housing authority of portland board of … authority of portland board of commissioners meeting ......

Housing Authority of PortlandBoard of Commissioners Meeting

Multnomah County Building501 SE Hawthorne Blvd.

(located at the east end of the Hawthorne bridge)Portland, Oregon

March 16, 2010, 6:15 PM

www.hapdx.org

Housing Authority of PortlandBoard of Commissioners Meeting

HAP Board Chair Lee Moore helps to open the James HawthorneApartments on February 26. The opening drew more than 125 guests,who were impressed with what the 48-unit special needs building offersits vulnerable residents. Joining Commissioner Moore from right wereMargaret Van Vliet, director, Portland Housing Bureau; Judy Shiprackand Deborah Kafoury, Multnomah County Commissioners; VictorMerced, director, Oregon Housing and Community Services; and JamesHawthorne Beck, great grandson of the mental health pioneer whoinspired the building’s name.

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLAND

INDEX FOR ELECTRONICALLY DISTRIBUTED BOARD OF

COMMISSIONERS BOARD MEETING PACKET FOR MARCH 16, 2010

Index Page 4 Notification Letter Page 6 Agenda/Consent Calendar Page 8 Minutes Page 17 Executive Directors Report Page 21 Staff Reports Page 63 Dashboard Report Page 66 Resolutions

Housing Authority of PortlandBoard of Commissioners PacketMarch 2010 2

PUBLIC NOTICE:

THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLAND BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

will meet on Tuesday, March 16, 2010

At 6:15 pm At the Multnomah County Building – Commission Room

501 SE Hawthorne Blvd, Portland


TO: COMMUNITY PARTNERS FROM: STEVE RUDMAN DATE: March 10, 2010 The Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authority of Portland will meet on Tuesday, March 16, 2010 at the Multnomah County Building – Commission Room 501 SE Hawthorne Blvd, Portland at 6:15 P.M. The commission meeting is open to the public. The meeting site is accessible, and persons with disabilities may call 503-802-8423 or 503-802-8554 (TTY) for accommodations (e.g. assisted listening devices, sign language, and/or oral interpreter) by 12:00 pm (noon), Friday, March 12.


CONSENT CALENDAR MINUTES


HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLAND BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING

Multnomah County Building – Board Room 501 SE Hawthorne Blvd

Portland, Oregon March 16, 2010 6:15 PM

INTRODUCTION AND WELCOME PUBLIC COMMENT General comments not pertaining to specific resolutions. Any public comment regarding a specific resolution will be heard when the resolution is considered. MEETING MINUTES (Consent Calendar/Minutes Tab) Topic Minutes of February 16, 2010 Board of Commissioners Meeting

REPORTS / RESOLUTIONS Following Resolutions: 10-03 TOPIC Presenter/POC Phone # REPORT Executive Director’s Report

(Exec Director Tab) Steve Rudman 503.802.8455

01 Authorize Project Based Voucher Allocation, City of Portland Notice of Funds Availability (NOFA)

Catherine Such Jill Riddle Margaret Van Vliet, Portland Housing Bureau

503.802.8505 503.802.8565

02 Authorize Adoption of the FY11 Annual Budget

Todd Salvo 503.802.8535

Report FY10 Third Quarter Financial Results

Todd Salvo Julie Satterwhite

503.802.8535 503.802.8354

03 Authorization to Take Ownership of Dawson Park/15 Year Transaction

Dianne Quast Donna Kelley

503.802.8338 503.802.8485

04 Authorization Adoption of Findings Related to the Use of Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) for Hillsdale Terrace

Mike Andrews John Manson

503.802.8507 503.802.8511

ADJOURN Housing Authority of PortlandBoard of Commissioners PacketMarch 2010 6

EXECUTIVE SESSION The Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authority of Portland may meet in Executive Session pursuant to ORS 192.660(2). Only representatives of the news media and designated staff are allowed to attend. News media and all other attendees are specifically directed not to disclose information that is the subject of the session. No final decision will be made in the session. THE NEXT BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING The Board of Commissioners will meet Tuesday, April 20 at 6:15 PM. This meeting will take place at the Multnomah County Building, 501 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Portland.


1

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLAND BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING MINUTES

February 16, 2010 Housing Authority of Portland

135 SW Ash Street, Portland, OR 97204 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Chair Lee Moore, Vice Chair Harriet Cormack, Treasurer David Widmark, Chair Emeritus Jeff Bachrach; Commissioners: Gretchen Kafoury, Shelli Romero, Jim Smith, Brian Lessler, Amie Pico STAFF PRESENT Steve Rudman, Katie Such, Shelley Marchesi, Dianne Quast, Mike Andrews, Betty Dominguez, Peter Beyer, Jill Riddle, Todd Salvo, Jeff Klatke, Julie Satterwhite, John Manson, Rachel Devlin, Rebecca Gabriel, Michael Buonocore, Cinna’Mon Williams, Celia Strauss, Pamela Prideaux LEGAL COUNSEL Steve Abel Chair Moore called the meeting to order at 6:15pm. PUBLIC COMMENT None MEETING MINUTES Chair Moore called for a motion to adopt the minutes of the regular January 19, 2010, Board of Commissioners meeting; Commissioner Cormack moved to adopt and Commissioner Kafoury seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Chair Moore – Aye Vice Chair Cormack – Aye Treasurer Widmark– Aye Chair Emeritus Bachrach – Aye Commissioner Kafoury– Aye Commissioner Romero – Aye Commissioner Smith – Aye Commissioner Lessler - Aye Commissioner Pico – Aye After the vote, Commissioner Kafoury said she would like the Board to send a response to Richard Ellmyer’s comments made at the January Board of Commissioners meeting. Commissioner Smith agreed. Commissioner Lessler received an email from Mr. Ellmyer


2

and said that the response also should address the content of said email. Shelley Marchesi, Public Affairs Director said that the Board had established policy regarding requests or allegations and that she would review past practices of the Board and reaffirm that policy with the Commissioners. Chair Moore questioned whether Ellmyer’s status today is different because he is a political candidate. Steve Abel, HAP’s Board of Commissioners counsel, said his status has not changed. It was agreed that the document would be signed by Chair Moore. Moore also suggested a future meeting to discuss this issue more thoroughly. REPORT Executive Director’s Report Executive Director Rudman began by saying that since this month’s Board of Commissioners meeting is light in requesting board actions, we would be presenting some reports from staff on American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, as update on the Public Housing Preservation Initiative (PHPI), and a report from Rent Assistance outlining some pilot projects that have produced some very positive results. Rudman told the Board that in the coming months we will review the annual budget, with some good news on that front. Primarily that our investment from HUD is the largest while proration has been the smallest, adding that we are as close to full funding as we’ve seen in a long time. We are now prorated in the high 90’s versus the low 80’s. Executive Director Rudman remarked on HUD Secretary Donovan’s recent visit to Portland, stating that Donovan gave Portland many accolades around our sustainability efforts. Money will be available from the EPA, HUD, Department of Labor, and the Department of Human Services. Although it is a relatively small pool of money, the 2011 budget proposal has far reaching ideas about HUD’s relationships with communities. HUD is trying to streamline processes and incent work at the lower level. We will need to figure out which subsidies makes the most sense for us. Already there have been discussions to incent metro areas to look at a more regionalized approach. We are entering year 12 as a Moving-To-Work agency, which will continue to enable us to have the resources we need for our community. An example is rent assistance using MTW funds to assist populations with barriers to housing. We are fully leased and able to look at programs for very hard to house populations. Lastly, Rudman stated that goals have been in regards to the quarterly business plan, which makes this a good time for strategic planning, adding that the Board retreat will be postponed until May 1st. Rudman announced that the opening for the James Hawthorne Apartments is scheduled for February 25th and added that with the Peter Paulson and Hamilton West, we now own three-quarters of that block with REACH owning the rest. Commissioner Romero asked what will happen when ARRA funding goes away, and Rudman answered that it depends on Congress. Housing Authority of PortlandBoard of Commissioners PacketMarch 2010 9

3

Resolution 10-02-01 Authorization to submit FY2011 – Year 12 Moving to Work Plan Michael Buonocore, Assistant Director Planning and Policy, reviewed the resolution, stating that the plan looks like the previous drafts with a couple of distinctions. The first was that the local HUD office wanted to see more detail about our management of site based waiting lists for Project Based Section 8 vouchers. The second was wanting to see our responses to public comments on the plan. This information is included in the updated version of the plan. Chair Moore called for a motion to adopt Resolution 10-02-01. Commissioner Kafoury moved to adopt and Commissioner Lessler seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Chair Moore – Aye Vice Chair Cormack – Aye Treasurer Widmark– Aye Chair Emeritus Bachrach – Aye Commissioner Kafoury– Aye Commissioner Romero – Aye Commissioner Smith – Aye Commissioner Lessler - Aye Commissioner Pico – Aye REPORTS American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Oblig ation and Expense Status and a Public Housing Preservation Initiative Update Mike Andrews, Director of Development and Community Revitalization, and Dianne Quast, Director of Real Estate Operations, began with a brief overview of the Public Housing Preservation Initiative (PHPI) that began in July of 2007. The initiative was created to find ways to retain as many of our public housing properties as possible. The goal was to replace inefficient units with better housing stock, which led to selling our scattered sites as a way to produce revenue. The policy and directive was passed by the Board in the summer of 2007. Each month we have provided a summary of the initiative’s progress in the PHPI report. Andrews provided a summary of the different PHPI projects (on file with the minutes). Quast stated that the first initiative was to relocate 166 residents living in the scattered sites. Relocation vouchers were given to residents and to date we have relocated 144 families. . Director Quast stated the approach we are using is a shift from how we used capital proceeds previously. In the past we repaired units only with glaring needs. We now want to move all units up to a solid B and will use maintenance and operations staff to keep it at that level. ARRA provided the necessary shot in the arm. With yearly capital grant monies we want to focus on our smaller properties rather than spread the money across all properties more thinly.


4

Quast referred to some before and after photos of properties we have recently upgraded (Cora Park and Alderwood Apartments), adding that these were highly orchestrated projects and a number of staff from Real Estate Operations, along with Chrissy McCausland, Relocation Manager and John Manson, Assistant Director of Construction Services met regularly. She added that we are currently working on an ARRA report summarizing what we accomplished and what we learned from it. Another goal is replacing units as part of the 1 for 1 replacement goal. Properties that are part of that are: The Jeffrey, Martha Washington Apartments, the Resource Access Center and Rockwood Station. No capital grant money was used for the Jeffrey. We are spending time to find larger family units to replace what we have lost in the sale of scattered sites. For that endeavor we are working with realtors and brokers who understand the market. They have stated that in 2009 properties were overpriced, but that 2010 should be more of a buyer’s market. We also want to make sure we do not repeat mistakes we made in the 90’s. Quast added that Rockwood Station was remodeled with the proceeds from scattered site sales. Additionally, five units at Rockwood Station are now ADA units. Chair Emeritus Bachrach asked about the remaining capital improvement plan. Andrews explained that we are queued up with the “Fam 4,” totaling 104 units. We will use all capital grant monies, adding that we are looking at tax credit equity for Gallagher and Sellwood Center to leverage money, stressing that we are looking beyond the use of capital grant dollars. He added that we can use tax credits in public housing for rehab. Executive Director Rudman said for the “High 5”, of which Gallagher and Sellwood Center are a part, we are contemplating other resources because the annual capital grant funds would not be enough. Commissioner Romero said that she appreciates the new strategy and direction; focusing more on all of the improvements in a smaller subset. Commissioner Kafoury commented that because of the superior staff involved, we were lined up for the Sweet 16 and other projects, so that when ARRA money was available we were ready to go. Vice Chair Cormack agreed. Chair Moore asked the newest commissioners if they had received their orientation and understood the initiative. He then asked what we are doing to set aside money to make sure the efforts we are taking will remain, adding that we didn’t have sufficient money for ongoing maintenance. Quast replied that we cannot set aside funds for public housing maintenance and that all our properties have planned maintenance and frequent site visits. She said we are being much more diligent about knowing what needs to be done, adding staff will be evaluated on the performance on those tasks. She ended by saying that if big things were to happen to a property we are dependent on federal funds. Chair Moore asked if we were on target with the initial projected dollar amount since starting the PHPI initiative. Andrews said that the ARRA funds we received had to be obligated by March of 2010, and the jobs needed to be under contract by then, stating that we are on track to meet that date. He said that the Board would be receiving a letter


5

from the HUD Assistant Secretary, encouraging the efforts to keep HAP on pace. He said that a report had just been completed by local HUD staff, who spent two days looking through our files, asking questions, and touring properties, adding that they were pleased. The only thing HUD stated for correction was that we did not describe in enough detail what we were doing and that we always need to use the proper HUD forms. Commissioner Romero asked if she could use the February board packet when responding to the clarification letter from HUD and Andrews said that would be okay. Resolution 10-02-02 Authorizes a contract Amendment to Add Construction Contingency for Fir Acres, Demar Downs, Stark Manor, and Townhouse Terrace Mike Andrews introduced the resolution and John Manson, Assistant Director for Construction Services, provided background information. The Board was asked to authorize an amendment to the contract between Great Kate/Walsh Construction and HAP to add a construction contingency in the amount of $387,355 to be used to fund work outside the current contract and will be added for such things as unforeseen conditions. The amount of the contingency is about 10% of the current contract, which is typical. HAP will closely monitor and approve expenses, making sure the contingency is used only for any additional scope of work. Vice Chair Cormack requested clarification regarding some wording in the background information stating that ARRA funds and capital grant funds can both be used to fund a project, but reading further it states that ARRA funds cannot be mixed with capital grant funds. Manson explained that we are working with Great Kate and Walsh Construction on five properties. The first four projects are funded with ARRA dollars. For the fifth property, Celilo Court, we planned to use ARRA money and some of our money, but we learned that we couldn’t combine sources in the same contract so there are two contract instruments for Celilo; a change order to the ARRA funded contract that obligates remaining ARRA funds, and a stand along contract for the balance of the work funded with PHPI funds. Commissioner Lessler pointed out that two different contracts with two different payment processes could potentially cause problems down the road, but Andrews assured him that we had a similar situation during the construction of New Columbia and HUD approved of the process. Chair Moore called for a motion to adopt Resolution 10-02-02. Commissioner Smith moved to adopt and Commissioner Romero seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Chair Moore – Aye Vice Chair Cormack – Aye Treasurer Widmark– Aye Housing Authority of PortlandBoard of Commissioners PacketMarch 2010 12

6

Chair Emeritus Bachrach – Aye Commissioner Kafoury– Aye Commissioner Romero – Aye Commissioner Smith – Aye Commissioner Lessler - Aye Commissioner Pico – Aye Resolution 10-02-03 Authorizes a Contract Amendment at Celilo Court for Capital Improvements John Manson introduced the resolution by saying that we have a balance of $260,000 in ARRA funds that will be obligated for Celilo Court as a separate contract. Bid results have been reviewed and we are within budgeted amounts. The larger explanation of the resolution was included with the review of Resolution 10-02-02. Chair Moore called for a motion to adopt Resolution 10-02-03. Commissioner Romero moved to adopt and Treasurer Widmark seconded the motion. Vice Chair Cormack added that this was brilliant work. The vote was as follows: Chair Moore – Aye Vice Chair Cormack – Aye Treasurer Widmark– Aye Chair Emeritus Bachrach – Aye Commissioner Kafoury– Aye Commissioner Romero – Aye Commissioner Smith – Aye Commissioner Lessler - Aye Commissioner Pico – Aye REPORT Rent Assistance Special Initiatives-Fungible Dollar s Update Jill Riddle, Rent Assistance Director, provided an introduction to the pilot projects that have been started in order to serve higher barrier people and the work her department is doing with partner agencies, adding that we have been able to assist 40 additional people just with the pilots. The purpose of the pilot projects, set up by Rachel Devlin, Community Initiatives Manager are to test different concepts of how to better serve this particular population. The board meeting report provided by Rent Assistance was reviewed. Commissioner Kafoury asked if Short Term Rent Assistance (STRA) money could be used to assist people with deposits and Devlin said that it could be used, depending on the agency and where the funding is coming from. She also added that not having money for deposits is the number one barrier for rents along with application fees. Devlin said that we are just beginning to see the results of these initiatives to determine which ones are working, adding that the first group has over an 80% success rate so far.


7

Commissioner Pico asked how long these pilot projects will continue and Devlin said up to 2-3 years, depending on the trends. She noted that we have a two year commitment from NW Pilot Project and a three year commitment from SE Works. Rudman explained that pilot programs provide us with information about how we are doing. Some of these examples show how we can tweak programs and make decisions locally, such as how we measure the depth of the household being served versus the number of households served. This information helps us determine what might make a difference and if we can adopt pilots as main stream programs. Treasurer Widmark asked Director Riddle when we determine if a pilot program becomes part of our program and Riddle said when the money set aside for the pilot programs runs out, adding that she will be providing a report to the Board on these projects. Chair Emeritus Bachrach asked if it was similar to rent assistance, in the way that NW Pilot Project and others work directly with landlords, but have some elements of Section 8 because of funding sources. Devlin said it was similar to STRA and Riddle said it is a hybrid of both. Riddle replied that this could help us in the future with voucher money potentially going to other sources. Commissioner Lessler asked what kinds of checks and balances will HAP use in the future and where is the control of these funds given to providers. Devlin answered that file audits begin in March and quarterly tracking provides a lot of data on each client. Riddle added that timelines have been given to the providers. Chair Moore said it was a very good report and he liked the matrix that was developed, saying that is was easy to read and well laid out. ADJOURN Treasurer Widmark announced that he will not be at the March Board meeting. There being no further business, Chair Moore adjourned the meeting at 7:42 pm. EXECUTIVE SESSION The Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authority of Portland did not meet in Executive Session pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(c). Attached to the Official Minutes of the Housing Aut hority of Portland are all Resolutions adopted at this meeting, together with copies of memoranda and material submitted to the Commissioners and conside red by them when adopting the foregoing Resolutions. A taped recording of th e proceedings is also kept on file. Celia M. Strauss Recorder, on behalf of Steven D. Rudman, Secretary


8

ADOPTED: February 16, 2010 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLAND

_________________________________ Lee E. Moore, Sr., Chair

ATTEST: __________________________________ Steven D. Rudman, Secretary


EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S

REPORT


1

M E M O R A N D U M

Office of the Executive Director

DATE: March 16, 2010 TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: Steve Rudman SUBJECT: March Executive Director’s Report In March we will discuss two major pieces of business: our support for the City of Portland’s current affordable housing funding cycle and the budget for our fiscal year starting on April 1. Support for the City of Portland Margaret Van Vliet, director of the new Portland Housing Bureau, will join us for the discussion of the City’s request that we provide project-based vouchers to supplement the funding they are making available competitively for affordable housing development. Project-based vouchers – Section 8 vouchers assigned to a unit rather than a household – are critically important to the success the City hopes to have in generating development of deeply affordable housing. Project-based units are affordable to persons with extremely low incomes, typically between 0 and 30 percent of median family income. These 0-30% units are the hardest to finance because the tenants who qualify to rent them are able to pay very little, if any, rent. If project-based Section 8 is attached to a unit, it provides a reliable funding stream that, in combination with what a tenant is able to pay, equals market rent and thus is of immense help in covering operating costs. Often, project-based Section 8 is used in developments serving a very vulnerable population, such as persons in drug and alcohol recovery. These tenants can find it challenging to rent in the private market with a Section 8 voucher, so this resource gives them certainty over the choice afforded by tenant-based vouchers.


2

We have used project-based vouchers in some of our developments, and we have made them available to other affordable housing developers, both through our own competitive allocations, and more recently, joining with the City of Portland and Multnomah County in affordable housing funding cycles. HUD allows housing authorities to project-base up to 20 percent of their total voucher supply. We have approximately 1,100 project-based vouchers out of 7,800, so we are short of the limit. For all of the benefits of project-basing vouchers, it is important to note that we must draw these vouchers from the overall pool, thereby reducing the tenant-based vouchers available in our community. Furthermore, fulfilling project-based Section 8 commitments increases the wait time for those on our tenant-based waiting list. We still have 2,000 households on the list and with the project-based vouchers in our pipeline and a slower attrition rate for tenant-based vouchers created by the current economic conditions, it will be several years before we are able to open the list again. That said, we strongly recommend supporting the City’s request for 50 vouchers for the advantages noted above. In addition, supporting this request allows us to align our affordable housing resources with a valued housing partner and work even more effectively in support of mutual goals. The City originally asked for a multi-year commitment. We recommend supporting their 2010 funding cycle, with the understanding that the strategic planning both organizations are undertaking will allow us to look at how to best align resources in future years. Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Ironically in these still tough economic times, we are fortunate to move into the next 12 months with a healthy budget picture. Our relationship with our major funder, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is strong, we are at or very near to full funding without proration in public housing or Section 8, and we’ve managed our reserves prudently over the turbulence of the past several years. Because real estate is a major part of our business, we have chosen to examine our annual funding flow as we construct our fiscal year budgets. Typically we separate our Development operations from this analysis due to the multi-year cycle of developments and the timing differences between when costs are incurred and developer’s fees are received. Excluding Development from this funding flow analysis, we have a modest surplus in the coming fiscal year’s budget. We have chosen to keep this surplus as a buffer to cost increases we know we will face in the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) starting in fiscal year 2012. We believe taking a conservative approach now will help us through what will undoubtedly be a more challenging budget a year from now. This year’s budgeting process marked the third year that we have worked under the guidance of CFO Todd Salvo’s financial planning unit managed by Julie


3

Satterwhite. We now have a very smooth process that begins in November and involves all of our different departments as we sort through the trade-offs that come with any budget development. While favorable conditions certainly made for smoother sailing, the good work of staff across the organization contributed as well. You will find detail on the proposed budget in the materials later in this packet. Upcoming Events The April work session is Wednesday, April 7 at 5:00 PM and the board meeting will be at 6:15 on Tuesday, April 20.


