AGENDA
Garden Grove City
C
ouncil
Tuesday, September 13,
2 022
6:30 PM
Community Meeting
C
enter 11300 Stanford
Avenue Garden Grove
California 92840
Steve Jones
Mayor
Diedre Thu-Ha Nguyen
Mayor Pro Tem - District3
George S. Brietigam
Council Member - District1
John R. O'Neill
Council Member - District2
Patrick Phat Bui
Council Member - District4
Stephanie Klopfenstein
Council Member - District5
Kim B. Nguyen
Council Member - District6
COVID-1 9 Information: Members of the public can address the City Council during the public comment portion of the meeting in person or via e-mail. If you plan to attend the meeting in person, masks or face coverings are required to be worn if you are not vaccinated. If you feel ill or are showing symptoms of COVID-19 , please consider submitting comments by e-mail. Instructions are available on the City's website at https://ggcity.org/city-council/meetings-participation Meeting Assistance: Any person requiring auxiliary aids and services, due to a disability, to address the City Council, should contact the City Clerk's Office 72 hours prior to the meeting to arrange for accommodations. Phone: (714) 741-5040.
Agenda Item Descriptions: Are intended to give a brief, general description of the item. The City Council may take legislative action deemed appropriate with respect to the item and is not limited to the recommended action indicated in staff reports or the agenda.
Documents/Writings: Any revised or additional documents/writings related to an item on the agenda distributed to all or a majority of the Council Members within 72 hours of a meeting, are made available for public inspection at the same time (1) in the City Clerk's Office at 11222 Acacia Parkway, Garden Grove, CA 92840, during normal business hours; (2) on the City's website as an attachment to the City Council meeting agenda; and (3) at the Council Chamber at the time of the meeting.
Public Comments: Members of the public who attend the meeting in-person and would like to address the City Council are requested to complete a pink speaker card indicating their name and address, and identifying the subject matter they wish to address. This card should be given to the City Clerk before the meeting begins. General comments are made during "Oral Communications" and should be limited to matters under consideration and/or what the City Council has jurisdiction over.
Persons wishing to address the City Council regarding a Public Hearing matter will be called to the podium at the time the matter is being considered.
Manner of Addressing the City Council: After being called by the Mayor, you may approach the podium, it is requested that you state your name for the record, and proceed to address the City Council. All remarks and questions should be addressed to the City Council as a whole and not to individual Council Members or staff members. Any person making impertinent, slanderous, or profane
remarks or who becomes boisterous while addressing the City Council shall be called to order by the Mayor.If such conduct continues, the Mayor may order the person barred from addressing the City Council any further during that meeting.
Time Limitation: When any group of persons wishes to address the City Council on the same subject matter, the Mayor may request a spokesperson be chosen to represent the group, so as to avoid unnecessary repetition.At the City Council's discretion, a limit on the total amount of time for public comments during Oral Communications and/or a further limit on the time allotted to each speaker during Oral Communications may be set.
PLEAS E SILENC E YOUR CELL PHONE S DURIN G THE MEETING .
AGEND A
ROL L CALL : COUNCI L MEMBE R BRIETIGAM , COUNCI L MEMBE R
O'NEILL , COUNCI L MEMBE R BUI, COUNCI L MEMBE R KLOPFENSTEIN , COUNCI L MEMBE R K. NGUYEN , MAYOR PRO TEM D. NGUYE N , MAYOR JONE S
INVOCATIO N
PLEDG E OF ALLEGIANC E TO THE FLA G OF THE UNITE D STATE S OF
AMERIC A
1. ORA L COMMUNICATION S (to be held simultaneously with other legislative bodies)
RECES S
CONDUC T OTHE R LEGISLATIV E BODIES ' BUSINES S
RECONVEN E
2. CONSEN T ITEM S
(Consent Items will be acted on simultaneously with one motion unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by a Council Member .)
2.a. Adoption of a Proclamation celebrating Hispanic Heritage Month. (A ctio n Item)
2.b. Consideration and approval to submit a response to the Grand Jury Report, How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness? (Action Item)
2.c. Adoption of a Resolution authorizing submittal of an application to the County of Orange Continuum of Care for the Special Notice of Funding Opportunity to address unsheltered homelessness. (A ctio n Item)
2.d. Authorize issuance of a purchase order to National Auto Fleet Group for two (2) new Public Works pick up trucks. (Cost:
$62,310.28) (A ctio n Item)
2.e. Authorize issuance of purchase orders to: Coastline Equipment, RDO Equipment, and Belkorp Ag for the purchase of flail mower attachment parts. (Cost: $150,000) (A ctio n Item)
2.f. Receive and file minutes from the meeting held on July 12, 2022. (A ctio n Item)
2.g. Receive and file warrants. (A ctio n Item)
2.h. Approval to waive full reading of ordinances listed. (A ctio n Item)
3. PUBLI C HEARING S
(Motion to approve will include adoption of each Resolution unless otherwise stated.)
3.a. Approval of resolution approving dispositio n agreement for real property located at 12291 Thackery Drive, Garden Grove, California . (J oin t Action Item with the Housing Authority)
3.b. Approval of the sale and transfer of real property located 12311 Thackery Drive, Garden Grove. (Amount: $460,000)
(J oin t Action Item with the Successor Agency.)
3.c. Adoption of Resolution approving Street Vacation No. SV-000- 2022 for a portion of Thackery Drive and Alley north of Twintree Avenue, west of Harbor Boulevard, Garden Grove. (A ctio n Item)
3.d. Adoption of a Resolution approving the Dispositio n and Development Agreement between the City of Garden Grove and Newage Garden Grove II, LLC. (A ctio n Item)
4. ITEM S FOR CONSIDERATIO N
4.a. Authorize issuance of a purchase order to National Auto Fleet Group for eight (8) new Police Department vehicles.
(Cost: $358,597.69) (A ctio n Item)
4.b. Authorize issuance of purchase orders to National Auto Fleet Group for the purchase of seven (7) new Police Patrol vehicles and two (2) new Police K-9 Units. (Cost: $450,299.85) (A ctio n Item)
4.c. Award contracts to Cannon Corporation and to NV5 to provide on-call professional land surveying and related services. (Cost:
$400,000 each contract) (A ctio n Item)
4.d. Award a contract to R.J. Noble Company, for Chapman Avenue Resurfacing and 5-Year Landscape and Irrigation
Maintenance. (Cost: $4,185,570.00) (A ctio n Item)
4.e. Adoption of a Resolution approving a Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions with West St Investment LLC for property located at 13871 West Street, and award a contract to Borders Architect for architectural services. (Cost: $5,650,000) (Cost:
$304,000) (A ctio n Item)
5. ORDINANCE S PRESENTE D FOR SECON D READIN G AND ADOPTIO N
5.a. Second reading of Ordinance No. 2938
Entitled: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Garden Grove approving an amendment to Planned Unit Development No.
PUD-141-0 1 to create a sub-area Planned Unit Development zoning, PUD-141-01(A) , establishing development standards and performance standards for the Site B2 Hotel Project for properties located at the northwest corner of Harbor Boulevard and Twintree Avenue, east of Tamerlane Drive, at 12241, 12261, 12271, 12291, 12311 and 12323/12321 Harbor Boulevard,
12246, 12252, 12262, 12282, 12292, 12312, 12322, 12251, 12261, 12281, 12291, 12311, and 12321 Thackery Drive,
(Assessor Parcel Numbers: 231-471-06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24. (A ctio n Item)
6. MATTER S FRO M THE MAYOR , CIT Y COUNCI L MEMBERS , AND CIT Y
MANAGE R
7. ADJOURNMEN T
The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, September 27, 2022, at 5:30 p.m. n the Community Meeting Center, 11300 Stanford Avenue, Garden Grove, Californi a 92840.
Happy Early Birthday to Council Member Brietigam!
Agenda Item - 2.a.
City of Garden Grove
INTER-DEPARTMEN T MEMORANDU M
To: Scott C. Stiles From: Teresa Pomeroy
Dept.: City Manager Dept.: City Clerk
Subject: Adoption of a Proclamation Date:
celebrating Hispanic Heritage
Month. (A ctio n Item)
9/13/2022
Attached is the proclamation celebrating September 15, through October 15, 2022, as Hispanic Heritage Month recommended for adoption.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type File Name
Proclamation - Hispanic
Heritage Month 9/6/2022 Proclamation 9-13-
22_Hispanic_Heritage_Month.pdf
Proclamation
National Hispanic Heritage Month
WHEREAS, September 15, 2022 to October 15, 2022, is recognized nationally as Hispanic Heritage Month;
WHEREAS, The 2022 Hispanic Heritage Month observance theme “Unidos:
Inclusivity for a Stronger Nation.”
WHEREAS, the Latino community is a resilient and integral part of Garden Grove, with business owners and residents alike who are members of a proud heritage;
WHEREAS, Latinos have made innumerable contributions to the Garden Grove community in business, law, politics, education, community service, the arts, government service and other fields and it is important the City recognize and celebrate the diverse histories and cultures of the Latino population; and
WHEREAS, the day of September 15 is significant because it is the anniversary of independence for Latin American countries of Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. In addition, Mexico and Chile celebrate their independence days on September 16 and 18 respectively.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT PROCLAIMED that the City Council of the City of Garden Grove does hereby celebrate and recognize September 15, through October 15, 2022 to be Hispanic Heritage Month.
September 13, 2022
Agenda Item - 2.b.
City of Garden Grove
INTER-DEPARTMEN T MEMORANDU M
To: Scott C. Stiles From: Maria Stipe
Dept.: City Manager Dept.: City Manager
Subject: Consideration and approval Date:
to submit a response to the
Grand Jury Report, How is
Orange County Addressing
H
omelessness? (Action Item)
9/13/2022
OBJECTIV E
The purpose of this report is for the City Council to consider and approve the attached response to the 2021-2022 Grand Jury Report, How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?, and authorize submittal to the Orange County Grand Jury.
BACKGROUN D
On June 23, 2022, the Orange County Grand Jury released its 2021-2022 Grand Jury Report, How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness? The purpose of the report was to study the Orange County Continuum of Care (CoC) to understand how the County is working to address homelessness and evaluate the collaborative efforts led by the CoC and Orange County Office of Care Coordination . While the collaborative efforts have resulted in progress in the fight against homelessness, includin g a system of care across multiple levels of government programs and community providers, the system has shortcomings and bottlenecks.
In compliance with Penal Code 933.05 (a) and (b), the City is required to provide a response to each of the findings and recommendations directed to the City Council by September 21, 2022. Specifically, the City is to respond to two of the report findings (F3 and F4) and three recommendations (R4, R5, and R6).
DISCUSSIO N
F3 states that the County of Orange and cities within Orange County have been inconsistent in collaboratio n for support of shelters and services, which has resulted in missed opportunities to end homelessness and F4 states there are an insufficien t number of rental units available to those exiting Emergency Shelters, resulting in the majority returning to homelessness when leaving the shelters. In response to these findings, the followin g recommendations were made by the Grand Jury, to which the
City must respond: By July, 1, 2024, the County of Orange and cities should collaborate to open facilities that can house people with severe and persistent mental illness and addiction issues in a secure setting (R4); By July 1, 2023, the County of Orange, cities and CoC should collaborate to encourage the development of housing affordable to individual s exiting the emergency shelters in Orange County (R5); and By December 1, 2022, the County of Orange, cities and CoC should collaborate to increase the number of housing opportunities for Transitional Aged Youth (R6).
The attached response states that the City disagrees partially with F3 and agrees with F4. A broad list of examples that highligh t the City’s collaborative efforts working with the County and other agencies to support homeless shelters and services and increase affordable housing is provided. The City’s response to recommendations R4, R5, and R6 highlights Garden Grove’s efforts to develop a “low barrier” navigation center in the Central Service Planning Area, provide affordable and permanent supportive housing, and increase the number of housing opportunities for Transitional Aged Youth. The great need for additional funding to help jurisdiction s develop affordable housing is also noted.
FINANCIA L IMPAC T
None.
RECOMMENDATIO N
It is recommended that the City Council :
Approve the attached response and authorize submittal to the Orange County Grand Jury.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type File Name
Respons e to Grand 8/31/2022Jury Report Exhibit
FINAL_-
_Response_to_OC_Grand_Jury_Report_on_Homelessness_ -
clean_copy.docx
Grand Jury Report:
H
ow is Orange 8 /31/2022County Addressing
H
omelessness?
Exhibit 2022-06-
23_How_is_Orange_County_Adressing_Homelessness.pd f
_________________________________________________________________________
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
September 15, 2022
The Honorable Erick L. Larsh
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court of California
County of Orange
700 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, CA 92701
RE: Response to the 2021-22 Orange County Grand Jury Report re How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
Dear Judge Larsh,
In accordance with Penal Code 933.05(a) and (b), t he City of Garden Grove submits the following response to the report, finding s, and recommendations of the 2021-22 Orange County Grand Jury Report entitled, “How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?”.
FINDINGS
F3. The County of Orange and cities within Orange County have been inconsistent in collaboration for support of shelters and services, which has resulted in missed opportunities to end homelessness.
Response: The City of Garden Grove disagrees partially with the above find ing. The City of Garden Grove is fully committed to collaborating with the County and its fellow municipalities to support homeless shelters and services . The City works and supports the efforts of the Orange County Commission to End Homelessness and has been a member of the Commission since 2020. The City of Garden Grove is also a member of the Orange County Housing Trust and a member of the ACCOC Homelessness Task Force. Garden Grove Mayor Steve Jones has served on the United Way’s “United to End Homelessness” Leadership Council since 2018.
In July 2022, the City executed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Cities of Fountain Valley and Westminster to develop a navigation center in the Central S ervice Planning Area, and is currently collaborating wi th the County on this effort . The City also collaborates regularly with the County regarding homeless services programs, including: participating in the Orange County Emergency Solutions Grant Collaborative; collaboration with the County on the Be-Well OC in Garden Grove Mobile Response Unit; and through administration of the Garden Grove Housing Authority, one of only four in the County, which administers Section 8 housing vouchers, Emergency h ousing vouchers and Mainstream housing vouchers that provide increased financial stability to homeless individuals and individuals at risk of becoming 11222 Acacia Parkway P.O. Box 3070 Garden Grove, CA 92842 www.ci.garden-grove.ca.us Page 9 of 640
homeless. In addition, Garden Grove staff participated in the Orange County Mental Health Crisis Response Continuum Forum hosted at Freedom Hall Mile Square Park in July 2021 and the City’s GGPD Special Resources Team regularly collaborates with the County mobile crisis assessment (CAT) team to address homelessness and identify shelter solutions.
F4. There are an insufficient number of rental units available to th ose exiting Emergency Shelters, resulting in the majority returning to homelessness when leaving the shelters.
Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding.
RECOMMENDATIONS
R4. By July 1, 2024, the County of Orange and cities should collaborate to open facilities that can house people with severe and persistent mental illness and addiction issues in a secure setting. (F2)
Response: The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. The City is fully committed to collaborat ing with the County and its fellow municipalities on opportunities to house people with severe and persistent mental illness and substance use issues. The City has executed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Cities of Fountain Valley and Westminster to develop a “low barrier” navigation center in the Central Service Planning Area, and we are collaborating with the County on this effort. It is anticipated this project will move forward and open by July 1, 2024. The navigation center would provide emergency housing and services to the literally homeless population, including those with severe and persistent mental illness and substance use issues. There is great need for additional funding opportunities to assist jurisdictions develop housing for those experiencing severe or persistent mental illness and substance use issues.
R5. By July 1, 2023, the County of Orange, cities and CoC should collaborate to encourage the development of affordable housing to individuals exiting the emergency shelters in Orange County. (F3, F4, F5)
Response: The recommendation has been implemented . The City is fully committed to continuing our collaboration with the County and its fellow municipalities to encourage the development of affordable housing for those exiting emergency shelter. The City completed development of an 8-unit permanent supportive housing project at 11742 Stuart Drive in August 2022, which now houses the most vulnerable homeless individuals. Additionally, the City of Garden Grove has approximately 1,700 deed restricted affordable housing units, 2,200 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, 117 Emergency Housing Vouchers, and 75 Mainstream Vouchers. There is great need for additional funding opportunities to assist jurisdictions develop affordable housing.
R6. By December 1, 2022, the County of Orange, cities and CoC should collaborate to increase the number of housing opportunities for Transitional Aged Youth. (F6) Response: The recommendation has been implemented . The City is fully committed to continuing our collaboration with the County and its fellow municipalit ies to increase the number of housing opportunities for the Transitional Aged Youth (TAY) population. The City currently funds Stand Up for Kids to provide services to the TAY population. Stand Up for Kids provides Street Outreach and Rapid Rehousing services to the homeless TAY population in Garden Grove. In addition, the City is currently in discussions with Thomas Hous e Family 11222 Acacia Parkway P.O. Box 3070 Garden Grove, CA 92842 www.ci.garden-grove.ca.us Page 10 of 640
Shelter for a potential acquisition and rehabilitation affordable housing project for the TAY population. These discussions will continue through December 1, 2022. There is great need for additional funding opportunities to assist jurisdictions develop affordable housing.
Respectfully Submitted,
Steven R. Jones
Mayor of Garden Grove
11222 Acacia Parkway P.O. Box 3070 Garden Grove, CA 92842 www.ci.garden-grove.ca.us Page 11 of 640
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
GRAND JURY 2021-2022
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
Table of Contents
SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................... 1 REASON FOR THE STUDY ...................................................................................................... 4 METHOD OF STUDY ................................................................................................................. 5 INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS ......................................................................................... 5 Orange County Continuum of Care Collaboration................................................................. 5 Prioritizing Homeless Funding ............................................................................................... 6 Continuum of Care Funding Oversight ................................................................................... 7 Major Funding Sources Overseen by the CoC........................................................................ 8 CoC Process to Address Homelessness................................................................................... 8 OC System of Care Resources ............................................................................................... 12 FINDINGS................................................................................................................................... 13 RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................ 14 COMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................. 14 RESPONSES ............................................................................................................................... 15 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................ 20 GLOSSARY................................................................................................................................. 21 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page ii
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
SUMMARY
Orange County’s homeless population continues to be of great concern to residents. Seeing homeless individuals on the streets raises awareness of this persistent problem, but the elaborate efforts to address homelessness are less evident. Orange County’s response to homelessness is a collaboration led by the independent Orange County Continuum of Care Board (CoC), which oversees the distribution of federal and state homeless funding. The CoC is supported by the Orange County Office of Care Coordination (OCC) which administers contracts, monitors budgets, and evaluates the results of the funded programs.
The Orange County Grand Jury (OCGJ) studied the CoC to understand how the County is working to address homelessness. The collaborative efforts led by the CoC and OCC have resulted in progress in the fight against homelessness, including a system of care across multiple levels of government programs and community providers. It further established a coordinated entry system, a cooperative homeless information system, and consolidated applications for federal and state funds. Together, the members were responsible for a quick and effective response to the coronavirus disease (COVID) pandemic on the homeless, an increase in the number of shelter beds, a decrease in homeless encampments, more outreach and treatment alternatives, and new housing vouchers being available for permanent housing.
This collaborative system of care developed by the CoC and OCC amounts to a great achievement. The graphs in this OCGJ report show the increased outreach, prevention efforts, shelter beds provided, and permanent housing made available that the CoC and OCC achieved.
They also show the additional system of care resources provided by the County of Orange to prevent people from falling into homelessness. Unfortunately, from 2018 to 2021, exits from the CoC homeless system to permanent housing have hovered between 24 percent and 32 percent.1 Orange County is addressing homelessness with elaborate systems even beyond the efforts of the CoC and OCC, but the reality of homelessness is that despite these programs our system has shortcomings and bottlenecks. This OCGJ found that: South Orange County needs an emergency shelter; homeless individuals suffering from mental illness and substance abuse need court- ordered treatment; Orange County does not have enough housing affordable to individuals exiting homeless shelters; and youth aging out of foster care do not have enough safe housing, resulting in many falling into homelessness.
BACKGROUND
There are numerous causes of homelessness. These causes range from poverty, unemployment, lack of affordable housing, and individual issues of mental and/or substance use disorders. Other risk factors include medical problems, physical disability, domestic violence, and youth aging out of the child-care system.2
The continuum of care concept was created by HUD in 1994 to promote communitywide commitment to the goal of ending homelessness. HUD provided funding to quickly rehouse 1 211 OC, Longitudinal Systems Analysis, FY 2018 through 2021, from HMIS data. 2 US Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 1
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
individuals and families, promote participation in programs for the homeless, and optimize self- sufficiency among those experiencing homelessness.3
HUD recommended the collaborative development of plans to end homelessness in all communities receiving HUD funding. In response, Orange County created the Commission to End Homelessness that published a Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness in 2012.4 Over the ensuing decade, implementation of this model Ten-Year Plan was beyond the power of the Commission and major parts of the plan were not achieved.
Meanwhile, in 2009, HUD outlined the process of building a collaborative CoC comprised of organizations and individuals dedicated to ending homelessness. The CoC was created in 2016 along with the OCC. HUD, the major funder of homeless programs, gave the CoC responsibility for prioritizing the distribution of competitive federal homeless assistance program monies. The strategy of the CoC is to prioritize funding of programs that focus on four pillars: Prevention, Outreach, Shelter, and Housing.
Mixed Success in Addressing Homelessness
In Orange County, various approaches to manage homelessness have been tried with varying levels of success.
• Moving the Homeless: When businesses and residents complained about homeless individuals, police were expected to relocate them. Pushing homeless individuals out of town sometimes resulted in simply shifting the problem to neighboring communities. • Ordinances by Cities: Ordinances that criminalized camping on public property or loitering contributed to the incarceration of homeless individuals, including many suffering from mental illness and substance abuse issues. Orange County Sheriff Don Barnes commented, “By default, the Orange County Jail had become the de facto mental hospital of Orange County…. [in] 2018, Orange County jails had about 2,200 inmates with severe mental illnesses.”5
• Housing and Treatment: Recent approaches that emphasized housing only or treatment only fell short in substantially reducing homelessness. • Local Opposition Prevented Shelter and Housing: In Orange County, early efforts to provide low-threshold emergency shelters6 to get individuals off the streets were met with local opposition in most communities, as were developments of housing affordable to individuals exiting shelters. The development of a Coordinated Entry System (CES)7 helped reduce the neighborhood impact of shelters.
3 HUD Office of Community Planning and Development, Continuum of Care 101, June 6, 2009. 4 Orange County Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness, 2012. 5 Nick Gerda, “OC Mental Health Jail Expansion Draws Pushback and Debate”, Voice of OC, October 23, 2019. 6 A Low-Threshold Emergency Shelter offers an alternative to living on the streets. Individuals in these shelters must comply with the shelter rules but are not required to be drug and alcohol free. 7 Coordinated Entry System (CES) is a shared database between service providers that shuttles homeless individuals in and out of shelters eliminating walk-in and walk-out shelter access that caused community opposition. The CES is also a point of referral into permanent housing.
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 2
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
• Prevention Investments: Additional assistance for rent or utilities, as well as Section 8 housing vouchers, resulted in increased financial stability of individuals at danger of becoming homeless.
• Outreach Expanded: More homeless individuals were reached through trust-building and outreach efforts resulting in increased numbers being sheltered. • Increased Shelter: Emergency shelter beds available to the homeless increased providing immediate help to more of the unhoused.
• Permanent Housing Added: Some permanent housing opportunities increased through new HUD vouchers, as well as County of Orange Permanent Supportive Housing developments.
Point in Time Count
The HUD-mandated Point in Time Count (PIT)8 is a national effort to create a census of homeless individuals every two years. While this one-day initiative to contact and count the homeless is assumed to result in a significant undercount, it is a consistent approach which shows comparable data collected over time. The most recent PIT was conducted in 2022 and reported a decrease of 1,142 homeless individuals counted in Orange County.
North and Central SPA cities sheltered 49% of their homeless while South SPA cities sheltered on 28% of their homeless according to the 2022 PIT.9
OC Homeless Point in Time Count
8000
2017 2019 2022
Sheltered Homeless
Unsheltered Homeless
2208 2899 2661
2584
3961
3057
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8 Point in Time Count, Orange County Office of Care Coordination, May 2022 9 Ibid.
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 3
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
“John” was a homeless man who lived in Hart Park in the City of Orange for several years.
He sought housing at the County “BRIDGES at Kraemer” shelter, where he stayed for seven months. He was an Army Veteran and during his time at BRIDGES, the staff worked with him to obtain identification and get his veteran benefits. Together they developed a housing plan and found a permanent home for him in Fountain Valley. He reported his joy when BRIDGES staff even gave him transportation to his new home where he now lives.
Federal Court Intervenes and Regional Shelters Are Opened In response to a lawsuit against the County of Orange filed on behalf of the homeless individuals living in large encampments along the Santa Ana River and other public property, a federal District Court got involved in overseeing the County’s actions to clear the encampments.
On February 13, 2018, US District Court Judge David Carter ordered that “OC officials, cities and homeless advocates collaborate to find shelter for hundreds of people who have been living in the camps.”10 Judge Carter issued a Temporary Restraining Order barring the arrest of those living along the Santa Ana River stating, “That order will stand until public officials can identify an alternative place to house those living along the river trail.”11 As a result of this litigation, on July 23, 2019, the District Court brokered a Settlement Agreement between the County of Orange and the advocates for the homeless.12 This agreement outlined the number of emergency shelter beds that must be developed in each Orange County Service Planning Area (SPA)13, before any homeless individuals could be removed from the encampments. This agreement was later adopted by North and Central SPA cities to avoid litigation and became a major impetus to opening low-threshold emergency shelters in the North and Central OC communities. South OC SPA cities did not sign the Settlement Agreement and no new low-threshold emergency shelters have subsequently been opened to meet the need of the South OC homeless identified in the OCGJ investigation.
REASON FOR THE STUDY
Homelessness continues to be one of the most frequently identified issues of concern to Orange County residents.14 Previous Grand Juries examined efforts to address homelessness and made recommendations, many of which have been implemented.15 Yet concerns about homelessness persist in our communities. The purpose of this report is to discuss the effectiveness of the CoC and OCC in collaborating to address Orange County’s homelessness through the services that are provided by the 37 contracts they authorize and oversee. The Grand Jury sought to evaluate the 10 Hannah Fry and Doug Smith, “Frustrated judge demands O.C. find shelter for homeless being evicted from camps”, Los Angeles Times, February 14, 2018
11 Ibid.
12 “Federal Judge Approves Settlement of Homeless Lawsuits”, City News Service, July 23, 2019. 13 Service Planning Area (SPA) is the division of Orange County cities into three regional areas North, Central, and South, for the purpose of facilitating regional collaboration in the provision of services to the homeless. 14 OC Annual Survey, Chapman University 2020.
15 OCGJ Report 2017-18.
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 4
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
amount of money is being spent, the outcomes achieved, and whether this investment of public dollars is making a difference.
“James” abruptly found himself homeless and on the street at the age of 18 when his foster parents said they had completed their obligation to him. With few resources, he turned to friends who let him “couch surf”, and then out of desperation, enlisted in the military. After his service, he returned to Orange County where found a friend to stay with and worked to get back on his feet. His lifelong struggles with homelessness coupled with excessive anger issues, addictions, and recovery from negative childhood experiences have required committing to radical personal change. Today in his early 50s, James has a job, and a mission to serve his community, teaching kids and helping the homeless with food, resources, and advice.
METHOD OF STUDY
• Reviewed CoC contracts, budgets, and performance evaluations. • Toured emergency shelters, food service providers, substance abuse and mental health treatment programs, and the Collaborative Courts.
• Interviewed federal authorities, city managers, shelter providers, homeless outreach workers, law enforcement personnel, county staff responsible for shelter and affordable housing, mental health professionals, OC jail staff, and homeless individuals. • Reviewed documents including the Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness, Continuum of Care Board minutes and reports, previous California Grand Jury reports, budgets, articles, and litigation.
• Conducted internet research on homeless issues.
INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS
Orange County Continuum of Care Collaboration
Since 1998, Orange County has developed a comprehensive regional continuum of care to address homelessness in Orange County. This collaboration covers Orange County’s 34 cities and unincorporated areas. County departments and agencies, local governments, homeless, housing, supportive service providers, and community groups (including non-profits, faith-based organizations, interested business leaders, schools, individuals with lived experience, and many other stakeholders) joined as participants with the shared mission to address homelessness.
The Orange County Continuum of Care Board (CoC), created in 2016, is the governing body for the continuum of care, whose goal is to oversee and implement this strategic collaboration as authorized by federal legislation.16 The CoC is comprised of diverse representatives of the collaborative participants.
16 Subtitle C of Title IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, (42 U.S.C.11381-11389). 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 5
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
The CoC vision is to develop a dignified and equitable system to permanently house those experiencing homelessness, on a collaborative and regional basis, to allocate funds to match the greatest needs.
