HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-03-29 EHA MINUTES•
I.
II.
•
III.
•
D R A F T D R A F T D R A F l
ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY
Board of Commissioners
Regular Meeting
March 29, t 989
9 B t
The Regular Meeting of the Englewood Housing Authority Bo .. ,rd
of Commissioners was called to order at 'l: 10 p.m. on
Wednesday, March 29, 1989, at Simon CP.nter, ~':l:.-l33 ~outh
Lincoln Street, Englewood, Colorado, 80110, by r.h~, i rm.m
Thomas J. Burns.
ROLL CALL ---------
Nembers Present:
Members Absent:
Also Present:
MINUTES
Thomas J. Burns, Chairman
R. J. Berlin, Vice Chai.rman
Roger Koltay, City Council Hep.
Bradley L. Zieg, Commi.ssioner
Nurleen Norden, Commissioner
James F. Wagenlander, EHi, Ll?g,"31 Coun5el
Paul Malinowski, E.,u~cut1ve Dir·ector
Mary A. Hyan, Recording Secretary
Regular Meeting held February 22, l9l39
Changes made to Paqe 6, Paragraph C.2.a.,
follows:
now re.-1ds c.1s
Management
other faction
management.
OnE?
of
fac-:tion
tenants
of tenants feels opposed to the
with regard& to Resident ~ouncil
Changes made to Page b, Paragraph C.3. with deletion of
words "and on".
Changes made to Page 7, last paragr~>h on page,
!,entenc:e of paragraph nnw reads:
last
The commissioners felt that a written copy of the!:,e
Grievance Procedures should be yiven to every resident .
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
IT WAS
HOUSING
1989, AS
MO!!.Q~ •
MOVED BY R. J'. BERLIN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THF: EMGLEWIJOD
AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEFr ING Hf:I..D FE.BR1 tf\nY 2c~,
PRESENTED, WITH CHANGES. BRADLEY L. ZIEG SECONDED THE MOTHIN.
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstained:
Absent:
IV.
v.
Burns, Berlin, Zieg, Koltay
None
None
Norden
The Chairman declared the motion carried.
VISITORS --------
James F. Wagenlander, Attorney at Law, recently hirP.d lly the
Engle11o1ood Housing Authority, attended this meeting c,1 .. t.he
Board of Commissione,·s. Mr. Wagenlandt::•r gave an i nfo1 m.,t i ve
presentation on the history df the Public Housinu Pr ·ogram,
briefly covering other housing programs as weJl.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
A. Program Reports:
Qs_s_~~~}:, ~!.~~'!~ ~!.e.~~~: The F.,cecu t .1. ve Di 1· er tor.
e><plained why the total units leaser1 for all p,·oq,ams
(518) e><ceeded th~ total units for all proqrams <517).
A voucher holder th,·ough the Little Housing Autho,·ity
had contacted 61:?u la Sherman, Leased t-lou!'", i. nq Manaqer ,
stating that she would like to tran<:,fer her as s i c;t.,,ncP.
to Englewood. Normally, the EHA wnuld cnT1vt-"?rt. the:!
initial PHA's (Littleton's) voucher into the E HA's
program rather than bi l ling the initial PHA fnr thE.•
monthly housing assistance payment. At thP time this
participant contacted Mrs. Sherman, there were no
certificates or vour.hers available through t.h~ FHA'c..;
Section 8 Progr·am. lhe participant was over·--i~,c;uecl a
two-bedroom voucht~r ·from project No. V --001, •
The E>eec:ut i ve Di rector stated that WAND Rental 1.m it~,
are be1.ng kept vacant in 01-der that rehab wo, I< may b e•
done on them as funding becomes available.
WAND ~~l!e.~~~~ ~~!.'!~'!~ f:!~e.~~~: ThP. E><c.=?cutive D1r·ecto1·
confirmed that 431 East Gir·ard 's n~hab wm k was
basically completed during the month of Marci,, J9UY.
Mr. Malinowski also informed the Commissionm-s t.hal. t;he
Englewood Housing Authority will c lo s e on ::1 :7155 South
Pennsylvania on Friday, March 31, 1989.
-·2 ··· •
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
•
•
Director's R4!e.ort
B. Memorandum to City Council Regarding
Residents' Complaints Fol low-·up.
