State of North Dakota's 1995 Consolidated Plan Submission (CPS) constitutes a strategic vision for housing and community development in the State. This document summarizes that plan so that citizens in the community can have a quick overview of State of North Dakota's housing and community development problems; the 5-year broad goals, strategies and actions proposed to deal with those problems; and, the specific projects proposed for 1995 to carry out this strategy.
The Consolidated Plan will serve the following functions:
The state Consolidated Plan addresses the following specific elements:
The Governor of North Dakota has designated the Office of Intergovernmental Assistance (OIA) to act as the lead agency for developing, facilitating, implementing, and monitoring the Consolidated Plan in North Dakota. The Plan, while only required to address the areas of the state outside of the cities of Bismarck, Fargo, and Grand Forks, and Indian Reservations, will in fact be a statewide plan to the extent possible based on the availability of data and possible strategies. Once approved by HUD, the Plan will enable the state, local jurisdictions, and nonprofits to access HUD's formula grants and other HUD housing programs:
The consolidated plan includes an action plan constituting an application for funds under three different HUD formula programs (including reallocations from prior years) for a total of $ 10,258,000 million. The funding breakdown is as follows:
The Office of Intergovenmental Assistance (OIA) undertook a number of actions. These included conducting eight public hearings (one in each planning region) during October 1994. Letters requesting input were sent to all appropriate state agencies (i.e. Human Services, Health Department, Water Commission, etc.), District Health Units, the League of Cities and Association of Counties, county social service offices, Community Action Agencies, and Regional Planning Councils. Because of how the CDBG program is designed, each Regional Council was required to identify their housing and non-housing priorities and short and long-term community development objectives within their respective regions. The seven Community Action Agencies were required to identify housing priorities because of their roles with the HOME program as non-profits and Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs).
All cities and counties received notice of the development of the Plan and the public hearings. This was done in an effort to consult with community leaders. Because the Regional Planning Councils represent local governments, they became the primary source to coordinate with and receive input from units of general local government.
In addition to being able to participate at a public hearing, we notified everyone of the opportunity to provide written input after the public hearings, up to thirty days, and in some case longer.
Prior to the adoption of the Plan, we notified the same entities identified above of the availability of the Plan and the opportunity to provide additional comment. Copies of the draft Plan were also provided to the State Library and made available through their statewide network.
The State of North Dakota consists of 69,300 square miles of land, with approximately 9.2 persons per square mile. It is divided into 53 counties containing 364 cities, 45 percent of which have less than 200 residents. The state also has five Indian Reservations within its borders. For planning purposes, the state is divided into eight planning regions (Exhibit 1).
According to the 1990 Census, North Dakota has a total population of 638,800 persons, 601,592 of which are white, non-Hispanic. Estimates for 1993, from the Census Bureau, show the population to be 635,000. This indicates, on the surface, a declining population, but is actually an increase from the Bureau's 1991 and 1992 estimates. Population projections from the North Dakota Census Data Center through the year 2000, however, offer another look, projecting a decrease in the state's population to approximately 613,747 persons. It is generally believed that these projections are too severe, but most believe that we will continue to see a population decline, given current rates of outmigration and a continual decline in the state's birth rate.
We see that the state's population declined by two percent between 1980 and 1990, primarily the result of outmigration. This is consistent with national reports reflecting North Dakota as the state with the most people moving out. In fact, from 1980-1990, 71,714 more persons moved away from, than into, the state.
Regional Planning Councils. There are eight regional planning
councils, all of which are directly involved in identifying community needs and
implementing the CDBG program. They are responsible, under the CDBG program,
for determining the types of activities that will be funded within their
respective regions and within the eligibility requirements of the program.
These agencies may also participate with the Community Action Agencies to
implement the HOME program.
The housing and supportive services needs in the state's eight planning regions have a number of common areas, but differences do exist, especially in priorities. In addition, larger cities are significantly different from rural areas in the types of needs that are of concern. The larger cities have concerns about their ability to meet the needs of special needs populations, as well as how to provide for the people moving from rural areas. Most rural communities, on the other hand, are concerned with how to retain population and how to provide housing when economic opportunities come knocking.
As we gathered input for the development of the Consolidated Plan, many communities expressed a need for a wide range of housing opportunities, but indicated that they have not been able to find private sector developers willing to invest. In addition, many communities identified the need for financing programs geared to provide assistance to middle income people in the 81-95 percent median family income category. These middle income people have too much income to qualify for low income programs, but not enough to obtain housing through the private market. This concern coincides with projections in the Housing Needs Assessment for 1,600 new households, over the next eight years, who could earn too little to qualify for a home loan, but too much to qualify for rental assistance.
For the Consolidated Plan, however, given the emphasis for HUD housing and community development programs, we will focus our primary attention on the extremely low, low and moderate income households. We will also focus on the elderly, large families, persons with disabilities, and the homeless. We are concerned with middle income families obtaining affordable housing, but given the small percentage of families in this category, and the limited resources available, their needs are not a high priority.
According to the 1990 Census, we had 100,980 renter and owner households in one of the three low income categories. A total of 50,839 were renters and 50,141 were homeowners. Regions 7, 5 and 2 respectively had the most low income owners, while Regions 5, 7, and 2 respectively had the most low income renter households. Those figures included the entitlement cities of Bismarck and Fargo. When those cities are factored out, we find that the regions with the most low income owners were 7, 2, and 6 respectively, while Regions 2, 6 and 5 respectively had the most low income renters. The graphs on the following pages, reflect the number of low income owners and renters by region, by entitlement versus non-entitlement.
