Fiscal Note

Department:	Contact Person/Phone:	DOF Analyst/Phone:
D.C.L.U.	Jim Metz 684-7979	Stephen Land 684-7920

Legislation Title:

Emergency Relocation Assistance Account

Summary of Legislation:

The proposed ordinance establishes an Emergency Relocation Assistance Account in the Construction and Land Use Fund to assist low income tenants with household incomes at or below fifty percent (50%) of the median family income in King County who must move as a result of an Emergency Order to Vacate and Close their housing unit. The main purpose of the Account would be to advance relocation assistance payments to eligible low income tenants when property owners failed to pay such tenants as required under current authorization of the Housing and Building Maintenance Code (HBMC). The Account would also be used to pass through relocation payments to tenants from those property owners who complied with the requirements of the HBMC.

Appropriations (in $1,000’s):

Fund Name and Number	Department	Budget Control Level*	2002 Appropriation	2003 Anticipated Appropriation
			0	0
TOTAL			0	0

* This is line of business for operating budgets, and program or project for capital improvements

Notes: No appropriation is being sought to fund the Emergency Relocation Assistance Account. The Account would be reimbursed by civil penalties assessed for failure to pay relocation assistance. The total amount of unreimbursed advances from the Account at any give time would not exceed $50,000.00

.

Anticipated Revenue/Reimbursement (in $1,000’s):

Fund Name and Number	Department	Revenue Source	2002 Revenue	2003 Revenue
			0	0
TOTAL			0	0

Notes: The Emergency Relocation Assistance Account would not generate revenues. It would be only reimbursed by civil penalties assessed for failure to pay relocation assistance.

Total Permanent Positions Created Or Abrogated Through Legislation, Including FTE Impact; Estimated FTE Impact for Temporary Positions:

Fund Name and Number	Department	Position Title*	2002 FTE	2003 FTE
			0	0
TOTAL			0	0

* List each position separately

Do positions sunset in the future? (If yes, identify sunset date):

There are no permanent positions created or abrogated by the proposed ordinance.

Background (Include brief description which states the purpose and context of legislation and include record of previous legislation and funding history, if applicable):

The main purpose of the Emergency Relocation Assistance Account is to advance relocation assistance payments to eligible low income tenants when property owners fail to pay relocation to such tenants displaced by an Emergency Order to Vacate and Close as required under current authorization of the Housing and Building Maintenance Code (HBMC). The Account would also be used to pass through relocation payments to tenants from those property owners who complied with the requirements of the HBMC.

The proposed procedures are a departure from present practice. Currently, property owners are responsible for paying relocation assistance directly to tenants displaced by an Emergency Order. Under this proposal, property owner payments would be passed through the new account and paid to the tenants by the City. When owners failed to pay, the account would advance payments to low income tenants and impose a penalty upon the defaulting property owners.

The Account would be reimbursed by civil penalties assessed for failure to pay relocation assistance. No appropriation is being sought to fund the Account and the total amount of unreimbursed advances from the Account at any given time would be limited to $50,000.

The financial cost of not implementing the legislation (Estimate the costs to the City of not implementing the legislation, including estimated costs to maintain or expand an existing facility or the cost avoidance due to replacement of an existing facility, potential conflicts with regulatory requirements, or other potential costs if the legislation is not implemented):

There would be no direct financial cost to the City if the proposed ordinance is not implemented.

Possible alternatives to the legislation which could achieve the same or similar objectives (Include any potential alternatives to the proposed legislation, including using an existing facility to fulfill the uses envisioned by the proposed project, adding components to or subtracting components from the total proposed project, contracting with an outside organization to provide the services the proposed project would fill, or other alternatives):

1) Retain the current Housing and Building Maintenance Code (HBMC) requirement that property owners pay relocation assistance directly to tenants. This approach would leave unresolved the current problem of owners not paying relocation assistance to low income tenants and the associated negative impact on this vulnerable population. 2) Set the penalty for failure to pay relocation assistance so high as to provide a strong incentive for owners to comply with the HBMC. It is our view, however, that it is highly unlikely that the courts would levy penalties at levels sufficient to accomplish this objective

Is the legislation subject to public hearing requirements (If yes, what public hearings have been held to date):

A public hearing is not required for the proposed ordinance.

Other Issues (including long-term implications of the legislation):

The proposed legislation was developed in response to repeated failures by property owners to pay relocation assistance to tenant households displaced by emergency orders to vacate and close. The majority of those affected have been largely single-parent households, single men and women with very low wage jobs or who are receiving some form of public assistance, and individuals who were recently homeless. Currently, the City has the authority to sue a property owner who fails to pay required relocation assistance, but can only seek to collect civil penalties. It has no authority to sue a property owner for the amount of unpaid relocation assistance. A tenant can bring a private civil action to claim the assistance. However, it has been the experience of the D.C.L.U. that the average tenant is unprepared to sue, even in Small Claims Court. This problem would remain unaddressed should the proposed legislation not be implemented.

Implementation of the proposed ordinance would result in a small increase in administrative costs associated with processing deposits by property owners, reviewing applications for assistance, and processing payment requests and checks. Since it is anticipated that the number of cases requiring the payment of relocation assistance will be rather small, the additional administrative costs should also be small. As an example, in the period May 2000 through December 2001, eight (8) low income households were not paid relocation assistance as required by the Housing and Building Maintenance Code.

FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS ONLY

Background (Include brief description that states the purpose and context of legislation, the expected useful life, anticipated customers/users, assumed level of LEED or other sustainable design elements. Also include record of previous legislation and funding history, if applicable):

Project Name:

Project Location:

Start Date:

End Date:

Spending Plan and Future Appropriations for Capital Projects (Estimate cost of legislation over time; list timing of anticipated appropriation authority requests and expected spending plan. Please identify your cost estimate methodology including inflation assumptions and key assumptions related to the timing of appropriation requests and expected expenditures. In addition, include the projected costs of meeting the LEED Silver standard in all facilities and buildings with over 5,000 gross square feet of occupied space. Also, be sure to include percent for art and percent for design as appropriate):

Spending Plan and Budget	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	Total
Spending Plan
Current Year Appropriation
Future Appropriations

Key Assumptions:

Funding source (Identify funding sources including revenue generated from the project and the expected level of funding from each source):

Funding Source	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	Total
TOTAL

Bond Financing Required (If the project or program requires financing, please list type of financing, amount, interest rate, term and annual debt service or payment amount. Please include issuance costs of 3% in listed amount):

Type	Amount	Assumed Interest Rate	Term	Timing	Expected Annual Debt Service/Payment
TOTAL

Uses and Sources for Operation and Maintenance Costs for the Project (Estimate cost of one-time startup, operating and maintaining the project over a six year period and identify each fund source available. Estimate the annual savings of implementing the LEED Silver standard. Identify key assumptions such as staffing required, assumed utility usage and rates and other potential drivers of the facility’s cost):

O&M	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	Total
Uses
Start Up
On-going
Sources (itemize)

Key Assumptions:

Periodic Major Maintenance costs for the project (Estimate capital cost of performing periodic maintenance over life of facility. Please identify major work items, frequency):

Major Maintenance Item	Frequency	Cost	Likely Funding Source
TOTAL

Funding sources for replacement of project (Identify possible and/or recommended method of financing the project replacement costs):

Revised 7/09/02