Agenda packet, joint meeting — Glendale City Council, June 24, 2025 (part 1 of 2)

PACKET
JOINT MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL AND GLENDALE HOUSING AUTHORITY

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
Meetings

are

broadcast

live

Glendale

TV,

viewable

Spectrum

Cable,

channel

and

AT&T

U-
verse,

channel

99. Meetings

are

also

streamed

live

high

definition

(HD)

the

City

webpage,
glendaleca.gov/live
,

YouTube.com/myglendale
,

and

Apple

TV,

Roku,

Amazon

Fire,

iOS

and
Android

devices

using

free

app

called

Cablecast

and

choosing

"Glendale

TV"

from

the

menu.

Meetings

are

also

archived

the

City

Website

for

viewing

anytime

glendaleca.gov/agendas
.

Call

(818)

548-4013

for

program

schedules.

For

public

comments

and

questions

during

the
meeting,

call

(818)

937-8100.

Public

comments

specific

agenda

item

will

taken

when

that
agenda

item

discussed.

you

have

any

question

about

matters

the

agenda,

requests

for
assistance, please contact the City Clerk at (818) 548-2090 during regular business hours.

PLEASE TURN OFF CELLULAR PHONES WHILE INSIDE THE MEETING LOCATION In

compliance

with

the

Americans

with

Disabilities

Act

(ADA)

1990,

auxiliary

hearing

aids,

sign
language

translation,

and

Braille

transcripts

are

available

upon

request.

Assisted

listening

devices
are

available

same-day

upon

request.

The

City

Clerk’

office

should

notified

72 hours

(three
business

days)

soon

practicable

for

requests

regarding

sign

language

translation

and
Braille

transcription

services.

All

documents

open

session

items

this

agenda

that

are
received

less

than

72 hours

prior

this

meeting,

and

are

public

records,

will

available

for

review
in the Office of the City Clerk, 613 E. Broadway, RM 110, Glendale, CA 91206.

Translation

services

are

provided

for

meetings

through

the

use

bilingual

staff

for

speakers

who
wish

utilize

the

service

available.

Speakers

should

state

their

request

contacting

the

City
Clerk’s

office

(818)

548-2090,

least

72 hours

prior

the

scheduled

meeting

soon

as
practicable.

Please

specify

the

language

for

which

you

require

translation.

The

exclusive

use

City
provided

interpreters

not

required

and

persons

are

welcome

use

their

own

interpreter

speak
in their native language.

JUNE 24, 2025

ROLL CALL
-
2:00 PM
-
Report of the City Clerk of the City Council and Housing Authority, re: Posting of Agenda.

The Agenda for the Tuesday, June 24, 2025 joint public meeting of the City Council and Housing Authority was posted on June 20, 2025, on the Bulletin Board outside City Hall.

1 TYPED 6/20/2025 1:15:54 PM
06 24 25
CC HA

JOINT PUBLIC MEETING
of the City Council and Housing Authority is hereby called to meet at

2:00 PM
on
Tuesday, June 24, 2025
, in the Council Chamber, 613 E. Broadway,
2nd Floor, Glendale, CA 91206 to consider the following item(s) of business, to wit;

1. Community Development, re:

Adoption of the FY 2025-26 Glendale Housing
Authority Budget and Contract Amendments
a. Resolution of the City Council Making Findings and Approving Expenditures of Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds for Administration and Planning and Expenditures Outside Redevelopment Project Areas for the FY 2025-26 Housing Authority Budget; b. Resolution of the Housing Authority Making Findings and Approving Expenditures of Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds for Administration and Planning and Expenditures Outside Redevelopment Project Areas for the FY 2025-26 Housing Authority Budget and Adopting the FY 2025-26 Housing Authority Budget; c. Motion of the Housing Authority to Approve an Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Kane, Ballmer and Berkman (Contract C106203) to Increase the Contract Amount by $300,000 for a New “Not to Exceed” Contract of $1,040,000 for Affordable Housing Legal Services; and to Extend the Agreement T erm for Two Years to June 30, 2027; and
d. Motion to Approve Amendment to the Servicing Agreement between the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale and Heritage Housing Partners (Contract 8000078), Extending the Agreement T erm for Two Years to June 30, 2027

2. Community Development, re:

Note and File the City of Glendale’s 2025 Homeless
Point-in-Time Count
a. Council Motion to Note and File the City of Glendale’s 2025 Homeless Point-in-Time Count
b. Housing Authority Motion to Note and File the City of Glendale’s 2025 Homeless Point- in-Time Count

3. Community Services and Parks, re:

Regarding 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME) programs
a. City Council Resolution Adopting an Environmental Negative Declaration b. City Council Motion to approve 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and authorizing submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development c. City Council Motion to approve FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Annual Action Plan totaling $3,266,569.65; authorize the submission of the Annual Action Plan to U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development, as recommended by the CDBG Advisory Committee and Continuum of Care Board (CoC); and authorize the City Manager or a designee, to redirect excess, cancelled or unused program funds under $50,000 from one project to another with CDBG Advisory Committee approval d. Housing Authority Motion to approve 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and authorize submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development e. Housing Authority Motion to approve FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Annual Action Plan totaling $3,266,569.65; and authorize the submission of the Annual Action Plan to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, as recommended by the CDBG Advisory Committee and Continuum of Care Board (CoC)

ADJOURNMENT

2 TYPED 6/20/2025 1:15:54 PM
06 24 25
CC HA

1 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA
REPORT TO THE JOINT MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL AND GLENDALE

HOUSING AUTHORITY

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Adoption of the FY 2025-26 Glendale Housing Authority Budget and Contract Amendments
1) Resolution of the City Council Making Findings and Approving Expenditures of Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds for Administration and Planning and Expenditures Outside Redevelopment Project Areas for the FY 2025-26 Housing Authority Budget;
2) Resolution of the Housing Authority Making Findings and Approving Expenditures of Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds for Administration and Planning and Expenditures Outside Redevelopment Project Areas for the FY 2025-26 Housing Authority Budget and Adopting the FY 2025-26 Housing Authority Budget; 3) Motion of the Housing Authority to Approve an Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Kane, Ballmer and Berkman (Contract C106203) to Increase the Contract Amount by $300,000 for a New “Not to Exceed” Contract of $1,040,000 for Affordable Housing Legal Services; and to Extend the Agreement Term for Two Years to June 30, 2027; and
4) Motion to Approve Amendment to the Servicing Agreement between the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale and Heritage Housing Partners (Contract 8000078), Extending the Agreement Term for Two Years to June 30, 2027.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for June 24, 2025 calendar
3 of 335

21 6
1 2
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Community Development Department, Housing Division presents the Fiscal Year 2025- 26 budget of all Housing funds for consideration and budget adoption.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council and Housing Authority adopt the FY 2025-26 budget as presented and make the required findings to utilize funds outside of the Redevelopment Project Areas.

BACKGROUND
The proposed budget for the Glendale Housing Authority is $60,191,386 for FY 2025-

26. The Housing Authority Budget is primarily a grant funded / special revenue specific budget with funding from:
- Federal sources that are received on an annual basis; - Encumbered assets/program income from previous investments of Redevelopment 20% Housing Set Aside funds;
- Development related affordable housing fees including the Affordable Housing Density Bonus fee, City-Wide Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu fee, and the Commercial Development Impact fee; and
- One-time State grant awards.

The Housing Authority has the responsibility for administering the following programs:
-The Housing Assistance Fund (2020) – federal Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV), VASH, Mainstream Vouchers for rental assistance to low income households, and Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHV) to assist individuals and families who are homeless, at-risk of homelessness, fleeing, or attempting to flee, domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or human trafficking, or were recently homeless or have a high risk of housing instability;
-HOME Grant Fund (2030) – federal funds for housing development and preservation activities for low income households;
-Continuum of Care Grant Fund (2040) –federal funds for Supportive services, Rapid Re-Housing, permanent supportive housing, and rental assistance Program, to assist unhoused individuals and families regain housing stability and work towards self-sufficiency;
-Emergency Solutions Grant Fund (2050) – Federal funding for homeless prevention, outreach, emergency shelter essential services, and rapid re- housing, to support those who are at-risk of homelessness currently experiencing homelessness.
-Affordable Housing Trust Fund (2090) – funds received from inclusionary housing fees, affordable housing density bonus fees, and miscellaneous program income to be expended on affordable housing purposes not covered by other restricted state and federal housing funds;
4 of 335

31 6
1 2
1 -BEGIN Affordable Homeownership Fund (2120) – State funds for down payment assistance to first time home buyers who are Moderate Income households (currently invested in the Doran Gardens project); -Low & Mod Income Housing Asset Fund (2130) – funds from previous 20% Redevelopment Set Aside funds for housing development and preservation activities (including administration and program delivery) for Low and Moderate Income households, in accordance with State law;
-Miscellaneous Grant Funds (2160) – State grant funds for the Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention Program (HHAP-5)
-Permanent Local Housing Allocation Fund (2280) – State funds for housing- related projects and programs to address the unmet housing needs in the community; and
-Housing Mitigation Fee Fund (4110) – deposits from the Commercial Development Impact Fee.

Requirement for Findings Related to Former Redevelopment Areas:

Despite substantial changes to the sections of the California Law that apply to Redevelopment (including the dissolution of Redevelopment agencies), some elements of Redevelopment law remain. Redevelopment Project Areas were not eliminated and the requirement remains to approve proposed expenditures of the Redevelopment 20% Set Aside program income (LMIHAF) funds outside the project area as being necessary in order to increase, improve and preserve the supply of affordable housing within the City. Also, the requirement to approve the necessity and appropriateness of the expenditure of LMIHAF funds for administration and planning purposes remains as well.

This has been approved annually in previous year’s budgets and new City Council and Housing Authority resolutions are included in this report to meet those State requirements.

Information Regarding Section 8 HCV, VASH, EHV, and Mainstream Program Expenditures Review:

In preparing the Section 8 federal fund expenditures included in the FY 2025-26 proposed Housing Authority Budget, expenditures have been reviewed for conformance with HUD’s requirements under the Uniform Administrative requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit requirement for Federal Awards.

Contract Amendments
Kane, Ballmer, Berkman (KBB): KBB provides the Housing Authority with specialized affordable housing legal services for affordable housing development projects and specialized programs. These services augment the City Attorney Office's work in this area. The need for these services is based upon the number and complexity of projects in development during the fiscal year. At each stage of development, including negotiations, financing, land acquisition, and construction financing, specialized legal 5 of 335

41 6
1 2
1 services are required to assure that the Housing Authority's interests are protected and that the requirements of State and Federal regulations governing use of Housing Authority funding sources are met. Continuous service by a professional legal services firm is important for quick and effective implementation of housing development projects. The requested amendment is to increase the contract amount by $300,000 for a new “Not to Exceed” $1,040,000 and to extend the agreement term for two years.

Heritage Housing Partners (HHP): HHP is a nonprofit affordable housing developer that developed the 57-unit Doran Gardens affordable homeownership housing development. The units were sold to qualified, moderate-income, first-time home buyers at a restricted sales price, relative to their income and the requirements of redevelopment set aside law. The project was designed to restrict all future sales of the units under the same criteria so that the affordability of these units continues to subsequent buyers for 45 years. This is accomplished through a First Right of Refusal option incorporated into the covenants of the units. As a result, there is a significant amount of loan servicing requirements and demands associated with managing a portfolio of this size and complexity.

When a homeowner is interested in selling a unit, they must notify the City/HHP of their intent and the City must exercise that right within a certain number of days. The City/HHP must then either market and find a qualified replacement buyer to purchase the unit at a restricted sales price directly from the seller within a specific timeframe, or must purchase the unit at the restricted sales price, and then market the units for resale at a timeline of its choosing. This process includes taking title to property, possibly making needed repairs and upgrades to the units, managing and financing of the unit during the holding period, and then marketing and eventually reselling the units. These are all complex functions that require quick responses to the buyers within a limited timeframe.

As a condition of the initial funding of the development, HHP was required to perform loan servicing functions for the units for the first five years and the responsibility of those functions then was supposed to shift back to the Housing Authority. Recognizing the complexity of these specialized loan servicing needs, a Professional Services Agreement for the ongoing services was established with HHP. A line of credit was provided at $1.2M. This line of credit funds the interim purchase of homes, when necessary, and is largely repaid through an eventual resale of the units. HHP will be paid for their services via a 6% commission based on the contract price for the home.

HHP is responsible for all transaction costs (i.e., holding costs, escrow, etc.). The contract extension is proposed for two more years.
6 of 335

51 6
1 2
1 ANALYSIS
This is a fiscally responsible budget, meeting Council’s goal of providing quality housing to the Glendale community. The presented budget, findings, and contract amendment will allow the Housing division to continue to successfully administer a robust Housing program.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Not applicable.

FISCAL IMPACT
This report presents the annual proposed FY 2025-26 Housing Budget of $60,191,386 to the Glendale Housing Authority for adoption. In addition to the special revenue funds, Homeless Services also includes $543,440 in General Fund dollars which will be included in the Citywide Budget Adoption process.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Not applicable.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
The names and business addresses of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CFO, Subcontractors and any person or entity with more than 10% interest in the company proposed for contract in this Agenda Item Report are attached in Exhibit 1, in accordance with the City Campaign Finance Ordinance No. 5744.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: City Council and Housing Authority make findings and approve expenditures of the LMIHA Funds for administration and planning and expenditures outside Redevelopment Project Areas for the FY 2025-26 proposed Housing Authority Budget, the FY 2025-26 budget, and contract amendments.

Alternative 2: Disapprove the proposed findings and expenditures of the funds from LMIHAF for administration and planning and expenditures outside Redevelopment Project Areas for the FY 2025-26 proposed Housing Authority Budget, and may disapprove the FY 2025-26 proposed Housing Authority Budget and contract amendments, this will prohibit the Housing programs from continuing.

Alternative 3: The City Council and Housing Authority may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.
7 of 335

61 6
1 2
1 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Tamar Sadd, Deputy Director of Community Development
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Campaign Disclosures
Exhibit 2: FY 2025-26 Glendale Housing Authority Budget Summary 8 of 335

RESOLUTION No. ___________

RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

MAKING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

AND EXPENDITURES OUTSIDE THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS FOR THE 2025-26 HOUSING AUTHORITY BUDGET
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale (“Housing Authority”) administers the Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF) pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33334.3 for the purpose of increasing, improving and preserving the City’s affordable housing stock; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority must incur certain administrative expenses in connection with its programs to increase, improve and preserve the supply of affordable housing within the City; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority finds that the expenditure of LMIHAF outside the Central Glendale and the San Fernando Road Corridor Redevelopment Project areas (the “Project Areas”) will be of benefit to the Project Areas as the completion of project implementation within the Project Areas and will continue to generate jobs within the Project Areas, thereby creating the need for programs throughout the City to increase the supply of affordable housing and improve and preserve the City’s existing affordable housing stock; and

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1.The Council finds and determines that the planning and administrative expenses provided for in the Housing Authority’s Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to be made from the LMIHAF are necessary for the production, improvement and preservation of low- and moderate- income housing and directly relate to the projects and programs funded by the LMIHAF.

SECTION 2.The Council finds that the expenditure of LMIHAF outside the Redevelopment Project areas (Central and San Fernando) will be of benefit to the Redevelopment Project areas as the implementation of the Redevelopment Projects has and will continue to generate jobs in the Redevelopment Projects, thereby creating the need for programs throughout the City to increase the supply of affordable housing and improve and preserve the City’s existing affordable housing stock.

Adopted this _____ day of June, 2025.
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
City Clerk
9 of 335

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2025, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
___________________
City Clerk
10 of 335

RESOLUTION No. ___________

RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE

MAKING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

AND EXPENDITURES OUTSIDE THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS FOR THE 2025-26 HOUSING AUTHORITY BUDGET AND ADOPTING
THE 2025-26 HOUSING AUTHORITY BUDGET
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale (“Housing Authority”) administers the Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF) pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33334.3 for the purpose of increasing, improving and preserving the City’s affordable housing stock; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority must incur certain administrative expenses in connection with its programs to increase, improve and preserve the supply of affordable housing within the City; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority finds that the expenditure of LMIHAF monies outside the Central Glendale and the San Fernando Road Corridor Redevelopment Project areas (the “Project Areas”) will be of benefit to the Project Areas as the completion of project implementation within the Project Areas and will continue to generate jobs within the Project Areas, thereby creating the need for programs throughout the City to increase the supply of affordable housing and improve and preserve the City’s existing affordable housing stock; and

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1.The Housing Authority finds and determines that the planning and administrative expenses provided for in the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Housing Authority Budget to be made from the LMIHAF are necessary for the production, improvement and preservation of low- and moderate-income housing and directly relate to the projects and programs funded by the LMIHAF.

SECTION 2.The Housing Authority finds that the expenditure of LMIHAF monies outside the Redevelopment Project areas (Central and San Fernando) will be of benefit to the Redevelopment Project areas as the implementation of the Redevelopment Projects has and will continue to generate jobs in the Redevelopment Projects, thereby creating the need for programs throughout the City to increase the supply of affordable housing and improve and preserve the City’s existing affordable housing stock.

SECTION 3. The Housing Authority hereby adopts the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Housing Authority Budget as set forth and described in the Joint Report to the Housing Authority and City Council dated June 24, 2025.
11 of 335

Adopted this _____ day of June, 2025.
______________________________
Chair
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Authority Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., Clerk of the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.______________was duly adopted by the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale, at a Joint Meeting of the Housing Authority and the Council of the City of Glendale held on the _______ day of ________________________, 2025, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
___________________________________________
Clerk of the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale
12 of 335

MOTION
Moved by Housing Authority Member ____________________________, seconded by Housing Authority Member ___________________________, that the Housing Authority hereby approves an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement between the Housing Authority and Kane Ballmer & Berkman (C106203) in connection with professional legal services necessary in the area of affordable housing development as described in the Joint Report to the Council and Housing Authority dated June 24, 2025. The amendment to the agreement will (i) increase the contract amount by $300,000 to a total not to exceed amount of $1,040,000 and (ii) extend the contract term for two years to June 30, 2027.

The Executive Director or his designee is authorized to execute the amendment to the agreement subject to approval by the City Attorney.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
13 of 335

MOTION
Moved by Council Member__________________________,
seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the Council hereby approves an amendment to the contract with Heritage Housing Partners for loan servicing and administering a line of credit for the purchase/resale of Doran Affordable Homeownership Units. The amendment will extend the agreement term for two years to June 30, 2027, as particularly outlined in the Joint Report to the Council and Housing Authority dated June 24, 2025.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
14 of 335

City of Glendale

DISCLOSURE - CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE
The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5744, “Campaign Finance Ordinance,” which became effective on September 9, 2011, and amended it with Ordinance No. 5768, which became effective on March 15, 2012 (“the Ordinance”). The Ordinance prohibits: (1) A contractor* (including a subcontractor**)― who has a contract with the City of Glendale (“City”), Economic Development Department (“EDD”), or the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale (“HA”) and that contract is subject to approval by the City Council, EDD, or HA― from making a contribution to a City Council member, EDD member, HA member, City Clerk, or City Treasurer; and (2) Council members, EDD members, and HA members from voting on matters concerning a contract with a person who has provided a campaign contribution.

The Ordinance applies to a contractor whose contract requires the City Council’s, EDD's, or HA’s approval. A contract with the City, EDD, or HA is known as a “City Contract.” The Ordinance also applies to a subcontractor who has a subcontract through a City Contract. The Ordinance excludes a competitively bid contract awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.

To assist members of the City Council, EDD, and HA before they vote on a matter regarding a City Contract, the Ordinance requires City staff to prepare this report which discloses certain information about: the contractor receiving the City Contract, and the subcontractor(s) working under the City Contract.

A contractor must provide the information listed below when: A subcontractor must provide the information listed below when:
•The City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $50,000 or more; or • The subcontract through a City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $25,000 or more; or
• A combination or series of City Contracts have a value of $50,000 or more. • A combination or series of subcontract s, for the same or different projects, have an aggregate value of $25,000 or
more. Information that must be disclosed: ● Name of the person, entity, or organization (i.e., the Contractor or Subcontractor) ● Name of the Chief Executive Officer/Pre
siden t
● Chief Operating Officer
● Chief Financial Officer
● Chairper
son
● All members of the Board of Directors
● All persons who own more than 10% of the perso
n, entity, or organi zation
● Name of any campaign committee owned or controll ed by the person, entity, or organization Please complete the following disclosure form:

Contractor(s)*:

Name Address
Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
*“Contractor” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, EDD, or HA or any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Direct ors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operat ing Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entit y, or organization, and any campaign committee that is o wned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address. 15 of 335

Rev. 6/7/12 J:\FILES\DOCFILES\ORD\CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION\DISCLOSURE FORM – CONTRACTOR – 6-7-12.doc Subcontractor(s)**:

Name Address
Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
** “Subcontractor” is the person, entity, or organization that has entered into a contract for the performance of all or a portion of the work undertaken under an agreement with an architect, design professional, engineer, or gener al or prime contract, usually by a general or prime contrac tor. Subcontractor includes any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financ ial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address.

Campaign Committee owned or controlled by:

Title Business Address City State Zip

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named Contractor Subcontractor:
• I acknowledge that I have a continuing obligation to update this disclosure form if I substitute― or if I select additional ― architects, design professionals, contractors, or subcontractors within ten (10) days of the selection or change; and • I hereby certify that:
I have identified all persons for which the Ordinance requires disclo sure; The information in this disclosure form (and any attachment to this form) is true, accurate, correct, and complete; and I have been legally authorized to su bmit this disclosure form.

In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is pages.

Executed on: , 20 , at: , California.

Signature: Print Full Name:

Address:

Phone Number: E-mail Address:
16 of 335

City of Glendale

DISCLOSURE - CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE
7KH&LW\&RXQFLODGRSWHG2UGLQDQFH1R³&DPSDLJQ)LQDQFH2UGLQDQFH´ZKLFKEHFDPHHIIHFWLYHRQ6HSWHPEHU DQGDPHQGHGLWZLWK2UGLQDQFH1R
ZKLFKEHFDPHHIIHFWLYHRQ0DUFK
³WKH2UGLQDQFH´
7KH2UGLQDQFHSURKLELWV

$FRQWUDFWRU

LQFOXGLQJDVXEFRQWUDFWRU

ʊZKRKDVDFRQWUDFWZLWKWKH&LW\
RI*OHQGDOH
³&LW\´
(FRQRPLF'HYHORSPHQW'HSDUWPHQW
³(''´
RUWKH+RXVLQJ$XWKRULW\RIWKH&LW\RI*OHQGDOH
³+$´
DQGWKDWFRQWUDFWLVVXEMHFWWRDSSURYDOE\WKH&LW\
&RXQFLO(''RU+$ʊIURPPDNLQJDFRQWULEXWLRQWRD&LW\&RXQFLOPHPEHU(''PHPEHU+$PHPEHU&LW\&OHUNRU&LW\7UHDVXUHU DQG

&RXQFLOPHPEHUV(''
PHPEHUVDQG+$PHPEHUVIURPYRWLQJRQPDWWHUVFRQFHUQLQJDFRQWUDFWZLWKDSHUVRQZKRKDVSURYLGHGDFDPSDLJQFRQWULEXWLRQ 7KH2UGLQDQFHDSSOLHVWRDFRQWUDFWRUZKRVHFRQWUDFWUHTXLUHVWKH&LW\&RXQFLO¶V('' VRU+$¶VDSSURYDO$FRQWUDFWZLWKWKH&LW\(''RU+$LVNQRZQDVD³&LW\ &RQWUDFW´7KH2UGLQDQFHDOVRDSSOLHVWRDVXEFRQWUDFWRUZKRKDVDVXEFRQWUDFWWKURXJKD&LW\&RQWUDFW7KH2UGLQDQFHH[FOXGHVDFRPSHWLWLYHO\ELGFRQWUDFWDZDUGHGWR WKHORZHVWUHVSRQVLEOHELGGHU
7RDVVLVWPHPEHUVRIWKH&LW\&RXQFLO(''DQG+$EHIRUHWKH\YRWHRQDPDWWHUUHJDUGLQJD&LW\&RQWUDFWWKH2UGLQDQFHUHTXLUHV&LW\VWDIIWRSUHSDUHWKLVUHSRUWZKLFK GLVFORVHVFHUWDLQLQIRUPDWLRQDERXW
WKHFRQWUDFWRUUHFHLYLQJWKH&LW\&RQWUDFWDQGWKHVXEFRQWUDFWRU V
ZRUNLQJXQGHUWKH&LW\&RQWUDFW
A contractor must provide the information listed below when: A subcontractor must provide the information listed below when:
x The City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $50,000 or more; or x The subcontract through a City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $25,000 or more; or
x A combination or series of City Contracts have a value of $50,000 or more. x A combination or series of subcontracts, for the same or different projects, have an aggregate value of $25,000 or
more. Information that must be disclosed: Ɣ Name of the person, entity, or organization (i.e., the Contractor or Subcontractor) Ɣ Name of the Chief Executive Officer/President
Ɣ Chief Operating Officer
Ɣ Chief Financial Officer
Ɣ Chairperson
Ɣ All members of the Board of Directors
Ɣ All persons who own more than 10% of the person, entity, or organization Ɣ Name of any campaign committee owned or controlled by the person, entity, or organization Please complete the following disclosure form:

Contractor(s)*:

Name Address
Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
* “Contractor” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, ('', or HA or any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operat ing Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is o wned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address. contract awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.

Kane, Ballmer and Berkman, A Law Corporation 515 S Figueroa St., Ste 780, Lo s Angeles, CA 90071 Royce K. Jones 515 S Figueroa St., Ste 780 Los Angeles CA 90071 Todd C. Mooney 515 S Figueroa St., Ste 780 Los Angeles CA 90071 Kendall D. Levan 515 S Figueroa St., Ste 780 Los Angeles CA 90071 Royce K. Jones, Kendall D. Levan, Susan Y. Apy, Todd C. Mooney 515 S Figueroa St., Ste 780 Los Angeles CA 90071 Royce K. Jones, Kendall D. Levan, Susan Y. Apy 515 S Figueroa St., Ste 780 Los Angeles CA 90071 17 of 335

Rev. 6/7/12 J:\FILES\DOCFILES\ORD\CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION\DISCLOSURE FORM – CONTRACTOR – 6-7-12.doc Subcontractor(s)**:

Name Address
Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
** “Subcontractor” is the person, entity, or organization that has entered into a contract for the performance of all or a portion of the work undertaken under an agreement with an architect, design professional, engineer, or g eneral or prime contract, usually by a general or prime contrac tor. Subcontractor includes any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financ ial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address.

Campaign Committee owned or controlled by:

Title Business Address City State Zip

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named Contractor Subcontractor:
x I acknowledge that I have a continuing obligation to update this disclosure form if I substitute ʊ or if I select additional ʊ architects, design professionals, contractors, or subcontractors within ten (10) days of the selection or change; and x I hereby certify that:
I have identified all persons for which the Ordinance requires disclosure; The information in this disclosure form (and any attachment to this form) is true, accurate, correct, and complete; and I have been legally authorized to submit this disclosure form.

In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is pages.

Executed on: , 20 , at: , California.

Signature: Print Full Name:

Address:

Phone Number: E-mail Address:

Susan Y. Apy
0 June 16 25 Los Angeles
Susan Apy
515 S Figueroa St., Ste 780, Los Angeles, CA 90071
213-617-0480 [email protected]
18 of 335

Summary of Revenues & Appropriations
Housing Funds
Net Surplus/
(Use of Fund
Balance)
Proposed
FY 2025‐26
Appropriations
Proposed
FY 2025‐26
RevenuesFund
$ (47,772)$ 56,113,075$ 56,065,303 2020 ‐ Housing Assistance Fund ‐1,245,4311,245,4312030 ‐ Home Grant Fund*
‐‐‐2040 ‐ Continuum of Care Grant Fund**
562,285562,2852050 ‐ Emergency Solutions Grant Fund*
500,173148,127648,3002090 ‐ Affordable Housing Trust Fund ‐ 12,00012,0002120 ‐ BEGIN Affordable Homeownership Fund (751,060)1,830,0601,079,0002130 ‐ Low & Mod Income Housing Asset Fund ‐280,408 280,408
2160 ‐ Grant Fund (Homeless Housing Assistance and
Prevention Program [HHAP‐5])
‐‐‐2280 ‐ Permanent Local Housing Allocation Fund***
1,368,384 ‐1,368,3844110 ‐ Housing Development Impact Fee Fund $1,069,725$60,191,386$61,261,111Special Revenue Total
* Fund 2030 and Fund 2050 ‐ Table reflects actual allocations awarded for revenues and appropriations. Proposed Citywide Budget will be revised administratively
** Fund 2040 ‐ $3,298,618 was appropriated March 18, 2025. Projects will carryover to FY 2025‐26. *** Fund 2280 ‐ FY24 appropriation for revenue and expenses will carryover to FY 2025‐26 .

Slide 2
Summary of Revenues & Appropriations
2 19 of 335

2 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA
REPORT TO THE JOINT MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL AND

GLENDALE HOUSING AUTHORITY

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Note and File the City of Glendale’s 2025 Homeless Point-in-Time Count

1. Council Motion to Note and File the City of Glendale’s 2025 Homeless Point-in- Time Count.

2. Housing Authority Motion to Note and File the City of Glendale’s 2025 Homeless Point-in-Time Count.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for June 24, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Glendale, serving as the collaborative applicant for the Glendale Continuum of Care (CoC), is required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to conduct an annual Point-in-Time (PIT) count during the last ten days of January.

Due to wildfires, the 2025 count was postponed and conducted on February 19. The count identified 197 individuals experiencing homelessness in Glendale, a 13% increase from 175 in 2024. This figure includes both 110 sheltered and 87 unsheltered individuals. The PIT count provides a critical snapshot of local homelessness and supports the City’s ability to monitor trends, identify service gaps, and develop targeted housing strategies.

As the legal and fiscal agent for the CoC, the City of Glendale uses this data to inform policy decisions, enhance community outreach, and strengthen its overall homeless response system.

RECOMMENDATION
That City Council and Housing Authority each pass a Motion to note and file the City of Glendale’s 2025 Homeless Point-in-Time Count.

ANALYSIS
The Glendale CoC is one of thirteen CoCs in Southern California officially recognized by HUD. As the local planning body for homelessness, the CoC is responsible for managing federal, state and county funding to support housing and services for individuals and families experiencing homelessness. Under the HUD CoC Program (24 CFR Part 578), the Glendale CoC is required to:
20 of 335

22 6
1 3
4 Maintain a Coordinated Entry System (CES) to ensure a fair and efficient access to housing resources.
Administer the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) for data collection and reporting and;
Conduct the annual PIT count to capture a snapshot of current homelessness locally.

The City of Glendale serves as the collaborative applicant and legal and fiscal agent for its local CoC. Since 1996, the City has participated in the annual CoC Program Competition, securing over $66 million in federal funding exclusively for homeless programs. The City is one of only three cities in the County of Los Angeles that operates its own homeless CoC and is eligible to receive CoC funds directly from HUD. All other communities in the County fall under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA).

Homeless Point-in-Time Count
The CoC is required by HUD to conduct an annual PIT count during the last ten (10) days of January. In 2025, Glendale’s PIT count was rescheduled to February 19 due to January wildfires, which delayed data collection across the region. The count identified 197 individuals experiencing homelessness, a 13% increase from 175 in 2024. The unsheltered population, consisting of people living in places not meant for habitation, rose by 9% to 87 individuals, while the sheltered population, those in emergency shelters or transitional housing, increased by 16%, with 110 individuals counted.

Table 1: Comparison of 2024 and 2025 Homeless Counts
Household Composition and Demographics
Adult-only households represented 61% (120 individuals), a 17% increase from the prior year, while households with children accounted for 39% (77 individuals), a 7% increase.

The number of households experiencing domestic violence has increased by 20% from 20 in 2024 to 24 in 2025. Youth under 18 make up the largest percentage of the shelter homeless population (46%) and are primarily members of families fleeing domestic violence. This aging population represents 25% of the sheltered population and 43% of the unsheltered population and is particularly vulnerable, often facing greater health challenges and limited access to resources, highlighting the need for intensive wrap- around support and intervention. Lastly, of the 87 unsheltered individuals surveyed, 20 (23%) reported having at least one disabling condition-nearly doubled the 12 cases reported in 2024.

Racial/Ethnic Composition
Homeless Point-In-Time Count Sheltered Unsheltered Total 2024 95 80 175
2025 110 87 197
Difference: +16% +9% +13%
21 of 335

32 6
1 3
4 Between 2024 and 2025, Glendale’s sheltered homeless population saw a 233% increase in individuals identifying as Black, African American, or African, which may reflect progress in reducing barriers to access. This shift suggests that local programs may be improving in their use of culturally responsive assessments and screenings, allowing more individuals from historically underserved communities to be identified and connected to services. New representation also emerged among American Indian/Alaska Native and Middle Eastern/North African individuals. Meanwhile, Asian and Multiracial individuals were no longer represented in the sheltered count.

Unsheltered Population
The unsheltered population in Glendale experienced notable demographic shifts, including a 23% increase in individuals identifying as Hispanic and a 39% rise among White individuals. Armenian representation tripled, while the number of Black and Asian individuals declined significantly by 61% and 20% respectively. Meanwhile, representation among American Indian Alaskan Native, or Indigenous individuals remained unchanged.

Comparison of Census data with the 2025 PIT count reveals significant racial and ethnic disparities in Glendale’s homeless population. Black residents, who make up just 1.7% of the general population, account for 19% of the homeless count. Similarly, Hispanic individuals represent 17% of the city but comprise 34% of those experiencing homelessness. These disparities reflect broader systemic inequities affecting communities of color. Additionally, some ethnic groups such as Armenians, are classified as White in federal data, yet face distinct social, economic, and cultural barriers that may contribute to their growing presence among the unsheltered population. This highlights the importance of going beyond standard racial categories to better understand and address the unique vulnerabilities within Glendale’s diverse communities. The 2025 PIT count reflects significant demographic shifts, rising needs, and persistent disparities in Glendale’s homeless population. These findings also inform ongoing efforts to refine outreach and services and ensure equitable access to housing for all residents.

Table 2: Comparison of 2020 U.S. Census Data and PIT Results (Race/Ethnicity) Chronic Homelessness
Chronic homelessness increased by 44% in 2025, with 26 individuals identified compared to 18 in 2024. Of those identified in 2025, 17 were unsheltered, nearly triple the number from 2024, when 6 chronically homeless individuals were unsheltered. This data highlights a growing need for targeted interventions to support individuals with long-term housing and mental health resources. It is important to note that, of the 110 sheltered Race/Ethnicity 2020 Census Data PIT Data
White 62.3% 35%
Hispanic or Latino 17.1% 34%
Black or African American 1.7% 19%
Native American or Alaska Native 0.5% 0.3%
Multi-racial 3.4% 0.2%
22 of 335

42 6
1 3
4 individuals counted on the night of the survey, only 9 individuals (8%) were identified as chronically homeless. This represents a 25% decrease from the 12 individuals identified as chronically homeless in the 2024 sheltered count. The decrease in chronic homelessness among the sheltered population is likely due to the availability of emergency housing vouchers and more temporary housing options, which have provided a pathway out of homelessness for some individuals
An individual qualifies as chronically homeless if they have experienced homelessness continuously for at least 12 months or have had multiple episodes of homelessness totaling 12 months over the past three years and have a qualifying disability, such as a physical or mental health condition.

First-Time Homelessness
First-time homelessness also became a significant concern: 43% (37) of the unsheltered individuals reported becoming homeless for the first time in Glendale. Strikingly, 62% (23) of them had lived in the city for more than a decade, some for their entire lives, indicating deep community roots among many newly unhoused individuals. Older adults made up a significant portion of the unsheltered population: 37 individuals (49%) were aged 55 or older. Overall, first-time homelessness in Glendale increased by 28% compared to 2024.

Key contributing factors identified include:
Rent Increases:
38% (14 out of 37) of respondents cited rising rent as the primary cause of their homelessness representing a 75% increase from 2024. This highlights the growing impact of housing affordability on housing stability. Unemployment:

Also reported by 32% (12 out of 37) of respondents, unemployment remains a leading cause, though it reflects a 14% decrease from the previous year. The data suggests continued vulnerability among low-income residents, especially those in unstable or low-wage jobs.
Unexpected Illness:
11% (4 out of 37) of respondents reported health-related issues, consistent with 2024 findings. Both physical and mental health challenges remain persistent risks for those on the brink of homelessness.
Divorce or Separation:

Reported by (3 out of 37) 8% of respondents, this factor has decreased by 25% from 2024. While still notable, it appears to be a less dominant contributor compared to prior years.

Limitations of the PIT Count
The PIT count has several limitations that should be considered when interpreting its data.

Conducted on a single night each year, it provides only a snapshot of homelessness and does not capture year-round trends or fluctuations. Its reliance on visual observation and brief interviews can lead to significant undercounts, particularly of individuals in hidden or 23 of 335

52 6
1 3
4 less visible locations. To address these gaps, the HMIS collects ongoing data on individuals entering and exiting homelessness. This continuous data provides valuable context, allowing for better trend analysis and more informed decision-making. For example, in Glendale, annual data consistently shows more unsheltered individuals than are captured in the PIT count. In 2024, the PIT count identified 80 unsheltered individuals, whereas our services reached 1,075 unduplicated individuals over the year. Similarly, the 2025 PIT count recorded 87 individuals, but between January and March 2025 alone, we served 672 unduplicated individuals.

These discrepancies highlight the limitations of relying solely on a one-night count. Many people experiencing homelessness may be missed due to their location or circumstances on that specific night. Its critical to supplement the PIT count with continuous data collection to gain a fuller, more accurate understanding of homelessness and its evolving nature. For the full report and comprehensive analysis, please refer to the (Exhibit 1).

During the PIT count, people experiencing homelessness are asked to complete a survey about their background and needs. Some individuals may not answer all the questions or may choose not to take the survey. To ensure everyone is still counted, HUD provides an extrapolation tool that uses the completed surveys to estimate information for those who didn’t participate fully. This comprehensive PIT report includes data from that tool to give a more complete picture of the those experiencing homelessness in Glendale. (Exhibit 2).

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
After approval from City Council/Housing Authority, the agencies and community will be informed of the 2025 PIT results via the City’s Homeless Services webpage and other online platforms, including social media..

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This item is not a project as defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15378, and thus, is not an activity subject to CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines § 15060(c)(3).)

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not approve the Motion to Note-and-File the 2025 Homeless PIT Report Alternative 2: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
24 of 335

62 6
1 3
4 Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Arsine Isayan, Deputy Director, Community Development/Housing Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1 2025 Homeless PIT Comprehensive Report
Exhibit 2 2025 Homeless Point-in-Time Count HUD Report Submission 25 of 335

1 4
5 8
1 MOTION
Moved by Councilmember , seconded by
Councilmember , that, with respect to the
report of the Director of Community Development dated June 24, 2025, the City Council hereby notes and files the City of Glendale’s 2025 Homeless Point-in-Time Count.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
26 of 335

1 4
5 8
1 MOTION
Moved by Housing Authority Member , seconded by
Housing Authority Member , that, with respect to the
report of the Director of Community Development dated June 24, 2025, the Housing Authority hereby notes and files the City of Glendale’s 2025 Homeless Point-in-Time Count.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
27 of 335

2025 Point-In- Time
Homeless Count
hOMELESS cOUNT dATE
02/19/2025
EXHIBIT 1
28 of 335

TABLE OF CONTENTS
When was the 2025 Count Conducted?......................

Who was Counted?.....................................................

Who was not Counted.................................................

Data Limitations.........................................................

Comparison of 2024 and 2025 Survey Results.........

Demographic Breakdown...........................................

Household Type...................................................

Gender.................................................................

Age......................................................................

Race/Ethnicity.....................................................

Chronic Homelessness .............................................

Unsheltered population.......................................

Disabling Conditions....................................

Length of Residency in Glendale..................

The Cause of Chronic Homelessness............

Sheltered population ..........................................

Subpopulation............................................................

Special Needs .....................................................

Veterans .............................................................

Youth ..................................................................

Unsheltered Count......................................................

Sheltered Count..........................................................

Demographic Breakdown..........................................

Sleeping Conditions..................................................

Gender.......................................................................

Age............................................................................

INTRODUCTION

METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION
2025 SURVEY RESULTS
1 15
15 15
16 6
7 8
8 8
9 9
9 10
10 11
11 11
13 13
13 14
14 4
4 5
5 UNSHELTERED POPULATION
2 4
3 29 of 335

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Comparison of 2024 and 2025..............................

Length of Residency in Glendale...........................

Gender....................................................................

Age.........................................................................

Race and Ethnicity.................................................

Employment Status...............................................

Factors Contributing to Homelessness..................

Disabling Conditions............................................. 2025 Count Results.............................................

Supopulations..................................................

Homelessness Among Glendale Residents...........

Trends 2023-2025...............................................

HOMELESSNESS AMONG GLENDALE

RESIDENTS
25 26
27 28
20 20
20 20
20 21
21 22

HIGHLIGTS

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusion and Recommendations....................... 24

SHELTERED POPULATION
Age........................................................................

Gender...................................................................

Race and Ethnicity...............................................

Households with Children......................................

Households without Children................................. 18 18
19 19
19 5
6 7
8 Race/Ethnicity.........................................................

Disabling Conditions...............................................

Employment Status.................................................

Factors Contributing to Homelessness.................... 16 17
17 18
30 of 335

INTRODUCTION
When Was the 2025 Count Conducted?
Due to wildfires in January, the 2025 PIT Count was rescheduled and conducted on February 19, during two time windows: 5:00 AM–9:00 AM and 7:00 PM–11:00 PM.

During these periods, teams were dispatched throughout Glendale to identify and survey unsheltered individuals. The count also incorporated data from emergency shelters and transitional housing programs, capturing individuals who had stayed in these facilities the previous night.

Who Was Counted?
In accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidelines, individuals were considered homeless, and therefore included in the Point-in-Time Count, if they were residing in any of the following locations on the night of the count:
2025 Homeless Count Report
4 Each year, the City of Glendale conducts its annual Point-in-Time (PIT) Count to measure the scope of homelessness within the community. This count includes both sheltered and unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness and serves as a vital tool for understanding local trends, evaluating existing programs, and identifying the needs of the unhoused population in Glendale. The PIT Count is part of a nationwide initiative to provide a comprehensive "snapshot" of homelessness on a single day each year.

While the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires local jurisdictions to conduct the PIT Count biennially, typically during the last 10 days of January, to remain eligible for Continuum of Care (CoC) funding, Glendale goes further by conducting the count annually. This approach allows the city to maintain a more consistent, data-driven strategy for addressing homelessness. As one of over 400 jurisdictions that apply annually for HUD CoC funding, Glendale’s yearly count strengthens its ability to respond to emerging needs.
31 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
Data Limitations
While the Point-in-Time (PIT) Count provides valuable insights, it also comes with inherent limitations that should be considered when interpreting the results. One key limitation is its temporal scope—because the count is conducted on a single night, it cannot fully capture the dynamic nature of homelessness throughout the year. Seasonal changes, policy shifts, and economic conditions may all cause fluctuations that are not reflected in this one-day snapshot.

Another significant limitation is the potential for underreporting. The PIT Count relies on visual identification and in-person interviews, which may miss individuals who are in hidden or hard-to- reach locations. People who avoid contact or reside in less visible, informal shelters may not be counted, leading to an underestimation of the true extent of homelessness. To address these gaps, Glendale also relies on data from the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS).

Unlike the PIT Count, HMIS tracks individuals over time, capturing patterns of entry into and exit from homelessness.

For instance, our annual data consistently reveals a higher number of unsheltered individuals in Glendale than what is recorded in the PIT Count. In 2024, the PIT Count identified 80 unsheltered individuals, while our services reached 1,075 unduplicated unsheltered individuals throughout the year. Similarly, the 2025 PIT Count recorded 87 unsheltered individuals, but between January Who Was Not Counted?
Individuals were not included in the homeless count if they were staying in:

Medical facilities (e.g., hospitals, psychiatric facilities, or nursing homes) Jails, prisons, or juvenile detention centers
Substance abuse treatment or detox centers
Foster care homes or group homes for minors
Places not meant for human habitation, such as cars, tents, parks, sidewalks, or abandoned buildings
Emergency shelters
Hotels or motels paid for by government programs
Transitional housing designated for people experiencing homelessness Safe Havens
5 32 of 335

The unsheltered count focuses on areas within Glendale that have high concentrations of homelessness. These high-priority areas are identified using local data, prior knowledge, and input from service providers and law enforcement. To ensure the count’s accuracy, trained survey teams conduct face-to-face interviews with individuals living on the streets or in places not meant for habitation. These teams are supervised by Glendale Police officers to guarantee both the effectiveness and safety of the process.

The survey instrument for this count is developed using ESRI's ArcGIS software and Survey123.

This tool helps capture critical demographic information, such as age, gender, race, ethnicity, housing status, and the duration of homelessness. Volunteers, staff from community organizations, and City of Glendale personnel are all trained to administer the survey. Data gathered from these interviews is processed through ArcGIS software for further analysis.

METHODOLOGY AND DATA

COLLECTION
2025 Homeless Count Report
The methodology behind the PIT Count is carefully designed to ensure that data collected is as accurate and representative as possible. The process involves two key components:

Street Outreach & Interviews: Trained volunteers and staff conduct interviews with unsheltered individuals and visually survey public areas during designated early morning and evening hours.

Shelter and Program Data: Information is also gathered from emergency shelters, transitional housing programs, and other service providers, many of which report through HMIS.

Incorporating both direct engagement and administrative data allows the city to create a more complete picture of homelessness in Glendale. The approach prioritizes data integrity, dignity, and respect for those being surveyed, while minimizing bias and ensuring demographic representation.

To ensure the accuracy of the count, a unique
identifier is assigned to each respondent based on
demographic data and a detailed description of their
situation. If duplicate surveys are detected during data entry, they are promptly removed to avoid skewing
the results. In cases where demographic data is
missing- whether from individuals who declined to
participate or were missed in the count- an
and March of 2025 alone, we have already served 672
unduplicated individuals. This disparity highlights the challenge of capturing the full extent of homelessness
in a single, one-night survey, as many individuals may
not be visible during the count or may not seek
assistance on that particular night.

It underscores the importance of using continuous
data collection methods alongside the PIT Count to
gain a more accurate understanding of the homeless
population and its evolving needs.
6 33 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
The sheltered count is an important complement to the unsheltered Count, focusing on individuals residing in formal housing arrangements, such as shelters and transitional housing programs. While the unsheltered count addresses those living on the streets or in places not meant for habitation, the sheltered count captures individuals experiencing homelessness who are temporarily housed in structured settings, like emergency shelters or transitional housing programs.

The goal of the sheltered count is to identify and collect data on individuals residing in emergency shelters, transitional housing, or temporary housing provided by third-party social service agencies. Although temporarily housed, these individuals are still considered homeless under the HUD definition due to the lack of permanent, stable housing. Tracking those in shelters helps to fully capture the scope of homelessness, including individuals who may face challenges in securing long-term housing.

Data collection for the Sheltered Count is primarily managed through the HMIS system, a federally mandated system recommended by HUD for managing and reporting homeless populations, especially in shelter settings. HMIS is an integrated software platform used by agencies that provide services to individuals experiencing homelessness. It centralizes data across shelters, transitional housing programs, and other supportive housing services.

