Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners...

1

Deerfield Beach Housing Authority

Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting

533 S. Dixie Highway, Suite 201

Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

AGENDA

A. Roll Call

B. Minutes –August 20, 2014

C. Public Comments (Limit 3 Minutes)

D. RAD Update- Ray Baker

E. Financial Overview- Andrea Hartt

F. Legal Updates – Attorney David Tolces

G. New Business

a. Resolution 2014-18: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Approving Deerfield Beach Housing Authority’s (DBHA) Budget for Fiscal Year Ending 9/30/2015

b. Resolution 2014-19: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners to authorize the Executive Director to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Deerfield Beach concerning administering Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), State Housing Initiative Program (SHIP) and HOME Program funds

c. Resolution 2014-20: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners approving the Deerfield Beach Authority’s (DBHA) 2015 Annual Plan for the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

H. Executive Director’s and Division Report

I. Commissioners Concern & Discussion Items

J. Adjournment

2

MINUTES


Regular Meeting

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

4:30 P.M.

The Board of Commissioners (BOC) of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority (DBHA) met in a regular session at the Sylvia Poitier Business Skills Center, 533 S. Dixie Highway, Suite 201, Deerfield Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, August 27, 2014. Chairman Pelt called the meeting to order at 4:39 p.m. This was the ninth (9th) meeting for Fiscal Year 2014. A. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Anthony Pelt – Chairman Jamie Marlowe – Vice Chairman

Naomi Gayle - Commissioner Tony Guadagnino - Commissioner Marta Riviera - Commissioner Annette Scott Woods - Commissioner

Commissioners Absent:

David Reynolds – Commissioner A quorum was declared. Others Present: Dr. Nadine Jarmon – Executive Director Jasmine Privott – Director of Housing Operations Jan Housh – HCV Manager

David Tolces – DBHA Attorney Jennifer Ray – Executive Assistant

B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

a. June 18, 2014 - Regular Meeting Commissioner Guadagnino made a motion to approve the minutes of June 18, 2014. Commissioner Rivera seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0. C. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Limit three (3) minutes)

3

Chairman Pelt invited but received no comments from the public. D. PRESENTATIONS

a. No discussion.

b. Chairman Pelt acknowledged the achievements of Latoysha Baldwin and Craig Baldwin. Jasmine Privott, Director of Housing Operations indicated both recipients received $1,500, noting part of the application process included recommendation letters, which the DBHA was very happy to submit on their behalf. Chairman Pelt suggested DBHA staff send out a press release, at least in a local publication, when residents achieved such excellence.

c. - Chairman Pelt stated the DBHA employees worked hard to provide excellent services to the agency’s residents. Though the Board was seldom privileged to witness it, their work facilitated the Board and the DBHA accomplishing their duties and goals. He recognized Martha Harris and Xiomara Cotes for reaching their five-year mark working with the DBHA, stating their commitment and dedication to the DBHA was greatly appreciated by the agency and the Board of Commissioners. Executive Director Jarmon noted at the five-year mark, DBHA employees were fully vested in terms of the retirement program, so this was a major milestone. The remaining members of the Board of Commissioners echoed their appreciation for the work Ms. Harris and Ms. Cotes did for the DBHA, helping the agency maintain its excellent service to its residents. E. RAD Update – C. Ray Baker C. Ray Baker gave the Board an update of the RAD as set forth in the backup, highlighting the following:

Background work continued to facilitate the commencement of construction, including: architectural drawings, modeling, submission to a third party architectural firm working with the lender; the information had been submitted and was being reviewed; some comments were sent back and corrections were being made

Inspections of the property would take place in the coming month

4

The bond process was proceeding with the underwriter for the Broward County Housing Finance Authority, and the goal was to attend the October 8, 2014, Broward County Commission meeting to ask for the physical bonds

Simultaneous working on putting together the tax credit application that went to the state, as once the bonds were issued, the tax credits would come to the DBHA as a matter of right

Once both processes were complete, on October 14, 2014, they would officially submit the FHA application to HUD, including a financing plan incorporating all sources and uses of funds. This was anticipated to be a 60-day review process, the aim being for the DBHA to receive an RCC

In the process of due diligence, a termite inspection was completed, and some infestation was found, so tenting the buildings would be necessary; there were contingencies included in the budget for occurrences such as mold mitigation, etc., so budgetary adjustments would be made.

Executive Director Jarmon referred to a handout distributed to the Board at the meeting, noting as part of the process, the DBHA had to get an environmental assessment. DBHA staff received a response from the firm EE&G, so a notice to proceed was issued to them to commence work, and Attorney Tolces reviewed the contract as part of the procurement process and found it acceptable, so the company was now hired and working. She informed the Board that the entire color scheme of the Stanley Terrace buildings would be changed in order to make the development more market driven, and the color options were included in the Board packet. Dr. Jarmon recommended, with regard to new colors and the new names for Stanley Terrace, the residents should participate in the selection process and their feedback incorporated into the Board’s final decision. There were discussions as to installing a guard booth, numbered parking slots and other amenities that were normally a part of a residential product on the property market. She explained once the agency invested such a sizeable amount of funds into the subject property, the DBHA had to tighten up on its leads, etc. If the Board had any suggested names or color scheme preferences, they could communicate them to Ms. Privott or her, and all the information gathered would be compiled and presented to the Commission for a final decision. Dr. Jarmon remarked on the relocation of residents while the buildings were being tented, stating a “checkerboard” relocation would be used. Each building would be entirely emptied and tented, then the same would be repeated for the other buildings, rather than emptying the entire residential complex. HUD would allow occupants of two-bedrooms to be relocated to three-bedroom units, but not vice versa. She mentioned, regarding the pest control, DBHA staff recently found out the buildings had to be sealed off and treated, and this changed the relocation plans; a formal relocation plan would be submitted to the Miami field office along with the investors. The plan would be well thought out, with proper noticing to residents, etc., helping them to understand the process and that after the improvements were finished, there would be new lease requirements for them to fulfill. Commissioner Gayle asked if the roofs would be done before or after the termite treatment. Mr. Baker replied the roofs would be done after the treatment. Executive Director Jarmon believed the termite firm stated there had to be a down time of three to five days, as the buildings had to be sealed off with no one allowed to enter. She preferred the buildings to be emptied completely of people, furniture, etc. to minimize any possible liability to the DBHA. F. FINANCIAL OVERVIEW – Andrea Hartt

5

Executive Director Jarmon referred to the Financial Updates contained in the backup, highlighting the following:

Ms. Hartt would be present to address the BOC At the September Board meeting when the Annual Staffing and Budget Plans would be submitted,

and it that would contain considerable detail. The DBHA was within its current budget for the most part, with the exception of few line items related to insurance and maintenance costs

Reminded the Board Ms. Hartt mentioned HUD would take about $600,000 away from the DBHA. However, HUD did not actually take money out of the agency’s account, rather they reduced the amount of funds they gave the agency each month. For example, the thumb receipt in the Board packet, the balance of the HCV department last month was $896,000, but in the current month that amount was reduced to $581,000, indicating HUD’s reduction of the agency’s funds in that deposit. The amount would be again reduced in September

All other bank balances were healthy in terms of making payroll and covering bills Ms. Cotes was complimented for being extremely diligent in paying checks when they came in.

G. LEGAL UPDATES – Attorney David Tolces Attorney Tolces commented he was certified by the Florida Bar, and after taking an exam in May 2014, he was proud to announce that he passed the exam and was now certified in city/county local government. Regarding the legal update, he had been assisting where possible with the RAD process, working with Mr. Baker and his team. He was working to finalize the interlocal agreement with the City of Deerfield Beach regarding the DBHA managing the City’s public housing programs. There were no evictions and everything else was quiet on the legal front for the DBHA. H. NEW BUSINESS

a. Resolution 2014-13: Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of f u u ’ f Public Housing Program effective October 1, 2014, and authorizing an automatic Adjustment to not less 80% of the Fair Market Rent ( ) ’ published.

Director of Housing Operations Jasmine Privott gave an overview of the subject resolution, as detailed in the backup. She noted the FMR would drive some of the higher families out, but it will not impact that many families. The positive aspect was if they decided to leave due to having a higher income and not wishing to pay for public housing, they could live elsewhere outside of public housing. Though this would be bad for the DBHA, as the agency would lose revenue, it was good for the lower income families on the agencies waiting list unable to obtain public housing. She stated if a family no longer needed public housing, they should be in the market and pay market rent, and make way for those waiting families more in need of public housing. Executive Director Jarmon commented with the RAD at Stanley Terrace, no residents were being encouraged to leave, but DBHA staff was looking into past issues that need to be addressed if the subject resolution were enforced. Things would be different once the RAD was complete and the conversions

6

were finished. She noted the apartments would be beautiful, insulated, and pest free, and the improvements after the RAD would stabilize the community even more. Chairman Pelt felt though the rents for the DBHA properties were low in comparison to the general residential rental market, they were still high for many families in need of public housing. The action advocated by the subject resolution was something the agency could not avoid, as it was part of the tasks the DBHA performed. Commissioner Gayle made a motion to approve Resolution 2014-13. Commissioner Woods seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.

b. Resolution 2014-14: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners adopting changes to the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Section 3 Plan.