Prioritizing Homeless Funding
The CoC Board is responsible for the distribution of federal, state, and local funding to address homelessness. These dollars are restricted for specific uses by the funding sources. The CoC prioritizes awarding contracts based on four strategic pillars, and the OCC administers, monitors, and evaluates the contracts. The four pillars are:
1. Prevention - short-term intervention to keep people in their homes, avoid eviction, and stabilize their housing.
2. Outreach - seeking, reaching out to, and engaging individuals as a first step towards ending their homelessness and providing services to develop self-sufficiency and independence.
3. Shelters- temporary residence providing protection from exposure and a safety net for the homeless.
4. Housing - including housing coupled with treatment and supportive services enables greater potential success of homeless individuals suffering from mental illness and substance abuse.
OC CoC Annual Contracts by Pillar 2021
$16,369,867
$30,015,965
$5,578,591
$910,062
Housing
Shelter
Outreach
Prevention
Source: Office of Care Coordination.17
17 Contract Inventory 2021, Orange County Office of Care Coordination. 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 6
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
Continuum of Care Funding Oversight
The CoC oversees 37 contracts that outline the terms and agreements as to what services must be provided, and which funding source is used (such as the County General Fund, or various state and federal grants). The source of funds dictates how the funds must be used.
The CoC receives funding through various state and federal sources through a Notice of Funding Availability. The CoC issues a Request for Proposals to which qualified non-profits submit proposals. The CoC and the Commission to End Homelessness work together to establish funding priorities. The CoC selects which proposals to fund and sends them to the Board of Supervisors for legal approval.
All contracts specify that audits may be required. Audits are based on performance and proper use of funds required by the funding source. The County can also request an audit at any time during the contract term. The OCC monitors the contracts through a monthly Expenditure and Revenue report. Along with this financial review, the County conducts yearly site visits for each contract. The on-site audit reviews all aspects of the contract obligations to ensure that the contractors are compliant with the specifications of the funding.
Contractors who meet or exceed their requirements are typically renewed. Those who fail are given the opportunity to explain unexpected hurdles they faced, such as COVID issues or other unavoidable circumstances. After a full review, the CoC Board decides whether to renew or terminate a contract.
OC Continuum of Care Funding Sources 2021
County Funds
$28,031,000
State Funds
$29,166,000
Federal Funds
$60,562,000
NOTE: This pie chart includes some grants awarded for multiple years. Source: Office of Care Coordination.18 18 Ibid.
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 7
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
Major Funding Sources Overseen by the CoC
A variety of federal, state, and county restrictive grants with specific uses required make up the funding that the CoC allocates.19
CoC Process to Address Homelessness
OCGJ sought to evaluate the effectiveness of the CoC contracts under each pillar using the data from the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) which is the shared database of all homeless services providers required by HUD for CoC’s and maintained by the non-profit 211 OC.
1. Prevention - CoC investments in homeless prevention, include rental and utility assistance, as well as housing vouchers, and are measured as “increased income” in the graph below.
The CoC system does not represent the only County of Orange expenditures to prevent homelessness. The County allocates significant amounts of funding to prevent individuals and families from becoming homeless as outlined later in this report.
Prevention Performance
10000
2020 2021
Client Contacts
Increased Income
831
9045
723
6785
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
19 Grant sources include: American Recovery Plan Act (ARPA)*, Business, Consumer and Housing Agency, COVID 19 Tenant Relief Act (BCSH)*, California Emergency Solution Housing (CESH), Consolidated Appropriations Act for Rental Assistance (CAA), Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security A ct (CARES)*, Federal Continuum of Care fund (CoC), Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP), Homeless Housing Assistance Prevention (HHAP), HUD Emergency Shelter Grant program (ESG), HUD Housing Community Development (HCD), Orange County General Fund (GF). * COVID Related Funding. 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 8
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
A homeless man hanging out at a volunteer organization that provides food and assistance to the homeless described his experience in Orange. He stated that because he did not have a home, he was constantly stopped and harassed by the police, both physically and mentally. He believed that the Be Well Center was just a trick to get people off the streets. They would 5150 (72-hour mental health hold) everyone referred to their program and no one ever saw them again.
2. Outreach – Outreach efforts of CoC non-profit contractors resulted in successful exits from homelessness to shelter increasing about 33 percent from 2,245 in 2019 to 2,994 in 2021. In that period, outreach efforts by non-profits seeking to build trust with homeless individuals resulted in the doubling of client contacts, to over 10,000 a year. Increasing client contacts, building trust, and successful entrance into shelter are measures of successful outreach programs.
Some people believe that chronically homeless individuals do not want permanent housing and are resistant to programs. While this may be true in some cases, the OCGJ learned several reasons for this resistance, including:
• Individuals who lack trust in outreach program staff due to promises previously broken. • Substance abusers who are not ready for treatment.
• Mentally ill individuals who lack awareness of their illness. • Individuals who fear for their safety in shelters or housing. • Individuals who do not like the rule that forbids walking in and out of the shelter and require access by arranged transportation only.
The OCGJ learned from law enforcement and shelter officials that there were not enough rehabilitation and treatment facilities and services to meet the need of homeless Orange County residents suffering from mentally illness or substance abuse.
Outreach Performance
12000
2019 2020 2021
Client Contacts
Successfully Sheltered
5220
7532
10,705
2245 2636 2994
0 2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Source: 211 OC, HMIS data, 2019-21
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 9
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
3. Shelter - Emergency shelter capacity increased over 40 percent from 2,665 in 2017 to 3,756 in 2021, primarily in North and Central SPA cities. This increase helped to temporarily house many of the homeless of Orange County.
Low-Threshold Emergency Shelters are open to all individuals whose behavior is consistent with the shelter rules. This includes individuals who are suffering mental illness as well as those who are still using drugs and alcohol. The County of Orange funds two such shelters, BRIDGES in the North SPA and YALE in the Central SPA, but has been unsuccessful in siting a shelter in South SPA.
Navigation Centers are emergency shelters that are funded by cities and other sources.
Shelters have opened in Anaheim, Buena Park, Fullerton, Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach, Placentia, Tustin, and Santa Ana. Additional shelters are operated by various non-profits and faith-based organizations around Orange County. The OCGJ found that no low-threshold emergency shelters had been opened in South SPA cities to meet the identified need.
Various levels of service are provided at the emergency shelters in addition to safe beds, food, and showers. The low-threshold, multi-service county shelters work with the residents to do the following: develop a plan to get into permanent housing; get job training and secure a job; obtain benefits for which they qualify, such as veterans, general relief, disability, or other public assistance; get into treatment programs to help with their substance abuse or mental illness; receive medical care and needed medicine; and overcome other individual challenges to independent living.
Shelter Capacity
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
2665 2921
3494 3584 3756
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
Note: Numbers include year-round and seasonal shelters, and 517 temporary COVID beds. 20 20 HIC Report Year Over Year 2017-21, 211 OC, Orange County, 2021. 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 10
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
4. Housing - Permanent housing, including Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH), has increased 13 percent over the last five years, from 3,261 in 2017 to 3,689 in 2021. 652 753 882 956 1087
2609 2546 2243 2496 2602
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Permanent Housing Performance
Permanent Housing
Permanent Supportive Housing
21Source: 211 OC Housing Inventory Count 2017 -21
• Housing Vouchers (Section 8) are issued by local Housing Authorities who set aside some for the homeless. They prioritize individual veterans, disabled, and families with children, as well as designating some for PSH projects. Vouchers are a permanent housing subsidy that require individuals to contribute 30 percent of their income to rent. • Exits from emergency shelters to permanent housing were limited not only by the number of vouchers available, but by the inability of homeless individuals to find housing where landlords would accept vouchers. From 2018 to 2021, exits from the CoC homeless system to permanent housing have hovered between 24 and 32 percent.22 • 2,700 PSH units were needed according to the PIT count in 2017. PSH is for homeless individuals who are living with disabilities and mental illness. OC Housing Community Development leveraged California Mental Health Services Act funds resulting in 2,700 PSH units being built, approved, or in the planning stage as of 2022. • Treatment programs for homeless individuals, who could benefit from permanent housing but require treatment programs to be successful, are in short supply. • Transitional Aged Youth (TAY), are 16–24-year-olds who age out of the Foster Care system. They are vulnerable and many become homeless. The CoC funds one shelter with 25 beds for TAY where the waiting list for a bed is nine months. During the pandemic, housing vouchers for TAY increased from five to 120 but fell short of meeting the 150 beds needed.23
21 Orange County Housing Stock, 211 OC, Housing Inventory Count 2021 Report. 22 Longitudinal Systems Analysis, 211 OC, FY 2018 through 2021. 23 Dr. Shauntina Sorrells, MSW, DSW, Chief Program Officer, Orangewood Children’s Home, Chair CoC TAY Committee, in a presentation to OC Supervisor Foley’s Forum on Homelessness, Santa Ana, April 20, 2022. 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 11
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
OC System of Care Resources
While the CoC represents the targeted collaboration to combat homelessness envisioned by HUD, there are additional programs in the Orange County System of Care that serve homeless individuals through other County agencies, such as the following:
• Prevention - Health care services which include: mental health, substance abuse treatment, and public health (infectious disease control); public assistance programs such as: Cal Fresh (EBT, food assistance), Cal WORKS (job training), Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants, Medi-Cal, and General Relief (cash assistance). • Outreach - Link to Services, Housing, Treatment, Basic Skills, and Job Training. • Shelter - All emergency shelter funds go through the CoC Board. • Housing - Housing Choice Vouchers, and Supportive Housing.
OC System of Care Resources
FY 2021-22 Budget in Millions
$59
$28
$14
$15
$218
$19
$749
Housing
Shelter
Outreach
Prevention
$- $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 Specifically for Homeless
All Residents Including Homeless
Source County of Orange 24
Total Orange County Cost of Homelessness
In addition to the costs of the Orange County System of Care, the county spends significant funds annually on homeless individuals in jail and in the criminal justice system. When these expenditures are included, Orange County homeless costs were an estimated $1.6 billion in FY 2021.25
The graphs in this OCGJ report illustrate the increased outreach, prevention, shelter, and permanent housing that the CoC and OCC achieved, as well as additional system of care 24 OC System of Care Resources, FY 2021-22, Orange County Office of Care Coordination. 25 OC District 2 Services Assessment Final Report, Moss Adams, February 2022. 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 12
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
resources provided by the County of Orange. The 2022 Point in Time count documents the resulting decrease in homelessness, even as it shows the remaining challenges.
These County of Orange investments to address homelessness make a big difference by taking many people off the streets, providing shelters with basic services, giving needed medical and mental health care, helping with job training, and creating some permanent housing. While these investments are essential, they do not go far enough to house all the homeless people living in Orange County; in fact, only about 30 percent of the individuals exiting temporary shelters move into permanent housing.
The challenge of homelessness in our changing economy has been evolving as have our systems of care and prevention. It is clear that no one approach is going to eradicate homelessness.
However, if we continue to come together to learn and to improve our collective efforts, we will enable greater success in the exhaustive task of serving this vulnerable population in our community.
FINDINGS
Based on its investigation described in this report, the 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury has arrived at the following findings:
F1 South Orange County SPA cities lack low-threshold emergency shelters resulting in more homeless encampments and individuals living on the streets.
F2 Too many of the homeless who are severely and persistently mentally ill and those with addiction issues end up incarcerated instead of more appropriate placements.
F3 The County of Orange and cities within Orange County have been inconsistent in collaboration for support of shelters and services, which has resulted in missed opportunities to end homelessness.
F4 There are an insufficient number of rental units available to those exiting Emergency Shelters, resulting in the majority returning to homelessness when leaving the shelters.
F5 The Office of Care Coordination, in collaboration with the Continuum of Care Board, provides an effective community-based system of setting priorities to address homelessness, learning best practices, awarding and monitoring contracts, and overseeing a comprehensive system of care. However, the challenge of housing all our homeless requires much more.
F6 Transitional Aged Youth who age out of the Foster Care system are a vulnerable population that often become homeless and need assistance in finding housing. There are insufficient resources to adequately serve these young people.
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 13
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on its investigation described herein, the 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following recommendations:
R1 By July 1, 2023, the CoC and County of Orange should leverage funding to persuade South Orange County cities to open a regional, low-threshold emergency shelter for the homeless, in addition to the Laguna Beach Friendship Shelter. (F1) R2 By July 1, 2023, South OC SPA cities should collaborate in siting and funding a low- threshold emergency shelter for the homeless, in addition to the Friendship Shelter in Laguna Beach. (F2)
R3 The CoC should fund programs in fiscal year 2022-23 for people with severe and persistent mental illness and addiction issues to receive supervised care and treatment. (F2) R4 By July 1, 2024, the County of Orange and cities should collaborate to open facilities that can house people with severe and persistent mental illness and addiction issues in a secure setting. (F2)
R5 By July 1, 2023, the County of Orange, cities and CoC should collaborate to encourage the development of housing affordable to individuals exiting the emergency shelters in Orange County. (F3, F4, F5)
R6 By December 1, 2022, the County of Orange, cities and CoC should collaborate to increase the number of housing opportunities for Transitional Aged Youth. (F6)
COMMENDATIONS
Continuum of Care - The Orange County Grand Jury commends the broad-based collaboration between the County, cities, non-profit shelter and service providers, homeless advocates, faith- based organizations helping the homeless and hungry, and public and private entities, known as the Continuum of Care. This federally supported initiative has a representative board of directors and enjoys the highly effective professional support of the County of Orange Office of Care Coordination.
The OCGJ toured facilities and interviewed those engaged at all levels in this community-wide endeavor and was impressed at the dedication and caring to help the less fortunate in our County.
During the OCGJ investigation into the CoC, several exceptional organizations and dedicated individuals were brought to our attention. While not a direct part of our focus on the CoC, they were part of this broad community effort to address homelessness so the OCGJ thought they warranted honorable mention, including:
• Be Well OC in Orange is an innovative collaboration to provide outreach vans with mental health crisis teams, and a residential facility to reduce the incarceration of individuals with mental illness and/or substance abuse problems. • Mary’s Kitchen in the city of Orange provides dignified services including food to the walk-in homeless. Additionally, clients can receive mail and take showers. 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 14
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
• Navigation Centers in the cities of Laguna Beach, Fullerton, Buena Park, Placentia, Tustin, and Huntington Beach are providing critical shelter and services to the homeless. • Orange County’s Emergency Shelters, Yale, and Bridges at Kraemer are unique multi- service, low-threshold shelters run by PATH and Mercy House respectfully. • Outreach and Prevention work being done by City Net and city homeless liaisons are the front line in reaching the chronically homeless.
• Permanent Housing is being developed by many entities overcoming various obstacles.
The Grand Jury commends Jamboree Housing for their successful PSH units we toured, and the OC Housing Community Development department for their success in leveraging partnerships to create 2700 units of PSH.
• The Salvation Army operates a low-threshold, comprehensive homeless shelter for the City of Anaheim and is in the process of building an adjacent apartment complex with permanent supportive housing.
• US District Court Judge David Carter played an extraordinary role in bringing the cities and county to the table with the advocates and homeless to create change. His “hands on” approach demonstrated the compassion he expected of all. • Whatever It Takes (WIT) Collaborative Court is an initiative to help high risk, high need, convicted felons, to be successfully reintegrated into society. Coordinated resources and guidance are offered to complete a program of sobriety, housing, employment, counseling, relationship issues, and consistent healthy behavior.
RESPONSES
California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors.
Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows:
(a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 15
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor.
(b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor.
(c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.
The Orange County Grand Jury requires and requests the following responses:
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
OC Board of Supervisors X X X X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
OC Board of Supervisors X X X X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Aliso Viejo X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Aliso Viejo X X X X X
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 16
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Anaheim X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Anaheim X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Brea X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Brea X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Buena Park X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Buena Park X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Costa Mesa X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Costa Mesa X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Cypress X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Cypress X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Dana Point X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Dana Point X X X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Fountain Valley X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Fountain Valley X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Fullerton X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Fullerton X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Garden Grove X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Garden Grove X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Huntington Beach X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Huntington Beach X X X
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 17
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Irvine X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Irvine X X X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
La Habra X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
La Habra X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
La Palma X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
La Palma X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Laguna Beach X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Laguna Beach X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Laguna Hills X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Laguna Hills X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Laguna Niguel X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Laguna Niguel X X X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Laguna Woods X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Laguna Woods X X X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Lake Forest X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Lake Forest X X X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Los Alamitos X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Los Alamitos X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Mission Viejo X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Mission Viejo X X X X X
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 18
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Newport Beach X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Newport Beach X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Orange X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Orange X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Placentia X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Placentia X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Rancho Santa Margarita X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Rancho Santa Margarita X X X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
San Juan Capistrano X X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
San Juan Capistrano X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Santa Ana X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Santa Ana X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Seal Beach X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Seal Beach X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Stanton X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Stanton X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Tustin X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Tustin X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Villa Park X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Villa Park X X X
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 19
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Westminster X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Westminster X X X
90 Day Response Required F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Yorba Linda X X
90 Day Response Required R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Yorba Linda X X X
90 Day Response Requested F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Office of Care Coordination X X X X X X
90 Day Response Requested R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Office of Care Coordination X X X X X X
90 Day Response Requested F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
Continuum of Care Board X X X X X X
90 Day Response Requested R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Continuum of Care Board X X X X X X
REFERENCES
211 OC Website Data: Orange County CoC Dashboard – Orange County HMIS (ochmis.org) 211 OC Housing Inventory Count, Orange County Housing Stock, from HMIS data, 2021 Report 211 OC, HIC Report Year Over Year, from HMIS data, for Orange County 2017-2021 211 OC, Longitudinal Systems Analysis, from HMIS data FY 2018 through 2021 City of Anaheim, Addressing Homelessness FACT SHEET, Winter 2021 Chapman University, OC Annual Survey 2020
City News Service, Federal Judge Approves Settlement of Homeless Lawsuits, 7/23/2019 City of Fullerton, Report of the Fullerton Task Force on Homelessness and Mental Health Services, 5/15/2012
City of Fullerton, Housing Game Plan, 3/9/2021
Fullerton Homeless Plan Committee, Strategic Plan for Addressing Homelessness, 1/24/2020 Los Angeles Times, Frustrated judge demands O.C. find shelter for homeless being evicted from camp, 2/14/2018
Moss Adams, OC District 2 Services Assessment Final Report, February 2022 OCGJ Report, Where there’s a Will There’s a Way, 2018
OCGJ Report, Homeless Report, 2005
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 20
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
OC Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness, 2012
Orange Housing Finance Trust, https://ochft.org
Orange County, OC System of Care Resources by Resource Type, Budget 2020-2022 Office of Care Coordination (OCC) Contract Map, 2021-22 OCC, Contract Inventory, 2021
OCC, Coordinated Entry System Policy and Procedures 9/11/2019 OCC, Emergency Shelter List by SPA, 3/9/2021
OCC, Contracts Monitoring System Reports, 2021
OCC, Website Documents and Reports, www.ochealthinfo.com/about-hca/directors- office/office-care-coordination/homeless-services/continuum-care OC Community Resources, HUD Consolidated Plan, 6/23/2020 OC Register, Welcome Home OC 12/12/21
Orange County Point in Time Count, 2017-2022
Subtitle C of Title IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, (42 U.S.C.11381- 11389). As noted in CFR 24 Part 578.1
US Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
US Department of Housing and Urban Development, CoC Homeless Assistance Programs Populations and Sub-Populations Reports 2016-2020
United Way of OC, Homelessness in Orange County: The Cost to Our Community, 2017 Voice of OC, OC Mental Health Jail Expansion Draws Pushback and Debate, 10/23/2019 Voice of OC, Where does OC’s Homelessness Spending Actually Go? Here’s What We Found Out, 7/25/21
GLOSSARY
211 OC: A non-profit that administers the county Homeless Management Information System and publishes the data on their website.
Chronically Homeless: An individual or family who is homeless and lives in a place not meant for human habitation, for at least 1 year.
Chronic Substance Abuse: adults with a substance abuse problem that is expected to be of indefinite duration and substantially impairs the person’s ability to live independently.
Commission to End Homelessness: A collaborative board of County and city government, private foundations, advocacy groups, community organizations, and other interested stakeholders that promote the success of the Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness. 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 21
How is Orange County Addressing Homelessness?
Coordinated Entry System (CES): A system to coordinate program participant intake assessment, and provision of referral.
Continuum of Care (CoC): A HUD-mandated local board of individuals and organizations working together to address homelessness on a regional basis.
Disability: A person with physical, mental, or emotional impairment, which is expected to be of long duration, and substantially impedes an individual's ability to live independently.
Domestic Violence: The act of family member, partner or ex-partner attempting to physically or psychologically dominate another.
Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS): Computerized data base to capture client-level information on the characteristics and service needs of those experiencing homelessness.
Housing Inventory Count (HIC): The HUD-mandated annual count of homeless shelter beds available, conducted by the CoC.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): An agency of the United States Government.
Low-Threshold Emergency Shelter: A facility offering limited shelter as a safe alternative to living on the streets and provides essential services. “Low-threshold” means that individuals do not have to be drug and alcohol free, only that their behavior complies with the shelter rules.
Navigation Center: Another name for emergency shelter, emphasizing the service provided to residents to navigate to permanent housing, jobs, medical care, and other independent living skills.
Office of Care Coordination (OCC): County of Orange staff who provide support to the CoC Board and coordinate homeless program funds and services.
Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH): Long-term, community-based housing that has supportive services for homeless persons with disabilities including mental illness.
Point-in-Time Count & Survey (PIT): A community-wide effort to collect information on the number and characteristics of individuals and families experiencing homelessness.
Severely and Persistently Mentally Ill: adults with mental health problems that are expected to be life-long and substantially impairs the person’s ability to live independently.
Sheltered Homeless: individuals who are in emergency shelters, navigation centers, or other temporary housing.
Service Planning Area (SPA): Divisions of Orange County into North, Central, and South cities to coordinate homeless shelters and services on a regional basis.
Unsheltered Homeless: individuals who spent last night in the streets, a vehicle, an abandoned building, bus/train station, camping not in a designated campground, sleeping anywhere outside, or other place not meant for human habitation or stayed in friend or family’s garage, backyard, porch, shed or driveway.
2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Page 22
Agenda Item - 2.c.
City of Garden Grove
INTER-DEPARTMEN T MEMORANDU M
To: Scott C. Stiles From: Lisa L. Kim
Dept.:
Subject:
City Manager Dept.:
Adoption of a Resolution Date:
authorizing submittal of an
application to the County of
Orange Continuum of Care
for the Special Notice of
Funding Opportunity to
a
ddress unsheltered
homelessness. (A ctio n Item)
Community and Economic
Development Department
9/13/2022
OBJECTIV E
For the City Council to adopt a Resolution to approve the submittal of an application to the County of Orange Continuum of Care for the Special Notice of Funding Opportunity to Address Unsheltered Homelessness.
BACKGROUN D
On June 22, 2022, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD ) released the Continuum of Care (CoC) Supplemental to Address Unsheltered and Rural Homelessness (Special NOFO) , which is a package of resources to address unsheltered homelessness and homeless encampments. The Orange County CoC Board have set forth a Request for Proposals for the Special NOF O and will evaluate submittals to ensure the most competitive application is put forth to HUD. The Orange County CoC has opened an application for new projects in response to the Special NOF O that follow a Housing First approach, and focus on providing supportive services to underserved communities and individual s and/or families experiencing homelessness with severe service needs.
DISCUSSIO N
Over the previous year, the City has collaborated with the Garden Grove Unified School District (GGUSD ) and Stand Up for Kids in an effort to enhance the services going to McKinney Vento children in the school district. The McKinney-Vento Act defines homeless children and youth as individual s who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence. Stand Up for Kids recently executed an agreement with GGUS D to provide outreach services to the McKinney Vento children in the school district, which provides these children with essential services and referrals to
services.
Based on data provided by the GGUSD , approximately 151 out of 466 children on the McKinney Vento list are literally homeless and living in a place not meant for human habitation. This figure represents approximately 32% of the children currently on the McKinney Vento list, which includes children and families who are doubled up and/or precariously housed.
In order to address this need, the City is submitting an application to the Orange County CoC in response to the Special NOFO . The City is applying for $600,000 to implement a Rapid Rehousing Program that will serve homeless children currently going to school in GGUS D over a 3-year period. The annual budget is projected to be approximately $200,000.
The City’s non-profi t homeless service provider, Stand Up for Kids, will be the administrator for this grant program and is currently buildin g a client list through their current Outreach Program in GGUSD . The City’s proposed Rapid Rehousing Program will provide rental assistance and supportive services to homeless families that are currently on the McKinney Vento list, and will provide additional supportive services that will help families maintain permanent housing on their own.
FINANCIA L IMPAC T
The CoC’s Special NOF O requires a 25% match from the City, which will be accomplished through in-kind donations from Stand Up for Kids. The expected yearly cost includes: 6-12 months of rental assistance, supportive services, Homeless Information Management System and administrative costs. There is no impact to the City’s General Fund.
RECOMMENDATIO N
It is recommended that the City Council :
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the submittal of an application to the County of Orange Continuum of Care for the Special Notice of Funding Opportunity to Address Unsheltered Homelessness.
By: Timothy Throne, Project Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type File Name
Exhibit_1_-
Resolution 9/7/2022 Resolution _Attachment_2_-
_Grant_Resolution.doc x
CoC Special NOFO
I
nstructions 9/6/2022 Backup Material
CoC_Special_NOFO_RFP_-
_Instructions_-
_FINAL_(4).pdf
GARDEN GROVE CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE , CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION AND ACCEPT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND URB AN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $600,000 AND AUTHORIZE AGREEMENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE ROADMAP TO SUCCESS PROGRAM.
WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove desires to undertake a certa in project designated as the ROADMAP TO SUCCESS PROGRAM to serve homeless children currently attending GGUSD schools and provide supportive services that will help families maintain permanent housing (Program);
WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove is eligible to receive funds made available through the Orange County Continuum of Care (CoC) administered by HUD; WHEREAS, the City will administer the Program through the Office of Economic Development with a contracted non-profit service provider; WHEREAS, the City desires to be reimbursed from the eligible funds for operational and administrative tasks;
WHEREAS, it is necessary to execute Agreements and authorization to enter into extensions if approved by HUD;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE:
1. Does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Garden Grove or his designee to apply for funding, and approve and execute all Agreements implementing the Program , including the Certification of Consistency in the Consolidated Plan, Limited Scope Environmental Review Form, the Professional Services Agreement with Stand Up for Kids, Inc., and to execute and submit all other necessary grant documents, including but not limited to applications, agreements, modifications, payment requests, and amendments.
2. Grant funds received under the Program shall not be used to supplant ongoing program expenditures.
Orange County
Continuum of Care
Request for Proposals (RFP) for
Special Notice of Funding
Opportunity (NOFO) to Address
Unsheltered Homelessness
Release Date
August 9, 2022
Submission Deadline
September 7, 2022, at 12:00 p.m. (PDT)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................. 3 SPECIAL NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS UNSHELTERED HOMELESSNESS – FUNDING AND PROJECT TYPES........................................................................................................................... 4 PROPOSAL MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................... 7 RFP REVIEW, SCORING AND SELECTION PROCESS ................................................................................ 9 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 12 REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ................................................................................................................. 13 BRIEF OVERVIEW OF REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ............................................................................... 14 TIMELINE AND DUE DATES ............................................................................................................. 16 SUBMITTAL ..................................................................................................................................... 16 RIGHT OF ORANGE COUNTY CONTINUUM OF CARE TO WAIVE IRREGULARITIES .......................... 17 FURTHER QUESTIONS AND ADDITIONAL RESOURCES .................................................................... 17 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION .......................................................................................................... 17
INTRODUCTION
Welcome to the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Special Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) to Address Unsheltered Homelessness.
On June 22 , 2022 , the U.S. D epartment of Housing and Urban Development ( HUD) released the Continuum of Care (CoC) Supplemental to Address Unsheltered and Rural Homelessness (S pecial NOFO)1, a first -of-its-kind package of resources to address unsheltered homele ssness and h omeless encampments, including funds set aside specifically to address homelessness in rural communities.
Through this Special NOFO, HUD is making available approximately $ 322 million to the CoC Program nationally ($267.5 million for Unsh eltered Homeless Set Aside and $54.5 million available for the Ru ral Set Aside). HUD will award funding to commun ities to imple ment coordinated approaches -- grounded in Housing First and public health principles -- to reduce the prevalence of unsheltered homelessness, and improve services engagement, health outcomes, and housing stability among highly vulnerable unsheltered individuals and families. The Special NOFO establishes the funding criteria for communities nationwide to provide housing and services to populations experiencin g unsheltered homelessness, specifically those with severe service needs2. The Special NOFO will exclusively fund only new projects that enhance data collection for identifying those most in need and tailor solutions to meet the needs of people with severe service needs.
The Special NOFO outlines HUD’s Homeless Policy and Program Prio rities, including the following that apply to the Orange County CoC : connecting highly vulnerable populations experiencing unsheltered homelessness to health and hou sing resources ; involving a broad array of stakeholders in the CoC ’s efforts to reduce homelessness for individuals and families with severe service needs; advancing equity to address the needs of underserved communities 3 and populations who are disproportionately more likely to experience homelessness; and utilizing a Housing First approach throughout the CoC.
