San Joaquin County is located just east of the San Francisco-Oakland metropolitan region and northeast of the San Jose/Silicon Valley area. Positioned at the heart of California's rapidly urbanizing Central Valley, the entire County is a focal point of an area that many forecasters believe will be the fastest growing region in the State of California in the coming decades. The San Joaquin County Consolidated Plan area consists of the unincorporated portions of San Joaquin County and the cities within the County, excluding the City of Stockton: Escalon, Lathrop, Lodi, Manteca, Ripon, and Tracy.
The San Joaquin County Consolidated Plan (Consolidated Plan) provides a framework for addressing identified housing and community development needs within the Consolidated Plan area. One of the primary objectives of the Consolidated Plan is to bring about meaningful collaboration among service providers so that effective and coordinated strategies for addressing needs emerge. Through this process, it is expected that more effective use of scarce public and private resources will result. The Consolidated Plan includes a One Year Action Plan for spending almost $5.6 million of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Program, and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funds during the 1995-96 Federal fiscal year (July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996). The County, as the lead jurisdiction responsible for adopting the Consolidated Plan on behalf of all jurisdictions within the Consolidated Plan area, will disperse the funds to participating jurisdictions and to service providers for projects identified in the One Year Action Plan.
The input of public and private agencies and organizations that provide housing and related services to special needs groups, and the clients they represent, was actively solicited during the preparation of the Consolidated Plan. In addition to the required notices of public hearings appearing in local newspapers, notices of meetings on the Consolidated Plan were mailed directly to approximately 130 interested persons, agencies and organizations. Those contacted by mail were primarily groups that serve the needs of specific minority groups (including the Hispanic, Asian Pacific, Cambodian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Chinese, Lao, communities) or were advocacy groups for populations living in distressed and blighted areas (including farmworker groups, community and senior centers, and advocacy groups for those on General Relief, homeless assistance and outreach programs, shelters, and refugee assistance programs) in the Consolidated Plan area. In addition to basic information (i.e., Consolidated Plan content, time and place of meeting, proposed funding levels, etc.), the notices included a statement that technical assistance would be made available to groups and individuals wishing to develop proposals for Consolidated Plan activities. The notices also included a statement that translator services would be provided to those persons wishing to attend public hearings who do not speak English as their primary language if prior notification for translator services is given. To further foster citizen participation, a number of informational presentations were made to public and private sector agencies and groups, including advisory committees and groups of citizens, who would be the beneficiaries of activities proposed for funding.
In adopting the Consolidated Plan, two public hearings were conducted. The first public hearing was a joint meeting held by San Joaquin County and the City of Stockton, which was preparing its own Consolidated Plan, on November 17, 1994. The purpose of this hearing was to inform both the public and service providers about the process of developing the Consolidated Plan and to provide a forum for identifying and assessing housing and other community development needs in both the County and the City. The second public hearing was held on May 9, 1995 to consider adopting a draft Consolidated Plan. Prior to the second public hearing, the public was given a 30 day period to review and comment on the draft Consolidated Plan. At the May 9, 1995 hearing, the Board of Supervisors, having considered the views expressed both orally and in writing of citizens and other interested parties, adopted the final Consolidated Plan.
Although the cities included in the Consolidated Plan area were not
obligated to comply with the citizen participation requirements of the Federal
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), all initiated a public
participation process to assist them in defining needs and in identifying
potential projects for funding. The public participation process varied from
city to city but included several common elements: publication in the local
newspaper of notices of meetings and public hearings regarding the Consolidated
Plan, and receipt of comments and proposals regarding the use of funds by each
The population of the San Joaquin County Consolidated Plan area has increased significantly since 1980. According to the 1990 Census, the population was 269,685. This represented an increase of almost 37 percent since 1980, or an annual rate of increase of 3.2 percent. By contrast, the rate of increase for the State of California during this period was 2.6 percent per year. Not surprisingly, the rate of growth in the Consolidated Plan area has decreased during the past several years owing to the persistent recession in California. However, by California standards it is still significant: 2.5 percent per year.
A major portion of this growth can be attributable to the growth in the minority population. Although comprising only 29 percent of the total population of the Consolidated Plan area in 1990, the minority population accounted for over 45 percent of the growth during this period. The most dramatic changes occurred in the Hispanic, Asian, and Black populations.
The growth of the Consolidated Plan area has been fueled to a great extent
by workers from the San Francisco Bay Area in search of more affordable single
family housing. In response to this demand, home prices have risen dramatically.