Executive Director Jarmon reviewed the proposed resolution as illustrated in the backup, noting the DBHA’s Section 3 Plan had not been updated since 2008. With the coming of the RAD, it was very important for the BOC and the vendors the DBHA did business with understood the Section 3 Plan. She noted no one to date had been under the Section 3 requirement. Additionally, if the agency did not hire the regulated number of new hires for Section 3, the DBHA could charge ten percent of their contract labor hours. She wished to make the Board aware that if the staff wished to implement the Section 3 Plan during the RAD, it had to be monitored. If contractors did not hire residents, the DBHA had the opportunity to charge each of their draw ten percent, and put those funds into a special account. Dr. Jarmon asked Mr. Baker if he had a Section 3 person on their team. Mr. Baker answered no. Vice Chairman Marlowe expressed concern about the increased workload implementing and monitoring the Section 3 Plan might place on existing DBHA staff. Executive Director Jarmon replied it was not that tedious and there was certified payroll that informed the DBHA staff where people’s addresses were. As part of the resident meetings, the DBHA staff was asking residents if they needed a moving company, as a considerable number of moves had to be made over the 12 to 18-month period. She reminded the Board that the DBHA paid for Grassroots to conduct the entrepreneurial training for some of the agency’s residents. Dr. Jarmon felt comfortable that her staff and she could handle the added workload, and if this changed, she would let the Board know and consider contracting out the work at that point. Commissioner Gayle made a motion to approve Resolution 2014-14. Commissioner Woods seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.

c. Resolution 2014-15: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners approving a one year extension with C. Ray Baker & Associates to provides Housing Administration and Capital Fund Program Management.

7

Executive Director Jarmon went over the subject resolution, as detailed in the backup. She recommended approval of the proposed resolution in order to allow Mr. Baker and his company to continue to provide their invaluable service. Commissioner Guadagnino asked if this was an item that was in the budgeted. Executive Director Jarmon answered yes, stating the DBHA was a small agency, and an agency with less than 250 part units could move all of their capital funds over to their operating budget every year; the DBHA had 196 units. The DBHA’s capital fund budget was around $250,000, and the subject contract was close to $99,000, and Mr. Baker had not exceeded his current contract. She would direct staff to move all of the DBHA’s capital fund money into the operating fund, and there would be sufficient funds to cover the proposed extension of Mr. Baker’s contract. Commissioner Guadagnino made a motion to approve Resolution 2014-15. Commissioner Woods seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.

d. Resolution 2014-16: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners approving a one-year extension for Goren, Cherof, Doody, and Ezrol, PA, to provide Legal Services.

Executive Director Jarmon discussed the proposed resolution, as set forth in the backup. Vice Chairman Marlowe made a motion to approve Resolution 2014-16. Commissioner Woods seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0. Attorney Tolces thanked the DBHA Board and staff for their continued vote of confidence, as it was a privilege to work for the DBHA. When he told people he worked for the DBHA, he always received positive feedback, as they knew the agency was a good organization to work for.

e. Resolution 2014-17: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners approving Chairman, Anthony Pelt; Vice Chairman, Jamie Marlowe; and Executive Director, Nadine Jarmon to sign the Bank America Deposit Account and Management Services Bank, Resolution, Signature Card and Certificate of Incumbency for the Palms of Deerfield Beach, LP.

Executive Director Jarmon discussed the proposed resolution, as set forth in the backup, noting the subject action had been a major undertaking, as DBHA staff were unaware of the issues until they began emerging in relation to the IRS and vendors’ 1099s. The situation was now corrected. Vice Chairman Marlowe initially thought the matter had been a small mistake but now realized that it was not. Executive Director Jarmon affirmed it was not a small mistake. Chairman Pelt remarked the DBHA had some accounts that had been in existence for a considerable time, wondering if the resolution would address all the issues.

8

Executive Director summarized that she did a review and found that the bank made an error in the DBHA’s favor; that is, the bank overcharged one of the DBHA’s accounts approximately $28,500 in fees. This prompted her, when going through the current process, to closely scrutinized all the DBHA’s monthly banking statements, and found the bank overcharged the agency $5,500 a month for six months. She stated the bank was supposed to deposit $28,500 in the DBHA’s account by August 27, 2014, and had extended their profound apologies for the error. Dr. Jarmon intimated DBHA staff was exploring other banking relationships, as the agency’s current bank relationship existed for over 20 years. Thus, at some point in the near future, the DBHA should consider bidding out its banking business, as other housing authorities had zero interest/fees banking relationships. She said the agency normally had a considerable sum sitting in the bank, and though the current bank had been responsive to the DBHA’s needs as requested, she felt it was necessary to be diligent in ensuring the DBHA was getting the best value. Better service could possibly be provided by a different banking institution. Dr. Jarmon stated the situations with Ms. Robinson and overcharging of the agency’s accounts by the bank prompted her to explore other financial institutions. She would probably make recommendations in the new fiscal year, as the DBHA received its funding directly from HUD, along with direct deposits, and staff normally went through various steps to pay the agency’s payroll and other expenses. Vice Chairman Marlowe felt the $28,000 owed to the agency by the bank was sizeable and the error was unacceptable. Commissioner Gayle sought confirmation the DBHA did business with Bank of America (BOA). Executive Director Jarmon affirmed this to be the case. Commissioner Gayle believed BOA changed their polices in recent years and went through a variety of changes that affected and both business and personal accounts Commissioner Rivera made a motion to approve Resolution 2014-17. Commissioner Gayle seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.

f. CDBG Update with the City of Deerfield Beach, FL.

Attorney Tolces reviewed the subject item as set forth in the backup, including the latest draft of the interlocal agreement between the City of Deerfield Beach and the DBHA for the latter to administer the City’s housing programs. The draft agreement showed revisions made to the agreements over time and. from a legal perspective, he had no serious concerns; the few things he might change were with respect to the default provision in section 5.1. He explained the City of Deerfield Beach expected the Board to take some action on the interlocal agreement, as the effective date was October 1, 2014, and they hoped to set up meetings with current contractors and City staff, so everyone was on board. Executive Director Jarmon explained she had been in negotiations, with Attorney Tolces doing reviews and keeping her informed from a legal standpoint. The draft agreement was for the DBHA to oversee the City’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP), CDBG home and SHIP loans. She indicated the City had since decided to give the NSP fund of over $340,000 to a company called BAND. The removal of those funds reduced the DBHA’s administrative fee and, in addition, the City wished to do a 50/50 split of the administrative fee with the DBHA. Dr. Jarmon pointed out that the DBHA’s share went down from $120,000 to about $109, 000 and with the latter sum, the agency would have to hire staff to execute the

9

scope of work as represented in the backup. She expressed concern about the cost to the agency to administer the City’s abovementioned programs, as well as with the 50/50 split, as it appeared the DBHA would be doing 100 percent of the administrative work, while getting 50 percent of the administrative fee. It was unclear if the terms were negotiable; she spoke to a number of subcontractors, and it was likely the DBHA could get two or three good people for about $40,000 to $45,000 each. The two people most affected if the DBHA took over the administration of the City’s housing programs would be Ms. Cotes and her, as additional staff hired would be program specific. If she drew any monies, she would have to label them as for oversight and work out an arrangement to make it a programmatic part of DBHA operations to prevent any appearance of double billing. HUD was satisfied with the DBHA forming the subject agreement, as long as the administrative duties were clarified. She thought that without doubt there was a synergy, that the DBHA was capable of administering the City’s programs, but the question was whether the effort was worth the agency’s time and energy with the fee reduction due to the 50/50 split with the City. If the 50/50 split was negotiable, she would recommend a 60/40 split. Dr. Jarmon noticed the City had to maintain some staff, as Deerfield Beach was an entitlement city, so they had to pay some staff to administer the programs, but 50/50 did not seem to be an equitable split. Commissioner Gayle asked if Dr. Jarmon would be supervising the staff hired to administer the City’s housing programs. Executive Director Jarmon affirmed she would, reiterating it would involve an entirely different staff other than Ms. Cotes and she, and she would be responsible for doing the oversight and reviewing the monthly reports that had to be submitted. Commissioner Woods wondered if the DBHA had to house the additional staff. Executive Director Jarmon believed 90 percent of the administrative work could be done from wherever the new staff was located, but the DBHA had to provide a location for public hearings. The City already had such accommodations arranged. Commissioner Guadagnino noted the email he received showed task one, task two, task three, with no additional information for clarity. It seemed the City was looking for an administrative person, so they could just hire a secretary or two to do the work. He felt the DBHA taking on such duties could become a headache, as the information in the email implied that the City could call on DBHA staff and demand they do multiple tasks, and Dr. Jarmon might have to drop DBHA business to respond. The City was not giving the DBHA control over anything, based on the information sent in the email, and despite initial discussions. Attorney Tolces clarified the tasks listed in the email described the scope of services expected of the DBHA that were necessary for the programs to operate, and they were currently being supplied by the City’s current provider. Therefore, it was a matter of whether the DBHA wished to undertake the subject responsibility and, based upon the information DBHA staff received in the previous day or two regard the fees, whether it was something worth the DBHA’s time. Vice Chairman Marlowe objected to the 50/50 split, questioning how the BOC could communicate this to the Deerfield Beach City Commission.

