|
|||||
|
|
|||||
|
| Community Developement QuickLinks |
| Community Developement Block Grant |
| Housing |
| Economic Developement |
| Community Developement |
| Capital Improvements |
| Ranking Rating Criteria |
| Executive Summary |
Housing in the Uintah Basin is quite unique when compared to the rest of the state. We find that the cause and effect of the Homestead Act that brought settlers into the Uintah Basin and onto the Uintah-Ouray Reservation, along with other migration patterns have presented particular problems that require innovative solutions. The early homesteaders built homes on their farms instead of congregating in communities creating a sparse number of homes in the outlying areas. Trade and commerce centers were established along major travel routes. Those that have survived and grown over the years are now the Uintah Basin?s major cities and towns. Housing is more condensed in and around these locations, ?Rural and Country? is still the preferred lifestyle of most residents and every effort is made to preserve it.
Since the 1960?s the Uintah Basin has for the most part, been experiencing the effects of a boom and bust economy. Because the economy of the Region has been based largely upon the extraction of oil and natural gas, the area has at times experienced the rewards and sudden turbulence of rapid growth while at other times felt the disappointment of a failing economy.
The dramatic energy boom of the 1970's created an instant need for housing units to accommodate the rapidly expanding work force. Unfortunately, due to the need of available housing units, zoning ordinances and building codes were not enforced in order to facilitate the process. Mobile homes, especially older substandard units were allowed to be brought in - many of which are still in existence today.
After approximately ten years of doing everything possible to accommodate the fast paced growth, the oil prices became unstable and the demand for domestic oil substantially decreased. Many of those employed by the industry, or for companies which support that industry, were compelled to go elsewhere for jobs and a steady income. This caused severe damage to the housing market, especially within Duchesne and Uintah Counties. The mid 80's brought a large out-migration and saw vacancy rates explode to as high as forty-one percent. Many single family homes, condominiums and multiple housing unites were repossessed, abandoned or foreclosed upon.
Homes, and especially mobile homes, that are left unoccupied typically need extensive amount of repairs to make or keep them habitable. That requires great sums of money. Deficient, substandard and deteriorated is what the Uintah Basin faces with its housing stock.
H.B. 295
Utah Code Section 10-9-307 Cities and Towns
Utah Code Section 17-27-307 Counties
In 1996, the Utah Legislature passed H.B. 295 to mandate preparation of affordable housing elements to community general plans so that the communities would systematically assess their housing situations. The Division of Community and Economic Development with the aid of Bear West, developed a Utah Affordable Housing Manual designed to lead counties, cities and towns, into developing their own housing plans.
In addition to conducting public hearings, obtaining local elected officials approval and gathering data from various public agencies, the housing component has direct input from very low-low moderate-income clientele. As an ongoing process to gather relevant information from those served, need assessments are attached to program applications (Weatherization, Community Services, Heat, Community Development, Emergency Home Repair, etc.). The benefit that this process has proven to be invaluable.
Affordable Housing as defined by HUD is paying no more than thirty percent of the household income on housing.
Household income guidelines are established by HUD based on a county?s median income and size each household. The methodology used to estimate median family income is based on 2000 census data, a combination of local Bureau of Labor Statistics data and Census Divisional data.
The income limits are categorized into three basic areas according to Adjusted Median Income:These income guidelines are used to determine eligibility of individuals for housing programs, i.e. HOME, Community Development, Mutual Self-Help Housing, Emergency Shelter and other State and Federal funded programs.
HUD income guidelines as revised March 8, 2004 for the region are as follows:| Persons | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| DAGGETT | ||||||||
| 50% Very Low Income | 17600 | 20100 | 22650 | 25150 | 27150 | 29150 | 31200 | 33200 |
| 80% Low Income | 28150 | 32200 | 36200 | 40250 | 43450 | 46700 | 49900 | 53100 |
| DUCHESNE | ||||||||
| 50% Very Low Income | 16950 | 19350 | 21800 | 24200 | 26150 | 28050 | 30000 | 31950 |
| 80% Low Income | 27100 | 31000 | 34850 | 38700 | 41800 | 44900 | 48000 | 51100 |
| UINTAH | ||||||||
| 50% Very Low Income | 16950 | 19350 | 21800 | 24200 | 26150 | 28050 | 30000 | 31950 |
| 80% Low Income | 27100 | 31000 | 34850 | 38700 | 41800 | 44900 | 48000 | 51100 |
Fair Market Rents (FRMs) are estimated annually and effective October 1st of every year. They are based on 1990 Bureau of Census, American Housing Surveys and Random Dibit Dialing (RDD) Surveys. Base year estimates are updated using funding factors based on the Consumer Price Index data for rents and utilities or HUD regional rent chance factors from RDD Surveys. They are based on 40 percentile rents in the market area, thus do not typically reflect ?market rate? rents. They are set to assure that a sufficient supply of rental housing is available to program participants. Fair Market Rents do include a utility allowance estimated by local housing authorities. Fair Market Rents for manufactured housing are 30 percent of the applicable area?s 2 bedroom FMR.
| County | FRM0 | FRM1 | FRM2 | FRM3 | FRM4 |
| DAGGETT | |||||
| Fair Market | 352 | 481 | 639 | 802 | 898 |
| DUCHESNE/UINTAH | |||||
| Fair Market | 325 | 396 | 498 | 665 | 800 |
With this information local elected officials can evaluate what is currently taking place in their jurisdictions and can plan accordingly to encourage housing development that will increase their affordable housing stock.
Early in 2004 under the direction of the Department of Community and Economic Development, the Association of Governments throughout the state of Utah were instructed to conduct a windshield survey of the housing stock in the area that they served.
With the survey instructions in hand, three individuals drove through local neighborhoods where they took these photos to use as examples in determining the condition of each home.
Homes that were given this classification appeared to have roof and wall damage. A lack of skirting or the foundation was in question and the doors and windows seemed to be substandard or missing. Many of these homes currently had occupants, but were in serious need of rehabilitation.
The homes that were classified as deteriorated appeared to need obvious repairs. This included new roofing materials, window replacement, foundation repair, repainting, etc. The homes were very habitable, but were in urgent need of repairs.
The homes that received this classification appeared to be in good repair. Shingles had been updated, windows had been upgraded and foundations appeared to be in sound condition.
The homes that were classified as new had a fresh clean appearance and look as if they had been constructed within the last five years.
The windshield survey was conducted for the most part by two individuals, which gives the survey consistency. Every home in the region was not surveyed. All major areas were surveyed and their surrounding suburbs. It was determined that as many areas as were safe and accessible would be surveyed. Those areas that were extremely remote and questionable were left unevaluated.
Results of the windshield survey are as follow:
In the remote area of Daggett County, 505 single-family homes were surveyed. Of those, eight were new construction, which equated to two percent of the total. Five site built homes and three new mobile homes. 283 were in an acceptable condition, which equaled 56 percent of the total. 125 site built homes and 158 mobile homes. 185 or 37 percent of the total were considered to be deteriorated. 26 site built homes and 159 mobile homes. 29 or six percent were considered dilapidated. Six site built and 23 mobile homes. No duplexes or larger were noted in the area.
In the remote areas of Uintah County, 3768 single-family homes were surveyed. Of those 168 were new construction, which equated to four percent of the total. 154 site built homes and 14 mobile homes. 2213 were in an acceptable condition, which equaled 59 percent of the total. 1899 site built homes and 298 mobile homes. 1201 or 32 percent of the total were considered to be deteriorated. 751 site built homes and 445 mobile homes. And 186 or 5 percent were considered dilapidated. 89 site built homes and 97 mobile homes. Included in the above totals were 13 duplexes that were in acceptable condition and five that were in a deteriorated condition. One 4-plex was noted. It was in acceptable condition.
