HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/03/1996, 4 - SECTION 108 LOAN APPLICATION AND AMENDMENTS TO THE 1996 CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND CDBG PROGRAM council
j agenba izEpoit �N�
CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: Arnold Jo 0
PREPARED BY: Jeff Hoo
SUBJECT: Section 108 loan application and amendments to the 1996 Consolidated Plan and
CDBG Program
CAO RECONEMENIDATION: 1) Authorize staff to proceed with the Section 108 loan application
in the amount of$1.65 million; 2) authorize the CAO to execute an agreement with Mark Briggs
and Associates for consultant services and the use of Section 108 loan funds to cover consultant
costs, not to exceed $10,000; and 3) recommend that the Board of Supervisors amend the Urban
County Consolidated plan to include changes to the City's 1996 CDBG program, as described
below.
DISCUSSION
Background
In April the City Council approved the City's 1996 CDBG program, allocating approximately
$954,000 to various community housing, social service, public works and economic development
activities. As part of its action, Council authorized participation in the Section 108 Guaranteed
Loan Program in the amount of$1.485 million. Council earmarked $273,000 in 1996 CDBG
funds to cover first year loan payments.
Subsequently, the County's approved 1996 Consolidated Plan, including the City of San Luis
Obispo's approved CDBG activities, was amended by the Board of Supervisors at HUD's
direction to reflect Congressional budget approval. The approved federal budget resulted in a
three percent, across-the-board cut in the Urban County funding, including San Luis Obispo
County's CDBG program. Based on input from the participating cities, the Board decided to
reflect the three percent cut by reducing funding approximately three percent for all 1996 CDBG
activities in the San Luis Obispo Urban County Consolidated Plan. This was considered the most
equitable approach, given the high number of on-going, essential programs and diverse funding
priorities. The City of San Luis Obispo will receive about$926,000 in 1996 CDBG funds, instead
of the $954,000 originally anticipated. Exhibit A summarizes the original funding allocations,
the Urban County approved revisions, and staff's recommended amendments to the City's 1996
program that would reinstate funding to most of the CDBG activities.
Staff has begun work on preparing the Section 108 loan application. After talking with several
cities with similar programs, staff contacted Mark Briggs and Associates, a consultant on Section
108 loans and federal grant programs, who made a presentation for City staff. Staff has received
a proposal from Mark Briggs and Associates (MBA) to assist the City with developing a
repayment plan and preparing loan documents. In its presentation, MBA explained that HUD's
Council Staff Report
Page 2
loan security requirements have recently increased. Because this change could have fiscal
implications for the City, staff is bringing the Section 108 loan back to Council for confirmation
before proceeding with the Ioan application. Once a loan application is prepared, it would come
back to Council for final approval before being submitted to HUD.
Overall'Strategyfor Using Section 108 Loan Funds
Simply stated, staff recommends that the City move forward with the Section 108 loan application
process and use some of the loan proceeds to fund the Historical Museum handicapped access and
rehabilitation. Staff proposes increasing the Section 108 loan amount from $1.485 to $1.65
million, with $650,000 to be allocated to the museum rehabilitation, and $1 million to go to the
Housing Authority for affordable housing. Most of 1996 CDBG funds originally allocated to the
museum project would be replaced by Section 108 loan proceeds, "freeing up" about $86,000
which can then be reallocated to restore funding of other 1996 CDBG activities to their original
levels. This funding strategy is shown in Exhibit A.
Of the$1.485 million dollar loan amount originally proposed for the City's 1996 CDBG Program
Year, $485,000 was tentatively earmarked for infrastrucuture improvements as part of efforts to
annex the Airport and Margarita Areas. At this time, however, it is premature to fund those
improvements. A specific plan and detailed improvement plans must first be prepared. Instead,
staff recommends that $650,000 of the loan be used for the Carnegie Library/Historic Museum
Rehabilitation, since this project is in critical need of funding and there is no other adequate source
of funding which would allow timely project completion. An additional $185,199 for the museum
project would come from 1995 and 1996 CDBG funds, for a total funding of$835,199. The
estimated cost for a total rehabilitation of the museum is $835,600. This includes seismic safety
and other building improvements, handicapped access improvements, and waterproofing.
