Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Hearing to Adopt Resolution No 2025-32 Approving the (2) �e�TiNT-` 2000 Main Street, c ps,F;;; °2 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 City of Huntington Beach 9r: - ` g APPROVED 6-0-1 (GRUEL—ABSENT) .,COUNTV Ca�\o�, File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Travis Hopkins, City Manager VIA: Jennifer Villasenor, Director of Community Development PREPARED BY: Charles Kovac, Housing Manager Subject: Public Hearing to adopt Resolution No. 2025-32 approving the 2025-26 Annual Action Plan, 2025-29 Consolidated Plan, 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan, and 2025-29 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing for Use of CDBG and HOME Funds Statement of Issue: The City of Huntington Beach receives annual federal entitlement grants from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) programs. To remain eligible for these funds, HUD requires the City to submit the following planning documents: • Five-Year Consolidated Plan • Citizen Participation Plan • Assessment of Fair Housing (prepared regionally) • Annual Action Plan (submitted each year) These documents identify the community's needs and priorities, describe how CDBG and HOME funds will be used, and outline how the public will be involved in the process. In accordance with HUD regulations, these documents were made available for a 30-day public review and comment period that ran from April 4, 2025 to May 6, 2025. During this time, the draft plans were posted on the City's website, and hard copies were made available at City Hall and local libraries. The public hearing on May 6, 2025, fulfills HUD's requirement for formal adoption of the following documents: • 2025-26 Annual Action Plan • 2025-29 Consolidated Plan • 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan • 2025-29 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing . City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by Legistarw 312 File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 Financial Impact: The City has not yet received its 2025-26 CDBG and HOME grant allocations from HUD, which are expected to be released in mid-May. As a result, the estimated budgets for these programs are based on the current 2024-25 funding levels. • Estimated CDBG funds: $1,380,063 • Estimated HOME funds: $984,428 These estimates include projected entitlement amounts, carryover funds from prior years, and program income (such as repayments from previously issued housing loans). Approval of the 2025-26 Annual Action Plan, 2025-29 Consolidated Plan, 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan, and the 2025-29 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing will not impact the City's General Fund. Recommended Action: A) Conduct a public hearing on the following documents: 1. 2025-26 Annual Action Plan (for CDBG and HOME funding) 2. 2025-29 Consolidated Plan 3. 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan 4. 2025-29 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing B) Approve and adopt Resolution No. 2025-32, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Approving the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan, 2025-2026 Action Plan, 2025-2029 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, and the 2025-2029 Citizen Participation Plan for Federal Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnerships Programs;" and C) Authorize the City Manager to sign all necessary documents. Alternative Action(s): Do not approve, and direct staff accordingly. If the City does not submit the approved documents to HUD within 60 days of receiving the final allocation amounts, it may be considered out of compliance and risk losing CDBG and HOME funding. Alternatively, the City Council may choose to modify the proposed funding recommendations for specific CDBG and HOME projects and programs. Any modifications must remain within the overall budget limits and program requirements outlined in this report. Analysis: Overview of CDBG and HOME Programs The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) programs are federal grant programs administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). These programs provide funding to local governments to support housing, infrastructure, and community development activities. The City of Huntington Beach City of Huntington Beach Page 2 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by Legistar"" 313 File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 receives annual entitlement allocations from both programs. To continue receiving these funds, the City must prepare and adopt a series of planning documents that identify local needs, set priorities, and describe how funds will be used. The planning documents presented for adoption include the following: • The 2025-29 Consolidated Plan, which sets the strategic vision for the use of CDBG and HOME funds over the next five years; • The 2025-26 Annual Action Plan, which identifies specific projects and programs to be funded in the upcoming fiscal year; • The 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan, which outlines how the City will engage the public in the planning and implementation process; and, • The 2025-29 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, a HUD-required analysis of barriers to fair housing that supports long-term planning. Together, these documents establish the policy and funding framework for more than $9 million in projected federal funds to address local housing and community development needs. - Community Needs and Strategic Priorities The 2025-29 Consolidated Plan is the City's strategic roadmap for investing HUD funds. It is based on a combination of local data, community feedback, and HUD requirements. The City's estimated five-year funding includes: • CDBG: $5.9 million • HOME: $3.5 million • Total: Approximately $9.4 million The plan identifies seven priority areas: 1. Homeless Services 2. Community Services 3. Services for Special Needs Populations 4. Housing Needs 5. Community Facility Needs 6. Infrastructure Needs 7. Other Housing and Community Development Needs To develop these priorities, the City conducted a Housing and Community Development Needs Survey in 2024 and held two public meetings to gather feedback on community needs. Annual Action Plan The 2025-26 Annual Action Plan serves as the first-year implementation plan under the 2025-29 Consolidated Plan. It outlines how the City will use its estimated CDBG and HOME allocations during the 2025-26 fiscal year to address the priorities identified in the five-year plan. The Annual Action Plan includes: City of Huntington Beach Page 3 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by Legistarn, 314 File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 • A summary of the recommended programs and projects; • Proposed outcomes and performance measures; and, • Funding levels for public services, capital projects, and administration. The Annual Action Plan also functions as the City's formal grant application to HUD for the upcoming program year. HUD regulations require that CDBG and HOME funds be used primarily to benefit low- and moderate -income households. To ensure that funding addresses local needs, the City issues a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) and invites nonprofits and community-based organizations to apply for CDBG public service funding. The Citizen Participation Advisory Board (CPAB) reviews all eligible applications, hears oral presentations from the applicants, receives public comments, and makes funding recommendations to the City Council. These recommendations are summarized in Table 2 of Attachment 1 and detailed in the 2025-26 Annual Action Plan (Exhibit B of Attachment 2). 2025-26 CDBG and HOME Funding Levels As of the date of this report, HUD has not released the City's official 2025-26 CDBG and HOME allocations. Therefore, the funding levels used in this report are based on the City's 2024-25 allocations, along with projected carryover and program income. Estimated funding for the 2025-26 program year includes: CDBG Funds • Entitlement allocation: $1,121,195 • Carryover funds from prior years: $228,868 • Program income (e.g., housing loan repayments): $30,000 • Total estimated CDBG resources: $1,380,063 HOME Funds • Entitlement allocation: $538,328 • Carryover funds from prior years: $321,100 • Program income: $125,000 • Total estimated HOME resources: $984,428 These estimated budgets support a variety of eligible activities, including public services, housing preservation, code enforcement, capital improvements, and program administration. The actual allocations will be incorporated into the final Annual Action Plan prior to submission to HUD. Adjustments to specific funding categories will follow the proportional increase or decrease strategies outlined later in this report, ensuring compliance with HUD funding limits. City of Huntington Beach Page 4 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by LegistarTM 315 File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 Funds Available for CDBG Public Services Programs Under federal regulations, the City may allocate up to 15 percent of its annual CDBG entitlement toward public service activities. These programs are intended to improve community services that support low- and moderate-income residents. Based on the estimated CDBG entitlement allocation funding level of$1,121,195, maximum amount available for public service programs in 2025-26 is $168,179. Eligible public service activities may include services related to: • Health and mental health services • Substance abuse treatment • Employment assistance • Childcare • Education • Recreation • Welfare and supportive services These funds are awarded through the City's annual NOFA process and are recommended by the CPAB based on community needs and program impact. Funds Available for CDBG Capital Projects CDBG regulations allow the City to use a portion of its funding for eligible capital improvements and neighborhood enhancement projects that benefit low- and moderate-income residents. These projects typically address long-term infrastructure needs, improve public facilities, and support neighborhood revitalization efforts. For the 2025-26 program year, the City estimates that $987,645 will be available for CDBG capital projects. Eligible uses include: • Public facility improvements, including ADA accessibility upgrades • Code enforcement in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods • Infrastructure improvements such as sidewalks, curbs, and drainage • Rehabilitation and preservation of existing housing • Other capital activities that serve low- and moderate-income residents These investments help ensure neighborhoods are safe, accessible, and well-maintained, and align with the community priorities identified in the Consolidated Plan. Funds Available for HOME Capital Projects The HOME program provides funding to support a range of housing-related activities that benefit low- income households. For the 2025-26 program year, the City estimates that $790,595 will be available-- for HOME capital activities. City of Huntington Beach Page 5 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by Legistar'TA 316 File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 Eligible uses include: • Temporary rental assistance for income-eligible households • Assistance for households at risk of homelessness • Support for mobile home residents through tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA) • Set-aside funding for future projects in partnership with a qualified Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO), as required by HUD HOME funding allows the City to provide targeted assistance to residents facing housing instability and to respond flexibly to changing community needs. All uses of HOME funds must comply with federal program requirements and focus on improving housing opportunities for low-income individuals and families. Funds Available for Program Administration HUD allows the City to use a portion of its CDBG and HOME funding for program administration and planning activities necessary to carry out the programs. For 2025-26 the amount available for CDBG Administration (up to 20% of the total CDBG entitlement funds) is estimated at $224,239. The amount available for HOME Administration (up to 10(Yo of the total HOME entitlement funds) is estimated at$53,833 In addition to the 2025-26 HOME administration funds, staff proposes to use approximately $140,000 in unspent HOME administration funds from prior years (fiscal years 2020-21 and 2021-22). These funds will support the following activities: • Preparing the 2026-27 Annual Action Plan • Compliance monitoring of existing affordable housing projects • Fair housing services (proposed to be provided by the Fair Housing Foundation) • Program administration, grant management, and regulatory compliance Fair housing services are a HUD mandated activity and include education, tenant/landlord mediation, unlawful detainer assistance, and investigations of housing discrimination complaints. Fiscal Year 2025-26 Funding Recommendations As part of the annual funding process, the City issued a NOFA and invited eligible nonprofit and community-based organizations tb apply for CDBG public service funding. Applications were reviewed by the CPAB as part of a publicly noticed process. Following the NOFA and application period, the CPAB held a public meeting on January 30, 2025, to hear presentations from applicants and receive community input. On February 20, 2025, the CPAB reconvened to deliberate and develop its funding recommendations. The City Council also reviewed the proposed funding allocations at a joint study session with CPAB on March 18, 2025. Recommended allocations are based on estimated entitlement amounts, projected carryover, and City of Huntington Beach Page 6 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by LegistarTm 317 File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 anticipated program income. Final adjustments will be made once HUD releases the City's official 2025-26 grant allocations. CDBG Public Services - $168,179 (15% cap) The CPAB recommended funding for six public service programs that benefit low- and moderate- income Huntington Beach residents: • Children's Bureau -After-school youth enrichment program (Oak View): $40,530 • Robyne's Nest- Transitional services for vulnerable youth: $40,529 • Senior Outreach Care Management- Homebound senior care services: $30,530 • Project Hope Alliance - Case management for at-risk youth: $20,530 • Pathways to Independence - Mentorship and housing support for young women: $20,530 • StandUp for Kids - Street outreach and support for homeless youth: $15,530 CDBG Capital Projects - $987,645 • Code Enforcement: $246,506 • Housing Rehabilitation Loans and Grants: $381,139 • TBRA Program Supportive Services: $235,000 • Sidewalks and Curbs ADA Improvements - Maintenance Zone 3: $125,000 These projects address infrastructure, neighborhood preservation, and housing-related services in qualified low- and moderate-income areas of the City. In addition to the funding request above for the Housing Rehabilitation Program, staff is also requesting that the maximum allowable grant within this program's Policies and Procedures be increased from $15,000 to $20,000 to address significant increases in labor and construction material costs. This action is incorporated within Resolution No. 2025-32 (Attachment 2) and the 2025-26 Action Plan, which is part of Exhibit"B" to Attachment 2. CDBG Administration - $224,239 Up to 20% of CDBG funds may be used for planning and program administration. These funds support activities required to ensure compliance with HUD regulations, including: • Preparation of the Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and related amendments • Program monitoring and performance reporting • Financial and regulatory compliance • Oversight of subrecipients and grant-funded projects HOME Capital Projects - $790,595 HOME funds support rental assistance and help address housing instability among low-income households. Recommended 2025-26 HOME allocations include: City of Huntington Beach Page 7 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by Legistar" 318 File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) Programs: o Families Forward: $200,000 o Mercy House: $200,000 o Mobile Home TBRA (senior households): $128,841 • CHDO Set-Aside (required 15% reserve for future housing development): $261,754 HOME Administration - $53,833 + $140,000 carryover Up to 10% of current-year HOME funds and prior-year carryover (from FY 2020-21 and 2021-22) will be used to support: • Preparation of the 2026-27 Annual Action Plan • Program oversight, monitoring, and HUD-required reporting • Coordination with affordable housing providers and service partners • Fair housing services (proposed to be provided by the Fair Housing Foundation) CDBG & HOME Funding Alternatives Because HUD has not yet released the City's official 2025-26 CDBG and HOME allocations, the CPAB's recommendations and the draft Annual Action Plan are based on estimated funding levels. To remain flexible and compliant, the CPAB has recommended the following alternative strategies to adjust funding if actual allocations are higher or lower than expected. These adjustments will be made prior to submitting the final Action Plan to HUD, and no additional Council action will be required, unless changes exceed the scope of these strategies. CDBG Public Services: • If funding is lower than the estimated: Each of the six recommended programs will receive a proportionate reduction in funding. . • If funding is higher than estimated: The additional funds will be evenly distributed across the six recommended programs, not to exceed the 15% cap set by HUD. CDBG Capital Projects: • If funding is lower than estimated: Funding for Code Enforcement and TBRA Supportive Services will be maintained. Any necessary reductions will be applied equally to the Housing Rehabilitation Program and ADA Improvements. • If funding is higher than estimated: Funding for Code Enforcement and TBRA Supportive Services will remain the same. Additional funds will be split equally between the Housing Rehabilitation Program and ADA Improvements. HOME Capital Projects: • If funding is lower than estimated: The Mobile Home TBRA Program will be adjusted to reflect the reduced budget. All other HOME-funded activities will remain unchanged. • If funding is higher than estimated: Additional funds will be allocated to the Mobile Home TBRA Program. Other program allocations will remain as proposed. City of Huntington Beach Page 8 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by Legistarn, 319 File #: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 CHDO Set-Aside (HOME Requirement): The 15% CHDO set-aside will be adjusted proportionally based on the final HOME allocation, as required by HUD. These funds will remain reserved for future eligible projects carried out by a qualified Community Housing Development Organization. Administration Funds (CDBG and HOME): Administrative allocations will be adjusted proportionally, based on the final grant amounts, but will not exceed HUD's caps: • CDBG Admin: 20% of total CDBG allocation • HOME Admin: 10% of total HOME allocation Citizen Participation Plan HUD regulations require.the City to adopt a Citizen Participation Plan that outlines how the public will be involved in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of CDBG and HOME programs. This plan must be updated periodically to reflect current engagement practices and regulatory requirements. The City's updated 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan describes the process for involving residents, stakeholders, and community organizations in the development of: • The Consolidated Plan • Annual Action Plans - • Substantial amendments to these plans • The Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) - an end-of-year. report that details how CDBG and HOME funds were used and the progress made toward achieving the City's Consolidated Plan goals .- The plan emphasizes meaningful outreach to low- and moderate-income residents and encourages • broad participation throughout the City. It also outlines the role of the CPAB in reviewing funding applications and making recommendations to the City Council. The updated plan ensures consistency with 24 CFR 91.105, the federal regulation governing citizen participation for HUD-funded entitlement jurisdictions. The draft plan is included as Exhibit D of Attachment 2. Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing The federal Fair Housing Act requires jurisdictions receiving HUD funding to affirmatively further fair housing by identifying barriers to housing choice and take meaningful actions to overcome them. To meet this requirement, cities across Orange County collaborated on a Regional Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) for the 2025-29 planning period. This assessment replaces the former Analysis of. Impediments to Fair Housing and is intended to promote a more coordinated, data-driven overview of fair housing issues across the region. The AFH includes: City of Huntington Beach Page 9 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by Legistarw 320 File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 • A summary of regional housing conditions and demographic trends; • Identification of contributing factors to fair housing challenges; and, • Shared goals to guide future planning efforts. The findings of the assessment were considered as part of the development of the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan, in accordance with HUD requirements. The 2025-2029 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing is included as Exhibit C of Attachment 2. Public Review Process In accordance with HUD regulations and the City's Citizen Participation Plan, the draft versions of the following documents were made available for a 30-day public review and comment period from April 4 to May 6, 2025: • 2025-26 Annual Action Plan • 2025-29 Consolidated Plan • 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan • 2025-29 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing Draft documents were posted on the City's website and made available for in-person review at City Hall, the Central Library, and the Oak View Library. Environmental Status: This action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Since federal funds are being used for the proposed CDBG and HOME activities, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance will be required prior to execution of funding agreements and disbursement of funds. The City will complete all NEPA Compliance for the approved CDBG and HOME activities prior to the start of the Program Year(July 1, 2025). Strategic Plan Goal: Non Applicable -Administrative Item Attachment(s): 1. FY 2025-26 CDBG & HOME Funding and Recommendations 2. Resolution No. 2025-32, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Approving the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan, 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan, 2025- 2029 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, and the 2025-2029 Citizen. Participation Plan for Federal Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment City of Huntington Beach Page 10 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by LegistarTM 321 File#: 25-272 MEETING DATE: 5/6/2025 Partnerships Programs." 3. PowerPoint Presentation City of Huntington Beach Page 11 of 11 Printed on 4/30/2025 powered by Legistarm 322 RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING THE 2025-2029 CONSOLIDATED PLAN, 2025-2026 ACTION PLAN, 2025-2029 ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING,AND THE 2025-2029 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN FOR FEDERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAMS WHEREAS, the City of Huntington Beach ("City")participates in the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) programs; and WHEREAS,the City is required by HUD to adopt a five-year Consolidated Plan,Action Plan,Assessment of Fair Housing, and a Citizen Participation Plan as part of the federal requirements for the CDBG and HOME programs; and WHEREAS, a Resolution by the City Council is required for adoption of the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan, 2025-2026 Action Plan, 2025-2029 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, and 2025-2029 Citizen Participation Plan that is due to HUD within 60 days of receiving the final 2025-2026 allocation amounts; acid WHEREAS, the City's 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan contains a housing needs assessment, a survey of available resources, and a five-year strategy that specifies achievable housing and community development goals and programs; and WHEREAS,the City's 2025-2026 Action Plan implements the first year of the five-year strategy of the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan; and WHEREAS,the 2025-2029 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing implements the Federal Fair Housing Act, which requires jurisdictions receiving HUD funding to affirmatively further fair housing by identifying barriers to housing choice and take actions to overcome those barriers; and WHEREAS, the 2025-2029 Citizen Participation Plan sets forth the City's policies and procedures for encouraging citizen involvement in the planning, implementation and evaluation of the City's CDBG and HOME programs; and WHEREAS, a notice was published in The Wave on April 3, 2025 regarding a City Council public hearing and the availability of the Draft 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan (including the 2025-2026 Action Plan), 2025-2029 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, and the 2025-2029 Citizen Participation Plan for a minimum 30-day public review and comment period from April 4, 2025 to May 6, 2025; and RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 WHEREAS,the City's CD$G and HOME funding allocations for the 2025-2026 Program Year have not yet been determined or released by HUD, and therefore all funding references in this resolution are based on anticipated amounts; and WHEREAS, as directed by HUD,the Citizen Participation Advisory Board (CPAB) on February 20, 2025, made 2025-2026 CDBG public services program recommendations based on the current year's (2024-2025) funding levels, pending final allocation amounts from HUD for 2025-2026; and WHEREAS, for Fiscal Year 2Q25-2026,the City anticipates receiving approximately $1,121,195 in CDBG funds and $538,328 in HOME funds from HUD; and WHEREAS, in the event HUD releases the final CDBG and HOME funding allocations after the May 6, 2025 City Council meeting,the funding allocations approved by this resolution will be adjusted upward or downward accordingly, and staff will implement the proportional changes as outlined in this resolution; and WHEREAS, in addition to the estimated CDBG funding allocations of$1,121,195 and HOME funding of$538,328 from HUD, carry over funding and program income from prior years of$258,868 for CDBG and$306,100 for HOME funds increases the total estimated allocation within the 2025-2026 Action Plan to $1,380,063 for CDBG and $844,428 for HOME; and WHEREAS, in addition to the estimated $844,428 in HOME funds for 2025-2026, $85,000 in 2020-2021 and$55,000 in 2021-2022 HOME Administration funds can be allocated to cover certain costs in 2025-2026 related to: 1) preparation of the 2026-2027 Action Plan; 2) annual monitoring costs of existing HOME affordable housing projects; 3) fair housing services provided by Fair Housing Foundation; and 4) City staff salaries and public noticing costs, for a total of$984,428 in HOME funding for 2025-2026; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the community needs, priorities and strategies set forth in the draft 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan and the allocation of$1,380,063 in CDBG funds, and $984,428 in HOME funds in the draft 2025-2026 Action Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed 2025-2026 CDBG and HOME programs and activities are summarized in Exhibit "A" and fully described in the 2025-2026 Action Plan, which is a component of the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B"; and WHEREAS, one of the CDBG activities described in the 2025-2026 Action Plan, the Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program, staff desires to amend this program's Policies and Procedures to increase the maximum grant amount from $15,000 to $20,000 in order to address significant increases in labor and construction material costs; and WHEREAS, the proposed 2025-2029 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing is attached hereto as Exhibit "C", and the 2025-2029 Citizen Participation Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit"D"; and 2 25-16272/376024 RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 WHEREAS,pursuant to Section 15378 of the California Code of Regulations relating to implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed activities to be funded are not considered projects resulting in a direct alteration of the environment and, therefore, are exempt from the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS,the proposed activities to be funded are subject to the provisions of the National Environmental Protection Act of which any and all projects funded shall comply, except that, in accordance with 24 CFR Sections 58.34 (a) and 58.35 as to review pursuant to the National Environmental Protection Act,the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan,the 2025-2026 Action Plan,the 2025-2029 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, and the 2025-2029 Citizen Participation Plan are not subject to federal environmental review. NOW, THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. That the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit"B", the 2025-2026 Action Plan, included in the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B", the 2025-2029 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, attached hereto as Exhibit"C", and the 2025-2029 Citizen Participation Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit"D" are hereby adopted, and the City Manager or the City Manager's designee is hereby authorized to execute all necessary related budget approvals and documents deemed necessary by HUD or the City to implement the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan and the 2025-2026 Action Plan including but not limited to, executing all implementing and related documents and agreements, such as, grant and loan agreements with subrecipients, professional services agreements and service agreements for program administering for all approved CDBG and HOME programs and projects set forth in the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan and 2025-2026 Action Plan. SECTION 2. That $168,179 in CDBG Public Service funds, $987,645 in CDBG Capital and Housing Preservations Project Funds, $224,239 in CDBG Administration Funds, $790,595 in HOME Capital and Housing Preservation Project Funds, and$193,833 in HOME Administration Funds (including 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 HOME Administration) are hereby allocated to the CDBG and HOME projects indicated in Exhibit "A." SECTION 3. That the City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to implement the following adjustments, as approved by the City Council, in the event that the final 2025-2026 CDBG and HOME funding allocation amounts from HUD differ from the anticipated levels reflected in this Resolution: CDBG Public Service allocations: 1. If actual CDBG funding is less than the anticipated amount: Decrease the funding allocation for each of the six recommended organizations identified in Exhibit "A"by a proportionate share (weighted average). 3 25-16272/376Q24 RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 2. If actual CDBG funding is greater than the anticipated amount:Allocate increased funds by equal amount to the six recommended organizations identified in Exhibit «A» Capital and Housing Preservation Project allocations: 1. If actual CDBG funding is less than the anticipated amount: Maintain the recommended funding allocations for Special Code Enforcement and Housing Services for TBRA Program and reduce funding to Housing Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program and Maintenance Zone Area 3 ADA Improvements equally. 2. If actual CDBG funding is greater than the anticipated amount: Maintain the recommended funding allocations for Special Code Enforcement and Housing Services for TBRA Program and increase funding to Housing Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program and Maintenance Zone Area 3 ADA Improvements equally. 3. If actual HOME funding is less than or greater than the anticipated amount: Adjust the Mobile Home TBRA program accordingly. Other HOME capital programs to remain unchanged. Administration allocations 1. If actual CDBG funding is less than or more than the anticipated amount:Adjust CDBG Administration allocation shown in Exhibit"A" accordingly but will not exceed the 20 percent maximum requirement of the HUD CDBG allocation for 2025-2026. 2. If actual HOME funding is less than or more than the anticipated amount:Adjust HOME Administration and Community Housing Development Organization funding reserves as shown in Exhibit "A" but will not exceed the 10 percent and 15 percent maximum requirements of the HUD HOME allocation for 2025-2026. In the event of such changes, no additional City Council action shall be required unless the adjusted allocations exceed the thresholds or priorities previously approved herein. SECTION 4. That the City Council authorizes staff to amend the Policies and Procedures for the Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program to increase the maximum grant amount from $15,000 to $20,000. SECTION 5. That the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan and the 2025-2026 Action Plan projects and programs shall undergo an environmental review prior to any release of funds consistent with the Program Regulations found in 24 CFR, Part 58.6 and the City Manager or the City Manager's designee is authorized to execute all environmental documentation required by HUD. 4 25-16272/376024 RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Resolution and shall take effect as provided by law. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of May, 2025. Mayor REVIEWED AND APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CityMan ger CityAttorney INITIATED AND APPROVED: Direct r of Community Development 5 25-16272/376024 RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 EXHIBIT "A" FY 2025-2026 CDBG AND HOME FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS 6 25-16272/376Q24 RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 Exhibit "A" City of Huntington Beach FY 2025-2026 CDBG and HOME Recommendations 2025-2026 CDBG PUBLIC SERVICES FUNDING 1 City of HB —Oak View FRC Drop-on Recreation $40,530 Program (Children's Bureau) 2 City of HB — Senior Center Care Management $30,530 3 Pathways to Independence—Pathways to Independence $20,530 Program 4 Project Hope Alliance—On Site Case Management $20,530 Program for Homeless Youth 5 Robyn's Nest—Homeless & At-Risk Youth $40,529 6 StandUp for Kids—Homeless Street Outreach $15,530 TOTAL FUNDING $168,179 2025-2026 CDBG CAPITAL &HOUSING PRESERVATION FUNDING 1 Special Code Enforcement $246,506 2 Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans/Grants Program $381,139 ADA Improvements (Curbs/Ramps)-Maintenance $125,000 3 Zone 3 4 Housing Services for Tenant Based Rental Assistance $235,000 (TBRA)- Program Administration TOTAL FUNDING $987,645 7 25-16272/376024 RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 Exhibit "A" (Continued) 2025-2026 CDBG ADMINISTRATION FUNDIN G 1 CDBG Adminstration $224,239 TOTAL FUNDING $224,239 2025-2026 HOME PROGRAM FUNDS FUNDING 1 Families Forward TBRA $200,000 2 Mercy House TBRA $200,000 3 Mobile Home (Seniors) TBRA $128,841 4 CHDO Reserve /Affordable Housing $261,754 5 HOME Administration $53,833 6 Prior (FY 20-21 & 21-22)HOME Administration Funds $140,000 TOTAL FUNDING $984,428 8 25-16272/376024 RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 EXHIBIT "B" 2025-2029 CONSOLIDATED PLAN (Includes the 2025-2026 Action Plan) 9 25-16272/376024 fr /*IslTINGI04/ p( 4F , 9 v = r ,, 2 'It ce- p,L\S�✓r ouniri t . FY 2025/26 — 2029/30 Consolidated Plan & FY 2025/26 Annual Action Plan Draft for Public Review and Comment City of Huntington Beach Community Enhancement Division 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26— 2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 ES-05 Executive Summary-24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b) 4 THE PROCESS 12 PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b) 12 PR-10 Consultation—91.100, 91.110,91.200(b), 91.300(b), 91.215(I) and 91.315(1) 13 PR-15 Citizen Participation—91.105, 91.115, 91.200(c) and 91.300(c) 23 NEEDS ASSESSMENT 26 NA-05 Overview 26 NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment- 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c) 27 NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems—91.205 (b)(2) 35 NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems—91.205 (b)(2) 38 NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens—91.205 (b)(2) 41 NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion —91.205(b)(2) 42 NA-35 Public Housing—91.205(b) 44 NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment—91.205(c) 48 NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment- 91.205 (b,d) 51 NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs—91.215 (f) 56 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS 60 MA-05 Overview 60 MA-10 Number of Housing Units—91.210(a)&(b)(2) 62 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing- 91.210(a) 67 MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing—91.210(a) 71 MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing—91.210(b) 76 MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services—91.210(c) 79 MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services—91.210(d) 82 MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing—91.210(e) 89 MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets—91.215 (f) 90 MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion 98 MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate-Income Households- 91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2) 100 MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3) 102 STRATEGIC PLAN 104 SP-05 Overview 104 SP-10 Geographic Priorities—91.215 (a)(1) 105 SP-25 Priority Needs-91.215(a)(2) 108 HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 2 SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions-91.215 (b) 112 SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2) 113 SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure—91.215(k) 115 SP-45 Goals Summary—91.215(a)(4) 121 SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement—91.215(c) 127 SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing—91.215(h) 128 SP-60 Homelessness Strategy—91.215(d) 130 SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards—91.215(i) 134 SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy—91.215(j) 136 SP-80 Monitoring—91.230 139 EXPECTED RESOURCES 141 AP-15 Expected Resources—91.220(c)(1,2) 141 ANNUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 145 AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives 145 PROJECTS 149 AP-35 Projects—91.220(d) 149 AP-38 Project Summary 151 AP-50 Geographic Distribution —91.220(f) 167 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 168 AP-55 Affordable Housing—91.220(g) 168 AP-60 Public Housing—91.220(h) 169 AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities—91.220(i) 170 AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing—91.220(j) 174 AP-85 Other Actions—91.220(k) 176 PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 179 AP-90 Program Specific Requirements—91.220(I)(1,2,4) 179 APPENDIX Appendix A Glossary of Terms Appendix B Figures Appendix C FY 2025/26 Certifications Appendix D Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424)for CDBG Program Appendix E Assurances—Non-Construction Programs (SF 424-B) for CDBG Program Appendix F Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424)for HOME Program Appendix G Assurances— Non-Construction Programs (SF 424-B) for HOME Program Appendix H Public Notices Appendix I Agency and Citizen Participation Comments HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-05 Executive Summary- 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b) Introduction The Executive Summary of the five-year Consolidated Plan for FY 2025/26— 2029/30 (Con Plan) provides an overview of the City of Huntington Beach's (City) housing and community development needs, as well as the City's priorities and strategies to address these needs. It is meant to inform the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), housing and service providers, City residents, and businesses. Each year, the City of Huntington Beach receives federal funds through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)and Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME)to support housing and community development projects that primarily benefit low- and moderate-income households. In order to receive these funds, the City must adopt a five-year strategic plan that identifies local needs and outlines how these needs will be addressed using the available funds. The City's current five-year plan (FY 2020/21-2024/25) will end on June 30, 2025, requiring the adoption of a new plan before that date. The new five-year Con Plan builds on several key documents, including the current Con Plan, the City's Draft 2013-2021 Housing Element,the 2024 Orange County Homeless Point-in-Time Count and Report, and the 2024 Orange County Continuum of Care. The Con Plan includes the following sections: • Executive Summary • The Process • Needs Assessment • Housing Market Analysis • Strategic Plan • One-Year Action Plan Summary of the Objectives and Outcomes Identified in the Plan Needs Assessment Overview The City's Con Plan strategy outlines general priorities to address community needs and guides the investment of federal funds. To effectively meet these needs, the City has identified seven priority areas that require the most attention. These priorities are: 1. Housing Needs: The need for affordable housing options in the City continues to be high, based on the proportion of households in the City experiencing cost burdens. 2. Community Facility Needs: The City recognizes the high need for public improvement activities throughout the City in order to provide for and maintain a safe and decent HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 4 environment for its citizens. Identified community facility needs include, but are not limited to, parks and playgrounds, community and neighborhood facilities, and childcare and youth centers. 3. Infrastructure Needs: The City recognizes the high need for public infrastructure improvements throughout the City in order to provide for and maintain a safe and decent environment for its citizens. Identified public infrastructure needs include, but are not limited to, sidewalk improvements, bicycle and walking paths, street and alley improvements, and tree planting and beautification. 4. Homeless Needs: The is a high need for continued investment of federal funding into serving the City's homeless and at risk of homelessness populations. Using CDBG public service funds, the City will provide assistance to homeless service providers that assist various subcategories of homeless populations such as homeless youth and women. 5. Special Needs: Huntington Beach prioritizes housing and services for special needs populations. Special needs populations include the elderly, families with young children, developmentally disabled, victims of domestic violence, homeless individuals, and those with behavioral or physical health issues. 6. Community Service Needs: There are a number of vital community services in the City that need continued support. These community services serve low-to moderate-income households and generally do not fall under the other service populations (homeless, special needs, etc.). 7. Other Housing and Community Development Needs: The City has identified the need to provide support for the HOME and CDBG programs in the City, as well as to affirmatively further fair housing. These activities are vital to the continuation of the City's efforts to administer these programs. These priorities are aligned with the national objectives and outcomes set by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), as described below: National Objectives HUD's national objectives are guidelines that federal funds must meet in order to address community development needs.These objectives are set by HUD for programs such as CDBG and HOME. The three national objectives are: • Provide decent affordable housing: This objective focuses on activities that increase or improve the availability and quality of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income households. This includes efforts such as building new housing, rehabilitating existing housing, or assisting with rent or homeownership. