Mission derives its name from the tiny, old La Lomita Mission, built in 1845 by Oblate Fathers. Used as a chapel and way-station for priests traveling between Brownsville and Roma, Texas, the Oblate mission grew and remained active until the fathers moved to the established town of Mission in 1911. Today Mission is a thriving city of over 28,000 full-time residents. According to the 1990 Census, 80% of the population is Hispanic.
On the banks of the Rio Grande midway between the Gulf of Mexico and Falcon Lake lies the City of Mission Hidalgo County, Texas. Mission is located 240 miles south of San Antonio, Texas, 158 miles southwest of Corpus Christi, Texas 85 miles west of the sandy beach of South Padre Island by the Gulf Coast, 8 miles northwest of Reynosa, Tamaulipas (Mexico), 145 miles northeast of Monterrey, Nuevo Leon (Mexico) and 149 miles southeast of Laredo, Texas.
Mission's economy has been primarily driven by the citrus and tourism industries for many years and has been known by many as "Home of the Grapefruit" and "Tourist Mecca of South Texas". Mission, like most border communities, also depends on the Mexican consumer for retail trade.
The City plans for specific activities it expects to pursue using Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds during local Program Year (October 1, 1995 to September 30, 1996). The funds have been allocated to community needs based on public input and several meetings held by City Staff. the CDBG funding allocation for Fiscal year 1995 is $1,038,000. In the One Year Action Plan, the funds were distributed as follows:
| Public Facilities and Improvements | 57.5% | of CDBG funds | |
| Planning and Administration | 17.2% | ||
| Sec. 108 Loan Repayment | 11.4% | ||
| Public Service | 9.6% | ||
| Clearance and Demolition | 2.4% | ||
| Rehabilitation | 1.9% | ||
| 100% |
The Consolidated Plan Strategy (CPS) is the result of considerable discussion and input from many different sources. The CPS was developed through the efforts of City Staff, City Council, Citizens Advisory Committee, HUD Staff, local nonprofit, and residents of the City.
To directly obtain input from social service organizations, a questionnaire was mailed and telephone calls were made to fifteen social service organizations. The questionnaire requested information about the organization and their client's needs.
In addition, several public hearings and meetings were held for public input. A total of eight public hearings were held to allow residents of the City to participate in identifying the needs of the community. Furthermore, some of the public hearing meetings were held on Saturday to allow citizens that work during the week to attend one of the several public hearings held. During the public hearing, the participants were asked to complete a questionnaire as well.
Furthermore, a complete draft of the City of Mission Consolidated Plan and
Strategy was made available for public review and comments for a period of 30
days, starting June 28 - July 31, 1995. The City published a notice on June 28,
1995 regarding the comment period and the availability of the CPS draft document
at the Community Development Division (CDD), 900 Doherty and Mission Speer
Library, 801 E. 12th, Mission, TX. Residents may call the Community Development
Division at (210) 580-8674 and request a copy of the CPS draft document for
public review and comments could be mailed and/or returned to the CDD no later
than July 31, 1995.
On the banks of the Rio Grande midway between the Gulf of Mexico and Falcon
Lake lies the City of Mission in Hidalgo County, Texas. The population for the
City of Mission in 1980 was 17,021 and in 1990 was 28,653, a 59% increase.
Three of the four quadrants of the City meet the low to moderate income criteria
of HUD. The quadrants are identified as Census Tracts 201, 202, and 204. The
Hispanic population in the City is 22,945, 80% of the 28,653 population.
According to the revised income limits for Fiscal Year 1995 recently distributed
by HUD, the average median income for McAllen, Mission and Edinburg area is
$22,000.
Mission is also part of the Mission/McAllen/Edinburg MSA which is the 8th fastest growing MSA in the U.S. The unemployment rate peaked out in 1994 at 18.2% for the MSA. Recent figures show that the rate has declined as more companies discover the advantages of locating in the MSA.
There are several factors that create a difficult living environment for lower income residents. Factors such as rental markets, affordable land, lack of homebuyer education, flood/drainage problems and rehabilitation issues combine to create a difficult environment for Mission's lower income residents.