In compliance with HUD guidelines, each organization or agency managing shelter beds is required to input data into the HMIS system, including demographic information, housing status, duration of homelessness, and other relevant data points about the individuals they serve. This data is collected at various points of entry, such as when a person first arrives at a shelter or enters transitional housing and can be updated as they progress through services or move to permanent housing. HMIS data includes:

Demographic Information: Basic details such as age, gender, race, ethnicity, and family composition. This data helps identify trends across demographic groups and highlights the unique needs of different sub-populations within the homeless community.

Housing Status: Information on the current housing situation, including whether individuals are in emergency shelters, transitional housing, or another form of temporary housing.

Length of Homeless Time: Data regarding the duration of homelessness, crucial for understanding the severity and persistence of homelessness. This information can help identify individuals who may require more intensive support services.

Supportive Services Received: Many shelter programs offer additional services like case management, job training, or mental health support. These services are tracked in HMIS to evaluate their impact on outcomes for those experiencing homelessness. extrapolation tool is used to estimate the missing information. This tool employs regression analysis, a statistical method that examines relationships between variables. By analyzing correlations between collected demographic data (such as age, gender, race, and location) and data within the HMIS system, the city can project missing characteristics for individuals encountered during the street count. This method ensures that even incomplete data sets provide an accurate representation of the homeless population.
7 34 of 335

2025 SURVEY

RESULTS
This year’s total homeless population was recorded at 197 individuals, reflecting a 13% increase compared to the 175 individuals counted in 2024. The unsheltered population, or those living in places not meant for habitation, rose by 9%, with 87 individuals identified in this category. The sheltered population, consisting of individuals in emergency shelters or transitional housing, saw a 16% increase, with 110 individuals staying in shelters. 2025 Homeless Count Report
Demographic Breakdown
Household Type: Glendale’s homeless population was composed of 61% (120 individuals) in adult- only households without children and 39% (77 individuals) in households with children, out of a total of 197 individuals. This marks a slight shift from 2024, when out of 175 individuals, 59% (103 individuals) were in adult-only households and 41% (72 individuals) were in households with children. From 2024 to 2025, adult-only households increased by 17%, while households with children saw an increase of 7 %. While both categories saw an increase in total numbers, the proportion of adult-only households rose from 59% to 61%, suggesting a growing number of single adults or adult couples experiencing homelessness.
8 35 of 335

Racial and Ethnic Composition:

Between 2024 and 2025, the racial and ethnic composition of the sheltered population shifted notably. The most significant increase was among individuals identifying as Black, African American, or African, whose number more than tripled- from 9 to30 - representing a 233% increase. The number of individuals identifying as Hispanic/Latina/e/o grew modestly from 36 to 40, an 11% rise. Those identifying as White remained steady at 26 in both years, while the number of individuals identifying as both White and Hispanic dropped sharply from 12 to 5, a 58% decrease. New representation appeared among individuals identifying as American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous (increasing from 0 to 6) and those identifying as Middle Eastern or North African (from 0 to 3). Conversely, individuals identifying as Asian and Multiracial were no longer represented, with both groups decreasing from 6 in 2024 to 0 in 2025. 2025 Homeless Count Report
The age distribution showed notable patterns among the homeless population 26% of individuls experiencing homelessness were under 18, while 4% were between the ages of 18 and 24, an age group that often faces housing challenges due to limited income or support networks. The majority, 70%, were adults aged 25 and older, including 13% who were 65 years or older.

Gender distribution revealed that 59% (116 of the 197) of the homeless population were male, 40% (79 of the 197) were female, and 1% (2 of the 197) identified as transgender and more than one gender.

Among the sheltered population, the number of males increased by 12%, from 41 in 2024 to 46 in 2025, while females rose by 15%, from 54 to 62. Individuals identifying with a different gender also appeared for the first time, increasing from 0 to 2. In the unsheltered population, males saw a significant 19% increase, rising from 59 to 70 and continuing to represent the majority. Females in this group decreased by 15%, from 20 to 17. While one unsheltered individual identified with a different gender identity in 2024, none were recorded in this category in 2025. 9 36 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
Chronic Homelessness in Glendale
In the 2025 homeless count, 26 individuals were identified as chronically homeless, an increase from 18 in 2024. Of these, 17 were unsheltered and 9 were sheltered. This 44% year-over-year increase underscores a troubling rise in chronic homelessness in the region. *Chronic homelessness refers to individuals who have been homeless for at least one year or have experienced multiple episodes of homelessness, combined with the presence of one or more disabling conditions such as mental health issues, substance use disorders, chronic physical health conditions, and severe cognitive impairments that make it difficult to maintain stable housing and employment. These individuals face deeper-rooted challenges than the general homeless population, making it extremely difficult for them to exit homelessness. Chronic homelessness is often marked by repeated cycles of homelessness, wherein individuals may transition in and out of shelters or temporary housing, but are unable to secure permanent using due to their health, economic, and social barriers.

Unsheltered Chronic Homeless Population: 17 individuals were identified as chronically homeless and unsheltered, a stark increase from just 6 individuals in 2024. This represents a 183% increase in the number of chronically homeless individuals within just one year. This significant rise is a clear indication of escalating homelessness in the region, driven by several interrelated factors, including the housing affordability crisis, rising rent costs, and insufficient mental health services.

Many of the chronically homeless individuals are entrenched in a cycle of unemployment, substance abuse, and physical and mental health challenges that prevent them from breaking free of homelessness.
* The HMIS (Homeless Management Information System) does not include a specific category for “Armenian” as a race or ethnicity. As a result, it is difficult to determine exactly how many individuals of Armenian descent are sheltered in Glendale. Some may identify as “White,” others as “Middle Eastern or North African,” or “Other.” This limitation should be considered when interpreting the racial and ethnic composition data, as it may affect the accuracy of representation for the Armenian community within the homeless population.
10 In contrast, the unsheltered population experienced a different set of demographic shifts between 2024 and 2025. Hispanic representation increased by 23%, rising from 22 to 27 individuals. The number of White individuals, including those identifying as Armenian, grew by 39%, from 31 to 43.

In contrast, the Black population declined sharply by 61%, dropping from 18 to 7, while the Asian population decreased by 20%, from 5 to 4. Those identifying as Multiracial grew by 33%, from 3 to

4. Meanwhile, representation among American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous individuals remained unchanged at 1.
37 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
Length of Residency in Glendale: A substantial number of the chronically homeless individuals surveyed have long-standing ties to Glendale. Specifically, 10 of the 17 chronically homeless individuals became homeless while living in the city. When asked about their prior living situations, many individuals indicated that they had been living in Glendale for several years, with some having resided in the city for over a decade before losing their housing. For many, Glendale is not just the place they are experiencing homelessness—it’s their home, where they grew up, worked, or raised families. This highlights the complexity of the homelessness issue in the city and the necessity for solutions that reflect the unique challenges of Glendale residents.

The causes of chronic homelessness in Glendale are multifaceted and include both individual and structural factors. According to the 2025 survey, unemployment and rising rent costs were the most frequently cited reasons for homelessness.

Disabling Conditions: Among the 17 unsheltered chronically homeless individuals, 12% reported developmental disabilities, 41% had general health issues, 18% experienced mental health conditions, 47% had physical disabilities, and 6% reported substance use disorders.

Compared to 2024, these figures reveal concerning trends: the prevalence of physical disabilities and developmental disabilities doubled, indicating a growing number of individuals facing severe functional impairments. General health issues also saw an increase of 40%, suggesting worsening overall health among this population. In contrast, rates of mental health conditions and substance use disorders remained stable, reflecting persistent challenges in these areas that continue to require focused attention. These shifts highlight the evolving and complex needs of the chronically homeless community, emphasizing the importance of integrated healthcare, accessible disability services, and targeted support programs to address both physical and cognitive impairments alongside ongoing mental health and substance use concerns.
11 38 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
Rising Rent Costs: High housing costs were another major contributing factor. 3 of the 17 individuals surveyed (18%) attributed their homelessness to rising rent prices. As rent continues to increase in Glendale, individuals with limited or unstable incomes struggle to maintain housing. This reflects a broader affordability crisis across California and the nation. For chronically homeless individuals, the combination of high rents, low wages, limited affordable housing, and unstable employment opportunities creates significant barriers to securing and maintaining permanent housing. Additionally, evictions— whether due to non-payment or other reasons—remain a common pathway into homelessness.

Family Conflicts and Health Issues: Beyond economic challenges, personal and health- related issues also play a significant role. Some chronically homeless individuals reported becoming homeless due to family conflict, divorce, or serious health problems. When family support systems break down, individuals may have nowhere else to turn. Health- related issues, such as chronic illness or untreated mental health conditions, can also prevent individuals from working or maintaining stable housing. In the 2025 survey, 2 of the 17 individuals (12%) cited illness as a cause of their homelessness, while another 2 (12%) reported divorce or separation as contributing factors.

Unemployment: Of the 17 individuals surveyed, 6 (35%) reported becoming homeless due to unemployment. A lack of job opportunities, compounded by barriers such as mental health issues, substance use, and discrimination, makes it especially difficult for many to secure or maintain employment, further entrenching them in homelessness. Among those surveyed, only 2 individuals were currently employed, each earning $501 or more per month. Interestingly, income levels among the unemployed were higher overall: 1 unemployed person reported earning between $251–$500 per month, while 7 reported earning $501 or more. These findings highlight the complex and varied financial circumstances faced by homeless individuals—suggesting that employment status alone may not always align with income level, and that informal or non-traditional income sources may be at play.
12 39 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
In contrast, there was a notable increase in the number of adults with HIV/AIDS. This year, 3 individuals with HIV/AIDS were identified, double the number reported in 2024.

Furthermore, the count included 24 victims of domestic violence, a 20% increase from 2024.

Domestic violence remains a leading cause of homelessness, particularly for women and children, and these individuals often require specialized care and housing options that can support their recovery from trauma.

Subpopulations
Each year, the homeless count provides an important snapshot of the prevalence of specific disabilities and health conditions within the homeless population. For many individuals and families experiencing homelessness, health issues are a significant contributing factor to the financial crises that result in the loss of stable housing. Without access to essential support services, even minor illnesses can escalate into more severe or chronic conditions. Exposure to harsh environmental elements, physical violence, inadequate nutrition, and a lack of preventive care often intensifies health issues, leading to more serious illnesses and placing an increasing financial burden on local communities.

Special Needs: This year’s count highlights a few key subpopulations of homeless individuals with specific needs. There were 15 adults identified with serious mental illness, representing a 7% increase from 14 individuals counted in 2024. Mental health disorders remain a significant challenge, and the lack of appropriate treatment or housing can worsen the instability these individuals experience. Similarly, 2 adults were reported with substance use disorder, showing no change from 2024. Substance abuse often both contributes to and results from homelessness, and the need for better access to treatment programs is evident.

Sheltered Chronic Homeless Population: While the unsheltered population saw a marked increase in chronic homelessness, the sheltered population in Glendale showed a different trend.

Of the 110 sheltered individuals counted on the night of the count, only 9 individuals (8%) were identified as chronically homeless. This represents a 25% decrease from the 12 individuals identified as chronically homeless in the 2024 sheltered count. The decrease in chronic homelessness among the sheltered population is likely due to the availability of emergency housing vouchers and more temporary housing options, which have provided a pathway out of homelessness for some individuals. These vouchers help individuals secure housing while they work through the underlying issues of chronic homelessness, such as substance abuse or mental health conditions. While this decrease is a positive development, it is clear that a comprehensive approach is needed to address the rising rates of chronic homelessness in Glendale, particularly among the unsheltered population.
13 40 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
Youth: In the 2025 count, 7 individuals aged 18 to 24 were identified, marking a 17% increase from the previous year. This increase in youth homelessness is particularly troubling, as young people are at a heightened risk of long-term instability. Among these youth, 2 were unsheltered, a slight decrease from the 3 unsheltered youth reported in 2024. While this suggests some progress in sheltering youth, there is still a long way to go. The majority of the youth in this group, 5 individuals, were sheltered. Of these, 2 were unaccompanied and 3 were parenting youth with minor children, an increase from 2024, when 3 parenting youth were sheltered.

Veterans continue to represent a unique sub-population within the homeless community. In 2025, 4 unsheltered veterans were identified, consistent with the number found in 2024.

However, the number of sheltered veterans decreased by 100% from 2024. Over the past three years, coordinated efforts at the federal, state, and local levels have led to a notable decline in veteran homelessness. Key strategies included a Housing First approach, increased funding for housing and support services, and targeted outreach through veteran-led case management teams. Veterans were connected to permanent housing along with mental health care, job training, and other essential services. Public-private partnerships also played a critical role in expanding housing access and employment opportunities.
14 41 of 335

UNSHELTERED POPULATION
2025 Homeless Count Report
Demographic Breakdown
Gender: Between 2024 and 2025, the gender composition of Glendale’s unsheltered population shifted modestly. The number of unsheltered males increased from 59 to 70, a 19% rise, maintaining their status as the majority demographic. In contrast, the number of unsheltered females declined by 15%, from 20 to 17. Individuals identifying with a gender identity other than male or female were no longer represented in 2025, decreasing from 1 individual in the previous year to none.

The unsheltered homeless population in Glendale continues to be a significant concern, with an increase of 9% from 2024. The 2025 PIT count recorded 87 unsheltered individuals, compared to 80 in the previous year. This increase highlights not only the housing affordability crisis but also the growing intersection of homelessness with mental health challenges. Many unsheltered individuals struggle with untreated or under-treated mental health conditions, which can hinder their ability to access services, maintain employment, or navigate housing systems. 15 42 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
The racial and ethnic composition of Glendale’s unsheltered population shifted notably between 2024 and 2025. The number of Hispanic individuals increased by 23%, rising from 22 to

27. White individuals grew modestly by 8%, from 26 to 28, while those identifying as Armenian experienced a sharp increase of 200%, from 5 to 15 individuals. In contrast, the number of Black individuals declined significantly by 61%, dropping from 18 to 7. Asian representation also decreased, falling by 20%, from 5 to 4 individuals. The Multiracial population saw a 33% increase, rising from 3 to 4. Notably, a new racial/ethnic category—Middle Eastern—was recorded for the first time, accounting for 1% of the population.

These demographic shifts underscore the evolving nature of homelessness in Glendale and highlight the need for culturally responsive, community-informed services that address the diverse experiences and needs of those affected.

The age distribution of the unsheltered population reveals notable and concerning trends, particularly among older adults. Between 2024 and 2025, the most significant growth occurred in two age groups. The 25-54 age group increased by 7%, rising from 44 to 47 individuals, and the number of individuals aged 55 and older grew by 16%, from 32 to 37.

By 2025, older adults made up a significant portion of the unsheltered population: 37 individuals (43%) were aged 55 or older, including 19 (22%) who were 65 and above. This aging population is particularly vulnerable, often facing greater health challenges and limited access to resources, highlighting the need for targeted support and intervention. 16 43 of 335

Employment Status: Economic hardship remains a contributing driver of homelessness. In 2025, 50 unsheltered individuals (57%) reported being unemployed—an increase from 35 individuals in 2024. This trend highlights the growing role of unemployment in perpetuating homelessness.

Even for those who are employed, many job opportunities in Glendale do not offer a livable wage, leaving low-income individuals unable to afford stable housing.

Among unsheltered individuals who reported having some form of income:
2025 Homeless Count Report
7 individuals (8%) reported earning more
than $1,000 per month.
6 individuals (6.9%) reported earning
between $501 and $1,000 per month.
7 individuals (8%) earned between $251
and $500 per month.
8 individuals (9%) earned between $1 and
$250 per month.
24 individuals (27.6%) reported having no
income at all, making it nearly impossible
for them to afford housing.

Barriers and Contributing Factors
Disabling Conditions Health issues remain a major barrier to overcoming homelessness. In 2025, a total of 20 individuals (23%) reported having at least one disabling condition, nearly double the 12 cases reported in 2024. Among these 20 individuals, many were living with multiple co- occurring health issues, including:
10 individuals (11%) with physical impairments
9 individuals (10%) with chronic health conditions
4 individuals (5 %) experiencing mental health issues
These overlapping conditions contribute to greater vulnerability and underscore the need for comprehensive, coordinated health and housing services.

Additionally, 3 individuals (3%) reported being diagnosed with AIDS, and 4 individuals (5%) indicated they were experiencing homelessness due to domestic violence.

These health-related challenges illustrate the complex needs of the unsheltered population, with many individuals requiring access to healthcare services, mental health counseling, and substance abuse treatment. Expanding access to these critical services is essential to helping people exit homelessness and prevent them from falling back into it. 17 44 of 335

SHELTERED POPULATION
Demographic Breakdown
Gender: Sheltered homelessness increased across all gender categories between 2024 and 2025.

The number of sheltered males rose by 12%, from 41 to 46, while the number of sheltered females increased by 15%, from 54 to 62, representing a larger share of the overall growth. In total, the sheltered population grew by 16%, increasing from 95 to 110 individuals. 2025 Homeless Count Report
Age: The 0–17 age group increased slightly from 47 to 51 individuals (a 9 % rise), continuing to makeup a substantial portion of the sheltered homeless population. The 18–24 group doubled from 3 to 6 individuals, marking a significant 100% increase. Adults aged 25–54 grew from 36 to 41 (a 14% increase), highlighting ongoing demand for services among working-age individuals.

Notably, the 55+ group saw a sharp increase from 9 to 12 individuals, a 33.3% rise, underscoring the growing presence of older adults in the sheltered population and the urgent need for more age-appropriate services and support for seniors.

Factors Contributing to Homelessness: Of the 87 unsheltered individuals counted, 20 (23%) reported unemployment as the primary cause of their homelessness, 17 (20%) cited high rent, 9 (10%) mentioned divorce or separation, 5 (6%) pointed to illness, and 1 (1%) attributed their homelessness to COVID-19. An additional 9 individuals (10%) identified other reasons, including family conflict, incarceration, disputes with landlords, substance abuse, and fleeing domestic violence. 32 individuals declined to answer the question. 18 45 of 335

HOMELESSNESS AMONG

GLENDALE RESIDENTS
2025 Homeless Count Report
Within households with children, the majority were female, with 51 individuals (66%) compared to 26 males (34%). The group was predominantly Hispanic/Latina/o, with 34 individuals (45% of the subgroup), followed by 18 Black or African American (23%), 11 White (14%), 6 American Indian or Alaska Native (8%), 5 identifying as White and Hispanic/Latina/o (6%), and 3 Middle Eastern or North African (4%).

Homelessness in Glendale has escalated in recent years, with a 28% increase in the number of residents experiencing homelessness in 2025 compared to 2024. According to the 2025 Unsheltered Homeless Count, 43%, 37 out of 87 unsheltered individuals surveyed reported that they were experiencing homelessness for the first time in Glendale. One of the most striking findings from the 2025 survey is that 62%, or 23 of the 37 individuals who became homeless for the first time in Glendale have lived in the city for more than a decade, and in some cases, for their entire lives.

These 23 individuals have deep ties to the community, having lived and worked in the city for over 10 years before experiencing homelessness.

Those identifying as White remained steady at 26 in both years, while the number of individuals identifying as both White and Hispanic dropped sharply from 12 to 5, a 58% decrease. New representation appeared among individuals identifying as American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous (increasing from 0 to 6) and those identifying as Middle Eastern or North African (from 0 to 3). Conversely, individuals identifying as Asian and Multi-Racial were no longer represented, with both groups decreasing from 6 in 2024 to 0 in 2025.

Households without Children were primarily composed of adults, with no individuals under 18.

Among this group, there were 11 females (33%), 20 males (61%), 1 transgender individual (3%), and 1 person identifying with more than one gender (3%). Racially, 15 individuals (46%) identified as White, 12 (36%) as Black or African American, and 6 (18%) as Hispanic/Latina/o.

Racial and Ethnic Composition: Between 2024
and 2025, the racial and ethnic composition of
the sheltered population shifted notably. The
most significant increase was among individuals
identifying as Black, African American, or
African, rising from 9 to 30, a 233% increase.

The number of individuals identifying as
Hispanic/Latina/e/o grew modestly from 36 to
40, an 11% rise.
19 46 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
The ethnic composition of Glendale’s homeless population reflects a diverse community.

Hispanic/Latina/e/o individuals made up the largest group, accounting for 14 people, followed closely by those identifying as Armenian, with 12 individuals. White individuals represented 8 people within the homeless population, while 2 identified as Black, African American, or African.

One individual identified as Middle Eastern. This distribution highlights the presence of both long- standing and immigrant communities among those experiencing homelessness in Glendale.

Demographic Breakdown
The demographic profile of the 37 individuals who became homeless for the first time in Glendale reveals significant trends in terms of gender, age, and employment status:

Gender: An overwhelming 84% of these individuals, or 31 out of 37, were male.

Age: Among the 37 individuals, 46% (or 17 individuals) were aged 55 or older. This reflects a concerning trend of older adults increasingly facing homelessness, a group that often faces unique challenges such as limited earning capacity, health problems, and fewer resources to navigate the housing system.
20 47 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
The factors contributing to homelessness for the 37 individuals who became homeless for the first time in Glendale reflect a complex mix of personal, economic, and structural issues. When asked about the main causes of their homelessness, respondents identified several key factors:

Rent Increases (38%): A significant number of individuals cited rising rent costs as a major factor leading to their homelessness, with 38% of the respondents indicating rent hikes as the primary reason for losing their housing. This marks a 75% increase in rent-related responses compared to the 2024 survey.

Unemployment (32%): Unemployment was another significant factor contributing to homelessness, with 32% of individuals citing job loss or inability to secure employment as the cause. Compared to 2024, the percentage of people reporting unemployment as a factor actually decreased by 14%. However, unemployment remains one of the largest contributing factors, pointing to the vulnerability of low-income residents who may lack job security, particularly in low-wage or precarious employment sectors.

Unexpected Illness (11%): Health issues have consistently played a role in contributing to homelessness, and 11% of the respondents in the 2025 survey pointed to unexpected illness as a cause. This response mirrors the findings from the 2024 survey, showing that health problems—whether physical or mental—remain a major vulnerability for individuals at risk of homelessness.

Divorce or Separation (8%): Divorce or separation accounted for 8% of responses, marking a 25% decrease from the 2024 survey. While it remains a significant factor, the decrease suggests that family breakdowns might be somewhat less prominent as a cause of homelessness compared to previous years.

Barriers and Contributing Factors
Employment Status: Of the 37 individuals, a substantial 84% (or 31 individuals) reported being unemployed at the time they became homeless. Among the unsheltered individuals surveyed, 1 person was employed and earning between $251 and $500 per month, while 1 person earned between $501 and $1000, and 3 people earned more than $1000per month. These figures show that even among those employed, many still face significant financial challenges. On the other hand, 11 unemployed individuals reported earning $0 income, 6 individuals earned between $1 and $250, 2 earned between $251 and $500, 4 earned between $501 and $1000, and 5 earned over $1000. These figures highlight the extreme financial insecurity many individuals face, with the majority struggling to earn enough to secure stable housing. 21 48 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
Disabling Conditions: In 2025, 5 out of 37 individuals surveyed (14%) reported health-related issues, including general health problems (8%), physical health conditions (5%), mental health issues (3%), and substance use (3%). This represents an increase from 2024, when only 3 out of 37 individuals (8%) reported health challenges, with general health issues at 3%, physical health conditions at 5%, mental health issues at 3%, and substance use at 3%. The rise in health-related issues from 8% in 2024 to 14% in 2025 suggests that health problems are becoming an increasingly significant barrier to stability and housing among the homeless population.

COVID-19 (1%): Only 1 person reported falling into homelessness due to the COVID-19 pandemic, a figure that mirrors the response from the 2024 survey. While the pandemic certainly exacerbated homelessness for many individuals, it appears to have had a lesser impact on the 2025 cohort of homeless individuals in Glendale compared to previous years. 22 49 of 335

CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusion: The 2025 homeless count in Glendale reveals a deepening and increasingly complex homelessness crisis, with the total population rising to 197 individuals, a 13% increase from 2024.

While both sheltered and unsheltered populations grew by 16% and 9%, respectively, the most concerning development is the 183% rise in chronic homelessness among the unsheltered population, indicating a troubling escalation in long-term, entrenched homelessness driven by systemic and personal barriers such as unemployment, rising rent costs, and disabling health conditions.

Chronic homelessness, in particular, presents urgent challenges. A majority of these individuals suffer from disabling conditions, notably physical and general health issues, and many have long- standing ties to Glendale, having lived in the city for years before becoming homeless.

Despite the overall rise in homelessness, the decrease in chronic homelessness among the sheltered population suggests that interventions like emergency housing vouchers have had a positive impact. However, this progress remains limited, as these vouchers offer only a temporary solution and are no longer available. Without additional resources or permanent housing options, sustaining this progress will be challenging.

Demographic shifts further underscore the evolving nature of Glendale’s homeless population.

Among the sheltered, there was a dramatic rise in individuals identifying as Black and Hispanic/Latina/e/o, along with new representation of American Indian/Alaska Native and Middle Eastern/North African individuals. Meanwhile, the unsheltered population showed significant increases in Armenian, White and Hispanic representation, suggesting changing patterns of visibility, outreach effectiveness, or community-specific challenges.

Subpopulation data adds further urgency: increases in mental illness, HIV/AIDS, and domestic violence-related homelessness demonstrate the interconnectedness of health, safety, and housing stability. Notably, the rise in youth homelessness, especially among parenting youth, highlights the need for tailored services that address the unique needs of this group.

Recommendation: To effectively address the rising rates of homelessness in Glendale, particularly among chronically homeless and unsheltered individuals, the city should continue the implementation of a Housing First strategy, integrated with wraparound support services. Special attention should be given to high-risk subpopulations such as veterans, parenting youth, and individuals with disabling conditions. Additionally, expanding culturally competent outreach efforts to better meet the diverse cultural needs of the community, ensuring that services are culturally responsive and accessible to all.
2025 Homeless Count Report
23 50 of 335

2025 Homeless Count Report
24 Moreover, targeted interventions for vulnerable groups, including older individuals and survivors of domestic violence, should be expanded. Based on the survey responses, a significant portion of Glendale’s homeless population has long-term ties to the city, meaning that community- based solutions and local partnerships will be essential in addressing the issue.

Glendale CoC shares geographic boundaries with Service Planning Areas (SPAs) 4 and 6—regions that are significantly impacted by high rates of homelessness. This geographic overlap compounds the challenges faced by the unsheltered population, placing additional pressure on local resources and systems. Therefore, regional coordination and support is essential to bring l in additional services and ensure homelessness is rare, brief and non-reoccurring. 51 of 335

UNSHELTERED LIVING CONDITIONS

TOTAL POPULATION
197

RACE/ETHNICITY

HOUSEHOLD TYPES
GENDER
shelteredUnsheltered
Multiracial White
Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Middle Eastern or North African
Black, African American or African
Asian or Asian American
American Indian or Alaska Native
White & Hispanic Latina/e/o01020304050
4 26
434027
31 30
7 461 5
44%56%
AGE

DISTRIBUTION
2025 POINT-IN TIME (PIT) COUNT
02/19/2025
Of the 193 individuals counted, 120 (62%) were in households without children, which is a 17% increase from 2024. The remaining 73 individuals (38%) were in households with children, representing a 1% increase from the previous year.

Outdoors
(38) 44%
vehicles
(15) 17%
abandoned
buildings
(5) 6%
bus/train
stations
(2) 2%
parks
(1) 1%
church
(1) 1%
tent
(1) 1%
+7%-36%
The majority, 70% were adults aged 25 and older, with 13% of the total population being 65 years or older.

Gender: 55% identified as
male, 44% as female, 1% as
transgender and more than
one gender.

The 2025 PIT count recorded 87 unsheltered individuals, compared to 80 in the previous year. This population includes individuals living in places not meant for human habitation, such as parks, streets, vehicles, abandoned buildings, and other makeshift shelters. Of the 87 individuals, 24 declined to disclose their specific sleeping location or conditions.

Ethnicity: Of those counted, 34% were
identified as White ( including individuals
of Armenian descent), 34% as Hispanic,
18% as Black, 4% as White & Hispanic
Latina/e/o, 4% as American Indian, 2% as
Asian, 2% as Middle Eastern, and 2% as
multiracial.

Decrease from 2024
Increase from 2024
Refused: 24 individuals
+7%
+17%
52 of 335

VETERANS
SUBpOPULATION

SPECIAL NEEDS

YOUTH

UNSHELTERED CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS
A total of 17 individuals
were identified as
chronically homeless, a
significant increase from just
6 individuals in 2024.

Of these 17, 10 became
homeless in the city of
Glendale.

In the 2025 count, 7 individuals aged 18 to
24 were identified, reflecting a 17%
increase from the previous year.

Among these youth, 2 were unsheltered, a
slight decrease from the 3 unsheltered
youth reported in 2024.

Mental Illness: 15 adults identified with serious
mental illness, representing a 7% inccrease from the
14 individuals counted in 2024.

Substance Use Disorder: 2 adults were reported
with substance use disorder, showing no change from
2024.

HIV/AIDs: 3 individuals with HIV/AIDS were identified,
double the number reported in 2024.

Survivors of DV: 24 victims of domestic violence
were identified, marking a 20% increase from 2024.

The number of unsheltered veterans remained unchanged in 2025 compared to 2024, with 4 individuals. However, the number of sheltered veterans decreased by 100% from 2024. 53 of 335

HOMELESSNESS AMONG

GLENDALE RESIDENTS
Of those 14 , 86% (12 individuals ) were male, and 50% (7 individuals ) were aged 55 or older.

Of the 37 individuals
who became
homelss for the first
time in Glendale,
62% (23 individuals)
had lived in the city
for more than a
decade, and in some
cases, for their
entire lives.

Length of Time in the Community
Employment StatusAge and Gender
Gender: 84% ( 31
individuals) of the 37 were
male, and 16 % (6
individuals) were female.

Age: 49% (18 individuals)
of the 37 first-time
homeless individuals were
aged 55 or older.

Income was higher among those who were unemployed
38% (14 individuals ) of the 37 became homeless due to high rents.

Factors Contributing to Homelessness
Of the 87 unsheltered
individuals surveyed in
Glendale, 43% (37
individuals) reported that
this was their first time
experiencing
homelessness in the city.

First Time Homeless
54 of 335

TRENDS
2023-2025
Domestic Violence
Population
Annual Unsheltered Homelessness
2023-2025
Annual Unsheltered vs PIT Count
2023-2025
Sheltered vs Unsheltered
Population
Unsheltered Population
by Age
Sheltered Population
by Age
55 of 335

Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
10 13 23
34 43 77
22 29 51
1 3 4
3 6 9
3 4 7
5 1 6
0 0 0
0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
23 28 51
11 15 26
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
0 6 6
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
13 5 18
0 0 0
9 25 34
3 0 3
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
4 7 11
5 0 5
0 0 0
0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
0 N/A 0
0 N/A 0
Shelter Count PIT
[FY 2025]
CA-612 - Glendale
Date PIT: 02/19/2025
CoC Category Filter: Site CoC
Apply Enrollment CoC Filter: No
Client ID Selection: Clarity Unique Identifier
HUD does not allow uploading "Client Doesn't Know", "Client Prefers Not to Answer", "Data Not Collected" and "Null" values.

ALL HOUSEHOLDS
Households with at Least One Adult and One Child
Total number of households
Total number of persons
Number of children (under age 18)
Number of youth (age 18 to 24)
Number of adults (age 25 to 34)
Number of adults (age 35 to 44)
Number of adults (age 45 to 54)
Number of adults (age 55 to 64)
Number of adults (age 65 or older)
Gender (adults and children)
Woman (Girl if child)
Man (Boy if child)
Culturally Specific Identity
Transgender
Non-Binary
Questioning
Different Identity
More Than One Gender
Of those that selected More Than One Gender, how many people reported gender identities that:

Includes Woman (Girl if child)
Includes Man (Boy if child)
Includes Culturally Specific Identity
Includes Transgender
Includes Non-Binary
Includes Questioning
Includes Different Identity
Race and Ethnicity (adults and children)
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Asian or Asian American
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Black, African American, or African
Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Middle Eastern or North African
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o White
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o)
Chronically Homeless
Total number of households
Total number of persons
Exhibit 2: 2025 Homeless Point-in-Time Count HUD Report Submission 56 of 335

Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Unsheltered Total
32 0 0 85 117
33 0 0 87 120
2 0 0 2 4
6 0 0 7 13
10 0 0 17 27
3 0 0 16 19
5 0 0 15 20
7 0 0 16 23
0 0 0 14 14
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
11 0 0 16 27
20 0 0 67 87
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 4 4
1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 3
0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 6 17
0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 22 27
0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 35 48
4 0 0 0 4
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 3
0 0 0 16 16
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
9 N/A 0 17 26
Shelter Count PIT
[FY 2025]
CA-612 - Glendale
Date PIT: 02/19/2025
CoC Category Filter: Site CoC
Apply Enrollment CoC Filter: No
Client ID Selection: Clarity Unique Identifier
Households without Children
Total number of households
Total number of persons
Number of youth (age 18 to 24)
Number of adults (age 25 to 34)
Number of adults (age 35 to 44)
Number of adults (age 45 to 54)
Number of adults (age 55 to 64)
Number of adults (age 65 or older)
Gender (only adults)
Woman (Girl if child)
Man (Boy if child)
Culturally Specific Identity
Transgender
Non-Binary
Questioning
Different Identity
More Than One Gender
Of those that selected More Than One Gender, how many people reported gender identities that:

Includes Woman (Girl if child)
Includes Man (Boy if child)
Includes Culturally Specific Identity
Includes Transgender
Includes Non-Binary
Includes Questioning
Black, African American, or African
Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Middle Eastern or North African
Includes Different Identity
Race and Ethnicity (only adults)
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Asian or Asian American
DontKnowRefused
DontKnowRefused
DontKnowRefused
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o)
Chronically Homeless
Total number of persons
2 / 9
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o White
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
57 of 335

Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
0 N/A 0 0
Shelter Count PIT
[FY 2025]
CA-612 - Glendale
Date PIT: 02/19/2025
CoC Category Filter: Site CoC
Apply Enrollment CoC Filter: No
Client ID Selection: Clarity Unique Identifier
Households with Only Children (under age 18)
Total number of households
Number of children (under age 18)
Gender (children only)
Woman (Girl if child)
Man (Boy if child)
Culturally Specific Identity
Transgender
Non-Binary
Questioning
Different Identity
More Than One Gender
Of those that selected More Than One Gender, how many people reported gender identities that:

Includes Woman (Girl if child)
Includes Man (Boy if child)
Includes Culturally Specific Identity
Includes Transgender
Includes Non-Binary
Includes Questioning
Includes Different Identity
Race and Ethnicity (children only)
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Asian or Asian American
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Black, African American, or African
Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Middle Eastern or North African
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o White
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o)
Chronically Homeless
Total number of persons
3 / 9
Powered ByThu Feb 27 09:16:41 AM 2025
58 of 335

Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
0 N/A 0
0 N/A 0
Shelter Count PIT
[FY 2025]
CA-612 - Glendale
Date PIT: 02/19/2025
CoC Category Filter: Site CoC
Apply Enrollment CoC Filter: No
Client ID Selection: Clarity Unique Identifier

VETERAN HOUSEHOLDS
Veteran Households with at Least One Adult and One Child Total number of households
Total number of persons
Total number of veterans
Gender (veterans only)
Woman (Girl if child)
Man (Boy if child)
Culturally Specific Identity
Transgender
Non-Binary
Questioning
Different Identity
More Than One Gender
Of those that selected More Than One Gender, how many people reported gender identities that:

Includes Woman (Girl if child)
Includes Man (Boy if child)
Includes Culturally Specific Identity
Includes Transgender
Includes Non-Binary
Includes Questioning
Includes Different Identity
Race and Ethnicity (veterans only)
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Asian or Asian American
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Black, African American, or African
Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Middle Eastern or North African
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o White
Total number of persons
4 / 9
Powered ByThu Feb 27 09:16:41 AM 2025
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o)
Chronically Homeless (Veteran Households)
Total number of households
59 of 335

Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Unsheltered Total
0 0 0 4 4
0 0 0 4 4
0 0 0 4 4
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 4
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 3
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
0 N/A 0 3 3
Shelter Count PIT
[FY 2025]
CA-612 - Glendale
Date PIT: 02/19/2025
CoC Category Filter: Site CoC
Apply Enrollment CoC Filter: No
Client ID Selection: Clarity Unique Identifier
Veteran Households without Children
Total number of households
Total number of persons
Total number of veterans
Gender (veterans only)
Woman (Girl if child)
Man (Boy if child)
Culturally Specific Identity
Transgender
Non-Binary
Questioning
Different Identity
More Than One Gender
Of those that selected More Than One Gender, how many people reported gender identities that:

Includes Woman (Girl if child)
Includes Man (Boy if child)
Includes Culturally Specific Identity
Includes Transgender
Includes Non-Binary
Includes Questioning
Includes Different Identity
Race and Ethnicity (veterans only)
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Asian or Asian American
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Black, African American, or African
Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Middle Eastern or North African
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o White
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Powered ByThu Feb 27 09:16:41 AM 2025
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o)
Chronically Homeless (Veteran Households)
Total number of persons
5 / 9
60 of 335

Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Unsheltered Total
2 0 0 2 4
2 0 0 2 4
0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 2 4
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1
1 1
1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Total
1 N/A 0 0 1
Shelter Count PIT
[FY 2025]
CA-612 - Glendale
Date PIT: 02/19/2025
CoC Category Filter: Site CoC
Apply Enrollment CoC Filter: No
Client ID Selection: Clarity Unique Identifier

YOUTH HOUSEHOLDS
Unaccompanied Youth Households
Total number of unaccompanied youth households
Total number of unaccompanied youth
Number of unaccompanied children (under age 18)
Number of unaccompanied young adults (age 18-24)
Gender (unaccompanied youth)
Woman (Girl if child)
Man (Boy if child)
Culturally Specific Identity
Transgender
Non-Binary
Questioning
Different Identity
More Than One Gender
Of those that selected More Than One Gender, how many people reported gender identities that:

Includes Woman (Girl if child)
Includes Man (Boy if child)
Includes Culturally Specific Identity
Includes Transgender
Includes Non-Binary
Includes Questioning
Includes Different Identity
Race and Ethnicity (unaccompanied youth)
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Asian or Asian American
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Black, African American, or African
Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Total number of persons
6 / 9
Powered ByThu Feb 27 09:16:41 AM 2025
DontKnowRefused
DontKnowRefused
White
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o)
Chronically Homeless (unaccompanied youth)
Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Middle Eastern or North African
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 61 of 335

Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
1 2 3
2 4 6
1 2 3
1 2 3
0 0 0
0 0 0
1 2 3
1 2 3
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
1 2 3
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
1 0 1
0 0 0
0 4 4
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH Total
0 N/A 0
0 N/A 0
Shelter Count PIT
[FY 2025]
CA-612 - Glendale
Date PIT: 02/19/2025
CoC Category Filter: Site CoC
Apply Enrollment CoC Filter: No
Client ID Selection: Clarity Unique Identifier
Parenting Youth Households
Total number of parenting youth households
Total number of persons in parenting youth households
Total Parenting Youth (youth parents only)
Total Children in Parenting Youth Households
Number of parenting youth under age 18
Children in households with parenting youth under age 18 Number of parenting youth age 18 to 24
Children in households with parenting youth age 18 to 24 Gender (youth parents only)
Woman (Girl if child)
Man (Boy if child)
Culturally Specific Identity
Transgender
Non-Binary
Questioning
Different Identity
More Than One Gender
Of those that selected More Than One Gender, how many people reported gender identities that:

Includes Woman (Girl if child)
Includes Man (Boy if child)
Includes Culturally Specific Identity
Includes Transgender
Includes Non-Binary
Includes Questioning
Includes Different Identity
Race and Ethnicity (youth parents only)
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous
American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Asian or Asian American
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Black, African American, or African
Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Middle Eastern or North African
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o White
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
7 / 9
Powered ByThu Feb 27 09:16:41 AM 2025
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o
Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o)
Chronically Homeless (parenting youth households)
Total number of households
Total number of persons
62 of 335

Sheltered
ES
Sheltered
TH
Sheltered
SH Unsheltered Total
11 0 0 4 15
2 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 3 3
7 13 0 4 24
Shelter Count PIT
[FY 2025]
CA-612 - Glendale
Date PIT: 02/19/2025
CoC Category Filter: Site CoC
Apply Enrollment CoC Filter: No
Client ID Selection: Clarity Unique Identifier
Adult Survivors of Domestic Violence (optional)
8 / 9
Powered ByThu Feb 27 09:16:41 AM 2025

HOMELESS SUBPOPULATIONS
Additional Homeless Populations
Adults with a Serious Mental Illness
Adults with a Substance Use Disorder
Adults with HIV/AIDS
63 of 335

Unsheltered Total Unsheltered Unsheltered Total
ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total
Total number of households* 10 13 0 23 N/A N/A N/A 10 13 0 23 Total number of persons* 34 43 0 77 N/A N/A N/A 34 43 0 77 * Please enter these totals before moving on to the counts by demographics
Age (adults and children) ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total Number of persons (persons under age 18) 22 29 0 51 0 0 0 22 29 0 51 Number of persons (persons age 18-24) 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 1 3 0 4 Number of persons (persons age 25-34) 3 6 0 9 0 0 0 3 6 0 9 Number of persons (persons age 35-44) 3 4 0 7 0 0 0 3 4 0 7 Number of persons (persons age 45-54) 5 1 0 6 0 0 0 5 1 0 6 Number of persons (persons age 55-64) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Number of persons (persons over age 64) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of persons for which age IS KNOWN 34 43 0
Total number of persons for which age IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 Gender (adults and children) ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total Woman (Girl if child) 23 28 0 51 0 0 0 23 28 0 51
Man (Boy if child) 11 15 0 26 0 0 0 11 15 0 26
Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non-Binary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Questioning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
More Than One Gender (This should be a deduplicated count of the total number of people who identified as more than one gender) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of persons for which gender IS KNOWN 34 43 0 Total number of persons for which gender IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 Of those that selected More Than One Gender
Includes Woman (Girl if child) 0 0 0 0
Includes Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0
Includes Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0
Includes Transgender 0 0 0 0
Includes Non-Binary 0 0 0 0
Includes Questioning 0 0 0 0
Includes Different Identity 0 0 0 0
Total number of genders identified 0 0 0
Number of genders for extrapolation (This field is calculated as part of the extrapolation process. You do not need to do anything with this field )
Race/Ethnicity (adults and children) ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 Households with at Least One Adult and One Child
Total PIT Count Extrapolated Information Total
Sheltered Sheltered Sheltered
64 of 335

American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian or Asian American 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African 13 5 0 18 0 0 0 13 5 0 18 Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hispanic/Latina/e/o 9 25 0 34 0 0 0 9 25 0 34
Middle Eastern or North African 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 3
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White 4 7 0 11 0 0 0 4 7 0 11
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 5
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of persons for which race/ethnicity IS KNOWN 34 43 0 Total number of persons for which race/ethnicity IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 Chronically homeless ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total
Number of households 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0
Number of persons 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0
65 of 335

Unsheltered Total Unsheltered Unsheltered Total
ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total
Total number of households* 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of children* 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0 0 * Please enter these totals before moving on to the counts by demographics
Gender ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total
Woman (Girl if child) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non-Binary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Questioning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
More Than One Gender (This should be a deduplicated count of the total number of people who identified as more than one gender) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of children for which gender IS KNOWN 0 0 0 0 Total number of children for which gender IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 0 Of those that selected More Than One Gender
Includes Woman (Girl if child) 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Transgender 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Non-Binary 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Questioning 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0
Total number of genders identified 0 0 0 0
Number of genders for extrapolation (This field is calculated as part of the extrapolation process. You do not need to do anything with this field )
Race/Ethnicity ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian or Asian American 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle Eastern or North African 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Households with Only Children Sheltered Sheltered Sheltered Total PIT Count Extrapolated Information Total
66 of 335

Total number of children for which race/ethnicity IS KNOWN 0 0 0 0 Total number of children for which race/ethnicity IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 0 Chronically homeless ES TH SH UN ES TH UN UN ES TH SH UN Total Number of children 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0 0
67 of 335

Unsheltered Total Unsheltered Unsheltered Total
ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total
Total number of households* 32 0 0 85 117 N/A N/A N/A N/A 32 0 0 85 117 Total number of persons* 33 0 0 87 120 N/A N/A N/A N/A 33 0 0 87 120 * Please enter these totals before moving on to the counts by demographics
Age ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total
Number of persons (persons age 18-24) 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 3 5 Number of persons (persons age 25-34) 6 0 0 7 13 0 0 0 1 6 0 0 8 14 Number of persons (persons age 35-44) 10 0 0 17 27 0 0 0 3 10 0 0 20 30 Number of persons (persons age 45-54) 3 0 0 16 19 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 19 22 Number of persons (persons age 55-64) 5 0 0 15 20 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 18 23 Number of persons (persons over age 64) 7 0 0 16 23 0 0 0 3 7 0 0 19 26 Total number of persons for which age IS KNOWN 33 0 0 73 Total number of persons for which age IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 14 Gender ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total
Woman (Girl if child) 11 0 0 16 27 0 0 0 1 11 0 0 17 28 Man (Boy if child) 20 0 0 67 87 0 0 0 3 20 0 0 70 90
Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transgender 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Non-Binary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Questioning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
More Than One Gender (This should be a deduplicated count of the total number of people who identified as more than one gender) 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Total number of persons for which gender IS KNOWN 33 0 0 83 Total number of persons for which gender IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 4 Of those that selected More Than One Gender
Includes Woman (Girl if child) 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
Includes Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Non-Binary 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
Includes Questioning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total number of genders identified 2 0 0 0
Number of genders for extrapolation (This field is calculated as part of the extrapolation process. You do not need to do anything with this field )
0 Total PIT Count Extrapolated Information Total
Households without Children Sheltered Sheltered Sheltered 68 of 335

Race/Ethnicity ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian or Asian American 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 4
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African 11 0 0 6 17 1 0 0 1 12 0 0 7 19 Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hispanic/Latina/e/o 5 0 0 22 27 1 0 0 5 6 0 0 27 33
Middle Eastern or North African 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White 13 0 0 35 48 2 0 0 8 15 0 0 43 58
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o) 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 4 Total number of persons for which race/ethnicity IS KNOWN 29 0 0 71 Total number of persons for which race/ethnicity IS NOT KNOWN 4 0 0 16 Chronically homeless ES TH SH UN ES TH UN UN ES TH SH UN Total Number of persons 9 0 0 17 26 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 0 0 17 26 69 of 335

Unsheltered Total Unsheltered Unsheltered Total
ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total
Total number of unaccompanied youth households* 2 0 0 2 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 0 0 2 4 Total number of unaccompanied youth 2 0 0 2 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 0 0 2 4 Number of youth under age 18* 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0 0 Number of youth age 18-24* 2 0 0 2 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 0 0 2 4 * Please enter these totals before moving on to the counts by demographics
Gender (unaccompanied youth only) ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total Woman (Girl if child) 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2
Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non-Binary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Questioning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
More Than One Gender (This should be a deduplicated count of the total number of people who identified as more than one gender) 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Total number of youth for which gender IS KNOWN 2 0 0 1 Total number of youth for which gender IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 1 Percent of UN youth with unknown
gender (50%) is higher than 20%.

