluntary Compliance Agreement (VCA) between the City of Los Angeles and HUD, Orange County should consider adopting the same standards; nearby Santa Monica is also planning to confirm to the requirements in the VCA. IV. Goal 4: Ensure equal access to housing for persons with protected characteristics, who are disproportionately likely to be lower -income and to experience homelessness. a. Reduce barriers to accessing rental housing by eliminating application fees for voucher holders and encouraging landlords to follow HUD's guidance on the use of criminal backgrounds in screening tenants. Stakeholders reported that high application fees for rental housing are a significant barrier for voucher holders. Additionally, some landlords to continue to refuse rental housing to prospective tenants based on decades -old criminal background checks or minor misdemeanors. b. Incorporate a fair housing equity analysis into the review of significant rezoning proposals and specific plans. At times, large scale development and redevelopment efforts have not sufficiently addressed the needs of large families with children, persons with disabilities, and Hispanic and Vietnamese residents, in particular. By incorporating a fair housing analysis in the review process for redevelopment plans at an early stage, planning staff for municipalities could catch issues such as the distribution of unit sizes in proposed developments while it is still feasible to amend plans. V. Goal 5: Expand access to opportunity for protected classes. a. Explore the voluntary adoption of Small Area Fair Market Rents or exception payment standards in order to increase access to higher opportunity areas for Housing Choice Voucher holders. A significant barrier in the county is the lack of affordable housing and the sufficiency of payment standards to provide geographic options to voucher holders. Orange County Housing Authority has three payment standards; basic, central, and restricted. HUD's Small Area FMRs for Orange County permit certain zip codes to have higher payment standards than those currently used. 276 75A-555 b. Explore the creation of a mobility counseling program that informs Housing Choice Voucher holders about their residential options in higher opportunity areas and provides holistic supports to voucher holders seeking to move to higher opportunity areas. The housing authorities located in Orange County currently lack funding to implement full-scale housing mobility programs. A formal counseling program, as found in Chicago, Dallas, Baltimore, and elsewhere, can make a significant difference in the settlement patterns of HCV households. These programs generally identify opportunity areas, while assisting voucher holders to find new residences within them. Workshops and information sessions allow for participants to ask questions, find higher -performing schools and locate areas of lower crime. Individual counselors may provide assistance to families to find units in opportunity areas, while also following up post - move to ensure the family is adjusting well to their new neighborhood. c. Study and make recommendations to improve and expand Orange County's public transportation to ensure that members of protected classes can access jobs in job centers in Anaheim, Santa Ana, and Irvine. There are few viable and reliable public transportation options in Orange County. It is important that there is a match between where low- and moderate -income members of protected classes, who are more likely to use public transportation, are able to commute to county job centers. d. Increase support for fair housing enforcement, education, and outreach. Nonprofit fair housing organizations and legal services providers play a critical role in fair housing enforcement, education, and outreach but struggle to meet the full needs of victims of discrimination due to limited financial and staff capacity. By helping these organizations expand their operations, municipalities can ensure that groups have can address critical emerging issues, like those that have stemmed from the passage of S.B. 329, which extends source of income protections to Housing Choice Voucher holders, and A.B. 1482, which caps annual rent increases in at 5% plus the regionally -adjusted Consumer Price Index and requires landlords to have 'Just cause" in order to evict tenants. It would also make proactive audit testing of housing providers rather than reactive complaint -based testing more feasible. VI. Santa Ana -Specific Goals a. Review and amend Santa Ana's inclusionary housing ordinance to increase its effectiveness. The review should include an evaluation of whether or not the current in - lieu fee is set high enough relative to the cost to develop units on -site. The current fee was established in 2015 and since then the market values have increased. The evaluation should also consider requiring on -site affordable housing for projects with fifty or more units, with no option to pay the in -lieu fee, while simultaneously increasing the in -lieu fee for projects under fifty units. b. Evaluate the creation of a motel conversion ordinance to increase the supply of permanent supportive housing similar to the City of Anaheim and Los Angeles. Such an ordinance would allow existing motels to be rehabilitated more efficiently to respond to Santa Ana's immediate housing needs. 277 75A-556 c. Review Santa Ana's density bonus ordinance and explore adding a density bonus for transit -oriented development (TOD) similar to the City of Los Angeles. This bonus would be available to affordable housing developments within a one-half mile radius of a transit stop. Transit stops would include train stations, bus stops, or streetcar stops. d. Explore establishing a dedicated source of local funding for a Right to Counsel program for residents of Santa Ana to ensure that they have access to legal representation during eviction proceedings similar to the City of New York. e. Continue to invest in local eviction prevention strategies to reduce the number of homeless individuals and families in Santa Ana. ?i8 75A-557 VIL PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING APPENDIX ?i9 75A-558 Table 1: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics and Surrounding Census Tract Demographics, Orange County Households with children in Low the Censu Income Propert Proper Proper Propert development s Censu Units vs. y ty ty y OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract sTract Program Project Units in White Black Hispan Asian Developmen Numb White Black Hispan Asian Povert Type Name Project (%) (%) is (%) (%) t T e er % (%) is (%) (%) y Rate Project - Based Laurel Section Park 1101. 22.1 8 Manor 70 22% N/a 4% 74% N/a 13 49.1% 2.5% 18.7% % 5.6% Project - Based Section Villa La 0117. 8 Jolla 55 36% 2% 36% 26% 45% 20 4.5% 2% 89.2% 3.2% 29.1% Project - Based Section Vista 0626. 8 Aliso 70 88% N/a 6% 4% N/a 32 81.6% 0.2% 8.9% 3.9% 4.1% Project - Based Section Rancho 0626. 11.1 8 Moulton 51 27% 8% 45% 20% 34% 25 52.4% 0% 34% % 17.9% Project - Based Section Rancho 0626. 11.1 8 Niguel 51 14% 4% 58% 18% 26% 25 52.4% 0% 34% % 17.9% Project - Based Section Cypress 1101. 8 Sunrise 74 30% N/a 4% 66% N/a 04 36.7% 2% 20% 38% 8.5% Project - Based Section Imperial 0117. 20.1 8 Villas 58 61% 6% 24% 9% 30% 17 54.3% 1.6% 20.4% % 3.5% Other Multifa Hagan 626.0 mily Place 24 92% N/a 8% N/a N/a 5 84.2% 1.8% 8.7% 4.8% 10.6% Other Stanton Multifa Accessibl 878.0 24.9 mily e 9 N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a 1 25.3% 1.8% 45.4% % 11.7% Stonegat 21.74 Large 878.0 22.9 LIHTC eII 25 26 0.00% 6.52% % 0.00% Family 5 16.1% 4.0% 55.7% % 16.2% Bircb Hills Apartme it 22.82 62.82 13.80 Large 218.1 22.3 LIHTC nts 114 5 % 5.63% % % Family 4 47.7% 1.2% 24.3% % 4.4% Bonterra Apartme nts 26.13 40.07 Large 218.1 31.8 LIHTC Homes 93 94 % 5.23% % 6.97% Family 5 42.7% 3.0% 17.9% % 2.6% Imperial Park Apartme 10.95 31.75 Non 11.4 LIHTC nts 91 92 % 1.09% % 0.36% Targeted 15.03 48.5% 0.8% 35.8% % 15.4% Vintage Canyon Sr. Apartme 10 64.41 16.95 17.80 25.5 LIHTC nts 104 5 % 3.39% % % Senior 15.06 48.3% 0.0% 23.6% % 12.20/0 Walnut Village Apartme 33.78 Large 11.4 LIHTC n[s 46 46 6.76% 2.03% % 0.00% Family 15.03 48.5% 0.8% 35.8% % 15.4% RRI 75A-559 Tara Village Apartme 1101. nts 17 12.85 73.53 Large 04 38.8 LIHTC 168 0 % 4.80% 8.05% % Family 36.7% 2.0% 20.0% % 8.5% Glenneyr e Apartme 84.62 11.54 626.0 LIHTC nts 26 27 % 3.85% % 7.69% SRO 5 84.2% 1.8% 8.7% 4.9% 10.6% Jackson Aisle Apartme 76.67 10.00 16.67 Special 997.0 51.1 LIHTC nts 29 30 % % % 6.67% Needs 2 21.2% 0.9% 23.8% % 21.2% Park Stanton Seniors 33 31.19 13.50 881.0 20.7 LIHTC Apts 335 5 % 5.31% 9.29% % Senior 1 27.8% 5.7% 43.1% % 10.9% Plaza 10 67.49 Large 879.0 39.6 LIHTC Court 102 3 4.64% 0.55% % 1.09% Family 1 16.3% 1.5% 41.4% % 21.7% Continen tal Gardens Apartme 29 32.69 Non 878.0 23.0 LIHTC nts 297 7 0.00% 0.00% 2.37% % Targeted 3 7.9% 0.8% 65.3% % 33.3% Oakcrest Heights (Savi Large 219.2 23.1 LIHTC Ranch II) 53 54 Family 4 45.2% 4.3% 22.4% % 5.8% Oakcrest 60.61 51.52 Large 219.2 23.1 LIHTC Terrace 68 69 % 3.03% % 2.02% Family 4 45.2% 4.3% 22.4% % 5.8% Parkwoo d Apartme 10 218.0 LIHTC uts 100 1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Senior 9 68.8% 1.0% 15.0% 9.1% 2.9% Villa 55.10 58.50 Large 218.0 LIHTC Plumosa 75 76 % 0.00% % 0.68% Family 2 60.8% 0.3% 28.0% 8.1% 9.5% Vintage at Stonehav en Apartme 12 57.24 218.2 16.3 LIHTC nts 124 5 % 1.97% 9.21% 7.89% Seniors 5 65.1% 0.3% 16.2% % 4.2% Yorba Linda Palms Apartme 31.58 33.55 Large 218.0 LIHTC HIS 43 44 % 9.21% % 5.92% Farm 2 60.8% 0.3% 28.0% 8.1% 9.5% Sender 10 58.91 14.73 320.5 12.6 LIHTC Bluffs 106 7 % 1.55% % 6.20% Seniors 6 61.8% 1.4% 17.8% % 4.2% Esencia Norte Apartme it 50.82 53.28 Large 320.5 12.6 LIHTC nts 111 2 % 6.01% % 4.10% Family 6 61.8% 1.4% 17.8% % 4.2% Table 2: Aliso Viejo Households with Low children in Cens Income the us Units Propert Propert developme Census Tract vs. y Propert y Propert nt OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Pover Progra Project Units in White yBlack Hispani yAsian Developme Numbe White Black Hispan Asian ty m lWe Name Project NO (%) c (%) (%) n[ lWe r % (%) is (%) (%) Rate 281 75A-560 Woodpark Apartment s 12 12 Large LIHTC 8 8 75.39% 6.94% 28.71% 4.73% Family 626.39 62.9% 4.3% 11.7% 14.4% 4.0% Table 3: Anaheim Households with children in Cens Low Proper the us Income Propert ty developme Census Tract Tract Units vs. y Property Hispa Propert nt OR Tract Tract Tract Hispa Tract Pove Program Project Units in White Black Bic yAsian Developme Numbe White Black Bic Asian rty Type Name Project (%) (%) (%) (%) ntType r % (%) (%) (%) Rate Project - Based Village Section Center 0873.0 11.7 19.7 8 A is 100 11% N/a 8% 81% N/a 0 16.2% 0.8% 69.1% % % Project - Based Westchest Section er 0869.0 24.6 26.4 8 Housing 64 16% 25% 48% 11% 49% 1 17.3% 6.1% 50.4% % % Project - Based Anaheim Section Memorial 0873.0 11.7 19.7 8 Manor 75 19% 1% 5% 73% N/a 0 16.2% 0.8% 69.1% % % Project - Based Carbon Section Creek 15.7 8 Shores 40 66% 11% 24% N/a 14% 864.07 18.9% 1.3% 63.7% 9.8% % Anton Monaco Apartment 22 23 50.21 Non- 13.6 17.9 LIHTC s 9 2 26.39% 9.99% % 9.13% Targeted 871.02 16.8% 4.3% 62.1% % % Arbor View Apartment 65.32 Large 21.5 13.5 LIHTC s 45 46 56.07% 4.62% % 2.89% Family 870.02 24.9% 3.0% 48.9% % % Avenida 13.89 Special 18.3 12.4 LIHTC Villas 28 29 41.67% 19.44% % 11.11% Needs 877.01 19.8% 1.4% 57.4% % % Avon Dakota 90.00 Large 24.9 LIHTC Phase 15 16 28.33% 3.33% % 0.00% Family 874.04 4.1% 1.0% 91.5% 3.5% % Belage Manor Apartment 17 18 23.87 24.7 21.7 LIHTC s 7 0 32.88% 7.66% % 22.97% Senior 871.05 25.8% 0.5% 40.8% % % Broadway 95.98 Large 11.2 15.7 LIHTC Village 45 46 79.40% 0.00% % 0.00% Famil 863.01 17.2% 1.2% 69.7% % % Calendula 36.54 Large 21.5 13.5 LIHTC Court 31 32 24.04% 16.35% % 11.54% Family 870.02 24.9% 3.0% 48.9% % % California 26.67 21.5 13.5 LIHTC Villas 33 34 31.11% 2.22% % 35.56% Senior 870.02 24.9% 3.0% 48.9% % % Casa 31.03 Special 18.7 18.8 LIHTC Alegre 22 23 41.38% 10.34% % 10.34% Needs 870.01 17.8% 9.5% 51.9% % % Cerritos Avenue Apartment 13.07 Large 29.7 16.9 LIHTC s 59 60 16.48% 6.25% % 2.84% Family 877.03 22.3% 1.9% 40.9% % % Comersto Large 18.3 12.4 LIHTC Be 48 49 2.41% 1.20% 9.64% 0.00% Family 877.01 19.8% 1.4% 57.4% % % Dimond 19.35 Special 15.9 LIHTC Aisle 24 25 54.84% 12.90% % 6.45% Needs 872 22.6% 4.4% 61.7% 9.6% % 282 75A-561 Apartment s Elm Street 77.78 Large 11.8 19.7 LIHTC Commons 51 52 68.69% 4.55% % 2.02% Family 873 16.2% 0.8% 69.1% % % Greenleaf Apartment 55.56 Large 11.9 23.1 LIHTC s 19 20 55.56% 11.11% % 4.76% Family 867.02 13.6% 2.5% 68.5% % % Hermosa Village aka Jeffrey - Lynne Perimeter 11 11 72.28 Large 15.2 24.3 LIHTC Re 1 8 18.40% 5.10% % 3.55% Family 875.05 15.9% 1.1% 63.8% % % Jeffrey Lynne Neighborh ood Revitalizat ion Phase 86.67 Large 15.2 24.3 LIHTC IV 36 36 22.96% 8.89% % 1.48% Family 875.05 15.9% 1.1% 63.8% % % Jeffrey - Lynne Apartment 19 20 74.46 Large 15.2 24.3 LIHTC sPhase I 2 0 9.51% 7.61% % 2.58% Family 875.05 15.9% Ll% 63.8% % % Jeffrey - Lynne Neighborh ood Revitalizat ion Phase 64.29 Large 15.2 24.3 LIHTC 3 76 85 11.90% 13.49% % 10.71% Family 875.05 15.9% 1.1% 63.8% % % Jeffrey - Lynne Neighborh ood Revitalizat ion 10 73.46 Large 15.2 24.3 LIHTC PhaseIl 99 0 20.67% 3.35% % 6.15% Family 875.05 15.9% 1.1% 63.8% % % Linbrook 26.1 11.0 LIHTC Court 80 81 17.39% 0.00% 0.00% 78.26% Senior 871.01 25.4% 5.3% 40.1% % % Lincoln Anaheim 35.97 Large 11.8 19.7 LIHTC Phase 71 72 31.29% 4.68% % 9.71% Family 873 16.2% 0.8% 69.1% % % Lincoln Anaheim 59.93 Large 11.8 19.7 LIHTC Phase II 73 74 41.44% 4.79% % 6.51% Family 873 16.2% 0.8% 69.1% % % Magnolia 10.00 18.7 18.8 LIHTC Acres 40 40 90.00% 0.00% % 10.00% Senior 870.01 17.8% 9.5% 51.9% % % Monarch Pointe Apartment 72.96 Large 11.9 23.1 LIHTC Homes 62 63 62.76% 7.14% % 5.10% Family 867.02 13.6% 2.5% 68.5% % % Palm West Apartment 33.56 Non- 1102.0 26.0 24.2 LIHTC s 57 58 22.82% 7.38% % 14.09% Targeted 2 28.5% 3.8% 37.6% % % Park Vista Apartment 39 39 63.14 Non- 26.0 LIHTC s 0 2 2.95% 1.82% % 1.13% Targeted 866.01 6.8% 3.4% 82.5% 5.8% % Pasco Village Family Apartment 17 17 82.92 Large 26.0 LIHTC s 4 4 2.82% 7.13% % 2.82% Family 866.01 6.8% 3.4% 82.5% 5.8% % Pebble 11 11 37.28 Non- 17.5 17.2 LIHTC Cove 0 1 31.58% 6.58% % 14.91% Targeted 878.06 18.7% 2.0% 56.6% % % Renaissaa 12 12 24.41 Non- 24.6 26.4 LIHTC nce Park 4 6 8.27% 8.27% % 3.94% Targeted 869.01 17.3% 6.1% 50.4% % % 283 75A-562 Apartment s aka Monterey Apts. Rockwood Apartment 54.29 LIHTC s 51.43% 9.80% % 4.49% Solara 13 13 11.43 1102.0 38.3 17.3 LIHTC Court 1 2 14.86% 0.57% % 76.00% Senior 1 26.7% 4.1% 27.3% % South Street Anaheim Housing Partners 40.72 Large 21.6 8.7 LIHTC LP 91 92 30.47% 5.26% % 14.68% Family 874.01 20.5% 1.1% 53.7% % % Large 17.5 17.2 LIHTC Stone ate 37 38 9.87% 4.61% 9.87% 1.32% Family 878.06 18.7% 2.0% 56.6% % % The Crossings at Cherry Large 1102.0 38.3 17.3 LIHTC Orchard 44 44 4.46% 0.00% 8.28% 1.27% Family 1 26.7% 4.1% 27.3% % % The Vineyard Townhom 85.71 11.7 19.7 LIHTC es 50.00% 14.29% % 0.00% 873.00 16.2% 0.8% 69.1% % % Tyrol Plaza Senior Apartment 27.03 11.2 15.7 LIHTC s 59 60 71.62% 6.76% % 13.51% Senior 863.01 17.2% 1.2% 69.7% % % Villa 13 13 18.97 1102.0 38.3 17.3 LIHTC Anaheim 4 5 26.44% 0.57% % 37.36% Senior 1 26.7% 4.1% 27.3% % Table 4: Buena Park Households with children in Censu Low the Ceram True s Income Propert Propert developme s t Tract Units vs. y Propert y Propert or OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Asia Pover Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispan yAsian Developme Numb White Black Hispan ❑ ty e Name Project (%) (%) is (%) NO nt a er % (%) is (%) (%) Rate Project - Based Section Newport 1103. 