Households, renters, and owners in the 0-50 percent median family income rangeare of particular concern. We need to focus on their ability to sustain and maintain in their current housing. These households, especially those in the 0-30 percent category, are the most at risk of becoming homeless. They are the households most likely living in poverty
The complete Consolidated Plan reflects the Nonhousing community development needs typically funded under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The assigned priorities reflect the needs that historically have been in the most demand, and the needs identified by the Regional Planning Councils. The Consolidated Plan identifies the priorities assigned to these general activities for each region of the state.
All activities funded by the CDBG program are targeted to benefit extremely low, low, and moderate income persons or families. The needs of targeted beneficiaries are fulfilled through direct assistance, area-wide benefit, or through being part of a limited clientele, such as an activity to directly benefit the elderly.
By far, the highest priority non-housing community development need is to create more jobs statewide, especially jobs that will provide for household sustaining wages. To accomplish this, there is a need to target funds to expand existing businesses, to attract new manufacturing businesses, to provide for local infrastructure, and to make housing an essential factor to the economic development equation.
Highest priority non-housing community development need is to create more jobs statewide, especially jobs that will provide for household sustaining wages.
High priority Sewer and water activities, followed by fire facilities and removal of architectural barriers, are activities that we expect will consume the majority of funds for non-housing activities for a number of years to come.
Affordable Housing
High priority to the income categories of 0-50 percent median family income. Overcrowding, according to the Housing Needs Assessment and Census data, is not a major problem, therefore, it received only a medium priority.
Low priority to elderly households because the available data points to overcrowding as a problem mainly for large related families.
High priority to the need to continue to provide assistance to the homeless shelters
High priority to transitional and permanent housing because of the need to help main stream various categories of homeless.
High priority to undertaking assessment and outreach activities is a for homeless families and individuals as no real mechanisms exist to identify these homeless people until they reach the shelters
We established the following long and short term objectives for the CDBG program to address these priorities:
Long Term Objectives
Short Term Objectives
State Method of Distribution - Funds Available By Emphasis Area
Emergency needs are those demonstrating an immediate threat to health and safety. The remaining funds in each region's allocation will be available to fund these activities. (Plus any unobligated or returned funds)
Any adjustments made prior to October 1, must address emergency situations only and first be approved by the Regional Council Board or its designated committee and submitted to the Governor and the OIA for their approval. All cities, counties and other interested parties in the region must be notified in writing of the transfer of funds.
Regional councils having provisions for Urgent (emergency) Need projects
Tri-County
Tri-County Economic Development Association to allow for other contingencies. These funds, if any, would be made available for projects based on the following definitions:
Red River Regional Council
The Red River Regional Council will have an emergency set-aside, contingent upon left-over or turn back funds from public facilities or housing rehabilitation. If funds are available for emergencies, only urgent needs projects will be considered. Urgent needs projects are activities needed to address an immediate and/or urgent condition which was not apparent or not known at the application deadline.
Lewis and Clark and Roosevelt-Custer Regional Council will also address
urgent needs.
The state, through the OIA, receives three formula grants from the Department of HUD to address housing and community development needs. Two grants, the HOME program and the Emergency Shelter Grants Program, are available statewide. The CDBG program may only be used in the areas outside of the cities of Bismarck, Fargo, and Grand Forks. Those three cities receive their own CDBG funds directly from HUD.
The enclosed program statements or descriptions for these three formula grant programs describe how the state will distribute funds to local governments and nonprofit organizations to carry out activities. The CDBG program, while administered by the state, is de-centralized down to the eight Regional Councils. They each develop their own priorities and selection processes, and submit funding recommendations to the OIA. Overall, access to the CDBG program is on a competitive basis. The ESGP is made available statewide on a competitive basis, with the state making funding decisions.
With respect to the HOME program, the OIA contracts with the HFA for administration of some funds; allocates funds on a yearly basis to the cities of Bismarck, Fargo, and Grand Forks; provides funds through the state's seven CAAs; makes funds available to designated CHDOs; and makes grants available to units of local government.
Each program requires the design of selection criteria to meet identified state priorities and objectives. For the CDBG program, criteria must also address the identified regional priorities. All funds must address priorities identified as high or medium, as well as work to the achievement of state objectives. Program staff will review all proposed applications and activities accordingly. The state's specific objectives are all tailored to fit the identified priorities for housing and nonhousing activities. Therefore, activities that are funded will also address the state's specific housing and nonhousing objectives over time.
With the exception of the North Dakota Community Development Block Grant Program, the state plans to make the funds it receives available statewide. The Community Development Block Grant program can only be used in the nonentitlement areas of the state, which means the state will not use CDBG funds in the cities of Bismarck, Fargo, and Grand Forks.
CDBG will address the national objectives of the program, which are:
For further details on the national objective, see CFR 24 Part 570.
Emergency Shelter Grants Program Awarding of funds on a competitive basis to the state's emergency shelters and other non-profits to provide shelter, services and homeless prevention activities.
HOME Foster and Maintain Affordable Housing: Our primary
efforts during the year will be to encourage more use of HOME funds to create
housing, especially multi-family housing in rural areas and special needs
housing.