In Vernal City, 2480 single-family homes were surveyed. Of those 42 were new construction, which equated to two percent of the total. 42 site built homes and two mobile homes. 1455 were in an acceptable condition, which equaled 59 percent of the total. 1266 site built homes and 189 mobile homes. 952 or 38 percent of the total homes were considered to be deteriorated. 656 site built homes and 296 mobile homes. And 29 or one percent were considered dilapidated. Six site built homes and 23 mobile homes. Included in the above totals were 86 duplexes. Thirteen were new construction. 52 of the duplexes were in acceptable condition and 21 that were in a deteriorated condition. 50 4-plex was noted. 29 of those were in acceptable condition. 21 were in a deteriorated condition. 26 complexes were noted that were larger than five units. Of those, 15 were in acceptable condition and 11 were in a deteriorated condition.
In the Naples area, 358 single-family homes were surveyed. Of those, seven were new construction, which equated to two percent of the total. Seven site built homes and no new mobile homes. 252 were in an acceptable condition, which equaled 70 percent of the total. 234 site built homes and 18 mobile homes. 92 or 26 percent of the total were considered to be deteriorated homes. 69 site built homes and 23 mobile homes. Seven or two percent were considered dilapidated. Four site built and three mobile homes. No duplexes or larger were noted in the area.
In the Ballard area, 237 single-family homes were surveyed. Of those, six were new construction, which equated to three percent of the total. Six site built homes and no new mobile homes. 117 were in an acceptable condition, which equaled 49 percent of the total. 87 site built homes and 30 mobile homes. 102 or 43 percent of the total were considered to be deteriorated homes. 65 site built homes and 37 mobile homes. Twelve or five percent were considered dilapidated. Four site built and eight mobile homes. One duplexes or larger were noted in the area, it appeared to be in acceptable condition.
*Myton City and Tabiona Town's data is included in Duchesne County's Table
In the remote areas of Duchesne County, 3014 single-family homes were surveyed. Of those units 83 were new construction, which equated to three percent of the total. 76 site built homes and seven mobile homes. 1459 were in an acceptable condition, which equaled 48 percent of the total. 1125 site built homes and 334 mobile homes. 1196 or 40 percent of the total were considered to be deteriorated. 661 site built homes and 535 mobile homes. And 276 or nine percent were considered dilapidated. 121 site built homes and 155 mobile homes. Included in the above totals were two duplexes that were in acceptable condition and one that was in a deteriorated condition. One 4-plex was noted. It was in acceptable condition.
In Roosevelt City, 1638 single-family homes were surveyed. Of those 46 units were new construction, which equated to three percent of the total. 46 site built homes and seven mobile homes. 604 were in an acceptable condition, which equaled 37 percent of the total. 556 site built homes and 48 mobile homes. 952 or 58 percent of the total homes were considered to be deteriorated. 656 site built homes and 296 mobile homes. And 29 or two percent were considered dilapidated. Six site built homes and 23 mobile homes. Included in the above totals were 24 duplexes. 12 of the duplexes were in acceptable condition and 11 that were in a deteriorated condition. Fourteen 4-plexes was noted. 3 of those were in acceptable condition. 11 were in a deteriorated condition. 3 complexes were noted that were larger than five units. Of those, 2 were in acceptable condition and 1 was in a deteriorated condition.
In the Altamont area, 64 single-family homes were surveyed. Of those, three were new construction, which equated to three percent of the total. One site built homes and two new mobile homes. 54 were in an acceptable condition, which equaled 49 percent of the total. 43 site built homes and 11 mobile homes. 47 or 42 percent of the total were considered to be deteriorated homes. 20 site built homes and 27 mobile homes. One home or one percent was considered dilapidated. One duplex or larger were noted in the area, it appeared to be in acceptable condition.
In Duchesne City, 505 single-family homes were surveyed. Of those, ten were new construction, which equated to two percent of the total. Nine site built homes and one mobile homes. 223 were in an acceptable condition, which equaled 44 percent of the total. 179 site built homes and 44 mobile homes. 252 or 50 percent of the total were considered to be deteriorated homes. 140 site built homes and 112 mobile homes. 20 or four percent were considered dilapidated. Twelve site built and eight mobile homes. Five duplexes or larger were noted in the area, one appeared to be in acceptable condition with four in deteriorated condition.
The current housing stock in Daggett County that was surveyed totaled 505 homes. Of those homes, 165 were site built homes. Of those site built homes, twenty percent were in need of repair or replacement. 343 homes are mobile or modular homes. Of those, 53 percent are in need to repair or replacement. In total, 42 percent of the current housing stock is substandard.
The housing stock that was surveyed in Uintah County as a whole, totaled approximately 6843 homes. Of those homes, 5150 are site built homes. Of the total number of homes, 60 percent were in acceptable condition. 1519 of the total number of homes are mobile homes or modular units which equals 22 percent. 38 percent of the total number of homes in need of some kind of repair or replacement.
Likewise in Duchesne County, 5221 approximate homes were surveyed. Of those homes, 2340 homes were in an acceptable condition. That equals 45 percent. Of the 5221 homes, 1593 are mobile homes or modular units. That number equals 31 percent of the housing stock. Of the total number of the housing stock units, 53 percent are in need of some kind of repairs.
Overall, of the 12,569 units surveyed region wide, 27 percent of the homes were mobile homes. Of total number of units surveyed, it was also determined that 23 percent of the stock surveyed was substandard.
As each area of the region is quite distinctive in what their housing needs are, it can be surmised that the region is in need of an improved housing stock. In order to determine what was currently happening in the housing arena area jurisdictions supplied local research and input data to the Uintah Basin Association of Governments before the time of the publication of this document; the UBAOG generated the numbers for these counties, therefore, the numbers in the following tables may be different than those generated locally.
Prior to the model matrix from the Affordable Housing Manual, the Housing Department at the AOG compiled the following tables, also depicting housing need estimates. Data in the following tables was obtained from information obtained from the County Assessors Office?s. Any parcel that had a residential structure attached to it was counted thereby creating different housing categories. Through research of the local real estate trends it was determined that a household income of $31,500 would be able to purchase a $105,800.00 home.
The following range of categories were used in determining the number of affordable housing in each area:
In determining the current housing stock, the condition and price range of each area, county assessors? offices were contacted. In projecting the needs that each area will be requiring in the future, the studies and projections that were done by Ms. Pamela S. Perlich were used in generating the following determinations.
According to - Daggett County: Profile and Data Book prepared by Pamela S. Perlich, Ph.D. shows the population of Daggett County at 933 in 2000. Projected growth for the year 2030 is 1,208, which would be an average of .87% increase per year.
The market in Daggett County is leaning towards recreational type properties. As the area is so small, they are not part of any Multiple Listing Service so the number of homes that are currently on the market was unavailable. The 2000 median income is $30,833. If median income means 50 percent of the residents? income is below $30,833, the 467 residents or 173 households (based on 2.48 individuals per household) are below the median income.
| Target Market % of Median Income | Income | Maximum Housing Purchase | Maximum Rent/Mortgage Payment & Utilities |
| 30% | $9,250 | $30,833 | $231 |
| 50% | $15,417 | $51,388 | $385 |
| 80% | $24,666 | $82,221 | $617 |
| 100% | $30,833 | $102,777 | $771 |
| Location | # of homes below $20,000 | # of homes between $20,000 - $70,000 | # of homes $70,000 or above | Manufactured/Mobile Homes below $20K | Manufactured/Mobile Homes above $20K | Total Units | % of homes below $70,000 |
| Daggett County | 25 | 177 | 191 | 143 | 72 | 608 | 33.22% |
| Manila Town | 3 | 88 | 67 | 51 | 167 | 376 | 24.20% |
| TOTAL | 28 | 265 | 258 | 194 | 239 | 984 |
As referenced in - Duchesne County: Profile and Data Book prepared by Pamela S. Perlich, Ph.D, it shows the population of Duchesne County at 14,397 in 2000. Projected growth for the year 2030 is 19,545, which would be an average of 1.02 % increase per year.