18.2 8 House 10 73% 7% 13% 7% N/a 03 36.1% 0.8% 40.2% % 5.2% Project - Based Casa Section Santa 1105. 20.7 25.5 8 Maria 100 6% N/a 3% 91% No 00 15.2% 5.9% 54.9% % % City Yard Workforce LIHTC Housing 8.05% 15.44% 24.16% 35.57% Dorado Senior Apartment 32.65 868.0 26.0 17.6 LIHTC s % 2.04% 15.31% 53.06% 3 25.2% 1.3% 44.9% % % Emerald Gardens Apartment 18.21 1102. 38.3 17.3 LIHTC % 10.49% 42.28% 7.10% 01 26.7% 4.1% 27.3% % % qs 12.00 1105. 20.7 25.5 LIHTC % 4.00% 6.67% 61.33% 00 15.2% 5.9% 54.9% % % 42.33 868.0 25.0 LIHTC % 18.60% 40.93% 22.33% 1 29.3% 3.7% 40.7% % 5.3% 284 75A-563 Apartment s Walden Glen Apartment 18 14.81 Non- 20.7 25.5 LIHTC s 5 186 % 8.83% 22.22% 9.12% targeted 1105 15.2% 5.9% 54.9% % % Table 5: Costa Mesa Households with Low children in Censu Income the s Units Propert Propert developme Census Tract vs. y Propert y Propert in OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Pover Progra Project Units in White yBlack Hispani yAsian Developme Numbe White Black Hispan Asian ty in Type Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) ❑t e r % (%) is (%) (%) Rate Project -Based Section 0637.0 8 Casa Bella 74 68% 1% 17% 14% N/a 2 35.1% 0.7% 56.5% 4.7% 17% Project -Based Section St. Johns 0632.0 8 Manor 36 77% N/a 9% 14% N/a 2 35.1% 0.7% 56.5% 4.7% 17% Tower on 26 26 LIHTC 19th 6 9 52.73% 2.12% 10.30% 17.58% Seniors 637.01 17.4% 0.8% 78.4% 2.5% 31.7% Table 6: Fountain Valley Households with children in Low the Censu Trac Trac Censu Income Proper Propert developme s t t s Units vs. Property Propert ty y nt OR Tract Tract Blac Tract Asia Tract Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispan Asian Developme Numb White k Hispani ❑ Povert Type Name Project (%) (%) is (%) (%) nt Type er % (%) c (%) (%) y Rate Our Lady Project- of Based Guadalup 0992. 37.1 Section e 71 15% N/a 1% 84% N/a 33 51.4% 0% 10.7% Fountain Valley Senior ne 15 992.5 Jasmine 4 12.00 0 28.6 16.6% LIHTC 156 49.00% 0.50% % 46.00% Senior 39.5% 1.2% 28.5% ?4� 75A-564 Table 7: Fullerton Households with children in Low the Censu Trac Trac Censu Income Propert Propert developmen s t t s Units vs. y Propert y Propert tOR Tract Tract Blac Tract Asia Tract Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispan yAsian Developm® Numb White k Hispan ❑ Povert Type Name Project (%) NO is NO (%) t Type er % (%) is (%) (%) y Rate Project- Amerige Based Villa 0112. 1.4 9.8 Section A is 101 9% N/a 1% 90% N/a 00 50.6% % 34.4% % 15.8% Other Casa Multifamil Maria 0115. 1.8 Del Rio 24 73% N/a 23% 4% N/a 02 30% % 46.1% 19% 16.7% Other Harbor Multifamil View 0017. 0.2 34.8 Terrace 24 71% 13% 8% 8% 4% 06 50.1% % 10.1% % 8.9% Courtya rd Apartme 10 Large 1.4 9.8 LIHTC nts 8 108 64.43% 3.08% 60.78% 26.89% Family 112 50.6% % 34.4% % 15.8% East Fullerto Large 115.0 1.8 LIHTC ❑ Villas 26 27 10.64% 2.13% 82.98% 6.38% Family 2 30% % 46.1% 19% 16.7% Fullerto ❑ City Lights Resident 13 4.3 11.1 LIHTC tat Hotel 4 137 63.19% 9.03% 13.89% 4.17% SRO 113 58.7% % 19.3% % 12.0% Fullerto 11 Family 15.65 Large 4.3 11.1 LIHTC Housing 54 55 30.61% % 60.54% 12.93% Family 113 58.7% % 19.3% % 12.0% Fullerto ❑ Special LIHTC Heights 35 36 43.18% 9.09% 39.77% 12.50% Needs 1162 Gamet Lane Apartme Large 117.1 3.6 20.2 LIHTC nts 17 18 2.60% 0.00% 61.04% 0.00% Family 1 30.6% % 43.7% % 11.7% Klimpel 4.3 11.1 LIHTC Manor 58 59 48.00% 2.00% 22.00% 32.00% Senior 113 58.7% % 19.3% % 12.0% North Hills Apartme 20 Non- 2.3 26.6 LIHTC nts 3 204 54.76% 1.57% 67.91% 0.60% Targeted 16.01 44.8% % 23.3% % 9.2% Palm Garden Apartme 22 Non- 116.0 5.3 9.5 LIHTC nts 3 224 0.28% 0.00% 20.51% 0.14% Targeted 1 9.4% % 75.10/( % 30.1% Ventana Senior Apartme LIHTC nts 18.25% 4.76% 4.76% 29.37% 1 Senior Table 8: Garden Grove Households Low with Censu Trac Censu Income Propert Proper children in s t s Units vs. Property Propert y ty the Tract Tract Tract Tract Asia Tract Progra Project Units in White yBlack Hispani Asian developmen Numb White Black Hispan ❑ Povert m e Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) t OR er % (%) is (%) (%) y Rate M& 75A-565 Developmen tType Project Donald -Based Jordan Section Senior 0886. 39.1 8 Manor 65 8% 2% 2% 89% N/a 02 19.7% 1.1% 35.6% % 12.4% Project -Based Section Acacia 0886. 47.8 8 1 Villa Apts 160 4% 1% 1% 94% N/a 01 18.7% 1.4% 30.2% % 12.5% Briar Crest+ Rosecrest Large 885.0 28.8 LIHTC Apartments 40 41 53.78% 0.00% 89.92% 0.84% Family 1 14.6% 0.8% 54.4% % 16.6% Garden Grove Senior 74.14 885.0 36.8 LIHTC Apartments 84 85 13.79% 0.86% 6.90% % Senior 2 12.0% 0.7% 47.0% % 21.1% Grove Park 10 10 55.66 891.0 17.5 LIHTC Apartments 3 4 3.30% 6.60% 33.02% % At -Risk 4 2.2% 0.2% 79.8% % 22.7% Malabar 12 12 Large 882.0 37.2 LIHTC Apartments 5 5 12.90% 2.30% 26.04% 3.00% Family 3 25.3% 0.6% 30.4% % 18.6% Stuart Drive Apts. Rose Garden 23 23 39.41 Non- 885.0 28.8 LIHTC Apts. 9 9 2.16% 0.00% 16.19% % Targeted 1 14.6% 0.8% 54.4% % 16.6% Sungrove 42.00 885.0 36.8 LIHTC Sr. Apts 80 82 33.00% 4.00% 13.00% % Senior 2 12.0% 0.7% 47.0% % 21.1% Table 9: Huntington Beach Households with children in Cens Low the Trac us Income Propert Proper developmen t Tract Units vs. Property Propert y ty t OR Census Tract Blac Tract Tract Pover Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispan Asian Developme Tract White k Hispan Asian ty Type Name Project (%) (%) is NO (%) nt Type Number % (%) is NO (%) Rate Project - Based Huntingt Section on 0.2 16.5 12.9 8 Gardens 185 60% 2% 5% 33% 1 N/a 0994.13 64.3% % 17.5% % % Project - Based Humingt Section on Villa 27.1 8 Yorba 192 20% 1% 17% 63% 12% 0992.41 43.9% 3% 21% % 9.5% Beachvie 10 2.2 12.4 LIHTC w Villa 6 107 39.05% 5.71% 18.10% 3.81% SRO 992.35 66.7% % 20.5% 8.5% % Bowen 26.09 0.7 LIHTC Court 20 20 60.87% 0.00% 17.39% % Senior 993.05 57.1% % 30.1% 5.4% 7.3% Emerald Cove Senior Apartme 16 0.2 16.5 12.9 LIHTC ruts 2 164 20.71% 1.78% 0.59% 0.00% Senior 994.13 64.3% % 17.5% % Hermosa Vista Apartme Non 0.0 16.7 LIHTC ruts 87 88 50.71% 1.90% 62.56% 7.58% Targeted 996.05 57.6% % 20.7% % 5.2% Oceana Apartme Large 0.2 16.5 12.9 LIHTC nts 77 78 52.63% 14.04% 39.04% 1.32% Family 994.13 64.3% % 17.5% Pacific Large 0.7 LIHTC Court 47 48 88.96% 0.00% 48.05% 0.659/6 Family 993.05 57.1% % 30.1% 5.4% 7.3% 287 75A-566 Apartme nts Pacific Sun Apartme Special 0.4 35.4 LIHTC nts 6 6 34.78% 0.00% 13.04% 0.00% Needs 994.02 20.0% % 68.3% 6.6% % Quo Vadis Apartme 10 Non 0.2 16.5 12.9 LIHTC nts 2 104 69.01% 2.92% 19.88% 8.77% Targeted 994.13 64.3% % 17.5% % % Table 10: Irvine Households with children in Censu Low the Censn s Income Proper Propert developmen s Tract Tract Units vs. ty Propert y Propert t OR Tract Tract Tract Hispa Tract Pover Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispani yAsian Developmen Numb White Blac me Asian ty Type Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) t e er % k(%) (%) (%) Rate Woodbri Project- dge Based Manor I, 0525. Section 8 It & Iii 165 64% N/a 1% 34% N/a 11 54.7% 1.9% 6.4% 30.3% 6.2% Access Project- Irvine, Based Inc.(aka 0626. 43.9 Section 8 Sk loft) 39 64% 8% 5% 23% N/a 11 35.3% 6.8% 9.9% % 34.7% Project- The Based Parkland 0525. 49.9 Section 8 s 120 41% 4% 8% 48% 25% 25 31.3% 1.9% 9.6% % 9.7% Project - Based Windwo 0525. 42.1 Section 8 ad Knoll 60 49% 10% 11% 30% 14% 27 37.1% 5.6% 7.5% % 8.5% Project - Based Woodbri 0525. 13.8 31.7 Section 8 dge Oaks 120 68% 1% 6% 25% 21% 14 50.9% 0.2% % % 8.9% Project- Woodbri Based dge 0525. 33.4 Section 8 Villas 60 73% 5% 3% 17% 18% 19 51.4% 2.5% 5.8% % 10.8% Project- Orchard Based Park 0525. 42.2 Section 8 A is 59 58% 5% 10% 27% 27% 17 44.2% 5.6% 4.5% % 9.2% Project - Based Harvard 0626. 13.1 47.9 Section 8 Manor 100 60% 2% 9% 29% 17% 27 33.4% 1.9% % % 38.3% Sutton Project- Irvine Based Residenc 525.2 16.4 37.5 Section 8 es 9 100% N/a 0% N/a N/a 6 38.8% 0.9% % % 5.8% Other Villa Multitam Hermosa 0525. 42.1 it - Irvine 24 50% 25% 4% 21% 4% 27 37.1% 5.6% 7.5% % 8.5% Anesi Apartme nts (aka Alegre 10 21.52 Large 525.1 26.8 LIHTC A is) 2 104 % 7.62% 21.19% 36.42% Family 8 61.0% 1.8% 6.6% % 11.3% Anton Portola Apartme 25 Non- 524.0 29.7 37.3 LIHTC HIS 3 256 9.04% 1.69% 3.95% 3.58% Targeted 4 30.2% 2.9% % % 0.0% Cadence Family Irvine 36.06 Large 524.0 29.7 37.3 LIHTC Housing 81 82 % 3.35% 14.50% 7.43% Family 4 30.2% 2.9% % % 0.0% MH 75A-567 (aka Luminara D1 Senior Irvine Housing (aka 15 18.66 524.0 37.3 LIHTC Luxaira) 6 156 % 0.48% 4.31% 15.31% Seniors 4 30.2% 2.9% 29.7% % 0.0% Pare Derian Apatme 67.38 Large 755.1 36.0 31.7 LIHTC nts 79 80 % 10.73% 31.76% 10.30% Family 5 27.4% 1.1% % % 19.4% Doria Apatme at Homes 18.31 Large 524.2 0.50 9.50 39.7 LIHTC Phase 59 60 % 3.52% 12.68% 23.94% Family 6 45.10% % % 0% 6.1% Doria Apatme nts Homes 21.84 Large 755.0 38.8 12.5 LIHTC Phase II 74 74 % 1.72% 9.77% 15.52% Family 5 41.5% 2.8% % % 8.3% Granite 45.36 Non 755.1 36.0 31.7 LIHTC Court 71 71 % 1.64% 20.22% 9.29% Targeted 5 27.4% 1.1% % % 19.4% Irvine 19 19.05 755.1 36.0 31.7 LIHTC Inn 2 192 % 2.65% 2.65% 4.76% SRO 5 27.4% 1.1% % % 19.4% Laguna Canyon Apatme 12 47.57 Large 525.1 26.8 LIHTC HIS 0 120 % 0.00% 30.10% 4.85% Family 8 61.0% 1.8% 6.6% % 11.3% Montecit o Vista Apatme 16 Large 525.2 50.6 LIHTC ut Homes 1 162 9.24% 8.84% 14.86% 17.27% Family 5 31.3% 1.9% 9.6% % 9.7% Paramou at Family Irvine Housing Partners LP (aka 21.82 Large 524.0 29.7 37.3 LIHTC E aira) 83 84 % 4.89% 15.31% 5.21% Family 4 30.2% 2.9% % % 0.0% Pavilion Park Senior Housing Partners LP (aka 21 19.54 524.2 39.7 LIHTC Solaira) 9 221 % 0.99% 1.99% 15.56% Seniors 6 45.1% 0.5% 9.5% % 6.1% San Paulo Apatme 15 37.31 Non 525.2 20.1 33.8 LIHTC nts 3 382 % 2.09% 11.94% 5.67% Targeted 1 38.3% 3.6% % % 15.6% Santa Alicia Apatme 31.82 Large 525.1 46.7 LIHTC nts 84 84 % 0.00% 10.00% 18.18% Family 5 36.9% 0.3% 9.0% % 12.7% ne Arbor at Woodbur Large 524.1 53.8 LIHTC y 90 90 2.12% 6.36% 8.05% 24.15% Family 8 32.6% 3.0% 6.5% % 14.0% neIun At Woodbri 12 64.05 525.2 20.1 33.8 LIHTC d e 0 120 % 1.31% 7.84% 15.03% Senior 1 38.3% 3.6% % % 15.6% Windrow Apatme 21.80 Large 524.1 49.9 LIHTC HIS 96 96 % 4.51% 18.80% 16.54% Family 7 37.0% 1.2% 7.5% % 9.8% 289 75A-568 Woodbur 15 49.01 Large 524.1 53.8 LIHTC Walk 0 150 % 0.00% 1 12.58% 1 17.88% Family 8 1 32.6% 1 3.0% 1 6.5% % 1 14.0% Table 11: La Habra Households with Low children in Censn Income dte s Units Propert Propert developme Census Tract vs. y Propert y Propert nt OR Tract Tract pact Tract Tract Pover Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispani yAsian Developme Numbe White Black Hispan Asian ty Type Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) nt T e r % (%) is (%) NO Rate Project- Las Based Lomas 0013.0 13.6 Section 8 Gardens 93 44% 1% 44% 11% 47% 3 24.3% 1.4% 59.1% % 9.2% Project- CasaEl Based Centro 0012.0 Section Apts. 55 11% N/a 21% 68% N/a 2 12.7% 0.2% 85.1% 1.8% 15.1% Table 12: La Palma Households with children in Cens Low the us Income Propert Propert developme Census Tract Units vs. y Propert y Propert nt OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Pove Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispani yAsian Developme Numbe White Black Hispan Asian try Type Name Project NO (%) c (%) NO nt Type r % (%) is (%) (%) Rate Camden Place Apartment 1101.1 47.0 LIHTC s 35 35 9.30% 9.30% 9.30% 65.12% Senior 6 24.5% 5.6% 17.6% % 8.4% Casa La Palma Apartment 26 26 Non 1101.1 47.0 LIHTC s 9 9 15.93% 3.53% 17.29% 48.46% Targeted 6 24.5% 5.6% 17.6% % 8.4% 290 75A-569 Table 13: Lake Forest Households with Low children in Censu Income the s Units Propert developme Census Tract vs. Property Propert y Propert at OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Pover Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispani yAsian Developme Numbe White Black Hispan Asia ty Type Name Project (%) NO c (%) (%) nt Type r % (%) is (%) ❑ (%) Rate Baker Ranch Affordab le (aka Arroyo at Baker 18 18 Large 524.22 13.7 LIHTC Ranch) 7 9 7.45% 7.45% 36.86% 5.49% Family 55.5% 2% 20.2% % 7% Table 14: Laguna Niguel Households with children in Cens Low the us Income Propert Propert developme Census Tract Units vs. y Propert y Propert nt OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Pove Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispani yAsian Developme Numbe White Black Hispan Asian rty Type Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) nt Type r % (%) is (%) (%) Rate Project - Based Section Village La 0423.3 13.7 8 