|
Previous Council Item |
Next Council Item | Corresponding Agenda |
| List of Council Meetings | List of Reports to Council | Sunnyvale Home Page |
May 21, 2002
|
SUBJECT: |
Program Status Report and Recommended Guidelines for the Down Payment Assistance Component-Housing for Public School Employees, City Employees and Child Care Teachers Program (HPCC) |
|
REPORT IN BRIEF |
|
|
This report provides the implementation status of the Housing for Public School Employees, City Employees and ChildCare Teachers Program (HPCC) and recommended guidelines and eligibility criteria for implementation and participation in the Down Payment Assistance component of the HPCC program . |
|
|
BACKGROUND |
|
|
As a top priority for study in 2001, the Sunnyvale City Council directed staff to explore "options for affordable housing for teachers and City employees". From January through June an interdepartmental team developed options for Council to consider ways to enhance affordable housing for City and school district employees. This report was presented to the City Council on June 19, 2001 (RTC 01-220). City Council approved several elements outlined in the report for staff implementation during 2001 and 2002. On October 9, 2001, Council approved Budget Modification Number 2 to begin the implementation process of the Housing for Public School Employees, City Employees and Child Care Teachers Program (RTC 01-351), and on January 15, 2002, Council approved guidelines for the implementation of the rental assistance and educational components. The final component is the down payment loan program to assist first time home ownership. The rental assistance component includes the implementation of a Security Deposit Loan Program to assist employees to obtain rental housing. Staff began the outreach efforts for this program in March, and at present four security deposit loans have been made. All four loans were funded to City employees .The education component includes a series of specialized homebuyer education classes and creation of a website that will provide available information on housing assistance programs and training. The educational classes began this February. As of April 30, six four-hour classes have been held. More than three hundred people have attended. Of those who attended, 37% are City employees, 47% are school district employees and 16% are childcare workers. The website is under construction and will be operational by the end of May.Staff is now prepared to implement the Down Payment Loan component of the HPCC program. Since December, staff has worked with D.R. Elrod and Associates to research and develop recommendations for the Down Payment Loan component of the HPCC Program. The following actions have been completed :
Staff met with school district representatives about the programs. The proposed program guidelines have been developed in cooperation with each school district’s representative. |
|
|
EXISTING POLICY |
|
Land Use and Transportation Sub-Element (1997) GOAL C2: Ensure ownership and rental housing options in terms of style, size, and density that are appropriate and contribute positively to the surrounding area. Housing and Community Revitalization Sub-Element (1992): GOAL A: Foster the expansion of the housing supply to provide greater opportunities for current and future residents given environmental, social, fiscal, and land use constraints. GOAL C: Promote and maintain a diversity in tenure, type, size, location and cost-of-housing to permit a range of individual choice for all current residents and those expected to become city residents as a result of normal growth processes and employment opportunities. C.3.a. The City should consider direct City and public financial involvement in housing programs, including City bonding resources and possible submission of an Article 34 election to voters if needed. |
|
DISCUSSION |
Staff has researched the loan programs underway in the following jurisdictions:
Jurisdiction |
Program |
City of Oakland |
Public Safety Officer/Teacher Down Payment Assistance Program |
City of Oakland |
First-Time Homebuyers Mortgage Assistance Program |
City of San Jose |
Teacher Homebuyer Program |
City of San Mateo |
Countywide Home Investment Partnership (CHIP) |
County of San Mateo |
START (Second Mortgage) |
County of San Mateo |
StartPLUS (secured Third Mortgage) |
County of Santa Clara |
Teacher MCCs |
County of Santa Clara |
Housing Bond Trust Fund Second Mortgage |
County of Santa Clara (SVMG) |
Deferred $6,500 Assistance Program |
State of California (CHFA) |
Extra Credit Teacher Home Purchase Program (operated through SCC Teacher MCCs, above) |
State of California (CHFA) |
High Cost Area Home Purchase Assistance Program (HiCAP) --First Loan |
State of California (CHFA) |
High Cost Area Home Purchase Assistance Program (HiCAP) --Second Loan |
State of California (CHFA) |
CHAP 100% Loan Program |
These jurisdictions were selected for review because they either offered a first-time homebuyer loan program specifically for teachers and/or public employees, or because their general first-time homebuyer program has proven successful and could be transferable, in whole or in part, to the City of Sunnyvale. For each jurisdiction, copies of Council/Board reports, deeds of trust, promissory notes, program information, eligibility criteria and similar documents were obtained and analyzed.
Our analysis reveals that the following generalities can be drawn:
The County of Santa Clara’s CASA program is a good example of what does not work in a first time homebuyer program. According to one of the managers of the program, Knaphtali Knox, the County’s CASA program closed after just two years, with only five loans closed during that time [the City contributed $100,000 in Housing Mitigation Funds to this program, most of which has been returned].
He cites a number of reasons for the failure of the program, such as loan amounts that were insufficient to substantially aid the borrower in affording a home, intimidating equity share provisions, and income limits that were too low to attract a reasonable pool of applicants.
With respect to this last issue, in order for the program’s sole lender to receive CRA credit, the lender initially required borrowers to be less than 80% of median (low income), and not a single loan was closed that first year. Although median income at the time of the program’s inception was nearly $90,000 for a family of four, 80% of median was simply too low to attract any eligible borrowers. And, while the lender adjusted the income requirements to 100% of median for the program’s second year, it was still not high enough, with only five loans closing in total. Mr. Knox suggested that a more viable income limit would have been 120% of median, which in fact is generally the standard for most jurisdictions’ first-time homebuyer programs.