The real estate market in Duchesne County has approximately 14 homes listed between the $20,000 to $70,000 dollar ranges at any given time. The 1999 median income is $31,298. If median income means 50 percent of the resident?s income is below $31,298 then 7,199 residents or 2,315 households (based on 3.11 individuals per household) are below the median income.
| Target Market % of Median Income | Income | Maximum Housing Purchase | Maximum Rent/Mortgage Payment & Utilities |
| 30% | $9,389 | $31,298 | $235 |
| 50% | $15,649 | $52,163 | $391 |
| 80% | $25,038 | $83,461 | $626 |
| 100% | $31,298 | $104,327 | $782 |
| Location | # of homes below $20,000 | # of homes between $20,000 - $70,000 | # of homes $70,000 or above | Manufactured/Mobile Homes below $20K | Manufactured/Mobile Homes above $20K | Total Units | % of homes below $70,000 |
| Altamont | 28 | 33 | 25 | na | na | 86 | 70.93% |
| Duchesne | 133 | 265 | 128 | na | na | 526 | 75.67% |
| Myton | 88 | 75 | 6 | na | na | 169 | 96.45% |
| Roosevelt | 254 | 507 | 655 | na | na | 1416 | 53.47% |
| Tabiona / Hanna | 23 | 13 | 11 | na | na | 47 | 76.60% |
| Unincorporated | 600 | 1024 | 673 | na | na | 2315 | 70.93% |
| TOTAL | 1126 | 1935 | 1498 | 0 | 0 | 4559 |
The Uintah County: Profile and Data Book prepared by Pamela S. Perlich, Ph.D shows the population of Uintah County at 25,297 in 2000. Projected growth for the year 2030 is 30,619, which would be an average of .65 % increase per year. The real estate market in Uintah County has 60 homes listed between the $20,000 to $70,000 dollar ranges. The 1999 median income is $34,518. If median income means 50 percent of the residents income is below $34,518 then 12,649 residents or 4,147 households (based on 3.05 individuals per household) are below the median income.
| Target Market % of Median Income | Income | Maximum Housing Purchase | Maximum Rent/Mortgage Payment & Utilities |
| 30% | $10,355 | $34,518 | $259 |
| 50% | $17,259 | $57,530 | $431 |
| 80% | $27,614 | $92,048 | $690 |
| 100% | $34,518 | $115,060 | $863 |
| Location | # of homes below $20,000 | # of homes between $20,000 - $70,000 | # of homes $70,000 or above | Manufactured/Mobile Homes below $20K | Manufactured/Mobile Homes above $20K | Total Units | % of homes below $70,000 |
| Ballard | 3 | 69 | 68 | 11 | 74 | 225 | 32.00% |
| Naples | 7 | 91 | 247 | 12 | 72 | 429 | 22.84% |
| Vernal | 68 | 1307 | 3306 | 143 | 659 | 5483 | 25.08% |
| Uintah County | 26 | 139 | 211 | 67 | 116 | 559 | 29.52% |
| Unincorporated | 33 | 222 | 258 | 90 | 218 | 821 | 31.06% |
| TOTAL | 137 | 1828 | 4090 | 323 | 1139 | 7517 |
The following tables indicate the estimated number of affordable housing units needed in the next 5 years. The estimates were derived by multiplying growth rates, then multiplying this number by the percentage of homes below $70,000.
*These numbers reflect the number of units that will be needed each year assuming that the growth rate is the same from 2000 to 2005 as it has been from July 1996 to July 2000.
The following tables indicate how many building permits that have been pulled in various entities throughout the region in the past five years. The blue tables indicate the permits for single-family dwellings. The yellow tables indicate the permits pulled that were for manufactured housing.
According to the Utah Affordable Housing Manual, many arms of Government take part in affordable housing issues:
Housing production in the United States is primarily a function of private industry and private ownership. The private market adequately meets the housing needs of people with moderate or high incomes. People with lower incomes, however, have always faced difficulty finding affordable, decent housing. Historically, the federal government has provided the funds, programs and rules to eliminate slums and to build housing for the poor. Although the land-use power of local governments is a critical factor, the role of local governments historically has been one of regulation and provision of service.
Until recently, most government intervention originates at the federal level. Federal housing policy underwent a dramatic change in the early 1980s. The President?s Commission of Housing concluded that housing was primarily a state of local responsibility. In 1983, federal housing policy was revised, discontinuing subsidiaries for low income housing construction and rehabilitation and focusing instead on federal housing allowances for individuals.
In 1990, the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (NAHA) was enacted, the first major federal housing legislation in more than a decade. The Act promotes the production of low-income housing through federal/local partnerships and existing HUD program. The centerpiece of the ACT - the HOME Investment Partnerships Program - provides grants, allocated by formula, to state and local governments to develop and support affordable rental housing and home ownership opportunities through the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, or rehabilitation of affordable housing including property acquisition, site improvement, and other expenses.
Changes in federal housing policies have increased the burden on state and local resources to deal with housing needs. The 1996 federal budget included a 25 percent reduction in HUD?s budget, with programs targeted to people with the greatest housing needs bearing the bulk of the reductions. The 1997 housing appropriates bill passed by Congress and signed by the President in September 1996 dropped the number of new families receiving housing certificates and vouchers to zero. While the federal role has diminished, the segment of the population affected by housing problems has broadened.
State and local governments have gradually assumed larger roles in the provision of low and moderate-income housing. Over the past ten years, the State of Utah has become much more involved in housing, especially the fostering of affordable housing delivery and expanding housing mobility and opportunity. Utah has established a variety of new resources and programs to promote affordable housing opportunities. In 1996, the Utah State legislature appropriated $3,000,000 to the Olene Walker Housing Loan Fund for acquisition, rehabilitation and new construction of affordable housing. In 1997, the Legislature appropriated an additional $1.5 million, and 1998, $2.5 million was requested for the fund. The Homeless Trust Fund is funded by state appropriations and voluntary contributions. In 2004 the Olene Walker Housing Trust Fund became the Olene Walker Housing Loan Fund and is now able to more fully utilize its funds to establish programs where low-income households will able to achieve anything from home repairs and renovation to home ownership.
The role of local governments historically has been one of regulations and provision of service. As responsibility shifts from the federal to the state level, opportunities for local government to affect housing are also increasing and the role of local government in housing is expanding. Whether assistance originates at the federal or state level, it is the local government that determines where and how it will be applied. Local governments bear the primary responsibility for accommodating, supporting, and regulating housing. As housing issues broaden from housing the poor to include affordability for the middle-income persons, housing the elderly, providing consumer protection, and other concerns, the role of the local jurisdictions continues to broaden.
The gap between affluent Americans and the nation?s poor has widened dramatically in the last two decades. The majority of American families struggle to make a mortgage payment, in many cases paying more than 30 percent of their adjusted gross income for housing. A substantial number of Americans are homeless and numbers increasing everyday. Single parents are prevalent in today?s society causing many youngsters to be raised in unstable environments without the sanctuary of a comfortable and safe home. Many of our nation?s elderly and special need populations are living in substandard housing. The high cost of housing, and the heavy burden it is placing upon Americans to house themselves and their families, is taking a toll upon the social fiber of this country.
The cause and effect of unaffordable housing is passed on to communities via declining economic basis, increased crime and social decay. In reverse, affordable housing for low-income residents will make a difference in family stability, in turn decreasing crime. A community?s economic base tax base will increase as home ownership increases and slum and blighted areas are eliminated. Adequate affordable housing stock for workers encourages investors to bring in business and industry.