Since local wages are lower than those in the San Francisco Bay Area, local
residents have been less able to afford the single family homes being
Unemployment within the Consolidated Plan area continues to be a problem. In 1990 the unemployment rate was 7.7 percent. By comparison, the Statewide rate was 6.6 percent. Although relatively high, the unemployment rate within the Consolidated Plan area represents an improvement over the 1980 rate. This improvement is due to two things: (San Francisco) Bay Area transplants living in the Consolidated Plan area but continuing to commute to their jobs in the Bay Area; and the decline in the dominance of agriculture in the local economy. Since 1990, however, the unemployment situation in the Consolidated Plan area has worsened. This has occurred as a result of the current recession, lower immigration from the Bay Area, and defense and local government cutbacks and layoffs.
The Consolidated Plan identifies two overriding housing needs: the need to provide affordable rental and ownership housing, particularly for low income households (i.e., those earning less than 80 percent of the County median income); and the need to conserve and rehabilitate the existing housing stock. Analysis of 1990 Census data reveals that there were over 12,200 low income renter households and over 6,900 low income owner households who experienced housing problems in the Consolidated Plan area. The number of substandard housing units was estimated at 3,400 rental units and 5,000 ownership units in 1990. Of the substandard rental units, an estimated 90 percent were occupied by low income households.
The Consolidated Plan also focuses on the housing needs of special needs groups. The Plan states that approximately 950 frail elderly need supportive housing; that between 175 to 640 mentally ill persons need housing assistance; and that an estimated 350 developmentally disabled individuals need supportive housing. In addition, the Plan notes that there is a need for housing with a supportive environment for recovering addicts and alcoholics completing treatment programs; that facilities are needed where women who are recovering from substance abuse can reside with their children; that housing and supportive services are needed for HIV- infected individuals; and that additional housing is needed for farmworkers.
In 1990 there were over 93,700 housing units in the Consolidated Plan area, 95 percent of which were occupied. Of the occupied housing units, 35 percent were renter occupied and 65 percent were owner occupied. During the 1980's, the average number of units added to the housing stock was over 1,900 units per year. Because of the recession, the average number of units added had declined to less than 1,500 units per year during the 1990 to 1993 period.
Demand for housing in the Consolidated Plan area is high. Symptomatic of this demand is the increase in the incidence of overcrowding from 1980 to 1990 (particularly for rental units), the conversion of single-family ownership to rental housing, and the extremely low vacancy rates for both rental and ownership housing.
A high demand for housing in the Consolidated Plan area has resulted in significant increases in rents and (generally) the average sales price of single family homes. For example, from 1990 to 1992 fair market rents increased approximately eight percent. Although single family home prices declined during this period due to the housing recession, a comparison of the average price of single family homes sold from 1985 to 1992 shows a staggering increase of over 100 percent.
Examination of 1990 Census data shows that only about one third of studio and one bedroom renter occupied units and less than one fourth of either two or three bedroom renter occupied units in the Consolidated Plan area were affordable to low income households who earned less than 50 percent of the median family income. These same households were even less able to afford homeownership. Only about one fifth of all two bedroom homes and less than three percent of all three bedroom homes were affordable to such households. These and other statistics support the conclusion that the market alone is unable to meet the affordable housing needs of low income households, and that governmental involvement is needed to supplement the efforts of the private sector.
The homeless population in the Consolidated Plan area was estimated at between 770 during the summer and 700 during the winter. About a third of the homeless was estimated to be unsheltered during the summer months, with a lower percentage during the winter months.
The general needs of this population include the need for: job training; jobs providing wages above minimum wage; affordable housing and/or housing subsidies; support services relative to life skills (e.g. budget management); access to health care; improved education; access to private or public transportation; access to vocational training opportunities; access to substance abuse treatment programs; and food.
More specific needs identified by the Consolidated Plan include the need for: more emergency housing for men; more family shelters; programs teaching independent living skills to minors emancipating from Safe House, residential treatment, and other programs; more counseling services for homeless individuals in shelters; more aftercare and transitional housing for homeless individuals leaving shelters; resources for rental deposits and utilities; safe, affordable child care for homeless families wishing to pursue job training, schooling, and jobs; family planning, well baby care, child health and disability screening; assistance with family communication problems, marriage counseling, and parental training; and medical and dental services provided by professionals sensitive to the needs of abused women and families.