This will affect the accuracy of your
data.

Of those that selected More Than One Gender
Includes Woman (Girl if child) 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
Includes Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Non-Binary 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
Includes Questioning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total number of genders identified 2 0 0 0
Number of genders for extrapolation (This field is calculated as part of the extrapolation process. You do not need to do anything with this field )
0 Race/Ethnicity ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian or Asian American 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hispanic/Latina/e/o 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 3
Middle Eastern or North African 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unaccompanied Youth Households Sheltered Sheltered Sheltered Total PIT Count Extrapolated Information Total
70 of 335

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of youth for which race/ethnicity IS KNOWN 2 0 0 1 Total number of youth for which race/ethnicity IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 1 Percent of UN youth with unknown
race/ethnicity (50%) is higher than
20%. This will affect the accuracy of
your data.

Chronically homeless ES TH SH UN ES TH UN UN ES TH SH UN Total Number of youth 1 0 0 0 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 0 0 0 1
71 of 335

Unsheltered Total Unsheltered Unsheltered Total
ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total
Total number of households* 1 2 0 3 N/A N/A N/A 1 2 0 3 Total number of persons 2 4 0 6 N/A N/A N/A 2 4 0 6
Number of youth parents under 18* 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0 Number of youth parents age 18-24* 1 2 0 3 N/A N/A N/A 1 2 0 3 Number of children in households with parenting youth under age 18* 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0 Number of children in households with parenting youth are 18 to 24* 1 2 0 3 N/A N/A N/A 1 2 0 3 * Please enter these totals before moving on to the counts by demographics Gender (youth parents only) ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total Woman (Girl if child) 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 1 2 0 3
Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non-Binary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Questioning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
More Than One Gender (This should be a deduplicated count of the total number of people who identified as more than one gender) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of persons for which gender IS KNOWN 1 2 0 Total number of persons for which gender IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 Of those that selected More Than One Gender
Includes Woman (Girl if child) 0 0 0 0
Includes Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0
Includes Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0
Includes Transgender 0 0 0 0
Includes Non-Binary 0 0 0 0
Includes Questioning 0 0 0 0
Includes Different Identity 0 0 0 0
Total number of genders identified 0 0 0
Number of genders for extrapolation (This field is calculated as part of the extrapolation process. You do not need to do anything with this field. ) Race/Ethnicity (adults and children) ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian or Asian American 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Total PIT Count Extrapolated Information Total
Parenting Youth Households Sheltered Sheltered Sheltered 72 of 335

Middle Eastern or North African 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of persons for which race/ethnicity IS KNOWN 1 2 0 Total number of persons for which race/ethnicity IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 Chronically homeless
ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total
Number of households 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0
Number of persons 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0
73 of 335

Unsheltered Total Unsheltered Unsheltered Total
ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total
Total number of households* 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0 Total number of persons* 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0
Total number of veterans* 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0
* Please enter these totals before moving on to the counts by demographics
Gender (veterans only) ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total Woman (Girl if child) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non-Binary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Questioning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
More Than One Gender (This should be a deduplicated count of the total number of people who identified as more than one gender) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of persons for which gender IS KNOWN 0 0 0 Total number of persons for which gender IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 Of those that selected More Than One Gender
Includes Woman (Girl if child) 0 0 0 0
Includes Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0
Includes Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0
Includes Transgender 0 0 0 0
Includes Non-Binary 0 0 0 0
Includes Questioning 0 0 0 0
Includes Different Identity 0 0 0 0
Total number of genders identified 0 0 0
Number of genders for extrapolation (This field is calculated as part of the extrapolation process. You do not need to do anything with this field )
Race/Ethnicity (veterans only) ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian or Asian American 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle Eastern or North African 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total PIT Count Extrapolated Information Total
Veteran Households with at Least One Adult and One
Child
Sheltered Sheltered Sheltered
74 of 335

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of persons for which race/ethnicity IS KNOWN 0 0 0 Total number of persons for which race/ethnicity IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 Chronically homeless ES TH UN ES TH UN ES TH UN Total
Number of households 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0
Number of persons 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0
75 of 335

Unsheltered Total Unsheltered Unsheltered Total
ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total
Total number of households* 0 0 0 4 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 4 4 Total number of persons* 0 0 0 4 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 4 4 Total number of veterans* 0 0 0 4 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 4 4 * Please enter these totals before moving on to the counts by demographics
Gender ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total
Woman (Girl if child) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4
Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transgender 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non-Binary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Questioning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
More Than One Gender (This should be a deduplicated count of the total number of people who identified as more than one gender) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of veterans for which gender IS KNOWN 0 0 0 4 Total number of veterans for which gender IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 0 Of those that selected More Than One Gender
Includes Woman (Girl if child) 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Man (Boy if child) 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Culturally Specific Identity 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Transgender 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Non-Binary 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Questioning 0 0 0 0 0
Includes Different Identity 0 0 0 0 0
Total number of genders identified 0 0 0 0
Number of genders for extrapolation (This field is calculated as part of the extrapolation process. You do not need to do anything with this field )
Race/Ethnicity ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN ES TH SH UN Total American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian or Asian American 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Asian or Asian American & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black, African American, or African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle Eastern or North African 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Middle Eastern or North African & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
White & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial & Hispanic/Latina/e/o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Racial (not Hispanic/Latina/e/o) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of veterans for which race/ethnicity IS KNOWN 0 0 0 4 Veteran Households without Children Sheltered Sheltered Sheltered Total PIT Count Extrapolated Information Total
76 of 335

Total number of veterans for which race/ethnicity IS NOT KNOWN 0 0 0 0 Chronically homeless ES TH SH UN ES TH UN UN ES TH SH UN Total Number of veterans 0 0 0 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 3 3
77 of 335

3 25-88207

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA
REPORT TO THE JOINT MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL AND

GLENDALE HOUSING AUTHORITY

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Regarding 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME) programs.

1. City Council Resolution Adopting an Environmental Negative Declaration.

2. City Council Motion to approve 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and authorizing submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

3. City Council Motion to approve FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Annual Action Plan totaling $3,266,569.65; authorize the submission of the Annual Action Plan to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, as recommended by the CDBG Advisory Committee and Continuum of Care Board (CoC); and authorize the City Manager or a designee, to redirect excess, cancelled or unused program funds under $50,000 from one project to another with CDBG Advisory Committee approval.

4. Housing Authority Motion to approve 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and authorize submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

5.Housing Authority Motion to approve FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Annual Action Plan totaling $3,266,569.65; and authorize the submission of the Annual Action Plan to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, as recommended by the CDBG Advisory Committee and Continuum of Care Board (CoC).

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for June 24, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff is requesting approval of the Five Year 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025- 2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Annual Action Plan in the amount of $3,266,569.65 and authorization for submission to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 78 of 335

32 25-88207
6 1
4 1
(HUD) for final approval.

The CDBG Advisory Committee (Committee) made funding recommendations for the CDBG program, as outlined in Exhibit 1, based on program priorities and an estimated entitlement allocation from HUD.

The Committee reviewed proposals from community agencies for Public Social Services (PSS) and Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), conducted interviews with agencies and recommended funding twelve (12) community agencies for PSS, one (1) community agency for CIP, and two (2) City CIP projects, Elk Mini Park Playground Project and Pelanconi Park Renovation Project for FY 2025-2026.

The CoC Board approved the FY 2025-2026 funding recommendations in the proposed Annual Action Plan for the ESG Program, as outlined in Exhibits 7 & 8, based on program priorities, for an entitlement allocation of $152,328. The ESG funding plan is a two-year plan. Subject to review and approval by the CoC Board, ESG programs that request continued funding for the subsequent year and meet their outcomes and performance goals are allowed to be renewed for funding. The funding allocation for FY 2025-2026 is in the amount of $152,328, which is $2,795 less than the previous year’s allocation.

The Housing Authority uses HOME funding to develop affordable housing projects and programs. It periodically updates a Statement of Interest to reflect funding and priorities for the HOME allocation it receives each year from HUD. It also seeks input from community members through the Annual Action Plan process. Funding priorities for FY 2025-2026 include the following:
• Affordable Rental Development-New Construction and/or Acquisition • Administrative Costs

RECOMMENDATION
City Council and Housing Authority should approve a resolution adopting an Environmental Negative Declaration; approve 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan for CDBG, ESG, HOME programs totaling $3,266,569.65; authorize submission to HUD as recommended by the CDBG Advisory Committee and CoC Board, and authorize the City Manager, or a designee, to redirect excess cancelled or unused program funds under $50,000 from one project to another with CDBG Advisory Committee approval.

ANALYSIS
The City of Glendale (City) has been receiving Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from HUD since the inception of the CDBG program in 1974, marking it the 51st year of the Glendale CDBG program. The Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) program was added in 1987, and the Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) program was added in 1992.
79 of 335

33 25-88207
6 1
4 1
The national and local objectives of the CDBG program are to:

1. eliminate conditions of slums and blight, and

2. provide programs and services that benefit low and moderate-income persons, including the homeless.

The objectives of the ESG program are to:

1. engage homeless individuals and families living on the street;

2. improve the number and quality of emergency shelters for homeless individuals and families;

3. help operate these shelters;

4. provide essential services to shelter residents;

5. rapidly re-house homeless individuals and families; and

6. prevent families and individuals from becoming homeless.

The objective of the HOME program is to provide and preserve affordable housing for low-income persons.

The City is responsible for following HUD guidelines and developing a 5-year Consolidated Plan (ConPlan) and an Annual Action Plan for the use of the funds.

Consolidated Plan
As a condition of eligibility for CDBG, ESG, and HOME entitlement funds, the City is required to submit to HUD a five-year ConPlan for the use of these funds. The current 2020-2025 ConPlan expires in June 2025. Therefore, a new five year 2025-2030 ConPlan must be prepared and submitted to HUD this year. The ConPlan provides a profile of the City, and establishes program priorities, funding strategies and proposed goals for addressing community development, housing, and homeless needs in the community. The ConPlan also incorporates other funding sources, programs and initiatives that assist in addressing the City’s community development, housing, and homeless needs; and strategies for leveraging and coordinating these resources.

The ConPlan is the primary planning document that HUD uses to measure the City’s effectiveness and to approve the submission of Annual Plans and other funding applications to HUD. The Annual Plans are comprised of specific projects the City plans to implement to meet the objectives of the ConPlan every fiscal year.

The ConPlan sets forth the goals and funding allocations for the CDBG program, which seeks to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate-income persons (with incomes at or below 80 percent of Area Median Income); the ESG program, which provides homeless persons with basic shelter and essential supportive services, and the HOME program, which funds a wide range of activities that build, buy, and/or rehabilitate affordable housing for rent or homeownership or that provide direct rental assistance to low- and moderate-income people. (See Exhibit 2 for Draft Consolidated Plan)
80 of 335

34 25-88207
6 1
4 1
Community Needs Assessment
To prepare the ConPlan and determine program priorities for the next five years, including FY 2025-2026, the City hired Veronica Tam and Associates as the consultant to help with the expansive community needs assessment process, which included the following:

1. Development of a Community Needs Survey in three languages (English, Armenian, and Spanish) made available through SurveyMonkey to those who live, work and go to school in the City of Glendale. A total of 759 online surveys were received and tabulated.

2. A public meeting held on October 2, 2024, at the Adult Recreation Center with breakout sessions available in English, Armenian and Spanish to help identify community needs and priorities. One hundred twenty (120) attendees participated in this meeting with participation in all three language sessions.

3. Analysis of housing and population characteristics from the 2023 American Community Survey (ACS) and a variety of other sources to update a summary list of key demographic indicators.

As a result of these efforts, the program priorities included in the 2025-2030 ConPlan and FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan were developed, recommended and approved in November 2024 by the City Council and Housing Authority.

Consolidated Plan Funding Levels
Based on the existing funding levels, the City is projected to receive approximately $15,682,848 in federal CDBG, ESG, and HOME funds over the next 5 years. HUD does not provide revenue estimates beyond the current program year. Absent any information to suggest otherwise, at this time, this projection assumes that funding will remain at current year funding. Since formula allocations for CDBG, ESG, and HOME are based on the population, poverty levels, and age and condition of housing stock, HUD reserves the right to increase or decrease funding allocations each year.

HUD Program
Funding Source
Five Year
Projected
Allocation
CDBG $8,694,055
ESG $761,640
HOME $6,227,153
Total $15,682,848
81 of 335

35 25-88207
6 1
4 1
2025-2030 Consolidated Plan Goals/Strategies
Priority Need Name Homeless
Funding $1,261,640
ESG Funds: $761,640
CDBG Funds: $500,000
Goals Homeless Services
Enhance Public Services
1 Description There is a high need for Homeless Services including: outreach, case management mental health and substance abuse treatment, emergency shelter and transitional housing, permanent supportive housing services support, rapid re-housing, and homeless prevention.

Priority Need Name Public Facilities
Funding $5,651,136
Goals Public Facility Improvements
2 Description Construction and rehabilitation of public community facilities needs were established for the following:
Indoor Community Centers
Park & Recreation Facilities
Health Care Facilities
Youth Centers
Libraries
Multi-purpose Community Centers
Child Care Centers
Priority Need Name Public Social Services
Funding $804,108
Goals Enhance Public Services
3 Description Expand public services that create conditions for eligible residents to obtain and maintain self-sufficiency, specifically in the areas of youth, seniors, mental health, employment, and homeless services.

Priority Need Name Public/Neighborhood Improvements
Funding $250,000
4 Goals Public/Neighborhood Improvements
82 of 335

36 25-88207
6 1
4 1
Description Upgrade of public infrastructure in eligible low-and moderate-income neighborhoods including:
Sidewalk Improvements
Street/Alley Improvements
Street Lighting
Traffic Calming
Priority Need Name Housing
Funding $6,227,153
Associated Goals Affordable Housing
5 Description Housing priority needs include: new construction of affordable rental housing and rental assistance. This includes affordable housing for special needs groups, such as seniors and the disabled.

Annual Action Plan
In developing the Annual Action Plan, HUD requires that the City involve citizens in the plan development and approval process. This process includes a combined effort for CDBG, ESG, and HOME programs and includes community meetings, board meetings and oversight boards.

CDBG:

The most prominent program in the ConPlan/Action Plan development process, is the CDBG program. Annual planning for the CDBG program includes outreach to Glendale non-profit community agencies to introduce the CDBG program and process; hosting a community meeting to identify community needs and set program priorities, pre- designating funds to City CIP; issuing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to community agencies for PSS programs and CIP; working with the CDBG Advisory Committee to review the proposals, interview the agencies that submitted proposals and recommend funding for community agencies; monitoring current fiscal year programs; and reallocating funds as necessary.

CDBG ADVISORY COMMITTEE:

To achieve citizen involvement in plan development and approval process, the City Council appoints a citizen CDBG Advisory Committee, whose responsibility it is to help oversee the CDBG planning process.

The Committee’s current responsibilities include:
Reviewing and commenting on the annual community needs assessment strategy. Recommending program priorities, based on findings from the needs assessment, as well as input from the City Council;
Evaluating funding proposals;
Interviewing community agencies and City departments that submit project proposals;
83 of 335

37 25-88207
6 1
4 1
Recommending projects for funding;
Reviewing sub-recipient performance, such as site visits and outcome reviews; Reviewing and approving revisions or amendments to projects throughout the program year; and
Reviewing and recommending reprogramming of CDBG funds.

The current CDBG Advisory Committee is comprised of the following members:

Committee Member Appointing Council Member

1. Armik Avedisian (Chair) Councilmembers Ardy Kassakhian

2. Marina Manoukian (Vice Chair) Councilmember Elen Asatryan

3. Zanku Armenian Councilmember Daniel Brotman

4. Anita Quiñonez-Gabrielian Former Councilmember Paula Devine

5. Ronnie Gharibian Mayor Ara Najarian
CDBG funds are divided into three categories: Program Administration, Public Social Services, and Capital Improvement Projects.

Administration (Planning, Program Management and Oversight):

HUD allows jurisdictions to use 20% of their CDBG entitlement funds for administration of the CDBG program to ensure that they have the capacity to comply with the administratively laden HUD requirements and minimize financial risks. The core functions of Administration are planning, monitoring, contract compliance, financial management and project coordination. HUD is becoming stricter in requiring more low- income documentation from the sub-recipients in order to show eligibility for CDBG funds, which translates to greater financial risk and need for management and oversight.

Public Social Services:

HUD imposes a statutory limit of 15% on the amount of CDBG entitlement funds that can be used for social services regardless of how great the local need is for these services.

The basic HUD eligibility criteria for social service projects are: 1) the program constitutes a new or expanded level of service at the time that it is first funded, 2) the program serves over 60% low-income families (those who earn less than 80% of the County median), and 3) the CDBG funds are not used to substitute another available funding source. In addition to HUD eligibility criteria, agencies will have to meet financial capacity prequalification guidelines, such as submission of two years of financial statement compilations and copies of Board minutes approving the financial statements, to be eligible to apply for City’s CDBG Program funds.

Capital Improvement and Neighborhood Improvement Projects:

Capital and neighborhood improvement funds represent 65% of CDBG entitlement funds, plus any available reprogrammed funds, which can only be used for capital and neighborhood improvement projects. Projects that qualify for this funding category include: community centers, such as parks, libraries, recreation centers, senior centers, 84 of 335

38 25-88207
6 1
4 1
youth centers, employment centers and social service centers; handicapped accessibility projects anywhere in the City; public improvements in low income neighborhoods; commercial rehabilitation; and economic development projects.

Traditionally, as part of the funding allocation plan, the City Council pre-designates and pre-approves City CIP deemed a priority and authorizes the issuance of a Request for Funding Proposal (RFP) to community agencies for the remainder of the CDBG funds.

Proposals are solicited from community agencies for PSS and the balance of capital improvement funds for community CIP. Any qualified non-profit community agency or public agency is eligible to apply for CDBG funds provided that projects meet one of the two broad national objectives: 1) serving low-income persons, or 2) preventing or eliminating conditions of slums and blight. In addition, funded projects are required to serve primarily Glendale residents and not to discriminate in the provision of services.

Furthermore, projects that meet the identified program priorities are given preference for funding.

The proposal evaluation criteria used by the CDBG Advisory Committee includes:
1) Overall quality of the proposal;
2) Whether the project meets a program priority;
3) Ability of the applicant to substantiate that the project meets a community need; 4) Whether the proposal clearly articulates a target population/outreach strategy; 5) Financial capacity of the organization,
6) Demonstration of coordination and collaboration with other agencies/programs; 7) Program goals and outcomes;
8) Feasibility of proposed implementation plan;
9) Budget, cost effectiveness and leveraging of funds; and 10) Demonstrated experience, effectiveness, and administrative capacity of sponsoring Organization/City Department, including performance history.

Additional tools provided to the Committee to evaluate capacity and effectiveness of proposals include: 1) mid-year performance reports, 2) financial analysis report prepared by staff for each non-profit organization, and 3) proposal evaluation rating forms.

ESG PROGRAM:

The ESG Program follows the same process as CDBG, in terms of identification of homeless priorities, issuance of RFPs and proposal evaluation, except that ESG funding proposals are reviewed and recommended by a separate homeless proposal review committee comprised of the Continuum of Care (CoC) Board. The CoC Board is guided by the specific needs of the CoC model of homeless services adopted by the Glendale CoC. The ESG funding plan developed is a two-year plan. ESG programs that request continued funding for the subsequent year and meet their program outcomes and performance goals are allowed to be renewed for funding subject to review and approval by the CoC Board.
85 of 335

39 25-88207
6 1
4 1
The published national objective of the ESG program is to help with the expansion, improvement and operation of emergency shelter facilities, supportive services, rapid re- housing, and homeless prevention.

The current CoC Board is comprised of the following members:

Board Member Agency
Melissa Younesian, Chair Verdugo Jobs Center
Lt. Alex Krikorian, Vice Chair Glendale Police Department Hagop Eulmessekian Glendale Unified School District
Jeffrey Brooks Glendale Fire Department
Vacant Homeless Alumni
HOME
The Housing Authority is a Participating Jurisdiction under the HOME Program. As such, it receives an allocation each year directly from HUD to carry out affordable housing programs and projects.

The Housing Authority periodically updates a Statement of Interest to reflect its funding priorities. Like the CDBG and ESG programs, it seeks input from the community through the Annual Action Plan process to determine what housing needs exist. It also solicits Requests for Proposal from developers when sufficient funding is available for development of an affordable housing project. A review team consisting of city staff reviews proposals and provides recommendations to the Housing Authority for viable affordable housing developments.

The Housing Authority uses HOME funding, as well as other funding sources including Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF), Measure S Funding, Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program Funding, and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program to create affordable housing programs and projects. The City Council can also assign General Fund funds to housing related purposes.

ConPlan/Action Plan Development
September 2024
As part of the development of the 2025-2030 ConPlan and FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan, staff held an annual CDBG Open House event in a virtual platform inviting over 99 non-profit organizations to participate via Microsoft Teams. 17 representatives from 15 non-profit community agencies attended the Open House to learn about the CDBG program.

October 2024
In October 2024, a community meeting was held to gather input from residents to identify needs and determine program priorities for CDBG, ESG and HOME. 86 of 335

310
25-88207
6 1
4 1
November 2024
On November 5, 2024, as part of the annual program planning cycle, staff presented the CDBG Advisory Committee recommendations to City Council/Housing Authority for approval and they approved: a preliminary proposed FY 2025-2026 CDBG Funding Allocation Plan by Funding Category; 2025-2030 ConPlan program priorities; and issuance of an RFP for PSS programs and CIP based on estimated $1,700,000 CDBG entitlement funding from HUD.

December 2024
A mandatory Technical Support Workshop was held on December 4, 2024, to review the CDBG RFP cycle and to provide in-person demonstration/training to community agencies utilizing the ZoomGrants System, an online grant management system. Upon completion of the workshop, agency attendees received a link to ZoomGrants to begin the RFP application process.

The proposed FY 2025-2026 Funding Allocation Plan by Funding Category was based on an estimated $1,700,000 in CDBG entitlement funds:
$340,000 (20%) for Administration (planning, program management and oversight)
$255,000 (15%) for public social services programs
$1,105,000 (65%) for capital improvement projects
-$500,000 for pre-designated City projects
-$605,000 undesignated and available to community agencies for community capital improvement projects under an RFP
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS:

When the RFP was issued on November 18, 2024, it was based on an estimated $1,700,000 in entitlement funds. Seventeen (17) CDBG PSS and CIP funding proposals were received, 2 agencies withdrew their proposals from consideration, and the remaining 15 were evaluated by staff and the CDBG Advisory Committee through a Strength and Weakness Analysis.

The Committee, in a full day session on February 28, 2025, interviewed each community agency requesting PSS and CIP funds. The Committee deliberated and developed funding recommendations based on an estimated CDBG entitlement amount.

The final FY 2025-2026 HUD Entitlement Funds for all programs is summarized below and is part of the final proposed Annual Action Plan: (See Exhibit 2)

CDBG $1,738,811
ESG $ 152,328
HOME $1,245,430.65 + $130,000 (Program Income)
Total $3,266,569.65
87 of 335

311
25-88207
6 1
4 1
Based on the final HUD allocations released on May 14, 2025, the proposed FY 2025- 2026 Funding Allocation Plan for the CDBG Program is as follows:
$260,821 (15% of entitlement funds) for PSS.
$1,130,228 (65% of entitlement funds) for CIP
o$500,000 for pre-designated City projects
o$630,228 for community agency CIP
$347,762 (20% of entitlement funds) for planning, program management and oversight.

Public Social Services
Fourteen (14) proposals were received for PSS programs totaling $681,051 which was $420,230 over the available amount of $260,821. Twelve (12) programs were recommended for funding, Ascencia withdrew their proposal from consideration and Armenian American Civil Support Center’s Transportation & Bilingual Information Services Program was not recommended for funding. .

The Committee recommendations were based on a lower total amount as the final HUD allocations were not released at the time of the meeting. The Committee also approved a CDBG Contingency Plan, giving staff direction on how to adjust the funding recommendations should the final HUD allocations come in higher/lower than the estimate. The CDBG Contingency Plan was to equally increase or decrease funding to all funded agencies, except for the Housing Rights Center, based on the final HUD allocation, but would not decrease funding from a funded agency if the recommended funding is $10,000.

Below is a summary table of Public Social Services final funding recommendations for FY 2025-2026:

PROGRAM CATEGORY/PROJECTS/SPONSOR

RECOMMENDED
FY 25-26 FUNDING
YOUTH AND TEEN PROGRAMS:

AESA STEM Academy, Armenian Engineers and Scientists of America $10,529 Mental Wellness in Athletes Program, Homenetmen Glendale Ararat $10,529 Intervention/Prevention Clinical Group Counseling, CASPS $34,529 Youth Employment Program, Glendale Youth Alliance $10,529 Subtotal $66,116
ADULT COUNSELING & CASE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS:

Pro Bono Legal Clinic, Armenian Bar Association $20,529 Community Outreach Program, Armenian Relief Society $64,529 Fair Housing Program, Housing Rights Center
(Additional funding from Section 8 Earned Administration Funds- $10,000 for a total allocation of $20,000)cc
$10,000
88 of 335

312
25-88207
6 1
4 1
The highest percentage of PSS funding is recommended for homeless services programs at 38% ($99,645). The next highest funding allocation by program type is adult counseling and case management programs at 36% ($95,058) and lastly, youth programs, which include: in-school programs, enrichment programs, afterschool programs, youth employment, and teen programs at 26% ($66,116).

In addition to the CDBG funding for PSS programs, the City uses other non-CDBG funds to leverage programs provided by community agencies. For example, the City has leveraged Section 8 Earned Administration funds and CDBG funds to fund the Housing Rights Center’s (HRC) Fair Housing Program for fair housing services and tenant landlord information. The current contract amount for the FY 2024-2025 Fair Housing Program is $20,000 which includes $10,000 in CDBG funding and $10,000 in Section 8 Earned Administration funding. A similar split is recommended for FY 2025-2026.

Capital Improvement Projects
Three community agencies submitted CIP proposals for consideration, totaling $1,412,125 over the available CIP allocation of $630,228. The project that was recommended for funding is Lexington Office Historic Building Preservation and Rehab Project for YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena. Verdugo Hills Council, Boy Scouts withdrew their proposal from consideration. Kid’s Community Clinic of Burbank’s Expansion of Dental Treatments for Low Income Children Program was not recommended for funding as their proposal and interview reflected the agency is awaiting final decision on other grant funds and could not confidently determine total project budget, or identify leveraged funds at the February 28, 2025 meeting of the CDBG Advisory Committee to move forward with the project.

The Committee recommended funding (3) City projects for FY 2025-2026. However, staff is recommending to move $200,000 from Wilson Mini Park Project to Elk Mini Park Playground Project and will use Measure A grant funds for the Wilson Mini Park Playground Project.

Subtotal $95,058
HOMELESS PROGRAMS:

Glendale Community Center Loaves and Fishes, Catholic Charities of Los Angeles, Inc. $32,529
People’s Choice Market, Salvation Army $20,529
Crisis Aid for Homeless Families, Home Again, Los Angeles $15,529 Domestic Violence Mental Health & Case Management, Door of Hope $10,529 Mental Health Services for Survivors of Domestic Violence, YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena $20,529
Subtotal $99,645
TOTAL PUBLIC SOCIAL SERVICES: $260,821
89 of 335

313
25-88207
6 1
4 1
Below is a summary table of the Capital Improvement Project final funding recommendations for FY 2025-2026:

CDBG Cancelled/Unused Funds
Furthermore, staff is requesting for Council to authorize the City Manager, or a designee, to redirect excess, cancelled, or unused program funds under $50,000 from one project to another with CDBG Advisory Committee approval. This authorization will allow staff to work with the CDBG Advisory Committee to reallocate funds, should there be a need, without having to come back to Council for such a small amount.

Exhibit 3 provides a Summary List of FY 2025-2026 CDBG Funds Requested and Recommended for Funding Based on Estimated and Final Allocations.

ESG PROGRAM:

A Request for Proposal was issued on November 18, 2024. On February 26, 2025, the CoC Board reviewed the submissions and recommended funding for the ESG community projects listed below for FY 2025-26. Projects that meet performance goals may be considered for renewal in FY 2026-2027. The RFP was based on the prior year’s ESG allocation of $155,123. However, the final FY 2025-2026 allocation is $2,795 less. As a result, the City has adjusted the budgeted amount for “accounting for the use of grants” to align with HUD’s final funding allocation.

RECOMMENDED PROJECT/SPONSOR RECOMMENDED
FY 25-26 FUNDING

COMMUNITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Lexington Office Historic Building Preservation and Rehab Project, YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena $630,228
Subtotal $630,228

PRE-DESIGNATED CITY PROJECTS
Elk Mini Park Project, Community Services & Parks $400,000 Wilson Mini Park Project, Community Services & Parks (originally recommended for $200,000) $0
Pelanconi Park Renovation Project, Community Services & Parks $100,000 Subtotal $500,000
TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING AVAILABLE: $1,130,228 90 of 335

314
25-88207
6 1
4 1
The FY 2025-26 ESG funding recommendations are as follows:

Ascencia- Emergency Housing Program $33,703
YWCA of Glendale-Domestic Violence Housing & Emergency $26,500 Shelter Program (Rapid Re-Housing)
Catholic Charities- Loaves & Fishes Homeless Prevention Program $37,236 HOME Again LA (New) $51,365
Rapid Re-Housing Program
City HMIS $0
Accounting for use of Grant Administration $3,524
GRAND TOTAL $152,328
HOME PROGRAM:

HOME projects are not solicited in the same manner as the CDBG and ESG programs.

Specific HOME projects are developed by the Housing Authority on an ongoing basis (through a continuous Statement of Interest that is updated periodically to reflect funding and priorities and through a RFP process when sufficient funds are available for a feasible development project). Also, as part of the process of developing the Annual Plan, HUD requires input from the community regarding housing needs and housing programs for the Housing Authority to consider when approving housing programs and projects. The HOME planning and budgeting process is currently underway and the FY 2025-2026 Affordable Housing Budget will be brought to the Housing Authority for review in June 2025. In addition to HOME funds, the Affordable Housing Budget also includes Section 8 Rental Assistance, federal CoC homeless funds, BEGIN Homeownership Program, the Affordable Housing Trust Fund expenditures, and program income from Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund.

The funding plan for the use of HOME funds will be determined by the Housing Authority as part of the Housing Authority’s review and approval of the annual Affordable Housing Budget, with consideration given to input received regarding housing needs as part of the CDBG, ESG and HOME Annual Plan community needs assessment process.

The HOME program is one of four major housing resources addressed in the City’s 2025- 2030 Consolidated Plan. The table below shows the four major funding sources and two additional funding sources, estimated FY2025-2026 revenues from each, and percentage of total revenues for each.
91 of 335

315
25-88207
6 1
4 1
Estimated Affordable Housing Revenue FY 2025-2026
Funding Source Estimated
Revenue
Percent of
Total Revenue
HOME Investment Program $1,375,429 2.32%
Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds $1,079,000 1.82% Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program $56,065,303 94.74% Affordable Housing Trust Fund $648,300 1.10%
BEGIN Homeownership Program $12,000 0.02%
CoC Homeless Competitive Funding $3,298,618* -
TOTAL FUNDS $59,180,032 100%
* Carryover funds from FY 2024-25
Generally, the budget allocates the majority of HOME funds for use in projects and programs that increase affordable housing opportunities and supply. Based on the current housing market, the greatest opportunity for increasing the affordable housing supply in the next year is through the Affordable Rental – New Construction and Acquisition/Rehabilitation Program. HOME funds are restrictive in that they can only be used for lower income households. Other HOME fund requirements typically include: a 25% match by developers; a reserve of 15% for a Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO); federal prevailing wages for larger housing projects; a commitment of funds to a specific project within 24 months (temporarily suspended); and a requirement for expenditure of funds within five years.

The entitlement amount for HOME funds in FY 2025-2026 is $1,245,430, a negligible decrease from the FY 2024-2025 grant amount. In addition, $130,000 is also available from HOME program income for FY 2025-2026 HOME projects. HOME funds from FY2025-2026 and prior years represent the majority of funds that will be available in FY2025-2026 for new construction of affordable housing units.

Therefore, it is recommended that the funding strategies for the HOME program in FY 2025-2026 include:
• Affordable Rental Development-New Construction and/or Acquisition $1,051,071
92 of 335

316
25-88207
6 1
4 1
• 15% CHDO Reserve
$186,814
It is also recommended to appropriate $137,542 for administration to pay for costs associated with planning, reporting, project development, and compliance monitoring of HOME projects. This amount is equal to 10% of the 2024 HOME entitlement amount, plus 10% of program income.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The ConPlan is the main planning document that HUD uses to measure the City’s effectiveness and to approve the submission of Annual Action Plans and other funding applications to HUD. The greatest effort and emphasis to conduct a community needs assessment to gain input from the community and to identify program priorities comes with the development of the ConPlan.

Multiple platforms were used as part of the development of the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan and the preparation for the five-year ConPlan to assess community need and gather community input to determine program priorities for the upcoming year as well as 2025-2030, including an in-person community meeting held at the Adult Recreation Center on October 2, 2024 with breakout sessions in English, Armenian and Spanish.

The community meeting was advertised through the City/department website, City Connection newsletter, CSP newsletter, email distribution list, City department counters, community events, flyers placed at downtown Glendale businesses, Glendale Unified School District, Glendale Community College, non-profit email distribution list, and social media platforms (Facebook, Instagram, X) and posted on Nextdoor.

HUD requires the City to publish a notice regarding CDBG, ESG and HOME funding recommendations in the newspaper, and conduct a public hearing to receive public comments. This year outreach efforts included an in-person meeting at the Adult Recreation Center on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, as well as an option to send public comments by way of mail, email, or telephone call between April 1, 2025 through April 30, 2025.

On March 27, 2025 a public notice was published in the Glendale Independent.

Furthermore, during the month of March and April 2025, the City posted a public notice on the City’s webpage, social media, and in the Community Services & Parks Department (CSP) Newsletter informing residents of a public comment period. Furthermore, reminder e-mails were sent out to CSP contact lists, community non-profits, and posted on social media. Three (3) persons attended the in-person Public Hearing and (2) emails or telephone comments were received. All comments were received and recorded in Exhibit 4.
93 of 335

317
25-88207
6 1
4 1

FISCAL IMPACT
CDBG, ESG, and HOME HUD entitlements totaling $3,266,569.65, which was included as part of the FY 2025-2026 budget process is outlined below:

Funding Source Amount
CDBG Fund $1,738,811
Emergency Solutions Grant Fund $152,328
Home Grant Fund ($1,245,430.65) + Program Income
($130,000)
$1,375,430.65
Total $3,266,569.65

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The Community Development Department, after conducting an Initial Study, prepared a Negative Declaration for the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan that was circulated for a 20-day public review period from April 18, 2025, to May 7, 2025. No comments were received. (See Exhibit 5)
Staff is requesting the City Council adopt the negative declaration for the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan.

If the Council and the Authority approve the Annual Action Plan and if the Council adopts the Resolution for the Environmental Negative Declaration, staff will place a 30-day notice in the newspaper informing the public that the approved Plans are available for study and comment. The Annual Action Plan will be submitted to HUD and implementation of the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME programs will commence on July 1, 2025.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
The names and business addresses of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CFO, Subcontractors and any person or entity with more than 10% interest in the company proposed for contract in this Agenda Item Report are attached in Exhibit 6, in accordance with the City Campaign Finance Ordinance No. 5744.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Council
Alternative 1: Do not approve the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Annual Action Plan.

Alternative 2: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff. 94 of 335

318
25-88207
6 1
4 1
Housing Authority
Alternative 1: Do not approve the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Annual Action Plan.

Alternative 2: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Onnig Bulanikian, Director of Community Services & Parks Prepared by:

Arsine Isayan, Deputy Director of Community Development/Housing Maggie Kavarian, Community Services Manager
Pamela Jackson, Housing Coordinator
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: FY 2025-2026 Proposed CDBG Funding Allocation Plan by Funding Category
Exhibit 2: Proposed 2025-2030 ConPlan/Annual Action Plan for CDBG, ESG, and HOME
Exhibit 3: Summary List of FY 2025-2026 CDBG Funds Requested and Recommended for Funding Based on Estimated and Final Allocations Exhibit 4: Summary of Public Hearing and Public Comments Exhibit 5: Proposed Negative Declaration
Exhibit 6: Campaign Finance Disclosures
Exhibit 7: FY 2025-2026 Glendale CoC Board Meeting ESG Funding Deliberation Exhibit 8: FY 2024-2025 ESG Funding Allocation
95 of 335

1 RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION

UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
FOR THE FY 2025-36 CDBG, ESG, AND HOME

ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2025, the Director of Community Development— after having considered the Initial Study prepared on behalf of Community Services and Parks Department for the proposed Fiscal Year 2023-24 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Programs in the City of Glendale, California (“Project”)— directed that a Proposed Negative Declaration be prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the proposed Negative Declaration— which is attached as Exhibit 5 to the June 24, 2025 Report to the City Council and the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale and is incorporated into this Resolution as if fully set forth— was published, was duly noticed as required by law, and was made available for a 20-day public review and comment period; and
WHEREAS, a final Negative Declaration has been prepared incorporating any comments received during the review period and any responses to those comments; and WHEREAS, the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of Glendale; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the City Council acknowledges the findings of the Director of Community Development with respect to the preparation of the Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the Glendale Community Development Department has been identified as the custodian of record for the Negative Declaration.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE:

SECTION 1.The recitals set forth above are true and correct.

SECTION 2.The Negative Declaration for the Project was prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act and State and Local Guidelines.

SECTION 3.The Negative Declaration has been presented to the City Council.

The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Initial Study, the Negative Declaration, and public comments, and finds on the whole record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore, the City Council hereby certifies and adopts the Negative Declaration prepared for the Project.
96 of 335

2 Adopted this __________ day of _______________, 2025.

Mayor
ATTEST:

City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS.

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. _____________ was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a joint meeting of the Council and Housing Authority of the City of Glendale held on the __________ day of _______________, 2025. and that same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

City Clerk
97 of 335

MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale has reviewed and approves the Five-Year 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnership Act (HOME) Programs as more particularly outlined in the Joint Report to the City Council and Housing Authority dated June 24, 2025 including Attachments and Exhibits, and as further amended by the Council and Housing Authority at the Joint Meeting on June 24, 2025 Staff is authorized to submit the Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
98 of 335

1 MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the City Council:

1. Has reviewed and approves the FY 2025-26 Annual Action Plan (“Plan”) for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnership Act (HOME) Programs totaling $3,266,569.65, as more particularly outlined in the June 24, 2025 Joint Report, including its attachments and exhibits, to the City Council and Housing Authority of the City of Glendale;

2. Authorizes staff to submit the Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as recommended by the CDBG Advisory Committee, the Continuum of Care Board, and staff; and

3. Authorizes the City Manager, or a designee, to redirect excess, cancelled, or unused program funds under $50,000 from one project to another with CDBG Advisory Committee approval.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
99 of 335

MOTION
Moved by Housing Authority Member ____________________________, seconded by Housing Authority Member ___________________________, that the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale has reviewed and approves the Five-Year 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnership Act (HOME) Programs as more particularly outlined in the Joint Report to the City Council and Housing Authority dated June 24, 2025 including Attachments and Exhibits, and as further amended by the Housing Authority and Council at the Joint Meeting of the Council and the Housing Authority on June 24, 2025. Staff is authorized to submit the Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
100 of 335

1 MOTION
Moved by Housing Authority Member ____________________________, seconded by Housing Authority Member ___________________________, that the Housing Authority:

2. Authorizes staff to submit the Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as recommended by the CDBG Advisory Committee, the Continuum of Care Board, and staff.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
101 of 335

EXHIBIT 1
FY 2025-2026 PROPOSED CDBG FUNDING ALLOCATION PLAN BY FUNDING CATEGORY

FY 23-24

FINAL HUD
Allocation
FY 24-25

FINAL HUD
Allocation
FY 25-26
Proposed HUD
Allocation
$1,764,982 $1,733,207 $1,738,811
HUD ENTITLEMENT: $0 $0 $0
CURRENT YEAR CDBG PROGRAM INCOME $0 $0 $0
UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE $0 $146,795
REPROGRAMMED FUNDS* $552,629
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES:

ADMINISTRATION (20% of Entitlement): $352,996 $346,641 $347,762 (planning, program management and oversight)
PUBLIC SOCIAL SERVICES (15% of Entitlement): $264,747 $259,980 $260,819 Reprogrammed Funds:

COMMUNITY PROJECTS: (100%)
•AESA STEM Academy-Armenian Engineers and Scientists of America $0 $10,498 $10,529 •Mental Wellness in Atheletes Program- Homenetmen Glendale Ararat $0 $0 $10,529 •Pro Bono Legal Services-Armenian Bar Association $20,000 $20,498 $20,529 •Community Outreach Project-Armenian Relief Society $60,000 $65,498 $64,529 •Loaves and Fishes Homeless Prevention Program-Catholic Charities $35,000 $28,898 $32,529 •Intervention/Prevention Group Counseling Program-CASPS $33,000 $34,498 $34,529 •Domestic Violence Services-Door of Hope $22,000 $20,498 $10,529 •Youth Employment Program-Glendale Youth Alliance (GYA) $20,000 $15,498 $10,529 •Crisis Housing Support-Home Again LA $15,000 $15,498 $15,529 •Fair Housing Program-Housing Rights Center $10,150 $10,000 $10,000 •People's Choice Food Pantry-Salvation Army $0 $0 $20,529 •Mental Health Services for Survivors of DV-YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena $24,597 $28,098 $20,529 •Homeless Outreach Case Management-Ascencia $25,000 $10,498 $0 Public Social Services Sub-total $264,747 $259,980 $260,819 CAPITAL/NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS: $1,147,239 $1,826,010 $1,130,230 PRE-DESIGNATED PROJECTS: $667,043 $870,000 $500,000
• Elk Mini Park Project 25/26 $400,000
• Pelanconi Park Renovation Project $100,000
•FY23-24 Pacific Natural Grass Project $667,043 $370,000 •FY24-25 Pac/Ed Artifical Turf Project $500,000
UN-DESIGNATED COMMUNITY PROJECTS: $480,196 $956,010 $630,230 •Lexington Office Historic Building Preservation & Rehab Project-YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena $630,230 •Bathroom Renovation Project at Main Campus-Homenetmen Ararat Chapter $433,540 •Glendale Community Center-Catholic Charities of Los Angeles $268,100 •First Floor Locker Room Project- YMCA of Glendale $254,370 •Community Services Center-Verdugo Hills Council, Boy Scouts $92,696 •Public Safety Improvement to NLSLA Parking Lot- Neighborhood Legal Services $120,000 •Repairing/Repaving Parking Lot, Driverway, Front Parking Lot MC-Homenetmen Ararat $247,500 •Ascencia CIP Project- Ascencia $20,000
FY PROJECTED EXPENDITURES: $1,764,982 $2,432,631 $1,738,811 Balance $0 $0 $1,738,811
Uncommitted Grant funds
102 of 335

PUB

LIC REVIEW DRAFT
Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan
Fiscal Year 2025-2029 and Fiscal Year 2025-2026
City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks
Community Development
613 East Broadway Room 120
Glendale CA 91206
Draft
Exhibit 2
103 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE i
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 ES-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b) ......................................................................... 1 The Process ................................................................................................................................................... 6 PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b) ............................................................................. 6 PR-10 Consultation – 91.100, 91.110, 91.200(b), 91.300(b), 91.215(I) and 91.315(I) .............................. 6 PR-15 Citizen Participation – 91.105, 91.115, 91.200(c) and 91.300(c) ................................................. 16 Needs Assessment ...................................................................................................................................... 21 NA-05 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 21 NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c) .................................................................... 22 NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) ........................................ 32 NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) ............................ 35 NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens – 91.205 (b)(2) .................................. 38 NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion – 91.205(b)(2) ..................................................... 39 NA-35 Public Housing – 91.205(b) .......................................................................................................... 41 NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment – 91.205(c).................................................................................... 45 NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.205 (b,d) ............................................................ 48 NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs – 91.215 (f) ....................................................... 51 Housing Market Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 54 MA-05 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 54 MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2) ............................................................................. 54 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.210(a) ............................................................... 57 MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a)...................................................... 59 MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing – 91.210(b) .................................................................................... 62 MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services – 91.210(c) .............................................................................. 64 MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services – 91.210(d) ....................................................................... 66 Draft
104 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE ii
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing – 91.210(e) ................................................................................ 69 MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets – 91.215 (f) ...................................................... 71 MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion ....................................................................................... 76 MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate-Income Households -

91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2) ....................................................................................................................... 77 MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3) ........................................................................... 78 Strategic Plan .............................................................................................................................................. 80 SP-05 Overview ....................................................................................................................................... 80 SP-10 Geographic Priorities – 91.215 (a)(1) ............................................................................................ 80 SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.215(a)(2)......................................................................................................... 83 SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions – 91.215 (b) ................................................................................ 88 SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement – 91.215(c) ......................................................... 100 SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.215(h) ................................................................................. 100 SP-60 Homelessness Strategy – 91.215(d) ............................................................................................ 102 SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards – 91.215(i) ......................................................................................... 104 SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy – 91.215(j) ............................................................................................... 106 SP-80 Monitoring – 91.230 ................................................................................................................... 107 Draft
105 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 1
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Executive Summary
ES-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b)

1. Introduction
The Consolidated Plan is a document submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that serves as a comprehensive housing affordability strategy, community development plan and submission for funding under any of HUD’s entitlement formula grant programs.

The Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development was established through legislation passed by the U.S. Congress in 1990. Under the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, jurisdictions that receive federal entitlement funds for housing and community development activities are required to prepare a comprehensive three-to five-year plan for using those funds.

The entitlement formula utilizes population information, poverty and overcrowded housing data to establish funding allocations. The City of Glendale (the “City”) qualifies as a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnership, and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) entitlement City based on the grant formula. The City coordinates its efforts to provide a balanced approach to community needs using its available resources. A five-year strategic plan has been developed by the City of Glendale that identifies and prioritizes the future use of the City’s CDBG, ESG, and HOME funds. The 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan covers the timeframe from July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2030.

This Consolidated Plan was prepared using the eCon Planning Suite system developed by HUD. The system prescribes the structure and contents of this document, following the Federal Consolidated Planning regulations.