In Orange County, the CoC Board is the group of community stakeholders that sets local priorities for the CoC Program funding. As a result, the CoC Board, i n collaboration with the County of Orange ’s (County) Office of Care Coordination as the Administrative Entity, have set forth the following RFP for the Special 1 Special NOFO: https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/coc/specialCoCNOFO/supplemental 2 “Severe service needs” means any combination of the following factors: facing sig nificant challenges or functional impairments, including any physical, mental, developmental or behavioral health disabilities regardless of the type of disability, which require a significant level of support in order t o maintain permanent housing (this f actor focuses on the level of support needed and is not based on disability type); high utilization of crisis or emergency services to meet basic needs, including but not limited to emergency rooms, jails, and psychiatric facilities; currently living in an unsheltered situation or having a history of living in an unsheltered situation; experiencing a vulnerability to illness or death; having a risk of continued or repeated homelessness; and having a vulnerability to victimization, including physical assault, trafficking or sex work. 3 “Underserved communities” include populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and ci vic life. These communities include Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, and other persons of color; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; pe rsons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality.
NOFO and will evaluate submittals to ensure the most competitive application is put forth to HUD consistent w ith HUD gui dance and Homeless Emergency A ssistance and Rapid Transition to H ousing (HEARTH) Act regulations. The Orange County CoC will begin solicitations of new Projects in response to the Special NOFO that follow a Housing First approach and focus on providing supportive services to underserved communities and individua ls and /or families experiencing hom elessness with se vere service needs.
SPECIAL NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS UNSHELTERED HOMELESSNESS – FUNDING AND PROJECT TYPES
The Orange County CoC is eligible to apply for $19,846,82 funding during the Special NOFO, through the Unsheltered Homelessness Set Aside funding outlined within the Special NOFO Application process. The Orange County CoC is not eligible to apply for the Rural Set Aside. The grant term for projects under this Special NOFO will be three (3) years, including the CoC Planning costs.
Eligible project types under the Special NOFO include Permanent Housing: Rapid Rehousing (RRH) or Permanent Supportive Housing ( PSH), Joint Transitional Housing and Permanent Housing – Rapid Rehousing (Joint TH and PH-RRH), Supportive Services Only (SSO), SSO – Coordinated Entry System (SSO- CES) and Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). Only the CES Lead and HMIS Lead for the CoC are able to submit project proposals for CES or HMIS funding respectively in response to the RFP and the Special NOFO.
Further, the Orange County CoC has determined it will only solicit Request for Proposals for the below project types. Generally, eligible costs under the regular CoC competition apply in the Special NOFO , as detailed in 24 CFR 578.37 through 578.63 However, projects applying for funders under the Unsheltered Homelessness Set Aside may not request funds for acquisi tion, rehabilitation, or new construction. The Orange County CoC and HU D will reject any request for ineligible costs and will reject any projects that request funds for acquisition, new construction, or rehabilitation. All proposed services must be new, and proposed project funding cannot replace other existing funding sources. The Special NOFO must be dedicated to individuals and/or families experiencing homelessness.
Rapid Rehousing
Rapid Rehousing (RRH) is a model of housing assistance that is designed to assist individuals and families experiencing homelessness to move as quickly as possible into permanent housing and achieve stability in that housing. RRH assistance is time-limited, individualized, and flexible. RRH projects funded u nder the Special NOFO competition must follow Housing First principles and participate in the Coordinated Entry System (CES). For more information on RRH project type see 24 CFR 578.3.
Permanent Supportive Housing
Permanent S upportive Housing (PSH) means permanent housing in which s upportive services are provided to assist persons experiencing homelessness with a disability to live independently. PSH provides permanent housing in the form of community-based housing without a designated length of
stay, the program participant must be the tenant on a lease for a term of at least one year, which i s renewable for terms that are a minimum of one month long and is terminable only for cause. PSH projects funded under the Special NOFO competition must follow Housing First principles and participate in the CES. For more information on PSH project type see 24 CFR 578.3.
Joint TH and PH-RRH
The Joint Transitional Housing and Permanent Housing – Rapid Rehousing ( Joint TH an d PH -RRH) component project combines two existing progra m components–transitional housing and permanent housing-rapid rehousing–in a single project to serve individuals and families experiencing homelessness.
Joint TH and PH -RRH should prioritize those with the high est needs using an evidence -based approach designed to provide stable housing and services that, to the greatest e xtent possibl e, mov e the participant towards self-sufficiency and independence. Program participants may only receive up to 24- months of total assistance. For more information about Joint TH and PH -RRH component projects, see Section III.C.2.g of the Special NOFO or 24 CFR 578.3.
When a pro gram participant is enrolled in a Joint TH and PH- RRH component project, the recipient or subrecipient must be able to provide both components, including the units supported by the transitional housing component and the tenant -based rental assistance and s ervices provided through the PH- RRH component, to all participants. A program participant may choose to receive only the transitional housing unit, or the assistance provided through the PH-RRH component, but the recipient or subrecipient must make both types of assistance available. Additionally, if CoC Program funds are not bein g requested for both TH and PH-RRH units, the project application must still describe the number of TH and PH-RRH units that will be utilized by the project, if select ed for condit ional award, and provide details in the project description of how TH and PH-RRH assistance will be provided.
Supportive Services Only
The Supportive Services Only (SSO) component include s projects that allow recipients to provide supportive services—such as conducting outreach to sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons and families and providing referrals to other housing or other necessary services—to families and individuals experiencing homelessness. The recipient may only assist program participants for whom the recipient or subrecipient of the funds is not providing housing or housing assistance. As indicated in Section V.B.3.e., all SSO projects must follow a Housing First approach as defined in Section III.C.2.e.
Additional detail on the requirements for each type of new project that m ay be funded through this Request for Proposals are detailed in the table below.
Category PH-RRH Joint TH and PH-RRH SSO
Eligible
Applicants
Non-profits, government entities, public housing authorities Eligible
Participants
Individuals and/or families experiencing homelessness
Eligible • Term Rental • Term Rental • Annual
Activities/ Assistance (6-12 Assistance (up to 24 Assessment of Expenses months) months) Service Needs
(24 CFR • Support Services • Leasing of a • Assistance with 578.43 - • HMIS structure or unit moving costs
578.63) • Project
Administrative
Costs
• Operating Costs
• Support Services
• HMIS
• Project
Administrative
Costs
• Case
Management
• Childcare
• Education
services
• Employment
Assistance and
Job Training
• Food
• Housing Search
and Navigation
• Legal Services
• Life Skills
Training
• Mental Health
Services
• Outpatient
Health Services
• Outreach
• Substance Use
Treatment
• Transportation
• Utility Deposits
• Provision of
Services
Support
Services
Grant funds may be used for any supportive service listed as eligible under 578.53 Grant Term Only three (3) year grant terms will be considered, to maximize available funding.
Timeliness Program funds must be obliga ted by September 30 , 2023. Applicants must start programs in a timely manner.
Match 25% of total grant request. Leasing funds do not have to be matche d. Match can be cash or in-kind and must be spent on eligible project costs.
HMIS Must agree to partic ipate in the Orange County Homeless Ma nagement Information System (HMIS) or comparable database.
Coordinated
Entry
Must agree to participate in Orange County Coordinated Entry System.
Housing First
Model
Must operate a Housing First Model.
PROPOSAL MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
HUD Threshold Requirements
The Special NOFO requires all project applicants to meet Threshold Requirements as listed in S ection V.C.3.
a. Ineligible Applicants. HUD will not consider a project application from an ineligible project applicant. b. Project Eligibility Threshold. HUD will review all projects to determine if they meet the following eligibility threshold requirements on a pass/fail standard. If HUD determines that the applicable standards are not met for a project, the project will be rejected.
1. Project applicants and potential subrecipients must meet the eligibility requirements of the CoC Program was described in 24 CFR part 578 and provide evidence of eligibility required in the applications.
2. Project applicants and subrecipients must demonstrate the financial and management capacity and experience to carry out the projects as detailed in the project application and to administer Federal funds.
3. Project applicants must submit the required certifications as specified in the Special NOFO.
4. The population to be served must meet program eligibility requirements as described in Section II.B.4 of the Special NOFO, and the project application must clearly establish eligibility of project applicants.
5. Project applicants must agree to participate in a local HMIS System. However, in accordance with Section 407 of the Act, any victim service provider that is an applicant must not disclose, for purposes of HMIS, any personal identifying information about any client. Victim service providers must use a comparable database that meets the needs of the local HMIS.
6. Project applicants must demonstrate operational inte grity with the Housing First model o f project implementation.
c. Project Quality Threshold. HUD will review all new project applications to determine if they meet the following project quality threshold requirem ent. As indicated on pages 25 to 30 of the Special NOFO, HUD will assess a ll new pr ojects for the following minimum project quality threshold requirements. Additionally, the housing and services proposed mus t be appropriate for its components, program participants and the community.
1. Permanent Supportive Housing or Rapid Rehousing Proposal Requirements As indicated on pages 25 and 26 o f the Special NOFO, Permanent Su pportive Housing or Rapid Rehousing component project applications must receive at least 4 out of the 5 poin ts available for this project type. Projects that do not receive at least 4 points will be rejected. i. The type of housing proposed, includi ng the number and configuration of units, fit the needs of the program participants. (1 point)
ii. The type of supportive services that will be off ered to program participants will ensure successful retention in or help to obtain permanent housing, in cluding all supportive services regardless of funding source. (1 point)
iii. The proposed project has a specific plan for ensuring program partici pants will be individually assisted to obtain the benefits of mainstream health, social, and employment programs for which they are eligible to apply, and which meet the needs of program participants. (1 point)
iv. Program participants are assisted to obtain and remain in permanent housing in a manner that fits their needs. This may be demonstrated by a project that provides the participant with some typ e of transportation to access needed services, safety planning, case management, housing that meets accessibility related needs and additional assistance to ensure retention of permanent housing. (1 point)
v. The proposed project is consistent with the plan described by the CoC in response to Section VII.B.4 of the Special NOFO. (1 point)
2. Joint TH and PH-RRH Proposal Requirements
As indicated on page s 26 and 27 of t he Special NOFO, new Joint TH and PH- RRH component project applications must receive at least 4 out of 6 points available for this project type. Projects that do not receive at least 4 points will be rejected. i. The type of housing proposed, including the number and configuration of units, will fit the needs of the program participants. (1 point)
ii. The proposed project will provide enough rapid rehousing assistance to ensure that at any given time a program participant may move from transitional housing to perma nent housing. This may be demonstrated by identifying a budget that has twice as many resources for the rapid re housing portion of the project tha n the TH portion, by having twice as many PH -RRH units at a point in time as TH units, or by demonstrating that the budget and units are appropriate for the population being served by the project. (1 point) iii. The type of the supportive services that will be offered to program participants will ensure successful retention or help to obtain permanent housing. (1 point) iv. The proposed project has a specific plan to coordin ate and integrate with other mainstream health, social services, and employment programs and ensure that program participants are assisted to obtain bene fits from the mainstream programs for with they are eligible to apply and which meet the needs of the program participants. (1 point) v. Program participants are assisted to obtain and remain in permanent housing in a manner that fits their needs. This may be demonstrated by a project that provides the participant with some type of transportation to access needed services, safety planning, case management and additional assistance to ens ure retention of permanent housing . (1 point)
vi. The proposed project is consist ent with the plan described by the CoC in respo nse to Section VII.B.4 of the Special NOFO. (1 point)
3. SSO – Not Including SSO Projects for Coordinated Entry As indicated on page 28 of the Special NOFO, SSO project appl ications must receive 4 out of 6 points available for this project type:
i. The proposed project has a strategy for providing supportive service s to those with the highest service needs, including those with histories of unsheltered homelessness and those who do not traditionally engage with supportive services. (1 point)
ii. Program participants are assisted to obtain and maintain permanent housing in a manner that fits their needs. (1 point)
iii. The propose d project has a specific plan for ensuring program participan ts will be individually assisted to obtain the benefits of mainstream health, social services, and employment programs for which they are elig ible to apply and which meet the needs of the program participants. (1 point).
iv. The project proposed will participate in coordinated entry. (2 points) v. The proposed project is consistent with the plan described by the CoC in response to Section VII.B.4 of this Special NOFO. (1 point)
RFP REVIEW, SCORING AND SELECTION PROCESS
Review Process
Applicants responding to this RFP must submit materials as described in this solicitation. Applications that are late, incomplete, or substantially deficient will not be advanced to the Project Review Panel for scoring. All applications will be reviewed to ensure they meet HUD threshold requirements and project quality threshold standards. Any correctable deficiencies will be identified, and selected applicants will have the opportunity to submit corrected documents before the final CoC application is submitted to HUD.
The Orange County CoC will convene an unbiased P roject Review Panel to review each project that passes the technical and threshold review. Any member of the CoC who is making an application or is affiliated with an organization/agency that is making an application will not participate in the review and ranking process or otherwise influence those that are ranking the applications.
The Project Review Panel will receive the applications and scoring instructions in advance of the meeting.
The Project Review Panel will hold on e meeting to review and average their scores and arrive at a decision about which projects to fund. Should there be a need for clarification, the Project Review Panel may call in high performing/scoring applicants for a Question-and-Answer Session. This session is at the discretion of the Project Review Panel. In keeping with HUD requirements, the Project Review Panel will also assign a ranked order to all projects that will be funded. They will also recommend which project/s should be submitted in response to the Special NOFO . The Project Review Panel may also rec ommend that projects either increase or decrease their funding request to maximize the use of available funds.
The final ranking of new projects as determined by the Project Review Panel will be recommended to the Special NOFO Ad Hoc Committee to determine their order on the Pro ject Priority Listing sub mitted to HUD. The final Project Priority list will be approved by the CoC Board (with review of the Special NOFO Ad Hoc). Applicants will be notified of the results no later than October 5, 2022. Any projects not selected for funding may ap peal the decision by followin g the CoC’s appeal process. Placement on the Project Priority List does not guarantee funding, as HUD will review and assess all new project applications for threshold compliance and project quality.
Applicants conditionally selected for funding by HUD will be required to provide additional information in the form of a technical submission within 30 days of notification by HUD of the project’s condition al approval.
Appeal Process
The CoC Board approves applications for ranking and funding recommendations to HUD. That ranking decision is communicated to all applicants by email. In all cases, the Appeals Committee has the final authority on appeals decisions.
A formal appeal must be submitted by 12:00 p.m. two (2) business days after the CoC Board decision.
The a ppeal document must consist o f a short, written statement (no longer than two pages) of the agency’s appeal of the decision addressing the flaw in methodology or in the process used in the decision. The overall performanc e measurements or data are no t a basis for an appeal. The statement can be in the form of a letter or a memo from an individual authorized to represent the agency (i.e., Executive Director). The appeal must be transmitted by email to Zulima Lundy ([email protected]) and Felicia Boehringer ([email protected]).
The Appeals Panel will be selected from the CoC Board or its designees. The membership of the Appeals Panel will have no conflict of interest in serving. The Appeal Panel will conduct an in person or telephone meeting with a representative(s) of the agency/collaborative who filed the appeal to discuss it, if needed. The Appeal Panel will inform appealing agencies of its decision. In all case s, the appeals panel has the final authority on appeals decisions.
Scoring Criteria
All projects will be scored on a 100-point scale using the following criteria:
Criterion Points Description of basis for assigning points 1 CoC
Participation
Up to 10
points
• Applicant has demon strated participation and involvement in the Orange County CoC and core activities of the CoC, such as Point In Time Count and Housing Inventory Count.
• Applicant participates in the local HMIS and comp letes timely and curate data submissions, as requested.
• Applicant participates in the local CES.
2 Capacity
of
Applicant
and
Partners
Up to
10 points
• Past and current relevant expe rience in providing housing and services related to those in this solicitation, including evaluation of current and similar project types.
• Past and current relevant experience in effectively utilizing federal funds and performing the activities proposed in the application , i l di d ii i fi i l d i 3 Applicant
Service
Experience
and
Approach
Up to
20 points
• Applicant has demonstrated experience in working with targe t population to quickly se cure h ousing, make connections to supportive services, and promote housing stability.
• Applicant described ser vice delivery approach for serving people with severe service needs.
• Applicant described service delivery approac h to serving underserved communities.
• Applicant described data driven approach to service delivery.
4 Involving
Persons
with Lived
Experience
Up to
10 Points
• Applicant has a mem ber on the Board of Director ’s with current and/or past experience of homelessness.
• Applicant ensures perspectives of people with lived experience of homelessness are meaningfully and intentionally integrated into the decision-making process.
• Applicant practices meaningful involvement of people with lived experience in the delivery of services.
5 Proposed
Project -
Service
Plan and
Supportive
Services
Up to
25 points
• Proposed project, including service plan and supportive services, is appropriate for the household type and/or subpopulation • Proposed project includes strategies to assist participants to obtain and remain in permanent housing, increase their
employment and/o r income and maximize their ability to live independently.
• Proposed project will implement a Housing F irst, client-centered approach and evidence-based practices in program operations. In order to receive full p oints, applicants must clearly describe the evidence-informed practic es that the project will use in its policies, procedures and operations.
• Proposed project will have tailored approach to serve people with severe service needs and underserved communities.
• Proposed project will aim to leverage housing resources and/or healthcare resources.
6 Outcomes Up to
10 points
• Proposed performance outcomes (not outputs) that will be achieved by the project and how data will be used to measure those outcomes and determine success.
• Proposed performance outcomes should foc us on participants housing placement and permanent housing retention, as well as improved quality of life, rather than just measuring the amount or types of services provided (not outputs).
7 Project
Readiness
Up to 5
points
• Estimated schedule for the proposed project to begin operations, including housing serv ices and supportive service activities. Full points will be given to projects that can begin soon after the grant is awarded.
8 Budget
and Match
Up to
10 points
• Budget is reasonable for type of project proposed, total number of households and participants to be served and clearly articulated.
• Applicant is able to provide the required match of at least 25% is included and documented.
• Applicant is abl e to demonstrate how leveraged housing resources and/or health care resources contribute to the overall budget of the project proposed.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
The RFP process will be a thorough review of an agency’s (1) capacity to adminis ter a CoC homeless service project in the Orange County CoC, (2) experience in administering similar programs as indicated in the Threshold Requirements for Agency Section of the RFP, and (3) project proposal for eligible project type ( PSH, RRH, Joint TH and P H-RRH and/or SSO), and determination of how it meets HUD’s Policy and Program Priorities as indicated in the Special NOFO.
The Request for Proposals process will include a comprehensive review of the following:
1. Threshold Requirements for Agency
2. Technical Requirements
3. Document Presentation Requirements
4. Required Documents
Threshold Requirements for Agency
The Request for Proposals (RFP) for Special NOFO Projects will require all applicant agencies to meet the below Threshold Requirements:
1. Applicant must be an eligible entity.
2. Applicant must have financial and management capacity to carry out the project.
3. Applicant must show experience in providing services related those in this RFP.
4. Applicant must submit required certifications and documentation.
5. Applicant must commit to participate in HMIS and CES.
6. Applicant must complete and timely submit the proposal in response to the RFP.
Technical Requirements
1. One (1) printed original with s ignatures and three (3) complete copies in binders with clearly marked tab dividers for all exhibits, attachments, and supp orting documents. Clea rly marked original and copies.
2. One (1) electronic copy via DropBox of th e Request for Proposals Submittal – exhibits, attachments, and supporting documents – to be organized and separated per Document Presentation Requirements.
Document Presentation Requirements
1. No late submissions will be accepted.
2. Clearly identify which version is the original and w hich is the copy on the cover page of the submittal.
3. Tab dividers must be clearly labeled between each exhibit and attachment.
4. All exhibits and attachments must be numbered separately within tab dividers in a ccordance with the Document Checklist.
5. Most recent documentation must be submitted for each exhibit and/or attachment.
6. Do not leave any blank responses without an explanation (e.g., if the question is not applicable, indicate N/A).
7. All documents with a signature block must be signed by the authorized officer(s).
8. All required documents must be included in the submission.
9. All supporting documents must be legible.
REQUIRED DOCUMENTS
The following documents must be submitted.
• Documents Checklist
• Cover Letter (signed by Authorized Signatory)
• Exhibit 1: Lead Agency Information Form
o Attachment 1: Organizational Chart – include Board of Director’s body as it relates to the entire organization
o Attachment 2: Board of Directors’ Roster2 and Resolution authorizing submittal of the new project application in response to the CoC Special NOFO competition process o Attachment 3: State Certificate of Status3
o Attachment 4: Agency’s Code of Conduct
o Attachment 5: 501(c)3 Certification, if applicable
• Exhibit 2: Financial Assessment
o Attachment 6: Two most recent agency financial audits by a certified public accountant (CPA).
o Attachment 7: Two most recent single audits, previously known as the OMB Circular A- 133, if applicable.
• Exhibit 3: Orange County Continuum of Care Participation • Exhibit 4: Terms and Conditions
• Exhibit 5: Related Services Experience and Approach
o Attachment 8: HMIS Project Perfor mance Report for all of agency’s current project types
• Exhibit 6: Strategy for Involving Persons with Lived Experience • Exhibit 7: Project Information Form
o Attachment 9: Certification of Consistency in the Consolidated Plan o Attachment 10: Environmental Information – Limited Scope Environmental Re view Form or Environmental review of Categorically Excluded not Subject to Section 58.5 o Attachment 11: In-Kind Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) o Attachment 12: 25% Match Documentation Letters
o Attachment 13: Document(s) supporting Housing First Model for proposed project type o Attachment 14: Housing Resources Leveraging Commitment(s) o Attachment 15: Health Care Resource Leveraging Formal Agreement • HUD CoC Project Application (e-snaps)
BRIEF OVERVIEW OF REQUIRED DOCUMENT S
Orange County Continuum of Care Participation (Exhibit 3) The Exhibit captures information related to the applicant agency ’s participation and involvement in the Orange County CoC and overall engagement in the homeless service system, including HMIS and CES requirements.
Terms and Conditions (Exhibit 4)
The Exhibit outlines the terms an d conditions of the RFP for the Spe cial NOFO, as well as outlines the applicant agency’s understanding of the Orange County CoC ’s requirements if and when the proposed project is awarded by HUD. The Exhibit is to be signed by the person preparing the proposal in response to the RFP and by the Chief Executive Officer or Executive Director of the agency.
Related Services Experience and Approach (Exhibit 5)
The Exhibit captures information on the applicant agency’s current and relevant experience in providing similar services, operating similar programs and addressing the needs of the target population. The Exhibit includes questions specific to the Super NOFO and HUD’s priorities relate d to addressing unsheltered homelessness, serving people with sever e service needs and underserved communities.
Answers provided in this exhibit should demonstrate the applicant agency ’s deep understanding of evidenced-based principles and strategies to operate the proposed project as descri bed in the RFP and the Super NOFO.
Project Information Form (Exhibit 7)
The Exhibit captures information on the proposed project to ensure that project design meets the needs of the target population as outlined in the RFP and the S pecial NOFO, as well as evaluates how the proposed pr oject will operate within the Orange County CoC and i mprove outcomes for people experiencing homelessness with severe service needs and/or underserved communities. The Exhibit also captures information on leveraged housing and health care resources and how these will be used in the ongoing operations of the project and service delivery that best meets the needs of the population.
Additionally, it includes a Housing First Mod el Assessment given HUD’s requirement that projects types funded through the Specia l NOFO operate utilizing a Housing F irst approach to increase access to housing options for households that often face multiple barriers to housing. The Housing First is a model of housing assistance that prioritizes rapid placement and stabilization in pe rmanent housing that does not have service participatio n requirements o r preconditions (such as sobri ety or a minimum income threshold). Joint TH and PH -RRH and SS O projects can be considered to be using a hous ing first mode l for the purposes of the Special NOFO, if they operate wit h low-barriers, work to quickly move people into permanent housing, do not require participation in supportive services, and, for transitional housing projects, do not req uire any preconditions for moving into the transitional housing (e.g. , sobriety or minimum income threshold).
Certification of Consistency with the Consolidated Plan (Attachment 9) Each agency must submit a Certification of Consistency with the Consolidated Plan (form HUD -2991), in which a local jur isdiction certifies that the proposed activities or projects are consistent with the jurisdiction’s HUD-approved Consolidated Plan. The certification must be made in ac cordance with the provisions of the con solidated plan regulations at 24 CFR part 91, subpart F. Form HUD-2991 must be
completed and dated between June 22 , 2022, and October 20, 2022, or date of submission, whichever one is the earliest date.
Environmental Reviews (Attachment 10)
The Env ironmental Review is required by HUD to ensure the pro ject does not negatively impact the surrounding e nvironment a nd that the prop erty itse lf will not have adverse environme ntal or health effects on occupants. All CoC Program assistance is subject to environmental review by a responsible entity under HUD regulation 24 C FR part 59, the National E nvironmental Policy Act and applicable related Federal environmental authorities. Conditional selection of projects under the CoC Homeless Assistance competition is subject to the environmental review requirements of 24 CFR 582.230, and 882.804(c) as applicable.
The County of Orange will p erform the Environment R eview a nd once a pproved, w ill present the applicant agency with an environmental clearance letter. This env ironmental clearance letter is addressed per project and will be valid for the next five (5) calendar years from the day dated and may be submitted in lieu of the Environmental Review Forms.
The recipient, its project partners , and their contractors may not acquire, rehabilitate, co nvert, lease, repair, dispose of, demolish, or construct property for a project under this Special NOFO, or commit or expend HUD or local funds for such eligible activitie s under th e Special NOFO, until the responsible entity (as defined by 24 CFR 58.2(a)(7)) has completed the environmental review procedures required by 24 CFR Part 58 and the en vironmental certification and Request for Release of Funds h ave been approved or HUD has performed an environmental review under 24 CFR Part 50 and the recipie nt has received HUD approva l of the property. HUD will not release grant funds if the re cipient or any other party commits gra nt funds before the recipient s ubmits and HUD approves its Request for Release of Funds, where such submission is required (page 31 of the Special NOFO).
Financial Commitment (Attachments 11 and 12)
All eligible funding costs, except leasing, must be m atched with no less than 25% cash or in -kind contribution. No match is required for leasing activities in the budget. The match requirements apply to project administration funds, along with t he traditional e xpenses (op erations, rental assistance, supportive services, and HMIS). M atch must be met on an an nual basis. HUD requires match letters to be submitted with the e-snaps application and should be included in the RFP Submittal.
For in-kind match, the applicant agency may use the value o f property, equipment, goods, o r services contributed to the project, provided that, if the recipient or sub-recipient had to pay for such items with grant funds, the costs would have been eligible. If third party services are to be used as match, the third- party service provider that w ill deliver the services must enter into a memorandum of under standing (MOU) before the grant is executed documenting that the thir d pa rty w ill provide such ser vices and value towards the project. HUD requires Match letters to be submitted with the e-snaps Application and should be included in the RFP Submittal.
TIMELINE AND DUE DATES
Please review the key dates and deadlines of the RFP for Special NOFO process:
Activity Dates
HUD released Special NOFO to Address Unsheltered and Rural Homelessness June 22, 2022 Office of Care Coordination release of the RFP for Special NOFO for new projects August 9, 2022 Bidders Conference on RFP for Special NOFO via WebEx
Meeting Link: https://ocgov.webex.com/ocgov/j.php?MTID=mea3b78017d76c76cd0bd0bca7f31f285 Meeting access code: 2468 005 0266
Meeting password: cocNOFO
Join by phone: +1-213-306-3065 United States Toll (Los Angeles) August 17, 2022, at 9 am
Technical Assistance Office Hours via Webex.
Contact Felicia Boehringer at [email protected] to schedule an appointment.
August 29, 2022, to
September 1, 2022
Question and Answer Period Ends September 1, 2022, at
5:00 pm (PDT)
Deadline for Agencies to submit new project RFP applications to the Office of Care Coordination
September 7, 2022, at
12:00 pm (PDT)
Deadline for the Office of Care Coordination to notify all agencies concerned regarding project acceptance, rejection or reduction by the Orange County CoC October 5, 2022 Office of Care Coordination to post consolidated application for Special NOFO on webpage October 18, 2022
HUD submission deadline for Special NOFO October 20, 2022
SUBMITTAL
It is the sole responsibility of the Agency to ensure that del ivery is made prior to the due date and time.
The Special NOFO Project Application including all Exhibits and Attachments in response to the RFP must be hand delivered b y 12:00 pm PDT on September 7, 2022, electronically via DropBox, and also printed binder submissions to:
County Executive Office
Attention: Felicia Boehringer
405 W. 5
th Street, Suite 685
Santa Ana, CA 92701
(714) 834-4454
[email protected]
RIGHT OF ORANGE COUNTY CONTINUUM OF CARE TO WAIVE IRREGULARI TIES The Orange County CoC reserves the right to:
1. Withdraw this solici tation at any t ime without pri or notice a nd, furth ermore, mak es no representation that any contract occurs and that funds will be awarded by HUD to any respondent to this solicitation.
2. Waive any irregularities in the RFP process and to reject any and a ll submissions not in the best interest of the CoC.