Paz 100 84% 2% 7% 7% 11 4 55.5% 2% 20.2% % 7% Project- Alicia Based Park Section Apartment 0423.2 8 s 56 75% 4% 13% 8% 17% 6 62% 4.7% 19.1% 8% 8.6% 291 75A-570 Table 15: Mission Viejo Household s with Low children in Income the Units Propert Propert Propert developm Census Census vs. y y y Propert cut OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Program Project Units in White Black Hispaui yAsian Developm Numbe White Black Hispan Asian Povert Type Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) cut Type r % (%) is (%) (%) Rate Arroyo Vista Apartmen 15 15 Large LIHTC is 5 5 64.75% 1.36% 37.97% 1 15.93% Family 320.22 38.9% 1.4% 47.2% 8.3% 7.5% Heritage Villas Senior 14 14 Non LIHTC Housiu 1 3 6.37% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Targeted 320.13 74.5% 4.3% 10.0% 3.3% 4.8% Table 16: Newport Beach Househ olds with children in the develop Censu Low ment s Income Propert OR Census Tract Units vs. y Propert Property Property Develop Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Pover Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispaui Asian ment Numbe White Black Hispan Asian ty e Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) Type r % (%) is (%) (%) Rate Project- Seaview Based Luthera Section 8 ❑ Plaza 100 86% N/a 4% 10% N/a 0626.44 84.4% 0% 6% 8.9% 9.2% Bayvie w 11 79.43 LIHTC Lauding 9 120 % 1.42% 6.38% 5.67% Senior 630.04 82.3% 2.9% 7.4% 6.6% 4.8% Lange Drive 50.81 Large 11.3 12.2 LIHTC Family 74 74 % 1.61% 55.24% 1.61% Family 740.03 20.7% 1.6% 64.9% % % Newport Veteran Non- s Targete LIHTC Housing 12 12 0.00% 15.38% 7.69% 0.00% d 636.03 75.8% 0.3% 15.7% 4.7% 6.1% Table 17: Orange (City) Household s with children in Low the Censu Income Propert Propert developme s Census Units vs. y Propert y Propert nt OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispau yAsian Developme Numb Whit Black Hispan Asian Povert Type Name Project (%) (%) is (%) (%) or Type er e % (%) is (%) (0/6 yRate Project - Based Section Triangle 0759.0 56.3 8 Terrace 75 57% 3% 24% 15% N/a 2 % 1% 37.3% 3.7% 18.3% Project- Casa 0759.0 51.9 Based Ramon 75 19% N/a 77% 3% 37% 1 % 1.4% 1 41.9% 2.8% 1 24.1% 292 75A-571 Section 8 Project - Based Section Casas Del 46.6 8 Rio 39 89% N/a 8% N/a N/a 758.06 % 0.4% 47.6% 3.8% 15.7% Project - Based Section Friendly 51.9 8 Center 8 N/a I N/a N/a N/a N/a 759.01 % 1.4% 41.9% 2.8% 24.1% Buena Vista Apartment Large 52.7 LIHTC s 17 17 66.18% 0.00% 64.71% 1.47% Family 762.02 % 1.0% 38.3% 7.1% 7.4% Chestnut Place (Fairway Manor Large 46.6 LIHTC LP) 49 50 46.15% 1.54% 15.38% 24.62% Family 758.06 % 0.4% 47.6% 3.8% 15.7% Citrus Grove Apartment Large 11.6 LIHTC s 56 57 85.65% 3.59% 81.17% 0.00% Family 762.04 % 1.3% 79.6% 5.7% 23.1% Commu❑it y Garden 33 33 28.7 16.1 LIHTC Towers 2 3 2.44% 0.00% 0.44% 4.44% Senior 761.02 % 7.0% 47.1% % 19.4% Harmony Creek Apartment 46.6 LIHTC s 83 83 39.13% 1.09% 13.04% 9.78% Senior 758.06 % 0.4% 47.6% 3.8% 15.7% Orangeval e Apartment Non 52.0 11.0 LIHTC s 64 64 9.76% 1.63% 82.52% 2.44% Targeted 762.05 % 0.7% 32.5% % 14.0% Serrano Large 35.2 LIHTC Woods 62 63 83.81% 2.02% 85.02% 0.00% Family 758.11 % 0.2% 53.7% 9.6% 18.1% Stonegate Senior Apartment 34.7 11.0 LIHTC s 19 20 62.50% 4.17% 37.50% 0.00% Senior 758.16 % 1.7% 47.1% % 17.2% ne Knolls Apartment s aka Villa 26 26 Non 34.7 11.0 LIHTC Santiago 0 0 33.80% 2.66% 71.18% 5.90% Targeted 758.16 % 1.7% 47.1% % 17.2% Walnut- Large 33.1 12.9 LIHTC Pixle 22 22 88.89% 1.85% 72.22% 1.85% Family 760 % 2.5% 49.9% % 15.1% Table 18: San Clemente Households with children in Low the Trac Censu Income Propert developme Census t s Units vs. Property Propert y Propert nt OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Asia Tract Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispa❑i yAsian Developme Numbe White Black Hispan ❑ Povert Type Name Project % % c % NO n[ Type r % % is % % Rate Project - Based Section Casa De 0421.1 8 Se❑iors 72 78% N/a 15% 7% N/a 3 82.8% 0.4% 15.2% 1% 1 9.4% Cotto❑s Point LIHTC Se❑ior 75.82% 0.00% 7.69% 7.69% 293 75A-572 Apartment s Las Palmas Village (aka Avenida Large 1.4 LIHTC Serra) 18 19 30.77% 0.00% 42.31% 3.85% Family 421.08 69.9% 0.0% 26.3% % 12.1% Talega Jamboree Apartment 12 Large 6.3 LIHTC aPhase I 3 124 48.60% 1.40% 64.02% 1.87% Family 320.23 75.5% 0.7% 11.4% % 2.2% Talega Jamboree Apt Ph. II Mendocin o at Large 6.3 LIHTC Talega 11 1 61 62 1 52.25% 1 2.25% 51.35% 1 2.70% 1 Family 320.23 75.5% 0.7% 11.4% % 2.2% 1Le Presidio (formerly known as Wycliffe LIHTC Casa de 71 72 76.74% 0.00% 16.28% 10.47% Seniors 421.13 82.8% 0.4% 15.2% 1% 9.4% Vintage 12 1.9 LIHTC Shores 0 122 91.24% 1.46% 8.76% 2.19% Senior 422.06 79.5% 2.8% 14.3% % 4.2% Table 19: San Juan Capistrano Househol ds with children in the Censu Low developm LNmb s Income Propert cut OR Tract Units vs. Property Propert y Property Develop Tract Tract Tract Tract Pover Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispani Asian men[ White Blac Hispani Asian ty Type Name Project NO (%) c (%) (%) Type % k (%) c (%) (%) Rate Seasons Senior Apartme nts at San Juan Capistra 11 11 423.1 19.4 LIHTC no 2 2 78.99% 1.45% 10.87% 2.17% Senior 2 25.2% 0.0% 68.0% 3.0% % Villa Palmma Senior Apartme 423.1 19.4 LIHTC nts 66 84 85.14% 0.00% 16.22% 2.70% Senior 2 25.2% 0.0% 68.0% 3.0% Seasons II Senior Apartme 423.1 19.4 LIHTC nts 37 38 83.33% 2.38% 7.14% 0.00% Senior 2 25.2% 0.0% 68.0% 3.0% % Table 20: Santa Ana Households with children in Low the Censu Income Propert Prope developmen s Census Units vs. Property Propert y rty tOR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispani Asian Developmen Numb White Black Hispau Asian Povert Type Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) t Type er % (%) is (%) (%) y Rate 294 75A-573 Project - Based Flower 0751. Section Terrace 140 7% 1% 13% 78% N/a 00 17.3% 1.2% 77% 3.7% 23.8% Project- Flower Based Park 0749. Section Plaza 199 3% 1% 14% 59% N/a 01 0.9% 0% 94.7% 4.3% 25.8% Project- Highland Based Manor 749.0 Section Apts. 12 18% N/a 82% N/a 36% 2 2.9% 0.1% 95.8% 1.3% 26.9% Project - Based Rosswoo 0750. Section dVilla 198 3% 1% 33% 62% N/a 02 6% 0.3% 86.5% 5.8% 37.8% Project- Santa Based Ana 0750. Section Towers 198 4% 2% 24% 69% N/a 02 6% 0.3% 86.5% 5.8% 37.8% Project - Based Sullivan 0748. Section Manor 54 33% N/a 52% 15% 49% 02 1.6% 0.5% 88.1% 9.3% 25.5% Andaluci a Apartme nts (aka 815 N. Large 891.0 LIHTC Harbor) 56 70 70.00% 2.35% 85.00% 2.65% Family 5 1.7% 0.0% 89.1% 9.2% 27.0% City Gardens Apartme 27 Non 753.0 LIHTC nts 4 274 7.24% 0.30% 84.77% 1.36% Targeted 1 21.1% 1.5% 66.6% 9.5% 16.6% Depot at Santiago Apartme Large 744.0 LIHTC nts 69 70 89.80% 0.78% 91.37% 1.57% Faint 5 5.3% 1.3% 89.8% 2.8% 20.8% Guest Special 749.0 LIHTC House 71 72 1.22% 10.98% 30.49% 1.22% Needs 1 0.9% 0.0% 94.7% 4.3% 25.8% Heninger Village Apartme 37.33 750.0 LIHTC nts 57 58 17.33% 5.33% 45.33% % Senior 2 6.0% 0.3% 86.5% 5.9% 37.8% La Gema Del 100.00 Large 740.0 1.60 64.90 11.30 LIHTC Barrio 6 6 0.00% 0.00% % 0.00% Famil 3 20.70% % % % 12.2% Lacy & Raiff Apartme Large 748.0 LIHTC nts 34 35 86.32% 0.85% 88.03% 0.00% Farrity 6 1.4% 1.3% 93.0% 4.3% 30.8% Raiff Street Apartme 100.00 Large 748.0 LIHTC nts 6 6 0.00% 0.00% % 0.00% Farnity 2 1.6% 0.5% 88.1% 9.5% 25.5% Ross -Du rant Apartme Large 750.0 LIHTC nts 48 49 78.95% 0.00% 88.89% 0.00% Farnity 3 2.5% 0.1% 94.8% 1.6% 32.3% Santa Large 750.0 LIHTC Ana Infill 50 51 94.00% 0.00% 95.60% 3.20% Farrity 2 6.0% 0.3% 86.5% 5.9% 37.8% Santa Ana Station District Large 744.0 LIHTC Phase 73 74 10.09% 1.26% 95.58% 0.32% Farnity 5 5.3% 1.3% 89.8% 2.8% 20.8% Santa Ana Station District Large 744.0 LIHTC Phase II 39 40 16.46% 1.27% 89.24% 0.00% Fatuity 5 5.3% 1.3% 89.8% 2.8% 20.8% Vista Del Rio Apartme Special 891.0 35.2 LIHTC nts 40 41 78.33% 11.67% 41.67% 1.67% Needs 7 8.9% 0.0% 55.4% % 8.3% 295 75A-574 Wakeha or Grant Apartme 12 Non 745.0 LIHTC nts 6 127 8.83% 1.42% 84.33% 5.98% Targeted 1 1.0% 0.9% 91.2% 6.6% 39.8% Wilshire & Minnie Apartme 14 Large 744.0 LIHTC nts 3 144 97.57% 0.00% 97.76% 1.12% Family 3 3.6% 0.0% 93.9% 2.5% 28.8% Table 21: Tustin Households with children in Censu Low the Censu s Income Propert developmen s Tract Units vs. Property Propert y Propert tOR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Pover Program Project Units in White yBlack Hispani yAsian Developmen Numb White Black Hispan Asian ty Type Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) t Type er % (%) is (%) (%) Rate Project - Based Section Tustin 755.0 8 Gardens 100 29% N/a 12% 59% N/a 5 41.5% 2.8% 38.8% 9.2% 8.3% Anton Legacy Apartment 16 22 Non- 755.1 31.7 LIHTC s 1 5 37.90% 7.83% 33.10% 16.90% Targeted 5 27.4% 1.1% 36.0% % 19.4% Coventry 24 755.0 16.7 LIHTC Court 97 0 40.47% 5.06% 8.56% 26.85% Senior 7 31.1% 3.8% 45.0% % 13.2% Hampton Square Apartment 21 35 Non- 744.0 LIHTC s 2 0 12.16% 1.54% 78.08% 1.03% Tar Hed 7 10.8% 1.3% 84.1% 2.0% 22.9% Heritage Place At 755.1 31.7 LIHTC Tustin 53 54 38.81% 2.99% 13.43% 25.37% Senior 5 27.4% 1.1% 36.0% Westchest 14 15 Non 755.1 20.5 LIHTC er Park 9 0 13.12% 3.38% 75.35% 7.16% Tar eted 3 14.4% 3.6% 57.9% Table 22: Westminster Households with children in Low the Censu Censu Income Proper Propert Propert developme s s Units vs. Property ty y y nt OR Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Tract Program Project Units in White Black Hispani Asian Developme Numb White Black Hispan Asian Povert Type Name Project (%) (%) c (%) (%) of Type er % (%) is (%) (%) y Rate Project - Based Pacific Section Terrace 0997. 51.1 8 A is 97 3% N/a 1 % 96% N/a 02 21.2% 0.9 % 23.8 % % 21.2% Cambrid ge Heights Senior Apartme 55.56 998.0 30.3 LIHTC nts 21 22 33.33% 0.00% 3.70% % Senior 2 14.5% 1.0% 32.1% 49.7% % Coventry 67.33 998.0 30.3 LIHTC Heights 75 76 9.90% 0.00% 3.96% % Senior 2 14.5% 1.0% 32.1% 49.7% % Royale Apartme 12.03 Large 998.0 26.7 LIHTC nts 35 36 18.05% 5.26% 49.62% % Family 1 14.5% 0.6% 40.4% 44.2% 296 75A-575 LIHTC ne Rose Gardens 13 2 13 3 9.15% 0.61% 3.05% 84.76 % Large Family 998.0 3 17.5% 0.0% 24.4% 54.3% 23.0 % Westmin ster Senior Apartme 81.25 998.0 30.3 LIHTC nts 91 91 9.38% 0.00% 4.69% % Senior 2 14.5% 1.0% 32.1% 49.7% % Windsor Court - Stratford 55.84 Large 998.0 23.0 LIHTC Place 85 86 20.30% 5.08% 19.80% % Family 3 17.5% 0.0% 24.4% 54.3% % ?9i 75A-576 VHI. GLOSSARY Accessibility: whether a physical structure, object, or technology is able to be used by people with disabilities such as mobility issues, hearing impairment, or vision impairment. Accessibility features include wheelchair ramps, audible crosswalk signals, and TTY numbers. See: TTY Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH): a requirement under the Fair Housing Act that local governments take steps to further fair housing, especially in places that have been historically segregated. See: Segregation American Community Survey (ACS): a survey conducted by the US Census Bureau that regularly gathers information about demographics, education, income, language proficiency, disability, employment, and housing. Unlike the Census, ACS surveys are conducted both yearly and across multiple years. The surveys study samples of the population, rather than counting every person in the U.S. like the Census. Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA): federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities. Annual Action Plan: an annual plan used by local jurisdictions that receive money from HUD to plan how they will spend the funds to address fair housing and community development. The Annual Action Plan carries out the larger Consolidated Plan. See also: Consolidated Plan CDBG: Community Development Block Grant. Money that local governments receive from HUD to spend of housing and community improvement Census Tract: small subdivisions of cities, towns, and rural areas that the Census uses to group residents together and accurately evaluate the demographics of a community. Several census tracts, put together, make up a town, city, or rural area. Consent Decree: a settlement agreement that resolves a dispute between two parties without admitting guilt or liability. The court maintains supervision over the implementation of the consent decree, including any payments or actions taken as required by the consent decree. Consolidated Plan (Con Plan): a plan that helps local governments evaluate their affordable housing and community development needs and market conditions. Local governments must use their Consolidated Plan to identify how they will spend money from HUD to address fair housing and community development. Any local government that receives money from HUD in the form of CDBG, HOME, ESG, or HOPWA grants must have a Consolidated Plan. Consolidated Plans are carried out through annual Action Plans. See: Action Plan, CDBG, HOME, ESG, HOPWA. Consortium: in this analysis, the terms "the Consortium" and "the Taunton Consortium" are used interchangeably. The Consortium refers to the cities of Taunton and Attleboro, and the towns of Berkley, Carver, Dighton, Freetown, Lakeville, Mansfield, Middleboro, North Attleboro, Norton, Plainville, Raynham, and Seekonk. 