2. Summary of the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan Needs Assessment Overview
The City of Glendale incorporated outcome measures for activities in accordance with the Federal Register Notice dated March 7, 2006, which require the following Performance Measure Objectives/Outcomes to be associated with each activity funded:

General Objective Categories- Activities will meet one of the following:
• Decent Housing (DH)
• A Suitable Living Environment (SL)
• Economic Opportunity (EO) General

Outcome Categories- Activities will meet one of the following:
• Availability/Accessibility (1)
• Affordability (2)
• Sustainability (3)
Draft
106 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 2
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
In addition to national objectives and performance outcomes, the City must weigh and balance the input from different groups and assign funding priorities that best bridge the gaps in the City’s service delivery system. While other goals the City has set are also important, for the purposes of the Consolidated Plan, only those which are anticipated to be funded with CPD funding programs (CDBG, HOME, and ESG) during the five-year planning cycle, are indicated to be high priorities. The City utilizes other funding sources to meet goals that are not considered high priority in the Consolidated Plan. The City established priorities for allocating CPD funds based on a number of criteria, including:

• Urgency of needs
• Cost efficiency
• Eligibility of activities/programs
• Availability of other funding sources to address specific needs • Funding program limitations
• Capacity and authority for implementing actions
• Consistency with Citywide goals, policies, and efforts

Needs which have been determined to be a High Priority level will receive funding during the Five-Year Consolidated Plan. The priorities for the FY 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan, established in consultation with residents and community groups, include the following:

• Homeless
• Public Facilities
• Public Social Services
• Public/Neighborhood Improvements
• Housing

3. Evaluation of past performance
Between FY 2020 and FY 2024, the City accomplished the following under the previous Consolidated Plan -
Public Facilities:
• Homenetmen Gym Divider Project, Roofing and HVAC project • Armenian Cultural Foundation Solar Panel Project
• Pelanconi Park Playground
• YMCA of Glendale First Floor All-Inclusive Locker Room • Campbell Center Alma House Renovation
• Pacific Park Pool and Shade Structure Project
• Pacific Natural Grass Project and Pacific Edison Artificial Turf Project (design phase complete)

Draft
107 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 3
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Homeless Services:
• Continued operation of the year-round emergency shelter with 45 beds • YWCA increased the number of beds from 10 to 16 for the year round domestic violence crisis shelter
• Home Again Los Angeles (HALA) year-round Rapid Rehousing Program (funding allocated) Housing (Each project utilized HOME funds to develop 11 units):
• Citrus Crossing – 127 units serving very low- and low-income seniors that opened Fall 2024 • Harrower Village – 40 units serving very low- and low-income seniors (will open in 2025) • 515 Pioneer – 337 units serving very low- and low-income families and seniors (will open in 2026)
• 426 Piedmont Avenue and 507 Naranja Drive – properties purchased and a developer has been selected to build 67 units for seniors. (Expected to be completed by June 2026 using HOME-ARP funding)
Unduplicated Persons Served:
• FY 2020-2021
o CDBG program - 3,874 persons
o CDBG-CV3 program – 2,671 persons
o ESG program – 892 persons
• FY 2021-2022
o CDBG program – 914 persons
o CDBG-CV3 program – 3,248
o ESG program – 354 persons
• FY 2022-2023
o CDBG program – 1,256 persons
o CDBG-CV3 program – 3,248 persons
o ESG program – 395 persons
• FY 2023-2024
o CDBG program – 1,870 persons
o CDBG-CV3 program – 422 persons
o ESG program – 372 persons

4. Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process Citizen participation is one of the most important components of the Consolidated Plan process. To solicit public input during the development of the Consolidated Plan, the City conducted different types of meetings. The City also administered a Housing and Community Development Needs Survey. The different forms of outreach are detailed below:

Draft
108 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 4
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Meetings: The City conducted a community workshop on October 2, 2024 at the Glendale Adult Recreation Center. A total of 120 people attended and translation services in Armenian and Spanish were provided. Attendees were given the opportunity to comment on housing, public social services, community and economic development and homelessness issues. Links to the online survey were also provided (please see survey information below).

Community Events: City staff attended several community events in the fall of 2024 to notify people about the Consolidated Plan and to gather feedback. These events included:
• Armenian American Museum Festival
• Ballet Folklorico Mexico Azteca event
• Community Fall Fair at Glendale Presbyterian Church
• Estate Planning Workshop
• Library Arts and Culture Author Talk (Poetry)
• Storybook Science with STEAM Superheroes
Virtual Open House: A virtual open house was held on September 17, 2024 via Microsoft Teams for non- profits to learn the fundamentals of federal funding and to discuss priorities for the Consolidated Plan. A total of 16 non-profits participated.

Housing and Community Development Survey: The survey was made available between September 16 and October 16, 2024 in Spanish, Armenian and English both on-line and hard copy form. A total of 759 responses were received. Outreach for the survey included:
• Posting links to the survey on the City’s Social Media pages • Posting information about the survey in various publications • Providing hard copies of surveys at all meetings and community events

Applications for Funding:

Public Review of Draft Documents: A 30-day public review period for the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan is from April 1, 2025 to April 30, 2025.

The final Consolidated Plan, amendments to the Plan, and annual performance reports will be available for five year at City Hall. Residents affected by the Plan’s implementation have access to the City’s Plans.

Public Hearings:

A CDBG Advisory Committee meeting was held on October 23, 2024. During this meeting a presentation was made to the five-member committee about the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan, including the public outreach being conducted.

A City Council meeting for adoption of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan will be held 6/24/2025.

Draft
109 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 5
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

5. Summary of public comments
A summary of public comments received is provided in Appendix B.

6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them All comments were received and accepted.

7. Summary
The City of Glendale has undertaken diligent and good faith efforts in outreaching to all segments of the community that may benefit from the CDBG, HOME and ESG programs.

Draft
110 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 6
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
The Process
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b)

1. Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source.

Agency Role Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator GLENDALE Community Services & Parks
Department
HOME Administrator GLENDALE Community Development
Department
ESG Administrator GLENDALE Community Development
Department
Table 1 – Responsible Agencies

Narrative
The City of Glendale’s Community Development Department administers the HOME and ESG programs and the Community Services & Parks Department administers the CDBG program.

Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
Maggie Kavarian, Community Services Manager
[email protected]
Phone (818) 548-3715
Website: https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community-s ervices-parks/human- services/community-development-block-grant
PR-10 Consultation – 91.100, 91.110, 91.200(b), 91.300(b), 91.215(I) and

91.315(I)

1. Introduction
As part of this Consolidated Plan development, the City undertook an outreach program to consult and coordinate nonprofit agencies, affordable housing providers, and government agencies. The outreach program has been summarized in the Executive Summary and Citizen Participation sections of this Consolidated Plan. Comments received as a result of the survey and community outreach activities are summarized in Unique Grantee Appendices.

Draft
111 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 7
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(I)).

In order to perform outreach to various agencies and organizations, the City compiled an outreach list consisting of different agencies, including:
• Nonprofit service providers that cater to the needs of low and moderate income households and persons with special needs, including persons with disabilities; • Affordable housing providers;
• Housing advocates;
• Housing professionals;
• Public and quasi-public agencies (such as school districts, health services, public works), including those that address emergency and hazard management as well as digital divide; • Economic development and employment organizations; and • Community and neighborhood groups.

The complete outreach list is included in Appendix B. These agencies were invited to attend the community workshops and meetings as well as to participate in the community needs survey. Specific agencies were also contacted to obtain data in preparation of this Consolidated Plan.

The City of Glendale (City) has a robust system of coordination and collaboration with assisted housing providers, health, mental health and service agencies. The City’s homeless Continuum of Care (CoC) is compromised of the Glendale CoC Committee, Glendale CoC Board, Coordinated Entry System (CES) Council and sub-committee. The City also collaborates with the Glendale Healthier Community Coalition, Crescenta Valley Alliance, and with housing providers such as Habitat for Humanity, Ascencia, Door of Hope, The Salvation Army, Home Again LA, formerly Family Promise of Verdugo’s, Armenian Relief Society, YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena, Catholic Charities of Los Angeles, and Community Development and Housing’s Section 8 and HOME sections provide information and feedback on coordinating housing and social service activities. This coordinated effort primarily involved the City sponsoring community meetings and focus groups for community residents and community agencies.

The City also manages federal Workforce Investment Opportunity Act programs and coordinates its HUD entitlement programs with the Verdugo Workforce Investment Board for economic development program assistance.

Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness The Glendale Continuum of Care (CoC) and the Glendale Consolidated Plan jurisdictions cover the exact same geography. The CoC receives local, County, State, and Federal funds to provide a variety of homeless programs and services in Glendale including, Coordinated Entry System (CES); Homeless Prevention; a 45-bed Emergency Shelter (operated by lead CES Agency Ascencia); a 16 bed facility Draft
112 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 8
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
operated by the YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena for victims of domestic violence; Transitional Housing Permanent Supportive Housing; Rapid Re-Housing, Outreach and Case Management; management of the Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS) and Landlord Incentive Programs, and a year- round non-congregating sheltering program to help identify units to place homeless families and individuals.

The City’s Coordinated Entry System (CES) processes ensure that all people experiencing homelessness in different populations and subpopulations including people experiencing chronic homelessness, veterans, families with children, youth, persons involved with the criminal justice system, and persons who are fleeing, or attempting to flee, domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, stalking, or other dangerous or life-threatening conditions including human trafficking, will have fair and open access to the coordinated entry process.

The CES utilizes the coordinated entry intake and assessment process to match persons and households experiencing homelessness to appropriate housing resources in accordance with the CES matching and prioritization policy. All Permanent Supportive Housing programs funded through the CoC are targeted to serve persons with the highest needs and greatest barriers towards obtaining and maintaining housing for persons experiencing chronic homelessness. CES services include, but are not limited to the following: laundry, showers, mail pick-up, on-site case management for employment, veteran’s services, substance abuse, outreach, mental health services and housing coordination. Housing for homeless veterans is coordinated with the Community Development-Housing Division through regular coordination meetings. The City’s homeless service providers make direct referrals for veterans who are homeless to either a project based affordable housing or coordinate with the Veterans Administration for scattered site VASH Vouchers for homeless who are discharged honorable with DD214’s. The City coordinates with YWCA of Glendale & Pasadena and Door of Hope for homeless programming and services specifically for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or human trafficking, as defined under the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act (HEARTH Act). Youth and Families experiencing homelessness are quickly assessed and linked to the Family Solutions Center through the SPA 2 CES system and Home Again LA. Youth and families with children are matched to permanent housing resources pursuant to the order of priority established by the CES matching and prioritization policy.

Most recently, through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the CoC partnered with the Glendale Housing Authority (GHA) to jointly administer the Emergency Housing Voucher Program (EHV). A total of 225 vouchers have been utilized to serve the unhoused community and those at-risk in the City of Glendale and the Greater Glendale area. The CoC service providers work with each homeless person to complete the necessary paperwork for eligibility determination and also provide housing navigation and placement. In addition, the service providers have agreed to provide ongoing case management to homeless clients who are placed in the EHV program. This program will be crucial in aiding our goal of ending chronic homelessness in the City of Glendale.

Draft
113 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 9
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS The City of Glendale along with the Continuum of Care Board of Directors coordinates the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Request for Proposal (RFP) process to allocate ESG funds. Both CoC and ESG notifications are released through a local RFP, which is also posted in various locations including, the City newspaper, City’s’ website, directly mailed and emailed out to all agencies on the CoC distribution list and is coordinated with the City’s Library Department and Workforce Investment Act (WIA) program.

A formal review of all of the RFP’s are conducted by the CoC Board, including agency interviews, review of semi-annual progress reports, HMIS, outcomes, overall program capacity, financial management and coordination of CoC programs. The formal report is submitted to City Council for approval and submission to HUD. The ESG program strategies and funding levels are included in the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan for the CoC programs. The administration of HMIS is handled through City’s Community Development Department.

2. Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities 1 Agency/Group/Organization ASCENCIA
Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing
Services - Housing
Services-homeless
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Homeless Needs – Homeless & Chronically homeless
individuals

Homelessness Needs - Veterans

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 10
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Non-homeless community development needs

Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
4 Agency/Group/Organization KIDS’ COMMUNITY DENTAL CLINIC Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Children
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Homeless Needs - Families with children
Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth
Non-homeless community development needs
Non-homeless special needs
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
5 Agency/Group/Organization HOUSING RIGHTS CENTER
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Housing
Services- Families with Children
Services-Elderly Persons
Services-homeless
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Housing Need Assessment
Non-Homeless Special Needs
Anti-poverty Strategy
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
6 Agency/Group/Organization ARMENIAN RELIEF SOCIETY
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Elderly Persons Services-Health
Services-Employment
Immigration
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Non-Homeless Special Needs
Anti-poverty Strategy
Non-homeless community development needs
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
7 Agency/Group/Organization HOMENETMEN GLENDALE ARARAT CHAPTER Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Children
Draft
115 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 11
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
non-homeless community development needs
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
8 Agency/Group/Organization YWCA OF GLENDALE AND PASADENA Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Housing
Services-Children
Services-Victims of Domestic Violence
Services-Education
Services-Employment
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Housing Need Assessment
Homelessness Needs - Veterans
Homelessness Strategy
Non-Homeless Community Development Needs
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
9 Agency/Group/Organization CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF LOS ANGELES, INC.

Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Housing
Services-homeless
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless
Homeless Needs - Families with children
Anti-poverty Strategy
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
10 Agency/Group/Organization DOOR OF HOPE
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Housing
Services-Victims of Domestic Violence
Services-homeless
Services-Health
Services - Victims
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Housing Need Assessment
Homeless Needs - Families with children
Homelessness Strategy
Anti-poverty Strategy
Draft
116 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 12
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
11 Agency/Group/Organization THE CAMPBELL CENTER AND NEW HORIZONS Agency/Group/Organization Type Non-Homeless Special Needs Services – Housing
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Housing Needs Assessment
Non-Homeless Community Development Needs
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
12 Agency/Group/Organization ARMENIAN CULTURAL ASSOCIATION, HAMAZKAYIN INC. GLENDALE
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – cultural
Services – Children
Services – Elderly
Services – Employment
Regional organization
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Non-homeless community development needs
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
13 Agency/Group/Organization VERTERANS OF ARMENIA & ARARAT FOUNDATION Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Housing
Services – Homeless
Services - Veterans
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Housing Needs Assessment
Homelessness Needs - Veterans
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.
14 Agency/Group/Organization VETERANS OF AMERICA
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Housing
Services – Homeless
Services - Veterans
What section of the Plan was addressed
by Consultation?
Housing Needs Assessment
Homelessness Needs - Veterans
Draft
117 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 13
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Agency attended the Virtual CDBG Open House held
on September 17, 2024. Input assisted in creating
priorities, goals and objectives.

Table 2 – Agencies, groups, organizations who participated

Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting The City reached out to all types of organizations. Such organizations included: child welfare agencies, HIV/AIDs service providers, federal, state, and county public agencies, and persons with disabilities agencies. However, some did not respond to the invitation to surveys, focus group meetings, or participated in the public hearings.

Draft
118 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 14
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the
goals of each plan?
Continuum of Care Glendale Continuum of Care
Committee/City of Glendale
Community Development
Department
The goals for the Continuum of
Care were used for the
development of the homeless
strategic plan in the
Consolidated Plan. The goal is to
establish a comprehensive
Continuum of Care System that
supports people experiencing
homelessness, guiding them
from the streets to more stable
and supportive housing.

Housing Element Community Development
Department
The housing goals in the
Consolidated Plan aligns with
the overall vision of the Housing
Element.
2023 and 2024 Homeless
Counts
Glendale Continuum of Care
Committee/City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks
Department
The information from the
Homeless Counts were used for
the development of the
homeless strategic plan in the
Consolidated Plan.

Glendale 2024 Homeless Action
Plan
Glendale Continuum of Care
Committee/City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks
Department
Priority areas and strategies in
the Action Plan were used for
the development of the
homeless strategic plan in the
Consolidated Plan.
2022-2025 Economic
Development 3-Year Strategic
Plan
City of Glendale Economic
Development Division
Goals and objectives in the
Economic Development
Strategic Plan were used for the
development of the
Consolidated Plan Strategic
Plan.

Safety Element and Appendices
(Public Review Draft)
City of Glendale Community
Development Department
Information related to natural
hazards and vulnerable
populations from climate
change included in the
Consolidated Plan.

Table 3 – Other local / regional / federal planning efforts

Draft
119 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 15
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(l)) The City continually consults with its closest local unit of government- the City of Burbank and the City of Pasadena for regional community development, homeless, and housing needs. The City of Burbank and Pasadena’s community profile closely resembles that of the City of Glendale. The City of Glendale also coordinates with the Department of Housing and Community Development, State of California and receives grant funds from HCD.

Narrative (optional):

Refer to Appendix B for a complete outreach list, proof of publication, results of the Housing and Community Development Needs Survey, and summary of public comments received.

Draft
120 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 16
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
PR-15 Citizen Participation – 91.105, 91.115, 91.200(c) and 91.300(c)

1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting

As described earlier, the City of Glendale made diligent efforts in soliciting public input to help develop the Consolidated Plan.

The Needs Assessment process for the FY 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025-2026 Annual Plan included consultation and input from community residents, community coalitions and social service and housing agencies providing services to low- and moderate-income residents.

This process included:

1. A Virtual Open House was held on September 17, 2024 via Microsoft Teams for non-profits to learn the fundamentals of federal funding and to discuss priorities for the Consolidated Plan. A total of 16 non-profits participated.

2. A Community Workshop held on October 2, 2024 at the Glendale Adult Recreation Center. A total of 120 people attended and translation services in Armenian and Spanish were provided. Attendees were given the opportunity to comment on housing, public social services, community and economic development and homelessness issues. Links to the online survey were also provided (please see survey information below).

3. A Housing and Community Development Survey was made available in Spanish, Armenian and English both on-line and hard copy form.

A total of 759 responses were received. Distribution of the survey included: posting links to the survey on the City’s Social Media pages, posting information about the survey in various publications and providing hard copies of surveys at all meetings and community events.

4. A CDBG Advisory Committee meeting was held on October 23, 2024. During this meeting a presentation was made to the five-member committee about the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan, including the public outreach being conducted.

5. A 30-day Public Review Period for the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan was from April 1, 2025, to April 30, 2025.

6. A City Council meeting for adoption of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan will be held 6/24/2025.

Draft
121 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 17
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Citizen Participation Outreach
Draft
122 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 18
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of response/attendance
Summary of
comments received
Summary of comments
not accepted
and reasons
URL (If
applicable)
1 Virtual Open
House
(Stakeholder
Consultation)
Non-
targeted/broad
community
September 17, 2024
– 16 non-profit
agencies, several City
departments
attended
All comments
received are
documented as
part of Appendix B.

All comments were
accepted.

2 Community
Workshop
Minorities

Non-English
speaking
(Armenian and
Spanish)

Persons with
disabilities

Non-
targeted/broad
community
October 2, 2024. A
total of 120 people
attended. Armenian
and Spanish
translation was
provided.

A summary of
comments received
are documented as
part of Appendix B.

All comments were
accepted.

Draft
123 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 19
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
3 Housing and
Community
Development
Survey
Minorities

Non-English
speaking
(Armenian and
Spanish)

Persons with
disabilities

Non-
targeted/broad
community

Residents of Public
and Assisted
Housing

Community
Agencies

Survey open from
September 16, 2024,
through October 16,
2024. Provided in
digital and hard copy
form. Surveys were in
English, Spanish and
Armenian. A total of
759 responses were
received.

A summary of
comments received
are documented as
part of Appendix B.

All comments were
accepted.

4 CDBG Advisory
Committee
Meeting
October 23, 2024.

Presentation made to
the 5-member
committee.

A summary of
comments received
are documented as
part of Appendix B.

All comments were
accepted.

5 30-day Public
Review
Non-
targeted/broad
community
Opportunity for the
public to comment
on the Con Plan April
1, 2025- April 30,
2025.

A summary of
comments received
are documented as
part of Appendix B.

All comments were
accepted.

6 Public Hearing City Council Meeting
held on 6/24/2025.

A summary of
comments received
are documented as
part of Appendix B
All comments were
accepted.

Draft
124 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 20
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Table 4 – Citizen Participation Outreach
Draft
125 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 21
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Needs Assessment
NA-05 Overview
Needs Assessment Overview
The Needs Assessment of the Consolidated Plan, in conjunction with information gathered through consultations and the citizen participation process, will provide a clear picture of the City of Glendale's needs related to affordable housing, community development, and homelessness. From this Needs Assessment, the City identified those needs with the highest priority, which will form the basis for the Strategic Plan and the programs and projects to be delivered over the five-year planning period.

The Needs Assessment relies on a variety of statistical data to inform Consolidated Plan priorities.

Municipalities are required to use a template provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to structure the Consolidated Plans. This HUD template includes tables with demographic information from the 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS), which the City uses to analyze trends and develop narratives related to housing, economic conditions, and population demographics.

When the template does not provide specific data, the City supplements with the most current information available. The data sources utilized include:
• 2018-2022 American Community Survey Five-Year Estimates • 2016-2020 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Data from HUD • 2024 Glendale Point-In-Time Homeless Count
• December 2022 Consumer Count by California ZIP Code and Residence Type from the California Department of Developmental Services
• Glendale Continuum of Care
• City of Glendale General Plan
• City of Glendale FY2024-2025 Action Plan
HUD typically defines low- and moderate-income households as those earning up to 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI) for the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). However, some data sources may define low-income households as those earning up to 100 percent of AMI.

Draft
126 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 22
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c)
Summary of Housing Needs
In 2020, Glendale had a population of 199,355 persons and 74,765 households (Table 5). These were both slight increases from the base year of 2009. During that same timeframe, the median income for Glendale residents increased by 34 percent, from $52,574 to $70,596. According to the most recent CHAS data (2016-2020) approximately 54 percent of Glendale households (40,645) qualify as low-to- moderate income based on HUD guidelines (<80 percent AMI) (Table 6). This includes 80 percent renter households (32,600) and 20 percent owner occupied households (8,036).

Households with at least one elderly person (persons over the age of 62 represent the most prevalent type of household in Glendale (Table 6). Approximately 29,775 such households are in the city (40 percent of total households). In terms of income level, 64 percent of households (19,135) with at least one elderly person are low-income (<80 percent AMI).

Housing Needs Summary Tables
To help dissect the housing problems facing Glendale, the following tables provide details:
• Table 5 presents the population and household growth between 2009 and 2020. • Table 6 presents the number of households by special characteristics. • Table 7 presents an overview of the number of housing problems by household income, household type, and tenure.
• Table 8 presents the number of households with one or more housing problem (inadequate housing, overcrowding, cost burden of 50 percent, or cost burden of 30 percent) by income and tenure.
• Table 9 summarizes the number of households with more than one or more severe housing problem by income and tenure. Severe housing problems are: inadequate housing; severe overcrowding (1.51 persons or more per room); and housing cost burden of 50 percent. • Table 10 isolates those households with housing cost burden of over 30 percent (inclusive of those with cost burden of over 50 percent) by income and tenure. • Table 11 further isolates those households with cost burden of over 50 percent. • Table 12 presents overcrowding by household type.
• Table 13 is intended to show overcrowding for households with children. However, the American Community Survey provides no data for the City.

As mentioned above, for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), a person is considered to be of low income only if he or she is a member of a family whose income would qualify as "very low income" under the Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments program. Unrelated individuals are considered as one-person families for this purpose. Generally, these Section 8 limits are based on 50 percent of area median income (AMI). Similarly, CDBG moderate income relies on Section 8 "lower income" limits, which are generally tied to 80 percent of AMI.

Draft
127 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 23
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
As defined by HUD in the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, housing problems include:
• Units with physical defects (lacking complete kitchen or bathroom); • Overcrowded conditions (housing units with more than one person per room); • Housing cost burden (including utilities) exceeding 30 percent of gross income; and • Severe housing cost burden (including utilities) exceeding 50 percent of gross income.

Demographics Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2020 % Change Population 196,985 199,355 1%
Households 71,500 74,765 5%
Median Income $52,574.00 $70,596.00 34%
Table 5 - Housing Needs Assessment Demographics

Data Source: 2000 Census (Base Year), 2016-2020 ACS (Most Recent Year)

Number of Households Table
0-30%
HAMFI
>30-50%
HAMFI
>50-80%
HAMFI
>80-100%
HAMFI
>100%
HAMFI
Total Households 18,440 9,420 12,785 6,110 28,010
Small Family Households 5,275 4,220 6,175 3,210 14,930
Large Family Households 920 785 880 470 2,190
Household contains at least one
person 62-74 years of age 5,430 2,390 3,215 1,525 6,335 Household contains at least one
person age 75 or older 4,835 1,435 1,830 470 2,310
Households with one or more
children 6 years old or younger 1,790 1,030 1,400 920 2,760 Table 6 - Total Households Table
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

Draft
128 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 24
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Total
Households Elderly
Household
Small
Household
Large
Household Total Elderly
Household
Small
Household
Large
Household Total
Extremely Low Income (<30%
AMI) 7,605 4,685 790 15,820 1,550 590 130 2,615 18,435
With any housing problem 90.3% 91.0% 98.1% 90.0% 88.7% 86.4% 26.9% 79.0% 88.4% Cost burden >30% 62.3% 90.2% 98.1% 89.0% 88.4% 86.4% 26.9% 78.8% 87.5% Cost burden >50% 53.7% 86.3% 91.8% 82.2% 80.6% 84.7% 26.9% 73.8% 81.0% Low Income (30-50% AMI) 1,675 3,595 675 7,605 955 625 110 1,820 9,425 With any housing problem 92.8% 89.7% 100.0% 93.1% 59.7% 76.8% 68.2% 68.1% 88.3% Cost burden >30% 90.1% 87.9% 98.5% 91.5% 62.8% 74.4% 68.2% 66.5% 86.7% Cost burden >50% 57.6% 55.6% 45.9% 55.9% 25.7% 40.0% 45.5% 36.3% 52.1% Moderate Income (50-80%
AMI) 1,510 4,645 630 9,175 1,535 1,535 250 3,610 12,785 With any housing problem 57.3% 62.5% 69.0% 62.0% 45.3% 70.4% 86.0% 61.6% 61.9% Cost burden >30% 54.0% 58.2% 35.7% 56.2% 45.0% 70.4% 80.0% 60.9% 57.6% Cost burden >50% 8.9% 6.9% 8.7% 9.2% 23.1% 42.3% 26.0% 34.6% 16.4% Middle/Above Moderate
Income (>80% AMI) 1,550 8,940 910 16,750 5,050 9,200 1,750 17,375 34,125 With any housing problem 17.4% 15.6% 38.5% 17.4% 26.1% 23.7% 29.7% 25.3% 21.4% Cost burden >30% 13.9% 9.3% 7.1% 11.2% 26.2% 23.2% 11.1% 23.1% 17.2% Cost burden >50% 0.6% 0.5% 0.0% 0.4% 2.3% 4.2% 1.7% 3.5% 1.9% All Households 12,340 21,865 3,005 49,350 9,090 11,950 2,240 25,415 74,765 With any housing problem 77.5% 53.9% 74.4% 60.6% 43.6% 35.6% 37.7% 39.0% 53.3% Cost burden >30% 59.0% 50.0% 57.6% 56.9% 43.8% 35.0% 22.5% 37.3% 50.2% Cost burden >50% 42.1% 29.3% 36.3% 36.8% 21.6% 15.0% 8.0% 17.5% 30.2% Table 7 – Housing Problems by Household Income, Household Type , and Tenure Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

Draft
129 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 25
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

1. Housing Problems (Households with one of the listed needs) Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Substandard
Housing -
Lacking
complete
plumbing or
kitchen
facilities
885 430 260 60 1,635 15 4 20 0 39
Severely
Overcrowded -
With >1.51
people per
room (and
complete
kitchen and
plumbing)
475 410 450 75 1,410 0 45 45 4 94
Overcrowded -
With 1.01-1.5
people per
room (and
none of the
above
problems)
655 580 360 210 1,805 15 55 45 50 165
Housing cost
burden greater
than 50% of
income (and
none of the
above
problems)
11,24
5 3,730 785 20
15,78
0 1,900 610 1,210 250 3,970
Draft
130 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 26
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total
Housing cost
burden greater
than 30% of
income (and
none of the
above
problems)
980 1,935 3,830 800 7,545 130 520 895 720 2,265
Zero/negative
Income (and
none of the
above
problems) 855 0 0 0 855 320 0 0 0 320
Table 8 – Housing Problems Table
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

2. Housing Problems 2 (Households with one or more Severe Housing Problems: Lacks kitchen or complete plumbing, severe overcrowding, severe cost burden) Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Having 1 or
more of four
housing
problems
13,260 5,145 1,855 365 20,625 1,930 715 1,325 300 4,270 Having none of
four housing
problems
2,560 2,455 7,325 3,735 16,075 685 1,100 2,285 1,705 5,775 Household has
negative
income, but
none of the
other housing
problems
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 9 – Housing Problems 2
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

Draft
131 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 27
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

3. Cost Burden > 30%
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-50%
AMI
>50-80%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-50%
AMI
>50-80%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Small Related 4,225 3,160 2,705 10,090 510 465 1,080 2,055 Large Related 775 665 225 1,665 35 75 200 310
Elderly 6,755 1,510 815 9,080 1,370 560 690 2,620
Other 2,320 1,625 1,410 5,355 140 109 225 474
Total need by
income
14,075 6,960 5,155 26,190 2,055 1,209 2,195 5,459
Table 10 – Cost Burden > 30%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

4. Cost Burden > 50%
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-50%
AMI
>50-80%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Small Related 0 0 2,000 2,000 500 250 0 750
Large Related 0 0 310 310 35 50 65 150
Elderly 6,025 965 135 7,125 1,250 255 355 1,860
Other 0 2,215 975 3,190 140 0 0 140
Total need by
income
6,025 3,180 3,420 12,625 1,925 555 420 2,900
Table 11 – Cost Burden > 50%
Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

5. Crowding (More than one person per room)
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-
30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Single family
households 1,045 875 570 145 2,635 30 75 80 35 220
Multiple,
unrelated family
households 115 135 210 110 570 0 25 10 19 54
Draft
132 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 28
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-
30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total
Other, non-family
households 50 50 65 30 195 0 0 10 0 10
Total need by
income
1,210 1,060 845 285 3,400 30 100 100 54 284
Table 12 – Crowding Information – 1/2
Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
Total
Households
with Children
Present

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Table 13 – Crowding Information – 2/2
Draft
133 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 29
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Describe the number and type of single person households in need of housing assistance.

In 2022, approximately 20,000 households (27 percent) in Glendale were single-person households (2012-2022 ACS). This is a significant increase from the 2010 Census when there were 8,247 such households. Of these households in 2022, about three-fourths (14,607) were renters. Approximately 42 percent of the City’s single-person households are those aged 65 or older living alone. Seniors living alone typically require assistance with repairs and maintenance.

Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance who are disabled or victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking.

Persons with Disabilities: Of the 123,277 persons 18 to 64 years of age and categorized as civilian noninstitutionalized, 8,299 (6.7 percent) have disability status, lower than the Los Angeles County average of seven percent. (2018-2022 ACS). However, disability status is much higher for persons aged 65 and older, with 45 percent of the senior population in Glendale living with a disability. This percentage is higher than the senior population in the County with a disability (36 percent).

In general, persons with disabilities require accessible and affordable housing, with easy access to supportive services and transportation services. This can include special housing design features for the physically disabled, income support for those who are unable to work, and in-home supportive services for those with medical conditions. The majority of persons with disabilities live on an income that is significantly lower than the non-disabled population. Ambulatory difficulty is the most prevalent for Glendale residents with a disability (68 percent), followed by an independent living difficulty and self- care difficulty (65 percent and 51 percent, respectively).

The Frank D. Lanterman Regional Center serves individuals with developmental disabilities in Glendale.

As of December 2021, the center supported approximately 1,929 residents within Glendale’s ZIP codes.

Notably, more than 85 percent of these clients were living with a parent or guardian.

Victims of Domestic Violence: The 2024 Glendale Point-In-Time Homeless Count included 62 sheltered persons who identified as being homeless due to domestic violence. These persons accounted for 62 percent of the sheltered homeless population and was an increase from 56 persons who identified as being homeless due to domestic violence in 2023. Victims of domestic violence may require special services to find housing, especially if the person happens to be a single mother. The 2018-2022 ACS states that approximately 15 percent of the City’s female-headed households, with no husband present and with children under 18 years of age
are living below the poverty level in 2022 compared to nine percent of married couple households.

What are the most common housing problems?
The most common housing problems are housing cost burden and overcrowded housing, which are often related. These problems apply to all levels of low income renters and to a lesser extent to low income homeowners.

Draft
134 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 30
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
According to the 2016-2020 CHAS data presented in the tables above shows that the most common housing problem for low- and moderate-income households is housing cost burden that exceeds 50 percent of household income (Table 8). Approximately 15,760 low and moderate renter households were facing severe cost burden, representing approximately 48 percent of the total low and moderate income renter households in Glendale. About 3,720 low- and moderate-income owner households face severe cost burden as well, representing 46 percent of owner households in these income categories. As shown on Table 7, severe cost burden increases signiﬁcantly for extremely low income (ELI) households, with 82 percent of renter and 74 percent of owner ELI households spending more than 50 percent of income on housing.

A total of 3,684 renter and owner households are overcrowded in Glendale. Similar to cost burden, overcrowding impacts renter households more than owner households.

Are any populations/household types more affected than others by these problems? Overall, renter households are more impacted by housing problems than owner households (Table 8) Approximately 60 percent of households affected by housing problems and burdens were renter households compared to 39 percent of owner households. Overall senior renter and owner households are impacted the most by cost burden in the city. However, when looking at income levels, extremely lower income large renter households (98 percent) and extremely low and low income small owner households face significant cost burden issues (86 percent and 74 percent, respectively).

Overcrowding impacts single family households more than other household types in Glendale. 2,635 renter and 220 owner single family households face overcrowding conditions (Table 12).

Describe the characteristics and needs of Low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered 91.205(c)/91.305(c)). Also discuss the needs of formerly homeless families and individuals who are receiving rapid re-housing assistance and are nearing the termination of that assistance
In Glendale, approximately 25 percent (18,435 households) of households earn extremely low incomes (Table 7). Of these, 86 percent are renters and 14 percent are owners.

About 14 percent of all Glendale families were below the poverty line in 2022, which is similar to that of LA County (15 percent). The highest concentration of persons below poverty is in the southern area of Glendale located south of Lexington Drive. A majority of census tracts in this area have between 18 and 28 percent of persons below the poverty rate. These same tracts also face severe cost burden (>50 percent of income spent on housing).

Glendale Continuum of Care (CoC) programs adhere to the Housing First model which eliminates barriers and provides access to permanent housing without prerequisites or conditions beyond those of a typical renter to help reduce the length of homelessness. In order to ensure that families maintain their housing, case managers assist families with connecting them to mainstream and community
Draft
135 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 31
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
resources that may include income assistance, employment services, health care, mental health services, and substance use treatment. By encouraging participation in these programs and services, homeless families and individuals gain the knowledge and skills they need in order to maintain their housing. Case managers generally work with families for up to six months after rapid rehousing assistance ends. The organization responsible for overseeing the rapid rehousing strategy is Home Again Los Angeles. Since 2017, 100 percent of families enrolled in Rapid Rehousing have successfully taken over their apartment leases at the culmination of the program.

For low-income individuals and families at risk of homelessness, providing financial assistance such as rental and utility subsidies, along with access to childcare and preventative services like eviction counseling, is crucial. Simultaneously, employment support through job training and placement is crucial to building long-term economic security. These interventions stabilize income, maintain housing affordability, and equip families with the tools to navigate housing challenges. By addressing these immediate needs, it is possible to prevent families from entering the homelessness crisis.

The Verdugo Job Center is a one-stop career center serving the cities of Burbank, Glendale and La Canada Flintridge. Services include career counseling, job search assistance, training opportunities, job fairs and more, free of charge. The Job Center also provides services to businesses. Between 2020 and 2024, 1,121 Glendale residents looking for employment utilized the Job Center, with the highest number (298) occurring in 2024. During that same time frame, 342 Glendale businesses sought assistance from the Job Center, with highest number (87) occurring in 2020.

If a jurisdiction provides estimates of the at-risk population(s), it should also include a description of the operational definition of the at-risk group and the methodology used to generate the estimates:

Households at risk of becoming homeless include those extremely low income households with a severe housing cost burden (spending 50 percent or more of their income on housing). In 2020, 82 percent of extremely low income renters and 75 percent of extremely low income owners were paying more than 50 percent of their income on housing in Glendale.

Specify particular housing characteristics that have been linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness
Housing characteristics linked to instability and increased risk of homelessness include: high housing costs relative to income, overcrowding, substandard housing conditions, and living in temporary or transitional housing such as motels or shelters. These factors often contribute to financial strain, housing insecurity, and ultimately, homelessness. Extremely low income households with a severe housing cost burden are more likely to lose their homes in the event of loss of employment or other unexpected expenses.

Draft
136 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 32
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.

Introduction
A disproportionate housing need refers to any group that has a housing need, which is at least 10 percentage points higher than the total population. The following tables identify the extent of housing problems by income and race. The four housing problems are 1) Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2) Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3) More than one person per room, 4) Cost burden greater than 30 percent.
0%-30% of Area Median Income
Housing Problems Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 14,960 940 930
White 11,330 755 680
Black / African American 120 0 10
Asian 1,100 90 155
American Indian, Alaska Native 0 0 0
Pacific Islander 0 0 0
Hispanic 2,170 95 90
Table 14 - Disproportionally Greater Need 0 - 30% AMI
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

*The four housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30%

30%-50% of Area Median Income
Housing Problems Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 8,325 830 0
White 5,275 560 0
Black / African American 110 0 0
Draft
137 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 33
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Housing Problems Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Asian 970 90 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 59 0 0
Pacific Islander 0 0 0
Hispanic 1,765 180 0
Table 15 - Disproportionally Greater Need 30 - 50% AMI
Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS
*The four housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30%

50%-80% of Area Median Income
Housing Problems Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 8,360 3,530 0
White 5,105 1,905 0
Black / African American 229 65 0
Asian 1,330 510 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 0 25 0
Pacific Islander 0 0 0
Hispanic 1,575 955 0
Table 16 - Disproportionally Greater Need 50 - 80% AMI
Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS
*The four housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30%

Draft
138 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 34
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
80%-100% of Area Median Income
Housing Problems Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 2,585 3,535 0
White 1,485 1,960 0
Black / African American 95 125 0
Asian 455 585 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 0 0 0
Pacific Islander 0 10 0
Hispanic 485 775 0
Table 17 - Disproportionally Greater Need 80 - 100% AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

*The four housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30%
Discussion
The following is a breakdown of disproportionate housing problems by race/ethnicity and income levels:
• Among extremely low income households (0 percent – 30 percent of AMI), while no groups are disproportionately affected by housing problems since 94 percent of ELI households overall face housing problems, at least 92 percent of all race/ethnic groups have housing problems, including all Black/African American ELI households.
• Among low income households (31 percent to 50 percent of AMI), Black/African American and American Indian/Alaska Native households are disproportionately affected by housing problems (100 percent for both groups, compared to 90 percent in the jurisdiction as a whole). • Among moderate income households (51 percent to 80 percent AMI), no race group was disproportionately affected by housing problems.
• Among middle income households (81 percent to 100 percent of AMI), no race group was disproportionately affected by housing problems.

Draft
139 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 35
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems –

91.205 (b)(2)
Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.

Introduction
A disproportionate housing need refers to any group that has a housing need, which is at least 10 percentage points higher than the total population. The following tables identify the extent of housing problems by income and race. The four severe housing problems are 1) Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2) Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3) More than 1.5 persons per room, 4) Cost burden greater than 50 percent.
0%-30% of Area Median Income
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 13,815 2,090 930
White 10,330 1,755 680
Black / African American 120 0 10
Asian 1,065 125 155
American Indian, Alaska Native 0 0 0
Pacific Islander 0 0 0
Hispanic 2,075 190 90
Table 18 – Severe Housing Problems 0 - 30% AMI
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

*The four severe housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50%

Draft
140 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 36
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
30%-50% of Area Median Income
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 5,795 3,360 0
White 3,695 2,135 0
Black / African American 60 50 0
Asian 670 390 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 39 20 0
Pacific Islander 0 0 0
Hispanic 1,225 720 0
Table 19 – Severe Housing Problems 30 - 50% AMI
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

*The four severe housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50%

50%-80% of Area Median Income
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 3,365 8,525 0
White 2,045 4,965 0
Black / African American 49 240 0
Asian 570 1,270 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 0 25 0
Pacific Islander 0 0 0
Hispanic 660 1,875 0
Table 20 – Severe Housing Problems 50 - 80% AMI
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

*The four severe housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50%

Draft
141 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 37
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
80%-100% of Area Median Income
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 1,140 4,980 0
White 495 2,950 0
Black / African American 15 205 0
Asian 235 805 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 0 0 0
Pacific Islander 0 10 0
Hispanic 385 880 0
Table 21 – Severe Housing Problems 80 - 100% AMI
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
*The four severe housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50%

Discussion
The following is a breakdown of disproportionate severe housing problems by race/ethnicity and income levels:
• Among extremely low income households (0 percent – 30 percent of AMI), Black/African American households were disproportionately affected by housing severe problems (100 percent compared to 87 percent in the jurisdiction as a whole). • Among low income households (31 percent to 50 percent of AMI), no race group was disproportionately affected by housing problems.
• Among moderate income households (51 percent to 80 percent AMI), no race group was disproportionately affected by housing problems.
• Among middle income households (81 percent to 100 percent of AMI), Hispanic/Latino households were disproportionately affected by severe housing problems. (30 percent compared to 19 percent in the jurisdiction as a whole).

Draft
142 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 38
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens – 91.205 (b)(2)
Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.

Introduction:

A disproportionate housing need refers to any group that has a housing need, which is at least 10 percentage points higher than the total population. The following tables identify the extent of housing cost burden by race. Cost burdened means a household spends more than 30 percent of its income on housing costs. Severe cost burden means a household spends more than 50 percent of its income on housing costs.

Housing Cost Burden
Housing Cost Burden <=30 30-50% >50% No / negative
income (not
computed)
Jurisdiction as a whole 35,065 15,130 21,560 980
White 21,620 9,630 15,500 700
Black / African
American 650 449 230 10
Asian 6,175 2,320 1,975 175
American Indian,
Alaska Native 35 20 39 0
Pacific Islander 35 0 0 0
Hispanic 5,490 2,450 3,465 95
Table 22 – Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens AMI
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

Discussion:

Overall, 51 percent of Glendale households experienced cost burden (spent more than 30 percent of gross household income in housing). American Indian/Alaska Native households disproportionately experience cost burden (63 percent) compared to the jurisdiction as a whole.

About 30 percent of Glendale households experienced severe cost burden. Severe cost burden disproportionately affected American Indian/Alaska Native households (42 percent) compared to the city as a whole.

Draft
143 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 39
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion – 91.205(b)(2) Are there any Income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category as a whole?
Among extremely low income households (0 percent – 30 percent of AMI), while no groups are disproportionately affected by housing problems since 94 percent of ELI households overall face housing problems, all Black/African American ELI households. Black/African American households were disproportionately affected by housing severe problems (100 percent compared to 87 percent in the jurisdiction as a whole).

Among low income households (31 percent to 50 percent of AMI), Black/African American and American Indian/Alaska Native households are disproportionately affected by housing problems (100 percent for both groups, compared to 90 percent in the jurisdiction as a whole).

Among middle income households (81 percent to 100 percent of AMI), Hispanic/Latino households were disproportionately affected by severe housing problems.( 30 percent compared to 19 percent in the jurisdiction as a whole).

Figure 1 below shows the block groups where over 51 percent of the population earns low and moderate incomes. As shown, most of these areas are in the southern portion of Glendale generally south of Glenoaks Boulevard along with three block groups in just north of the Verdugo Mountains Open Space Preserve and adjacent to the 210 Freeway.

If they have needs not identified above, what are those needs? The analysis described above shows the need for additional affordable housing options in Glendale as well as rehab and maintenance programs for households facing lack of plumbing and kitchen facilities.

Are any of those racial or ethnic groups located in specific areas or neighborhoods in your community?
A minority “concentration area” is defined as an area whose proportion of minority population is greater than the overall Los Angeles County average of 74.8 percent. No census tracts in Glendale exceed the County average.

One Census Tract in the southwestern portion of the City (3024.01) is identified as an area of high segregation and poverty. This neighborhood, is generally bound by the city limits, Brand Boulevard, and Maple Street. Approximately 57 percent of the population in this tract are minorities. The median income is $41,300 and 30 percent of residents are below the poverty line.

Draft
144 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 40
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Figure 1:Low and Moderate Income Block Groups (HUD, ACS 2016-2020)

Draft
145 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 41
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
NA-35 Public Housing – 91.205(b)
Introduction
Totals in Use
Program Type
Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project
-based
Tenant
-based
Special Purpose Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
Disabled
*
# of
units
vouchers
in use 3 0 0 3,010 0 3,009 1 0 0
Table 23 - Public Housing by Program Type
*includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition

Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center)

Characteristics of Residents
Program Type
Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project
-based
Tenant
-based
Special Purpose Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
Average Annual
Income 10,702 0 0 13,740 0 13,738 20,076 0
Average length
of stay 0 0 0 7 0 7 1 0
Average
Household size 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0
# Homeless at
admission 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
# of Elderly
Program
Participants
(>62)
0 0 0 2,313 0 2,312 1 0
# of Disabled
Families 2 0 0 390 0 390 0 0
Draft
146 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 42
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Program Type
Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project
-based
Tenant
-based
Special Purpose Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
# of Families
requesting
accessibility
features 3 0 0 3,010 0 3,009 1 0
# of HIV/AIDS
program
participants
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
# of DV victims 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 24 – Characteristics of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center)

Race of Residents
Program Type
Race Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project
-based
Tenant
-based
Special Purpose Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
Disabled
*
White 2 0 0 2,957 0 2,956 1 0 0
Black/African
American 1 0 0 32 0 32 0 0 0
Asian 0 0 0 18 0 18 0 0 0
American
Indian/Alaska
Native 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pacific
Islander 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
*includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Table 25 – Race of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center)

Draft
147 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 43
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Ethnicity of Residents
Program Type
Ethnicity Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project
-based
Tenant
-based
Special Purpose Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
Disabled
*
Hispanic 0 0 0 174 0 174 0 0 0
Not
Hispanic 3 0 0 2,836 0 2,835 1 0 0
*includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Table 26 – Ethnicity of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center)

Draft
148 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 44
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Section 504 Needs Assessment: Describe the needs of public housing tenants and applicants on the waiting list for accessible units:

Glendale has no public housing units.

Most immediate needs of residents of Public Housing and Housing Choice voucher holders The immediate needs of Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) holders in Glendale are being met but may need to be reevaluated as the housing market conditions change. The Glendale Housing Authority services 1,592 Housing Choice Vouchers, 14 mainstream vouchers, 6 VASH vouchers, 225 Emergency Housing Vouchers, 27 Fair Choice Vouchers and 1,110 Portability Vouchers throughout the 2023-24 Fiscal Year.

However, there are approximately 1,330 persons on the HCV waiting list. The greatest need for Housing Choice Voucher holders is housing with rents that meet the Housing Assistance Payment of the Housing Authority. With housing in Glendale becoming more expensive, it is becoming more difficult for voucher holders to find affordable units to rent even with their rental assistance.

How do these needs compare to the housing needs of the population at large The needs of HCV holders are similar to the population at large. Overall, renter households are more impacted by housing problems than owner households. Approximately 60 percent of households affected by housing problems and burdens were renter households compared to 39 percent of owner households. Overall senior renter and owner households are impacted the most by cost burden in the city. However, when looking at income levels, extremely low and very low-income large renter households (98 percent) and extremely low and very low-income small owner households face significant cost burden issues (86 percent and 74 percent, respectively).

Draft
149 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 45
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment – 91.205(c)
Introduction:

Factors contributing to the rise in homelessness include a lack of housing affordable to low and moderate income persons, increases in the number of persons whose income falls below the poverty level, reductions in subsidies to the poor, drug/alcohol abuse, and the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill. During the 2024 Homeless count, there were 179 homeless persons in Glendale, both sheltered and unsheltered. This number was a decrease from 195 persons in the 2023 count. During the PIT count, a majority of Glendale’s unsheltered community members were located in Downtown, specifically Central Park.

