City of Lawrence, KS

Community Development Advisory Committee

May 23, 2013 Minutes (City Commission Room)

MEMBERS PRESENT:		Alex Delaney, James Minor, Julie Mitchell, Vern Norwood, Aimee Polson, Travis Weller, Patrick Wilbur

MEMBERS ABSENT:		Linda Bush, Quinn Miller

STAFF PRESENT:		Danelle Dresslar, Rhonda Peterson, Brian Jimenez

PUBLIC PRESENT:		Sandra Tutwiler, Michelle Meyer

Chair Polson called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m.

1. Introductions.

Members introduced themselves. New member Travis Weller was welcomed to his first committee meeting.

2. Approval of the April 11, 2013 Minutes.

Delaney moved to approve the CDAC meeting minutes from April 11, 2013. The motion was seconded by Wilbur and passed 7-0.

3. Property Maintenance Code Appeal – 929 Holiday Drive.

Appeal hearing was deferred for approximately 30 minutes to give appellant Mark Bradburn time to arrive as he was not present when the agenda item was called.

4. Discuss Revised CDBG/HOME Allocation Amount, if applicable.

Dresslar said the funding amounts have not been announced yet. As long as the final numbers awarded and individual activities do not change by 50% from what was budgeted, the committee will not have to re-present the allocations to the City Commission. If the funding change is greater than 50%, the committee can meet and discuss how to change the allocations. The only thing that cannot be done without a Substantial Amendment is to fund new projects; that would cause the entire process to start over again. Dresslar used the example of funding Breezedale if there were additional funds that became available. Funding that project would require a Substantial Amendment.

Polson asked if that means the committee should have funded a minimal amount to Breezedale.

Dresslar responded no. Changing individual line allocations by more than 50% require the same Substantial Amendment.

Dresslar said the allocation for the Just Food Refrigerated Box Truck will have to stay at $25,000 even though they asked for more funding. This is because the City had to request a waiver of Conflict of Interest from HUD because Just Food Chief Operating Officer Jeremy Farmer is on the City Commission, and a Commission member cannot be a beneficiary of funds, administratively or as a participant. Dresslar added they do not foresee a problem with the waiver request at this time.

Minor asked what happens if HUD decides they will not allow Just Food to be a recipient of the funds.

Dresslar responded the committee would have to meet and reallocate the funds to another project.

Dresslar asked if there were any questions from those members who attended the City Commission meeting. The Oread Neighborhood Association came up in discussions by the City Commission. Dresslar said the committee needs to come up with a template for neighborhood reporting so there is a tool to compare neighborhood reports. There is no uniformity in how the five neighborhoods report their data right now.

Norwood said she thought the committee had discussed this before, and they had decided to leave the neighborhoods alone and let them submit reports how they wanted.

Dresslar said the City Commission asked for it to be streamlined. They want there to be a mechanism in place for staff to monitor the neighborhood reports. Dresslar noted several of the City Commission members were included in emails that were sent out to CDAC members regarding the Oread Neighborhood.

Norwood asked for clarification of the Oread Residents Association.

Dresslar said the Oread Residents Association is different from the Oread Neighborhood Association. They are not an open group. For example, owning property or living in the Oread neighborhood qualifies someone to be a member of the Oread Neighborhood Association. That is not necessarily the case with the Oread Residents
Association. The city does not provide governance over either association, or over other neighborhood associations in the city limits.

Dresslar added Oread was the neighborhood who had a coordinator who lived in Arkansas, which is what prompted the discussion about having coordinators live in the state of Kansas and in Douglas County. This discussion led to the amendment of the Citizen Participation Plan last year. Oread had to have a replacement in place by March 2012 in order to continue to have a CDBG-funded coordinator. They did not do that. Oread has not requested any funding to reimburse a coordinator position for their neighborhood since then. Dresslar added they are in the process of hiring a coordinator. Dresslar noted in certain circumstances funding has been pulled before due to lack of performance; Pinckney funding was withheld a few years ago when it was about two and one half years behind on its performance reports. Staff is watching the situation with Oread very closely.

Dresslar handed out a report which outlines the status of the neighborhoods’ performance reports. This report is on the City’s website under Planning and Development Services, Neighborhood Info.

Wilbur asked who makes the decision to pull funding.

Dresslar said she believed the committee discussed it last time, and then city staff sent a letter to the neighborhood association. Half of the original funding was reinstated because they got caught up with their reporting.

Polson pointed out East Lawrence has not turned a report in since October.

Dresslar agreed and said she is emailing the associations who are late turning in their reports.

Norwood said she thought the committee had set up some guidelines for the neighborhood associations to use regarding performance reports and withholding funding.

Dresslar responded yes, this was a discussion the committee had in regard to neighborhood association payments.

Norwood asked if that is being done.