298 75A-577 Continuum of Care(CoQ: a HUD program designed to promote commitment to the goal of ending homelessness. The program provides funding to nonprofits and state and local governments to quickly rehouse homeless individuals and families, promote access to and effect utilization of mainstream programs by homeless individuals, and optimize self- sufficiency among individuals and families experiencing homelessness. Data and Mapping Tool (AFFHT): an online HUD resource that combines Census data and American Community Surveys data to generate maps and tables evaluating the demographics of an area for a variety of categories, including race, national origin, disability, Limited English Proficiency, housing problems, environmental health, and school proficiency, etc. De Facto Segregation: segregation that is not created by the law, but which forms a pattern as a result of various outside factors, including former laws. De Jure Segregation: segregation that is created and enforced by the law. Segregation is currently illegal. Density Bonus: an incentive for developers that allows developers to increase the maximum amount of units allowed at a building site in exchange for either affordable housing funds or making a certain percentage of the units affordable. Disparate Impact: practices in housing that negatively affect one group of people with a protected characteristic (such as race, sex, or disability, etc.) more than other people without that characteristic, even though the rules applied by landlords do not single out that group. Dissimilarity Index: measures the percentage of a certain group's population that would have to move to a different census tract in order to be evenly distributed with a city or metropolitan area in relation to another group. The higher the Dissimilarity Index, the higher the level of segregation. For example, if a city's Black/White Dissimilarity Index was 65, then 65% of Black residents would need to move to another neighborhood in order for Blacks and Whites to be evenly distributed across all neighborhoods in the city. ESG: Emergency Solutions Grant. Funding provided by HUD to 1) engage homeless individuals and families living on the street, 2) improve the number and quality of emergency shelters for homeless individuals and families, 3) help operate these shelters, 4) provide essential services to shelter residents, 5) rapidly re -house homeless individuals and families, and 6) prevent families/individuals from becoming homeless Entitlement Jurisdiction: a local government that receives funds from HUD to be spent on housing and community development. See also: HUD Grantee Environmental Health Index: a HUD calculation based on potential exposure to harmful toxins at a neighborhood level. This includes air quality carcinogenic, respiratory, and neurological hazards. The higher the number, the less exposure to toxins harmful to human health. Environmental Justice: the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, especially minorities, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental 299 75A-578 laws, regulations, and policies. In the past, environmental hazards have been concentrated near segregated neighborhoods, making minorities more likely to experience negative health effects. Recognizing this history and working to make changes in future environmental planning are important pieces of environmental justice. Exclusionary Zoning: the use of zoning ordinances to prevent certain land uses, especially the building of large and affordable apartment buildings for low-income people. A city with exclusionary zoning might only allow single-family homes to be built in the city, excluding people who cannot afford to buy a house. Exposure Index: a measurement of how much the typical person of a specific race is exposed to people of other races. A higher number means that the average person of that race lives in a census tract with a higher percentage of people from another group. Fair Housing Act: a federal civil rights law that prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of race, class, sex, religion, national origin, or familial status. See also: Housing Discrimination. Federal Uniform Accessibility Standards (UFAS): a guide to uniform standards for design, construction, and alternation of buildings so that physically handicapped people will be able to access and use such buildings. Gentrification: the process of renovating or improving a house or neighborhood to make it more attractive to middle-class residents. Gentrification often causes the cost of living in the neighborhood to rise, pushing out lower -income residents and attracting middle-class residents. Often, these effects which are driven by housing costs have a corresponding change in the racial demographics of an area. High Opportunity Areas/Low Opportunity Areas: High Opportunity Areas are communities with low poverty, high access to jobs, and low concentrations of existing affordable housing. Often, local governments try to build new affordable housing options in High Opportunity Areas so that the residents will have access to better resources, and in an effort to desegregate a community, as minorities are often concentrated in low opportunity areas and in existing affordable housing sites. HOME: HOME Investment Partnership. HOME provides grants to States and localities that communities use (often in partnership with nonprofits) to fund activities such as building, buying, and/or rehabilitating affordable housing for rent or ownership, or providing direct rental assistance to low-income people. Housing Choice Voucher (HCV)/Section 8 Voucher: a HUD voucher issued to a low- income household that promises to pay a certain amount of the household's rent. Prices are set based on the rent in the metropolitan area, and voucher households must pay any difference between the rent and the voucher amount. Voucher holders are often the subject of source of income discrimination. See also: Source of Income Discrimination. 300 75A-579 Housing Discrimination: the refusal to rent to or inform a potential tenant about the availability of housing. Housing discrimination also applies to buying a home or getting a loan to buy a home. The Fair Housing Act makes it illegal to discriminate against a potential tenant/buyer/lendee based on that person's race, class, sex, religion, national origin, or familial status. HUD Grantee: a jurisdiction (city, country, consortium, state, etc.) that receives money from HUD. See also: Entitlement Jurisdiction Inclusionary Zoning: a zoning ordinance that requires that a certain percentage of any newly built housing must be affordable to people with low and moderate incomes. Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): a federal civil rights law that ensures students with a disability are provided with Free Appropriate Public Education that is tailored to their individual needs. Integration: the process of reversing trends of racial or other segregation in housing patterns. Often, segregation patterns continue even though enforced segregation is now illegal, and integration may require affirmative steps to encourage people to move out of their historic neighborhoods and mix with other groups in the community. Isolation Index: a measurement of how much the typical person of a specific race is only exposed to people of the same race. For example, an 80% isolation index value for White people would mean that the population of people the typical White person is exposed to is 80% White. Jobs Proximity Index: a HUD calculation based on distances to all job locations, distance from any single job location, size of employment at that location, and labor supply to that location. The higher the number, the better the access to employment opportunities for residents in a neighborhood. Labor Market Engagement Index: a HUD calculation based on level of employment, labor force participation, and educational attainment in a census tract. The higher the number, the higher the labor force participation and human capital in the neighborhood. Limited English Proficiency (LEP): residents who do not speak English as a first language, and who speak English less than "very well" Local Data: any data used in this analysis that is not provided by HUD through the Data and Mapping Tool (AFFHT), or through the Census or American Community Survey Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC): provides tax incentives to encourage individual and corporate investors to invest in the development, acquisition, and rehabilitation of affordable rental housing. Low Poverty Index: a HUD calculation using both family poverty rates and public assistance receipt in the form of cash -welfare (such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families 301 75A-580 (TANF)). This is calculated at the Census Tract level. The higher the score, the less exposure to poverty in the neighborhood. Low Transportation Cost Index: a HUD calculation that estimates transportation costs for a family of 3, with a single parent, with an income at 50% of the median income for renters for the region. The higher the number, the lower the cost of transportation in the neighborhood. Market Rate Housing: housing that is not restricted by affordable housing laws. A market rate unit can be rented for any price that the market can support. NLVIBY: Not In My Back Yard. A social and political movement that opposes housing or commercial development in local communities NIMBY complaints often involve affordable housing, with reasons ranging from traffic concerns to small town quality to, in some cases, thinly -veiled racism. Poverty Line: the minimum level of yearly income needed to allow a household to afford the necessities of life such as housing, clothing, and food. The poverty line is defined on a national basis. The US poverty line for a family of 4 with 2 children under 18 is $22,162. Project -Based Section 8: a government -funded program that provides rental housing to low- income households in privately owned and managed rental units. The funding is specific to the building. If you move out of the building, you will no longer receive the funding. Publicly Supported Housing: housing assisted with funding through federal, State, or local agencies or programs, as well as housing that is financed or administered by or through any such agencies or programs. Quintile: twenty percent of a population; one -fifth of a population divided into five equal groups Reasonable Accommodation: a change to rules, policies, practices, or services which would allow a handicapped person an equal opportunity to use and enjoy their housing, including in public and common use areas. It is a violation of the Fair Housing Act to refuse to make a reasonable accommodation when such accommodation is necessary for the handicapped person to have equal use and enjoyment of the housing. R/ECAPs: Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty. This is a HUD -defined term indicating a census tract that has more than 50% Non -White residents, and 40% or more of the population is in poverty OR where the poverty rate is greater than three times the average poverty rate in the area. In the HUD Data and Mapping Tool (AFFHT), RECAPS are outlined in pink. See also: Census Tract Region: the Taunton Consortium is located within the HUD -designated Taunton Consortium Custom Region, which covers Bristol, Plymouth, and Norfolk Counties. However, the individual CDBG jurisdictions of Attleboro and Taunton are actually part of the Providence - Warwick, RI -MA Region. Both Regions are used in this analysis, but are always clearly delineated by name and with maps. 302 75A-581 Rehabilitation Act (Section 504): a federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs conducted by federal agencies, in programs receiving federal financial assistance, in federal employment and in the employment practices of federal contractors. School Proficiency Index: a HUD calculation based on performance of 4s' grade students on state exams to describe which neighborhoods have high -performing elementary schools nearby and which are near lower performing elementary schools. The higher the number, the higher the school system quality is in a neighborhood. Segregation: the illegal separation of racial or other groups in the location of housing and neighborhoods. Segregation can occur within a city or town, or in comparing multiple cities. Even though segregation is now illegal, often, housing continues to be segregated because of factors that make certain neighborhoods more attractive and expensive than others, and therefore more accessible to affluent White residents. See also: Integration. Source of Income Discrimination: housing discrimination based on whether a potential tenant plans to use a Housing Choice Voucher/Section 8 Voucher to pay part of their rent. Source of income discrimination is illegal under Massachusetts state law. See also: Housing Choice Voucher/Section 8 Voucher. Superfund Sites: any land in the U.S. that has been contaminated by hazardous waste and identified by the EPA as a candidate for cleanup because it poses a risk to human health and/or the environment Supplemental Security Income (SSI): benefits paid to disabled adults and children who have limited income and resources, or to people 65 and older without disabilities who meet the financial limits. Testers: people who apply for housing to determine whether the landlord is illegally discriminating. For example, Black and White testers will both apply for housing with the same landlord, and if they are treated differently or given different information about available housing, their experiences are compared to show evidence of discrimination. Transit Trips Index: a HUD calculation that estimates transit trips taken for a family of 3, with a single parent, with an income of 50% of the median income for renters for the region. The higher the number, the more likely residents in that neighborhood utilize public transit. TTY/TDD: Text Telephone/Telecommunication Device for the Deaf. TTY is the more widely used term. People who are deaf or hard of hearing can use a text telephone to communicate with other people who have a TTY number and device. TTY services are an important resource for government offices to have so that deaf or hard of hearing people can easily communicate with them. Unbanked: not served by a financial institution. Underbanked: an area that does not have enough banks to meet market demand 303 75A-582 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA): a federal law protecting women who have experienced domestic and/or sexual violence. The law establishes several programs and services including a federal rape shield law, community violence prevention programs, protections for victims who are evicted because of events related to domestic violence or stalking, funding for victim assistance services, like rape