There are a total of 1,640 housing units in the Consolidated Plan area which receive some type of Federal assistance. Of these, 245 are Public Housing Units, 382 are Section 8 (existing) rental units, and the remainder receive assistance from various other Federal programs. In addition to these Federally subsidized units, there are a total of 61 units subsidized by multi- family mortgage revenue bond financing from the City of Tracy. As of February 1995, all Public Housing units were occupied. A telephone survey of managers of other assisted housing units conducted in July 1993 revealed that there were few vacant units (resulting in a vacancy rate of less than 1½ percent). Managers reported that they maintain waiting lists of several years for these assisted housing units, and that, consequently, any vacant units are quickly filled.
The Consolidated Plan identified a number of barriers to providing affordable housing. Barriers to providing affordable housing attributable (partly or completely) to government include the following: insufficient vacant land zoned for multi-family development; growth control measures by some jurisdictions causing an escalation in the cost of housing; lack of sufficient infrastructure (e.g., sewage treatment capacity) to support residential development; exactions (e.g., dedications for street widening) and impact fees (e.g., fees charged for new school facilities) on development increasing the price of housing; and environmental concerns delaying residential development.
Other barriers to affordable housing noted in the Consolidated Plan include: changes in Federal tax laws and lending criteria for commercial lending institutions that have reduced the profitability and attractiveness of residential development, particularly multi-family projects; increases in the cost of land, labor, and materials that have reduced the profit margins of developers; the difficulty of securing a reliable and sufficient supply of water for (some) projects; the difficulty of obtaining a mortgage by low income and moderate income residents; CC&Rs (i.e., covenants, conditions, and restrictions) that impose square foot minimums, design requirements, and other restrictions on development, thereby increasing the cost of housing; housing production targeted primarily at middle and upper income households; and lack of private rehabilitation of older homes because rehabilitation costs would exceed the market value of the rehabilitated structure.
Fair housing assistance to residents within the Consolidated Plan area is provided via a contract between San Joaquin County and a community based non-profit agency, San Joaquin Fair Housing, Inc. (SJFH). SJFH provides tenant-landlord mediation services and counseling upon request; conducts training sessions with members of the real estate and financial community to educate them on their rights and responsibilities under fair housing laws; conducts other workshops and seminars on fair housing; and informs the general public of the availability of fair housing information and services which it provides through the media. Residents are able to obtain SJFH services and information directly by visiting the SJFH office in Stockton or by calling a toll free number. It is projected that SJFH will provide tenant-landlord mediation services to 245 households within the Consolidated Plan area during the 1995-96 Federal fiscal year.
In 1990 there were an estimated 47,800 occupied housing units, 16,600 renter occupied units and 31,200 owner occupied units, that contained lead-based paint. Over 80 percent of the renter occupied units and approximately one fifth of all owner occupied units containing lead based paint were occupied by low income households.
Several agencies within the Consolidated Plan area have been empowered to respond to the potential dangers posed by the incidence of lead-based paint in residential structures. The agencies within the Consolidated Plan area most active in evaluating and reducing lead-based paint hazards are the Housing Authority and the Environmental Health Division of the San Joaquin county Public Health Services Department.
Within the five year period of the Consolidated Plan, an additional 14,000 new households are projected to reside in the Consolidated Plan area. Of this number, approximately 5,600 will be low income households. It is estimated that over 60 percent of these low income households will need some form of housing assistance.
Community development needs within the Consolidated Plan area include the need for: affordable housing and/or housing subsidies; jobs providing a livable wage; access to job and vocational training for the unemployed and underemployed and for at-risk populations; support services relative to life skills (e.g. budget management); improved access to health care; affordable and accessible transportation; affordable child care; access to substance abuse treatment programs; shelters for families and homeless individuals; emergency assistance for at- risk individuals and families; and infrastructure improvements.
There are a number of efforts among categories of service providers to coordinate their activities within the Consolidated Plan area. The Stockton Developmental Center and Valley Mountain Regional Center work together in providing supportive housing to the developmentally disabled. United Cerebral Palsy coordinates with the County's in-Home Supportive Services Program to enable cerebral palsy clients to remain in the least restrictive setting. The Stockton Shelter for the Homeless, the Ryan White Consortium, and the AIDS Program of Public Health Services work cooperatively in the running of the Ryan White House (a transitional housing program for those who are HIV positive).
In the area of jobs, the San Joaquin Partnership, the Can Joaquin County Economic Development Association, the Greater Chamber of Commerce, and the Business Council have entered into a Cooperation Agreement in order to clarify roles and responsibilities, avoid duplication of efforts, and enhance the coordination of the organizations' complimentary programs and activities.