The approved 1996 CDBG program includes $273,000 in CDBG funds to pay first year start-up,
principal and interest costs for a $1.485 million Section 108 loan. Increasing the loan amount to
$1.65 million would require principal and interest payments of approximately $341,000 (actual
payments will be confirmed prior to final Council acceptance of the loan terms). During the first
year, the additional funding for loan repayment would come out of the CDBG funds originally
allocated to the museum project. For five subsequent grant years, $341,000 in CDBG funds
would have to be allocated annually to repay the loan.
Section 108 Guaranteed Loan Security Requirements
HUD guidelines state that for loan repayment terms of six years or less, a city's CDBG
entitlement is considered adequate security. This was staff and Council's understanding when the
City approved its 1996 CDBG Program. Our HUD Analyst in L.A., Peter Severynen, has
confirmed that there has been a policy change at HUD. Now, all Section 108 loans must provide
security beyond the pledge of CDBG funds for repayment. To avoid putting City General Funds
at risk, the Housing Authority intends to use Housing Authority real property assets as collateral
for its portion of the loan, and supports using Housing Authority funds to repay the loan if CDBG
funds were discontinued. Initial indications are that HUD would accept this approach since this
has been done elsewhere. With this approach, the risk to the City's General Fund for repayment
Council Staff Report
Page 3
of the loan proceeds for the Housing Authority would be nil. For the $650,000 loan amount used
for the improvements to the Historical Museum, the City would need to provide loan security.
Staff anticipates using the property itself as security for the loan. For a six-year loan term, there
would still be some risk that the CDBG funding could be cut and the museum loan funds would
have to be repaid with other than CDBG funds. With a relatively small loan amount and short
repayment term, however, that risk appears very small. Moreover, HUD's Section 108 loan
portfolio exceeds$1 billion in California alone. Congress and HUD are unlikely to take steps that
would jeopardize the CDBG program and hence, repayment of Section 108 loans. Considering
the relative risks and benefits involved, staff believes the Section 108 loan is a "good deal" for
the City, despite the additional security requirement.
Last month, Congress approved$1.5 billion in loan guarantee authority for HUD loans under the
Section 108 program for the coming federal fiscal year. Recent information out of Washington,
D.C. is that there's a debate going on whether to reverse HUD's recent policy
shift regarding loan security requirements or to somehow modify the policy to avoid discouraging
borrowers. HUD has engaged Price Waterhouse to develop additional collateral requirements to
secure these loans and to develop underwriting guidelines and will be meeting with practitioners
for input on the new guidelines. This is a debate staff will monitor closely.
Use of a Consultant To Prepare Loan Application
Before the City can access these funds, it must prepare and submit a Section 108 loan application
to HUD. It can take six months or longer before loan funds become available, so it is in the
City's interest to begin the process soon if it intends to participate in the Section 108 program.
Staff contacted the cities of Alhambra and Pico Rivera, who have qualified for $3 million and
$1.85 million, respectively, in Section 108 loans. Both noted that the loan planning and approval
process was complicated and potentially time-consuming, and emphasized that Mark Briggs and
Associates, Inc., a consultant on Section 108 loans, had provided valuable assistance.
Staff met with Mark Briggs and Associates to learn more about the Section 108 application process
and to determine if the City would benefit from consultant services. Staff also contacted a
prominent local land use/economic planning firm, but found that this firm did not handle Section
108 loans. Sole source contracts under $10,000 are allowed when specialized skills or services
are needed. Consequently, staff supports contracting with MBA to prepare the loan application
and to help structure a repayment plan since: 1) this is a fairly technical area in which staff does
not have expertise; and 2) the consultant has the experience and contacts at HUD to expedite the
loan application process.