crisis centers and hotlines, programs to meet the needs of immigrant women and women of different races or ethnicities, programs and services for victims with disabilities, and legal aid for survivors of domestic violence. White Flight: white families that moved from cities to suburbs in response to desegregation Sod 75A-583 IX. Contributing Factors Appendix Access for Students with Disabilities to Proficient Schools Access for students with disabilities to proficient schools is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues. There are more than 600 public schools in Orange County, part of 27 school districts. There is a long history of barriers to education for persons with disabilities in Orange County.10 These included issues with school districts in Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, and Orange, as well as the Capistrano Unified School District which crosses city boundaries. However, this Analysis did not reveal more recent systemic policies or practices driving disparities for students with disabilities. At the same time, school discipline data for Orange County reveals a 4.5% suspension rate for students with disabilities as compared to a 1.9% suspension rate for students who do not have disabilities. Both rates are lower than statewide but still show that students with disabilities face barriers in accessing education that others do not encounter. This data calls for affirmative strategies to reduce school discipline disparities and avoid unnecessary suspensions of students with disabilities. Access to Transportation for Persons with Disabilities Access to transportation for persons with disabilities is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. The main barrier to transportation for persons with disabilities in Orange County is the lack of public transportation infrastructure generally, including the lack of east -west rail service and rail service in coastal communities and long wait times for buses in the southern portion of the county. Because many persons with disabilities are dependent on public transportation, these problems hit persons with disabilities especially hard. This Analysis did not reveal any systemic problems with the accessibility of major providers' services, such as Metrolink or the Orange County Transportation Authority. Each agency's vehicles generally appear to meet accessibility requirements, and the Orange County Transportation Authority provides required paratransit service through OC Flex. Access to Financial Services Access to financial services is a contributing factor to fair housing issues for Hispanic residents of Orange County. Although this Analysis did not undertake a comprehensive analysis of bank branch locations in Orange County, a limited review of the banks ranked as the three best in Orange County by the Orange County Register revealed disparities in locations served." The highest ranked bank, California Bank & Trust, has nine locations in Orange County, none of which are located in the cities of Anaheim and Santa Ana,12 the two largest cities in the county and areas with concentrations of Hispanic population. Although larger banks like Chase and Bank of 1D Rex Dalton, OC Families Face Fierce Fightfor Special Ed Services, VOICE of OC (Sep. 25, 2012), httos://v oic eofoc. org/2012/09/oc-families-face-fierce-fieht-for-special-ed-services/. "Kenya Barrett, Best of Orange County 2019: Best Bank, THE ORANGE CouNTY REGISTER (Sep. 19, 2019), https://www. ocregister. com/2019/09/19/best-of-orange-county-2019-best-bank/. 12 https://www.calbanktrust.com/locations/ 305 75A-584 America have branches in Anaheim and Santa Ana, there are still disproportionately few branches in those locations than in smaller, less heavily Hispanic cities like Irvine and Huntington Beach. For example, there are 16 Chase branches in Irvine and seven in Huntington Beach as opposed to five in Anaheim and one in Santa Ana Bank of America's distribution of service is somewhat more balanced (though not when accounting for population) with six branches in Santa Ana, eight in Anaheim, eight in Irvine, and six in Huntington Beach. Lack of access to conventional financial services like those offered by banks can prevent residents of underserved neighborhoods from building credit that will help them attain homeownership and can leave residents with few options but to patronize predatory financial services providers like payday lenders. A 2016 report from the California Department of Business Oversight noted that, while 38.7% of California's population was Hispanic, the average percentage of Hispanic residents in zip codes with six or more storefront payday lenders was 53%.13 Payday loans often lead to a cycle of debt that impedes individuals' access to opportunity and economic mobility more generally. In Orange County, that phenomenon appears to be especially likely to harm Hispanic residents, particularly in Santa Ana. Access to Publicly Supported Housing for Persons with Disabilities Access to publicly supported housing for persons with disabilities is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Although persons with disabilities are generally able to access Housing Choice Vouchers at rates that are commensurate with their share of the income -eligible population, access to Project -Based Section 8 is more limited in many cities. For Project -Based Section 8, cities with disproportionately low concentrations of residents with disabilities include Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, La Habra, and Westminster. Admissions and Occupancy Policies and Procedures, Including Preferences in Publicly Supported Housing Admissions and occupancy policies and procedures, including preferences in publicly supported housing are a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. In particular, housing authorities, including the Orange County Housing Authority, provide live -work preferences to applicants for Housing Choice Vouchers. Given that Los Angeles County is significantly more heavily Black than Orange County, live -work preferences in Orange County may have the effect of disproportionately excluding Black families that might want to move to Orange County. Housing authorities also have some criminal background screening policies that might be overly restrictive. For example, the Orange County Housing Authority and the Anaheim Housing Authority consider violent criminal activity that occurred as long as five years ago, even if that activity consisted of minor misdemeanor conduct. The Garden Grove Housing Authority also denies assistance based on arrest records alone in certain cases, a policy that contradicts applicable HUD guidance. "The Demographics of California Payday Lending: A Zip Code Analysis of Storefront Locations, CALI oRNIA DEPARTMENT of BusiNEss OVERSIGHT (2016), https:Hdbo.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/296/2019/02/The- Demographics-of-CA-Payday-L ending-A-Zip-Code-Analysis-of-Storefront-L ocations.pdf. 306 75A-585 Availability of Affordable Units in a Range of Sizes The availability of affordable units in a range of sizes is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Overcrowding in Orange County is very high, at 9.51% overall, expanding to 15.97% for renters. Broken down by race, White, Black, and Asian American residents live in overcrowded conditions at a rate of 6 or 7%, while Hispanic residents are overcrowded at a rate of 26% countywide. For Publicly Supported Housing, a supermajority (74.67%) of Project -Based Section 8 units are 0-1 bedroom units, as are Other Multifamily units (84.54%, the other 15% having 2 bedrooms). A plurality of Housing Choice Vouchers are also limited to 0-1 bedroom units (43.97%). 5,561 households or 26.20% of Housing Choice Voucher occupants are also households with children, the highest of any category of publicly supported housing (followed by Project -Based Section 8, with 9.62%). Overall, most housing units in the county contain 2 (28%), 3 (30%), or 4 (21%) bedrooms, indicating that on paper, accessing housing units with enough bedrooms to house families or live-in aides using a voucher is likely. However, these numbers do not speak to affordability and/or whether these units are within the payment standards for vouchers. One silver lining is that source of income discrimination was recently outlawed statewide, so even more units within the payment standards should be available to voucher users in the future. Availability, Type, Frequency, and Reliability of Public Transportation The availability, type, frequency, and reliability of public transportation are contributing factors to fair housing issues in Orange County. Public transportation in Orange County primarily consists of bus service operated by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and Metrolink light rail service. Additional, more geographically limited service is available through Anaheim Resort Transportation's bus system and the OC Streetcar, connecting Garden Grove and Santa Ana. Paratransit service is available through OC Flex. This public transportation has two important shortcomings that have ramifications for fair housing issues. First, Metrolink does not provide service to coastal communities in the central and northern portions of Orange County. These communities, such as Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, and Laguna Beach are disproportionately White in comparison to the county as a whole. The relative lack of public transportation in these areas may deter members of protected classes who do not have cars and are reliant on public transportation from choosing to live there, thus reinforcing patterns of segregation. Second, although the OCTA offers bus service throughout the county, none of its high -frequency lines, which run every 15 minutes during weekday rush hour, serve the southern half of the county. As with the lack of light rail service in coastal communities, poorer quality bus service in the disproportionately White southern half of the county may deter households from making residential choices that would further integration. The low frequency and sparse bus lines in southern Orange County also burden low-income households that disproportionately consist of protected class members and make their lives more difficult. 07 75A-586 Community Opposition Community Opposition is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. The County is now only plurality White,14 but recent political and demographic change have not slowed opposition to affordable housing in Orange County, as residents have mobilized to delay and prevent affordable housing efforts. For instance, city councils in Laguna Beach, Irvine, and elsewhere have voted to oppose or are preparing to oppose statewide plans to add 22,000 affordable housing units in the County.15 For the most part, residents and councilmembers opposed to the plan have cited procedural concerns such as insufficient concern for local participation,16 but recent opposition to housing for the homeless and affordable housing generally betrays a wider opposition to such initiatives based on "NIMBY" ("Not In My Backyard") sentiments. In Fullerton, for example, residents recently mobilized to stop the creation of an affordable housing complex, citing concerns that the complex would reduce property values, create danger to children, and "attract people from other cities" that would become the responsibility of Fullerton residents.17 Additionally, in early 2019, opposition to state plans to increase affordable housing forced California to sue the city of Huntington Beach to force compliance.18 Finally, landlord opposition groups have organized to oppose rent control and anti -eviction initiatives aimed at preserving low- income residents' access to housing.19 Overall, despite demographic and political changes, community opposition to fair housing in Orange County remains robust. Deteriorated and Abandoned Properties Deteriorated and abandoned properties are not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Although there was a surge in deteriorated and abandoned properties in the wake of the foreclosure crisis, particularly in heavily Hispanic areas and with significant harmful consequences for communities,20 that issue has gradually abated over the ensuring years. The table below reflects the proportion of vacant housing units in each city in Orange County that is categorized as "Other Vacant" in the American Community Survey. These are the vacant units "QuickFacts: Orange County, California, UNITED STATES CENSUS BUREAU, https://www.census.gov/auickfacts/oraneecountvcalifomia (last visited Jan. 16, 2020). " Hosam Elattar and Noah Biesiada, OC Cities Pushing Back Against Housing Targetlncreases, VOICE OF OC (Jan. 14, 2020), https://voiceofoc.org/2020/01/oc-cities-pushing-back-against-housing-target-increases/. 6Id. Complaints included that the state plan's "methodology was unfair" and not done in "good faith." Jill Replogle, 'Not In My Backyard': What the Shouting Down of One Homeless Housing Complex Means For Us All, LAiST (Oct. 15, 2018), https://prrojects.scpr.org/interactives/fullerton-nimble. 18 Don Thompson, California Sues Wealthy Coastal City Over Low -Income Housing, ASSOCIATED PRESS (Jan. 25, 2019), httns://apnews.com/f5c6edc6bd31442082f5b4964aObc5ld. 19 Marisa Kendall, California -Wide Rent Cap Advances Despite Landlord Opposition, O.C. REGISTER (July 10, 2019), httos://www.ocregister.com/2019/07/10/ab-1482-set-for-senate-hearing/. 20 Alejandra Molina, No More Eyesores: Santa Ana Asks Courts to Intervene and Fix Abandoned Properties, O.C. REGISTER (Mar. 11, 2015), https://www.ocregister.com/2015/03/11/no-more-eyesores-santa-ana-asks-courts-to- intervene-and-fix-abandoned-properties . 