(Jr-chard PldC:P
Roger Koltay infurmed the other Commissioner<.; that Clt;y
Council's viewpoint is that the Englewood llnu~:;ing
Authority is competent in handling these pr11bl.emc;.
Communication channels seem to be open1ng up c1ncJ
Council felt it was worthwhile that the EHA have staff
present at the Tenant Council Meetings.
C. Memorandum Concerning False Alarm Ordinance.
D.
Executive Director Malinowski informed the
Commissioners that he had been in communication with
City Attorney DeWitt on this proposed ordinanre. He
had asked the City Attorney to respond to several
concerns and questions:
1. What is the current status of the ordinanr.e·., Wh1:m
would the City Council be hearing public opinion?
2. What is the official definition o ·f a "false
alarm?" For example, if a resident's smoke alarm
is set off by "burnt toast," would we he .:i~sess,,~d
a fine for that'? Is the building owner or the
resident assee:.sed the fine? Are subsequent fines
determined by individual apartment number or l:he
property as a whole?
3. Do the Fire Department and Po 1 ice Oepartm1:mt !)~~~
to respond to the site generating the alarm, or
can they verify the need t ·or a response w i ti I t;he
resident building attendants by phone?
4. Could these properties possibly be waivPd from the
ordinance's fines since the resident•:=. are
low-income senior citizens or handicapped?
Roger Koltay stated that this ordinance is r.ominq up
for second reading shortly, and it is expected that
some amendments wi 11 b•~ made.
Letter
Vo .uchers.
from HUD Approvinq tS Additional Housing
Briefly noted was the letter from I-IUD announcing the
approval of the EHA's application for l~j Ac1dit.ional
Housing Vouchers. The ACC for· Contract C099 -·V048·-··00S
was presented for manua 1 e><ecut ion by the Chci i rman of
the Englewood Housing Authority •
-3-
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
E. Update on Rehab Lo."ln Properties Sent to C1ty f\t t ,.H"m ·y·
for Preliminary Foreclosure Action:
VI.
The E,cecutive Director stated that C:i ty Atto n ,e y l>eWi tt
had written the last "procedural letter" to r e hah loan
recipients who are seriously delinquen t:. 011 UH?ir
accounts. The letter stated:
·The Englewood Housing Authority Board n f t :ommis ·~i,1r.e:.'1·s
has determined that you are not willing to fu .lfill ymff
obligations under the C i ty of E ngJewood llnu•·:;Jnq
Authority's Rehabilitation Loan P,o g r ·am. Cont.,c t thi s
(City Attorney'!:i) office on or before ~i :00 p.m. on
<date> regarding your unpaid ba I anct.~. If you rlo not.
•ake contact with t his off-ice, we )·;hat I p ro crcer1 w1 th .::i n
action foreclosing upon your propPrty."
F. The E>eecutive DirE-1r.tor informed the C nmmissionC?i-L-t.h.,t
he had contacted the real esti.ltc• broker· h n nn 1 t ng 'til e
t ·our-bu i 1 ding, 82-un it apartment comp I ex d i c..:;c:,.as ~.P d at
the EHA Board Meeting held F~b r uary 22, 1989. •~
learned that th e ~.el lc~r of the 8 2-uni t; apa r t me n t
complex actually had ten buildings hP want P '1 tn se ll
and only as a "package" (all ten bui lrl1ng s o r n one).
1·he Commissioners aqreed that this s i tu a tion was one
the EHA did not want to pursue further.
DISCUSSION ITEMS, MOTIONS ~!:J_Q ~~§Q~!-JI_!.Q!'_I~:
A. Attendance Gu i delines for Englewood Housinq Author i ty
Board of Commissioner~. Member s :
In February, 1q09, the Englewood City Council p~sse d a
resolution ,-equiring each Boartl dnd Commis si on of l:he
City to submit a-ttendance guidel i nE ~s for boa r d mee t-.ing w.:,
to them within c::, i >< ty days. The EHf\ • ·~ ny -·l..aws add rnss
meeting datE•s but do not include individual board
member attendanc e quidel inc~s. l't was t he und t:?r·r,t a nc-l i ng
of ttu~ Exec utive Di r ector that the•;;e C.jU t d e li.ne •:_; c an !:l e
fai,-ly broad and do not have to bE' punitive. The
Attendanc.e Guideli11es submitted to the Mayo, l>y C i.ty
Planning and Zoning Commission wer e s t11rli £.~d. Hnger
Koltay stated City Counc il felt :,i.m.:1,~ ttu~y m 3 ke the
appointments to the commissions and rely on bo ~r ds and
commissions to handle cer tain munic i pal
responsibilities, that regular attendan c e of rippoin t e es
is necess ary tor pr·oper functioning of the hoa r d•,, and
comm i ssions. Council f elt that c ommuni c ation o;;hnuld qo
to them if a prohlem arose concern i nq atte11danc £', a ·ncJ
that the boards or c:ommi ssion~ could rPcommPnd to t it~~
City Council the rumoval of that appointee.