Estimate the # of
persons experiencing
homelessness on a given
night
Estimate the
#
experiencing
homelessness
each year
Estimate
the #
becoming
homeless
each year
Estimate the
# exiting
homelessness
each year
Estimate the #
of days
persons
experience
homelessness
Sheltered Unsheltered
Persons in
Households
with Adult(s)
and Child(ren)
70 2 112 39 45 140
Persons in
Households
with Only
Children
NA NA 0 0 0 0
Persons in
Households
with Only
Adults
25 78 908 318 330 248
Chronically
Homeless
Individuals
126 6 401 139 146 205
Chronically
Homeless
Families
0 0 401 139 146 205
Veterans 1 4 19 6 7 108
Unaccompanied
Child 0 0 0 0 0 0
Persons with
HIV 1 0 31 10 9 170
Table 27 – Persons Experiencing Homelessness in Glendale, 2023 Draft
150 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 46
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Data Source: Glendale 2024 Homeless Count, HUD Annual Homelessness Assessment Report (2024)

If data is not available for the categories "number of persons becoming and exiting homelessness each year," and "number of days that persons experience homelessness," describe these categories for each homeless population type (including chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth):

The City of Glendale (City) completed its 2024 Homeless Point-in-Time (PIT) count on January 24, 2024. • A total of 175 persons were counted as homeless.
• The count included 95 sheltered persons and 80 unsheltered persons. • Unsheltered persons included 59 males, 20 females and one identified as different identity.

Shelter persons included 41 males and 54 females.
• 127 persons (73 percent) were adults over the age of 18. Approximate percent were Transitional Age Youth (Ages 18-24), 28 percent were between 25-44 years of age, 29 percent were between 45 and 64 years of age and 12 percent were 65 years of age and older. • 48 persons (27 percent) were children under the age of 18 • 12 persons (15 percent) had a disabling condition.
• 62 persons (62 percent of sheltered population) reported being domestic violence survivors. • 10 reported being chronically homeless. 6 of these persons were unsheltered and 12 were sheltered.

Nature and Extent of Homelessness: (Optional)
Race Sheltered Unsheltered (optional)
White 38 31
Black or African American 9 18
Asian 6 5
American Indian or Alaska
Native 0 1
Native American or Pacific
Islander 0 0
Multiple Races 6 3
Ethnicity Sheltered Unsheltered (optional)
Hispanic 50 22
Not Hispanic 45 58
Table 28 – Persons Experiencing Homelessness in Glendale by Race and Ethnicity, 2023 Data Source: Glendale 2024 Homeless Count, HUD Annual Homelessness Assessment Report (2024)

Draft
151 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 47
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance for families with children and the families of veterans.

The 2024 Glendale Homeless Count identified approximately 72 persons in households with adults and children (70 sheltered, 2 unsheltered). Households with children are more likely to be in transitional housing and domestic violence shelters than in general emergency shelters or street homeless. Of the 72 individuals counted in 2024, 41 were in Transitional Housing, 29 were in shelters (including the Intimate Partner Violence Shelter) and 2 were unsheltered.

The 2024 Homeless Count revealed a total of 5 homeless people that identified themselves as veterans (1 was sheltered, 4 were unsheltered), presenting a 16 percent decrease from the 6 overall veterans reported on the 2023 Homeless Count. Out of the 5, 4 persons reported to be male and 1 female. Efforts to address homelessness among veterans in Glendale include partnership with The Salvation Army Veteran Employment Services. This program is aimed at assisting unemployed and underemployed veterans with a customized approach to career development. In addition, Glendale in partnership with the County department of Health Services, is accepting referrals for the HUD the HUD--VASH Collaborative Case Management (CCM) Pilot VASH Collaborative Case Management (CCM) Pilot program. The program pairs HUD's Housing Choice Voucher rental program, The program pairs HUD's Housing Choice Voucher rental assistance with Intensive Case Management Services for unhoused assistance with Intensive Case Management Services for unhoused veterans with veterans with Other Than Honorable discharges.

Describe the Nature and Extent of Homelessness by Racial and Ethnic Group.

As shown in Table 28 the majority of people included in the 2024 Homeless Count identified as Hispanic (40 percent) followed by White (39 percent). The next highest percentage of people identified as Black or African American (15 percent).

Compared to their overall proportion of the Glendale’s resident population, minority populations are overrepresented in the homeless population.

Black/African Americans are especially overrepresented at a rate of 7 to 1 compared to the general population. Blacks/African Americans comprised 2 percent of the overall population in the 5-Year US Census 2022 American Community Survey and were overrepresented in 2024 PIT Count, where they comprised of 15 percent of 179 people who were reported as experiencing homelessness.

Latinos/Hispanics also experience homelessness at a disproportionately higher rate, where persons experiencing homelessness were 40 percent in 2024 PIT count compared to the 19 percent general
population residents in Glendale. For American Indian/Alaska Native/Indigenous people, the disproportionality ratio may be as high as 5 to 1.

This data comes in sharp contrast to other communities of color, specifically the Asian population, who have a lower rate of homelessness as they comprise of 14 percent of Glendale residents compared with less than one percent of the 179 persons experiencing homelessness on the night of the count.

Draft
152 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 48
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Describe the Nature and Extent of Unsheltered and Sheltered Homelessness.

The 2024 Homeless Count estimated that there were 95 sheltered persons and 80 unsheltered persons in Glendale. This was a ten percent reduction in the unsheltered count from 2023. The sheltered count in 2024 also showed a decrease of seven percent from the previous year. These findings suggest that efforts to address homelessness in Glendale, such as increased access to Emergency Housing Vouchers, Interim housing and supportive housing, may be having a positive impact on reducing the number of homeless individuals in the community. Most recently, through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the CoC has partnered with the Glendale Housing Authority (GHA) to jointly administer the Emergency Housing Voucher Program (EHV). A total of 225 vouchers have been utilized to serve the unhoused community and those at-risk in the City of Glendale and the Greater Glendale area. The CoC service providers work with each homeless person to complete the necessary paperwork for eligibility determination and also provide housing navigation and placement. In addition, the service providers have agreed to provide ongoing case management to homeless clients who are placed in the EHV program. This program will be crucial in aiding our goal of ending chronic homelessness in the City of Glendale.

However, it is noteworthy that Glendale Police Department Street Outreach project reported a much higher number of individuals experiencing unsheltered homelessness at 289 in our year-round Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). This is likely due to the fact that the Homeless Count is one night a year, and therefore, provides a snapshot of homelessness in Glendale whereas the Street Outreach program is all year round. The large number of individuals experiencing homelessness identified through the year round Street Outreach project highlights the ongoing need for resources and support to address the issue.

NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.205 (b,d) Introduction:

Certain households, because of their special characteristics and needs, may require special accommodations and may have difficulty finding housing. Special needs groups include the elderly, persons with disabilities, persons with alcohol or other drug addiction, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, female-headed households, large households, victims of domestic violence, veterans, extremely-low income households and farmworkers.

Describe the characteristics of special needs populations in your community:

Elderly: A
ccording to the 2018 -2022 ACS, approximately 42,817 people in Glendale are 62 years old or older and 35,862 people are 65 years old or older. Elderly persons are likely to have fixed incomes and often have special needs related to housing location and amenities. Furthermore, according to the 2016- 2020 CHAS data, Glendale has 21,430 elderly households, which accounts for 29 percent of the City’s total households. Of these elderly households, 12,340 are renters (58 percent) and 9,090 are owners (42 percent). The CHAS data also shows that elderly households face housing problems, including cost burden, at a higher rate than Glendale households overall (Table 7) . Approximately 44 percent of elderly
Draft
153 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 49
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
owner households face cost burden compared to 37 percent overall and 59 percent of elderly renter households face housing problems compared to 57 percent overall. Table 7 also shows that housing problems increase significantly for lower income senior households, with 62 percent of extremely low- income senior renter households and 88 percent of extremely low senior owner households facing cost burden in Glendale.

Persons with Disabilities: Of the 123,277 persons 18 to 64 years of age and categorized as civilian noninstitutionalized, 8,299 (6.7 percent) have disability status, lower than the Los Angeles County average of seven percent. (2018-2022 ACS). However, disability status is much higher for persons aged 65 and older, with 45 percent of the senior population in Glendale living with a disability. Ambulatory difficulty is the most prevalent for Glendale residents with a disability (68 percent), followed by an independent living difficulty and self-care difficulty (65 percent and 51 percent, respectively).

Persons with Alcohol or Drug Addicti on: The County of Los Angeles Public Health Department has various data points about alcohol and drug use within the County. A 2022 report examined five alcohol- related consequences (violent crimes, vehicle crashes, emergency department visits, hospitalizations and deaths) in cities, City Council Districts and Service Planning Areas (SPAs). 1 According to the report,
Glendale had the following occurrences (rates per 10,000 people): Violent crimes: 14.7, Vehicle crashes:

2.2, Emergency Department Visits: 30.9, Hospitalizations: 33.5 and one death. These ra7es were lower than the Service Planning Area (SPA 2) overall and fell into the low range (0-33 percent) of the study.

While city-level information is not available regarding drug use in Los Angeles County, a report was published in July 2024 that looked at fentanyl use in the SPAs. 2 Between 2016 and 2022, 818 fentanyl
overdose emergency department visits and 313 hospitalizations occurred in SPA 2. This accounted for 20 percent and 23 percent of the County totals, respectively. The Glendale Police Department has stated that fentanyl overdoses in Glendale have increased by more than 400 percent between 2020 and 2022.

The Police Department has several resources and contacts for people who are struggling with addiction.

Single-P
arent Households: According to the 2018-2022 ACS estimates, about 18 percent (approximately 13,104) of Glendale’s households are single-parent households. About three-fourths are renter households (10,068). The ACS also indicates that of the approximately 4,500 female-headed households with their own children under the age of 18, about 10 percent live below the poverty line.

Large Households: Larg e households are those with five or more members. The 2018-2022 ACS estimated there were 5,966 large households in Glendale, representing eight percent of all households.

Among the City’s large households, 2,798 are owner occupied (47 percent) and 3,168 are renters. (53 percent). The 2016-2020 CHAS data shows that half of large households are lower income. Regarding

1 Alcohol Outlet Density and Alcohol-Related Consequences, Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Health Outcomes and Data Analytics Branch, Substance Abuse Prevention and Control, January 2025. 2 Data Report: Fentanyl Overdoses in Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County Department of Public Health Substance Abuse Prevention and Control, updated July 2024.

Draft
154 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 50
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
cost burden almost all extremely low and low income large renter households (98 percent) pay more than 30 percent of their income on housing.

Victims of Domestic Violence: According to the California Department of Justice, City of Glendale agencies received 472 domestic violence related calls for assistance in 2023. This number was significantly higher than the 309 calls received in 2022, 332 calls received in 2021 and 277 call received in 2020. The 2024 Glendale Point-In-Time Homeless Count included 62 sheltered persons who identified as being homeless due to domestic violence. These persons accounted for 62 percent of the sheltered homeless population and was an increase from 56 persons who identified as being homeless due to domestic violence in 2023.

Veterans: The 2018-2
022 ACS estimates that there were 3,075 veterans in Glendale, representing two percent of the total population. For the 2023 Homeless Count, 6 persons identified as veterans, all of whom were unsheltered.

Extremely-Low Income Households: A
ccording to the most recent CHAS data available (2016-2020), there are approximately 18,435 extremely-low income (ELI) households in the City (15,820 renters and 2,615 owners). ELI households represent approximately 25 percent of all households in Glendale. About 88 percent of ELI households experience cost burden and 81 percent are severely cost burdened.

Farmworkers: Da ta on employment by industry and occupation from the 2018-2022 ACS indicates that approximately 126 people are employed in farming, fishing and forestry occupations. However, Glendale is an urban community in a metropolitan area, and persons identified as having agriculture jobs are most likely employed at plant nurseries and similar enterprises and thus are not anticipated to have the seasonal housing needs associated with crop related farm worker jobs.

What are the housing and supportive service needs of these populations and how are these needs de
termined?
Discussions with service providers during the Consultation Plan consultation process indicated that there is need for additional supportive services in the City, including housing, emergency shelter services, youth services and activities, senior services, services for victims of domestic violence, mental health and substance abuse treatment, health/medical care, counseling, and employment services.

Discuss the size and characteristics of the population with HIV/AIDS and their families within the Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area:

According to the 2022 Annual HIV Surveillance Report by the Los Angeles County Public Health Department, Division of HIV and STD Programs/HIV Epidemiology, there are 943 persons living with HIV in Glendale, which is part of the San Fernando Service Planning Area (SPA 2). The number of persons living with HIV in Glendale was 12 percent of the total persons living with HIV in SPA 2 and 1.7 percent in LA County. In 2022, there were 19 new HIV diagnoses and 10 new AIDS diagnoses in the city. For the 2023 Homeless Count, three unsheltered persons identified as having HIV/AIDS.

Draft
155 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 51
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Individuals with HIV/AIDs may require special health care or access to services compared to the other populations in the City.

If the PJ will establish a preference for a HOME TBRA activity for persons with a specific category of disabilities (e.g., persons with HIV/AIDS or chronic mental illness), describe their unmet need for housing and services needed to narrow the gap in benefits and services received by such persons. (See 24 CFR 92.209(c)(2) (ii))
The City does not currently have any HOME TBRA activities. The City may establish a TRBA program during this Consolidated Plan period. If this occurs, the City may establish preferences for disabled residents.

NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs – 91.215 (f) Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Facilities:

The City of Glendale has a range of public facility needs. The following highlight key projects that the City may consider over the next five years. Other public facility projects may be pursued pending funding availability and or the urgency of needs.
• Park Facilities ADA Improvements: Several City parks in Glendale are not ADA compliant. This type of work meets a National Objective of LMC – Presumed Eligible. • Community Facilities: Improvements (including ADA improvements) are needed at various community facilities benefitting low and moderate income persons and those with special needs (such as seniors, youths, and persons with disabilities). This type of work meets a National Objective of LMC – Presumed Eligible.

How were these needs determined?
These needs were determined through a combination of public input, comments received at the community meetings, and staff assessments.

Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Improvements:

The City of Glendale has a range of public improvement needs, which could be funded with CDBG. The following highlight the types of projects the City may consider over the next five years. Other public improvements may be pursued pending funding availability and or the urgency of needs. • Off-Site Improvements for Affordable Housing: Off-site improvements may be needed to support the construction of affordable housing. Improvements may include bus stops, necessary realignment of utilities, or additional amenities such as a community garden or childcare center.

The type and amount of improvements paid for with CDBG funds will be determined based on cost and the availability of other funds. The LMC National Objective will be met by only allowing tenants that meet the HUD criteria for low and moderate household income.

Draft
156 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 52
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
• ADA Sidewalk Improvements: Many areas of the City do not have ADA compliant curb cuts, making it difficult for those residents with disabilities to navigate. Corners to receive curb cuts will be chosen depending on available funding. This type of work meets a National Objective of LMC – Presumed Eligible.
• ADA Crosswalk Median Modifications: There are cross-walks throughout the City which could be made disabled accessible by modifying medians which encroach into the cross-walks. The modification will create a safer path of travel, especially for the disabled and elderly. Medians to be modified will be chosen depending on available funding. This type of work meets a National Objective of LMC – Presumed Eligible.
• Disabled Accessibility: Existing and new public facilities such as parks and community centers may need disabled accessibility improvements and modifications.

How were these needs determined?
These needs were determined through a combination of public input, comments received at the community meetings, and staff assessments.

Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Services:

Public service needs in the City include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Childcare: There could be a lack of affordable childcare throughout the city. • Transitional and Affordable Housing: There could be a need for transitional housing units located within the City and the supply of affordable units is not sufficient to meet the need in the community.
• Homeless Services: The City has a homeless population that requires a range of supportive services.
• Services for the Disabled: Persons with disabilities have a range of needs, including employment, recreation, and counseling, among others.
• Senior Services: Senior Centers and services should be expanded to meet the growing need in the community.
• Employment Training and Services: Resources that promote skills and open doors to employment opportunities are needed.
• Youth Services: Resources to engage youth and provide afterschool activities.

How were these needs determined?
These needs were determined through a combination of public input, comments received at the community meetings, and staff assessments.

Draft
157 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 53
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

Draft
158 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 54
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Housing Market Analysis
MA-05 Overview
Housing Market Analysis Overview:

The Housing Market Analysis section provides information on the affordability and condition of the housing market in the City. Most of the tables below were populated with data provided by HUD for preparation of the Consolidated Plan, based on the 2016-2020 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) and the 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS).

MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2)
Introduction
The City of Glendale had approximately 79,750 housing units in 2020. Overall, the housing stock was comprised of about 36 percent single-family units (detached and attached) and 63 percent multi-family units. No mobile home or other types of housing units are in Glendale. Approximately 34 percent of the housing units (25,420 units) were owner-occupied and 67 percent (49,345 units) were renter-occupied as of 2020.

All residential properties by number of units
Property Type Number %
1-unit detached structure 26,260 33%
1-unit, attached structure 2,630 3%
2-4 units 9,110 11%
5-19 units 23,005 29%
20 or more units 18,685 23%
Mobile Home, boat, RV, van, etc. 60 0%
Total 79,750 100%
Table 29 – Residential Properties by Unit Number
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Unit Size by Tenure
Owners Renters
Number % Number %
No bedroom 220 1% 4,485 9%
1 bedroom 835 3% 17,675 36%
2 bedrooms 6,920 27% 21,840 44%
3 or more bedrooms 17,445 69% 5,345 11%
Total 25,420 100% 49,345 100%
Table 30 – Unit Size by Tenure
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Draft
159 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 55
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Describe the number and targeting (income level/type of family served) of units assisted with federal, state, and local programs.

There are 27 properties with 1,132 affordable rental units assisted with federal, state and local programs in Glendale. This includes Citrus Crossing, the recently completed 126-unit senior project. The affordability and unit type breakdown is as follows:

Below 30 percent AMI
• 74 senior units
Between 20 percent and 70 percent AMI
• 126 senior units
Between 30 percent and 60 percent AMI
• 194 units (74 senior, 44 veteran, 7 disabled seniors) Below 50 percent AMI
• 286 units (18 formerly homeless, 47 disabled, 157 senior) Below 60 percent AMI
• 283 units (51 senior)
Below 80 percent AMI
• 84 units (82 senior)
Below 120 percent AMI
• 85 senior units
In addition to the units listed above, other assisted projects are in construction. One project is Harrower Village (920 E Broadway), an adaptive re-use and historic preservation project will create 39 units of affordable housing for seniors. As of April 2025, the project received temporary Certificate of Occupancy and was over 50% leased up.

Another project located at 515 Pioneer Drive will create 338 units of affordable housing for seniors and small families. Construction is expected to complete in January 2026. These projects will utilize HOME funded for 11 units in each building.

As of April 2025, construction was underway at 426 Piedmont Avenue and 507 Naranja Drive, an adaptive reuse affordable housing project. The property will provide 67 affordable units for extremely low, very low- and low-income seniors. The City utilized $2.1 million of its HOME ARP award to Draft
160 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 56
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
construct 67 affordable units. 11 of the 67 unites utilized HOME ARP funding and for those units, the City may give a preference to seniors over the age of 62 who are experiencing homelessness, or who are at risk of homelessness. Construction is expected to be completed by June 2026.

Provide an assessment of units expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory for any reason, such as expiration of Section 8 contracts.

Provided continued renewal of HUD 202 and Section 8 Annual Contracts, no affordable units are expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory. Due to new construction of 444 affordable units described above, there will be no net loss of affordable units in the City due to potential conversion of units to market rate rentals. However, no units are eligible for conversion in this planning period.

Does the availability of housing units meet the needs of the population? Glendale has an insufficient supply of affordable housing. According to the CHAS data, approximately 40,645 households were earning less than or equal to 80 percent AMI in 2020. However, in 2020 there were 33,119 housing units affordable to households earning less than or equal to 80 percent AMI. The disparity of affordable housing increases when looking at households earning 30 percent or less of the AMI (18,440 households and only 2,485 affordable units) and households earning between 31 to 50 percent AMI (9,420 households and 5,615 affordable units). As described in the Needs Assessment above, the Housing Authority services 1,592 Housing Choice Vouchers, 14 mainstream vouchers, 6 VASH vouchers, 225 Emergency Housing Vouchers, 27 Fair Choice Vouchers and 1,110 Portability Vouchers throughout the 2023-24 Fiscal Year. However, there are approximately 1,330 persons on the HCV waiting list with an average wait of 24 years.

Describe the need for specific types of housing:

Discussion
Lower-income housing for seniors and large households is needed due to significant cost burden faced by these groups. Approximately 62 percent of extremely low income senior renter households and 88 percent of extremely low senior owner households facing cost burden in Glendale. Almost all extremely low and low income large renter households (98 percent) pay more than 30 percent of their income on housing.

Draft
161 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 57
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.210(a) Introduction
One of the most important factors in evaluating a community’s housing market is the cost of housing and, even more significant, whether the housing is affordable to households who live there or would like to live there. Housing problems directly relate to the cost of housing in a community. If housing costs are relatively high in comparison to household income, a correspondingly high rate of housing cost burden and overcrowding could result.

Similar to many communities in California, the cost of housing has continued to rise. The median home value in Glendale increased from $619,000 in 2009 to $821,500 in 2020, representing a 33 percent increase. Rents in Glendale increased by 30 percent during the same time period, going from about $1,202 a month to $1,560 a month. Home values and rents have continued to increase in the City. Zillow data indicates that as of December 2024, median home values have increased by 43 percent since 2020 to $1,172,107. Rents have also continued to rise. A rental survey in November 2024 found the following median rents in Glendale: Studio - $1,800; One-bedroom - $2,100; Two-bedroom - $2,795 and Three- bedroom - $3,997. With housing costs rising for both homeowners and renters cost burden and overcrowding remain significant concerns, especially for lower-income residents.

Cost of Housing
Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2020 % Change
Median Home Value 619,200 821,500 33%
Median Contract Rent 1,202 1,560 30%
Table 31 – Cost of Housing

Data Source: 2000 Census (Base Year), 2016-2020 ACS (Most Recent Year) Rent Paid Number %
Less than $500 3,324 6.7%
$500-999 4,200 8.5%
$1,000-1,499 15,990 32.4%
$1,500-1,999 15,905 32.2%
$2,000 or more 9,930 20.1%
Total 49,349 100.0%
Table 32 - Rent Paid
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Housing Affordability
Number of Units affordable to
Households earning
Renter Owner
30% HAMFI 2,485 No Data
50% HAMFI 5,515 100
Draft
162 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 58
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Number of Units affordable to
Households earning
Renter Owner
80% HAMFI 24,635 384
100% HAMFI No Data 709
Total 32,635 1,193
Table 33 – Housing Affordability
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

Monthly Rent
Monthly Rent ($) Efficiency (no
bedroom)
1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom
Fair Market Rent $1,777 $2,006 $2,544 $3,263 $3,600
High HOME Rent $1,559 $1,671 $2,007 $2,310 $2,558
Low HOME Rent $1,213 $1,300 $1,560 $1,803 $2,011
Table 34 – Monthly Rent
Data Source: HUD FMR and HOME Rents

Is there sufficient housing for households at all income levels? According to the CHAS data by HUD, mismatches in terms of supply and affordability exist in the City.

Approximately 18,440 households earning less than 30 percent of AMI reside in the City; however, there are only 2,485 dwelling units affordable to those at this income level. Similarly, the City has 9,420 households earning between 31 and 50 percent of AMI and only 5,615 housing units affordable to those at this income level. There are approximately 25,019 housing units in the City that are affordable to households earning between 51 and 80 percent AMI, more than the number of households (12,785) in Glendale at this income level. However, a housing unit affordable to a particular income group does not mean the unit is actually occupied by a household in that income group. Therefore, the affordability mismatches are likely to be more severe than what is presented by the CHAS data.

How is affordability of housing likely to change considering changes to home values and/or rents?
As discussed above, housing costs continue to rise in Glendale. Since 2020, home values have increased by 43 percent. The median rent ranges from $1,800 for a studio (efficiency unit) to $3,997 for a three- bedroom unit. With limited affordable housing funds available, cost burden will continue to impact a significant portion of Glendale households.

How do HOME rents / Fair Market Rent compare to Area Median Rent? How might this impact your strategy to produce or preserve affordable housing? Comparing the rental survey results shown above with Table 34, the median rents in Glendale are higher than fair market rents (ranging from about $200 more to $800 more). They are also higher than HOME Draft
163 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 59
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
rents. This shows the need for the City to continue to preserve and produce affordable housing when funding is available.

Discussion
MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a) Introduction
The American Community Survey (ACS) defines a "selected condition" as owner-or renter-occupied housing units having at least one of the following conditions: 1) lacking complete plumbing facilities; 2) lacking complete kitchen facilities; 3) more than one occupant per room; and 4) selected monthly housing costs greater than 30 percent of household income. Based on this definition, 60 percent of renter households and 39 percent of owner households had at least selected condition between 2016 and 2020 (Table 35).

Describe the jurisdiction's definition of "standard condition" and "substandard condition but suitable for rehabilitation":

In Glendale, substandard housing conditions may consist of the following: structural hazards, poor construction, inadequate maintenance, faulty wiring, plumbing, fire hazards, and inadequate sanitation.

Substandard units suitable for rehabilitation are those units where the total rehabilitation costs do not exceed 25 percent of the after-rehabilitation value.

Condition of Units
Condition of Units Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
Number % Number %
With one selected Condition 9,620 38% 26,025 53%
With two selected Conditions 260 1% 3,690 7%
With three selected Conditions 40 0% 200 0%
With four selected Conditions 0 0% 0 0%
No selected Conditions 15,500 61% 19,430 39%
Total 25,420 100% 49,345 99%
Table 35 - Condition of Units
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Year Unit Built
Year Unit Built Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
Number % Number %
2000 or later 845 3% 3,690 7%
1980-1999 4,090 16% 9,995 20%
1950-1979 9,660 38% 23,280 47%
Before 1950 10,820 43% 12,395 25%
Draft
164 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 60
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Year Unit Built Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
Number % Number %
Total 25,415 100% 49,360 99%
Table 36 – Year Unit Built
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard
Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number %
Total Number of Units Built Before 1980 20,480 81% 35,675 72% Housing Units build before 1980 with children present 1,945 8% 635 1% Table 37 – Risk of Lead-Based Paint
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS (Total Units) 2016-2020 CHAS (Units with Children present)

Vacant Units
Suitable for
Rehabilitation
Not Suitable for
Rehabilitation
Total
Vacant Units 4,977 0 4,977
Abandoned Vacant Units NA NA NA
REO Properties NA NA NA
Abandoned REO Properties NA NA NA
Table 38 - Vacant Units
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Need for Owner and Rental Rehabilitation
Given the older age of the housing stock in the City, the number of substandard housing units could potentially be large. Housing age can indicate general housing conditions within a community. Housing is subject to gradual deterioration over time.

According to Table 36 and Table 37, 75 percent of homes in Glendale were built prior to 1980, including 81 percent of owner-occupied and 72 percent of renter-occupied homes. With these units over 45 years old, some type of rehabilitation may be needed. The City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element included additional information about rehabilitation needs. A citywide housing conditions survey was last performed in 2019 and indicated at the time that approximately two percent of housing units were in need of maintenance and rehabilitation while no housing units were in need of replacement. The City’s Building and Safety Division has estimated that two percent of housing units in 2021 were in need of substantial rehabilitation or replacement. A community survey conducted as part of the Housing Element update included questions about the physical condition of residences. The majority of residents (42.5 percent) responded that their home was in excellent condition, while almost a third (31.3 percent) of residents indicated that their home shows signs of minor deferred maintenance such as peeling paint or chipped stucco. Another 23.8 percent of resident respondents indicated that their home was in need Draft
165 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 61
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
of one or more major systems upgrades (such as new roof, windows, electrical, plumbing, HVAC system, etc.).

Estimated Number of Housing Units Occupied by Low or Moderate Income Families with LBP Hazards
Discussion
Housing age is the key variable used to estimate the number of housing units with lead-based paint (LBP). Starting in 1978, the federal government prohibited the use of LBP on residential property.

National studies estimate that 75 percent of all residential structures built prior to 1970 contain LBP.

Housing built prior to 1940 is highly likely to contain LBP (estimated at 90 percent of housing units nationally), and in housing built between 1960 and 1979, 62 percent of units are estimated to contain LBP.

Using the 75 percent national average of potential LBP hazard and applying it to the amount of units built prior to 1980 in the City, an estimated 42,116 units (15,360 owner-occupied and 26,756 renter- occupied) may contain LBP. Furthermore, approximately 54 percent of households in the City are low and moderate income (earn less than 80 percent of AMI). This translates to approximately 22,911 housing units with potential LBP that may be occupied by low and moderate income households.

Lead poisoning also impacts children more severely, inflecting potentially permanent damage to young children, such as developmental disabilities. Approximately eight percent of the owner-households and one percent of the renter-households built before 1980, have children (Table 37). Therefore, the number of units with potential LBP hazards and occupied by households with children is estimated at 2,580 units (1,459 owner-occupied units and 476 renter-occupied units).

Draft
166 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 62
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing – 91.210(b)
Introduction
The City of Glendale does not have public housing. The number of units shown in Table 39 are for Housing Choice Vouchers based in Glendale. In addition to the vouchers listed below, the Glendale Housing Authority serviced 14 mainstream vouchers, 6 VASH vouchers, 225 Emergency Housing Vouchers, 27 Fair Choice Vouchers and 1,110 Portability Vouchers throughout the 2023-24 Fiscal Year.

However, there are approximately 1,330 persons on the HCV waiting list.

Totals Number of Units
Program Type
Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project -
based
Tenant -
based

Special Purpose Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
Disabled
*
# of units
vouchers
available 2 0 1,592 0 1,592 0 0 0
# of
accessible
units n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
*includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Table 39 – Total Number of Units by Program Type
Data
Source:

PIC (PIH Information Center)

Describe the supply of public housing developments:

Not applicable; there are no public housing developments in Glendale.

Describe the number and physical condition of public housing units in the jurisdiction, including those that are participating in an approved Public Housing Agency Plan:

No public housing developments are located in the City of Glendale.

Public Housing Condition
Public Housing Development Average Inspection Score
NA NA
Table 40 - Public Housing Condition

Describe the restoration and revitalization needs of public housing units in the jurisdiction:

No public housing developments are located in the City of Glendale.

Draft
167 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 63
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Describe the public housing agency's strategy for improving the living environment of low- and moderate-income families residing in public housing:

No public housing developments are located in the City of Glendale.

Draft
168 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 64
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services – 91.210(c)
Introduction
Per the Glendale Continuum of Care Point-In-Time Homeless Count, a total of 179 persons were counted as homeless on January 24, 2024. This count included 99 sheltered and 80 unsheltered persons. The numbers in Table 41 show the types of housing available to households experiencing homelessness in Glendale. Please note that the permanent supportive housing beds include permanent supportive housing and rapid re-housing beds.

Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless Households
Emergency Shelter Beds Transitional
Housing Beds
Permanent Supportive
Housing Beds
Year Round
Beds
(Current &
New)
Voucher /
Seasonal /
Overflow
Beds
Current &
New
Current &
New
Under
Development
Households with
Adult(s) and Child(ren) 39 0 44 93
Households with Only
Adults 38 O 0 101
Chronically Homeless
Households n/a 0 n/a 133
Veterans 0 0 0 23
Unaccompanied Youth 0 0 0 0
Table 41 - Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless Households Data Source: HUD 2024 Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance Programs Housing Inventory Count Report Draft
169 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 65
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Describe mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services to the extent those services are used to complement services targeted to homeless persons.

The following services extend assistance to homeless persons in Glendale:

Health Services: All for Health, Health for All, Glendale Free Health Clinic, Adventist Health Glendale Foundation, Comprehensive Community Health Center, Dignity Health, Verdugo Workforce Development, and Glendale Youth Alliance.

Mental Health Services: Los Angels County Mental Health Support, Sexual Assault Support, Domestic Violence Support, Veterans Support Services and Substance Abuse Services Hotline.

The Glendale Police Department’s Community Outreach resource and Engagement (CORE) team provides homeless outreach and mental health support by partnering CORE officers with a Mental Health Clinician to support the unhoused population during outreach and engagement.

Employment Services: The Verdugo Jobs Center is based in Glendale and provides a variety of resources for job seekers in the region. This includes those persons experiencing homelessness.

In addition to the emergency shelter in Glendale, Ascencia has an outreach team that provides assessment and services to homeless persons on the streets of Glendale. This includes help with housing, counseling, employment, health and mental health services.

List and describe services and facilities that meet the needs of homeless persons, particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth. If the services and facilities are listed on screen SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure or screen MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services, describe how these facilities and services specifically address the needs of these populations.

As shown in Table 41, services are available to help assist particular groups of homeless individuals and families in Glendale. The following list is from the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element:
• YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena: emergency shelter for women and families fleeing from domestic violence;
• The Salvation Army: permanent housing for families; children. • Door of Hope: transitional housing for survivors of domestic violence, single parent households and families; permanent supportive housing for veterans (Veteran’s Village). • Home Again Los Angeles: emergency shelter, transitional housing and Rapid Re-housing for unhoused families.
• Armenian Relief Society: Rapid Re-housing for unhoused individuals. • Glendale Youth Alliance: employment services and diversion and prevention for youth. • Ascencia: emergency shelter and a variety of social services.

Draft
170 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 66
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services – 91.210(d) Introduction
Persons with special needs include the elderly and frail elderly; persons with disabilities; persons substance abuse disorders; and persons with HIV/AIDS. An inventory of facilities and services provided for this population are described below.

Including the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons with alcohol or other drug addictions, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, public housing residents and any other categories the jurisdiction may specify, and describe their supportive housing needs
Elderly/Frail Elderly
The elderly, especially those who are frail, requires a range of supportive housing needs. Accessible housing design is essential, featuring ramps, widened doorways, grab bars, and emergency alert systems to ensure safety and mobility. On-site medical care, medication management, and home health aides are important in healthcare needs. Personal care assistance, housekeeping, and transportation support are equally important for daily living. Meal services are also essential since some of these persons may be homebound. Safety and security are paramount, with 24/7 supervision and controlled access to the facility. Emotional and mental health support, including counseling and peer support groups, is vital for overall well-being. Legal and financial assistance, through case management and advocacy services, ensures residents' rights are protected and their needs are met as they age in place with dignity and comfort.

The following are affordable housing projects for seniors (62 and over) in Glendale:
• Citrus Crossing: 126 units (new development - construction completed in November 2024) • Harrower Village: 39 units (adaptive reuse - construction expected to end May 2025.) • 515 Pioneer: 92 units (construction expected to end in January 2026) • 426 Piedmont: 67 units -this project will substantially rehabilitate an existing structure that used to serve as an assistant living facility. 11 units will be funded with HOME-ARP dollars and offered to seniors who meet one of the qualifying populations under the HOME ARP program.(construction is expended to end June 2026).

The City’s Community Services & Parks Department includes a variety of senior programs and services.

Many of these programs are held at the City’s Adult Recreation Center and the Sparr Heights Community Center. Services include: nutrition programs, case management, legal assistance, Medicare and Medi-Cal Counseling, transportation services and bus passes, and a variety of classes and activities.

Persons with Disabilities (
Mental, Physical, Developmental)
Supportive housing for individuals with disabilities requires accessible environment that accommodates diverse physical, sensory, and cognitive needs. Housing design should prioritize accessibility, Draft
171 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 67
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
incorporating features like ramps, wide doorways, adjustable countertops, and accessible bathrooms to ensure mobility and independence. On-site or easily accessible healthcare services, including physical therapy, and occupational therapy, are crucial for managing health and enhancing quality of life.

Personal care assistance and transportation assistance supports residents in maintaining independence.

Legal and financial assistance through case management ensures that residents can navigate benefits, manage finances, and advocate for their rights. Finally, educational and vocational support, including job training and skill development programs, are essential for empowering residents to foster a sense of purpose and autonomy. Many of the services available to Glendale seniors also benefit persons with disabilities.

Persons with Alcohol or Drug Addictions
Supportive housing for individuals with alcohol or other drug addictions must prioritize creating a safe, substance-free environment that fosters recovery and prevents relapse. Access to healthcare services is crucial, including on-site or nearby medical care, addiction treatment services, and integrated support for co-occurring mental health disorders. Counseling and mental health support are essential for addressing the underlying causes of addiction and providing ongoing emotional support. Relapse prevention and continued support services, are key to maintaining sobriety. Life skills training, such as job training and daily living skills, is vital for helping residents achieve independence. Legal and financial assistance through case management and advocacy ensures residents can navigate legal issues and manage responsibilities.

The City’s Police Department has a Substance Abuse and Wellness Resource Program that aims to provide accessible mental health and substance abuse support and resources. A variety of resources are listed on the Police Department website. Additionally, the County’s Substance Abuse Prevention and Control Division (a section of the Public Health Department) offers and coordinates a range of outpatient and residential treatment programs.

Persons with HIV/AIDS and Their Families
Supportive housing for individuals with HIV/AIDS and their families focuses on providing stable and safe living conditions, ensuring long-term housing that alleviates stress and supports overall health. Access to comprehensive healthcare services is crucial, including regular medical check-ups, antiretroviral therapy with on-site or nearby clinics helping to maintain consistent care. Mental health and emotional support, through counseling and peer support groups, is essential for addressing the emotional challenges of living with HIV/AIDS and combating stigma. Social services and case management are important for navigating healthcare systems, accessing benefits, and managing complex needs.

AIDS Project Los Angeles provides a range of programs and services that are designed to promote self- sufficiency for people living with HIV/AIDS, to support positive medical outcomes, and to keep people living with HIV/AIDS in care and treatment programs.

Draft
172 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 68
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Large Households
Large households face significant cost burden in Glendale. Almost all extremely low and low income large renter households (98 percent) pay more than 30 percent of their income on housing. Due to high housing costs, finding an adequately-sized home can be challenging for large households. This challenge increases for lower-income large households. The 2018-2022 ACS estimated that half of the City’s 5,966 large households are lower income. Affordable housing for families and Housing Choice Vouchers benefit large households.

Single-Parent Households
According to the 2018-2022 ACS estimates, about 18 percent (approximately 13,104) of Glendale’s households are single-parent households. About three-fourths are renter households (10,068). The ACS also indicates that of the approximately 4,500 female-headed households with their own children under the age of 18, about 10 percent live below the poverty line. Finding affordable housing can be challenging for female-headed households in addition to other services such as childcare. Housing Choice Vouchers benefit many female-headed households in Glendale.

Describe programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental and physical health institutions receive appropriate supportive housing
Local hospitals have discharge policies for high-risk persons, including homeless persons. These policies include connecting patients with available local resources.

Residential care facilities provide supportive housing for persons with disabilities. The types of facilities available in Glendale include:
• Group Homes: Facilities of any capacity that provide 24-hour non-medical care and supervision to children in a structured environment. Group Homes provide social, psychological, and behavioral programs for troubled youths.
• Adult Residential Facilities (ARF): Facilities of any capacity that provide 24-hour non-medical care for adults ages 18 through 59, who are unable to provide for their own daily needs. Adults may be physically handicapped, developmentally disabled, and/or mentally disabled. • Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFE): Facilities that provide care, supervision and assistance with activities of daily living, such as bathing and grooming. They may also provide incidental medical services under special care plans.

According to the state of California Community Care Licensing Division of the State Department of Social Services, as of January 2025 there were eight adult residential facilities and 28 residential care facilities for the elderly in Glendale.

Draft
173 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 69
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. 91.315(e)
Glendale will continue to support and fund several nonprofits that provide supportive services. As in previous years, this includes at-risk youth programs, services for persons who are at risk of becoming homeless, and services for elderly and frail elderly persons. Glendale will continue to encourage both the private and public sectors to produce or assist in the production of housing for special needs groups such as: the disabled, the elderly, large families, single-parent households, and formerly homeless.

For entitlement/consortia grantees: Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. (91.220(2)) See discussions above.

MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing – 91.210(e)
Negative Effects of Public Policies on Affordable Housing and Residential Investment Lack of Affordable Housing Funds: Similar to other jurisdictions, the availability of funding for affordable housing in Glendale has been severely affected by the dissolution of Redevelopment in the State of California. Similar to most communities across the State, the City lacks a steady source of funding to operate affordable housing programs. Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), one of the most significant funding sources for affordable housing, is highly competitive, and alone cannot provide enough funds for the development of affordable housing. Typically, the development of affordable housing requires multiple levels of public financing. HUD Community Planning and Development (CPD) funds such as CDBG and HOME funds have not kept up the increases in needs. To mitigate the lack of available funds, the City’s 2021–2029 Housing Element includes programs to supply Direct City Financial Assistance (such as land assemblage and write down, below market interest rate loans and grants or deferred payments).

Environmental Protection: State law (California Environmental Quality Act, California Endangered Species Act) and federal law (National Environmental Protection Act, Federal Endangered Species Act) regulations require environmental review of proposed discretionary projects (e.g., subdivision maps, use permits, etc.). Costs resulting from the environmental review process are also added to the cost of housing. Furthermore, opponents often use the CEQA process to block or delay housing development.

However, recent changes to State law have significantly streamlined the review and approval processes (including CEQA requirements) for affordable housing. Specifically, reuse vacant or underutilized sites in the Housing Element to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) will be eligible for Draft
174 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 70
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
by-right approval (CEQA exempt) if 20 percent or more of the units are set aside for lower income households.

Local Residential Development Policies and Regulations: Some portions of the City are subject to development constraints due to the presence of hillsides and ridgelines, oak trees, flood potential, seismic hazards, environmental issues, or other special circumstance. Hillsides, ridgelines, and floodplains must be protected from over-development in order to prevent erosion, flooding, damage from landslides, and preserve scenic views. Preservation of significant oak trees is also defined in the General Plan as a community goal because these trees are important biological resources. These constraints affect the development of all housing, not just affordable housing. To mitigate these development constraints, the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element has programs for development opportunities, including Accessory Dwelling Units, Adaptive Re-Use, Public Property Conversions, Density Bonus and Inclusionary Zoning.

Planning and Development Fees: Development fees and taxes charged by local governments also contribute to the cost of housing. Application processing fees in the City of Glendale have been established by Resolution.

Permit and Processing Procedures: The processing time required to obtain approval of development permits is often cited as a contributing factor to the high cost of housing. Unnecessary delays add to the cost of construction by increasing land holding costs and interest payments. Single-family residences are subject to the approval of a Development Review Permit. This process generally takes two to six weeks.

Multi-family residences are subject to the approval of a Development Review Permit. Multi-family residences can also be constructed in commercial zones with the approval of a CUP. This process generally takes 2-6 weeks from initial submittal to approval. The Conditional Use Permit generally takes around four to six months. To mitigate these impacts, the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element includes a program for Permit Streamlining and Streamlined and Ministerial Review for Eligible Affordable Housing Projects.

State and Federal Davis-Bacon Prevailing Wages: The State Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) expanded the kinds of projects that require the payment of prevailing wages. A prevailing wage must be paid to laborers when federal funds are used to pay labor costs for any project over $2,000 or on any multi-family project over eight units. The prevailing wage is usually higher than competitive wages, raising the cost of housing production and rehabilitation activities. Davis-Bacon also adds to housing costs by requiring documentation of the prevailing wage compliance.

Draft
175 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 71
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets – 91.215 (f) Introduction
Labor and employment characteristics have a direct impact upon current and future housing needs within Glendale. Wage levels from different employment sectors impact a household’s ability to afford certain types of housing and to adequately maintain housing. Certain sectors may have mismatches between jobs available and number of workers, potentially resulting in high unemployment rates in those sectors (Table 42).

Examples include Agricultural, Mining, Oil & Gas Extraction, Information, and Transportation and Warehousing. According to the ACS, the average unemployment rate was 7.54 percent for the City between 2026 and 2020 (Table 43).

Economic Development Market Analysis
Business Activity
Business by Sector Number of
Workers
Number of Jobs Share of Workers
%
Share of Jobs
%
Jobs less workers
%
Agriculture, Mining, Oil & Gas Extraction 517 55 1 0 -1 Arts, Entertainment, Accommodations 10,005 9,382 12 9 -2 Construction 2,641 3,227 3 3 0
Education and Health Care Services 25,414 33,328 29 33 3 Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 5,352 7,804 6 8 1
Information 7,541 1,328 9 1 -7
Manufacturing 4,539 8,192 5 8 3
Other Services 3,196 3,175 4 3 -1
Professional, Scientific, Management Services 9,025 11,465 10 11 1 Public Administration 0 0 0 0 0
Retail Trade 8,099 12,540 9 12 3
Transportation and Warehousing 1,590 779 2 1 -1
Wholesale Trade 3,251 2,335 4 2 -1
Total 81,170 93,610 -- -- --
Table 42 - Business Activity
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS (Workers), 2020 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (Jobs) Draft
176 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 72
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Labor Force
Total Population in the Civilian Labor Force 104,160
Civilian Employed Population 16 years and over 96,315
Unemployment Rate 7.54
Unemployment Rate for Ages 16-24 23.10
Unemployment Rate for Ages 25-65 5.05
Table 43 - Labor Force
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Occupations by Sector Number of People
Management, business and financial 30,530
Farming, fisheries and forestry occupations 4,630
Service 9,090
Sales and office 21,830
Construction, extraction, maintenance and
repair 5,180
Production, transportation and material
moving 4,150
Table 44 – Occupations by Sector
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Travel Time
Travel Time Number Percentage
< 30 Minutes 45,614 54%
30-59 Minutes 29,062 34%
60 or More Minutes 9,734 12%
Total 84,410 100%
Table 45 - Travel Time
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Education:

Educational Attainment by Employment Status (Population 16 and Older) Educational Attainment In Labor Force
Civilian
Employed
Unemployed Not in Labor
Force
Less than high school graduate 4,360 640 3,220
High school graduate (includes
equivalency) 15,295 1,265 7,425
Some college or Associate's degree 21,750 1,565 6,350
Draft
177 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 73
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Educational Attainment In Labor Force
Civilian
Employed
Unemployed Not in Labor
Force
Bachelor's degree or higher 42,310 2,275 7,165
Table 46 - Educational Attainment by Employment Status
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Educational Attainment by Age
Age
18–24 yrs 25–34 yrs 35–44 yrs 45–65 yrs 65+ yrs
Less than 9th grade 95 305 605 2,960 7,385
9th to 12th grade, no diploma 805 755 565 3,040 2,340
High school graduate, GED, or
alternative 3,605 5,740 4,945 13,305 7,985
Some college, no degree 6,475 5,375 3,155 8,430 5,000
Associate's degree 1,140 3,270 2,595 6,910 2,610
Bachelor's degree 2,455 12,120 8,260 13,585 6,450
Graduate or professional degree 95 4,660 5,630 7,495 3,960 Table 47 - Educational Attainment by Age
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Educational Attainment – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Educational Attainment Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Less than high school graduate 22,197
High school graduate (includes equivalency) 30,739
Some college or Associate's degree 38,702
Bachelor's degree 61,324
Graduate or professional degree 77,332
Table 48 – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction?
The largest employment sector in Glendale is Education and Health Care Services, with 20 percent of the City’s workers and 33 percent of the City’s jobs. The next highest sectors are Arts, Entertainment and Accommodations (12 percent of workers and nine percent of jobs and Professional, Scientific and Management Services (10 percent of workers, 11 percent of jobs).