3. Request additional information and material. In addition, once released, the application from HUD may require and warrant the request of supplemental material.
4. Not select grants proposed by agencies that have exhibited serious capacity is sues in prior grants, including performance and financial problems, HMIS participation, or unresolved monitoring issues, or based on the best interest of the entire CoC Application. HUD will review applications and make the final funding decision.
5. Retain all submitted applications. Selection or rejection of an application does not aff ect these rights.
FURTHER QUESTIO NS AND ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
The Office of Care Coordination is available to answer questions on the RFP for the Special NOFO , application deadlines, process, training, or to provide c opies of application materials specific to the Orange County CoC. For further questions or technical assistance, please email the Office of Care Coordination at [email protected] and Carbon Copy (Cc) F elicia Boehringer ([email protected]) and Zulima Lundy ([email protected]).
Specific questions re garding your HUD grant amount, HUD guid elines and etc., shou ld be d irected to your local HUD field o ffice representative. Please DO NOT contact the H UD office regarding Orange County’s local application deadlines or process, as the Office of Care Coordination is available to answer those questions.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Agencies will be required to comply with terms set forth by the CoC and HUD. In addition, all applicants are strongly advised to review all applicable terms, conditions, and federal requirements. It is strongly recommended that you obtain, and review information related to the Continuum of Care P rogram, the CoC I nterim Rule, and the HEA RTH Act Regulations, along with any o ther related documents p rior to completion of this RFP. In addition, HUD w ill provide u pdates via their website at https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/coc/specialCoCNOFO.
Agenda Item - 2.d.
City of Garden Grove
INTER-DEPARTMEN T MEMORANDU M
To: Scott C. Stiles From: Willia m E. Murray
Dept.: City Manager Dept.: Public Works
Subject: Authorize issuance of a
purchase order to National
Auto Fleet Group for two (2)
new Public Works pick up
trucks. (Cost: $62,310.28)
(A ctio n Item)
Date: 9/13/2022
OBJECTIV E
To secure City Council authorization to purchase two (2) new Public Works Department pick up trucks from National Auto Fleet Group through the Sourcewell competitive bid program, Contract #091521-NAF.
BACKGROUN D
The Public Works Department has two (2) pick up trucks that currently meet the City’s guidelines for replacement and were approved through the FY 22/23 budget process. The trucks are replacing a 2008 Chevy Colorado truck, VIN# 1GCCS199788216391 , with 57,543 miles from the Buildin g Services Department, and a 2012 Chevy Malibu, VIN# 1G1ZB5E06CF16304 3 with 81,088 miles from the Engineering Division . Experience has shown that the City’s buying power is enhanced through joining with other public agencies to purchase fleet vehicles and equipment.
DISCUSSIO N
Sourcewell nationally solicits , evaluates and awards contracts through a competitive bid process. As a member of Sourcewell , the City is able to utilize bid awards for equipment purchases. Staff recommends piggybacking on the results of a recent Sourcewell competitive bid program, Contract #091521-NAF. The results deemed National Auto Fleet Group as the lowest responsive bid.
National Auto Fleet Group
(Ford Ranger extra cab)
Buildin g Services Department
$30,058.94*
National Auto Fleet Group
(Ford Ranger crew cab)
$32,251.34*
Engineering Department
* This price includes all applicable tax and destination charges.
FINANCIA L IMPAC T
There is no impact to the General Fund. The financial impact is $62,310.28 to the Fleet Management Fund. The surplus equipment will be sold at public auction.
RECOMMENDATIO N
It is recommended that the City Council :
Authorize the Finance Director to issue a purchase order in the amount of $62,310.28 to National Auto Fleet Group for the purchase of two (2) new Public Works Department pick up trucks.
By: Steve Sudduth, Equipment Maintenance Supervisor
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type File Name
Nation Auto Fleet Group 8/23/2022Quote Backup Material NAFG_quote_Ford_Ranger_extra_cab.pd f Nation Auto Fleet Group 8/23/2022Quote Backup Material NAFG_quote_Ford_Ranger_crew_cab.pd f
Agenda Item - 2.e.
City of Garden Grove
INTER-DEPARTMEN T MEMORANDU M
To: Scott C. Stiles From: Willia m E. Murray
Dept.: City Manager Dept.: Public Works
Subject: Authorize issuance of
purchase orders to:
Coastline Equipment, RDO
Equipment, and Belkorp Ag
for the purchase of flail
mower attachment parts.
(Cost: $150,000) (A ctio n
Item)
Date: 9/13/2022
OBJECTIV E
For the City Council to authorize purchase orders for flail mower attachment parts to Coastline Equipment, RDO Equipment, and Belkorp Ag.
BACKGROUN D
The Public Works Department Vehicle Maintenance Divisio n is responsible for maintaining the City’s fleet of vehicles and equipment. The Public Works Parks Divisio n utilizes two (2) John Deere tractors with three (3) Alamo flail mower attachments per mower. Due to the exorbitant cost increases of the parts needed to rebuild these mower attachments and to avoid delays in the purchase and delivery of the required materials to meet our customers needs in a timely manner, it is essential that Public Works have the ability to purchase these items from more than one vendor. The lowest bidder, Coastline Equipment, will be designated as the primary vendor. Belkorp Ag and RDO Equipment will be the second and third vendors utilized.
DISCUSSIO N
Specification s were prepared and sent to the only vendors authorized to sell Alamo parts in the Western United States. The parts quoted were the amount needed to rebuild the attachments for one flail mower.
Coastline Equipment Co. $54,106.51
Long Beach, CA.
Belkorp Ag $56,747.15
Stockton, CA.
RDO Equipment Co. $63,651.88
Riverside, CA.
FINANCIA L IMPAC T
The financial impact to the Fleet Management Fund would be $150,000 per year for five (5) years. There is no impact to the General Fund.
RECOMMENDATIO N
It is recommended that the City Council :
Authorize the Finance Director to issue three (3) purchase orders for flail mower attachment parts in a fixed amount collectivel y not to exceed $150,000 per year for five (5) years and to be divided between Coastline Equipment, Belkorp Ag, and RDO Equipment.
By: Steve Sudduth, Equipment Maintenance Supervisor
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type File Name
Coastline Equipment quote 8/18/2022 Backup Material Coastline_Equipment_Quote.pd f Belkorp Ag quote 8/18/2022 Backup Material BelkorpAg_quote.pd f RDO Equipment quote 8/18/2022 Backup Material RDO_Equipment_quote.pd f Alamo parts specifications 8/18/2022 Backup Material Alamo_specifications.pdf
Agenda Item - 2.f.
City of Garden Grove
INTER-DEPARTMEN T MEMORANDU M
To: Scott C. Stiles From: Teresa Pomeroy
Dept.: City Manager Dept.: City Clerk
Subject: Receive and file minutes Date:
from the meeting held on
July 12, 2022. (A ctio n Item)
9/13/2022
Attached are the minutes from the meeting held on July 12, 2022, recommended to be received and filed as submitted or amended.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type File Name
Minutes 9/7/2022 Minutes cc-min_07_12_2022.pdf
MINUTES
GARDEN GROVE CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, July 12, 2022
Community Meeting Center
11300 Stanford Avenue, Garden Grove, CA 92840
CONVENE CLOSED SESSION
AT 6:00 p.m., Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen convened closed session.
ROLL CALL PRESENT: (5) Council Members Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen,
ABSENT: (2) Mayor Jones, Council Member O’Neill absent
at Roll Call, but joined the meeting at 6:10
p.m.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FOR CLOSED SESSION
Speakers: None.
Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation
Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4): Two potential cases.
Conference with Real Property Negotiators
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 for property (held concurrently with Successor Agency Closed Session)
City/Successor Agency Properties: 12241, 12261, 12271, 12291, 12311 and 12321 Harbor Boulevard; 12246, 12252, 12262, 12282, 12292, 12312, 12322, 12251, 12261, 12281, 12291, 12311 and 12321 Thackery Drive
City/Successor Agency Negotiators: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager/Executive Director; Lisa Kim, Assistant City Manager/Economic and Community Development Director
Negotiating Parties: Newage Garden Grove II, LLC; Kam Sang Company, Inc.; Ronnie Lam
Under Negotiation: To obtain direction regarding the price and terms of payment for the sale/exchange/disposition of the properties.
-1- 7/12/22
ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION
At 6:35 p.m., Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen adjourned closed session.
CONVENE REGULAR MEETING
At 6:40 p.m., Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen convened the meeting in the Council Chamber with Council Members Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, and K. Nguyen present.
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
ADOPTION OF A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING MARK MAHONEY AND SUE JEANETTE TALLMON FOR BEING NAMED 2022 STRAWBERRY BALL KING AND QUEEN/SENIOR VOLUNTEER MAN AND WOMAN OF THE YEAR (F: 83.1)(XR: 42.3) It was moved by Council Member O’Neill, seconded by Council Member K. Nguyen that:
A Proclamation recognizing Mark Mahoney and Sue Jeanette Tallmon as the 2022 Strawberry Ball King and Queen and Senior Volunteer Man and Woman of the Year, be adopted.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
PRESENTATION - COMMUNITY SPOTLIGHT RECOGNIZING THE GARDEN GROVE STRAWBERRY FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION FOR ORGANIZING THE 2022 GARDEN GROVE STRAWBERRY FESTIVAL (F: 42.3)
PRESENTATION - COMMUNITY SPOTLIGHT HONORING MARK MAHONEY AND SUE JEANETTE TALLMON FOR BEING NAMED 2022 STRAWBERRY BALL KING AND QUEEN/SENIOR VOLUNTEER MAN AND WOMAN OF THE YEAR (F: 42.3)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Speakers: Police Chief DaRé, OCFA Division Chief Roberts, and Assistant City Manager Maria Stipe reported on July 4, 2022, activities; members of the public were: Ana Parker, Maureen Blackmun, and Verla Lambert. -2- 7/12/22
Written Communications: Lynn Groff
RECESS
At 7:08 p.m. Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen recessed the meeting.
RECONVENE
At 7:12 p.m., Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen reconvened the meeting with Council Members Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, and K. Nguyen present.
ADOPTION OF A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING MARK MAHONEY AND SUE JEANETTE TALLMON FOR BEING NAMED 2022 STRAWBERRY BALL KING AND QUEEN/SENIOR VOLUNTEER MAN AND WOMAN OF THE YEAR (F: 83.1)(XR: 42.3) This matter was considered earlier in the meeting.
ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT NO. 2163101280 REVISED - GARDEN GROVE PARK IMPROVEMENTS AT 9301 WESTMINSTER BOULEVARD, GARDEN GROVE, AS COMPLETE (F: 55-Western State Builders, Inc.) (XR: 73.5) It was moved by Council Member O’Neill, seconded by Council Member K. Nguyen that:
Project No. 2163101280 - Garden Grove Park Improvements Revised at 9301 Westminster Boulevard, Garden Grove, be accepted as complete; The City Manager be authorized to execute the Notice of Completion of Public Works Improvement and Work; and
The Finance Director be authorized to release the retention payment when appropriate to do so
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D.
Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
WARRANTS
It was moved by Council Member O’Neill, seconded by Council Member K. Nguyen that:
-3- 7/12/22
Payroll deposits 00008322 through 00008944 and checks 00185041 through 00185063 inclusive have been verified by the Finance Division as properly issued and bear all proper signatures, be received and filed.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
APPROVAL TO WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCES LISTED
It was moved by Council Member O’Neill, seconded by Council Member K. Nguyen that:
Full reading of ordinances listed be waived.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
PUBLIC HEARING – APPROVAL OF THE 2022 DRINKING WATER PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL REPORT (F: 112.1)
Following staff’s presentation, Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen declared the public hearing open and asked if anyone wished to address the City Council.
Speakers: None
There being no response from the audience, the public hearing was declared closed.
It was moved by Council Member K. Nguyen, seconded by Council Member Brietigam that:
The 2022 Drinking Water Public Health Report be approved.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
-4- 7/12/22
PUBLIC HEARING - ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING CERTAIN USER FEES FOR COST RECOVERY (F: 60.2A)
Following staff’s presentation, Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen declared the public hearing open and asked if anyone wished to address the City Council.
Speakers: None
There being no further response from the audience, the public hearing was declared It was moved by Council Member K. Nguyen, seconded by Council Member Brietigam that:
Resolution No. 9762-22 entitled: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Garden Grove, California, amending user fees for various city services, be adopted.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
AWARD A CONTRACT TO SELECT ELECTRIC, INC., FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF PROJECT NO. 02-2022, MAIN STREET ELECTRICAL PROJECT (F: 55-Select Electric, Inc.)
Following staff introduction, it was moved by Council Member K. Nguyen, seconded by Council Member Klopfenstein that:
A contract be awarded to Select Electric, Inc., in the amount of $379,871, for the construction of Project No. 02-2022, Main Street Electrical Project between the Garden Grove Community Foundation (GGCF), Select Electric, Inc., and the City of Garden Grove; and
The City Manager be authorized to execute the contract and to make minor modifications as necessary and appropriate on behalf of the City.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
-5- 7/12/22
AWARD A CONTRACT TO PROJECT FINANCE ADVISORY, LIMITED FOR THE P3
PROJECT FEASIBILITY AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE GARDEN GROVE CIVIC CENTER PROJECT (F: 55-Project Finance Advisory) Following staff introduction, and City Council discussion, it was moved by Council Member Klopfenstein, seconded by Council Member Bui that:
A contract be awarded to Project Finance Advisory for the P3 Feasibility and Project Management consultant services for the Garden Grove Civic Center Project, in an amount not to exceed $181,448.00; and
The City Manager be authorized to execute the agreement on behalf of the City, and make minor modifications as needed.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
APPROVAL OF A COMMERCIAL PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND JOINT ESCROW
INSTRUCTIONS WITH KJ INVESTMENTS GROUP LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11277 GARDEN GROVE BOULEVARD (F: 55-KJ Investments) (XR: 84.1) Following staff introduction and City Council discussion, it was moved by Council Member Klopfenstein, seconded by Council Member K. Nguyen that:
The Commercial Purchase Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions with KJ Investment Group, LLC, for the acquisition of property located at 11277 Garden Grove Boulevard, in the amount of $7,999,000, and an amount of $50,000 for escrow and title related costs, be approved; and
The City Manager be authorized to execute the Purchase Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions on behalf of the City, and make minor modifications thereto as needed.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
-6- 7/12/22
INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE REAUTHORIZING THE
PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL, AND GOVERNMENTAL FEE ON STATE VIDEO FRANCHISEES OPERATING WITHIN THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE (F: 121.2H)
(As approved earlier in the meeting, it was moved by Council Member O’Neill, seconded by Council Member K. Nguyen, and approved by a 6-0-1 vote, that full reading of ordinances listed be waived.)
Following staff introduction and Council comments, it was moved by Council Member K. Nguyen, seconded by Council Member Klopfenstein that:
Ordinance No. 2937 entitled: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Garden Grove reauthorizing the public, educational, and Governmental Fee on State Video Franchisees operating within the City of Garden Grove, be passed to second reading.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
MATTERS FROM THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND CITY MANAGER
DISCUSSION REGARDING ESTABLISHING A GARDEN GROVE FILM INCENTIVE
PROGRAM IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE GARDEN GROVE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND GARDEN GROVE TOURISM IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, AS REQUESTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KIM NGUYEN (F: 60.2)
Council Member Kim Nguyen noted that she serves on the California Film Commission, which has brought her the opportunity to learn more about the tax incentives available for filming. She mentioned that she attended a shoot at the Santa Ana Train Station for The Mysterious Benedict Society, a Disney production for children. She learned through conversations with the production crew that filming in Garden Grove is difficult due to the radius perimeter requirements that impacts costs. She noted that there is an upcoming pilot produced by Free Form about three young Vietnamese women centered in Orange County. She was able to contact the producer who shared that there are only a few segments that were filmed at the Asian Garden Mall – Phước Lộc Thọ - due to costs associated with the 30 mile radius of filming. In conversation with the members of the Film Commission, it was suggested that she work with her City, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Tourism District to find ways to promote filming in Garden Grove. This would take work in determining places that could be used in terms of road closures and local businesses, hotels and restaurants willing to participate.
She would like the cultural aspects of Garden Grove featured through film projects -7- 7/12/22
in order to gain interest. She would like to list a feasibility study on a city council agenda in the next few months, noting that filming on the Free Form pilot could be picked up and would want to start filming soon.
Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen stated that she would like to make a motion to study the feasibility and to partner with the Chamber and Tourism District and asked if this would affect the City’s budget.
Council Member K. Nguyen expressed that she was not sure but indicated the need for local hotels to provide block rates.
Council Member Bui suggested looking at costs and comparisons to other cities and counties to determine how to incentivize filming.
Council Member K. Nguyen noted that throughout California, there are rules tied to union labor and includes a 30-mile radius outside of Los Angeles whereby lodging and food is required to be provided by production companies to cast and crew members. She expressed that incentivizing filming in Garden Grove could be a good opportunity and suggested streamlining the process on the City’s website for obtaining permits as well as partnering with local businesses.
Council Member Brietigam seconded Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen’s motion, and stated he would like to see this opportunity expand beyond Garden Grove’s Vietnamese cultural centers.
The motion to list for future action, a feasibility study to incentivize filming in Garden Grove, carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
DISCUSSION ABOUT ADVANCEMENT OF A FUTURE NAVIGATION CENTER AS REQUESTED BY CITY MANAGER STILES (F: 117.15B)
Assistant City Manager/Community and Economic Development Director, Lisa Kim, provided a PowerPoint presentation highlighting the steps taken to address the homelessness crisis. Comprehensive information is available on the City’s website at https://ggcity.org/endhomelessness
The online dashboard includes: The Memorandum of Understanding between the Cities of Garden Grove, Westminster, and Fountain Valley, a collaborative effort on establishing a Navigation Center; webinars in partnership with local non-profits including United Way; Community Outreach and Engagement; a Comprehensive Strategic Five-Year Roadmap to address homelessness; Resources for ending -8- 7/12/22
homelessness; links for the community to get involved to be part of a coalition to address homelessness; a graph with statistics; the Police Department’s Special Resource Team; PowerPoint presentations provided to the City Council; and the Be Well OC Mobile Response Team.
Locating a Navigation Center has been a challenge as light industrial real estate is in very high demand; however, staff is working with an industrial real estate broker seeking off-market properties with the goal of bringing forward a site for City Council approval in August.
MATTERS FROM THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND CITY MANAGER (Continued)
Council Member Kim Nguyen asked for an update on the homeless encampments located near the 22 freeway ramps in District 6; the 99 Cents Store has cleaned up their trash area; however, they are receiving deliveries at 3:00 a.m. which is disturbing the residents living adjacent. She asked that staff check with the store manager and ensure compliance with the delivery ordinance; and she asked for staff to review the direction of the lighting that was installed to deter homeless activity that is now directed onto residential properties. She asked that parks restroom closures be listed on a future agenda as well, and noted other cities have been putting up temporary facilities with hand wash stations. The restrooms have been closed for several years, which is not fair to the public.
Council Member Klopfenstein thanked Public Works for installing new turf at West Haven Park and she thanked the residents for their patience while the park has been under improvements. She noted a Vector Control update that typhus from fleas has been infecting wild animals, and she cautioned everyone to take extra precautions with their children, pets, and yards for ticks and fleas.
Council Member Bui reported that his trip to ICSC in May was very successful, and there was interest from multiple developers from both inside and outside California.
He expressed concern for the passage of SB 357, which decriminalizes loitering and undermines the enforcement of laws preventing prostitution. He expressed concern for an uptick of prostitution taking place in the tourist district as it had been in the past, and he would like to list this on a future agenda for discussion and recommendations for mitigating potential outcomes as a result of SB 357.
Council Member O’Neill agreed that he is opposed to anyone standing, for example, on a median, that could impose a safety hazard.
Council Member Brietigam noted a decrease overall in solicitation taking place on the public sidewalks as more of that activity is done through social media.
Council Member Bui expressed concern this bill will hamper law enforcement’s efforts and he motioned to add an urgency matter for the purpose of listing an -9- 7/12/22
action item for discussion to request the City Attorney to provide recommendations to mitigate potential effects of SB 357. Council Member Brietigam seconded the motion.
Council Member K. Nguyen suggested working with the League of California Cities on this matter.
The motion carried by a 6-0-1 vote as follows:
Ayes: (6) Brietigam, O’Neill, Bui, Klopfenstein, K. Nguyen, D. Nguyen
Noes: (0) None
Absent: (1) Jones
Council Member Brietigam stated that the City can do better addressing the need to keep park restrooms open and that our citizens should not have to do without. He suggested that there are simple methods that can be used to accommodate the residents. He noted that Eastgate Park restrooms have been vandalized at least twice in the early morning hours due to staff not locking up the restrooms. He asked why it takes Garden Grove 30 to 60 days for a building inspection, which he feels is too long based on what he has learned of other cities and that this has been a common complaint. He challenged city staff to address these issues and do better, and that if more money is needed for extra staffing, that staff ask the City Council to allocate funding. He noted that he personally funded a catalytic converter engraving event at the Grease Monkey Garage where about 120 cars came through from every city district. He offered the engraving equipment to his colleagues for having an event in their respective districts.
Council Member O’Neill noted in response to Ana Parker who spoke under public comments that he has been to Ms. Parker’s home a few times. Ms. Parker’s neighbors who have built an addition and fence have had a surveyor map the property line. He understands the difficulty of having new neighbors make changes by adding to their homes; however, City staff, as well as an engineering surveyor, have inspected the home, the property and the fence which meets code. He expressed that he is looking forward to the State of the City coming up on July 13 th.
He noted that since the homeless encampments on the Santa Ana riverbed were disbanded, surrounding communities have experienced issues within their park restrooms. The vandalism at park restrooms has been so bad that it became unaffordable to keep them open. He noted that he is optimistic that park restrooms can be reopened, maintained, and scheduled for opening and closing times, and that the City Council is responsible to direct staff and to allocate funding. He wished Council Member K. Nguyen an early birthday.
Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen agreed that the City can do better with providing accessibility to the park restrooms. Many residents visit the park for a variety of activities and the restrooms are a necessity. She asked for the public’s help as -10- 7/12/22
well, asking them to report issues in their parks and to keep their restrooms clean.
She thanked the Special Resource Team for addressing hotspots in District 3, and commented they have been doing excellent work. She wished Council Member K.
Nguyen an early birthday.
City Manager Stiles announced the State of the City to take place on July 13, 2022, at noon at the Hyatt on Chapman Avenue. The video of the event and the Mayor’s speech will be posted on the City’s website following the event. He noted that the City Council meeting scheduled for July 26, 2022, will be cancelled, and the next meeting will be on August 9, 2022. The National Night Out hosted by the Garden Grove Police Department will be held on August 2, 2022, from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. with details on the event are posted on the City’s website.
City Attorney Sandoval stated that no reportable action was taken on the Closed Session item listed on the City Council Closed Session agenda concurrently with the City of Garden Grove as Successor Agency to the Agency for Community Development agenda for real property negotiations. For the matter listed on the City Council Closed Session agenda regarding the initiation of litigation, the City Attorney was authorized by the City Council to commence receivership on property located at 12272 Tamerlane Drive, Garden Grove.
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:47 p.m., Mayor Pro Tem D. Nguyen adjourned the meeting. The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 9, 2022, at 5:30 p.m. at the Community Meeting Center, 11300 Stanford Avenue, Garden Grove, California.
Teresa Pomeroy
City Clerk
-11- 7/12/22
Agenda Item - 2.g.
City of Garden Grove
INTER-DEPARTMEN T MEMORANDU M
To: Scott C. Stiles From: Patricia Song
Dept.: City Manager Dept.: Finance
Subject: Receive and file warrants.