•
•
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
•
•
•
DISCUSSION ITEMS, MOTIONS AND RESOL.UTlONS:
A. Attendant:e Guidelines for Englewood Housing Aut.hority
Board of Commissioners Members
.Ja11Res Wagenlander stated most o r dinanc es c-:r-eat.ing
authorities state that members of commissions cannot be
removed from the commission by counci 1 wi thou1. r.'.ausE-.!,
and the EHA cannot remove their own comm is•;;i one ,·~.
because of state 1 aw. (CRS ,:!9-4-c~OB states: ''The mayor-
may remove a commi5sioner for inE?fficiem:y or negh~ct
of duty or misconduct in of'fice, but only art.er· the
commissioner has been given a copy of th,~ chcffg•·~s .
Nhich may be made by the mayor against him, and ha s had
an opportunity to be heard in person or· by coun~.e I . "}
Bradley Zieg stated that Planning a nd 7oninq
Commissions guidelines relate to a "City" board a nd
that the EHA should have guidelines developed by the
EHA Board of Commissioners which are specific to the
EHA. Such guidelines should then be fon.,a,·ded to City
Council with a memorandum which state5 that the EHA i ~
dealing with thi!, matter bec,3use t.hey a,·e noL
insensitive to the concerns of City Counci l; b11t. that
the EHA is going to make an indepenr1E,mt d1.~t.e1 mination
on this matter·. It was the c.onsenstff, of the E nqJt1wood
Housiny Authority Board of' Commissioner s ·that t.ht.·' EHA
should develop their own mechanism for dPaliny with
attendance by comm1.s sion£ffS at Board of Cnmmi ssinn
Meetings and review this at the next meeting .
B. Removal of E,cisting ARRP Un:i ts from Marketinq S1:.~rv1ces
Contract
At the February 22, 1989, the EHA awarclec1 l.o Mi I ton
Senti of Metro Brokers a listing contract for several
of its properties, including (but not limited to>:
2743 South Delaware St.
3034 South Galapago St.
3036 South Galapago St.
After these properties were viewed by the EHA's agent~,
Milton and Miriam Senti, they sent the EHA a written
report which includect a m.:lrket analysis and a proJectert
sale pric~ for each of the above units. The selling
prices suggested by the Sentis f'or the three ARRP unit s
are substantially lower than what the EHA had askerl
just a couple of years ago. The ARRP urn t~; .u-e the
type of houses (older/smaller) which have particularly
suf·fered in the current market. The Senti s fe It that
the EHA might be better of·f keeping these uni ts otf the
market and maintaining them as n~ntal un .i ts until Lhe
market improves.
-5-
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
VI. DJSCUSSION_ITEMSz.. M01IONS ANO HESOLUTIUNS •
B. Removal of E,cisti.ng ARRP Units t ·,-om Marke.ting !:il~1-v1 r:e ":-,
Contract
It was suggested that perhaps these un1t~; c ould he
transferred to the EHDC in or·der to make them e i .i g i i-i IP
for Section 8 Existir~ tenants.
It was the consensus of the EHA Board fff Comm'i!,~;iont:?r-s
members present .:it the Regular Meeting held thi•.:; date
that the ARRP uni ts at · 2743 South Delaware St., ~m:31,
South Galapago St., and 3036 South Cialap.aqo St. he
removed from the original list of p,-op1.:!r·tje!",lC1be
listed with Milton Senti <Metro Broker<:;) and h::-pt; as
rental units.