10

Attorney Tolces replied the Board could direct Dr. Jarmon to go back to City representatives and state the Board’s objection to the proposed agreement, along with the Board’s recommended changes, as to a 60/40, 70/30 split, etc. Dr. Jarmon could suggest a “no worse than” figure in the negotiation of the administrative fee split if the Board thought it was something the DBHA should do at the right price. However, if the Board thought the DBHA was better off not getting involved in the proposed arrangement, this should be communicated to the City by Dr. Jarmon. He said DBHA staff could bring the results of that meeting with City representatives back to the Board at its September 2014 meeting for a formal decision. Commissioner Guadagnino questioned, in a 50/50 split, how much work would the City staff actually be doing. Executive Director Jarmon responded, looking at the scope of work detailed in City staff’s email and with Deerfield Beach being an entitlement city, it was likely they would do about ten percent of the administrative work . In most instances where outside agencies implemented programs, they ended up packaging and doing all the work, and the entitlement city simply did the submission to HUD. She noted the City had a staff person doing the administrative work, including processing the DBHA payments, as the money had to flow through the City. Chairman Pelt asked if the Board had to vote on the draft agreement contained in the backup. Attorney Tolces stated the Board did not have to take any action on the draft agreement. The City Commission wished the DBHA Board of Commissioners to indicate whether the DBHA would be willing to enter into such an interlocal agreement with the City. He received a call the previous day from the assistant city attorney who stated he was working on changes and would get the updated draft to him prior to the present meeting, which he had. The changes were those discussed above by the Board and, from a legal perspective, they were not significant. He felt the bigger issue was the fee and how it was to be split, and whether this was work the DBHA wished to take on. Chairman Pelt indicated the motion would be to accept or reject the forming of the proposed interlocal agreement, and to direct Dr. Jarmon to communicate the Board’s position to the City representatives accordingly. Executive Director Jarmon commented the benefit was the DBHA would try to do something long-term with the RAD, and the subject matter began as a totally different conversation than what it evolved into at present. The DBHA had its eye on the CDBG funds as a pot of money to assist the agency long-term in some development activity to address issues related to affordable housing as a whole. She believed the proposed agreement failed to achieve the DBHA’s goals for entering into the agreement. It was unlikely any entity would undertake such administrative tasks with the City’s requirement of a 50/50 split of the administrative fee, as $109,000 to do all the tasks listed in the email was insufficient. Chairman Pelt remarked he was troubled by the fact that when the DBHA was first approached by the City, the impression was they sought an agency to take full control of the administration of its various housing programs. He wondered what had transpired to cause the changes in the City’s requirements over time.

11

Attorney Tolces understood that the City was looking for a new contractor to handle Deerfield Beach’s various housing programs, as the City no longer wished to do further work with their current contractor. The idea was that the contract would be assigned to the DBHA, and whatever the current contractor received in administrative dollars would be the amount the DBHA would receive as the administrative fee. Dr. Jarmon discovered the previous day that staff did not have the exhibit related to the fees attached to the agreement and emailed City staff, asking them to send it, and the email was the result of that request, alluding to a 50/50 split of the administrative fee. There had been no communication with neither Dr. Jarmon nor him as to what took place in the interim, reiterating he understood the DBHA would be paid as a regular contractor. Attorney Tolces said he could find out what changes transpired and report his findings to the BOC. Vice Chairman Marlowe made a motion to reject the DBHA entering into an interlocal agreement f f f f ’ P G IP housing programs. Commissioner Guadagnino seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0. Executive Director Jarmon noted Mayor Robb was a champion of the effort when the DBHA thought it would be given full control of the City’s housing programs. Thus, Vice Chairman Marlowe might wish to communicate with her, apprising her of the present meeting dialog that led to the rejection, hopefully removing any appearance that the DBHA did not supporting the Mayor. Mayor Robb should be informed that the rejection was based on the practical application. Vice Chairman Marlowe stated he was well aware that Mayor Robb championed the DBHA taking over the administration of the abovementioned City programs, and fought avidly in this regard. I. UTI I T ’ I I I P T Executive Director Jarmon introduced Ms. Bonnye Deese as the individual to whom the City gave the NSP money to do the home repairs . Ms. Deese, Executive Director of BAND, noted they had been in existence initially as a nonprofit membership organization for affordable housing, community development and community development practitioners since 2002. Since 2009, they had been the major organization to administer the NSPs for Broward County, and the Cities of Sunrise, Plantation and the Hollywood. The administration of the City of Deerfield Beach’s NSP was brought to DBHA, and she thought the goal was to assist the City meet an expenditure of some set aside funds for NSP. She said they too were shocked to learn of the new contents of the proposed interlocal agreement, and she was unhappy to now learn they would not be working with the DBHA on such matters. Chairman Pelt disclosed that he had known Ms. Deese for a long time, stating the DBHA looked forward to working with her and helping her where possible. Vice Chairman Marlowe excused himself from the meeting at 5:53 p.m. Chairman Pelt mentioned Commissioner Reynolds was absent from the meeting, as his wife was very ill.

12

Executive Director Jarmon went over the highlights of her report, mentioning the following:

The DBHA was still waiting on funding to do improvements to the high rise She informed the Board that the DBHA held an extremely successful back-to-school event, as

various sponsors contributed to the event, such as Office Depot, Wayne Barton, City Fire and numerous private donators. The event was posted on the DBHA website

She commended DBHA staff for outstanding work, as there were currently two vacancies to fill for the agency staffing; Renee Prince spent time working at both Stanley Terrace and the Palms

The DBHA was going through a transition and was doing some trial and error in terms of staffing that she would later bring a staffing plan and recommendations before the Board

The DBHA WAS managing and the staffing budget had been reduced due to Ms. Hobbs’ resignation after 14 years with the DBHA. Her salary significantly increased the agency’s budget, including a large sum going into the employee contributions

She attended a meeting in Tampa for Florida Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (FAHRO)

She attended a meeting for executive directors in Broward County held every six months; she received a lot of good information, particularly regarding the need to continually reexamine the agency’s insurance coverage. Insurance was the second highest expenditure in the DBHA budget, and there was information on how to possibly reduce insurance coverage, and she would review it out for budgetary consideration. The action might not be taken for the current fiscal year, as it would be very drastic.

She informed the Commissioners that NAHRO’s Fall Conference for executive directors, agency staff and Commissioners; the event would take place October 16 to the 18 in Baltimore, and if members of the Board wished to attend, their expenses would fall under the next fiscal year’s budget; any Board members interested in attending the conference in Baltimore should indicate this to Ms. Ray or her as soon as possible

Despite the numerous programs the agency was involved in, DBHA staff and she were managing the workload well, and she appreciated the concern voiced by Vice Chairman Marlowe on not overloading the staff.