(A ctio n Item)
Date: 9/13/2022
Attached are the warrants recommended to be received and filed.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type File Name
22.09.02_-
Payroll warrants 9/7/2022 Warrants _Payroll_Warrant_Register_- _signed.pdf
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 1
EF - Payroll EFT
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011486 E03973 AVILA, VERONICA 09/08/2022 $2,489.18
00011487 E03982 BECKLES, CAROL E 09/08/2022 $49.27
00011488 E04755 BRIETIGAM III, GEORGE S 09/08/2022 $409.87 00011489 E04332 BUI, PHAT T 09/08/2022 $443.79
00011490 E01338 CARRENO, SHAUNA J 09/08/2022 $2,203.83
00011491 E02788 DAVIS, JEFFREY P 09/08/2022 $2,776.52
00011492 E00803 HADDAD, PAMELA M 09/08/2022 $2,052.27
00011493 E04750 HO, VY D 09/08/2022 $1,794.73
00011494 E04096 HUYNH, DANNY 09/08/2022 $5,093.69
00011495 E03612 JONES, STEVEN R 09/08/2022 $421.86
00011496 E04131 KIM, NOELLE N 09/08/2022 $2,685.44
00011497 E02612 KLOESS, VILMA C 09/08/2022 $2,847.93
00011498 E04536 KLOPFENSTEIN, STEPHANIE L 09/08/2022 $294.47 00011499 E01949 LE, IVY 09/08/2022 $2,333.48
00011500 E01280 LE, TAMMY 09/08/2022 $1,863.78
00011501 E05828 MIDDENDORF, LINDA 09/08/2022 $3,362.59
00011502 E02787 MORAN, MARIE L 09/08/2022 $2,857.32
00011503 E02539 NAVARRO, MARIA A 09/08/2022 $2,658.79
00011504 E04535 NGUYEN, DIEDRE THU HA 09/08/2022 $410.57 00011505 E04948 NGUYEN, HOAI THUONG H 09/08/2022 $1,492.42 00011506 E04537 NGUYEN, KIM B 09/08/2022 $414.80
00011507 E03255 NGUYEN, PHUONG VIEN T 09/08/2022 $2,233.58 00011508 E02560 NGUYEN, QUANG 09/08/2022 $2,790.76
00011509 E01286 NGUYEN, TINA T 09/08/2022 $2,212.43
00011510 E04534 ONEILL, JOHN R 09/08/2022 $295.98
00011511 E04528 PARK, SHAWN S 09/08/2022 $2,971.93
00011512 E03541 PHI, THYANA T 09/08/2022 $2,844.28
00011513 E04443 POLLOCK, AMANDA M 09/08/2022 $1,928.68
00011514 E06945 POMEROY, TERESA L 09/08/2022 $3,980.77
00011515 E01964 PULIDO, ANA E 09/08/2022 $4,163.37
00011516 E01356 RAMOS, MARIA 09/08/2022 $2,604.72
00011517 E05057 SATO, MICHI L 09/08/2022 $2,929.75
00011518 E04387 STILES, SCOTT C 09/08/2022 $6,160.09
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
00011520
00011525
00011530
00011535
00011540
00011545
00011550
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 2
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011519 E00564 STIPE, MARIA A 09/08/2022 $6,009.88
E03715 THAI, KRISTY H 09/08/2022 $2,505.16
00011521 E02543 TO, TANYA L 09/08/2022 $1,734.22
00011522 E01971 TRAN, CUONG K 09/08/2022 $2,413.23
00011523 E02056 TRUONG, ELAINE 09/08/2022 $1,895.83
00011524 E03983 VASQUEZ, LIZABETH C 09/08/2022 $2,451.04 E04971 VITAL, ANDREA 09/08/2022 $1,790.16
00011526 E02562 VO, THANH-NGUYEN 09/08/2022 $1,884.93
00011527 E04944 ANDERSON CAMBA, ASHLEIGH R 09/08/2022 $2,260.98 00011528 E04764 BRADLEY, JANNA K 09/08/2022 $2,912.93
00011529 E03766 CERDA, MARY C 09/08/2022 $2,244.54
E04673 HART, BRANDI M 09/08/2022 $1,586.01
00011531 E04363 KWAN, LIANE Y 09/08/2022 $4,107.72
00011532 E01985 LEE, JANY H 09/08/2022 $4,284.90
00011533 E03420 PROCTOR, SHERRILL A 09/08/2022 $4,632.52 00011534 E04417 STEPHENSON, CAITLYN M 09/08/2022 $2,467.58 E02115 STOVER, LAURA J 09/08/2022 $11,196.67
00011536 E04445 BROWN, KAREN J 09/08/2022 $1,019.60
00011537 E03313 BUI, AI N 09/08/2022 $1,705.52
00011538 E04961 CHAO, VICTORIA 09/08/2022 $1,605.90
00011539 E03686 CHAVEZ, JAIME F 09/08/2022 $1,798.83
E03760 CHUNG, JANET J 09/08/2022 $3,013.48
00011541 E04957 CURTSEIT, MARIA 09/08/2022 $2,163.41
00011542 E04960 FUKAZAWA, KEISUKE 09/08/2022 $1,977.81
00011543 E05055 GAMINO, LINDA M 09/08/2022 $1,392.62
00011544 E03134 GARCIA, SYLVIA 09/08/2022 $2,632.71
E03429 GULLEY, SUSAN J 09/08/2022 $319.82
00011546 E03016 HERNANDEZ, GARY F 09/08/2022 $1,845.45
00011547 E04569 HOFFMAN, CORINNE L 09/08/2022 $2,550.60 00011548 E04968 HONG, SEUNGBUM 09/08/2022 $1,783.76
00011549 E04959 LE, KENNETH H 09/08/2022 $1,496.32
E00057 MANALANSAN, NEAL M 09/08/2022 $2,120.94
00011551 E01668 MAY, ROBERT W 09/08/2022 $1,714.56
00011552 E01393 MENDEZ, ANGELA M 09/08/2022 $2,080.68
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 3
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011553 E03628 MENDOZA, CHRISTI C 09/08/2022 $1,915.69 00011554 E04958 NGO, TINA 09/08/2022 $2,588.11
00011555 E04838 NIGATU, SELAMAWIT 09/08/2022 $2,477.80
00011556 E01362 PETERSON, JENNIFER L 09/08/2022 $2,158.97 00011557 E02429 PHAM, ANH 09/08/2022 $1,881.16
00011558 E03610 RAMIREZ, EVA 09/08/2022 $2,111.68
00011559 E05008 RAMOS, ASHLEY 09/08/2022 $820.45
00011560 E04973 RAMOS, NANCY 09/08/2022 $2,818.96
00011561 E03539 SEGAWA, SANDRA E 09/08/2022 $3,812.43
00011562 E04780 SONG, YUAN 09/08/2022 $5,376.14
00011563 E04859 VO, MY TRA 09/08/2022 $3,112.87
00011564 E03433 WESTON, RETA J 09/08/2022 $1,047.62
00011565 E04674 WHITTAKER DEGEN, HELEN E 09/08/2022 $747.13 00011566 E04527 YOO, MEENA 09/08/2022 $2,333.65
00011567 E04493 ANDREWS, STEVEN F 09/08/2022 $2,516.57
00011568 E00845 CHANG, TERENCE S 09/08/2022 $3,037.61
00011569 E03498 ESPINOZA, VERNA L 09/08/2022 $2,690.88
00011570 E04523 GALLO, CESAR 09/08/2022 $3,158.82
00011571 E04415 GOLD, ANNA L 09/08/2022 $2,284.56
00011572 E04713 HINGCO, ERNIE E 09/08/2022 $2,148.43
00011573 E02617 KLOESS, GEOFFREY A 09/08/2022 $4,145.52 00011574 E03571 MORAGRAAN, RACHOT 09/08/2022 $4,207.74
00011575 E01277 PROFFITT, NOEL J 09/08/2022 $3,390.29
00011576 E01901 RAO, ANAND V 09/08/2022 $5,457.05
00011577 E05027 SANCHEZ MENDOZA, ALFREDO 09/08/2022 $2,015.33 00011578 E03384 SCHULZE, KATRENA J 09/08/2022 $2,730.76 00011579 E04395 SWANSON, MATTHEW T 09/08/2022 $1,976.58 00011580 E01674 VALENZUELA, ANTHONY 09/08/2022 $1,687.83 00011581 E00809 VICTORIA, ROD T 09/08/2022 $2,358.69
00011582 E03014 WILDER, CANDY G 09/08/2022 $2,227.65
00011583 E03509 WINSTON, TERREL KEITH 09/08/2022 $3,228.39 00011584 E03725 ABU HAMDIYYAH, AMEENAH 09/08/2022 $2,141.67 00011585 E02996 ASHLEIGH, JULIE A 09/08/2022 $2,098.05
00011586 E03161 AUSTIN, MICHAEL G 09/08/2022 $2,843.74
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 4
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011587 E00740 BLODGETT, GREG 09/08/2022 $4,154.81
00011588 E09999 BLYTHE, GILBERT 09/08/2022 $0.00
00011589 E03808 CHENG, ALANA R 09/08/2022 $3,029.26
00011590 E03601 CHUNG, CHRISTOPHER 09/08/2022 $2,846.82 00011591 E03353 COVARRUBIAS, MONICA 09/08/2022 $3,681.20 00011592 E00128 CRAMER, RITA M 09/08/2022 $2,695.79
00011593 E04394 DAHLHEIMER, BRYSON T 09/08/2022 $2,440.44 00011594 E04879 DAKE, RYAN J 09/08/2022 $2,276.26
00011595 E04578 DENT, DAVID A 09/08/2022 $4,609.46
00011596 E03697 GUERRERO, PAUL 09/08/2022 $3,480.33
00011597 E03600 HARTWIG, TODD C 09/08/2022 $2,891.23
00011598 E03531 HERNANDEZ, RALPH V 09/08/2022 $2,548.00 00011599 E04855 HERRERA JR, ARMANDO 09/08/2022 $921.43
00011600 E03410 HODSON, AARON J 09/08/2022 $2,350.65
00011601 E04716 KASKLA, PRIIT J 09/08/2022 $2,150.68
00011602 E04442 KIM, LISA L 09/08/2022 $5,416.59
00011603 E03617 LEE, GRACE E 09/08/2022 $2,814.79
00011604 E04490 LY, HUONG Q 09/08/2022 $2,277.83
00011605 E03412 MARINO, LEE W 09/08/2022 $4,617.85
00011606 E04194 MARTINEZ, MARIA L 09/08/2022 $2,585.95
00011607 E03044 MOORE, JUDITH A 09/08/2022 $2,188.83
00011608 E02895 MOURE, SVETLANA 09/08/2022 $2,397.37
00011609 E04635 NGUYEN, PHU T 09/08/2022 $3,945.62
00011610 E02842 PARRA, MARIA C 09/08/2022 $3,324.00
00011611 E04894 REFUERZO JR., ORLINO CAMPOS 09/08/2022 $466.54 00011612 E04992 ROBLES, ALFONSO 09/08/2022 $2,470.78
00011613 E04408 THRONE, TIMOTHY E 09/08/2022 $3,419.15
00011614 E04862 TRAN, JAKE P 09/08/2022 $2,019.33
00011615 E05048 TUONG, NGHIA T 09/08/2022 $2,137.31
00011616 E03643 ALVARADO, YOLANDA A 09/08/2022 $1,804.96 00011617 E05009 ALVAREZ, CYNTHIA 09/08/2022 $819.61
00011618 E04390 AMBRIZ, STEPHANIE 09/08/2022 $633.19
00011619 E04978 AVINA, MIKAYLA M 09/08/2022 $318.31
00011620 E04771 BAILOR, REBECCA J 09/08/2022 $535.34
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 5
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011621 E04010 BAIRD, SARAH M 09/08/2022 $86.46
00011622 E04988 BAUTISTA, BRENDA 09/08/2022 $1,994.31
00011623 E04262 BEARD, ALEX C 09/08/2022 $1,364.32
00011624 E02658 CAMARENA, RACHEL M 09/08/2022 $2,262.93 00011625 E01588 CAMARENA, RENE 09/08/2022 $2,320.70
00011626 E01902 CASILLAS, VICTORIA M 09/08/2022 $2,070.89 00011627 E05058 CATAQUIZ, CHARLIZE N 09/08/2022 $581.34 00011628 E04949 CEDILLO PADILLA, JESSICA 09/08/2022 $720.47 00011629 E03304 CHUMACERO, DEANNA M 09/08/2022 $1,324.04 00011630 E04611 CROSS, AMANDA D 09/08/2022 $1,915.18
00011631 E02956 CUMMINGS, KENNETH E 09/08/2022 $0.00
00011632 E04688 DELGADO CHAVEZ, MARLY 09/08/2022 $0.00
00011633 E04653 DIAZ, GABRIELA 09/08/2022 $801.56
00011634 E04794 DINH, AARON D 09/08/2022 $505.74
00011635 E02120 FRAUSTO, LUIZ F 09/08/2022 $381.01
00011636 E04679 FREEMAN, MARK C 09/08/2022 $3,665.42
00011637 E05019 FUENTES, DIANA 09/08/2022 $401.35
00011638 E04481 GARCIA, JARED D 09/08/2022 $190.80
00011639 E04253 GARCIA, VANESSA L 09/08/2022 $124.56
00011640 E03337 GODDARD, JENNIFER DANIELLE 09/08/2022 $2,762.35 00011641 E03877 GOMEZ, STEVEN E 09/08/2022 $911.30
00011642 E04982 GONZALEZ, KATHERYN 09/08/2022 $656.04
00011643 E00940 GRANT, JACOB R 09/08/2022 $2,564.63
00011644 E04967 HASHEMI, SETAREH 09/08/2022 $342.12
00011645 E01687 HOLER, KIMBERLY K 09/08/2022 $0.00
00011646 E05032 LEE, JASON J 09/08/2022 $304.47
00011647 E04682 LOPEZ, KALYSTA N 09/08/2022 $76.12
00011648 E03603 MA AE, ELAINE M 09/08/2022 $3,101.93
00011649 E05014 MARIN, AMANDA T 09/08/2022 $55.36
00011650 E01552 MEDINA, JESUS 09/08/2022 $1,875.42
00011651 E00455 MEDINA, JUAN 09/08/2022 $2,424.11
00011652 E05038 MILLER, RUBY C 09/08/2022 $138.40
00011653 E02808 MONTANCHEZ, JOHN A 09/08/2022 $5,673.47 00011654 E05022 MUNOZ, JULIANNE I 09/08/2022 $155.86
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
00011655
00011660
00011665
00011670
00011675
00011680
00011685
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 6
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
E04173 NAKAISHI, KIRSTEN K 09/08/2022 $0.00
00011656 E04947 NGUYEN, ALEXANDER H 09/08/2022 $269.87
00011657 E05052 NGUYEN, RYAN N 09/08/2022 $609.89
00011658 E04391 NICHOLAS, NOEL N 09/08/2022 $1,398.83
00011659 E04931 NODAL, NATALIE 09/08/2022 $449.79
E00785 OCADIZ HERNANDEZ, GABRIELA 09/08/2022 $3,631.37
00011661 E04965 ORDUNO, SAMANTHA 09/08/2022 $359.83
00011662 E03881 PANGAN, CHRISTIAN 09/08/2022 $71.64
00011663 E03361 PELAYO, JANET E 09/08/2022 $3,923.44
00011664 E04777 PHAN, EDOUARD T 09/08/2022 $476.78
E03893 PICKRELL, ARIELLE 09/08/2022 $1,096.34
00011666 E04463 PUAILOA, SHADY S 09/08/2022 $587.92
00011667 E02754 REYNOSO, SUGEIRY 09/08/2022 $2,661.87
00011668 E03362 ROMERO, MARINA Y 09/08/2022 $2,097.94
00011669 E04684 ROSALES, MARIA D 09/08/2022 $412.89
E04614 ROSAS, TANYA 09/08/2022 $646.23
00011671 E04620 SALDIVAR, DIANA 09/08/2022 $352.44
00011672 E01893 SAUCEDO, DANA MARIE 09/08/2022 $2,955.46 00011673 E00925 SCHLUMPBERGER, EMERON J 09/08/2022 $1,071.89 00011674 E04926 SERNA, SAMANTHA M 09/08/2022 $341.96
E05016 SIERRA, AILEEN S 09/08/2022 $553.37
00011676 E04795 SIEVE, MYCHAELLA J 09/08/2022 $952.62
00011677 E04927 SINGER, LAUREN ROSE EMIKO N 09/08/2022 $6.92 00011678 E03895 SMITH, REBECCA S 09/08/2022 $422.59
00011679 E04798 TANG, ETHAN 09/08/2022 $207.97
E03292 TRAN-LUONG, ANNIE NGAN 09/08/2022 $0.00
00011681 E04924 TU, KATHY 09/08/2022 $276.79
00011682 E01396 VALDIVIA, CLAUDIA 09/08/2022 $3,475.18
00011683 E00015 VAN SICKLE, JEFFREY 09/08/2022 $2,714.18 00011684 E04687 VARGAS, SAMANTHA B 09/08/2022 $405.27
E05046 VARGAS-CABRERA, ARMANDO 09/08/2022 $131.48
00011686 E05017 VARGAS-SERNA, KELLY 09/08/2022 $519.17
00011687 E04118 VENCES, DAISY O 09/08/2022 $412.89
00011688 E04478 VENCES, JOSHUA 09/08/2022 $464.35
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
00011690
00011695
00011700
00011705
00011710
00011715
00011720
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 7
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011689 E03085 VICTORIA, PAUL E 09/08/2022 $1,513.09
E05018 VILLEGAS, MIA A 09/08/2022 $172.99
00011691 E04609 VIRAMONTES, JACOB D 09/08/2022 $215.66
00011692 E04937 VO, ADRIAN K 09/08/2022 $53.22
00011693 E04274 WILMES, DAVID M 09/08/2022 $770.20
00011694 E04734 ACOSTA, GIOVANNI 09/08/2022 $2,469.79
E03819 ALAMILLO, MARCOS R 09/08/2022 $4,330.78
00011696 E03712 ALARCON, CLAUDIA 09/08/2022 $3,574.94
00011697 E05029 ALARID, DAVID M 09/08/2022 $1,885.69
00011698 E03616 ALCARAZ, MARIA A 09/08/2022 $2,558.37
00011699 E00121 ALLISON, WILLIAM 09/08/2022 $5,462.71
E04873 ALVARADO, MADELINE M 09/08/2022 $1,812.95
00011701 E04080 ALVAREZ BROWN, RICHARD A 09/08/2022 $3,494.74 00011702 E05028 AMAYA, JOSE J 09/08/2022 $1,886.90
00011703 E03011 ANDERSON, BOBBY B 09/08/2022 $3,536.02
00011704 E05040 ARCHULETA, ANDREW M 09/08/2022 $1,551.38 E01234 ARELLANO, PEDRO R 09/08/2022 $4,228.43
00011706 E04875 ARROYO, SANDRA M 09/08/2022 $2,051.45
00011707 E04497 ASHBAUGH, TIMOTHY R 09/08/2022 $2,861.59 00011708 E03397 ASHBY, PAUL W 09/08/2022 $4,364.83
00011709 E04719 ATWOOD, MARIA S 09/08/2022 $2,089.68
E04613 AVALOS JR, FRANCISCO 09/08/2022 $3,070.35
00011711 E04550 BAEK, SHARON S 09/08/2022 $2,297.14
00011712 E05062 BAEZ, JASMIN 09/08/2022 $503.64
00011713 E04209 BAINTO, JUDY A 09/08/2022 $564.19
00011714 E04778 BAKER, COLLIN E 09/08/2022 $2,686.46
E03005 BANKSON, JOHN F 09/08/2022 $4,026.96
00011716 E04645 BARRAZA, RENE 09/08/2022 $3,391.51
00011717 E05041 BARRIOS-ROA, JAYDE D. 09/08/2022 $1,791.77 00011718 E04432 BEHZAD, JOSHUA K 09/08/2022 $2,456.17
00011719 E04951 BELLO, ANGELICA 09/08/2022 $1,890.01
E03006 BELTHIUS, LISA A 09/08/2022 $394.70
00011721 E04976 BELTHIUS, TYLER E 09/08/2022 $497.42
00011722 E04753 BERENGER, BEAU A 09/08/2022 $4,681.74
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 8
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011723 E03296 BERESFORD, EVAN S 09/08/2022 $4,189.11
00011724 E01604 BERLETH, RYAN S 09/08/2022 $2,690.26
00011725 E03443 BLUM, JAMES A 09/08/2022 $4,154.66
00011726 E04149 BOGUE, SUMMER A 09/08/2022 $2,257.96
00011727 E03363 BOWEN, GENA M 09/08/2022 $2,118.13
00011728 E04767 BOWMAN, TROY F 09/08/2022 $2,428.30
00011729 E04963 BOYENS III, ROBERT 09/08/2022 $2,966.74 00011730 E00946 BRAME, KAREN D 09/08/2022 $2,205.63
00011731 E04803 BRANTNER, BRITTANEE N 09/08/2022 $1,765.62 00011732 E03380 BROWN, JEFFREY A 09/08/2022 $5,244.16
00011733 E03968 BRUNICK, CARISSA L 09/08/2022 $1,782.17 00011734 E02031 BURILLO, RICHARD O 09/08/2022 $5,331.48 00011735 E03972 BUSTILLOS, RYAN V 09/08/2022 $7,918.86
00011736 E03964 CAMARA, DANIEL A 09/08/2022 $2,818.40
00011737 E04074 CAMPOS, JESENIA 09/08/2022 $2,225.21
00011738 E03739 CAPPS, THOMAS A 09/08/2022 $3,566.60
00011739 E05002 CARBALLO, MILTON A 09/08/2022 $2,343.11 00011740 E02372 CENTENO, JUAN C 09/08/2022 $4,390.78
00011741 E03607 CHANG, DAVID Y H 09/08/2022 $3,401.01
00011742 E04867 CHAPPELL, SHYLER R.D. 09/08/2022 $2,193.36 00011743 E03481 CHAURAN HAIRGROVE, TAMMY L 09/08/2022 $2,470.18 00011744 E04498 CHEATHAM, JEROME L 09/08/2022 $2,953.85 00011745 E01541 CHO, HAN J 09/08/2022 $5,669.85
00011746 E03423 CHOWDHURY, JACINTA F 09/08/2022 $1,838.68 00011747 E04414 CHUNG, RANDY G 09/08/2022 $0.00
00011748 E00003 CIBOSKY, COURTNEY P 09/08/2022 $3,361.02 00011749 E04539 CLASBY JR, BRIAN M 09/08/2022 $0.00
00011750 E04062 COOPMAN, AARON J 09/08/2022 $3,029.80
00011751 E04872 CORNETT, KRISTINA L 09/08/2022 $1,641.13 00011752 E04832 CORTEZ JR, DARRYL B 09/08/2022 $3,727.21 00011753 E04666 CORTEZ, JULIO C 09/08/2022 $3,057.81
00011754 E01875 COUGHRAN, ADAM B 09/08/2022 $0.00
00011755 E01796 COULTER, GARY L 09/08/2022 $2,962.38
00011756 E04555 CRUZ, REYNA 09/08/2022 $2,124.23
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 9
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011757 E01364 DALTON, BRIAN D 09/08/2022 $3,918.33
00011758 E04874 DANG, JOHN 09/08/2022 $830.26
00011759 E00126 DANIELEY III, CHARLIE 09/08/2022 $3,162.93 00011760 E01951 DANIELSON, PAUL E 09/08/2022 $2,002.30
00011761 E01968 DARE, THOMAS R 09/08/2022 $9,465.57
00011762 E04503 DAVILA, ISAAC 09/08/2022 $2,915.35
00011763 E04431 DE ALMEIDA LOPES, NICHOLAS A 09/08/2022 $3,503.78 00011764 E04731 DE PADUA, TANNER C 09/08/2022 $2,120.87 00011765 E03691 DELGADO JR, JUAN L 09/08/2022 $4,273.42 00011766 E03395 DIX, JENNIFER A 09/08/2022 $3,235.56
00011767 E02313 DOSCHER, RONALD A 09/08/2022 $3,307.49
00011768 E04586 DOVEAS, CHRISTOPHER C 09/08/2022 $678.02 00011769 E04281 DRISCOLL, RUSSELL B 09/08/2022 $2,151.90 00011770 E04844 DUARTE, TAYLOR M 09/08/2022 $3,581.20
00011771 E04720 DUDLEY, BROC D 09/08/2022 $2,475.90
00011772 E03625 EARLE, CHRISTOPHER M 09/08/2022 $3,370.21 00011773 E03740 EL FARRA, AMIR A 09/08/2022 $4,768.60
00011774 E03927 ELHAMI, MICHAEL K 09/08/2022 $5,237.27
00011775 E03933 ELIZONDO, BENJAMIN M 09/08/2022 $3,941.26 00011776 E04016 ELIZONDO, FLOR DE LIS 09/08/2022 $2,364.13 00011777 E01598 ELSOUSOU, HELENA 09/08/2022 $3,055.54
00011778 E02734 ESCALANTE, OTTO J 09/08/2022 $6,011.93
00011779 E04334 ESCOBEDO, JOSHUA N 09/08/2022 $3,432.66 00011780 E02724 ESTLOW, STEPHEN C 09/08/2022 $3,380.61
00011781 E04358 ESTRADA MONSANTO, MICHELLE N 09/08/2022 $3,259.92 00011782 E04748 FAJARDO, JESUS 09/08/2022 $301.39
00011783 E04303 FERREIRA JR, HECTOR 09/08/2022 $2,940.40 00011784 E01663 FERRIN, KORY C 09/08/2022 $3,689.34
00011785 E03976 FIGUEREDO, GEORGE R 09/08/2022 $3,269.71 00011786 E02838 FISCHER, JAMES D 09/08/2022 $635.72
00011787 E04774 FLINN, PATRICIA C 09/08/2022 $3,528.92
00011788 E02887 FOSTER, VICTORIA M 09/08/2022 $1,948.89 00011789 E04033 FRANCISCO, KATHERINE M 09/08/2022 $1,726.45 00011790 E02963 FRANKS, JAMES D 09/08/2022 $4,360.85
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 10
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011791 E04747 FRESENIUS, ROBERT D 09/08/2022 $2,399.58 00011792 E00903 FRUTOS, VERONICA 09/08/2022 $1,705.05
00011793 E04729 GARCIA, JOSEPH A 09/08/2022 $3,091.89
00011794 E03086 GARCIA, PETE 09/08/2022 $3,935.55
00011795 E03659 GARNER, AMANDA B 09/08/2022 $1,083.90
00011796 E02606 GEORGE, DAVID L 09/08/2022 $2,636.96
00011797 E04351 GERDIN, MICHAEL E 09/08/2022 $3,348.98
00011798 E04542 GIFFORD, ROBERT J 09/08/2022 $3,664.03
00011799 E04658 GIRGENTI, BRIAN C 09/08/2022 $3,965.74
00011800 E04401 GLEASON, SEAN M 09/08/2022 $2,750.81
00011801 E04917 GOMEZ, JESUS 09/08/2022 $2,161.70
00011802 E04863 GONZALEZ JR, GONZALO 09/08/2022 $2,591.36 00011803 E05003 HA, DANNY 09/08/2022 $2,727.15
00011804 E04732 HADDEN, TRAVIS J 09/08/2022 $2,470.21
00011805 E04787 HALEY, KYLE N 09/08/2022 $2,351.10
00011806 E03527 HALLER, TROY 09/08/2022 $4,587.64
00011807 E03402 HEINE, STEVEN H 09/08/2022 $3,685.68
00011808 E02469 HERRERA, JOSE D 09/08/2022 $4,032.78
00011809 E04244 HINGCO, PINKY C 09/08/2022 $2,561.83
00011810 E03713 HOLLOWAY, WILLIAM T 09/08/2022 $18,758.17 00011811 E04739 HOWARD, JASON A 09/08/2022 $5,097.18
00011812 E04654 HURLEY, KIRK P 09/08/2022 $2,309.37
00011813 E04089 HUTCHINS, DONALD J 09/08/2022 $3,767.50 00011814 E03815 HUYNH, AI KELLY 09/08/2022 $2,270.31
00011815 E03559 HUYNH, THI A 09/08/2022 $3,034.05
00011816 E04915 ITURRALDE, JENNIFER L 09/08/2022 $1,056.17 00011817 E04583 JENSEN, MICHAEL J 09/08/2022 $4,537.30
00011818 E02935 JENSEN, NICKOLAS K 09/08/2022 $3,895.99 00011819 E04587 JIMENEZ JR, EFRAIN A 09/08/2022 $3,145.48 00011820 E04781 JIMENEZ TAVAREZ, SERGIO J 09/08/2022 $2,090.08 00011821 E04655 JOHNSON, CODY M 09/08/2022 $2,932.34
00011822 E03368 JOHNSON, JASON L 09/08/2022 $4,452.00
00011823 E03831 JORDAN, GERALD F 09/08/2022 $3,113.85
00011824 E04444 JULIENNE, PATRICK R 09/08/2022 $3,007.33 Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
00011825
00011830
00011835
00011840
00011845
00011850
00011855
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 11
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
E04559 KELLEY, KRISTOFER D 09/08/2022 $5,140.07
00011826 E04353 KEUILIAN, SHELBY 09/08/2022 $2,148.76
00011827 E04663 KIM, CHAD B 09/08/2022 $2,462.71
00011828 E04641 KIM, EDWARD K 09/08/2022 $1,069.23
00011829 E04538 KIMBERLY, ALLYSON L 09/08/2022 $1,839.17 E03932 KIVLER, ROBERT J 09/08/2022 $3,461.41
00011831 E03389 KOLANO, JOSEPH L 09/08/2022 $3,312.46
00011832 E03294 KOVACS, LEA K 09/08/2022 $3,249.35
00011833 E05000 KOVACS, TIMOTHY M 09/08/2022 $2,694.44
00011834 E04669 KOVACS, TIMOTHY P 09/08/2022 $3,699.72
E03484 KUNKEL, PETER M 09/08/2022 $3,677.17
00011836 E04804 LADD, LAUREN M 09/08/2022 $2,186.34
00011837 E04857 LANG, MICHAEL J 09/08/2022 $4,037.64
00011838 E03511 LAZENBY, NICHOLAS A 09/08/2022 $3,212.85 00011839 E04877 LE, BAO TINH THI 09/08/2022 $1,954.25
E04021 LEE, RAPHAEL M 09/08/2022 $3,177.76
00011841 E04970 LEIVA, EDUARDO C 09/08/2022 $5,242.40
00011842 E03488 LEYVA, ERICK 09/08/2022 $4,261.15
00011843 E04541 LINK, DEREK M 09/08/2022 $4,266.31
00011844 E00030 LOERA JR, RAFAEL 09/08/2022 $4,418.00
E05033 LOFFLER, CHARLES H 09/08/2022 $5,430.58
00011846 E02645 LOPEZ, DAVID 09/08/2022 $3,567.52
00011847 E05066 LORD, MARK A 09/08/2022 $4,336.58
00011848 E04581 LOWEN, BRADLEY A 09/08/2022 $3,193.50
00011849 E04761 LUCATERO, JESSE A 09/08/2022 $2,522.60
E00027 LUKAS, STEVEN W 09/08/2022 $2,220.23
00011851 E04048 LUX, ROBERT D 09/08/2022 $2,613.85
00011852 E03663 LUX, RYAN M 09/08/2022 $5,740.84
00011853 E04772 LY, LINDALINH THU 09/08/2022 $1,555.85
00011854 E04661 MACHUCA, ROBERTO 09/08/2022 $2,888.69
E03752 MACY, TAYLOR A 09/08/2022 $3,267.75
00011856 E04532 MANIACI, GIANLUCA F 09/08/2022 $3,500.65 00011857 E04435 MARCHAND, MATTHEW P 09/08/2022 $3,975.00 00011858 E01359 MARTINEZ JR, MARIO 09/08/2022 $4,662.57 Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
00011860
00011865
00011870
00011875
00011880
00011885
00011890
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 12
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011859 E04974 MARTINEZ, JUANITA PATRICIA 09/08/2022 $2,737.00 E02792 MATA, RAQUEL D 09/08/2022 $1,085.92
00011861 E04656 MAZON, JORGE L 09/08/2022 $2,964.82
00011862 E02796 MCFARLANE, MARIA C 09/08/2022 $2,164.40 00011863 E06761 MEEKS, REBECCA S 09/08/2022 $3,163.45
00011864 E03826 MEERS, BRYAN J 09/08/2022 $3,599.57
E02655 MENDOZA CAMPOS, MELISSA 09/08/2022 $2,507.80
00011866 E04402 MERRILL, KENNETH E 09/08/2022 $624.29
00011867 E03965 MIHALIK, DANNY J 09/08/2022 $15,042.90
00011868 E04840 MONTOYA, DAWN M 09/08/2022 $1,737.98
00011869 E04865 MORIN, LINDA M 09/08/2022 $3,853.53
E04352 MORSE, JEREMY N 09/08/2022 $5,145.96
00011871 E01940 MORTON, NATHAN D 09/08/2022 $3,621.55
00011872 E04454 MOSER, MICHAEL A 09/08/2022 $2,221.97
00011873 E03929 MURILLO JR, RAUL 09/08/2022 $5,035.37
00011874 E04626 MURO, JASON M 09/08/2022 $5,139.14
E04577 MUSCHETTO, PATRICK J 09/08/2022 $2,894.53
00011876 E03422 NADOLSKI, THOMAS R 09/08/2022 $2,256.23 00011877 E04111 NEELY, JACOB J 09/08/2022 $2,084.01
00011878 E04436 NGUYEN, JEFFREY C 09/08/2022 $4,100.56
00011879 E02813 NGUYEN, TRINA T 09/08/2022 $1,965.35
E04540 NIKOLIC, ADAM C 09/08/2022 $6,032.47
00011881 E05054 NUNEZ, BREANNE S 09/08/2022 $1,648.14
00011882 E03350 OLIVO, JOSHUA T 09/08/2022 $4,166.36
00011883 E04035 ORTIZ, STEVEN TRUJILLO 09/08/2022 $3,013.70 00011884 E03427 PANELLA, JOSEPH N 09/08/2022 $2,483.12
E04910 PAQUA, BRANDON J 09/08/2022 $2,238.54
00011886 E01948 PARK, BRANDY J 09/08/2022 $2,869.57
00011887 E02995 PAYAN, CRISTINA V 09/08/2022 $2,542.89
00011888 E00824 PAYAN, LUIS A 09/08/2022 $4,688.60