There are other examples of coordination between agencies with similar
interests and purposes. However, the Consolidated Plan identifies a number of
areas where increased coordination is required. For example, the Plan notes that
communication between non-profit organizations and governments, and between
cities and the County, needs to be enhanced to make them aware of federal
programs and grants and to facilitate the development of affordable housing
programs and activities.
The Consolidated Plan was developed to achieve three broad statutory goals: to provide decent housing; to provide a suitable living environment; and to expand economic opportunities. The Consolidated Plan was also developed to achieve the following more specific goals: elimination of slums and blight; elimination of conditions that are detrimental to health, safety, and public welfare; conservation of the existing housing stock; expansion and improvement in the quantity and quality of community services; alleviation of physical and economic distress; and reduction in the isolation of income groups within communities and geographical areas.
The objectives and priorities of the Consolidated Plan reflect the vision for change outlined in the preceding section. These objectives and priorities are: to provide housing which is affordable to low income groups; to rehabilitate substandard housing units occupied by low income groups; to improve the living environments of low income households; to provide for the shelter needs of the homeless and special needs groups; to provide support services for the homeless and special needs groups; to provide needed public improvements and facilities; and to facilitate the creation of jobs providing a livable income.
Priorities for providing affordable housing include providing rental assistance payments to low income households, especially very low income elderly households, small related households, and large related households; constructing rental units affordable to low income households; assisting low income households, including current public housing residents, purchase their first home; and providing debt management assistance and refinancing assistance to low income households, particularly very low income homeowners.
Priorities for rehabilitating substandard housing units focus primarily on rehabilitating housing units occupied by low income homeowners.
Priorities for improving the living environments of low income households include conducting neighborhood code enforcement activities; conducting neighborhood clean-up activities; and facilitating weatherization efforts.
Priorities for meeting the shelter needs of the homeless and special needs groups include providing continued support for existing shelters; developing new shelters for individuals, families, and victims of domestic violence; providing emergency housing and food to homeless persons and families through vouchers; providing temporary housing for individuals with special needs (e.g., abused and/or abandoned seniors); providing long term housing to homeless persons with disabilities, including those with serious mental illnesses; providing housing to developmentally disabled adults and children; and providing continued support for halfway houses for individuals, mothers and their children recovering from substance abuse.
Priorities for meeting the supportive service needs of the homeless and special needs populations include providing assessment, treatment, and referral services to homeless persons in shelters and outside of shelters; providing continued support for food supplement activities for the near homeless, especially low income families with children; providing transitional schooling to elementary age homeless children in family shelters; providing safe, affordable child care for homeless single parents and families pursuing job training, jobs, and education; providing individual counseling, marriage and family counseling, and parenting training to homeless families; providing substance abuse counseling, health care, and educational services to mothers and their children who have substance abuse problems; providing nursing services, counseling, and money management services to the elderly, blind, and disabled; providing case management, home nursing care, counseling, and housing payment assistance to persons who have AIDS or who are HIV positive; and providing no cost medical and dental care to homeless persons.
Priorities for providing needed public improvements and public facilities include expanding, replacing, or constructing new, essential infrastructure (e.g., curbs, gutters, sidewalks, storm drainage systems, water systems, and sanitary sewer systems), particularly in low income areas; installing new facilities or renovating existing facilities to increase accessibility by the disabled; constructing new facilities or renovating existing structures housing public service providers to allow maintenance or expansion of service levels; and expanding recreational facilities for low income youth.
Priorities for creating jobs providing a livable wage include supporting job training and life-skills training activities that help low income persons and economically disadvantaged persons qualify for and retain a job; supporting business retention and expansion activities; supporting activities to attract job-creating investments and new businesses; and promoting the commercial and economic development of the City of Stockton/San Joaquin County Enterprise Zone.
The Consolidated Plan identifies and describes in detail numerous programs and activities which assist economically disadvantaged persons and households in both the City of Stockton and the Consolidated Plan area. Collectively, these efforts comprise an anti-poverty strategy. An important part of this strategy consists of programs and activities concerned with increasing the number of people with decent paying jobs. This focus on jobs constitutes an overt recognition by both public and private providers that in order to solve housing and housing related problems the issue of jobs must be addressed.