A high priority for the City is encouraging homeownership and property improvements. The supply of affordable housing is necessary in order to allow lower-income persons participate in homeownership, thus increasing housing stock. Another high priority of which the City strongly believes in is rehabilitation of properties. Housing rehabilitation increases the opportunity for a decent, safe and sanitary living environment.
In Mission there are a total of 10,658 housing units. Only 8,315 of the 10,658 are occupied units. Of these 5,949 are owner-occupied, 2,366 are renter-occupied units and 2,343 are vacant units.
The City does not have a count on the number of substandard housing units. The City Inspector estimates approximately 5% of the housing stock (occupied or vacant) needs substantial rehabilitation or needs to be replaced. The City currently has a waiting list of 165 households interested in housing rehabilitation assistance.
As the City's housing stock ages, property maintenance and repair become more critical. Over time, lack of adequate property upkeep can diminish neighborhood attractiveness, reduce property value, decrease resident willingness to invest in the community, and increase property abandonment.
Many of the factors which tend to restrict housing supply cannot be controlled by local government, especially those that relate to regional, national and even worldwide economic conditions. Various factors not under the control of local government influence the cost, supply and distribution of housing. These factors include land costs, construction costs, financing costs, and availability of land.
Housing affordability is impacted by local factors such as the availability of land for new construction, the income of residents, the supply of housing and, of course, housing cost.
Households with incomes at or below 50 percent of MFI (24 percent of all households) have the greatest housing cost burden. They need rental assistance and affordable housing options, and owners need rehabilitation assistance. Low-income first time homebuyers need down payment assistance, credit counseling, and home maintenance training.
There is no accurate count of the number and characteristics of homeless in Mission. According to the 1990 Census, Mission has zero count for homeless. Furthermore, there is no homeless or emergency shelter in Mission or in the surrounding cities. There are several social service organizations that provide some type of emergency shelter assistance. These organizations provide some type of temporary emergency shelter to homeless individuals and homeless families and all have the same goal to deter homeless. The existing gaps in the delivery system of affordable and supportive housing services to residents is the extensive need of funds.
The public housing agency for the City is Mission Housing Authority (MHA). There are several housing assistance program provided by MHA. There are 199 cases in the Rental Voucher Program and 551 cases in the Rental Certificate Program. In addition, MHA administers several types of housing programs and oversees 260 housing units.
Moreover, MHA has made numerous improvements to its housing project sites. Improvements included roofing, plumbing, carports, utility line replacement such as sewer lines and water lines, pavement projects such as driveways and street overlay, and a playground area was renovated into a multi-sport playground.
The City-wide policies have not proven to have a negative impact on the continued development of affordable housing. Nor have these policies created a discriminatory environment for members of a racial or ethnic minority group. Compared to nearby communities, Mission's policies and fees are reasonable. Mission cannot control the costly environmental assessment required by the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission.
For the most part the high cost of housing has stemmed from the high cost of land, construction, and building material.
Nonetheless, the City acknowledges that more must be done to increase affordable housing opportunities. As a result, the City will continue to re-evaluate all development fees, regulations and program policies and procedures to determine whether any further revisions may be appropriate to enhance affordable housing for low-income residents of the City.
The City, in conjunction with the housing authority, nonprofit and for-profit developers, social service providers, lenders, and realtors will make every effort to ensure that no individual or family is in any way discriminated against on the grounds of race, color or national origin.
There are no current court orders, consent decrees, or HUD-imposed sanctions that affect the provision of fair housing remedies.
Age of the housing units is one of the key ways to estimate the number of units which contain lead-based paint. However, estimating the number of units that may have lead-based paint is extremely difficult because we can not state all housing units built before 1979 contain lead paint. According to the 1990 CHAS Database, there were 1,399 rental housing units and 3,803 owner-occupied housing units built before 1979.
As stated before, not all housing units built before 1979 contain lead paint. As required by the CPS, Mission consulted with many agencies to gather information on lead-based paint in the City. The organizations involved in the consultation included Texas Department of Health, Texas Department of Human Services, Texas Department of Regulatory and Protective Services, Mission Independent School District, Mission Housing Authority, City Inspector/Code Enforcement Officer and City Housing Division. The above mentioned organizations all reported no lead-based paint in the City.
