The URL can be used to link to this page

HC 3-27-2025 Searchable PacketCITY OF CUPERTINO HOUSING COMMISSION AGENDA 10185 North Stelling Road, Quinlan Conference Room; and Teleconference Location Pursuant to Government Code section 54953(b)(2); 16925 Hierba Drive San Diego CA 92128 Thursday, March 27, 2025 5:30 PM Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following ways: 1) Attend in person at Quinlan Community Center, 10185 N. Stelling Road 2) The meeting will also be streamed live on and online at https://youtube.com/@cupertinocitycommission Members of the public wishing to comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the following ways: 1) Appear in person at Quinlan Community Center. 2) E-mail comments by 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, March 27, 2025 to the legislative body at housingcommission@cupertino .gov. These e-mail comments will also be posted to the City’s website after the meeting. Oral public comments may be made during the public comment period for each agenda item. Members of the audience who address the legislative body must come to the lectern/microphone and are requested to complete a Speaker Card and identify themselves . Completion of Speaker Cards and identifying yourself is voluntary and not required to attend the meeting or provide comments. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Subject: Approve the minutes of the December 19, 2024 Housing Commission meeting. Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the December 19, 2024 Housing Commission meeting. Page 1 1 Housing Commission Agenda March 27, 2025 A - Draft Minutes POSTPONEMENTS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Commission and not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Commission from making any decisions with respect to a matter not on the agenda. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 2.Subject: Election of Chair and Vice Chair Recommended Action: Elect a Chair and Vice Chair of the Housing Commission 3.Subject: Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, Below Market Rate Affordable Housing Fund (BMR AHF), General Fund Human Services Grant (HSG), Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA), and County funding allocations. Recommended Action: Consider the FY 2025-26 CDBG, BMR AHF, General Fund HSG, PLHA, and County funding applications and make recommendations to City Council for final approval. Staff Report A - FY 2025-26 NOFA B - Housing Commission Resolution 17-02 (CDBG Contingency Plan) C - PLHA Cupertino County Consortium Agreement Amendment 1 D - FY 2024-25 County of Santa Clara Unhoused Program Funding Agreement E - FY 2025-26 CDBG, BMR AHF, and HSG Funding Application Summary (as of 3/18/25) STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS FUTURE AGENDA SETTING ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request in advance by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format. Page 2 2 Housing Commission Agenda March 27, 2025 Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the members after publication of the agenda will be made available for public inspection. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office in City Hall located at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours. IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section 2.08.100 written communications sent to the City Council, Commissioners or staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written communications are accessible to the public through the City website and kept in packet archives. Do not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will be made publicly available on the City website. Page 3 3 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 25-13822 Agenda Date: 3/27/2025 Agenda #: 1. Subject: Approve the minutes of the December 19, 2024 Housing Commission meeting. Approve the minutes of the December 19, 2024 Housing Commission meeting. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 3/20/2025Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™4 DRAFT MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING CUPERTINO HOUSING COMMISSION Thursday, December 19, 2024 At 5:35 p.m. Chair Connie Cunningham called the Special Housing Commission meeting to order at 10185 North Stelling Road, Quinlan Conference Room. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Connie Cunningham, Vice Chair Ryan Golze and Commissioners Angan Das, Yuyi He, and Govind Tatachari. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Subject: Approve the minutes of the October 24, 2024 Housing Commission meeting. Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the October 24, 2024 Housing Commission meeting. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu introduced the item. Chair Cunningham asked if anyone had questions about the minutes. Commissioner Tatachari asked why future agenda items were not included in the minutes. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu explained the missing items and introduced Administrative Assistant Lindsay Nelson. Commissioners asked questions and discussed whether the future agenda items needed to be added to the minutes MOTION: Golze moved and both Tatachari and He seconded to approve the minutes of the October 24, 2024 meeting. The motion carried with the following vote: Ayes: Cunningham, Golze, He and Tatachari. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: Das. POSTPONEMENTS - None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS – None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS- None OLD BUSINESS– None 5 Page 2 Housing Commission DRAFT Minutes December 19, 2025 NEW BUSINESS – 2. Subject: 2025 Housing Commission Meeting Schedule Recommended Action: Establish the Housing Commission Meeting Schedule for 2025. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu delivered the staff report. Commissioners asked questions and made comments. Commissioners determined that they would not like to change any of the dates on the schedule at this time. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu requested a vote. Commissioner Das arrived at the meeting. MOTION: Golze moved and He seconded to establish the Commission Meeting Schedule for 2025. The motion carried with the following vote: Ayes: Cunningham, Das, Golze, He and Tatachari. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. 3. Subject: 2025-2030 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consolidated Plan Outreach Presentation Recommended Action: Conduct Public Hearing; and Receive a presentation on development of the 2025-2030 CDBG Consolidated Plan. Chair Cunningham noted that the action was to receive the presentation, and that they would have further action in the spring to review and approve the items at that time. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu introduced the presenter, consultant Heidi Aggler. Heidi Aggler presented on the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan. Commissioners asked questions and made comments. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu and consultant Heidi Aggler answered questions. Chair Cunningham opened the floor for public comment and the following people spoke:  A representative with Northern California Carpenter Union.  Sujatha Venkatraman from West Valley Community Services  Andy Lee from Charities Housing Chair Cunningham closed the public comment period. Chair Cunningham brought the conversation back to the commission and requested a motion, then asked the commission if they had comments. MOTION: Golze moved and Das seconded to acknowledge receipt of the presentation. 6 Page 3 Housing Commission DRAFT Minutes December 19, 2025 Commissioners asked more questions and made comments. Commissioner Das asked Andy Lee, a member of the public, about how they were utilizing their funding. Andy Lee spoke. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu clarified that the plan would be covered in March when it is complete. Chair Cunningham asked for a vote on the motion. MOTION: Golze moved and Das seconded to acknowledge receipt of the presentation. The motion carried with the following vote: Ayes: Cunningham, Das, Golze, He, and Tatachari. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. 4. Subject: Study session to amend the City’s Policy and Procedures Manual for Administering Deed Restricted Affordable Housing Units (BMR Admin Manual) and/or draft new City ordinance to include a new anti-displacement policy. Recommended Action: Receive presentation and recommend approval of an anti-displacement policy for tenants residing in expiring Below Market Rate units to City Council for adoption. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu introduced the item and requested the Commissioners state either: which of the policies they were in favor of, if they wanted to use alternatives, or if they wanted to make modifications to the policies as presented. He numbered the policies 1,2,3 and alternatives as (1B, 2B). Commissioners discussed their options and asked clarifying questions. Sujatha Venkatraman spoke with the Commissioners. Commissioners further discussed items related to housing. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu responded to questions. Commissioners asked for clarification on the study session process. Commissioners and Housing Manager Nicky Vu agreed to go around the table for votes. Chair Cunningham voted for 1A or 1B. Then changed her vote to option 3. Commissioner Goldberg chose option 3. 7 Page 4 Housing Commission DRAFT Minutes December 19, 2025 Commissioner He chose option 3. Commissioner Tatachari chose option 3. Commissioner Das chose option 1B and option 2B. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu noted that a decision had been made, with the decision being in favor of both, with one in favor of 1B in terms of the anti-displacement policy. Senior Housing Coordinator Nicky Vu suggested they take a vote on option 3. MOTION: Golze moved and He seconded to recommend approval of Option 3, both of the displacement priority policies. The motion carried with the following vote: Ayes: Cunningham, Das, Golze, He and Tatachari. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner He mentioned her friend left his apartment in Mountain View and he got a lot of things deducted from his security deposit and it said “non-negotiable”. She questioned the legality of this process, and suggested that tenants should have a right to negotiate and establish clarity with property managers regarding various aspects of security deposits. FUTURE AGENDA SETTING Commissioner He proposed continuing the discussion on security deposits. ADJOURNMENT At 7:35 p.m., Chair Connie Cunningham adjourned the Special Housing Commission Meeting. Minutes prepared by: _______________________________ Lindsay Nelson, Administrative Assistant 8 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 25-13830 Agenda Date: 3/27/2025 Agenda #: 2. Subject: Election of Chair and Vice Chair Elect a Chair and Vice Chair of the Housing Commission CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 3/20/2025Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™9 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 25-13836 Agenda Date: 3/27/2025 Agenda #: 3. Subject:Fiscal Year (FY)2025-26 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)Program,Below Market Rate Affordable Housing Fund (BMR AHF),General Fund Human Services Grant (HSG), Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA), and County funding allocations. Consider the FY 2025-26 CDBG,BMR AHF,General Fund HSG,PLHA,and County funding applications and make recommendations to City Council for final approval. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 3/20/2025Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™10 HOUSING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT March 27, 2025 Subject Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, Below Market Rate Affordable Housing Fund (BMR AHF), General Fund Human Services Grant (HSG), Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA), and County funding allocations. Recommended Action Consider the FY 2025-26 CDBG, BMR AHF, General Fund HSG, PLHA, and County funding applications and make recommendations to City Council for final approval. Background An annual Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) and Request for Proposals (RFP) (Attachment A) was issued on November 4, 2024, inviting applicants to apply for eligible public services (two-year funding cycle) and capital housing projects (one-year funding cycle) for the upcoming FY 25-26. The NOFA/RFP deadline ended on February 4, 2025. Housing Commission reviews CDBG, BMR AHF, and General Fund HSG applications and makes funding recommendations to the City Council. BMR AHF and HSG funding amounts for FY 25-26 are subject to City Council approval. CDBG funding amounts will be reduced or increased proportionately for FY 25-26 based on final HUD allocations. On May 11, 2017, the Housing Commission adopted Resolution 17-02 (CDBG Contingency Plan, Attachment B), in the event that the City receives more or less CDBG funding from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Public service funding cycles have been determined by the timeframe in the City’s 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan. The current cycle covered FY 25-26 and 26-27. The Below Market Rate Affordable Housing Fund (BMR AHF) is a local funding source dedicated to increasing housing affordability within the City of Cupertino. The ten eligible activity uses for the fund are as follows: BMR Program Administration, Land Acquisition, New Construction, Acquisition and/or rehabilitation of buildings for permanent affordability, Preserving “at-risk” BMR Units, Substantial Rehabilitation, Rental Operating Subsidies, Down Payment Assistance, Direct gap financing, and Fair Housing. Thus, while awarding funds for the construction of new affordable housing, two activities which should be budgeted for are BMR Administration and Fair Housing enforcement. FY 25-26 will be the final year of a four- 11 2 year contract the City has enacted for BMR administration with Rise Housing. The costs of the contract are approximately $300,000 per year. Fair Housing costs are approximately $50,000 per year. In order to fulfill the City’s commitment to the remainder of the administration contract, and to budget enough reserve funds to cover the costs associated with enacting new administration, fair housing, and other professional contracts until 2030, a minimum of $1,800,000 would need to be maintained as a reserve. The Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) fund is an entitlement formula grant awarded to cities to increase housing affordability from the California State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Since 2021, the City entered into a consortium to allow the County of Santa Clara to jointly administer PLHA funds on behalf of the City alongside other participating jurisdictions throughout the County, under the condition that the funds be used only for the predevelopment and development of new affordable rental housing. As of 2025, the fund has not been spent and has collected $908,683 but has been committed to the Charities Housing – Mary Ave project for predevelopment costs. Through this action, the Housing Commission may recommend awarding funds to either affordable housing development applicant to begin authorizing their use. A separate action to award funds will also be taken with the City Council and County Board of Supervisors at a later date. The County of Santa Clara awarded the City of Cupertino a $50,000 inventory grant in August 2024 to be used for supplementing services and support for residents experiencing homelessness. Previously, the City received a similar $50,000 grant from the County in 2023 for services to the unhoused and awarded the funds to the West Valley Community Services for the Haven to Home and Rotating Safe Car Park programs. The 2024 funds have yet to be awarded. As the PLHA and the County funds were not included in the NOFA, the Commission may recommend to award these funds either to applicants that responded to the NOFA as well as other eligible and qualified nonprofit providers of services. Discussion CDBG Funding HUD annually allocates CDBG funding to local jurisdictions for community development activities. Cupertino is one of nine entitlement jurisdictions within Santa Clara County. Jurisdictions typically must have a population of 50,000 or more to qualify as an “entitlement jurisdiction” that receives grant funding directly from HUD. Entitlement grants are largely allocated on a formula basis, based on several objective measures of community needs, including the extent of poverty, populations, housing overcrowding, age of housing, and extent of population growth lag in relationship to other metropolitan areas. This is Cupertino’s 21st year as an entitlement jurisdiction receiving a CDBG grant directly from HUD. The City anticipates that it will receive approximately $387,000 in FY 25-26 CDBG entitlement funding. Program income in the amount of $7,944 will be received