 |
|
|
|
National Night Out Increases Community Awareness
The San Antonio Housing Authority (SAHA) and Southwest Housing are proud of the huge success of the grand opening celebration of Primrose at Mission Hills that took place on July 12, 2007 at 10:30 a.m.
T he grandopening attract ed impressive media coverage and a large crowd, including Councilman Roland Gutierrez, Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkission, State Representative Robert Puente and DoraGalvan, who attended as a representative of Congressman Ciro Rodriguez.
The collaboration between SAHA and Southwest Housing reflects the growing need for better housing options for senior citizens who want to live independently, but still need assistance. If you are one of these citizens, Primrose at Mission Hills is a great option for you.
Primrose at Mission Hills is an affordable, master-planned community designed specifically for independent senior citizens over the age of 55. From its beautifully landscaped grounds to its gorgeous designer interiors, we have attended to all the details so you can live your life to the fullest.
Residents of this new community will enjoy an exciting lifestyle filled with social gatherings, educational opportunities, celebrations and recreational outings. Primrose at Mission Hills also offers all the amenities, special features and services you need, as well as all the comforts and luxuries you deserve.
There is definitely something for everyone at Primrose at Mission Hills. Start enjoying life’s finer moments by living among friends in a community that is devoted to serving you in any way possible.
Even if you did not make it to the grand opening celebration last week, we encourage you to find more information about our impressive new housing development. And remember that there will always be a special place reserved for you at Primrose at Mission Hills
|
|
|
National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act Makes Headway in ‘O7
On July 31, 2007, the dream of housing authorities across the nation was achieved when the House Financial Services Committee passed the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act of 2007.
The bill, or H.R. 2895, was passed by the substantial winning vote of 45 to 23. According to the new bill, between $800 million and $1 billion will be distributed to state and local communities in order “to provide for the construction, rehabilitation and preservation of decent, safe and affordable housing for low-income families.”
The bill states that without increasing the federal deficit or the governmental budget, 1.5 million state and local housing units will receive special care and attention over the course of the next 10 years.
This bill is the boldest step taken in years that supports housing authorities and the low-income individuals living in their housing developments.
|
|
|
HUD Approves Buy-Back Option for Mirasol Homeowners
As of August 6, 2007, the eligible homeowners of the Mirasol single-family development now have the option to have their homes purchased back.
The San Antonio Housing Authority (SAHA) has confirmed that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has approved this recent amendment to the homeownership program. The amendment states that eligible homeowners (as of April 1, 2007) will have 180 days to decide whether or not they would like to repurchase their homes. If the homeowners opt to participate, they must release SAHA from all claims that arise from the condition of their homes. The homes will be bought back at the current Fair Market Value (FMV), and all second mortgages will be forgiven that are held by SAHA. This amendment was passed at the urging of the homeowners living in the Mirasol development.
“The offer is significantly better than the offer from SAHA because this offer allows us to forgive the second mortgage,” Alvarez said.
Mirasol Task Force Chairman Gordon Hartman says this amendment serves as a significant step toward the resolution of the problems related to the Mirasol homes.
“This is a sign of really giving closure to this issue,” said Hartman
|
|
PHA Spotlight: San Antonio Housing AuthorityArticle source: HUD Asset Management E-Newsletter, Issue 6 – July 2007
This month the Spotlight shares the experience of the San Antonio Housing Authority (SAHA) in its early adoption of “fee-for-service.” Fee-for-service is one of the key components of public housing’s transition to asset management.
SAHA operates 6,468 units of public housing and 12,000 Section 8 housing vouchers. In addition, it owns approximately 3,100 units of affordable housing.
The Spotlight spoke with Ed Hinojosa, SAHA’s Chief Financial Officer, and Gavino Ramos, from SAHA’s Corporate Relations Office, to understand why SAHA implemented fee-for-service earlier than required, how they approached this conversion, and the impact it has had on their agency.
PHAs are not required to convert to project-based budgeting and accounting, and in particular to a management fee approach, until fiscal years beginning July 1, 2007. However, you began using fee-for-service with your fiscal year beginning July 1, 2006. Why? We did it because we thought it would be simpler administratively and it would provide us with a stronger business model. We also believed that, due to a number of efficiency initiatives, we could operate the central office for the fees HUD published.
You have a large portfolio of non-public housing that you own. Had you previously used fee-for-service for that inventory? Interestingly, we didn’t. We managed that portfolio, in terms of overhead, under the public housing model, i.e., we allocated central office staff. When HUD came out with its asset management guidance we began thinking: “Why aren’t we doing this for our entire agency?”