J. COMMISSIONERS CONCERNS & DISCUSSION ITEMS None K. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:59 p.m. ________________________________________________________________ Anthony Pelt, Chairman ________________________________________________________________ Dr. Nadine Jarmon, Executive Director

13

RAD Update

20

Financial Overview

22


Consolidated – Income Statement

For the period ending AUGUST 31, 2014

Unaudited

Budget Actual

Variance %

Annual YTD Rev/Exp

of budget Comment

Revenue

HUD subsidy/grants 4,683,145 4,292,883 3,932,379 (360,504)

84%

Dwelling rents 547,997 502,331 549,779 47,449

100%

HUD Capital Grants 215,674 215,674 215,674 - 100%

Other tenant revenue 35,000 32,083 14,686 (17,398)

42%

FSS escrow forfeitures (fraud recovery) 5,000 4,583 0 (4,583)

0%

Interest Income 725 665 399 (266)

55%

Other revenue 337,390 319,145 231,196 (87,949)

69%

Gain (loss) on sale of fixed assets 0 0 0 - 100%

Total Revenue 5,824,931 5,367,364 4,944,112 (423,251)

85%

Operating Expenditures

Administrative 1,083,132 992,871 1,160,695 (167,824)

107% 3 pay periods

Resident Services 15,000 13,750 16,791 (3,041)

112%

Utilities 115,600 105,967 169,841 (63,875)

147% Increase for Summer

Ordinary maintenance 364,451 334,080 371,587 (37,507)

102%

Insurance 153,540 140,745 174,031 (33,286)

113%

Collection loss 0 0 0 - 0%

Other general expense 164,499 160,662 131,947 28,714

80%

Total Operating Expenditures 1,896,222 1,748,074 2,024,892 (276,818)

107%

Other Expenditures

Extraordinary maintenance 0 12 0 12

0%

Casualty losses 0 0 0 - 0%

Housing assistance payments 3,933,922 3,606,095 3,259,881 346,215

83%

Total Other Expenditures 3,933,922 3,606,107 3,259,881 346,227

83%

23

Total Expenditures 5,830,144 5,354,182 5,284,773 69,409

91%

Excess (deficiency) of total revenue

over (under) expenses

(5,213) 13,182 (340,661) (353,843)

Capital Outlay 4,000 3,667 0 3,667

0%

Operating Transfer 0 0 0 - 0%

HAP Reserve Net (Increase) /decrease 170,994 156,745 68,568 353,843

40%

Net cash increase (used) in operations

169,781 173,593 (272,093) 3,667

Depreciation

327,194 299,928 299,928 0

0%

Budget deliberately created to utilize reserves as mandated by HUD. Currenly trending under projected required deficient used to access the reserve.

HUD Funding is below budget/forecast due to sequestration and required use of excess reserves mandate.

Cash on Hand = $537,826.49

24


Public Housing Budget - Income Statement

For the period ending August 31, 2014

naudited

Budget Actual Variance %

Annual YTD Rev/Exp

of budget Comment

Revenue

HUD subsidy/grants 351,880 322,557 423,573 101,016 120%

Dwelling rents 547,997 502,331 549,779 47,449 100%

HUD Capital Grants 0 0 - 0%

Other tenant revenue 35,000 32,083 14,686 (17,398) 42%

FSS escrow forfeitures (fraud recovery) 0 0 - 0%

Interest Income 500 458 159 (299) 32%

Other revenue 20,000 18,333 165 (18,168) 1%

Gain (loss) on sale of fixed assets 0 0 - 0%

Total Revenue 955,377 875,762 988,362 112,600 103%


Administrative 519,539 476,244 621,598 (145,353) 120% Audit/Accounting Cost; 3 pay periods

Resident Services 15,000 13,750 16,791 (3,041) 112%

Utilities 107,000 98,083 159,825 (61,742) 149% Increase for Summer

Ordinary maintenance 351,060 321,805 344,190 (22,385) 98%

Insurance 143,000 131,083 163,174 (32,091) 114% Premium Increase


Other general expense 34,052 31,214 2,500 28,714 7%

Total Operating Expenditures 1,169,651 1,072,180 1,308,078 (235,898) 112%

Other Expenditures

Extraordinary maintenance 0 - 0%

Casualty losses 0 - 0%

Housing assistance payments 0 - 0%

Total Other Expenditures 0 0 0 - 0%

Total Expenditures 1,169,651 1,072,180 1,308,078 (235,898) 112%



(214,274) (196,418) (319,716) (123,298)

Capital Outlay 4,000 3,667 0 3,667 0%

Operating Transfer 215,674 215,674 215,674 - 100%

HAP Reserve Net (Increase) /decrease 0 0 0 - 0%

Net cash increase (used) in operations 5,400 22,923 (104,042) (119,631)

25

Depreciation

296,384 271,685 271,685 0 92%

26


Housing Voucher Program (S8) Budget - Income Statement


Unaudited


Annual YTD Rev/Exp

of budget

Revenue

HUD subsidy/grants 4,331,265 3,970,326 3,508,806 (461,520) 81%

Dwelling rents 0 0 - 0%


Other tenant revenue 0 0 - 0%

FSS escrow forfeitures (fraud recovery) 5,000 4,583 0 (4,583) 0%

Interest Income 200 183 231 47 115%

Other revenue 9,500 8,708 67,367 58,659 709%


Total Revenue 4,345,965 3,983,801 3,576,404 (407,398) 82%


Administrative 402,730 369,169 427,919 (58,750) 106%

Resident Services 0 0 - 0%

Utilities 0 0 - 0%

Ordinary maintenance 931 853 46 808 5%

Insurance 4,900 4,492 4,708 (216) 96%

Collection loss 0 0 - 0%

Other general expense 12,000 11,000 11,000 - 92%

Total Operating Expenditures 420,561 385,514 443,673 (58,159) 105%

Other Expenditures

Extraordinary maintenance 12 0 12 0%

Casualty losses 0 0 - 0%

Housing assistance payments 3,933,922 3,606,095 3,259,881 346,215 83%

Total Other Expenditures 3,933,922 3,606,107 3,259,881 346,227 83%

Total Expenditures 4,354,483 3,991,621 3,703,554 288,068 85%



(8,518) (7,820) (127,150) (119,330)

Payment on debt principal 0 0 0 - 0%


HAP Reserve Net (Increase) /decrease 170,994 156,745 68,568 88,177 n/a

27


Depreciation

1,200 1,100 1,100 - 0%

28


Capital Fund Budget - Income Statement


Unaudited


Annual Month/YTD Rev/Exp

of budget Comment

Revenue HUD subsidy/grants 0 0 -

Dwelling rents 0 0 -

HUD Capital Grants 215,674 215,674 215,674 - 100%

Other tenant revenue 0 0 -

FSS escrow forfeitures (fraud recovery) 0 0 -

Interest Income 0 0 -

Other revenue 0 0 -

Gain (loss) on sale of fixed assets 0 0 -

Total Revenue 215,674 215,674 215,674 - 100%

Operating Expenditures Administrative 0 0 -

Resident Services 0 0 -

Utilities 0 0 -

Ordinary maintenance 0 -

Insurance 0 0 -

Collection loss 0 0 -

Other general expense 0 0 -

Total Operating Expenditures 0 0 0 -

Other Expenditures Extraordinary maintenance

Casualty losses 0 0 -

Housing assistance payments 0 0 -

Total Other Expenditures 0 0 0 -

Total Expenditures 0 0 0 -

Excess (deficiency) of total revenue over (under) expenses

215,674 215,674 215,674 - 0%

Capital Outlay 0 0 0 - 0%

Operating Transfer (215,674) (215,674) (215,674) - 0%


Net cash increase (used) in operations 0 0 0 - 0%

29

Depreciation

0 0 0 - 0%

30


Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) Budget - Income Statement


Unaudited


Annual Month/YTD Rev/Exp

of budget Comment

Revenue HUD subsidy/grants 0 0 -

Dwelling rents 0 0 -

HUD Capital Grants 0 0 -

Other tenant revenue 0 0 -

FSS escrow forfeitures (fraud recovery) 0 0 -

Interest Income 0 0 -

Other revenue 118,447 118,447 118,447 -

Gain (loss) on sale of fixed assets 0 0 -

Total Revenue 118,447 118,447 118,447 -

Operating Expenditures Administrative 0 0 -

Resident Services 0 0 -

Utilities 0 0 -

Ordinary maintenance 0 0 -

Insurance 0 0 -

Collection loss 0 0 -

Other general expense 118,447 118,447 118,447 -

Total Operating Expenditures 118,447 118,447 118,447 -

Other Expenditures Extraordinary maintenance 0 0 -

Casualty losses 0 0 -

Housing assistance payments 0 0 -

Total Other Expenditures 0 0 0 -

Total Expenditures 118,447 118,447 118,447 -

Excess (deficiency) of total revenue over (under) expenses

0 0 0 -

Capital Outlay 0 0 0 -

Operating Transfer 0 0 0 -

31

HAP Reserve Net (Increase) /decrease 0 0 0 -

Net cash increase (used) in operations 0 0 0 -

Depreciation

0 0 0 -

32


Skills Center Budget - Income Statement


Unaudited


Annual YTD Rev/Exp

of budget Comment

Revenue

HUD subsidy/grants 0 0 - 0%

Dwelling rents 0 0 - 0%


Other tenant revenue 0 0 - 0%

FSS escrow forfeitures (fraud recovery) 0 0 - 0%

Interest Income 25 23 9 (14) 35%

Other revenue 189,443 173,656 45,216 (128,440) 24% Pending CDBG


Total Revenue 189,468 173,679 45,225 (128,454) 24%


Administrative 160,863 147,458 111,178 36,280 69%

Resident Services 0 0 0 - 0%

Utilities 8,600 7,883 10,016 (2,133) 116%

Ordinary maintenance 12,460 11,422 27,351 (15,929) 220%

Insurance 5,640 5,170 6,149 (979) 109%


Other general expense 0 0 0 - 0%

Total Operating Expenditures 187,563 171,933 154,694 17,239 82%

Other Expenditures

Extraordinary maintenance 0 0 - 0%

Casualty losses 0 0 - 0%

Housing assistance payments 0 0 - 0%

Total Other Expenditures 0 0 0 - 0%

Total Expenditures 187,563 171,933 154,694 17,239 82%



1,905 1,746 (109,469) (111,215)

Capital Outlay 0 0 0 - 0%




33

Depreciation

29,610 27,143 27,143 - 0%

34

Legal Updates

35

New Business

36


Resolution 2014-18

Resolution 2014-15: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners approving the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority’s (DBHA) Budget for Fiscal Year Ending 9/30/2015.