Draft
178 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 74
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Describe the workforce and infrastructure needs of the business community:

The Verdugo Workforce Development Board (VWDB), which was created by the 2000 federal Workforce Investment Act, develops workforce policies and oversees state and federal funding for the cities of Burbank, Glendale and La Canada Flintridge.

The VWDB has two primary customers, job seekers (adults and youth) and local businesses. Through its service providers, the Verdugo Jobs Center and the Burbank Workforce Connection, the VWDB helps job seekers to find job opportunities and build careers through job training. The VWDB also helps identify business needs and provides direct assistance to businesses that may have workforce needs, capital needs, or other service needs.

The VWDB’s July 2024 Quarterly Report lists the top industry sectors for employment in the Burbank/Glendale/La Canada Flintridge area. The top four sectors in 2024 were health care, professional services, information-based services and retail. The Quarterly Report also listed the type of job advertisements published in the Verdugo Region. The highest number of jobs advertised were for registered nurses, retail salespersons and first-line supervisors of retail sales workers. The information in the VWDB report reflects the data in Table 42. The Education and Health Care Services sector and Retail Trade sector do not have enough workers to fill the available jobs in Glendale. On the other hand, the Information Sector does not have enough job opportunities for workers in the City with that skill set.

Youth training programs are also needed in Glendale. As shown in Table 43, the unemployment rate for persons aged 16-24 is 23 percent.

As the City is urbanized, all major infrastructures are already provided, i.e., streets and other public improvements. Information provided by the service and utility companies also indicates that the present infrastructure is generally sufficient to accommodate planned growth levels. Thus, the capacity of service and facility infrastructure is not considered an obstacle to the development, maintenance and improvement of businesses in the City.

Describe any major changes that may have an economic impact, such as planned local or regional public or private sector investments or initiatives that have affected or may affect job and business growth opportunities during the planning period. Describe any needs for workforce development, business support or infrastructure these changes may create.

The City adopted an Economic Development Three-Year Strategic Plan in 2022. This plan has several goals to support economic development in Glendale: Brand Identity, Business Culture, Innovation Ecosystem (tech sector) and Entertainment and Lifestyle (grow the arts and entertainment sector).

Implementing this plan will result in expansion efforts for new businesses, job growth and infrastructure). Efforts underway include business placemaking, the Verdugo Wash Visioning Study (create a 9-acre linear park with nature paths and adjacent businesses and entertainment), the Housing Element (affordable housing opportunities), the Bicycle Transportation Plan improvements from the Citywide Pedestrian Plan. The VWDB will also be involved in the process with workforce development support.

Draft
179 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 75
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
The Activate Artsakh project looks to enhance this area of the Arts and Entertainment District including the nearby public alley and passageways. The goal is to attract visitors to the various art and entertainment venues while also maintaining adequate parking and traffic flow.

How do the skills and education of the current workforce correspond to employment opportunities in the jurisdiction?
As shown in Table 44, a majority of people employed in Glendale work in the management, business and financial sector. These jobs tend to require a higher level of education and skill training. Table 46 illustrates that the highest percentage of unemployed persons in Glendale’s labor force are those with less than a high school education (13 percent), followed by high school graduate or equivalency (eight percent), some college or associate degree (seven percent) and lastly, bachelor’s degree or higher (five percent).

Despite the number of jobs available in Glendale (over 93,000 shown in Table 42, longer communing patterns is prevalent. As illustrated in Table 45. Almost half of employed Glendale residents (46 percent) travel 30 minutes or more to their jobs.

Describe any current workforce training initiatives, including those supported by Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations. Describe how these efforts will support the jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan.

The Verdugo Jobs Center (part of the VWDB) overs a variety of training and career counseling opportunities. These include:
• Career Counseling
• Career Information
• Skills Assessment
• Paid On-The-Job Training
• Vocational School
• Certification and Apprenticeships
• VWDB Youth Training, Employment and Mentoring Program (TEAM) Does your jurisdiction participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)?
No
If so, what economic development initiatives are you undertaking that may be coordinated with the Consolidated Plan? If not, describe other local/regional plans or initiatives that impact economic growth.

The Glendale Economic Development Corporation is a non-profit, public benefit 501(c)3 corporation formed in June 2014 to assist and support the City in the expansion of job opportunities; stimulation of Draft
180 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 76
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
economic development; growth in the physical improvement of the City; and to implement, assist and support the City in development activities.

Please also see the discussion above about the City’s Three-Year Economic Development Strategy for more details about the Economic Development Corporation’s efforts.

Discussion
Please see discussion above
MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion
Are there areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration")
Housing problems impact lower and moderate income households disproportionately compared to middle and upper income households. Therefore, areas with concentrations of low and moderate income households are likely to have high rates of housing problems.

A low and moderate income concentration is defined as a block group where at least 51 percent of the population is low and moderate income. Figure 1 above shows the block groups where over 51 percent of the population earns low and moderate incomes. Most of these areas are in the southern portion of Glendale generally south of Glenoaks Boulevard along with three block groups in just north of the Verdugo Mountains Open Space Preserve and adjacent to the 210 Freeway.

Are there any areas in the jurisdiction where racial or ethnic minorities or low-income families are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration") A minority “concentration area” is defined as an area whose proportion of minority population is greater than the overall Los Angeles County average of 74.8 percent. No census tracts in Glendale exceed the County average.

The census tracts with the highest poverty rates are concentrated in the southern areas of the City. This One Census Tract in the southwestern portion of the City (3024.01) is identified as an area of high segregation and poverty. This neighborhood, is generally bound by the city limits, Brand Boulevard, and Maple Street. Approximately 57 percent of the population in this tract are minorities. The median income is $41,300 and 30 percent of residents are below the poverty line.

What are the characteristics of the market in these areas/neighborhoods? The market characteristics in these neighborhoods are in many ways similar to the market characteristics of the City as a whole. While rising home values are good news for those who are already homeowners, it often makes housing more expensive for renters and for those seeking to attain home ownership. Rising rental rates are being seen in these neighborhoods as they are in the greater Glendale housing market.

Draft
181 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 77
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Are there any community assets in these areas/neighborhoods? There are many community assets in the southern Glendale area, including Tract 3024.01. Residents are in close proximity to transportation options via the Glendale Avenue and Colorado Street main boulevards and the I-5 and 2 Glendale freeways, as well as the Glendale Transportation Center/Metrolink station. A variety of recreation and shopping activities are available at the Glendale Galleria, surrounding shops, several neighborhood parks, a central library, and a public swimming pool.

All neighborhoods enjoy the presence the public elementary, middle, and high schools.

Multiple government services are available to residents in southern Glendale, including the main City Hall building which includes Human Services and Housing Divisions, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services (DPSS), the State of California Economic Development Department (unemployment office), and the Verdugo Jobs Center. Residents in need can visit several social services in southern Glendale for food, clothing, rent and utility assistance. The area is serviced by numerous health facilities, including the Dignity Health – Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center.

Are there other strategic opportunities in any of these areas? The southern Glendale area is located in areas with a high concentration of retail jobs. Businesses in these areas offer opportunities that may not require a higher level of education such as jobs available through hotels, high end retail stores, or hospitals. Job training is being provided through the Verdugo Job Center via Workforce Investment Act programs and is an effective program to train the workforce for jobs in this area. The South Glendale Community Plan is the official guide to development within the neighborhoods and commercial districts in the southern part of Glendale. This plan is intended to shape positive community change while balancing the unique character of the community.

The City is updating its General Plan, including the addition of a new Environmental Justice Element.

Policies and programs related to southern Glendale will be part of the General Plan’s implementation measures. The City’s Three-Year Economic Development Strategic Plan described earlier may also benefit the employment base and opportunities in southern Glendale.

MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate- Income Households - 91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2)

Describe the need for broadband wiring and connections for households, including low- and moderate-income households and neighborhoods.

The 2022 Five-Year ACS estimates showed that 89 percent of Glendale households had an internet subscription. Looking at broadband service specifically, 76 percent of households had some type of broadband service, such as cable, fiber optic or DSL. However; household income did impact the rates of internet service. For households earning less than $20,000 a year, 66.3 percent had broadband service; Draft
182 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 78
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
for households earning between $20,000 to $74,999 a year, 86.4 percent had broadband service and for households earning more than $75,000 a year, 96.3 percent had broadband service.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has an interactive mapping tool (the California Broadband Mapping Tool) that depicts the served and underserved areas of broadband deployment.

The term “served” depends on the internet speed standards and has varying thresholds at the state and federal level. The State’s “served” speed standard is 6 megabits per second (Mbps) downstream/1 Mbps upstream while current Federal Communications Commission (FCC) standards are 25 Mbps up/3 Mbps down.

According to the California Broadband Mapping Tool, the City meets the State’s minimum service standards and is “served.” However, there are pockets (predominantly located in South Glendale) that do not meet the FCC standard of “served.” In addition, the mapping tool shows that mass market underserved locations are in the City’s lower income neighborhoods. This corresponds to the ACS estimates described above.

The City of Glendale Water & Power (GWP) department is implementing a high speed optic broadband network project with the goal of providing access to high speed communication services for Glendale businesses, City buildings, utility facilities, libraries and other anchor institutions in the City. The project involves both overhead and underground sections. Fiber cable will be attached to over 1000 existing utility power poles as well as 14 transmission towers along the Verdugo mountains. Furthermore, fiber cable will be installed in existing conduits, pull boxes and vaults. Where there is a lack of such underground substructures, new substructures will be installed to enable fiber cable installation.

In January 2023, the City was awarded a Local Agency Technical Assistance grant from the California Public Utilities Commission. The award is predicated on the City’s agreement to provide technical assistance that will benefit unserved or underserved persons in the City.

Describe the need for increased competition by having more than one broadband Internet service provider serve the jurisdiction.

The City of Glendale is served by over 20 broadband internet service providers. There is no need to increase competition.

MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3)

Describe the jurisdiction’s increased natural hazard risks associated with climate change.

As part of the City’s Climate Action & Adaptation Plan, a Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment was completed in September 2023. Changes in temperature and precipitation are expected to influence the Draft
183 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 79
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
frequency, duration, and magnitude of a variety of climate hazards. The Assessment listed the following impacts expected to occur in Glendale by the end of the century3:
• Extreme Heat and Warm Nights – Annual number of extreme heat days is projected to increase by as many as 32 days and warm nights is expected to increase by as many as 69 by 2100. • Drought – The City is expected to experience increases in the length of dry spells. • Wildfire – The annual wildfire probability in Glendale is expected to increase from 20 percent to 30 percent.
• Landslides – This risk is expected to increase as precipitation variability increases and wildfires increase in frequency, size and severity.
• Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation – Changes in precipitation patterns will overwhelm the stormwater infrastructure, leading to localized flooding in highly paved areas. • Poor Air Quality – Air quality is anticipated to worsen in the region due to regional wildfires and average maximum temperatures.

Describe the vulnerability to these risks of housing occupied by low- and moderate-income households based on an analysis of data, findings, and methods.

The City’s Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment included social vulnerability from climate change in Glendale. Vulnerable populations in Glendale include people experiencing poverty, unemployed, renters, individuals without vehicle access, single female households with children, people in overcrowded households, households experiencing cost burden among others. The Assessment looked at Census Tracts in Glendale and social vulnerability. The greatest concentration of vulnerable populations are in south and southwest Glendale. The Census Tracts that have more than 60 percent vulnerable populations are considered a high social vulnerability area. These areas are generally on either side of Glenoaks Boulevard in Southwest Glendale and between Brand Boulevard and Colorado Street and south of Colorado Street in South Glendale.
4 3 City of Glendale, Climate Action & Adaptation Plan: Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, September 2023. 4 Figure 5: Social Vulnerability in Glendale, City of Glendale, Climate Action & Adaptation Plan: Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, September 2023.

Draft
184 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 80
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Strategic Plan
SP-05 Overview
Strategic Plan Overview
The Strategic Plan is the centerpiece of the Consolidated Plan. The Plan describes:
• General priorities for assisting households;
• Programs to assist those households in need; and
• Five-year objectives identifying proposed accomplishments The Strategic Plan also addresses the following areas:
• Anti-poverty strategy;
• Lead- based paint hazard reduction;
• Reduction of barriers to affordable housing; and
• Institutional Structure/Coordination among agencies
SP-10 Geographic Priorities – 91.215 (a)(1)
Geographic Area
1 Area Name: CDBG Target Areas
Area Type: Other
Other Target Area Description: Low- and moderate-income block groups HUD Approval Date:
% of Low/ Mod: >51%
Revital Type: Comprehensive
Other Revital Description:

Identify the neighborhood boundaries for
this target area.

See Figure 2
Most of these areas are in the southern portion of
Glendale generally south of Glenoaks Boulevard
along with three block groups in just north of the
Verdugo Mountains Open Space Preserve and
adjacent to the 210 Freeway.

Draft
185 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 81
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Include specific housing and commercial
characteristics of this target area.

Medium and High Density Residential Uses near
community services and/or commercial and
industrial uses.

How did your consultation and citizen
participation process help you to identify
this neighborhood as a target area?
In Community Workshops and survey, residents
commented on improvements needed. Additional
needs for low- to moderate-income households
identified in Needs Assessment and Housing
Market Analysis.

Identify the needs in this target area. Affordable housing, rehabilitation assistance, infrastructure improvements, public social
services, employment needs
What are the opportunities for
improvement in this target area?
Job training, infrastructure and community
facility/services improvements
Are there barriers to improvement in this
target area?
Low and moderate income households face very
high housing costs, older housing, lower median
incomes.

Table 49 - Geographic Priority Areas

Draft
186 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 82
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Figure 2: Low and Moderate Income Block Groups (HUD, ACS 2016-2020)

Draft
187 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 83
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
General Allocation Priorities
Describe the basis for allocating investments geographically within the jurisdiction (or within the EMSA for HOPWA)
In terms of specific geographic distribution of investments, infrastructure improvements and public facilities will be focused primarily in areas with concentrations of low and moderate income population.

Figure 1 is a map illustrating the low- and moderate-income block groups in the City (defined as a block group where at least 51 percent of the population with incomes not exceeding 80 percent of the Area Median Income). Investments in public facilities and services serving special needs populations and primarily low and moderate income persons will be made throughout the City. Housing assistance will be available to income-qualified households citywide.

SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.215(a)(2)
Priority Needs
1 Priority Need
Name
Homeless
Priority Level High
Population Extremely Low
Low
Families with Children
Elderly
Chronic Homelessness
Individuals
Families with Children
Mentally Ill
Chronic Substance Abuse
Veterans
Persons with HIV/AIDS
Victims of Domestic Violence
Non-housing Community Development
Geographic
Areas
Affected

Associated
Goals
Homeless Services
Enhance Public Services
Draft
188 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 84
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description There is a high need for Homeless Services including: outreach, case management mental health and substance abuse treatment, emergency shelter and transitional housing, permanent supportive housing services support, rapid re- housing, and homeless prevention.

Basis for
Relative
Priority
The High Priority for Homeless Services resulted from public hearing comments, community meeting, and high rank in the community needs survey. 2 Priority Need
Name
Public Facilities
Priority Level High
Population Extremely Low
Low
Moderate
Large Families
Families with Children
Elderly
Chronic Homelessness
Families with Children
Victims of Domestic Violence
Elderly
Frail Elderly
Victims of Domestic Violence
Geographic
Areas
Affected

SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Associated
Goals
Public Facility Improvements
Description Construction and rehabilitation of public community facilities needs were established for the following:
• Indoor Community Centers
• Park & Recreation Facilities
• Health Care Facilities
• Youth Centers
• Libraries
• Multi-purpose Community Centers
• Child Care Centers
Draft
189 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 85
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Basis for
Relative
Priority
The high need for the above public facilities was established using information gathered from the community needs survey, the community meeting, public hearings, and City of Glendale Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Needs Analysis.
3 Priority Need
Name
Public Social Services
Priority Level High
Population Extremely Low
Low
Moderate
Large Families
Families with Children
Elderly
Chronic Homelessness
Individuals
Families with Children
Mentally Ill
Veterans
Victims of Domestic Violence
Elderly
Frail Elderly
Persons with Mental Disabilities
Victims of Domestic Violence
Non-housing Community Development
Geographic
Areas
Affected

SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Associated
Goals
Enhance Public Services

Description Expand public services that create conditions for eligible residents to obtain and maintain self-sufficiency, specifically in the areas of youth, seniors, mental health, employment, and homeless services.

Basis for
Relative
Priority
The high need for the above public services was established using information gathered from the community meeting and high rank in the community needs survey.
4 Priority Need
Name
Public/Neighborhood Improvements
Priority Level High
Draft
190 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 86
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Population Extremely Low
Low
Moderate
Large Families
Families with Children
Elderly
Elderly
Frail Elderly
Persons with Physical Disabilities
Non-housing Community Development
Geographic
Areas
Affected

SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Associated
Goals
Public/Neighborhood Improvements
Description Upgrade of public infrastructure in eligible low-and moderate-income neighborhoods including:
• Sidewalk Improvements
• Street/Alley Improvements
• Street Lighting
• Traffic Calming
Basis for
Relative
Priority
The high need for the above neighborhood/public was established using information gathered from the community needs survey, the community meeting, the public hearings, and City departments.
5 Priority Need
Name
Housing
Priority Level High
Draft
191 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 87
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Population Extremely Low
Low
Moderate
Middle
Large Families
Families with Children
Elderly
Chronic Homelessness
Individuals
Families with Children
veterans
Victims of Domestic Violence
Elderly
Frail Elderly
Persons with Mental Disabilities
Persons with Physical Disabilities
Persons with Developmental Disabilities
Victims of Domestic Violence
Geographic
Areas
Affected

Associated
Goals
Affordable Housing
Description Housing priority needs include: new construction of affordable rental housing, new construction of first time homeownership assistance, multi-family housing rehabilitation, and rental assistance. This includes affordable housing for special needs groups, such as seniors and the disabled.

Basis for
Relative
Priority
High priority as identified in RHNA housing needs allocation, community needs survey and community meeting and other outreach. Needs assessment indicates large percentage of extremely low, very low, and low income residents have cost burden and severe cost burden as major housing problem. Both new construction of rental and first time home buyer units increases housing supply to address this problem. Rehabilitation of multi-family residential units is necessary to address problem properties in targeted neighborhoods as well as provide additional affordable housing. Rental assistance programs can address needs of extremely low income elderly and other households. Rents continue to increase and many people are not able to keep up, including seniors and disabled persons.

Table 50 – Priority Needs Summary

Draft
192 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 88
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Narrative (Optional)
In establishing five-year priorities for assistance, the City has taken several concerns into consideration:
• Those categories of low and moderate income households most in need of housing and community development assistance;
• Which activities will best meet the needs of those identified households; and • The extent of federal and other resources available to address these needs.

SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions – 91.215 (b)
Influence of Market Conditions
Affordable Housing Type Market Characteristics that will influence the use of funds available for housing type
Tenant Based Rental
Assistance (TBRA)
Given the limited funding, the City does not plan to utilize HOME funds for Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA).

TBRA for Non-Homeless
Special Needs
Given the limited funding, the City does not plan to utilize HOME funds for Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA).

New Unit Production The majority of the City's lower and moderate income households experienced housing cost burden. The supply of affordable housing is limited compared to the need. Based on funding availability and allocations, the City may allocate a portion of the HOME funds to increase the supply of safe, decent, affordable housing for lower income households (including extremely low income households), such as seniors, disabled, the homeless, and those at risk of homelessness.

Rehabilitation Approximately 75 percent of the City’s housing stock was built prior to 1980 and is at least 45 years old. The City will provide assistance to rehabilitate single-family, mobile home and multi-family units.

Acquisition, including
preservation
The City may also pursue acquisition/rehabilitation of multi-family housing and deed-restrict the improved units as affordable housing.

Table 51 – Influence of Market Conditions

Draft
193 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 89
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2) Introduction
• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds
• HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds
• Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds
• General funds
• HUD Section 108 Loan funds
• California Housing Finance Agency funds (CalHFA)
• State Housing and Housing and Community Development housing funds • National Housing Trust Fund

Draft
194 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 90
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Anticipated Resources
Draft
195 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 91
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Program Source
of
Funds
Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount
Available
Remainder of
ConPlan
$
Narrative Description
Annual
Allocation: $
Program
Income: $
Prior Year
Resources:
$
Total:
$
CDBG public
-
federal
Acquisition
Admin and
Planning
Economic
Development
Housing
Public
Improvements
Public Services
$1,738,811
0 0 $1,738,811

$6,955,244

Community
Development Block
Grant (CDBG)
Annual allocation is
estimated at
$1,738,811. For the
remainder of the CP
period, $6,955,244
may be available
HOME public
-
federal
Acquisition
Homebuyer
assistance
Homeowner rehab
Multifamily rental
new construction
Multifamily rental
rehab
New construction
for ownership
TBRA
$1,245,430.65
0 0 $1,245,430.65

$4,981,722.60

Home Investment
Partnership (HOME)
Annual allocation is
estimated at
$1,245,430.65
. For the remainder of
the CP period,
$4,981,722.60
may be available
Draft
196 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 92
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
ESG public
-
federal
Conversion and
rehab for
transitional
housing
Financial
Assistance
Overnight shelter
Rapid re-housing
(rental assistance)
Rental Assistance
Services
Transitional
housing
$152,328
0 0 $152,328

$609,312

Emergency Solutions
Grant (ESG)
Annual allocation is
estimated at $152,328.

For the remainder of
the CP period, $609,312
may be available
Table 52 - Anticipated Resources
Draft
197 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 93
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied The City will attempt to leverage CDBG funds, HOME funds, ESG funds, Grants and other funding when appropriate to meet the objective of the Annual Action Plan. The City does add local funds (including unexpended CDBG and HOME funds from prior years if available) to further support the organizations and individuals receiving CDBG and HOME funding.

HOME matching funds requirements for HOME projects will be met through qualifying non-federal contributions to projects as well as use of balances in the Glendale HOME Match Bank from previous projects, if necessary.

The ESG program has a 100 percent matching requirement, which amounts to approximately $150,000 annually. ESG agencies such as Ascencia, Catholic Charities, and Home Again Los Angeles fill ESG matching fund requirements with CDBG and their own private funding.

The Continuum of Care Program has 25 percent matching or leverage funding for all CoC funded programs per project. The City monitors individual CoC funded services provided by Ascencia, the Salvation Army, the Glendale Housing Authority/City of Glendale, and Home Again Los Angeles to ensure they meet the matching fund requirements. All grant activity and matching funds are documented in the Annual Progress Reports submitted to HUD.

If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan The Housing Authority of the City of Glendale (Authority) continues to search for land to acquire for the development of affordable housing.

Discussion
See discussion above.

Draft
198 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 94
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure – 91.215(k)
Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its consolidated plan including private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions.

Responsible Entity Responsible Entity
Type
Role Geographic Area
Served
GLENDALE Government Economic
Development
Homelessness
Non-homeless special
needs
Ownership
Planning
Rental
neighborhood
improvements
public facilities
public services
Jurisdiction
Table 53 - Institutional Delivery Structure

Assess of Strengths and Gaps in the Institutional Delivery System The strengths in the delivery system are interdepartmental communication and collaboration. City staff from various departments works with each other, with organizations and agencies that assist low- income individuals and with families in Glendale and community residents to establish priorities for utilizing CDBG funding. The primary gap in the delivery system is due to inadequate funding resources.

The need in the City outreaches the funding resources. As a result, even projects with a high priority may have to wait to be funded as the City continues to seek additional funding sources.

The City relies heavily on its partnerships with nonprofit partners to deliver services and assist in the development of affordable housing. These organizations are also heavily impacted by diminishing resources for this work.

Availability of services targeted to homeless persons and persons with HIV and mainstream services
Homelessness Prevention
Services
Available in the
Community
Targeted to
Homeless
Targeted to People
with HIV
Homelessness Prevention Services
Counseling/Advocacy X X
Legal Assistance X X
Mortgage Assistance
Rental Assistance
Utilities Assistance X X
Draft
199 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 95
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Street Outreach Services
Law Enforcement X X
Mobile Clinics X
Other Street Outreach Services X X
Supportive Services
Alcohol & Drug Abuse X X
Child Care X
Education X
Employment and Employment
Training
X X
Healthcare X X

HIV/AIDS
Life Skills X X
Mental Health Counseling X X
Transportation X X
Other
Recreation/Case
Management/Nutrition
Services

Table 54 - Homeless Prevention Services Summary

Describe how the service delivery system including, but not limited to, the services listed above meet the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) As previously discussed in the Needs Assessment and Housing Market Analysis sections, while a variety of services are available to the City of Glendale residents; the level of services available is not adequate to meet the needs.

Describe the strengths and gaps of the service delivery system for special needs population and persons experiencing homelessness, including, but not limited to, the services listed above
There are a variety of services for special needs population and persons experiencing homelessness in Glendale. However, major gaps in the service delivery system exist:
• Inadequate funding to provide the level of services needed; and • Lack of coordination among different agencies.

Specifically, many homeless service agencies are exploring opportunities to expand their programs and services to meet the changing needs of the community that are brought along by the increase in immigrant population and increasingly diverse population. With an aging population, the need for senior services has also increased in recent years. However, lack of funding is the most significant constraint to adequately address the community’s various needs.

Draft
200 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 96
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Provide a summary of the strategy for overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system for carrying out a strategy to address priority needs The City continues to participate in regional planning groups and forums to foster collaboration with other agencies and organizations. Through collaboration, the City identifies common goals and strategies to avoid overlaps in services and programs and identify potential for leveraging resources.

However, there are key elements in the structure and delivery system, which could be improved. These areas for development include:
• Coordination of youth services;
• Continual capacity building for non-profit organizations; • Transportation to social service agencies;
• Childcare for low-income working families;
• Closer working relationship between apartment owners, property managers and the City; • More English as a Second Language courses for limited English speaking families; and • Effective economic development to help businesses create new livable wage jobs for low income families.

The City of Glendale will attempt to address these gaps through the following strategies:
• Maintaining multi-purpose centers to ensure coordination and efficiency of community services; • Coordinating youth activities;
• Increasing English as a Second Language courses throughout the City; • Continuing involvement of housing providers and social service agencies with the Glendale Continuum of Care;
• Increasing capacity building for non-profit housing and social service organizations through technical assistance and grant writing workshops;
• Increasing the dissemination of housing information to the Glendale Board of Realtors Affordable Housing groups; and
• Better coordination between the CDBG program and workforce development, and the citywide economic development program.

Draft
201 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 97
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
SP-45 Goals Summary – 91.215(a)(4)
Goals Summary Information

Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic
Area
Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator
1 Homeless Services 2025 2029 Homeless Homeless CDBG:
$500,000

ESG:
$761,640

Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities
other than Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit:
0 Persons Assisted

Public service activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit:
500 Persons Assisted

Homeless Person Overnight Shelter:
1,940 Persons Assisted

Homelessness Prevention:
645 Persons Assisted
2 Public Facility
Improvements
2025 2029 Non-Housing
Community
Development

SOUTHERN

GLENDALE
Public Facilities CDBG:
$5,401,136
Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities
other than Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit:
15,000 Persons Assisted
3 Enhance Public Services 2025 2029 Non-Housing
Community
Development

SOUTHERN

GLENDALE
Homeless
Public Social Services
CDBG:
$804,108
Public service activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit:
2,750 Persons Assisted
4 Affordable Housing 2025 2029 Affordable
Housing
Housing HOME:
$6,227,153.25

Rental units constructed:
443 Household Housing Unit

Homeowner Housing Added:
0 Household Housing Unit
5 Public/Neighborhood
Improvements
2025 2029 Non-Housing
Community
Development

SOUTHERN

GLENDALE
Public/Neighborhood
Improvements
CDBG:
$250,000
Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities
other than Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit:
1,000 Persons Assisted

Draft
202 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 98
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Table 55 – Goals Summary

Goal Descriptions
1 Goal Name Homeless Services
Goal
Description
Provision of homeless services including: outreach, emergency shelter, case management, transitional housing, rapid re -housing, and permanent supportive housing services.
2 Goal Name Public Facility Improvements
Goal
Description
Development and rehabilitation of public facilities that service low and moderate income persons. Public Facility priority needs according to the annual needs assessment include:
• Indoor Community Centers
• Park & Recreation Facilities
• Health Care Facilities
• Youth Centers
• Libraries
• Multi-purpose Community Centers
• Child Care Centers
• Homeless facilities
3 Goal Name Enhance Public Services
Goal
Description
Enhance public services as determined by the community needs assessment. This includes top priorities:
• Anti-Crime Programs (such as drug prevention and gang prevention programs) • Youth Services/ Activities
• Homeless Services
• Employment and Training Services
Public Social Service projects with a medium priority include:
• Health Services
• Mental Health Services
• Child Care Services
• Senior Services
• Fair Housing/Tenant-Landlord Services
• Services for the developmentally and physically disabled 4 Goal Name Affordable Housing
Draft
203 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 99
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Goal
Description
Overall Housing programs priority needs were determined through the community needs assessment process including the following needs:
• Construct new or acquire and complete substantial rehabilitation to increase affordable housing units available to low, very low, and extremely low income households.
• Construct new affordable housing units available to large, low income first time homebuyer households. • Construct new affordable housing for special needs groups, such as seniors and the dis abled. 5 Goal Name Public/Neighborhood Improvements
Goal
Description
Based on the community survey responses and comments from the public hearings, the following Public/Neighborhood Improvement needs were identified:
• Sidewalk Improvements
• Street/Alley Improvements
• Street Lighting
• Traffic Calming
In addition, neighborhood improvements in eligible target areas included code enforcement activities as commented during the public hearings by community residents.

Estimate the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as defined by HOME 91.315(b)(2)
2,015 households could be assisted with affordable housing as defined by HOME.

Draft
204 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 100
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement – 91.215(c) Need to Increase the Number of Accessible Units (if Required by a Section 504 Voluntary Compliance Agreement)
There is no public housing located in Glendale.

Activities to Increase Resident Involvements
There is no public housing located in Glendale.

Is the public housing agency designated as troubled under 24 CFR part 902? Not applicable.

Plan to remove the ‘troubled’ designation
Not applicable.

SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.215(h)
Barriers to Affordable Housing
Lack of Affordable Housing Funds: Similar to other jurisdictions, the availability of funding for affordable housing in Glendale has been severely affected by the dissolution of Redevelopment in the State of California. Similar to most communities across the State, the City lacks a steady source of funding to operate affordable housing programs. Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), one of the most significant funding sources for affordable housing, is highly competitive, and alone cannot provide enough funds for the development of affordable housing. Typically, the development of affordable housing requires multiple levels of public financing. HUD Community Planning and Development (CPD) funds such as CDBG and HOME funds have not kept up the increases in needs. To mitigate the lack of available funds, the City’s 2021–2029 Housing Element includes programs to supply Direct City Financial Assistance (such as land assemblage and write down, below market interest rate loans and grants or deferred payments).

Draft
205 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 101
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Local Residential Development Policies and Regulations: Some portions of the City are subject to development constraints due to the presence of hillsides and ridgelines, oak trees, flood potential, seismic hazards, environmental issues, or other special circumstance. Hillsides, ridgelines, and floodplains must be protected from over-development in order to prevent erosion, flooding, damage from landslides, and preserve scenic views. Preservation of significant oak trees is also defined in the General Plan as a community goal because these trees are important biological resources. These constraints affect the development of all housing, not just affordable housing. To mitigate these development constraints, the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element has programs for development opportunities, including Accessory Dwelling Units, Adaptive Re-Use, Public Property Conversions, Density Bonus and Inclusionary Zoning.

Strategy to Remove or Ameliorate the Barriers to Affordable Housing The City works to remove barriers to affordable housing and the financial impact of efforts to protect public health and safety by taking actions to reduce costs or provide off-setting financial incentives to assist in the production of safe, high quality, affordable housing. In addition, the City will implement the following actions identified in its 2021-2029 Housing Element to remove barriers to affordable housing:
• Program 1C: Public Property Conversion to Housing Program • Program 1F: Accessory Dwelling Units
• Program 1H: Adequate Alternative Sites
• Program 2A: Multi-family Acquisition/Rehabilitation Loan Program Draft
206 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 102
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
• Program 2C: Code Enforcement
• Program 3A: Direct City Financial Assistance
• Program 3C: Inclusionary Zoning
• Program 3 D: Community Housing Development Organizations and other Nonprofit Housing Organizations
• Program 4A: Section 8 Rental Housing Choice Voucher Payments • Program 6A: Care Management Services
• Program 6C: Developmental Disabilities Housing Services • Program 7A: Fair Housing Plan
• Program 7C: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Program

SP-60 Homelessness Strategy – 91.215(d)
Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs
The City of Glendale understands that in order to further reduce the number of people experiencing homelessness each year, the jurisdiction should take affirmative steps that include setting annual “reduction” goals and adopting and implementing evidence-based and best practices to ensure the goals are met.

Specific to engagement strategy, jurisdictions will work with partner agencies to identify, engage, house, and provide intensive integrated supportive services and treatment to the most vulnerable, visible, and hardest-to-reach chronically homeless single adults and families who have been living on the streets of Glendale.

Additionally, the City of Glendale will focus on supporting street outreach and engagement efforts. Such action will continue to focus on identifying chronically homeless persons in need of a housing first approach. Such attention should be given to the most visible and hardest-to-reach individuals. These actions should have the support of various public and private partners who can help identify, house, and provide social services in order to help implement a housing first approach. Specific outreach strategy will include:
• Outreach: Provide street outreach services to homeless persons and connect clients to the continuum of care.
• Intake, Assessment, Case Management, Supportive Services: Provide intake, assessment, specialized case management, and supportive services to help clients address barriers contributing to homelessness. Enroll 500 persons into specialized case management at Coordinated Entry System.

The 2021-2029 Housing Element lists specific service goals for the community over the 8-year period.

These include:

Draft
207 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 103
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
• Emergency Shelter: 2,500 persons
• Transitional Shelter: 976 beds for persons
• • Permanent Supportive Housing: 720 persons
• Case Management and Supportive Services: 9,600 persons • Prevention Services: 2,000 persons
• Street Outreach: 2,550 unduplicated clients served
• Domestic Violence Programs: 768 persons
• Supportive Services: 20,000 unduplicated clients served

Addressing the emergency and transitional housing needs of homeless persons State Housing Law requires that cities identify sites that can adequately accommodate emergency homeless shelters. Additionally, Glendale’s Charter allows applicants to request use variances to allow uses not listed as permitted or conditionally permitted in all other zones except for single family residential zones. Glendale’s existing emergency shelters have been approved through various methods including by-right, by conditional use permit, and by use variance. Specific strategies to addressing the emergency and transitional housing needs of homeless persons will include the following:
• Emergency Shelter: Provide year-round emergency shelter beds and year-round domestic violence crisis shelter beds to homeless persons.
• Transitional Housing: Provide transitional housing for family households at any given time.

Please also see the goals about shelters and transitional housing described above.

Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again.

Chronically homeless persons require rehabilitation services, employment training and placement, health services, and case management to move from homelessness to transitional housing, and then to supportive/permanent housing. The City supports the Continuum of Care’s strategy for constructing housing facilities that help transition chronically homeless persons to a stable housing situation and to receive supportive services that would improve their employment skills.

Help low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families who are likely to become homeless after being discharged from a publicly funded institution or system of care, or who are receiving assistance from public and private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education or youth needs
Draft
208 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 104
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Indicator of those “at-risk” of becoming homeless is the percentage of income paid for housing or rent.

Because the housing costs in Glendale are higher than many other Los Angeles communities, housing cost burden is a significant issue for Glendale households. A significant fraction of households are considered overburdened by housing costs. The problem is most acute for renters. Many of these persons are rent burdened and are at-risk of becoming homeless if a financial emergency or job loss occurs. Glendale service providers reported that another obstacle facing the homeless “at-risk” population is underemployment or unemployment because of shifts in the local economy and a lack of viable job skills. Without the appropriate skill development, low-income households are restricted to low paying jobs without opportunity for advancement. Furthermore, some individuals and families are unaware of, or ineligible for, the job training and employment assistance resources available in the community. Other prevalent issues among the homeless “at-risk” population include lack of transportation and affordable childcare. These present difficulties in obtaining and sustaining employment.

Specific strategies will include:
• Homeless Prevention: Provide case management to 50 households and serve 100 households with direct utility and rental assistance.
• Rapid Re-Housing: Provide case management and direct financial assistance to 20 households. • Reallocation: The City of Glendale will reallocate Transitional Housing Programs to Permanent Supportive Housing for Chronic Homeless Families when applicable.

SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards – 91.215(i)
Actions to address LBP hazards and increase access to housing without LBP hazards The Housing Authority is requiring the following actions for all existing and operating affordable housing projects that receive assistance with HOME and other HUD CPD funds, in accordance with HUD CPD lead based paint regulations:
• Ensure that all purchasers, occupants, and owner-occupants receive the brochure “Protect Your Family from Lead in Your Home.”
• Require Visual Assessments for defective paint surface (interior and exterior) and notification of owner if defective paint surfaces are discovered during the assessment. • Require paint testing on surfaces that will be disturbed during rehabilitation. • Require Risk Assessments for housing units that receive more than $5,000 of City assistance using HOME and other HUD CPD funds.
• Require lead hazard reduction treatments of defective paint surfaces that are disturbed during construction or renovation.
• Require safe work practices for all work on lead based paint surfaces. • Require lead hazard clearance prior to occupancy.
• Require on-going maintenance, monitoring and cleaning for rental properties. City staff, as available, will continue to attend HUD-sponsored training in lead-based paint and will coordinate with the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program of Los Angeles County Draft
209 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 105
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Department of Health Services – Public Health on an annual basis. This will include obtaining information on the annual number of child lead cases detected in Glendale through referral from local providers of the Child Health Disability Prevention Program which tests children between ages 1 and 2 for elevated blood lead levels.

How are the actions listed above related to the extent of lead poisoning and hazards? With more than 75 percent of Glendale’s housing stock built prior to 1980, it becomes important to test these units for lead poisoning and hazards. The age of the housing stock is the key variable for estimating the number of housing units with lead-based paint (LBP). Starting in 1978, the use of all LBP on residential property was prohibited.

National studies estimate that 75 percent of all residential structures built prior to 1970 contain LBP.

Housing built prior to 1940 is highly likely to contain LBP. Using the 75 percent national average of potential LBP hazard and applying it to the amount of units built prior to 1980 in the City, an estimated 42,116 units (15,360 owner-occupied and 26,756 renter-occupied) may contain LBP. Furthermore, approximately 54 percent of households in the City are low and moderate income (earn less than 80 percent of AMI). This translates to approximately 22,911 housing units with potential LBP that may be occupied by low and moderate income households.

Lead poisoning also impacts children more severely, inflecting potentially permanent damage to young children, such as developmental disabilities. Approximately eight percent of the owner-households and one percent of the renter-households built before 1980, have children. Therefore, the number of units with potential LBP hazards and occupied by households with children is estimated at 2,580 units (1,459 owner-occupied units and 476 renter-occupied units).

The City will continue to provide lead-based paint testing when required. To date there have been few to no cases of childhood lead poisoning reported in Glendale by the Los Angeles County Health Department.

How are the actions listed above integrated into housing policies and procedures? In accordance with federal regulations and the City of Glendale’s policy regarding the identification of lead-based paint hazards, all housing built prior to 1978 must undergo lead based paint testing as part of any HOME funded affordable housing project. If deteriorated lead-based paint surfaces are found, it must be stabilized during the rehabilitation of the property. Abatement must be performed by a certified lead-based paint professional and the certified lead-based paint assessor must issue a Clearance Inspection prior to the issuance of the Notice of Completion. Procedures are in place for property managers to notify residents in older buildings assisted with affordable housing funds when they initially lease their unit of the potential dangers of lead based paint and resources available to assist them. Community Development staff monitor these procedures as part of the annual monitoring process.

Draft
210 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 106
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy – 91.215(j)
Jurisdiction Goals, Programs and Policies for reducing the number of Poverty-Level Families The primary emphasis of the anti-poverty strategy, required by CFR 91.215 (h), is to raise the income of Glendale's poorest households, especially those living below the poverty level. This includes providing those households with the educational, training, supportive service and childcare opportunities that will allow them to address barriers to income and career development. Affordable housing opportunities can also allow poorer families to devote additional resources to raising their incomes and furthering their careers.

Community development and housing programs will emphasize further reducing the number of poverty level families. This section describes the jurisdiction's goals, programs, and policies for reducing the number of poverty level families. This section also addresses how the production and preservation of affordable housing will be coordinated with other programs and services for which the jurisdiction is responsible. Identification of the extent this strategy will reduce the number of poverty level families is also included when feasible. The following list of programs will continue to be part of the anti-poverty strategy.
• Affordable Childcare and Youth Programs
• Public Social Services
• Employment, Training and Education
• Transportation
• Housing Programs
• Homeless Services
• Section 3 Employment Program

How are the Jurisdiction poverty reducing goals, programs, and policies coordinated with this affordable housing plan
The City’s poverty reducing goals, programs, and policies are coordinated with the Economic Development Department, which are: business retention, business attraction, business creation, marketing, pro-business approach to City processes, and local and regional partnerships. These efforts are also coordinated with the Verdugo Workforce Investment Board (WIB), currently focused on the entertainment, healthcare, green jobs, and manufacturing industries. As a coordinated effort, the City as partner agencies will link poverty reduction and community development activities to job creation for low-income residents. Specifically the following will be supports by the City as specific strategies:
• Job Creation/Employment: Continue to fund social service programs that support, leverage, and coordinate employment, ESL, and basic skills programs with WIA programs and the VJC. Begin to explore provision of job center satellites at libraries and neighborhood centers.

Draft
211 of 335

Consolidated Plan GLENDALE 107
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
• Business and Technical Assistance: When additional CDBG funding becomes available, continue to explore eligible business assistance activities to help local businesses with technical and strategic support to create jobs for low and moderate-income residents.

SP-80 Monitoring – 91.230
Describe the standards and procedures that the jurisdiction will use to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements
The City’s Community Services & Parks Department and Community Development Departments are responsible for ensuring that the receipt and expenditure of HUD funds comply with program requirements through the monitoring of program performance for CDBG, ESG, and CoC programs.

Careful evaluation of the housing and public service delivery system can be the most effective tool in detecting gaps and making appropriate modifications. Glendale will follow monitoring procedures identified in the City’s Sub-recipient Monitoring Plan. Other procedures will include in-house review of progress reports and expenditures, and on-site visits to ensure compliance with federal regulations. The monitoring system will encourage uniform reporting to achieve consistent information on beneficiaries.

Monitoring will also aim at resolving any program or accounting findings or other problems that may keep an organization from meeting its contractual obligations. Technical assistance will be provided where necessary. Community Services & Parks, and Community Development staff will regularly monitor specific actions such as minority business outreach and Section 3 compliance.

Furthermore, project and financial data on CDBG-funded activities will be maintained using HUD’s IDIS (Integrated Disbursement Information System) software. Use of this system allows HUD staff easy access to local data for review and progress evaluation.

The Community Services & Parks Department serves as the lead agency on Consolidated Planning and Reporting, labor compliance reporting and other Uniform Federal Requirements for all CPD grants activities.

Project and financial data on HOME-funded activities will be maintained using HUD’s IDIS (Integrated Disbursement Information System) software. Use of this system allows HUD staff easy access to local data for review and progress evaluation.

The City ensures compliance by:
• Checking project eligibility against regulations and staying in constant communication with the City's HUD CPD representative.
• Reviewing HUD's monitoring handbook to ensure compliance with national objectives HOME Entitlement Program requirements
• Reviewing CPD notices on HOME program and planning requirements Draft
212 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
108
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Appendix A- Alternate/Local Data Sources

1 Data Source Name
Glendale Community Needs Assessment Survey
List the name of the organization or individual who originated the data set.

City of Glendale, Community Services and Parks Department, CDBG Section Provide a brief summary of the data set.

Survey questions were sought to determine the level of concern and priority for social service, neighborhood improvement, and community facilities categories. The survey was made available both on-line and in hard copy form in English, Spanish, and Armenian. A total of 752 responses were received.

What was the purpose for developing this data set?
Survey questions were sought to determine the level of concern and priority for social service, neighborhood improvement, and community facilities categories. A total of 752 responses were received.

Provide the year (and optionally month, or month and day) for when the data was collected.

August 2019 to October 2019
Briefly describe the methodology for the data collection.

Questions in the written survey (also on-line) sought to determine the level of concern and priority for seven general social service programs, public/neighborhood improvements, public facilities, and housing. The questionnaire asked residents to indicate whether each service provided by the City was most important to them within a particular category.

Describe the total population from which the sample was taken.

The City participated in community events to bring awareness to the consolidated plan process and to ask residents to fill out surveys. The community events included Cruise Night, GUSD Back to School Night, One Glendale Championship Game, and the Senior Emergency Preparedness Event
Draft
213 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
109
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Describe the demographics of the respondents or characteristics of the unit of measure, and the number of respondents or units surveyed. 752 responses were received anonymously and were asked no personal questions on demographics.

Draft
214 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
110
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Appendix B – Public Outreach
CDBG Open House Outreach List

1. Glendale Youth Alliance

2. Verdugo Hill Council, Boy Scouts

3. Kid’s Community Dental Clinic

4. YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena

5. Housing Rights Center

6. Armenian Relief Society of Western USA Inc.

7. Campbell Center/New Horizons

8. Armenian Cultural Association (Hamazkayin)

9. Ascencia

10. Veterans of Armenia

11. Ararat Foundation

12. Homenetmen Glendale Ararat

13. Door of Hope

14. Catholic Charities of Los Angeles

October 2, 2024 Community Meeting and Public Hearing Comments

2025-2023 Consolidated Plan
FY 2024-25 Annual Action Plan Public Hearing Comments
October 2, 2024
In-Person Community Meeting (120 attendees)
21 Residents Participated
Public Meeting Comments: English, Armenian, Spanish Comments Combined I. Citizenship Participation
Draft
215 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
111
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Share information with citizens through email, Facebook, GWP Bill, advertising plans and meetings via Glendale Unified School District (GUSD).

Give us a texting option so we can remember to attend meetings.

Add flyers to weekly newsletters sent to parents and participants in organizations. Examples include GUSD and GWP Bill
Continue to do dinners and raffles so people to be willing to attend meetings.

In-person meetings are preferred because they are more interactive with the public.

II. Housing
Offer a discount to young adults to be able to afford their own homes in Glendale. Very difficult with the pricing.

What limit services to only developmentally disabled can include mentally disabled. I have a stable medically complaint bipolar daughter in her 30’s.

Rents are too high and we have only been here a few years and our salaries are not enough to pay rent and have a better life to help ourselves. We are learning English and what we get in salaries are not sufficient to be able to live comfortably.

Need Rent Control
Salaries are not going up with rent increases, utilities and food increases. We cant live and feel we are being pushed out.

Rents are too high and it is difficult to afford because it does not keep with fixed rates.

The City provides a lotto for housing but some seniors keep applying but end up not wining the lottery.

Seems unfair.

Apartment owners are increasing rent by 9% every year for the past 2 years. Its relentless to keep up.

Rent prices are too high and not affordable.