C. Resolution Authorizing Execution of Amcndm1:,nt Nu. i.=> tn
Annual Contributions Contract No. DEN --2:375, Pro-.1«,ict CO
48-3 <Public Housing Duple>< Units>
The EHA had received from HUD Regionol LE'gal Couns el
AmP.ndment No. 2 to Low Rent Con•50 l i dated Annua 1
Contributions Contract No. DEN--23'15 cover i.ng P r oJcc:t
No. CO 48-3 which is the EHA's Public llou!;;inq Fam'a ly
Dup]eK Units. The purpose of the amendment i s to
reflect the. Actual Total Developme nt Co!:;t-. Cthr. f111dl.
cost;), . rather than the , Est _l _materl Tot,1 I Ueve l opme11t Cc.st
r1s shown , on t-.hE,> 111-~qinal ACC !'or t.lie ~,e un'tt•.;. HUli
stated, that the• n~ason this had c.ome up at t-hi !'; ldte ·.
date was simply hecau~e it had "fa] Jen thro11c;Jh thP
cracks:" and ,:;·ince the ac. tuaJ development co~,t 1r,.1s
lower than the EHA's -orig1nr.1l ACC had st:.:ited, HUD
wanted to deob l i gate ·these 1·unds in order to r £C ap l ur<'?
them nn paper-. Gad/ Blessant anc.1 ElainP WIH~eJ•:; ot
HUD's Housing Development Di.vi•:;ion statt~d that tlw Fltl\
wou 1 d not have t;n pay back the di. fferPru:-:P.
($20,740.00). This amendment was solely t.o c orre(""t. thP
original ACC by making the Total Development C:ost s hown
on the ACC match what was a c tuaJ ly •.;pent on thc'=,e
units.
James Wa,Jen] ande.•r rer:ommendPd the EHi\ slmu 1 d:
1. Independently c-onfirm pr·oj,~ct ,:osts anrl if th..-,
final costs on this proJect were mnr ·p nr less than
the figure used by HUD, he advised that the EHA
NOT sign the amendment as current I y prP.pa,-ed;
-6--•
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/09
•
•
•
DISCUSSION_ITEMSL MOTIONS_AND_RESOLUT(ONS
C. Resolution Authorizing Execution of Amendment No. 2 to
Annual Contributions Contract No. DEN ·--2375, Proj1:.~c~t en
4B-3 <Public Housing Duplex Units>
2. Mr. Wagenlander also suggested that the FHA be
aNare of debt forgivenes~ ramification~. He
stated that HUD had paid off the deht on this
project after the original contract was sjqned,
but before this amendment was proposed. For this
reason, a logical argument could be made that the
sections of the amendment involving m1ni~1m
government interest rate, maximum contributions
percentage, and initial loan commitment no longer
have any meaning or effect. The ~;."lme may he l:t ·ue
for ·the permanent note that HUD asked thr EHA to
sign. He stated that the EHA may want to ~1mply
strike these sections in the amendment and not
sign the permanent note.
Mr. Wagenlander stated that the EHA had already signed
the original permanent note and ACC with HUD and this
amendment merely adjusted the figures. He f-111 ther
5tated that from a legal standpoint, the only
significant right the EHA might be waiving in ~,;iqnin•J
the note and an unmodified contrart amendment is the
right to argue at a l.:iter tim•~ that debt forgivenes s
frees the EHA of the cont,-act and HUD. He stat.Pd this
is a controversial idea and the EHA may tee! thir-. 1dea
may never be an interest of the authority-
The EKecutive Director recommend~d that the ~HA pass
the resolution and sign the appropriate doc1.1me11ts
amending the original ACC with the cunt1nqency that
the E.HA receives a written statement t,-om HUD verifying
the EHA does NOT owe I-IUD the diffprence between t:he
Estimated Total Development Cost shown on t;he or· i g i na l
ACC and the Actual Total Development Cost ($28,740).
It was also recommended that a letter be sent tu HUD
with the Amendment stating that th~ FHn passPd
Resolution No. 5, Se,-ies of 1.989, amend1n9 ACC No.
DEN-2375, Project ·co 48-3, with the unclerst ,inding that
the EHA doPs NOT owe HUD the difference of $28,740.