The consultant would also: 1) help minimize the City's risk exposure by structuring a loan
security program with the Housing Authority; 2) maximize the amount the City could borrow
while keeping the repayment term to the shortest possible period using CDBG funds to pay off the
loan; and 3) speed up the application filing. Once the Section 108 loan is filed and approved, the
loan terms will be confirmed by HUD's underwriter. Ultimately, the City may still opt not to
proceed with the loan if, upon Council review, the loan terms appear unfavorable to the City or
financial conditions warrant reconsideration.
11
Council Staff Report
Page 4
CONCURRENCES
The Finance Department and City Housing Authority concur with these recommendations.
FISCAL EWPACT
The recommended strategy is expected to have an overall beneficial fiscal impact. No adverse
impacts to city budget or assets are anticipated or likely.
RECONIlVIENDATION
To amend the 1996 CDBG program to reflect the proposed changes, Council should forward a
recommendation to the County Board of Supervisors to amend the Consolidated Plan with funding
amounts as shown in Exhibit A; authorize staff to proceed with the Section 108 loan application;
and authorize the CAO to contract with Mark Briggs and Associates for consultant services in
preparing the loan application, using up to $10,000 in Section 108 loan proceeds to fund the
services.
Attachments:
-Exhibit A: Summary of recommended 1996 CDBG Program amendments
-Letter from San Luis Obispo City Housing Authority
-Consultant's Proposal
1
SUMMARY OF CDBG FUNDING
Original, Revised and Proposed: 1996-97
Fundinjt
Original Revised 1 Proposed
Public Services
Homeless shelter operations 120,000 116,559 120,000
At-risk youth services (2) 63,000 61,194 63,000
Homeless day care center at Prado road - operations 40,000 38,853 40,000
Public Facilities
Historical museum handicapped access improvements(3) 117,000 113,645 27,199
Section 108 loan repayment- historical museum(4) 134,300
Homeless day care center at Prado road- construction 50,000 48,566 50,000
Economic development
Seismic retrofit grants 100,000 97,133 100,000
Housing
Section 108 loan repayment(4) 272,976 265,149 206,600
Planning
Airport area specific plan(2) 95,372 92,637 92,637
Program administration 95,3721 92,638 92,638
TOTAL 1 $953,7201 $926,374 $926,374
Notes
1. Based on the County's across-the-board reduction of 3%.
2. Additional funding has been allocated to these two programs in the amount of$70,000 on a one-time basis
from a closed-out State CDBG grant($49,000 for the at-risk youth program and$21,000 for the airport area
spec plan).
3. CDBG funding is currently allocated for the historical museum as follows:
Program Year 1995-96 158,000
Pro am Year 1996-97 117,000
TOTAL 275 000
With the proposed funding program,$835,300 would be made available for the historical museum(including
the cost of assistance in preparing the Section 108 loan application).
Program Year 1995-96 158,000
Program Year 1996-97 27,199
Program Year 1996-97: Section 108 Loan Proceeds 650,000
TOTAL 835-1991
4. Section 108 loan payments will be about$340,900 annually based on a loan amount of$1.65 million,an interest
rate of 6.5%per annum and a loan repayment period of 6 years,allocated between housing and the historical
museum as follows:
Principal %of Total I Annual t
Housing 1,000,000 60.6% 206,600
Historical museum 650,000 39.4% 134,300
TOTAL 1650 000 1Q0.0% 340,900
H:SECT108
All -
.!!r
LO
' e.rwturmes
Housing Authority 487 Leff Street P Box 1289 San Luis Obispo CA 93406-1289
of the City of (805) 543-4478 fax (8
San Luis Obispo
4110 a Director-secretary
��' .CC77�f �nn� J.Moylan
ty Oa7
August 20, 1996 amn1`5'-.
h
Mr. John Dunn
Chief Administrative Officer
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dear John:
Please be advised that at their regular monthly meeting of August
15, the Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authority of the City .
of San Luis Obispo authorized me to "conceptually pledge" Authority
assets to a Section 108 Loan Guaranty.