Due to the downsizing of government, no level of government can shoulder the burdens of providing affordable housing to low income Americans in and of itself. It has become necessary for federal, state, and local governments to partnership and pool resources. The private sector, looking for opportunities to cut taxes, has become a new contributor for housing initiatives. Housing non-profits and foundations have sprung up across the country offering funding relief for affordable housing projects. It is becoming more evident that the majority of funding options will come through non-profits and foundations rather than government programs.
The concept of ?one-stop shopping? to fund a project is no longer feasible. Government programs, banks and lending institutions all require leveraging of other funds. ?Gap financing? has become a familiar term with many lenders. Fragmentation of all the various programs and their policies and regulations require artful networking and collaboration, staying current and being educated. Pulling a project together takes substantial effort and time to bring it to fruition.
The Uintah Basin Association of Governments (UBAOG) administers and delivers affordable housing programs. The agency has been a leader in promoting safe, decent, affordable, housing for the residents of the region that it serves. It also coordinates with and supports other agencies. In an effort to meet the growing demand for housing, UBAOG has applied for a variety of funding from various agencies and become very innovative. Rehabilitations, replacement, new construction, minor home repair, energy efficient methods and housing counseling are programs that the housing department delivers with pride and efficiency.
The Northeastern Housing Partnership is a coalition that consists of the Uintah Basin Applied Technology College, Duchesne County Justice Complex and the Uintah Basin Association of Governments. The Partnership was formed with the primary goal of constructing affordable housing units that would be placed in the Uintah Basin. By utilizing the occupational training outreach program of the Uintah Basin Applied Technology College and the student/inmates that are housed at the Duchesne County Justice Complex, labor costs are minimal. Through a revolving loan fund provided by the State of Utah, Community Development Division and administered by the Uintah Basin Association of Governments, materials are supplied for the construction of modular housing units.
The Duchesne County Justice Complex which houses more than 195 inmates, has constructed an enclosed work compound with platforms on which three houses can be constructed and a large metal building which houses construction tools. Those inmates who have a desire to work on the project are trained and tested by an instructor from the Uintah Basin Applied Technology College. When they have passed all necessary training, they are allowed to work on the homes within the compound under the watchful eye of the construction supervisor, with an hourly wage of about fifty cents per hour.
Homes are constructed in two halves for easier mobility. As much work as possible is done by the student/inmates, which will range from basic construction to cabinet making. Construction of a home takes twelve to fourteen weeks. Local subcontractors are hired to transport the home to its permanent location, crane it onto a foundation and set the home. Finish work takes two to three weeks depending on the work schedules of the subcontractors.
With this unique partnership, homes can be constructed for less than $70,000 and when attached to a permanent foundation can appraise for more than $90,000. The partnership not only helps to provide affordable housing for low-income individuals, but also trains inmates in a skill that will help them build self-confidence and a trade. Those skills will give them an increased chance of making it on the outside, thus limiting the repeat offender syndrome.
The Mutual Self-Help Housing program is an opportunity for low and very low-income families to obtain affordable housing through their own labor. UBAOG in cooperation with USDA/Rural Development and Rural Community Assistance Corporation are providing the opportunity for families in the Uintah Basin to build their own homes, lower their over all mortgage amount, and build equity through their willingness to work. Together, family?s work side by side during a twelve month construction period. No one is allowed to move into their home until all homes in the group are completed. There are several basic floor plans available to accommodate the family size of the qualifying participating member. All floor plans have a minimum of three bedrooms and two baths with a double car garage.
Families contribute more than 35 hours per week, in the evenings and on weekends, toward the construction of the homes. They work under the direction of a Construction Supervisor that teaches them the necessary basic construction skills. All work must meet local building codes and is inspected by the area building inspector. The families must complete sixty-five percent of the construction on each home.
The loan limits in the Uintah Basin stand at $136,000. Most loans for the Self-Help program are approx. $95,000, making the maximum payment approximately $600 depending on the closing interest rate. Loans that Rural Development provides with the Mutual Self-Help program can be subsidized to as low as 1% interest, making payments as low as $250. The subsidy is based on what the applicant qualifies for.
The HOME program in the State of Utah has under gone several changes during the last year. Eight agencies including UBAOG, throughout the State will receive funding for single-family rehabilitation. These projects vary from minor repair work to home replacement. The Uintah Basin Housing Advisory Board over sees these and other housing funds that come to UBAOG. Applications are taken from individuals throughout the Tri-County area, must meet HUD guidelines, live in the home for at least one year, and are in need of assistance, but are unable to obtain financing from any other source due to low income levels. After applications have been compiled and reviewed, they are brought before the Advisory Board for final decision.
Applicants must follow the housing policy of UBAOG as developed by the Advisory Board. Repair or replacement must follow HUD guidelines and each client must have some pay back ability.
The Uintah Basin Association of Governments under the direction of American Express provides Home Buyer Education Courses to members of the Ute Tribe. Tribal members are instructed on all aspects of financial literacy. They learn how the economy works and what role they play in local business. They learn how to open checking and savings accounts and are encouraged to do so. They are also instructed on how to develop a budget and stick with it. The class has been very successful to date having over 21 graduates. The course runs for eight weeks.
Emergency Home Repair also known as Critical Needs funding is obtained to provide emergency home repairs to eligible low-income households.
This money has been appropriated by the Legislature since 1984 and is funded by the state general revenues; allocations are generally grants and are based on the recommendations of the Governor?s Housing Development Advisory Council. The following types of projects have been funded in the past: roof repair, furnace replacement, ADA issues, bathroom repairs, water connections, and septic systems. The Uintah Basin Association of Governments administers the funds and oversees the projects that serve approximately 15 clients per year.
The major goal of the program is to enable low-income individuals and families, particularly the elderly, disabled, and households with children under the age of 6, to participate in energy conservation programs which will lessen the impact of the high cost of energy on their household budget, improve household health and safety, and reduce their dependence on the Low-Income Heating Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). The program also helps to reduce energy consumption as part of a national goal of energy independence by increasing the thermal efficiency of the homes of the poor, reducing the greenhouse gas CO22, and providing employment opportunities in both the public and private sectors.
The Uintah Basin Homeless Shelter - provided 24-hour supervision and case management services to assist in coordination of additional services needed for both emergencies and long term needs of shelter clients. The shelter was the only designated facility, with staff, to address the immediate needs and problems of homeless clients. In 1995-96, 99 individuals spent 168 nights housed in the two bedrooms, common kitchen, and living room facility. In 1997-98, it was closed for extensive rehabilitation (ADA and extra bedroom), and only served 22 individuals. In 1999-00 funding was applied for but reduced after the State Advisory Board concluded that services could be delivered more efficiently through local motels. Currently, the shelter is closed and vacant but the AOG hopes that it can be utilized for some type of housing service. To serve the needs of homeless in the area, the AOG?s Community Services Program administers funding for hotel rooms. Referrals are received from public and private agencies, and organizations throughout the Uintah Basin.
Uintah Basin Family Support Center - serves all three Counties and is located in Roosevelt. The Center is dedicated to the prevention of child abuse and neglect by providing support to parents and their children. The facility is open 24-hours a day for emergency and respite care. A safe homelike environment for children ages? birth to eleven are received and given balanced meals and nutritional snacks. House parents are committed to provide each child with a safe, nurturing and happy experience.
Uintah Basin Women?s Crisis Center - serves the needs of all three Counties and is located in Vernal. The Center can temporarily house two families that find themselves in a crisis.
Northeastern Counseling Center - provides mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services in Daggett, Duchesne, and Uintah Counties. They operate a four-plex housing unit in Vernal and a duplex in Roosevelt for the mentally disabled. This is a supportive residence that is visited once a day by a case manager.
Long Term Care Facilities - The Uintah Basin has two long-term care facilities, one in Roosevelt (59 bed) and the other in Vernal (85 bed) that are generally filled to capacity. Both facilities are planning to expand in the current year.