STAFF REPORTS


HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLAND

FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET


Table of Contents

Management Discussion ...............................................2-7 Operating Statement & Summary of Performance.............................................8 Line Item Analysis & Assumptions ............................9-13

Operating & Administrative Segment Review ........14-28 Operating Statement by Segment...................................29 Funding Flow Analysis & Staffing Summary................30


Housing Authority of Portland Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Management Discussion

Budget Overview Fiscal year (FY) 2011 represents a considerable change from prior years relating to the funding of our two major programs, Public Housing and Section 8 Rent Assistance. The federal appropriations for the operating subsidies were increased for both programs to nearly full funding under their respective formulas. This increase will favorably impact revenue supporting these programs. In addition, development fee revenue will see a considerable increase in FY 2011 from the recognition of fees associated with the Resource Access Center. As discussed later, this revenue increase recorded under accounting rules and reflected in the Agency operating statement budget will not result in cash collected until the subsequent fiscal year. Lastly, the conversion of three tax credit properties to Agency ownership will further drive revenue higher as well as increase Agency operating expense above the prior fiscal year. Tax credit properties are separate legal entities during their 15 year tax compliance period and are not consolidated into the Agency’s financial statements during that period. Upon conversion to Agency ownership their financial activity is included in the Agency’s financials. These three major elements are primarily responsible for the increasing revenue and expense budgeted for FY 2011. Total Agency revenue is projected to increase $9.3M over FY 2010 to a total of $107.9M. Operating expense is anticipated to increase $6.4M to $109M in FY 2011. Similar to the revenue increase, higher operating expense results from the addition of the three tax credit properties converting to Agency ownership along with higher Section 8 voucher payments. Although there are no planned increases in staff, annual compensation increases also contributes to the expense growth. The net result for FY 2011 is an operating loss of $1M. From an operating cash flow basis, the Agency, excluding Development and Community Revitalization (DCR), reflects a positive net operating cash flow (from here forward referred to as funding flow) from operations of $373K. The individual operating groups’ funding flow is as follows:

Operating Group Funding Excess (Deficit)

Public Housing (248,485) Affordable Housing 621,618 Rent Assistance 0

Total of Program Group 373,133


This funding flow result reflects excess funding after paying for all cash expenses for the Agency’s major programs and associated administration costs. During FY 2010, the Resident Services Department was reorganized with responsibility for the self-sufficiency program and staff reporting to Rent Assistance and the Resident Services staff and services contracts supporting the properties reporting to Real Estate Operations. All Resident Services costs are included in the results shown above for the three operating groups, and additional detail has been provided in the Resident Services section on page 22. Additionally, each operating group also has been allocated overhead costs from the administrative units (Executive, Finance & Accounting, Human Resources, Information Technology and Purchasing), as the operating groups are users of those functions agency-wide. The allocation of Executive department costs are equally allocated to each of the operating groups (Public Housing, Affordable Housing, Rent Assistance and DCR) while the remaining administrative units are allocated primarily based on staff levels of the respective operating group. The program group (Public Housing, Affordable Housing, Rent Assistance) receives annual funding in the form of rent, subsidies and grants that must consistently correspond to the amount of expenses incurred in any given year. Ideally, each operating group would have the capacity to fully fund its fully burdened operating costs on an annual basis. Rent Assistance has yet to receive confirmation regarding the amount of Admin Fee Revenue to be received from HUD but federal appropriations were sufficient to ensure that they will be able to fund all of their operating costs resulting in a break-even funding flow for FY 2011. With continuing maintenance and services needs within Public Housing and the absorption of the Resident Services Department, increased revenue in 2011 was insufficient to fully fund all expenses. Affordable Housing will generate a positive funding flow such that the program group combined will reflect a positive funding flow. For the program group as a whole, the projected remaining funding flow of $373K will be retained by the Agency in anticipation of higher operating costs in FY 2012 principally associated with increasing public employee retirement system (PERS) contribution expense and to hedge any risk of lower federal funding. The exclusion of DCR from the above program group funding flow measure is necessary due to the highly volatile nature of the revenue associated with development activity and the multi-year development cycle that attends to such activity. DCR will, from an accrual accounting basis, record a considerable amount of development fee revenue in FY 2011. However, the actual cash receipt of most of these fees will occur in the following fiscal year. The result is that DCR is expected to generate a funding flow deficit of $1.9M in FY 2011. This deficit comes after FY 2010 reflects a positive funding flow of $4.7M for DCR. The analysis of DCR’s funding flow occurs over multiple years as the volatility of revenue and the associated development costs funded by development fees require this multi-year approach. Including Development Department’s funding flow deficit, total Agency funding flow for FY 2011 is:


Total of Program Group 373,133

Development (1,949,749)

Total Agency (1,576,615)

This DCR funding flow deficit for FY 2011 will be funded from reserves held by the Agency. Reserves will be replenished as cash developer fees are collected in subsequent years. Agency Operating Expense The following provides a perspective of the major expense components included in the FY 2011 budget presented in order of magnitude:

Total Operating Expense 108,965,879

Housing assistance payments 63,197,932 58.0%Agency personnel expense (net) 20,005,069 18.4%Other admin expense 6,022,282 5.5%Depreciation expense 6,034,503 5.5%Other maintenance expense 5,030,876 4.6%Utilities 4,010,364 3.7%Other tenant services 2,241,609 2.1%Public housing subsidy to tax credit partnerships 1,456,216 1.3%General Expense 967,028 0.9%

The $109M in operating expense can also be viewed in two separate segments. The first is transfer payments consisting of housing assistance payments made to private market landlords as well as the public housing subsidy that the Agency forwards to tax credit partnerships containing Public Housing units. These transfer payments total $64.7M or 59.3% of total budgeted operating expense. The remaining $44.3M or 40.7% represents the budgeted expense associated with Agency’s operations supporting Agency owned properties, program administration, and development activities. Three Year Business Plan and Initiatives Fiscal year 2011 will be the third and final year of the Agency’s three year business plan. Although many of the goals set forth in the three year business plan have been completed or are in a monitoring phase, there are several that will continue to absorb staff time and resources through the coming fiscal year. Several of the more significant efforts occurring during the 2011 fiscal year are: Goal 1: Preserve and expand housing options Continued implementation and monitoring of program based vouchers Primarily staff time involved. The FY 2011 budget includes $266K from MTW reserves for the Department of Human Services pilot and $160K from MTW reserves for Agency based assistance. Both of these initiatives were funded with fungible dollars from unutilized Section 8 voucher subsidy. These pilot programs were adopted by the Board during CY 2009.


Public Housing preservation initiative (PHPI) This board approved initiative consists of the sale of 148 (162 units) primarily single family Public Housing properties followed by the reinvestment of the sale proceeds to provide for replacement units with remaining available sale proceeds applied to capital work to preserve existing Public Housing properties. PHPI - sale of scattered sites The FY 2011 budget anticipates the relocation 18 households and the sale of 28 units. These sales are budgeted to generate a gain on sale of $4.4M as reflected in the Agency’s operating statement. PHPI - One for one replacement DCR staff activities associated with the Resource Access Center (providing 30 replacement units) and the Martha Washington project (providing 25 replacement units) are included in the operating budget of the DCR department. PHPI - Public Housing capital improvements The final seven of the Sweet Sixteen projects will be completed in FY 2011. These projects are funded by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, Capital Grant funds and scattered site sale proceeds. Additionally, phase 2 of the capital improvement work under the Public Housing Preservation Initiative will begin at four Public Housing sites utilizing $5.1M of Capital Grant funds and potentially scattered site sales proceeds. DCR’s budget reflects staff costs associated with these activities for FY 2011. Year 15 tax credit properties transfer to Agency ownership With the transfer of Peter Paulson in January to Agency ownership along with the planned conversions of Pearl Court and Dawson Park, Agency operating income and operating expense for FY 2011 will increase by $2.4M and $1.9M respectively. As existing tax credit properties reach their 15 year compliance period, asset management works with the limited partners and lenders to convey ownership to the Agency ensuring the ongoing affordability and management of these properties by the Agency. Properties approaching year 15 enter an agency analysis process during which pre-conversion action steps are employed to minimize cost of conversion and ensure the economic viability of the property as it becomes an Agency owned affordable asset. Goal 2: Increase resident and participant engagement This goal was largely met in FY 2010 with the creation of a position related to staff the Resident Advisory Committee. This position continues into this fiscal year. Rent reform initiative Primarily staff time required from various departments along with $20K in consulting expense budgeted for FY 2011. Goal 4: Improve the Agency’s infrastructure Improve Agency infrastructure support


Operating budget includes $77K for upgrades to desktop computers. Capital budget of $217K supports efforts to move the Agency’s current server/storage architecture to “virtualization” allowing for future cost reductions in the replacement of hardware lowering overall cost of the Agency’s technology platform and reducing the amount of space required for IT equipment. This also supports the Agency’s business continuity plan by allowing efficient back up systems to quickly recover when primary systems fail. Also included in the capital budget is $24k for an additional scanner and software for electronic filing and storage of documents for Rent Assistance and Real Estate Operations Risks and Opportunities While economic conditions have stabilized, continuing employment weakness could further limit the ability of residents and participants to maintain or enhance incomes potentially affecting rental income and voucher costs. Final confirmation from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regarding the Public Housing operating subsidy and the administration fees for section 8 has not been received. While the FY 2011 budget assumes a conservative estimate based on federal appropriations, the actual amount to be received will not be known until notification from HUD is received. The Agency has just recently received the Section 8 voucher award for CY 2010. With the resolution of our funding mechanism which moves the Agency to a block grant, the amount awarded is estimated to provide an additional $1.5M in voucher subsidy than budgeted allowing for additional funding for MTW purposes by the end of FY 2011. All current MTW programs and initiatives have sufficient MTW reserves from prior years to fund the following Board approved initiatives – Landlord Guarantee Fund, Rent Well Education Courses, Department of Human Services Pilot and the Agency Based Assistance with NW Pilot Project and SE Works. The Agency is currently engaged in a comprehensive strategic planning effort. This process will assemble information from internal and external stakeholders to assist in developing Agency direction on several critical issues affecting our programs and utilization of Agency resources. With the development of the strategic plan continuing into FY 2011, it is not now known what financial impacts may result from the adoption of the final strategic plan. Assessment of financial impacts that result from the adoption of actions based on the direction set by the strategic plan (for example, the possibility of relocating the Agency’s headquarters and/or contemplating a name change for the Agency, in addition to new business intiatives) will occur during the fiscal year and such impacts will be presented to the Board as they become known. Conclusion The Agency continues to focus on maintaining operations within a financially sustainable framework. The critical measure in achieving sustainability is the determination of the adequacy of annual funding to support the agency operations. This sustainability measure is established by extending the operating statement prepared under generally accepted accounting principles into an analysis that provides the net funding flow excess or deficit for the Agency and each of its operating divisions.


With the program group (Public Housing, Affordable Housing and Rent Assistance) generating a combined surplus funding flow in FY 2011, largely as a result of the increased federal appropriations, Management has determined that retaining this relatively modest surplus to be the prudent course. Anticipated cost pressures, primarily for labor costs, including retirement costs, along with the possibility of less robust federal funding in FY 2012 form the basis of this decision. Unlike the program group that has an annual sustainability measure and operating cycle, the Development and Community Revitalization (DCR) department’s operating cycle and financial sustainability must be considered over multiple years. The funding flow deficit that DCR will experience in FY 2011 will be largely recovered by the collection of development fees for the Resource Access Center in FY 2012. However, the current year shortfall will require funding from Agency reserves during FY 2011. Total cash reserves at December 31, 2010, were just under $26M, consisting of $16.2M relating to real estate sales and development activities (largely obligated for one-for-one replacement and capital improvements to existing properties under the Public Housing Preservation Initiative), $2.9M associated with received but unutilized rent assistance proceeds and $6.8M of general unobligated reserves. While the Agency was the beneficiary of increased federal funding for this year, there is some caution when looking beyond this fiscal year. Management is concerned that funding for federal programs that the Agency administers is unlikely to experience additional increases and could come under some pressure in the coming years. That possibility with the knowledge that some costs such as public employee retirement contributions will put upward pressure on operating costs in future years adds to the cautious view. With these issues in mind, FY 2011 budgeting limits were put in place which kept non-personnel administrative costs flat to the prior fiscal year. Management’s decision to retain the FY 2011 funding flow excess from the program groups also signals concern regarding funding and expense issues in coming years. Management, while cautious about the outlook, believes the strength of the Agency’s balance sheet and the FY 2011 budget provide the resources necessary to continue pursuing the major remaining initiatives contained in the three year business plan, enhance the quality of the programs and properties that are home to those we serve, and embark upon the development of the strategic plan providing direction to the Agency efforts in the coming years. The remaining sections of this budget report provide greater detail and analysis of the Housing Authority of Portland’s FY 2011 budget.


Housing Authority of Portland

FY 2010 FY 2011 Increase/Operating Statement Forecast Budget (Decrease)

Dwelling Rental 10,447,226 12,851,956 2,404,730 Non-dwelling Rental 1,232,413 1,249,216 16,803 HUD Subsidies -Housing Assistance 63,002,901 65,646,466 2,643,564 HUD Subsidies -Public Housing 9,431,001 10,247,964 816,964 HUD Grants 5,735,205 5,970,238 235,033 Development Fee Revenue, Net 954,045 4,017,621 3,063,576 State, Local & Other Grants 1,988,718 1,182,400 (806,318) Other Revenue 3,950,339 4,424,345 474,005 ARRA Operating Revenue 1,978,769 2,338,099 359,330 Total IA Revenue (49,898) (0) 49,898

Total Operating Revenues 98,670,719 107,928,304 9,257,585 PH Subsidy Transfer 1,200,867 1,456,216 255,349 Housing Assistance Payments 60,639,093 63,197,932 2,558,839 Administrative Personnel Expense 13,450,815 14,298,882 848,067 Other Admin Expenses 5,371,166 6,022,282 651,116 Fees/overhead charged - - - Tenant Svcs Personnel Expense 1,845,422 1,671,519 (173,902) Other Tenant Svcs Expenses 1,828,534 2,241,609 413,075 Maintenance Personnel Expense 4,348,324 4,408,606 60,282 Other Maintenance Expenses 4,659,765 5,030,876 371,111 Utilities 3,694,306 4,010,364 316,058 Total IA Expense (401,899) (373,939) 27,960 Depreciation 5,115,756 6,034,503 918,747 General 850,103 967,028 116,925 Impairment Charge - - -

Total Operating Expenses 102,602,250 108,965,879 6,363,628 Operating Income (Loss) (3,931,531) (1,037,575) 2,893,957 Reserve Funding 0 (0) (0) Operating Income (Loss) after Reserve Funding (3,931,531) (1,037,575) 2,893,956

Investment Income 575,441 362,173 (213,268) Interest Expense (2,374,128) (2,871,872) (497,744) Amortization (47,985) (42,121) 5,864 Investment in Partnership Valuation Charge - - - Gain (Loss) on Sale of Assets 5,664,439 4,405,366 (1,259,073) Chg in Derivative Contract Value 318,435 - (318,435)

Net Other Income (Expense) 4,136,202 1,853,546 (2,282,655) HUD Nonoperating Contributions 8,675,160 3,691,164 (4,983,995) Other Nonoperating Contributions 6,616,276 - (6,616,276) ARRA Nonoperating Contributions 1,965,235 5,001,281 3,036,046 Nonoperating contributions made - - - Reserve Funded Capital Contributions (0) (0) (0)

Net Capital Contributions 17,256,671 8,692,445 (8,564,225) Net Changes 17,461,341 9,508,417 (7,952,924)

Funding Flow Analysis

Operating Income (Loss) (3,931,531) (1,037,575) 2,893,957

Funding Flow Adjustments 8,705,117 (539,041) (9,244,158)

Net Funding Flow 4,773,585 (1,576,615) (6,350,201)

FY 2010 Forecast – Consists of nine months of actual results through December, and three months of forecasted results through March.

Details of funding flow adjustments are shown on page 30.


Line Item Analysis and Budget Assumptions REVENUE

◊ Dwelling Rental - $12.8M, $2.4M greater than FY 2010 Forecast

o Affordable Housing rents (including Special Needs) are budgeted to increase by $2.4M in FY 2011. This increase results from the conversion of the Dawson Park, Peter Paulson, and Pearl Court properties from a Tax Credit Partnership to an Agency owned affordable property. Please note that this is largely an accounting transaction – these affordable housing properties were originally owned by Partnerships, and as such, were budgeted separately. Although the Agency contracts for the management and is responsible for all operations and financial reports of the Tax Credit Partnerships, the partnerships are not reflected in the Agency’s financial statements. Upon conversion from the partnership to an Agency owned affordable property, the balance sheet and all operating activity is then incorporated into the Agency financial statements. The Affordable Housing portfolio occupancy levels are budgeted at 96% in FY 2011. While budgeted to actual revenues were down in FY 2010 as a result of the market, management believes that these occupancy levels are achievable.

o Public Housing rents of $4.2M are expected to be flat compared to FY 2010 Forecast. Occupancy levels are budgeted at 97% in 2011.

◊ Non-dwelling Rental – $1.2M, flat to FY 2010 Forecast

o Non-dwelling rental includes commercial rents, payments for special needs master leased properties, land lease revenue, cell tower revenues, and parking revenue.

◊ HUD Subsidies – Housing Assistance - $65.6M, $2.6M greater than FY 2010 Forecast

o The FY 2011 budget assumes per voucher funding consistent with FY 2010 at 99.1% proration.

o Administrative fees assume an increase in proration from 91% to 95% resulting in $279K increase.

o The budget assumes that Veteran’s Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) vouchers are fully utilized, resulting in an increase in revenue of $700K.

o In fiscal 2010, $1.6M of Housing Assistance Subsidy was ARRA funded, recorded on a separate line in the 2010 forecast.

o Per voucher funding refers to the annual subsidy provided for households receiving a voucher. Historically this funding was based on the Agency’s average cost per voucher. In years when the actual average cost provided to the household was less than the subsidy provided, the Agency used its MTW authority to set aside the excess for local MTW programs. Beginning with CY 2010, the Agency has converted to block grant funding. The subsidy provided will no longer be tied to the average cost per voucher, rather will be based on the prior year grant inflated and prorated according to HUD formula.

◊ HUD Subsidies – Public Housing - $10.2M, $817K greater than FY 2010 Forecast

o Operating Subsidy proration for FY 2011 is assumed to be 97% of what the formula calculates as necessary to operate the public housing portfolio. This rate is greater than


that received in FY 2010, but is a conservative estimate based on appropriations information.

o Public Housing units will increase a net 70 units with new units at Rockwood Station (20), The Jeffrey (20) and Martha Washington (25).

o The 28 Scattered Site units projected to be sold during FY 2011 will continue to receive subsidy as an asset repositioning fee. Total asset repositioning fee associated with the sale of scattered sites is $300K in FY 2011.

o The Agency will no longer receive an asset repositioning fee for the redevelopment of Iris Court (Humboldt Gardens). The Agency received $200K in FY 2010.

◊ HUD Grants - $6M, $235K greater than FY 2010 Forecast

o Rent Assistance has increased utilization of HUD Shelter Plus Care Grants resulting in a net increase of $310K.

o Public Housing is expected to utilize approximately $320K of the Capital Fund to support operating expense associated with maintenance activities. This is a reduction of $50K from prior year.

o The utilization of Capital Grant funds to support Public Housing operations is budgeted to remain at $900K, essentially the same as prior year.

HUD Grants consist of: 2010 2011

HOPE VI Endowment – New Columbia $0.07M $0.07M HOPE VI – Humboldt Gardens 0.19M 0.17M ROSS Grant 0.45M 0.47M Shelter Plus Care 3.31M 3.62M Elderly/Disabled CHSP Grant 0.41M 0.41M Modernization Grant 0.37M 0.32M Capital Fund used for operations 0.90M 0.90M

Total $5.7M $6.0M

◊ Development Fee Revenue - $4M, $3M greater than FY 2010 Forecast

Consists of: 2010 2011

Resource Access Center $0.75M $3.21M Jeffrey Apartments 0.10M Martha Washington 0.10M 0.70M University Place * 0.55M $0.11M

Total $1.50M $4.02M

* Eliminated at the Agency level.