Commissioners understand that up to $1 million of the planned loan
would be used by the Housing Authority to expand affordable housing
opportunities in the City. They also understand that the City may
be concerned that General Fund monies not be placed at risk to
provide the loan security. By pledging its assets, the Authority
intends to provide the Section 108 loan collateral required by the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and to avoid using
the City's General Fund as loan security. Our Commission's action
was with the understanding that they would. have an opportunity to
review and approve the amount and nature of. the security before the
loan is approved.
If needed I would be more than happy to discuss our position with
you or the Council.
Sincerely,
George J. Moylan
Executive Director
cc: Arnold Jonas
Community Development Director
D o °
June 4, 1996
Mr. John Dunn
City Administrator
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RE: Letter Agreement-Preparation of Section 108
Loan Guarantee Application
Dear Mr. Dunn:
This Letter Agreement is to cover the services to be provided by Mark Briggs & Associates, Inc.
for the preparation of a Section 108 Loan Guarantee Application for submittal to the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The application may include various
potential development sites within the City. The services to be provided include the following:
• Work with City staff to identify potential sites and costs to be included in the application.
• Prepare repayment alternatives for City review and to assist in determining the scope of the
application.
• Work With City staff to determine Section 108 National Objective
• Prepare draft Application for City review and comments.
• Prepare final Applications for City review.
• Attend City public hearing on Application.
• Amend final Application for submittal to HUD.
• Work with City staff to respond to HUD questions regarding the Application.
The fee for the preparation and submittal of the Section 108 Loan Guarantee Application will be
$9,500.00 and will be payable as follows:
Approval of Contract: $1,000.00
Submittal of Draft Applications to City: $5,000.00
Submittal of Final Application to HUD: $3,000.00
Response to HUD Inquires on Application $ 500.00
MARK BRIGGS &ASSOCIATES, INC. -
505 N. Tustin Avenue,Suite 115,Santa Ana,California 92705 (714)550-0390 •FAX(714)972-8321
PROVIDING SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS SINCE 1974
Mr. John Dunn
June 4, 1996
Page 2
If you have any questions regarding this Letter Agreement or the proposed services to be
provided, please give me a call. We look forward to working with you on this Application.
This Agreement is in effect with the execution of the signatures by both parties.
City of San Luis Obispo Mark Briggs & Associates, Inc.
LA
Date Date
rontmevsanlui5
.{.:.................... ::::.::. ..C.:.... x.....:x.:r::..Y:}::iv..}:.:i.:i:J. }}:tt.::.::y'. �':i:.}:"iii:.v:C:.:;in.!C•:m
..
::
n•.:C:ii}liih.
__. .J.f.>,Aiii��l�. � :':y;�'.?#°[:diiEriE!ii�?s?'•":.'::i::'..v:xr�:.r�...
•nC'i%:i iiiii w:%'ii:�:ii'w :i:A:
:.uC.n:r... .w...:'......a..C:y.::::::i.::�:.v.i:v:;...w::.v:::.i{.:r»}i}}':{i{.}:ivC}}:i.}:C:CW}}}}:3 i'i<..........:..... }iJ.':jio:k::k::kYF:�i:R:i.•.:<::':5'if:k:::k:i:}:i:?:�;:r' i::J:iii'+i�?i:):::.
...:.......................v:.'.,.nvC..:.n..v..v.:..v.nm.n..w:::nC:...Y.A...,..}},n.:v:.n,.::.n•;}..;:.:.:::.:.v�:::::.:.n:.:::v.,Yf.:::�:.::::::......::.:C:.:Y:nwv::...::::..n. }.......: ::ikC'k n'V:n...�h}:>.iY
.....r .w rrn...... ..::n.,.,r.n:.::::.,Jn.::.v.a...... .... ... :.�.:. ::.i. ..i. .... ....