00011889 E04843 PEREZ, EMMANUEL 09/08/2022 $2,531.23
E00145 PERKINS, JASON S 09/08/2022 $5,353.03
00011891 E04429 PHAM, PHILLIP H 09/08/2022 $3,803.49
00011892 E06938 PLUARD, DOUGLAS A 09/08/2022 $4,671.92
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 13
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011893 E03299 POLOPEK, COREY T 09/08/2022 $3,710.53
00011894 E05050 QUANG, DENNIS 09/08/2022 $3,262.75
00011895 E04788 QUIROZ, LUIS A 09/08/2022 $2,260.31
00011896 E03967 RAMIREZ OROZCO, SINDY 09/08/2022 $4,327.48 00011897 E04955 RAMIREZ, KAYLYN C 09/08/2022 $1,965.57
00011898 E03390 RAMIREZ, LUIS F 09/08/2022 $3,970.22
00011899 E05021 RAMIREZ, TERRA M 09/08/2022 $3,375.17
00011900 E05049 RAMOS, DAVID N 09/08/2022 $3,127.58
00011901 E04914 RAMOS, RODOLFO B 09/08/2022 $497.42
00011902 E03217 RANEY, JOHN E 09/08/2022 $4,763.17
00011903 E04941 RASMUSSEN, TRENTON L 09/08/2022 $2,237.13 00011904 E04659 REED, THOMAS S 09/08/2022 $4,055.28
00011905 E03486 REYES, RON A 09/08/2022 $3,264.96
00011906 E04911 RICHARDS, BRYANT D 09/08/2022 $2,289.22 00011907 E04437 RICHMOND, RYAN R 09/08/2022 $5,480.79
00011908 E04860 ROCHA, RUDY A 09/08/2022 $671.49
00011909 E04738 RODRIGUEZ, DANIEL 09/08/2022 $2,968.28
00011910 E04082 RODRIGUEZ, JENNIFER M 09/08/2022 $2,553.20 00011911 E05001 RODRIGUEZ, RYAN ELIJAH 09/08/2022 $2,232.91 00011912 E04438 ROGERS, CHRISTIN E 09/08/2022 $3,410.76 00011913 E04385 ROJAS, ASHLEY C 09/08/2022 $2,105.50
00011914 E04507 ROMBOUGH, JENNIFER V 09/08/2022 $1,972.45 00011915 E04552 RUZIECKI, ERIC T 09/08/2022 $3,643.11
00011916 E02845 SALAZAR, SEAN M 09/08/2022 $3,082.79
00011917 E04845 SALGADO JR., ALFREDO 09/08/2022 $2,306.94 00011918 E03297 SAMOFF, TANYA L 09/08/2022 $3,060.55
00011919 E02646 SANTANA, LINO G 09/08/2022 $8,644.16
00011920 E03035 SEYMOUR, SUSAN A I 09/08/2022 $3,759.73 00011921 E04282 SHELGREN, CHRISTOPHER M 09/08/2022 $2,950.49 00011922 E04616 SHIPLEY, AARON T 09/08/2022 $2,439.49
00011923 E02937 SHORROW, NICOLE D 09/08/2022 $3,267.09
00011924 E04864 SILVA, LEVI JOENIEL 09/08/2022 $2,684.43 00011925 E04576 SIMONS, SHAYLEN L 09/08/2022 $3,446.89
00011926 E04934 SLETTVET, HEATHER P 09/08/2022 $2,168.54 Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 14
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011927 E02587 SOSEBEE, DANNY J 09/08/2022 $2,943.27
00011928 E03563 SPELLMAN, MARSHA D 09/08/2022 $2,741.56 00011929 E04500 STAAL, GAREY D 09/08/2022 $4,018.16
00011930 E03218 STARNES, CHARLES W 09/08/2022 $5,488.58 00011931 E03761 STEPHENSON III, ROBERT M 09/08/2022 $4,746.74 00011932 E04584 STROUD, BRIAN T 09/08/2022 $5,016.40
00011933 E02979 TESSIER, PAUL M 09/08/2022 $3,743.46
00011934 E04449 TRAN, SPENCER T 09/08/2022 $4,323.82
00011935 E02982 VAICARO, VINCENTE J 09/08/2022 $4,392.33 00011936 E03053 VALENCIA, EDGAR 09/08/2022 $3,806.67
00011937 E04667 VAUGHN, CALEB I 09/08/2022 $445.69
00011938 E04977 VAZQUEZ, BRIAN M 09/08/2022 $497.42
00011939 E04434 VELLANOWETH, KIMBRA S 09/08/2022 $2,419.80 00011940 E04903 VIGIL, DANIEL C 09/08/2022 $2,598.29
00011941 E03022 VU, TUONG-VAN NGUYEN 09/08/2022 $2,689.57 00011942 E04730 VU, TYLER D 09/08/2022 $497.42
00011943 E01905 WAINWRIGHT, JONATHAN B 09/08/2022 $4,146.99 00011944 E03220 WARDLE, DENNIS 09/08/2022 $3,697.60
00011945 E03213 WARDLE, SANTA 09/08/2022 $2,411.71
00011946 E04758 WEYKER, CHRYSTAL L 09/08/2022 $1,671.29 00011947 E03930 WHITNEY, CHERYL L 09/08/2022 $1,954.28
00011948 E03305 WIMMER, ROYCE C 09/08/2022 $6,055.86
00011949 E04762 WREN, DANIELLE E 09/08/2022 $3,709.58
00011950 E04763 WRIGHT, SARAH A 09/08/2022 $2,734.00
00011951 E04856 XU, DUO 09/08/2022 $2,785.64
00011952 E03543 YELENSKY, SHANNON M 09/08/2022 $2,267.62 00011953 E04156 YERGLER, JOHN J 09/08/2022 $4,251.03
00011954 E04722 YNIGUEZ, COLE A 09/08/2022 $2,314.10
00011955 E01978 ZMIJA, ADAM D 09/08/2022 $4,507.65
00011956 E04517 AGUIRRE, ALFRED J 09/08/2022 $3,153.08
00011957 E01626 AGUIRRE, ANSELMO 09/08/2022 $2,174.43
00011958 E04451 AGUIRRE, ANTHONY U 09/08/2022 $332.83
00011959 E04631 ANDREI, IOAN 09/08/2022 $1,127.29
00011960 E04678 BABINSKI IV, SYLVESTER A 09/08/2022 $1,929.47 Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 15
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00011961 E04336 BECERRA, RODOLPHO M 09/08/2022 $2,697.64 00011962 E04972 BECERRA-SAMANIEGO JR, GABRIEL 09/08/2022 $2,018.10 00011963 E04770 BELL, DONEISHA L 09/08/2022 $839.80
00011964 E01255 BOS, MICHAEL C 09/08/2022 $2,265.29
00011965 E04650 BUCHLER, RAYMOND A 09/08/2022 $1,623.99 00011966 E01584 CANDELARIA, DANIEL J 09/08/2022 $4,556.01 00011967 E04300 CANO, EDGAR A 09/08/2022 $2,473.00
00011968 E03828 CANTRELL, JEFFREY G 09/08/2022 $2,293.78 00011969 E03811 CARRISOZA, ALBERT J 09/08/2022 $2,524.90 00011970 E00916 CARTER, PHILLIP J 09/08/2022 $3,434.91
00011971 E04869 CHAVEZ, DAMIAN JESUS 09/08/2022 $721.53 00011972 E04551 CONTRERAS, GABRIELA R 09/08/2022 $3,005.48 00011973 E03518 COTTON, JULIE T 09/08/2022 $1,860.34
00011974 E03807 DE LA ROSA, VINCENT L 09/08/2022 $3,215.78 00011975 E03736 DIBAJ, KAMYAR 09/08/2022 $3,759.52
00011976 E04989 DOCHERTY, PAUL 09/08/2022 $614.11
00011977 E02515 DUVALL, RICK L 09/08/2022 $2,673.57
00011978 E04514 ESPINOZA, ERIC M 09/08/2022 $2,018.34
00011979 E03733 ESPINOZA, JULIA 09/08/2022 $1,317.70
00011980 E05957 FERNANDEZ, ARYANA C 09/08/2022 $528.83
00011981 E03405 FERNANDEZ, CECELIA A 09/08/2022 $1,293.41 00011982 E04997 FLORES, ANTHONY 09/08/2022 $733.54
00011983 E04990 FLORES, MITCHELL C 09/08/2022 $733.54
00011984 E00558 FREGOSO, ALICE K 09/08/2022 $4,143.08
00011985 E05037 GAINES, JEFFREY S 09/08/2022 $740.66
00011986 E05010 GALVAN, EDGAR 09/08/2022 $919.39
00011987 E04754 GARCIA, ALICIA R 09/08/2022 $1,681.08
00011988 E04677 GIROUARD, CASEY G 09/08/2022 $1,744.87
00011989 E04629 GOMEZ, DIANA 09/08/2022 $1,012.88
00011990 E03341 GONZALEZ, JORGE 09/08/2022 $1,248.71
00011991 E04473 GOUNTOUMA, SOUMELIA K 09/08/2022 $2,485.54 00011992 E03400 GREENE, MICHAEL R 09/08/2022 $2,169.61
00011993 E03685 GUZMAN, JESSE 09/08/2022 $3,168.45
00011994 E04299 HANSEN, AARON R 09/08/2022 $1,961.07
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
00011995
00012000
00012005
00012010
00012015
00012020
00012025
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 16
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
E03523 HARO, GLORIA A 09/08/2022 $1,261.82
00011996 E03759 HERNANDEZ, HERMILO 09/08/2022 $2,762.09 00011997 E04622 HOFER, ALICIA M 09/08/2022 $2,097.90
00011998 E02874 HOLMON III, ALBERT J 09/08/2022 $3,902.15 00011999 E04347 HSIEH, NICOLAS C 09/08/2022 $3,765.41
E03588 HUYNH, HUY HOA 09/08/2022 $2,433.50
00012001 E04831 ILFELD, MATTHEW D 09/08/2022 $1,759.25
00012002 E01907 JACOT, ROSEMARIE 09/08/2022 $2,348.60
00012003 E04296 JOHNSON, ERIC W 09/08/2022 $2,321.21
00012004 E04979 JURADO, MICHAEL 09/08/2022 $1,278.69
E04470 KAYLOR, BRENT 09/08/2022 $2,498.97
00012006 E04728 KHALIL, MARK M 09/08/2022 $2,176.34
00012007 E04382 KWIATKOWSKI, BRYAN D 09/08/2022 $1,982.80 00012008 E02852 LADNEY, MARK W 09/08/2022 $3,783.39
00012009 E04769 LAMAS, LEONEL A 09/08/2022 $1,098.50
E03813 LEWIS, SHAN L 09/08/2022 $2,762.41
00012011 E03301 LEYVA, RAUL 09/08/2022 $3,860.10
00012012 E05006 MARQUEZ, STEVEN ADAM 09/08/2022 $1,356.84 00012013 E05364 MARU, NAVIN B 09/08/2022 $3,639.51
00012014 E04665 MEJIA, DIEGO A 09/08/2022 $1,986.90
E03493 MENDEZ, RIGOBERTO 09/08/2022 $4,051.53
00012016 E04998 MENDOZA, LAURA 09/08/2022 $965.79
00012017 E04724 MOORE, DOUGLAS A 09/08/2022 $2,364.20
00012018 E04827 MORELAND, ANDREW J 09/08/2022 $1,623.16 00012019 E04222 MOSS, DANIEL C 09/08/2022 $1,908.78
E01243 MURRAY JR, WILLIAM E 09/08/2022 $7,510.46
00012021 E04634 NAVARRO, JUAN C 09/08/2022 $3,207.21
00012022 E04969 ORNELLAS, MICHAEL 09/08/2022 $1,202.47
00012023 E03378 ORTIZ, STEVEN T 09/08/2022 $2,573.63
00012024 E04999 ORTUNO, ANIBAL 09/08/2022 $1,962.01
E03754 PINKSTON, RICHARD L 09/08/2022 $2,690.92
00012026 E04567 POWELL, AUSTIN H 09/08/2022 $2,356.85
00012027 E03799 QUIROZ, ROLANDO 09/08/2022 $2,593.45
00012028 E05031 RAMIREZ, AACIN 09/08/2022 $1,969.16
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
00012030
00012035
00012040
00012045
00012050
00012055
00012060
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 17
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00012029 E04572 REED, MELVIN P 09/08/2022 $1,802.55
E02058 REYES, DELFRADO C 09/08/2022 $1,309.65
00012031 E04295 ROBLES, RAFAEL 09/08/2022 $1,949.72
00012032 E04563 RODRIGUEZ, ADRIANNA M 09/08/2022 $1,241.63 00012033 E05004 RUELAS, SERGIO 09/08/2022 $771.44
00012034 E04289 SALDIVAR, RICARDO 09/08/2022 $1,567.95
E04505 SANTOS, MICHAEL F 09/08/2022 $3,503.95
00012036 E09991 SHIRLEY, ANNE 09/08/2022 $0.00
00012037 E04215 SMOUSE, TREVOR G 09/08/2022 $2,887.12
00012038 E04836 SOTO, WILLIAM A 09/08/2022 $1,816.55
00012039 E03091 SUDDUTH, STEPHEN D 09/08/2022 $2,812.36 E01625 TAPIA, LUIS A 09/08/2022 $2,779.89
00012041 E04756 TARIN, ALEXIS P 09/08/2022 $2,214.91
00012042 E03239 TAUANU U, STEVE J 09/08/2022 $2,114.30
00012043 E04773 THURMAN JR, EDWIN O 09/08/2022 $1,071.76 00012044 E08679 THURMAN, RODERICK 09/08/2022 $1,860.32
E03480 TRIMBLE, EMILY H 09/08/2022 $2,020.79
00012046 E04825 TRUJILLO, JOSEPH E 09/08/2022 $1,499.09 00012047 E02482 UPHUS, MARK P 09/08/2022 $5,086.57
00012048 E03681 VASQUEZ, JOSE A 09/08/2022 $2,842.62
00012049 E02942 VERA, EVARISTO 09/08/2022 $2,066.44
E03727 VERGARA NEAL, ANA G 09/08/2022 $3,023.32
00012051 E03670 VITALI, SUSAN 09/08/2022 $634.29
00012052 E01580 VU, DAI C 09/08/2022 $4,590.31
00012053 E04362 VU, KHANG L 09/08/2022 $3,292.67
00012054 E01619 WHITE, WILLIAM J 09/08/2022 $2,374.17
E03414 WILLIAMS, HILLARD J 09/08/2022 $211.06
00012056 E04006 WILLIAMS, RICHARD L 09/08/2022 $3,320.72 00012057 E05023 YNIGUEZ, KARISSA N 09/08/2022 $2,378.75 00012058 E03436 ZIEGLER, RICK S 09/08/2022 $976.70
00012059 E03917 ALLEN, CHRISTOPHER L 09/08/2022 $118.44 E04163 AMBRIZ GARCIA, EDWARD D 09/08/2022 $4,519.78
00012061 E04784 BANUELOS, ALEJANDRO 09/08/2022 $5,504.36 00012062 E04063 BERGER, JAN 09/08/2022 $2,546.34
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 18
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00012063 E00651 BERMUDEZ, ROBERT P 09/08/2022 $3,439.48 00012064 E03495 BLAS, VICTOR T 09/08/2022 $2,407.95
00012065 E00070 CANNON, TIM P 09/08/2022 $5,111.63
00012066 E04365 DAN, CARINA M 09/08/2022 $2,459.90
00012067 E04440 DAVIS, RYAN H 09/08/2022 $2,014.54
00012068 E03051 DIEMERT, RONALD W 09/08/2022 $2,539.40
00012069 E02718 ESCOBAR, CHRIS N 09/08/2022 $2,859.91
00012070 E03688 GLENN, JEREMY J 09/08/2022 $1,513.53
00012071 E01618 GOMEZ, JOSE 09/08/2022 $2,676.75
00012072 E02701 GONZALEZ, ALEJANDRO 09/08/2022 $5,011.17 00012073 E03763 GRIFFIN, LARRY 09/08/2022 $2,654.14
00012074 E04828 GUERRERO, MICHAEL V 09/08/2022 $1,876.63 00012075 E04018 HAENDIGES, ROBERT A 09/08/2022 $3,536.18 00012076 E03575 HART, RYAN S 09/08/2022 $3,043.77
00012077 E03701 HAYES, WALTER B 09/08/2022 $3,540.05
00012078 E03399 HOWENSTEIN, FRANK D 09/08/2022 $2,582.32 00012079 E03406 HUY, EDWARD A 09/08/2022 $2,627.82
00012080 E04782 JIN, LIYAN 09/08/2022 $2,484.59
00012081 E03534 KIM, SAMUEL K 09/08/2022 $3,844.68
00012082 E03254 KIRZHNER, ALLEN G 09/08/2022 $2,718.92
00012083 E03988 LI, REBECCA PIK KWAN 09/08/2022 $3,905.96 00012084 E02063 MA AE, DAVID 09/08/2022 $2,116.02
00012085 E03249 MANSON, RAQUEL K 09/08/2022 $2,828.18
00012086 E04837 MARTINEZ, ALFREDO 09/08/2022 $2,131.19
00012087 E02124 MEISLAHN, TYLER 09/08/2022 $2,069.57
00012088 E04403 MONTGOMERY, JESSE K 09/08/2022 $2,501.01 00012089 E04707 MORRIS, JUSTIN M 09/08/2022 $1,857.10
00012090 E03590 MOYA JR, STEVEN J 09/08/2022 $2,448.33
00012091 E03519 MURAD, BASIL G 09/08/2022 $2,504.95
00012092 E03144 NATLAND, KIRK L 09/08/2022 $1,524.53
00012093 E04291 NGUYEN, DUC TRUNG 09/08/2022 $2,495.67
00012094 E04904 NGUYEN, LISA 09/08/2022 $563.26
00012095 E03221 NICOLAE, CORNELIU 09/08/2022 $3,227.11
00012096 E04210 NUNES, BRANDON S 09/08/2022 $1,768.90
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 19
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00012097 E03923 ORNELAS, ANDREW I 09/08/2022 $2,656.97
00012098 E03582 ORTEGA, DAVID A 09/08/2022 $2,516.26
00012099 E03578 PASILLAS, CELESTINO J 09/08/2022 $3,059.87 00012100 E03170 PEARSON, WILLIAM F 09/08/2022 $2,498.33 00012101 E04950 PHAM ADA, DYLLAN TUAN ANH 09/08/2022 $441.55 00012102 E04805 POLIDORI, JESSICA J 09/08/2022 $3,479.50 00012103 E02500 PORRAS, STEPHEN 09/08/2022 $3,806.91
00012104 E07590 RUITENSCHILD, LES A 09/08/2022 $3,537.97 00012105 E03926 RUIZ, JONATHAN 09/08/2022 $2,612.21
00012106 E07690 SANTOS, ALEXIS 09/08/2022 $2,010.74
00012107 E07692 SARMIENTO, ADRIAN M 09/08/2022 $3,070.83 00012108 E04956 SON, TOMMY T 09/08/2022 $2,296.30
00012109 E04301 TALAMANTES JR, ALBERT 09/08/2022 $3,433.27 00012110 E04121 TRAN, MINH K 09/08/2022 $2,423.98
00012111 E00151 VALENZUELA JR, ALEJANDRO 09/08/2022 $0.00 00012112 E08881 VALENZUELA, ALEJANDRO N 09/08/2022 $8,073.55 00012113 E01882 VIRAMONTES, JESSE 09/08/2022 $1,944.40
00012114 E04195 WOLLAND, RONALD J 09/08/2022 $1,713.01
00012115 E09940 YERGENSEN, VICTOR K 09/08/2022 $2,713.11 00012116 E09954 ZAVALA, JOHN 09/08/2022 $2,595.44
Issued: 631 $1,636,775.61
EF - Payroll EFT Total: 631 $1,636,775.61
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
FEFM001 All Checks Register
Check Dates Sep 8, 2022
Bank(s): EF - Payroll EFT, PY - Payroll
Report Generated on Sep 6, 2022 3:21:10 PM Page 20
PY - Payroll
Check Vendor # Vendor Name Issue Date Check Amount
00185143 E04994 GREENUP, BREANNA C 09/08/2022 $819.68
00185144 E05035 NGUYEN, TAN V 09/08/2022 $49.27
00185145 E00977 BELAIR, DIANE 09/08/2022 $2,523.92
00185146 E05043 BARRAGAN, AUDREY A 09/08/2022 $414.35
00185147 E05013 DINH, TIFFANY 09/08/2022 $13.84
00185148 E05015 FALETOI, TERRY U 09/08/2022 $326.75
00185149 E04808 HUANG, HALLIE S 09/08/2022 $117.64
00185150 E04824 PACHECO, LAURA M 09/08/2022 $83.04
00185151 E05042 TO, THOMAS A 09/08/2022 $521.11
00185152 E05045 VIRAMONTES, KATE E 09/08/2022 $138.40
00185153 E05012 HODNETT, RYAN P 09/08/2022 $626.21
00185154 E03529 ROCHA, MICHAEL F 09/08/2022 $2,264.57
00185155 E03145 DE LA ROSA, FRANK X 09/08/2022 $2,905.72 00185156 E03446 JIMENEZ, VIDAL 09/08/2022 $2,638.27
Issued: 14 $13,442.77
PY - Payroll Total: 14 $13,442.77
Issued: 645 $1,650,218.38
Summary Total: 645 $1,650,218.38
Server Name: cognos.ggcity.org User Name: keisukef
Agenda Item - 3.a.
City of Garden Grove
INTER-DEPARTMEN T MEMORANDU M
To: Scott C. Stiles From: Lisa L. Kim
Dept.:
Subject:
City Manager/Executive Director
Approval of resolution approving
dispositio n agreement for real
property located at 12291
Thackery Drive, Garden Grove,
California . (J oin t Action Item
with the Housing Authority)
Dept.:
Date:
Community & Economic
D
evelopment
9/13/2022
OBJECTIV E
For the City Council in a joint action with the Housing Authority to consider approving that certain agreement with escrow instructions for dispositio n of real property (“Dispositio n Agreement”) between the City and Housing Authority; authorizing the Executive Director/Cit y Manager to carry out the Dispositio n Agreement; and making certain other findings in connection therewith regarding 12291 Thackery Drive.
BACKGROUN D
The real property that is located at 12291 Thackery Drive, Garden Grove, Californi a 92840, Assessor Parcel No. 231-471-22 was purchased by the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development in 2007. The size of the parcel is approximately 7,200 square feet, and is vacant and unimproved. The Property is located in the R-1-7 (Single-Famil y Residential) zone district; however, the underlying land use designation in the City’s General Plan is International West Mixed Use (IW) .
As of February 1, 2012, the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development (“Former Agency”) was dissolved pursuant to State Law and the Housing Authority became the successor to the rights, powers, assets, liabilities , duties and obligation s associated with the housing functions of the Former Agency. Pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 34176(a)(2), the Housing Authority, as housing successor to the Former Agency, prepared a Housing Asset Transfer Schedule (“HAT” ) and submitted the HAT to the State of California , Department of Finance (“DOF” ) for review and approval. On August 30, 2012, the DOF approved the HAT with certain modification s that are unrelated to the subject Property. The approved HAT includes the subject Property.
DISCUSSIO N
The City of Garden Grove and New Age Garden Grove, LLC, (“Developer” ) are parties to that certain Second Amended and Restated Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA ) dated as of April 24, 2018, which agreement was amended by certain amendments that extended the term of the ENA through December 31, 2022. The representatives of the parties to the ENA have been negotiating the terms and conditions of a certain proposed Dispositio n and Development Agreement (“DDA” ) for an economic development hotel project, which DDA will be presented to the City’s City Council at a duly noticed public hearing of even date with the public hearing that is the subject of this Dispositio n Agreement or at a later date. The subject of the DDA affects certain parcels of real property that are described and defined collectivel y in the DDA as the
p p p y y
“
Site.” One parcel that is a part of the Site is the subject Property. Under the Dispositio n Agreement herein, the Housing Authority desires and intends to convey the Property to the City at its fair market value, and the City desires and intends to convey the Property to the Developer.
A Summary Report was prepared pursuant to Californi a Health and Safety Code Sections 33433 and 34312b (Attached). The Summary Report provides:
The proposed dispositio n of the Property by the Housing Authority to the City will be at the appraised value of the Property in the amount of $460,000. The appraisal is attached.
The public purpose for the dispositio n is for economic development reuse by the City pursuant to the DDA .
Under the DDA , the City will sell the larger, full Site, which includes the subject Property, to the Developer for construction and operation of a new first-class hotel development with ancillary uses.
The Former Agency expended and incurred $588,954 in costs related to acquisitio n and ownership of the Property.
The Housing Authority will deposit the proceeds net costs of sale of the Property into the LMIHA F for future development of affordable housing.
In conformance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines , on August 23, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 9768-22 approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitorin g Program, which evaluates and analyses the anticipated physical environmental impacts of the Developer’s hotel project and provides for specified mitigation measures. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitorin g Program is available for review on the City's website at https://ggcity.org/planning/evironmental-documents . A complete copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitorin g Program is on file and can be viewed in the Planning and Buildin g Department of the City located at 11222 Acacia Pkwy, Garden Grove, CA 92840.
FINANCIA L IMPAC T
Minimal impacts are anticipated. The City’s payment will be reimbursed by the Developer through the proposed DDA .
RECOMMENDATIO N
It is recommended that the City Council and Housing Authority:
Adopt the Resolution approving the Dispositio n Agreement between the Housing Authority and City; and,
Authorize the City Manager/Executive Director to execute the Dispositio n Agreement, Grant Deed, pertinent documents needed to effectuate the Dispositio n Agreement and make minor modification s as needed, on behalf of the Housing Authority and City.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Type File NameDate
City Council 9/2/2022 Resolution 9-13-22_Resolution_of_City_Council_Approving_Disposition_of_12291_Thackery_to_City_(2).pd fResolution Housing 9-13-Authority 9/2/2022 Resolution 22_Resolution_of_Housing_Authority_Approving_Disposition_of_12291_Thackery_to_City_(4).pd fResolution
Summary 9/2/2022 Backup 9-13-22_Summary_Report_12291_Thackey_Drive_333433_and_34312_(B).pd fReport Material Disposition 9/2/2022 Agreement 9-13-22_Disposition_Agreement-City_and_Housing_Authority-12291_Thackery_(1).pd fAgreement Appraisal 9/6/2022 Backup GG_Thackery_12291_Appraisal_Report.pd fMaterial Public
Hearing 9/6/2022 Notice 9-13-22_Affidavit__for_HAT_without_costs.pd f Notice
GARDEN GROVE CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE APPROVING
THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY (“DISPOSITION AGREEMENT”) BETWEEN THE CITY AND HOUSING AUTHORITY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO CARRY OUT THE DISPOSITION AGREEMENT; AND MAKING CERTAIN OTHER FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove is a municipal corporation of the State of California (“City”); and
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority is a public body corporate and politic formed and operating under the California Housing Authorities Law, Health and Safety Code Section 34200, et seq. (“HAL”) and serves as the housing successor under the Dissolution Law, Health and Safety Code Section 34170, et seq., in particular Section 34176.1; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority is the fee owner of certain real property located at 12291 Thackery Drive, Garden Grove, California APN: 231- 471-22 (“Property”) as proposed hereunder to be conveyed by the Housing Authority to the City for economic development objectives; and
WHEREAS, prior to February 1, 2012, the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development (“Former Agency”) was a community redevelopment agency duly organized and existing under the California Community Redevelopment Law (HSC Section 33000, et seq.), and was authorized to transact business and exercise the powers of a redevelopment agency pursuant to action of th e Cit y Council (“Cit y Council”); and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill x1 26, chaptered and effective on June 27, 2011, added Parts 1.8 and 1.85 to Division 24 of the HSC that caused the dissolution of all California redevelopment agencies and winding down of the affairs of former agencies, including as such laws were amended by Assembly Bill 1484, chaptered and effective on June 27, 2012 (together, the “Dissolution Law”); and on and as of February 1, 2012 the Former Agency was dissolved under the Dissolution Law; and WHEREAS, on January 17, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 9089-12 by which the City declined to assume the housing assets and responsibility to perform the housing functions performed previously by the Former Agency and designated the Housing Authority to serve and act as the “housing successor” under HSC Section 34176(b); and
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2012, the Garden Grove Housing Authority (“Housing Authority”) by motion and then unanimous vote accepted the rights, powers, assets, liabilities, duties and obligations associated with the housing functions of the Former Agency (at that date still the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development pre dissolution.; and
Garden Grove City Council
Resolution No.