Rent is too expensive; immigrants cannot afford to live in the city in a a studio even. $1,600 for a studio and we still cannot afford to live.

Need Rent Control
Rent is increasing every year and seniors are being priced out of Glendale.

Need more affordable housing
The City should spent money on senior renters to help their living situations since many of them are afraid of losing their homes.

III Public Social Services
Draft
216 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
112
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
All your projects are great for all the mentioned groups. We would also like to see as where “neurodivergent” adults would fall under or in fact they don’t fall under any of the mentioned group.

Therefore, is the City of Glendale going to start a group category for these residents who have “behavioral health issues’ but the also need to be able to live an independent life.

As the caregiver of an adult that is neurodivergent and on the autism spectrum safety is a concern.

Representing a nonprofit 2BHappy our concern is about having one or more of our parks being developed to accommodate the individual within the Autism spectrum, especially that parks have fence around so parents will not be worried for child’s elopement. (running off without realizing safety of self) As a board member of 2BHappy nonprofit organization, Behavioral Analysist we suggest that the City of Glendale separate behavioral health from mental health and provides free behavioral health consultations to all needs. Additionally, all public places and all events must be environmentally modified for those with behavioral dx.

Beeline is overcrowded in the morning by Hoover High School 7:44am to 8:05am.

Women’s Self Defense classes are important and provided by the City is in dire need.

In all neighborhoods, park improvements such as public safety cameras are needed. This could increase the safety of being in walkable areas, making people feel more comfortable.

Youth/Childcare Centers and South Glendale Parks can be higher on the priority list for community facility improvements. Everyone wants a place to go and feel safe at.

IV. . Community Development/ Economic Development
Infrastructure development sidewalk improvement and bus shelters.

Aging population and sight and hearing disabilities crosswalk buttons that talk, rigid grids on sidewalks like the sidewalks in Japan.

Bus Shelters not just for Metro but for Beeline too.

Personally witnessed young man using a white cane fall into a open tree box, ran into outside patio dining on sidewalk.

Need better paying jobs so we can afford rent. The American Dream is not available to us in Glendale.

Brand Blvd Project; Fremont Park are not finished; Brand project took away lanes; it has created more traffic congestion. Took away parking;
Parking throughout the City is limited.

Excessive Speeding and Safety is a major concern for us.

Gas and GWP bills are higher than ever. When will this stop? Residents cant continue to pay pay pay.

Draft
217 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
113
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Need more police presence. Crime Prevention is important these days; need surveillance and more cops.

Hard to find jobs to provide for our families. Good paying jobs are non-existent.

Need more bus stations
Better sidewalks, benches and walking paths are needed.

V. Homelessness
It seems that we are getting an influx of homeless individuals Sidewalks are inaccessible because homeless have their belongings there.

There are piles of trash in alleyways.

We pay through the nose for rent however we have to share the space with homeless in downtown Glendale who trash the area with their debris and carts. City needs to put a stop to this.

What is the Library doing about or should be concerned about the number of homeless individuals in the libraries and around the area. This creates many issues such as bedbugs, mental health challenges, and aggressive behavior. Needs to have limits to this problem which is affecting the rest of the Glendale residents.

Email Comments
Other way to REALLY IMPROVE Glendale way of life and FOR BUSINESSES is to KEEP minimum 2 lanes EACH DIRECTION and REMOVE BICYCLE LANES in main streets.

Among others, Brand Blvd between (Glenoaks and Mountain) is an accident waiting to happen, if not yet seeing evidence of this.

Seems that the simplest way to improve low/moderate income residents of Glendale is to help them find good-paying jobs.

Why not make Glendale attractive for Businesses who can then generate/offer jobs to those who wish to work.

One way to do this is to offer some sort of income supplement to WORKING PEOPLE.

When I moved to Glendale in the 70’s, people chose Glendale before Burbank/Pasadena.

Draft
218 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
114
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

Today, Burbank/Pasadena has more Businesses with good-paying jobs and property values (hence property taxes) are higher
than Glendale properties (which of course are not cheap by any measure).

However, it seems that Glendale is the first choice for those who want social services – which is fine if we choose to be ‘the go-to place for this.

Glendale would be entirely different city if/when we CHOOSE/DECIDE to promote Businesses instead of Social Services.

Telephone Comments
Need to help seniors who are experiencing homelessness
Beeline needs to be more accessible with routes
Preference to do virtual meetings
Need affordable ADA units and accessible bathrooms in Glendale apartment units.

Verdugo Park public restrooms are filthy and need to upkeep. Restrooms are in horrible condition and dust and cobwebs are present. Need more service of this area. *Comments are written as presented verbally, as part of a comment card, or email by residents and may contain grammatical errors.

Draft
219 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
115
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
October 24, 2024 Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes/Comments Draft
220 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
116
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

Draft
221 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
117
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

Draft
222 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
118
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

Draft
223 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
119
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

Draft
224 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
120
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

Public Comment Period from April 1, 2025 through April 30, 2025 and Public Meeting Comments from April 30, 2025:

Add June 24 CC/HA Meeting Minutes:

Draft
225 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
121
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Expected Resources
AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220(c)(1,2)
Introduction
This section identifies the federal, state, local, and private resources expected to be available to the City of Glendale to address priority needs and specific objectives identified in the Strategic Plan. This section of the plan will also describe how federal funds will leverage additional resources, including a narrative description of how matching requirements of the HUD programs will be satisfied.

Anticipated Resources
Program Source
of
Funds
Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount
Available
Remainder of
ConPlan
$
Narrative Description
Annual
Allocation: $
Program
Income:
$
Prior Year
Resources:
$
Total:
$
CDBG public -
federal
Acquisition
Admin and
Planning
Economic
Development
Housing
Public
Improvements
Public Services
$1,738,811 0.00 0.00 $1,738,811 $6,955,244
Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Annual
allocation is estimated at
$1,738,811. For the
remainder of the ConPlan
period, $6,955,244 may be
available.

Draft
226 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
122
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Program Source
of
Funds
Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount
Available
Remainder of
ConPlan
$
Narrative Description
Annual
Allocation: $
Program
Income:
$
Prior Year
Resources:
$
Total:
$
HOME public -
federal
Acquisition
Homebuyer
assistance
Homeowner
rehab
Multifamily
rental new
construction
Multifamily
rental rehab
New
construction for
ownership
TBRA $1,245,430.65 0 0 $1,245,430.65 $4,981,722.60
Home Investment Partnership
(HOME)
Annual allocation is estimated
at $1,245,430.65.

For the remainder of the CP
period, $4,981,722.60
may be available
Draft
227 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
123
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Program Source
of
Funds
Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount
Available
Remainder of
ConPlan
$
Narrative Description
Annual
Allocation: $
Program
Income:
$
Prior Year
Resources:
$
Total:
$
ESG public -
federal
Conversion and
rehab for
transitional
housing
Financial
Assistance
Overnight
shelter
Rapid re-
housing (rental
assistance)
Rental
Assistance
Services
Transitional
housing
$152,328 0.00 0.00 $152,328 $609,312
Emergency Solutions Grant
(ESG) Annual allocation is
estimated at $152,328.

For the remainder of the
ConPlan period, $609,312
may be available.

Draft
228 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
124
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Program Source
of
Funds
Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount
Available
Remainder of
ConPlan
$
Narrative Description
Annual
Allocation: $
Program
Income:
$
Prior Year
Resources:
$
Total:
$
Other public -
federal
Admin and
Planning
Rapid re-
housing (rental
assistance)
Other
409,957.00 0.00 0.00 409,957.00 0.00
The City of Glendale will
receive a special allocation of
ESG RUSH funding to address
the needs of individuals who
are homeless or at risk of
homelessness in areas
affected by a major disaster,
and whose needs may not be
met by other federal disaster
programs. The needs of this
population may include all
ESG eligible activities
including emergency shelter,
homelessness prevention,
rapid rehousing, and street
outreach. Additional
information will be collected
from potential participants to
avoid duplication in benefits
per Stafford Act
Table 56 - Expected Resources – Priority Table

Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied
Draft
229 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
125
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
The City will attempt to leverage CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds with other private and local funding when appropriate to meet the objective of the Annual Action Plan. The City does add local General Funds (including unexpended CDBG and HOME funds from prior years if available) to further support the organizations receiving CDBG and HOME funding.

The City uses a variety of funding sources to leverage its HOME allocation. Some sources include State of California Permanent Local Housing Allocation funds, State of California Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Funds, and local Measure S Funds. The City has a project in construction - 515 Pioneer Drive. The project utilized HOME dollars and received the following funding: California Housing Finance Agency Mixed-Income Program Funding and 4% bonds from the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee. 426 Piedmont, another affordable housing project in construction used leverage funding for the acquisition, including Measure S Funds, State Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds, and State of California Permanent Local Housing Allocation fund.

HOME (25%) matching funds requirements for HOME projects will be met through qualifying non-federal contributions to projects as described above, as well as use of balances in the Glendale HOME Match Bank from previous projects, if necessary.

CDBG has no matching fund requirement; however, the City extensively leverages its CDBG funds with the City’s General Revenue and Capital Improvement Project funds (CIP) for construction projects. City General Revenue and County of LA Department of Aging and Disabilities grant funds will also provide leverage for City operated social service programs which support CDBG program activities and goals. The amount of General Fund and LA County Grant support for senior services is approximately $750,000 per year. Previously, Supportive Services Program and Elderly Nutrition Program was partially funded with CDBG and the Elderly Nutrition Program is currently receiving CDBG-CV funding to help feed seniors as a response to the pandemic. In addition, the social service agencies supported by CDBG funds utilize a variety of private and non- federal funds to leverage CDBG funds.
“Workforce Investment Opportunity Act (WIOA) funds in the amount of $3,273,455 per year are received by the Verdugo Workforce Development Board and utilized to support workforce programs for individuals with the greatest barriers such as low income, homeless, English language learners, including participants of the CDBG funded Youth Employment Program.” The ESG program has a 100 percent matching requirement, which amounts $152,328 for FY 2025-26. Agencies such as Ascencia, the YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena, Catholic Charities and Home Again LA must meet ESG matching fund requirements with CDBG and/or their own private funding. Matching funds will be monitored by staff to ensure compliance with the 100 percent match requirements under the ESG Program. The Draft
230 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
126
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
City matches its ESG Administration funding with City General Revenue funds.

The Continuum of Care Program has 25% cash match or in-kind matching funding for all CoC funded programs per project. The City monitors individual CoC funded services provided by Ascencia, the Salvation Army, the Glendale Housing Authority/City of Glendale, and Home Again LA to ensure compliance. All grant activity and match documentation are submitted monthly with invoices. Staff conducts annual program and financial monitoring which also include the review of match documentation for each sub-recipient contract with the CoC.

Draft
231 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
127
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan The City actively searches for available land to purchase.

Discussion
N/A
Draft
232 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
128
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Annual Goals and Objectives

AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives
Goals Summary Information
Sort
Order
Goal Name Start
Year
End
Year
Category Geographic
Area
Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator
1 Homeless Services 2025 2026 Homeless SOUTHERN

GLENDALE
Homeless

CDBG:
$100,000

ESG:
$152,328
Public Facility or
Infrastructure Activities
other than
Low/Moderate Income
Housing Benefit:
0 Persons Assisted

Public service activities
other than
Low/Moderate Income
Housing Benefit:
100 Persons Assisted

Homeless Person
Overnight Shelter:
388 Persons Assisted

Homelessness
Prevention:
129 Persons Assisted
Draft
233 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
129
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Sort
Order
Goal Name Start
Year
End
Year
Category Geographic
Area
Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator
2 Public Facility
Improvements
2025 2026 Non-Housing
Community
Development
Program
Administration

SOUTHERN

GLENDALE
Public Facilities CDBG:
$1,080,227
Public Facility or
Infrastructure Activities
for Low/Moderate
Income Housing Benefit:
3,000 Households
Assisted
3 Enhance Public
Services
2025 2026 Non-Housing
Community
Development
Program
Administration

SOUTHERN

GLENDALE
Public Social Services CDBG:
$160,821
Public service activities
other than
Low/Moderate Income
Housing Benefit:
550 Persons Assisted
4 Affordable Housing 2025 2026 Affordable
Housing

SOUTHERN

GLENDALE
Housing HOME:
$1,245,430.65
Rental units constructed:
22 HOME designated
units within 2 projects
that have a total unit
count of 404 units.
5 Public/Neighborhood
Improvements
2025 2026 Non-Housing
Community
Development

SOUTHERN

GLENDALE
Public/Neighborhood
Improvements
CDBG: $50,000 Public Facility or
Infrastructure Activities
other than
Low/Moderate Income
Housing Benefit:
250 Persons Assisted
Table 57 – Goals Summary

Goal Descriptions
Draft
234 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
130
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

1 Goal Name Homeless Services
Goal
Description
Provision of homeless services including: outreach, emergency shelter, case management, transitional housing, rapid re- housing, and permanent supportive housing services.
2 Goal Name Public Facility Improvements
Goal
Description
Development and rehabilitation of public facilities that service low- and moderate-income persons. Public Facility priority needs according to the annual needs assessment include:
• Indoor Community Centers
• Park & Recreation Facilities
• Health Care Facilities
• Youth Centers
• Libraries
• Multi-purpose Community Centers
• Child Care Centers
• Homeless facilities
Draft
235 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
131
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
3 Goal Name Enhance Public Services
Goal
Description
Enhance public services as determined by the community needs assessment. This includes top priorities:
• Anti-Crime Programs (such as drug prevention and gang prevention programs) • Youth Services/ Activities
• Homeless Services
• Employment and Training Services
Public Social Service projects with a medium priority include:
• Health Services
• Mental Health Services
• Child Care Services
• Senior Services
• Fair Housing/Tenant-Landlord Services
• Services for the developmentally and physically disabled 4 Goal Name Affordable Housing
Goal
Description
Overall Housing programs priority needs were determined through the community needs assessment process including the following needs:

Construct new or acquire and complete substantial rehabilitation to increase affordable housing units available to low, very low, and extremely low-income households.

Construct new affordable housing units available to large, low-income first-time homebuyer households.

Construct new affordable housing for special needs groups, such as seniors and the disabled.

Draft
236 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
132
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
5 Goal Name Public/Neighborhood Improvements
Goal
Description
Based on the community survey responses and comments from the public hearings, the following Public/Neighborhood Improvement needs were identified:
• Sidewalk Improvements
• Street/Alley Improvements
• Street Lighting
• Traffic Calming
In addition, neighborhood improvements in eligible target areas included code enforcement activities as commented during the public hearings by community residents

Draft
237 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
133
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Projects
AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d)
Introduction
The FY 2025-2026 Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) programs represents the FIRST YEAR of the City of Glendale’s Five-Year Consolidated Plan. Each project that is approved for funding relates to the needs and priorities addressed in the 2025-2030 Five Year Consolidated Pan. The Consolidated Plan is reviewed annually and may be modified depending on changes in the community and any new input from residents.

Projects
# Project Name
1 CDBG 2025 Administration
2 AESA-STEM Academy 25/26
3 HOME ARARAT-Athlete Program 25/26
4 ABA-Legal Services 25/26
5 Comm Outreach Project- ARS 25/26
6 Loaves & Fishes-CC 25/26
7 Clinical Counseling-CASPS 25/26
8 DV Services-DOH 25/26
9 Youth Employ Program-GYA 25/26
10 Crisis Aid- HALA 25/26
11 Fair Housing Program-HRC 25/26
12 Peoples Choice-Salvation Army 25/26
13 MH Services for DV-YWCA 25/26
14 YWCA Lexington CIP 25/26
15 Elk Mini Park Project 25/26
16 Pelanconi Park Project 25/26
17 ESG25 Glendale
18 HOME Administration 2025
19 Rental Housing-Rental Acquisition/Rehab and/or New Construction 20 2025-2026 HOME Administration Program Income PA
Table 58 - Project Information

Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs

Draft
238 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
134
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
AP-38 Project Summary
Project Summary Information
Draft
239 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
135
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
1 Project Name CDBG 2025 Administration
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Homeless Services
Public Facility Improvements
Enhance Public Services
Affordable Housing
Public/Neighborhood Improvements
Needs Addressed Homeless
Public Facilities
Public Social Services
Public/Neighborhood Improvements
Housing
Funding $347,762
Description Administration of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
Admin
Location Description City Offices
201 East Colorado Street Glendale, CA 91205
Planned Activities Administration of CDBG Program
2 Project Name AESA-STEM Academy 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $10,529
Draft
240 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
136
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description Armenian Engineers & Scientists of America (AESA) requested funds to provide students ages 8 to 18 from low to moderate income households who do not have access to the course material, equipment, facility and/or hardware available within their educational community nor in their households to fill in the educational gap and partially unburden their local schools to invest in STEM program. The program is held at Academy USA: 1219 Los Angeles St., Glendale, CA 91204 in partnership with Academy USA.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
30 Students
Location Description 1219 Los Angeles St., Glendale, CA 91204 Planned Activities
3 Project Name HOME ARARAT-Athlete Program 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $10,529
Draft
241 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
137
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description Homenetmen Glendale Ararat is requesting funding to start a new program for athletes ages 8-18 to combat athlete anxiety and unhealthy atmosphere around team sports. Agency is proposing a series of workshops by a psychotherapist to promote Mental Wellness in Athletes by fostering emotional resilience, teamwork, sportsmanship and a healthy competitive mindset through sports. A timeline of 45 sessions over a 16-month time period is proposed to coordinate services with bimonthly workshops to be attended by coaches, athletes and parents led by a certified Family and Child Psychotherapist. The overall goals of the program include: 1) Teach athletes and parents how sports can build life skills; 2) Develop strategies for handling wins and losses, 3) Instill the importance of being a team player, 4) Build Resilience by emphasizing self reflection, mindfulness and healthy coping mechanism; 5) Strengthen the parent-athlete relationship by fostering share understanding and support. Homenetmen is proposing a new program with services offered and conducted at two campuses Main Center (3347 N. San Fernando Road, Los Angeles, CA 90065) and North Campus (3618 San Fernando Road Glendale, CA 91204).

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
30 unduplicated Glendale residents.

Location Description 3347 N. San Fernando Road, Los Angeles, CA 90065 Planned Activities
4 Project Name ABA-Legal Services 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $20,529
Draft
242 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
138
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description Armenian Bar Association (ABA) is requesting funding to provide pro bono legal clinic services to low- and moderate-income individuals living in Glendale. One-to-one counseling services are provided at the Adult Recreation Center at 201 E Colorado, Glendale, CA 91205 with a goal of bridging the language and finance gap that limits the client’s ability to access justice. ABA has 2 goals: (1) to provide legal assistance to indigent clients, whose access to justice is limited; and (2) to provide legal educational programs in multiple languages to serve low- and moderate- income communities so that they can learn about their rights and opportunities under the law. ABA Services include: housing rights, employment matters, domestic violence, expungement services, criminal law matters, estate planning, and additional services. ABA does not have formal offices and uses a P.O. Box 29111, Los Angeles, CA 90029 for correspondence.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
25 unduplicated Glendale residents.

Location Description Adult Recreation Center community center 201 East Colorado Street, Glendale CA 91205.

Planned Activities
5 Project Name Comm Outreach Project- ARS 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $64,529
Draft
243 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
139
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description Armenian Relief Society (ARS) requested funding to continue to provide the Community Outreach Program to low-moderate income individuals, adults, disabled adults, and seniors. Service delivery activities include:

Activities include ESL/Life Skills Classes for senior citizens (110) to improve English language proficiency and receive safety net services with classes held twice per week for two hours a session per level (2 levels) inclusive of pre- and post-test assessments; employment services by way of job search assistance, building soft skills, interview/resume preparation, referrals, and placement for low-income adults (80); and services to disabled adults (120) through intensive case management, access/linkages to public benefits, assistance w/ housing/transportation, completion of forms, and more. Target population includes Glendale residents with Limited English Proficient communities, disabled adults, older adults, immigrants/refugees, unemployed/underemployed individuals facing various challenges. Community Outreach Program is an existing program with services offered and conducted throughout the year. ARS services and classes are held at 517 West Glenoaks Blvd, Glendale, CA 91202.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
200 individuals
Location Description 517 West Glenoaks Blvd, Glendale, CA 91202 Planned Activities
6 Project Name Loaves & Fishes-CC 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Homeless Services
Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Homeless
Public Social Services
Funding $32,529
Draft
244 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
140
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description Catholic Charities of Los Angeles, Inc requested funding for an existing homeless prevention program. The program provides case management, referrals, advocacy, and social supportive services to primarily low income, non or limited English-speaking immigrant individuals and families who are at imminent risk of becoming displaced. These families are in poverty, and many receive public assistance. The program proposes to provide homeless prevention services to address food insecurity, case management, and supportive services. Based on client’s needs, services will include: clothing, food, utility assistance, and advocacy. Additionally, case managers provide referrals for access to other supportive services such as: immigration; legal assistance; health/mental care; substance abuse services; social welfare programs; and childcare. The Program is offered at the Glendale Community Center located at 4322 San Fernando Road, Glendale, CA 91204.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
40 households
Location Description 4322 San Fernando Road., Glendale CA 91204 Planned Activities
7 Project Name Clinical Counseling-CASPS 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $34,529
Draft
245 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
141
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description CASPS is an existing program which requested funding to administer the Intervention/Prevention Clinical Group Counseling Program for K-6 elementary students at 4 Glendale GUSD schools (Columbus, Mann, Muir, and Cerritos). CASPS will continue to operate the program for 100 “at- risk” unduplicated students who face academic, behavioral, and /or social skill issues at four GUDSD schools. The program aims to serve 25 students at each school. The overall goal of the program is to provide 3 ten-week sessions of counseling which include Play Therapy and Expressive Therapy to help with self-awareness, improve self-esteem and motivation. The program is conducted by an experienced licensed Clinical Psychologist, and professional in the field of counseling. CASPS administrative offices are located at 6252 Honolulu Ave, La Crescenta, 91214. Target population is chosen by a team of GUSD principals, administrators and teachers who make a recommendation for services to GUSD students and their families.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
44 students
Location Description Admin Office: 6252 Honolulu Ave, La Crescenta, CA 91214 Planned Activities
8 Project Name DV Services-DOH 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $10,529
Draft
246 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
142
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description Door of Hope (DOH) a Glendale women’s shelter is requesting funding to continue to provide services for Domestic Violence Mental Health and Case Management Program assisting 22 adult survivors and 10 children annually. The trauma informed care program will provide transitional housing, case management, and mental health support, the project addresses financial, housing, and emotional needs weekly. Predominantly serving Glendale residents, the shelter deals with diverse challenges, with the majority being Latino and all low income. Door of Hope's trauma informed services aim to break cycles of abuse, violence, and homelessness. Support ensures the continuation of vital services, making a lasting impact on survivors' lives to all residents, and to shelter these families at the undisclosed location. Program Service Activities include: 1) trauma informed therapy, 2) case management, 3) transitional housing/shelter and 4) reduce symptoms of mental illness. The site of the services is called Hamilton Court and is at an undisclosed location due to the nature of the services.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
32 total (22 adults/10 children/teens)
Location Description Undisclosed location
Planned Activities
9 Project Name Youth Employ Program-GYA 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $10,529
Draft
247 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
143
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description Glendale Youth Alliance (GYA) requested funding to continue to operate the Youth Employment Program. The Program currently operates a spectrum of six mentored employment programs ranging for the youngest youth who have never held a job to older youth ready to enter mainstream employment. Furthermore, all youth receive intense case management, training, and supportive services to meet their human needs. GYA proposes to provide employment training and mentored work experience to 50 at risk youth ages 14-24 annually. These programs are operated continuously during the summer month and during the school year. GYA provides the youth with pre-employment training skills, employment skills, communication skills, work experience, supportive services, and case management. GYA operates out of the Verdugo Jobs Center, located at 1255 South Central Ave, in Glendale.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
16 youth.

Location Description 1255 S. Central Ave Glendale
Planned Activities
10 Project Name Crisis Aid- HALA 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Homeless Services
Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Homeless
Public Social Services
Funding $15,529
Draft
248 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
144
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description Home Again Los Angeles requested funding for the existing Crisis Aid for Homeless Families program focusing on providing support to Glendale Families with children in need. The objective is to decrease the amount of time an unhoused family is searching for resources, expedite the process by placing into Emergency Shelter, a local motel, or a partnering agency shelter. Activities/Core Services include: 1) Immediately placing homeless families into shelter or transitional housing; 2) Providing housing search and placement support for permanent housing, working with landlords and advocates to place families and 3) Providing supportive services to include job development, financial planning. Home Again Los Angeles program is 134 North Kenwood, 4th floor, Glendale, CA 91206.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
30 households
Location Description 134 North Kenwood, 4th floor, Glendale, CA 91206.

Planned Activities
11 Project Name Fair Housing Program-HRC 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $10,000
Draft
249 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
145
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description The Housing Rights Center (HRC) requested funding to continue providing Fair Housing Program to landlords/tenants servicing 280 Glendale residents and investigating 10 fair housing complaints (housing discrimination). HRC provides services in four main areas: 1) Discrimination Complaint Investigation, 2) Landlord/Tenant Counseling, 3) Education and Outreach, and 4) Fair Housing Legal Services. HRC will conduct 2 fair housing workshops for Glendale tenants and property owners/managers per year. HRC collaborates with local agencies to provide multi-lingual outreach, education programs, and workshops in Armenian, Cantonese, Korean, Mandarin, Russian, and Spanish. Services are targeted primarily to low- and moderate-income individuals of all racial and ethnic backgrounds. HRC is located at 3255 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1150 in Los Angeles. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires jurisdictions that receive CDBG funding to affirmatively further fair housing, and HRC has been working in partnership with the City to help fulfill this requirement through CDBG and Community Development Department’s Housing Division.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
280
Location Description 3255 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1150 in Los Angeles Planned Activities
12 Project Name People’s Choice-Salvation Army 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $20,529
Draft
250 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
146
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description The Salvation Army requested funding for the People’s Choice Market (food pantry), an existing program, which provides groceries to vulnerable, low-income households. The program operates Monday through Thursday from 12:00 noon to 3:00 pm and targets low-income individuals and families – including families with children and seniors – experiencing hunger, poverty, and/or homelessness. The objective is to respond to food insecurity in the most vulnerable households by providing free groceries to low-income individuals and families in Glendale. Project activity is focused on food distribution. Once a month, families may visit the food pantry and receive groceries from local markets. Requested funds will allow the Agency to purchase nonperishable palletized food from wholesalers as well as cover partial personnel expenses associated with the project. Program is located at 801 Central Ave, Glendale, CA 91204.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
250 households
Location Description 801 Central Ave, Glendale, CA 91204 Planned Activities
13 Project Name MH Services for DV-YWCA 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Social Services
Funding $20,529
Description YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena (YWCA) requested funding to provide an existing DV Clinical Program offering no cost, trauma informed individual and group therapy to victims of domestic violence and their children who have experienced trauma. The service locations are 735 East Lexington Drive, Glendale, CA 91202 and at the undisclosed Sunrise Village Shelter.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Draft
251 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
147
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
25 women/children
Location Description 735 East Lexington Drive, Glendale CA 91202 Planned Activities
14 Project Name Elk Mini Park Project 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Public Facility Improvements
Needs Addressed Public Facilities
Funding $630,228
Description YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena requested funding for the Lexington Office Historic Building Preservation and Rehab project to the 735 East Lexington Drive, Glendale CA 91206 facility which houses the Domestic Violence Services Center and historic campus. The facility is 13,971 sq ft. and built in phases: Main office-1939, Headstart/gym-1948, pool-1955.

CDBG funding request supports Phase I of the project and includes the following Scope of Work: 1) Electrical Panel Updates/Relocation-Relocate 5 existing electrical panels from the basement to the outside wall at the point of entry. Provide new breakers. Combine basement panels. 2) HVAC for Main Office-Replace and upgrade 5 HVAC units and 3 furnaces with energy-efficient systems to meet Glendale building & Safety requirements. Install a combination of heat pumps for office spaces and ducted split units. Use equipment from DIKIN and GOODMAN that meet Glendale code requirements and ensure 24/7 automation and energy compliance. 3) Flat Roof Replacement, and Tile Roof
Repair/Replacement- Remove the flat roof down to the sheeting, inspect for damage, and repair as needed. Install a double torch-down roofing system with new flashings and a GAF cool roof layer. a. Remove/Save usable roof tiles while replacing damaged tiles. Strip the underlayment to inspect and repair sheeting, then install torch-down underlayment before re-installing tiles. Replace all gutters and downspouts with new aluminum seamless gutters and sectional square downspouts.

Target Date 6/30/2030
Draft
252 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
148
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
Number Served: 2,600 unduplicated individuals
Location Description 735 East Lexington Drive, Glendale CA 91206 Planned Activities
15 Project Name Elk Mini Park Project 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Public Facility Improvements
Needs Addressed Public Facilities
Funding $400,000
Description Elk Mini-Park, the third mini-park built in the city, was completed in 2003.

The 13,500-square-foot facility, on the corner of Elk and Everett streets, has a small children’s playground with Engineered Wood Fiber (EWF) surfacing, picnic tables, an open-shaded lawn area, and a craftsman-style trellis over a mosaic tile entry. There have not been any improvements to the playground since opening the park in 2003. Staff is proposing to design and install a playground replacement with poured-in-place (PIP) rubber outdoor surfacing and integrated shade. It is estimated that $400,000 would cover the cost for the design and development of a new playground.

Target Date 6/30/2030
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
1,500
Location Description 800 E Elk Ave, Glendale, CA 91205
Planned Activities
16 Project Name Pelanconi Park Project 25/26
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Public Facility Improvements
Needs Addressed Public Facilities
Draft
253 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
149
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Funding $100,000
Description Established in 1947, Pelanconi Park is one of the oldest parks in Glendale and retains much of its original character. Located on a triangular property south of Glenoaks, the park is divided into three sections. In the center section are a combination of tree-covered picnic areas, children’s playgrounds (replaced in 2022 with funding from CDBG), a restroom building, and exercise equipment (installed in 2018). The south section, at an acute angle of the triangle parcel, is an open grass field. And the northern section has a baseball stadium, with bleachers and lights for night games, and an informal basketball half-court/driveway. The baseball backstop and dugout fencing were installed in 1974, and most of this infrastructure remains. The Pelanconi Park Renovation Project will address park infrastructure deficiencies, including replacing the backstop fencing, replacement of asphalt around the baseball field and the basketball half-court, replacing/repairing the bleachers, and replacing irrigation in the south end of the park (outside the baseball field). The project is estimated to cost $100,000 and be completed by Spring 2026.

Target Date 6/30/2030
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
1,500
Location Description 1000 Grandview Ave, Glendale, CA 91201 Planned Activities
17 Project Name ESG25 Glendale
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Homeless Services
Enhance Public Services
Needs Addressed Homeless
Public Social Services
Funding :

Draft
254 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
150
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description City of Glendale's 2025 Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds will be used to operate an emergency shelter for the homeless (Ascencia), provide emergency homeless prevention assistance to prevent homelessness (Catholic Charities), and provide homeless prevention assistance for recently homeless persons and operational costs for the YWCA's Sunrise Village Shelter (YWCA of Glendale), Home Again Los Angeles (Home Again LA) to provide Rapid Rehousing. Activities will be carried by three sub-recipients, Ascencia, YWCA of Glendale, and Catholic Charities of Los Angeles, Inc. Home Again Los Angeles See list of activities below. Recipients must provide matching funds equal to the amount of funds provided by the ESG grant. The ESG funding allocations adhere to all the required ESG funding caps for program activities. Funding caps for the allocation of ESG funds are listed on a separate document. The FY 2025-2026 ESG funding recommendations are as follows: Ascencia- Emergency Housing Program- $33,703 YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena- DV Housing & Emergency Shelter Program (Rapid Re-housing)- $26,500 Catholic Charities- Loaves & Fishes Homeless Prevention Program- $37,236, Home Again LA Rapid Re-housing Program $51,365, City HMIS- $0 Accounting for use of Grant Administration- $3,524 GRAND TOTAL- $152,328.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
300
Location Description various
Administrative Offices: 613 East Broadway Room 120, Glendale, CA 91206
Draft
255 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
151
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Planned Activities Planned Activities
The planned activities for the 2025 ESG program are listed below.

1. Emergency Housing Program, ESG Grant $33,703
This activity is sponsored by Ascencia for operation of its existing 45-bed year-round Emergency Housing Program for homeless families and individuals at the Ascencia Emergency Shelter and Access Center at 1851 Tyburn Street, Glendale 91204. The program is proposing to serve up to 180 unduplicated clients.

2. Loaves & Fishes Homeless Prevention Program, ESG Grant $37,236 This activity is sponsored by Catholic Charities of Los Angeles, Inc. and involves direct financial assistance to 20 low-income households who have received a notice of eviction or utility shut-off for non-payment, or who need assistance with a portion of rent and/or security deposits to move into their own apartment. The program is located at the Glendale Community Center at 4322 San Fernando Road, Glendale, 91204.

3. Domestic Violence Housing & Emergency Shelter Program, ESG Grant $26,500
This activity is sponsored by the YWCA for City of Glendale for the ongoing operation of their emergency shelter at a confidential site (Sunrise Village) for women and their children who have become homeless as a result of domestic violence. The Sunrise Village Program provides up to 45-90 days of safe emergency shelter, food, clothing, and supportive services for women and their children escaping from family violence. In addition, the YWCA is proposing a new Domestic Violence Housing Services (DVHS) Program, which would focus on finding stable housing with homeless prevention funds as quickly as possible for a minimum The Sub-recipient shall use the ESG Funds to operate the Program, which will serve a minimum of one hundred (100) unduplicated persons within each Program year (that is, 100 unduplicated persons in the first Program year and another 100 unduplicated persons in the second Program year). Participating households may include individuals and/or families (that is, women and/or women with children) who are fleeing, or attempting to flee, domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or other life-threatening conditions related to violence and are defined as homeless. YWCA of Glendale is located at 735 E.

Lexington Drive, Glendale, 91206

Home Again Los Angeles: Rapid Re-housing Program for Unsheltered Families $51,365
This activity is sponsored by Home Again Los Angeles for the operations Draft
256 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
152
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
of a Rapid Re-housing (RRH) Program for unsheltered families. The new RRH program is designed to mobilize unsheltered families with children in Glendale into permanent housing while giving them the comprehensive case management services that lead to self-sufficiency. Services rendered include: CES assessments, housing navigation, security deposit assistance, up to six months of rental assistance, and stabilization services that include financial education and employment securement. The purpose of the project is to transition unsheltered families back into housing and provide them the financial support needed to overcome their barriers.

4. HMIS- $0

5. ESG Administration, ESG Grant- $3,524
TOTAL ESG PROGRAM $152,328
18 Project Name HOME Administration 2025
Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Affordable Housing
Needs Addressed Housing
Funding :

Description Administration of the HOME Partnership Program Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities

Location Description City of Glendale, Community Development Department, 141 N. Glendale Ave., Room 202, Glendale, Ca 91206
Planned Activities
19 Project Name Rental Housing-Rental Acquisition/Rehab and/or New Construction Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Affordable Housing
Needs Addressed Housing
Funding :

Draft
257 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
153
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Description Glendale will provide new construction and/or acquisition/rehabilitation loans to affordable rental housing developers for development of new or rehabilitated rental housing units serving Low or Very Low Income households at or below 60% AMI. Glendale will require that the improved or newly constructed units be rented at affordable rents for a period of time at a minimum equal to the HOME required period of affordability which will be secured by affordable housing covenants on the property. This program funding includes the required 15% 2025-26 CHDO funds ($186,814). As part of the project selection process the Housing Authority continues to outreach to CHDO developers and all CHDOs are encouraged to apply. The Housing Authority anticipates meeting the minimum 15% CHDO requirement in the future, however if a suitable project is not found total funds for this project may be reduced due to the loss of CHDO funds if not committed within 2 years if that requirement still applies at the time.

Target Date 6/30/2028
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities
Future affordable housing projects will provide housing for low and very low income households
Location Description Future affordable housing projects will provide housing for low and very low income households
Planned Activities
20 Project Name 2025-2026 HOME Administration Program Income PA Target Area SOUTHERN GLENDALE
Goals Supported Affordable Housing
Needs Addressed Housing
Funding :

Description HOME Program Income sub granted to the Administration fund.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number
and type of families
that will benefit from
the proposed
activities

Draft
258 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
154
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Location Description
Planned Activities
Draft
259 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
155
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
AP-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220(f)
Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed The City’s target areas are defined by physical, social and economic conditions, which include concentrations of minority and low- and moderate-income households, areas of poverty, above average crime rates, higher concentrations of multi-family housing, and substandard housing conditions. Based on the analysis of these conditions and trends, southern Glendale is determined to be the primary target area for use of federal funds. The southern portion of the City is located south of Broadway, between San Fernando Road and the eastern boundary.

Southern Glendale will receive the largest amount of CDBG funding. An estimated 70% of the entire FY 2025-2026 CDBG and ESG funds will be used to fund social services, housing, community centers, and public improvements that will benefit low- and moderate-income residents living in Southern Glendale.

Geographic Distribution
Target Area Percentage of Funds
SOUTHERN GLENDALE 70
Table 59 - Geographic Distribution

Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically As mentioned above and described in detail in the City's Consolidated Plan, CDBG and ESG funding will be utilized primarily in southern Glendale due to the high concentration of low-income families and minority concentrations. The need for affordable housing is present throughout the City. Use of HOME funds is highly dependent upon topography (flat land suitable for multi-family development), identification of vacant (or underutilized) and properly zoned sites. The Housing Element (Chapter 5.

Resources, Section 5C Residential Sites Inventory, and Appendix A: Housing Sites Inventory) identifies land suitable and available for residential development to meet the City’s regional housing need by income level, and housing capacity for future multi-family residential development. The limited supply of developable vacant land in Glendale has accounted for a steady increase in raw land costs.

Opportunity to purchase these sites for a reasonable cost is major determining factor of affordable housing location.

Discussion
n/a

Draft
260 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
156
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Affordable Housing
AP-55 Affordable Housing – 91.220(g)
Introduction

One Year Goals for the Number of Households to be Supported Homeless 200
Non-Homeless 2,585
Special-Needs 0
Total 2,785
Table 60 - One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Requirement

One Year Goals for the Number of Households Supported Through Rental Assistance 2,647
The Production of New Units 22
Rehab of Existing Units 0
Acquisition of Existing Units 6
Total 2,669
Table 61 - One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Type

Discussion
The Housing Authority anticipates servicing 1,592 Housing Choice Vouchers, 14 mainstream vouchers, 15 VASH vouchers, 200 Emergency Housing Vouchers, 45 Fair Choice Vouchers and 959 Portability Vouchers throughout the 2025-26 Fiscal Year.

The Housing Authority also expects to produce 11 HOME-funded units at 515 Pioneer, a 337-unit affordable housing project expected to be completed in January 2026. The Housing Authority will also produce an additional 11 HOME-ARP funded units at 426 Piedmont, a 67-unit affordable housing project expected to be completed in June 2026.

Although the City of Glendale through the Glendale Continuum of Care Program expects to administer over 180 units of permanent housing funded by the CoC Rental Assistance program (formerly Shelter Plus Care Program), Rapid Re-Housing Program and Permanent Supportive Housing programs for formerly homeless persons to provide rental assistance and ongoing case management in FY 2025-2026, Draft
261 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
157
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
these projects are funded by federal Continuum of Care funds and so are not listed in the chart above.

Draft
262 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
158
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
AP-60 Public Housing – 91.220(h)
Introduction
The City of Glendale does not have Public Housing.

Actions planned during the next year to address the needs to public housing The City of Glendale does not have Public Housing.

Actions to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership
The City of Glendale does not have Public Housing.

If the PHA is designated as troubled, describe the manner in which financial assistance will be provided or other assistance
The City of Glendale PHA is not designated as troubled by HUD and does not have Public Housing.

Discussion
The City of Glendale does not have Public Housing.

Draft
263 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
159
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities – 91.220(i) Introduction
The City of Glendale (City) has several collaborative partners through both the Continuum of Care (CoC)and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) programs that are working to solve the issue of homelessness for those who are sheltered, unsheltered, chronically homeless, and those who are at risk of becoming homeless. From the results of the overall homeless Point-in-Time in 2025, homelessness has increased by 13%. The city has been implementing Housing First and Rapid Re-Housing program models to increase the number of beds for the Glendale CoC. Chronically homeless individuals and families including other sub-populations are assessed and prioritized for housing placement. The City’s Action Plan also includes goals to service the needs of non-homeless special needs population as described below.

Describe the jurisdictions one-year goals and actions for reducing and ending homelessness including:

Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs
Due to wildfires, the 2025 count was postponed and conducted on February 19. The count identified 197 individuals experiencing homelessness in Glendale, a 13% increase from 175 in 2024. This figure includes both sheltered (110) and unsheltered (87) individuals.

Adult-only households represented 61% (120 individuals), a 17% increase from the prior year, while households with children accounted for 39% (77 individuals), a 7% increase. The number of households experiencing domestic violence has increased by 20% from 20 in 2024 to 24 in 2025. Youth under 18 make up the largest percentage of the shelter homeless population (46%) and are primarily members of families fleeing domestic violence. This aging population represents 25% of the sheltered population and 43% of the unsheltered population and is particularly vulnerable, often facing greater health challenges and limited access to resources, highlighting the need for intensive wrap-around support and intervention. Lastly, of the 87 unsheltered individuals surveyed, 20 (23%) reported having at least one disabling condition-nearly doubled the 12 cases reported in 2024.

The unsheltered population, consisting of people living in places not meant for habitation, rose by 9% to 87 individuals, while the sheltered population, those in emergency shelters or transitional housing, increased by 16%, with 110 individuals counted. Chronic homelessness increased by 44% in 2025, with 26 individuals identified compared to 18 in 2024. Of those identified in 2025, 17 were unsheltered nearly triple the number from 2024, when 6 chronically homeless individuals were unsheltered. This data highlights a growing need for targeted interventions to support indi viduals with long-term housing and mental health resources. It’s important to note that of the 110 sheltered individuals counted on the night of the survey, only 9 individuals (8%) were identified as chronically homeless. This represents a 25% decrease from the 12 individuals identified as chronically homeless in the 2024 sheltered count. The decrease in chronic homelessness among the sheltered population is likely due to the availability of Draft
264 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
160
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
emergency housing vouchers and more temporary housing options, which have provided a pathway out of homelessness for some individuals
Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons Use State of California funding - Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HHAP) Program– county Measure H, and Measure A funds and local funding to increase Interim Housing Programs and improve collaboration with Mainstream and Health Care Service Providers to quickly re-house the homeless population in Glendale. In addition, used State funds to prepare a local Homelessness Action Plan to better identify the needs of the unhoused population. The City received HHAP Round 3,4 and 5 funds totaling $942,784.75. HHAP Round 3 and 4 funds are being utilized to increase the number of Rapid Rehousing beds in the Community along with landlord incentives, outreach and coordination, systems support, and delivery of permanent housing and innovation housing solutions. Since the approval of the Glendale Homeless Action Plan, the city has tripled its number of interim housing and rapid rehousing beds for the unhoused community and those who are at-risk.

In order to finish the job, the public and private partners should continue to implement the best practices identified below.
• Permanent supportive housing and a Housing First approach through the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program, which combines Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) rental assistance for homeless Veterans with case management and clinical services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). VA provides these services for participating Veterans at VA medical centers (VAMCs) and community-based outreach clinics; • Rapid Re-Housing and a Housing First approach through the Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) Program, which provides supportive services to very low-income Veteran families that are currently in or transitioning to permanent housing. SSVF is designed to rapidly re-house homeless Veteran families and prevent homelessness for those at imminent risk due to a housing crisis; and
• City will prioritize veterans for the Shelter Plus Care (SPC) Rental Assistance Voucher program Draft
265 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
161
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
and coordinate affordable housing placements with Veterans Village.

Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families and those who are: being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); or, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs.

People “at-risk” of becoming homeless include very low-income individuals and families who, because of a number of barriers, are in immediate threat of becoming homeless. Among the risk factors to becoming homeless are poverty and high housing costs. In terms of subpopulations, seniors, those who are released from correctional institutions, and emancipated youth from the foster care system are especially vulnerable to becoming homeless.

The number of households “at-risk” for homelessness is directly related to poverty rates. According to the Economic Roundtable’s report Homelessness in Los Angeles, approximately one quarter of Los Angeles County residents with incomes below 50 percent of the poverty threshold become homeless at some point during the year. According to 2022 ACS Census data, for the City of Glendale as a whole, the total percentage of persons below poverty level was 13.4 percent, a decrease from the 13.9 poverty level from the 2020 Census. However, the poverty rates for southern Glendale residents are significantly higher with certain census tracts with 30 percent poverty rates. Although public assistance benefits do provide some help for those in poverty, General Relief benefits are usually inadequate for a person to maintain housing. According to a separate report by the Economic Roundtable, over half of the individuals who receive General Relief experience homelessness.

Another indicator of those “at-risk” of becoming homeless is the percentage of income paid for housing or rent. Because the housing costs in Glendale are higher than many other Los Angeles communities, housing cost burden is a significant issue for Glendale low-income households. A significant fraction of low-income households are considered overburdened by housing costs as documented in the Consolidated Plan. The problem is most acute for renters. Many of these persons are rent burdened and are at-risk of becoming homeless if a financial emergency or job loss occurs. Glendale service providers reported that another obstacle facing the homeless “at-risk” population is underemployment or unemployment because of shifts in the local economy and a lack of viable job skills. Without the appropriate skill development, low-income households are restricted to low paying jobs without opportunity for advancement. Furthermore, some individuals and families are unaware of, or ineligible for, the job training and employment assistance resources available in the community. Other prevalent issues among the homeless “at-risk” population include lack of transportation and affordable childcare.

These present difficulties in obtaining and sustaining employment.

Specific strategies will include:
• Homeless Prevention: Provide case management to 55 households, and serve 50 households with direct utility and rental assistance.
• Rapid Re-Housing: Provide case management and direct financial assistance to 6 households.

Draft
266 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
162
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
• Reallocation: The City of Glendale has reallocated a supportive service only program to Coordinated Entry System (CES) for servicing 500 persons.
• Job Training Programs: Improve utilization of the Verdugo Jobs Center, a workforce development funded one-stop employment center for skill development, job training, and employment counseling for 20 persons.

Discussion
Rental assistance is a short-term way to assist low-income renters burdened with housing overpayment.

Glendale has a large elderly population, on fixed income, faced with spending most of their incomes on housing costs. Rental assistance will continue to be a key strategy for assisting this group in the next year for very low-income renters burdened with housing overpayment.

Section 8 Emergency Housing Vouchers available through ARPA to address impact of the pandemic on the economy, public health, individuals, businesses. HUD is providing 70,000 housing choice vouchers to local PHAs to assist individuals/families.

On May 2021, Glendale Housing Authority was awarded 225 new EHVs for Section 8 Program under the ARPA and $4,268,736 in funding for the program. To date, 194 of the 225 EHVs have been qualified and have been place in units. Staff continues to work with our CoC in identifying more homeless or at-risk of homelessness clients for processing and qualifying.

About additional special needs, in 2018, Glendale Housing Authority applied for and was awarded 14 Mainstream vouchers. Mainstream vouchers assist non-elderly persons with developmental disabilities.