◊ State, Local & Other Grants - $1.2M, $806K less than FY 2010 Forecast

Grants consist of: 2010 2011

Short-term Rent Assistance $1.80M $1.16M Schools & Family Housing 0.15M Children’s Investment Fund 0.02M City of Portland – New Columbia/Humboldt 0.02M Meyer Memorial 0.03M

Total $2.0M $1.2M

◊ Other Revenue - $4.4M, $474Kgreater than FY 2010 Forecast

Other Revenue consists of: 2010 2011

Portability Revenue $1.78M $1.92M Property related income – PH 0.20M 0.20M Property related income – AH 0.64M 0.90M CHSP Medicaid payments 0.30M 0.30M County funds for youth programs 0.17M 0.17M BHCD PSH Contract 0.21M 0.25M PILOT – Short-term Rent Assistance 0.31M 0.20M Fraud/Bad Debt Recovery 0.17M 0.22M Housing Authority of Clackamas Co 0.06M Other 0.03M 0.15M Procedure Fees, City Funds, Energy Trust 0.13M 0.04M

Total $3.95M $4.4M

EXPENSE

◊ PH Subsidy Transfer - $1.5M, $255K greater than FY 2010 Forecast o Represents Public Housing Subsidies paid to the Agency's Tax Credit properties.

Increase due to additional subsidy proration of 97% and additional 70 units at Rockwood Station (20), The Jeffrey (20) and Martha Washington (25).

◊ Housing Assistance Payments - $63.2M, $2.6M greater than FY 2010 Forecast o This increase results from additional funding for 89 vouchers for a full year and the

assumption that our cost per voucher is equal to our subsidy per voucher. In the FY 2010 forecast, $714K of subsidy in excess of payments is reserved for future MTW activities. In addition to Section 8 voucher payments, the budget reflects increases due to the Department of Human Services Pilot program, Agency based assistance, increased Port Ins, and increases in Short-term Rent Assistance.

◊ Administrative Personnel Expense - $14.3M, $848K greater than FY 2010 Forecast o Total labor expense assumes HAP is fully staffed to budgeted FTEs. No provision for

position vacancy was included. Expenses assume an average increase of 4% in wages and 5% increase in benefits. Total FTEs for the agency in FY 2011 are budgeted at 264.6, which is 1.4 FTE less than FY 2010 budget.

o Administrative Personnel expense includes staff that in prior years were classified as Tenant Service Personnel. The increase in Administrative Personnel expense is offset by a decrease in Tenant Service Personnel expense. The Agency defines staff as either Administrative, Tenant Services, or Maintenance. As employees move between positions or positions are reclassed, the general ledger account that is charged may also change.


Therefore, the Agency tends to look at Administrative and Tenant Services labor together when evaluating change year over year.

◊ Other Administrative Expense - $6M, $651K greater than FY 2010 Forecast o Other Administrative Expense for all properties and administrative departments existing

in 2010 are flat to FY 2010 forecast. o The $632K increase in Other Administrative Expense is commensurate with the expense

of the additional three affordable properties converting to Agency ownership. ◊ Tenant Services Personnel Expense - $1.7M, $174K less than FY 2010 Forecast

o Wages and benefits are budgeted to increase an average of 4% and 5% respectively. This increase is offset by the transfer of a supervisor to Administrative personnel expense and the change of CHSP staff from agency personnel to contract services.

◊ Other Tenant Services Expense - $2.2M, $413K greater than FY 2010 Forecast o The FY 2011 budget reflects the change from employees to contract services for the

CHSP program ($100K), additional ARRA funded relocation ($100K), additional services/supplies at New Columbia and Humboldt Gardens ($140K) and Rockwood ($100K due to unplanned vacancy in 2010).

◊ Maintenance Personnel Expense - $4.4M, $60K increase over FY 2010 Forecast o Increase in expense represents budgeted increases in compensation and benefits for

existing staff. ◊ Other Maintenance Expense - $5M, $371K greater than FY 2010 Forecast

o Maintenance expenses at existing properties are budgeted at $64K less than FY 2010 forecasted expense.

o The increase in Other Maintenance Expense is commensurate with the expense associated with the three new affordable properties.

◊ Utilities - $4M, $316K increase compared to FY 2010 Forecast o For existing properties, the 2011 budget projects a decrease of $263K in utility expenses

compared to the FY 2010 budget due to the success of the water conservation rehabilitation to existing units as well as a rate decrease projected for natural gas. The forecast for FY 2010 already reflects a reduction in utility expenses, therefore FY 2011 compared to forecast is increased only $28K.

o The remaining increase of $288K is due to the expense associated with the three new affordable properties.

◊ Total Intra-Agency Expense - $373K credit, flat to FY 2010 Forecast o This credit represents the cost of labor associated with capital projects that will be moved

to work in progress and capitalized as part of property improvements on the Agency balance sheet.

◊ Depreciation - $6M, $918K greater than FY 2010 Forecast o Capital improvements to existing properties accounts for $0.5M of the increase. o The three additional affordable properties account for the remaining $0.4M increase over

FY 2010 forecast. ◊ General - $1M, $117K increase compared to FY 2010 Forecast

o The 2011 budget projects general expenses flat compared to the FY 2010 budget for existing properties.

o The FY 2010 forecast is less than FY 2010 budget by $79K, which is offset by the conversion of the 3 tax credit properties to Agency ownership.

NET OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE)


◊ Investment Income - $362K, $213K less than FY 2010 Forecast o Interest rates for our investment portfolio have decreased significantly. The FY 2011

budget assumes our best estimate of investment balances and assumed rates for the fiscal year.

◊ Interest Expense - $2.8M, $497K greater than FY 2010 Forecast o The 2011 budget projects interest expense to increase only $15K compared to the FY

2010 forecast for existing properties. o The remaining increase of $492K is due to the expense associated 3 tax credit properties

converting to Agency ownership. ◊ Amortization - $42K, $5K less than FY 2010 Forecast ◊ Gain (Loss) on Sale of Assets - $4.4M, $1.3M less than FY 2010 Forecast

o Budgeted gain represents sale of 28 Public Housing scattered sites compared to 36 sales in the prior year.

◊ Change in Derivative Contract Value – Not budgeted, $318K in FY 2010 Forecast o This is a non-cash accounting entry and routinely is not budgeted.

NET OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS

◊ HUD Non-Operating Contributions - $3.7M, $5M less than FY 2010 Forecast

Capital Contributions consist of: 2010 2011

HOPE VI – Humboldt Gardens $4.53M $0.00M PH Capital Fund – Cap Fund bond pymt 0.52M 0.52M PH Capital Fund – Capital Projects 3.62M 3.17M

Total $8.67M $3.69M

◊ Other Non-Capital Contributions – None planned for 2011, $6.6M less than FY 2010 Forecast o In FY 2010 we received $6.6M for:

� $1.1M Oregon Housing and Community Services Housing Plus grant funds related to the redevelopment of University Place and Martha Washington

� $4.7M like kind contribution of land and building by Multnomah County related to the redevelopment of Martha Washington

� $400K from PDC for the Resource Access Center � $300K from Bank of America Community Development for New Columbia debt

forgiveness ◊ ARRA Capital Contributions - $5M, $3M greater than FY 2010 Forecast

o The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was executed in the spring of 2009. The Agency rapidly put together a plan to spend the grants awarded. While the Agency spent a considerable amount in FY 2010, the balance of the grant will be spent on Public Housing Preservation activities in FY 2011.


OPERATING AND ADMINISTRATIVE

SEGMENT REVIEW


Rent Assistance

Summary Budget Data FY2010 forecast FY2011 budget Inc.(Dec.)Operating Revenue 69,536,789 71,754,039 2,217,250

Operating Expense 67,336,012 70,225,743 2,889,731

Operating Income Before OH 2,200,777 1,528,296 (672,481)

Allocated Overhead 2,102,153 2,019,833 (82,319)

Operating Income after OH 98,625 (491,537) (590,162)

Reserve Funding (411,100) 483,605 894,705

Operating Income after Reserve Funding (312,475) (7,932) 304,542

Funding Surplus (Deficit) (284,039) (0) 284,039

o Department Profile � Vouchers Administered 7,795 � Housing Assistance Payments $54.5M � Short-term Rent Funds Administered $3.0M � Shelter + Care Funds Administered $3.2M � Other Housing Assistance $2.5M � Staff FTE – FY 2011 63.1 � As a general description, the Rent Assistance department consists of three major

operating segments: the Housing Choice Voucher staff, dedicated to both landlords and households receiving subsidy, the Short Term Rent Assistance staff, funded by jurisdictional partners, and the family self-sufficiency, or GOALS staff, discussed below.

o Key Budget Assumptions: � Section 8 Housing Assistance funding is assumed to be at the same rate received in the

prior year ($582 per voucher). � Section 8 Administrative Fees are assumed to be at the same rate as the prior year

prorated at 95% versus 91% in the prior year. � Voucher Costs are assumed to fully utilize all available funding. � GOALS staff funding from Section 8 funds assumes revenue for four staff. This could

increase by $50-100K if additional HUD funding becomes available.

o Major Programs/Initiatives/Activities and estimated budget impact � In calendar year 2009, the Board of Commissioners approved establishing several new

initiatives funded by excess, or “fungible” dollars from the Rent Assistance program, that were available as a result of actual costs/voucher being less than funded costs/voucher. These new initiatives are detailed below; budgeted amounts were previously approved. As the Agency accumulates excess housing assistance subsidy, the excess is set aside in a reserve fund. In later years, as this prior excess is spent on local programs, the operating costs are funded from these reserves. The following programs are funded from these reserves in FY 2011.


� Agency Based Assistance is projected to increase by $124K to a total of $160K utilizing reserve funding from prior years’ excess Housing Assistance Payments.

� The Department of Human Services Pilot collaboration is projected to increase by $35K to a total of $266K utilizing reserve funding from prior year excess Housing Assistance Payments.

� As a result of the Resident Services reorganization, the Rent Assistance department absorbed the staff and programs related to GOALS during the current year including GOALS classes and recruitment incentives that will utilize $31K of reserve funding from prior year excess Housing Assistance Payments.

� The implementation of the Rent Well readiness program will utilize $27K of reserve funding from prior year excess Housing Assistance Payments.

Reserve Funding Summary

FY 2010 Forecast

FY 2011 Budget Increase (Decrease)

GOALS (workshops) DHS Pilot Landlord Guarantees/ Deposits for Sec8 vouchers holders GRRENT forecast for deposits Rent Well classes Agency based assistance (NW Pilot & SE Works) Total

266 229,551

16,613 13,530 6,938

36,297

303,196

30,600 265,806

0 0

27,199

160,000

483,605

30,334 36,255

(16,613) (13,530)

20,261

123,703

180,409

o Causes of Year over Year change for major revenue/expense fluctuations

� Operating Revenue is increasing $2.2M over FY 2010 forecast due to: o HUD Housing Assistance Subsidy increases $700K for Housing Assistance Payment

Expenses due to the assumption of full utilization of the VASH vouchers and $279K for Administrative Fees. The increase in Administrative Fees is due to an increase in proration to 95%.

o HUD Grants increases $208K due to increased leasing in Shelter Plus Care, but is offset by the end of a $100K GOALS grant.

o State, Local and Other Grants decrease $769K for Short-Term Rent Assistance funding from the City of Portland. This decline is more than replaced by ARRA funding of $2M to be received in FY 2011.

� Operating Expense is increasing $2.9M over FY 2010 due to: o Housing Assistance Payment expense accounts for $2.6M of the operating expense

increase, correlating to the revenue changes above. The current forecast reflects payments less than subsidy of $714K that is transferred to Reserve Funding. FY 2011 budget assumes full utilization of subsidy for payments.

o Administrative personnel expense accounts for $244K of the increase, which includes temporary staff increases to work on scanning electronic files and annual compensation increases .


o Major Funding Flow Adjustments � Reserve funding includes two components which currently show an increase of $895K

for FY 2011 compared to the forecast. o Reserve funds applied to new initiatives increases $180K. o Reserve funds resulting from excess HAP in FY 2011 is zero since we budget for

full utilization. This is compared to the current forecast which anticipates $714K of excess voucher funding for FY 2010.


Public Housing



Operating Income Before OH (442,730) (923,703) (480,974)

Allocated Overhead 1,723,022 2,140,928 417,905

Operating Income after OH (2,165,752) (3,064,631) (898,879)

Reserve Funding - 26,744 26,744

Operating Income after Reserve Funding (2,165,752) (3,037,887) (872,135)

Funding Surplus (Deficit) 190,147 (248,485) (438,632)

o Department Profile � Public Housing Properties managed 42 � Affordable and Tax Credit properties with PH units 7 � Units managed 2,551 � Staff FTE – FY 2011 108.5 � Public Housing is one of three departments within Real Estate Operations (REO). Also

included in REO are Affordable Housing and Resident Services. There are restrictions placed on federally funded programs which include Public Housing and some resident services that do not apply to the Affordable Portfolio and non-grant funded services. Therefore the Agency budgets and accounts for these portfolios separately.

o Key Budget Assumptions � Occupancy – Public Housing is assuming 97% occupancy in FY 2011. � Subsidy Proration – Public Housing will assume 97% proration for FY 2011.

o Major Programs/Initiatives/Activities and estimated budget impact � Public Housing “Bed Bug Team” – Through changing our portfolio assignments, we

have designated two FTEs to assist with managing the issue of bedbug infestations in our high-rises. No new FTEs were created.

� In January 2010 public housing staff assumed the property management function at Humboldt Gardens. The staff costs will be paid by the tax credit entity.

o Cause of Year over Year change for major revenue/expense fluctuations

� Operating Income is increasing $2.1M over FY 2010 forecast due to: o HUD Subsidies – Public Housing is budgeted to increase $689K due to the increase

in proration offset by the loss of asset repositioning fees. o Intra Agency Revenue is budgeted to increase $1.3M due to the change in Resident

Services methodology. All revenue associated with resident services at a property


will be credited to that property via Intra Agency transfer – Resident Services. Offsetting expenses will be reflected in Intra Agency Resident Service Expense.

� Operating Expense is increasing $2.6M over FY 2010 forecast due to:

o Public Housing Subsidy transfer is budgeted to increase $255K due to the increase in proration.

o Administrative Personnel increase of $221K is due to both the correction of general ledger codes between years, as well as the absorption of the Construction Community Specialist and annual compensation increases.

o Other Administrative expense increase of $204K is due to the current forecast significantly under budget in rent-up related expenses due to the Sweet 16 improvements. In addition, FY 2011 budget reflects the full year impact of the Key Not a Card courtesy patrol.

o Other Tenant Services expense increase of $104K is due to increased relocation expenses. This is offset by the increase in ARRA revenue.

o Intra Agency Expense is budgeted to increase $1.3M due to the change in Resident Services Methodology. Properties with services will show both the revenue and expense associated with those services.

o Depreciation is budgeted to increase $459K due to the completion of Sweet 16 work. � Overhead Allocations for PH increased $418K due to absorbing 60% of Resident

Services’ agency overhead and Resident Services Department shortfall as well as the change in allocation method for the Executive department to reflect the Resident Services reorganization.

o Major Funding Flow Adjustments

� Depreciation as shown in the operating statement is reversed in funding flow since this is

a non-cash expense.


Affordable Housing Portfolio



Operating Income Before OH 1,495,099 2,216,384 721,285

Allocated Overhead 361,774 713,918 352,145

Operating Income after OH 1,133,325 1,502,466 369,140

Reserve Funding 54,312 95,233 40,921

Operating Income after Reserve Funding 1,187,637 1,597,698 410,061

Funding Surplus (Deficit) 774,996 621,618 (153,378)

o Department Profile

� Affordable and Tax Credit Properties 37 � Affordable and Tax Credit Units 3,959 � Special Needs Properties 36 � Special Needs Units 422 � Staff FTE – FY 2011 12.3 � As a general description, the Affordable Housing portfolio is largely the result of

development and acquisitions undertaken by the Agency in the past. Cash flow from the Affordable Housing portfolio is controlled by agreements with investors and funders. Cash flow to the agency can be constrained by physical needs within the properties, although management endeavors to cover all capital costs with reserves at the property level whenever possible.

o Key Budget Assumptions � Occupancy – The average expected occupancy is 96%. � Average rent increase – The entire rental income increase from FY 2010 is due to the

conversion of three tax credit partnerships to agency owned affordable properties and their inclusion in the Agency financials. Excluding these properties, rental income is flat to FY 2010.

o Major Programs/Initiatives/Activities and estimated budget impact � Interior upgrades at the Plaza- This project will include extensive interior upgrades

(painting, flooring, new heaters, and cabinetry) to almost half of the units on site. The work will be done in house, and the total for the project is approximately $240K.

o Cause of Year over Year change for major revenue/expense fluctuations - There are three, year-15 tax credit properties that will be transferring ownership to the Agency in FY 2011. The result is large increases in both revenue and expenses compared to FY 2010. Total revenue from these properties is $2.4M and total expense is $1.9M, resulting in $544K net operating income. However, there is no impact to funding flow from these transfers due to prior year cash received from the tax credit entity, the restrictions on cash to the Agency and funding of reserves.


Detailed below are the revenue/ expense fluctuations without the addition of these three properties, except as noted:

� Operating Revenue is increasing $896K over FY 2010 forecast due to:

o HUD Subsidies Housing Assistance combined with ARRA subsidy which replaced Housing Assistance in FY 2010 increased $190K because of increases at the Project Based Section 8 properties.

o HUD Subsidies Public Housing increased $119K due to full year of subsidy at Rockwood Station for the 25 public housing units places at this property.

o HUD Grants increased $172K due to the addition of Humboldt Gardens support. Community involvement and support is a fundamental piece of the HOPE VI grant. At completion, the residual grant becomes an endowment to fund the Community and Supportive Services (CSS) program. In FY 2010 this revenue and associated expense was reflected in Resident Services.

o Other Revenue increased $122K resulting from an increase in Property Management fees from the addition of three agency owned properties.

o Intra Agency Revenue increased $199K to reflect the transfer of resident service revenue to the properties where the expense is incurred.

� Operating Expense for properties existing in FY 2010 is increasing $719K due to: o Administrative personnel increased $166K due to the addition of 2 community

builders transferred from Executive department and annual compensation increases. o Tenant Services increased $132K due to the inclusion of Humboldt Gardens Support

into the Affordable Housing roll up ($45K), and the increase in program supplies and the Crew at New Columbia.

o Intra Agency Expense increased $280K due to increased Resident Services charges for additional services at some affordable properties. As part of the process to account for resident services revenues and expense at the property level, the department administration of resident services is partially paid for by a charge to each property receiving services equal to 10% of the cost of services. This fee is consistent with most grant allowances for administrative costs.

� Overhead increased $350K due to the absorption of 40% of the Resident Service Agency allocation and of the Resident Services department shortfall as well as the change in allocation method for the Executive department to reflect the Resident Services reorganization.

o Major Funding Flow Adjustments

� Total cash generated by the affordable properties is expected to increase $356K over FY 2010 forecast to a total $2.5M.

� New Columbia Support receives $340K of the total cash to the agency. The budget for New Columbia support will require $95K from reserves, which is $64K less than FY 2010 forecast.

� The decline in net funding flow is due to the absorption of Resident Services agency and department overhead.