Assisted Living - Roosevelt facility is designed to respond to the individualized needs of those who are unable to continue to live alone but do not need the 24 hour skilled medical care of a nursing home. It provides Private rooms with 3/4 baths, 24-hour security and staffing, emergency Call system, telephone and television hookups and personal laundry and housekeeping services. It has 12 beds. An Assisted Living center recently open in Uintah County that offers services of the same nature, it also has 12 beds.
Senior Housing Project - Roosevelt Housing Authority - In Roosevelt a 19-unit apartment complex (two ADA units) for senior citizens can be rented to eligible seniors, 62 or older who meet income eligibility. There will be rent subsidies to assist low-income renters over a five-year period.
Senior Housing Project - Uintah Basin Assistance Council - In Vernal there is a 29-unit apartment complex (two ADA units) for senior citizens. The units will be available to senior citizens 62 or older and meet the 50 percent income eligibility.
Crown Projects - Uintah Basin Assistance Council - Rent to own for 15 years, with an option to purchase. A portion of the rent payment goes to a reserve account that assists with the down. This housing program offers assistance for individuals who meet the 50 percent income criteria.
Just recently USDA/Rural Development celebrated the 50th anniversary of the enactment of one of the most significant pieces of legislature passed in this century: the National Housing Act of 1949. Signed into law by President Truman, this act has enabled millions of rural American families to achieve the dream of home ownership.
It began as a program that allowed farm families to build homes on the land they were working but evolved into a housing program that now impacts every facet of rural American life.
The rural housing programs of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, begun with the passage of the Act in 1949, have played a key role in helping 75 percent of rural families become homeowners. Since its inception, these programs have helped more than 1.9 million families purchase their homes. Without this financing, most of these families would not have been able to obtain a mortgage to finance a home.
It is virtually impossible to image what rural farmsteads and towns might look like today without this infusion of capital. However, we know rural access to quality housing would be far more limited and the rural living standards nationally would be significantly lower.
Who are the families that have benefited from USDA?s direct-lending program for single-family homes? They are families who contribute to their communities in the most significant ways. They include teachers, nurses, local police, and fire fighters -- the entire scope of the rural population.
They also include very low-income families who also make contributions to their communities. These families have incomes which average around $18,000 per year, but some earn as little as $9,000 per year.
Many children have enjoyed growing up in a safe, decent home because of the Housing Act. Many elderly couples, as well as widows and widowers, have been able to remain in their communities as a result of housing built through the Act. USDA?s rural housing programs provide critical subsidies for homeowners and give them a boost on the road to prosperity.
Rural economies throughout the nation have been bolstered with the construction of each new home financed through USDA. On average, 2.5 jobs are created with each new home built. The wages and revenues generated for local and state governments also extend the impact of these federal dollars well beyond their initial reach.
But what does home ownership really mean for the millions of individuals who have benefited from USDA?s home loan program? Testimonials are plentiful. They include expressions of gratitude from those who had been homeless as well as those who had lived in unsafe and unsanitary housing. But what it really means is that someone has been able to say to him or herself. ?This is my home and I am very proud that it is.? Home ownership instills a sense of self worth and optimism about the possibilities for a brighter future.
People who own their own homes also generally take better care of their property and their community. The streets are often safer and cleaner, which attracts business investment and new jobs. The higher tax base leads to better public schools, another major draw for potential newcomers. The home mortgage interest deduction increases the consumer power of home owning families, who often pump that money back into the local economy by supporting local merchants.
In recent years, USDA has expanded its rural housing program menu. We now work with mortgage banks and community development corporation to leverage more financing dollars and provide home buyer education services. We also allow homebuyers to reduce the size of their mortgage by investing sweat equity in their homes, by working with their neighbors to build their house themselves.
These new approaches also have enabled hard-to-reach families in more remote communities and more minorities now participate in these programs.
The new century will bring new challenges, no doubt, but we can continue to build on this highly successful effort and make home ownership a reality for everyone in rural America.
The Rural Housing Service (RHS) of USDA Rural Development works to improve the quality of life for rural Americans by ensuring that they have access to safe, well-built, affordable homes. A house is more than a roof over our heads; it is often the cornerstone upon which rests our ability to live near good jobs and to gain access to good services. Home ownership builds economic stability and, over the long term, creates equity to finance education, business startups and retirement. People with equity in their homes not only take greater pride in them, they also become more involved in their communities. RHS thus not only helps rural people acquire homes, it helps build better lives and communities.
There are more than 2.5 million substandard housing units in rural America. RHS housing programs help address this challenge by annually financing new or improved housing for over 65,000 low - moderate - income families annually. Over 2 million families now own their homes as a result of the RHS rural homeownership programs.
RHS offers two types of home ownership loans: guaranteed and direct loans. The purpose is to provide financing with no down payment and at favorable rates and terms, either through a direct loan with RHS or with a loan from a private financial institution, which is guaranteed by RHS. These loans are for the purchase, construction, rehabilitation, or relocation of a dwelling and related facilities for low-or moderate - income rural persons.
Self-Help Housing Loans help groups of eight to ten low-income families build their own homes by providing materials and the skilled labor they cannot furnish themselves. The families must agree to work together until all homes are finished.
Apartment living is often an alternative for people who cannot afford the purchase price and maintenance costs of their own individual house. Rural Rental Housing loans are made to finance building construction and site development of multi-family living quarters for people with low, very low and moderate incomes. Some units are reserved for people aged 62 and over. Loans can be made in this program to construct housing that will be operated in cooperation form, but loan funds may not be used to finance individual units within the project.
Home Improvement and Repair Loans and Grants enable low-income rural homeowners to remove health and safety hazards from their homes and to make homes accessible for people with disabilities. Grants are available for people 62 years old and older who cannot afford to repay a loan.
Farm Labor Housing Loans and Grants enable farmers, public or private nonprofit organizations, and units of State and local governments to build, buy, or repair farm labor housing in either dormitory or multifamily apartment style.
These grants help low-income homeowners repair and rehabilitate their homes. Rental property owners can use them to repair and rehabilitate their units if they agree to make such units available to low-income families.
RHS can help subsidize monthly mortgage and rental payments, limiting these costs to no more than 30 percent of the adjusted monthly income of the applicant. These subsidies can be used for the home ownership, rural rental and farm labor programs described above.
The Section 8 rental voucher are the federal government?s major programs for assisting very low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled to rent decent, safe and sanitary housing in the private market. Since the rental assistance is provided on behalf of the family or individual, participants are able to fine and lease privately owned housing, including single-family homes, townhouses and apartments. The participant is free to choose and housing that meets the requirements of the program and is not limited to units located in subsidized housing programs.
Section 8 rental vouchers and rental certificates are administered locally by public and Indian housing agencies (HA). The HA receive Federal funds from the HUD to administer the Section 8 programs. A family issued a rental voucher or certificate and is responsible for funding and selecting a suitable rental unit of its choice, which may include its present unit. Rental units must meet minimum standards of health and safety, as determined by the HA. A rental subsidy is paid directly by the HA to the landlord on behalf of the participating family. The family then pays the difference between the actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program.
Eligibility for a rental voucher or certificate is determined by the HA based on the total annual gross income and family size and is limited to U.S. citizens and specified categories of non-citizens who have eligible immigration status. In general, the family?s income may not exceed 50% of the median income for the county or metropolitan area in which the family chooses to live. Median income levels are published by HUD and vary by location. The HA serving your community can provide you with the income limits for your area and family size.
During the application process, the HA will collect information on family income, assets and family composition. The HA will verify this information with other local agencies, your employer, and bank and will use the information to determine program eligibility and the amount of the rental assistance payment.
If the HA determines that your family is eligible, it will put your name on a waiting list, unless it is able to assist you immediately. Once your name is reached on the waiting list, the HA will contact you and issue to you a rental voucher or certificate.
If you are interested in applying for a rental voucher or a certificate, contact your local Housing Authority.