... :. .. ....v ..... ... .. .. .:.v:v. .... .... n v. :. ::.: F�^ir.
....v x}: .. ..:....w........n..*..... ............... ... .. .... .... .. ..... .}.k....... .....Y ... .. ...
.............i ...........a :.:..:..0 :.:.:...»...................... ..... ......................n..........:....i .....v....r..............................::`err' :vr sn:,�'�::i:;:`:::'ir':C :i
.\....n......r nSv.n..:....:....x}}...:.C:.:::....... x.::::x.::.a.:xnxm nn..H:f.:n\:n............ :in......
The following is the list of programs Mark Briggs & Associates, Inc., has utilized or is currently in the process of
negotiating assistance for their development projects, totaling$528,846,030
1. Section 108 Loan/Economic Development Initiative(EDI) Grant
This program is where cities borrow against their future years Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds. Cities repay the loans from their annual allocation of CDBG funds or tax revenues. In
either case, the developers would not repay the Section 108 loan. We have secured the following Section
108 Loan and/or Economic Development Initiative Grant funds:
Citv Amount Developer
Riverside $ 3,400,000 Birtcher Campbell Properties
Maywood 600,000 Hopkins Development Company
Maywood 2,000,000 Community Center
San Diego 7,200,000 San Diego Mercado Associates
San Diego 7507000 EDI- San Diego Mercado Associates
Los Angeles 9,530.000 Schurgin Development Companies
La Puente 2,180,000 Economic Development Loan Fund
Maywood 1,900,000 Watt Commercial Development
Maywood 2,000,000 Multi-Purpose/Recreation Center
San Bernardino 11.000,000 Center City Company
Glendale 53000,000 Donahue Schriber
Compton 5,000,000 Economic Development Loan Program
Compton 5007000 EDI-Economic Develop. Loan Program
Commerce 3,8007000 Manny Industries
Commerce 400,000 EDI-Manny Industries
Riverside 4,130,000 Southland-University Village
Riverside 950,000 EDI - University Village
Pico Rivera 1,850,000 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Pico Rivera 750,000 EDI -Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
San Jose 5.200.000 Historic Rehab
San Jose 475,000 EDI -Historic Rehab
South Gate 3,625,000 Town Center
South Gate 475.000 EDI-Town Center
Alhambra 2,025,000 Downtown Mixed Use
Alhambra 675.000 EDI -Downtown Mixed Use
$ 75,415,000
�-9
2. Tax Rebates or Abatements
We have negotiated a number of tax rebate programs for development projects or to write down the cost of
land. They are:
Citv Amount Developer
Escondido $ 2,625.000 Schurgin Development Companies
Santa Ana 4,550,000 Schurgin Development Companies
Corona 2,600,000 SDC Development
Victorville 1,950,000 Donahue Schriber
Manteca 1,900,000 Riley/Pearlman Company
Perris 8,000,000 Sudberry Properties
Orange 1,550.000 The Home Depot, Inc.
Santa Clarita 690,000 The Home Depot, Inc.
Commerce 1,400,000 The Home Depot, Inc.
Alhambra 2,000,000 The Home Depot, Inc.
San Ramon 270001000 The Home Depot, Inc.
Barstow 810,000 Angeles Corporation
Barstow 650,000 Sterling Development Corporation
Ceres 3,320,000 Wal-Mart Stores,Inc.