Based on the research undertaken, those jurisdictions that do specifically target teachers and/or public service employees have program parameters that do not meet the City of Sunnyvale’s needs in terms of loan amount, loan terms, return on
investment, and similar factors. A brief summary follows.Program |
Concerns |
City of Oakland’s Public Safety Officer/Teacher Down Payment Assistance Program |
Loan amount ($10,000) considered too low to be an effective tool for potential first-time buyers. |
City of San José Teacher Homebuyer Program |
Borrower cannot own primary residence but can own rental property to qualify; 0% loan with no repayment for 30 years; can retain loan even if the teacher is no longer employed by the schools; 100% loan-to-value accepted. |
County of Santa Clara’s Teacher MCC Program |
A variant of the existing Mortgage Credit Certificate Program, not a true loan program; maximum purchase price restrictions; income eligibility to 100% of median only; must be a teacher in a "low performing school" selected by the State (includes only Downtown San José). |
We have determined that a combination of the programs offered by the City and County of San Mateo hold the most promise for the City of Sunnyvale to utilize in the development of its first-time homebuyer program. Although neither of these jurisdictions’ programs specifically target teachers and/or public service employees, their loan provisions and requirements respond effectively to the unique housing and economic conditions facing potential borrowers in the Bay Area today. These are highly successful programs that have attracted much interest from potential borrowers in the last few years.
We recommend that the following criteria be adopted for the City of Sunnyvale’s program:
The City will include decreasing equity share rights if the borrower sells the subject property between year five and year
ten of the loan term. In this way, the equity share provisions would be an inducement to the borrower to remain in the program for as long as possible. The terms may include waiver of the equity share if transfer is made to an income eligible household, if the sale is due to hardship, or due to involuntary termination of employment. The following is an example of the proposed equity share formula:Original Purchase Price = $450,000 City Loan = $50,000 = 11% equity share
.|
Years held before resale |
% Equity Share |
Gross Proceeds |
Due City |
|
One to Five Years |
11%x200= 22% |
$40,000 |
$8,800 |
|
Sixth Year |
11%x180= 19.8% |
$40,000 |
$7,920 |
|
Seventh Year |
11%x160= 17.6% |
$40,000 |
$7,040 |
|
Eight Year |
11%x140= 15.4% |
$40,000 |
$6,160 |
|
Nine Year |
11%x120= 13.2% |
$40,000 |
$5,280 |
|
Ten Year |
11%x100= 11% |
$40,000 |
$4,400 |
The following scenarios illustrate the impact of the proposed program. The following two tables show that, based on a purchase price of $450,000 (approximately median purchase price) and a down payment of 5%, the City’s loan would effectively reduce the amount of the purchase price so that a household with just $86,100 annual income could afford to purchase the subject home. Without the City loan, a household would need $97,500 to purchase the same home.
Scenario 1: Borrower Receives $50,000 City Loan
|
$450,000 |
Purchase price |
|
($22,500) |
Downpayment |
|
($50,000) |
City loan |
|
$377,500 |
Amount borrower must finance |
|
$2,512 |
Monthly payment |
|
$91,345 |
Income needed to finance (based on housing payments = 33% of income) |
Scenario 2: Borrower Receives No City Loan
|
$450,000 |
Purchase price |
|
($22,500) |
Downpayment |
|
$0 |
City loan |
|
$427,500 |
Amount borrower must finance |
|
$2,844 |
Monthly payment |
|
$121,885 |
Income needed to finance (based on housing payments = 28% of income) |
These scenarios illustrate that the City could potentially reach a significantly lower income pool of applicants with its loan than were such applicants afforded no such loan. Attached to this report are additional scenarios showing the impact of using different purchase prices ($450,000, $375,000 and $300,000) at 33% and at 28% of housing cost to income.
Staff recommends that the City’s funding allocation for loans be limited to $500,000 for the first year of the program. During that time, staff will gain sufficient experience working with the program to identify shortcomings or programmatic weaknesses. After the first year of implementation, staff will be better able to assess the demand for loans from the targeted participants and any guidelines that may require modification. However, should initial demand greatly exceed expectations or other deficiencies arise, staff will report these issues to Council for correction as soon as they are known.
|
FISCAL IMPACT |
|
Council action will have no fiscal impact. Funds were appropriated for $719,912 on October 9, 2001 (RTC 01-351) for the implementation of the assistance programs. |
|
PUBLIC CONTACT |
|
Public contact was made through posting of the Council agenda on the City’s official notice bulletin board, posting of the agenda and report on the City’s web page, and the availability of the report in the Library and the City Clerk’s Office. |
|
ALTERNATIVES |
|
The key areas to be determined to begin the implementation of the program include the loan terms and eligibility criteria that are described in items 1 through 13 of this report. |
The City Council may take no action. |
|
RECOMMENDATION |
|
Staff recommends Alternative 1. |
|
Prepared by: |
|
Reviewed by: |
|
Approved by: |
|
Attachments |
|
Previous Council Item |
Next Council Item | Corresponding Agenda |
| List of Council Meetings | List of Reports to Council | Sunnyvale Home Page |