and allocated from existing CDBG loan payoffs. HUD regulations implement maximum percentages that may be allocated to CDBG administration and public services. Of the total estimated funding, a maximum of 20% may be used for administrative costs to cover salary and benefits of staff who operate the CDBG program, a maximum of 15% may be used for public services, and the remaining 65% may be 12 3 used for capital housing projects. As noted earlier, CDBG funding amounts will be reduced or increased proportionately for FY 25-26 based on final HUD allocations and City Council approval. FY 25-26 CDBG Budget (est.) Entitlement Amount (EN) $387,000.00 Program Income (FY 25-26) $7,944.00 Unexpended Funds $22,523.37 Total Revenues $417,467.37 Program Administration (20% EN) $77,400.00 Public Service (15% EN) $58,000.00 Capital/Housing Projects (65% EN + Unexpended Funds) $282,017.37 Total Expenses $417,467.37 HUD regulations require that eligible activities selected for funding must benefit very low and low-income households, eliminate a blighted area, or address an urgent (emergency) community need, and must also meet a national objective. In addition, only certain types of eligible activities qualify under the CDBG regulations. Examples of eligible activities are: • Acquisition of Land • Public improvements • Public service activities • Affordable housing developments • Property acquisition for affordable housing • Rehabilitation of affordable units 2025-26 CDBG Program Administration Funds An estimated total of $77,400.00 will be used for CDBG program administration. The City will use these funds for administrative costs to cover salary and benefits of staff who operate the CDBG program. 2025-26 CDBG Capital Housing Project Funds (One-Year Funding Cycle) An estimated total of $261,758.87 is available to be used for eligible CDBG capital housing projects. This consists of FY 25-26 funding and unexpended funding from prior years. City staff conducted extensive outreach and the NOFA/RFP was sent to over 250 contacts in the affordable housing community. The City received one application in this category totaling $107,500.00. The City recommends awarding the excess of funds, or approximately $174,517.37, to the Charities Housing Mary Ave project. The award is specifically for public infrastructure site work to reconfigure areas currently in the public right away necessary for the development of affordable housing. This includes but is not limited to redevelopment of the sidewalk, street parking spaces, bike lanes, curbs, and gutters. The Mary Ave award will be contingent on Charities Housing completing the necessary NEPA Environmental review for the project. The contingence will also include the ability of Charities Housing to satisfy the City’s requirement to 13 4 spend down funds in accordance with HUD CDBG timeliness guidelines. If at any point in time, the City finds it necessary to reallocate the funds, either for an immediate drawdown or because the Mary Ave project is unable to acquire planning entitlement, the City will reserve the right to complete a Substantial Amendment to the FY 25-26 Annual Action Plan and will award the funds to the City Public Works Department for an applicable project. Funding recommendations are listed in the table below. 1 CDBG Capital Housing Projects FY 25-26 Application Summary Funds Available Funding Requests Funding Award FY 24-25 Funding Allocations a Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley- Homeowner Repair and Rehabilitation Program $107,500.00 $107,500.00 $96,237.55 b Charities Housing – Mary Ave $174,517.37 $174,517.37 $0 Sub-Total $282,017.37 $282,017.37 $282,017.37 $96,237.55 2025-26 CDBG Public Service Funds (Two-Year Funding Cycle) An estimated total of $58,000 is available to be used for eligible CDBG public service activities. The City received two applications in this category totaling $109,494.00. Funding was decreased proportionally based on the City’s Contingency Plan. Funding recommendations are listed in the table below. 2 CDBG Public Services FY 25-26 Application Summary Funds Available Funding Requests Funding Award FY 24-25 Funding Allocations a Live Oak Adult Day Services $22,000.00 $18,000.00 $9,414.00 b West Valley Community Services (WVCS) – Community Access to Resources and Education Program (CARE) $87,494.00 $40,000.00 $17,774.00 Sub-Total $58,000.00 $109,494.00 $58,000.00 $27,188.00 2025-26 BMR AHF Public Services (Two-Year Funding Cycle) The BMR AHF receives its revenue from the payment of housing mitigation fees from non- residential (commercial, retail, hotel, research and development (R&D) and industrial) and residential development. Formal agreements and monitoring are required for this program, but the requirements are less stringent than federal funding. A total of $50,000 is available to be used for eligible BMR AHF public services. The City received one application in this category totaling $50,000.00. Funding recommendations are listed in the table below. 14 5 3 BMR AHF Public Services FY 25-26 Application Summary Funds Available Funding Requests Funding Award FY 24-25 Funding Allocations a Project Sentinel – Fair Housing Activities $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 Sub-Total $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 2025-26 BMR AHF Capital Housing Project Funds (One-Year Funding Cycle) The City estimates up to $4,800,000 will be available to fund eligible BMR AHF projects for FY 25-26 prior to accounting for administrative and other expenses. As previously stated, staff recommends that a minimum of $1,800,000 be reserved to budget for these other expenses until the year 2030. Therefore, the City in practice has $3,000,000 to award for affordable housing projects. The City received two applications for FY 25-26 BMR AHF Capital Housing Projects. The first application, Charities Housing – Mary Ave, proposes 40 units, with 19 very low- income units, 20 extremely low-income units, and one manager unit. Within the affordable unit mix, 19 units will be reserved for individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities. The second application, Eden Housing – Wolf Rd, proposes 249 units built across two phases. The first phase will contain 101 units of mixed-income housing for school district employees, will contain approximately 34 low income units and 67 moderate income units. The second phase will contain 148 units, with 60 very low-income units, 86 low-income units, and two manager units. Staff recommendations are based on numerous criteria that include but not limited to the following: number of affordable units provided, level of affordability reached, special needs populations served, consistency with long range housing goals, availability of other funding, project readiness, community feedback, financial viability, and project feasibility. Regardless of award, staff will continue to support both projects through technical assistance to the developers and supporting applications for additional funding from state and federal sources such as Project Homekey+, Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities (AHSC), Local Housing Trust Fund (LHTF), Section 8 Project Based Vouchers (PBV), and other opportunities as they become available. If either project is unable to acquire planning entitlement, or the City receives additional BMR funds previously unaccounted for, the City will reserve the right to either uncommit funds committed to either project to be returned to the BMR fund balance, or to recommend awarding additional funds at a future Housing Commission meeting. Staff recommends that BMR funds below be committed at the following amounts, with award contingent on the developer’s attaining planning entitlements. 15 6 4 BMR AHF Capital Housing Projects FY 25-26 Application Summary Funds Available Funding Requests Funding Commitment FY 24-25 Funding Allocations a Charities Housing – Mary Ave $4,400,000 $1,000,000.00 $0 b Eden Housing, Inc. – Wolf Rd $4,800,000 $2,000,000.00 $0 Sub-Total $3,000,000 $9,200,000 $3,000,000.00 $0 2025-26 General Fund HSG Public Services (Two-Year Funding Cycle) The General Fund HSG program is funded by the City’s General Fund. Formal agreements and monitoring are required for this program, but the requirements are less stringent than federal funding. A total of $129,000 is available to be used for eligible General Fund HSG public service activities. The City received three applications in this category totaling $161,380. Funding recommendations are listed in the table below. 