Resident Services

Summary Budget Data FY2010 forecast FY2011 budget Inc.(Dec.)Operating Revenue 2,102,507 2,579,716 477,209

Operating Expense 2,411,264 2,778,015 366,751

Operating Income Before OH (308,757) (198,300) 110,458

Allocated Overhead 371,053 (169,772) (540,825)

Operating Income after OH (679,811) (28,528) 651,283

Reserve Funding 28,528 28,528 0

Operating Income after Reserve Funding (651,283) 0 651,283

Funding Surplus (Deficit) (637,331) 0 637,331

Over this past year the Resident Services Department was integrated into several agency departments. The GOALS program joined the Rent Assistance Department and Resident Involvement was moved to the Executive Department. All site-based services, including Resident and Community Service Coordinators, the Opportunity Housing Initiative (OHI), youth contracts and the Congregate Housing Services Program (CHSP), are now part of Real Estate Operations (REO). The budget represented above reflects only those programs that are now Real Estate Operations (REO). Site-based services are an important piece of REO and are important to the mission of the Housing Authority. Overall, these programs support families at Fairview, Humboldt Gardens and New Columbia with self-sufficiency services and other service coordination at multiple properties. Specialty services focused on independent living for elderly and disabled residents are also provided as part of the Congregate Housing Program and additional resources are targeted to youth for school success. To meet the goal of reporting all Resident Services expense and revenue at a property receiving such services, and keeping Resident Services as a budget group, a method was developed to allocate such services to the respective properties they serve. All recipient properties that receive services programs pay a fee to support Resident Services department costs. In the Public Housing property budgets there is an increase in both intra agency revenue and expense which accounts for services funded by grants and other sources. In the budgets for Public Housing and Affordable Housing Department there are increases in overhead to account for both the Resident Services department budget shortfall and the portion of the Resident Services agency overhead. o Department Profile

� GOALS/OHI Participants 487 � Properties receiving Services 30 � Staff FTE – FY 2011 17.6

o Key Budget Assumptions � The Public Housing Set Aside for Resident Service Coordination set aside was prorated

at 97%


o Major Programs/Initiatives/Activities and estimated budget impact

▪ New or increased services planned at Hamilton West, the Jeffrey, Pearl Court, Yards at Union Station, the Plaza, Rosenbaum Plaza, Grace Peck and Unthank Plaza of $180K service dollars, offset by revenue to Resident Services from these properties paid for from property operations. o Funding dedicated to services at the Jeffrey, Yards at Union Station, and the Plaza are

restricted funds and have no impact to the agency’s cash flow. o Increased services at Hamilton West, Pearl Court, Rosenbaum Plaza, Grace Peck and

Unthank Plaza reduces the amount of net remaining cash flow to the Agency. The value of the increase is $100K and is inclusive of the Resident Service 10% admin fee and an FY 2010 obligation to increase services at Rosenbaum.

o Cause of Year over Year change for major revenue/expense fluctuations ▪ Operating Revenue is increasing $477K over FY 2010 due to:

o Increase of $138K in other revenue which is primarily from tax credit properties that will be receiving services managed by Housing Authority Resident Services.

o Increase in Intra-agency (IA) Revenue of $399K resulting from services provided to the tax credit properties and a fee charged to all properties receiving services to defray the cost of the Resident Services department overhead.

▪ Operating Expense is increasing $367K over FY 2010 due to: o $271K increase in Other Tenant Services due to increasing in contract services.

Changes were: � The agreement with AFSCME for remaining CHSP staff ended in October and

staffing expenses moved from Agency personnel to contracts � New services contracts are being planned for at tax credit sites referenced above. � Rockwood Landing services moved from agency staff to contract

o $91K increase in IA expense of which $154K for the administrative costs of Resident Services group and is offset by IA revenue (see first bullet above); $54K decrease in shared staff at Hollywood East.

▪ Overhead Allocated - the shortfall in Resident Services Department administrative costs ($170K) is credited to Resident Services and then split between Public Housing (60%) and Affordable Housing (40%). In addition the Resident Services portion of Agency Overhead is allocated to Public Housing and Affordable (approx $250K).


Development and Community Revitalization Department


Operating Expense 2,438,609 2,259,024 (179,585)

Operating Income Before OH (790,191) 1,952,005 2,742,196

Allocated Overhead 861,170 889,602 28,432

Operating Income after OH (1,651,361) 1,062,403 2,713,764

Reserve Funding (657,526) (797,808) (140,283)

Operating Income after Reserve Funding (2,308,886) 264,595 2,573,481

Funding Surplus (Deficit) 4,731,795 (1,949,749) (6,681,544)

o Department Profile � Active Projects* 13 � Active Projects – total budget $146M � Staff FTE – FY 2011 19.6

*”Sweet 16 included as single project” � As a general description, the Development and Community Revitalization (DCR)

department focuses on the Agency’s Public Housing Preservation Initiative by identifying and developing opportunities to replace or improve public housing units. The department works with the existing residents during rehabilitation of existing properties and, when necessary, facilitates the relocation of residents. The department earns Developer Fees to pay for their costs of development. Relocation costs associated with public housing units is funded by the Public Housing Capital Grant.

o Key Assumptions � Developer Fees Accrued/Received – Due to the cyclical nature of development activity,

there is a significant timing difference when a fee is earned and when payment is received; as evidenced by the funding flow shortfall of $1.9M. The developer fees recorded for accounting purposes of approximately $4.0M are a 165 percent increase compared to FY 2010 forecast. $2.8M of the earned $3.3M fee for the Resource Access Center is expected to be received in cash during FY 2012.

� In order to better plan for development cash flow and department funding of costs, the agency performs a long range analysis for development projects that considers the cash flow for the department over multiple years.

o Major Programs/Initiatives/Activities and estimated budget impact � Public Housing Preservation Initiative (PHPI) – Implementing the adopted plan is

steadily moving forward and the injection of ARRA stimulus funds is keeping staff focused on completing the 16 projects on time and on budget of $12.5M. Nine of the projects are complete. Two projects will complete by Q1 FY 2011. The remaining 5 projects will complete by Q3 FY 2011. The funding source is a combination of ARRA, Capital Fund Grant and Scattered Site Sales Proceeds.


� Family Houses (Fam4) – This initiative is continuing the PHPI plan into phase II. This initiative would be funded with Capital Fund Grant and possibly Scattered Site Sales. Currently 104 units @ $48,725 for each unit are in the budget for 4 locations for a total of $5.1M.

� Resource Access Center – $23M bond proceeds will be drawn on this project. � Housing Authority of Clackamas County – The Agency board recently approved an

agreement to provide relocation services to HACC, hence an additional revenue source for five months, has increased other revenue by $64K.

� A Hope VI application was submitted for Hillsdale Terrace and if we are successful with a grant award this project will be included in the development pipeline and provide an opportunity for an additional developer fee in subsequent years. Award notifications will be communicated by early March.

o Cause of Year over Year change for major revenue/expense fluctuations

� Operating Revenue is increasing $2.5M over FY 2010 forecast due to: o Developer Fee increases $2.5M due to cyclical nature of projects in the development

pipeline and the timing for earning developer fee. In FY 2010, there were several smaller projects started and completed earning $1.5 in developer fee, whereas the Resource Access Center, a $45M dollar project with $3.9M total Developer Fee, will span a 2 year completion timeframe and accounts for $1.7M of the FY2011 increase. Additionally, the Martha Washington, an $18M dollar project with a $800K Developer Fee, accounts for $800K.

� Operating Expense is decreasing $180K from FY 2010 forecast due to: o Administrative Personnel expense decrease of $86K due to the transfer of staff to

Public Housing and Purchasing. o Tenant Services expense declines $63K from FY 2010 forecast due to change in

closeout of Humboldt Gardens and the focus of the relocation team charging costs directly to projects where services are performed.

o A change in accounting practice of expensing Tenant Services Personnel Costs rather than capitalizing the labor reduced our credit in IA Expense/Capital Labor.

o Major Funding Flow Adjustments � The funding flow deficit results from the following:

Project

Accrued Developer Fee

RevenueDeveloper Fee

Received Funding Flow

Resource Access Center 3,211,621 728,000 (2,483,621) Martha Washington 700,000 - (700,000) James Hawthorne aka UP - University Place 106,000 106,000 -

4,017,621 834,000 (3,183,621)


PHAB

Summary Budget Data FY2010 forecast FY2011 budget Inc.(Dec.)Operating Revenue 140,837 120,257 (20,580)

Operating Expense 125,362 120,096 (5,266)

Operating Income Before OH 15,475 162 (15,313)

Allocated Overhead 98,192 - (98,192)

Operating Income after OH (82,717) 162 82,879

Reserve Funding 56,333 - (56,333)

Operating Income after Reserve Funding (26,385) 162 26,546

Funding Surplus (Deficit) (0) 0 (0)

o Department Profile � PHAB represents the discontinued operations associated with the sales of scattered sites.

o Major Programs/Initiatives/Activities and estimated budget impact � Projected sales activity for FY 2011 will be lower than the prior year. The allocation

methodology once included PHAB, but with the near completion of relocation and decreased sales, the Agency no longer allocates overhead to PHAB.


Administration

Summary Budget Data FY2010 forecast FY2011 budget Inc.(Dec.)Operating Revenue 7,013 279,316 272,303

Operating Expense 5,562,177 5,891,734 329,558

Operating Income Before OH (5,555,164) (5,612,418) (57,255)

Allocated Overhead (5,517,364) (5,594,509) (77,145)

Operating Income after OH (37,800) (17,909) 19,890

Reserve Funding - 17,909 17,909

Operating Income after Reserve Funding (37,800) (0) 37,799

Funding Surplus (Deficit) (1,982) (0) 1,982

o Department Profile � Staff FTE – Fiscal Year 2011 43.5 � As a general description, the Administration group includes the Executive department,

Business Services (Human Resources, Information Technology, and Purchasing), and Accounting & Finance

o Key Assumptions � Ignoring positions transferred to other departments, staffing remains flat to prior year. � All Administrative costs are allocated to the operating groups:

o Executive department is allocated 25% to each of the four operating groups. o Business Services is allocated to the operating groups based on budgeted FTEs. o Accounting & Finance is allocated to the operating groups based on a combination of

selected fixed assets and operating costs.

o Major Programs/Initiatives/Activities and estimated budget impact � Strategic plan development will continue into FY 2011. $30K has been budgeted for the

consultant expense in support of this effort. Any expenses associated with the strategic plan implementation will be addressed as those decisions become clear.

� The FY 2011 assumes the completion of the three-year business plan. � Information Technology will engage in efforts to improve the Agency technology

platform moving the architecture to virtualization, reducing ongoing equipment costs and enhancing business continuity capabilities.

o Cause of Year over Year change for major revenue/expense fluctuations � Operating Revenue reflects the change to charging rent as a direct expense (as opposed to

overhead in prior years) to the operating groups for New Market West premises expenses. � Operating Expense increases $330K from FY10 forecast due to:

o Administrative personnel increased $290K. $120K is due to the actual first nine months of FY 2010 reflecting lower expense associated with accrued vacation which is accounted for at the Administration level. This vacation accrual expense can fluctuate up or down, depending on the timing of when vacation is earned and when it


is actually taken. The remaining $170K is due to annual compensation increases for existing staff.

o Depreciation Expense increased $25K and Utilities increased $13K.


P

age 29

Rent Public Affordable Resident PHOperating Statement Assistance Housing Housing Services Development Preservation Administration Reserves Elimination Total HAP

Dwelling Rental - 4,156,402 10,495,554 - - - - - (1,800,000) 12,851,956 Non-dwelling Rental - 265,692 1,002,856 - - - 279,316 - (298,648) 1,249,216 HUD Subsidies -Housing Assistance 62,338,210 - 3,308,256 - - - - - - 65,646,466 HUD Subsidies -Public Housing 64,270 9,414,380 408,479 240,578 - 120,257 - - - 10,247,964 HUD Grants 3,821,508 1,224,460 247,091 677,179 - - - - - 5,970,238 Development Fee Revenue, Net - - - - 4,017,621 - - - - 4,017,621 State, Local & Other Grants 1,157,400 - 25,000 - - - - - - 1,182,400 Other Revenue 2,320,800 358,786 957,733 777,972 63,986 - - - (54,932) 4,424,345 ARRA Operating Revenue 2,000,554 292,675 - - 44,870 - - - - 2,338,099 Total IA Revenue 51,298 1,590,486 203,583 883,987 84,553 - - - (2,813,907) (0)

Total Operating Revenues 71,754,039 17,302,881 16,648,552 2,579,716 4,211,029 120,257 279,316 - (4,967,487) 107,928,304 PH Subsidy Transfer - 1,456,216 - - - - - - - 1,456,216 Housing Assistance Payments 64,982,824 - 15,108 - - - - - (1,800,000) 63,197,932 Administration 4,264,994 3,949,011 3,882,431 398,218 2,140,256 4,800 5,681,454 - - 20,321,164 Administrative Personnel Expense 3,837,494 3,102,494 904,336 327,253 1,879,896 - 4,247,409 - - 14,298,882 Other Admin Expenses 427,500 846,517 2,978,095 70,965 260,360 4,800 1,434,045 - - 6,022,282 Fees/overhead charged 153,157 43,955 37,595 - 63,941 - - - (298,648) - Tenant Services 725,657 431,647 259,423 2,226,518 124,934 74,979 69,971 - - 3,913,129 Tenant Svcs Personnel Expense 557,017 - - 931,166 124,934 - 58,403 - - 1,671,519 Other Tenant Svcs Expenses 168,640 431,647 259,423 1,295,352 - 74,979 11,568 - - 2,241,609 Maintenance - 5,728,210 3,625,691 - - - 136,133 - (50,552) 9,439,482 Maintenance Personnel Expense - 4,283,843 124,763 - - - - - - 4,408,606 Other Maintenance Expenses - 1,444,367 3,500,928 - - - 136,133 - (50,552) 5,030,876 Utilities - 2,070,763 1,856,806 - - - 87,175 - (4,380) 4,010,364 Total IA Expense 99,112 1,422,780 1,370,685 153,280 (209,066) 40,317 (437,139) - (2,813,907) (373,939) Depreciation - 2,758,859 2,829,103 - 133,584 - 312,956 - - 6,034,503 General - 365,144 555,325 - 5,375 - 41,184 - - 967,028 Impairment Charge - - - - - - - - - -

Total Operating Expenses 70,225,743 18,226,585 14,432,168 2,778,015 2,259,024 120,096 5,891,734 - (4,967,487) 108,965,879 Operating Income (Loss) 1,528,296 (923,703) 2,216,384 (198,300) 1,952,005 162 (5,612,418) - (0) (1,037,575) Total Overhead Allocations 2,019,833 2,140,928 713,918 (169,772) 889,602 - (5,594,509) - - (0) Operating Income (Loss) after Overhead (491,537) (3,064,631) 1,502,466 (28,528) 1,062,403 162 (17,909) - (0) (1,037,575) Reserve Funding 483,605 26,744 95,233 28,528 (797,808) - 17,909 145,790 - (0) Operating Income (Loss) after Reserve Funding (7,932) (3,037,887) 1,597,698 0 264,595 162 (0) 145,790 (0) (1,037,575)

Investment Income - - 231,280 - 3,140 - 127,753 - - 362,173 Interest Expense - - (2,649,494) - (210,978) - (11,400) - - (2,871,872) Amortization - - (37,873) - - - (4,248) - - (42,121) Investment in Partnership Valuation Charge - - - - - - - - - - Gain (Loss) on Sale of Assets - 111,350 (114,804) - - 4,408,820 - - - 4,405,366 Chg in Derivative Contract Value - - - - - - - - - -

Net Other Income (Expense) - 111,350 (2,570,891) - (207,838) 4,408,820 112,105 - - 1,853,546 HUD Nonoperating Contributions - 3,175,186 - - 515,978 - - - - 3,691,164 Other Nonoperating Contributions - - - - - - - - - - ARRA Nonoperating Contributions - 5,001,281 - - - - - - - 5,001,281 Nonoperating contributions made - - - - - - - - - - Reserve Funded Capital Contributions - 242,072 - - - (5,287,800) - 5,045,728 - (0)

Net Capital Contributions - 8,418,539 - - 515,978 (5,287,800) - 5,045,728 - 8,692,445 Net Changes (7,932) 5,492,002 (973,192) 0 572,735 (878,818) 112,105 5,191,518 (0) 9,508,417

Housing Authority of PortlandFiscal Year 2011 Operating Statement by Operating Group


P

age 30

Rent Public Affordable Resident PHHousing Authority of Portland Assistance Housing Housing Services Development Preservation Administration Reserves Elimination Total HAP

Operating Income (Loss) (491,537) (3,064,631) 1,502,466 (28,528) 1,062,403 162 (17,909) - (0) (1,037,575) -

Real Estate PortfolioAffordable Housing Properties Operating Activity - - (3,170,280) - - - - - - (3,170,280) Revenue from Properties to AH Department - - (649,714) - - - - - - (649,714) Unrestricted Cash to HAP - - 2,558,020 - - - - - - 2,558,020 Net Replacement Reserve Activity (New Market West)(47,573) (22,535) (9,204) (0) (18,342) (745) - - - (98,400) Net Replacement Reserve Activity (Special Needs) - - (134,171) - - - - - - (134,171)

Financing/Investment ActivityInvestment Income - Unrestricted 35,788 69,563 115,886 (0) 11,116 - - - - 232,353 Principal & Interest - Special Needs - - (208,585) - - - - - - (208,585) Principal & Interest - New Market West (39,354) (18,642) (7,614) 0 (15,173) (617) - - - (81,400)

Capital Acquisitions

IT Equipment and Software (60,932) (118,437) (18,705) (0) (18,927) - - - - (217,000)

Non-Cash Operating Activity

Developer Fee Revenue - - - - (4,017,621) - - - - (4,017,621) Depreciation Expense 120,004 2,879,452 548,287 0 176,603 1,201 - - - 3,725,546

Operating Activity Funded by Cash Reserves

Developer Fee - Cash to HAP(Net) - - - - 834,000 - - - - 834,000 Developer Fee - Reserved - - - - - - - - - - Other Project - Reserve Funded - - - - - - - - - - Iris Court - Project Ops - RE Reserve Funded - - - - - - - - - - New Columbia Support Services - - 95,233 - - - - - - 95,233 MTW Special Initiates Fund 483,605 - - 28,528 - - - - - 512,133 Excess Section 8 - - - - - - - - - - PHPI Funded - - - - - - - - - - Public Housing Repair/Modernization - 17,142 - - - - - - - 17,142 ARRA Administration - 9,602 - - 36,192 - 17,909 - - 63,703 Scattered Site Sales Costs - - - - - - - - (0) -

Funding Source or (Shortfall) (0) (248,485) 621,618 0 (1,949,749) 0 (0) - (0) (1,576,615)

Rent Public Affordable Resident PHAssistance Housing Housing Services Development Preservation Administration Reserves Elimination Total HAP

FY 2010 Budget 61.5 108.4 9.0 20.1 20.7 - 46.3 - 266.0 FY 2010 Transfers and Re-organizations 3.3 (0.3) 3.3 (1.0) (2.1) - (3.6) (0.4) FY 2010 Adds/(Reduction) (1.6) 0.4 (1.5) 1.0 0.7 (1.0) FY 2011 Adds - FY 2011 Budgeted FTE 63.1 108.5 12.3 17.6 19.6 - 43.5 - 264.6

Fiscal Year 2011 Full-Time Equivalent Adds by Operating Group

Fiscal Year 2011 Funding Flow Analysis by Operating GroupHousing Authority of Portland


HAP Q3 FY10 Financial Results 1

PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

• The nine months ending December, 2009 produced a $2.4 million operating loss. However this was $1.2 million less than expected for the period

• Total Net assets increased by $18.4 million, favorable to budget by $14.9 million

Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net AssetsComparison of Budget and Actual

Time.FiscalYear: Property Code HAP5All Board GroupingHAP5All: For the period of F10-December(2009)

YTD YTD AnnualActual Budget $ Variance % Variance Budget

Operating Revenues

Dwelling Rental 7,813,417$ 8,146,102$ (332,685)$ -4.1% 10,839,911$ Non-dwelling Rental 918,686 1,012,047 (93,361) -9.2% 1,321,570

Total Rental Revenues 8,732,103 9,158,149 (426,046) -4.7% 12,161,481

HUD Subsidies -Housing Assistance 47,077,755 47,470,179 (392,424) -0.8% 63,308,086 HUD Subsidies -Public Housing 7,104,491 6,961,882 142,609 2.0% 9,288,392 HUD Grants 4,323,072 4,138,218 184,854 4.5% 5,470,124 Development Fee Revenue, Net 1,020,509 886,700 133,809 15.1% 1,199,259 State, Local & Other Grants 1,009,019 1,355,366 (346,348) -25.6% 1,803,654 Other Revenue 2,839,886 2,355,260 484,625 20.6% 3,140,271 ARRA Operating Revenue 1,978,769 - 1,978,769 0.0% -

Total Operating Revenues 74,085,603 72,325,754 1,759,849 2.4% 96,371,267 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Operating Expenses

PH Subsidy Transfer 890,576 930,875 40,299 4.3% 1,241,166 Housing Assistance Payments 45,053,764 44,151,911 (901,853) -2.0% 58,869,214 Administrative Personnel Expense 9,973,044 10,099,696 126,652 1.3% 13,507,834 Other Admin Expenses 4,038,482 4,196,246 157,764 3.8% 5,476,144 Fees/overhead charged - - - 0.0% - Tenant Svcs Personnel Expense 1,395,373 1,348,644 (46,728) -3.5% 1,783,733 Other Tenant Svcs Expenses 1,437,861 1,263,252 (174,609) -13.8% 1,657,457 Maintenance Personnel Expense 3,261,451 3,253,290 (8,160) -0.3% 4,340,163 Other Maintenance Expenses 3,592,507 3,493,184 (99,323) -2.8% 4,451,942 Utilities 2,674,382 2,947,677 273,295 9.3% 3,984,101 Capitalized Labor (293,343) (341,867) (48,523) 14.2% (455,823) Depreciation 3,808,566 3,909,530 100,964 2.6% 5,216,720 General 630,247 696,425 66,179 9.5% 929,411 Impairment Charge - - - 0.0% -