Aside from serving a special population, Mainstream vouchers are administered using the same rules as other Housing Choice Vouchers. The Glendale Housing Authority continues to successfully leased all 14 vouchers and continue to administer them.

426 Piedmont Avenue, an acquisition and substantial rehabilitation project, the City intends to reserve 25-30 units for seniors experiencing homelessness, & seniors who are at risk of homelessness, per the City’s approved HOME-ARP Allocation Plan.

Housing Development and Preservation: The City has developed 7 projects with nonprofit development partners to provide affordable housing for physically/developmentally disabled households. In those projects, the Housing Authority provided approximately $9 million in affordable housing financing towards their development.

These projects ranged between physical and/or developmentally disabled facilities in either a group home or independent living facilities format and total 78 units that serve approximately 97 households. Of the four (4) new construction independent living facilities, three (3) were developed in conjunction with HUD under their 811 program. The HUD 811 program serves very low income, developmentally disabled adults. This program allows persons with disabilities to live as independently Draft
267 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
163
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
as possible in the community by increasing the supply of rental housing with supportive services provided by the developer and monthly rental housing assistance provided by HUD directly through project-based Section 8 housing vouchers.

The remaining 3 projects were developed as single-family group homes. These 3 projects involved the acquisition and rehabilitation of single-family homes in R-1 zoned neighborhoods and were all sponsored by The Campbell Center. These homes provide housing for up to 23 individuals with disabilities.

All of these projects currently have waiting lists or referral systems for consideration for housing placement. While the waiting lists on many of them remain open for people to apply and are much smaller in number than other housing project waiting lists, the wait time for vacancies remains challenging for those in need.

City continues to work the DVA and New Directions, to help house & offer supportive services to VASH voucher holders. Collaborations and referrals continue with Armenian Relief Society and City of Glendale Community Services & Parks. The CoC will provide housing to homeless disabled persons. Supportive services for CoC program residents are provided by local service providers with expertise in the residents’ disabilities.

Draft
268 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
164
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.220(j)
Introduction:

The City works to remove barriers to affordable housing and the financial impact of efforts to protect public health and safety by taking actions to reduce costs or provide off-setting financial incentives to assist in the production of safe, high quality, affordable housing.

Actions planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment include:
• Continue to streamline the environmental review process for housing developments, using available state categorical exemptions and federal categorical exclusions, when applicable. • Continue to improve the permit processing and planning approval processes to minimize the delay in housing development in general and affordable housing development in particular. • Additional actions as noted below.

The Planning Division is finalizing amendments to the mixed use and commercial corridor zoning standards to assess any barriers to residential and mixed-use development. The updates will enable projects to maximize the available residential development potential in those commercial and mixed- use zones, thereby resulting in a future increase in the amount of affordable residential units. As identified in the 2021-2029 Housing Element Program 3E: Mixed Use Standards on Transportation Corridors, the study has been completed and new zoning will be implemented by the Community Development Department by the end of 2025 (delayed from October 2024).

The Planning Division is also finalizing changes to existing zoning standards that will address housing constraints to potential development within multi-family zone designations, as well as working with residential development community to encourage and produce multi-family projects. As part of the updates to existing zoning standards, the City is implementing objective design standards for multi- family developments to streamline review and ensure quality housing options. This is consistent with the 2021-2029 Housing Element Program 9B: Zoning Code Amendments – Housing Constraints, subprogram 9B(D) - Streamlined and Ministerial Review for Eligible Affordable Housing Projects: The Zoning Code will be updated to ensure that eligible multifamily projects with an affordable component are provided streamlined review and are only subject to objective design standards consistent with State law, and subprogram 9B(I) - Objective Standards. The City will prepare and adopt new objective design standards for multifamily and mixed-use projects.

Additionally, the City is working on the first comprehensive update to the Land Use Element of the General Plan since 1986 (with subsequent amendments). When implemented, the new Element will allow for increased density limits in several residentially zoned neighborhoods close to transit, permit Draft
269 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
165
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
housing development on certain City-owned parking lot sites and resolve conflicts between the Land Use Element and zoning ordinance. Adoption is anticipated by the end of 2025 or early 2026. The Land Use Element will create an efficient pattern of land use that is aligned with the updated Mobility Element (formerly the Circulation Element) to facilitate affordable housing development in areas best served by transit. This work will be coordinated with the planned Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) North Hollywood to Pasadena route that passes through Glendale and will be in implemented prior to the opening of the BRT. This is in line with Housing Element Policy 1.4 to encourage higher-density residential development in proximity to public transportation, jobs, services, and activity centers.

The City of Glendale’s Density Bonus Program offers major incentives for developers of market-rate, affordable, and senior housing—including up to a 50% density bonus for eligible market-rate projects, 80% for 100% affordable projects, and unlimited density for certain projects meeting additional criteria.

Glendale continues to approve affordable units under this program, which is administered in compliance with state law. The City is currently updating its Density Bonus ordinance in coordination with other zoning updates, with adoption expected in late 2025 or early 2026. The City also Discussion:

The 2021-2029 City of Glendale Housing Element has several programs to limit or reduce barriers to residential housing generally that often reduce barriers to affordable housing as well. These include the ones described above, as well as the new program introduced for the 2022-2029 Housing Element is Program 7C: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Program.

Program 7C Description: The City of Glendale is committed to doing its part to affirmatively further fair housing. Affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.

The duty to affirmatively further fair housing extends to all of a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing and community development. The City will consider its duty to affirmatively further fair housing within the local and regional context, to ensure that City goals, policies, and programs address both local and regional fair housing concerns.

Program goals (“Action Areas”) include Fair Housing Education and Outreach, Housing Mobility Enhancement, New Housing Choices and Affordability in High Opportunity Areas, Place-Based Strategies for Community Preservation and Revitalization, and Displacement Protection. Table HP-1 in the Housing Element summarizes the fair housing issues, program objectives, and implementing actions for the AFFH Program goals; the City is working towards completing the outlined actions that include tasks such as Draft
270 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
166
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
encouraging development of ADUs and JADUS to expand housing opportunities (Program 1F), supporting public property conversion to housing (Program 1C), continued implementation of the City’s Inclusionary Zoning requirement (Program 3C) and Density Bonus Program (Program 3A), creation of an Adaptive Reuse Ordinance (Program 1E), and conserving existing and future affordable units (Program 2E).

Lastly, the City continues to implement proposed process improvements to help streamline development of affordable housing. In 2023, 4Leaf (consultant) conducted an evaluation of existing conditions within the Planning Division and Permit Services and to provide a report with recommendations to reduce the overall review time, create more predictability and clarity within the development approval and permitting processes, and enhance customer service and improve the entitlement process. The report was reviewed by the City Council late November 2023, and process improvements proposed within the document are being implemented in a phased timeline. In 2024, the City implemented Municipal Code amendments to the design review and entitlement approval processes to create more streamlined simpler, more predictable, and faster processes for many projects. Additionally, improvements were made to the building permit process to reduce review times and redundancies in the process. Specifically, a cooperative plan check between the Fire Department and Building and Safety was introduced to streamline review of most business and mercantile tenant improvements.

The City is also in the process of updating its Density Bonus Ordinance and ADU Ordinance to reflect State legislation and ensure streamlined development of such projects. These are all in keeping with the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element’s Goal 3, Policy 3.12: Continue to monitor local, state and federal regulations, ordinances, departmental processing procedures and fees related to their impact on housing costs.

Draft
271 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
167
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220(k)
Introduction:

The following section describes the City’s planned actions to carry out the following strategies that were outlined in the Consolidated Plan with actions that will occur during the program year. These include actions to:

• Address obstacles to meeting underserved needs
• Foster and maintain affordable housing
• Evaluate and reduce lead-based paint hazards
• Reduce the number of poverty-level families
• Develop and enhance the institutional structure
• Enhance coordination
The priorities for the FY 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan, which form the basis for establishing objectives and outcomes in the FY 2025-202 Action Plan, are as follows:
• Services for the Homeless
• Funding for Public Facilities
• Funding for Public Social Services
• Funding for Public/Neighborhood Improvements
• Funding for Housing
Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs For FY 25-26, Glendale will continue to search for sites to acquire to provide affordable housing for underserved populations. While the City expects a reduction in some funding annual allocations, it will continue to work with development partners, private and nonprofit to assist in competing for leveraged development funds. It may also utilize local funds where needed to assist with the acquisition of property for future affordable housing development.

For FY 25-26, the City will also look to collaborate with local Community Housing Development Organizations to create projects that provide housing for underserved populations.

Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing The City continues to monitor affordable housing covenants and their expiration dates within the City. As expiration dates approach, the City contacts owners on a proactive basis to determine how to Draft
272 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
168
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
preserve affordable housing including leveraging rehabilitation funds from federal and state sources.

The City aggressively implements affordable housing density bonus programs, to provide affordable housing units in private, for profit residential developments. It expects to work with an estimated 6 private developers to either enter into density bonus agreements for a number of affordable housing units within their development, or collect a fee to be used for future affordable housing development.

The City, as identified in the 2021-2029 Housing Element, is implementing nine comprehensive program strategies to address the City’s housing needs, including: Provision of Adequate Sites, Preservation and Enhancement of Existing Housing Stock, Production of Affordable Housing, Rental Assistance, Increase Homeownership Opportunities, Housing Services, Fair Housing, Sustainability, and Removal Constraints. Each of these comprehensive program strategies feature a series of specific programs that implement each program strategy that include program goals, funding source(s), responsible agency and implementation time frame.

Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards
On an annual basis the City tracks lead based paint poisoning cases as identified by the Los Angeles County Health Department (within privacy limits) to determine trends and areas with increased instances of lead based paint hazards. As part of annual compliance monitoring, staff is checking to make sure that proper notification of tenants of lead based paint hazards in age appropriate buildings is taking place and is notifying property managers of mitigation measures necessary to address any potential hazards.

In conjunction with the city’s Section 8 program, the Glendale Housing Authority and property owners participating in the Section 8 program share responsibilities to meet lead-based paint requirements when a poisoned child, or child with an “Elevated Blood Lead Level” (EBLL), is identified. When a child less than age six, living in public housing or an assisted unit, is found to have an EBLL, the Health Department usually notifies the family and the property owner. The owner of the property has the responsibility to notify the Glendale Housing Authority.

Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families The primary emphasis of the anti-poverty strategy is to raise the income of Glendale's poorest households, especially those living below the poverty level. This includes providing those households with the educational, training, supportive service and childcare opportunities that will allow them to address barriers to income and career development. Affordable housing opportunities can also allow poorer families to devote additional resources to raising their incomes and furthering their careers.

While the City has no control over the majority of the factors affecting poverty, it may be able to assist those living below the poverty line. The City supports other governmental, private, and nonprofit agencies involved in providing services to low and moderate income residents and coordinates efforts Draft
273 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
169
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
with these groups where possible to allow for more efficient delivery of services.

The community development and housing programs will emphasize the need to further reduce the number of poverty level families in the next Consolidated Plan cycle. The programs listed below describe the jurisdiction's goals, programs, and policies for reducing the number of poverty level families. The following list of programs will continue to be part of the anti-poverty strategy. • Affordable Childcare and Youth Programs
• Public Social Services
• Employment, Training and Education (Workforce Investment Opportunity Act programs) • Transportation
• Housing Programs
• Homeless Services
• Section 3 Employment Program
The City’s affordable housing objectives for reducing poverty include increasing affordable rental opportunities through new construction, increasing affordable home ownership opportunities for first time home buyers through new construction, preserving and maintaining the existing affordable rental housing stock. These objectives and the programs which result from them, form a major component of the anti-poverty strategy by reducing the cost burden of housing, and by creating linkages with Glendale’s homeless continuum of care.

Programs for providing housing and supportive services to homeless families and the strategies for increasing affordable housing for low-income and special needs households are described in the Housing Strategies and Homeless Needs Assessment sections.

Actions planned to develop institutional structure
The City’s community development, homeless, and housing institutional structure and delivery system in Glendale is quite efficient. However, there are key elements in the structure and delivery system which could be improved. The City of Glendale will attempt to address these gaps through the following strategies and actions:
• Maintaining multi-purpose centers to ensure coordination and efficiency of community services; • Coordinating youth and senior citizen programs with City and community agencies; • Continuing involvement of housing providers and social service agencies with the Glendale Continuum of Care Committee;
• Increasing capacity building for non-profit housing and social service organizations through non- profit summit, technical assistance and grant writing workshops; • Increasing the dissemination of housing information to the Glendale Board of Realtors Draft
274 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
170
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Affordable Housing groups; and
• Increasing coordination of the CDBG and CoC programs with workforce development programs, and the citywide economic development program.

Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies
The City will continue to collaborate with public and private housing and social service agencies to meet the goals and objectives of the Consolidated Plan. The City would continue to have regular technical assistance funding meetings with social service community agencies and other ongoing meetings with the Continuum of Care Committee and special coalitions such as the Glendale Healthy Start Committee, Glendale Healthier Community Coalition, Glendale Mental Health Task Force, and other special community coalitions. The City also coordinates its Economic Development activities with the Workforce Investment Opportunity Act program which directly links with private business, industries, and job developers through the Verdugo Job Center located and operated by the City of Glendale.

The City will continue to provide technical assistance and development project management coordination and assistance to nonprofit affordable housing developers as their projects request funding and proceed through permitting and construction and lease up process.

The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program continues the collaborative effort with public and private housing and social service agencies to provide much needed services to the neediest populations in Glendale. Although, the majority of voucher participants are very low income elderly, disabled households, we assist the formerly homeless and those receiving VASH vouchers.

On May 10, 2021, the Glendale Housing Authority (Authority) was notified that it had been awarded 225 new EHVs for the Section 8 Program under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA). Accordingly, the Authority has also been awarded $4,268,736 in funding for the program. Of that amount, $3,033,456 is designated for rental assistance while the remainder, $1,235,280 is designated for administrative costs, bonus achievement awards, incentive programs, and services fees.

The Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHVs) program was made available through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021 to address the continued impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the economy, public health, State and local governments, individuals, and businesses. Through EHVs, HUD provided 70,000 housing choice vouchers to local Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) in order to assist individuals and families who are:
• Homeless;
• At-risk of homelessness;
• Fleeing, or attempting to flee, domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or Draft
275 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
171
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
human trafficking; or
• Were recently homeless or have a high risk of housing instability.

To date, in collaboration with CoC Partners, the Authority has leased up 225 EHVs, (100% utilization rate).

Our Agency continues to work the Department of Veteran’s Affairs and the non-profit group New Directions, to help house and offer supportive services to VASH voucher holders. Our agency has recently collaborated with Brilliant Corners to house formerly homeless voucher holders. Long term collaborations and referrals continue with the Armenian Relief Society and Services provided through City of Glendale Community Services & Parks.

Discussion:

Draft
276 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
172
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Program Specific Requirements
AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220(l)(1,2,4)
Introduction:

This section addresses the program specific requirements for the CDBG, HOME, and ESG programs.

Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1)
Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out.

1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed 0

2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan. 0

3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements 0

4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan 0

5. The amount of income from float-funded activities 0
Total Program Income: 0

Other CDBG Requirements

1. The amount of urgent need activities 0

2. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income. Overall Benefit - A consecutive period of one, two or three years may be used to determine that a minimum overall benefit of 70% of CDBG funds is used to benefit persons of low and moderate income. Specify the years covered that include this Annual Action Plan. 100%

HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(2)

1. A description of other forms of investment being used beyond those identified in Section 92.205 is Draft
277 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
173
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
as follows:

No other forms of investment are being used beyond those listed in the Plan.

2. A description of the guidelines that will be used for resale or recapture of HOME funds when used for homebuyer activities as required in 92.254, is as follows:

The HOME New Construction Home Ownership Program with related homebuyer activities will apply Resale Restrictions to ensure requirements of the HUD HOME rule 92.254 are met. A copy of the Resale Restrictions guideline is attached in the Grantee Unique Appendices attachment on the Administration Page. The guidelines ensure that if the housing does not continue to be the principal residence of the family for the duration of the period of affordability that the housing is made available for subsequent purchase only to a buyer whose family qualifies as a low income family and will use the property as the family’s principal residence. And the guidelines ensures that the price at resale provides the original HOME-assisted owner a fair return on investment and ensures that the housing will remain affordable to a reasonable range of low-income homebuyers.

3. A description of the guidelines for resale or recapture that ensures the affordability of units acquired with HOME funds? See 24 CFR 92.254(a)(4) are as follows:

As described in the City’s Homeownership Program Guidelines the period of affordability is based on the total amount of HOME funds invested in the housing. Deed restrictions in the form of Addendum to Grant Deed and HOME Deed of Trust are used to impose the resale restrictions.

4. Plans for using HOME funds to refinance existing debt secured by multifamily housing that is rehabilitated with HOME funds along with a description of the refinancing guidelines required that will be used under 24 CFR 92.206(b), are as follows:

There are no plans to refinance existing debt secured by multi-family housing that is rehabilitated with HOME funds.

5. If applicable to a planned HOME TBRA activity, a description of the preference for persons with special needs or disabilities. (See 24 CFR 92.209(c)(2)(i) and CFR 91.220(l)(2)(vii)).

N/A

6. If applicable to a planned HOME TBRA activity, a description of how the preference for a specific category of individuals with disabilities (e.g. persons with HIV/AIDS or chronic mental illness) will narrow the gap in benefits and the preference is needed to narrow the gap in benefits and services Draft
278 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
174
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
received by such persons. (See 24 CFR 92.209(c)(2)(ii) and 91.220(l)(2)(vii)).

N/A

7. If applicable, a description of any preference or limitation for rental housing projects. (See 24 CFR

92.253(d)(3) and CFR 91.220(l)(2)(vii)). Note: Preferences cannot be administered in a manner that limits the opportunities of persons on any basis prohibited by the laws listed under 24 CFR 5.105(a).

N/A

Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG)
Reference 91.220(l)(4)

1. Include written standards for providing ESG assistance (may include as attachment) The City of Glendale has developed the following standards in the attached Emergency Solutions Grant Written Standards for providing assistance with ESG funds as required by 24 CFR 576.400 (e).

These are initial standards that have been created in coordination with the City of Glendale Continuum of Care.
(See attached ESG Written Standards under Administration AD-25.)

2. If the Continuum of Care has established centralized or coordinated assessment system that meets HUD requirements, describe that centralized or coordinated assessment system.

The City of Glendale (City) is the Lead Agency for the Continuum of Care (CoC) and serves as the lead coordinator for homeless programs for the Glendale CoC. The City coordinates services for the chronically homeless persons through various organizations including Ascencia, Home Again LA, Armenian Relief Society (ARS), Door of Hope, YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena, and the Salvation Army. Ascencia is the lead Coordinated Entry Services (CES) coordinator for the City’s CoC. As the CES lead, Ascencia coordinates intake and assessment services, laundry, showers, mail pick-up, on site case management for the employment, veteran’s services, mental health services and housing coordination. Home Again LA is currently assisting the City by serving as the lead CES agency for homeless and/or at risk-families in Glendale Prevention and Diversion is coordinated through Catholic Charities. The City Administers the CoC Rental Assistance Program, formerly known as the Shelter Plus Care program and coordinates through the YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena and Door of Hope for homeless programming and services specifically for victims of domestic violence and other related crimes.

3. Identify the process for making sub-awards and describe how the ESG allocation available to Draft
279 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
175
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
private nonprofit organizations (including community and faith-based organizations).

The City of Glendale along with the Continuum of Care Board of Directors coordinates the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Request for Proposal (RFP) process to allocate ESG funds. Both CoC and ESG notifications are released through a local RFP process, which is also posted in various locations including, the City newspaper, City’s’ website, directly mailed and emailed out to all private non-profit agencies on the CoC distribution list and is coordinated with the City’s Library Department and Workforce Investment Opportunity Act (WIOA) program. A formal review of all of the RFP’s are conducted by the CoC Board, including agency interviews, review of semi-annual progress reports, HMIS, outcomes, overall program capacity, financial management and coordination of CoC programs. The formal report is submitted to City Council for approval and submission to HUD.

4. If the jurisdiction is unable to meet the homeless participation requirement in 24 CFR 576.405(a), the jurisdiction must specify its plan for reaching out to and consulting with homeless or formerly homeless individuals in considering policies and funding decisions regarding facilities and services funded under ESG.

The City meets this requirement.

5. Describe performance standards for evaluating ESG.

The City of Glendale, in compliance with HEARTH Act performance measurements, will focus on outcomes and ESG performance on the following measures that impact CoC performance:
•Reduction of length of time of stay at Emergency Shelters by 10% from previous year •Recidivism (subsequent return to homelessness)
•Access/coverage (thoroughness in reaching persons who are homeless) •Overall reduction in number of persons who experience homelessness •Job and income growth for persons
An evaluation of all of the proposals are conducted by the CoC Board, including agency interviews, review of semi-annual progress reports, HMIS program reporting, outcomes, overall program capacity, financial management and coordination of CoC programs. Sub-recipient homeless agencies submit quarterly reports to the City of Glendale in addition to reports from the HMIS for evaluation of program outcomes, goals and services provided on a quarterly basis. Final performance standards are reviewed, and a formal report is submitted to City Council for approval and submission to HUD.

HOME Eligible Applicants:

The Glendale HOME program serves low and very low-income households. The specific households to be served, and whether beneficiaries will be limited, and preference will be given to a particular section of the low-income population; will depend upon the specific project.

Draft
280 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
176
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
New Affordable Housing Projects in FY 2024--2025
The Action Plan makes note of the City acquired a property at 426 Piedmont Avenue and 507 Naranja Drive. The site is expected to develop 68 units of affordable housing, including 25-30 HOME-ARP funded units. In conjunction with the approved HOME-ARP plan, the City may give a preference to seniors over the age of 62 who are experiencing homelessness, or who are at risk of homelessness. The project is expected to begin construction during FY 24-25.

Draft
281 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
177
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Housing Trust Fund (HTF)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(5)

1. Distribution of Funds

a. Describe the eligibility requirements for recipients of HTF funds (as defined in 24 CFR § 93.2). b. N/A

b. Describe the jurisdiction’s application requirements for eligible recipients to apply for HTF funds.

N/A

c. Describe the selection criteria that the jurisdiction will use to select applications submitted by eligible recipients.

N/A

d. Describe the jurisdiction’s required priority for funding based on geographic distribution, which is a description of the geographic areas of the State (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) in which it will direct assistance during the ensuing program year.

N/A

e. Describe the jurisdiction’s required priority for funding based on the applicant's ability to obligate HTF funds and undertake eligible activities in a timely manner.

N/A

f. Describe the jurisdiction’s required priority for funding based on the extent to which rents for units in the rental project are affordable to extremely low-income families.

N/A

g. Describe the jurisdiction’s required priority for funding based on the financial feasibility of the project beyond the required 30-year period.

N/A

h. Describe the jurisdiction’s required priority for funding based on the merits of the application in meeting the priority housing needs of the jurisdiction (such as housing that is accessible to transit or employment centers, housing that includes green building and sustainable development features, or housing that serves special needs populations).

N/A
i. Describe the jurisdiction’s required priority for funding based on the location of existing affordable housing.

N/A

j. Describe the jurisdiction’s required priority for funding based on the extent to which the application makes use of non-federal funding sources.

N/A
Draft
282 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
178
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

2. Does the jurisdiction’s application require the applicant to include a description of the eligible
activities to be conducted with HTF funds?
N/A

3. Does the jurisdiction’s application require that each eligible recipient certify that housing units assisted with HTF funds will comply with HTF requirements?
N/A

4. Performance Goals and Benchmarks. The jurisdiction has met the requirement to provide for performance goals, consistent with the jurisdiction’s goals established under 24 CFR 91.215(b)(2), by including HTF in its housing goals in the housing table on the SP-45 Goals and AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives screens.

N/A

5. Rehabilitation Standards. The jurisdiction must establish rehabilitation standards for all HTF-assisted housing rehabilitation activities that set forth the requirements that the housing must meet upon project completion. The jurisdiction’s description of its standards must be in sufficient detail to determine the required rehabilitation work including methods and materials. The standards may refer to applicable codes or they may establish requirements that exceed the minimum requirements of the codes. The jurisdiction must attach its rehabilitation standards below. If the jurisdiction will not use HTF funds for the rehabilitation of housing, enter “N/A”.

In addition, the rehabilitation standards must address each of the following: health and safety; major systems; lead-based paint; accessibility; disaster mitigation (where relevant); state and local codes, ordinances, and zoning requirements; Uniform Physical Condition Standards; Capital Needs Assessments (if applicable); and broadband infrastructure (if applicable).

6. Resale or Recapture Guidelines. Below, the jurisdiction must enter (or attach) a description of the guidelines that will be used for resale or recapture of HTF funds when used to assist first-time homebuyers. If the jurisdiction will not use HTF funds to assist first-time homebuyers, enter “N/A”.

7. HTF Affordable Homeownership Limits. If the jurisdiction intends to use HTF funds for homebuyer assistance and does not use the HTF affordable homeownership limits for the area provided by HUD, it must determine 95 percent of the median area purchase price and set forth the information in accordance with §93.305. If the jurisdiction will not use HTF funds to assist first-time homebuyers, enter “N/A”.

Draft
283 of 335

Annual Action Plan
2025
179
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

8. L imited Beneficiaries or Preferences. Describe how the jurisdiction will limit the beneficiaries or give preferences to a particular segment of the extremely low- or very low-income population to serve unmet needs identified in its consolidated plan or annual action plan. If the jurisdiction will not limit the beneficiaries or give preferences to a particular segment of the extremely low- or very low-income population, enter “N/A.”
A
ny limitation or preference must not violate nondiscrimination requirements in § 93.350, and the jurisdiction must not limit or give preferences to students. The jurisdiction may permit rental housing owners to limit tenants or give a preference in accordance with § 93.303 only if such limitation or preference is described in the action plan.

8. R
efinancing of Existing Debt. Enter or attach the jurisdiction’s refinancing guidelines below. The guidelines describe the conditions under which the jurisdiction will refinance existing rental housing project debt. The jurisdiction’s refinancing guidelines must, at minimum, demonstrate that re
habilitation is the primary eligible activity and ensure that this requirement is met by establishing a minimum level of rehabilitation per unit or a required ratio between rehabilitation and refinancing.

I
f the jurisdiction will not refinance existing debt, enter “N/A.” N/A
Discussion:

The City of Glendale doesn’t receive funding from the Housing Trust Fund (HTF).

Draft
284 of 335

EXHIBIT 3

AGENCY PROGRAM
FY 25-26
Requested
Funding
FY 25-26
Recommended
Funding
based on
Final HUD
Allocation Difference
1 Armenian Engineers and Scientists of America AESA STEM Academy 27,220.00$ 10,529$ ($16,691.00) 2 Armenian American Civil Support Center Transportation&Billingual Information Services for LMI Individuals 35,000.00$ -$ ($35,000.00) 3 Homenetmen Glendale Ararat Chapter Mental Wellness in Athletes Program 25,000.00$ 10,529$ ($14,471.00) 4 Armenian Bar Association Pro Bono Legal Services 52,180.00$ 20,529$ ($31,651.00) 5 Armenian Relief Society of Western USA Community Outreach Program 118,573.00$ 64,529$ ($54,044.00) 6 Catholic Charities of Los Angeles Loaves & Fishes Program 68,141.00$ 32,529$ ($35,612.00) 7 Committee for Armenian Students in Public Schools Intervention/Prevention Clinical Group Counseling 67,985.25$ 34,529$ ($33,456.25) 8 Door of Hope DV Mental Health & Case Management 60,834.00$ 10,529$ ($50,305.00) 9 Glendale Youth Alliance Youth Employment Program 50,000.00$ 10,529$ ($39,471.00) 10 Home Again Los Angeles Crisis Aid for Homeless Families 35,000.00$ 15,529$ ($19,471.00) 11 Housing Rights Center Fair Housing Services 20,000.00$ 10,000$ ($10,000.00) 12 Salvation Army Peoples Choice Market 50,000.00$ 20,529$ ($29,471.00) 13 YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena Mental Health Services for Survivors of Domestic Violence 46,118.00$ 20,529$ ($25,589.00) $656,051.25 $260,819.00 ($395,232.25)
$260,819.00 $260,819.00 $260,819.00
($395,232.25) $0.00 ($395,232.25)
The results of the CDBG Advisory Committee's recommended funding for FY 2025-2026 was contingent upon receiving final funding allocations from U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development. With the exception of Housing Rights Center, which will be funded $10,000, all other agencies recommended for funding will equally increase or decrease funding recommendations (based on the final HUD allocation) but will not decrease funding if the recommended funding is $10,000.

TOTAL PUBLIC SERVICES

FUNDS AVAILABLE

DEFICIT/SURPLUS
Summary List of FY 2025-2026 CDBG Funds Requested and Recommended For Funding Based on Estimated and Final Allocations

PUBLIC SOCIAL SERVICES
285 of 335

PROGRAM
FY 25-26

REQUESTED

FUNDING
FY 25-26

RECOMMENDED

FUNDING
Difference
PRE-APPROVED CITY PROJECTS:
1 Elk Mini Park Project $ 200,000.00 $ 400,000.00 200,000.00$ 2 Wilson Mini Park Project (funding recommended to Elk Mini Park) $ 200,000.00 $ - (200,000.00)$ 3 Pelanconi Park Renovation Project $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 FUNDING REQUEST CITY PROJECTS SUB-TOTAL 500,000.00$ 500,000.00$ COMMUNITY PROJECTS:
1 Kid's Community Clinic of Burbank, Expansion of Dental Treatments for Low Income Children605,000.00$ 630,230.00$ 2 YWCA, Lexington Office Historic Building Preservation& Rehab Project 605,000.00$ -$ (605,000.00)$ FUNDING REQUEST COMMUNITY PROJECTS SUB-TOTAL 1,210,000.00$ 630,230.00$ TOTAL FUNDING REQUESTS FOR CITY/COMMUNITY AGENCY 1,710,000.00$ 1,130,230.00$

AVAILABLE FUNDING
FINAL FY 2025-2026 CDBG CIP Funding 1,130,230.00$ 1,130,230.00$ TOTAL FY 2024-2025 CDBG CIP AVAILABLE FUNDS 1,130,230.00$ 1,130,230.00$ Difference (579,770.00)$ -$ (605,000.00)$ 2025-2026 CDBG CIP FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS
The CDBG Advisory Committee recommended fully funding (3) three City projects. The results of the CDBG Advisory Committee's recommended funding for FY 2025-2026 was contingent upon receiving final funding allocations from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The YWCA of Glendale and Pasadena was the only community agency recommended for CIP FY2025-2026 funding. It was decided that if the final award from HUD is more than the estimated funding allocation, the award will be capped at 5% of the amount awarded and the remaining funds will go back to FY 2025-2026 as undesignated fund balance. 286 of 335

Exhibit 4
1 Summary of Public Hearing and Public Comments
Regarding the City of Glendale’s
Proposed FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan for
CDBG, ESG, and HOME Programs
Public Hearing, April 30, 2025, Adult Recreation Center, 201 East Colorado Street:

The Public Hearing was called to order at 7:15 p.m.
3 total in attendance.

Maggie Kavarian, Community Services Manager opened the public hearing for the FY 2025-2026 Consolidated Plan and Annual Plan and introduced city staff in attendance.

Tamar Kabanjian, Arsineh Isayan, and Pam Jackson helped to present during the meeting.

City staff provided a Power Point presentation which included: purpose of the meeting, a flowchart of the CDBG Annual Program Planning Process FY2025-2026; CDBG funding allocation plan, and the proposed 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY2025- 2026 Annual Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant, Emergency Solutions Grant, and HOME Programs; and encouraged public comment.

During the presentations, attendees were provided in depth review of the Program Planning, highlights of the steps in the process to conduct the public hearing to review and obtain comments from the public regarding the proposed funding recommendations for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs.

Ms. Kavarian stated that the funding recommendations will be submitted to the City Council for final approval on an estimated date in June 2025. Presentation included:

Proposal Evaluation Process to the attendees and explained how City Staff receive, evaluate, and prepare the proposals for CDBG Advisory Board review. Highlights of the CDBG Advisory Board Meeting on February 28, 2025 and the deliberation and decision making process of the Board was presented.

Ms. Isayan explained the ESG program process and how agencies are funded to combat Homelessness welcoming and encouraging public comment.

Next, Ms. Jackson explained the HOME program and the upcoming projects in the pipeline for affordable housing by use of HOME funds.

The public was also reminded that all comments would be submitted to the City Council and Housing Authority in writing.
287 of 335

Exhibit 4
2 MEETING QUESTIONS/COMMENTS
What happens when residents don’t take care of their Homes and properties? Is this Part of HUD?
There are many Homes here in Glendale, but they are not affordable. I want to share the challenges people face with affording to live here in Glendale. oPam Jackson from the HOME program answered these questions. For Park’s Project, do they inform you what they anticipate they will do, and how do they show you their ideas/proposal?
oMaggie Kavarian from the CDBG program answered this question If the Agency does not spend its full grant for homeless services. What happens then, what do you do with the remaining grant? Is the remaining grant returned back to the City?
oArsine Isayan from ESG program answered these questions.

Dale Gorman from Kid’s Community Dental was at the meeting and discussed their program to the audience.

Ms. Kavarian thanked everyone for attending the meeting and officially closed the Public Hearing.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:28 p.m.

EMAIL COMMENTS:

Glendale residents need an affordable way to get to and from LAX. Shared van services went away with COVID. Please bring them back. They were a very enjoyable way to meet fellow travelers, but most importantly: AFFORDABLE. For instance, Shuttle to LAX cost a flat $20.

Thank you for listening.

Glendale homeowner
NO TELEPHONE COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED.
288 of 335

Date Published: April 17, 2025

PUBLIC NOTICE

CITY OF GLENDALE

NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN:

The Community Development Department, after having conducted an Initial Study, has prepared a Negative Declaration for the following project:

Project Description:

The project includes the Action Plan for the proposed Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Programs for the City of Glendale.

Project Title: Fiscal Year 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Programs

Project Location: Citywide, Glendale, Los Angeles County

Project Applicant: City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks Department
613 E. Broadway, Room 120
Glendale, CA 91206
The Proposed Negative Declaration and all documents referenced therein are available for review in the Community Development Department, Planning Division office, Room 103 of the Municipal Services Building, 633 East Broadway, Glendale, California 91206-4386 and on the Planning Division website http://www.glendaleca.gov/environmental. For information on the proposed project and any upcoming public hearings and/or meetings please contact Maggie Kavarian in the Community Services & Parks Department at (818) 548-3715 or [email protected].

Written comments may be submitted to the Community Development Department, Planning Division office, at the address listed above for a period of 20 days after publication of this notice.

Proposed Negative Declaration Comment Period: April 18, 2025, to May 7, 2025

Exhibit 5
289 of 335

PROPOSED

NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME Programs

The following Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended, the State Guidelines, and the Environmental Guidelines and Procedures of the City of Glendale.

Project Title/Common Name: FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME Programs Project Location: Glendale, Los Angeles County, California: Glendale is located northeast of downtown Los Angeles. It is bounded by the cities of Burbank, Pasadena, La Canada Flintridge and the Los Angeles communities of Tujunga, Eagle Rock, and Los Feliz.

Project Description: Action Plan prepared by the City of Glendale Community Services and Parks Department for the fiscal year 2025-2026 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG), and HOME programs.

Project Type: Private Project Public Project
Project Applicant: Maggie Kavarian, Senior Community Services Supervisor City of Glendale Community Services and Parks Department 141 N. Glendale Avenue, Room 202
Glendale, CA 91206
Findings: The Director of the Community Development, on April 17, 2025, after considering an Initial Study prepared by the Planning Division, found that the above referenced project would not have a significant effect on the environment and instructed that a Negative Declaration be prepared.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Attachments: Initial Study Checklist
Contact Person: Dennis Joe, Senior Planner
City of Glendale, Community Development Department
633 East Broadway, Room 103
Glendale, CA 91206-4386
Tel: (818) 548-8157
Fax: (818) 240-0392

290 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 2
This page left intentionally blank.

291 of 335

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
FY 2025-2025 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Programs

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 3

1. Project Title: FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Programs

2. Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of Glendale Community Development Department
Planning Division
633 East Broadway, Room 103
Glendale, CA 91206

3. Contact Person and Phone Number:

Dennis Joe, Senior Planner
Tel: (818) 937-8157
Fax: (818) 240-0392

4. Project Location: Glendale, Los Angeles County, California: Glendale is located northeast of downtown Los Angeles. It is bounded by the cities of Burbank, Pasadena, La Canada Flintridge and the Los Angeles communities of Tujunga, Eagle Rock and Los Feliz.

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:

Maggie Kavarian, Senior Community Services Supervisor
City of Glendale Community Services and Parks Department 141 N. Glendale Avenue, Room 202
Glendale, CA 91206

6. General Plan Designation: N/A

7. Zoning: N/A

8. Description of the Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to, later phases of the project, and any secondary support or off-site features necessary for its implementation.)
Action Plan prepared by the City of Glendale Community Services and Parks Department for the fiscal year 2025-2026 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME programs. See attached Action Plan for full description.

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

The projects are located throughout the City of Glendale, and as such the surrounding uses vary depending on location.

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval or participation agreement).

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
292 of 335

293 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 5
A. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section
21099, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X

2. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
X

3. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?
X

4. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X
Comments to Sections A(1), (2), (3), and (4):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on aesthetics as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand.

As such, these programs would not adversely affect scenic vistas, damage scenic resources, degrade the visual character of any sites or create substantial light or glare.

Potential aesthetic impacts could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project- specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

B. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997, as updated) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.

294 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 6

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
X

2. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X

3. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code
Section 51104(g))?
X

4. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X

5. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
X
Comments to Sections B(1), (2), (3), (4) and (5):

The City of Glendale does not contain any agricultural resources or lands currently zoned for agricultural uses; instead, Glendale is an urbanized area with a mixture of commercial, residential and industrial uses. Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs would not have a negative impact on agricultural resources because there is no “prime farmland,” “unique farmland” or “farmland of statewide importance” that could be converted to non-agricultural use; no existing zoning for agricultural use or Williamson Act contracts; and no farmland that could be converted to non-agricultural use. There is no existing zoning of forest land or timberland in the City of Glendale. No forest land could be converted to non-forest use under the proposed project.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

C. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied on to make the following determinations.

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? X

2. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
X

3. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? X

4. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
295 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 7
Comments to Sections C(1), (2), (3), and (4):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on air quality as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect air quality.

Potential air quality impacts could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project- specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
X

2. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X

3. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
X

4. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
X

5. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
X

6. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X
Comments to Sections D(1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on biological resources as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect biological resources.

Potential impacts on biological resources could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
296 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 8
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

E. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
X

2. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5?
X

3. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? X
Comments to Sections E(1), (2), and (3):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on cultural resources as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect cultural resources.

Potential impacts on cultural resources could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

F. ENERGY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
X

2. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? X
Comments to Sections F(1) and (2):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on energy as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect energy consumption or obstruct with state of local energy plans.

Potential impacts on energy could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project- specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. 297 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 9
G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X

2. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? X

3. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on-or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
X

4. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as
updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
X

5. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
X

6. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X
Comments to Sections F(1)(i)(ii)(iii)(iv), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with geology and soils as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect geology and soils.

Potential impacts associated with geology and soils could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

298 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 10
H. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
X

2. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Comments to Sections H(1) and (2):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with greenhouse gases as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not result in direct or indirect impacts related to the generation of greenhouse gases or conflict with applicable plans.

Potential impacts associated with greenhouse gases could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X

2. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
X

3. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X

4. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
X

5. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
X

6. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X

7. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
X
299 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 11
Comments to Sections I(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with hazards and hazardous materials as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect hazards and hazardous materials.

Potential impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

J. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface of groundwater quality?
X

2. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
X

3. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:

i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site; X
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site;
X
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
X
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? X

4. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? X

5. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
X
Comments to Sections J(1), (2), (3)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), (4) and (5):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with hydrology and water quality as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect hydrology and water quality.

Potential impacts associated with hydrology and water quality could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects 300 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 12
would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

K. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Physically divide an established community? X

2. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
X
Comments to Sections K(1) and (2):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with land use and planning as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. Most of the programs are included in the City’s updated Housing Element adopted in December 2022. As such, these programs would not adversely affect land use and planning.

Potential impacts associated with land use and planning could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

L. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X

2. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
X
Comments to Sections L(1) and (2):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with the availability of know mineral resources as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect mineral resources.
301 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 13
Potential impacts associated with the availability of know mineral resources could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

M. NOISE
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X

2. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? X

3. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
X
Comments to Sections M(1), (2) and (3):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with noise as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect noise.

Potential impacts associated with noise could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

N. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
X

2. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X

302 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 14
Comments to Sections N(1) and (2):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with population and housing as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect population and housing.

Potential impacts associated with population and housing could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

O. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:

a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
Comments to Sections O(1)(a),(b), (c), (d) and (e):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with public services as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect public services.

Potential impacts associated with public services could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

303 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 15
P. RECREATION

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
X

2. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
X
Comments to Sections P(1) and (2):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on recreational facilities as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect recreational uses.

Conversely, the proposed programs included in the action plan would help to relieve existing pressure on the recreational facilities by providing after school programs away from park sites.

Potential impacts on recreational facilities could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Q. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Conflict with program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
X

2. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X

3. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X

4. Result in inadequate emergency access? X
Comments to Sections Q(1), (2), (3) and (4):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on transportation as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand.

As such, these programs would not adversely affect transportation.

Potential impacts associated with transportation could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be 304 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 16
evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

R. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined
in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as
either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape
that is geographically defined in terms of the
size and scope of the landscape, sacred place,
or object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:

i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in the
local register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to
a California Native American tribe.

X
Comments to Sections R(1)(i) and (ii):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on tribal cultural resources as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect tribal cultural resources.

Potential impacts associated with tribal cultural resources could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

305 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 17
S. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
X

2. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
X

3. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X

4. Generate solid waste in excess of state or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X

5. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
X
Comments to Sections S(1), (2), (3), (4) and (5):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on utilities and service systems as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect utilities and service systems.

Potential impacts on utilities and service systems could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

T. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,
would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? X

2. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X

3. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel, breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
X
306 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 18
If located in or near state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,
would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

4. Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
Comments to Sections T(1), (2), (3) and (4):

Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associate with wildfires as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect wildfires.

Potential wildfire impacts could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project- specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

U. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. Does the project have the potential to substantial
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
X

2. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.)
X

3. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
Comments to Sections U(1), (2) and (3):

Implementation of the action plan for the FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to degrade biological resources or the overall quality of the natural environment; eliminate important historic or prehistoric resources; have environmental effects causing substantial adverse effects on humans; or have cumulatively considerable impacts. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs are not considered cumulatively considerable.

Potential cumulative impacts could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project- specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available. 307 of 335

A PRIL 2025

FY 2025-2026 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS P AGE 19

13. Earlier Analyses
None

14. Project References Used to Prepare Initial Study Checklist One or more of the following references were incorporated into the Initial Study by reference, and are available for review in the Planning Division Office, 633 E. Broadway, Rm. 103, Glendale, CA 91206- 4386. Items used are referred to by number on the Initial Study Checklist.

1. Proposed Action Plan prepared by the City of Glendale Community Development and Housing Department for the fiscal year 2025-2026 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG), and HOME programs.

2. The City of Glendale’s General Plan, “Open Space and Conservation Element,” as amended.

3. California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, Los Angeles County Important Farmland 2010 (September 2011).

4. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42 (Revised 1997, Supplements 1 and 2 added 1999).

5. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning (May 2005).

6. City of Glendale, General Plan, “Safety Element” (2003).

7. California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State of California General Plan Guidelines (2017).

8. City of Glendale Municipal Code, as amended.
308 of 335

City of Glendale

A contractor must provide the information listed below when: A subcontractor must provide the information listed below when:
•The City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $50,000 or more; or • The subcontract through a City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $25,000 or more; or
• A combination or series of City Contracts have a value of $50,000 or more. • A combination or series of subcontract s, for the same or different projects, have an aggregate value of $25,000 or
more. Information that must be disclosed: ● Name of the person, entity, or organization (i.e., the Contractor or Subcontractor) ● Name of the Chief Executive Officer/Preside
nt
● Chief Operati
ng Officer
● Chief Financial Officer
● Chairperson
● All members of the Board of Dire
ctors
● All persons who own more than 10% of the person, entity, or orga nization
● Name of any camp
aign committee owned or controlled by the person, entity, or organizatio n Please complete the following disclosure form:

Contractor(s)*:

Christina Amirian Khanjian
517 W. Glenoaks Blvd.

Glendale
CA
91202
Melanie Vartabedian
517 W. Glenoaks Blvd.

CA
Glendale
91202
Allison Jurkowski
517 W. Glenoaks Blvd.

Glendale
CA
91202
517 W. Glenoaks Blvd.

Glendale
CA
91202
Eugenie Shamlian-Aroyan, Secretary
Exhibit 6
309 of 335

Rev. 6/7/12 J:\FILES\DOCFILES\ORD\CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION\DISCLOSURE FORM – CONTRACTOR – 6-7-12.doc Subcontractor(s)**:

Name Address
Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
** “Subcontractor” is the person, entity, or organization that has entered into a contract for the performance of all or a portion of the work undertaken under an agreement with an architect, design professional, engineer, or gener al or prime contract, usually by a general or prime contrac tor. Subcontractor includes any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financ ial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address.

Campaign Committee owned or controlled by:

Title Business Address City State Zip

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named Contractor Subcontractor:
• I acknowledge that I have a continuing obligation to update this disclosure form if I substitute― or if I select addition al― architects, design professionals, contractors, or subcontractors within ten (10) days of the selection or change; and • I hereby certify that:
I have identified all per sons for which the Ordinance requires disclosure; The information in this disclosure f orm (and any attachment to this form) is true, accurate, correct, and complete; and I have been legally auth orized to submit this disclosure form.

In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is pages.

Executed on: , 20 , at: , California.

Signature: Print Full Name:

Address:

Phone Number: E-mail Address:

June 10
25 Glendale
Melanie Vartabedian
517 W. Glenoaks Blvd. Glendale, CA 91202
818-241-7533
[email protected]
3 310 of 335

ՀԱՅ ՕԳՆՈՒԹԵԱՆ ՄԻՈՒԹԵԱՆ
ԱՐԵՒՄՏԵԱՆ ՄԻԱՑԵԱԼ ՆԱՀԱՆԳՆԵՐՈՒ
ԸՆԿԵՐԱՅԻՆ ԾԱՌԱՅՈՒԹԵԱՆ ԳՐԱՍԵՆԵԱԿ

ARMENIAN RELIEF SOCIETY
OF WESTERN USA, INC.

SOCIAL SERVICES
ARS Regional Executive Board
2024-2026
• Christina Amirian Khanjian, Chairperson
• Vicky Marashlian, Vice Chairperson
• Rita Hintlian, Corresponding Secretary
• Eugenie Shamlian Aroyan, Recording Secretary
• Maral Kouyoumdjian Manokian,Treasurer
• Haigo Ovayan Barsamian, Advisor
• Kenarig Avedisian, Advisor
• Siroun Bedirian, Advisor
• Taline Kayayan, Advisor

*ARS Board Members are members of the Armenian Relief Society of Western USA, as well as other community organizations.
311 of 335

City of Glendale

Glendale City CouncilJune 24, 2025

Glendale City Council
June 24, 2025