5 General Fund HSG Public Services FY 25-26 Application Summary Funds Available Funding Requests Funding Award FY 24-25 Funding Allocations a Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County – Long Term Care Ombudsman Program $12,000.00 $11,000.00 $10,000.00 b Senior Adults Legal Assistance (SALA) – Legal Assistance to Cupertino Elders $19,500.00 $18,000.00 $16,287.55 c West Valley Community Services – Haven to Home $129,880.00 $100,000.00 $74,034.34 Sub-Total $129,000.00 $161,380.00 $129,000.00 $100,321.89 2021-25 PLHA Affordable Rental Housing Funds (Four-Year Funding Cycle) The PLHA funding, which is awarded to the City of Cupertino and administered by the County of Santa Clara has accumulated $908,683 to be spent for predevelopment and development of new affordable rental housing. The City considered both applicants for the BMR AHF funds as potential recipients of PLHA funding. Funding recommendations are listed in the table below. 16 7 6 PLHA Affordable Housing Projects FY 25-26 Application Summary Funds Available Funding Requests Funding Award FY 24-25 Funding Allocations a Charities Housing – Mary Ave $908,683.00 $608,683.00 $0 b Eden Housing – Wolf Rd $908,683.00 $300,000.00 $0 Sub-Total $908,683.00 $908,683.00 $908,683.00 $0 2025-27 County of Santa Clara Funds (Two-Year Funding Cycle) The Santa Clara County funding, which was awarded to the City of Cupertino in the amount of $50,000, is reserved for services that support the unhoused. The Maitri women’s domestic violence shelter did not respond to the NOFA, making them ineligible to receive CDBG or HSG funding. However, the organization continues to have a funding gap of $25,000 per year. Staff recommends awarding the $50,000 in County funds to Maitri as a two-year agreement ($25,000 per year) to cover the funding gap and align their award with the two-year public service grants. Funding recommendation is listed in the table below. 7 Santa Clara County Funding Unhoused Programs FY 25-27 Application Summary Funds Available Funding Requests Funding Award FY 24-25 Funding Allocations a Maitri $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $24,678.11 Sub-Total $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $24,678.11 Fiscal Impact CDBG programs and projects are funded by HUD grant funds. PLHA programs and projects and funded by HCD grant funds. BMR AHF public services and projects are funded by housing mitigation fees collected from residential and non-residential development projects. General Fund HSG activities are funded through the City’s General Fund. County funding was received through an inventory grant from District 5 of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. Budget allocations for approved funding allocations will be included for City Council’s approval as part of the proposed and final budget. Analysis Attachment E provides a summary of the CDBG, BMR AHF, and HSG funding applications. 17 8 Process A public meeting will be held at a future City Council meeting. All required HUD notices will be published in the Cupertino Courier newspaper in advance announcing upcoming CDBG public hearings. Prepared by: Nicky Vu, Senior Housing Coordinator Reviewed by: Luke Connolly, Assistant Director of Community Development Approved for Submission by: Benjamin Fu, Director of Community Development Attachments: A - FY 2025-26 NOFA/RFP B - Housing Commission Resolution 17-02 (CDBG Contingency Plan) C- PLHA Cupertino County Consortium Agreement Amendment 1 D- FY 2024-25 County of Santa Clara Unhoused Program Funding Agreement E - FY 2025-26 CDBG, BMR AHF, and HSG Funding Application Summary 18 Page 1 of 4 City of Cupertino Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) and Request for Proposals (RFP) Issued: November 04, 2024 Deadline: February 04, 2025 The City of Cupertino has issued the fiscal year (FY) 2025/26 NOFA and RFP. The City is requesting proposals for eligible capital housing projects and public service programs. The City may award and appropriate funds to one or more eligible projects in each funding category. Funds must be used to serve low- and/or moderate-income households located within the City of Cupertino jurisdiction limits . The following funding sources are on a one-year grant funding cycle (FY 25/26): 1. Below Market Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) Capital Housing Projects (up to $4,800,000) 2. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Capital Housing Projects (approx. $267,000) The following funding sources are on a two-year grant funding cycle (FY 25/26 & 26/27): 1. BMR AHF Public Services (up to $50,000) 2. CDBG Public Services (approx. $58,000) 3. General Fund Human Services Grant (HSG) Program (up to $129,000) The estimated CDBG dollar amounts may change based upon the final federal budget approved by Congress. BMR AHF and General Fund HSG allocations are subject to City Council approval and may change as a result. CAPITAL HOUSING PROJECT FUNDS: • Funding Source #1- BMR AHF Capital Housing Projects (FY 25/26): The City estimates up to $4,800,000 will be available to fund eligible BMR AHF capital housing projects on a competitive basis for FY 25/26. BMR AHF funds must be used for eligible housing projects that will serve low - and/or moderate-income households located within the City of Cupertino jurisdiction limits. Project Requirements: BMR AHF capital housing project funds will not be granted or issued as forgivable loans. The City invites eligible non-profit and for-profit Development Entities (DEs) to submit proposals for eligible funding activities , which include, but are not limited to: ➢ Land acquisition ➢ New construction ➢ Acquisition and/or rehabilitation of buildings for permanent affordability ➢ Substantial rehabilitation Project Affordability Requirements: BMR AHF affordable rental and/or ownership housing proposals must meet the City ’s BMR requirements and offer 99 years of affordability. An affordable regulatory agreement will be recorded against the property to ensure affordability. Eligible Development Entities (DEs): Eligible DEs include non-profit and for-profit organizations licensed to conduct business in the State of California. 19 Page 2 of 4 • DEs must demonstrate credit worthiness, financial capacity, relevant experience to undertake acquisition, rehabilitation, operation of rental housing, or redevelopment of new affordable housing. • DEs must have no negative financial and project management history within the last five years (i.e., DEs has not been in monetary default on a loan and has been current on all financial obligations and compliance documentation). Loan Terms and Requirements: Rental Ownership Loan Type: Acquisition, predevelopment/construction converting to permanent, rehabilitation Acquisition, rehabilitation and/or construction Interest Rate: 3.0% simple interest 3.0% simple interest Loan Term: 30 yrs. 30 yrs. Affordability Term: 99 yrs. 99 yrs. Security: Deed of Trust, Promissory Note and other regulatory agreements recorded against the property as required by the City Deed of Trust, Promissory Note, and other regulatory agreements recorded against the property as required by the City Security Position: Will consider subordinating to a construction or permanent lender with City approval Will consider subordinating to a construction or permanent lender with City approval Repayment Terms: Interest only. All outstanding interest and principal will be due in full and payable on or by the maturity date. Required 50/50 split of the residual receipts. Interest only. All outstanding interest and principal will be due in full and payable on or by the maturity date. Required 50/50 split of the residual receipts. Timeframe: It is expected that projects must proceed expeditiously to construction It is expected that projects must proceed expeditiously to construction Financial Pro- Forma: Submit development financial pro-forma to be reviewed by City. Subject to review by qualified third-party consultant/organization to determine reasonableness Submit development financial pro-forma to be reviewed by City. Subject to review by qualified third-party consultant/organization to determine reasonableness Environmental Conditions: All environmental conditions (EX: CEQA) that are applicable to an eligible project must be satisfied All environmental conditions (EX: CEQA) that are applicable to an eligible project must be satisfied Project Conditions: Project may be subject to Planning Commission and/or City Council approval prior to Deed of Trust, Promissory Note and other recorded regulatory agreements being executed and disbursement of funding being approved Project may be subject to Planning