To increase the number of persons with adequately paying jobs, the Consolidated Plan spells out two parallel approaches: increasing the quantity and quality of jobs by attracting new businesses and assisting existing businesses expand and remain in San Joaquin County; and preparing low income individuals for employment by developing their job and life skills. A number of agencies and organizations are involved in this effort: the San Joaquin County Employment and Economic Development Department, the San Joaquin Partnership, the Business Council, chambers of commerce, city and county governments and agencies, the Private Industry Council, and community action centers. Among the programs administered by these groups are the following: the Business Retention and Expansion Program, the Revolving Loan Fund Program, Small Business Loan packaging programs, the Economic Development Association Program, the Enterprise Zone, redevelopment agency programs, Summer Youth Employment and Training Program, Mature Workers Program, Occupational Skills Training Program, the GAIN Program, the Cal-Learn Program, the Refugee Assistance Program, and the Food Stamp Employment and Training Program.
The agencies and organizations concerned with addressing housing and community development needs within the Consolidated Plan area draw on a variety of funding sources to pay for their activities. The primary Federal resources include CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds, HOME (Home Investment Partnership) funds, ESG (Emergency Shelter Grant) funds, HOPWA (Housing Opportunities for Persons with Aids) funds, Shelter Plus Care funds, Section 8 Voucher and Certificate Program funds, CGP (Comprehensive Grant Program) funds, FmHA 502 (Farmers Home Administration Home Ownership Loan Program) funds, Congregate Nutrition Program (Title III-C1) funds, Golden Age Harvest Program (Title III-B) funds, USDA Emergency Food Assistance Program funds, Federal Emergency Food and Shelter Program funds, SAMHSA (Substance Abuse, Mental Health Service Administration) funds, PATH (Project for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness) funds, AIM (Alliance of Infants and Mothers) funds, FOCUS (Families Overcoming Chemical Using Situations) funds, and JTPA (Job Training Partnership Act) funds. Primary State resources include Emergency Housing Assistance Program funds, AFDC Homeless Assistance Program funds, State Mental Health funds, and GAIN (Greater Avenue for Independence) funds. Local governmental resources include funding from redevelopment agencies, County matching funds, and General Fund contributions.
The actual day to day administration of components of the Consolidated Plan is the responsibility of a variety of public and private agencies. Efforts to achieve coordination among certain categories of providers have already been discussed above.
The Consolidated Plan recognizes, however, that the ultimate responsibility
for coordinating the activities of these provider groups rests not with the
groups themselves but with the Board of Supervisors of San Joaquin County and
the city councils of the Consolidated Plan area since they determine how Federal
and State funds are to be allocated. Accordingly, the Consolidated Plan calls
for the strengthening and restructuring of two advisory committees: the Policy
Advisory Committee (PAC) and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) which report
to the Board of Supervisors and the city councils respectively. The restructured
committees will perform the following advisory functions: assess what percentage
of funds available should be allocated to each type of program and each
geographical area; assess what grants should be pursued; analyze how to bring
resources to bear on the most significant identified needs; assess how to
coordinate the services provided, minimizing overhead and duplication of effort;
determine how in general to be of assistance to community based organizations;
and decide how most appropriately to encourage citizen participation.
The One Year Action Plan provides for the use of approximately $5.6 million in CDBG, HOME, and Emergency Shelter Grant funds. These funds will be spent for an a variety of housing and housing related activities, including:
The percentage of the funds received by each jurisdiction within the Consolidated Plan area is as follows: San Joaquin County, 52 percent; Lodi, 20.5 percent; Manteca, 11.3 percent; Tracy, 10.1 percent; Lathrop, 2.2 percent; Ripon, 2 percent; and Escalon, 2 percent.
The CDBG, HOME and ESG programs are all administered locally by San Joaquin County in cooperation with the Cities of Escalon, Lathrop, Lodi, Manteca, Ripon, and Tracy.
Housing goals for the One Year Action Plan include rehabilitating 27 housing units occupied by low income homeowners; assisting 42 low income households purchase their first home by means of GAP financing and down payment assistance; constructing a 36 unit apartment complex providing units affordable to low income and very low income families; providing 50 units of senior housing through the conversion of an existing hotel; providing 14 units of transitional housing; constructing a 14 unit single family housing complex for low income households; providing direct rental assistance to 382 households; serving 120 homeless families in emergency shelters; and serving 1300 homeless individuals in emergency shelters.
MAP 2 depicts points of interest and low-moderate income areas.
MAP 3 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, and minority concentration levels.
MAP 4 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, and unemployment levels.
MAP 5 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, unemployment levels, and proposed HUD funded projects; in addition, a table provides information about the project(s).
MAP 6 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, and proposed HUD funded projects.
MAP 7 depicts Neighborhood Segments and streets with proposed HUD funded projects.