Dresslar responded staff had not reached a level where they had to do that in this program year. Dresslar has been in contact with the East Lawrence neighborhood association, as well as others as they become late on reporting, and because they are aware they are late and are working on getting their reports in, she did not withhold payment for their latest reimbursement request.

Norwood asked if reimbursements should be withheld because they are late.

Dresslar said staff does not have a problem working with the groups as long a good faith effort is being shown to comply with reporting requirements. Staff is very good about communicating expectations, yet department’s philosophy has always been to work with them when they are making an effort.

Minor followed up on the template request, asking if the committee needs to provide guidelines for the neighborhoods to use.

Dresslar responded yes. The questions will be in the same regard as: where did the group meet; when was the meeting held; how many people were in attendance; are the minutes are attached; what other types of events has your neighborhood done; when was the newsletter printed; and asking for a copy. Dresslar said Public Service agencies have to send in reports about demographics. Any group who is provided with CDBG funding has to provide information on data like income status, gender and race. However, neighborhoods cannot do that because they are not set up the same way. There needs to be some uniformity in what the neighborhoods send in. Dresslar asked the committee to provide input as to what it would like to see in the reports, and what would help members when making their allocation decisions.

Mitchell added that some standardization would be helpful to the neighborhoods too, that way they would know what they need to be tracking and reporting.

Norwood asked if coordinator hours could be provided.

Dresslar replied that coordinator hours are turned in with each reimbursement request.

Weller said in looking at Oread’s report, there is not much information on it.

Dresslar agreed, but pointed out that may be due to the fact that they haven’t had any neighborhood meetings.

Minor said perhaps the committee should look at reports that are a good example of how a report should look and build on that with regard to guidelines for all of the neighborhoods.

Dresslar agreed and added that also looking at the Citizen Participation Plan and seeing what is required would be helpful as well. A template with that information would also provide the committee with more leverage if the neighborhood is not reporting the data as requested and required.

Polson said her concern is this is their only funding and by adding bureaucracy, they will be burning up all the coordinator’s hours dealing with it.

Dresslar said because it is federally funded, reporting is required. Lawrence is one of the only municipalities in this region that is still doing this type of activity so it is heavily monitored by HUD when a site visit occurs.

Minor added that utilizing a template would help the committee’s previous comments about not wanting to micro-manage the neighborhoods.

Wilbur asked if this is a process that could be started in September.

Dresslar said she thinks that would be fair to start it with the next grant year. She likes to meet with the coordinators and presidents of the associations before each new grant year starts, especially with turnover, so that everyone is aware of what expectations are.

Dresslar will draft a template and have it ready for the next meeting, and committee members can provide input at that time.

Dresslar added as soon as she receives the funding notification from HUD, she will notify the committee so the next meeting can be scheduled.

3 (reconvened). Property Maintenance Code Appeal – 929 Holiday Drive.

Polson said she feels the committee has given the appellant enough time after 45 minutes to show up for the appeal hearing, so the committee will reconvene that portion of the meeting and begin the appeal hearing.

Brian Jimenez introduced himself. He reminded the committee this will be its last appeal hearing on the City’s code issues as the City’s Board of Appeals will be handling them as of July 1, 2013.

Jimenez said a short memo and photos that were taken on May 28 were provided to the committee regarding the property at 929 Holiday Drive. This property has been in variation of non-compliance regarding City code for many years. There have been a couple of hearings on this property in the past. There are two code sections for which the property owner, Mr. Bradburn, has been cited, which are outlined in the memo.
Mr. Bradburn was officially sent a notice April 10, 2013, advising him that he could make an appeal to the committee by May 1, which he did via email on April 29. Jimenez responded to Mr. Bradburn with the appeal hearing date, which Bradburn acknowledged.

The property has not been cited for at least two years. He added there has been some progress in rectifying the non-compliance issues, which has been very slow. A search warrant was served at this property on April 18, 2011.

Polson asked if the search warrant was served before Mr. Bradburn’s last appeal hearing.

Jimenez replied no, Mr. Bradburn was in front of the CDAC prior to the search warrant being served. The original citation was for an Environmental Code issue. The Property Maintenance Code is the code being cited this time. The committee has not heard an appeal for this property for the Property Maintenance Code prior to this meeting.

Jimenez then showed photos to the committee which were not included in the previous correspondence. They show various conditions of the exterior of the property, which city staff believe is in violation of the Property Maintenance Code, and include photos taken on May 22, 2013.

In 2011 the property was condemned, but the property owner made repairs to the house which were sufficient for the city to remove the condemnation. As far as Jimenez knows, Bradburn is not living at the property, although he legally could. Electrical and structural repairs that have been made have been approved. All of the cosmetic exterior repairs that he has made to the structure did not require a permit, including windows of the same size, siding, roofing, replacing trim boards, and other similar items.

The code for which he is being cited says that he cannot have sheathing up without it being protected; there must be protective coating on the house.