Total Operating Expenses 76,462,908 75,948,864 (514,044) -0.7% 101,002,062

- - - 0.0% -

Operating Income (Loss) (2,377,305) (3,623,110) 1,245,805 -34.4% (4,630,796)

- - - 0.0% -

Other Income (Expense)Investment Income 461,292 389,647 71,646 18.4% 503,795 Amortization (37,516) (31,403) (6,113) 19.5% (41,872) Investment in Partnership Valuation Charge - - - 0.0% - Gain (Loss) on Sale of Assets 5,197,939 5,055,200 142,739 2.8% 6,454,700 Interest Expense (1,813,898) (1,742,652) (71,246) 4.1% (2,312,932) Chg in Derivative Contract Value 318,435 - 318,435 0.0% -

Net Other Income (Expense) 4,126,252 3,670,792 455,460 12.4% 4,603,691 - - - 0.0% -

Capital ContributionsHUD Nonoperating Contributions 8,088,706 3,430,464 4,658,243 135.8% 4,016,917 Other Nonoperating Contributions 6,616,276 - 6,616,276 0.0% - Nonoperating contributions made - - - 0.0% - ARRA Nonoperating Contributions 1,965,235 - 1,965,235 0.0% - Reserve Funded Capital Contributions

Net Capital Contributions 16,670,218 3,430,464 13,239,754 385.9% 4,016,917 - - - 0.0% -

Other Equity Changes - - - 0.0% -

INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS 18,419,165$ 3,478,145 14,941,020$ 429.6% 3,989,812

- - - -



REVENUE ANALYSIS

• Total Revenues of $74.1 million were $1.8 million favorable to budget through the nine months of FY 2010

• Dwelling Rental Revenue was $0.3 million unfavorable to budget primarily due to lower than budgeted occupancy in both Public Housing and the affordable portfolio

• HUD Housing Assistance subsidy of $47.1 million was $0.4 million less than budget. Project Based Housing Assistance subsidy of $1.4 million was recorded in ARRA Revenue as opposed to HUD Subsidies due to HUD sourcing these funds from ARRA appropriations, reducing what would have been a $1 million favorable variance. HUD funding per voucher came in at $582 compared to the budgeted amount of $572 accounting for $0.8 million and Section 8 administrative fees were higher than planned resulting in $0.2 million favorable variance

• State, Local & Other Grants of $1 million were $0.3 million less that budget due to lower than expected Short-term Rent Assistance (STRA) revenue which was replaced by ARRA funding

• Other Revenue was $0.5 million favorable to budget due to Section 8 Port In Revenues in excess of budget

• ARRA revenue of $2.0 million reflects $1.4 million in Project Based Housing Assistance offsetting the reduction in HUD Subsidies Housing Assistance indicated above. In addition we received and paid out $0.3 million of ARRA Homeless Prevention Rapid Rehousing funds, and incurred operating expenses associated with ARRA funded projects and have therefore received operating revenue to offset these expenses of $0.2 million. These funds were not anticipated in the budget

Operating RevenueFor the period of F10-December(2009)


Operating Revenues

Dwelling Rental 7,813,417$ 8,146,102$ (332,685)$ -4.08% 10,839,911$ Non-dwelling Rental 918,686 1,012,047 (93,361) -9.22% 1,321,570

Total Rental Revenues 8,732,103 9,158,149 (426,046) -4.65% 12,161,481

HUD Subsidies -Housing Assistance 47,077,755 47,470,179 (392,424) -0.83% 63,308,086 HUD Subsidies -Public Housing 7,104,491 6,961,882 142,609 2.05% 9,288,392 HUD Grants 4,323,072 4,138,218 184,854 4.47% 5,470,124 Development Fee Revenue, Net 1,020,509 886,700 133,809 15.09% 1,199,259 State, Local & Other Grants 1,009,019 1,355,366 (346,348) -25.55% 1,803,654 Other Revenue 2,839,886 2,355,260 484,625 20.58% 3,140,271 ARRA Operating Revenue 1,978,769 - 1,978,769 0.00% -

Total Operating Revenues 74,085,603$ 72,325,754$ 1,759,849$ 2.43% 96,371,267$



EXPENSE ANALYSIS

• Operating Expense of $76.5 million was greater than budget by $0.5 million resulting from:

• Housing Assistance Payments exceeded budget by $0.9 million due to Section 8 per voucher costs $5.27 greater than anticipated in the budget and vouchers leased were 937 unit months greater than budget

• Other Administrative Expenses were $0.2 million favorable to budget due to timing of legal, other professional services, computer software purchases and tenant screening expense. Some of this favorable result is expected to diminish as expenditures occur over the remainder of the year, however the current forecast projects the Agency will end the year $0.1 million favorable to budget

• Other Tenant Services Expense was $0.2 million greater than budget relocation associated with the Sweet 16 rehabilitation projects. This relocation is funded by ARRA and capital fund

• Utilities were $0.3 million favorable to budget due to the seasonality of utility expense which was budgeted flat for the year and the success of the Agency’s water conservation rehabilitation. The current forecast projects utility expense to remain favorable at year end by $0.3 million

Operating ExpenseFor the period of F10-December(2009)


Operating Expenses

PH Subsidy Transfer 890,576$ 930,875$ 40,299$ 4.33% 1,241,166$ Housing Assistance Payments 45,053,764 44,151,911 (901,853) -2.04% 58,869,214 Administrative Personnel Expense 9,973,044 10,099,696 126,652 1.25% 13,507,834 Other Admin Expenses 4,038,482 4,196,246 157,764 3.76% 5,476,144 Fees/overhead charged - - - 0.00% - Tenant Svcs Personnel Expense 1,395,373 1,348,644 (46,728) -3.46% 1,783,733 Other Tenant Svcs Expenses 1,437,861 1,263,252 (174,609) -13.82% 1,657,457 Maintenance Personnel Expense 3,261,451 3,253,290 (8,160) -0.25% 4,340,163 Other Maintenance Expenses 3,592,507 3,493,184 (99,323) -2.84% 4,451,942 Utilities 2,674,382 2,947,677 273,295 9.27% 3,984,101 Depreciation 3,808,566 3,909,530 100,964 2.58% 5,216,720 General 630,247 696,425 66,179 9.50% 929,411 Impairment Charge - - - 0.00% -

Total Operating Expenses 76,462,908 75,948,864 (514,044) -0.68% 101,002,062

Operating Income (Loss) (2,377,305) (3,623,110) 1,245,805 -34.38% (4,630,796)



OTHER INCOME/(EXPENSE) ANALYSIS

• Other Income (expense) was $4.1 million, and favorable to budget by $0.5 million

• Gain on Sale of Assets of $5.2 million, favorable to budget by $0.14 million. The sale of 34 properties compared to the budgeted sale of 27 properties resulted in a gain of $5.4 million offset by the write-off of property and equipment replaced during rehabilitation in real estate operations

• Unbudgeted income associated with Changes in Derivative Contract Values of $0.3 million was due to non-cash valuation changes in interest rate swaps connected to variable rate bond financing for Trouton & Cecelia tax credit partnerships

• Capital Contributions of $16.7 million were $13.2 million greater than budget due to the budget not reflecting $4.5 million of HOPE VI funds received for Humboldt Gardens, other non-operating contributions and ARRA non-operating contributions

• HUD Non-operating Contributions of $8.1 million consists of $4.5 million of HOPE VI funds received for Humboldt Gardens, $0.5 million in Replacement Housing Funds Grant for New Columbia bond payments, and Capital Fund grants of $3.1 million

• Other Non-operating Contributions of $6.6 million reflect $1.1 million Oregon Housing and Community Services Housing Plus grant funds related to the redevelopment of University Place, $4.7 million like kind contribution of land and building by Multnomah County related to the redevelopment of Martha Washington, $0.4 million from PDC for the Resource Access Center, and $0.3 million from Bank of America Community Development for New Columbia Community Campus Corporation (N4C) debt forgiveness

• ARRA Non-operating contributions of $2 million consists of Public Housing project spending related to the Sweet 16

Other Income/Expense For the period of F10-December(2009)


Other Income (Expense)Investment Income 461,292$ 389,647$ 71,646$ 18.39% 503,795$ Amortization (37,516) (31,403) (6,113) 19.47% (41,872) Investment in Partnership Valuation Charge - - - 0.00% - Gain (Loss) on Sale of Assets 5,197,939 5,055,200 142,739 2.82% 6,454,700 Interest Expense (1,813,898) (1,742,652) (71,246) 4.09% (2,312,932) Chg in Derivative Contract Value 318,435 - 318,435 0.00% -

Net Other Income (Expense) 4,126,252 3,670,792 455,460 12.41% 4,603,691

Capital ContributionsHUD Nonoperating Contributions 8,088,706 3,430,464 4,658,243 135.79% 4,016,917 Other Nonoperating Contributions 6,616,276 - 6,616,276 0.00% - Nonoperating contributions made - - - 0.00% - ARRA Nonoperating Contributions 1,965,235 - 1,965,235 0.00% - Reserve Funded Capital Contributions - - - 0.00% -

Net Capital Contributions 16,670,218 3,430,464 13,239,754 385.95% 4,016,917

Other Equity Changes - - - 0.00% -

INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS 18,419,165$ 3,478,145$ 14,941,020$ 429.57% 3,989,812$



CHANGE IN ASSETS

• Total Assets of $346.1 million increased $12.7 million from March 31, 2009

• Current Assets decreased $22.5 million to $42.7 million• Cash & Cash Equivalents increased $9.3 million due to scattered site sale proceeds received, the receipt of the Martha Washington

acquisition fee, the transfer from investments noted below, and $5 million in January voucher subsidy received in December offset by advances made on development activities primarily associated with the RAC, Martha Washington and James Hawthorne (formerly University Place)

• Investments decreased $1.5 million due to the maturity of a Certificate of Deposit investment that was not reinvested• Accounts Receivable increased 4.8 million due to accruals for capital fund projects and University Place totaling $3.9 million and a PDC

Grant for the Resource Access Center of $1.7 million, offset by collection of $0.8 million in Housing Choice Voucher funds accrued at prior year end

• Current Portion of Notes Receivable – Partnerships decreased $35.1 million due to the payoff of construction bonds for Trouton LLP ($18.5 million) and Humboldt Gardens LLP ($16.6 million)

• Noncurrent Assets increased $35 million to $294.5 million• Due from Partnerships increased $3.8 million resulting from $5.1 million from the Resource Access Center (RAC) closing and $1.2 million in

construction advances to the Martha Washington offset by $2.4 million of Trouton Developer Fee payment received by the agency and $0.1 million of Business Energy Tax Credits received from the Morrison to pay back construction advances

• Notes Receivable increased $9.4 million as $3.1 million of developer fees funded from a tax credit equity contribution was reinvested in the Trouton LP along with $6.1 million of funding for Humboldt gardens sourced from HOPE VI funds, NC lot sale proceeds and reinvested developer fees and $0.2 million pass through loan for Martha Washington from Mental Health Housing Funds

• Notes Receivable – Partnerships increased $22.4 million the issuance of the Resource Access Center (RAC) Bond of $23 million offset by regularly scheduled payments of other tax credit bonds

• Notes Receivable – Conduit Financing decreased $5.1 million. See notes under Liabilities• Land, Structures, Equipment, Net increased $4.5 million due to the addition of University Place ($4.6 million), $5.5 million in Public Housing

Capital Fund Projects, and $0.8 million in Affordable Housing Improvements. These increases are offset by normal depreciation ($3.8 million) and the reduction of $1.4 million in book value related to the sale of scattered sites and $1.2 million of Work in Progress transferred to the new Resource Access Center and Martha Washington tax credit partnerships

Statement of Net Assets

De cember 31, 2009 March 31, 2009 Incr (Decr)

AssetsCurrent AssetsCash and Cash Equivalents 16,276,507$ 6,964,645$ 9,311,863$ Investments 16,390,416 17,940,994 (1,550,578) Accounts Receivable, Net 8,140,394 3,390,551 4,749,843 Intra Agency Accounts Receivable 45,725 0 45,725 Prepaid Expenses 759,433 741,678 17,755 Inventories 0 0 - Current Portion of Notes Receivable-Partnerships 1,092,102 36,158,720 (35,066,618)

42,704,577 65,196,588 (22,492,012)

Restricted Asse tsFamily Self-Sufficiency Funds -A 1,047,062 1,256,326 (209,263) Tenant Security Deposits -A 803,668 804,287 (619) Construction Funds Escrow 10,967 10,913 54 Residual Receipts Reserve 131,184 130,642 543 Funds held in Trust 3,855,408 3,785,659 69,748 Debt Amortization Fund 3,075,076 2,787,414 287,663

8,923,366 8,775,241 148,126

Noncurrent Asse tsDue from Partnerships 16,273,570 12,403,457 3,870,113 Notes Receivable 72,995,683 63,591,479 9,404,205 Notes Receivable -Partnerships 78,253,900 55,848,023 22,405,877 Notes Receivable -Conduit Financing 0 5,075,000 (5,075,000) Deferred Charges, Net 1,003,878 1,043,394 (39,516) Investment in Partnerships 3,395,570 3,395,570 - Land, Structures, Equipment, Net 122,588,544 118,107,507 4,481,036

294,511,145 259,464,429 35,046,716

T OT AL ASSET S 346,139,088$ 333,436,258$ 12,702,830$



CHANGE IN LIABILITIES & NET ASSETS

• Current Liabilities decreased $29.8 million to $18.8 million

• Deferred Revenue increased $5 million due to receipt of Housing Choice Voucher subsidy for January received in December. This will reverse in January when the revenue is recorded

• Current portion of Bonds Payable – Partnership decreased $35.1 million due to the payoff of bonds for Trouton LLP ($18.5 million) and Humboldt Gardens LLP ($16.6 million)

• Noncurrent Liabilities of $119.5 million decreased $3.1 million

• Notes Payable increased $7.2 million resulting from PDC draws of $4.8 million for University Place construction and $2.8 million for the Resource Access Center, offset by normal principle payments

• Bonds payable – Partnerships increased $22.4 million, commensurate with the increase in Notes Receivable - Partnerships

• Bonds Payable – conduit Financing decreased $5.1 million due to the pay off of the final conduit bonds issued on behalf of other developers 11 years ago

• Net Assets increased $18.4 million to $180.6 million

Statement of Net Assets

Dece mber 31, 2009 March 31, 2009 Incr (Decr)

LiabilitiesCurre nt Liabilitie sAccounts Payable $3,262,224 2,262,377$ 999,847$ Accrued Interest Payable 1,655,916 1,484,415 171,502 Other Accrued Liabilities 3,702,380 4,457,893 (755,513) Deferred Revenue 6,014,332 1,031,679 4,982,653 Tenant Security Deposits -L 838,221 849,580 (11,360) Family Self-Sufficiency Funds -L 1,041,747 1,211,925 (170,177) Line of Credit 0 0 - Current Portion of Bonds Payable -Partnerships 1,092,102 36,158,720 (35,066,618) Current Portion of Notes & Bonds Payable 1,202,530 1,202,530 0

18,809,453 48,659,119 (29,849,666)

Noncurrent Liabilitie sNotes Payable 49,344,414 42,132,716 7,211,697 Bonds Payable 18,991,824 19,401,068 (409,243) Bonds Payable -Partnerships 78,253,900 55,848,023 22,405,877 Bonds Payable -Conduit Financing 0 5,075,000 (5,075,000) Other Liabilities 113,700 113,700 -

146,703,838 122,570,507 24,133,331

Net Assets (Deficit) 180,625,797 162,206,632 18,419,165

T OT AL LIABILIT IES AND NET ASSET S (DEFICIT ) 346,139,088$ 333,436,258$ 12,702,830$


Contract # Contractor Contract Amount Description Department Execution Date Expiration Date

S0601, #4 Walsh Construction Co. $29,242 Work Items at Fir Acres (Selected Sites) DCR 2/2/2010 9/30/2010

S0516, #3 Richart Family, Inc. $-(2,382) Credit for Changes at Camelia Court and Bel Park DCR 2/4/2010 10/30/09*

S0601, #5 Walsh Construction Co. $358,114

Commit Owner's Contingency for Fir Acres, Stark

Manor, Demar Downs and Townhouse Terrace

(Selected Sites)

DCR 2/26/2010 9/30/2010

S0601, #6 Walsh Construction Co. $260,352 GMP Agreement for Celilo Court (Selected Sites) DCR 2/26/2010 9/30/2010

C0657 Kristina Smock $5,000 Agency Survey and Analysis HRA 2/19/2010 12/31/2010

C0630 Oden-Orr Law $50,000Agency On-Call Contract for Legal Services; RFP

09/09-86HRA 1/6/2010 12/31/2010

C0631 Stoel Rives $150,000Agency On-Call Contract for Legal Services; RFP

09/09-86HRA 1/7/2010 12/31/2010

C0641 PBS Environmental $34,910Environmental Services at Stark Manor and

Townhouse TerraceDCR 1/13/2010 6/30/2010

C0642 MultiVista $4,999

Small Contract for Construction Photography

Documentation at the Martha Washington

Building

DCR 1/13/2010 6/30/2010

C0645 Language Fusion $25,000On-Call Language and Translation Services for

the Agency; IRFP 12/09-93HRA 1/14/2010 12/31/2010

C0650 Czopek & Erdenberger $25,000Security Planning and Design for 1st and 2nd

Floors at New Market WestHRA 1/25/2010 6/30/2010

C0646 Bruce International $25,000On-Call Language and Translation Services for

the Agency; IRFP 12/09-93HRA 1/26/2010 12/31/2010

C0624 Amec Earth & Environmental, Inc. $125,000Agency On-Call Task Order Contract for

Environmental Services; RFP 10/10-90DCR 1/27/2010 1/18/2011

C0625 Hahn & Associates, Inc.. $125,000Agency On-Call Task Order Contract for

Environmental Services; RFP 10/10-90DCR 1/27/2010 1/19/2011

C0649 George Morlan Plumbing $5,795 Provide and install Hot Water Heater for

Sellwood CenterREO 1/13/2010 1/31/2010

C0640 Point Monitor Corporation $76,364

Security Equipment Updates at Multiple

Properties: Williams Plaza, Northwest Tower,

Northwest Tower Annex, Medallion, Shrunk

Riverview Tower and Gallagher Plaza; IRFB

12/09-94

REO 1/25/2010 12/31/2010

C0362, #2 Elation Systems $30,000 Extends through 12-31-10 and Increases

CompensationHRA 1/5/2010 12/31/2010

C0269, #2 Billy SuellExtends through 9/4/2010 for On-Call Painting

ContractHRA 1/4/2010 9/4/2010

C0490, #1 A+ Child Care to You $1,380 Additional Compensation for Services REO 1/19/2010 3/31/2010

C0565, #3 Merrill Residential, LLC $6,793 Authorizes Changes to Original Contract for

Phase 2 Construction at Alderwood Apts.DCR 1/4/2010 2/28/2010

C0565, #4 Merrill Residential, LLC $16,959 Authorizes Changes to Original Contract for Phase 2 Construction at Powellhurst Woods

Apts.DCR 1/4/2010 2/28/2010

C0497, #6 LRS Architects $2,155 Document Lobby Changes at the Martha

Washington BuildingDCR 1/23/2010 7/31/2010

C0497, #7 LRS Architects $950 Additional Lobby Changes at Martha

Washington BuildingDCR 1/23/2010 7/31/2010

C0509, #5 R & H Construction $49,474 Cooling and Heat Recovery Ventilation

Systems and Smoking Room at the Martha Washington Building

DCR 1/25/2010 7/25/2010

C0509, #6 R & H Construction $6,913 Masonry and Brick Footings in Elevator pit at

the Martha Washington BuildingDCR 1/13/2010 7/25/2010

C0567, #2 Carlson Testing, Inc.Extends through 9/5/2010 for Special Testing

and Inspections at the Martha Washington Building

DCR 1/21/2010 9/5/2010

C0395, #9 R & H Construction $15,189 Shower Room Improvements for the James

Hawthorne Apartments (formerly named University Place)

DCR 1/5/2010 2/25/2010

C0304, #4 William Wilson Architects $8,500 Civil Engineering Coordination with City of Portland for James Hawthorne Apartments

(formerly named University PlaceDCR 1/4/2010 3/1/2010

C0267, #2 Hood to Coast $50,000 Extends through 9/23/2010; On-Call

Construction Services for Various ProjectsHRA 1/5/2010 9/23/2010

Purchasing Department MONTHLY CONTRACT REPORT Contracts Approved 1/1/10 -- 2/28/10

AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING CONTRACTS

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES

STIMULUS PROJECTS

3/8/10 Page 1 of 3 HRA Purchasing Department



C0290, #2 Professional Grounds ManagementExtends through 10/26/2010; On-Call

Landscaping Services for Various ProjectsHRA 1/7/2010 10/26/2010

C0041, #3 Commercial Drapery and Blinds $99,999 Extends through 7/30/2010. HRA 1/4/2010 7/30/2010

C0073, #2 Ball Janik LLPExtends through 1/31/2011; Government Relations Services Agency-wide Contract

DCR 1/6/2010 1/31/2011

C0464, #1 Hein Consulting Group Extends through 1/31/2011 DCR 1/13/2010 1/31/2011

C0532, #3 Seabold Construction $534 Parking Lot Zoning Requirements at Cora Park

/ Chateau Apts. ModernizationDCR 1/21/2010 11/14/09

*

C0292, #2 Professional Minority Group, Inc. $99,999 Extends through 11/16/2010 for On-Call

Abatement ServicesHRA 1/12/2010 11/16/2010

C0452 #2 Groff Solutions Extends through 1/31/2011 HRA 1/21/2010 1/31/2011

C0460 #1 TsaiComms Extends through 1/31/2011 HRA 1/21/2010 1/31/2011

C0453 #1 PLS Consulting Extends through 1/31/2011 HRA 1/21/2010 1/31/2011

C0458 #1 MicroSkill Extends through 1/31/2011 HRA 1/14/2010 1/31/2011

C0293 #2 AAM Environmental Extends through 1/31/2011 HRA 1/14/2010 1/31/2011

C0461 #1 Intercultural Communication Solutions Extends through 1/31/2011 HRA 1/13/2010 1/31/2011

C0462 #1 Vetter Solutions Extends through 1/31/2011 HRA 1/13/2010 1/31/2011

C0463 #1 TACS Extends through 1/31/2011 HRA 1/12/2010 1/31/2011

C0509, #7 R & H Construction ($-15,538)Credit from Contractor for Unit Refrigerators

and Bed Bug Reconciliation AllowanceDCR 1/25/2010 7/25/2010

C0456, #1 HR Answers Extends training contract thru 1/31/2011 HRA 1/25/2010 1/31/2011

C0450, #1 Unlimited PotentialExtends through 1/31/2011; For Training

ServicesHRA 1/22/2010 1/31/2011

C0565, #5 Merrill Residential, LLC $893 Authorizes Changes to Original Contract for

Phase 3 Construction at Alderwood Apts.DCR 1/22/2010 2/282010

C0565, #6 Merrill Residential, LLC $1,551 Authorizes Changes to Original Contract

Phase 3 Construction at Powellhurst Woods Apts.