Since the demand for housing assistance often exceeds the limited resources available to HUD and the local housing agencies, long waiting periods are common. In fact, a HA may close its waiting list when it has more families on the list than can be assisted in the near future.
In selecting a family from its waiting list, an HA may give preference to a family who is (1) homeless or living in substandard housing, (2) paying more than 50% of its income for rent, or (3) involuntarily displaced. Families who qualify for these preferences will move ahead of other families on the list that do not qualify for any preference. Each HA has the discretion to establish other additional preferences to reflect other needs of its particular community.
The Section 8 rental voucher and rental certificate programs each place the choice of housing in the hands of the individual family. A very low-income family who has been selected by the HA to participate is encouraged to consider several housing choices to secure the best rental housing for its needs.
The rental unit must meet an acceptable level of health and safety before the HA can approve payments to landlords under the rental voucher and certificate programs. When the rental voucher or certificate holder finds a unit that it wishes to occupy and reaches an agreement with the landlord over the lease terms, the HA must inspect the dwelling and review the lease for approval. A rental voucher or certificate holder is also advised of the unit size for which it is eligible, based on family size and composition, and the applicable rent levels.
Under the rental certificate program, the rent for the unit usually may not exceed a maximum rent, determined by the HA, based on HUD standards established for each county and metropolitan area. The maximum rents are adjusted on a periodic basis to keep pace with increased costs of rent and utilities. Most rental certificate holders must lease a unit in which the total rent including utilities does not exceed the maximum rent. The rental certificate holder generally pays 30% of its monthly-adjusted income towards the rent and utilities.
In the rental voucher program, the HA determines a payment standard which is used to calculate the amount of rental assistance a family will receive. But does not affect the amount of rent a landlord may charge or the family may pay. A family that receives a rental voucher can select a unit that rents below or above the payment standard. The rental voucher family must pay more than 30% of its monthly-adjusted gross income for rent and utilities if the unit rent is greater than the payment standard. However, the family would pay less than 30% of its monthly-adjusted gross income if the total rent were less than the payment standard.
In the rental certificate program, a family generally pays either 30% of its monthly adjusted gross income, 10% of its monthly gross income, or its welfare rent payment toward rent, whichever is greater. The family?s share of the rent is calculated by the HA, but the family pays that amount to the landlord. In turn, the HA pays the remainder of the rent directly to the landlord. The family?s rent share changes when its income or family circumstances change, while the HA rental assistance varies according to the actual rent.
Under the rental voucher program, a family may choose a unit that rents for more than the payment standard and may pay more or less than 30% of its monthly adjusted gross income for rent. The HA calculates the maximum amount of rental assistance allowable, which is the difference between the payments standard and 30% of the family?s monthly adjusted gross income, and pays rental assistance. The amount of rental assistance paid by the HA changes with the payment standard while the amount the tenant pays varies with the actual rent. For example, if a family locates a unit that rents below the payment standard, the family would pay less than 30% of its monthly-adjusted gross income for rent. On the other hand, if a family decides to rent a unit above the payment standard, it would pay over 30% of its monthly-adjusted gross income for rent. The family?s rent share also changes when its income or family circumstances change.
A majority of the 3,142 members of the Ute Indian Tribe reside on approximately 2.3 million acres comprising the Uintah and Ouray Reservation in the northeast part of Utah in Uintah and Duchesne Counties.
Most of the tribal families reside in the communities of Whiterocks, Myton, Randelett, Ouray and Fort Duchesne, which is also where the Tribe?s administrative offices are located. The Ute Indian TDHE has developed 16 projects consisting of over 300 homes since 1967 when it was created. The UITDHE currently owns and manages 277 housing units consisting of 109 low-income rental units and 168 Mutual Help Homeownership units.
According to the Tribe's records, there are 7400 Indian families living on the reservation of which 90% are defined as low-income. Nearly 20% of the families are elderly. About 75% of the low income families live in substandard housing and slightly over half of them live in over crowded conditions. Other than the governmental agencies and tribal programs, there are very few employment opportunities for tribal members and the unemployment rate is about 80%.
Based on an analysis of the information and data available, the UITDHE estimates that there is a need for approximately 490 more rental units and 245 more homeownership units to meet the unmet needs for low-income tribal families on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation. Since most of the families are low-income the need for assistance is till very high. Therefore, the UITDHE plans to analyze and review the establishment of a homeownership-financing program during this plan year.
Only an estimated 10% of the Indian families residing on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation aren't low-income or members of the Ute Indian Tribe. Most of the families already reside in privately owned homes that are in good condition and do not require any assistance from the UITDHE. Therefore, the estimated need for Indian families on the reservation apply only to low-income Indian families.
The UITDHE has identified the following Financial Resources to carry out NAHADA activities. The UITDHE Doesn?t plan to make available any funds for leveraging additional resources this plan year.
Resources will be committed to perform the activities to achieve the objectives for this plan year (April 1, 1999 through March 31, 2000).
The most significant characteristic of the housing market on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation is that UITDHE managed and owned homes are for the most part the only homes available. There are virtually no other homes currently available from other public sources and there are very few privately owned homes locate don the reservation.
Therefore, the UITDHE plans to use NAHASDA grant funds to create and establish home ownership assistance programs along with developing new units to meet the unmet needs that the existing housing market cannot meet.
The UITDHE has not involved any other governmental entities in the development of this plan. The UITDHE has established a working relationship with USDA Rural Development to modernize elderly low-income homes through the 504 program. The UITDHE has also referred several Tribal families to Zions Bank in Salt Lake City, Utah as potential participants in the Section 184 Guaranteed Loan Program. The UITDHE has also communicated with the Habitat for Humanity organization for housing assistance on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation.
The UITDHE plans to coordinate the implementation of this plan with at least four Federal agencies in cooperation with the Ute Indian Tribe. The UITDHE will rely on NAHASDA grant funds for the activities described in this plan. Leases on trust lands used for housing sites along with other land transactions will be coordinated with the Dept. of Interiors?, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). There are no plans to have the UITDHE administer the BIA funded Home Improvement Program (HIP).
The UITDHE plans to continue to work with the Dept. of Health and Human Service?s Indian Health Service (IHS) to provide planning and inspection services for water and sewer improvements and additions for housing sites on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation.
As described in the Statement of Needs section of this plan, there is a shortage of decent and affordable homes on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation. Many tribal families live in substandard homes, which in many cases are overcrowded due to the shortage of housing.
Even though the UITDHE has developed over 300 homes since 1962, there is still a shortage of homes to adequately meet the housing needs of the over 3,000 members of the Tribe. It is the consensus of the governing body of the UITDHE that the UITDHE needs to continue to maintain the existing housing stock and develop additional affordable homeownership programs for low-income tribal families to address the identified needs.
The lack of adequate income by the head of the household to provide a decent and affordable house for his/her family is identified as the major reason there exists substandard and overcrowded living conditions on the reservation. Therefore, plans and strategies to use NAHASDA funds to provide support for low-income families.
The UITDHE will continue to protect and maintain the housing units developed pursuant to the 1937 Housing Act by performing routine and non-routine maintenance work on the units as needed and scheduled. As identified in the Financial Resources section of this plan, the UITDHE has allocated adequate funds to maintain the existing units and are continuing to modernize and rehabilitate existing units through the existing Comprehensive Modernization Plan.
The UITDHE does not plan to create or establish any new rental or homeownership programs during this plan year. However, the UITDHE does plan to investigate the possibility of establishing a home financing assistance program to make homeownership more affordable to low-income tribal families residing on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation during this plan year. We don?t plan to use any NAHASDA funds to capitalize any homeownership financing programs this plan year.
The UITDHE will continue to assist any local tribal members interested in participation in the Section 184 program.
The UITDHE plans to use NAHASDA funds to perform housing rehabilitation activities during this plan year as described in the goals and objectives of the1 (one)-year plan.