Though no accurate information about the incidence of lead-based paint exits in Mission, the City realizes that lead-based paint poses a serious health threat and must be addressed. Currently, all units assisted through Mission's public and Section 8 housing programs are free of lead-based paint. The City will continue to inspect new public and assisted housing for lead paint and other hazards. The City will also encourage residents and property owners to test for and abate lead based paint.
Community development needs include gainful employment for the at-risk
population, adult education and vocational training programs, self-sufficiency
programs and intensive case management, affordable child care, educational and
development programs for children before first grade, retraining for displaced
workers, emergency assistance for at-risk families and individuals, and
affordable and accessible transportation, and infrastructure improvements.
City of Mission, through consultations, observations, and analysis within the community, has identified key priorities to aggressively pursue a policy and program basis. The priorities are in no particular order and are as follows:
Overall, the City plans to concentrate its efforts on programs that will primarily benefit low to moderate income communities.
Priorities for affordable housing include increasing the supply of affordable housing and reducing housing cost burdens for low-income households, improving the living environments of lower income residents, assisting public housing residents to become more self-sufficient, increasing housing choice for low-income and minority residents, and addressing the unique needs of large families, the elderly, and persons with disabilities.
Priorities for homelessness alleviation include providing adequate emergency shelter, ensuring transitional and permanent housing alternatives for homeless persons, creating supportive services for homeless persons not capable of independent living, and providing support networks and services to persons at risk of homelessness.
The priority for non-homeless persons with special needs is supportive housing and housing linked to supportive services for the frail elderly, persons with HIV/AIDS, and other persons with special needs.
Priorities for mixed-used areas include creating a living/working environment including low and moderate-income residents, encouraging residential infill and compatible business uses on vacant land in targeted areas, and conserving the heritage and character of targeted areas.
Priorities for economic development activities include providing training and related supportive services to residents of the State Enterprise Zone and Federal Enterprise Community and offering loans to businesses that meet need or job creation requirements.
Priorities for other community development activities include public facilities improvements (park recreation, youth centers, community center/police substation), infrastructure improvements (street, drainage, sewer and sidewalk), and public service provision.
Mission's Anti-Poverty Plan focuses on the most vulnerable group in the City--primarily the very low-income households with incomes between 0 and 30 percent of the median family income, the individuals in public or assisted housing and the uncounted homeless individuals and families. The lower-income households are generally those threatened with homelessness and persons in public or assisted housing dependent upon public subsidies to maintain their own residences. In all, this segment of the population has the highest incidence of poverty. These households will see the most immediate benefit from a concentrated effort to increase economic opportunities for households in Mission.
The primary Federal resource is CDBG and Public Housing Assistance. The City has also received EDA funds for an economic development project. In pursuing economic development activities, gaps are usually filled by private enterprises.
The primary State resource is HOME. HOME funds are used for housing rehabilitation assistance to low and moderate income households.
Local revenue in Mission is used to cover basic community services. However, the City is committed to assisting in housing and housing affordability and will continue to pursue locally- based housing initiatives.
The City is responsible for the Consolidated Plan activities, but a variety of public and private organizations are involved in administering plan components. The Consolidated Plan acknowledges that there is some overlap in service provision. However, the City lends itself to coordinated efforts.
Although the City feels that it has a well developed network of nonprofit
and private organizations to carry out its Consolidated Plan, it also noted some
gaps in the delivery of services. Coordination of services for the non-homeless
special needs population needs strengthening. Furthermore, efforts to eliminate
barriers to homeownership will also require increased attention and
coordination.
City of Mission's One-Year Action Plan outlines the proposed use of $1,038,000 in CDBG funds. These funds will be spent mainly on an array of housing and non-housing activities, including:
Projects in the One-Year Action Plan are in low-income areas. The suggested areas covered in this plan have been selected by City Staff, Citizens, Citizens Advisory Committee and by studies and surveys that have been conducted.
City of Mission's housing goals includes increasing the supply of affordable housing, increasing homeownership, providing housing rehabilitation assistance, placing public housing residents in self-sufficiency programs, creating supportive housing and preventing homelessness.
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, and proposed HUD funded projects; in addition, a table depicts information about the project(s).
MAP 6 depicts Neighborhood Streets and HUD projects, as referenced in the table in MAP 5.
MAP 7 depicts Neighborhood Streets and HUD projects, as referenced in the table in MAP 5.