DCR 1/22/2010 2/28/2010

C0041, #3 Commercial Drapery $99,999 Extends through 7/30/2010 for Agency-wide

Drapery Installation and Services.REO 1/4/2010 7/30/2010

C0378h, #1 Walsh Construction Co. $26,585 RAC Housing Groundbreaking and

Accelerating ScheduleDCR 1/10/2010 9/1/2011

C0509, #8 R & H Construction $197,132 Changes to Original Contract for the Martha

WashingtonDCR 1/28/2010 7/25/2010

C0395, #10 R & H Construction $6,393 Additional Work Items for James Hawthorne Apts. DCR 1/29/2010 2/25/2010

C0640, #1 Point Monitor $6,430 Secure Equipment at Northwest Tower REO 2/8/2010 12/31/2010

C0348, #2 Eastside Van and Storage Adds Cooperative Language DCR 2/2/2010 3/31/2010

C0492, #1 Seaholtz consulting $40,000 Extends through 123/31/2010; Analyze Potential

Concepts for Rent ReformEXEC 2/2/2010 12/31/2010

C0597, #2Native American Rehabilitation Association,

Northwest

Adds HAP Obligations and Responsibilities toward

PHB Under the Sub recipient Contract with COP

Ending Homelessness Projects

RA 2/4/2010 6/30/2010

C0612, #2 JOIN




RA 2/4/2010 6/30/2010

C0605, #2 Catholic charities/El Programa Hispano




RA 2/4/2010 6/30/2010

C0613, #2 Native American Youth & Family Center




RA 2/4/2010 6/30/2010

C0614, #2 Human Solutions




RA 2/4/2010 6/30/2010

C0608, #2 Self Enhancement




RA 2/4/2010 6/30/2010

C0343, #2 Pacific Screening Extends through 3/31/2010 REO 2/17/2010 3/31/2011

C0465, #1 Visuals Speak Extends through 1/31/2011. HRA 2/23/2010 1/31/2011




C0587, #1 KnightHawk Protection $700 Temporary Security Patrols at Dahlke Manor for

Two MonthsREO 2/23/2010 9/30/2010

C0474, #1 Carlson Testing, Inc. $806 Additional Site Inspection Services DCR 2/24/2010 4/30/2010

C0322, #1Holst Architecture - Professional A&E for RAC 09/07-

15

Shift Unexpected Reimbursables to Labor to Cover

Additional Scope of Work.DCR 2/24/2010 11/30/2010

C0459, #1 G. L. FordExtends Contract for Staff Development & Training

Services thru 1/31/2011HRA 2/8/2010 1/31/2011

C0449, #1 Possibilities, Inc. (formerly Collaboration Works)Extends through 1/31/2011; Staff Development

and Training ServicesHRA 2/8/2010 1/31/2011

C0600, #2 Cascade Aids Project

Adds HAP obligations and responsibilities toward

PHB under the Sub recipient Contract with COP

Ending Homelessness Projects effective 7/1/09.

RA 2/8/2010 6/30/2010

C0598, #2 Impact Northwest




RA 2/10/2010 6/30/2010

C0616, #2 Insights Teen Parent Program




RA 2/10/2010 6/30/2010

C0607, #2 Northwest Pilot Project




RA 2/10/2010 6/30/2010

C0611, #2 Cascadia




RA 2/10/2010 6/30/2010

C0378ah, #2 Walsh Construction Co. $15,860 MEP Changes to Construction Set Drawings for

RAC Day Use Access CenterDCR 2/11/2010 9/1/2011

c0378s, #1 Walsh Construction Co. $7,733 MEP Changes to Construction Set Drawings for

RAC ShelterDCR 2/11/2010 9/1/2011

c0378h, #3 Walsh Construction Co. $72,228 MEP Changes to Construction Set Drawings for

RAC HousingDCR 2/11/2010 9/1/2011

C0337, #1 Construction & Mapping Team $625 Additional ALTA Survey Services for James

Hawthorne Apts.DCR 2/16/2010 3/31/2010

C0656, #8 Merrill Residential, LLC $18,152 Authorizes Changes to Original Contract at

Powellhurst WoodsDCR 2/25/2010 4/30/2010

* = Substantial completion date: reviewing change orders and field orders to process final payment



Relocation

Project 0 1 2 3 4 S8 PH Private Purch. Other TotalRelocation to Date 0 4 11 109 10 65 44 14 3 8 134Relocation Remaining 0 0 0 27 1 28TOTAL RELOCATION 0 4 11 136 11 162

SalesTotal Total Gross Net Internal Net to

Project 0 1 2 3 4 Units Properties Proceeds Proceeds Costs HAPActual Sales to Date 4 11 86 7 108 96 20,877,026$ 19,958,125$ 1,153,226$ 18,804,899$ Projected Sales on Remaining Portfolio 50 4 54 52 9,984,303$ 9,426,996$ 633,290$ 8,793,706$ TOTAL SALES - PROJECTED 0 4 11 136 11 162 148 30,861,329$ 29,385,121$ 1,786,516$ 27,598,605$

1:1 Replacement# of New Total Total Total $ / New Total

Project 0 1 2 3 4 PH Units Units Proj. Cost $/Unit PH Unit InvestmentsCurrentThe Jeffrey 20 20 80 16,600,000$ 207,500.00 - - Martha Washington 25 25 108 18,043,118$ 167,065.91 76,080$ 1,902,000$ Resource Access Center 30 30 130 46,951,074$ 361,162.11 40,583$ 1,217,500$ Rockwood Station 25 25 195 271,514$ 1,392.38 N/A 271,514$ SUB-TOTAL: 75 0 25 0 0 100 513 81,865,706$ 159,582$ 33,910$ 3,391,014$

PotentialHillsdale Terrace(3) 8 122 41,460,112$ 339,837 750,000$ 6,000,000$ SUB-TOTAL: 8 122 41,460,112$ 339,837$ 750,000$ 6,000,000$

Avg. Invest.per PH unit

TOTAL REPLACEMENT: 75 0 25 0 0 108 635 123,325,818$ 499,419$ 86,954$ 9,391,014$

Capital Improvements# of Total HAP

Project PH Units Proj. Cost ProceedsMisc Upgrades tbd 452,200$ - Sweet 16 296 11,819,547$ 1,853,803$ Demar Downs ADA - Sweet 16 addtnl scope N/A 187,200$ 46,800$ Hollywood East 288 1,700,000$ -$ Gallagher 85 9,105,122$ -$ Sellwood 112 9,623,526$ -$ Eliot Square - part of the Fam4 30 1,461,750$ 801,869$ Fam4 (Carlton, Eastwood, Lexington) 74 3,605,650$ -$

TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: 885 37,954,995$ 2,702,472$

ARRA Administration

TOTAL ARRA ADMINISTRATION: 10 659,891$ 137,382$

NET PROCEEDS AVAILABLE 15,367,737$

(1) Net Proceeds are Gross Proceeds net of sales commissions, concessions, title and escrow fees and any other costs paid from escrow. Net Proceeds do not include internal selling costs ($1,153,226 through January 2010).

(2) Included are four units sold through the American Dream Homeownership program.

(3) 68 total PH units; replaces existing 60 units, 8 are new. PHPI encompasses 1:1 replacement as well as capital improvements.

Unit Size

Unit Size

PHPI: Activity and Investment Summary as of January 31, 2010

Unit Size Means of relocation


DASHBOARD REPORT


Housing Authority of Portland - Dashboard Report For February of 2010

Property Performance Measures

1 40 40 0 1 0 15 15 10 0 0 40Occupancy

Number of Physical Rentable Vacant OccupancyProperties Units Units Units Percentage Studio/SRO 1 Bdrm 2 Bdrm 3 Bdrm 4 Bdrm 5+ Bdrm Total

Public Housing 44 2,064 2,001 55 97.3% 513 844 352 341 14 0 2,064Public Housing Mixed Financed Owned * 1 40 40 0 100.0% 0 15 15 10 0 0 40Public Housing Mixed Finance Tax Credit * 5 425 424 17 96.0% 0 154 134 81 49 7 425

Total Public Housing 50 2,529 2,465 72 97.1% 513 1,013 501 432 63 7 2,529Affordable Owned with PBA subsidy 6 496 496 15 97.0% 72 229 104 91 0 0 496Affordable Owned without PBA subsidy 10 1041 1,041 72 93.1% 200 245 448 133 15 0 1,041

Total Affordable Owned Housing 16 1,537 1,537 87 94.3% 272 474 552 224 15 0 1,537Tax Credit Partnerships 19 2,234 2,234 99 95.6% 693 657 492 230 145 17 2,234

Total Affordable Housing 35 3,771 3,771 186 95.1% 965 1,131 1,044 454 160 17 3,771Eliminate Duplicated PH Properties/Units -6 -465 -464 -17 0 -169 -149 -91 -49 -7 -465

Combined Total PH and AH 79 5,835 5,772 241 95.8% 1,478 1,975 1,396 795 174 17 5,835Special Needs (Master Leased) 36 422 422

Total with Special Needs 115 6,257 6,194* property/unit counts also included in Affordable Housing Count

Financial 12/31/09Nine months ending 12/31/2009

Properties Units Properties UnitsPublic Housing $197.83 $320.50 $518.33 $439.10 $70.81 $8.42 21 1,254 23 831Affordable Owned $520.09 $198.73 $718.82 $461.01 $6.58 $251.23 14 1,339 1 105 6 6 3

Tax Credit Partnerships $532.52 $41.63 $574.14 $344.14 $15.70 $214.31 20 2,327 0 11 9 0

* Peter Paulson converted from TC to AH 1/1/10Public Housing Demographics

# of % of Average Average Unit Adults no Family with Elderly DisabledPublic Housing Residents Households Households Family Size Size Children Children Not Elderly

0 to 10% MFI 439 18.8% 2.1 1.7 10.2% 8.6% 0.4% 5.4% 5.0% 12.7% 0.7% 0.3% 0.4% 3.6% 15.2%11 to 20% 1,028 44.1% 1.7 1.5 33.0% 11.1% 11.8% 21.5% 10.2% 31.0% 1.7% 1.7% 0.4% 4.4% 39.7%21 to 30% 523 22.4% 1.8 1.5 16.3% 6.2% 6.9% 10.3% 4.7% 16.3% 0.8% 0.8% 0.2% 2.6% 19.9%31 to 50% 267 11.5% 2.2 1.8 6.0% 5.4% 2.2% 4.0% 3.0% 7.9% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 1.5% 10.0%51 to 80% 67 2.9% 2.8 2.1 1.3% 1.5% 0.4% 0.6% 0.7% 1.9% 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.7% 2.2%Over 80% 9 0.4% 2.4 2.1 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4%All 2,333 100.1% 1.9 1.6 67.1% 33.0% 21.8% 41.9% 23.9% 70.1% 3.6% 3.3% 1.2% 12.7% 87.3%

Waiting List0 to 10% MFI 2,203 48.8% 2.2 1.7 1.3% 17.2% 20.7% 23.8% 3.0% 1.2% 1.1% 4.5% 43.2%11 to 20% 1,315 29.1% 2.4 1.8 1.3% 12.4% 12.1% 14.5% 1.6% 1.0% 0.4% 2.5% 26.3%21 to 30% 574 12.7% 2.5 1.8 0.9% 4.2% 5.3% 6.4% 0.3% 0.6% 0.1% 1.4% 11.0%31 to 50% 366 8.1% 2.7 2.2 0.7% 1.8% 3.8% 3.7% 0.3% 0.3% 0.1% 1.1% 6.8%51 to 80% 58 1.3% 2.5 1.9 0.1% 0.3% 0.5% 0.7% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 1.2%Over 80% 2 0.0% 3.5 2.5 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%All 4,518 100.0% 2.4 1.8 4.3% 35.9% 42.4% 49.0% 5.3% 3.2% 1.7% 9.7% 88.6%

Other Activity#'s,days,hrs

Public HousingNames pulled from Wait List 58Denials 1New rentals 14Vacates 63Evictions 1# of work orders received 976# of work orders completed 950Average days to respond 11.9# of work orders emergency 0Average response hrs (emergency)

Asian

Per Unit Per Month Fiscal YTD ending 12/31/2009

Operating Expensew/o HMF

# of Properties meeting Debt

Coverage Ratio (DCR)

TotalRevenue

# of Properties/units Negative Net Operating Income (NOI)

SubsidyRevenue

PropertyRevenue

HAP Management Fees (HMF)

Unit Mix

NOI# of Properties/units Positive Net Operating Income (NOI)

Black African American

WhiteNative

AmericanHispanic/

LatinoHawaiian/

Pacific Islnd

Race % (head of household)Households % Family Type (head of household)

# of Properties DCR Not

Applicable

# of Properties not meeting

DCR

Non His- Panic/Latino

Ethnicity % (hoh)

1



Rent Assistance Performance Measures

Utilization and Activity

Average HUD Subsidy Remaining Waiting List Voucher Average HUD SubsidyVouchers Vouchers Utilization Voucher Over(Under) Waiting List Names New Vouchers Vouchers Inspections Utilization Voucher Over(Under) New Vouchers VouchersAvailable Paid Percentage Cost Utilized Size Pulled Leased Terminated Completed Percentage Cost Utilized Leased Terminated

Tenant Based Vouchers 6,697 6,662 99% $576 -$183,099 2,075 0 32 23 699 99% $583 -$73,100 79 54Project Based Vouchers 1,098 1,045 95% $470 -$167,252 15 6 59 95% $474 -$293,644 31 24SRO/Mod Vouchers 512 481 94% $362 10 14 14 95% $361 -$30,344 17 30

All Vouchers 8,307 8,188 99% $550 -$350,351 57 43 772 99% $556 -$397,088 127 108

Demographics

# of % of Average Average Unit Adults no Family with Elderly Disabled Black White Native Asian Hawaiian/ Hispanic NonTenant Based Voucher Participants Households Households Family Size Size Children Children Not Elderly American Pacific Islnd Hispanic

0 to 10% MFI 819 12.7% 2.0 2.0 6.8% 5.9% 0.3% 0.8% 5.9% 6.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.1% 0.9% 11.9%11 to 20% 2,275 35.4% 2.0 1.9 22.0% 13.4% 7.1% 14.4% 12.5% 20.1% 1.3% 2.3% 0.2% 2.0% 33.4%21 to 30% 1,831 28.5% 2.4 2.2 15.4% 13.1% 7.1% 10.3% 8.9% 17.4% 0.8% 1.8% 0.2% 1.7% 26.7%31 to 50% 1,264 19.7% 3.1 2.5 6.3% 13.4% 2.9% 4.2% 7.8% 10.5% 0.5% 1.1% 0.1% 1.1% 18.5%51 to 80% 223 3.5% 3.7 2.9 0.7% 2.8% 0.3% 0.4% 1.6% 1.7% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 3.3%Over 80% 18 0.3% 4.2 3.2 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3%All 6,430 100.0% 2.4 2.2 51.3% 48.7% 17.7% 30.1% 36.9% 56.2% 3.1% 5.8% 0.6% 5.9% 94.1%

Waiting List0 to 10% MFI 689 33.2% 2.1 1.1% 9.4% 15.9% 13.1% 1.9% 1.4% 0.4% 2.5% 26.4%11 to 20% 577 27.8% 2.0 2.8% 12.3% 9.4% 14.8% 1.8% 1.7% 0.3% 1.4% 24.3%21 to 30% 397 19.1% 2.3 3.2% 6.1% 5.6% 11.4% 0.6% 1.3% 0.1% 1.5% 15.4%31 to 50% 395 19.0% 2.5 2.1% 3.8% 7.6% 9.7% 0.5% 0.9% 0.1% 1.4% 15.6%51 to 80% 16 0.8% 2.4 0.0% 0.1% 0.3% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8%Over 80% 1 0.0% 1.0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%All 2,075 100.0% 2.2 9.3% 31.8% 38.7% 49.5% 4.9% 5.3% 1.0% 6.8% 82.5%

Short Term Rent Assistance

Shelter Plus Care 508 $274,521 $540Short Term Rent Assistance 382 $230,389 $603

Resident Services

Resident ProgramsHouseholds

Served/Participants

Congregate Housing Services Public Housing 89 $50,678 $569* as of previous month

Resident Services Coordination Public Housing 13 0 63 206 3 9 92 801

Community Supportive Services Public Housing 94 72 3Section 8 37 20 0

GOALS Program Public Housing 74 $110,581 7 0 $2,231 2 $0 -$3,530Section 8 294 $826,025 4 6 $42,308 9 $8,137 $1,553

Terminations or Exits

NewEnrollees

Escrow $ Disbursed

# of Participants

# of GraduatesEscrow $

Held

Ethnicity % (hoh)

# HH Stabilized

# HH Transitioned

Health and Safety Stabilized

Households % Family Type (head of household) Race % (head of household)

Housing Program Served

# of Households Participating

$ Amount of Assistance Provided

# HH Enrolled

Average Funds per Participant

# in Self Sufficiency

# In GOALS

Monthly Funding Amount

Average Cost per Household

Current Month Status

Unduplicated Number Served

Current Month Activity Calendar Year To Date

Escrow $ Forfeited

Avg Annual Earned Income Increase Over

Last Year

# Event Attendees

Crisis Intervention

Support System

Enhanced# Events

2



Agency Financial Summary

Nine months ending 12/31/2009

Subsidy Revenue $5,835,668 $54,182,246 $53,965,425 $216,820Grant Revenue $965,607 $7,310,860 $6,114,194 $1,196,665Property Related Income $1,042,941 $9,420,944 $9,522,310 ($101,366)Development Fee Revenue $166,464 $1,020,509 $447,918 $572,591Other Revenue $238,472 $2,151,045 $1,948,270 $202,775

Total Revenue $8,249,151 $74,085,603 $71,998,117 $2,087,486

Housing Assistance Payments $5,059,244 $45,053,764 $42,885,817 $2,167,947Operating Expense $3,095,052 $27,600,578 $26,413,565 $1,187,013Depreciation $432,819 $3,808,566 $4,487,068 ($678,502)

Total Expense $8,587,115 $76,462,908 $73,786,450 $2,676,458Operating Income -$337,964 -$2,377,305 -$1,788,333 ($588,973)

Other Income(Expense) $488,918 $4,126,252 $4,122,298 $3,954Capital Contributions $1,014,967 $16,670,218 $7,330,410 $9,339,808

Increase(Decrease) Net Assets $1,165,920 $18,419,165 $9,664,376 $8,754,789Total Assets $346,139,088 $346,139,088 $333,436,258 $12,702,830Liquidity Reserves $16,575,057 $25,907,775 $21,974,860 $3,932,915