Commission and/or City Council approval prior to Deed of Trust, Promissory Note and other recorded regulatory agreements being executed and disbursement of funding being approved Underwriting Criteria: Proposals and DE’s will be underwritten in accordance with City policies which includes, but not limited to, compliance with the General Plan, BMR Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual (Housing Mitigation Manual), and Policy and Procedures Manual for Administering Deed Restricted Affordable Housing Units (BMR Manual). • Funding Source #2: CDBG Capital Housing Projects (FY 23/24): The City estimates allocating approximately $267,000 in funding for eligible CDBG capital housing projects on a competitive basis for FY 25/26. CDBG capital housing project funds must be used for projects that will serve low-income households located within the City of Cupertino jurisdiction limits. CDBG capital housing projects 20 Page 3 of 4 are subject to HUD Section 3 requirements. The CDBG program is directed toward expanding and maintaining the affordable housing supply; promoting housing opportunities and choices; maintaining and improving community facilities; increasing economic opportunities, accessibility, energy efficiency and sustainability; and providing supportive services specifically for persons of very low and/or low-income. Targeted groups might include persons who are homeless, seniors, persons with disabilities, and other special needs groups. The City estimates receiving an approximate total of $387,000 in CDBG program entitlement funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for FY 25/26. Approximately $35,000 in unexpended CDBG funds from FY 23/24 FY 24/25 will be added to the eligible CDBG capital housing project category. CDBG funding is allocated on a competitive basis . A list of eligible CDBG capital housing project activities is available on the HUD website: https://www.hudexchange.info/cdbg-entitlement/cdbg-entitlement- program-eligibility-requirements/. Santa Clara County Measure A- Affordable Housing Bond The City’s NOFA/RFP is issued in conjunction with the County’s NOFA for the Measure A - Affordable Housing Bond. Measure A funding is available on a rolling basis for development capital funding, project -based vouchers, and acquisition funding. Information and applications are available on the County's Website. PUBLIC SERVICE FUNDS: (Note: Two-year funding cycle for FY 25/26 & FY 26/27) The City will award all Public Service funds through this NOFA/RFP on a two-year cycle to line up with the 2025-2030 CDBG Consolidated Plan. • Funding Source #3- BMR AHF Public Services (FY 25/26 & 26/27): The City estimates allocating up to $50,000 in funding annually for eligible BMR AHF public service programs for the two-year cycle. BMR AHF funds will be awarded on a competitive basis and must be used for eligible public service programs that will serve low- and/or moderate-income households located within the City of Cupertino jurisdiction limits. Eligible BMR AHF programs may include, but are not limited to, tenant/landlord dispute resolution, fair housing programs, and other programs serving low- and/or moderate-income households. • Funding Source #4- CDBG Public Services (FY 25/26 & 26/27): The City estimates allocating up to $58,000 in funding annually for eligible CDBG public service programs for the two-year cycle. CDBG public service funds will be awarded on a competitive basis and must be used to serve low-income households within the City of Cupertino jurisdiction limits. • Funding Source #5- General Fund HSG Program (FY 25/26 & 26/27): The City estimates allocating up to $129,000 in funding annually for eligible HSG programs for the two-year cycle. HSG funds will be awarded on a competitive basis and must be used to serve low- and/or moderate- income households within the City of Cupertino jurisdiction limits. Eligible HSG programs may include, but are not limited to, senior services, homeless services, and other services that serve low- and/or moderate-income households. RFP Review Process: Upon receipt of proposals, staff will conduct an initial review to determine program and/or project eligibility and completeness. The City reserves the right to request additional information from an applicant. After the RFP deadline, all eligible and complete applications will be forwarded to the City’s five-member Housing Commission for initial rating and ranking. A Housing Commission public hearing will be held in Spring 2025 and funding recommendations will be forwarded to the City Council for final approval. A City Council public hearing will be held in Spring 2025 to determine the final funding recommendations. Award Notification: In late Spring 2025, organizations will be notified of City Council final funding recommendations through this FY 25/26 NOFA/RFP. 21 Page 4 of 4 Disclaimer: This RFP does not commit the City to award any contract or developer agreement, execute any grant or loan documents, pay and pre-award expenses, or pay any costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal. The City reserves the right to: 1) accept or reject any or all proposals received; 2) waive a non-substantive deficiency or irregularity; 3) negotiate with any qualified applicant; 4) execute grant or loan documents in what it believes to be in the best interest of the City; 5) cancel this request, in part o r its entirety, if it is deemed to be in the best interest of the City; 6) reject the proposal of any applicant who has previously failed to perform properly; 7) reject the proposal of any applicant who has failed to complete a contract within the specified timeframe; 8) reject the proposal of any applicant that is not in a position to fulfill a resulting contractual obligation; or 9) recommend partial funding of a proposal. Evaluation Criteria: Proposals will be reviewed and scored relative to the below program and project scoring summary. The maximum possible score is 100. Scoring Summary Points 1. Organization Experience and Capacity 50 2. Program/Project Readiness 30 3. Program/Project Leveraged Funds 20 Maximum Possible Score 100 RFP Application Information & Deadlines: The RFP application period will open at 8:00am on Monday, November 04, 2024, and will end at 5:00pm on Tuesday, February 04, 2025. Organizations who intend to apply for funds through this RFP must apply online at www.citydataservices.net. To obtain a temporary login username and password, please visit and request at www.citydataservices.net. For additional questions, please contact Nicky Vu, Senior Housing Coordinator, at NickyV@cupertino.org or (408) 777-1347. Any RFP application that does not meet the deadline will not be accepted. Note: All proposals are subject to the conditions, instructions and specifications included in this NOFA/RFP. Applicants will be notified of upcoming meetings and public hearings to discuss the expenditure of BMR AHF, General Fund HSG, and CDBG funds. The City will provide alternative accessible formats of this document upon request. If you need this document in an alternative format such as large print, Braille, audiotape, or computer disc, please contact the City at the contact information listed above. 22 RESOLUTION NO. 17-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE 2017-18 CDBG, GENERAL FUND HUMAN SERVICE GRANTS (HSG) PROGRAM AND BELOW MARKET-RATE (BMR) AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND (AHF) RECOMMENDED FUNDING ALLOCATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL ADOPTION WHEREAS, the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 provides that funds be made available for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino wishes to apply for funds as an Entitlement Jurisdiction under said Act; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino estimates receiving a $307,952 CDBG entitlement grant from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to be allocated for fiscal year 2017-18; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino estimates allocating $7,944 in CDBG program income for fiscal year 2017-18; and WHEREAS, The City of Cupertino estimates allocating up to $8,161 of available uncommitted CDBG funds from prior fiscal year 2016-17 for fiscal year 2017-18; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino is required to submit a fiscal year 2017-18 CDBG Annual Action Plan to HUD for review and approval prior to being allowed to expend CDBG funds for fiscal year 2017-18; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino put into place a CDBG Contingency Plan (Exhibit 1) because