-7·-
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
VI. Q! §~Id~~!. o~_!.l~~§L MOT" IONS _ AND HESOLUT I or.is
c. Resolution Authorizing E,cecution of Amr-mdment No . i:'
Annual Contributions Contract No. OEN-2:t'l~, P r n jt:~c t I :o
48-3 <Public Housing Duplex Units>
It was decided, after lengthy discussion, that. th1~ E HA
would table any der:ision on passing Rf.~solutio n No.~>,
Series of 1989 authorizing execution of ·AmendmP nt No. 2
to Annual Con tr i but j ons Contract No. DEN -237~i, Pr· o j1C?c t :
CO 48-3 until such time as HUD contdcts thP f>.HA and
raises an oh ject ion to the non --, et urn of t he '..,t~
documents.
MOTION
IT WAS MOVED BY BRADLEY L. ZIEG TO TABLE ANY DtCH, ION ON PAS~i ING
RESOLUTION NO. 5, SER.lES OF 1989, AUHH.lRIZING EXECUTION OF AME.NDMFMT NtJ. ,:.'
TO ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS CONTRACT NO. DEN-23'/5, PROJECT CO 48-3 IINI rt SIICH
TIME AS THE ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY RECEIVES r.OMMUNlCAllfJN FHIIM lllllJ
RAISING AN OB.JECTION TO THE NON -RETURN OF THESE DOCUM E NTS. R. J. BEHLJN
SECONDED THE MOTION.
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstained:
Absent:
Burns, Berlin, Koltay, Zieg
None
None
Norden
The Chairman Declared the motion carried.
D. Ratif.ication of TelC!phone Poll H~garding Award l"1f·
Insur·ance Contract t ·or Eng lewond Hou "i inq Authori t.y tn
GKS InsurancE.! Agency of Lakewood, Color·ado .
In early January, 1'189, the FHA sent nequ .. :?sts t ·or
Proposals with detililed specificat i ons to agents who
had previously c ontacted the 1-~HA anc1 to aq rs>nt:s c in a
list of recent bidders to other housjng authnrit1e~, a s
well as advertising i.n the Q~~~~!:. ~Q.~t,. for any hidde,-s
on insurance.
The Englewood Housing Author·ity's insurance package
<Fire and Extended Coverage, Al 1--Risk, Li ah i l i ty ~ Auto,
Boiler l'I. Machinery, and Fidel i ty> expired nn March 2h,
1989. Because the regular meeting ot· t.he En<Jlewood
Hou~ing Author·it.y l::loard of Commissione,-s was s c ht-:!'c1uled
for March 29, 1989, the Executive UirPctor did a
telephone poll of all Commissioner s tn award the hid
•
for the EHA' s i nsur· ance on March 22, t 9139. 1 hE·•
E~ecutive Director rec ommended awarding the hid to GKS
Insurance Agency of Lnkewood. The Executive Direc tor
stated that the lnsurance bid rereived fr om GKS
Insurance Agency was an 11 percent reduction from the.
insu.-ance p.-=1ckage e,cpin~d on March 26, 198'7.
-8 ··
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
DISCUSSION_ITEMSL MOTIONS AND RESOLUTIONS
D. Ratification of Telephone Poll Regarding nwanj of
Insurance Contract for Englewood Housing Author i t:y to
GKS Insurance Agency of Lakewood, Colorado.
MOTION
IT WAS ttOVED BY R. J. BERLIN TO RAllFV THE TELEPHONE POLL CONDUCTED MARCH
22, 1989, REGARDING AWARD OF INSURANCE CONTRACT FOR THF: ENGLEWOOD HOU5IM6
AUTHORITY INSURANCE PACKAGE TO GKS INSURANCE AGENCY OF U.\KcWOlJD,
COLORADO. ROGER KOLTAY SECONDED THE MOTION.
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstained:
Absent:
•
•
Burns, Berlin, Koltay, Zieg
None
None
Norden
The Chairman declared the motion carried.
E. Review and Action on Proposed Contract for Offer on
Office Building at 3460 South Sherman Gtre£.>t..
The EHA Board of Commissioners had previously discussed
the need to con5olidate the program operations of the
Housing Authority, which are currently housed in four
different locations. The Board previously directPd the
Design Committee fR.J. Berlin and Brad Zieg> to review
any proposed locations and to establish cr~ter1a with
which to evaluate location~.
Si nee the l.v=,t. meeting of the EMA Hoard at
Commissioners, the Executive Director c1nd the Design
Committee had looked at two possible locations . £he
first location was the First Interstate Rank sat~llite
office at Sherman and Old Hampden. lhis bu~ lding was
too small, however, due to its circular arrangpment.