WHEREAS, the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners has reviewed the Annual Budget for

Fiscal Year Ending 9/30/2015.

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners has approved the DBHA

Budget for Fiscal Year Ending 9/30/2015 on this 17th day of September, 2014.

_________________________________ ___________________________________

Anthony Pelt Nadine Jarmon, PhD

DBHA Chairman Executive Director

39

PLAN FOR FY 2014-2015

Dr. Jarmon

Executive Director

Jasmine Privott

Director of Housing Operations

Xiomara Cotes

Palms Property Manager/ PT-AP Clerk

Fancy Laguerre

Stanley Housing Coordinator

Miguel, Sanjai (PT), Victor, Solomon &

Eric (PT)

Maintenance Department

Martha Harris

RAD Relocation Coor.

Tcherlie Macenat

Compliance Officer

* ACCOUNTING

*LEGAL

*CONSULTANTS

Rene Prince

Townhomes Property Manager

Sanjai Elliot

Maintenance Technican - PT

Jan Housh

HCV Manager

Betty Ferguson

FSS Manager

Delta Hofmeister

HCV Specialist

Jean St. Juste

Housing Inspector

Vacant

HCV Assistant- PT

Jennifer Ray

Executive Assistant

40


Resolution 2014-19

Resolution 2013-19: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners to

authorize the Executive Director to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Deerfield Beach

concerning administering Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), State Housing Initiative Program

(SHIP) and HOME Program funds.

WHEREAS, the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners authorizes the Executive

Director to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Deerfield Beach, a copy of which is attached

hereto.

BE IT RESOLVED, that the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners has authorized the

Executive Director enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Deerfield Beach in regards to (CDBG),

(SHIP) and (HOME) funds, on this 17th day of September, 2013.

_________________________________ ___________________________________



41

INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT

THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into by and between the CITY OF DEERFIELD

BEACH (“CITY”), a Florida municipal corporation and the DEERFIELD BEACH HOUSING AUTHORITY,

(“AUTHORITY”), a Florida public housing authority authorized pursuant to Chapter 421, Florida Statutes, as

follows

W I T N E S S E T H :

WHEREAS, CITY is desirous of retaining the services of AUTHORITY to provide administrative services

for the purpose of administering the City’s Community Development programs; and

WHEREAS, the AUTHORITY desires to provide said services pursuant to the terms and conditions set

forth herein; and

WHEREAS, the City Commission and the AUTHORITY's Board of Commissioners finds that this

Agreement serves both a municipal and public purpose, and is in the best interest of the health, safety, and

welfare of the citizens and residents of the City of Deerfield Beach.

NOW THEREFORE, be it agreed by and between the parties as follows:

ARTICLE I

INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES

1.1 The above referenced "Whereas" clauses are true and correct and made a part hereof.

1.2 This is an Agreement for the performance of services by the AUTHORITY in connection with certain

programs operated by the CITY. The AUTHORITY shall be responsible for the means and methods of

performing those services. The CITY shall have the sole decision making authority over matters of policy. The

services to be performed are contained on Exhibit “A,” which is attached hereto, and incorporated herein by

reference. Said services hereinafter referred to as the “Services”. In the performance of the Services, the

AUTHORITY shall adhere to all federal, state and local laws, rules, and regulations governing the

implementation of community development programs and activities.

42

ARTICLE II

TERM AND TIME OF PERFORMANCE

2.1 The initial term of this Agreement shall commence upon final execution of the Agreement by the CITY

upon the date last executed by the parties hereto (“Effective Date”) and shall expire two (2) one (1) years from

that date. This Agreement may be renewed for up to two (2) additional one (1) year terms upon mutual

agreement of the parties hereto.

2.2 Time shall be deemed to be of the essence in performing the duties, obligations and responsibilities

required by this Agreement.

ARTICLE III

COMPENSATION

3.1 CITY agrees to pay AUTHORITY during the initial one (1) year term of this Agreement the amounts set

forth on Exhibit “A” for each element of the Services, which amounts shall be accepted by AUTHORITY as full

compensation for all such work. It is acknowledged and agreed by AUTHORITY that this amount is the

maximum payable and constitutes a limitation upon CITY's obligation to compensate AUTHORITY for its

services related to this Agreement. This amount, however, does not constitute a limitation, of any sort, upon

AUTHORITY's obligation to perform all items of work required by or which can be reasonably inferred from

the Scope of Services. No amount shall be paid to AUTHORITY to reimburse its expenses. The CITY may

request additional or subsequent work to be performed regarding other federal or state funded program(s)

not listed in Exhibit "A". Such subsequent work will be subject to additional negotiated fees and be evidenced

by a mutual amendment to this Agreement.

3.2 AUTHORITY may submit invoices for compensation on a bi-weekly monthly basis after the services for

which the invoices are submitted have been completed. An original invoice plus one copy are to be submitted.

The final invoice must be received no later than sixty (60) days after this Agreement expires. Invoices shall

designate the nature of the services performed and/or the expenses incurred and any other information

required by law.

43

3.3 CITY shall pay AUTHORITY within thirty (30) calendar days of in accordance with the requirements of

Florida’s Prompt Payment Act after receipt of AUTHORITY's proper invoice. To be deemed proper, all invoices

must comply with the requirements set forth in this Agreement. Payment may be withheld for failure of

AUTHORITY to comply with a term, condition, or requirement of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any

provision of this Agreement to the contrary, CITY may withhold, in whole or in part, payment to the extent

necessary to protect itself from loss on account of inadequate or defective work which has not been remedied

or resolved in a manner satisfactory to the Agreement Administrator or failure to comply with this Agreement.

The amount withheld shall not be subject to payment of interest by CITY.

ARTICLE IV

INDEMNIFICATION

4.1 The CITY and the AUTHORITY shall be individually and separately liable and responsible for the actions

of its officers, agents and employees in the performance of their respective obligations under this Agreement.

4.2 The CITY and the AUTHORITY shall individually defend any action or proceeding brought against their

respective agency pursuant to this Agreement, and shall be individually responsible for all of their respective

costs, attorney fees, expenses and liabilities incurred as a result of any such claims, demands, suits, actions,

damages and causes of action, including the investigation or the defense thereof, and from and against any

orders, judgments or decrees which may be entered as a result thereof, including appellate proceedings.

4.3 The CITY and the AUTHORITY agree that no indemnification or hold harmless agreement shall be in

effect concerning any claims, demands, damages and causes of action which may be brought against either

party pursuant to this Agreement.

4.4 The parties shall each individually maintain throughout the term of this Agreement any and all

applicable insurance coverage required by Florida law for governmental entities. Within five (5) days of the

Effective Date, AUTHORITY shall provide the CITY with certificates of insurance evidencing the required

insurance. In the event AUTHORITY is self-insured, AUTHORITY shall provide CITY with such documentation

evidencing such self-insurance as may be reasonably required by CITY.

4.5 Notwithstanding the provisions contained herein, neither party waives their sovereign immunity or any

aspect thereof, nor any rights and privileges as provided in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes.

44

ARTICLE V

TERMINATION

5.1 In the event AUTHORITY shall default in any of the terms, obligations, restrictions or conditions in this

Agreement, including, but not limited to, repeated (whether negligent or intentional) submission for payment

of false or incorrect bills or invoices, failure to suitably perform the work; or failure to continuously perform

the work in a manner calculated to meet or accomplish the objectives as set forth in this Agreement, the CITY

shall give AUTHORITY written notice, of the default and that such default shall be corrected within three (3)

business days thereof, or actions taken to correct such default shall be commenced within three (3) business

days of written notice if corrective action is not reasonably capable of completion within three (3) business

days, and AUTHORITY shall diligently and promptly prosecute such corrective measures to completion. In the

event AUTHORITY has failed to correct the conditions(s) of the default or the default is not remedied to the

satisfaction and approval of the CITY, the CITY shall have all legal remedies available to it, including, but not

limited to, termination of the Agreement upon thirty (30) days written notice of termination to AUTHORITY, in

which case AUTHORITY shall be liable for any and all damages permitted by law arising from the default and

breach of the Agreement.