of the uncertainty in the federal budget and the revised timeline provided by HUD to submit the Action Plan; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Housing Commission of the City of Cupertino hereby recommends approval of the fiscal year 2017-18 CDBG, HSG and BMR AHF recommended funding allocations (Exhibit 2) to the City Council for final adoption; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the fiscal year 2017-18 CDBG, HSG and BMR AHF recommended grant funding allocations will be decreased/increased based on final budget allocations by HUD and the City Council. Attachment B - Housing Commission Resolution 17-02 (CDBG Contingency Plan) 23 PASS ED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Housing Commission of the City of Cupertino this 11th day of May, 2017 by the following vote: Vote Members of the Housing Commission A YES: Chair Daruwalla, Vice Chair Chu, Kapil, Zhao, Bose NOES: none ABSENT: none ABSTAIN: none ATTEST : APPROVED: KerriH~ Nill~ Senior Housing Planner Chair, Housing Commission 2 24 Exhibit 1 CDBG Contingency Plan In the case of funding increase, the following plan is recommended: ® Public Services ($47,188): Distribute the additional available amount in the public services cap until an applicant is fully funded. If an applicant reaches the funding amount requested, any remaining funds will be distributed to other applicants who have not yet reached the maximum funding amount. ® Administration ($63,107): Funds are to be allocated to the City of Cupertino for CDBG administration. General Fund allocation will be reduced accordingly. ® Capital/Housing Projects ($213,259): Distribute the additional available amount in the capital/housing projects cap until an applicant is fully funded. If an applicant reaches the funding amount requested, any remaining funds will be distributed to other applicants who have not yet reached the maximum funding amount. In the case of a funding decrease, the following plan is recommended: ® Public Services ($47,188): Distribute any funding decrease proportionately among the remaining public service applicants, but maintain a minimum funding allocation of $15 ,000 for any applicant to the extent feasible. ® Administration ($63,107): Any decrease in funding will be supplemented by the General Fund for CDBG administration. ® Capital/Housing Projects ($213,259): Any decrease in funding will be supplemented by the Below Market Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) for CDBG capital/housing projects. 3 25 Exhibit 2 FY 2017-18 Funding Allocations FY 2017/18 Est. FY Housing Fiscal Year 2017/18 2017/18 FY 2017/18 Commission No. Grant Application Summary Funds Funding Funding Available Requests Recommendations as of May 11, 2017 Meeting 1 CDBG Public Service Applications: (Two-Year Funding Cycle, FY 2016/17 & 17/18) a Live Oak Adult Day Services -Senior Adult $ 15,098.00 $ 15,098.00 Day Care b West Valley Community Services -Community $ 32,090.00 $ 32,090.00 Access to Resource and Education (CARE) Sub-Total $ 47,330.00 $ 47,188.00 $ 47,188.00 2 CDBG Capital/Housing Project Applications: (One-Year Funding Cycle, FY 2017/18) a Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley -Housing $ 64,000.00 $ 64,000.00 Repair and Rehabilitation Project b West Valley Community Services -Vista $ 300,000.00 $ 149,259.00 Village Renovation Sub-Total $ 213,259.00 $ 364,000.00 $ 213,259.00 3 CDBG Program Administration: (One-Year Funding Cycle, FY 2017/18) a Administration $ 63,107.00 $ 63,107 .00 Sub-Total $ 63,107.00 $ 63,107.00 $ 63,107.00 General Fund Human Service Grants (HSG) 4 Applications: (Two-Year Funding Cycle, FY 2016/17 & 17/18) a Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County -$ 6,500.00 $ 6,500.00 Long-Term Care Ombudsman b Maitri -MTH Direct Client Services $ 23,400 .00 $ 23,400.00 C Senior Adults Legal Assistance -Legal $ 10,100.00 $ 10,100 .00 Assistance to Elders Sub-Total $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 4 26 Below Market-Rate (BMR) Affordable 5 Housing Fund (AHF) Applications (Two-Year Funding Cycle, FY 2016/17 & 17/18): TBD -BMR Program Administration $ 175,000.00 $ 175,000 .00 a (Affordable Placement Program) b Project Sentinel -Landlord/Tenant Rental $ 35 ,000.00 $ 35,000 .00 Mediation Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 C (ECHO) -Fair Housing Services d West Valley Community Services -10311 & $ 160,000.00 $ 160,000.00 10321 Greenwood Court Renovation Project Sub-Total $ 380,000.00 $ 380,000.00 TOTAL $ 363,696.00 $ 894,295.00 $ 743,554.00 5 27 Page 1 of 2 First Amendment County PLHA Consortium Agreement FIRST AMENDMENT TO PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING ALLOCATION CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA AND THE CITY OF CUPERTINO This is the First Amendment to the Consortium Agreement between the County of Santa Clara, a subdivision of the State of California (the “County”) and the City of Cupertino (the “City”), which was executed on December 22, 2021 (“Agreement”). The County and City are sometimes referred to herein individually as a “Party,” or collectively as the “Parties.” WHEREAS, on December 22, 2021, the Parties executed an Agreement to be part of the Santa Clara County Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Consortium for the purpose of receiving PLHA funds and undertaking affordable housing activities with the areas served by the PLHA Consortium. WHEREAS, the Parties wish to amend the Agreement for the purpose of committing Nine Hundred Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Three Dollars ($908,683) in PLHA funds—of which Seven Hundred Fifty One Thousand Four Hundred and Forty Eight Dollars ($751,448) are funded from the City of Cupertino's Calendar Year (CY) 2020-2023 funds and One Hundred Fifty Seven Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Five Dollars ($157,235) are funded from the County of Santa Clara's CY 2020 PLHA funds—to the Mary Avenue Villas, a 40-unit affordable housing development for adults with developmental disabilities located at Mary Ave, Cupertino, California. WHEREAS the Mary Avenue Villas project will consist of thirty-nine (39) units of affordable housing and one (1) unrestricted staff unit. All thirty-nine (39) unrestricted units are for individuals and families with developmental disabilities with income at or below 60% of Area Median Income (“AMI”). WHEREAS, the Mary Avenue Villas PLHA commitment mean the County’s commitment for a predevelopment loan of $908,683 in PLHA funds. WHEREAS, the Mary Avenue Villas PLHA commitment shall commence on the date when the Loan Agreement is executed and shall continue until fifty-five (55) years from receipt of all Certificates of Occupancy or equivalent for the Project, even if the County Loan is paid in full or otherwise satisfied, or the Deed of Trust is reconveyed, prior to the end of the Term NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: I. Section 13 of the Agreement, entitled “ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES” shall be amended to read as follows: 13. ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES. The PLHA Consortium recognizes the creation and preservation of affordable housing in Santa Clara County as a high priority. The implementation of the programs will be determined by County upon consultation with the Consortium Cities and will depend upon the availability of funding to operate the program and the administrative capacity of County and/or subcontractor(s). Docusign Envelope ID: 08EED335-3EBF-463E-84C6-A6A14F780A66 28 Page 2 of 2 First Amendment County PLHA Consortium Agreement The following eligible activities under the PLHA program were selected by the City to address the lack of housing availability and affordability in Santa Clara County and are the focus of the Initial Term of the PLHA program administered by County: Consortium Members agree to the following: 13.1 Cities may direct that all or a portion of their annual PLHA allocation be used for specific use(s) to benefit their respective city or pool their funds with other Consortium Funds to fund eligible uses countywide, provided that no one eligible use will utilize less than the lesser of the city’s total allocation for that Fiscal Year, or $100,000. As such the City of Cupertino directs that their annual PLHA allocation be used for the following specific use(s): 13.1.i Pursuant to section 301(a)(1) of the Guidelines, the predevelopment, development, acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation of multifamily, residential live-work, rental housing that is affordable to extremely low-, very low-, low-, or moderate-income households (pursuant to section 101(c)(1) and (3) as of the Guidelines), including necessary operating subsidies. 