The Executive Director and the Design Comm1ttee then
looked at a building at 3460 South Sherman Street. It
is a two-story building that met many of the
established criteria. The listin~J brokeT· prep~-ired a
proposed contract spelling out terms and condition~ of
the proposed financing.
It
that
was
the
the recommendation of the Executive I>irec:tor
EHA Board of Commissioners review all saliC'nt
the proposed contract. If acceptable, he points of
recommended
clarification
contingencies.
entering into the contract subject to
on down payment amount, rate, te,m, and
-9-
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/i:?9/89
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS, MOlIONS AND RESOLU f lUNS
E. Review and ~;~·:~~-on ;;::~-:::---::ontr·art for fltt·e ,· on.
Office Building at 3460 South Sherman Street .
After discussion, it was the derision ot t hP IHA lh•a ,·d
of Commi s sioners to table any artion on t.h e pr <1rHl':;r.?d
contract for off'P.r on the offi c 1:• hu1 ld i.nq a l. :;ll,f.O ~,o ut la
Sherman Street until the f o llowing p o1t1 I.•_; wr.•r .-..
researched by legal counsel:
1. Can the EHA purchase an office bui ldinq?
2. Can the EHA use Simon Center re s P.r·v e 11111c.1 c-:i d !', ,.1
downpayment, outright purcha!.;e, nr· to m.ik e
payments on an office bui ldinq f'm .. EH{\ p e 1·~;n nnel . .,
3. Can the EHA c harge i tself ren t , ttwouqh t.he
various E HA Pt ·ograms, on this bui lrhnq and 11 •.:•e
that money tn 1·1nance thP. pur c ha s e o ·f l:he off 1.ce
building?
Other ques t iun~.; a ~;ked wer e :
l. What modifications w 1 I 1 have to h e dfJm,, t:n ma k e
certain the building ha •.,; ",e a ~·.cHh1blt.~.
ac c ommodations" 1or· handicapped a ppl H .an t <:, .. u,d
employe es?
2.
3.
Will any modifi c ations done to 1:lli ~. nf ftC:f!
bu i lding to render· it handicap ,u:n ·.i ~=-.!:,ible b e r:n st
effective, or· will the modifi c ation <:, m d ~P th e c c:,s t.
prohihiti.veJy high?
What steps will h,1ve to be ta k en tP.qard1ng tenclnt.s
pres ently leasing s pac.:1? i n th i s b11 't Ic1inq L-:ho a r c
oc c upying the s pa, e t he E H f \ wou ·lt! w a,1 1: ior
offi c e s',
4. Afte1-modifi c ations ar·e donE·' on th i r; bu 1 Id i ng,
wi 11 i. t meet Uni form Building Code ~ ••
Commissioner Zieg felt that the LHA's le<Jal c ounsel
should pr epan~ the do c ument•, reqarr.l i ng t:he pur c hase uf
th i s bu i l di rnJ •
Vice Chairman Berlin asked i t · ther e wa s r1 s t a le> r.1 gP.1K y
which would loan or· qrant thr~ EHA thP fund ~,. rn ?e dcd tn
render this huilrling h a ndi c ap ac c essible.
-10--•
Et-In UOC RetJII I iU Mm, t i ma
03/P'1/B9
• E . Hevu,•w .1nd Al:tinn 1111 P101.l n'.t"'d t:011t.r.11 I. 1111
Uf'f i c P l:lui hJtng al :v,1,0 !:.im1t.h !:,hP• "'"" !i i., Pl'l ..
111 I I •, flll
Ro<JC:ff Ko I lay ·(el t lhr Ci t. y u f "If I 1 •woe 1cl 11, 11 I II , 1111
llr.p;utml,nt ~t11n.1l1I c:htolk U11i:. lu11lrl111q l.11 ,,,.,. ,t 1.1,,., •.