AUTHORITY may terminate this Agreement by thirty (30) days written notice to the CITY if the CITY breaches

or is in default of any material obligation under this Agreement, and has not cured such default or breach

within thirty (30) days after receipt of notice of a default or breach specifying the nature of such default or

breach in reasonable detail.

5.2 Upon thirty (30) calendar days written notice to AUTHORITY, the CITY may without cause and without

prejudice to any other right or remedy, terminate this Agreement for the CITY's convenience whenever the

CITY determines that such termination is in the best interest of the CITY. Where the Agreement is terminated

for the convenience of the CITY the notice of termination to AUTHORITY must state that the Agreement is

being terminated for the convenience of the CITY under the termination clause and the extent of termination.

This Contract may also be terminated by the City Manager upon such notice as the City Manager deems

appropriate under the circumstances in the event the City Manager determines that termination is necessary

to protect the public health or safety. The parties agree that if CITY erroneously, improperly or unjustifiably

terminates for cause, such termination shall be deemed a termination for convenience, which shall be

effective thirty (30) days after such notice of termination for cause is provided. AUTHORITY shall discontinue

all work on the appointed last day of service. In the event this Contract is terminated for convenience,

AUTHORITY shall be paid for any services properly performed under the Contract through the termination

date specified in the written notice of termination. AUTHORITY acknowledges and agrees that it has received

good, valuable and sufficient consideration from CITY, the receipt and adequacy of which are, hereby

acknowledged by AUTHORITY, for CITY’s right to terminate this Agreement for convenience.

45

5.13 In the event this Agreement is terminated for convenience, AUTHORITY shall be paid for any services

properly performed under the Agreement through the termination date specified in the written notice of

termination. AUTHORITY acknowledges and agrees that it has received good, valuable and sufficient

consideration from CITY, the receipt and adequacy of which are, hereby acknowledged by AUTHORITY, for

CITY's right to terminate this Agreement for convenience. Intentionally Deleted

5.24 In the event this Agreement is terminated for any reason, any amounts due AUTHORITY shall be

withheld by CITY until all documents are provided to CITY pursuant to Section 7.1 of Article 7.

5.35 Should at any time during the term of this Agreement, including any option terms, the AUTHORITY is in

violation of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the City shall have the right to suspend the

AUTHORITY until the violation is resolved to the satisfaction of the City. If the violation is not promptly

resolved or is of such serious nature that the City determines that suspension is not adequate, the City

reserves the right to terminate for cause.

ARTICLE VI

EEO AND ADA COMPLIANCE

6.1 AUTHORITY shall not unlawfully discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion,

age, political affiliation or disability in the performance of this Agreement, the solicitation for or purchase of

goods or services relating to this Agreement, or in subcontracting work in the performance of this

Agreement. AUTHORITY shall include the foregoing or similar language in its Agreements with any

subcontractors retained by the AUTHORITY, except that any project assisted by the U.S. Department of

Transportation funds shall comply with the non-discrimination requirements in 49 C.F.R. Parts 23 and 26, as

amended. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements is a material breach of this Agreement, which

may result in the termination of this Agreement or such other remedy as CITY deems appropriate.

6.2 AUTHORITY shall not unlawfully discriminate against any person in its operations and activities or in

its use or expenditure of funds in fulfilling its obligations under this Agreement. AUTHORITY shall

affirmatively comply with all applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in the

course of providing any services funded by CITY, including Titles I and II of the ADA (regarding

nondiscrimination on the basis of disability), and all applicable regulations, guidelines, and standards. In

addition, AUTHORITY shall take affirmative steps to ensure nondiscrimination in employment against

disabled persons.

46

ARTICLE VII

MISCELLANEOUS

7.1 RIGHTS IN DOCUMENTS AND WORK. Any and all reports, photographs, surveys, and other data and

documents provided or created in connection with this Agreement are and shall remain the property of CITY;

and, if a copyright is claimed, AUTHORITY grants to CITY a non-exclusive license to use the copyrighted item(s)

indefinitely, to prepare derivative works, and to make and distribute copies to the public. In the event of

termination of this Agreement, any reports, photographs, surveys, and other data and documents prepared by

AUTHORITY, whether finished or unfinished, shall become the property of CITY and shall be delivered by

AUTHORITY to the Agreement Administrator within seven (7) days of termination of this Agreement by either

party. Any compensation due to AUTHORITY shall be withheld until all documents are received as provided

herein.

7.2 AUDIT RIGHT AND RETENTION OF RECORDS. CITY shall have the right to audit the books, records, and

accounts of AUTHORITY and its subcontractors that are related to this Project. AUTHORITY and its

subcontractors shall keep such books, records, and accounts as may be necessary in order to record complete

and correct entries related to the Project. All books, records, and accounts of AUTHORITY and its

subcontractors shall be kept in written form in both electronic and paper formats, or in a form capable of

conversion into written form in electronic and paper formats and within a reasonable time, and upon request

to do so, AUTHORITY or its subcontractors, as applicable, shall make same available at no cost to CITY in

written form in electronic and paper formats. AUTHORITY and its subcontractors shall preserve and make

available, at reasonable times for examination and audit by CITY, all financial records, supporting documents,

statistical records, and any other documents pertinent to this Agreement for the required retention period of

the Florida Public Records Act, Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, as may be amended from time to time, if

applicable, or, if the Florida Public Records Act is not applicable, for a minimum period of three seven (3 7)

years after termination of this Agreement. If any audit has been initiated and audit findings have not been

resolved at the end of the retention period or three seven (3 7) years, whichever is longer, the books, records,

and accounts shall be retained until resolution of the audit findings. If the Florida Public Records Act is

determined by CITY to be applicable to AUTHORITY's and its subcontractors' records, AUTHORITY and its

subcontractors shall comply with all requirements thereof; however, no confidentiality or non-disclosure

requirement of either federal or state law shall be violated by AUTHORITY or its subcontractors. Any

incomplete or incorrect entry in such books, records, and accounts shall be a basis for CITY's disallowance and

recovery of any payment upon such entry.

AUTHORITY and its subcontractors shall comply with all requirements of the Florida Public Recoirds Act; specifically to:

47

a. Keep and maintain public records that ordinarily and necessarily would be required by the public agency in

order to perform the service.

b. Provide the public with access to public records on the same terms and conditions that the CITY would

provide the records and at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in Chapter 119 or as otherwise

provided by law.

c. Ensure that public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure

requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law.

d. Meet all requirements for retaining public records and transfer, at no cost, to the public agency all public

records in possession of the AUTHORITY upon termination of this Agreement and destroy any duplicate

public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. All

records stored electronically must be provided to the public agency in a format that is compatible with the

information technology systems of the public agency.

e. If AUTHORITY does not comply with this section, the CITY shall enforce the contract provisions in accordance

with this Agreement and may unilaterally cancel this Agreement in accordance with state law.

No confidentiality or non-disclosure requirement of either federal or state law shall be violated by AUTHORITY

or its subcontractors.

AUTHORITY shall, by written Agreement, require its subcontractors to agree to the requirements and

obligations of this Section 8 7.2.

7.3 BACKGROUND CHECKS: In accordance with Section 38-117 of the City of Deerfield Beach Code of

Ordinances, prior to beginning any services under this request for proposal, the AUTHORITY shall provide

the CITY with a list of all employees who will have access to CITY property, project properties and grant

recipient properties. The CITY shall obtain a background check through the National Crime Information

Center (NCIC) at the AUTHORITY’s expense for each of the AUTHORITY's employees who has access to CITY

such propertyies and who is doing the work required pursuant to this Agreement. The AUTHORITY must

48

ensure a similar check has been done of its subcontractor’s employees who will have access to the CITY’s

property, project properties, or grant recipient properties.

7.3.1 If such a check reveals a conviction or a plea of nolo contendere, regardless of when the

plea or conviction occurred, which includes a felony or misdemeanor involving terrorist

behavior, violence, use of a dangerous weapon, crimes of moral turpitude or breach of

trust/fiduciary responsibility or which raises concerns about building, system, or personal

security or is otherwise a job-related crime, the AUTHORITY shall not assign the individual to

any CITY property, project property or grant recipient property. If such a check reveals any of

the foregoing after access has already been granted, any access privileges already granted shall

be immediately revoked and shall not be reinstated without the CITY’s express written

authorization. In the event that the AUTHORITY intends to hire new personnel to perform the

required services, the background checks should be initiated at the time of the hire.