75A-587 that are most likely to be abandoned rather than capturing vacation rentals and units that are currently on the rental or sales market. Table: Other Vacant Housing Units by City, 2013-2017 American Community Survey City Number of Other Vacant Units % of Vacant Units That Are Other Vacant Units Aliso Viejo 150 13.3% Anaheim 599 14.1% Brea 74 14.3% Buena Park 447 47.5% Costa Mesa 300 15.6% Cypress 144 33.8% Dana Point 196 7.5% Fountain Valley 180 36.3% Fullerton 485 20.1% Garden Grove 373 30.5% Huntington Beach 835 18.9% Irvine 628 11.4% Laguna Beach 640 23.7% Laguna Hills 26 4.6% Laguna Niguel 453 27.8% Laguna Woods 327 22.4% La Habra 144 19.0% Lake Forest 120 11.8% La Palma 38 28.8% Los Alamitos 12 9.2% Mission Viejo 239 20.6% Newport Beach 982 14.6% Orange 548 33.7% Placentia 155 38.3% Rancho Santa Margarita 0 0.0% San Clemente 397 12.0% San Juan Capistrano 312 46.2% Santa Ana 599 30.3% Seal Beach 315 27.3% Stanton 109 25.7% Tustin 162 13.8% Villa Park 45 43.3% Westminster 213 24.9% Yorba Linda 173 21.0% These Other Vacant units do not appear to be disproportionately concentrated in communities with high concentrations of Hispanic households and low White Populations. Villa Park and Fountain Valley have relatively low Hispanic population concentrations while San Juan Capistrano and 309 75A-588 Buena Park have similar concentrations to the county as a whole. Additionally, although Santa Ana has a fairly high concentration of Other Vacant units among its vacant units, overall vacancy is very low there in relation to the county as a whole. This is consistent with a picture of housing market that is very tight for low-income residents even in the lowest income parts of the area. Displacement and Lack of Housing Support for Victims of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, and Stalking Displacement and lack of housing support for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking are not significant contributing factors to fair housing issues in Orange County. California state law protects victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking, or abused elder or dependent adult who terminates their lease early.21 The tenant must provide written notice to the landlord, along with a copy of a temporary restraining order, emergency protective order, or protective order that protects the household member from further domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking, or abuse of an elder or dependent adult. Alternatively, proof may be shown by submitting a copy of a written report by a peace officer stating that the victim has filed an official report, or documentation from a qualified third party acting in their professional capacity to indicate the resident is seeking assistance for physical or mental injuries or abuse stemming from the abuse at issue. Notice to terminate the tenancy must be given within 180 days of the issuance date of the qualifying order or within 180 days of the date that any qualifying written report is made. This Analysis did not reveal specific evidence of noncompliance with these requirements in Orange County or of other barriers faced by domestic violence survivors. Displacement of Residents Due to Economic Pressures Displacement of residents due to economic pressures is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County and, in particular, in parts of Orange County that have historically had concentrations of low-income Hispanic and Vietnamese residents. The map below from the Urban Displacement Project at the University of California Berkeley shows census tracts that experienced gentrification both between 1990 and 2000 and between 2000 and 2015 (in red), census tracts that experienced gentrification between 2000 and 2015 (in light blue), census tracts that experienced gentrification between 1990 and 2000 (in dark blue), and disadvantaged communities that have not gentrified (in tan). Although there are no census tracts in Orange County coded as having experienced gentrification in both time periods, there are several census tracts that have undergone gentrification at some point since 1990 including in Anaheim, Costa Mesa, Dana Point, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Orange, San Clemente, and Villa Park. Though the Urban Displacement Project does not map the risk of future gentrification in displacement in Southern California as it does in the Bay Area, the areas most vulnerable to gentrification and displacement in Orange County — going forward — are disadvantaged areas located near areas that have already gentrified and disadvantaged areas located near major transit assets as well as anchor institutions like universities and hospitals. 21 https://Ieginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes displaySection.xhtml?lawCode—CIV&sectionNum=1946.7 310 75A-589 Because the southern and coastal portions of Orange County have relatively few disadvantaged areas, displacement risk is therefore concentrated in inland portions of central and northern Orange County such as Anaheim, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Irvine, Orange, Santa Ana, and Westminster. These areas also tend to have higher Hispanic and Asian population concentrations than the county as a whole, illustrating the fair housing implications of displacement. nlar mndo_ I. Infind o,hhmm.odc. 1911.s_ III AMM,n Rall AASADENA v • "n.w .......Iw nn.:M• U SAN BERNARDINO y" LOSANGE E,. p RIVER.IOE io.nn.e _ ana •me mom. PALM SPRINGS LONG BEACH •" •` —."A B E9ima IANE nv!• w.pxe A , ureroes� Mwm vl•le . � •.ncln.vnu re Impediments to Mobility Impediments to mobility are a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Specifically, Housing Choice Voucher payment standards that make it difficult to impossible to secure housing in many, disproportionately White parts of the county contribute to segregation and disparities in access to opportunity. Some housing authorities within the county have gone to tiered rent systems that provide greater nuance than region -wide payment standards, but their payment standards still are not as generous as Small Area Fair Market Rents would be. For example, the Anaheim Housing Authority has two tiers, one for zip code 92808 and one for all other zip codes. In zip code 92808, the payment standard for a two -bedroom unit is $2,438 while, in all other zip codes, it is $2,106. Yet the hypothetical Small Area Fair Market Rent for a two -bedroom unit in zip code 92808, which is located in the Anaheim Hills, would be $2,790. Additionally, zip codes 92806 and 92807, which also cover the eastern half of the city but do not benefit from the higher payment standard, would have Small Area Fair Market Rents of $2,380 and $2,660 respectively, far higher than $2,106. A similar phenomenon pervades the Orange County Housing Authority's administration of the voucher program. That agency has three tiers based on city rather than zip code, but the highest tier - $2,280 for two -bedroom units in selected cities — falls far short of Small Area Fair Market Rents and leaves some cities targeted for that payment standard out of reach. For example, in zip code 92660, located in Newport Beach, the Small Area Fair Market Rent for two -bedroom units would be $3,120. A Zillow search for that zip code revealed advertised two -bedroom units in only two complexes available for under $2,280 but many more available between $2,280 and $3,120. ;11 75A-590 Inaccessible Government Facilities or Services Inaccessible government facilities or services are not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. This Analysis did not reveal examples of government facilities or services in Orange County that are inaccessible. Inaccessible Public or Private Infrastructure Inaccessible public or private infrastructure is not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. This Analysis did not reveal examples of public or private infrastructure in Orange County that is infrastructure. Lack of Access to ODDortunity Due to High Housina Costs Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing costs is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. In particular, as the Disparities in Access to Opportunity section of this Analysis reveals, coastal areas of Orange County as far eastern portions of the county have greater access to educational, economic, and environmental opportunity than do most areas in between, with the partial exception of Irvine. Additionally, environmental quality is higher in predominantly White southern Orange County than in the more diverse areas to the north. In general, the disproportionately White coastal and hillside communities with better educational, economic, and environmental outcomes are also areas with high housing costs. Increasing housing affordability in these areas would make it easier for low-income households, disproportionately including Hispanic and Vietnamese households, to access the types of services and amenities that further social mobility. Lack of Affordable, Accessible Housing in a Range of Unit Sizes Lack of affordable, accessible housing in a range of unit sizes is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. As discussed in connection with several other contributing factors, there is a general shortage of affordable housing in the county. This is exacerbated by the fact that, as discussed in relation to the availability of affordable units in a range of sizes, the vast majority of publicly supported housing units are one -bedroom units. Low-income households that need larger units are dependent upon the Housing Choice Voucher program to access housing. However, unlike with Project -Based Section 8 units, for example, there is no requirement that privately owned and managed units that tenants use vouchers to rent meet the heightened accessibility requirements of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. This shortage has a particular effect on low-income families in which at least one member has a disability that requires accessibility features, and persons with disabilities who require the services of live-in aides. Lack of Affordable hi -Home or Community -Based Supportive Services Lack of affordable in -home or community -based supportive services are a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Due to the absence of any waiting list for Home and Community -Based Services for persons with developmental disabilities, this issue primarily 312 75A-591 affects people with psychiatric disabilities. A robust array of services, including the most intensive models of community -based services like Assertive Community Treatment, are available. Nonetheless, many people have trouble accessing needed services, and service providers are not always able to reach vulnerable populations through street outreach. Additionally, across types of disabilities, undocumented adults face barriers due to federal restrictions of Medicaid assistance for undocumented people. The California Legislature has approved state funding for Medi-Cal services for undocumented people until they reach the age of 26, a critical investment that exceeds that of any other state, but there remains a funding gap for services for most undocumented adults. Lack of Affordable, Integrated Housing for Individuals Who Need Supportive Services Lack of affordable, integrated housing for individuals who need supportive services is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. This is a significant contributing factor for two reasons. First, the shortage of permanent supportive housing throughout Orange County in comparison to the total need is characteristic of the broader shortage of affordable housing generally. Second, although there are some programs that specifically focus on providing permanent supportive housing to individuals with disabilities including developments built with Mental Health Services Act funds and Mainstream Housing Choice Vouchers, there has not been a concerted effort to raise local bond funds for affordable housing and then to prioritize permanent supportive housing with a portion of bond proceeds like there has been in some other California jurisdictions, including Los Angeles County and Santa Clara County. Lack of Assistance for Transitioning from Institutional Settings to Integrated Housing Lack of assistance for transitioning from institutional settings to integrated housing is not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. The Dayle McIntosh Center provides robust services to individuals transitioning from institutional settings to integrated housing, and there is no indication that they are unable to meet the total need for such services. Lack of Community Revitalization Strategies Lack of community revitalization strategies is not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. In communities with significant revitalization needs, such as in disproportionately low-income and heavily Hispanic and Vietnamese neighborhoods in Anaheim, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Santa Ana, and Westminster, there is no shortage of private investment interest that would enhance or has enhanced community amenities. The more pressing problem is the risk of displacement that would prevent long-time residents enjoying new amenities in recently revitalized communities. Lack of Local or Regional Cooperation Lack of local or regional cooperation is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Although the infrastructure for collaboration across jurisdictions existing, including through processes like this regional Analysis and through the Southern California Association of Governments, there remains a problem with local governments not taking the steps 313 75A-592 to achieve regionally determined goals like progress toward meeting each jurisdictions Regional Housing Needs Allocation for very low-income and low-income households. This gap has resulted in litigation between the City of Huntington Beach and the State of California.22 Lack of Local Private Fair Housing Outreach and Enforcement Lack of local private fair housing outreach and enforcement is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Although Orange County is