Development/Community Revitalization

New Development / Revitalization Construction Construction Current Total Cost PerUnits Start End Phase Cost Unit

Pine Square 143 tbd tbd Concept $13,800,000 $96,503Hawthorne Apartments * 48 Apr-09 Mar-10 Construction $7,914,653 $164,889Multnomah Village Lots tbd tbd tbd Concept tbd tbdThe Resource Access Center 130 Nov-09 Apr-11 Construction $46,951,074 $361,162Hillsdale Terrace tbd tbd tbd Concept tbd tbdMartha Washington 108 Aug-09 Jun-10 Construction $18,043,118 $167,066The Jeffrey 80 Mar-10 Apr-10 Preconstruction $16,600,000 $207,500

Capital ImprovementAinsworth 88 tbd tbd Predevelopment $1,980,000 $22,500Sweet 16 296 May-09 Sep-10 Construction $12,006,747 $40,563Gallagher Plaza 85 Dec-11 Dec-12 Predevelopment $9,105,122 $107,119Sellwood Center 112 Dec-11 Jun-13 Predevelopment $9,623,526 $85,924Hollywood East 288 Apr-10 Aug-10 Predevelopment $1,700,000 $5,903FAM4 104 Aug-10 Apr-11 Concept $5,067,400 $48,725Misc Upgrades tbd tbd tbd tbd $452,200

* LegendFormerly known as University Place

Increase (Decrease)

MonthFiscal Year to

DatePrior YTD

3


RESOLUTIONS


1

M E M O R A N D U M

DATE: March 16, 2010 TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: Katie Such, Deputy Executive Director Jill Riddle, Director Rent Assistance SUBJECT: A resolution authorizing HAP to allocate up to 50 project-based vouchers

from the Housing Choice Voucher pool to the City of Portland’s 2010 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)

10-03-01 The Board of Commissioners is specifically requested to approve up to 50 project based vouchers from the Housing Choice Voucher pool to be allocated through the NOFA, to projects awarded through this competitive process and under the conditions detailed below. Staff request approval for the contribution to the NOFA with the understanding that awards to individual projects will be made through a competitive process, described below. Background: The City of Portland (formerly as the Bureau of Housing and Community Development and the Portland Development Commission, now as PHB), Multnomah County, and HAP have previously partnered in NOFAs awarding jurisdictional funds, most recently in support of the City’s goal for the development of permanent supportive housing units for the formerly homeless. HAP’s resource contribution has been the provision of project based vouchers, awarded along with development subsidy from the City of Portland. Previous commitments from HAP to the competitive process included 92 vouchers issued in 2002 as part of a joint competitive process with the Portland Development Commission. In addition, in late 2006, HAP contributed 150 vouchers to the City of Portland’s NOFA, for a total of $8.5 million of resources. Details of the specific project awards are included as an exhibit. PHB requested a commitment of 150 vouchers (please see the attached correspondence). In deference to HAP’s strategic planning process, which is happening simultaneously with this request, staff recommend approval of 50 vouchers. With respect


2

to the specific approval of projects, staff anticipate HAP will be involved, along with community and jurisdictional partners, in the reviewing/recommending body, and will have final approval over awards of project-based vouchers. Summary of the key points of the NOFA: Funding: From PHB, the draft NOFA includes $3,325,000 in tax increment funds, restricted by neighborhood (specifically, Lents and Interstate); $2,000,000 in federal funds, and $3,500,000 in “Section 108” funds, which are amortizing loans to support the development of certain eligible projects. Goals: The main NOFA goal is the preservation, acquisition and rehabilitation, and/or new construction of affordable housing. There is a priority on projects that provide a significant number of rental units affordable to households with incomes of 0 – 30% of median family income (MFI). Projects citywide will be prioritized for maximum leverage of non-City resources and the provision of permanent housing linked with services for chronically homeless individuals or families. Selection: The selection process includes a total of 110 points, awarded on the basis of financial structure and feasibility, the provision of public benefit, the project sponsor’s qualifications including experience and capacity, timeliness as measured by readiness to proceed (each 25 points) and whether the project meets the preference criteria (an additional 10 points). Policy Implications Both the Portland Housing Bureau and Multnomah County are important and strategic partners for HAP. Historically, HAP, the City of Portland, and Multnomah County have discussed aligning resources at a jurisdictional level, to maximize leverage and to meet overall policy goals. This effort achieves a degree of alignment in the prioritization of development and operating resources for the 0-30% MFI population. HAP receives funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the overall Housing Choice Voucher program every year, and may choose to project-base a portion of our allocation. Of the total voucher program of approximately 7,800, 1,098 were project-based as of January, 2010. Doing so affects the tenant-based voucher waiting list: within the Housing Choice Voucher program, if HAP chooses to project base 50 vouchers in accordance with this request, those vouchers will not be available to potential participants on the tenant-based waiting list. We have 2,075 applicants on the waiting list. There was a modest pull of 130 names from the waiting list a few weeks ago (January 25, 2010). We last opened the waiting list for new applicants in November, 2006. HAP has long considered the project-based voucher program to be a rent assistance vehicle that allows households with high barriers to housing (for example, those who are chronically homeless, have no or very little income, disabled households, etc) to be housed in the larger community. Project-based vouchers, unlike tenant-based vouchers,


3

stay with the building, not with the resident. As a result, they provide a level of financial certainty and operating subsidy for the project owner. The reduction of these vouchers from the larger voucher pool helps ensure that the most vulnerable households have viable options for decent housing in the community. Budget Implications and Financial Impact on HAP Annual funding for the Housing Choice Voucher program fluctuates depending on previous year’s spending, appropriations, and utilization. Our allocation for this calendar year for HUD (not including administration fees, which have not yet been announced) is $56,127,287. Typically, project-based vouchers are awarded as either 10 year or 15 year contracts. In the event that federal appropriations were ever significantly cut, staff assume that the contractual obligations represented by project based voucher contracts would remain in place; as a result, this is a multi-year commitment. Please note that while most contracts for project-based vouchers have a termination date, they may also be renewed at HAP’s discretion. We believe most project sponsors would want to negotiate ongoing renewal of the contracts. Assuming our average annual cost/voucher for 50 vouchers over ten years, this allocation to the NOFA represents $285,600 per year. The overall allocation with this award would be approximately $2,856,000 to $4,284,000 over 10 to 15 years, depending on the duration of the contracts (the actual allocation is variable, depending on the duration of the contracts, payment standards, actual household income, and a variety of other matters - this range is a reasonable projection). Regarding staff investment, in 2009, Rent Assistance staff spent significant time conforming previous project-based voucher awards to HUD regulations, including wait list administration, the provision of services according to the population served, and file compliance. The staff time required for administering project-based vouchers is only modestly more than the time required for administering tenant-based vouchers, assuming there are no compliance or significant relationship issues with the building’s owner. Please see the Recommendations section below. Risks and Opportunities Risks: Risks associated with HAP’s ability to pull from the tenant-based wait list are detailed above. There are customary contractual risks, as there are with any contracts, because of the relationship between HAP and project sponsors. Finally, HAP has audit risk as represented by the need to administer project-based vouchers. This risk can be mitigated through the drafting of contracts and ongoing compliance monitoring – but in order to mitigate this risk, staff recommend that awards not be granted to any applicants who are not in good standing with the program (see “Recommendations” below). Staff also note that block grant funding for the Housing Choice Voucher program, expected to be approved by HUD and presented for board approval, may allow funding flexibility for future requests by jurisdictional partners for participation in joint funding processes.


4

Opportunities: The NOFA represents an additional opportunity to serve HAP’s mission through resource alignment, as well as an opportunity to support our partners at PHB and Multnomah County. The appropriate use of project-based vouchers helps to ensure an economically fragile population of participants is served appropriately. Conclusion/Recommendation Staff recommend approval of this allocation to the NOFA, with the following preferred conditions: Award conditions: Awards must be made in conformance with HUD and HAP policies for project-based vouchers and the overall Housing Choice Voucher program. All contracts should indicate that ongoing awards are subject to federal appropriations. To avoid confusion, all applicable conditions should be indicated in the NOFA. HAP staff should have final approval authority over project-based voucher awards. Populations: Awards of project-based vouchers should be made to projects proposing to serve populations with high barriers to housing (as previous awards have been), including but not limited to projects housing people with 0 – 30% of median family income. Sponsors: Applicants who already have project-based awards should be in good standing with HAP before receiving new awards. Currently, there are no sponsors that are not in good standing. However, properties and contracts are currently undergoing audits of their compliance work that may identify issues. Further, because of administration requirements, we recommend all project-based contracts be for ten or more vouchers. Staff recommend approval of the allocation of up to 50 project based vouchers with the conditions indicated above. Exhibits

� NOFA commitment for 150 project-based vouchers – previously awarded � Threshold and preference criteria from the NOFA


5

RESOLUTION 10-03-01 AUTHORIZING ALLOCATION OF UP TO 50 PROJECT-BASED VO UCHERS FROM THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER POOL TO THE CITY OF PORTLAND’S 2010 NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY (NOFA)

WHEREAS, HAP receives funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the overall Housing Choice Voucher program every year, and may choose to project-base a portion of its allocation; and WHEREAS, The Portland Housing Bureau (PHB) requested a commitment of project-based vouchers to the City of Portland’s 2010 NOFA for affordable housing; and WHEREAS, The PHB and Multnomah County are important strategic partners for HAP and the City of Portland, Multnomah County, and HAP have previously partnered in NOFAs awarding jurisdictional funds and discussed aligning resources at a jurisdictional level to meet overall policy goals; and WHEREAS, HAP considers the project-based vouchers to be a valuable resource that helps ensure the most vulnerable households with high barriers to housing are served appropriately and have viable options for decent housing in the community; and WHEREAS, the NOFA represents an additional opportunity to serve HAP’s mission through resource alignment, as well as the opportunity to support our partners at PHB and Multnomah County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the HAP Board of Commissioners authorizes the Executive Director to allocate up to 50 project-based vouchers from the Housing Choice Voucher pool to the City of Portland’s 2010 NOFA with the following conditions: Award conditions: Awards must be made in conformance with HUD and HAP policies for project-based vouchers and the overall Housing Choice Voucher program. All contracts should indicate that ongoing awards are subject to federal appropriations. To avoid confusion, all applicable conditions should be indicated in the NOFA. HAP staff should have final approval authority over project-based voucher awards. Populations: Awards of project-based vouchers should be made to projects proposing to serve populations with high barriers to housing (as previous awards have been), including but not limited to projects housing people with 0 – 30% of median family income.


6

Sponsors: Applicants who already have project-based awards should be in good standing with HAP before receiving new awards. Further, because of administration requirements, HAP recommends all project-based contracts be for ten or more vouchers. Adopted: March 16, 2010 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORT LAND Lee E. Moore, Sr., Chair Attest: Steven D. Rudman, Secretary