Why is fee-for-service advantageous administratively? Like most PHAs, we historically maintained complex overhead allocation (cost allocation) methods for determining how much of, say, the Finance Department’s costs should be allocated to public housing, Section 8 vouchers, our local affordable housing, etc. As you can tell, we’re a fairly large and complex real estate organization. It is far simpler to establish a fee structure than to maintain the prior cost allocation plans. We pride ourselves in thinking and operating like a business and the new structure allows us to place the accountability for the property (AMP) where it belongs, with the property manager. Fee-for-services gives us a benchmark and we like the discipline and challenge of working under the fee structure.
Based on preparation of a reasonable phase-in plan, PHAs have until 2011 to comply with new management fees. You wouldn’t be doing fee-for-service unless you could live with these new fee schedules. Is that the case? The short answer is yes. We realized that we could make the numbers work. Of course, you have to remember that we have a large portfolio, so we may have an economy of scale that other agencies may not enjoy.
Organizationally, how close were you already to the asset management model? What types of changes were needed to transition? We were already moving in that direction. SAHA had decided that site-based management and maintenance would improve performance all-around. When the asset management model came through the pipeline, we were ready to provide the extensive training opportunities necessary to help our managers and maintenance staff make the transition. We were also prepared to arrange the appropriate transfers within SAHA to maximize the utilization of our existing staff. Inevitably, we have experienced some attrition, as is normal during major transitions; but overall we feel we have done very well.
What property managements services do you handle through fee-for-service and how did you make that decision? First, there are some services that, historically, we recognized would be best performed by contract. For example, we have always contracted for landscaping and extermination and, for the time being, we believe that it is better for us to purchase those services externally rather than attempt to handle them in-house. Next, we looked at what tasks we were performing internally and evaluated whether or not it would be better to go with a contracted vendor. Early on, we determined that it was costing us more to maintain a centralized trash collection crew than to hire a private trash collection vendor; so we contracted that task out. We kept the centralized trade group and some vacancy preparation functions in-house, but priced the services aggressively, meaning that we priced below the prevailing market. We gave our site managers the option of purchasing these in-house services at below-market prices or using an outside provider. Every six months we plan to re-evaluate the pricing of our trade group.
How successful have you been at this arrangement? We have now completed our first year under this reporting structure. The managers have liked the fact that they have the choice to determine what’s in the best interest of the property (AMP) in terms of price, responsiveness, and quality. Over time, we’ll learn what works best. In the meantime, we believe that this transition has made the remaining centralized trades shops more competitive and more responsive. There’s more accountability at the site (AMP) and in the trades group. There is also a much greater awareness and control of costs throughout the organization.
What was the response to the transition to asset management (e.g. giving site managers the ability to make decisions) and how has staffing changed at SAHA since the transition, if at all? As we progressed with our asset management planning and transition, we dealt with a number of staffing concerns – attrition, transfer of staff, and training needs. Basically, we are asking many people to do a different job than what was originally intended and some were not interested in shifting their role. However, we have been successful in retaining a majority of our staff. This year we will continue to asses methods of increasing central office revenue and making it more efficient. |
|
Rosemont at Highland Park: Recreational and Beneficial
Last November,amidst the addition of the finishing architectural touches, the first residents ofRosemont at Highland Park signed their leases and moved into their units.
In March 2007, the ambitious $16,980,480 constructio n contract was competed, and potential residents had 252 affordable housing units to choose from.
The 240,000 sq. ft.-property, managed by Southwest Housing Management, includes multiple community amenities, such as a playground, a club house, a swimming pool, a health club, on-site laundry and a computer room.
A social services program is also available to residents in the comfort of their own community. Some of the program’s features include an after-school program, adult education programs, health screening and immunization, family counseling, computer education courses, emergency assistance and relief, community outreach programs, vocational guidance counseling, social and recreational activities and welfare program assistance.
One-bedroom, two-bedroom and three-bedroom units between 750 and 1,100 sq. ft. are available. Each individual unit also has numerous comfortable features, such as ceiling fans, cable television, telephone-ready hookups, washer and dryer hookups, a dishwasher, an oven, a refrigerator, a microwave and a garbage disposal.
The citizens of San Antonio who are looking for a new home need look no further than Rosemont at Highland Park. Between the numerous amenities and the beauty of the architecture and scenery, Rosemont at Highland Park is sure to prove itself one of SAHA’s most impressive communities yet.
|
|
|
|