Minor asked Jimenez if Bradburn has given a plan or timetable for the rehabilitation work.

Jimenez replied no, he refuses to provide staff a plan. Jimenez pointed out that Bradburn has been present at every other appeal hearing. He added the CDAC is not here to determine whether Bradburn has made progress, the committee’s task is to determine if the city has applied the code properly as relates to this citation.

Wilbur asked Jimenez if he sees the condition of this property as a danger to the neighborhood.

Jimenez said it is not a danger, but it definitely has a blighting influence on the neighborhood for any property owners wishing to sell their house.

Delaney disagreed, stating that squirrels and other rodents can cause a danger if they are able to gain entrance to the property and chew on electrical wires.

Minor asked if the utilities are on and active.

Jimenez said Bradburn has recently had a brand new electrical service approved and has been seen using power tools as recently as last week, so he would assume that the utilities are currently on.

Weller asked what would be the result of the violation.

Jimenez responded if the property owner does not appeal the violation, he is given a timeline to make progress and bring the property to code. The city will work with individuals who make steady progress. He said he is at the point if Bradburn called and asked for more time, he would tell him he is out of time. If the owner makes an appeal, such as the one today, there is a ruling made by this committee. If the committee supports the city’s application of the code, the owner’s appeal could take the case to the district court for appeal, which Bradburn has done before. It sets the city up to be able to prosecute the property owner for violation of the municipal code. A court date would then be set, and the property owner would enter a plea. Penalties can include fines and or jail time.

Polson asked if the worst case possible scenario for Bradburn would be jail time.

Jimenez replied possibly. The city can also choose to abate the property, which means the city would take control and start siding the property for him. The city does not take this action very often.

Weller asked what initiated this round of visitation to the property.

Jimenez replied the neighbors have made continual complaints regarding the condition of the property.

Minor said it looks like Bradburn was provided a pretty clear guideline of what he needs to do to bring the property into compliance.

Jimenez replied yes, he has been given clear direction. Jimenez said the committee’s task is to determine if the City has interpreted Municipal Code section 304.2 and section 304.6. He added none of the exterior walls have been painted nor sided.

Polson asked if there is an informal window of time the homeowner has to complete the repairs.

Jimenez responded the structure at 929 Holiday Drive has not been in compliance for two years; that is too long. This is not your typical situation where a homeowner rehabs the house in a month.

Minor asked how long will it take before the boards that are up starts to show wear.

Jimenez said that is a good point. It probably will not be too long before the lap board that is up starts to show wear as the elements degrade the exterior since it is not protected with siding or paint.

Polson asked if the neighbors present would like to make public comment before the committee makes a decision.

Sandra Tutwiler, neighbor residing at 928 Holiday Drive, directly across the street from Bradburn. Tutwiler made comment on the condition of the property. She added that property values in the neighborhood are dropping as a result of the exterior condition of the house and grounds.

Michelle Meyer, neighbor residing at 932 Holiday Drive, also made comment on the condition of the property. She added it has been a continual issue for several years, including cars parked on the street.

Tutwiler said the city must have statutes and codes that are designed to keep neighborhoods healthy. If the code can’t keep Bradburn from limiting the choices she has because the value of her property has dropped, there is something wrong with the code.

Delaney said he feels it is very obvious the code has not been followed by the homeowner and that staff was correct in citing the property. The exterior is not covered or weatherproofed in any way.

Jimenez said the committee needs to look at those two code sections and determine if the property in question violates those codes.

Delaney moved to approve the City’s interpretation of the code as applied on March 28, 2013 to the property at 929 Holiday Drive. The motion was seconded by Mitchell and passed 7-0.

5. Miscellaneous/Calendar.

Dresslar said she will let the committee know when she has the final numbers from HUD for allocation, and a meeting can be scheduled at that time. She expects the next meeting will be sometime in June so the numbers can be finalized. The grant agreements will be signed August 1.

6. Public Comment.

There was no additional public comment.

7. Adjourn.

Weller moved to adjourn the May 23, 2013 meeting of the CDAC at 6:45 p.m. Delaney seconded the motion.

The motion passed 7-0.

Attendance Record

Members

Jan 10

Jan 24

Feb 14

Feb 28

Mar 14

Mar 28

Apr 11

Apr 25

May 23

Jun

July

Aug 8

Aug 22

Sept 12

Sept 26

Oct 10

Oct 24

Nov 14

Dec 14

Deron Belt

Linda Bush

Alex

Delaney

Eric Hethcoat

Quinn Miller

Julie Mitchell

Vern Norwood

Aimee Polson

David Teixeira

Patrick Wilbur

James Minor

Travis Weller

E Excused Absence

U Unexcused Absence

X Meeting Cancelled – Weather Conditions

- Meeting Cancelled – Committee Vote/No Business

* First meeting after appointment

** Last Meeting Prior to expired term

^ Last Meeting