7.3.2 The AUTHORITY shall certify compliance with the requirements of this Article by

submitting a completed affidavit in the form attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit

“B” to the City within fourteen (14) days prior to the commencement of services under this

Agreement. The CITY reserves the right to approve or disapprove whether AUTHORITY

employees may perform the services for the CITY. Disapproval would apply solely to this

Agreement and shall have no bearing on the AUTHORITY's employment of an individual outside

of this Agreement.

7.4 COMPLAINTS AND DISPUTES: All complaints concerning misconduct on the part of the AUTHORITY or

disputes between CITY staff and the AUTHORITY are referred to the City Manager or his designee, who shall

conduct investigations and inquiries, including discussions with the AUTHORITY and involved staff. The

determinations of the City Manager or designee shall be binding upon the parties, and failure of the

AUTHORITY to follow any such determination could be considered a material breach and subject the

AUTHORITY to termination for cause. The AUTHORITY agrees that any complaints received by the CITY

concerning misconduct on the part of the AUTHORITY, such as excessive charges, poor business practices etc.,

will be referred to the Office of the City Manager for appropriate action. The AUTHORITY agrees to make any

complaints concerning the CITY available to the Office of the City Manager for action as required.

7.5 INDEPENDENT AUTHORITY. AUTHORITY is an independent contractor under this Agreement.

Services provided by AUTHORITY pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to the supervision of

AUTHORITY. In providing such services, neither AUTHORITY nor its agents shall act as officers, employees, or

49

agents of CITY. No partnership, joint venture, or other joint relationship is created hereby. CITY does not

extend to AUTHORITY or AUTHORITY's agents any authority of any kind to bind CITY in any respect

whatsoever.

7.6 THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. Neither AUTHORITY nor CITY intends to directly or substantially

benefit a third party by this Agreement. Therefore, the parties agree that there are no third party

beneficiaries to this Agreement and that no third party shall be entitled to assert a right or claim against

either of them based upon this Agreement.

7 .7 NOTICES. Whenever either party desires to give notice to the other, such notice must be in writing,

sent by certified United States Mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or sent by commercial express

carrier with acknowledgement of delivery, or by hand delivery with a request for a written receipt of

acknowledgment of delivery, addressed to the party for whom it is intended at the place last specified. The

place for giving notice shall remain the same as set forth herein until changed in writing in the manner

provided in this section. For the present, the parties designate the following:

FOR CITY:

City Manager

City of Deerfield Beach

150 N.E. 2nd Avenue

Deerfield Beach, FL 33441

With copy to:

Andrew Maurodis, City Attorney

710 E. Hillsboro Blvd, Suite 200

Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441

50

FOR AUTHORITY:

Nadine M. Jarmon, Executive Director


533 S. Dixie Highway

Deerfield Beach, FL 33441

With copy to:

David N. Tolces, General Counsel

Goren, Cherof, Doody & Ezrol, P.A.

3099 E. Commercial Blvd., #200

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33308

7.8 ASSIGNMENT AND PERFORMANCE. Neither this Agreement nor any right or interest herein shall be

assigned, transferred, or encumbered without the written consent of the other party. CITY may terminate this

Agreement, effective immediately, if there is any assignment, or attempted assignment, transfer, or

encumbrance, by AUTHORITY of this Agreement or any right or interest herein without CITY's written consent.

AUTHORITY represents that each person who will render services pursuant to this Agreement is duly qualified

to perform such services by all appropriate governmental authorities, where required, and that each such

person is reasonably experienced and skilled in the area(s) for which he or she will render his or her services.

AUTHORITY shall perform its duties, obligations, and services under this Agreement in a skillful and

respectable manner. The quality of AUTHORITY's performance and all interim and final product(s) provided to

or on behalf of CITY shall be comparable to the best local and national standards.

7.9 CONFLICTS. Prior to performing any Services, all employees of the AUTHORITY or

AUTHORITY contractor or consultant shall be provided a copy the CITY’s Conflict of Interest policy

and each such employee shall acknowledge in writing their receipt of same. Neither AUTHORITY nor

its employees shall have or hold any continuing or frequently recurring employment or contractual

relationship that is substantially antagonistic or incompatible with AUTHORITY's loyal and conscientious

exercise of judgment and care related to its performance under this Agreement. AUTHORITY further agrees

that none of its officers or employees shall, during the term of this Agreement, serve as an expert witness

against CITY in any legal or administrative proceeding in which he, she, or AUTHORITY is not a party, unless

51

compelled by court process. Further, AUTHORITY agrees that such persons shall not give sworn testimony or

issue a report or writing, as an expression of his or her expert opinion, which is adverse or prejudicial to the

interests of CITY in connection with any such pending or threatened legal or administrative proceeding unless

compelled by court process. The limitations of this section shall not preclude AUTHORITY or any persons in any

way from representing themselves, including giving expert testimony in support thereof, in any action or in

any administrative or legal proceeding. In the event AUTHORITY is permitted pursuant to this Agreement to

utilize subcontractors to perform any services required by this Agreement, AUTHORITY agrees to require such

subcontractors, by written Agreement, to comply with the provisions of this section to the same extent as

AUTHORITY. In addition to the foregoing and at all times during the term hereof, the AUTHORITY and its

officials, officers, agents, consultants and employees shall be subject to and comply with CFR Section 511.12

governing Conflicts of Interest, which is expressly incorporated herein.

7.10 MATERIALITY AND WAIVER OF BREACH. CITY and AUTHORITY agree that each requirement, duty,

and obligation set forth herein was bargained for at arms-length and is agreed to by the parties in exchange

for quid pro quo, that each is substantial and important to the formation of this Agreement and that each is,

therefore, a material term hereof. CITY's failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be

deemed a waiver of such provision or modification of this Agreement. A waiver of any breach of a provision

of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a

modification of the terms of this Agreement.

7.11 COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. AUTHORITY shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws,

codes, ordinances, rules, and regulations in performing its duties, responsibilities, and obligations pursuant to

this Agreement.

7.12 SEVERANCE. In the event a portion of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to

be invalid, the remaining provisions shall continue to be effective unless CITY or AUTHORITY elects to

terminate this Agreement. An election to terminate this Agreement based upon this provision shall be made

within seven (7) days after the finding by the court becomes final.

7.13 JOINT PREPARATION. Each party and its counsel have participated fully in the review and revision of

this Agreement and acknowledge that the preparation of this Agreement has been their joint effort. The

language agreed to expresses their mutual intent and the resulting document shall not, solely as a matter of

judicial construction, be construed more severely against one of the parties than the other. The language in

this Agreement shall be interpreted as to its fair meaning and not strictly for or against any party.

52

7.14 JURISDICTION, VENUE, WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL. This Agreement shall be interpreted and construed in

accordance with and governed by the laws of the state of Florida. All parties agree and accept that jurisdiction

of any controversies or legal problems arising out of this Agreement, and any action involving the enforcement

or interpretation of any rights hereunder, shall be exclusively in the state courts of the Seventeenth Judicial

Circuit in Broward County, Florida, and venue for litigation arising out of this Agreement shall be exclusively in

such state courts, forsaking any other jurisdiction which either party may claim by virtue of its residency or

other jurisdictional device. BY ENTERING INTO THIS AGREEMENT, AUTHORITY AND CITY HEREBY EXPRESSLY

WAIVE ANY RIGHTS EITHER PARTY MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY OF ANY CIVIL LITIGATION RELATED TO

THIS AGREEMENT.

7.15 AMENDMENTS. No modification, amendment, or alteration in the terms or conditions contained

herein shall be effective unless contained in a written document prepared with the same or similar formality

as this Agreement and executed by the CITY and AUTHORITY or others delegated authority to or otherwise

authorized to execute same on their behalf,

7.16 PRIOR AGREEMENTS. This document represents the final and complete understanding of the parties

and incorporates or supersedes all prior negotiations, correspondence, conversations, Agreements, and

understandings applicable to the matters contained herein. The parties agree that there is no commitment,

Agreement, or understanding concerning the subject matter of this Agreement that is not contained in this

written document. Accordingly, the parties agree that no deviation from the terms hereof shall be predicated

upon any prior representation or Agreement, whether oral or written.

7.17 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. The truth and accuracy of each "Whereas" clause set forth above is

acknowledged by the parties.

7.18 REPRESENTATION OF AUTHORITY. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of a party

hereto hereby represents and warrants that he or she is, on the date he or she signs this Agreement, duly

authorized by all necessary and appropriate action to execute this Agreement on behalf of such party and

does so with full legal authority.

7.19 MULTIPLE ORIGINALS. Multiple copies of this Agreement may be executed by all parties, each of

which, bearing original signatures, shall have the force and effect of an original document.

53

(THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.)