olr-r. any c: nlle v i u I r1 l inn"->, ,:incl wll,1 t. • 11d, .. , w1111 I ti I , .a v , · t.11
bn mel when 11a.1k 1 nq lht• h1J al d 1 nq h ,1111111 .ap .-., , '" ,, . 1 Ii 11•,
'lifll:'l .. i I 'i c:,i I 1 y, , ·.amp r t.'C'lll H 1·.•mc>n I.•· .•
lt Wit!:. S UQ(Jl.'!-ill·:1 1.t that. t.t11• ... ,:;ut• nf 1)111 I""'· i Ill) UH ·
building be l,1l .1h•1I ,mcl th.at thP lit" 111it.1ly 1.111· U 1•,1I
[stat,~ Broker th.it WP ,u-p mov1nr1 f11rw,111I ••'• q1111 i . l y .1 ~,
i~ pn1dt•nt, hut l.h.1t. l.h 1:1 1c> .uv lc•q.al 1•,•,111", ,11111
npininns th,1t n l ... ~tt tu h r.• r ,,,·,utv.-.cl . It ,1 •,p1 ·1 1.11
lllt'"fAlllllJ n ·f ttu:~ l ·IIA Hu ,u ·11 of 1 :umm,~.•.111111•1 ·•, , •• 111•1•cl,•ct 1111
thi!i mr.1t.tpr·, nm• w111 ht-~ , ,1111•11.
Ml H l llN
I r WAH
t:ONIHnCT
srm.t:.·1 •
l"IUVl:D nv HRAl>I E V I. /.H Ii Ill IAlll I lllt . l>I Cl~illlN 111\1 1111 l'Hlll'f)!;I I)
FlJU OFf EH II J PUHCt-iA!.a . I Ill . t.)( I l t:I . 111111 I) .I Nli f\ I : ,,, l,O ! iflll 111 ! ii II HMi\N
H. J. Bl::HI . IN r;F CONDl ~U IHI-Mlll lllN.
a;:: W.t.ai ncsd:
l'ib~r~nt:
•
1-lurn!i, Uer l 1 n, Kn l t ,.,y, / 11 ·q
NOii(:"
None
No,-clPn
1'111~ l:hc'lll fflc\ll l'lt:~C l,u-c.•r1 1.l·u ·• llllltll)II l',H 1-11 -~cl.
r·· • Fk~v 1 PW , , ucl f\r t 1 on
CPA•.-,, Corn 1J1·11tnl1 J-'Y
1111 , .. tt,.•,·
• tr; nuc1 i t .
lhL' EIIA r·f::'1 .t ,•ntly •.,iqru ~d a 1 .. n11t,·,ul to, ,1111111. •,,.•,v i(, ... ,
w1ll1 l>f.~nton, N.-.th.-.1 lon, t.:PA,, to ,uul1I. 1.111• I.II"'', 1 '100
LJnok ,-,. lH the ·· m1•,111l1mP, I.ht• l:llt) rec t'1111•tl .. 1 ll'tlt •r 1111111
lhr• !italP of t.:11101 ·,1110, l>Ppd1 l.mr11l of I 111 di IHt,11r•,, .-1 •.,
WP I I ..i ~;. .a lf' l .-•phn11r • l ,1 I I f, um I.tu.' t: 1 t. y II f I 11q I Pwuod
,-i n,:tnc ,~ l>ep.u· Lm,•nl, q11t ."·,l iuni 1u1 ll11• 1 11mp lt>l.1•11e•·,,_, ,incl
dCt.:lff,U.y 111 tllP l'/11'/ .111t.J1l. wlai c h Wei', pt -i l'ltHllll:'d lay l :.uol
Mu,, 1•:;on.
cf i ~bar r t-~d
M~.;. Mo,·, 1 ~:,on h.a•,
cnnlr ,11 lo, by HUD ,uu.l
",lt"l( I' 111.'l'll clt'I' l.11 l't.l d
I ..... , I J.l p , Ir f? JI l ( y I II) I 111 1q I _. ,.
p1 .. -i c ti c 1n1J c:1c.-r::11urati11q '" f'.oln,-.-u1n •
· I I
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS, ~QI!.Q~~ AND ~~~Ql:~!!.Q~~
F. Review and · Act 10n on Letter f.-om Denton, Ne thr-~r· tnn,
CPAs, Concerning FY '87 Audit.
In preparing to perfor,n 1988's audit, Denton, Nether·tnn
reviewed the letter from the State anrl me t wjth the
City's Finance Department. l"heir c1Jnr J.usi on wa r,, to
reaudit the 1987 hooks, although only a purt1on ot tlte
EHA FY '87 Audit was incomplete. ·1 hE~ Si nq I e {\1.uh t Act
under which the EHA falls would dictate that the enti.n~
audit be redone. A price r ·..inge was pr·opo ~:.ed hy Mr.