The UITDHE does not plan to demolish or dispose of any housing units developed under the 1937 Housing Act during this plan year.
The UITDHE plans to cooperate with the Tribal Social Services Department and welfare recipients by offering them the opportunity to fulfill their community service or work obligations in accordance with the Ute Indian Tribe and State of Utah, Department of Social Services Welfare Reform guidelines. The UITDHE doesn?t anticipate incurring any expenses.
BIA provides Law Enforcement for the entire Uintah and Ouray Reservation utilizing 9 officers. The Ute Indian tribe provides 5 Security Officers in the communities on the reservation.
These officers patrol the communities and protect the Tribal buildings and facilities from vandalism and theft. The UITDHE?s Resident Organization plans to expand the organization to include more crime prevention activities. Such crime prevention activities include installing additional security lighting in the communities as needed along with installation of security fencing in existing rental projects as determined by the Resident Organization.
The Ute Indian Tribal Council has designated the former Ute Indian Housing Authority as the Ute Indian Tribally Designated Housing Entity (UITDHE) by resolution 98-087 dated March 24, 1998 in accordance with the Native American Housing and Self Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA). Therefore, the Ute Indian Tribally Designated Housing Entity will be responsible for the activities described in this plan.
A 6 member Board of Commissioners governs the UITDHE. The commissioners establish and adopt policies and the UITDHE staff implements and administer the adopted policies under the direction of Felecia Foolbear, newly appointed UITDHE Executive Director. The UITDHE staff of 11 is responsible for the management of all 277 housing units currently owned and managed by the UITDHE.
The UITDHE staff works closely with the program administrators of the Ute Indian Tribe and maintains a good line of communications, which prevents the duplication of services to tribal members. The close working relationship with Ute Indian tribe will enable the UITDHE?s staff to successfully implement the activities described in this plan.
The 1-Year Plan section of the Tribal Housing Plan must contain information, relating to the upcoming fiscal year for which assistance is to be made available, including the following:
A statement of the goals and objectives to be accomplished during the period that is measurable as determined by the Tribe/UITDHE.
The 5-Year Plan section of the Tribal Housing Plan must contain with respect to the 5-year period beginning with the fiscal year for which the plan is submitted, the following information:
The Mission of the Ute Indian Tribally Designated Housing Entity is to provide affordable and decent housing for the Tribal families residing on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation.
Alleviate the acute shortage of decent, safe and sanitary housing that presently exists on the Reservation by utilizing all available resources.
Objective 1. Plan for and develop 30 new rental units within the service area.
Objective 2. Provide information for homeownership opportunities through the utilization of Section 184 Loan Guarantee, USDA-Rural Development Funding and other home funding programs for eligible families.
Objective 3. Rehabilitate sub-standard housing under the TDJE?s jurisdiction.
Objective 4. Purchase vacant and abandoned units to rehabilitate and place into rental system.
Provide for the development of infrastructure to accommodate projected community growth.
Objective 1. Evaluate and analyze needs for the development of the reservation infrastructure.
Objective 2. Provide the funding necessary to develop the infrastructure for each site or project area.
Teach residents through educational programs how to maintain their homes in a safe and sanitary condition.
Objective 1. Expand the existing Resident organization to address housing issues and concerns and to coordinate the efforts to improve living conditions.
Objective 2. Provide a housing inspector to evaluate conditions and address concerns of residents.
Objective 3. Solicit the assistance of other resource agencies in education residents on public safety and sanitation matters.
Objective 4. Provide small training workshops on the various types of cleaning and landscape techniques.
Maintain and manage the current assisted stock in an acceptable manner.
Objective 1. Identify need and correct housing inadequacies.
Objective 2. Maintain and provide an adequate staff.
Objective 3. Develop working relationship with regional and national housing organizations, financial institutions, government agencies and planning organizations.
Objective 4. Develop closer working relations with Tribal Departments, i.e. Water systems, Sanitation, Social Services, Law Enforcement and Youth Program.
Objective 5. Provide a safe environment to enhance the well being for the communities.
The Uintah Basin experiences a wide range of homelessness issues. With our vast geographic area and the economy relying primarily on oil and gas production, we see great variations in homelessness needs and population. Each year our homeless population increases. The majority of our homeless population five years ago was transients going through the area. The majority of our homeless population now is local residents. When looking at this there are several factors that have contributed to this. One is that as oil and gas production increases in the area, creating new higher paying jobs, landlords are bombarded with individuals seeking housing. Because of the demand, the rental rates increase thus making it harder for the lower paid long-term residents to afford their rent.
Another factor is the decrease and limited availability of Section 8 Subsidized Housing Vouchers and subsidized housing units for low-income residents. A majority of families are experiencing rent burdens of 60-70% of their gross income. When these families experience an emergency situation such as vehicle repairs, their limited incomes cannot afford both rent and the cost of the repairs. They need the vehicle to continue working, so they get behind on their rent, face possible eviction and homelessness.
HUD's definition of homelessness is a person who resides in a place not meant for human habitation, such as cars, parks, sidewalks, abandoned building, or on the street. It can also be a person who resides in an emergency shelter, transitional housing or supportive housing for homeless persons. HUD does not define homelessness as several families living under the same roof. In the Uintah Basin it is not uncommon for there to be up to three families living under the same roof, this is especially true with the Native American population. Since January of 2004, we have assisted 68 households (170 individuals) with homeless issues, such as motel vouchers, rental/deposit assistance, or mortgage foreclosure assistance. Of those households, 48 of those meet HUD?s definition of homeless. Of the 170 individuals, 79 were children, 28 were single parent females, 59 were Native American and 34 individuals had no source of income.
The following graphs depict the numbers of homeless individuals by various demographic factors that we have served from 2001-2004.
* Numbers for 2004 are not a complete representation of the homeless population.
The following graph shows the increase in Uintah Basin?s homeless population from 2001-2004. Numbers for 2004 are not a complete representation of the homeless population.
The Uintah Basin Association of Governments receives Emergency Shelter Grant and Community Services Block Grant funds to help with homelessness issues. We work with a homeless individual on a case by case basis. We provide motel vouchers, emergency food boxes, referrals to Department of Workforce Services for job placement and other services, and the local housing authorities. We work with the individual on a plan for permanent housing, which includes financial assistance for the 1st months rent or deposit. We also provide homeless prevention in the form of eviction assistance and mortgage match payments.
Resources in our rural area are very limited and affordable housing is difficult to acquire. There are very few subsidized rental apartments and most have a one year waiting period. In the past we operated a homeless shelter in the area, but found that it was not adequate for the needs. We are currently working on a plan to renovate the old shelter into a transitional housing unit that will accommodate a household for approximately six months to a year, working the household towards home ownership. During this time period, the household will be required to find and maintain employment, establish credit, attend household and budgeting classes, apply for a mortgage loan, etc. We will be seeking funding from various funding sources such as the Continuum of Care, Emergency Shelter Grant, Community Development Block Grant, and the Olene Walker Housing Loan Fund. It is our hope that with this type of assistance a homeless individual will obtain permanent housing and have the necessary skills to maintain that housing so as to never be homeless again.
The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing because of:
The Fair Housing Act covers most housing. In some circumstances, the Act exempts owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single-family housing sold or rented without the use of a broker, and housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members.
In the Sale and Rental of Housing: No one may take any of the following actions based on race color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status or disability:
In Mortgage Lending: No one may take any of the following actions based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status or handicap (disability):
In Addition: It is illegal for anyone to:
If you or someone associated with you:
your landlord may not:
See Affordable Housing Summary
This component of the AFFHP discusses if impediments exist, and if so, what solutions can be provided to overcome them.
Income is often the major obstacle to home ownership. When all other elements are removed, income is the determining factor of an individuals? ability to own their own homes. Income appears to be the major impediment for home purchasing by the region?s most prevalent non-white population, as well as disabled, single individuals of either gender, and especially by single mothers.