13.1.iii Cities may save or “bank” their annual allocation(s) for use in a future year for an eligible use within their city, up to a total of three years’ allocation. If, after three years of banking its funds, the City has not identified eligible use(s) for the City’s Funds; the County will work with the City to identify alternative eligible projects. III. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. Except as set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect; provided, however, in the event of any conflict between the terms of this First Amendment and the Agreement, the terms of this First Amendment shall control. The Agreement, as amended by this First Amendment, constitutes the entire Agreement of the Parties concerning the subject matter herein and supersedes all prior oral and written agreements, representations, and understandings concerning such subject matter. IV. CONTRACT EXECUTION. Unless otherwise prohibited by law or County policy, the parties agree that an electronic copy of a signed contract, or an electronically signed contract, has the same force and legal effect as a contract executed with an original ink signature. The term “electronic copy of a signed contract” refers to a transmission by facsimile, electronic mail, or other electronic means of a copy of an original signed contract in a portable document format. The term “electronically signed contract” means a contract that is executed by applying an electronic signature using technology approved by the County. Docusign Envelope ID: 08EED335-3EBF-463E-84C6-A6A14F780A66 29 Page 3 of 2 First Amendment County PLHA Consortium Agreement The Parties acknowledge and accept the terms and conditions of this Amendment No. 1 as evidenced by the following signatures of their duly authorized representatives. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CITY OF CUPERTINO ______________________________________ ____________________________________ Kathryn Kaminski Pamela Wu Acting Director City Manager Date _______________________ Date _______________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM AND APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: LEGALITY: ______________________________________ ____________________________________ Miriam Sondag Christopher Jensen Deputy County Counsel City Attorney Date ______________________ Date _______________________ Docusign Envelope ID: 08EED335-3EBF-463E-84C6-A6A14F780A66 12/20/2024 12/20/2024 12/30/2024 12/30/2024 30 31 32 33 34 City Live Oak Adult Day Services City West Valley Community Services (CARE) City Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County City Senior Adults Legal Assistance (SALA) City West Valley Community Services (Haven to Home) City Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley City Charities Housing City Eden Housing, Inc. City Project Sentinel *Final version to be shared during Housing Commission meeting during staff presentation City of Cupertino FY 2025-2026 NOFA Application Summary (as of 3/18/25)* Status Applicant CDBG Public Services General Fund Human Services Grant (HSG) CDBG Capital Housing Project Below Market-Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) Capital Housing Projects Below Market-Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) Public Service Projects 35 Senior Adult Day Care/Caregiver Respite, Cupertino Center $22,000.00 $.00 $1,625,615.00 Community Access to Resources and Education (CARE)$87,494.00 $.00 $7,302,419.00 TOTAL $109,494.00 $.00 $8,928,034.00 Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program $12,000.00 $.00 $53,040,517.00 Legal Assistance to Cupertino Elders $19,500.00 $.00 $1,050,120.00 Haven to Home $129,880.00 $.00 $.00 TOTAL $161,380.00 $.00 $54,090,637.00 Repair and Accessibility Modification Program for Low-Income Homeowners$107,500.00 $.00 $4,932,795.00 Mary Avenue Villas $4,400,000.00 $.00 $9,997,029.00 Wolfe Road Mixed-Income Workforce Housing Development$4,800,000.00 $.00 $473,988,901.00 TOTAL $9,200,000.00 $.00 $483,985,930.00 Fair Housing, Tenant-Landlord Counseling and Dispute Resolution Services$52,373.00 $.00 $4,469,959.00 TOTAL $9,630,747.00 $.00 $556,407,355.00 *Final version to be shared during Housing Commission meeting during staff presentation City of Cupertino FY 2025-2026 NOFA Application Summary (as of 3/18/25)* Project Name Amount Requested Amount Awarded Total Budget Below Market-Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) Capital Housing Projects Below Market-Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) Public Service Projects 36 1%1 85 Why is there a 165% jump in salary from FY 2024? 1%1 67 1. Under Program Budget, Funds requested is $87,494 ($79,544 + 7,950) But, some numbers don't add up: The Client Associate's hourly rate is listed as $30, working 40 hours per month for 12 months = $14,400. So, why is the request $31,200? So, the salary for Client Services Program Manager at $34,000 plus the Client Associates' at $14,400, the total request should be $48,400 not $87,494. 2. Under Consolidated Plan Goals, response to question #2 'Explain how you will meet these goals,' is not clear - doesn't seem to respond to the question... 3. Cost of fundraising is more than double the administrative costs and 4 times the proposed project budget? 4. No adequate explanation of why the funding request has doubled since last fiscal year.. 1% %1 95 No Comments 2%1 90 #DIV/0!1 0 1. The Program Coordinator's salary is noted as $35 per hour, working 40 hours per week for 12 months, puts the total as $16,800. So, why is the request $72,800? 2. The Intake Associate's salary is noted as $30 per hour, working 40 hours per week for 12 months, put the total as $14,400. So, why is the request at $31,200? % 2%1 85 Well written proposal with clear identification of needs and use of funding. 44%1 75 1. If this is approved, it would be nice if the Housing commissioners can review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 2. Did this go through CEQA process and an Environment Impact Report prepared? With the number of housing units just being constructed at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/ Mary Avenue corner, what will be the traffic impact at this already crowded junction? 1%1 70 1. The proposed rent for the units doesn't seem to benefit low-income population. 2. Has this gone through CEQA process? With the number of units planned, the development at Vallco, and the location of Apple campus is already a strain on city infrastructure at this location. 3. If approved, it would be good if Housing commissioners are able to review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 2% 1%1 80 2% City of Cupertino FY 2025-2026 NOFA Application Summary (as of 3/18/25)* % NPO Budget Number of Evals Average Score Comments 37 1. Under Program Budget, Funds requested is $87,494 ($79,544 + 7,950) But, some numbers don't add up: The Client Associate's hourly rate is listed as $30, working 40 hours per month for 12 months = $14,400. So, why is the request $31,200? So, the salary for Client Services Program Manager at $34,000 plus the Client Associates' at $14,400, the total request should be $48,400 not $87,494. 2. Under Consolidated Plan Goals, response to question #2 'Explain how you will meet these goals,' is not clear - doesn't seem to respond to the question... 3. Cost of fundraising is more than double the administrative costs and 4 times the proposed project budget? 4. No adequate explanation of why the funding request has doubled since last fiscal year.. 1. The Program Coordinator's salary is noted as $35 per hour, working 40 hours per week for 12 months, puts the total as $16,800. So, why is the request $72,800? 2. The Intake Associate's salary is noted as $30 per hour, working 40 hours per week for 12 months, put the total as $14,400. So, why is the request at $31,200? Well written proposal with clear identification of needs and use of funding. 1. If this is approved, it would be nice if the Housing commissioners can review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 2. Did this go through CEQA process and an Environment Impact Report prepared? With the number of housing units just being constructed at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/ Mary Avenue corner, what will be the traffic impact at this already crowded junction? 1. The proposed rent for the units doesn't seem to benefit low-income population. 