Netherton.
MOTION
IT WAS MOVED BY BRADLEY L. ZIEG TO AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DHWCTOR II F THE
ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY TO SPENO THE ADDITJONAL H.INDS Nl:CF SS(.\RY rn
REAUO I T THE ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHOR I TV BOOKS OF ACCUUN 1 FOH t= I SCAI .. Y u,R
1987. ROGER KOLTAY SECONDED THE MOTION.
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstained:
Absent:
Burns, Rerlin, Koltay, Zieg
None
None
Norden
The Chairman declared the motion carried.
6. Revision c,f Cooperation A(Jreement with C1ty of
Englewood
As par·t of the )ow-rent public housing 1.nog r .·1m~ c i ti~c;
and housing authoritie5 frequently ,~nte r iotu a
Cooperation Ag,eement that spells out S {~rvil.e ~, that th£?
city would provide in exchanqe tor an annual Payment tn
Lieu of Taxe1;. <PILOT> by the housing aut;hori t.y.
In order to reduce the t ·inancial burden ou the public
housing program, the E><t~cutive Di,-ect:or pn1pnsed tt,at
the EHA ask City Council to al low the Et-10 to n ,!v:i•:;1=1 the~
Agreement to "prff t ion ot· rents c:o l J e c t£.~d under the
public housing program and c.1 portion under· the Ser-t.iun
8 New Pr·ogram."
-··12-·
•
•
•
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
DJ SCUSS I ON I TENS, MOT I ONS AND ~f:.SOUH l lJNS
G. Revision of Cooperation Agreempnt with t :1 ty of
Englewood
EHA legal counsel, Jim Wagenlande.-, s uc1ges t e d that. the
Section B New Program donate ·functs from 1 t r ; pr·oqr.-1m
reserves to the Public Housing t.J1oq r ,.1m 111 rn-ne,· to
prevent the J>rojected \C7B9 budgt?t clefi c:tt tm ttiat
program. Mr. Wagenlander stated hE• wantc.!d tn I c•5 ,:,,:1rT h
whether· or not this could he done with fi1m1.111 f :pnte,
Reserve Funds.
MOl ION
BRADLEY L. ZIEG MOVED THAT A DECISION ON WHICH PROGRAM WILi PHIJVll 'f IHI-:.
FUNDS FOR THE PI LOT PAYMENT TU fHE. C 1 TV OF ENGLl::WOUD HF 1 f\BI. t= D I JN f Tl. HfA
LEGAL COUNSEL CLARIFIES IF SECT ION fl NEW CONSTRUCT ION HESFRVF. · l'IINUS U -\N Ht::
USED FOR THIS PURPOSE. IT WAS FUHTHFR MOVED THAT IHJS l}EClSfllN BE IABL L U
LINT IL THE ENGLE.WOOD HOUSING AUTHOR l TV BOOKS OF ACCOUN rs run F V ' m ! AH[
REDONE IN ORDER TO ACCURATELY Ol:.TEHMINE EXACTLY WHAl fl ·II : 111181. IC HUUS 1 NG
RESERVES ARE. R. J. BERLIN SE.CONDED THE MOTION.
-
s:
s:
tained:
Ab!ctent:
VII.
VTIJ.
IX.
•
Burns, Berlin, Koltay, Zieg
None
None
Norden
The Chairman declared the motion carried.
FINANCIAL REPOHT
No financial n~por-·t s for the mont;h at felff u,n·y, 198~, are
av.-:iilablc.• duF~ to tht:~ pemJinq yt-?ar-··enc.t clos1nq of l9HH.
CONSENT AGENDA --------------·-
Noted briefly with little discussion
GENERAL DISCUSSION
A. Commis~ioners' Choire
B.
Commissioner· Zieg repor ·ted lhdt his ti,-m wouJrj be happy
to contract on .1 Pro Hono basis, ·for any a•,!·;i s t,1nr..r:.! on
the planning o-f the EIIA's office building.
Director's ChoiLe
Nothing to distuss •
-· 13·-
EHA BOC Regular Meeting
03/29/89
x. AO.JOIJRNMENT
All business being t -ini.shed, the Regul.ar Meet:inq o f the.
Englewood Housing Authority Board of Commissiom:?r ·s h P ld
l'larch 29, 1989, adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Thomas .J. Burns, Chairman
•
--J 4 -•