Another factor that can be an obstacle is the home loan. Sometimes getting a home loan can be confusing, intimidating and scary. An individual needs to ask questions about the advantages and disadvantages of each type of home loan available to them. Additionally, they need to know if they qualify for assistance that can lower the down payment, or closing costs. In some cases they may be eligible for special interest rates. The ?Biggest Investment? inmost individuals life, is their home. Individuals seeking home loans need to be aware of the following:
There are many different factors that can influence a selection on a mortgage, but the most important are these:
Fixed rate loan - the interest rate and monthly principal will stay the same (taxes and insurance may increase.
Adjustable Rate Mortgage (ARM) - this allows the interest rate to change at specific Adjustment intervals over the term of the loan. Interest rates declines and increases are based on the financial index used by the lender and are limited by other provisions of the loan.
With an ARM, a client can generally qualify for a higher loan balance, with more flexible provisions, than with a fixed rate mortgage. This is due to the interest rate in the first year of the loan usually being lower.
Payment amounts may fluctuate with an ARM and decrease in the loan balance will not be as predictable as with a fixed mortgage rate.
Be cautious if the initial interest rate on an ARM is considerably less than offered by other lenders. Ask about the anticipated interest rates during the second and third year to see if rates could change even if the index stays the same.
Convertible ARM loan - This allows a client, for a fee and after an initial waiting period, to convert your ARM to a fixed rate loan. Conversion details and availability of this loan vary.
Consider a fixed rate loan if -
Consider an ARM if -
Federal Housing Administration (FHA) means that they have insured the repayment of the loan to the lender. Because there is less risk involved for the lender, a smaller down payment is often possible. But FHA loans require the borrower to pay mortgage insurance premiums. Both fixed rate and adjustable rate loans are available.
Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) refers to home loans guaranteed by the VA. On a primary residence, the guarantee b the VA reduces the risk for the lender, so that qualified veterans may obtain mortgages from an approved lender without a down payment.
Conventional financing refers to home loans that have not been insured by the FHA or VA. These loans may require a larger down payment, or the purchase of private mortgage insurance. Both fixed rate and adjustable loans are available with Conventional financing.
Currently, there are two conventional banks represented within the Uintah Basin. Neither has a mortgage loan officer assigned to any of their branches within the Region. All loan requests for the purchase of property here must be processed and approved by loan officers located in their corporate offices. Local managers recognize the need to localize the authority for making mortgage loans and are constantly pursing upper level management for the means to fulfill this need. Presently there does not appear to be any ?red-lining? here, as there was a decade ago, but it is obvious that the corporate officers of these banks are tenuous when they are asked to approve real estate loans of any type for clients in the Uintah Basin.
There are two major mortgage companies doing business in all three counties within the Uintah Basin. The majority of the real estate loans in the Uintah Basin are arranged by thee two companies. Both companies are national organizations with branches throughout the country. The loan officers of thee two companies are very knowledgeable regarding available funding programs and are adept at fitting needs to resources.
Although all state and federally assisted programs available for home financing are utilized b these companies, the most frequently used programs to qualify low-to-moderate income (LMI) buyers are Utah Housing Finance.
The Utah State Legislature established the Utah Housing Finance Agency (UHFA) in 1975 to provide decent, safe and sanitary housing for low and moderate-income individuals of the State. UHFA is a self-supporting, public agency which finances, develops and helps preserve affordable housing opportunities for lower income families and individuals throughout Utah. Mortgages are funded through the sale of tax-exempt bonds, which are the sole obligation of the UHFA and are repaid with money received from payments of mortgage loans, not tax dollars.
All UHFA mortgage are a fixed interest rate for 30-years. Generally UHFA interest rates are considerably lower than conventional mortgage rates; therefore qualifying homebuyers are able to afford home ownership by taking advantage of lower monthly mortgage payments.
Two Point Option - A low interest rate option have two discount points which must be paid by either the home buyer or the seller at closing (a ?point? is equal to 1% of the total amount borrowed).
Zero Point Option - A slightly higher fixed interest rate option that does not require any points to be paid at closing by the home buyer or the seller of the home.
CHAMP - One of the biggest stumbling blocks for first-time homebuyers is being able to save enough for a down payment and closing costs. For this reason, UHFA allows a 4% secured subordinate note to be used or down payment and closing costs.
There are three advantages to purchasing a home within a targeted area. They are:
All of Duchesne County has been designated by the Utah Housing Finance as a "targeted area."
The following table shows average values of homes in the region according to the 2000 census study. The percent of total affordable homes reflects homes that are below $80,000, which is considered to be affordable.
The impact of the dramatic energy boom of the 1970's created an instant need for housing units to accommodate the rapidly expanding work force. Unfortunately, because of this need, zoning ordinances and building codes were not fully enforced. Local government officials did everything possible to facilitate the availability of additional housing. As a result, substandard housing units were allowed to be built or brought in - many of which are still in existence. The cost of rehabilitation of housing of this type is often very high which discourages many prospective buyers. Planning and zoning departments and government officials, indicate that there is now an effort to upgrade zoning ordinances, as well as stringently enforce those which are already in effect. There is still much to be done in standardizing building and zoning throughout the area in an effort to make it equal.
Generally, throughout the region, urban areas have zoning was permitting higher density housing which allows for more multiple family housing development. It is more difficult to place pre-manufactured homes within most city limits. However, the counties allow the placement of mobile homes on private lots in unincorporated areas. For this reason mobile homes and other pre-manufactured homes are filling some of the need for affordable housing in the unincorporated areas of the region.
ADA Housing - Over the past years it has been difficult for disabled individuals within the Uintah Basin to acquire housing that is accessible to them. With the exception of apartment complexes in Roosevelt and Vernal, existing housing has not been able to meet the need. Stairways, narrow doors, inadequate bathroom facilities, and other hindrances to comfortable living, all contribute to impediments for disabled individuals.
Senior Housing - In 1993 the Uintah Basin Association of Governments prepared a needs-assessment for seniors and seniors with disabilities. This study projected that the elderly population of the Uintah Basin will almost double within the next twenty years. The population over the age of 75 years will increase from 1,348 in 1990 to 2,317 b the year 2010. These facts indicate a dramatic increase in the number of persons who will require assistance with such services as home delivered meals, home health services, congregate meals, transportation, day care, recreational programs, and housing/assisted living.
Recognizing the need for individuals with a disability, and the senior population, housing for these target groups are being constructed in Roosevelt and Vernal. (See Housing Resources)
In evaluating the information contained in the regional summary of affordable housing needs, Table 2.11, the following housing trends depict the needs of very low, low-moderate income individuals.
In 1990 there was a significant deficiencies in all income levels
Certain factors need to be considered before acting on these conditions:
Based on the needs assessment submitted by the local governments, the following needs were identified in relationship to affordable housing:
(See housing resources)
The following information was taken from the housing needs assessments submitted by each entity. It is an overall view of regional housing needs.
When reviewing the needs assessments from all entities, there were several commonalities. The similarities are discussed in the table below, which identifies regional barriers and strategies for housing.
| Regional barriers to obtaining vision | Regional strategies to overcoming barriers |
| Lack of personal funds that are needed to achieve home ownership | Present information regarding American Dream Downpayment Innovative (ADDI) to local entities so that they can be aware of funding resources |
| Lack of funding and resources | Identify and secure funding sources Coordinate with agencies to determine grants available in the area Continue to work with and support regional housing agencies in their pursuit of funding Work with agencies and media to distribute information on available resources |
| Insufficient ADA homes Insufficient senior and disabled homes | Identify and obtain funding to rehabilitate existing housing to meet ADA standards so as to accommodate senior and disabled individuals Encourage local housing agencies to develop ADA housing |
| Availability of property | Develop building sites Utilize proper planning |