Visalia 2,000.000 General Growth/Cigna
New Orleans 3,000,000 General Growth/Cigna
Modesto 500,000 Target Stores
Worcester 14.500.000 New England Development/Cigna
$ 54.045.000
3. City or Aoencv Direct Infusion of Funds and Tax Increment Financing
On a number of occasions, we have negotiated assistance v.-here we substantiated that the project needed a
direct infusion of funds in order to be feasible. Those have included the following:
Citv Amount Developer
Westminster $ 8,400,000 IDM Corporation
Westminster 4,000.000 Pacific Theatres Realty
Clackamas County 2.230.000 Schurgin Development Companies
San Diego 1.200,000 Sickles Group
El Cerrito 2,600.000 Schurgin Development Companies
San Diego 500.000 Gaslamp Quarters Enterprises
Maywood 300.000 Watt Commercial Development
Riverside 7,500,000 Birtcher Campbell Properties
Lancaster 300.000 Riley/Pearlman Company
Austin 45.0001000 Bennett Prop./Yarmouth Group
Euless 31.200,000 Bennett Prop./Yarmouth Group
Perris 6.500.000 Sudberry Properties
Chino 12,950,000 Majestic Realty
Hanford 2.000.000 Crumpler/Kruger Commercial R.E
Oakland 735,000 Del Monte Corp/Reynolds &Brown
Des Peres 30.000.000 Westfield Corporation
$ 155.415,000
-2 */0
4. Certificates of Participation, Sales Tax Bonds Revenue Bonds
Citv Amount Developer
Tracy $ 9,200,000 General Growth
Euless 13,000,000 Bennett Properties/Yarmouth Group
Encinitas 10.000.000 Carltas Company/Zelman
$ 32,200,000
5. Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) Funds
Cities receive an annual entitlement amount from HUD under the CDBG program. Cities which have been
willing to commit those funds directly into projects are:
City Amount Developer
Maywood $ 400,000 Hopkins Development Company
Los Angeles 950,000 Schurgin Development Companies
Maywood 400,000 Watt Commercial Development
La Puente 250,000 La Puente Pavilion Partnership
San Diego 250.000 Mercado Associates
$ 2,250,000
6. Off-Site Improvements Provided or From Assessment Bonds
Cities have been willing to finance off-site improvements through assessment bonds. The following is the
list of cities where we negotiated the assessment bond package:
City Amount Developer
Riverside $ 5.700.000 Donahue Schriber
Escondido 2,700,000 Schurgin Development Companies
San Pablo 3,750,000 Hopkins Development Company
Chino 11,100,000 Majestic Realty
Hanford 5,000.000 Crumpler/Kruger Commercial R.E.
Fresno 9.200,000 CALCOT, Inc.
Encinitas 14,0007000 Carltas Company/Zelman
Daly City 500.000 American Stores
$ 517950,000
7. Grant Funds for Off-Sites
There are programs to fund off-site improvements where there is not an assessment on the property. The
first is an Oregon State program, the second a direct federal appropriation.
City Amount Developer
Clackamas County $ 1,900,000 Schurgin Development Companies
Tacoma 2.500.000 Schurgin Development Companies
$ 4,400,000
8. Parkins Structures
As part of development programs, the construction of parking structures can be an important element of
public assistance. We have negotiated programs where the debt service on the parking bonds was paid
from the tax revenues generated by the project. That has been done on the following projects:
Citv Amount Developer
Santa Ana $ 2,500,000 Chase Development
Riverside 12,000,000 Donahue Schriber
Austin 15.000.000 Bennett Properties
$ 29,500,000
9. Tax Exempt Bonds
Under certain circumstances, bonds can be used to finance development projects. The following are the
projects where the bonds were issued:
Citv Amount Developer
Escondido $ 9,500,000 Schurgin Development Companies
El Cerrito 91500,000 Schurgin Development Companies
Santa Ana 6,000,000 Chase Development
Clackamas County 5.000.000 Schurgin Development Companies
$ 30,000,000
10. Commercial Revitalization
Some projects may include both new construction and rehabilitation. Mark Briggs & Associates has
provided consultant services to many cities and counties on commercial rehabilitation programs. In those
cases, the local jurisdictions have invested funds -in rehabilitation grants and loans and public works
assistance. In-fill development is important as part of commercial revitalization. A few of the projects
where.we provided the consultant services for commercial revitalization are listed below:
Citv Amount Developer
Norwalk $ 1,7007000 Firestone Boulevard
South Gate 2,0007000 Tweedv Boulevard
South Gate 1.000.000 Garfield Avenue
Maywood 500.000 Atlantic Avenue & Slauson Avenue
Bell Gardens 400.000 Eastern Avenue
Bell 500.000 Atlantic Avenue
County of Los Angeles 3.000.000 Eight Commercial Areas
$ 9,100,000
-4 7��
11. U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) Local Public Works and Sudden and Severe
Grants
-EDA has, from time to time, instituted public works grant programs to create jobs throughout the Nation.