2. Has this gone through CEQA process? With the number of units planned, the development at Vallco, and the location of Apple campus is already a strain on city infrastructure at this location. 3. If approved, it would be good if Housing commissioners are able to review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 38 1. Under Program Budget, Funds requested is $87,494 ($79,544 + 7,950) But, some numbers don't add up: The Client Associate's hourly rate is listed as $30, working 40 hours per month for 12 months = $14,400. So, why is the request $31,200? So, the salary for Client Services Program Manager at $34,000 plus the Client Associates' at $14,400, the total request should be $48,400 not $87,494. 2. Under Consolidated Plan Goals, response to question #2 'Explain how you will meet these goals,' is not clear - doesn't seem to respond to the question... 3. Cost of fundraising is more than double the administrative costs and 4 times the proposed project budget? 4. No adequate explanation of why the funding request has doubled since last fiscal year.. 1. The Program Coordinator's salary is noted as $35 per hour, working 40 hours per week for 12 months, puts the total as $16,800. So, why is the request $72,800? 2. The Intake Associate's salary is noted as $30 per hour, working 40 hours per week for 12 months, put the total as $14,400. So, why is the request at $31,200? 1. If this is approved, it would be nice if the Housing commissioners can review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 2. Did this go through CEQA process and an Environment Impact Report prepared? With the number of housing units just being constructed at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/ Mary Avenue corner, what will be the traffic impact at this already crowded junction? 1. The proposed rent for the units doesn't seem to benefit low-income population. 2. Has this gone through CEQA process? With the number of units planned, the development at Vallco, and the location of Apple campus is already a strain on city infrastructure at this location. 3. If approved, it would be good if Housing commissioners are able to review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 39 1. Under Program Budget, Funds requested is $87,494 ($79,544 + 7,950) But, some numbers don't add up: The Client Associate's hourly rate is listed as $30, working 40 hours per month for 12 months = $14,400. So, why is the request $31,200? So, the salary for Client Services Program Manager at $34,000 plus the Client Associates' at $14,400, the total request should be $48,400 not $87,494. 2. Under Consolidated Plan Goals, response to question #2 'Explain how you will meet these goals,' is not clear - doesn't seem to respond to the question... 3. Cost of fundraising is more than double the administrative costs and 4 times the proposed project budget? 4. No adequate explanation of why the funding request has doubled since last fiscal year.. 1. The Program Coordinator's salary is noted as $35 per hour, working 40 hours per week for 12 months, puts the total as $16,800. So, why is the request $72,800? 2. The Intake Associate's salary is noted as $30 per hour, working 40 hours per week for 12 months, put the total as $14,400. So, why is the request at $31,200? 1. If this is approved, it would be nice if the Housing commissioners can review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 2. Did this go through CEQA process and an Environment Impact Report prepared? With the number of housing units just being constructed at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/ Mary Avenue corner, what will be the traffic impact at this already crowded junction? 1. The proposed rent for the units doesn't seem to benefit low-income population. 2. Has this gone through CEQA process? With the number of units planned, the development at Vallco, and the location of Apple campus is already a strain on city infrastructure at this location. 3. If approved, it would be good if Housing commissioners are able to review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 40 1. Under Program Budget, Funds requested is $87,494 ($79,544 + 7,950) But, some numbers don't add up: The Client Associate's hourly rate is listed as $30, working 40 hours per month for 12 months = $14,400. So, why is the request $31,200? So, the salary for Client Services Program Manager at $34,000 plus the Client Associates' at $14,400, the total request should be $48,400 not $87,494. 2. Under Consolidated Plan Goals, response to question #2 'Explain how you will meet these goals,' is not clear - doesn't seem to respond to the question... 3. Cost of fundraising is more than double the administrative costs and 4 times the proposed project budget? 4. No adequate explanation of why the funding request has doubled since last fiscal year.. 1. If this is approved, it would be nice if the Housing commissioners can review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 2. Did this go through CEQA process and an Environment Impact Report prepared? With the number of housing units just being constructed at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/ Mary Avenue corner, what will be the traffic impact at this already crowded junction? 1. The proposed rent for the units doesn't seem to benefit low-income population. 2. Has this gone through CEQA process? With the number of units planned, the development at Vallco, and the location of Apple campus is already a strain on city infrastructure at this location. 3. If approved, it would be good if Housing commissioners are able to review the design and provide input prior to start of construction documents. 41 1. Under Program Budget, Funds requested is $87,494 ($79,544 + 7,950) But, some numbers don't add up: The Client Associate's hourly rate is listed as $30, working 40 hours per month for 12 months = $14,400. So, why is the request $31,200? So, the salary for Client Services Program Manager at $34,000 plus the Client Associates' at $14,400, the total request should be $48,400 not $87,494. 2. Under Consolidated Plan Goals, response to question #2 'Explain how you will meet these goals,' is not clear - doesn't seem to respond to the question... 3. Cost of fundraising is more than double the administrative costs and 4 times the proposed project budget? 4. No adequate explanation of why the funding request has doubled since last fiscal year.. 42 1. Under Program Budget, Funds requested is $87,494 ($79,544 + 7,950) But, some numbers don't add up: The Client Associate's hourly rate is listed as $30, working 40 hours per month for 12 months = $14,400. So, why is the request $31,200? So, the salary for Client Services Program Manager at $34,000 plus the Client Associates' at $14,400, the total request should be $48,400 not $87,494. 2. Under Consolidated Plan Goals, response to question #2 'Explain how you will meet these goals,' is not clear - doesn't seem to respond to the question... 3. Cost of fundraising is more than double the administrative costs and 4 times the proposed project budget? 4. No adequate explanation of why the funding request has doubled since last fiscal year.. 43 1. Under Program Budget, Funds requested is $87,494 ($79,544 + 7,950) But, some numbers don't add up: The Client Associate's hourly rate is listed as $30, working 40 hours per month for 12 months = $14,400. So, why is the request $31,200? So, the salary for Client Services Program Manager at $34,000 plus the Client Associates' at $14,400, the total request should be $48,400 not $87,494. 2. Under Consolidated Plan Goals, response to question #2 'Explain how you will meet these goals,' is not clear - doesn't seem to respond to the question... 3. Cost of fundraising is more than double the administrative costs and 4 times the proposed project budget? 4. No adequate explanation of why the funding request has doubled since last fiscal year.. 44 1. Under Program Budget, Funds requested is $87,494 ($79,544 + 7,950) But, some numbers don't add up: The Client Associate's hourly rate is listed as $30, working 40 hours per month for 12 months = $14,400. So, why is the request $31,200? So, the salary for Client Services Program Manager at $34,000 plus the Client Associates' at $14,400, the total request should be $48,400 not $87,494. 2. Under Consolidated Plan Goals, response to question #2 'Explain how you will meet these goals,' is not clear - doesn't seem to respond to the question... 3. Cost of fundraising is more than double the administrative costs and 4 times the proposed project budget? 4. No adequate explanation of why the funding request has doubled since last fiscal year.. 45