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2012 by Resolution No. 2-12, the Oversight Board to the Successor Agency to the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development determined and affirmed that the Forme r Agency’s housing assets and housing functions were transferred to the Housing Authority, acting as Housing Successor, on and as of February 1, 2012 and affirmed that the Housing Authority, acting as Housing Successor, has all rights, powers, duties and obligations relating to the housing assets and functions of the Former Agency under the Dissolution Law; and WHEREAS, under HSC Section 34176(a)(2), the Housing Authority, as housing successor to the Former Agency, prepared a Housing Asset Transfer Schedule (“HAT”) and submitted the HAT to the State of California, Department of Finance (“DOF”) for review and approval, and then, on August 30, 2012, the DOF approved the HAT with certain modifications that are unrelated to the HA Property; the approved HAT includes the subject HA Property and thereby is a DOF-approved housing asset under the Dissolution Law and asset of the Housing Authority under the HAL; and WHEREAS, therefore, on, as of, and ongoing the Housing Authority by operation of law, in particular under the Dissolution Law Sections 34176 and 34176.1, has been vested with the ownership and control of the housing assets, including without limitation the HA Property (defined in next recital) that is the subject of this Disposition Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Property has been appraised by an independent professional appraiser, which appraisal dated as of July 14, 2022, establishes a fair market value of $460,000; and
WHEREAS, the City and New Age Garden Grove, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”) are parties to tha t certain Second Amended and Restated Exclusive Negotiation Agreement dated as of April 24, 2018, which agreement was amended by certain amendments that extended the term of such agreement; the term of the ENA, as amended, expires on December 31, 2022 (together, as amended “ENA”).
WHEREAS, pursuant to the ENA, representatives of the parties have been negotiating the terms and conditions of a certain proposed Disposition and Development Agreement (“DDA”) for an economic development hotel project, which DDA will be presented to the City’s City Council at a duly noticed public hearing for consideration and discretionary action of even date with the public hearing that is the subject of this Disposition Agreement or at a date after such public hearing. The subject of the DDA affects certain parcels of real property that are described and defined collectively in the DDA as the “Site”. One parcel that is a part of the Site is the subject Property.
WHEREAS, by this Disposition Agreement, the Housing Authority desires and intends to convey the Property to the City at its fair market value, and the City desires and intends to convey the Property to the Developer.
Garden Grove City Council
Resolution No.
WHEREAS, the Exchange with conveyance of the HA Property by the Housing Authority to City is subject to the provisions of HSC Sections 34312.3(b) and 33431; and, in implementation thereof, the City Council and Housing Authority have held a public hearing at a duly noticed special joint meeting and the City Council by this Resolution desires to approve the Disposition Agreement; and WHEREAS, a summary report about the HA Property was prepared and made available to the public along with the Disposition Agreement and were presented to the City Council and Housing Authority in connection with this matter and the joint public hearing; and
WHEREAS, capitalized terms used in this Resolution are as defined in the Disposition Agreement, unless otherwise defined herein; and WHEREAS, the City Council and Housing Authority have duly considered all terms and conditions of the Disposition Agreement and believe that the Exchange in the vital and best interest of the City and Housing Authority and the health, safety and welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable laws and by this Resolution the City Council and Housing Authority desire to approve the Disposition Agreement; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), andthe State of California Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Section 15000 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the hotel project;
WHEREAS, in conformance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, on August 23, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 9768-22 approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, which evaluates and analyses the anticipated physical environmental impacts of the hotel project and provides for specified mitigation measures. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program is available for review on the City's website at https://ggcity.org/planning/evironmental-documents. A complete copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program is on file and can be viewed in the Planning and Building Department of the City located at 11222 Acacia Pkwy, Garden Grove, CA 92840.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE:
Section 1. The City Council finds and determines the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are a substantive part of this Resolution.
Section 2. The City Council approves the Disposition Agreement between the City and Housing Authority with such changes mutually agreed and necessary as are
Garden Grove City Council
Resolution No.
minor and in substantial conformance with the form of the Disposition Agreement that has been submitted herewith. The City Manager, and his authorized designees, and the City Clerk, and her authorized designees, are hereby authorized to execute and attest the Disposition Agreement on behalf of the City. And, in implementation of the Disposition Agreement, the City Manager ( and authorized designees) is authorized to sign the final version of the Disposition Agreement after completion of non-substantive, minor revisions, if any. Copies of the final form of the Disposition Agreement, when duly executed and attested, shall be placed on file in the office of the City Clerk. Further, the City Manager (or authorized designees) is authorized to implement the Disposition Agreement and take all further actions and execute all documents referenced therein and/or necessary and appropriate to carry out such contract including any and all implementing agreements thereto. The City Manager (or authorized designees) is authorized to implement the Disposition Agreement and take all further actions and execute all documents referenced therein and/or necessary and appropriate to carry out such contract including any and all implementing agreements thereto. The City Manager (or authorized designees) is hereby authorized to the extent necessary during the implementation of the Disposition Agreement to make technical or minor changes and interpretations thereto after execution and take other actions, as necessary, to properly implement and carry out the Disposition Agreement, provided any and all such changes and actions thereunder shall not in any manner materially affect the rights and obligations of the City under the Disposition Agreement approved hereby.
Section 3. In addition to the authorization of Sections 2 above, the City Manager (or authorized designees) is hereby authorized, on behalf of the City, to sign all other documents and take other necessary actions appropriate to carry out and implement the Disposition Agreement, including causing the issuance of warrants in implementation thereto, and to administer the City’sobligations, responsibilities and duties to be performed under the Disposition Agreement.
Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
ATTACHMENT TO CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
COPY OF DISPOSITION AGREEMENT
GARDEN GROVE HOUSING AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE GARDEN GROVE HOUSING AUTHORITY APPROVING THAT
CERTAIN AGREEMENT WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY (“DISPOSITION AGREEMENT”) BETWEEN THE CITY AND HOUSING AUTHORITY; AUTHORIZING THE AUTHORITY DIRECTOR TO CARRY OUT THE DISPOSITION AGREEMENT; AND MAKING CERTAIN OTHER FINDINGS IN
CONNECTION THEREWITH
WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove is a municipal corporation of the State of California (“City”); and
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority is a public body corporate and politic formed and operating under the California Housing Authorities Law, Health and Safety Code (“HSC”) Section 34200, et seq. (“HAL”) and serves as the housing successor under the Dissolution Law, Health and Safety Code Section 34170, et seq., in particular Sections 34176 and 34176.1; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority is the fee owner of certain real property located at 12291 Thackery Drive, Garden Grove, California APN: 231-471-22 (“Property”) as proposed hereunder to be conveyed by the Housing Authority to the City for economic development objectives; and
WHEREAS, prior to February 1, 2012, the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development (“Former Agency”) was a community redevelopment agency duly organized and existing under the California Community Redevelopment Law (HSC Section 33000, et seq.), and was authorized to transact business and exercise the powers of a redevelopment agency pursuant to action of th e Cit y Council (“Cit y Council”); and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill x1 26, chaptered and effective on June 27, 2011, added Parts 1.8 and 1.85 to Division 24 of the HSC that caused the dissolution of all California redevelopment agencies and winding down of the affairs of former agencies, including as such laws were amended by Assembly Bill 1484, chaptered and effective on June 27, 2012 (together, the “Dissolution Law”); and on and as of February 1, 2012 the Former Agency was dissolved under the Dissolution Law; and WHEREAS, on January 17, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 9089-12 by which the City declined to assume the housing assets and responsibility to perform the housing functions performed previously by the Former Agency and designated the Housing Authority to serve and act as the “housing successor” under HSC Section 34176(b); and
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2012, the Housing Authority by motion and then unanimous vote accepted the rights, powers, assets, liabilities, duties and obligations
Garden Grove Housing Authority
Resolution No.
associated with the housing functions of the Former Agency (at that date still the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development pre dissolution; and WHEREAS, on March 28, 2012 by Resolution No. 2-12, the Oversight Board to the Successor Agency to the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development determined and affirmed that the Forme r Agency’s housing assets and housing functions were transferred to the Garden Grove Housing Authority, acting as Housing Successor, on and as of February 1, 2012 and affirmed that the Housing Authority, acting as Housing Successor, has all rights, powers, duties and obligations relating to the housing assets and functions of the Former Agency under the Dissolution Law; and
WHEREAS, under HSC Section 34176(a)(2), the Housing Authority, as housing successor to the Former Agency, prepared a Housing Asset Transfer Schedule (“HAT”) and submitted the HAT to the State of California, Department of Finance (“DOF”) for review and approval, and then, on August 30, 2012, the DOF approved the HAT with certain modifications that are unrelated to the HA Property; the approved HAT includes the subject HA Property and thereby is a DOF-approved housing asset under the Dissolution Law and asset of the Housing Authority under the HAL; and WHEREAS, therefore, on, as of, and ongoing the Housing Authority by operation of law, in particular under the Dissolution Law Sections 34176 and 34176.1, has been vested with the ownership and control of the housing assets, including without limitation the HA Property (defined in next recital) that is the subject of this Disposition Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Property has been appraised by an independent professional appraiser, which appraisal dated as of July 14, 2022, establishes a fair market value of $460,000; and
WHEREAS, the City and New Age Garden Grove, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”) are parties to tha t certain Second Amended and Restated Exclusive Negotiation Agreement dated as of April 24, 2018, which agreement was amended by certain amendments that extended the term of such agreement; the term of the ENA, as amended, expires on December 31, 2022 (together, as amended “ENA”).
WHEREAS, pursuant to the ENA, representatives of the parties have been negotiating the terms and conditions of a certain proposed Disposition and Development Agreement (“DDA”) for an economic development hotel project, which DDA will be presented to the City’s City Council at a duly noticed public hearing for consideration and discretionary action of even date with the public hearing that is the subject of this Disposition Agreement or at a date after such public hearing. The subject of the DDA affects certain parcels of real property that are described and defined collectively in the DDA as the “Site”. One parcel that is a part of the Site is the subject Property.
Garden Grove Housing Authority
Resolution No.
WHEREAS, by this Disposition Agreement, the Housing Authority desires and intends to convey the Property to the City at its fair market value, and the City desires and intends to convey the Property to the Developer.
WHEREAS, the conveyance of the Property by the Housing Authority to City is subject to the provisions of HSC Sections 34312.3(b) and 33431; and, in implementation thereof, the City Council and Housing Authority have held a public hearing at a duly noticed special joint meeting and the Housing Authority by this Resolution desires to approve the Disposition Agreement; and WHEREAS, a summary report about the Property was prepared and made available to the public along with the Disposition Agreement and were presented to the City Council and Housing Authority in connection with this matter and the joint public hearing; and
WHEREAS, capitalized terms used in this Resolution are as defined in the Disposition Agreement, unless otherwise defined herein; and WHEREAS, the City Council and Housing Authority have duly considered all terms and conditions of the Disposition Agreement and believe that the disposition of the Property in the vital and best interest of the City and Housing Authority and the health, safety and welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable laws and by this Resolution the City Council and Housing Authority desire to approve the Disposition Agreement; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), andthe State of California Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Section 15000 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the hotel project;
WHEREAS, in conformance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, on August 23, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 9768-22 approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, which evaluates and analyses the anticipated physical environmental impacts of the hotel project and provides for specified mitigation measures. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program is available for review on the City's website at https://ggcity.org/planning/evironmental-documents. A complete copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program is on file and can be viewed in the Planning and Building Department of the City located at 11222 Acacia Pkwy, Garden Grove, CA 92840.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GARDEN GROVE HOUSING AUTHORITY:
Garden Grove Housing Authority
Resolution No.
Section 1. The Housing Authority Board finds and determines the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are a substantive part of this Resolution.
Section 2. The Housing Authority Board approves the Disposition Agreement between the City and Housing Authority with such changes mutually agreed and necessary as are minor and in substantial conformance with the form of the Disposition Agreement that has been submitted herewith. The Authorit y Executive Director, and his authorized designees, and the Secretary, and her authorized designees, are hereby authorized to execute and attest the Disposition Agreement on behalf of the Housing Authority. And, in implementation of the Disposition Agreement, the Director ( and authorized designees) is authorized to sign the final version of the Disposition Agreement after completion of non-substantive, minor revisions, if any. Copies of the final form of the Disposition Agreement, when duly executed and attested, shall be placed on file in the office of the Secretary. Further, the Director (or authorized designees) is authorized to implement the Disposition Agreement and take all further actions and execute all documents referenced therein and/or necessary and appropriate to carry out such contract including any and all implementing agreements thereto. The Director (or authorized designees) is hereby authorized to the extent necessary during the implementation of the Disposition Agreement to make technical or minor changes and interpretations thereto after execution and take other actions, as necessary, to properly implement and carry out the Disposition Agreement, provided any and all such changes and actions thereunder shall not in any manner materially affect the rights and obligations of the Housing Authority under the Disposition Agreement approved hereby.
Section 3. In addition to the authorization of Sections 2 above, the Director (or authorized designees) is hereby authorized, on behalf of the Housing Authority, to sign all other documents necessary, and take other necessary actions appropriate to carry out and implement the Disposition Agreement, including causing the issuance of warrants in implementation thereto, and to administer the Housing Authority’s obligations, responsibilities and duties to be performed under the Disposition Agreement.
Section 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Joint Resolution.
ATTACHMENT TO HOUSING AUTHORITY RESOLUTION
COPY OF DISPOSITION AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
FOR DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY
This AGREEMENT WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY (“Disposition Agreement”) is entered into as of September 13, 2022 by and between the City of Garden Grove , a California municipal corporation (“City”) and the Garden Grove Housing Authority, a public body, corporate and politic (“Housing Authority”). Each of the City and Housing Authority is a “Party” and together the “Parties”.
R E C I T A L S
A. The Housing Authority is a public body corporate and politic formed and operating under the California Housing Authorities Law, Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34200, et seq. (“HAL”).
B. The City is a California municipal corporation and general law city.
C. The Housing Authority is the fee owner of certain real property located at 12291 Thackery Drive, Garden Grove, California APN: 231-471-22 (“Property”) as proposed hereunder to be conveyed by the Housing Authority to the City for economic development objectives.
D. The Property has been appraised by an independent professional appraiser, which appraisal dated as of July 14, 2022, establishes a fair market value of $460,000.
E. The City and New Age Garden Grove, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”) are parties to tha t certain Second Amende d and Restated Exclusiv e Negotiation Agreement dated as of April 24, 2018, which agreement was amended by certain amendments that extended the term of such agreement; the term of the ENA, as amended, expires on December 31, 2022 (together, as amended “ENA”).
F. Pursuant to the ENA, representatives of the parties have been negotiating the terms and conditions of a certain proposed Disposition and Development Agreement (“DDA”) for an economic development hotel project, which DDA will be presented to the City’s City Council at a duly noticed public hearing for consideration and discretionary action of even date with the public hearing that is the subject of this Disposition Agreement or at a date after such public hearing. The subject of the DDA affects certain parcels of real property that are described and defined collectively in the DDA as the “Site”. One parcel that is a part of the Site is the subject Property.
G. By this Disposition Agreement, the Housing Authority desires and intends to convey the Property to the City at its fair market value, and the City desires and intends to convey the Property to the Developer.
H. Prior to February 1, 2012, the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development (“Former Agency”) was a community redevelopment agency duly organized and existing under the California Community Redevelopment Law (HSC Section 33000, et seq .), and was authorized to transact business and exercise the powers of a redevelopment agency pursuant to action of the City Council.
I. Assembly Bill x1 26, chaptered and effective on June 27, 2011, added Parts 1.8 and
1.85 to Division 24 of the HSC that caused the dissolution of all California redevelopment agencies and winding down of the affairs of former agencies, including as such laws were amended by Assembly Bill 1484, chaptered and effective on June 27, 2012 (together, the “Dissolution Law”); and on and as of February 1, 2012 the Former Agency was dissolved under the Dissolution Law.
J. On January 17, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 9089-12 by which the City declined to assume the housing assets and responsibility to perform the housing functions performed previously by the Former Agency and designated the Housing Authority to serve and act as the “housing successor” under HSC Section 34176(b).
K. On January 24, 2012, the Housing Authority by motion and unanimous vote accepted the rights, powers, assets, liabilities, duties and obligations associated with the housing functions of the Former Agency (at that date still the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development pre-dissolution.)
L. On March 28, 2012 by Resolution No. 2-12, the Oversight Board to the Successor Agency to the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development determined and affirmed that the Former Agency’s housing assets and housing functionswere transferred to the Garden Grove Housing Authority, acting as Housing Successor, on and as of February 1, 2012 and affirmed that the Housing Authority, acting as Housing Successor, has all rights, powers, duties and obligations relating to the housing assets and functions of the Former Agency under the Dissolution Law.
M. Under HSC Section 34176(a)(2), the Housing Authority, as housing successor to the Former Agency, prepared a Housing Asset Transfer Schedule (“HAT”) and submitted the HAT to the State of California, Department of Finance ( “DOF”) for review and approval. On August 30, 2012, the DOF approved the HAT with certain modifications that are unrelated to the Property. The approved HAT includes the subject Property and thereby is a DOF-approved housing asset under the Dissolution Law and asset of the Housing Authority under the HAL.
N. Therefore, on, as of, and ongoing the Housing Authority by operation of law, in particular under the Dissolution Law Sections 34176 and 34176.1, has been vested with the ownership and control of the housing assets, including without limitation the Property that is the subject of this Disposition Agreement.
O. The conveyance of the Property by the Housing Authority to City is subject to the provisions of HSC Sections 34312.3(b) and 33431. In implementation thereof, the City Council and Housing Authority have held a public hearing at a duly noticed special joint meeting and considered and approved this Disposition Agreement. A summary report about the Property was prepared and made available to the public along with this Disposition Agreement and were presented to the City Council and Housing Authority in their respective consideration of this Disposition Agreement.
P. In connection with the disposition of the Property, the Housing Authority covenants that the consideration paid by City to Housing Authority hereunder shall be deposited into the Housing Authority’s low to moderate income housing asset fund (“LMIHAF”) immediately after the Closing described herein, and such funds will be administered by the Housing Authority in compliance with the HAL, the Dissolution Law, in particular HSC Section 34176.1, and other applicable laws and regulations.
2
Q. The City and Housing Authority desire to set forth the terms and conditions of the disposition of the Property, including financial terms, escrow and title provisions, and timing therefor.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the City and Housing Authority agree as follows:
1. Recitals Incorporated. The Recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated by reference into this Disposition Agreement.
2. Disposition. The Housing Authority agrees to convey the Property to the City on the terms and conditions set forth in this Disposition Agreement.
3. Consideration. City shall pay to Housing Authority at the Closing an amount equal to the appraised value of the Property, which amount is Four Hundred Sixty Thousand Dollars ($460,000.00) plus all Closing costs incurred for the disposition transaction (together, “Consideration”).
4. Escrow and Closing.
(a) Escrow Holder. City shall cause the escrow to complete the disposition (“Escrow”) with First American Title Company or such escrow company as the parties in the DDA may designate (“Escrow Holder”).
(b) Escrow. For purposes of this Disposition Agreement, the Escrow shall be deemed opened (“Opening of Escrow”) on the date that Escrow Holder receives (i) a fully executed and attested copy of this Disposition Agreement. City and Housing Authority agree to execute, deliver and comply with any reasonable or customary supplemental escrow instructions or other instruments reasonably required by Escrow Holder to consummate the disposition transaction contemplated by this Disposition Agreement; provided, however, no such instruments shall conflict with, amend or supersede any portion of this Disposition Agreement. If there is any conflict or inconsistency between the terms of such instruments and the terms of this Disposition Agreement, then the terms of this Disposition Agreement shall control.
(c) Closing. For purposes of this Disposition Agreement, the “Closing” shall be the date that the Grant Deed is recorded in the Official Records, County of Orange, State of California (“Official Records”). Unless changed in writing by the Parties, the Closing shall occur on or before December 31, 2022, subject to City and Housing Authority’s rights to extend the date or terminate this Disposition Agreement as set forth herein.
(d) Deed. The grant deed conveying the Property by the Housing Authority to the City with a certificate of acceptance (“Property Grant Deed”) is attached as Exhibit A.
5. Conditions Precedent and Termination Right . The Closing and the Parties ’ obligation to consummate the disposition transaction contemplated by this Disposition Agreement are subject to the timely satisfaction or written waiver of the following “Conditions Precedent”. (a) Representations and Warranties . All representations and warranties of each of the Parties set forth in this Disposition Agreement shall be materially true and correct as of the date made and as of the Closing with the same effect as if those representations and warranties were made at and as of the Closing.
3
(b) No Default. As of the Closing, no Party shall be in default in the performance of any material covenant or agreement to be performed under this Disposition Agreement. (c) Approval of DDA with Developer. As of the Closing, the City shall have approved the DDA with the Developer.
6. Deliveries to Escrow Holder.
(a) Delivered Documents. On or before one (1) business day prior to the date set for Closing, each Party shall each deposit or cause to be deposited with Escrow Holder the following items, duly executed, attested and, as applicable, acknowledged by a notary, by City and Housing Authority (together, “Delivered Items”):
(i) Property Grant Deed. The Property Grant Deed conveying the Property to the City, which shall be delivered to Escrow Holder with Housing Authority as grantor and City as grantee. (ii) Consideration. City shall deliver and pay into Escrow not less than one business day prior the Closing the Consideration ($460,000 plus costs incurred for the Escrow and Title Company in connection with this transaction and Disposition Agreement.) (iii) FIRPTA. A Transferor’s Certification of Non-Foreign Status, as and if applicable, (“FIRPTA Certificate”), one (1) from each of City and Housing Authority. (iv) Authority. Such proof of each Party ’s authority and authorizationto enter into this Disposition Agreement and to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby as may be reasonably requested by Title Company.
(v) Preliminary Change of Ownership Report . A Preliminary Change of Ownership Report (“Preliminary Change of Ownership Report”), fully completed. (vi) Further Documents or Items . Any other documents or items reasonably required to close the Exchange transaction contemplated by this Disposition Agreement.
7. Closing Procedure.
(a) Escrow Holder’s Closing Instructions. When all Conditions Precedent to the Closing have been satisfied or waived, and all required documents and funds have been deposited with Escrow Holder, Escrow Holder shall immediately close Escrow in the manner and order provided below:
(b) Date; Counterparts. Escrow Holder shall date all instruments as of the date of the Closing (if not dated), and combine all counterparts of instruments delivered to Escrow Holder in counterparts.
(c) Document Recordation. Escrow Holder shall record the Deed in the Official Records. (d) Preliminary Change of Ownership Reports . Escrow Holder shall submit the Preliminary Change of Ownership Report to the Recorder’s Office concurrently with the submission of the Deed for recordation.
4
(e) Notification. Escrow Holder shall provide telephonic notice to City and Housing Authority that the Closing has occurred.
(f) Disburse Funds. Escrow Holder shall disburse to Housing Authority the sum of $460,000.00, then deliver final closing statements to each Party, and disburse remaining funds deposited for fees and costs of Escrow to Escrow Holder, and remaining funds, if any, to City. (i) In this regard, Housing Authority agrees to deposit the full amount of $460,000 into the LMIHAF, which funds shall be expended in compliance with the Dissolution Law, HAL and other applicable laws.
(g) Informational Reports. Escrow Holder shall file informational reports, if any, required by Internal Revenue Code Section 6045(e), as amended.
8. Representations and Warranties. City and Housing Authority represent and warrant to the other under this Disposition Agreement:
(a) Power. Each Party has the legal power, right and authority to enter into this Disposition Agreement and the instruments referenced herein, and to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby.
(b) Requisite Action. All requisite action has been taken by City and Housing Authority, respectively, in connection with entering into this Disposition Agreement and the instruments referenced herein; and, by the Closing, all such necessary action will have been taken to authorize the consummation of the transaction contemplated hereby. By the Closing, no additional consent of any governmental authority shall be required to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Disposition Agreement.
(c) No Conflict. Neither the execution and delivery of this Disposition Agreement and the documents and instruments referenced herein, nor incurring the obligations set forth herein, nor the consummation of the transaction contemplated herein, nor compliance with the terms of this Disposition Agreement and the documents and instruments referenced herein conflict with or result in the material breach of any terms, conditions or provisions of, or constitute a default under, any bond, note or other evidence of indebtedness or any contract, indenture, mortgage, deed of trust, loan, partnership agreement, lease or other agreement or instrument to which City or Housing Authority, respectively, is a Party or is bound.
(d) Survival of Representations and Warranties . The covenants, representations and warranties herein shall survive the Closing or the termination of this Disposition Agreement.
9. Obtaining Information . As a material inducement to the execution and delivery of this Disposition Agreement by City and Housing Authority and the performance hereunder each of the City and Housing Authority hereby acknowledges, represents, warrants and agrees that (a) City is acquiring the Property in an “AS-IS,” “WITH-ALL-FAULTS” condition as of the Closing with respect to any facts, circumstances, conditions and defects; (b) City and Housing Authority each have no obligation to repair or correct any such facts, circumstances, conditions or defects (including, without limitation, any patent or latent defects or conditions affecting the Property) or to seek additional compensation or consideration for same; (c) each Party is fully satisfied that the Consideration is fair and adequate consideration for the Exchange to be consummated; and (d) each Party assumes the full risk of any 5
loss or damage occasioned by any fact, circumstance, condition or defect pertaining to the condition of the Property.
10. Liability and Indemnification. In contemplation of the provisions of California Government Code Section 895.2 imposing certain tort liability jointly upon public entities solely by reason of such entities being parties to an agreement as defined by Government Code Section 895, each of the Parties hereto, as between themselves, pursuant to the authorization contained in Government Code Sections 895.4 and 895.6, shall assume the full liability imposed upon it, or any of its officers, agents or employees, by law for injury caused by negligent or wrongful acts or omissions occurring in the performance of this Disposition Agreement to the same extent that such liability would be imposed in the absence of Government Code Section 895.2. To achieve the above-stated purpose, each Party indemnifies, defends and holds harmless the other Party from and against any liability, losses, cost or expenses that may be incurred by such other Party solely by reason of Government Code Section 895.2.
11. Further Assurances; Cooperation; Consultation . The Parties agree to take such further actions, and to execute and deliver such additional documents, as may be reasonably necessary or appropriate to effectuate the provisions and intent of this Disposition Agreement. Without limiting the foregoing, the Agency Director or his authorized designee, on behalf of the Housing Authority, and the City Manager or his authorized designee, on behalf of the City, are hereby authorized to execute and deliver, and file and record each and all implementing documents, including without limitation subsequent amendment(s), if any, deemed by them to be reasonably necessary to evidence further the Parties’ intentions and obligations under this Disposition Agreement. (a) Cooperation. The Parties agree to confer with each other to establish priorities for completion of the disposition prior to the Outside Closing Date and thereafter in furtherance of this Disposition Agreement.
12. General Provisions.
(a) Damage to Property . If, prior to the Closing, all or any portion of the Property is damaged by earthquake, flood, fire or other casualty (collectively “Damage”), the transaction contemplated herein shall still proceed to the Closing, and each acquiring Party shall take the applicable property subject to such Damage, and each acquiring Party shall be entitled to receive any insurance proceeds for such Damage, if any.
(b) Brokers. Each Party hereby represents and warrants to the other that it has dealt with no broker or finder in connection with this Exchange transaction. (c) Assignment. No Party may assign its rights or obligations under this Disposition Agreement without the prior written consent of the other Party, which consent may be withheld in any other Party’s sole and absolute discretion.
(d) Survival. All covenants, representations, warranties, releases, waivers and indemnities set forth in this Disposition Agreement by each Party shall survive the Closing. (e) Cooperation. The Parties agree to execute such instruments and documents and to diligently undertake such actions as may be required in order to consummate the disposition contemplated herein and shall use all reasonable efforts to accomplish the Closing in accordance with the provisions hereof.
6
(f) Time. Time is of the essence of every provision herein contained. All references herein to a particular time of day shall be deemed to refer to California time. In the computation of any period of time provided for in this Disposition Agreement or by law, the day of the act or event from which said period of time runs shall be excluded, and the last day of such period shall be included, unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, in which case the period shall be deemed to run until 5:00 p.m. of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all time periods expiring on a specified date or period herein shall be deemed to expire at 5:00 p.m. on such specified date or period.
(g) Counterparts; Facsimile Signatures. This Disposition Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which, together, shall constitute but one and the same instrument. A facsimile signature shall be deemed an original signature.
(h) Captions. Any captions to, or headings of, the sections or subsections of this Disposition Agreement are solely for the convenience of the Parties hereto, are not a part of this Disposition Agreement, and shall not be used for the interpretation or determination of the validity of this Disposition Agreement or any provision hereof.
(i) No Obligations to Third Parties . Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the execution and delivery of this Disposition Agreement shall not be deemed to confer any rights upon, nor obligate any of the Parties to this Disposition Agreement to, any person or entity other than the Parties hereto.
(j) Exhibits. Each and all of the exhibits referred to herein and attached hereto are incorporated by this reference for all purposes.
(k) Amendment to this Disposition Agreement. The terms of this Disposition Agreement may not be modified or amended except by an instrument in writing executed by each of the Parties hereto.