97209 - 32% '01 - 438 '10 - 577

97202 - 2% '01 - 229 '10 - 233

97206 - 14% '01 - 357 '10 - 408

97215 - (-45%) '01 - 103 '10 - 57

97214 - (-26%) '01 - 291 '10 - 214

97232 - (-48%) '01 - 80 '10 - 42

97212 - (-23%) '01 - 129 '10 - 99

97213 - (-17%) '01 - 275 '10 - 228

97218 - 63% '01 - 136 '10 - 222

97211 - (-47%) '01 - 568 '10 - 300

97217 - 1% '01 - 400 '10 - 402

97203 - 36% '01 - 382 '10 - 519

97205 - 59% '01 - 218 '10 - 346

97210 - (-8%) '01 - 25 '10 - 23

97204 - 130% '01 - 23 '10 - 53

97221 - (-5%) '01 - 41 '10 - 39

97201 - (-4%) '01 - 208 '10 - 200

97219 - 97% '01 - 77 '10 - 152

97266 - 80% '01 - 337 '10 - 606

97236 - 122% '01 - 302 '10 - 671

97233 - 53% '01 - 500 '10 - 764

97216 - 34% '01 - 191 '10 - 256

97220 - 134% '01 - 185 '10 - 433

97230 - 81% '01 - 292 '10 - 528 97024 - 24%

'01 - 85 '10 - 105

97030 - 74% '01 - 206 '10 - 358

97060 - 99% '01 - 74 '10 - 147

97227 - (-19%) '01 - 105 '10 - 85

97231 - (-33%) '01 - 3 '10 - 2

97080 - 48% '01 - 88 '10 - 130

97035 - 200%'01 - 1'10 - 3

97019 - 0%'01 - 1'10 - 1

97239'01 - 0'10 - 51

Multnomah

Clark

Clackamas

Washington

Portland

Gresham

Camas

Tigard

Vancouver

Damascus

Beaverton

Troutdale

Happy Valley

Lake Oswego

Washougal

Milwaukie

Fairview

Camas

Wood Village

King City

Maywood ParkI84

I5

I205

MARINE

SR-14

POWELL

STARK

HALL

FOSTER

122N

D

DIVISION

BURNSIDE

HWY 212

LOMBARD

HWY 217

SANDY

SUNSET

ORIENT

ST HELENS

BARBUR

CORNELLI40

5

SUNNYSIDE

HWY 26PACIFIC

A

HWY 224

KANE

AIRPORT

39TH

82ND

CANYON

SR-50

0

MCLOUGHLIN

I-205

181S

T

6TH

YEON

GRAN

D

222N

D

BROADWAY

182N

D

TERWILLIGER

BOONES FERRY

242N

D

MACA

DAM

COLUMBIA RIVER

BLUFF

NAITO

BEAVERTON HILLSDALE

COLUMBIA

RIVERSIDE

BARNES 257T

H

SCHOLLS FERRY

PORTLAND

WEIDLER

STAT

E

BRIDGE

DENV

ER

TACOMA

COUNTRY CLUB

MCVEY

KILLINGSWORTH

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR

US HWY 26

COMPTON

FRONTAGEJORDAN

I84-I205

ROSS ISLAND

WALK

ER

BURGARD

I84-I5

3RD

I84-181ST

SELLWOOD

BELMONT

I84-JORDAN

BALTIC

MARQUAMSYLVAN-SUNSET

WOODSTOCK

I84

HWY 26

HWY 2

17I-205

SR-14

BLUFF

ORIENT

82ND

I5

BURNSIDE

SR-14I205

39TH

SUNSET

82ND

16

20

21

22

26

Housing Authority of PortlandSection 8

Concentration of Households by Zip CodeJanuary 1, 2010

Total Section 8 Households:2001 - 6,350 and 2010 - 8,257

March 2, 2010

LegendCounty LineZip Code Boundary

Cities in Multnomah Countycityname

FairviewGreshamMaywood ParkPortlandTroutdaleWood Village


97209 - 32% '01 - 438 '10 - 577

97202 - 2% '01 - 229 '10 - 233

97206 - 14% '01 - 357 '10 - 408

97215 - (-45%) '01 - 103 '10 - 57

97214 - (-26%) '01 - 291 '10 - 214

97232 - (-48%) '01 - 80 '10 - 42

97212 - (-23%) '01 - 129 '10 - 99

97213 - (-17%) '01 - 275 '10 - 228

97218 - 63% '01 - 136 '10 - 222

97211 - (-47%) '01 - 568 '10 - 300

97217 - 1% '01 - 400 '10 - 402

97203 - 36% '01 - 382 '10 - 519

97205 - 59% '01 - 218 '10 - 346

97210 - (-8%) '01 - 25 '10 - 23

97204 - 130% '01 - 23 '10 - 53

97221 - (-5%) '01 - 41 '10 - 39

97201 - (-4%) '01 - 208 '10 - 200

97219 - 97% '01 - 77 '10 - 152

97266 - 80% '01 - 337 '10 - 606

97236 - 122% '01 - 302 '10 - 671

97233 - 53% '01 - 500 '10 - 764

97216 - 34% '01 - 191 '10 - 256

97220 - 134% '01 - 185 '10 - 433

97230 - 81% '01 - 292 '10 - 528 97024 - 24%

'01 - 85 '10 - 105

97030 - 74% '01 - 206 '10 - 358

97060 - 99% '01 - 74 '10 - 147

97227 - (-19%) '01 - 105 '10 - 85

97231 - (-33%) '01 - 3 '10 - 2

97080 - 48% '01 - 88 '10 - 130

97035 - 200%'01 - 1'10 - 3

97019 - 0%'01 - 1'10 - 1

97239'01 - 0'10 - 51

Multnomah

Clark

Clackamas

Washington

I84

I5

I205

MARINE

SR-14

POWELL

STARK

HALL

FOSTER

122N

D

DIVISION

BURNSIDE

HWY 212

LOMBARD

HWY 217

SANDY

SUNSET

ORIENT

ST HELENS

BARBUR

CORNELLI40

5

SUNNYSIDE

HWY 26PACIFIC

A

HWY 224

KANE

AIRPORT

39TH

82ND

CANYON

SR-50

0

MCLOUGHLIN

I-205

181S

T

6TH

YEON

GRAN

D

222N

D

BROADWAY

182N

D

TERWILLIGER

BOONES FERRY

242N

D

MACA

DAM

COLUMBIA RIVER

BLUFF

NAITO

BEAVERTON HILLSDALE

COLUMBIA

RIVERSIDE

BARNES 257T

H

SCHOLLS FERRY

PORTLAND

WEIDLER

STAT

E

BRIDGE

DENV

ER

TACOMA

COUNTRY CLUB

MCVEY

KILLINGSWORTH


US HWY 26

COMPTON

FRONTAGEJORDAN

I84-I205

ROSS ISLAND

WALK

ER

BURGARD

I84-I5

3RD

I84-181ST

SELLWOOD

BELMONT

I84-JORDAN

BALTIC


WOODSTOCK

I84

HWY 26

HWY 2

17I-205

SR-14

BLUFF

ORIENT

82ND

I5

BURNSIDE

SR-14I205

39TH 257TH

SUNSET

82ND

16

20

21

22

26

Housing Authority of PortlandPercent Change of Section 8


March 2, 2010

Number of VouchersJanuary 1, 2009

>80% >30% - 80%

>0 - 29% >0 to minus 25%

>-26% - -50%

LEGENDCounty LineZip Code Boundary


97209 - 32% '01 - 438 '10 - 577

97202 - 2% '01 - 229 '10 - 233

97206 - 14% '01 - 357 '10 - 408

97215 - (-45%) '01 - 103 '10 - 57

97214 - (-26%) '01 - 291 '10 - 214

97232 - (-48%) '01 - 80 '10 - 42

97212 - (-23%) '01 - 129 '10 - 99

97213 - (-17%) '01 - 275 '10 - 228

97218 - 63% '01 - 136 '10 - 222

97211 - (-47%) '01 - 568 '10 - 300

97217 - 1% '01 - 400 '10 - 402

97203 - 36% '01 - 382 '10 - 519

97205 - 59% '01 - 218 '10 - 346

97210 - (-8%) '01 - 25 '10 - 23

97204 - 130% '01 - 23 '10 - 53

97221 - (-5%) '01 - 41 '10 - 39

97201 - (-4%) '01 - 208 '10 - 200

97219 - 97% '01 - 77 '10 - 152

97266 - 80% '01 - 337 '10 - 606

97236 - 122% '01 - 302 '10 - 671

97233 - 53% '01 - 500 '10 - 764

97216 - 34% '01 - 191 '10 - 256

97220 - 134% '01 - 185 '10 - 433

97230 - 81% '01 - 292 '10 - 528 97024 - 24%

'01 - 85 '10 - 105

97030 - 74% '01 - 206 '10 - 358

97060 - 99% '01 - 74 '10 - 147

97227 - (-19%) '01 - 105 '10 - 85

97231 - (-33%) '01 - 3 '10 - 2

97080 - 48% '01 - 88 '10 - 130

97035 - 200%'01 - 1'10 - 3

97019 - 0%'01 - 1'10 - 1

97239'01 - 0'10 - 51

Multnomah

Clark

Clackamas

Washington

I84

I5

I205

MARINE

SR-14

POWELL

STARK

HALL

FOSTER

122N

D

DIVISION

BURNSIDE

HWY 212

LOMBARD

HWY 217

SANDY

SUNSET

ORIENT

ST HELENS

BARBUR

CORNELLI40

5

SUNNYSIDE

HWY 26PACIFIC

A

HWY 224

KANE

AIRPORT

39TH

82ND

CANYON

SR-50

0

MCLOUGHLIN

I-205

181S

T

6TH

YEON

GRAN

D

222N

D

BROADWAY

182N

D

TERWILLIGER

BOONES FERRY

242N

D

MACA

DAM

COLUMBIA RIVER

BLUFF

NAITO

BEAVERTON HILLSDALE

COLUMBIA

RIVERSIDE

BARNES 257T

H

SCHOLLS FERRY

PORTLAND

WEIDLER

STAT

E

BRIDGE

DENV

ER

TACOMA

COUNTRY CLUB

MCVEY

KILLINGSWORTH


US HWY 26

COMPTON

FRONTAGEJORDAN

I84-I205

ROSS ISLAND

WALK

ER

BURGARD

I84-I5

3RD

I84-181ST

SELLWOOD

BELMONT

I84-JORDAN

BALTIC


WOODSTOCK

I84

HWY 26

HWY 2

17I-205

SR-14

BLUFF

ORIENT

82ND

I5

BURNSIDE

SR-14I205

39TH 257TH

SUNSET

82ND

16

20

21

22

26

Housing Authority of PortlandSection 8


March 2, 2010

Number of VouchersJanuary 1, 2009

>700 >500-700 >300-500 >100-300

LEGENDCounty LineZip Code Boundary


Multnomah

Clark

Clackamas

Washington

97080

98607

97060

97220

97230

97217

97236

97219

97203

97211

97210

97030

98683

97218

97202 97206 97266

98671

97233

97229

97221

97222

9721397024

97225

97239

98664

97214

97223

98661

97212

9721697215

97086

97201

97232

97009

98684

97227

97009

97209

97205 97204

97231

98660

97208

97238

97228

97280

97294

97283

9729297207

97240

97258 97293

97296

97290

97242

98687

97286

97282

I84

I5

I205

MARINE

SR-14

POWELL

STARK

82ND

122N

D

FOSTER

DIVISION

BURNSIDE

LOMBARD

SANDY

BARBUR

I405

SUNSET

SR-50

0

I-205

KANE

AIRPORT

ST HELENS

39TH

181S

TCORNELL

6TH

YEON

GRAN

D

MCLO

UGHL

IN

BROADWAY

ORIENT

182N

D

MACA

DAM

NAITO

COLUMBIA

19TH

HWY 26

257T

H

CANYON

BARNES

COLUMBIA RIVER

PORTLAND

TERW

ILLIG

ER

WEIDLER

BEAVERTON HILLSDALE

MART

IN LU

THER

KING

DENV

ER

TACOMA

CAPITOL

HWY 224

KILLINGSWORTH

RIVERSIDE


HWY 30

US HWY 26

VAUGHNFRONTAGE

JORDAN

ROSS ISLAND

BURGARD

I84-I5

3RD

I84-181ST

I84 FW

Y-I20

5 FWY

SELLWOOD

I84-JORDAN

I5-AL

BERT

A

SR-14

SR-14

I405

PORTLAND

I-205

SUNSET

SR-14

I-205

HWY 26

82ND I205

I5

I5

39TH

BURNSIDE

I84

257TH

16

20

21

Housing Authority of PortlandSection 8 Zero Income Households within Zip Codes

January 1, 2010

March 3, 2010


Number of Zero Income Section 8 Households 1 - 4 5 - 9 10 - 15 16 - 20 30 - 50


Multnomah

Clark

Clackamas

Washington

97080

98607

97060

97220

97230

97217

97236

97219

97203

97211

97210

97030

98683

97218

97202 97206 97266

98671

97233

97229

97221

97222

9721397024

97225

97239

98664

97214

97223

98661

97212

9721697215

97086

97201

97232

97009

98684

97227

97009

97209

97205 97204

97231

98660

97208

97238

97228

97280

97294

97283

9729297207

97240

97258 97293

97296

97290

97242

98687

97286

97282

I84

I5

I205

MARINE

SR-14

POWELL

STARK

82ND

122N

D

FOSTER

DIVISION

BURNSIDE

LOMBARD

SANDY

BARBUR

I405

SUNSET

SR-50

0

I-205

KANE

AIRPORT

ST HELENS

39TH

181S

TCORNELL

6TH

YEON

GRAN

D

MCLO

UGHL

IN

BROADWAY

ORIENT

182N

D

MACA

DAM

NAITO

COLUMBIA

19TH

HWY 26

257T

H

CANYON

BARNES

COLUMBIA RIVER

PORTLAND

TERW

ILLIG

ER

WEIDLER

BEAVERTON HILLSDALE

MART

IN LU

THER

KING

DENV

ER

TACOMA

CAPITOL

HWY 224

KILLINGSWORTH

RIVERSIDE


HWY 30

US HWY 26

VAUGHNFRONTAGE

JORDAN

ROSS ISLAND

BURGARD

I84-I5

3RD

I84-181ST

I84 FW

Y-I20

5 FWY

SELLWOOD

I84-JORDAN

I5-AL

BERT

A

SR-14

SR-14

I405

PORTLAND

I-205

SUNSET

SR-14

I-205

HWY 26

82ND I205

I5

I5

39TH

BURNSIDE

I84

257TH

16

20

21

Housing Authority of PortlandSection 8 Elderly/Disabled Households within Zip Codes

January 1, 2010

March 3, 2010


Number of Elderly/Disabled Section 8 Households <100 100 - 199 200 - 299 300+


1

M E M O R A N D U M

DATE: March 16, 2010 TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: Todd Salvo, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Approval of the Housing Authority of Portland Budget for the Fiscal year

Ending March 31, 2011 Resolution 10-03-02 Issue Resolution 10-03-02 requests the approval of the Housing Authority of Portland’s budget for the year beginning April 1, 2010 and ending March 31, 2011. Background: Summary of key considerations and elements of the Fiscal Year 2011 budget:

- This budget represents the third and final year of the Agency’s three year business plan. As such, the budget reflects the continuation of those initiatives and activities reflected in the three year business plan as adopted by the Board in fiscal year 2009.

- The budget reflects total revenue of $107.9 million, total operating expense of $109 million resulting in an operating loss of $1 million.

- Adjusting this loss for expenses that do not require a cash payment (such as depreciation) and adjusting for revenue that is not received in cash, but included as revenue in the fiscal year 2011 operating statement (e.g., developer fees); the Agency’s 2011 funding flow projects a deficit of $1.6 million.

- Increased federal funding for Public Housing and Rent Assistance has boosted revenue resulting in a funding flow surplus of $373 thousand for the Program Group (Rent Assistance, Public Housing, and Affordable Housing). The Agency intends to retain this projected fiscal year 2011 surplus from the Program Group in anticipation of higher personnel costs primarily from PERS contribution increases in fiscal year 2012, and in recognition of some uncertainty regarding federal program appropriations.


2

- Development and Community Revitalization (DCR) projects a funding deficit of $1.9 million in fiscal year 2011. While development fee revenue for the Resource Access Center of $3.2 million will be recorded in fiscal year 2011, the majority of cash associated with this fee is expected to be received in fiscal year 2012. This deficit will be funded by Agency cash reserves which are currently in excess of $25 million.

- Financial results for development activities cannot be assessed in a single year budget. Development projects span several years and operating costs of the Development department can be incurred long before the revenue (in the form of develop fees) is received, creating large swings in the financial results from year to year. This condition requires multi-year planning associated with development activity, which the Agency undertakes separately from the annual budget.

- Total Agency staffing of 264.6 full time equivalent positions (FTE) for fiscal year 2011 is 1.4 FTE less than the fiscal year 2010.

Risks and Opportunities Final confirmation from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regarding the Public Housing operating subsidy and the administration fees for Section 8 has not been received. The fiscal year 2011 budget assumes a conservative estimate based on federal appropriations, the actual amount to be received will not be known until notification from HUD is received. Public housing proration is assumed at a fiscal year average of 97%. Housing Choice voucher administrative fee proration is assumed at 95%. While economic conditions have stabilized, continuing employment weakness affecting resident and participant incomes could have a negative effect on rent and housing choice voucher costs.

The Agency has just completed negotiations with HUD regarding conversion of the Section 8 voucher subsidy to a block grant. Subsequent to the completion of the fiscal year 2011 budget, HUD has confirmed that HAP’s Section 8 voucher funding under the block grant will provide $1.5 million in additional funding above that currently reflected in the budget. These additional funds will be available for MTW purposes.

The Agency is engaged in a comprehensive strategic planning effort. While the budget contains consulting costs associated with the development of the strategic plan, costs of implementation are not included. Assessment of the financial impacts that result from the adoption of actions based on the direction set by the strategic plan will occur during the fiscal year and such impacts will be presented to the Board as they become known.

Policy Implications The budget does not reflect any new policy matters that the Board has not previously engaged in. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Resolution 10-03-02.


3

RESOLUTION 10-03-02

RESOLUTION 10-03-02 AUTHORIZES THE APPROVAL OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLAND’S BUDGET FOR THE YEAR ENDING MARCH 31, 2011 WHEREAS, the Housing Authority of Portland is committed to be a responsible steward of public assets, and; WHEREAS, the staff of the Housing Authority of Portland have carefully and thoughtfully prepared a financial budget to accomplish the objectives of the Authority for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2011, and; WHEREAS, this budget outlines expected sources of revenue and other funds which are sufficient to cover planned expenditures for the year, and; WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners has reviewed the budget; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , that the Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authority of Portland approves the budget for the year ending March 31, 2011 as submitted. Adopted: March 16, 2010 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLAND ______ Lee E. Moore, Sr., Chair Attest: Steven D. Rudman, Secretary


1

M E M O R A N D U M

DATE: March 16, 2010 TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: Dianne Quast, Director of Real Estate Operations Donna Kelley, Asset Manager SUBJECT: Authorization to Complete “Year 15” Transfer of Dawson Park from Dawson

Park Limited Partnership to HAP Resolution 10-03-03 The Board of Commissioners is specifically requested to authorize the following actions necessary to complete the transfer of the ownership of Dawson Park Apartments from Dawson Park Limited Partnership to HAP:

• The acceptance of the offer from the limited partner to assign its interest in the partnership to HAP

• The execution of the Assignments of Limited Partner’s interest

• The execution of assignment and assumption documents for the existing bond debt

• The execution of assignment and assumption documents for the Portland Development Commission (“PDC”) loan on the property and the execution of documents extending the current deferral of payments on this loan for an additional 12 months

• HAP’s assumption of the partnership’s commitment to extended low-income use from Oregon Housing and Community Services Department

• The dissolution of the partnership and the transfer of its assets to HAP

Background: In November 1994, HAP entered into a Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Limited Partnership for the purpose of constructing Dawson Park Apartments. The property consists of 67 one- and two-bedroom units. US Bancorp Community Development Corporation (US Bank) is the limited partner, with HAP serving as the General Partner of Dawson Park Limited Partnership. HAP used a combination of tax credit equity, bond


2

proceeds, and funding from PDC to finance the construction of the building. In exchange for the tax credit equity, the partnership provided the limited partners with 10 years of tax credits and tax losses. At the end of the 15 year LIHTC compliance period, it was anticipated that the limited partner would exit the partnership and HAP would take over ownership. Dawson Park reached “Year 15” in 2009; it took longer than anticipated to reach agreement with US Bank on the terms of their exit. We have now reached agreement with US Bank on terms favorable to HAP. Under the partnership agreement, HAP has the right to purchase the limited partner’s interest (the building and all other assets, including reserves) for the greater of the fair market value of the interest or the amount of exit taxes owed. In this case, the value of the interest is estimated at $1.4 million. Exit taxes are projected at $200,0001. US Bank has agreed to accept the tax value of a charitable donation in lieu of a payment from HAP. In negotiating with US Bank, it was our goal to protect the reserves and minimize payments to the limited partners for their exit taxes. The reserve balances are approximately $120,000. The agreement we have reached achieves these goals and is favorable to HAP in the context of both the partnership agreement and the tax situation of the limited partners in this project. Listed below are the key terms of this transaction:

• US Bank will transfer its interest in the partnership to HAP in return for a charitable donation

• The operating reserve and replacement reserve will remain with the property • The limited partner will be responsible for payment of its exit taxes • Each party will be responsible for its own legal fees

This transaction is very similar to the transaction the Board approved in April 2009 related to the Peter Paulson Apartments. Budget Implications and Financial Impact on HAP HAP’s costs to close this transaction will be approximately $40,000. These costs will be for legal and title fees. The property has approximately $30,000 in cash on hand and a very tight operating cash flow. There is an additional $82,000 in operating reserves, which can be used to cover closing costs. The Dawson Park property is a marginal performer financially. The property has approximately $2 million outstanding on its primary debt, which consists of HAP-issued bonds. The property achieved a 1.08 debt coverage ratio for 2009; the required coverage ratio is 1.15. In addition, the required debt service on the bonds is scheduled to rise by $15,000 per year in 2011 and an additional $5,000 per year in 2013. There is also $479,000 in outstanding debt with PDC. Since November 2006 payments on the PDC loan have been deferred. Payments were scheduled to resume in May 2010. As part of tonight’s action, you are being asked to approve documents extending the deferral for an 1 Exit taxes occur when the sum of the operating losses allocated to the limited partner(s) over the 15-year compliance period exceed their initial capital contributions.


3

additional 12 months. The property is in good physical condition, with only about $80,000 in repair needs over the next five years; however, there is a gap of approximately $100,000 between anticipated capital needs and reserve deposits that will be available to make the repairs over the next 10 years. Risks and Opportunities There are risks inherent in owning rental real estate. Despite the increase in debt service for 2011, the property is budgeted to break-even during the next year. The overall debt load on the property is manageable, with total debt less than $40,000 per unit. With the additional 12 month deferral from PDC, staff will be able to develop and negotiate a comprehensive restructure of both the bond debt and the PDC debt. We expect to bring this proposal to the Board prior to the May 2011 bond payment due date. The opportunity for HAP is to realize our intentions when we entered into the partnership, which is to own this property outright. The property is located in a neighborhood that has seen substantial gentrification in recent years. While the property was developed for households at 50% and 60% of Area Median Income (“AMI”), the property has 24 households whose income is below 30% of AMI living there and 15 households between 31% and 50% of median. A substantial number of households living at Dawson Park are Section 8 Voucher participants. By taking ownership of this property we are preserving this valuable housing resource for the community and serving a vulnerable resident population. The property is in good physical condition with only modest repair needs over the short to medium term. The property’s operations have been generally stable over the last several years. As the general partner of the partnership, we would still be subject to the same financial risks; as the sole owner we can manage these risks without having to consult with an investor limited partner. Conclusion/Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Resolution 10-03-03.


4

RESOLUTION 10-03-03

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF DOCUMENTS BY THE AUTHORITY, ON ITS OWN BEHALF AND IN ITS CAPA CITY AS GENERAL PARTNER OF DAWSON PARK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, TO EFFE CTUATE THE TRANSFER OF THE LIMITED PARTNERS’ INTERESTS IN THE PARTNERSHIP TO THE AUTHORITY AND THE SUBSEQUENT DISSOLUTION OF THE PARTNERSHIP AND DISTRIBUTION OF ITS ASSETS TO THE AUTHORITY

WHEREAS, the Housing Authority of Portland (the “Authority”) seeks to encourage the provision of long-term housing for low-income persons residing in the City of Portland, Oregon (the “City”);

WHEREAS, ORS 456.120(18) authorizes the Authority enter into partnership agreements and to make loans to partnerships to finance, plan, undertake, construct, acquire and operate housing projects;

WHEREAS, ORS 456.065 defines “housing project” to include, among other things, “any work or undertaking . . . to provide decent, safe and sanitary urban or rural housing for persons or families of lower income”;

WHEREAS, the Authority serves as the general partner of Dawson Park Limited Partnership, an Oregon limited partnership (the “Partnership”), which Partnership owns and operates the Dawson Park Apartments in Portland, Oregon (the “Project”);

WHEREAS, financing for the Project included proceeds of certain tax-exempt bonds issued in 1994, which bonds were refunded by the Authority’s Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1995 (Dawson Park Apartments Project)(the “Bonds”);

WHEREAS, the limited partner of the Partnership is US Bancorp Community Development Corporation (the “Limited Partner”);

WHEREAS, the Authority received a Letter of Intent (the “LOI”) dated January 8, 2010, setting forth the conditions upon which the Limited Partner is willing to transfer its limited partnership interest (the “Limited Partnership Interest”) in the Partnership to the Authority, a copy of which is attached hereto;


5

WHEREAS, the Authority desires to acquire the Limited Partner’s interest upon the general terms and conditions set forth in the LOI;

WHEREAS, upon the acquisition of the Limited Partnership Interest, the Authority desires to take such steps as may be necessary to dissolve the Partnership and distribute its assets to the Authority;

WHEREAS, in order to acquire the Limited Partnership interests, dissolve the Partnership, and distribute the Partnership assets to the Authority it will be necessary for the Partnership and/or the Authority to obtain the consent or acknowledgement of the Oregon Housing and Community Services Department (the “Allocating Agency”), and the existing lenders to the Project, which include the Portland Development Commission, Bank of New York Mellon (Trustee for the Bonds) and/or the Bondholders, and Housing Authority of Portland (collectively the “Project Lenders”) and to execute such assignment and assumption agreements and other transfer documents as may be reasonably required by such parties; and

WHEREAS, ORS 456.135 authorizes the Authority to delegate to one or more of its agents and employees such powers as it deems proper;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED :

1. General Approval of Transfer of Partnership Interests. The Authority hereby approves the acquisition of the Limited Partnership Interests pursuant to the general terms and conditions of the LOI and further approves taking such steps as may be reasonably required to then dissolve the Partnership and distribute its assets to the Authority. In furtherance of such transfer and distribution the Authority further resolves as follows:

2 Approval of Partnership Documents. The Authority has been presented with the LOI. The LOI and an assignment and assumption of the Limited Partnership Interest, along with such other documents as may be reasonably required to effectuate the transfer of the Limited Partnership Interests to the Authority are hereafter referred to as the “Partnership Documents”. The Chair of the Board, the Authority’s Executive Director and their respective designees (each, an “Authorized Officer” and, collectively, the “Authorized Officers”), and each of them acting alone, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver, on behalf of the Authority (acting on its own behalf or as general partner of the Partnership), the Partnership Documents; provided however, any Authorized Officer may approve on the Authority’s behalf any further changes to the such documents including material changes, and such Authorized Officer’s signature on the final Partnership Documents shall be construed as the Authority’s approval of such changes. The Authorized Officers (and each of them acting alone) are also authorized and directed to execute and deliver, on behalf of the Authority, supplements to or amendments of the trust indenture, loan agreement, trust deed and official statement relating to the Bonds, and all documents and certificates reasonably required to be executed by the Authority to effect the change in structure of and


6

security for the bonds. In connection with the change in structure, the Authority pledges to payment of debt service on the Bonds all revenues derived from the Project, including without limitation all lease payments, insurance proceeds and condemnation awards, but excluding refundable security deposits. The Authorized Officers (and each of them acting alone) are further authorized and directed to execute and deliver, on behalf of the Authority (acting on its own behalf or as general partner of the Partnership), any other documents reasonably required to be executed by the Authority or the Partnership to carry out the transactions contemplated by the Partnership Documents.

3 Approval of Transfer Documents. The Authority anticipates receipt of certain assignment, assumption and consent documents from the Project Lenders and the Allocating Agency pursuant to which the Authority will agree to assume and be bound by the loan documents and regulatory agreements and/or covenant affecting the Project (collectively the “Transfer Documents”). The Authorized Officers (and each of them acting alone) are authorized and directed to execute and deliver, on behalf of the Authority (acting on its own behalf or as general partner of the Partnership), Transfer Documents. The Authorized Officers (and each of them acting alone) are further authorized and directed to execute and deliver, on behalf of the Authority (acting on its own behalf or as general partner of the Partnership), any other documents reasonably required to be executed by the Authority or the Partnership to carry out the transactions contemplated by the Transfer Documents.

4. Approval of Dissolution of the Partnership and Distribution of Assets. The Authority further authorizes the Authorized Officers to take such steps and to execute and deliver such documents (each of them acting alone) as may be necessary to dissolve the Partnership and distribute the assets of the Partnership to the Authority, such documents including but not limited to a certificate of dissolution, such deeds, bills of sale and/or other assignments as may be required to distribute all Partnership assets to the Authority and the filing of those tax returns as may be necessary to effectuate the transfer of Limited Partnership Interests, the dissolution of the Partnership assets and the distribution of such assets to the Authority.

5. Ancillary Documents. The Authorized Officers, and each of them acting alone, are authorized on behalf of the Authority (acting on its own behalf or as general partner of the Partnership) to execute, deliver and/or file (or cause to be delivered and/or filed) any affidavits, certificates, letters, government forms, documents, agreements and instruments that any such Authorized Officer determines to be necessary or desirable: (i) to give effect to this resolution and/or (ii) to consummate the transactions contemplated herein.

6. Expenditures. The Authority is authorized to expend such funds (and to cause the Partnership to expend such funds) as are necessary to pay for all filing fees, application fees, registration fees and other costs relating to the actions authorized by this resolution.


7

7. Acting Officers Authorized. Any action required by this resolution to be taken by the Chair of the Board or Executive Director of the Authority may, in the absence of such person, be taken by the duly authorized acting Chair of the Board or acting Executive Director of the Authority, respectively.

8 Effective Date. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption and approval.

Adopted: March 16, 2010 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLA ND

_________________________________ Lee E. Moore, Sr., Chair

Attest: _______________________________ Steven D. Rudman, Secretary


Resolution 10-03-04 Will be provided at the Board meeting