Mark Briggs &Associates, Inc.,secured 15 such grants the last time EDA funded a public works program.
More recently, the firm has secured additional Local Public Works grants and Sudden and Severe
Economic Distress grants.
Recipient Amount Proiect
Newport-Mesa School Dist. $ 1,739,475 Auditorium Rehabilitation
Newport-Mesa School Dist. 639.342 New Gymnasium
Yorba Linda School Dist 2,767.660 New Administration Building
City of South Gate 1,985,037 City Hall Expansion
City of Woodland 580,320 Storm Drains
City of Woodland . 322680 City Park
City of Woodland 384.000 Sewer Conversion
Calaveras County 993,516 'Black Bart"Jail Renovation
City of Manteca 851,000
Library n Expansion
Fremont School District 738.000 New School
Fremont School District 250.000 Admin. Building Rehabilitation
City of Fremont 259.000 Police Facility Expansion
City of Fremont 550.000 New Community Facility
Carlsbad School District 1.037.000 New School
City of Coronado 328,000 Sew interceptor
Oceanside 500.000 Santa Fe Railroad
Oceanside 1.500.000 Mariott/Data Property Services
Riverside 1.000.000 Birtcher Campbell Properties
Riverside 471.000 Southland -University Village
San Diego 1.000.000 San Diego Mercado Associates
South Gate 1.500.000 Water Reservoir
San Diego 5.476.000 Defense Conversion Grant
Oakland 1,100.000 Reynolds &Brown
Commerce 1.000.000 Rail Cycle
Glendale 1.000.000 Donahue Schriber
$ 27,972.030
12. Urban Development Action Grants (UDAG)
The UDAG program existed from 1978 to 1989. While no program has been passed by Congress,
legislation is pending a new program which «•ill be targeted to urban development needs, called the Local
Initiative for the Future (Lift)
Citv Amount Developer
Commerce $ 6.990.000 Trammell Crow Company
Dallas 4.200.000 Trammell Crow Company
Charlotte 2.900.000 Trammell Crow Company
Bell 2.100,000 Trammell Crow Company
South Gate 2,7D0.000 HON Industries
5 -
sl-/3
South Crate 2,000,000 World Oil Industries
South Gate 800.000 Watson and Associates
Bell Gardens 2,400,000 Watson and Associates
San Diego 4,200,000 The Sickles Group
San Diego 1,050,000 Gaslamp Quarter Enterprises
San Diego 850,000 Hopkins Development Company
Maywood 1,000,000 Watt Commercial Property Corp.
Maywood 2,700,000 Hopkins Development Company
San Pablo 1,600,000 Hopkins Development Company
Los Angeles 4,250,000 Schurgin Development Companies
Riverside 2,500,000 Birtcher Campbell Properties
Pico Rivera 5,400,000 Lewis Properties
Richmond 1,059,000 Bridge Housing Corporation
Stockton 5,400,000 Schmitz Development
Santa Ana 900.000 Chase Development
$ 54,999,000
13. Transportation Enhancement Activitv Promm (iSTEA)
Citv Amount Project
Riverside $ 700.000 University Avenue
Riverside 900.000 University Avenue
$ 1,600.000
It should be noted, in revie%%ing the programs and projects, that we combined several assistance programs for one
project. That often is the case. We work with the public and private entity to determine the level of assistance
needed, work with the City staff to justify the need, then develop the public finance structure from various
programs to meet the need or fill the gap in funding.
mktglprog-am