(l) Waiver. The waiver or failure to enforce any provision of this Disposition Agreement shall not operate as a waiver of any future breach of any such provision or any other provision hereof. (m) Applicable Law. This Disposition Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the local law of the State of California.
13. Approvals and Notices . Any approval, disapproval, demand, document or other notice (“Notice”) which either Party may desire or be required to give to the other Party under this Agreement must be in writing at the address of the Party as set forth below, or at any other address as that Party may later designate in writing. Any Notice given under this paragraph, whether personally or by mail, shall be deemed received only upon actual receipt by the intended Party.
To City and Housing Authority: City Clerk and/or Housing Authority Secretary, as applicable Garden Grove City Hall
11222 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, CA 92840
7
With copies to: Scott Stiles, City Manager and Authority Director Garden Grove City Hall
11222 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, CA 92840
Omar Sandoval, City Attorney and General Counsel
Garden Grove City Hall
11222 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, CA 92840
Tom Clark, Special Counsel
Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth
660 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1600
Newport Beach, California 92660
14. Entire Agreement . This Disposition Agreement supersedes any prior agreements, negotiations and communications, oral or written, and contains the entire agreement between the City and Housing Authority with respect to the subject matter hereof. The Parties hereto expressly agree and confirm that this Disposition Agreement is executed without reliance on any oral or written statements, representations or promises of any kind which are not expressly contained in this Disposition Agreement. No subsequent agreement, representation or promise made by either Party hereto, or by or to an employee, officer, agent or representative of either Party hereto shall be of any effect unless it is in writing and executed by the Party to be bound thereby. [Signature blocks on next page.]
8
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Housing Authority have signed this Disposition Agreement with Escrow Instructions for Disposition of Real Property as of the date first set forth above.
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
a California municipal corporation
By:
Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
or Authorized Designee
ATTEST:
TERESA POMEROY, CMC, CITY CLERK
Teresa Pomeroy or Authorized Designee
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Omar Sandoval, City Attorney
or Authorized Designee
HOUSING AUTHORITY
GARDEN GROVE HOUSING AUTHORITY
a public body, corporate and politic
By:
Scott C. Stiles, Executive Director
or Authorized Designee
ATTEST:
TERESA POMEROY, CMC, SECRETARY
Teresa Pomeroy or Authorized Designee
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH
Special Counsel
9
EXHIBIT A
GRANT DEED
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
City of Garden Grove
11222 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, California 92840
Attn: City Clerk
DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX $ NONE
The undersigned hereby declares this Instrument to be
exempt from Recording Fees (Govt. Code §§ 6103 and
27383) and Documentary Transfer Tax (Rev. & Tax. Code
§11922)
GRANT DEED
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the GARDEN GROVE HOUSING AUTHORITY , a public body, corporate and politic (“Grantor”), hereby GRANTS to the CITY OF GARDEN GROVE , a California municipal corporation (“Grantee”), the real property in the County of Orange, Stat e of California, described in the legal description attached hereto as Attachment A and incorporated herein.
1. Covenants of Non-Discrimination : There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of any basis listed in subdivision (a) or (d) of Section 12955 of the Government Code, as those bases are defined in Sections 12926, 12926.1, subdivision (m) and paragraph (1) of subdivision (p) of Section 12955, and Section 12955.2 of the Government Code, in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises herein conveyed, nor shall the grantee or any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees, or vendees in the premises herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land. All deeds, leases or contracts affecting the Property, as applicable, shall contain or be subject to substantially the following nondiscrimination or non-segregation clauses:
Deeds:
In deeds: “The grantee herein covenants by and for himself or herself, his or her heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of any basis listed in subdivision (a) or (d) of Section 12955 of the Government Code, as those bases are defined in Sections 12926, 12926.1, subdivision (m) and paragraph (1) of subdivision (p) of Section 12955, and Section 12955.2 of the Government Code, in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises herein conveyed, nor shall the grantee or any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any practice or practices of discrimination or Exhibit A
Grant Deed
segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees, or vendees in the premises herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land.”
Leases:
In leases: “The lessee herein covenants by and for himself or herself, his or her heirs, executors , administrators, and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through him or her, and this lease is made and accepted upon and subject to the following conditions:
“That there shall beno discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons, on account of any basis listed in subdivision (a) or (d) of Section 12955 of the Government Code, as those bases are defined in Sections 12926, 12926.1, subdivision (m) and paragraph (1) of subdivision (p) of Section 12955, and Section 12955.2 of the Government Code, in the leasing, subleasing, transferring, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises herein leased nor shall the lessee himself or herself, or any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use, or occupancy, of tenants, lessees, sublessees, subtenants, or vendees in the premises herein leased.”
Contracts:
In contracts: “There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of any basis listed in subdivision (a) or (d) of Section 12955 of the Government Code, as those bases are defined in Sections 12926, 12926.1, subdivision (m) and paragraph (1) of subdivision (p) of Section 12955, and Section 12955.2 of the Government Code, in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises which are the subject of this Agreement, nor shall the grantee or any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees, or vendees in the premises herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land.”
GRANTOR
GARDEN GROVE HOUSING AUTHORITY
a public body, corporate and politic
By:
Scott Stiles, Executive Director
or Authorized Designee
Exhibit A
Grant Deed
EXHIBIT A TO GRANT DEED
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
GARDEN GROVE IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
APN: 231-471-22
Exhibit A
Legal Description to
Grant Deed
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF _________________________ )
On ___________________ before me, ____________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared _____________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose names(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal
SIGNATURE OF NOTARY PUBLIC
__________________________
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interests in certain real property conveyed under the foregoing GRANT DEED dated as of September __, 2022 as granted by the GARDEN GROVE HOUSING AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politi c (“Housing Authority” or “Grantor”) t o the CITY OF GARDEN GROVE, a California municipal corporation (“City” or “Grantee”), is hereby accepted by the undersigned officer or agent on behalf of the City pursuant to joint action by the City Council and Housing Authority on September 13, 2022 and the City consents to recordation of this Grant Deed by its duly authorized officer.
Dated: September __, 2022
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE,
a California municipal corporation
By:
Scott Stiles, City Manager
or Authorized Designee
ATTEST:
Teresa Pomeroy, CMC, City Clerk
or Authorized Designee
Exhibit A
Certificate of Acceptance
APPRAISAL REPORT
VACANT LAND PARCEL
12291 THACKERY DRIVE
GARDEN GROVE, CALIFORNIA
APN: 231-471-22
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
INCORPORATED
APPRAISAL REPORT
VACANT LAND PARCEL
12291 THACKERY DRIVE
GARDEN GROVE, CALIFORNIA
APN: 231-471-22
Effective Date
of
Market Value Study
July 14, 2022
Prepared for
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
11222 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, CA 92842
Prepared by
R. P. LAURAIN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
3353 Linden Avenue, Suite 200
Long Beach, California 90807
Date of Report
July 18, 2022
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
INCOR P O R AT ED 3353 LINDEN AVENUE, SUITE 200
LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90807
July 18, 2022
TELEPHONE
FACSIMILE
(562)
(562)
426-0477
988-2927
[email protected]
City of Garden Grove
Economic and Community Development Department
11222 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, CA 92842
Attention: Paul Guerrero
Real Property
Subject: Vacant Land Parcel
12291 Thackery Drive
Garden Grove, California
APN: 231-471-22
In accordance with your request and authorization, I have personally inspected and appraised the above-referenced property. The appraisal study included (1) an inspection of the subject proper ty, (2) a review of market data, and (3) the valuation analysis.
The subject property is located on the west side of Thackery Drive, beginning 150± feet north of Twintree Avenue, in the City of Garden Grove. The subject property contains 7,200 square feet of land area. The site has an interior location on a secondary street. The subject property is an effectively vacant land parcel. The subject property is located in the R-1-7 (Single-Family Residential) zone district of the City of Garden Grove. The underlying land use designation, however, is International West Mixed Use (IW).
It will be demonstrated in the accompanying report that the maximally productive use, and therefore, the highest and best use of the subject property is low density residential development. The subject property has been appraised accordingly.
After considering the various factors wh ich influence value, the fee simple market value of the subject property, as of July 14, 2022, is estimated at:
FOUR HUNDRED SIXTY THOUSAND DOLLARS
$460,000.
APPRAISERS - ANALYSTS Page 156 of 640
City of Garden Grove
Attention: Paul Guerrero
July 18, 2022
The foregoing value is subject to the assumptions and limiting conditions set forth in the Preface Section, and the valuation study in the Valuation Analysis Section. No portion of this report shall be amended or deleted.
This appraisal complies with the reporting requirements set forth in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, under Standard Rule 2-2(a), for an Appraisal Report. This report has bee n submitted as an electronic (PDF) document; a file copy has been retained.
If you have any questions regarding the report, please contact the undersigned at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
R. P. LAURAIN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
John P. Laurain,
MAI, ASA
Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
California Certification No. AG 025754
JPL:jlr
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
INCORPORATED Page 157 of 640
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
Letter of Transmittal
Table of Contents
PREFACE
Location Map
Date of Value
Purpose of the Appraisal
Property Rights Appraised
Intended User of Appraisal
Intended Use of Appraisal
Appraiser’s Certification
Scope of the Appraisal
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
Terms and Definitions
SUBJECT PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Apparent Vestee
Property Address
Legal Description
Site Description
Plat Map
Improvements
Ownership History
Assessment Data
Neighborhood Environment
VALUATION
Highest and Best Use Analysis
Valuation Methods
Sales Comparison Approach
Final Estimate of Value
Marketing Exposure
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
MARKET DATA
Summary of Land Value Indicators
Land Sales Data and Photographs
Market Data Map
ADDENDA
Additional Photographs
Orange County Regional Data
Qualifications of Appraiser
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYSTS
PREFACE
DeLorme Street Atlas USA® 2015
LOCATION MAP
Data use subject to license. TN Scale 1 : 81,250
© DeLorme. DeLorme Street Atlas USA® 2015. MN (11.6°E)
www.delorme.com
0 ½ 1 1½ 2 mi
km0 1 2 3
1" = 1.28 mi Data Zoom 12-0
DATE OF VALUE
The date of value (effective date) employed in this report, and all opinions and computations expressed herein, are based on July 14, 2022. Said date being generally concurrent with the inspection of the subject property, and the valuation analysis process.
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
The purpose of this appraisal report is to express an estimate of market value, in fee simple, for the subject property, absent any liens, leases, or other encumbrances, as of the date of value set forth above. The definition of market value is set forth in the following portion of this section following the heading “Terms and Definitions.”
Further, it is the purpose of this appraisal report to describe the subject property, and to render an opinion of the highest and best use based on (1) the character of potential development of the property appraised, (2) the requirements of local governmental authorities affecting the subject property, (3) the reasonable demand in the open market for properties similar to the subject property, and (4) the location of the subject property considered with respect to other existing and competitive districts within the immediate and general subject market area.
Further, it is the purpose of this appraisal report to provide an outline of certain factual and inferential information which was compiled and analyzed in the process of completing this appraisal study.
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED
The property rights appraised herein are those of the fee simple interest. Fee simple is defined as, "An absolute fee; a fee without limitations to any particular class of heirs, or restrictions, but subject to the limitations of eminent domain, escheat, police power, and taxation. An inheritable estate." R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
INTENDED USER OF APPRAISAL
It is understood that the intended user of the appraisal will be the client, the City of Garden Grove, and specific representatives thereof.
INTENDED USE OF APPRAISAL
It is understood that this appraisal will be utilized by the City of Garden Grove and specific representatives thereof to establish the market value of the subject property for the possible acquisition (purchase) of the property appraised.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned does hereby certify that:
I have personally inspected the subjec t property; I have no present or contemplated future interest in the real estate which is the subject of this appraisal report. Also, I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the subject matter of this appraisal report, or the parties involved in this assignment.
My engagement in this assignment an d the amount of compensation are not contingent upon the reporting or development of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the am ount of the value opinion, the attainment of a predetermined or stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. Also, to the best of my knowledge and belief the statements of fact contained in this appraisal report, upon which the analys es, opinions, and conclusions expressed herein are based, are true and correct.
This appraisal report sets forth all of the assumptions and limiting conditions (imposed by the terms of this assignment or by the undersigned), affecting my personal, impartial, and unbiased pr ofessional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practi ce of the Appraisal Institutes, and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. As of the date of this report I have completed the continuing education program for Designated Member of the Appraisal Institute, the State of California and the American Society of Appraisers; note that duly authorized representatives of said organizations have the right to review this report. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.
No one other than the undersigned prepared the analyses, conclusions, and opinions for this appraisal study. No other person provided significant professional Renewal Date: April 16, 2023
assistance. I have appraised the subject property within the last three years, for the client, the City of Garden Grove.
______________________________
John P. Laurain, MAI, ASA
Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
California Certification No. AG 025754
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL
The appraiser, in connection with the following appraisal study, has:
1. Been retained, and has accepted the assignment, to make an objective analysis and valuation study of the subject property and to report, without bias, the estimate of fair market value.
The subject property is particularly described in the following portion of this report in the section entitled Subject Property Description.
2. Toured the general area by automobile to become acquainted with the extent, condition, and quality of nearby developments, sales and offerings in the area, density and type of
development, topographical features, economic conditions, trends toward change, etc.
3. Walked within the subject property, and some of the nearby neighborhood, to become acquainted with the current partic- ular attributes, or shortcomings, of the subject property.
4. Completed an inspection of the subject property for the purpose of becoming familiar with certain physical charac- teristics.
5. Made a visual observation concerning public streets, access, drainage, and topography of the subject property.
6. Obtained information regarding public utilities and sanitary sewer available at the subject site.
7. Made, or obtained from other qualified sources, calculations on the area of land contained within the subject property. Has made, or caused to be made, plat s and plot plan drawings of the subject property, and has checked such plats and plot plan drawings for accuracy and fair representation.
8. Taken photographs of the subject property, together with photographs of the immediate environs.
9. Made, or caused to be made, a search of public records for factual information regarding recent sales of the subject property.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL (Continued)
10. Reviewed current maps, zoning ordinances, and other material for additional background information pertaining to the subject property, and sale properties.
11. Attempted to visualize the subject property as it would be viewed by a willing and informed buyer, as well as a willing and informed seller.
12. Interviewed various persons, in both public and private life, for factual and inferential information helpful in this appraisal study.
13. Formed an opinion of the highest and best use applicable to the subject property appraised herein.
14. Made, or caused to be made, a search for recent sales of comparable properties. Has viewed, confirmed the sale price, and obtained certain other information pertaining to each sale property contained in this report.
15. Formed an estimate of market value of the subject property, as of the date of value expressed herein, by application the Sales Comparison Approach; the Cost and Income
Capitalization Approaches were not considered applicable in the subject case.
16. Prepared and delivered this appraisal report in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, and in summation of all the activities outlined above.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
This appraisal is made with the following understanding as set forth in items No. 1 through 17, inclusive:
1. That this narrative Appraisal Report is intended to comply with reporting requirements set forth in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, under Standard Rule 2-2(a), for an Appraisal Report. The information contained in this appraisal report is specific to the needs of the client; no responsibility is assumed for the unauthorized use of this report.
2. That title to the subject property is assumed to be good and merchantable. Liens and encumbrances, if any, have not been deducted from the final estimate of value. The subject property has been appraised as though under responsible ownership. The legal description is assumed accurate.
3. That the appraiser assumes there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the subject property, subsoil, structures, or other improvements, if any, which would render them more or less valuable, unless otherwise stat ed. Further, the appraiser assumes no responsibility for such conditions or for the engineering which might be required to discover such
conditions. That mechanical and electrical systems and equipment, if any, except as otherwise may be noted in this report, are assumed to be in good working order. The property appraised is assumed to meet all governmental codes, require- ments, and restrictions, unless otherwise stated.
4. That no soils report of the subject property was provided to the appraiser; therefore informatio n, if any, provided by other qualified sources pertaining to these matters is believed accurate, but no liability is assumed for such matters. Further, information, estimates and opinions furnished by others and contained in this report pertaining to the subject property and market data were obtained from sources considered reliable and are believed to be true and correct. No responsibility, however, for the accuracy of such items can be assumed by the appraiser.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS (Continued)
5. That unless otherwise stated herein, it is assumed there are no encroachments, easements, soil toxics/contaminants, or other physical conditions adversely affecting the value of the subject property.
6. That no report(s) pertaini ng to mold, organic toxins, or chemical substances at the subject property was provided to the appraiser; therefore, information, if any, provided by other qualified sources pertaining to these matters is believed accurate, but no liability is assumed by the appraiser for such matters. That unless otherwise stated herein, the subject property has been appraised assuming the absence of mold, organic toxins, the presence of asbestos, or other organic and/or chemical substances which may adversely affect the value of the subject property.
7. That no opinion is expressed regarding matters which are legal in nature or which require specialized investigation or knowledge ordinarily not employed by real estate appraisers, even though such matters may be mentioned in the report.
8. That no oil rights have been included in the opinion of value expressed herein. Further, that oil rights, if existing, are assumed to be at least 500 feet below the surface of the land, without the right of surface entry.
9. That the distribution of th e total valuation in this report between land and improvements, if any, applies only under the existing program of utilization. The separate valuations for land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used.
10. That the valuation of the property appraised is based upon economic and financing conditions prevailing as of the date of value set forth herein. Further, the valuation assumes good, competent, and aggressive management of the subject
property.
11. That the appraiser has conducted a visual inspection of the subject property and the market data properties. Should subsequent information be provided relative to changes or differences in (1) the quality of title, (2) physical condition or characteristics of the property, and/or (3) governmental R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS (Continued)
restrictions and regulations, which would increase or decrease the value of the subject property, the appraiser reserves the right to amend the final estimate of value.
12. That the appraiser, by reason of this appraisal, is not required to give testimony in court or at any governmental or quasi- governmental hearing with reference to the property
appraised, unless contractual arrangements have been previ- ously made therefor.
13. That drawings, plats, maps, and other exhibits contained in this report are for illustration purposes only and are not necessarily prepared to standard engineering or architectural scale.
14. That this report is effective only when considered in its entire form, as delivered to the client. No portion of this report will be considered binding if taken out of context.
15. That possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication, nor shall the contents of this report be copied or conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, sales, news, or other media, without the written consent and approval of the appraiser, particularly with regard to the valuation of the property appraised and the identity of the appraiser, or the firm with which he is connected, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute, or the American Society of Appraisers, or designations conferred by said organizations.
16. That the form, format, and phraseology utilized in this report, except the Certification, and Terms and Definitions, shall not be provided to, copied, or used by, any other real estate appraiser, real estate economist, real estate broker, real estate salesperson, property manager, valuation consultant,
investment counselor, or others , without the written consent and approval of Ronald P. Laurain.
17. That this appraisal study is considered completely confidential and will not be disclosed or discussed, in whole or in part, with anyone other than the client, or persons designated by the client.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Certain technical terms have been used in the following report which are defined, herein, for the benefit of those who may not be fully familiar with said terms.
MARKET VALUE (or Fair Market Value):
Market value is sometimes referred to as Fair Market Value; the latter is a legal term and a common synonym of Market Value. Market value as defined in Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) is defined as follows:
"The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and
knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
2. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their own best interests;
3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
4. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and
5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing, or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale." SALES COMPARISON APPROACH:
One of the three accepted methods of estimating Market Value. This approach consists of the investigation of recent sales of similar properties to determine the price at which said properties sold. The information so gathered is judged and considered by the appraiser as to its comparability to the subject properties.
Recent comparable sales are the basis for the Sales Comparison Approach.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
TERMS AND DEFINITIONS (Continued)
COST-SUMMATION APPROACH:
Another accepted method of estimating Market Value. This approach consists of estimating the new construction cost of the building and yard improvements and making allowances for appropriate amount of depreciation. The depreciated reconstruction value of the improvements is then added to the Land Value estimate gained from the Sales Comparison Approach. The sum of these two figures is the value indicated by the Cost-Summation Approach.
INCOME CAPITALIZATION APPROACH:
The Income Capitalization Approach consists of capitalizing the net income of the property under study. The capitalization method studies the income stream, allows for (1) vacancy and credit loss, (2) fixed expenses, (3) operating expenses, and (4) reserves for replacement, and estimates the amount of money which would be paid by a prudent investor to obtain the net income. The capitalization rate is usually commensurate with the risk, and is adjusted for future depreciation or appreciation in value.
DEPRECIATION:
Used in this appraisal to indicate a lessening in value from any one or more of several causes. Depreciation is not based on age alone, but can result from a combination of age, condition or repair, functional utility, neighborhood influ- ences, or any of several outside economic causes. Depreciation applies only to improvements. The amount of depreciation is a matter for the judgment of the appraiser.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE:
Used in this appraisal to describe that private use which will (1) yield the greatest net return on the investment, (2) be permitted or have the reasonable probability of being permitted under applicable laws and ordinances, and (3) be appropriate and feasible under a reason able planning, zoning, and land use concept.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYSTS
SUBJECT PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
SUBJECT PROPERTY
View looking northwesterly at the subj ect property from intersection of Thackery Drive and Twintree Avenue. See additional photographs in the Addenda Section.
VESTEE: Garden Grove
Development
Agency for Community
ADDRESS: 12291 Thackery Drive
Garden Grove, CA 92840
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 35, Tract No. 2148, per map recorded in Book 58, Pages 46, 47, and 48 of Miscellaneous
Maps, in the office of the County Recorder,
County of Orange, California.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
SITE DESCRIPTION
LOCATION: The subject property is located on the west side of Thackery Drive, beginning 150± feet north
of Twintree Avenue, in the City of Garden
Grove.
LAND SHAPE: Effectively rectangular land configuration.
DIMENSIONS: 72’ x 100’.
LAND AREA: 7,200 square feet.
TOPOGRAPHY: Effectively level.
DRAINAGE: Appears to be adequate.
FLOOD HAZARD: The subject property is located on FEMA Flood Zone Map 06059C0141J, dated December 3,
2009; per said map, the subject site is located
in Flood Zone X with a reduced flood risk due
to levee. Flood insurance (for improved
properties) is not federally required by lenders
for loans on properties in Flood Zone X.
SOIL STABILITY: Appears to be adequate based on the subject development, as well as developments in the
immediate area. A soils report, however, was
not provided for review.
SOIL CONTAMINATION: None known or observed, however, an environ- mental assessment report was not provided for
review. The subject site has been appraised as
though free of soil contaminants requiring
remediation.
OIL/MINERAL RIGHTS: The subject appraisal specifically excludes any existing oil or mineral rights. Further, oil or
mineral rights, if existing, are assumed to be at
least 500 feet below the surface of the land,
without the right of surface entry.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APN: 231-471-22
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
SITE IMPROVEMENTS (Continued)
EARTHQUAKE FAULT: While the greater Southern California area is prone to earthquakes, no seismic or geological
studies were provided for review. No responsi-
bility is assumed for the possible impact of
seismic activity or earthquakes.
FRONTAGE: The subject property has 72 feet of frontage on Thackery Drive.
RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH: Thackery Drive: 50 feet.
STREET SURFACING: Asphalt paving at west portion of Thackery Drive; gravel surfacing at east portion.
CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK: Concrete curbs and gutters on both sides of the street (no sidewalks).
STREETLIGHTS: Ornamental standards; street light fixtures have been removed as of the date of value.
UTILITIES: Water, gas, electr ic power, telephone service, and sanitary sewer are available in the
immediate area.
ENCROACHMENTS: None apparent, however, a surv ey pertaining to the subject property was not provided for
review.
EASEMENTS: A Preliminary Title Report prepared by First American Title, dated May 18, 2021, pertaining
to multiple parcels, inclusive of the subject site,
was provided for review. The subject site
appears to be impacted by easements for
public road purposes, assumed to be the
existing Thackery Drive, as well as utility pole
line easements. Said easements are deemed
typical of the subject area and are not
considered to have an impact on the existing
or future highest and best use.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
SITE IMPROVEMENTS (Continued)
EASEMENTS: (Continued) Other easements, if existing, are assumed to be located along the property boundaries
and/or not interfering with the existing or any
future highest and best use development. It is
assumed there are no “cross-lot” or “blanket”
easements which will preclude a highest and
best use development.
The title report also identifies a Declaration of
Protective Covenants which initially limited the
use of sites in the subject larger Tract No. 2148
to single family residential dwellings. The
covenant was originally established in 1954,
with a 25 year term, renewed automatically
every ten years unless an agreement is signed
by a majority of the lot owners terminating the
covenant. While it is understood that the
covenant has not been terminated, certain lots
have been developed with buildings other than
single family residences. It is also understood
that the subject site may be joined with other
adjacent parcels in the same tract for a hotel
development.
ILLEGAL USES: None observed.
PRESENT USE: Effectively vacant land.
ZONING: The subject property is located in the R-1-7
(Single-Family Residential) zone district of the
City of Garden Grove.
The “R-1” zone district “is intended to provide
for the establishment and promotion of single
family detached residences on individual lots
and compatible associated activities.”
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
SITE IMPROVEMENTS (Continued)
ZONING: (Continued) The minimum lot size is 7,200 square feet. The maximum building height is 35 feet. The front
yard setback is 20 feet. The rear yard setback
is 20% of the lot depth not to exceed 25 feet.
The interior side yard setback is 5 feet,
however, the street side yard setback is
10 feet.
Note, however, the land use designation is
International West Mixed Use (IW). The IW
land use is “intended to provide for a mix of
uses, including resort, entertainment, retail,
hotel, and some higher density residential.”
The density for residential development is 42.1
to 60 dwelling units per acre.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE: The reader is referred to the first portion of the Valuation Analysis Section for a discussion
regarding the highest and best use of the
subject site.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
OWNERSHIP HISTORY
COMMENT: Information regarding the date of acquisition
by the Garden Grove Agency for Community
Development was not provided to the
appraiser. Orange County Assessor’s records
indicate the subject property has been vested
with the current owner for more than five
years. The acquisition of the property by a
public agency, however, may not be reflective
of, or relevant to, the current fair market value.
ASSESSMENT DATA
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 231-471-22
ASSESSED VALUATIONS: Land: $571,845
Improvements: $53,098
TAX RATE AREA: 18055
TAX YEAR: 2021-2022
REAL ESTATE TAXES: $349.88*
* Real estate taxes will be adjusted in the event the subject property is sold to a private party. The adjusted real estate taxes will be 1.02±% of the sale price, or Assessor’s “cash value.” In the absence of a sale, transfer, or capital improvements, the maximum allowable increase in the assessed valuations is 2% per year, per Real Estate Tax Initiative of 1978 (Proposition 13).
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENT
LOCATION: The subject property is located in the northeast portion of the City of Garden Grove. The City of
Garden Grove encompasses 18 square miles
populated by just under 175,000 residents
within the corporate limits of the City. The
predominant land use in the City is residential
(51%), followed by commercial and industrial
(14%). Office use make up less than 1% of the
land within the city limits. The remaining land
area is open space, institutional/government,
vacant land parcels, and street and railroad
rights of way.
ACCESS: Major north-south thoroughfares in the subject
area include Fairview Street, Harbor Boulevard,
and Euclid Street. Major east-west thorough-
fares include Garden Grove Boulevard,
Chapman Avenue, and Lampson Avenue. The
Santa Ana (5) Freeway is located approx-
imately one and one half miles to the northeast
and the Garden Grove (22) Freeway is located
approximately one mile to the south of the
subject property. Said freeways are part of the
greater freeway network serving the Southern
California region.
LAND USES: The immediate ne ighborhood is zoned R-1-7
(single family). The majority of secondary
streets in the immediate subject area are
developed with low density single family
residential developments. As stated, primary
streets are predominantly developed with
commercial uses. The Orange County Outlets is
located one and one quarter miles to the east
of the subject property. Disneyland and
Downtown Disney are located approximately
two miles northerly. A hotel development is
located within one block north of the subject
property.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S
NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENT (Continued)
BUILT-UP: The subject neighborhood is effectively 95%
built-up, including public parks, public facilities,
parking lots, and school sites.
PRICE RANGE: Single family residential properties generally range from $800,000 to exceeding $1,200,000
exclusive of condominium developments.
The indicated price range is dependent upon
the various elements of comparability which
include location, building size, building
condition, design, number of bedrooms and
baths, and the overall land size.
PRICE TREND: There was an upward value trend affecting
residential properties in the general subject
market area, from the first portion of 2000
through the mid portion of 2006, after which
property values generally stabilized.
Beginning in 2007, residential property values
began to decrease significantly. The decrease
in residential sales activity and pricing
continued through the mid to latter portion of
2009, due primarily to the subprime credit and
housing crisis, and a lack of available financing.
In the latter portion of 2009 residential values
abruptly stabilized, due primarily to fiscal
stimulus programs and first-time home buyer
tax credits. The residential real estate market
remained largely flat from the latter portion of
2009 through the mid portion of 2012.
Residential property values in the greater
subject market area began to increase in the
first part of 2013, due largely to the continued
availability of relatively low mortgage interest
rates. Said price increase continued through
the latter portion of 2019, however, the rate of
increase slowed in 2019 as compared to prior
years.
R. P. LAURAIN
& ASSOCIATES
APPRAISERS - ANALYST S