served by two, high -quality private, non-profit fair housing organizations, they are underfunded and understaffed in comparison to the total need for their services. Victims of discrimination would be more able to exercise their rights, thus deterring future discrimination, if the capacity of existing organizations grew to meet the scale of the problem. Lack of Local Public Fair Housing Outreach and Enforcement Lack of local public fair housing outreach and enforcement is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. There are no local public entities that conduct fair housing outreach and enforcement, with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and HUD constituting the only public enforcement bodies that operate in Orange County. Advocates across Orange County and the state of California have reported issues with the timeline of the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing's investigations and the standards that it applies in making probable cause determinations. A local public enforcement agency, if created, would have the potential to be more responsive to victims of discrimination in Orange County than either the state or HUD is. Lack of Meaningful Language Access for Individuals with Limited English Proficiency Lack of meaningful language access for individuals with limited English proficiency is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Private landlords generally are not required to provide leases or other key documents or communications in the primary languages of individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP). This can create confusion about individuals' rights. Housing authorities frequently have staff who are fluent in Spanish and/or Vietnamese, but LEP speakers of other languages may have limited options, with housing authorities relying on paid translation or interpretation services to communicate. Lack of Private Investment in Specific Neighborhoods Lack of private investment in specific neighborhoods is not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. There are neighborhoods, particularly disproportionately low- income, predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods, that have historically been subject to 22 Priscella Vega et al., State Sues Huntington Beach over Blocked Homebuilding, L.A. TIMES (Jan. 25, 2019), httos://www.latimes. com/soc aVdadypilot/news/tn-dpt-me-hb-housing-lawsuit-20190125-story.html. 314 75A-593 disinvestment by the private sector. Santa Ana had long been emblematic of that pattern, but it has begun to see a return of private capital, and accompanying gentrification risk, in recent years 23 Lack of Public Investment in Specific Neighborhoods Lack of public investment in specific neighborhoods is not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Although there is a history of disparities in public infrastructure in Orange County between areas that are predominantly White and more heavily Hispanic communities, this Analysis did not reveal evidence of the current extent of this potential problem nor if the interrelationship of that issue to patterns of segregation and displacement. This Analysis addresses the public resources available to schools in the contributing factor relating to the location of proficient schools and school assignment policies. Lack of Resources for Fair Housing Agencies and Organizations Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Two robust fair housing organizations operate in Orange County, provide services to residents, and engage in enforcement, outreach, and education. However, the size of the federal Fair Housing hiitiatives Program, the primary funding program for fair housing organizations, has failed to keep up with inflation, making Congress's appropriations worth less over time. In order to meet the needs of residents of a large and diverse county, local fair housing agencies and organizations require greater levels of resourcing. Lack of State or Local Fair Housing Laws Lack of state or local fair housing laws is not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Although no jurisdictions in Orange County had prohibited source of income discrimination against Housing Choice Voucher holders prior to the California Legislature passing SB 222 and SB 329 banning the practice statewide, that step by the State means that there are not significant gaps in non-discrimination protections for residents of Orange County. Land Use and Zoning Laws Land use and zoning laws are a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. With some exceptions, communities in Orange County that have relatively high concentrations of White residents and relatively low concentrations of Hispanic residents tend to have zoning that allows for limited opportunities to develop multifamily housing. include Dana Point, Laguna Beach, Mission Viejo, Villa Park, and Yorba Linda. In the absence of multifamily zoning, it is generally infeasible to develop affordable housing for which occupancy is likely to disproportionately consist of protected class members. The zoning map of Laguna Beach, shown v Erualdo R. Gonzalez et al., The Gentrification of Santa Ana: From Origin to Resistance, KCET (Sep. 13, 2017), httos://www. kcet.org/shows/city-rising/the-gentrification-of-santa-ana-from-origin-to-resistance. 315 75A-594 below, illustrates the high proportion of land that is reserved for low -density residential development. ;16 75A-595 Zoning Map for the City of Laguna Beach NOTE: SLAG uldil%e Wifir General Plan lyd,and e PI labaeetl on Nei M2Mrpn 913)2 fiom1 dl Please call WaWetlo Mahn at %.h]]G1861 oc email Iila M1YnW@PLag.W.gOV Nr ad, g11P5119n5.. - i i j , e / i� MilYX a1 2 Mile6 ili L>K� Ag,,hM. Reon:ahon Cl-LocalBusiness Enstncl CA-CIvicm Dishhld CBD-I(Ri,sacenlial Serving) MR-2 (Dovnfrnvn Commercial) WD- Office p mo Pubnc Pana - MD- Vr ltac Cammerh l MD- Central Bluffs I� CBD- Munrple FamTy District -HM- Lonna l Honotwtel CN- Commeraal NeghbotllaW I IuIlatlonal LAG Lagunga LBP--.. Mdness Professional Pat A-Llghtlndutflkl 'Al B-Light Ind iai MH- Mobile Hoax ()SC- open spaoel Cwservabon OSCR- OpenNi l CmsorvaAmBRe[tedtlon OSP- Open Space! Passive PL- Public Lantl Ri- Resiaenhal Low Doi R2- ResiderNal Metl Density R3 Restlential High Density RD- ResltleMial Development Reveallon RHP- Re'tiderdial HIILsiOe PmteO. Stvsaidlh Laguna Village Commercial SIL Sarah Thurston Park TAB -Three Arch Bay TBZ VG vilage Community J Oihef Swgur_ Cilyaf LaguplRE�pF1,11..-5CAG 2D99 e'l< 75A-596 Villa Park appears to be a particularly extreme case. As the map below shows, multifamily housing is not permitted in any location in the city. 318 75A-597 Zoning in City of Villa Park r !/ All . ✓ E K,Plil A,,. - L r.aili,.. n A:., - E ?4 n N ` � �.« m =� o- .m._ es G`I[utavu Ommrm.vg'--rsuwn ne �Fnmmlµ+vimn\rv�iiw Le v+. CwT.rarr.eoo- _c Zoaurg —. EA Small Estate Residential =Neighborhood Commercial 0 R-1 (O.DW13, 500) � PC -Martinique School E-4-17 0 PC -Orchards =Public Institution E-0-16 t� Commemial Professional = Orange County Flood Control District III E-9 19 Sw CAy o1.SCAG.2m5 1 Date.12110J2015 0 ons o.r ¢z /� C'\� Pak\ K rd IN] i �-7 yllp{ 0 119 75A-598 Lending Discrimination Lending discrimination is a contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Given the scarcity of affordable rental housing and high cost of living within Orange County, loan opportunities for home improvement, purchase, and refinancing are important tools for moderate and low-income households. Using Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data, the tables below show the racial discrepancies in the likelihood that a person's loan application, based on their race, will result in an originated loan or a denial. Percentage of Loan Applications Resulting in Originated Loans by Race or Ethnicity and Loan Purpose in Orange County, 2014-2017 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data Race or Ethnicity Home Purchase Refinancing Home Improvement White, Not Hispanic 66.56% 59.12% 61.96% Black, Not Hispanic 61.93% 49.62% 49.49% Asian, Not Hispanic 63.95% 55.35% 51.26% Hispanic/Latino 59.54% 50.57% 51.60% Percentage of Loan Applications Denied by Race or Ethnicity and Loan Purpose in Orange County, 2014-2017 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data Race or Ethnicity Home Purchase Refinancing Home hnprovement White, Not Hispanic 9.09% 16.30% 17.60% Black, Not Hispanic 12.03% 22.04% 31.74% Asian, Not Hispanic 9.75% 16.65% 23.21% Hispanic/Latino 12.38% 20.75% 28.12% Across all ethnic groups and loan types, White residents are the most likely to have their loan applications result in originated loans. Disparities across racial or ethnic groups are not very significant, however. For Home Purchase, approval rates range between 59.54% and 66.56%. Home Purchase loans also have the highest rate of approval, which is important in ensuring equal access to the homeownership market. Refinancing and Home improvement loans have similar approval rates, with Black borrowers approved at about 49%, while White borrowers are approved at 59% and 62%, respectively. In a county where 57% of housing units are owner occupied and the median price for a sold home is $721,400,24 the lack of a significant disparity in loan origination for home purchase loans is promising. More disparities emerge when looking at the other types of loans. Across refinancing and home improvement loan applications, Hispanics are less likely to have a loan originate, and roughly 10% more likely to have a home improvement loan application denied and 4% more likely to have a refinancing loan denied. All ethnic groups are more likely than White residents to have their loan applications denied. Black residents are roughly 6% more likely to have refinancing loan application denied. More drastic disparities appear for home improvement loans. Black residents 24 https://www.zillow.com/orange-county-ca/home-values/ 320 75A-599 are nearly twice as likely to have a home improvement loan denied than White residents, Asian residents are 5% more likely In addition, the HMDA data indicates the rates at which certain races receive high-priced loans. In Orange County, White and Asian borrowers are least likely to be given a high cost loan. Meanwhile, Black residents are nearly twice as likely to receive subprime loans, and Hispanics are nearly 2.5 times more likely. Lack of access to loans, or loans that are not high-priced, for Black and Hispanic borrowers can often price these households out of owner -occupied single-family homes, and increases the cost burden over time as rent continues to increase across the county. Percentage of Originated Loans That Were High -Cost by Race or Ethnicity in Orange County, 2014-2017 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data Race or Ethnicity Number of Loans Originated Percentage High -Cost White, Not Hispanic 3,408 2.06% Black, Not Hispanic 102 3.79% Asian, Not Hispanic 1,277 2.07% Hispanic/Latino 1,757 4.90% Location and Type of Affordable Housing The location and type of affordable housing are significant contributing factors to fair housing issues in Orange County. With respect to the location of affordable housing, at a high level, there is relatively little such housing in coastal areas, hillside communities, or in the southern portion of the county, all areas that are disproportionately White and have relatively low Hispanic population concentrations. Within some cities that have patterns of intra jurisdictional segregation, affordable housing is concentrated in particular areas that tend to be more heavily Hispanic. This is especially true in Anaheim, where affordable housing is concentrated in the heavily Hispanic western portion of the city rather than in the mostly White Anaheim Hills. Similarly, in Fullerton, affordable housing is more concentrated in the disproportionately Hispanic southern portion of the city, and, in Garden Grove, affordable housing is concentrated in the disproportionately Hispanic eastern portion of the city. With respect to the role of the type of affordable housing in causing fair housing issues, the total lack of public housing in Orange County, which tends to be more accessible to members of protected classes than do Low Income Housing Tax Credit developments, plays a role in perpetuating segregation. Location of Accessible Housing The location of accessible housing is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Specifically, with a few exceptions the location of accessible housing tends to track areas where there are concentrations of publicly supported housing. In Orange County, publicly supported housing tends to be concentrated in areas that are disproportionately Hispanic and/or Vietnamese and that have relatively limited access to educational opportunity and environmental health. Irvine, which has a substantial supply of publicly supported housing, is a 321 75A-600 limited exception to this trend. Market -rate multifamily housing is also more likely to be accessible, though to a lesser standard than publicly supported housing, due to the design and construction standards of the Fair Housing Act. Multifamily housing tends to be concentrated in communities of color, but there are some predominantly White communities that have significant amounts of luxury multifamily housing that may be accessible and affordable to middle -income and high -income persons with disabilities. These areas include Aliso Viejo, Laguna Woods (which primarily consists of a large retirement community), Newport Beach, and Seal Beach. Overall, permitting more multifamily housing and assisting more publicly supported housing in predominantly White communities with proficient schools would help ensure that persons with disabilities who need accessibility features in their homes have a full range of neighborhood choices available to them. Location of Employers The location of employers is not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. There does not