54

DEERFIELD BEACH HOUSING

AUTHORITY, a Florida Public Housing

agency

ATTEST: By: _______________________________

Anthony Pelt, Chairman

________________________________

Nadine M. Jarmon, Executive Director Date: ______________________________

CITY OF DEERFIELD BEACH, a

Florida municipal corporation

ATTEST: By: _______________________________

Burgess Hanson, City Manager

_______________________________________

ADA GRAHAM-JOHNSON, MMC, CITY CLERK

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______________________________________

ANDREW S. MAURODIS, CITY ATTORNEY

H:\_GOV CLIENTS\DBHA 638\_120048 GM\AGREEMENTS\ILA for CDBG NSP and SHIP.docx

55


Resolution 2014-20

Resolution 2014-20: A Resolution of the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners approving the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority’s (DBHA) 2015 Annual Plan for the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

WHEREAS, all required public and resident meetings have been held in accordance with HUD Policies, and

WHEREAS, the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners has reviewed the Annual Plan and

allowed access to all relevant attachments and certifications.

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners has approved the DBHA

2015 Annual Plan on this 17th day of September, 2014.

_________________________________ ___________________________________



56

Executive Director’s and Division Reports

September 11, 2014

TO: Board of Commissioners

FROM: Nadine M. Jarmon, Executive Director

RE: Executive Director’s Report - August/September 2014

Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD)

Dr. Jarmon and Jasmine Privott continue to participate on weekly calls. Tremendous progress has been made in

the last two months. We have procured a consultant to assist with drafting the Relocation Plan at a cost of

$3,150. Mr. C. Ray Baker and Mr. Jonathan Brinkley will be present at the September board meeting to

summarize the progress. Dr. Jarmon composed a letter to Mr. Theodore Toon of HUD giving full details of the

progress to date on the project. The name change for Stanley will be delayed until which time we can garner

resident participation. We continue to wait for news from HUD on our RAD application for the Palms Elderly

high-rise building.

Legal Update

Dr. Jarmon worked with Attorney Tolces on the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Deerfield. Several

resident matters were reviewed by Attorney Tolces. Attorney Tolces also participates on the RAD weekly

conference calls.

Administrative Items

During the previous month ending September 11, Dr. Jarmon had various meetings with staff, legal counsel and

other parties in regards to the following matters:

(1) Dr. Jarmon worked with BofA to establish new accounts for the Townhomes

(2) Held several staff meetings in preparation of annual staffing plan

(3) Held staff meeting on September 10 to discuss internal issues

(4) Issued blast to staff and commissioners with update on Commissioner Reynold’s wife condition

(5) Assisted with coordination of several site visits related to the RAD

(6) Drafted forms for Annual Plan submission

City of Deerfield

Dr. Jarmon received a call immediately after the August board meeting in which she was advised by the

Assistant City Manager that they wanted to revisit the terms of the proposed Agreement after hearing that the

board had unanimously rejected the original proposed agreement. Dr. Jarmon met with Mr. Brian Donovan,

Ms. Donna DeFonzo and her assistant to refine the terms of the contract. Dr. Jarmon received a call on

September 10th

stating that the terms in which she had negotiated were acceptable to the City and that a revised

contract would be forthcoming to her and Attorney Tolces to be distributed in the board packet and considered

57

by the Board. Dr. Jarmon had several conversations with potential subcontractors she had asked to assist with

the implementation of the grants and ask that they attend a meeting on September 17 with the Assistant City

Manager and the current contractor to discuss transition terms in the event the board approves the new contract

terms. Members of the proposed team were also asked to attend the September board meeting to be introduced

to the board members.

Respective Department reports follows:

58

Housing Choice Voucher Program Update

September 17, 2014

Staff attended to a webinar for the Systematic Verification for Entitlements (SAFE) Program which is a web - accessible system that is utilized to obtain immigration status for Section 8 recipients that are non US citizens.

New Fair Market Rents and Payment Standard that will be effective October 1, 2014

The Section Department conducted their weekly staff meeting ( no relevant issues were discussed)

Employees provided their training wish list for Fiscal Year 2014 -2015

Planning of a Halloween Trick or Treat Activity for Section 8, Public Housing and The Palms of Deerfield’s residents.

FSS participants 49

Employed

(6 enrolled in school P/T)

33

Full-time student (unemployed) 2

Non-student (unemployed) 14

Participants with escrow accounts 21

Deposit from HUD (August ) $

Escrow deposit (August) $3053

Escrow balance (August) $76237.68

59

The Family Self Sufficiency Program had a fantastic Back to School Event on Saturday, August 16, 2014 from

10:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. The following persons were able to help secure these donations;

Ms. Delta Hofmiester, new HCV Specialist and Betty Ferguson, FSS Manager -book bags and supplies

Ms. Jan Housh, HCV Manager - Hot dogs from Brew Dogs

Ms. Tcherlie Macanet- food donation

Commissioner Guadagnino – Chocolate Candy donation

60

Public Housing Program Update

August Summary

PUBLIC HOUSING EVENTS

o PALMS

September 6, 2014 – F.A.C.T Friends and Family day was a huge success. Lots of food

and good company.

September 13, 2014 – F.A.C.T Yard Sale

VACANCIES

o The Palms has 2 vacancies pending a move –in from an available waiting list applicant and one unit transfer.

o Stanley has 10 vacancies for (RAD) that will remain vacant as a part of the upcoming relocation plan.

DEPARTMENTAL NEWS

o We are pleased to announce, Housing Coordinator Rene Prince is transitioning to become the Property Manager of the Townhomes.

o Departmental staffing changes pending. o Stanley Terrace residents have expressed concern over the crowd Westside Parks attracts and

the lack of parking at Stanley Terrace. I personally came out on Saturday, September 6, 2014 and was shocked to see how much of a mad house it really was! Tons of on resident vehicles parked inside Stanley Terrace, outside B’nai B’rith, Westside Park, and surrounding lots off of 3rd avenue. 95% of the crowd was not here to watch the football games yet to hang out, drink, smoke and loot. I witnessed several fights most of which bought on by intoxication and a child having to be rushed to the hospital. The park had no security. The only security onsite for the majority of the night was the BSO detail DBHA pays to man Stanley Terrace. Our deputy was forced to call in back up when the fights started to break out. I was appalled to see what should be a family outing in fact an adult block party. I debated having vehicles towed from Stanley Terrace but worried about a riot breaking out as there was a lot of intoxicated people. In addition, the crowds leave behind lots of trash and litter on our premises. Westside Park is cleaned within hours but our side of 2nd street is left a mess until staff arrives Monday morning. A compliant is being filed with the City.

MAINTENANCE

o Our 3 Technicians have been steady working hard performing work orders and general

maintenance at Stanley Terrace Apartments, The Palms of Deerfield Beach Apartments, The

61

Palms of Deerfield Beach Townhomes and the Business Skill Center. Our Two janitorial

employee’s upkeep the cleanliness at all sites as well.

RAD UPDATE

o RAD closing anticipated February 2015 can construction to begin as early as March 2015.

o RAD inspection conducted by Novogradac & Company LLP on September 9, 2014

o RAD inspection conducted by Dominion Group on September 10, 2014

o RAD inspection scheduled with Excel Engineering on September 17, 2014

o RAD Radon inspection scheduled with Radon Evaluations on September 22, 2014

o Multi-Color building scheme selected for exterior paint.

o Pending name change. No suggestions received as of yet.

o Weekly conference calls.

POLICY UPDATEs

o Pending new lease, building rules and lease addendums.

o Pending new Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan (AFHM Plan)

STAFF MEETINGS/TRAINING

o Weekly Monday Staff meetings. We commonly discuss weekly goals and opportunities for

improvement.

o Bed Bugs Webinar – September 10, 2014

o Upcoming Fair Housing Webinars

62

The Palms of Deerfield Beach Townhomes Report

August 1 thru August 31, 2014

The townhome continue to work toward Excellency in providing affordable housing options to families. The Deerfield

Beach Housing Authority’s maintenance department is working daily to complete many outstanding worker orders and

do the unit turnaround for the vacant unit. Management is currently being assisted by Betty Ferguson as Interim

Property Manager and Rene Prince who is in training for the Property Manager position. Ms. Prince has been diligently

learning the new duties as she transition into her role effective October 1, 2015. The following reports have been

submitted:

Monthly report for August for Broward County Housing Finance Authority

Monthly reports August to Florida Housing Finance Corporation- submitted Monthly report to RBC- submitted

Monthly report to Berkadia-submitted

August 1-31, 2014 Number of Units

Vacant

Units Vacant Percentage rate

Vacancies 1 431D

Move -Ins 1 421B

Occupancy 98%

Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners...

Documents

Transcript of Deerfield Beach Housing Authority Board of Commissioners...