appear to be any clear relationship between patterns of occupancy by race or ethnicity and where major job centers are in Orange County. In fact, there are areas of Hispanic population concentration, particularly in Anaheim and Santa Ana, that are located near major employment centers. Additionally, heavily Hispanic communities in Orange County have greater access to job centers in Los Angeles County than do predominantly White communities due to the routing of Metrolink through the central portion of the county rather than along the coast or through the hills. Location of Environmental Health Hazards The location of environmental health hazards is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Heavily Hispanic communities in Orange County bear the brunt of environmental harms although exposure primarily stems from vehicle emissions, the location of major freeways, and the settling of smog in the area between the coast and the hills rather than the location of major industrial facilities. As a county that developed as a predominantly suburban area, there is not a long history of heavy industrial activity in the area. Of the county's five Superfund sites, one — Orange County North Basin on the border of Fullerton and Anaheim — is located in a heavily Hispanic area. In light of these circumstances, efforts to reduce vehicle emissions and efforts to increase access to coastal and hillside communities for Hispanic residents would be most likely to reduce environmental health disparities. Location of Proficient Schools and School Assignment Policies The location of proficient schools and school assignment policies are significant contributing factors to fair housing issues in Orange County. The schools with the highest proficiency in Orange County are generally located in coastal areas and hillside areas rather than in the center of the county, though Irvine is an exception. This distribution of proficient schools maps on to patterns of residential racial and ethnic segregation, with disproportionately White population in areas with high performing schools and relatively low Hispanic population in those areas. Public education 322 75A-601 in Orange County is highly fragmented with 27 school districts serving the county's students. District boundaries frequently map onto municipal boundaries, which in turn correlate to patterns of segregation. Inter -district transfers are only available for extremely limited circumstances. This Analysis did not reveal school assignment policies that contribute to segregation within individual school districts. Loss of Affordable Housing The loss of affordable housing is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. When subsidy contracts expire, the housing providers that often have the least economic incentive to renew their affordability restrictions are those that are located in higher opportunity areas or in areas that are gentrifying or at risk of gentrification. In Orange County, according to the National Affordable Housing Preservation Database, there are 69 subsidized properties with affordability restrictions that are scheduled to expire between now and the end of 2024. The loss of the developments among these that are most likely to be converted to market -rate occupancy could contribute to segregation and fuel displacement. Occupancy Codes and Restrictions Occupancy codes and restrictions are a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Specifically, there is a substantial recent history of municipal ordinances targeting group homes, in general, and community residences for people in recovery from alcohol or substance abuse disorders, in particular. In 2015, the City of Newport Beach entered into a $5.25 million settlement of a challenge to its ordinance, but that settlement did not including injunctive relief calling for a repeal of that ordinance.25 Group home operators have also challenged the City of Costa Mesa's ordinance, though a jury found in the City's favor.26 Following the jury's verdict in that case, there were reports that Orange County was considering similar restrictions for its unincorporated areas. 2' Although municipalities have an interest in protecting the health and safety of group home residents, these types of restrictions may be burdensome for ethical, high -quality group home operators, and the need for restrictions generally is not backed up by data showing increased need for public services, including emergency services. Occupancy codes and restrictions are not as high priority of a barrier as the factors that hinder the development of permanent supportive housing, as group homes are generally less integrated than independent living settings. 25 Hannah Fry, Newport Will Pay Group Homes $5.25 Million Settlement, L.A. TIMES (July 16, 2015), hops://www.latimes. com/socal/dadypilot/news/tn-dpt-me-0716-newport-Eroup-home-settlement-20150716- story.html. 26 Alicia Robinson, Federal Jury Sides with Costa Mesa in Sober Living Case, O.C. REGISTER (Dec. 7, 2018), https://www.ocregister.com/2018/12/07/federal-ijI -sides-with-costa-mesa-in-sober-living case/. 29 Teri Sforza, Orange County, Following Costa Mesa's Lead May Regulate Sober Living Homes, O.C. REGISTER (Sep. 20, 2019), https://www.ocregister.com/2019/09/20/orange-county-following-costa-mesas-lead-may-regulate- sober-liv ing-homes/. 323 75A-602 Private Discrimination Private discrimination is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Although complaint data from local fair housing organizations was available, stakeholders reported the persistent nature of housing discrimination, as revealed through individual complaints and through fair housing testing. Quality of Affordable Housing Information Programs The quality of affordable housing information programs is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. None of the housing authorities serving Housing Choice Voucher holders in Orange County operate mobility counseling programs. Mobility counseling programs that help inform voucher holders of opportunities to use their assistance in higher opportunity areas, assist with applying for units in higher opportunity areas, and provide support in adjusting to life in different neighborhoods have demonstrated effectiveness in helping voucher holders make moves that foster integration.28 The lack of mobility counseling is not the only barrier to voucher holders accessing higher opportunity areas, but, as the discussion of impediments to mobility reveals, there often are at least some rental units available within housing authority payment standards in higher opportunity areas, even if availability would be greater if housing authorities implemented Small Area Fair Market Rents. Regulatory Barriers to Providing Housing and .SUDDortive Services for Persons with Disabilities Regulatory barriers to providing housing and supportive services for persons with disabilities are not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues for persons with disabilities in Orange County. The amount of affordable housing available (and its cost), the extent of outreach and capacity among service providers, and the scope of service provision are the biggest drivers of the segregation of persons with disabilities. To the extent that barriers are regulatory in nature, they overlap significantly with the zoning and land use barriers to the construction of affordable housing generally. This Analysis discusses those in detail in the analysis of the land use and zoning laws contributing factor. This Analysis discusses restrictions on group homes and community residences in connection with the occupancy codes and restrictions contributing factor. Siting Selection Policies, Practices, and Decisions for Publicly Supported Housing, Including Discretionary Aspects of Qualified Allocation Plans and Other Programs Siting selection policies, practices, and decisions for public supported housing, including discretionary aspects of Qualified Allocation Plans and other programs are a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues. The main policy -driven factor related to the siting of publicly supported housing is the heavy focus of affordable housing development efforts throughout the state on transit -oriented development. Access to transportation is very uneven throughout the county, and disproportionately White areas, which tend to have more proficient 28 Mary K. Cunningham et al., Moving to Better Neighborhoods with Mobility Counseling, UR3AN Ixs'rrnUrE (Mar. 2005), https://www.urban.org/sites/default/fiiles/publication/51506/311146-Moving-to-Better-Neighborhoods-with- Mobility-Counseling.PDR 324 75A-603 schools and better environmental health, tend to have limited access to transportation. When real affordability is built into transit -oriented development, these investments may have a positive effect on stable integration in areas undergoing gentrification by arresting the process of displacement; however, transit expansion to higher opportunity areas may be necessary to ensure that prioritizing transit oriented development contributes to integration. The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee's QAP incentivizes family -occupancy Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) development in what it terms "High Resource" or "Highest Resource" areas. As the map below illustrates, these areas are generally high opportunity areas that are disproportionately white. LIHTC development in these areas would contribute to greater residential racial integration. Developers have reported that the incentives to build affordable housing in these areas may not be sufficient to overcome differences in land costs between higher opportunity areas and historically disinvested areas. Nonetheless, in light of the incentives for LIHTC development in High Resource and Highest Resource areas, the QAP does not currently contribute to segregation. Other policy interventions, such as the donation of public land and land held by charitable organizations, are necessary to ensure the efficacy of existing incentives. As an additional note, the QAP includes a set -aside pool for Orange County of 7.3%, which is slightly less than its share in the population of the state (8.1%). rva..uwii pnAe rzrmnwLrmmu SM Qausng OSM Geomder Q'µ TrseahmYam zn an edam.. or eSglurvlew, LONG BEACH sreman s anaMBsnonsa eAlllatleu0e olClnal2¢IIe1nJ Me WMflS aaoVel Tc learn more ¢Lout NLs tool NGu01ng the meNMlt Nom, please Ns ,al RomCTCACOppMunE MMEth,iome Paae Source of Income Discrimination wm eaH�., U Rini Meaa� U Caplan Hamm (i mental.., Reanm 0 N.. Engle Reglm U Loa Mgalea Reglnn U Central Coal Regan P) ntange Coully Eaton U San plego Regan ® H es esouere l� II �aurte ©M eaauce an xgnsesmgaean a poraM eghd w Segre"'ma, &Povery o R hlho MaCe2te Raawe mc wgn Resource M�yllertRvsuulvx I roue a Mlvslf.1 nslSRiite Na[nnal85Ute PmklFoceSVRec Ala PanWF Leant I ®opmsreetxap ®canmp. t p.panmryue cammlacainwrlg Tmt emc.lanupfaree vfrzuip Source of income discrimination is a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. In October of 2019, Governor Newsom signed into law S13 329, which prohibits discrimination in housing based on use of a Housing Choice Voucher or other tenant -based rental assistance. Previously, no protections for voucher holders had existed in Orange County. News reports have indicated a high degree of difficulty in accessing housing that would accept a subsidy 325 75A-604 in Orange County.29 Specifically, if a voucher holder does not access housing within a four month window, they lose their voucher to the next person on the waiting list. Within the Orange County Housing Authority as well as the Garden Grove Housing Authority, the rate of voucher loss was 22% in 2016. In Anaheim, the rate of voucher loss was 33%, and in Santa Ana it was a whopping 64%. The manager of Santa Ana's Housing Division has noted that the number one reason for voucher failure has been source of income discrimination. Additionally, the vacancy rate in Orange County is only about 4%, with rent rising at a rate of about 3% a year; even without source of income discrimination, it is nevertheless a difficult market in which to use a voucher. As the source of income discrimination law has just been passed, it is difficult to say whether (now) illegal discrimination will continue in Orange County. A comprehensive landlord education campaign could help avert this, as well as comprehensive voucher counseling to help voucher holders navigate this difficult market. State of Local Laws, Policies, or Practices That Discourage Individuals with Disabilities from Living in Apartments, Family Homes, Supportive Housing, and Other Integrated Settings State or local laws, policies, or practices that discourage individuals with disabilities from living in apartments, family homes, supportive housing, and other integrated settings are not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. A severe shortage of available, integrated affordable housing is the primary driver of the segregation of persons with disabilities, rather than laws, policies, or practices that discourage persons with disabilities from living in integrated housing. This Analysis discusses restrictions on group homes and community residences in connection with the occupancy codes and restrictions contributing factor. Unresolved Violations of Fair Housing or Civil Rights Law Unresolved violations of fair housing or civil rights law are not a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Although concerning, the only unresolved violations or substantial allegations uncovered through this Analysis related to subject matter that is not closely related to fair housing issues. 29 Jeff Collins, No Voucher, No Vacancy, No Help: The Cruel Realities of Section 8 Housing in Orange County, O.C. REGISTER (Oct. 5, 2016), https://www.ocregister.com/2016/10/05/no-voucher-no-vacancy-no-help-the-cruel- realities-of-section-8-housing-in-orange-county/. 326 75A-605