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 5 • Create a suitable living environment: Activities under this objective aim to improve the quality of life for individuals and families by addressing various community issues. This can involve improving public facilities, increasing safety, upgrading infrastructure, or addressing environmental hazards to create a healthier and safer living environment. • Create economic opportunities: This objective relates to activities that promote economic development, such as job creation, business expansion, or commercial revitalization. The goal is to support local economies, improve job opportunities, and reduce poverty in low- and moderate-income areas. National Outcomes HUD's national outcomes are the specific results that HUD seeks to achieve through funded activities. These outcomes help to assess whether a project or program is effectively addressing the national objectives. The three national outcomes are: • Availability/Accessibility: This outcome focuses on ensuring that housing, services, or facilities are available and accessible to those who need them, especially for low- and moderate-income individuals. It includes activities that increase access to housing, public facilities, or services such as healthcare, education, or transportation. • Affordability: The goal of this outcome is to make housing, services, or infrastructure affordable for low- and moderate-income individuals and families. It typically includes activities like providing rental assistance, creating affordable housing units, or reducing the cost of essential services. • Sustainability: Sustainability focuses on long-term impact. It involves ensuring that projects or investments are designed to be enduring and continue to benefit the community over time. This could mean building energy-efficient housing, upgrading infrastructure to last, or implementing programs that will maintain positive community outcomes in the future. The City's strategy for meeting HUD's national objectives and outcomes is outlined below. Huntington Beach 2025/26—2029/30 Consolidated Plan Programs By HUD Objectives and Outcomes AVAILABILITY/ OBJECTIVE/OUTCOMES ACCESSIBILITY AFFORDABILITY SUSTAINABILITY Implementing Programs: Implementing Programs: • Housing Rehabilitation • HOME Loan Program Acquisition/Rehabilitati DECENT HOUSING • Housing Rehabilitation on of Affordable Administration Housing • Fair Housing Program • HOME New Construction of Affordable Housing HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 6 • HOME Tenant Based Rental Assistance Implementing Programs: Implementing Programs: • ADA Improvements • Special Code • Homeless Services Enforcement SUITABLE LIVING • Youth and Family • Public Facility ENVIRONMENT Services Improvements • Senior Services • Infrastructure • General Public Services Improvements ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY Table 1—2025/26-2029/30 Consolidated Plan Programs Evaluation of Past Performance HUD requires that grantees provide an evaluation of past performance. Since the current year, 2024/25, is still in progress, the City of Huntington Beach will measure the current years' performance for CDBG and HOME in the 2024/25 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) which will capture the City's progress towards meeting its five-year goals and objectives outlined in the 2020/21 — 2024/25 Con Plan. However, the following is an evaluation of performance to date: Decent Housing • In FY 2020/21, the City of Huntington Beach allocated $2.8 million in HOME funding to support the development of a 43-unit affordable senior housing project at 18431 Beach Boulevard. This project, in partnership with the Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) Jamboree Housing Corporation, is a significant step in addressing the housing needs of seniors. Of the 43 units, nine are HOME-income and rent-restricted, ensuring affordability for very-low-income households. The project was completed in December 2024 and contributes to nearly 50% of the City's 20-unit development goal for the 2020/21-2024/25 Consolidated Plan period. • Since July 2020, the City has allocated nearly $3 million in HOME funds for the Tenant- Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) program, which helps low- and moderate-income households with rental costs. This program has been instrumental in addressing housing affordability challenges and has assisted 218 households so far, showcasing its effectiveness in supporting vulnerable populations. • The City's Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program provides critical support to lower-income homeowners. The Rehabilitation Grant Program offers one-time grants of up to $15,000 for deferred maintenance and health/safety repairs, while the Rehabilitation Loan Program offers deferred payment loans up to $75,000 for larger repairs. To date, 43 homeowner rehabilitation projects have been completed through these programs, with more households currently being assisted in FY 2024/25. These HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 7 efforts demonstrate the City's ongoing commitment to supporting homeownership and preserving affordable housing for its residents. Suitable Living Environment • The City's Special Code Enforcement program has consistently surpassed its goal of assisting 600 housing units each year in CDBG-eligible areas. Since July 2020,the program has issued over 4,500 code violations, which in most cases, are voluntarily addressed by homeowners.This proactive approach to maintaining community standards and ensuring safe and habitable living conditions, underscores the City's commitment to ensuring compliance with housing standards and contributing to the overall well-being and livability of neighborhoods within CDBG-eligible areas. • The City of Huntington Beach continues to prioritize the delivery of high-quality services to various segments of the community, including youth, homeless individuals, seniors,the disabled, and illiterate adults.These efforts are supported through public service funding and aim to improve the well-being and accessibility of essential services for residents. Since July 2020, the City has made significant progress in its public service initiatives. For example, over 700 youth have benefited from subsidized after-school programming, enriching their educational experiences and offering valuable opportunities for personal growth. Additionally, 2,250 homeless individuals have received a range of services, including case management, emergency housing,outreach services, and other supportive programs.These efforts highlight the City's commitment to addressing homelessness and supporting vulnerable populations. Furthermore, around 1,500 seniors and individuals with special needs have accessed services through the City's Senior Care Services Program and the Oak View Family Literacy Program. These programs are designed to meet the specific needs of these groups, ensuring they receive the support and care they require.These initiatives reflect the City's ongoing dedication to enhancing the lives of its residents and ensuring that all members of the community have access to the services they need. • As part of its commitment to enhancing public facilities and community infrastructure, the City set a goal to assist 5,000 persons with improved or new public facilities during the 2020/21-2024/25 Consolidated Plan period. In FY 2023/24, the City allocated CDBG funding to the Central Library Restrooms Project,which includes ADA improvements.This project not only contributed to enhancing accessibility but also exceeded the goal by serving a larger number of individuals than initially targeted. • The City used CDBG funding in FY 2020/21, 2021/22, FY 2023/24, and in FY 2024/25 to make ADA curb cut improvements in various areas of the City. By the end of FY 2023/24, over 6,500 persons had already benefited from the handicap-accessible curb cuts, surpassing the 5-year goal of 2,000. An estimated 2,750 additional persons are set to benefit from the latest project in FY 2024/25. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 8 Economic Opportunity In 2024,the City of Huntington Beach updated its Economic Development Strategic Plan.The City Council initiated this update to reinforce existing economic development efforts, address current needs, and prioritize new initiatives. The plan provides a roadmap for strengthening the local economy, creating jobs, and ensuring that Huntington Beach remains a vibrant and welcoming place for businesses, residents, and visitors. A blend of new initiatives and enhancements across four main areas are featured in the plan: • Business Retention, Attraction & Expansion • Tourism, Culture & Community • Responsive & Effective Government • Communication & Collaboration The plan aims to enhance the City's economic vitality and quality of life by retaining and attracting a diversified mix of businesses, strengthening tourism and cultural offerings, growing the Streamline Surf City Initiative, and fostering stronger collaboration with local stakeholders. Each area includes specific goals and objectives with actionable milestones, as well as priorities for the upcoming year. In addition, in October 2023, the City Council adopted the 2023-2027 Strategic Plan for the City of Huntington Beach. This 2023-2027 Strategic Plan identifies various policies and programs that the City should prioritize, over and above normal operations,within the limited financial, human, and operational resources of the City. The goal of economic development is for greater business retention, investment, and job growth in Huntington Beach. Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process The City developed its Con Plan through extensive consultation and coordination with housing, social service and healthcare providers; public agencies; and the local public housing agency as presented in Table 2. As a means of gaining input from these agencies, the City conducted an agency consultation workshop, public meetings, a survey, and invited local grantees to provide comments on the draft Con Plan and Annual Action Plan. In addition, consultation in the development of the Con Plan involved several City departments. Consulted Agencies and Organizations Families Forward Fair Housing Foundation Literacy Volunteers Mental Health Association of StandUp for Kids Community SeniorSery Orange County Oak View Family Resource Open Arms Food Pantry and Center Children's Bureau Resource Center Robyne's Nest Pathways to Independence Project Hope Alliance HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 9 City of Huntington Beach Departments and Commissions Huntington Beach Office of Huntington Beach Community Huntington Beach Police Business Development Services Department Department Huntington Beach Public Works Huntington Beach City Council Citizen Participation Advisory Department Board (CPAB) Other Public Agencies Orange County Health Agency Orange County Housing Authority Table 2—Citizen Participation Consultation The City of Huntington Beach has followed HUD guidelines for citizen and community involvement in the preparation of its Con Plan and Annual Action Plan. This process aims to ensure that the community has an active role in shaping the documents, which will guide the allocation of federal funding for housing and community development projects. To encourage broad participation, the City engaged the public through various activities, including: • Agency Workshop • Community Meetings • Community Needs Survey • Public Hearings These efforts allowed residents and stakeholders to provide valuable input on the City's priorities and needs. A draft of the five-year Con Plan will be available for public comment from April 4 to May 6, 2025. During this period, the public will have the opportunity to review and provide feedback on the draft plan.Additionally,a City Council public hearing is scheduled for May 6, 2025, offering a final opportunity for residents and interested parties to comment on the plan before it is formally adopted and submitted to HUD. Summary of public comments Public comments received at the agency workshop, community meetings, the results of the community survey, and comments made at public hearing can be found in the Appendix. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them The City responded to all relevant comments. All comments received were accepted. Summary Key findings of the Needs Assessment include: HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 10 • Housing overpayment is the most prevalent housing problem, with 76% of Huntington Beach's low and moderate income (<80% AMI) renter households facing a cost burden (>30%of income on housing costs), and 40%facing a severe cost burden (>50%of income towards housing). Consultation with housing, homeless and public service providers identify the shortage of affordable rental housing as the most significant issue facing Huntington Beach's extremely low-, low- and moderate-income residents. • Household overcrowding is a far less significant problem than overpayment in Huntington Beach though it has doubled in the last decade from 5% of all renters in 2010 to 10% a decade later (as documented by the 2007-2011 and 2016-2020 ACS1). However, certain neighborhoods continue to experience high levels of overcrowding. • Many of the workers who make up Huntington Beach's workforce earn modest incomes, making it challenging to afford to in live in the City where they work. The analysis of rental housing costs and affordability illustrates that households earning extremely low, low and moderate incomes cannot afford average market rents in Huntington Beach. Local occupations priced out of the rental market include: bookkeepers, bus drivers, preschool teachers, retail sales managers, and food service managers. • For homeless people or people at-risk of becoming homeless, the most significant problem is the lack of affordable rental housing. This problem has been compounded by record high rents combined with decreases in public funding previously used to support affordable housing. • The City's Capital Improvement Program identifies the following general projects (within low- and moderate-income areas) in need of CDBG funds over the next five years: ✓ American with Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements to public facilities ✓ Sidewalk, curb and gutter improvements, including accessibility ramps ✓ Main Street Library HVAC installation project ✓ Critical repairs to police and fire stations throughout the City ✓ Necessary improvements to the Oak View Library, Oak View Family Resource Center, Central Library, and playground improvements at 9th Street and Lagenbeck Parks The American Community Survey (ACS), performed by the U.S. Census Bureau, is an ongoing Census statistical survey that samples a small percentage of the population every year, and publishes five-year averages of this data. Many of the tables in the Consolidated Plan are "pre-populated" by HUD with data from the 2016-2020 ACS, and thus the City has utilized the 2016-2020 ACS as the primary data source throughout the Plan. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 11 THE PROCESS PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b) Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source. Agency Role Name Department/Agency Lead Agency HUNTINGTON BEACH Community Enhancement Division CDBG Administrator HUNTINGTON BEACH Community Enhancement Division Jennifer Villasenor,Community Development Director HOME Administrator HUNTINGTON BEACH Community Enhancement Division Jennifer Villasenor,Community Development Director Table 3—Responsible Agencies Narrative The Community Enhancement Division of the City of Huntington Beach serves as the lead agency responsible for overseeing the development of both the Con Plan and the Annual Action Plan. This division plays a crucial role in coordinating the allocation of funding for various community development projects and initiatives. It is also responsible for monitoring community-based organizations that receive funding, ensuring compliance with program requirements, and managing the successful implementation of these projects.Additionally, the division administers the CDBG and HOME programs, which support affordable housing and other community development efforts. Beyond these responsibilities, the division also oversees other housing and community development initiatives, ensuring that all efforts align with the City's goals and HUD guidelines. Through these activities, the Community Enhancement Division plays a key role in fostering the growth and improvement of Huntington Beach's housing and community services. Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information Gregory Hoang Senior Housing Analyst City of Huntington Beach Community Enhancement Division 2000 Main Street, 5th Floor Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Phone: (714) 563-5473 Email: gregory.hoang@surfcity-hb.org HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 12 PR-10 Consultation—91.100, 91.110, 91.200(b), 91.300(b), 91.215(I) and 91.315(I) Introduction Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction's activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(1)). The City of Huntington Beach developed its Con Plan through a collaborative process that involved consultation with a wide range of stakeholders.These stakeholders included the Orange County Housing Authority, various City departments, health and social service providers, and neighboring local governments. A key part of this process was seeking input from housing, homeless, and social service providers active within Huntington Beach. To gather valuable insights, the City held an agency workshop to better understand the services they offer, identify priority needs within the community, and pinpoint any gaps in services. This workshop was an important tool for capturing the perspectives of organizations that work directly with residents in need of housing assistance, homeless services, and other social support. By engaging a diverse group of stakeholders and utilizing surveys and consultations, the City ensured that the Con Plan was shaped by the knowledge and experiences of those most directly involved in addressing the community's housing and social service needs. This collaborative approach was essential in making sure the plan reflects the community's priorities, ultimately guiding the allocation of resources to effectively address the key challenges Huntington Beach faces. Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children,veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness The City of Huntington Beach actively participates in the Orange County Continuum of Care(CoC), which is led and coordinated by the Orange County Health Care Agency. This partnership between public and nonprofit entities aims to ensure comprehensive and regional coordination of efforts and resources to address homelessness and support individuals at risk of homelessness throughout Orange County. As part of the CoC, the City's Homeless Outreach Case Manager collaborates with other stakeholders to promote community-wide commitment to the goal of ending homelessness. The CoC serves as a regional convener of year-round planning processes and facilitates the involvement of public and private agencies within the regional homeless system of care. The Orange County Continuum of Care system is structured to achieve several key objectives: HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 13 1. Promote Community-wide Commitment: The CoC fosters a shared commitment among stakeholders to end homelessness through regional coordination and collaboration. 2. Advocate for Funding and Resources: It advocates for funding and resources to support efforts aimed at quickly rehousing individuals experiencing homelessness while minimizing trauma and dislocation. 3. Promote Access to Mainstream Programs: The CoC works to ensure that homeless individuals and families have access to and effectively utilize mainstream programs and services. 4. Implement Best Practices: It promotes the implementation of best practices and evidence-based approaches to homeless programming and services to ensure effectiveness and efficiency. By actively participating in the Orange County Continuum of Care, the City of Huntington Beach contributes to the collective efforts aimed at addressing homelessness and improving outcomes for individuals and families experiencing housing instability in the region. Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS Not applicable. The City of Huntington Beach does not receive ESG funds. Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdiction's consultations with housing,social service agencies and other entities HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 14 How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the Agency/Group/ Agency/Group/ What section of the Plan was consultation or areas for improved Organization Organization Type addressed by Consultation? coordination? City of Huntington Other government • Housing Need Assessment Citizen Participation Advisory Board Beach -Local Homeless Needs (CPAB). The City of Huntington Beach Homelessness Strategy will continue to maintain strong • Non-Homeless Special Needs relationships with service providers Market Analysis through the Citizen Participation • Economic Development Advisory Board (CPAB)to help • Non-Housing Community implement the five-year strategy Development Strategy outlined in the Con Plan.The CPAB • Anti-Poverty Strategy plays a key role in ensuring that • Lead-based Paint Strategy community input and collaboration remain central to the process of allocating resources and addressing the social service needs of the community. Huntington Beach Civic Leaders • Housing Need Assessment Public hearings. Public hearings are a City Council • Non-Homeless Special Needs key component of the City's process Market Analysis for ensuring that the Con Plan • Economic Development accurately reflects the needs and • Non-Housing Community priorities of the community. City Development Strategy Council members,who represent the • Anti-Poverty Strategy needs of their constituents, play an important role in this process by incorporating community feedback into the Con Plan.The needs and priorities identified through public hearings,consultations,and surveys have been integrated into the Con Plan, ensuring that the City's strategy addresses the most pressing concerns of residents.These public hearings provide a platform for community members to voice their opinions and influence the allocation of resources to meet the housing and social service needs of Huntington Beach.Through this process,the City ensures that the Plan is responsive to the community's evolving needs. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 15 Huntington Beach Grantee • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, City Manager's Department • Public Housing Needs public input meeting,and comment Office • Homeless Needs— on the draft plan Chronically Homeless • Homeless Needs—Families with Children • Homeless Needs—Veterans • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy • Non-Homeless Special Needs • Market Analysis • Non-Housing Community Development Strategy • Anti-Poverty Strategy • Lead-Based Paint Survey City of Huntington Grantee • Non-Homeless Special Needs Invitation to participate in the survey, Beach Community Department • Non-Housing Community public input meeting,and comment and Library Development Strategy on the draft plan Services Services-Children Department Services-Education Services-Elderly Persons Oak View Literacy Grantee • Non-Homeless Special Needs Invitation to participate in the survey, Program Department • Non-Housing Community public input meeting,and comment Development Strategy on the draft plan Services-Education • Anti-Poverty Strategy Huntington Beach Services-Elderly • Non-Homeless Special Needs Invitation to participate in the survey, Council on Aging Persons public input meeting,and comment Huntington Beach Grantee • Homeless Needs— Invitation to participate in the survey, Police Department Department Chronically Homeless public input meeting,and comment • Homeless Needs—Families on the draft plan Services-Homeless with Children • Homeless Needs—Veterans • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy Huntington Beach Grantee • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, Public Works Department Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment Department on the draft plan Huntington Beach Grantee • Non-Homeless Special Needs Invitation to participate in the survey, Senior Center Department public input meeting,and comment on the draft plan HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 16 Orange County PHA • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, Housing Authority • Public Housing Needs public input meeting,and comment • Homeless Needs— on the draft plan Chronically Homeless • Homeless Needs—Families with Children • Homeless Needs—Veterans • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy Therapeutic Riding Services—Persons • Non-Homeless Special Needs Invitation to participate in the survey, Center of with Disabilities public input meeting,and comment Huntington Beach on the draft plan Beach Cities Services— • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, Interfaith Services Homeless • Homeless Needs— public input meeting,and comment Chronically Homeless on the draft plan • Homeless Needs—Families with Children • Homeless Needs—Veterans • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy • Non-Housing Community Development Strategy Open Arms Food Services—Children • Homeless Needs— Invitation to participate in the survey, Pantry& Resource Services—Elderly Chronically Homeless public input meeting,and comment Center Persons • Homeless Needs—Families on the draft plan Services—Persons with Children with Disabilities • Homeless Needs—Veterans Services- • Homeless Needs— Homeless Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy • Non-Homeless Special Needs • Anti-Poverty Strategy StandUP for Kids Services-Homeless • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, • Homeless Needs— public input meeting,and comment Unaccompanied Youth on the draft plan • Homelessness Strategy Robyne's Nest Services-Homeless • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, • Homeless Needs— public input meeting,and comment Unaccompanied Youth on the draft plan • Homelessness Strategy Families Forward Housing • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, • Homeless Needs—Families public input meeting,and comment Services-Homeless with Children on the draft plan • Homelessness Strategy HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 17 South County Housing • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, Outreach • Homeless Needs— public input meeting,and comment Services-Homeless Chronically Homeless on the draft plan • Homeless Needs—Families with Children • Homeless Needs—Veterans • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy Fair Housing Services-Fair • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, Foundation Housing • Public Housing Needs public input meeting,and comment on the draft plan Assistance League Services-Children • Non-Homeless Special Needs Invitation to participate in the survey, of Huntington Services-Veterans • Non-Housing Community public input meeting,and comment Beach Services-Education Development Strategy on the draft plan • Anti-Poverty Strategy Mercy House Housing • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, • Homeless Needs— public input meeting,and comment Services-Homeless Chronically Homeless on the draft plan • Homeless Needs—Families with Children • Homeless Needs—Veterans • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy Interval House Housing • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, • Homeless Needs— public input meeting,and comment Services-Homeless Chronically Homeless on the draft plan • Homeless Needs—Families with Children • Homeless Needs—Veterans • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy Illumination Housing • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, Foundation • Homeless Needs— public input meeting,and comment Services-Homeless Chronically Homeless on the draft plan • Homeless Needs—Families with Children • Homeless Needs—Veterans • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy Project Self- Housing • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, Sufficiency • Homeless Needs—Families public input meeting,and comment Services-Homeless with Children on the draft plan • Homelessness Strategy HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 18 Orange County Services-Fair • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, Fair Housing Housing • Non-Housing Community public input meeting,and comment Council Development Strategy on the draft plan Catalyst Kids Services-Children • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment on the draft plan Project Hope Services-Homeless • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, Alliance • Homeless Needs—Families public input meeting,and comment with Children on the draft plan • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy New San Cai Other • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, Government-State Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment on the draft plan The Priority Center Services-Health • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment on the draft plan Amuse Foundation Services-Children • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment on the draft plan Friendship Shelter Housing • Housing Needs Assessment Invitation to participate in the survey, • Homeless Needs— public input meeting,and comment Services-Homeless Chronically Homeless on the draft plan • Homeless Needs—Families with Children • Homeless Needs—Veterans • Homeless Needs— Unaccompanied Youth • Homelessness Strategy Straight Talk Services-Health • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, Counseling Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment on the draft plan Meals on Wheels Services-Elderly • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, OC Persons Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment on the draft plan Pathways to Services-Victims of • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, Independence Domestic Violence Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment on the draft plan Orange County Civil Rights • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, Congregation Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment Community on the draft plan Organization HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 19 Orange County Civil Rights • Non-Housing Community Invitation to participate in the survey, Asian Pacific Development Strategy public input meeting,and comment Islander on the draft plan Community Alliance Table 4—Agencies,groups,organizations who participated Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting The City of Huntington Beach diligently engaged in the development of its Consolidated Plan by consulting with a broad spectrum of stakeholders. These consultations included housing, social, and health service providers, as well as local agencies and governments, and the Orange County Housing Authority. By actively seeking input from these various entities, the City ensured that a comprehensive range of perspectives and expertise were considered in the planning process.The City is unaware of any Agency Types relevant to the Consolidated Plan that were not consulted. Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 20 How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the Name of Plan Lead Organization goals of each plan? Continuum of Care Orange County Health Care Leadership and coordination Agency, Office of Care of Orange County's Coordination Continuum of Care planning process is led by the Orange Health Care Agency, Office of Care Coordination. The organization uses housing and demographic data obtained through HMIS and Homeless Counts to determine needs and to pinpoint gaps in housing and services. This in turn helps to pool and coordinate resources with the County and cities to develop coordinated homeless access and assessment centers. Huntington Beach participates in building the regional continuum of care to address the homeless and persons at risk of homelessness. Huntington Beach 2013-2021 City of Huntington Beach Planning Key housing policies and Housing Element Division programs from the 2013- 2021 Housing Element have been reflected within the Con Plan. Orange County Housing Orange County Housing Authority The purpose of OCHA's Authority Administrative Plan (OCHA) Administrative Plan is to establish policies and procedures to implement the Section 8 Program in a manner consistent with HUD requirements and local objectives. The Con Plan reflects the policies set forth in the Administrative Plan. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 21 Huntington Beach HOME-ARP City of Huntington Beach The HOME-ARP Allocation Allocation Plan Plan describes how Huntington Beach intends to distribute its HOME-ARP funds.The plan includes an assessment of unmet needs and service gaps for the qualified population and a summary of the planned uses of the program funds for eligible activities.The Con Plan reflects much analysis in the HOME-ARP Allocation Plan. Multi-Family Submarket CoStar Group The Multi-Family Submarket Report for Huntington Report, prepared in August Beach/Seal Beach 2024, provides real estate information and analytics on both multi-family rental and multi-family sales in Huntington Beach. Table 5—Other local/regional/federal planning efforts Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(I)) The City of Huntington Beach has notified adjacent local governments including Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley,Seal Beach, Westminster and the County of Orange of the availability of the draft Consolidated Plan for 30-day review and comment. Huntington Beach coordinates with the local CoC in implementation of the Consolidated Plan's homeless strategy, and with the Orange County Housing Authority in implementation of the Housing Choice Voucher Program. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 22 PR-15 Citizen Participation—91.105, 91.115, 91.200(c) and 91.300(c) Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation The City followed HUD's guidelines for citizen and community involvement in preparation of the Consolidated Plan and Action Plan. To encourage citizen participation in the preparation of the documents, the City undertook several activities as summarized below. Housing and Community Development Needs Survey In order to evaluate public opinion of specific housing and community development needs, the City utilized a Needs Survey (in English and Spanish) in which the respondent was asked to rank the level of need for a particular housing program, capital improvement and public infrastructure project, and public service need. Hard copies of the survey were distributed in various community locations within low- and moderate-income neighborhoods and at the Senior Center, and published on the City's website. A total of 334 responses were received with the following results: • Top Housing Needs include the construction of new or rehabilitation of existing affordable rental housing, property maintenance/code enforcement, and the development of affordable senior housing. • Top Capital Improvement Needs include parks and playgrounds, community/neighborhood centers, and childcare/youth centers. • Top Infrastructure Improvement Needs include sidewalk improvements, bicycle and walking paths, street/alley improvements, and tree planting/beatification projects. • Top Public Service Needs include anti-crime, homeless, and domestic violence preventative and response services. A copy of the Housing and Community Development Survey, along with the Needs Survey Report can be found in the Appendix. Community Workshops The City held two community workshops on October 30, 2024, at Oak View Community Center and November 7, 2024, at Central Library. The presentation covered CDBG and HOME programs, eligible funding uses, and current funding uses, while also gathering public input on priority needs. Sixteen residents attended. Stakeholders Workshop On November 14, 2024, a stakeholders meeting was convened with various agencies that provide services to Huntington Beach's low- and moderate-income households, special needs populations, and homeless populations.The discussion focused on identifying priority needs and gaps in the services provided. A total of eight agencies participated in the meeting, including HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 23 those offering fair housing, tenant-based rental assistance, homelessness support, literacy programs, and other public services. Community Meetings and Public Hearings The Citizen Participation Advisory Board (CPAB) held a public hearing on January 16, 2025, at Huntington Beach City Hall to discuss community needs. Following this,two community meetings occurred on January 30 and February 20, 2025, allowing agencies and individuals to express opinions on public service gaps in Huntington Beach. The represented agencies/programs included Oakview Children's Bureau/Boys and Girls Club Afterschool Program, Fair Housing Foundation, Open Arms Food Pantry and Resource Center, Pathways to Independence, Project Hope Alliance, Robyne's Nest, Senior Center Care Management, and StandUp for Kids Orange County. Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting Citizen Participation Outreach Summary of comments Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of not accepted URL(If Order Outreach Outreach response/attendance comments received and reasons applicable) 1 Internet Non- A total of 334 See attached None Outreach targeted/ Housing and results in Appendix broad Community C. community Development Needs Survey's were received. 2 Community Non- Two community See attached None Meeting targeted/ workshops were held results in Appendix broad on 10/30/2024 and C. community 11/7/2024 to solicit opinions on housing and community development priority needs in Huntington Beach, 3 Community Non- A stakeholder See attached None Meeting targeted/ meeting was held on results in Appendix broad 11/14/2024 with C. community various agencies to discuss priority public service needs and gaps in service. 4 Newspaper Non- A newspaper No comments None Ad targeted/ advertisement was received. broad posted on 1/2/25 community notifying interested persons of a public hearing on needs and priorities scheduled for 1/16/2025. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 24 Summary of comments Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Summary of not accepted URL(If Order Outreach Outreach response/attendance comments received and reasons applicable) 5 Public Non- The Citizen Comments received None Hearing targeted/ Participation Advisory focused on the broad Board (CPAB),a continued need for community group of appointed youth after-school Huntington Beach education citizens, held two programs;fair public hearings on housing services; 1/16/25 to solicit senior services, input on housing and homeless support community services,and family development needs. services. 6 Community Non- The CPAB held two See attached None Meeting targeted/ public meetings on results in Appendix broad 1/16/25 and on C. community 2/20/25 to allow presentations from local agencies for CDBG funding in 2025/16. 7 Community Non- A joint CPAB and City See attached None Meeting targeted/ Council study session results in Appendix broad was held on 3/18/25 C. community to go over CPAB funding recommendations. 8 Newspaper Non- A newspaper See attached None Ad targeted/ advertisement was results in Appendix broad made soliciting public C. community comment on the draft 2025/26- 2029/30 Con Plan and the 2025/26 Action Plan and to notify the public of a public hearing to adopt the Plans on 5/6/25.The public notice was published on 4/3/25. 9 Public Non- The City Council held See attached None Hearing targeted/ a public hearing to results in Appendix broad adopt the 2025/26- C. community 2029/30 Con Plan and the FY 2025/26 Action Plan on 5/6/25. Table 6—Citizen Participation Outreach HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 25 NEEDS ASSESSMENT NA-05 Overview Needs Assessment Overview The Consolidated Plan's Housing and Community Development Needs Assessment was conducted in a variety of ways, including data review and analysis2; consultation with housing, homeless and service providers, and City Departments; Community Needs Assessment Survey; and community meetings to take public input on community needs. Key findings of the Needs Assessment include: • Housing overpayment is the most prevalent housing problem, with 80% of Huntington Beach's low and moderate income (<80% AMI) renter households facing a cost burden (>30%of income on housing costs), and 45%facing a severe cost burden (>50%of income towards housing). Consultation with housing, homeless and public service providers identify the shortage of affordable rental housing as the most significant issue facing Huntington Beach's low- and moderate-income residents. • Household overcrowding is a far less significant problem than overpayment in Huntington Beach and has decreased from 13% of all renters in 2000 to just 5% a decade later (as documented by the 2007-2011 ACS). However, certain neighborhoods continue to experience high levels of overcrowding. • For homeless persons or persons at risk of becoming homeless, the most significant problem is the lack of affordable rental housing. This problem has been compounded by record high rents combined with decreases in public funding previously used to support affordable housing. Surveys of homeless service providers in Huntington Beach identify additional affordable housing as the top priority need,followed by the need for additional substance abuse services, and additional tenant-based rental assistance. • The City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) presents a comprehensive listing of planned and projected capital project needs based on various long-range plans,goals, and policies. Pursuant to the 2023/24-2027/28 CIP, the following general projects (within low- and moderate-income areas) have been identified in need of CDBG funds over the next five years: ✓ Citywide sidewalk, curb and gutter improvements, including accessibility ramps ✓ Residential overlay and slurry seal program ✓ Other public facilities and infrastructure projects 2 The American Community Survey (ACS), performed by the U.S. Census Bureau, is an ongoing Census statistical survey that samples a small percentage of the population every year, and publishes five-year averages of this data. Many of the tables in the Consolidated Plan are "pre-populated" by HUD with data from the 2016-2020 ACS, and thus the City has utilized the 2016-2020 ACS as the primary data source throughout the Plan. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 26 NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment- 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c) Summary of Housing Needs Demographics Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2020 %Change Population 197,750 199,780 1% Households 74,460 77,590 4% Median Income $83,252.00 $97,469.00 17% Table 7-Housing Needs Assessment Demographics Data Source: 2000 Census(Base Year),2016-2020 ACS(Most Recent Year) Number of Households Table 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% >80-100% >100% HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI HAMFI Total Households 10,710 8,970 13,675 9,320 34,920 Small Family Households 2,965 2,880 5,020 3,705 17,195 Large Family Households 495 735 910 575 2,250 Household contains at least one 2,795 2,695 3,130 2,355 8,155 person 62-74 years of age Household contains at least one 2,390 1,840 2,380 1,145 2,775 person age 75 or older Households with one or more children 1,255 1,260 1,335 1,195 1,680 6 years old or younger Table 8-Total Households Table Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS Housing Needs Summary Tables 1. Housing Problems (Households with one of the listed needs) Renter Owner >30- >50- >80- >30- >50- >80- 0-30% 50% 80% 100% 0-30% 50% 80% 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI Total AMI AMI AMI AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Substandard Housing- Lacking 390 155 35 15 595 40 15 0 0 55 complete plumbing or kitchen facilities Severely Overcrowded- With>1.51 people per room 195 165 100 85 545 10 0 10 0 20 (and complete kitchen and plumbing) HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 27 Renter Owner >30- >50- >80- >30- >50- >80- 0-30% 50% 80% 100% 0-30% 50% 80% 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI Total AMI AMI AMI AMI Total Overcrowded- With 1.01-1.5 people per room 495 420 280 115 1,310 0 55 115 125 295 (and none of the above problems) Housing cost burden greater than 50%of income(and 3,855 2,235 695 10 6,795 2,430 1,580 1,055 370 5,435 none of the above problems) Housing cost burden greater than 30%of income(and 390 1,435 3,835 920 6,580 505 865 1,680 1,370 4,420 none of the above problems) Zero/negative Income(and none of the 355 0 0 0 355 350 0 0 0 350 above problems) Table 9-Housing Problems Table Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS 2. Housing Problems 2 (Households with one or more Severe Housing Problems: Lacks kitchen or complete plumbing, severe overcrowding, severe cost burden) Renter Owner >30- >50- >80- >30- >50- >80- 0-30% 50% 80% 100% 0-30% 50% 80% 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI Total AMI AMI AMI AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Having 1 or more of four housing 4,935 2,975 1,110 225 9,245 2,480 1,645 1,180 495 5,800 problems Having none of four 1,565 1,785 6,045 4,035 13,430 1,730 2,560 5,335 4,565 14,190 housing problems Household has negative income, but none of the 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 other housing problems Table 10-Housing Problems 2 Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 28 3. Cost Burden > 30% Renter Owner 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% AMI AMI AMI Total AMI AMI AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 1,715 1,975 1,720 5,410 815 490 975 2,280 Large Related 435 375 260 1,070 60 145 220 425 Elderly 1,475 1,120 805 3,400 1,580 1,620 1,205 4,405 Other 1,595 755 1,875 4,225 495 240 370 1,105 Total need by 5,220 4,225 4,660 14,105 2,950 2,495 2,770 8,215 income Table 11-Cost Burden >30% Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS 4. Cost Burden > 50% Renter Owner >50- 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% 0-30% >30-50% 80% AMI AMI AMI Total AMI AMI AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 0 0 960 960 735 285 0 1,020 Large Related 0 0 135 135 60 50 50 160 Elderly 1,215 880 155 2,250 1,220 1,070 . 590 2,880 Other 0 1,520 420 1,940 425 0 0 425 Total need by 1,215 2,400 1,670 5,285 2,440 1,405 640 4,485 income Table 12-Cost Burden>50% Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS 5. Crowding (More than one person per room) Renter Owner 0- >30- >50- >80- 0- >30- >50- >80- 30% 50% 80% 100% 30% 50% 80% 100% AMI AMI AMI AMI Total AMI AMI AMI AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Single family 585 555 365 90 1,595 0 45 125 115 285 households Multiple,unrelated 40 35 15 85 175 0 4 0 10 14 family households Other,non family 85 10 0 25 120 10 0 0 0 10 households Total need by 710 600 380 200 1,890 10 49 125 125 309 income Table 13-Crowding Information-1/2 Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 29 Renter Owner >30- >50- >30- >50- 0-30% 50% 80% 0-30% 50% 80% AMI AMI AMI Total AMI AMI AMI Total Households with Children Present Table 14—Crowding Information—2/2 Describe the number and type of single-person households in need of housing assistance. According to the 2023 5-year American Community Survey (ACS) estimates, there are approximately 10,170 single-person renter households in the City, but only 1,465 studio rental units and 8,170 one-bedroom rental units available (2016-2020 ACS — refer to Section MA-10 later in the report).These figures highlight a critical shortage of affordable rental units, with high rents making these options inaccessible to low- and moderate-income individuals. Tables 11 and 12 indicate that 4,225 low- and moderate-income single-person renter households are spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs, with nearly half (1,940 households) experiencing a severe cost burden, allocating more than 50% of their income to housing. Since 2010,the proportion of single-person renter households has remained steady, representing about 30% of all renter households and 12% of all households, regardless of tenure. In contrast, the 2023 5-year ACS data shows that there are 9,983 single-person owner-occupied households in Huntington Beach, presumably residing in the 260 studio units and 1,255 one- bedroom owner units available. Of these owner-occupied households, 11% (1,105 households) face some form of cost burden, with 425 experiencing severe cost burdens. While this is a significant challenge, it is far less pronounced than among the single-person renter households, highlighting the relative stability and lower cost burden faced by those who own their homes. These findings underscore the ongoing need for affordable rental housing, particularly for low- and moderate-income single-person households. Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance who are disabled or victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking. Among the 628 Huntington Beach residents reported by the Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA) as receiving Housing Choice Vouchers, 19% (117) have a disabled member. These statistics confirm the significant need for housing assistance among the City's disabled population. Persons spending greater than half their incomes on housing are considered precariously housed, and at risk of homelessness. The 2016-2020 CHAS documents 30% of Huntington Beach's low- and moderate-income households as spending more than half their incomes on housing;applying the same 30% severe housing overpayment figure to the City's estimated 22,698 disabled population (2008-10 ACS) translates to approximately 6,809 persons with disabilities in need of housing assistance. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 30 Domestic violence disproportionately affects women and children, with survivors often fleeing violent situations in search of safety and support. While specific data for Huntington Beach is limited, state-level statistics provide valuable insights into the scope of the issue. According to the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence (CPEDV), approximately 40% of women in California have experienced physical intimate partner violence at some point in their lives. When applying this statewide statistic to Huntington Beach's 2023 adult female population (age 18+), it is estimated that approximately 32,326 women in the City may have been victims of domestic violence at some stage. In contrast, the California Department of Justice reported 443 domestic violence-related calls in Huntington Beach in 2023. This significant gap between the number of potential victims and the actual number of calls for police assistance suggests a troubling underreporting of domestic violence incidents. Many victims may be reluctant to seek help due to fear, shame, or lack of knowledge about available resources, further underscoring the need for additional support services in the community. Beyond immediate safety concerns, women and children fleeing domestic violence often require a range of critical services, including emergency shelter, transitional housing, counseling, and childcare. These services are essential for helping survivors rebuild their lives and regain their independence. Given the large number of potentially affected women in Huntington Beach, the City may benefit from expanding domestic violence prevention and support programs to ensure that all victims have access to the care and protection they need. Dating violence is defined as the physical, sexual, psychological, or emotional violence within a dating relationship, including stalking. Dating violence is widespread with serious long-term and short-term effects. Many teens do not report it because they are afraid to tell friends and family. A 2019 CDC Youth Risk Behavior survey found that 41% of females and 26% of males have experienced contact sexual violence, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner during their lifetime. Even more alarming, is the same study reports that one in every 12 teens experience physical dating violence and about the same number face sexual dating violence. Supporting healthy, nonviolent relationships could reduce teen dating violence and prevent its harmful, long-lasting effects on individuals,their families, and their communities. During the pre- teen and teen years, it is critical for youth to begin learning skills to create and maintain healthy relationships, including managing feelings and communicating in a healthy way. Research also highlights the need for prevention efforts that address the unique needs of teens who are at greater risk of experiencing teen dating violence. What are the most common housing problems? Based on the CHAS tables provided by HUD (extrapolated from 2016-2020 ACS data), the following summarizes two key housing problems in Huntington Beach: HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 31 • Among Huntington Beach's approximately 18,420 low and moderate income (<80%AMI) renter households, 14,090 (76%) face a cost burden of spending greater than 30% of income on rent. Over 40% of the City's low- and moderate-income renters face a severe cost burden,with 7,910 spending more than 50%of income on rent. As depicted in Figure 4 located in Appendix B, census tracts with the highest concentrations of severe renter overpayment (32-55% of all renters spending >50% income on rent) are scattered throughout the City, with a predominance north of Warner Avenue. Consultation with housing, homeless and public service providers identify the shortage of affordable rental housing as the most significant issue facing Huntington Beach's low- and moderate- income residents. • Household overcrowding, defined as more than one person per room (excluding kitchens, porches, and hallways), is less prevalent than overpayment for housing in Huntington Beach, yet it remains a growing concern. Over the past decade, the rate of overcrowding has doubled from 5% in 2010 to 10% in 2020, as documented by the 2007-2011 ACS. Among low- and moderate-income renters, Table 13 highlights that 1,890 households— representing 10% of Huntington Beach's 18,420 low- and moderate-income renter households—are overcrowded. This marks a notable increase from 2015, when the number of overcrowded households stood at 1,190. • For homeless persons or persons at-risk of becoming homeless, the most significant problem is the lack of affordable rental housing. This problem has been compounded by record high rents combined with decreases in funding available through Section 8 and HOME, and the loss of$3 million in annual Redevelopment Housing funds previously used to support affordable housing. Surveys and discussions with homeless service providers in Huntington Beach conducted for the Consolidated Plan identify additional affordable housing as the top priority need, followed by the need for additional tenant rental assistance and wrap around support services. Are any populations/household types more affected than others by these problems? As reflected in Tables 12 and 13, small-related and single person, non-elderly ("other") households are most impacted by renter cost burden. Small, related households comprise 5,410, or 38%, of Huntington Beach's 14,105 low- and moderate-income renters spending greater than 30% of income on housing costs. Elderly person households are also most impacted by severe cost burden (>than 50% of income of housing costs) among low- and moderate-income renters, comprising 43% of the total low-and moderate-income households that experience severe cost burden. Based on input from local service providers, low- and moderate-income populations particularly impacted by housing overpayment in Huntington Beach include single-parent families, senior citizens on fixed incomes, the working poor, young adults, and persons suffering from a physical, mental or developmental disability. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 32 Describe the characteristics and needs of Low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered 91.205(c)/91.305(c)). Also discuss the needs of formerly homeless families and individuals who are receiving rapid re-housing assistance and are nearing the termination of that assistance Record-high rents in Huntington Beach have significantly increased the risk of homelessness, particularly for lower-income individuals and families. Among the most vulnerable are family households and single mothers, who are disproportionately affected by the high costs of housing and childcare. Additionally, individuals working in low-wage jobs are particularly vulnerable, as rising rent prices further strain their already limited resources. The lack of sufficient funding and limited availability of Section 8 vouchers exacerbates the situation, leaving many households with few options for affordable housing. Low-income renter households earning less than 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI) and facing extreme cost burdens—spending more than 50%of their income on rent—are at especially high risk of becoming homeless. This risk is compounded for those who are unemployed, employed in low-paying jobs,or dealing with serious health issues among family members.These factors create a perfect storm that can push households into homelessness if they do not have access to stable housing solutions. In response, the City of Huntington Beach offers three tenant-based rental assistance programs aimed at individuals and families at imminent risk of becoming homeless or residing in shelters. These programs provide up to 24 months of assistance, along with case management and support services to help households transition to stable, non-assisted housing. Beneficiaries include homeless individuals,those at risk of homelessness, families with children,veterans, and seniors. For households nearing the end of their rental assistance, maintaining stable housing requires more than just financial support. Full-time employment, affordable childcare, reliable transportation, and access to affordable housing are critical. In addition, healthcare access, life skills training, and opportunities for further education or vocational training play an essential role in ensuring long-term housing stability and self-sufficiency. If a jurisdiction provides estimates of the at-risk population(s), it should also include a description of the operational definition of the at-risk group and the methodology used to generate the estimates: Not applicable. The City adheres to HUD's criteria for defining homelessness to identify those at imminent risk of homelessness. Specify particular housing characteristics that have been linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness As highlighted in Table 12, an estimated 5,285 low- and moderate-income renter households, along with 4,485 owner-occupied households in Huntington Beach, are spending more than half HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 33 of their gross monthly income on housing costs. This significant financial burden leaves these households with limited resources to cover essential living expenses such as food,transportation, healthcare, utilities, and other necessities. With so little disposable income remaining, these households are especially vulnerable to eviction and homelessness. A sudden reduction in income—whether due to job loss, reduced work hours, or cuts in government benefits—can have catastrophic consequences. Similarly, unexpected expenses, such as a medical emergency, major car repair, or the onset of a serious illness that prevents someone from working, could push these households into financial instability, making it even more difficult to stay housed. Discussion As discussed above, housing affordability is a critical issue among Huntington Beach's renter population. With nearly 30% of low and moderate income (<80% AMI) renter households spending more than half their incomes on housing, severe housing cost burden is the most pervasive housing problem in the community. The need far exceeds the resources available through the Consolidated Plan and is further exacerbated by the increased costs associated with developing affordable housing. As described in the City's 2013-2021 Housing Element, many of the workers who make up Huntington Beach's workforce earn modest incomes, making it challenging to afford in live in the City where they work. The analysis of rental housing costs and affordability presented in the Housing Market section of this report (Section MA-15) illustrates that households earning low and moderate incomes (up to 80%AMI) cannot afford average market rents in Huntington Beach. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 34 NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems—91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole. Introduction A disproportionately greater housing need exists when the members of a racial or ethnic group at an income level experience housing problems at a greater rate (10%or more)than the income level as a whole. The following tables identify the presence of one or more housing problems among households of differing race/ethnicities and income levels, with the analysis that follows identifying any racial/ethnic group evidencing a disproportionate housing need.The four housing problems are: 1) Lacks complete kitchen facilities. 2) Lacks complete plumbing facilities. 3) More than one person per room; and 4) Cost Burden greater than 30%. 0%-30% of Area Median Income Household has no/negative Has one or more of income,but none of four housing Has none of the four the other housing Housing Problems problems housing problems problems Jurisdiction as a whole 7,400 1,280 800 White 4,345 915 590 Black/African American 140 15 0 Asian 880 195 85 American Indian,Alaska Native 20 25 0 Pacific Islander 15 0 0 Hispanic 1,865 125 110 Table 15-Disproportionally Greater Need 0-30%AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 35 30%-50% of Area Median Income _ Household has no/negative Has one or more of income,but none of four housing Has none of the four the other housing Housing Problems problems housing problems problems Jurisdiction as a whole _ 6,100 1,860 0 White 3,645 1,275 0 Black/African American 85 0 0 Asian 685 215 0 American Indian,Alaska Native 50 25 0 Pacific Islander 35 10 0 Hispanic 1,455 330 0 Table 16-Disproportionally Greater Need 30-50%AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS 50%-80% of Area Median Income Household has no/negative Has one or more of income,but none of four housing Has none of the four the other housing Housing Problems problems housing problems problems Jurisdiction as a whole 7,215 5,080 0 White 4,920 3,555 0 Black/African American 80 65 0 Asian 540 610 0 American Indian,Alaska Native 0 45 0 Pacific Islander 20 45 0 Hispanic 1,450 675 0 Table 17-Disproportionally Greater Need 50-80%AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS 80%-100%of Area Median Income Household has no/negative Has one or more of income,but none of four housing Has none of the four the other housing Housing Problems problems housing problems problems Jurisdiction as a whole 3,145 4,925 0 White 2,275 3,460 0 Black/African American 55 75 0 Asian 325 370 _ 0 American Indian,Alaska Native 0 30 0 Pacific Islander 15 10 0 Hispanic 380 825 0 Table 18-Disproportionally Greater Need 80-100%AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 36 Discussion Tables 15-18 above identify the presence of one or more housing problems (lacks complete kitchen, lacks complete plumbing, overcrowding at > 1 person per room, or overpayment at > 30%)for different racial/ethnic group within a given income category. The following summarizes the results of these CHAS tables and identifies groups experiencing disproportionate housing need in Huntington Beach. Extremely Low Income (0-30%AMI) • 78%of extremely low-income households in Huntington Beach have one or more housing problems, ranging from 44%to 100% by racial or ethnic group. • The highest incidence of housing problems (100%) is experienced by Pacific Islanders, representing a disproportionate need based on the CHAS data provided by HUD. However, at just 15 households, the total number of extremely low-income Pacific Islander households in Huntington Beach is minimal, representing just 0.1% of the total 9,480 extremely low-income households in the City. • Extremely low-income Black/African American and Hispanic households meet the definition of having a disproportionately greater housing need. A total of 90% of Black/African American and 89% of Hispanic extremely low-income households have one or more of the hour housing problems, compared to 78% of all households as a whole. Low Income (30-50%AMI) • 77%of low-income households in Huntington Beach have housing problems, ranging from 67% (American Indians) to 74% (Whites) to 82% (Hispanics) to 100% (Black/African Americans). • Black/African American households have a disproportionate housing need in this income category; however, at only 85 households, the total number of low-income Black/African American households only represents 1% of the total households in this income group. Moderate Income (50-80%AMI) • 59% of moderate-income households in Huntington Beach have housing problems, ranging from 31% (Pacific Islanders) to 68% (Hispanics) by racial or ethnic group. Median Income (80-100%AMI) • 39% of all households in Huntington Beach in the median income bracket have housing problems, ranging from 32%to 60% by racial or ethnic group. • Pacific Islander households earning median incomes evidence a disproportionate housing need, with 60% experiencing one or more housing problems. At 15 households, Pacific Islander households represent only 2% of Huntington Beach's median income households. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 37 NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems—91.205 (b)(2) Introduction A disproportionately greater housing need exists when the members of a racial or ethnic group at an income level experience housing problems at a greater rate (10%or more)than the income level as a whole. The following tables identify the presence of severe housing problems among households of differing race/ethnicities and income levels, with the analysis that follows identifying any racial/ethnic group evidencing a disproportionate housing need. The four severe housing problems are: 1) Lacks complete kitchen facilities. 2) Lacks complete plumbing facilities. 3) More than 1.5 persons per room. 4) Cost Burden over 50%. 0%-30% of Area Median Income Household has no/negative Has one or more of income,but none of four housing Has none of the four the other housing Severe Housing Problems* problems housing problems problems Jurisdiction as a whole 6,665 2,010 800 White 3,795 1,465 590 Black/African American 130 25 0 Asian 785 295 85 American Indian,Alaska Native 20 25 0 Pacific Islander 15 0 0 Hispanic 1,790 190 110 Table 19—Severe Housing Problems 0-30%AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS 30%-50% of Area Median Income Household has no/negative Has one or more of income,but none of four housing Has none of the four the other housing Severe Housing Problems* problems housing problems problems Jurisdiction as a whole 4,140 3,820 0 White 2,565 2,355 0 Black/African American 70 15 0 Asian 400 500 0 _ American Indian,Alaska Native 50 25 0 Pacific Islander 0 45 0 Hispanic 945 835 0 Table 20—Severe Housing Problems 30-50%AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 38 50%-80% of Area Median Income _ Household has no/negative Has one or more of income,but none of four housing Has none of the four the other housing Severe Housing Problems* _ problems housing problems problems Jurisdiction as a whole 3,020 9,270 0 White 1,890 6,590 0 Black/African American 40 104 0 Asian 175 975 0 American Indian,Alaska Native 0 45 0 Pacific Islander 4 60 0 Hispanic 820 1,305 0 Table 21—Severe Housing Problems 50-80%AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS 80%-100%of Area Median Income Household has no/negative Has one or more of income,but none of four housing Has none of the four the other housing Severe Housing Problems* problems housing problem s problems Jurisdiction as a whole 820 7,245 0 White 585 5,150 0 Black/African American 0 130 0 Asian 140 560 0 American Indian,Alaska Native 0 30 0 Pacific Islander 0 25 0 Hispanic 90 1,110 0 Table 22—Severe Housing Problems 80-100%AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS Discussion Tables 19-22 above identify the presence of one or more severe housing problems (lacks complete kitchen, lacks complete plumbing, overcrowding at > 1.5 person per room, or overpayment at > 50%) for different racial/ethnic group within a given income category. The following summarizes the results of these CHAS tables and identifies groups experiencing disproportionate housing need in Huntington Beach. Extremely Low Income (0-30%AMI) • 70%of all extremely low-income households in Huntington Beach experience one or more of the identified severe housing problems, ranging from 44%to 100% by racial or ethnic group. • The highest incidence of severe housing problems (100%) is experienced by Pacific Islanders, representing a disproportionate need. However, at just 15 households, the HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 39 total number of these households in Huntington Beach is minimal, representing well under 1% of the total extremely low-income households in the City. Low Income (30-50%AMI) • 52% of low-income households in Huntington Beach have severe housing problems, ranging from 0% (Pacific Islanders) to 82% (Black/African Americans) by racial or ethnic group. • Black/African American and American Indian/Alaska Native households earning low incomes evidence a disproportionate housing need, with 82% and 66% respectively, experiencing one or more severe housing problems. At 70 households, Black/African American households represent only under 1% of Huntington Beach's low-income households. Likewise, American Indian/Alaska Native households represent under 1% of low-income households as well, at 50 households. Moderate Income (50-80%AMI) • 25% of moderate-income households in Huntington Beach have severe housing problems, ranging from 0%to 39% by racial or ethnic group. • Hispanic households earning moderate incomes evidence a disproportionate housing need,with 39%experiencing one or more housing problems.At 820 households, Hispanic households represent 7% of Huntington Beach's moderate-income households. Median Income (80-100%AMI) • 10% of median-income households in Huntington Beach experience severe housing problems, ranging from 0%to 20% by racial or ethnic group. • Median income Asian households represent a disproportionate need, with 20% experiencing severe housing problems. Asian households represent under 2% of all households in this income category. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 40 NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens—91.205 (b)(2) Introduction Housing Cost Burden No/negative income (not �.� g �'Iier computed) Jurisdiction as a whole 47,850 14,430 13,580 840 White 34,795 10,000 8,830 590 Black/African American 440 195 185 0 Asian 5,370 1,525 1,530 90 American Indian,Alaska Native 190 35 55 0 Pacific Islander 95 90 15 0 Hispanic 5,740 2,240 2,715 135 Table 23—Greater Need:Housing Cost Burdens AMI Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS Discussion A disproportionately greater housing need exists when the members of a racial or ethnic group at an income level experience housing problems at a greater rate (10%or more)than the income level as a whole. Table 23 above identifies cost burden for each racial and ethnic group earning up to 100%AMI in Huntington Beach, including no cost burden (<30% income towards housing), cost burden (30-50%), severe cost burden (>50%), and not computed due to no/negative income. According to the CHAS data on which this table is based, 19% of Huntington Beach 0- 100% AMI households experience a cost burden, with an additional 18% experiencing a severe cost burden. In comparison with this citywide average, only one racial/ethnicity group— Pacific Islanders - experience disproportionate housing cost burdens. However, with a total of just 90 Pacific Islander households (earning 0-100% AMI) identified as residing in Huntington Beach by the 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS), combined with the sampling methodology utilized by the ACS, the results for such a small sample size are less than statistically significant. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 41 NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion—91.205(b)(2) Are there any Income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category as a whole? The analysis of housing problems and severe housing problems in sections NA-15 and NA-20 identify Hispanic, Asian, African American, Pacific Islander, and American Indian households as evidencing a disproportionate housing need. Tables 24A and 24B below identify the specific income categories among these racial groups where disproportionate need is apparent: Households with Housing Problems (#Households with Housing Problems) Income Citywide Hispanic Asian African Pacific American Category American Islander Indian 78% 89% 90% 100% 0 30% 9,480 1,865 140 15 30-50% 77% -- 100% 6,100 85 50-80% 59% 7,215 80-100% 39% 3 80 3,145 380 Table 24A—Housing Problems:Greater Disproportionate Need %Households with Severe Housing Problems (#Households with Severe Housing Problems) Income African Pacific American Category Citywide Hispanic Asian American Islander Indian 0 30% 70% 86% 84% 100% 9,475 1,790 130 15 30 50% 52% 82% 66% 7,960 70 50 50-80% 25% 39% 12,290 820 80-100% 10% 20% 8,065 140 Table 24B—Severe Housing Problems:Greater Disproportionate Need As illustrated in the above tables, the actual number of households within the Asian, Pacific Islander,African American and American Indian racial groups identified by the HUD CHAS data as experiencing disproportionate housing problems is extremely limited. As previously mentioned, given this small number of households, combined with the sampling methodology utilized by the American Community Survey, the results in such a small sample size are less than statistically significant. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 42 In contrast, disproportionate housing needs among low- and moderate-income Hispanic households are evident in Huntington Beach, particularly for those households of extremely-low income. If they have needs not identified above,what are those needs? Not applicable. Are any of those racial or ethnic groups located in specific areas or neighborhoods in your community? A minority concentration is defined as a census block group with greater than the City average of minority population (20%). Figure 6 (located in Appendix B) depicts minority concentrations in Huntington Beach. Under this definition, seven census block groups are identified as having a concentration of minorities. The majority of these areas are located in the area bound by Bolsa Avenue on the north, Talbert Avenue to the south, Goldenwest Street to the west and Newland Street to the east. Four of the seven census tracts correspond to the City's low- and moderate- income areas (refer to Figure 2). HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 43 NA-35 Public Housing—91.205(b) Introduction The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, formerly called the Section 8 program, is HUD's largest program that helps low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled find affordable decent, safe, and sanitary housing in the private market. Participants receive federally subsidized vouchers that they can use to rent the home or apartment of their choosing, provided that it meets the requirements of the program and agreement of the landlord. The funding assistance is provided to the family or individual, the voucher holder, and can move with the family or individual rather than being tied to the property or unit. The Orange County Housing Authority(OCHA) is the local public agency providing Housing Choice Vouchers within Huntington Beach. According to a special data run conducted by OCHA for the City, as of February 2025, there were a total of 628 Huntington Beach households receiving tenant-based Housing Choice Vouchers; 85 of these were Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Vouchers, 39 were Continuum of Care Vouchers, 16 were Family Self-Sufficiency Vouchers, and 24 were Family Unification Vouchers. Elderly households comprise 61% of the City's Section 8 recipients (381 households), indicative of several large senior housing complexes with significant numbers of Section 8 tenants. The City also has a significant number of disabled households receiving Section 8 (116 households), although many of these households are also likely to be seniors. There are no public housing projects located within Huntington Beach. Totals in Use Program Type Vouchers Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Family Mod- Public Project Tenant Supportive Unification Disabled Certificate Rehab Housing Total -based -based Housing Program #of units vouchers 0 0 0 628 0 628 85 26 116 in use Table 25-Public Housing by Program Type *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year,Mainstream Five-year,and Nursing Home Transition Data Source: PIC(PIH Information Center) Characteristics of Residents HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 44 Program Type Vouchers Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Family Mod- Public Project Tenant Supportive Unification Certificate Rehab Housing Total -based Wised Housing Program Average Annual Income 0 0 0 16,476 0 16,470 17,239 15,594 Average length of stay 0 0 0 8 0 8 0 4 Average Household size 0 0 0 2 0 2 1 3 #Homeless at admission 0 0 0 87 0 5 72 10 #of Elderly Program 0 0 0 4,926 0 4,884 38 3 Participants (>62) #of Disabled 0 0 0 2,163 0 2,075 64 14 Families #of Families requesting 0 0 0 10,825 0 10,418 187 207 accessibility features #of HIV/AIDS program 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 participants #of DV victims 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 26—Characteristics of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Data Source: PIC(PIN Information Center) Race of Residents Program Type Race Vouchers Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Family Mod- Public Project Tenant Supportive Unification Disabled , Afiertificate Rehab Housing Total -based -based Housing Program * White 0 0 0 5,857 0 5,528 139 182 6 Black/African 0 0 0 745 0 693 39 10 2 American Asian 0 0 0 4,128 0 4,107 4 15 2 American Indian/Alaska 0 0 0 64 0 60 4 0 0 Native Pacific 0 0 0 31 0 30 1 0 0 Islander Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 45 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled,Mainstream One-Year,Mainstream Five-year,and Nursing Home Transition Table 27—Race of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Data Source: PIC(PIH Information Center) Ethnicity of Residents Program Type Vouchers Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Family Mod- Public Project Tenant Supportive Unification Disabled Ethnicity Certificate Rehab Housing Total -based -based Housing Program Hispanic 0 0 0 1,941 0 1,814 34 8/ 4 Not Hispanic 0 0 0 8,884 0 8,604 153 120 6 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled,Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year,and Nursing Home Transition Table 27—Ethnicity of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Data Source: PIC(PIH Information Center) HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 46 Section 504 Needs Assessment: Describe the needs of public housing tenants and applicants on the waiting list for accessible units: Not Applicable, as there is no public housing in Huntington Beach and OCHA does not have a public housing program. Most immediate needs of residents of Public Housing and Housing Choice voucher holders The most immediate need of residents with Housing Choice Vouchers is available, affordable rental units that fall within the rent levels of HUD's Fair Market Rents. How do these needs compare to the housing needs of the population at large High rents and low vacancy rates in Orange County effect the population at large, not just low and extremely low-income residents. The increase in home prices has led to a decline in housing affordability, contributing to additional demand for rental housing. Discussion The impact of the high cost of rentals and low vacancy rates is evidenced in the increase in renter overpayment over the past decade. The 2016-20 American Community Survey(ACS) documents 46% of all Huntington Beach renters spend greater than 30% of their income on rent, compared to 38% in 2000. Furthermore,the ACS documents 8%of Huntington Beach's population as below the poverty level. These conditions have contributed to a lengthy waiting list for housing assistance, both for Housing Choice Vouchers from OCHA,tenant based rental assistance offered through the City, and for occupancy within the affordable rental projects within the City. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 47 NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment—91.205(c) Introduction Homelessness has become an increasingly urgent challenge across the United States, particularly in the Los Angeles and Orange County regions. A variety of factors contribute to this rise, including the lack of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income individuals, a growing number of people living below the poverty line, reductions in public assistance programs, substance abuse issues,the de-institutionalization of individuals with mental illness,and, in some cases, an increase in people who choose homelessness as a lifestyle. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) mandates that all Continuum of Care jurisdictions conduct a biennial unsheltered count and an annual sheltered count to measure homelessness on a single night during the last ten days of January. For 2024, Orange County's Sheltered Point in Time (PIT) Count was held on the night of Monday,January 22, 2024, with demographic data collected from all emergency shelter and transitional housing programs throughout the county. The Unsheltered PIT Count took place over three days, from Tuesday, January 23, to Thursday, January 25, 2024, to ensure that the county's 800-square-mile jurisdiction was thoroughly canvassed. With improvements in the PIT process, methodology, and data quality—thanks to the use of GIS technology—the results from the 2019, 2022, and now 2024 counts offer the most accurate representation of Orange County's homeless population to date. It is important to note that the PIT Count not only involves a physical tally of those experiencing homelessness but also includes a formula to estimate the total number of homeless individuals. The 2024 PIT Count identified 7,322 homeless individuals in Orange County, representing a substantial 28% increase from the 2022 count, which recorded 5,718 individuals. In Huntington Beach specifically, the count found 433 homeless individuals-173 of whom were unsheltered and 260 sheltered. This marks an increase from the 2022 figures, which reported a total of 330 homeless individuals: 188 unsheltered and 142 sheltered. Pinpointing the exact cause of the increase is a challenge given the number of variables that could influence the fluctuation of the numbers. The County does know, however, that certain resources existed in 2022 that did not exist during the 2024 PIT Count. Some of those include: • The Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERA). Approximately $300 million in rental assistance was awarded by the County and state to Orange County residents to prevent evictions due to COVID-19. • The Eviction Moratorium pursuant to the COVID-19 pandemic was still in effect; the moratorium ended on May 31, 2022. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 48 While the 2024 Point-in-Time Count report provides specific demographic information about the homeless population for the entire County, data for Huntington Beach specifically is limited. If data is not available for the categories "number of persons becoming and exiting homelessness each year," and "number of days that persons experience homelessness," describe these categories for each homeless population type (including chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth): Nature and Extent of Homelessness: (Optional) Race Sheltered Unsheltered American Indian,Alaskan Native,or Indigenous 36 75 American Indian,Alaska Native,or Indigenous& Hispanic/Latino/e/o 91 28 Asian or Asian American 103 164 Asian or Asian American &Hispanic/Latino/e/o 8 7 Black,African American,or African 329 223 Black,African American,or African&Hispanic/Latino/e/o 13 7 Hispanic/Latino/e/o 37 1509 Middle Eastern or North African 1 40 Middle Eastern or North African &Hispanic/Latino/e/o 0 2 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 53 45 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander& Hispanic/Latino/e/o 12 5 White 1,120 1,772 White& Hispanic/Latino/e/o 1,275 205 Multi-Racial& Hispanic/Latino/e/o 20 14 Multi-Racial&not Hispanic/Latino/e/o 51 77 TOTAL 3,149 4,173 Ethnicity Sheltered Unsheltered Hispanic/Latino/e/o 1,456 1,777 Not Hispanic/Latino/e/o 1,693 2,396 Notes: Race and ethnicity categories have been combined and expanded to align with HUD guidance for race and ethnicity reporting. Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance for families with children and the families of veterans. Individuals and families experiencing homelessness have diverse needs, which can range from medical care, job training, childcare, mental health services, credit counseling, and substance abuse treatment to English language education. Homeless families, in particular, may require housing that accommodates their unique needs, such as sufficient space for family members, affordable childcare, and support through counseling and life skills training. According to the 2024 PIT Count, Orange County's homeless population includes 1,128 people in 347 families with at least one adult and one minor. Of these families, 291 (representing 948 people, including 362 adults and 586 children) were sheltered, which accounts for 84 percent of the total homeless families. Given that Huntington Beach constitutes six percent of the county's HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 49 homeless population, it is estimated that approximately 68 individuals in 21 families within Huntington Beach may require housing assistance. For veterans, specific family data is unavailable for the 328 counted in the county. However, applying the same six percent estimate suggests that about 20 veterans in Huntington Beach may also need housing assistance. Describe the Nature and Extent of Homelessness by Racial and Ethnic Group. The 2024 Point-In-Time Count provides an analysis of the racial and ethnic composition of the homeless population in Orange County. The data indicates that Hispanic individuals account for 56% of this population, followed by White individuals at 39%, Black individuals at 8%, Asian individuals at 4%, American Indian/Alaska Native individuals at 2%, and multi-racial individuals at 2%. This reveals a notable overrepresentation of Hispanic and Black/African American groups within the homeless demographic compared to their respective proportions in the general population, where Hispanics comprise 20% and Black/African Americans less than 2%. Describe the Nature and Extent of Unsheltered and Sheltered Homelessness. The 2024 Point-in-Time (PIT) Count reported that Huntington Beach had an estimated 173 unsheltered homeless individuals and 260 sheltered individuals, accounting for 40% and 60%, respectively, of the total homeless population in the area. In contrast, approximately 57% of the total homeless population of 7,322 in Orange County were unsheltered. This suggests a lower incidence of unsheltered homelessness in Huntington Beach compared to the county overall.This difference may be attributed to the presence of the City's Navigation Center and a Homekey Program site in the city, which was functioning as an emergency shelter at the time of the count. This Homekey Program site is in the process of transitioning to permanent housing. Discussion The data collected from the Orange County 2024 PIT describing 7,322 homeless persons within Orange County, coupled with a 2024 Continuum of Care housing inventory count showing a total of 9,812 total year-round emergency, transitional, and permanent beds/units for homeless persons Orange County suggests the overall need for additional housing for homeless has been met, though not by type of housing. The prevalence of health-related conditions such as substance abuse, mental health, alcoholism, and other issues experienced by homeless persons also suggest a need for public services to assist with these conditions. Public outreach to housing and homeless service providers conducted in support of the Consolidated Plan echoes this need. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 50 NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment- 91.205 (b,d) Introduction Certain segments of the population may have greater difficulty finding adequate and affordable housing due to their unique special needs and circumstances. Such circumstances range from fixed incomes to limited mobility to the need for supportive services. The groups that categorically fall under special needs are the elderly and frail elderly, persons with disabilities, victims of domestic violence, persons with HIV/AIDS, and persons with substance abuse problems. These groups represent a significant part of Huntington Beach's population, and efforts must be made to ensure that decent, affordable and accessible housing is available to all such special needs populations. Describe the characteristics of special needs populations in your community: Elderly The elderly and frail elderly special needs population (age 65 and above) comprise approximately 39,110 residents in Huntington Beach (20%), reflecting a slightly greater proportion of seniors in comparison with Orange County (17%) and California as a whole (16%). Over 47% of Huntington Beach's seniors are 75 years of age and above, a population, which may require more supportive housing options as they age and tend to become more frail. Some of the more pressing housing needs of Huntington Beach's seniors include: • Rental affordability. Rising rents are a particular concern due to the fact that most seniors are on fixed incomes. Of Huntington Beach's approximately 7,495 senior renter households, 70%are low and moderate income (<80%AMI), with 42% low income (<50% AMI). Market rents in Huntington Beach are well beyond the level affordable to low- and moderate-income households, as confirmed by the Census which documents 45% of the City's low/mod income senior renters spending more than half their incomes on rent. • Disabilities. The Census identifies approximately 32% of Huntington Beach's seniors as having one or more disabilities, encompassing physical, sensory and mental disabilities, as well as conditions that limit the senior's ability to leave their home. Combined with the significant number of older seniors (age 75+) indicates a large segment of the senior population that may require various levels of housing support. • Housing maintenance. Huntington Beach has approximately 22,000 senior homeowners. As these homeowners age, many may be unable to maintain their homes or perform minor repairs.The installation of grab bars and other assistance devices may be necessary to enhance accessibility. Addressing the diverse housing needs of Huntington Beach's senior population will require strategies which foster independent living (such as home accessibility improvements, second HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 51 units, rehabilitation assistance), as well as strategies that encourage the provision of a variety of supportive living environments for seniors of all income levels. Persons with Disabilities The 2016-2020 ACS identifies 22,698 Huntington Beach residents as having one or more disabilities, representing 12% of the City's population. About one-third of these adult residents are unable to live independently. The ACS documents the presence of following types of disabilities among Huntington Beach's disabled residents: • Ambulatory-42% • Cognitive—40% • Hearing—29% • Vision — 14% Of the City's senior population, 32% suffer from a disability. As Huntington Beach's population continues to age, the number of residents with disabilities will also increase. Victims of Domestic Violence Individuals fleeing domestic violence are generally women and children. It is difficult to estimate the number of victims of domestic violence, as many victims do not call the police or seek services. Women between the ages of 18 and 44 are at an increased risk for domestic violence, with lower-income and immigrant women particularly vulnerable to abuse. This group needs transitional housing with counseling and supportive services. Persons with HIV/AIDS Persons with HIV/AIDS are considered a special needs group due to their need for affordable housing, health care, counseling and other supportive services. The Orange County Health Care Agency tracks HIV/AIDS cases and reports 266 newly diagnosed HIV cases in 2023 in Orange County. Among the top give cities impacted by new HIV cases include Santa Ana (60), Anaheim (41), Orange (18), Graden Grove (17),Costa Mesa (17), and Irvine (14). Short-term housing needs for persons with AIDS — many of whom face homelessness - may include hospice facilities, shelters or transitional housing. Long term needs include affordable housing near public transportation and health care facilities. Alcohol/Other Drug Abuse According to the National Center for Drug Abuse Statistics, one in ten Americans over the age of 12 suffers from Alcohol Use Disorder. In California, excessive alcohol use is responsible for an average of 15,443 deaths annually. Similarly, about half of individuals aged 12 and older in the United States have used illicit drugs at least once. Drug use is most prevalent among individuals aged 18 to 25, with 39% reporting use, compared to 34% of those aged 26 to 29. In California, an average of 6,198 drug overdoses occur each year, and approximately 2.31% of all deaths in the state are attributed to drug overdose, a figure that has increased by 10.37% over the past three years. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 52 Individuals struggling with drug and alcohol addictions often require a supportive living environment to break the cycle of substance abuse. Supportive housing for individuals with substance use disorders typically includes transitional housing programs that offer counseling, job training, and other resources to facilitate recovery. The County is the primary funding source for these types of programs, helping to provide the necessary services for those in need. What are the housing and supportive service needs of these populations and how are these needs determined? Housing and service needs are addressed under each group heading in the prior section. The housing needs of persons with disabilities is further elaborated on below. Persons with Disabilities Some people with disabilities may live comfortably without special housing accommodations, but persons with physical and/or sensory disabilities often require specially designed, barrier-free housing that allows freedom of movement not only to and from the housing unit, but also within the unit itself. Special modifications to permit free access are very important in maintaining independence. The California Code of Regulations Title 24 requirements set forth access and adaptability requirements for the disabled population.These regulations apply to public buildings and require that ramps, larger door widths, restroom modifications, and other special facilities be incorporated into building designs. However, these standards are not mandatory for new single-family residential construction.Therefore, conventional housing may require modification to ensure its suitability for occupancy by a disabled person. The City has a well-defined Reasonable Accommodation procedure that ensures individuals with disabilities are protected. Specifically, Chapter 17.77 — Reasonable Accommodation Procedures of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) provides an application process and review requirements for a Reasonable Accommodation request from the City's zoning and land use regulations, policies, and practices when necessary to provide an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. Chapter 17.77 ensures that reasonable accommodation requests are processed efficiently without imposing costs on the applicant. The City does not assess a fee for reasonable accommodation requests and does not require a public hearing. The administrative approval of reasonable accommodations is an objective decision- making process. The findings the City must make to provide a reasonable accommodation are based on the objective need to provide an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work independently within a conventional housing environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living environment where supervision is provided. The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person's living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 53 Discuss the size and characteristics of the population with HIV/AIDS and their families within the Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area: As reported in the Orange County Health Care Agency HIV/AIDS Surveillance Program's 2023 HIV Fact Sheet, by the end of 2023, there were 7,044 individuals living with HIV disease in Orange County. Among these individuals, 266 (or 4%) were newly diagnosed with HIV in 2023, highlighting ongoing challenges in both prevention and treatment. The demographic profile of those living with HIV in the county reflects a significant gender disparity, with the majority (78%) of individuals being male. Ethnically, the population is predominantly Hispanic and White, accounting for 51% and 31% of cases, respectively. Asians make up 11% of those living with HIV, and African Americans represent 6% of the population. This distribution points to specific communities that may face unique challenges in terms of access to care, education, and prevention efforts. When examining age distribution, the largest group of individuals diagnosed with HIV in 2023 were between the ages of 26 and 35, comprising 33% of new diagnoses. The next largest age groups were individuals aged 36 to 45 years (25%) and 19 to 25 years (18%). Individuals aged 46 to 55 years made up 14% of new diagnoses, while those 56 years and older accounted for 9%. This age distribution underscores the ongoing need for targeted HIV prevention and treatment strategies, particularly among younger populations, while also addressing the needs of older individuals who may face different health challenges related to living with HIV. This data highlights the importance of continuing efforts to provide comprehensive care,support, and education for individuals living with HIV, while also addressing the specific needs of different demographic groups within the county. If the PJ will establish a preference for a HOME TBRA activity for persons with a specific category of disabilities (e.g., persons with HIV/AIDS or chronic mental illness), describe their unmet need for housing and services needed to narrow the gap in benefits and services received by such persons. (See 24 CFR 92.209(c)(2) (ii)) Not applicable.The City of Huntington Beach administers HOME Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) programs designed to provide crucial support for individuals and families facing housing instability. These programs are specifically targeted to assist homeless individuals, those at risk of homelessness, veterans, victims of domestic violence, families with children, and seniors.The HOME TBRA programs offer rental assistance to help eligible participants secure safe and stable housing while also providing case management and support services to facilitate long-term housing stability. By offering temporary financial assistance and resources, the City aims to prevent homelessness, reduce the risk of eviction, and help vulnerable populations transition into stable, independent living situations. These efforts are essential in addressing the unique challenges faced by these groups, including limited income, high housing costs, and the need for additional supportive services. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 54 Discussion There is a small but significant population of non-homeless special needs persons in the City. Particular attention should be paid to elderly and disabled populations.Seniors 65 and over make up 20% of Huntington Beach's population. It's notable that the elderly population in the City is higher compared to the proportion of seniors in Orange County (17%) and the State as a whole (16%). In addition, among Huntington Beach's 7,500 senior renter households, nearly three- quarters are low and moderate income. This population is particularly vulnerable to rent increases as the majority are on fixed incomes. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 55 NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs—91.215 (f) Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Facilities: The City of Huntington Beach is home to a wide array of public facilities designed to serve the diverse needs of its residents. These amenities include five libraries, 79 parks covering nearly 767 acres with 190 playgrounds, a gym and pool facility, three clubhouses, a nature center, a golf club, a senior center,three community centers, a civic center, an art center, an International Surf Museum, and a community college. Additionally, the City is fortunate to have 208 acres of public beach and a 98-acre public golf course, providing recreational opportunities for residents and visitors alike. However, despite these extensive resources, many of the City's public facilities are aging and require significant repair and modernization. Key infrastructure assets such as the Civic Center, fire stations, libraries, and community centers are facing a range of critical issues, including water intrusion, failing HVAC systems, and outdated electrical infrastructure. Years of underfunding have led to deferred maintenance, creating safety risks and limiting the effectiveness of these facilities.To ensure the continued delivery of essential services and protect public safety,the City must prioritize investment in upgrades, secure additional funding, and adopt sustainable, modern infrastructure practices. The City's 2024 Infrastructure Report Card outlines a number of immediate, near-term, and long- term facility needs.Among the most urgent are the Main Street Library HVAC installation project, critical repairs to police and fire stations throughout the City, and necessary improvements to the Oak View Library, Oak View Family Resource Center, Central Library, and playground improvements at 9th Street and Lagenbeck Parks. To address these challenges, the City follows a five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which serves as a strategic guide for future facility and infrastructure investments. The City's 2023/24—2027/28 CIP identifies citywide facility ADA improvements that could potentially utilize Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)funding over the next five years. Many of the City's public facilities require significant accessibility improvements to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA).These improvements may involve the removal of architectural barriers and updates to restrooms, doors and doorways, signage, and paths of travel to ensure greater accessibility for all residents. By investing in these critical facility projects, the City of Huntington Beach aims to ensure that its public facilities continue to serve the needs of its residents safely and effectively for years to come. How were these needs determined? HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 56 The City of Huntington Beach's Capital Improvement Program forecasts capital needs over a five- year period based on various long-range plans, goals, and policies. The plan presents a comprehensive listing of planned and projected capital project needs which have been identified by City staff for the five-year planning period. The CIP document includes both new projects and upgrades to existing facilities. Needs were also determined in the City's 2024 Infrastructure Report Card which offers an evaluation of 13 infrastructure subcategories, including public facilities and parks, and aim to highlight strengths and urgent challenges while creating a long-term plan for a resilient Huntington Beach. While Huntington Beach benefits from adequate services in areas like parks, the pier and plaza, and roads, several systems—including stormwater, wastewater, and city facilities—are aging and approaching the end of their useful life. Of particular concern are the rehabilitation of City facilities, alleys, and pump stations, which have been identified as critical objectives requiring immediate attention to prevent service disruptions and safety risks. Finally, a Housing and Community Development survey was available during the development of this Con Plan. Of the 334 surveys collected, respondents ranked parks and playgrounds, community/neighborhood facilities, and childcare/youth facilities as the top three facility needs in Huntington Beach. Funds for capital improvement projects are provided mainly from Infrastructure Funds, however, some projects, particularly those involving sidewalk, curb, and gutter construction in enhancement areas, community center renovations, and citywide ADA improvements, can be funded with CDBG funds. Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Improvements: Infrastructure improvements cover such issues as upgrades or expansion of streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, sewer and drainage systems, and streetlights, and are in general an eligible expenditure for CDBG funds within low and moderate-income areas. Most of Huntington Beach's low-and moderate-income neighborhoods are older, and many contain aging infrastructure.The City's CIP has identified ADA ramp repairs and installation to be funded with CDBG funding in the next five years. CDBG funds will be allocated for the repair, design, and construction of ADA ramps throughout Huntington Beach, enhancing accessibility across key public spaces and ensuring that residents with mobility challenges have equal access to the City's services and facilities. How were these needs determined? The City's Capital Improvements Plan identifies infrastructure and public improvements to be undertaken in Huntington Beach from 2023/24 to 2027/28. The City has generally relied on a variety of other non-CDBG funding sources to pay for infrastructure improvements, and is actively addressing water, sewer, storm drain and street deficiencies through ongoing projects. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 57 Nonetheless, the City may direct CDBG funds towards infrastructure improvements in low- and moderate-income enhancement neighborhoods as needed. The Consolidated Plan Housing and Community Development Needs Survey, completed by 334 households in Huntington Beach identified sidewalk improvements, bicycle and walking paths, street and alley improvements, and tree planning/beautification as the most critical community development needs in Huntington Beach. Describe the jurisdiction's need for Public Services: Huntington Beach is home to a diverse range of special needs populations, as well as numerous low- and moderate-income households, all of which have distinct public service needs. Consultation with community residents and social service providers, conducted as part of this Consolidated Plan, has led to the identification of several critical service needs within the City. These needs are essential to supporting the well-being of vulnerable groups and enhancing overall community health and resilience. The following key service areas were highlighted: 1. Homeless Services: Addressing the needs of the homeless population, including services tailored to homeless youth, mental health care, case management, and wraparound services that offer comprehensive support. 2. Senior Services: Providing resources for homebound seniors, offering home modification assistance, ensuring access to nutrition resources, and providing respite for caregivers to support aging residents. 3. Healthcare and Mental Health Services: Expanding access to mental health services, substance abuse treatment, healthcare specifically for seniors, and drug and alcohol education to foster improved health outcomes for residents. 4. Financial Support Services: General support services that provide additional financial resources to assist individuals and families in need. 5. Disability Services: Offering resources for persons with disabilities, including assistive technology and other tools to support independence and enhance quality of life for individuals with disabilities. 6. Affordable Childcare: Access to affordable childcare services that enable families to work and maintain financial stability while ensuring quality care for their children. 7. Youth Services: Providing recreational and sports programs to engage young people, promoting physical activity, teamwork, and social skills development. Additionally, the Housing and Community Development Needs Survey revealed that the most urgent needs identified by residents included anti-crime efforts, homelessness prevention, and services for victims of domestic violence (for further details, see Appendix C). The City of Huntington Beach, along with local nonprofit organizations, offers a wide range of services to address the needs of low- and moderate-income residents, as well as those with special needs such as persons with disabilities and the homeless. The City actively supports the delivery of these essential services through its Community Services and Police Departments, HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 58 alongside its ongoing partnership with public service providers, ensuring a coordinated and effective response to the community's most pressing challenges. How were these needs determined? Consultation with social service providers actively engaged in the Huntington Beach area, coupled with the distribution of a comprehensive Housing and Community Development Needs Survey, has resulted in valuable and detailed input regarding the needs of the diverse populations they serve. This feedback has been instrumental in identifying critical areas of concern and in shaping a clear understanding of the challenges facing these communities. Additionally, the Community Development Department has played a vital role by offering crucial guidance in prioritizing public service needs, ensuring that resources and efforts are strategically directed toward the most pressing issues.This collaborative approach ensures that both community needs and departmental objectives are aligned, fostering a more effective and responsive strategy for addressing housing and social service challenges in Huntington Beach. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 59 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS MA-05 Overview Housing Market Analysis Overview Table 28 presents the City's housing unit mix, as reported in the 2016-2020 ACS. The City has approximately 81,840 housing units, reflecting a net increase of about 2,679 units over the past 10 years. The mix of housing types in Huntington Beach has remained relatively stable over the past two decades, with 60% of units being single-family homes and 36% being multi-family units. Additionally, the City has 18 mobile home parks, containing approximately 3,290 mobile home units, which make up 4% of the City's total housing stock. Housing tenure refers to whether a housing unit is owned, rented, or vacant. It serves as a key indicator of the housing climate within a community, reflecting the relative affordability of housing and residents' ability to access housing opportunities. Tenure also influences residential mobility, with owner-occupied units generally experiencing lower turnover rates compared to rental housing. According to the 2016-2020 ACS (Table 29), 54% of Huntington Beach's households are homeowners, while 41% are renters. Over the past two decades, owner occupancy has slightly declined in the City. This trend can be partly attributed to the increasing cost of homeownership and the development of multi-family housing designed to maximize the use of residentially zoned land. Another important characteristic of the City's housing supply is unit size in relation to the number of bedrooms. Large households, defined as those with five or more members, create a demand for units with three or more bedrooms. The 2016-2020 ACS identifies 8,430 rental units in Huntington Beach with three or more bedrooms, which generally aligns with the needs of the City's 5,592 large renter households. While it may seem that there is a sufficient supply of large rental units, many of these units are likely single-family homes, which may not be affordable for renters. Regarding single-person households, approximately 25% of the City's renters are one-person households, yet only 4% of the rental stock consists of studio units (without a bedroom). Although one-bedroom units account for an additional 24% of rental housing in Huntington Beach, the high rental prices make these units unaffordable for many single individuals. The vacancy rate is a key indicator of overall housing availability within a community and often reflects how well the current supply of for-sale and rental housing meets demand.A vacancy rate of 5%for rental housing and 2%for ownership housing is typically regarded as healthy, indicating a balance between housing supply and demand. According to the 2020 Census, the residential vacancy rate in Huntington Beach was 1.2% for ownership units, signaling a limited supply of homes on the market. For rental housing,the 2020 Census reported a vacancy rate of 2.6%,which is significantly below the healthy rate of 5%. Moreover, the City's August 2024 Multi-Family HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 60 Submarket Report by CoStar Group, a company specializing in real estate information and analytics, documented a multi-family rental vacancy rate of 3.2%for the Huntington Beach/Seal Beach area.This report suggests that the Huntington Beach multi-family vacancy rate is declining due to insufficient supply growth. Additionally, a recent survey conducted in February 2025 on the California Regional Multiple Listing System (CRMLS) indicated only 165 available rental units in Huntington Beach, with prices ranging from $1,495 per month for a 300-square-foot unit to $35,000 per month for a nearly 6,800-square-foot harbor front property. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 61 MA-10 Number of Housing Units—91.210(a)&(b)(2) Introduction All residential properties by number of units Property Type Number 1-unit detached structure 39,030 48% 1-unit,attached structure 9,445 12% 2-4 units 10,965 13% 5-19 units 8,400 10% 20 or more units 10,710 13% Mobile Home,boat, RV,van,etc 3,290 4% Total 81,840 100% Table 28—Residential Properties by Unit Number Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS Unit Size by Tenure Owners Renters Number % Number % No bedroom 260 1% 1,465 4% 1 bedroom 1,255 3% 8,170 24% 2 bedrooms 6,930 16% 15,575 46% 3 or more bedrooms 35,500 81% 8,430 25% Total 43,945 101% 33,640 99% Table 29—Unit Size by Tenure Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS Describe the number and targeting (income level/type of family served) of units assisted with federal, state, and local programs. As presented in the Affordable Rental Housing Table below, Huntington Beach currently has 2,459 deed-restricted affordable units. Approximately 20 percent (502 units) of these affordable units are for senior citizens, with the remainder available to family households. This inventory includes all multi-family units assisted under federal, state, and local programs, including HUD, state/local bond programs, density bonus, inclusionary, and former redevelopment programs. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 62 Tenant Total Affordable Potential Conversion Project Name Type Units Units Date American Family Housing 7802 Barton Drive Family 4 4 Very Low 2029 Avalon Huntington Beach (Lofts) Family 384 39 Moderate 2070 7400 Center Avenue Beach and Ocean Apartments Family 173 17 Moderate 2070 19891 Beach Boulevard Beach Grove Apartments(Bridges) 16851 Nichols Lane Family 80 80 Low 2027 Beachview Villa Apartments 47 Very Low 8102 Ellis Avenue Family 106 59 Low n/a Boardwalk by Windsor Family 487 10 Very Low 2070 7461 Edinger Avenue 47 Moderate Breakwater 135 Low Family 402 2036-2051 16761 Viewpoint Lane 267 Moderate Colette's Children's Home III Family 10 4 Very Low 2068 17432-17442 Keelson Lane 6 Low Elan 110 Low 18504 Beach Boulevard Family 274 164 Moderate 2036-2051 Hermosa Vista Apartments Family 88 26 Very Low 2063 15363& 15425 Goldenwest Street 62 Low Huntington Pointe Family 104 21 Very Low 2061 18992 Florida Street 83 Low Huntington Villa Yorba 16000 Villa Yorba Lane Family 192 192 Very Low n/a Luce Apartments 8 Low Family 510 2073 7290 Edinger Avenue 43 Moderate Main Place Apartments Family 29 26 Low 2033 7305 Luna Newman Avenue Family 13 1 Very Low 2066 7912 Newman Avenue 1 Low O.C.Community Housing—11th Street Family 9 9 Very Low 2034 313 11th Street O.C.Community Housing—Barton Family4 2 Very Low 2072 7792 Barton Lane 2 Low O.C.Community Housing—Koledo I Family 10 10 Very Low 2060 17361& 17371 Koledo Lane O.C. Community Housing—Koledo II Family 8 8 Very Low 2060 17351& 17291 Koledo Lane O.C. Community Housing—Koledo III 17401& 17432 Koledo Lane Family 10 10 Very Low 2060 O.C.Community Housing—Koledo IV Family 10 10 Very Low 2060 17411& 17421 Koledo Lane O.C.Community Housing—Koledo V 17412 Koledo Lane Family 5 5 Very Low 2060 O.C.Community Housing—Queens Family 8 8 Very Low 2027 17422&17432 Queens Oakview Apartments Family 4 4 Very Low 2067 17362 Jacqueline Lane Oakview Apartments Family 5 5 Very Low 2067 17362 Koledo Lane HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 63 Oakview Apartments 4 Very Low 17372 Koledo Lane Family 5 1 Low 2066 Oakview Apartments 17442 Koledo Lane Family 5 5 Very Low 2067 Oceana Apartments 8 Ext. Low 18151 Beach Boulevard Family 77 24 Very Low 2027 45 Low Ocean Aire Apartments 3 Low 7811 Talbert Avenue Family 65 18 Median 2068 44 Moderate Pacific Court Apartments Family 48 23 Very Low 2069 2200 Delaware Street 24 Low Pacific Sun Apartments (Colette's Children's Home) Family 6 6 Very Low 2062 17452, 17462, 17472 Keelson Lane Regency Apartments Family 30 3 Low 2073 1345-1365 Delaware Residences at Bella Terra Family 467 28 Very Low 2072 7521 Edinger Avenue 43 Moderate Residences at Pacific City Family 516 51 Moderate 2026 21060 Pacific City Circle Sea Aire Apartments Family 36 36 Low 2026 725,729, 733 Utica Sher Lane Apartments Family 66 33 Very Low 2028 16112 Sher Lane 33 Low Bowen Court 1978 Lake Street Senior 20 20 Very Low 2062 Emerald Cove Senior Apartments Senior 162 114 Very Low 2070 18191 Parktree Circle 48 Low Five Points Senior Apartments 33 Very Low 18561 Floria Street Senior 164 15 Moderate 2026 Fountain Glen at Seacliff 55 Very Low 7181 Garden Glen Court Senior 271 25 Low 2062 Huntington Gardens 18765 Florida Street Senior 183 183 Very Low n/a Pelican Harbor 33 Extremely 18431 Beach Boulevard Senior 42 Low 2084 9 Very Low TOTALS 2,459 units Provide an assessment of units expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory for any reason, such as expiration of Section 8 contracts. In return for public assistance, the developer/owners of affordable housing developments are typically required to make the units affordable to lower income households for a specified period of time contingent on the requirements of individual funding programs or city incentives (such as density bonus). HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 64 Upon expiration of a project's affordability controls, the affordable units are at risk of being sold or converted to market rate housing. As documented in the City's Affordable Rental Housing Table above, the City has 293 deed-restricted affordable units that are at risk of conversion to market rates during the 2025-2029 Con Plan period. This includes 48 senior units and 245 family units. Does the availability of housing units meet the needs of the population? The available housing units do not meet the needs of low-income City residents, as evidenced by the high rates of housing overpayment discussed in the following section on the Cost of Housing (MA-15). Describe the need for specific types of housing: The following types of housing are not being provided for in the market without some level of public assistance: • Rental housing affordable to extremely low-, low- and moderate-income households. • Rental housing with three or more bedrooms affordable to low- and moderate-income large households (5+ members). • Studio rental units affordable to low- and moderate-income single person households. • Homeownership housing affordable to the moderate- and middle-income workforce. • Affordable, accessible housing for persons living with disabilities. • Permanent supportive housing for persons with special needs, including homeless individuals and families, persons living with HIV/AIDS and their families, transition age (emancipated foster care) youth, persons with chronic mental illness, and others. Discussion The City of Huntington Beach utilizes a diverse range of funding sources for housing development, rehabilitation, tenant-based rental assistance, and services for special needs and at-risk populations. However, the overall funding available to the City is limited, and it can take several years to accumulate sufficient resources for housing projects.Some funding sources,such as the remaining housing successor funds from the dissolution of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, have been allocated to the Homekey Program project for major renovation/construction of "The Oasis" at 17251 Beach Boulevard. The City's primary funding source for affordable housing is the federal HOME program, though unfortunately, these funds have been steadily reduced each year. Over the past five years, the City has directed its HOME funds toward a significant affordable senior housing project, Pelican Harbor at 18431 Beach Boulevard consisting of 43 units, nine of which are HOME-restricted. Additionally,the City has supported several tenant-based rental assistance programs, which have provided housing opportunities for homeless individuals, those at risk of homelessness, seniors, veterans, and victims of domestic violence. These programs have not only facilitated access to HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 65 housing but have also provided essential support services to promote self-sufficiency and independence. As federal HOME funds continue to decline, the City will increasingly rely on alternative funding sources, such as Low-Income Housing Tax Credits,to finance future affordable housing initiatives. In this context, the City must also advocate for legislative changes that would secure increased funding for affordable housing. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 66 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing-91.210(a) Introduction Many housing challenges, such as overcrowding and cost burden, are directly linked to the cost of housing within a community. When housing costs are high in relation to household income, the prevalence of housing issues tends to be significantly higher. This section examines the affordability of housing in Huntington Beach for lower and moderate-income households. Cost of Housing Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2020 %Change Median Home Value 642,900 803,400 25% Median Contract Rent 1,535 1,881 23% Table 30-Cost of Housing Data Source: 2000 Census(Base Year),2016-2020 ACS(Most Recent Year) Rent Paid Number Less than$500 1,725 5.1% $500-999 1,020 3.0% 51,000-1,499 4,755 14.1% $1,500-1,999 12,765 37.9% $2,000 or more 13,390 39.8% Total 33,655 100.0% Table 31-Rent Paid Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS Housing Affordability Number of Units Renter Owner affordable to Households earning Units Households Units Households 30%HAMFI 1,410 6,500 No Data 4,210 50%HAMFI 2,945 4,765 1,245 4,205 80%HAMFI 14,635 7,155 2,295 6,520 100%HAMFI No Data 4,260 3,750 5,060 Total 18,990 22,680 7,290 19,995 Table 32-Housing Affordability Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS Monthly Rent Efficiency(no Monthly Rent($) bedroom) 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Online Rental Survey $2,725 $2,800 $3,750 $6,250 $6,950 Fair Market Rent $2,200 $2,344 $2,783 $3,769 $4,467 High HOME Rent $1,826 $1,958 $2,352 $2,708 $3,001 Low HOME Rent $1,381 $1,479 $1,776 $2,051 $2,288 Table 33-Monthly Rent Data Source Comments: Online Rental Survey conducted on 02/25/2024 on the California Regional Multiple Listing System(CRMLS) HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 67 Is there sufficient housing for households at all income levels? No. The greatest need for affordable housing in Huntington Beach continues to be for extremely low-income households. However, even moderate-income households face significant challenges due to high rent levels, making it difficult to find suitable housing. Table 32, "Housing Affordability," outlines the number of owner and renter housing units in Huntington Beach that are affordable for households within each income range, based on the affordability standard of spending no more than 30% of income on total housing costs. By incorporating data from the 2016-2020 CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) report, which details the number of owner and renter households in each income category, we can better understand the housing shortage for low- and moderate-income households. For instance, the table reveals that there are only 4,355 rental units in Huntington Beach affordable to low-income (<50% AMI) households, while there are 11,265 lower-income renter households, creating a shortfall of more than 250% in affordable rental housing. In the case of owner-occupied housing,the 2016-2020 CHAS report identifies just 7,290 affordable homeowner units, while there are 19,995 owner households earning less than 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI). These disparities between household incomes and housing costs mean a significant portion of Huntington Beach's population is spending more than 30% of their income on housing. How is affordability of housing likely to change considering changes to home values and/or rents? High prices and low inventory keep home ownership out of reach for many Huntington Beach residents. Limited land for new development, increasing construction costs, and rising inflation rates are all anticipated to keep home prices from dropping to affordable levels for many households.At the same time,the"Great Recession" and housing crisis in 2008 and 2009 resulted in many previous homeowners becoming renters. This increased demand for rental housing has placed upward pressure on rents, negatively impacting housing affordability for renters. How do HOME rents/ Fair Market Rent compare to Area Median Rent? How might this impact your strategy to produce or preserve affordable housing? A rental survey conducted on the CRMLS in February 2025 documented a total of 169 rental units available, including three 0-bedroom units, 33 one-bedroom units, 49 two-bedroom units, 43 three-bedroom units, 36 four-bedroom units, three five-bedroom units, and two six-bedroom units. According to the survey data, the median rents by bedroom size are as follows: $2,725 for a studio/0-bedroom, $2,800 for a one-bedroom, $3,750 for a two-bedroom, $6,250 for a three- bedroom, $6,950 for a four-bedroom, $8,800 for a five-bedroom, and $10,250 for a six-bedroom rental unit. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 68 As shown in Table 33, HUD Fair Market Rents (FMRs) are significantly underestimated compared to actual market rents in February 2025. For example, a 0-bedroom studio rents for a median price of$2,725, while HUD's reported fair market rent is$2,200, resulting in a difference of$525. The most significant discrepancies between current rental rates and FMRs are seen in three-and four-bedroom units, with deviations of nearly$2,500 each. The high rental market in Huntington Beach particularly affects the Section 8 rental subsidy program, administered by the Orange County Housing Authority, which relies on private landlords who request rents above the payment standards allowed. Discussion Housing affordability is based on the relationship between household income and housing expenses. According to HUD and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), housing is considered "affordable" if the monthly payment is no more than 30%of a household's gross income. Table 34 presents maximum affordable rents by income level and household size and compares that with median market apartment rents in Huntington Beach. As the table indicates, citywide average rents are above the level of affordability for all extremely low-, low- and moderate- income households. For example, the maximum affordable monthly rent for a three-person low- income household is $1,776, or up to $2,841 for moderate income household, whereas the median market rent for a two-bedroom apartment is $3,750. Maximum Affordable Rent Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom Income Level (1 person) (2 person) (3 person) (4 person) Extremely Low Income (0 30%AMI) $829 $948 $1,066 $1,184 Low Income (31 50%AMI) $1,381 $1,578 $1,776 $1,973 Moderate Income (51 80%AMI) $2,210 $2,525 $2,841 $3,156 Huntington Beach Average Apt Rents $2,725 $2,800 $3,750 $6,250 Table 34—Comparison of Market and Affordable Rents Housing sales price statistics for January 2025 were gathered from the CRMLS, providing an in- depth look at the housing market in Huntington Beach. According to the data, 89 condominiums and single-family homes were sold during the month, with a median sales price of $1,355,000. This price point is well beyond the reach of low-to moderate-income households, who struggle to afford homes in this price range. While there are some older and more affordable units on the market, these are becoming increasingly rare. Moreover, it is highly unlikely that any market-rate homes or condominiums HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 69 would be affordable to lower- or moderate-income residents, particularly those earning up to 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI). For households in this income bracket, the current housing prices in Huntington Beach present an insurmountable barrier to homeownership. The sales price data underscores a broader trend in beach communities, where housing costs are generally much higher than in other regions. In order to make homeownership accessible to low- and moderate-income buyers, it is clear that significant public subsidies are required. Without such subsidies, it is virtually impossible for these households to purchase homes at market prices, given the extreme price disparities between what they can afford and the current market rates. This highlights the growing need for affordable housing initiatives and the importance of providing financial support to bridge the gap between market prices and the needs of lower- income buyers. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 70 MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing—91.210(a) Introduction To adequately meet the needs of residents, housing within a city must be in habitable and safe condition,free from hazards such as lead-based paint, faulty electrical wiring, or other structural or safety concerns. Housing units in poor condition pose a significant risk to the health and safety of residents, potentially leading to serious injuries or long-term health issues. In addition to the immediate risks to residents, housing in disrepair can result in considerable financial costs for the City or housing providers including costly repairs, potential legal liabilities, and a decrease in property values. Ensuring that all housing units meet basic standards of safety and quality is crucial not only for the well-being of individuals and families, but also for maintaining the overall health of the community. Substandard housing conditions can also contribute to broader issues such as increased emergency services calls, public health concerns, and a lower quality of life for residents. This section provides a comprehensive overview of the condition of housing throughout Huntington Beach, examining the prevalence of housing in need of repairs or upgrades and identifying areas where intervention is needed to maintain safety standards and improve living conditions for residents. Describe the jurisdiction's definition of"standard condition" and "substandard condition but suitable for rehabilitation": The term "standard housing condition" is defined as a dwelling unit that complies with the California State Health and Safety Codes. According to this definition, substandard conditions, as outlined in the State Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3, refer to a dwelling that presents any of the following hazards that could pose a risk to health or safety: (a) inadequate sanitation, (b) structural hazards, (c) nuisances, (d) electrical wiring issues, (e) plumbing problems, (f) mechanical equipment malfunctions, (g) faulty weather protection, (h) risk of fire or explosion, and other unsafe conditions. A dwelling is generally considered suitable for rehabilitation if the cost of repairs does not exceed 75% of the unit's replacement value. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 71 Condition of Units Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Condition of Units Number % Number % With one selected Condition 13,025 30% 14,980 45% With two selected Conditions 165 0% 1,665 5% With three selected Conditions 0 0% 25 0% With four selected Conditions 0 0% 0 0% No selected Conditions 30,755 70% 16,975 50% Total 43,945 100% 33,645 100% Table 35-Condition of Units Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS Year Unit Built Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Year Unit Built Number % Number % 2000 or later 3,285 7% 2,985 9% 1980-1999 8,145 19% 6,665 20% 1950-1979 32,015 73% 22,590 67% Before 1950 505 1% 1,400 4% Total 43,950 100% 33,640 100% Table 36—Year Unit Built Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard Number % Number % Total Number of Units Built Before 1980 32,520 74% 23,990 71% Housing Units build before 1980 with children present 1,820 4% 920 3% Table 37—Risk of Lead-Based Paint Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS(Total Units)2016-2020 CHAS(Units with Children present) Vacant Units Suitable for Not Suitable for Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Total Vacant Units Abandoned Vacant Units REO Properties Abandoned REO Properties Table 38-Vacant Units Need for Owner and Rental Rehabilitation The age of a community's housing stock can provide an indicator of overall housing conditions. Typically housing over 30 years in age is likely to need rehabilitation work to major elements of HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 72 the structure, such as roofing, siding, plumbing and electrical systems. As a mature community, the majority of Huntington Beach's housing stock consists of units older than 30 years of age, as shown in Table 36.Among owner-occupied housing,74%of units were constructed prior to 1980, reflective of post WWII building boom throughout much of Orange County. Similarly, a substantial proportion of Huntington Beach's rental housing is greater than 30 years in age(71%); this housing typically suffers more wear-and-tear from tenants than owner-occupied housing. Table 35 presents the number of housing units in Huntington Beach with one or more housing problems, including: 1) lack of complete plumbing facilities, 2) lack of complete kitchen facilities, 3) more than one person per room, and 4) cost burden greater than 30 percent. As presented, approximately 30% of owner units have one or more of these problems (or "conditions"), and approximately 50% of renter units have one or more problems. The majority of these problems are associated with housing cost burden, rather than household overcrowding or the physical condition of the unit, as confirmed by Table 9 Housing Problems (among households earning up to 100 percent AMI)which identifies 650 units in Huntington Beach as lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities, and 2,170 overcrowded households, in comparison to 23,230 households experiencing cost burden. As indicated in Table 38, given the strength of Huntington Beach's housing market, City Code Enforcement staff are unaware of any homes sitting vacant or bank-owned in need of rehabilitation or replacement. Estimated Number of Housing Units Occupied by Low- or Moderate-Income Families with LBP Hazards The age of the housing stock is the key variable for estimating the number of housing units with lead-based paint. Starting in 1978, the use of lead-based paint on residential property was prohibited. National studies estimate that 75 percent of all residential structures contain lead- based paint and that older structures have the highest percentage of lead-based paint. As shown Table 36, about 74% of Huntington Beach's owner-occupied units were built prior to 1980, and of these 32,520 units, just 4% or 1,820 units have occupants that include children. Similarly, among Huntington Beach's rental housing, 71% were built prior to 1980 (23,990 units), with children present in just 3% or 920 of these units. Pre-1980 housing units with children pose the greatest threat of lead poisoning. With an estimated 2,740 such households in Huntington Beach, lead exposure among children is not a sizable issue. Another risk factor is household income, with lower income households having a greater risk of exposure. The 2016-2020 CHAS identifies 43 percent of Huntington Beach's households as earning less than 80 percent HAMFIError! Reference source not found., translating to an estimated 33,355 low- and moderate- income households residing in the City's approximately 56,510 pre-1980 housing units. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 73 Discussion As documented in Huntington Beach's 2013-21 Housing Element, City Code Enforcement staff conducted a citywide windshield survey to identify neighborhoods with deteriorating or deteriorated housing conditions. The survey focused on the exterior and publicly visible areas of units, rating each unit as"good," "fair,"or"poor" based on several factors,such as roof condition, paint, and landscaping. A total of 318 units were identified as needing significant repair or replacement. The City is committed to maintaining housing units in compliance with standards and continues to monitor those in need of repair or replacement through its Code Enforcement Division. In addition to the housing conditions survey, City staff identified areas of deterioration based on observed violations of the Uniform Housing Code. This effort was part of a broader strategy to identify geographic areas that meet the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidelines for utilizing Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding for targeted code enforcement and preservation activities. The survey revealed a significant deterioration issue in the area bounded by Bolsa Chica Street to the west, Bolsa Avenue to the north, Brookhurst Street to the east, and Atlanta Avenue to the south. This area, known as the "Special Code Enforcement Target Area," includes several census tracts and has a total population of 67,625. Of these residents, 45,300 individuals (69.99%) fall within the low- to moderate-income bracket. Special Code Enforcement Target Area Census Tract Total Persons Total LMI Persons Percentage 0992121 1,195 900 75.30% 0992122 1,385 895 64.60% 0992123 1,710 1,120 65.50% 0992124 1,250 890 71.20% 0992141 1,055 645 61.10% 0992142 725 395 54.50% 0992144 770 510 66.20% 0992161 1,000 575 57.50% 0992164 840 620 73.80% 0992204 1,490 825 55.40% 0992353 1,945 1,045 53.70% 0992404 2,145 1,405 65.50% 0992421 1,220 640 52.50% 0992432 1,765 930 52.70% 0992442 1,615 970 60.10% 0993052 2,120 1,755 82.80% 0993061 1,985 1,140 57.40% 0993062 885 600 67.80% 0993063 665 485 72.90% 0993065 810 435 53.70% 0993094 1,050 850 81.00% 0993102 1,240 910 73.40% 0993113 765 460 60.10% HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 74 0994021 2,615 1,975 75.50% 0994022 2,735 2,245 82.10% 0994024 1,720 1,320 76.70% 0994062 3,095 2,025 65.40% 0994101 1,160 600 51.70% 0994103 2,810 2,165 77.00% 0994112 2,480 2,055 82.90% 0994113 1,430 1,285 89.90% 0994114 1,005 655 65.20% 0994121 2,045 1,360 66.50% 0994163 2,675 1,420 53.10% 0994171 2,535 1,535 60.60% 0994183 1,890 1,510 79.90% 0995081 1,475 795 53.90% 0995083 1,930 1,615 83.70% 0995084 1,160 610 52.60% 0996041 1,945 1,085 55.80% 0997022 1,800 1,050 58.30% 0997031 1,490 995 66.80% TOTAL 67,625 45,300 66.99% Table 39—Special Code Enforcement Area by Census Tract Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS for LMI estimates by Census Tract HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 75 MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing—91.210(b) Introduction The following section discusses the Housing Assistance Voucher (formerly Section 8) rental assistance program administered by the Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA), consisting of 628 vouchers for low-income households in use in the City of Huntington Beach (2025).The City's inventory of 2,459 units of assisted rental housing, and 293 units at risk of conversion to market rate, is discussed in the earlier section MA-10. OCHA does not have any public housing. Within the overall Housing Assistance Voucher rental assistance program, OCHA administers several specialized HUD programs. The three specialized programs active in Huntington Beach are: Veteran Affairs Supportive Housing, Shelter Plus Care, and Family Unification. Each of these programs is described below, and the number of participants in the City identified. • The Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing(HUD-VASH) Program provides permanent housing subsidies and case management services to homeless veterans with mental and addictive disorders through a collaboration of the Departments of Housing and Urban Development and Veteran Affairs.A total of 650 HUD- VASH vouchers are being currently utilized in Orange County, with 85 (13%) in use within Huntington Beach. • The CoC (Continuum of Care) Program is designed to assist individuals and families experiencing homelessness by providing services to help them move into transitional and permanent housing. The program aims to promote communitywide commitment to ending homelessness by funding nonprofit providers and local governments. Additionally, the housing choice voucher program allows very low-income families to choose their own housing, with the assistance of the Public Housing Authority (PHA). A total of 40 CoC families are currently receiving housing choice vouchers as of January 2025. • Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Program is a proactive initiative by HUD that assists families living in public housing or receiving Section 8 vouchers. It aims to foster economic independence by providing services such as case management, referrals, and supportive social services. Eleven households in Huntington Beach are currently enrolled in the FSS Program. • The Family Unification Program (FUP) provides housing assistance to families for whom the lack of adequate housing is a primary factor in the separation of children from their parents. Under FUP, rental assistance is provided to families for whom the lack of adequate housing would result in 1) the imminent placement of the family's child or children in out-of-home care, or 2) the delay in the discharge of the child or children to HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 76 the family from out-of-home care. Twenty-four families in Huntington Beach are currently assisted through the FUP program. • Families assisted under OCHA's HCV program, may move from their current unit to another unit within OCHA's jurisdiction, or to a unit outside OCHA's jurisdiction under Portability. Within the limitations of the regulations a participant family or an applicant family that has been issued a voucher has the right to use tenant-based voucher assistance to lease a unit anywhere in the United States providing that the unit is located within the jurisdiction of a PHA administering a tenant-based voucher program The process by which a family obtains a voucher from one PHA and uses it to lease a unit in the jurisdiction of another PHA is known as portability. There are 115 Huntington Beach residents utilizing the portability allowability. • The Rental Assistance for Non-Elderly Persons with Disabilities Program provides incremental Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) for non-elderly disabled families served by PHAs with demonstrated experience and resources for supportive services. These vouchers will enable non-elderly disabled (NED) persons residing in nursing homes or other healthcare institutions to transition into the community with appropriate services. One Huntington Beach resident is currently receiving a NED voucher. • The Emergency Housing Voucher (EHV) program provides a significant opportunity for PHAs, Continuums of Care's, and Victim Service Providers (VSPs) to develop collaborative partnerships and strategies that effectively address the needs of vulnerable populations in their communities. Through EHV, HUD provided 70,000 housing choice vouchers to local PHAs to assist individuals and families who are homeless, at-risk of homelessness, fleeing, or attempting to flee, domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or human trafficking, or were recently homeless or have a high risk of housing instability. Fifty-nine Huntington Beach households are currently receiving emergency housing vouchers. Totals Number of Units Program Type Vouchers Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Tenant Affairs Family Mod- Public Project -based Supportive Unification Disabled Certificate Rehab Housing Total -based Housing Program * #of units vouchers 628 628 85 24 1 available #of accessible units *includes Non-Elderly Disabled,Mainstream One-Year,Mainstream Five-year,and Nursing Home Transition Table 40—Total Number of Units by Program Type HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 77 Data Source: Orange County Housing Authority,January 2025 Describe the supply of public housing developments: Not applicable. Describe the number and physical condition of public housing units in the jurisdiction, including those that are participating in an approved Public Housing Agency Plan: Not applicable. Public Housing Condition Public Housing Development Average Inspection Score Table 41-Public Housing Condition Describe the restoration and revitalization needs of public housing units in the jurisdiction: Not applicable. Describe the public housing agency's strategy for improving the living environment of low-and moderate-income families residing in public housing: Not applicable. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 78 MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services—91.210(c) Introduction Table 40 presents an inventory of emergency shelter, transitional, and permanent supportive housing facilities located within Huntington Beach, as well as in the surrounding communities of Costa Mesa, Santa Ana, Fountain Valley and Westminster, as reported by the Orange County Continuum of Care. Transitional housing is intended to facilitate the transition of homeless individuals and families to permanent housing. This type of housing limits the length of stay and re-circulates the assisted unit to another eligible individual or family. Supportive housing is defined as permanent rental housing linked to a range of support services designed to enable residents to maintain stable housing. A total of 3,301 beds were counted as part of the 2024 Orange County Continuum of Care (CoC) Housing Inventory, with 336 beds specifically available within Huntington Beach. The narrative that follows describes these facilities, as well as homeless services available to Huntington Beach's homeless and at-risk population. Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless Households Transitional Permanent Supportive Emergency Shelter Beds Housing Beds Housing Beds Voucher/ Year Round Seasonal/ Beds(Current Overflow Current& Current& Under & New) Beds New New Development Households with Adult(s) 51 0 64 400 and Child(ren) Households with Only 1,085 0 44 1,649 Adults • Chronically Homeless 0 0 0 312 Households Veterans 2 0 0 207 Unaccompanied Youth 8 0 0 0 Table 40-Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless Households Describe mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services to the extent those services are used to complement services targeted at homeless persons. The City of Huntington Beach has launched a comprehensive strategy to address homelessness. In FY 2021/22, the City appointed a Deputy Director of Homelessness & Behavioral Health Services and created the Homeless & Behavioral Health System of Care. This system provides outreach, engagement, case management, and connects individuals to shelter, housing, and behavioral health support. While the Deputy Director's role has evolved since February 2022,the City continues to support homelessness services. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 79 The HB Cares Volunteers program, established in 2023, is a key component of the system. It has trained 21 volunteers in de-escalation, trauma-informed care, vicarious trauma, and Mental Health First Aid. Volunteers manage the homeless outreach line, ensuring a streamlined communication process, and facilitate group activities at the Navigation Center such as resume building,job skill development, recovery groups, bingo, etc.Additionally, a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist began volunteering in December 2023, assisting with 62 Disabling Condition Assessments and continuing to support mental health services as needed. The system also includes three full-time homeless outreach social workers and a social services supervisor who engage with individuals, families, veterans, and seniors at risk of or experiencing homelessness. They connect people to resources, service providers, and help secure documents for County of Orange housing programs. They work closely with local shelters, such as the Navigation Center, and partner with crisis teams like Be Well to offer comprehensive support. Be Well OC (BWOC) in Huntington Beach employs a Mobile Crisis Response Team consisting of two operating vans and two Crisis Interventionists who provide in-community assessments and stabilization. The team is trained to offer information, referrals, transportation, and follow-up support to address mental health situations. List and describe services and facilities that meet the needs of homeless persons, particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth. If the services and facilities are listed on screen SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure or screen MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services, describe how these facilities and services specifically address the needs of these populations. The City of Huntington Beach has developed a variety of services and facilities aimed at meeting the needs of homeless individuals, particularly chronically homeless persons, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth. The Navigation Center, located at 17642 Beach Boulevard, opened in December 2020 and provides emergency shelter and essential services to individuals experiencing homelessness. Operated by Mercy House, the Navigation Center can shelter up to 174 adults and couples with ties to Huntington Beach. It offers case management, access to health services, and connections to permanent housing solutions, specifically supporting chronically homeless individuals and families as they work toward housing security in a safe, stable environment. Looking ahead, the City is still in the process of analyzing a repurposing of the Navigation Center property into a permanent navigation center and affordable housing development. It is proposed that the permanent project will offer supportive housing paired with services to chronically homeless individuals, further addressing long-term homelessness in the community. The City's ongoing collaborations with organizations like the State of California Homekey Program, the County of Orange, National CORE, and American Family Housing help leverage additional resources and expertise, enhancing the impact of these homelessness initiatives. Through these services and facilities, Huntington Beach remains committed to providing comprehensive support HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 80 to homeless individuals and families, helping them transition from homelessness to permanent housing and stability. Furthermore, in FY 2021/22, the City launched the HB Oasis project at 17251 Beach Boulevard, repurposing the former Quality Inn & Suites into transitional housing for up to 64 adults and households experiencing homelessness. This initiative, in collaboration with the State of California Homekey Program, the County of Orange, National CORE, and American Family Housing, provided trauma-informed, evidence-based support and services, including case management and connections to permanent housing. The HB Oasis project helped participants, including veterans and those with mental health or substance use issues, transitioning to long- term stability. In May 2024, HB Oasis was converted into permanent supportive housing and has since undergone major renovation and construction with the addition of kitchenettes to individual units and the use of project-based vouchers to assist with securing permanent housing. Supportive services offered at HB Oasis include mental and physical health care, substance use treatment, trauma counseling, employment assistance, and support for individuals involved in the criminal justice system. These wraparound services are essential for individuals overcoming barriers to housing and self-sufficiency, especially those experiencing chronic homelessness. Finally, the City is continuing its Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program, which has been instrumental in preventing homelessness since 2014. The program assists homeless individuals, families, seniors, and veterans by providing rental assistance to help them secure affordable housing, preventing displacement and promoting long-term stability. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 81 MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services—91.210(d) Introduction This section outlines the facilities and services available in Huntington Beach for populations with special housing needs. By offering additional support, these services enhance residents' quality of life and facilitate their transition to full independence when appropriate. Including the elderly,frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons with alcohol or other drug addictions, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, public housing residents and any other categories the jurisdiction may specify and describe their supportive housing needs. Elderly and Frail Elderly As presented previously in MA-10, Huntington Beach has six senior housing projects providing 842 rental units affordable to a mix of very low-, low- and moderate-income senior households. The State Community Care Licensing Division identifies 70 residential care homes for the elderly in Huntington Beach, providing 1,052 beds for seniors 60 years of age and over (February 2025). The majority of these residential care facilities are small (6 or fewer beds) "board and care" homes, with five larger assisted living facilities: Huntington Terrace (185 beds); Ivy Park at Huntington Beach (142 beds); Merrill Gardens (150 beds); Oakmont (111 beds); and Sea Cliff Health Care Center(84 beds). These residential facilities provide care, supervision and assistance with activities of daily living, such as bathing and grooming, and may also provide incidental medical services. For those seniors who live on their own, many have limited incomes and as a result of their age may not be able to adequately maintain their homes. The City administers a Housing Rehabilitation Program that provides low interest loans and emergency grants to assist lower income homeowners in making needed repairs. Mobile homes are also eligible for emergency rehabilitation grant assistance, a large number of which are occupied by seniors. The City also provides monthly rental assistance to eligible very low-income senior mobile homeowners in Huntington Beach to help cover a portion of their space rent for up to 24 months. As of March 2025, approximately 81 households were selected through a lottery process to participate in the program. Under the program guidelines, participating households are required to pay no more than 30%of their gross monthly income toward space rent,with the City covering the remaining balance up to the local fair market space rent. The Huntington Beach Community Services/Senior Services Division operates the Senior Center at Central Park. Programs offered include recreational and social activities, a congregate and home delivered meals program, preventative healthcare,transportation services, and supportive services. The Senior Outreach Center specifically focuses on programs and services to support independent living for frail or homebound seniors. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 82 The Huntington Beach Council on Aging (HBCOA) was formed in 1973 with the mission of enhancing the dignity and quality of life of the City's senior population through comprehensive services, education and advocacy. HBCOA publishes the monthly newsletter OUTLOOK on Active Aging, providing information on monthly activities at the Senior Center and community resources for seniors living in Huntington Beach. Persons with Disabilities There are a number of resources available throughout the County to serve the disabled and mentally ill residents of Huntington Beach. Table 41 below identifies some of the organizations in and near Huntington Beach that specialize in providing services for the disabled and mentally ill population. Organization Name Type of Service Provided Population Served Ability First - Newport Mesa After School enrichment programs Developmentally disabled youth Center for children with developmental disabilities Alzheimer's Family Services Provides dementia-specific adult Persons with dementia and their Center day health care,caregiver support, families and education outreach Blind Children's Learning Center Braille instruction, occupational Children from birth to 12th grade of Orange County and communication therapies,and vision services CSR Children's Foundation Inc. Assists children challenged by Children with special needs mental or physical disabilities by providing "once in a lifetime" watersport experiences that can be shared with their families. Creative Support Individualized service plans to Adults with a wide range of abilities promote independent and fulfilling and challenges including lives intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorder, seizure disorder, cerebral palsy, physical challenges, traumatic brain injury, and mental illness. Independent Endeavor Apartment Search, housing Disabled adults application process, social security paperwork,medical appointments, medication monitoring, community & personal safety, community interaction, and social interaction &skills Independent Options, Inc.Orange Residential services, day services, Disabled adults County and adult family home agency Dayle McIntosh Center for the Skills training, adaptive life skills, Disabled persons Disabled (DMC) resource/referrals, transitional youth services,etc. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 83 Organization Name Type of Service Provided Population Served Goodwill Industries of Orange Vocational evaluation, training, Adults with physical, psychiatric, County and employment opportunities and developmental disabilities ICAN California Abilities Network Provides quality employment, life Adults with intellectual and skills, and social programs for developmental disabilities Southern California's adults with intellectual & developmental disabilities. John Henry Foundation Medically supervised residential Mentally disabled persons facility Mental Health Association of Medication support, case Mentally disabled persons Orange County management, vocational rehabilitation,etc. No Ordinary Moments,Inc. Coordinates the OC Regional Developmentally disabled persons Center to provide services to developmentally disabled. Operates a supported living program and a mobile intervention unit/crisis team Orange County Arc Educational, vocational, and life Developmentally disabled adults skills training Project Independence Support for independent living,day Developmentally disabled persons programs, positive behavior supports, recreational and vocational resources Providence Speech and Hearing Complete diagnostic and Persons with speech and hearing Center treatment services impairments Regional Center of Orange County Educational and vocational skills Developmentally disabled adults training, resources and referrals United Cerebral Palsy Association Support group, life skills training Persons with cerebral palsy and of Orange County,Inc. similar disabilities Visiting Nurse Association Home Home-based nursing, III, injured, or physically disabled Health Systems rehabilitation,etc. persons Vocational Visions Health-related services and job Developmentally disabled adults placement support Table 41-Inventory of Facilities and Services for the Disabled and Mentally Ill Population: Huntington Beach and Surrounding Areas The living arrangements for persons with disabilities depends on the severity of the disability. Many persons live at home in an independent environment with the help of other family members. To maintain independent living, disabled persons may require assistance. This can include special housing design features for the physically disabled, income support for those who are unable to work, and in-home supportive services for persons with medical conditions. Accessible housing can also be provided via senior housing developments. The State Community Care Licensing Division (February 2025) identifies two small family homes for children with mental, developmental or physical disabilities (11 bed capacity) and three adult residential facilities (11-person capacity) in Huntington Beach that provide 24-hour non-medical care. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 84 Substance Abuse Facilities and Services The Orange County Care Agency offers a variety of outpatient and residential programs aimed at reducing or eliminating alcohol and drug abuse within the community. These services include substance use disorder (SUD) treatment at different levels of care, such as Outpatient, Intensive Outpatient, Withdrawal Management (both Social Model and Medical Detox), Residential Treatment, and Aftercare/Recovery Services. The programs provide a range of services, including crisis intervention, assessments and evaluations, individual, group, and family counseling, HIV education, pre- and post-test counseling, voluntary testing, and referrals to additional services when necessary. Outreach efforts are also made to schools and the broader community to raise awareness and offer support. The Perinatal Program offers services at both outpatient and residential levels, focusing on promoting the health of the community by providing evidence-based treatment for pregnant and parenting women. Special emphasis is placed on supporting women who are pregnant or IV drug users. These programs aim to increase understanding of addiction and recovery,teaching coping skills, fostering safe living environments, and addressing issues such as domestic violence and abuse. Additional specialized programs include Methadone maintenance and detoxification, other Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT), Recovery Residences, and services for individuals referred by the Orange County Collaborative Court, such as those involved in Drug and DUI courts. Substance abuse services available to Huntington Beach residents include, but are not limited to: • Orange County Drug & Alcohol Treatment Centers — Outpatient, Short Term and Long Term Residential for a mix of mental health and substance abuse services. • Crecent Moon Recovery — Addiction treatment center providing drug rehab services including evidence-based and medically assisted care, mental health therapy sessions, and medical detox • SoCAL Beach Recovery — Drug and alcohol rehab, detox programs, dialectical behavior therapy, dual-diagnosis programs, and PTSD services. • Coastline Behavioral Health — Substance abuse treatment and detoxification through inpatient, partial hospitalization programs, intensive outpatient programs, and sober living. • Buckeye Recovery Network— Outpatient care for addictions in alcohol, benzodiazepine, cocaine, fentanyl, gabapentin, opioids, and opiates. • Seacliff Recovery Center—Substance abuse treatment and detoxification through hospital inpatient, short-term and long-term residential services. • Hired Power Personal Recovery Assistants — Work one-on-one with clients to overcome addictive behaviors through outpatient services. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 85 • Connor Ranch Treatment Center—Alcohol, detox, recovery, residential drug rehab center. HIV/AIDS As the most populous city in Orange County, Anaheim receives and administers the federal Housing Opportunities for persons with AIDS (HOPWA) for the entire County, including Huntington Beach. The County's Health Care Agency is also responsible for administering federal grants provided by the Department of Health and Human Services and for collecting data on HIV/AIDS patients. HOPWA funds are utilized to support a variety of activities on a regional basis. These services include the following: • Supportive services and housing offered via contracts with the Orange County Health Care Agency, including: ✓ Short-term emergency housing and/or utility assistance ✓ Transitional housing ✓ Housing coordination services ✓ Medical detoxification-bed services • Tenant-based rental assistance administered by the Anaheim Housing Authority (available for residents countywide, including Huntington Beach) Describe programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental and physical health institutions receive appropriate supportive housing Huntington Beach supports a comprehensive approach to ensuring that individuals with mental health conditions in Orange County are discharged from facilities in a manner that adheres to both legal and ethical standards. According to California Health and Safety Code Section 1262, mental health patients cannot be discharged from psychiatric, skilled nursing, or hospital facilities without a written aftercare plan. The Orange County Health Care Agency(HCA) is responsible for determining the timing and appropriate location for the discharge of clients diagnosed with serious and persistent mental illnesses, both from inpatient stays and outpatient services. The County contracts with a variety of inpatient providers that offer different levels of care. These contracts ensure compliance with state law regarding "anti-dumping" policies, which prevent patients from being discharged to unsafe or unsuitable living conditions. Before discharge, each patient is assessed to determine the appropriate level and type of residential care. Patients may be placed in Adult Residential Facilities (ARF) or Residential Facilities for the Elderly(RFE), especially if they are over 60 years old,where they can receive care and supervision. In some cases, patients are placed in more specialized settings, such as Residential Rehabilitation beds or programs, which offer enhanced services. Some individuals may return to their former residences or be placed with family members. Others are connected to clinics and placed in supported short-term housing programs, room and board facilities, or independent living arrangements, depending on their ability to live on their own and whether they have funding or employment. For those determined to be capable of independent living, HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 86 assistance is provided to transition into Supportive Housing or Mental Health Services Act(MHSA) units as they become available. A range of agencies collaborate to ensure that individuals with mental illnesses in Orange County are provided with appropriate housing and aftercare. The Continuum of Care, OC Community Services, the Orange County Health Care Agency, Mercy House, Friendship Shelter, and several inpatient programs all play distinct yet coordinating roles. Other active organizations include Community Care Licensing, the California Hispanic Commission on Drugs and Alcohol, and the Illumination Foundation, which also contribute to the housing and support network for individuals transitioning out of inpatient care. Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e)with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. 91.315(e) Huntington Beach is planning a range of initiatives in the coming year to address the housing and service needs of its special needs population. The City will allocate Community Development Block Grant and HOME funding to support various programs and activities aimed at improving the quality of life for individuals facing unique challenges. The City is committed to continuing its support for programs targeting groups such as the elderly, individuals with disabilities,victims of domestic violence, those struggling with alcohol and drug abuse, and veterans. CDBG funds will be specifically allocated to two key initiatives: the Huntington Beach Senior Center Care Management Program, which provides vital support and resources to seniors in the community, and a homeowner rehabilitation program which provides both grants and loans that may be used to assist lower income seniors and disabled persons with accessibility improvements, ensuring that residents can remain safely in their homes. Additionally, HOME funding will support a tenant-based rental assistance program aimed at senior mobile homeowners, helping them afford the rising costs of space rents.This program will provide rental assistance for up to 24 months, offering much-needed financial relief to seniors living in mobile homes. In addition to supporting the senior mobile homeowner rental assistance program, HOME funding will also benefit victims of domestic violence,veterans, and other individuals with special needs through two other tenant-based rental assistance programs. Administered by Mercy House and Families Forward, these programs provide up to 24 months of rental assistance for 30 households a year, offering crucial financial support to help individuals secure stable housing. Beyond just rental assistance, these programs are designed to assist participants in achieving long-term independence by providing services that support self-sufficiency, such as case management, life skills training, and connections to other community resources. This multifaceted approach aims to ensure that those who face significant challenges have the support they need to transition to independent living and maintain stable housing over time. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 87 For entitlement/consortia grantees: Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. (91.220(2)) Same as above. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 88 MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing—91.210(e) Negative Effects of Public Policies on Affordable Housing and Residential Investment Huntington Beach has demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting affordable housing through various measures, including updates to its zoning ordinance and direct financial assistance to affordable housing projects. In late 2021, the City conducted public meetings to revise its Affordable Housing ordinance to better align with community needs and legal requirements. These updates aimed to provide compliance options with the law, implement current Housing Element programs, and adjust in-lieu fees and methodology to reflect current market conditions. Despite funding constraints resulting from the loss of Redevelopment Housing Funds, which previously generated approximately $3 million annually for housing activities, the City remains dedicated to developing affordable housing. However, one of the primary challenges faced by Huntington Beach in this regard is the scarcity of vacant land suitable for residential development. Much of the underdeveloped residentially zoned land is owned by separate owners, making lot consolidation and the demolition of existing structures necessary to accommodate higher density infill development. To address this challenge, the City has adopted alternative policy tools, such as the Amended Downtown and Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plans.These plans provide opportunities for high-density mixed-use and residential infill development, facilitating the creation of affordable housing units within the community. Through continued collaboration and innovative approaches, Huntington Beach aims to overcome barriers and enhance the availability of affordable housing for its residents. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 89 MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets—91.215 (f) Introduction The tables and narrative that follow describe the local economic condition of Huntington Beach and compares the ability of the local work force to satisfy the needs of local business. The tables give data on the primary industries in the City, the total population in the labor force, the unemployment rate, occupations by sector, travel time to work, the educational attainment of Huntington Beach residents by age, and median earnings. Economic Development Market Analysis Business Activity Share of Share of Jobs less Number of Number of Workers Jobs workers Business by Sector Workers Jobs Agriculture,Mining,Oil&Gas Extraction 590 107 1 0 -1 Arts,Entertainment,Accommodations 11,925 12,840 14 18 4 Construction 5,168 5,250 6 8 1 Education and Health Care Services 12,472 9,377 15 13 -2 Finance,Insurance,and Real Estate 6,450 3,201 8 5 -3 Information 2,301 851 3 1 -2 Manufacturing 8,019 9,991 10 14 5 Other Services 3,016 2,978 4 4 1 Professional,Scientific,Management Services 10,180 5,531 12 8 -4 Public Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Retail Trade 8,757 9,424 11 13 3 Transportation and Warehousing 2,747 888 3 1 -2 Wholesale Trade 5,170 4,566 6 7 0 Total 76,795 65,004 -- -- -- Table 42-Business Activity Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS(Workers),2020 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics(Jobs) Labor Force Total Population in the Civilian Labor Force 111,150 Civilian Employed Population 16 years and over 105,795 Unemployment Rate 4.83 Unemployment Rate for Ages 16-24 14.15 Unemployment Rate for Ages 25-65 3.35 Table 43-Labor Force Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 90 Occupations by Sector Number of People Management,business and financial 35,605 Farming,fisheries and forestry occupations 4,260 Service 9,565 Sales and office 24,965 Construction,extraction,maintenance and repair 5,485 Production,transportation and material moving 4,305 Table 44-Occupations by Sector Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS Travel Time Travel Time Number Percentage <30 Minutes 45,326 49% 30-59 Minutes 36,688 40% 60 or More Minutes 10,022 11% Total 92,036 100% Table 45-Travel Time Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS Educational Attainment by Employment Status (Population 16 and Older) In Labor Force Educational Attainment Civilian Employed Unemployed Not in Labor Force Less than high school graduate 4,760 250 2,355 High school graduate(includes 13,645 715 4,050 equivalency) Some college or Associate's degree 27,640 1,450 6,490 Bachelor's degree or higher 42,030 1,305 6,545 Table 46-Educational Attainment by Employment Status Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS Educational Attainment by Age Age 18-24 yrs 25-34 yrs 35-44 yrs 45-65 yrs 65+yrs Less than 9th grade 26 184 446 1,128 656 9th to 12th grade,no 685 603 464 1,018 602 diploma High school graduate,GED, 2,600 3,217 2,032 4,756 1,895 or alternative Some college,no degree 2,718 3,278 2,851 7,080 4,154 Associate's degree 501 1,297 1,178 2,318 1,883 Bachelor's degree 852 4,713 4,446 7,213 3,950 Graduate or professional 55 1,227 1,945 4,880 3,710 degree Table 47-Educational Attainment by Age Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2O25/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 91 Educational Attainment—Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Educational Attainment Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Less than high school graduate $23,949 High school graduate(includes equivalency) $34,938 Some college or Associate's degree $46,893 Bachelor's degree $71,753 Graduate or professional degree $94,568 Table 48—Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction? As presented in Table 42, in Huntington Beach, the local economy includes the following primary industries: • Arts, entertainment, and accommodations (18% of jobs) • Manufacturing (14% of jobs) • Education and health care services (13% of jobs) • Retail trade (13% of jobs) • Professional, scientific, and management services (8% of jobs) • Construction (8% of jobs) The 2020 Census estimates that jobs in the arts, entertainment, and accommodations represent 18% of all jobs, while an additional 13% of all jobs are in retail trade. The high concentration of jobs in these two industries is indicative of Huntington Beach's prosperous tourist economy. With beautiful beaches along the Pacific Ocean, combined with a wide variety of entertainment options, Huntington Beach welcomes over 11 million tourists throughout the year. The City boasts top-class restaurants, shopping, hotels, resorts, spas and a thriving downtown district. The downtown district includes an active art center, an eclectic shopping district, and the International Surfing Museum. Downtown was also once the home of the famous music club "The Golden Bear," which hosted the likes of Jimi Hendrix and Frank Sinatra. Visitors can also find the Surfing Hall of Fame and the Surfing Walk of Fame downtown. The City is also host to several special events each year including a very popular Independence Day Parade, the U.S. Open of Surfing, the AVP Pro Beach Volleyball Series, the, an Annual Cruise of Lights Boat Tour, and a Main Street Halloween Celebration, to name a few. Manufacturing comprises nearly 14% of all jobs in Huntington Beach mainly due to several major companies being located there such as Boeing, Quicksilver, Cambro Manufacturing, and C&D Aerospace. The 2020 Census reports approximately 10,000 manufacturing jobs in the City, with only 8,000 workers in the manufacturing sector. Jobs in education and health care, and professional, scientific, and management services, and construction round out the top six industries in Huntington Beach. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 92 Describe the workforce and infrastructure needs of the business community: Describe any major changes that may have an economic impact, such as planned local or regional public or private sector investments or initiatives that have affected or may affect job and business growth opportunities during the planning period. Describe any needs for workforce development, business support or infrastructure these changes may create. With nearly 50% of Huntington Beach's employment base in the manufacturing, retail and arts/entertainment/accommodations industries combined, a large segment of the City's economy does not necessarily require an educated workforce. However, as indicated in Table 46, 79% of Huntington Beach's employed workforce has at least some college education. Nearly half (48%) of the employed population has a Bachelor's degree or higher. Furthermore, approximately 75% (60,249 persons) ages 18 and over have at least some college experience. Persons with a bachelor's degree or higher make up 41% of the 18+years population. Huntington Beach has adequate transportation infrastructure to support its growing manufacturing and tourism business community. The City is served by three major freeway/highways - Interstate 405, Pacific Coast Highway (Highway 1), and Beach Boulevard (Highway 39) running through the heart of Huntington Beach. Regional bus service is offered through the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), with 14 bus routes currently in Huntington Beach and the number of routes and lines adjusted by OCTA based on ridership patterns. Major bus lines, such as Greyhound and Trailways, also provide transportation to the area. For passenger service, Amtrak stations are located in Santa Ana and Anaheim, each approximately 20 minutes away.The Union Pacific Railroad serves the City's Gothard Street with freight transportation to this industrial corridor that forms the central spine of the community. This rail service permits direct line shipment to the Midwest and Northwest. And lastly, the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are located 18 miles northwest and provide worldwide access to the global marketplace. The Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are committed to promoting maritime commerce and international trade. The City recognizes the importance of providing a transportation system that supports the economic vitality of the City. The Goldenwest Transportation Center at the intersection of Center Avenue and Gothard Street provides multiple bus routes and park-and-ride facilities serving transit riders. Both the City and OCTA operate demand responsive services. OCTA runs the ACCESS program, while both the City and OCTA operate the Senior Services Mobility Program. How do the skills and education of the current workforce correspond to employment opportunities in the jurisdiction? HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 93 Huntington Beach boasts a highly educated workforce, with 34% of its labor force having completed some college or earned an associate degree, 26% holding a bachelor's degree, and 15%attaining a graduate or professional degree.This educational composition supports the city's primary industries and aligns with the skill sets required for many of its leading occupations. The largest occupational sector in the city is management, business, and finance, employing 43% of the labor force, followed by sales and office roles, which account for 30% of the workforce. Additionally, 25% of the labor force holds a high school diploma or less, often working in service or retail sectors, where minimum wage is common. These individuals could potentially benefit from job training programs that could provide opportunities for career advancement. In support of local businesses, the City of Huntington Beach has partnered with the business community to establish two Business Improvement Districts (BIDs), aimed at improving the local economy and attracting new businesses. The Downtown Business Improvement District, formed in 2004, focuses on promoting the downtown commercial area. Businesses within this district contribute an annual assessment based on their size and type, with funds being allocated to marketing and improvements through decisions made by a BID Advisory Board. Additionally,the Tourism Business Improvement District, created in 2014 after the disbanding of the Hotel/Motel BID, aims to market the City as a destination for tourists, meetings, and events. The Tourism BID is funded by a 6% assessment on gross short-term room revenue, helping to increase overnight room sales and further strengthen the City's tourism economy.These efforts are vital in fostering business growth and improving Huntington Beach's image as a prime destination. The two BIDS will continue to promote job and business growth in the 2025/26 — 2029/30 Consolidated Plan period. Describe any current workforce training initiatives, including those supported by Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations. Describe how these efforts will support the jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan. The City of Huntington Beach supports a variety of economic development activities that help to create and retain jobs for low- and moderate-income households. Activities supported include a commercial property locator; employment assistance in the form of referrals to resources for finding and training employees; financial assistance through the Small Business Administration; business counseling and training via a litany of not-for-profit Orange County agencies; technical assistance in permits, trademarks, environmental review, and taxes; and export and trade assistance. Micro-enterprise assistance,job training services, and technical assistance are some areas that may warrant consideration for funding during the Consolidated Plan period. In 2024, the City of Huntington Beach completed its updated Economic Development Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan is designed to strengthen the local economy by focusing on business retention, attraction, and expansion. It also enhances tourism and culture, ensures responsive governance,and fosters proactive communication and collaboration.The updated plan promotes sustainable growth and active community engagement for a vibrant, resilient future for the City of Huntington Beach. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 94 This updated strategy provides a structured roadmap for economic resilience and growth, focusing on strategic business initiatives, cultural enhancement, responsive governance, and robust collaboration. With outlined milestones, the strategy aims to create a thriving, diverse, and sustainable economy for all residents and businesses, ensuring steady progress and adaptability, and positioning Huntington Beach for a prosperous future. In terms of workforce training initiatives, the City's Library has implemented a Adult Literacy Program, offering English speaking, reading, and writing skill development for persons 18 years and older. The goal of the program is to promote literacy and improved job skills. The Community for Entrepreneurship & Leadership at Golden West College is an endeavor to support workforce and economic development.The program began as a collaborative of the Oak View Renewal Partnership, a nonprofit organization that provided assistance to residents of Oak View (a low-income neighborhood in Huntington Beach), and Golden West College. In July 2021, the program transitioned away from workforce development services to a finer focus of entrepreneurial education and coaching, allocating its team and resources to the success and impact of aspiring entrepreneurs. CIELO, as the program is now called, serves as a small business support system for all Orange County residents,with a focus on low-income and under-resourced individuals who lack access to resources, knowledge, and support to change their economic trajectory. CIELO aims to reduce opportunity inequality by providing participants with the resources or connections they wouldn't otherwise have. Does your jurisdiction participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)? No. If so, what economic development initiatives are you undertaking that may be coordinated with the Consolidated Plan? If not,describe other local/regional plans or initiatives that impact economic growth. As described above, Huntington Beach has prepared an Economic Development Strategic Plan which identifies the City's highest priority economic development objectives, and establishes goals, policies and recommended actions. The Strategic Plan aims to strengthen the local economy through business retention, attraction, and expansion, enhancing tourism and culture, ensuring responsive governance, and fostering proactive communication and collaboration. The plan promotes sustainable growth and active community engagement for a vibrant, resilient future, including: ✓ Business Retention, Attraction, & Expansion • Retain and Grow Local Businesses: Prevent closures or relocations,support expansion, and provide resources. • Attract New Businesses: Increase tax revenue and job opportunities by showcasing Huntington Beach's strengths. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 95 • Market Business Opportunities: Promote local businesses to residents and visitors. • Promote a Year-Round Economy: Support businesses throughout all seasons. • Conduct Research and Make Recommendations: Gather data to support informed policymaking. ✓ Tourism, Culture, & Community • Expand Tourism, Film, and Event Opportunities: Collaborate with Visit Huntington Beach to attract more visitors and events. • Raise Awareness of Local Businesses During Special Events: Highlight and support local businesses. • Prepare for the LA 2028 Summer Olympics: Ensure readiness to maximize economic opportunities. • Enhance Arts and Culture: Develop new cultural programs and events. • Support the Social Economy: Boost local social venues and implement tourism enhancement programs. ✓ Responsive & Effective Government • Enhance Infrastructure: Invest in key infrastructure improvements. • Promote Business-Friendly Policies: Develop policies that facilitate business growth. • Deliver Exceptional Customer Service: Simplify processes and provide high-quality services. ✓ Communication & Collaboration • Engage with Stakeholders: Connect with local partners and address feedback. • Strengthen Partnerships: Work with business organizations to support local businesses. • Share Information and Resources: Use digital platforms to disseminate valuable information. 2025 Action Plan Priorities: • Organize business outreach visits and events. • Market available sites and develop an economic profile. • Engage with stakeholders and build partnerships. • Expand visibility with business recognition opportunities. • Elevate online presence with updated content. • Deliver exceptional permitting service. • Launch a shop/dine local campaign. • Expand and attract new cultural/sports events. • Lead projects to improve resident and visitor experiences. The City may choose to utilize CDBG funds to assist in implementation. For example, the enhancement of public services, commercial facade programs and assistance with tenant improvements, job training and literacy programs, street improvements, technical assistance, business incubator support, and job retention and attraction services are all activities which can HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 96 implement the City's Economic Development Strategic Plan and are eligible uses for CDBG funding. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 97 MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion Are there areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration") Low- and moderate-income households are most impacted by housing problems in Huntington Beach. The City defines an area of low/mod concentration as a census block group in which a minimum of 51 percent of households earn 80 percent or below the area median income; the census block groups that meet these criteria are depicted in Figure 2 - Low- and Moderate- Income Areas, located in Appendix B.As reflected in this Figure, low-and moderate-income areas are located throughout the City. Certain minority populations are also more affected by multiple housing problems in Huntington Beach. As shown in Table 53, among households earning up to 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI), Hispanic and Asian households evidence a greater percentage of housing problems than households that are White. Households Earning 0-80%Area Median Income(AMI) White Non- Total Hispanic Hispanic Asian Total Households 28,935 19,245 6,010 3,210 Households with any housing 20,715 12,910 4,770 2,105 problems % Racial/Ethnic Group with any housing problems 72% 67% 79% 66% Table 49-Huntington Beach Housing Problems by Race/Ethnicity Data Source:Table reflects compilation of housing problems by race/ethnicity and income derived from the 2016- 2020 CHAS, as presented previously in Tables 15-17. Housing problems include: 1) Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2) Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3)>than one person per room (overcrowded), or 4) Cost Burden >than 30%. Are there any areas in the jurisdiction where racial or ethnic minorities or low-income families are concentrated? (include a definition of"concentration") A minority concentration is defined as a census block group with greater than the City average of minority population (20%for Hispanics and 15.6%for Asians). Figure 6 and 7 (located in Appendix B) depicts minority concentrations of Hispanic and Asian households, respectively, in Huntington Beach. Under this definition, several census block groups are identified as having a concentration of minorities. These areas are scattered around the City and in many cases correspond with low and moderate income areas as seen in Figure 2. What are the characteristics of the market in these areas/neighborhoods? HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 98 The majority of Huntington Beach's low-and moderate-income neighborhoods coincide with the City's four Special Code Enforcement area due to high levels of housing deterioration. Within this area, the City's housing conditions survey in 2007 identified a total of 318 units as needing significant repair or replacement. These areas are the focus of increased code enforcement and neighborhood preservation activities by the City to improve the quality of life and condition of housing. Are there any community assets in these areas/neighborhoods? Huntington Beach is home to numerous public parks and neighborhood community centers, particularly in its low- and moderate-income areas, offering valuable resources to residents. For example, the Oak View Family and Community Center and Gymnasium provide a range of services, including recreational activities, educational programs, and human and family services. Additionally, the Oak View Branch Library serves as an important community resource, offering a Family Literacy Program that includes individualized tutoring to support residents' educational needs. The City of Huntington Beach uses Community Development Block Grant funds to enhance and improve these facilities, ensuring that they can better serve the needs of neighborhood residents and contribute to the overall well-being of the community. Are there other strategic opportunities in any of these areas? As outlined in Section MA-45, CIELO is a new initiative designed to provide entrepreneurial education and coaching to aspiring entrepreneurs.Serving as a small business support system for all residents of Orange County, CIELO primarily focuses on low-income and under-resourced individuals who may not have access to the necessary resources, knowledge, or support to change their economic trajectory. The goal of CIELO is to reduce opportunity inequality by offering participants the resources and connections that they may not otherwise have access to, helping them overcome barriers and achieve success in their entrepreneurial endeavors. By empowering individuals with the tools and guidance they need, CIELO aims to foster economic mobility and create more equitable opportunities for all. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 99 MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate-Income Households- 91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2) Describe the need for broadband wiring and connections for households, including low- and moderate-income households and neighborhoods. Digital equity revolves around understanding who in the United States has access to the internet, suitable devices, and the digital skills needed to navigate the online world — and who does not. In response to the Digital Equity Act of 2021, the U.S. Census Bureau released data detailing broadband availability and usage alongside demographic information for every state. The data reveals the number of individuals in the U.S. who belong to "covered populations" as defined by the Digital Equity Act, as well as the percentage of the population living in areas without access to fixed broadband, those in households lacking a computer or broadband subscription, and those not using the internet, a PC, or a tablet. The underlying data was collected through a collaboration between the Census Bureau and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). The covered population totals include individuals who fall into one or more of eight demographic categories.These categories tend to be associated with lower levels of digital inclusion.They may lack reliable broadband services, internet-ready devices or the skills needed to connect and ensure online privacy and cybersecurity. The eight categories are: • Individuals living in households with incomes at or below 150% of the poverty line. • Individuals 60 years of age or older. • Veterans. • Individuals living with one or more disabilities. • Individuals with barriers to the English language (including English language learners and those with low literacy). • Members of racial and ethnic minority groups. • Individuals residing in rural areas. • Individuals incarcerated in a nonfederal correctional facility. According to data for Huntington Beach, less than 2.5% of the population lives in areas where fixed broadband service with speeds of at least 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload is unavailable. While broadband is accessible to 97.5% or more of the population, three census tracts still show a high percentage of households without a computing device and/or broadband subscription. For instance, in census tract 99402, 36.9% of households lack a computer or internet service. This tract is home to 80% minority residents, and 42% face language barriers. Similarly, just under 17% of residents in census tracts 99212 and 99411 also lack computers or internet access. When combined with data on income and minority populations, it is evident that these tracts, which have high rates of digital exclusion, also face high levels of poverty and significant concentrations of Hispanic households. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 100 Describe the need for increased competition by having more than one broadband Internet service provider serve the jurisdiction. The top residential internet providers in Huntington Beach, including Spectrum, AT&T, Earthlink, and Frontier, contribute to a competitive broadband market in Orange County and Huntington Beach, making internet access widely available to most residents. This competition helps drive rates lower, which is particularly significant for low- and moderate-income (LMI) households, as it makes broadband more affordable. Despite the fact that almost all households in the City have computers and broadband access, lower-income households are still less likely to have their own internet subscription. However,while internet access is common,the exact percentage of income that LMI families spend on digital access remains unknown. This is an important consideration, as the cost of internet services could still place a financial strain on these families. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLI DATED PLAN 101 MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3) Describe the jurisdiction's increased natural hazard risks associated with climate change. Consolidated Plans are now required to consider resiliency to natural hazards within the jurisdiction, ensuring that communities are better prepared for the risks posed by climate change and other natural events. The natural hazards most strongly linked to climate change in Huntington Beach are flooding and fire hazards. Flooding can result from rising sea levels and increased rainfall, while the risk of wildfires is heightened due to hotter temperatures, dry conditions, and changing weather patterns. To address these challenges, the City has developed strategies for resilience and mitigation through its Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and Natural and Environmental Hazards Element. These plans outline actions to reduce risks, improve preparedness, and ensure that the City can better cope with the impacts of climate change.This includes measures such as improving infrastructure to withstand floods, implementing fire prevention programs, and developing long-term strategies to manage hazardous materials and waste safely. Flooding Flooding can be caused by a number of natural events, including heavy rains and coastal storms. Less often, floods can be caused by high tides (tidal flooding), or tsunamis. Flood events can also happen as a result of infrastructure failure; for example, if a water tank breaks. Flooding is the most common hazard in Huntington Beach. Areas at an elevated risk of flooding are generally divided into 100-year flood zones and 500-year flood zones.The City has areas within both flood zones. As land uses and climate conditions shift and as improvements are made to flood control channels, the size of these flood zones is likely to change. One hundred-year floods are those that have a 1/100 or 1%chance of occurring in any given year. The 100-year flood is a regulatory standard used by Federal agencies and most states to administer floodplain management programs and is also used by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) as the basis for flood insurance requirements nationwide. Flood insurance rates are based on FEMA designations of flood zones. Standard practice is to avoid or restrict construction within 100-year flood zones, or to engage in flood-proofing techniques such as elevating building pads or constructing walls, dams, and levees. Large portions of the City of Huntington Beach are located within a 100-year flood plain, primarily along wetlands, coastal areas, rivers, channels,and storm drains in the City.Approximately one-third of the City is located within the 100-Year to 500-Year Flood Zone. Fire Hazards Fires can occur in urban environments and can also impact unpopulated areas that may contain brush or grasslands. As an urbanized area surrounded by other urbanized communities, HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 102 Huntington Beach does not face the wildfire risks that are a threat to other areas of California. Urban fires are the primary fire hazard in the City, which can be caused by electrical faults, unattended cooking, or flammable or combustible materials exposed to a heat source, among other causes. Several areas and activities pose unique urban fire challenges due to the age of buildings, the size and density of structures, and the presence of flammable or combustible materials.As a result,the City must continue to address the growing need to defend both persons and property from fires. Proactive efforts, such as fire sprinkler systems,fire alarms,fire resistant roofing and construction methods, can help reduce the frequency and severity of urban fires. Describe the vulnerability to these risks of housing occupied by low- and moderate-income households based on an analysis of data,findings, and methods. While the City of Huntington Beach does have areas with an elevated risk of flooding, it is not considered a major hazard or constraint to housing development. Several housing projects have already been successfully built within the floodplain by implementing improvements to surrounding flood infrastructure, such as flood channels. These projects have received approval through proper mitigation measures, which include ensuring that flood risks are adequately addressed. Going forward, any new housing developments will undergo environmental reviews to ensure that flood protection measures are in place. This approach helps protect future residents, including those from low and moderate-income households, from environmental hazards like flooding. Similarly, while fire hazards pose a risk, particularly in older areas of Huntington Beach, newer structures are designed with safety features such as fire sprinkler systems and fire-resistant materials. These features help contain fires within the building of origin and reduce the risk of spreading. However, in older neighborhoods where building materials may not meet modern fire safety standards and fire sprinklers may not be installed,there is a higher probability of structural fires spreading to neighboring buildings. This is especially true in high-density areas, where the risk of fire spreading between buildings is greater. The City's General Plan Safety Element ensures that areas with a higher fire risk are carefully considered in development planning. It requires the identification of lands designated as a State Responsibility Area for fire services and those within a very high fire severity zone. Fortunately, there are no lands with these designations in the areas designated for future residential development in Huntington Beach. This reduces the risk of wildfire impacts on new residential areas, though urban fire safety remains a key consideration in the City's planning and building practices. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 103 STRATEGIC PLAN SP-05 Overview Strategic Plan Overview The Housing and Community Development Strategy is the centerpiece of the Consolidated Plan. The Strategy describes: • General priorities for assisting households • Programs to assist those households in need • Five-year objectives identifying proposed accomplishments The Strategic Plan also addresses the following areas: • Financial resources • Anti-poverty strategy • Lead-based paint hazard reduction • Reduction of barriers to affordable housing • Institutional Structure/Coordination among agencies In establishing five-year priorities for assistance with CDBG and HOME funds, the City of Huntington Beach has taken several factors into consideration: 1)those households most in need of housing and community development assistance, as determined through the Consolidated Plan Needs Assessment, Agency consultation, the Housing and Community Development Needs Survey, and public participation process; and 2) the extent of other non-federal resources and programs available to address the needs. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 104 SP-10 Geographic Priorities—91.215 (a)(1) Geographic Area 1 Area Name Citywide Area Type Local Target Area Other Area Type Description Not Applicable HUD Approval Date Not Applicable %of Low Mod 44.75% Revital Type Comprehensive Other Revital Description Not Applicable Identify the neighborhood Citywide boundaries for this target area. Include specific housing and Not applicable; this geographic area is used to identify where CDBG-funded commercial characteristics of homeless,special needs,and general community services are delivered. this target area. How did your consultation and Consultation with local service providers,City departments,and the Housing citizen participation process and Community Development Survey highlighted the need for funding help you to identify this community services in Huntington Beach. The most requested services neighborhood as a target include those for the homeless and victims of domestic violence.Additionally, the high senior population in Huntington Beach emphasizes the need for area? senior services. Identify the needs in this There is a need for community services for low- and moderate-income individuals, including the homeless, veterans, families with children, the target area. elderly,and victims of domestic violence. Opportunities for improvement in this target area include expanding What are the opportunities for community services for vulnerable populations such as the homeless,seniors, improvement in this target and families with children. Additionally, there is an opportunity to improve area? coordination between local service providers and City departments to meet the needs of low-and moderate-income residents. Are there barriers to A key barrier to improvement in this target area is the lack of funding to improvement in this target address all local needs. area? 2 Area Name Special Code Enforcement Area Area Type Local Target Area Other Area Type Description Not Applicable HUD Approval Date Not Applicable %of Low Mod 66.99% Revital Type Comprehensive Other Revital Description Not Applicable Identify the neighborhood Bolsa Chica Street to the west, Bolsa Avenue to the north, Brookhurst Street boundaries for this target to the east,and Atlanta Avenue to the south. area. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 105 Include specific housing and Housing owned or rented by predominantly low- and moderate-income commercial characteristics of households. Signs of property and structure deterioration seen from this target area. windshield survey and supported by census data (predominately built before 1980). How did your consultation and Consultation with Code Enforcement and Housing Divisions resulted in this citizen participation process area being set apart for CDBG-funded Code Enforcement programs and other help you to identify this programs that will,together,arrest the deterioration of the local target area. neighborhood as a target Further, a Housing and Community Development Survey found that code area? enforcement and property maintenance was highly needed in the City. Identify the needs in this Need for code enforcement, street and alley improvements, curb cuts and target area. ramp improvements,housing rehabilitation,and community services for low- and moderate-income households. What are the opportunities for There is an opportunity to direct federal investment to reverse the area's improvement in this target decline through code enforcement, homeowner rehabilitation, better area? infrastructure, improved public facilities,and enhanced community services. Are there barriers to The main barrier is the lack of funding to address the area's overall improvement in this target deterioration. area? Table 50-Geographic Priority Areas Describe the basis for allocating investments geographically within the jurisdiction (or within the EMSA for HOPWA) California. Much of the City's residentially designated land has already been developed. Future residential development rests primarily upon the recycling of existing parcels and infill development. Surrounding Huntington Beach are the Cities of Seal Beach to the northwest, Westminster to the northeast, Fountain Valley and Costa Mesa to the east, Newport Beach to the southeast, and the Pacific Ocean to the southwest. The City utilizes CDBG and HOME funds for projects and programs operated citywide. However, the majority of CDBG-funded infrastructure and facility projects are targeted to the most-needy neighborhoods: those census tracts where 51% or more of the residents are low- or moderate- income, as seen in Figure 2 in the Appendix. Specifically, for Code Enforcement, after establishing the general definition of "deteriorated" or "deteriorating" for purposes of code enforcement, the City conducted a visual (windshield) survey of CDBG eligible areas for properties, businesses, parkways, alleys, and structures that met the definition. Based on the visual (windshield) survey, the City determined that low- and moderate-income areas within the area bound by Bolsa Chica Street to the west, Bolsa Avenue to the north, Brookhurst Street to the east, and Atlanta Avenue to the south contained the most properties with deterioration. In some cases, some structures had multiple violations per parcel. This target area is known as "Special Code Enforcement Target Area." Inclusive of the following census tracts,the Special Code Enforcement Target Area is comprised of 67,625 persons, 45,300, or 66.99%, of which are of low-moderate income. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 106 Table 51-SPECIAL CODE ENFORCEMENT TARGET AREA TOTAL POPULATION V. LOW AND MODERATE-INCOME POPULATION 2016-2020 HUD LOW MOD INCOME SUMMARY DATA Census Tract Total Persons Total LMI Persons Percentage 0992121 1,195 900 75.30% 0992122 1,385 895 64.60% 0992123 1,710 1,120 65.50% 0992124 1,250 890 71.20% 0992141 1,055 645 61.10% 0992142 725 395 54.50% 0992144 770 510 66.20% 0992161 1,000 575 57.50% 0992164 840 620 73.80% 0992204 1,490 825 55.40% 0992353 1,945 1,045 53.70% 0992404 2,145 1,405 65.50% 0992421 1,220 640 52.50% 0992432 1,765 930 52.70% 0992442 1,615 970 60.10% 0993052 2,120 1,755 82.80% 0993061 1,985 1,140 57.40% 0993062 885 600 67.80% 0993063 665 485 72.90% 0993065 810 435 53.70% 0993094 1,050 850 81.00% 0993102 1,240 910 73.40% 0993113 765 460 60.10% 0994021 2,615 1,975 75.50% 0994022 2,735 2,245 82.10% 0994024 1,720 1,320 76.70% 0994062 3,095 2,025 65.40% 0994101 1,160 600 51.70% 0994103 2,810 2,165 77.00% 0994112 2,480 2,055 82.90% 0994113 1,430 1,285 89.90% 0994114 1,005 655 65.20% 0994121 2,045 1,360 66.50% 0994163 2,675 1,420 53.10% 0994171 2,535 1,535 60.60% 0994183 1,890 1,510 79.90% 0995081 1,475 795 53.90% 0995083 1,930 1,615 83.70% 0995084 1,160 610 52.60% 0996041 1,945 1,085 55.80% 0997022 1,800 1,050 58.30% 0997031 1,490 995 66.80% TOTAL 67,625 45,300 66.99% HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 107 SP-25 Priority Needs- 91.215(a)(2) Priority Needs HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 108 Priority Priority Geographic Associated Basis for Relative Need Level Population Areas Affected Goals Description Priority Priority High ✓ Extremely Citywide Preserve Existing The need for Housing was Housing Low and Create New affordable determined to Needs ✓ Low Affordable Housing housing in be a high priority ✓ Moderate ✓ Acquisition/ Huntington in Huntington ✓ Large Rehabilitation Beach remains Beach. Families ✓ New high due to the ✓ Families Construction significant with ✓ Homeowner number of Children Rehabilitation households ✓ Elderly Loans and experiencing ✓ Chronically Grants Program cost burdens. Homeless ✓ Housing ✓ Families Services for with TBRA Children ✓ Tenant Based ✓ Veterans Rental ✓ Victims of Assistance Domestic Violence Sustain and Strengthen Neighborhoods ✓ Special Code Enforcement Priority High ✓ Extremely Citywide Preserve Existing There is a need Needs Communi Low Community and for public Assessment and ty Facility ✓ Low Special Code Public Facilities improvements Housing and Needs ✓ Moderate Enforcement ✓ Various TBD to ensure a Community ✓ Large Area Public Facilities safe and Development Families decent Survey found ✓ Families environment these activities to with for its citizens. be highly rated Children Priority needs needs in ✓ Homeless in this category Huntington ✓ Elderly could include Beach. ✓ Persons homeless with shelters,parks, Disabilitie recreational s centers,youth centers,and healthcare facilities. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 109 Priority High V Non- Citywide Provide for Needed Provide Infrastructure Infrastruc Housing Infrastructure needed improvements in ture Communit Special Code Improvements infrastructure Huntington Needs y Enforcement V ADA improvements, Beach's low-and Developm Area Improvements including ADA moderate-income ent (Curb improvements, neighborhoods, Cuts/Ramps) in low/mod as well as V Various TBD neighborhoods enhancements to Infrastructure throughout streets and Projects Huntington sidewalks for Beach. better accessibility for disabled individuals,were identified as high priorities. Priority High V Homeless Citywide Support Efforts to Priority Homeless services Homeless Individual Address homeless were determined Needs s Homelessness needs entails to be a high V Homeless V Pathways to assisting non- priority in Families Independence profit Huntington with V Project Hope organizations Beach. Children Alliance in serving ✓ Homeless V Robyne's Nest Huntington Veterans V StandUp for Beach's ✓ Homeless Kids Street homeless Victims of Outreach community. Domestic Program Violence V Other TBD Homeless Public Service Programs Priority High V Elderly Citywide Support Agencies Priority special Special needs Special V Frail that Assist Special needs populations are a Needs Elderly Needs Populations encompass high priority for ✓ Senior Outreach providing Huntington Center Care services to the Beach. Management elderly and ✓ Other TBD frail elderly. Special Needs Services Priority High V Extremely Citywide Increase Access to Provide Public services for Communi Low Community Services needed low-and ty Service V Low for Low-and services to moderate-income Needs V Moderate Moderate-Income eligible persons and V Families Persons low/mod families are with V Children's income deemed a high Children Bureau After persons. priority. ✓ Elderly School Program ✓ Disabled V Other TBD Community Services HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 110 Other High Administrative Citywide Planning for This priority Other Housing Housing Housing and entails and Community and Community administrative Development Communi Development activities Needs ty ✓ CDBG Program needed to encompasses the Develop Administration implement administration of ment ✓ HOME Program housing and the CDBG and Needs Administration community HOME programs ✓ Fair Housing development and is a high Services needs in the priority for the City. City. Table 52—Priority Needs Summary Narrative In establishing five-year priorities for assistance with CDBG and HOME funds, the City of Huntington Beach has taken several factors into consideration: 1)those households most in need of housing and community development assistance, as determined through the Consolidated Plan needs assessment, consultation, and public participation process; 2) which activities will best meet the needs of those identified households; and 3) the extent of other non-federal resources and programs available to address these needs. Huntington Beach's primary source of funds used to address the community's housing needs is HOME. CDBG funds are directed almost entirely towards community development activities. The unmet housing needs identified in this section are based on 2016-2020 census statistics of households with housing problems compiled as part of the CHAS Databook. Huntington Beach's priority non-community development needs include unmet community facility, infrastructure, public service, and planning needs. Identified needs and priorities reflect the results of input from various City departments, as well as input from agency consultations and the citizen participation process. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 111 SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions—91.215 (b) Influence of Market Conditions Affordable Housing Type Market Characteristics that will influence the use of funds available for housing type Tenant Based TBRA is the fastest way to provide affordable housing to those in need as it partners Rental Assistance existing rental housing owners with voucher holders. With over 14,000 low- and (TBRA) moderate-income renter households cost burdened, the need for additional rental assistance is substantial. The challenge is that the use of TBRA is completely dependent on landlords'willingness to accept tenant-based rental assistance and to participate in a contractual relationship with Subgrantees, OCHA and/or HUD. In addition, Fair Market Rent levels are well below actual rents. TBRA for Non- Similar market characteristics that influence the use of TBRA above are applicable to the Homeless Special use of TBRA to serve persons with special needs, such as veterans and senior Needs citizens. However,special needs populations,on average,are likely have an even greater need for TBRA than the general low- and moderate-income population. An additional market characteristic that may influence the use of TBRA for special needs tenants is the willingness and ability of service providers to assist TBRA clients to remain stable in their housing. New Unit As documented in the Needs Assessment, 76% of low- and moderate-income renter Production households are cost burdened, with 40% severely cost burdened. These households would theoretically qualify for new affordable housing if sufficient resources existed to build them.The cost of land, labor and materials affects the total development costs and the number of units the City can support in any given year. While funds are limited, the City will use regulatory tools-such as flexible development standards, density bonus and other incentives-to support the expansion of needed affordable housing. Rehabilitation Based on the visual (windshield) survey, the City determined that low- and moderate- income areas within the area bound by Bolsa Chica Street to the west, Bolsa Avenue to the north, Brookhurst Street to the east, and Atlanta Avenue to the south contained the most properties with physical deterioration.Further,the potential presence of lead-based paint in the City's 56,510 owner and rental housing units built before 1980 would theoretically qualify for rehabilitation assistance if sufficient resources existed.The City prioritizes limited CDBG and HOME resources for rehabilitation and code enforcement of substandard housing. Acquisition, With 14,090 low- and moderate-income Huntington Beach renter households cost including burdened and nearly 2,000 overcrowded,these households would theoretically qualify for preservation newly acquired and rehabilitated affordable housing if sufficient resources existed. Typically, the City's rehabilitation resources support combined acquisition and rehabilitation projects in partnership with non-profits that leverage City dollars with other funding sources.The cost of land, labor and materials affects the total development costs and the number of units that the City can support in any given year.Another critical issue that influences the use of funds to acquire properties for the creation or preservation of affordable units is the lack of a permanent source of financing. The elimination of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, coupled with continued reductions in the HOME entitlement, makes addressing priority housing needs more challenging. Table 53—Influence of Market Conditions HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 112 SP-35 Anticipated Resources-91.215(a)(4),91.220(c)(1,2) Introduction The table below outlines the CDBG and HOME funding available for housing and community development activities during this Consolidated Plan period. The City receives approximately $1,121,195 in annual CDBG entitlement and $538,328 in annual HOME funds. While HOME funds are exclusively allocated for affordable housing activities, CDBG funds are primarily used for community development initiatives. Anticipated Resources Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Source Annual Program Prior Year Remainder of Allocation: Income: Resources: Total: of ConPlan Narrative Program Funds Uses of Funds $ $ $ $ $ Description CDBG Public- Acquisition, $1,121,195 $30,000 $228,868 $1,380,063 $4,604,780 Entitlement Federal Planning, funds Economic allocation Development, plus Housing, estimated Public program Improvements, income Public Services plus prior- year resources. HOME Public- Acquisition, $538,328 $125,000 $181,100 $844,428 $2,653,312 Entitlement Federal Homeowner allocation Rehab, plus Multifamily estimated rental new program construction, income and Multifamily prior-year rental rehab, resources. New construction for ownership, TBRA Table 14-Anticipated Resources Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied Federal funds are essential for implementing the Consolidated Plan, as local private and non- federal funds are often insufficient to meet the significant demand for housing and services in the community. Agencies receiving CDBG and HOME funds use these resources as leverage to secure additional funding from other sources. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 113 The City also maximizes other resources through various formula grant programs. For instance, the HOME program is often matched with private and public investments, including low-income housing tax credits. Future matching funds may come from sources such as inclusionary housing in-lieu fees and residual receipts from former Redevelopment Agency loans. HUD requires a 25% match for HOME funds used in affordable housing projects. Historically, the City has met this requirement with redevelopment tax increment funds, which were combined with HOME funds for affordable housing development. Although redevelopment tax increment funds are no longer available for matching, the City has a surplus of match funds from prior contributions by the former Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency. As of September 2023, this match surplus stands at approximately$3,725,103. If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan Not Applicable HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 114 SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure—91.215(k) Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its consolidated plan including private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions. Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Type Role Geographic Area Served Huntington Beach Government Affordable Housing, Jurisdiction Community Enhancement Economic Development, Division Neighborhood Improvements, Homelessness, Planning Huntington Beach Government Public Facilities, Jurisdiction Community& Library Public Services Services Department Huntington Beach Code Government Code Enforcement Jurisdiction Enforcement Division Huntington Beach Police Government Homelessness Jurisdiction Department Orange County Housing PHA Section 8 Rental Subsidy Countywide Authority(OCHA) Fair Housing Foundation Non-profit Organization Public Services Jurisdiction Orange County Regional Organization Homelessness Countywide Continuum of Care Homeless and Special Non-Profit Agencies Public Services Jurisdiction Needs Services Providers Table 55—Institutional Delivery Structure Assessment of Strengths and Gaps in the Institutional Delivery System Huntington Beach boasts a well-established housing and community development delivery system, supported by strong City and County agencies that anchor federal programs. The City is also backed by a robust network of experienced non-profit organizations that provide a wide range of services to residents. The Community Enhancement Division maintains close communication with other City departments when updating or revising housing policies, issues, and services. Through daily interactions, City staff implement programs,track issues of concern, and have easy access to data related to building activity, housing conditions, zoning, growth issues, employment trends, and other demographic information. Beyond the City's internal network, Huntington Beach collaborates with various non-profit agencies and public service groups through its federal entitlement and other resources. These agencies receive assistance from City staff in program planning, ensuring activity eligibility, compliance with federal regulations, and monitoring the timely expenditure of program funds. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 115 Agencies are required to submit quarterly and annual reports, meet federal requirements, and undergo periodic audits and on-site reviews. Additionally, the City of Huntington Beach performs project monitoring for all rent-restricted affordable units funded by HOME, CDBG, and former Redevelopment Agency housing funds.This includes: • Annual audits to ensure compliance with regulatory agreements and affordability covenants. • Periodic on-site visits, including property inspections and in-depth reviews of rent- restricted affordable unit files. As part of the Consolidated Plan process, the City gathered input from numerous housing and public service agencies through consultation workshops, interviews, and a Housing and Community Development Survey. This valuable input helped identify service needs and gaps, informing the development of the City's five-year Strategic Plan. Availability of services targeted to homeless persons and persons with HIV and mainstream services Homelessness Prevention Available in the Targeted to Targeted to People Services Community Homeless with HIV Homelessness Prevention Services Counseling/Advocacy X X X Legal Assistance X Mortgage Assistance Rental Assistance X X Utilities Assistance Street Outreach Services Law Enforcement X X Mobile Clinics X X Other Street Outreach Services X X Supportive Services Alcohol & Drug Abuse X X Child Care X X Education X X Employment and Employment X X Training Healthcare X X HIV/AIDS X X X Life Skills X X Mental Health Counseling X X Transportation X X Other Other Table 56-Homeless Prevention Services Summary HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 116 Describe how the service delivery system including, but not limited to,the services listed above meet the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families,families with children,veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) There are a variety of homeless and supportive services in the City that provide a range of care for homeless and at-risk households. These services work together, within the framework of the larger Continuum of Care to meet the needs of households. Homeless Prevention Services • Project Self-Sufficiency Orange County: Helps low-income single parents graduate from college or vocational training with the skills necessary to achieve economic independence. Participants are provided customized, wraparound services throughout their educational journey and transition into career. • Interval House: This six-unit transitional housing facility in the heart of Huntington Beach provides safe housing for women and children recovering from domestic violence. Near major transportation routes, shopping, and services, the 3-bedroom apartments all have enclosed patios and in-unit laundry facilities. Interval House Crisis Shelters provides their residents counseling, education programs, and assistance in becoming self-sufficient. • Collette Children's Home: The eight-unit Colette's Children's Home provides transitional housing for battered/homeless mothers with children and chronically homeless women. Support services provided include job development and retention training, parenting and life skill training, financial planning and assistance, case management services, counseling, and more. • Senior Outreach Center: Provides services that assist elders in the City with their physical, emotional and nutritional needs through professionally trained staff and volunteers. The Outreach Center focuses on programs and services for frail or homebound seniors to promote safety, self-sufficiency and independence. • Oak View Community Center: The Children's Bureau, a non-profit agency, provides a variety of family support and youth development services at the Oakview Community Center, including parent education classes, in-home parenting support and case management, health education and health access assistance, domestic violence prevention and intervention, literacy programs, homework clubs, tutoring, youth clubs, teen programs and clubs, community enrichment and culturally sensitive activities. Supportive Services • Huntington Beach Navigation Center: The Center can shelter up to 174 adults and couples with ties to Huntington Beach. The Center, operated by Mercy House, provides access to vital services that will help individuals experiencing homelessness on the path towards housing security. • Be Well HB: Be Well OC in Huntington Beach assists with a variety of non-emergency and non-medical, public assistance situations that have historically been handled by the Huntington Beach Police Department (HBPD). Be Well HB is equipped to de-escalate and assist with mental health crisis,suicidal ideation, public assistance, non-domestic violence HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 117 family disputes, drug and alcohol abuse/addiction, welfare checks, death notifications, and homelessness (with the HB Homeless Task Force). • Waymakers Huntington Beach Youth Shelter:The Youth Shelter offers a short-term crisis intervention residential program with the goal of family reunification. Children at risk of homelessness, institutionalization, incarceration, or hospitalization are given emergency shelter, meals, 24-hour supervision, individual, group and family counseling, academic tutoring, prevention, education, and life skills development activities as well as aftercare services. • Beach Cities Interfaith Services (BCIS): Coordinates the provision of a variety of financial and human services for the homeless and persons at-risk of homelessness in Huntington Beach. The organization provides sack lunches for homeless individuals and grocery allotments for persons with housing. Other services offered include utility assistance, food/clothing, personal hygiene kits,counseling/referrals,transportation assistance, mail box service, and financial assistance for prescriptions. BCIS is in the process of developing an intake/case management and referral system for the homeless, with the goal of functioning as a multi-service center for the homeless in Huntington Beach. • American Family Housing (AFH): Provides a continuum of services to Huntington Beach residents, including emergency shelter in coordination with local churches; transitional housing in scattered site locations; and permanent affordable rental housing. • Salvation Army Family Service Office: From their Emergency Family Services Office in Huntington Beach, the Salvation Army provides a variety of supportive services for those in need, such as emergency utility bill and rental assistance,clothing and household items, transportation assistance, free food and school supplies. • Mental Health Association of Orange County: Serving adults with severe and persistent psychiatric disorders through direct service, advocacy, education, and information dissemination. Three outpatient recovery centers include mental health assessments, diagnosis, treatment, medication services, individual and group therapy, crisis intervention and case management, support and encouragement. Also, psychosocial consumer clubhouses, wellness centers, veterans services, and resource and referral services are available. • Straight Talk Counseling: Offers affordable, high-quality counseling and prevention services to the community since it was founded in 1971. The mission of Straight Talk Counseling is to make available a variety of mental health, substance abuse, and rehabilitative services to individuals and families in need, for whom access, or utilization of such services is limited, restricted or otherwise unavailable. • Pathways to Independence: Assists single young women from disadvantaged backgrounds through education, therapy, mentoring, housing, and healthcare, to break the cycle of poverty and abuse.The vision is to change the course of young women's lives from abuse and poverty to empowerment and self-sufficiency. Outreach Services • Huntington Beach City Manager's Office: The City of Huntington Beach has established a comprehensive System of Care for those experiencing, or are at risk of, homelessness with HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 118 a focus on outreach, engagement, case management, and linkage to shelter, housing, and other supportive services. The City's Homeless and Behavioral Health Division is committed to taking a positive, balanced approach to assisting the homeless with compassion while upholding our community's overall quality of life. • Project Hope Alliance: PHA's mission is to "end the cycle of homelessness, one child at a time." A proactive, education-centric approach focuses holistically on each child's development so that each child can realize a future without homelessness and become self-sufficient adults. • Robyne's Nest: Resources to school students in the Huntington Beach area, with little to no parental support, to complete high school and pursue a path to self-sufficiency. This includes fostering these students an increased sense of self-worth and dignity, by providing housing, mental health therapy and teaching them how to become independent and self-supporting, and by providing them life skills, counseling services in nutrition, health, finance, educational aid,job training and other related areas. Robyne's Nest focuses on the front-end of the homeless crisis by breaking the cycles of toxicity that leads to homelessness, drug/alcohol addictions, domestic violence,teen pregnancies and more. • StandUp for Kids Street Outreach: Program provides wrap-around support aimed at moving youth facing homelessness from crisis to self-sufficiency.The youth are identified through weekly street outreach and referrals from partner agencies within the City.Youth are assessed for their immediate needs and provided with food, clothing, hygiene products, and transitional housing, as needed. Describe the strengths and gaps of the service delivery system for special needs population and persons experiencing homelessness, including, but not limited to,the services listed above Collaboration between public agencies, assisted housing providers, and private and governmental health, mental health, and human services agencies remains essential for the effective delivery of housing and support services. To strengthen this coordination, the City of Huntington Beach continues its involvement in the Commission to Address Homelessness, working alongside regional partners to improve outcomes for individuals and families experiencing homelessness and housing instability. The primary gap in Huntington Beach's service delivery system is a function of the significant cuts in public and private funding and associated reductions in service. Funding cuts in the CDBG and HOME programs over the last several years, combined with the increased demand for services stemming from increases in housing and rental costs, has resulted in significant gaps in service. Provide a summary of the strategy for overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system for carrying out a strategy to address priority needs The City proposes to strengthen, coordinate and integrate the governmental institutions, non- profit and private delivery systems to implement the City's five-year strategy and to address the priority needs outlined in the Consolidated Plan for Fiscal Years 2025/26—2029/30. Engaging the HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 119 community and stakeholders in the delivery of services and programs for the benefit of low to moderate residents will be vital in overcoming gaps in service delivery. The City will also utilize public notices, Community Workshops and Meetings (as appropriate), the City's website, and other forms of media to deliver information on carrying out the Consolidated Plan strategies. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 120 SP-45 Goals Summary—91.215(a)(4) Goals Summary Information HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 121 Sort Start End Geographic Needs Order Goal Name Year Year Category Area Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 1 Sustain and 2025 2029 Affordable Special Code Priority $1,232,530 Housing Code Strengthen Housing Enforcement Housing (CDBG) Enforcement/Foreclosed Neighborhoods Area Needs Property Care: Non-Housing 3,000 Household Community Citywide Housing Unit Development (Programs Under Consideration:Special Code Enforcement) $1,581,139 Rental Units (CDBG) Rehabilitated: 60 Household Housing Unit (Programs Under Consideration: Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program) HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 122 2 Preserve 2025 2029 Affordable Citywide Priority $584,751 Homeowner Units Existing& Housing Housing (HOME) Rehabilitated— Create New Needs 2 Household Housing Affordable Units Housing (Programs Under Consideration: Acquisition/Rehab/New Construction) $1,000,000 Tenant-Based Rental (HOME Assistance 75 Households (Programs Under Consideration:Families Forward TBRA Program) $1,000,000 Tenant-Based Rental (HOME) Assistance 75 Households (Programs Under Consideration:Mercy House TBRA Program) $644,205 Tenant-Based Rental (HOME) Assistance 30 Households (Programs Under Consideration:Mobile Home TBRA Program) $935,000 Other (CDBG) 330 Housing Units (Programs Under Consideration:Housing Services for TBRA) 3 Support Efforts 2025 2029 Homeless Citywide Priority $477,119 Public service activities to Address Homeless (CDBG) other than Homelessness Needs Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 1,400 Persons Assisted (Programs Under Consideration:Pathways to Independence=200 persons;Project Hope Alliance=525 persons; Robyne's Nest=125 persons;StandUp for Kids=550 persons) HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 123 4 Support 2025 2029 Non-Homeless Citywide Priority $150,530 Public service activities Agencies that Special Needs Special Needs (CDBG) other than Assist Special Low/Moderate Income Needs Housing Benefit: Populations 825 Persons Assisted (Programs Under Consideration:Senior Outreach Care Management) 5 Increase 2025 2029 Non-Housing Citywide Priority $200,530 Public service activities Access to Community Community (CDBG) other than Community Development Services Low/Moderate Income Services for Housing Benefit: Low-and 800 Persons Assisted Moderate- (Programs Under Income Consideration: Persons Children's Bureau) 6 Preserve 2025 2029 Non-Housing Citywide Priority $161,800 Public Facility or Community Community Community (CDBG) Infrastructure Activities and Public Development Special Code and Public other than Facilities Enforcement Facilities Low/Moderate Income Target Area Housing Benefit: 5,000 Persons Assisted (Programs Under Consideration: Various TBD Public Facilities) 7 Provide 2025 2029 Non-Housing Citywide Priority $125,000 Public Facility or Needed Community Infrastructure (CDBG) Infrastructure Activities Infrastructure Development Special Code Improvements other than Improvements Enforcement Low/Moderate Income Target Area Housing Benefit: 5,000 Persons Assisted (Programs Under Consideration:ADA Improvements to Curbs and Ramps=2,271 persons;Various TBD Public Facilities=2,729 persons) 8 Planning for 2025 2029 Administration Citywide Priority Other $1,121,195 Not Applicable. Housing and Housing and (CDBG) (CDBG Program Community Community Administration;Fair Development Development Housing Foundation) Needs $269,164 Not Applicable. (HOME) (HOME Program Administration) Table 57—Goals Summary HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 124 Goal Name Goal Description Sustain and Strengthen Neighborhoods Using CDBG funds, the City will sustain and strengthen neighborhoods by eliminating unsafe conditions and blight while improving the quality of life of residents within the community. (Programs Under Consideration: Special Code Enforcement; Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program) Preserve Existing and Create New To the extent possible, based upon the availability of funds and Affordable Housing a project's viability, HOME funds will be used to assist affordable housing developers in the acquisition, construction and/or rehabilitation of low-income rental and/or owner housing units, and in the provision of tenant-based rental assistance(TBRA). (Programs Under Consideration: Acquisition/Rehabilitation, New Construction, Mercy House TBRA, Families Forward TBRA, Mobile Home TBRA, and Housing Services for TBRA) Support Efforts to Address Homelessness Using CDBG public service funds,the City will provide assistance to homeless service providers. (Programs Under Consideration: Pathways to Independence, Project Hope Alliance, Robyne's Nest, StandUp for Kids Street Outreach;Other TBD Homeless Programs) Support Agencies that Assist Special Needs Using CDBG public service funds,the City will provide Populations assistance to special needs service providers. (Programs Under Consideration:Senior Outreach Care Management;Other TBD Special Needs Programs) Increase Access to Community Services for Using CDBG public service funds,the City will provide assistance Low-and Moderate-Income Persons to various social service agencies for programs for youth, fair housing,anti-crime,and general public services. Services must benefit at least 51 percent low/mod persons. (Programs Under Consideration: Children's Bureau; Other TBD Community Services) Preserve Community and Public Facilities Using CDBG funds, the City will provide financial assistance to improve public facilities and parks. (Programs Under Consideration: Various TBD Public Facility Projects) Provide Needed Infrastructure Using CDBG funds, the City will provide financial assistance to Improvements improve public infrastructure. (Programs Under Consideration: ADA Curb Cuts and Ramps; Other TBD Infrastructure Improvements) HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 125 Planning for Housing and Community The City will conduct the following administration/planning Development activities: (1) General Administration of CDBG and HOME Program, including preparation of budget, applications, certifications and agreements, (2) Coordination of CDBG- funded capital improvement projects, (3) Coordination of Public Service Subrecipients, (4) Coordination of HOME-funded housing projects, (5) Monitoring of CDBG and HOME projects/programs to ensure compliance with federal regulations, (6) Preparation of Annual Action Plan, and (7) Preparation of the CAPER. Up to 20% of the annual CDBG entitlement and up to 10%of the HOME entitlement is allowed for administration activities. (Programs Under Consideration: CDBG Program Administration; Fair Housing Foundation; HOME Program Administration) Table 58—Goal Descriptions Estimate the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as defined by HOME 91.315(b)(2) Over the next five years, the City of Huntington Beach plans to continue its efforts to address housing affordability challenges by providing tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA) to households in need. Specifically, the City intends to allocate HOME funding for TBRA through partnerships with Families Forward and Mercy House, with the goal of assisting 75 homeless, senior, veteran, and/or family households each. Additionally, a separate TBRA program will be available to senior households requiring assistance with mobile home space rents. The Consolidated Plan outlines a target of assisting 30 mobile home residents over the five-year period. In addition to these initiatives, the City is required to allocate 15% of each annual HOME entitlement allocation to support the development of affordable housing. This allocation will amount to approximately $584,751 over the next five years, which may be sufficient to fund the development of at least two affordable rental units. While no specific projects are currently under consideration for the development of affordable housing, the City remains committed to exploring potential opportunities and is open to discussions with community housing development organizations (CHDOs) interested in collaborating on future projects. While the 5-year affordable housing goals have been established using FY 2025/26 allocations, the City reserves the right to adjust funding as needed during the course of the Consolidated Plan period, including reallocating funds to other initiatives or other TBRA providers based on emerging needs and priorities. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 126 SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement—91.215(c) Need to Increase the Number of Accessible Units (if Required by a Section 504 Voluntary Compliance Agreement) Not appliable. Activities to Increase Resident Involvements Not applicable. Is the public housing agency designated as troubled under 24 CFR part 902? Not applicable. Plan to remove the 'troubled' designation. Not applicable. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 127 SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing—91.215(h) Barriers to Affordable Housing Huntington Beach has a well-established history of supporting affordable housing initiatives. The City has implemented several provisions in its Zoning Ordinance that facilitate diverse residential development and promote affordable housing, including a density bonus ordinance, an inclusionary housing ordinance, a planned development zone, and reasonable accommodation procedures for individuals with disabilities. However, the primary barrier to the development of affordable housing in Huntington Beach is the limited availability of vacant land suitable for residential use. Much of the underdeveloped and residentially zoned land in the City is owned by separate entities who hold smaller parcels, creating challenges for cohesive development. This situation necessitates alternative policy strategies, such as lot consolidation or the demolition of older structures, to accommodate higher-density infill development. Beyond the challenges faced by market-rate housing development—such as high land prices and construction costs—affordable housing projects encounter additional hurdles. While there are sites with some potential to accommodate affordable housing, including those targeting special needs populations, financial assistance for these projects remains scarce and highly competitive. Typically, a combination of funding sources is required to finance an affordable housing development, as substantial subsidies are necessary to ensure the units are affordable for extremely low,very low, and low-income households. It is not uncommon for affordable housing projects to rely on five or more funding sources to become financially viable. Each funding source may have different requirements, application processes, and deadlines, with some even requiring that financing commitments be secured before applications can proceed. Because securing financing is so critical and competitive, funding agencies often influence the scope and nature of housing projects. In recent years, funding for housing targeting special needs populations—such as veterans, individuals with mental disabilities, and the homeless—has generally been more available than for other low- and moderate-income households. Strategy to Remove or Ameliorate the Barriers to Affordable Housing Through the administration of the CDBG and HOME programs, every effort is made to remove barriers to affordable housing through agreements with for-profit and non-profit affordable housing developers. These efforts also include working with neighborhood residents to ensure affordable housing projects are acceptable. Ongoing monitoring of "for sale" affordable units is conducted by department staff by assuring that the affordable housing covenants are recorded on title when the unit is sold. To address the decline in sources of housing funds, the City will continue to advocate for and pursue federal, state, local and private funding sources for affordable housing. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 128 Additionally, as part of the City's Housing Element update,the City must assess and to the extent feasible, mitigate, its governmental constraints to housing for lower- and moderate-income households and persons with disabilities. The Housing Element addresses the City's provisions for affordable housing, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing. The following programs in the City's 2013-2021 Housing Element specifically address the variety of regulatory and financial tools used by the City to remove barriers and facilitate the provision of affordable housing: Multi-family Acquisition/Rehabilitation through Non-Profit Developers: Acquire, rehabilitate, and establish affordability covenants on 80 rental units. Residential and Mixed-Use Sites Inventory: Maintain current inventory of vacant and underutilized development sites and provide developers with information on incentives. Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan: Facilitate development through flexible, form-based standards and streamlined processing. Encourage affordable housing by requiring inclusionary units to be provided on-site, or within the Specific Plan, and providing additional incentives for increased percentages of affordable units. Inclusionary Housing Program and Housing Trust Fund: Continue implementation and re- evaluate Ordinance to provide consistency with case law and market conditions. Establish in-lieu fee amount for projects between 10-30 units. Affordable Housing Development Assistance: Provide financial and regulatory assistance in support of affordable housing. Provide information on incentives to development community. Affordable Housing Density Bonus: Continue to offer density bonus incentives as a means of enhancing the economic feasibility of affordable housing development. Development Fee Assistance: Continue to offer fee reductions to incentivize affordable housing. Specify the waiver of 100% of application processing fees in the Code for projects with 10% extremely low-income units. Residential Processing Procedures: Provide non-discretionary development review within the Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan. Adopt streamlined review procedures for multi-family development on a citywide basis. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 129 SP-60 Homelessness Strategy—91.215(d) Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs Homelessness has been a growing challenge across the country including in the Los Angeles and Orange County regions. Contributing factors include a shortage of affordable housing, increasing poverty rates, reduced subsidies, substance abuse issues, the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill, and a rising number of individuals who may view homelessness as a lifestyle choice. To address this issue, Orange County conducts a biennial enumeration of both sheltered and unsheltered homeless individuals in a 24-hour period. This effort, known as the Homeless Point- in-Time (PIT) Count, is required by Congress for all communities receiving U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding for homeless programs. HUD mandates that the PIT Count take place during the last ten days of January. For 2024, the count was conducted by the County of Orange and the Orange County Continuum of Care,with the sheltered count taking place on the night of January 22, 2024, and the unsheltered count occurring from the morning of January 23 through January 25, 2024. The 2024 PIT Count identified 7,322 homeless individuals in Orange County, marking a significant 28% increase from the 2022 count, which recorded 5,718 individuals. Specifically in Huntington Beach, the count revealed 433 total homeless persons, with 173 classified as unsheltered and 260 as sheltered. This represents an increase from the 2022 figures, where there were 330 total homeless individuals— 188 unsheltered and 142 sheltered. The City of Huntington Beach has implemented an ambitious strategy to address and ultimately end homelessness. In FY 2021/22, the City took significant steps by appointing a Deputy Director of Homelessness&Behavioral Health Services and establishing the Homeless& Behavioral Health System.This comprehensive system aims to support individuals experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness through outreach, engagement, case management, and connecting them with essential services such as shelter, housing, and behavioral health support. Although the Deputy Director's position has evolved since February 2022, the City continues to staff and support homelessness services. The HB Cares Volunteers program is an integral part of the Homeless& Behavioral Health System in Huntington Beach, serving as the backbone of the initiative and driving positive change within the community. Since its launch in 2023, the HB CARES Program has successfully recruited and trained 21 volunteers who have undergone various training sessions, including de-escalation techniques, trauma-informed care, vicarious trauma, and Mental Health First Aid. Volunteers answer the homeless outreach line daily and return calls, so those in need have a streamlined means of communication with our outreach team. Further, a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist started in December 2023 and has assisted with 62 Disabling Condition Assessments. The therapist will continue to support mental health services on an as-needed basis. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 130 The Homeless & Behavioral Health System also incorporated homeless outreach social workers who actively engaged with unhoused and at-risk of being unhoused individuals, families, veterans, and seniors. Social workers offered support by linking individuals to resources, service providers, and aiding in securing necessary documents for County of Orange housing programs. They maintained close collaboration with local and county shelters, including the Huntington Beach Navigation Center,while also partnering with crisis response teams like Be Well to provide comprehensive assistance and support to those in need. Working in collaboration with Homeless Task Force officers, they ensured that individuals received the necessary care and resources to address their unique situations effectively. Be Well OC in Huntington Beach (BWOC) is another component of the Homeless & Behavioral Health System. BWOC employs a Mobile Crisis Response Team (two operating vans) composed of two Crisis Interventionists who drive to locations and provide in-community assessment and stabilization services. The teams are well-trained and experienced in providing appropriate information, referrals, transportation to services, and additional follow-up support and case management-to help address mental health-related situations. In the ensuing years covered by this Consolidated Plan, the City intends to support homeless public service programs that provide outreach and assessment of homeless individuals. Such programs could include the Pathways to Independence Program which focuses on young single women experiencing homelessness, or Project Hope Alliance, Robyne's Nest, and StandUp for Kids Street Outreach which focus on homeless youth and providing them wrap around services unique to young individuals such as mentoring, food, clothing, housing, academic support, and educational aid. Further, the City may continue to support the operations and services at the Navigation Center, located at 17642 Beach Boulevard. The Navigation Center, which opened in December 2020, offers 174 beds for overnight shelter and provides direct access to essential services aimed at helping individuals experiencing homelessness move towards housing stability. These combined efforts reflect the City's commitment to addressing homelessness and facilitating pathways to long-term housing solutions. Addressing the emergency and transitional housing needs of homeless persons As mentioned above, the City has partnered with Mercy House to launch the Navigation Center, an emergency homeless shelter. The facility received significant federal funding to support its operations, including CDBG, CDBG-CV(for activities related to COVID-19 prevention, preparation, and response), and HOME funding from the American Rescue Program (HOME-ARP). The Navigation Center can shelter up to 174 adults and couples under normal conditions. In FY 2021/22, the City initiated the HB Oasis project in collaboration with the State of California Homekey Program, the County of Orange, National CORE, and American Family Housing. This HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 131 project involved acquiring and rehabilitating the former Quality Inn & Suites motel at 17251 Beach Boulevard to address homelessness in the region. HB Oasis served as interim housing for up to 62 individuals and households in Orange County's Central Service Planning Area. It provided not only transitional housing but also comprehensive property management and residential support services. The focus was on trauma-informed, evidence-based operations to support residents' reintegration into the community through robust case management and connections to permanent housing solutions. In May 2024, the HB Oasis project transitioned to permanent supportive housing. This transition involved renovating the individual units to include kitchenettes and utilizing project-based vouchers to support long-term housing stability for its residents. Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again. In its ongoing commitment to addressing homelessness and preventing those at risk from becoming homeless, the City of Huntington Beach has implemented a series of strategic initiatives designed to support a variety of populations, including chronically homeless individuals, families with children, veterans, victims of domestic violence, and unaccompanied youth. The City's approach is centered around facilitating the transition to permanent housing and independent living, reducing the duration of homelessness, improving access to affordable housing, and preventing recidivism among recently housed individuals. Key efforts include securing both short-term and long-term funding, collaborating with experienced service providers to leverage additional resources, and creating or securing affordable housing opportunities. The City also provides comprehensive case management services and conducts street outreach to connect homeless individuals with available resources. One notable initiative, the conversion of the former Quality Inn Hotel into the Huntington Beach Oasis project, created 62 non- congregate transitional housing units. This project offers extensive wraparound supportive services to address challenges such as mental and physical health issues, substance use,trauma, and employment barriers.The success of this program led to the conversion of these transitional units into permanent housing in May 2024. Similarly, the Navigation Center, supported by approximately$4.5 million in funding from CDBG, CDBG-CV, and HOME-ARP, offers a range of wraparound services to help individuals transition from emergency shelter to more stable housing. The City plans to repurpose the Navigation Center property into a permanent navigation center and affordable housing development project, which will provide both affordable housing and supportive services for chronically homeless individuals. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 132 Finally, the City intends to prioritize tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA), with plans to provide subsidies to 180 households between 2025/26 and 2029/30, further reinforcing its commitment to supporting those in need of stable housing. Help low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low- income individuals and families who are likely to become homeless after being discharged from a publicly funded institution or system of care, or who are receiving assistance from public and private agencies that address housing, health,social services,employment,education or youth needs To prevent homelessness and support at-risk populations, Huntington Beach actively participated in the Orange County Continuum of Care System. This system is designed to provide assistance to individuals at risk of becoming homeless, ensuring a network of support for those in need. The City is also committed to supporting families through HOME-funded rental assistance programs. During the five-year period covered by this Consolidated Plan,the City is proposing to support three rental assistance programs that will assist a variety of vulnerable population groups in Huntington Beach. For example, Families Forward assists families that are homeless or at risk of homelessness, while Mercy House targets lower-income households, veterans, and victims of domestic violence. The Mobile Home Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program targets senior owners of mobile homes with space rents. Although the City does not receive Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) or Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funding and therefore is not required to develop a discharge coordination policy, it remains committed to addressing this issue. The City will continue to work with the Orange County Housing Authority and the Continuum of Care Homeless Issues Task Force to develop and refine its discharge coordination policy. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 133 SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards—91.215(i) Actions to address LBP hazards and increase access to housing without LBP hazards As a means of better protecting children and families against lead poisoning, in 1999 HUD instituted revised lead-based paint regulations focused around the following five activities: • Notification • Lead Hazard Evaluation • Lead Hazard Reduction • Ongoing Maintenance • Response to Children with Environmental Intervention Blood Lead Level The City has implemented HUD Lead Based Paint Regulations (Title X), which requires federally funded rehabilitation projects to address lead hazards. Lead-based paint abatement is part of the City's Residential Rehabilitation Program and the Acquisition/Rehabilitation of Affordable Rental Housing Program. Units within rental housing projects selected for rehabilitation are tested if not statutorily exempt. Elimination or encapsulation remedies are implemented if lead is detected and is paid for by either the developer of the project, or with CDBG or HOME funds, as appropriate. How are the actions listed above related to the extent of lead poisoning and hazards? As discussed earlier in the Housing Market Analysis, 74% of Huntington Beach's owner-occupied units were built prior to 1980, however of these 32,520 units, only 5.6% or 1,820 units have occupants that include children. Similarly, 71% of Huntington Beach's rental housing was built prior to 1980 (23,990 units), with children present in just 3.8% or 920 of these units. Pre-1980 housing units with children present pose the greatest threat of lead poisoning.With an estimated 2,740 such households in Huntington Beach, lead exposure among children is not a sizable issue. Another risk factor is household income, with lower income households having a greater risk of exposure. The 2016-2020 CHAS identifies 43% of Huntington Beach's households as earning less than 80% HAMFI, translating to an estimated 24,300 low and moderate income households residing in the City's 56,510 pre-1980 housing units. Based on the visual (windshield) survey, the City determined that low- and moderate-income areas within the area bound by Bolsa Chica Street to the west, Bolsa Avenue to the north, Brookhurst Street to the east, and Atlanta Avenue to the south contained the most properties with physical deterioration. Further, the potential presence of lead-based paint in the City's 56,510 owner and rental housing units built before 1980 would theoretically qualify for rehabilitation assistance if sufficient resources existed. The City prioritizes limited CDBG and HOME resources for rehabilitation and code enforcement of substandard housing. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 134 How are the actions listed above integrated into housing policies and procedures? The Huntington Beach Community Enhancement Division leads the City's efforts to mitigate lead- based paint hazards. As part of its commitment to ensuring safe housing, all rehabilitation and tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA) projects funded through CDBG and HOME are subjected to testing for lead and asbestos. If a lead hazard is identified, the City engages a lead consultant to oversee the necessary abatement or implementation of interim controls to eliminate the risk. In addition, for Section 8 housing programs, the Orange County Housing Authority conducts annual inspections of both existing and newly available units. In all cases, any defective paint surfaces must be repaired. For units occupied by households with children under the age of six, corrective actions are taken, including testing and abatement when necessary, or abatement without prior testing if deemed appropriate to protect the health of the children.These measures reflect the City's and County's commitment to ensuring that all housing remains safe and free from lead-based paint hazards, particularly in vulnerable households. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 135 SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy—91.215(j) Jurisdiction Goals, Programs and Policies for reducing the number of Poverty-Level Families The 2016-2020 American Community Survey reported that 8% of City residents had incomes below the poverty level. Of greatest concern is record high rents in Huntington Beach that have placed many lower-income persons at greater risk of homelessness. As discussed previously in Section NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment, of the City's approximately 18,420 low- and moderate-income renter households, 14,090 (76%) face a cost burden of spending greater than 30% of income on rent. Additionally, 40% of the City's low- and moderate-income renters face a severe cost burden, with 7,910 spending more than 50% of income on rent. Many of the workers who make up Huntington Beach's workforce earn modest incomes, making it challenging to afford in live in the City where they work. The analysis of rental housing costs and affordability(Section MA-15) illustrates that households earning low-and moderate-incomes (up to 80%AMI) cannot afford average market rents in Huntington Beach. In general, individuals working in lower-wage service, retail, and support roles are most likely to find themselves priced out of the rental housing market in Huntington Beach due to the high cost of living in the area. For the homeless or those at-risk of becoming homeless, the most significant problem is the lack of affordable rental housing, which has been exacerbated by decreases in funding available through Section 8 and HOME, and the loss of approximately$3 million in annual Redevelopment Housing funds previously used to support affordable housing. The City's anti-poverty strategy seeks to enhance the employability of residents through the promotion and support of programs which provide employment training and supportive services, while expanding employment opportunities through the implementation of three Business Improvement Districts, and its recently completed Economic Development Strategic Plan. The City of Huntington Beach supports a variety of economic development activities that help to create and retain jobs for low- and moderate-income households. Activities supported include a commercial property locator; employment assistance in the form of referrals to resources for finding and training employees; financial assistance through the Small Business Administration; business counseling and training via a litany of not-for-profit Orange County agencies; technical assistance in permits, trademarks, environmental review, and taxes; and export and trade assistance. Micro-enterprise assistance, job training services, and technical assistance are some areas that may warrant consideration for funding during the Consolidated Plan period. In 2024, the City of Huntington Beach completed its updated Economic Development Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan is designed to strengthen the local economy by focusing on business retention, attraction, and expansion. It also enhances tourism and culture, ensures responsive governance, and fosters proactive communication and collaboration.The updated plan promotes HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 136 sustainable growth and active community engagement for a vibrant, resilient future for the City of Huntington Beach. This updated strategy provides a structured roadmap for economic resilience and growth, focusing on strategic business initiatives, cultural enhancement, responsive governance, and robust collaboration. With outlined milestones, the strategy aims to create a thriving, diverse, and sustainable economy for all residents and businesses, ensuring steady progress and adaptability, and positioning Huntington Beach for a prosperous future. In terms of workforce training initiatives, the City's Library has implemented an Adult Literacy Program, offering English speaking, reading, and writing skill development for persons 18 years and older. The goal of the program is to promote literacy and improved job skills. The Community for Entrepreneurship & Leadership at Golden West College is an endeavor to support workforce and economic development. The program began as a collaborative of the Oak View Renewal Partnership, a nonprofit organization that provided assistance to residents of Oak View (a low-income neighborhood in Huntington Beach), and Golden West College. In July 2021, the program transitioned away from workforce development services to a finer focus of entrepreneurial education and coaching, allocating its team and resources to the success and impact of aspiring entrepreneurs. CIELO, as the program is now called, serves as a small business support system for all Orange County residents,with a focus on low-income and under-resourced individuals who lack access to resources, knowledge, and support to change their economic trajectory. CIELO aims to reduce opportunity inequality by providing participants with the resources or connections they wouldn't otherwise have. Finally, the City will fully comply with Section 3 of the Housing and Community Development Act, which helps foster local economic development and individual self-sufficiency. This set of regulations requires that to the greatest extent feasible, the City will provide job training, employment, and contracting opportunities for low or very low-income residents in connection with housing and public construction projects. How are the Jurisdiction poverty reducing goals, programs, and policies coordinated with this affordable housing plan Huntington Beach's affordable housing programs are closely aligned with the City's broader goals and strategies for reducing poverty among local families and individuals. These programs work together to address both the immediate housing needs of low-income residents and the long- term economic self-sufficiency of vulnerable populations. Examples of the coordination between affordable housing initiatives and poverty reduction efforts include: • Housing Choice Rental Assistance Program: Over 600 low and extremely low-income households in Huntington Beach participate in the Housing Choice Rental Assistance Voucher Program, which is administered by the Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA). This program directly supports poverty reduction by helping these households HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 137 access affordable rental housing, thus easing financial strain and enabling them to allocate resources toward other basic needs, such as food, healthcare, and education. • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) Programs: The City plans to utilize HOME funds to support three tenant-based rental assistance programs. These programs will provide direct rental subsidies to eligible low-income households, helping reduce the financial burden of housing costs and offering families a better chance at achieving long-term stability and upward mobility. • Pathways to Independence Program: With CDBG funding,the City supports the Pathways to Independence program, which serves single women who are homeless or unstably housed. This program helps participants achieve economic self-sufficiency through education and personal development, providing a critical link between stable housing and the long-term reduction of poverty. By equipping individuals with the skills and support they need to succeed,the program contributes to breaking the cycle of homelessness and poverty. • Affordable Housing Development: During the five-year period of the Consolidated Plan, the City will work to utilize HOME funds to gap finance an affordable housing project at a yet-to-be-determined location. The development of new affordable housing will directly address the need for affordable living spaces for low-income families and individuals, providing them with stable housing opportunities that can help reduce economic vulnerability and improve quality of life. Through these initiatives, Huntington Beach's affordable housing programs are intricately connected to the City's poverty reduction goals. By ensuring access to affordable housing, supporting programs that enhance self-sufficiency, and developing new affordable housing units, the City is working to reduce poverty and improve the economic stability of its residents. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 138 SP-80 Monitoring—91.230 Describe the standards and procedures that the jurisdiction will use to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements. Huntington Beach follows monitoring procedures for CDBG-funded public service subrecipients which includes desk reviews of quarterly progress reports and expenditures, and periodic on-site visits to ensure compliance with federal regulations. All subrecipients are required by their subrecipient agreement to submit performance reports that demonstrate work is being performed in accordance with the scope of service, that evidences progress in meeting performance milestones, and that shows expenditures are allowable under the agreement. Staff also conducts periodic on-site monitoring of project activities to document compliance with HUD eligibility guidelines, performance in reaching contract goals, to determine if administrative and fiscal systems are adequate, and to ensure compliance with other crosscutting federal regulations. CDBG-funded capital projects are monitored by regular status and fiscal reports for Davis/Bacon and Section 3 requirements throughout the course of the project, as well as frequent site visits by staff. For some projects, the City's Public Works Department outsources monitoring and project inspections on construction work. The City is also responsible for monitoring HOME-assisted rental projects (e.g., transitional, permanent and special needs housing projects)throughout the period of affordability to ensure that these projects are in continued compliance with Federal and State regulations. Monitoring guidelines are intended to assist City staff in making informed judgments about asset management, HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME) Program compliance, and management efficiency of HOME-assisted rental projects. The City's monitoring protocol serves to determine if HOME-assisted rental housing remains affordable, its occupants are low-and very low-income, and that the property is maintained in standard condition throughout the affordability period. Rental project monitoring occurs at three levels: • Annually, a desk audit is performed wherein the owner/property manager will submit information certifying household sizes, household incomes and rents for all HOME- restricted units; • An on-site visit will be conducted triennially (once every three years) during which an in- depth review will occur of all HOME and federal crosscutting requirements, e.g., affirmative marketing and tenant selection procedures; • Upon receipt of a developer's project pro forma, the City conducts an economic analysis to ensure that, in accordance with the City's adopted underwriting and layering review HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 139 guidelines, the amount of warranted HOME assistance is necessary to provide affordable housing. The City has the prerogative to monitor on-site more frequently, especially if a project is at risk because of outstanding findings or insufficient capacity. The City shall also follow steps to monitor beneficiaries of the Homeowner Rehabilitation Program. During the pre-monitoring phase, applicants will sign a clause on the application form certifying that the property is the principal residence. Project and financial data on CDBG and HOME-funded activities is maintained using HUD's IDIS (Integrated Disbursement Information System) software. Use of this system allows HUD staff easy access to local data for review and progress evaluation. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 140 EXPECTED RESOURCES AP-15 Expected Resources—91.220(c)(1,2) Introduction Huntington Beach is an entitlement jurisdiction and as such,will receive an estimated $1,121,195 in CDBG entitlement funds, will have approximately $228,868 in prior year CDBG funds carried forward,and is estimated to receive around $30,000 in program income for a total of$1,380,063. The City does not have any income from float-funded activities or surplus from urban renewal settlements, sale of real property, prior period adjustments, loans outstanding or written off, CDBG-acquired property available for sale, or lump sum drawdown payments. Nor is the City funding any "urgent need activities." CDBG funds will be used for public services, housing services in support of eligible HOME activities, a homeowner rehabilitation program, code enforcement, infrastructure improvements, and CDBG administration. The City will also receive an estimated HOME entitlement allocation of $538,328. Prior year unallocated funds of $181,100 and approximately $125,000 in program income will also be available, for a total of$844,428. The City will use HOME funds for administration of the HOME program, three tenant-based rental assistance programs, and will reserve at least 15% for a future affordable housing project. The City is also proposing to use prior-year HOME administrative funds for current year fair housing services. In the event that final CDBG and HOME entitlement allocations differ from the estimated amounts described above, the following adjustments, as approved by the City Council, will be made to the FY 2025/26 Annual Action Plan: CDBG Public Service Allocations • If actual CDBG funding is less than the anticipated amount, decrease the funding allocation for each of the six recommended organizations by a proportionate share (weighted average). • If actual CDBG funding is greater than the anticipated amount, allocate increased funds by equal amount to the six recommended organizations identified in AP-35 Capital and Housing Preservation Project Allocations • If actual CDBG funding is less than the anticipated amount, maintain the recommended funding allocations for Special Code Enforcement and Housing Services for TBRA Program and reduce funding to Housing Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program and Maintenance Zone Area 3 ADA Improvements equally. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 141 • If actual CDBG funding is greater than the anticipated amount, maintain the recommended funding allocations for Special Code Enforcement and Housing Services for TBRA Program and increase funding to Housing Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program and Maintenance Zone Area 3 ADA Improvements equally. • If actual HOME funding is less than or greater than the anticipated amount, adjust the Mobile Home TBRA program accordingly. Other HOME capital programs are to remain unchanged. Administration Allocations • If actual CDBG funding is less than or more than the anticipated amount, adjust CDBG Administration allocation accordingly but will not exceed the 20 percent maximum requirement of the HUD CDBG allocation for 2025/26. • If actual HOME funding is less than or more than the anticipated amount, adjust HOME Administration and Community Housing Development Organization funding reserves accordingly, but will not exceed the 10 percent and 15 percent maximum requirements of the HUD HOME allocation for 2025/26. Another potential resource is SB-2, also known as the Permanent Local Housing Allocation funding, which was implemented in January 2019. It imposes an additional recording fee on property sales, with the aim of collecting revenues that are then distributed by the state to local jurisdictions. These funds are earmarked for financing affordable housing projects. Huntington Beach is set to receive annual revenues from this source, but it's contingent upon the certification of the 2021-2029 Housing Element by the State of California. Once the Housing Element is certified, Huntington Beach can continue to access these funds. This funding serves as a crucial resource that can be utilized to complement CDBG and HOME funds, particularly in addressing issues related to affordable housing and homelessness within the community. Leveraging these various funding sources can significantly bolster efforts to combat housing insecurity and homelessness in Huntington Beach. The Huntington Beach Housing Authority also contributes approximately$220,000 annually from the Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF) for homeless services personnel as part of the City's Homeless Taskforce effort. The City will pursue competitive public and private grants for the development and preservation of programs, housing, and services and work to support legislation that promotes funding for future affordable housing during the Consolidated Plan period. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 142 Anticipated Resources Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Source Annual Program Prior Year Remainder of Allocation: Income: Resources: Total: of ConPlan Narrative Program Funds Uses of Funds $ $ $ $ $ Description CDBG Public- Acquisition, $1,121,195 $30,000 $228,868 $1,380,063 $4,604,780 Entitlement Federal Planning, funds Economic allocation Development, plus Housing, estimated Public program Improvements, income Public Services plus prior- year resources. HOME Public- Acquisition, $538,328 $125,000 $181,100 $844,428 $2,653,312 Entitlement Federal Homeowner allocation Rehab, plus Multifamily estimated rental new program construction, income and Multifamily prior-year rental rehab, resources. New construction for ownership, TBRA Table 52-Expected Resources—Priority Table Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied Federal funds play a vital role in implementing the Consolidated Plan. Since local, private, and non-federal resources are often insufficient to meet the community's demand for housing and services, agencies receiving CDBG and HOME funds rely on substantial financial and in-kind support from individuals, foundations, and private organizations to address the needs outlined in the plan. Additionally, the City leverages other resources from formula grant programs. For instance, the HOME program is supported by a range of funding sources, including private and public investments, as well as low-income housing tax credits. Other potential matching funds include inclusionary housing in-lieu fees, residual receipts from former Redevelopment Agency loans, and State SERAF loan repayments from former Redevelopment Low/Mod Housing Funds. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 143 The City has also combined CDBG and CDBG-CV funds with local funding to support the operation of the Navigation Center, an emergency homeless shelter initially established to provide a safe place for people experiencing homelessness during the COVID-19 pandemic.The center has since become a permanent shelter for Huntington Beach's homeless population. Historically, the City has used former redevelopment tax increment funds and surplus contributions from the Redevelopment Agency to meet the 25% match requirement for HOME funds. Although redevelopment tax increment funds are no longer available for future matches, the City continues to use the surplus for this purpose. As of September 2023, the surplus stands at approximately$3,725,103, providing a valuable resource for meeting match requirements and supporting affordable housing development. If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan The City Council approved the acquisition of property at 17631 Cameron Lane, which was developed as an emergency homeless shelter to address the needs of the homeless population. This aligns with the priority need identified in the previous 2020/21-2024/25 Consolidated Plan and continues to be a priority in the 2025/26-2029/30 Consolidated Plan. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 144 ANNUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives Goals Summary Information HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 145 Sort Start End Geographic Needs Order Goal Name Year Year Category Area Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 1 Sustain and 2025 2026 Affordable Special Code Priority $246,506 Housing Code Strengthen Housing Enforcement Housing (CDBG) Enforcement/Foreclosed Neighborhoods Area Needs Property Care: Non-Housing 600 Household Housing Community Citywide Unit(Special Code Development Enforcement) $381,139 Rental Units (CDBG) Rehabilitated: 12 Household Housing Unit(Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program) 2 Preserve 2025 2026 Affordable Citywide Priority $200,000 Tenant-Based Rental Existing& Housing Housing (HOME Assistance Create New Needs 15 Households Affordable (Families Forward TBRA Housing Program) $200,000 Tenant-Based Rental (HOME) Assistance 15 Households (Mercy House TBRA Program) $128,841 Tenant-Based Rental (HOME) Assistance 6 Households (Mobile Home TBRA Program) $235,000 Other (CDBG) 36 Housing Units (Housing Services for TBRA) 3 Support Efforts 2025 2026 Homeless Citywide Priority $97,119 Public service activities to Address Homeless (CDBG) other than Homelessness Needs Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 280 Persons Assisted (Pathways to Independence=40 persons;Project Hope Alliance=105 persons; Robyne's Nest=25 persons;Standup for Kids=110 persons) HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 146 4 Support 2025 2026 Non-Homeless Citywide Priority $30,530 Public service activities Agencies that Special Needs Special Needs (CDBG) other than Assist Special Low/Moderate Income Needs Housing Benefit: Populations 165 Persons Assisted (Senior Outreach Care Management) 5 Increase 2025 2026 Non-Housing Citywide Priority $40,530 Public service activities Access to Community Community (CDBG) other than Community Development Services Low/Moderate Income Services for Housing Benefit: Low-and 160 Persons Assisted Moderate- (Children's Bureau) Income Persons 6 Provide 2025 2026 Non-Housing Citywide Priority $125,000 Public Facility or Needed Community Infrastructure (CDBG) Infrastructure Activities Infrastructure Development Special Code Improvements other than Improvements Enforcement Low/Moderate Income Target Area Housing Benefit: 5,000 Persons Assisted (ADA Curbs Cuts and Ramps in MZ 3=2,271 persons) 7 Planning for 2025 2026 Administration Citywide Priority Other $224,239 Not Applicable. Housing and Housing and (CDBG) (CDBG Program Community Community Administration;Fair Development Development Housing Foundation) Needs $53,833 (HOME) Not Applicable. (HOME Program Administration) Table 3—Goals Summary Goal Descriptions HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 147 Goal Name Goal Description Sustain and Strengthen Neighborhoods Using CDBG funds, the City will sustain and strengthen neighborhoods by eliminating unsafe conditions and blight while improving the quality of life of residents within the community. (Projects: Special Code Enforcement; Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program) Preserve Existing and Create New To the extent possible,based upon the availability of funds and Affordable Housing a project's viability, HOME funds will be used to assist affordable housing developers in the acquisition, construction and/or rehabilitation of low-income rental and/or owner housing units, and in the provision of tenant-based rental assistance(TBRA). (Projects: Mercy House TBRA, Families Forward TBRA, Mobile Home TBRA, and Housing Services for TBRA) Support Efforts to Address Homelessness Using CDBG public service funds, the City will provide assistance to homeless service providers. (Projects: Pathways to Independence, Project Hope Alliance, Robyne's Nest, StandUp for Kids Street Outreach) Support Agencies that Assist Special Needs Using CDBG public service funds,the City will provide Populations assistance to special needs service providers. (Project:Senior Outreach Care Management) Increase Access to Community Services for Using CDBG public service funds, the City will provide Low-and Moderate-Income Persons assistance to various social service agencies for programs for youth, fair housing, anti-crime, and general public services. Services must benefit at least 51 percent low/mod persons. (Project:Children's Bureau) Provide Needed Infrastructure Using CDBG funds, the City will provide financial assistance to Improvements improve public infrastructure. (Projects:ADA Curb Cuts and Ramps) Planning for Housing and Community The City will conduct the following administration/planning Development activities: (1) General Administration of CDBG and HOME Program, including preparation of budget, applications, certifications and agreements, (2) Coordination of CDBG- funded capital improvement projects, (3) Coordination of Public Service Subrecipients,(4)Coordination of HOME-funded housing projects, (5) Monitoring of CDBG and HOME projects/programs to ensure compliance with federal regulations, (6) Preparation of Annual Action Plan, and (7) Preparation of the CAPER. Up to 20% of the annual CDBG entitlement and up to 10%of the HOME entitlement is allowed for administration activities. (Projects: CDBG Program Administration; Fair Housing Foundation;HOME Program Administration) Table 61—Annual Action Plan Goal Descriptions HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 148 PROJECTS AP-35 Projects—91.220(d) Introduction The City plans to undertake the following CDBG and HOME-funded activities during FY 2025/26 to address its priority housing and community development needs. All proposed activities are eligible and meet program service targets. Additionally, the City of Huntington Beach has not exceeded any of its maximum allocations for CDBG public services, CDBG administration, or HOME administration. With an estimated CDBG allocation of$1,121,195, the City of Huntington Beach will allocate $168,179 for public services, representing 15% of the CDBG entitlement. This Action Plan proposes to allocate the following to 2025/26 public services: Pathways to Independence ($20,530); Project Hope Alliance ($20,530); Robyne's Nest ($40,529); StandUp for Kids ($15,530); Senior Outreach Care Management ($30,530); and Children's Bureau ($40,530). CDBG regulations also permit a maximum allocation of 20% of the annual entitlement, or $224,239, for CDBG administration activities. The City has allocated this entire amount to CDBG Administration. Lastly, a maximum of 10% of the annual HOME entitlement, $53,833, will be allocated to HOME Program Administration in FY 2025/26. Consistent with the City's Draft Citizen Participation Plan for 2025/26-2029/30 (to be adopted with this Consolidated Plan), the Annual Action Plan may contain a list of "back-up" projects to be activated during the given program year due to one or more of the following circumstances: • Additional funding becomes available during the program year from the close out of current projects that were completed under budget. • More program income becomes available than originally estimated and budgeted in the Annual Action Plan. • If, during the development of the Annual Action Plan, the City of Huntington Beach has not definitively decided which public facility or infrastructure improvement project to fund, the City may opt to categorize each option as a "back-up" project until further project and budget planning is performed. Initiation and funding of one or more of the "back-up" projects would not constitute a substantial amendment as defined in the Citizen Participation Plan. Preferential consideration will be given to those projects that demonstrate the ability to spend CDBG funds in a timely manner, consistent with the City's goal to meet CDBG timeliness rules, as well as those projects that meet the needs of the community as defined in the Consolidated Plan. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 149 Projects # Project Name 1 Special Code Enforcement 2 Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program 3 Families Forward Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program 4 Mercy House Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program 5 Mobile Home Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program 6 Housing Services for Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program 7 Pathways to Independence 8 Project Hope Alliance 9 Robyne's Nest 10 StandUp for Kids Street Outreach 11 Senior Center Care Management 12 Oak View Community Center—Children's Bureau 13 ADA Improvements in Maintenance Zone 3 14 CDBG Administration 15 HOME Program Administration 16 Unallocated HOME CHDO Reserve (CR) Funds Table 62—Project Information Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs The highest priority is given to the needs of the lowest-income residents, recognizing their increased vulnerability to displacement, homelessness, and other severe housing challenges due to limited financial resources and various other hardships they may face. The Consolidated Plan highlights several barriers to addressing underserved needs, including the persistent high demand for public services and the insufficient funding available to meet the community's needs, particularly in housing. This plan allocates resources specifically aimed at overcoming these challenges. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 150 AP-38 Project Summary Project Summary Information Project Name Special Code Enforcement Target Area Special Code Enforcement Target Area Goals Supported Sustain and Strengthen Neighborhoods Needs Addressed Priority Housing Needs Funding CDBG:$246,506 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.202(c)-Code Enforcement National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208 (a)(1) - Low Mod Area Benefit Funding will be used to support two (2) full-time Code Enforcement Officers (CEO)to support code enforcement in the Special Code Enforcement Target Area. As the City ages, certain areas within the City of Huntington Beach need ongoing, proactive property maintenance inspections by code enforcement to maintain a safe, habitable living environment. Thus, with continued code enforcement efforts and education,the quality of life and housing standards are maintained. The Special Code Enforcement Program benefits the community overall by working to upgrade the housing stock within deteriorating/deteriorated areas. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 600 housing units benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Special Code Enforcement Target Area Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 151 2 Project Name Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Preserve Existing and Create New Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Priority Housing Needs Funding CDBG:$381,139 Description Eligibility Citation:24 CFR 570.202-Housing/Rehab:Single Unit Residential National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208(a)(3) - Low Mod Housing Benefit The Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program assists lower-income households with much-needed home repairs and improvements. Available to eligible homeowners is a $75,000 loan to pay rehabilitation costs for a single-family home, town home, or condominium. The City charges a 3% simple interest. Repayment of the loan is deferred until the home is sold, transferred, or refinanced. The City also offers a one-time grant not to exceed$20,000 to low-income homeowners for deferred maintenance and health and safety-related household repairs. Qualified households may include owners of mobile homes. The Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and Grants Program will also fund operation costs associated with the implementation program. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 12 housing units benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 152 3 Project Name Families Forward Tenant-Based Rental Assistance(TBRA) Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Preserve Existing and Create New Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Priority Housing Needs Funding HOME:$200,000 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 92.205(a)(1) — Tenant Based Rental Assistance National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208(a)(3) - Low Mod Housing Benefit Families Forward will continue administering a Tenant Based Rental Assistance Program with a goal of assisting 15 households with short and medium-term rental assistance as well as housing relocation and stabilization services. Target Date 06/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 15 households benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 153 4 Project Name Mercy House Tenant-Based Rental Assistance(TBRA) Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Preserve Existing and Create New Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Priority Housing Needs Funding HOME:$200,000 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 92.205(a)(1)—Tenant Based Rental Assistance National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208(a)(3)-Low Mod Housing Benefit Mercy House will continue administering a Tenant Based Rental Assistance Program with a goal of assisting 15 households with short and medium-term rental assistance as well as housing relocation and stabilization services. Target Date 06/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 15 households benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 154 5 Project Name Mobile Home Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Preserve Existing and Create New Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Priority Housing Needs Funding HOME:$128,841 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 92.205(a)(1) — Tenant Based Rental Assistance National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208(a)(3) - Low Mod Housing Benefit The City of Huntington Beach will offer a Mobile Home Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program to seniors (age 62+)with at least one year of mobile home residency.The homeowners must also be very low income (50% area median income) or below and preference will be given to veterans, extremely low income, or to seniors who are severely cost burdened (paying over 50% of their income on housing).The program proposes assisting 6 households with much needed rental assistance. Target Date 06/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 6 households benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 155 6 Project Name Housing Services for Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA)Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Preserve Existing and Create New Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Priority Housing Needs Funding CDBG: $235,000 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.201 (k)—Housing Services National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208(a)(3) - Low Mod Housing Benefit The City will allocate$235,000 in CDBG funds to be used to pay costs in support of activities eligible for funding under the HOME program. This activity will fund services such as housing counseling in connection with tenant-based rental assistance,inspections,tenant selection,and management of the three Huntington Beach Tenant Based Rental Assistance Programs. Target Date 06/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 36 households benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 156 7 Project Name Pathways to Independence Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Support Efforts to Address Homelessness Needs Addressed Priority Homeless Needs Funding CDBG:$20,530 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.201(c)-Operating Costs of Homeless/AIDS Patients Programs National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208 (a)(2) - Low/Mod Limited Clientele Benefit The mission of Pathways to Independence is to transform the lives of single young women from disadvantaged backgrounds through education, therapy, mentoring, housing,and healthcare,to break the cycle of poverty and abuse. Pathways to Independence plans to utilize City of Huntington Beach CDBG funds to support a residential program, which empowers low-income young women with the financial security to complete their college education and achieve upward mobility.Support from the City of Huntington Beach CDBG Program will offset expenses to support program staff, utilities, and transportation costs for clients and case managers. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 40 persons(homeless) benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 157 8 Project Name Project Hope Alliance Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Support Efforts to Address Homelessness Needs Addressed Priority Homeless Needs Funding CDBG:$20,530 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.201(c)-Operating Costs of Homeless/AIDS Patients Programs National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208 (a)(2) - Low/Mod Limited Clientele Benefit PHA's mission is to "end the cycle of homelessness, one child at a time." PHA utilizes a unique program methodology - placing full time, professional case managers directly on school campus for the purpose of serving the educational and social-emotional needs of students experiencing homelessness. Project Hope Alliance has continued their work at Huntington Beach High School, Valley Vista High School, Westminster High School and Ocean View High School. PHA continues to host four case managers at our four partner HBUHSD schools to work with students experiencing homelessness, providing intensive, individualized, and long-term care that includes resources for academic guidance, social-emotional mentorship,transportation,technology, basic needs,and external referrals for additional needs. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 105 persons (homeless) benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Project Hope Alliance is located in Costa Mesa, CA; however, services will be offered at various schools in Huntington Beach, including: Huntington Beach High School: 1905 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Valley Vista High School:9600 Dolphin Street, Fountain Valley,CA 92708 Westminster High School, 14325 Goldenwest St., Westminster CA 92683 Oceanview High School: 17071 Gothard Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 158 9 Project Name Robyne's Nest Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Support Efforts to Address Homelessness Needs Addressed Priority Homeless Needs Funding CDBG:$40,529 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.201(c)-Operating Costs of Homeless/AIDS Patients Programs National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208 (a)(2) - Low/Mod Limited Clientele Benefit The mission of Robyne's Nest is to identify at-risk and homeless high school students and provide them a path to become stable and productive citizens. Robyne's Nest helps high school students in the Huntington Beach area who have little to no parental support with academic, financial,and life skills.They assist students with security, routine, and a place to belong.Their purpose is to enable students to complete their high school diploma and continue onward with college, trade school, or military programs. Robyne's Nest provides housing resources; basic needs such as food, clothing, and supplies; educational assistance such as tutoring, Chromebooks, school supplies,and fees;and overall help with health and wellbeing in the form of counseling, therapy, mentoring, and life skills classes. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 25 persons(homeless) benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 159 10 Project Name StandUp for Kids Street Outreach Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Support Efforts to Address Homelessness Needs Addressed Priority Homeless Needs Funding CDBG:$15,530 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.201(c)-Operating Costs of Homeless/AIDS Patients Programs National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208 (a)(2) - Low/Mod Limited Clientele Benefit StandUp for Kids Street Outreach provides wrap-around support aimed at moving youth facing homelessness into safe and stable housing. Youth are assessed for their immediate needs and provided with food, clothing, hygiene products, and transitional housing as needed. Youth are then linked with a volunteer mentor who assists the youth to create a pathway to self-sufficiency and to obtain safe and stable housing. This pathway can include assistance, job search and resume strategies, household and budget management, and home-finding assistance. Mentoring normally continues for six months, and sometimes much longer. Huntington Beach citizens will benefit through creating new self-supporting, contributing members of their communities. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 110 persons(homeless) benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 160 11 Project Name Senior Services Care Management Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Support Agencies that Assist Special Needs Populations Needs Addressed Priority Special Needs Funding CDBG:$30,530 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.201(e) - Public Services/Senior Services National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208(a)(2) - Low Mod Limited Clientele Benefit The CDBG funded Senior Center Care Management project will consist of two part time staff who will assist over 165 at-risk, older adult, Huntington Beach residents in fiscal year 2025/26. Various services will be provided to these residents and can include thorough intake, need assessment, care plan development, service implementation, as well as provision of senior specific information and referrals. Additional direct services to address unmet needs in the areas of nutrition, mobility, home safety, housing insecurity, access to services, emotional and social support needs are also provided to ongoing care management clients.Services can be short or long-term, depending on individual needs. Many of those served through this program lack the ability to access services on their own and do not have an adequate support system to assist. Most older adults served by care management are individuals and couples, with low incomes and who are at-risk. Care Managers work closely with community partners, local resources, County agencies, faith-based groups, philanthropic organizations and other City departments to help optimize the lives of our most vulnerable and isolated citizens. For all these reasons, this project positively impacts the residents of Huntington Beach. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 165 persons(seniors) benefit from the proposed activities Location Description The Senior Services Care Management Program is located at 18041 Goldenwest Street, Huntington Beach; however, the service is available to elderly persons citywide. Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 161 12 Project Name Children's Bureau Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Increase Access to Community Services for LMI Persons Needs Addressed Priority Community Services Funding CDBG:$40,530 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.201(e) - Public Services/Youth Services National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208(a)(2) - Low Mod Limited Clientele Benefit The Oak View Family Resource Center (FRC) is located in the Oak View enhancement area where many of the families are linguistically isolated,which creates a need for specialized services. The Children's Bureau provides after school recreation in a safe environment, promoting healthy activity,and social interaction,as an alternative to unsupervised,unstructured,high-risk activity. CDBG funds pay for staffing for the after-school recreation program,as well as for related costs for supplies, equipment and services. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 160 persons (youth) benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 162 13 Project Name ADA Curb Cuts in Maintenance Zone 3 Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Provide for Needed Infrastructure Improvements Needs Addressed Priority Infrastructure Needs Funding CDBG:$125,000 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.201(c)- Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements/Other National Objective Citation: 24 CFR 570.208(a)(2) - Low Mod Limited Clientele Benefit Residents and visitors with disabilities utilize ADA ramps to access street intersections when traveling on city sidewalks. CDBG funds will be used to remove existing curbs and gutters that act as an architectural barrier to sidewalk and street accessibility, particularly for persons with severe disabilities. The curbs and gutters will be removed in the area known as Maintenance Zone 3,which has been evaluated for specific ADA pavement and concrete improvements. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will 2,271 persons(disabled) benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Census tracts:099406,099603,099604,and 099605 Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 163 14 Project Name CDBG Program Administration Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Planning for Housing and Community Development Needs Addressed Other Housing and Community Development Needs Funding CDBG:$224,239 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 570.206(a) -Administration and Planning/General Program Administration National Objective Citation: Not Applicable The City will conduct the following administration/planning activities: (1) General Administration of CDBG Program,including preparation of budget, applications, certifications and agreements; (2) Coordination of CDBG-funded capital improvement projects; (3) Coordination of Public Service Subrecipients, (4) Coordination of HOME-funded housing projects; (5) Monitoring of CDBG projects/programs to ensure compliance with federal regulations; and (6) Preparation of the CAPER. Up to 20% of the annual CDBG entitlement is allowed for administration activities. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will Not applicable. benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Not applicable. Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 164 15 Project Name HOME Program Administration Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Planning for Housing and Community Development Needs Addressed Other Housing and Community Development Needs Funding HOME:$53,833 Description Eligibility Citation: 24 CFR 92.207(a) - General Management,Oversight and Coordination National Objective Citation: Not Applicable The City of Huntington Beach Community Enhancement Division is responsible for administering the HOME program. Up to 10 percent of the HOME allocation will be used to provide for staffing and other program administration costs associated with the HOME program, including planning, reporting, monitoring, and IDIS setup and maintenance. In addition to the 2025/26 HOME Program Administration activities identified above, available FY 2020/21 HOME Administration funds will be allocated to 2025/26 fair housing services to be provided by the Fair Housing Foundation, preparation of the Annual Action Plan, and staff salaries. Available 2021/22 HOME Administration funds will be allocated to monitoring existing HOME units and staff salaries. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will Not applicable. benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Not applicable. Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 165 16 Project Name Unallocated HOME CHDO Reserve Funds Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Not Applicable Needs Addressed Not Applicable Funding HOME:$261,754 Description Unallocated HOME Funds available for the development of affordable housing with a local CH DO. Target Date 6/30/2026 Estimate the number and type of families that will Not applicable. benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide. Planned Activities Same as description. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 166 AP-50 Geographic Distribution—91.220(f) Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration)where assistance will be directed Huntington Beach, situated in northwestern Orange County, California, is an urbanized coastal community characterized by extensive residential development. With much of the residentially designated land already developed, future residential growth primarily depends on the reuse of existing parcels and infill development. The City is bordered by Seal Beach to the northwest, Westminster to the northeast, Fountain Valley and Costa Mesa to the east, Newport Beach to the southeast, and the Pacific Ocean to the southwest. CDBG and HOME funds in Huntington Beach are allocated for projects and programs citywide, with a focus on addressing the needs of the most vulnerable neighborhoods, particularly those where 51% or more of the residents are low- or moderate-income. For Special Code Enforcement efforts, the City conducted a visual survey of CDBG-eligible areas to identify properties, businesses, parkways, alleys, and structures with violations. This survey identified areas within the vicinity bounded by Bolsa Chica Street to the west, Bolsa Avenue to the north, Brookhurst Street to the east, and Atlanta Avenue to the south as having significant deterioration issues. This designated area, known as the "Special Code Enforcement Target Area," encompasses several census tracts with a total population of 67,625 people. Of these residents, 45,300 individuals, or 69.99%, fall within the low-to moderate-income bracket. Geographic Distribution Target Area Percentage of Funds Citywide 89% Special Code Enforcement Target Area 11% Table 64-Geographic Distribution Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically The City is committed to using CDBG funds to improve all Huntington Beach communities. Public services will reach eligible residents citywide, providing much-needed services to Huntington Beach's youth, homeless, and senior populations. Nearly 90%percent of the City's federal budget for FY 2025/26 will be allocated to projects that provide citywide benefits. Also, alleviating blight motivates investments in the Special Code Enforcement Target Area. The Special Code Enforcement Program aims to transform the area by identifying substandard residential and commercial properties and seeing to it that code deficiencies are resolved. Eleven percent of the City's federal budget for 2025/26 will be used to fund these services. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 167 AFFORDABLE HOUSING AP-55 Affordable Housing—91.220(g) Introduction One Year Goals for the Number of Households to be Supported Homeless 15 Non-Homeless 15 Special-Needs 6 Total 36 Table 65-One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Requirement One Year Goals for the Number of Households Supported Through Rental Assistance 36 The Production of New Units Rehab of Existing Units Acquisition of Existing Units Total 36 Table 66-One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Type Discussion In FY 2025/26,the City of Huntington Beach plans to allocate$528,841 in HOME funds to support three tenant-based rental assistance programs. Families Forward and Mercy House will operate two of these programs, each aimed at assisting 15 households each comprising of homeless individuals, veterans, and victims of domestic violence. The third program, managed by GRC Associates, is specifically designed to aid senior residents of mobile home communities facing escalating space rent costs. Additionally, the City anticipates having an unallocated balance of approximately $261,754 in HOME funds, which it intends to allocate towards a new Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) affordable housing project in the future. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 168 AP-60 Public Housing—91.220(h) Introduction The City of Huntington Beach does not have any public housing developments. However, it benefits from the services of the Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA), which manages Housing Choice Vouchers(Section 8)for residential units within Huntington Beach. Currently, 687 households in Huntington Beach receive Section 8 vouchers from OCHA. Additionally, OCHA administers various other voucher programs, including 40 Continuum of Care, 11 Family Self-Sufficiency, 24 Family Unification, one Non-Elderly Disabled, 115 Portability, 85 Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing, and 59 Emergency Housing Vouchers. However, the waiting list for these programs is currently closed. Actions planned during the next year to address the needs to public housing Not applicable. Actions to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership Not applicable. If the PHA is designated as troubled,describe the manner in which financial assistance will be provided or other assistance Not applicable. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 169 AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities—91.220(i) Introduction Homelessness has been a growing challenge across the country including in the Los Angeles and Orange County regions. Contributing factors include a shortage of affordable housing, increasing poverty rates, reduced subsidies, substance abuse issues, the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill, and a rising number of individuals who may view homelessness as a lifestyle choice. To address this issue, Orange County conducts a biennial enumeration of both sheltered and unsheltered homeless individuals in a 24-hour period. This effort, known as the Homeless Point- in-Time (PIT) Count, is required by Congress for all communities receiving U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding for homeless programs. HUD mandates that the PIT Count take place during the last ten days of January. For 2024, the count was conducted by the County of Orange and the Orange County Continuum of Care,with the sheltered count taking place on the night of January 22, 2024, and the unsheltered count occurring from the morning of January 23 through January 25, 2024. The 2024 PIT Count identified 7,322 homeless individuals in Orange County, marking a significant 28% increase from the 2022 count, which recorded 5,718 individuals. Specifically in Huntington Beach, the count revealed 433 total homeless persons, with 173 classified as unsheltered and 260 as sheltered. This represents an increase from the 2022 figures, where there were 330 total homeless individuals— 188 unsheltered and 142 sheltered. The City of Huntington Beach has implemented an ambitious strategy to address and ultimately end homelessness. In FY 2021/22, the City took significant steps by appointing a Deputy Director of Homelessness&Behavioral Health Services and establishing the Homeless& Behavioral Health System.This comprehensive system aims to support individuals experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness through outreach, engagement, case management, and connecting them with essential services such as shelter, housing, and behavioral health support. Although the Deputy Director's position has evolved since February 2022, the City continues to staff and support homelessness services. Describe the jurisdictions' one-year goals and actions for reducing and ending homelessness including: Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs The HB Cares Volunteer Program, a key component of the Homeless & Behavioral Health Program, plays a vital role in outreach to homeless individuals and assessing their needs. Since its launch in 2023, the program has successfully recruited and trained 21 volunteers, equipping them with skills in de-escalation techniques,trauma-informed care,vicarious trauma,and Mental HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 170 Health First Aid. Volunteers are responsible for answering the daily homeless outreach line and returning calls, providing a streamlined communication channel for individuals seeking help. In addition, a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist joined the team in December 2023, assisting with 62 Disabling Condition Assessments. The therapist will continue to offer mental health support on an as-needed basis. The Homeless & Behavioral Health System also incorporated homeless outreach social workers who actively engaged with unhoused and at-risk of being unhoused individuals, families, veterans, and seniors. Social workers offer support by linking individuals to resources, service providers, and aiding in securing necessary documents for County of Orange housing programs. They maintain close collaboration with local and county shelters, including the Huntington Beach Navigation Center, while also partnering with crisis response teams like Be Well to provide comprehensive assistance and support to those in need. Working in collaboration with Homeless Task Force officers, they ensure that individuals receive the necessary care and resources to address their unique situations effectively. Be Well OC in Huntington Beach (BWOC) is another component of the Homeless & Behavioral Health System that provides outreach to Huntington Beach's homeless population. BWOC employs a Mobile Crisis Response Team composed of two operating vans and two Crisis Interventionists who drive to locations and provide in-community assessment and stabilization services. The teams are well-trained and experienced in providing appropriate information, referrals, transportation to services, and additional follow-up support and case management to help address mental health-related situations. Further, over the course of the years covered by this Consolidated Plan, the City intends to support homeless public service programs that offer outreach and assessment for homeless individuals. In FY 2025/26, for example, the Pathways to Independence Program focuses on young single women experiencing homelessness,while Project Hope Alliance, Robyne's Nest,and StandUp for Kids Street Outreach focus on homeless youth and providing wrap around services unique to young individuals such as mentoring, food, clothing, housing, academic support, and educational aid. Finally, the City may continue to support the operations and services at the Navigation Center, located at 17642 Beach Boulevard. The Navigation Center, which opened in December 2020, offers 174 beds for overnight shelter and provides direct access to essential services aimed at helping individuals experiencing homelessness move towards housing stability. Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons The City has partnered with Mercy House to launch the Navigation Center, an emergency homeless shelter. The facility received significant federal funding to support its operations, including CDBG, CDBG-CV (for activities related to COVID-19 prevention, preparation, and response), and HOME funding from the American Rescue Program (HOME-ARP). The Navigation HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 171 Center can shelter up to 174 adults and couples under normal conditions and will continue to operate in FY 2025/26. In FY 2021/22, the City initiated the HB Oasis project in collaboration with the State of California Homekey Program, the County of Orange, National CORE, and American Family Housing. This project involved acquiring and rehabilitating the former Quality Inn & Suites motel at 17251 Beach Boulevard to address homelessness in the region. HB Oasis served as interim housing for up to 62 individuals and households in Orange County's Central Service Planning Area. It provided not only transitional housing but also comprehensive property management and residential support services. The focus was on trauma-informed, evidence-based operations to support residents' reintegration into the community through robust case management and connections to permanent housing solutions. In May 2024, the HB Oasis project transitioned to permanent supportive housing. This transition involved renovating the individual units to include kitchenettes and utilizing project-based vouchers to support long-term housing stability for its residents. Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again The City of Huntington Beach is implementing a comprehensive approach to address homelessness, with a focus on both immediate relief and long-term solutions. The strategy involves securing both short-term and long-term funding, collaborating with experienced service providers, and creating affordable housing opportunities. The City's key efforts aim to support various populations, including chronically homeless individuals, families with children, veterans, victims of domestic violence, and unaccompanied youth. A central initiative is the Navigation Center, which has received around $4.5 million in funding from CDBG, CDBG-CV, and HOME-ARP grants. This center offers wraparound services to help individuals transition from emergency shelter to more stable housing.The City plans to repurpose the property into a permanent facility that will provide affordable housing and supportive services for chronically homeless individuals. Additionally, the City continues to prioritize tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA), with plans to offer rental subsidies to 36 households in 2025/26. Families Forward is responsible for providing rental assistance to households with children, while Mercy House focuses on supporting those experiencing homelessness, victims of domestic violence, and veterans. Another program is also in place to provide space rent relief for senior mobile homeowners for up to 24 months. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 172 By focusing on both immediate housing solutions and long-term support, Huntington Beach is working to not only reduce homelessness but also prevent those recently housed from falling back into homelessness. Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families and those who are: being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); or, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs To prevent homelessness and support at-risk populations, Huntington Beach actively participated in the Orange County Continuum of Care System. This system is designed to provide assistance to individuals at risk of becoming homeless, ensuring a network of support for those in need. The City is also committed to supporting families through HOME-funded rental assistance programs. In FY 2025/26, the City is proposing to support three rental assistance programs that will assist a variety of vulnerable population groups in Huntington Beach. As mentioned above, Families Forward assists families that are homeless or at risk of homelessness,while Mercy House targets lower-income households, homeless persons,veterans, and victims of domestic violence. The Mobile Home Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program targets senior owners of mobile homes with space rents. Although the City does not receive Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) or Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funding and therefore is not required to develop a discharge coordination policy, it remains committed to addressing this issue.The City will continue to work with the Orange County Housing Authority and the Continuum of Care Homeless Issues Task Force to develop and refine its discharge coordination policy. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 173 AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing—91.220(j) Introduction Huntington Beach has demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting affordable housing through various measures, including updates to its zoning ordinance and direct financial assistance to affordable housing projects. Despite funding constraints resulting from the loss of Redevelopment Housing Funds, which previously generated approximately $3 million annually for housing activities,the City remains dedicated to developing affordable housing. However, one of the primary challenges faced by Huntington Beach in this regard is the scarcity of vacant land suitable for residential development. Much of the underdeveloped residentially zoned land is owned by separate owners, making lot consolidation and the demolition of existing structures necessary to accommodate higher density infill development. To address this challenge, the City has adopted alternative policy tools, such as the Amended Downtown and Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plans.These plans provide opportunities for high-density mixed-use and residential infill development, facilitating the creation of affordable housing units within the community. Through continued collaboration and innovative approaches, Huntington Beach aims to overcome barriers and enhance the availability of affordable housing for its residents. Actions it planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls,tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes,fees and charges,growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment Through the administration of the CDBG and HOME programs, every effort is made to remove barriers to affordable housing through agreements with for-profit and non-profit affordable housing developers. These efforts also include working with neighborhood residents to ensure affordable housing projects are acceptable. Ongoing monitoring of "for sale" affordable units is conducted by department staff by assuring that the affordable housing covenants are recorded on title when the unit is sold. To address the decline in sources of housing funds, the City will continue to advocate for and pursue federal, state, local and private funding sources for affordable housing. Additionally, as part of the City's Housing Element update,the City must assess and to the extent feasible, mitigate, its governmental constraints to housing for lower and moderate-income households and persons with disabilities. The Housing Element addresses the City's provisions for affordable housing, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing. The following programs in the City's 2013-2021 Housing Element specifically address the variety of regulatory and financial tools used by the City to remove barriers and facilitate the provision of affordable housing: HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 174 Multi-family Acquisition/Rehabilitation through Non-Profit Developers: Acquire, rehabilitate, and establish affordability covenants on 80 rental units. Residential and Mixed-Use Sites Inventory: Maintain current inventory of vacant and underutilized development sites and provide developers with information on incentives. Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan: Facilitate development through flexible, form-based standards and streamlined processing. Encourage affordable housing by requiring inclusionary units to be provided on-site, or within the Specific Plan, and providing additional incentives for increased percentages of affordable units. Inclusionary Program and Housing Trust Fund: Continue implementation and re-evaluate Ordinance to provide consistency with case law and market conditions. Establish in-lieu fee amount for projects between 10-30 units. Affordable Housing Development Assistance: Provide financial and regulatory assistance in support of affordable housing. Provide information on incentives to the development community. Affordable Housing Density Bonus: Continue to offer density bonus incentives as a means of enhancing the economic feasibility of affordable housing development. Development Fee Assistance: Continue to offer fee reductions to incentivize affordable housing. Specify the waiver of 100% of application processing fees in the Code for projects with 10% extremely low-income units. Residential Processing Procedures: Provide non-discretionary development review within the Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan. Adopt streamlined review procedures for multi-family development on a citywide basis. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 175 AP-85 Other Actions—91.220(k) Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs The City of Huntington Beach has identified long-range strategies, activities, and funding sources to implement the goals in the areas of housing and community development services for the benefit of the residents. • The City will continue to seek other resources and funding sources to address the biggest obstacle to meeting the community's underserved needs, which is the lack of funding and/or inadequate funding. • The City will look for innovative and creative ways to make its delivery systems more comprehensive and will continue existing partnerships with both for-profit and not-for- profit organizations. • The City will use HOME and CDBG funds to concentrate on both affordable rental housing, tenant-based rental housing, and homeowner rehabilitation programs. • The City is currently addressing certain housing needs with federal funds, such as availability, condition, and fair housing practices to prevent homelessness. • The City is also addressing community development needs with federal funds, such as infrastructure, improving public facilities and code enforcement. • The City is working with surrounding jurisdictions on a regional approach to meeting the underserved needs. Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing The City's Consolidated Plan has identified the preservation of existing, and the creation of new, affordable housing as an implementing goal during the 2025/26-2029/30 timeframe. The City will continue to maintain the Affordable Housing Viewer on its website to allow the public to view where affordable housing units are located in the City. The City will continue to offer funding to tenant based rental assistance programs in Huntington Beach through a combination of CDBG and HOME funds. In FY 2025/26, the City will allocate $235,000 in CDBG and nearly $528,841 in HOME funds to assist 36 households with rental assistance. The City will offer rental assistance to both eligible Huntington Beach renters, as well as to senior mobile home residents to help with increasing space rents in Huntington Beach's mobile home park communities. Furthermore,the City will continue its residential rehabilitation programs available to Huntington Beach homeowners.The first program offers a one-time grant of up to $20,000 to eligible lower- income homeowners to make emergency and health or safety-related household modifications. The second program offers a loan of up to $75,000 with an interest rate of 3% for single family home and multifamily rental housing improvements. Collectively, the City is proposing to assist 12 lower-income households with rehabilitation assistance in FY 2025/26. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 176 Lastly,to supplement the cost of the City's effort to update the streamlining process of affordable housing,the City may be awarded an SB 2 Planning Grant Program grant funds from the California Department of Housing and Community Development once the 2021-2029 Housing Element is certified. Huntington Beach is slated to receive approximately $550,000 per year to leverage CDBG and HOME funds in the areas of affordable housing and homelessness. Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards As a means of better protecting children and families against lead poisoning, in 1999 HUD instituted revised lead-based paint regulations focused around the following five activities: • Notification • Lead Hazard Evaluation • Lead Hazard Reduction • Ongoing Maintenance • Response to Children with Environmental Intervention Blood Lead Level The City has implemented HUD Lead Based Paint Regulations (Title X), which requires federally funded rehabilitation projects to address lead hazards. Lead-based paint abatement is part of the City's Residential Rehabilitation Program and the Acquisition/Rehabilitation of Affordable Rental Housing Program. Units within rental housing projects selected for rehabilitation are tested if not statutorily exempt. Elimination or encapsulation remedies are implemented if lead is detected and is paid for by either the developer of the project, or with CDBG or HOME funds, as appropriate. Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families Huntington Beach has a strategy to help reduce poverty among local families and individuals. These programs work together to address both the immediate housing needs of low-income residents and the long-term economic self-sufficiency of vulnerable populations. Examples of the poverty reduction efforts include: • Housing Choice Rental Assistance Program: Over 600 low and extremely low-income households in Huntington Beach participate in the Housing Choice Rental Assistance Voucher Program, which is administered by the Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA). This program directly supports poverty reduction by helping these households access affordable rental housing, thus easing financial strain and enabling them to allocate resources toward other basic needs, such as food, healthcare, and education. • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) Programs: The City plans to utilize HOME funds to support three tenant-based rental assistance programs. These programs will provide direct rental subsidies to eligible low-income households, helping reduce the financial burden of housing costs and offering families a better chance at achieving long-term HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 177 stability and upward mobility. The City's goal is to provide a total of 36 households with TBRA in FY 2025/26. • Pathways to Independence Program: With CDBG funding, the City will support the Pathways to Independence program, which serves single women who are homeless or unstably housed. This program helps participants achieve economic self-sufficiency through education and personal development, providing a critical link between stable housing and the long-term reduction of poverty. By equipping individuals with the skills and support they need to succeed, the program contributes to breaking the cycle of homelessness and poverty. Pathways to Independence plans to enroll 40 women into their program in FY 2025/26. • Affordable Housing Development: During the five-year period of the Consolidated Plan, the City will work to utilize HOME funds to gap finance an affordable housing project at a yet-to-be-determined location. The development of new affordable housing will directly address the need for affordable living spaces for low-income families and individuals, providing them with stable housing opportunities that can help reduce economic vulnerability and improve quality of life. Actions planned to develop institutional structure The City proposes to strengthen, coordinate and integrate the governmental institutions, non- profit and private delivery systems to implement the City's five-year strategy and to address the priority needs outlined in the Consolidated Plan for Fiscal Years 2025/26—2029/30. Engaging the community and stakeholders in the delivery of services and programs for the benefit of low to moderate residents will be vital in overcoming gaps in service delivery. The City will also utilize public notices, Community Workshops and Meetings (as appropriate), the City's website, and other forms of media to deliver information on carrying out the Consolidated Plan strategies. Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies In an ongoing effort to bridge the gap of various programs and activities, the City has developed partnerships and collaborations with local service providers and City departments that have been instrumental in meeting the needs and demands of the homeless, low-income individuals and families, and other special needs. The array of partners include, but are not limited to: the Huntington Beach Police Department, Library Services, Community Services, and Public Works Departments; Mercy House, Families Forward, Colette's Children's Home, AMCAL, Orange County Community Housing Corporation, Jamboree Housing, National CORE, Community SeniorServ, Project Self Sufficiency,Alzheimer's Family Services, StandUp for Kids, Robyne's Nest, Project Hope Alliance, Pathways to Independence, the Fair Housing Foundation, the Orange County Housing Authority, 2-1-1 Orange County, and OC Community Services (Orange County Continuum of Care). During FY 2025/26, the City will continue to develop these partnerships. HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 178 PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AP-90 Program Specific Requirements—91.220(I)(1,2,4) The City of Huntington Beach participates in HUD's CDBG Program that is used for creating decent affordable housing, suitable living environments, and economic opportunities. The program year (2025/26) will begin on July 1, 2025. The FY 2025/26 CDBG allocation of approximately $1,121,195 will be used to implement CDBG projects and programs during the program year. Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(I)(1) Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out. 1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before $0 the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed 2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be $0 used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan 3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements $0 4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the $0 planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan. 5. The amount of income from float-funded activities $0 Total Program Income $0 Other CDBG Requirements 1.The amount of urgent need activities $0 HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 179 HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(1)(2) A description of other forms of investment being used beyond those identified in Section 92.205 is as follows: The City will provide grants, interest-bearing and non-interest-bearing deferred payment loans or residual receipts loans permitted under 24 CFR 92.206 (b) (1). The City will not institute other forms of investment forms not described in the aforementioned section nor provide loan guarantees described under 24 CFR 92.206 (b) (21). A description of the guidelines that will be used for resale or recapture of HOME funds when used for homebuyer activities as required in 92.254, is as follows: The City is not administering a homebuyer program with CDBG or HOME funds as part of its 2025/26 Annual Action Plan. The Annual Plan, therefore, does not describe resale or recapture guidelines as required in 92.254. A description of the guidelines for resale or recapture that ensures the affordability of units acquired with HOME funds?See 24 CFR 92.254(a)(4) are as follows: The City is not administering a homebuyer program with CDBG or HOME funds as part of its 2025/26 Annual Action Plan. The Annual Plan, therefore, does not describe resale or recapture guidelines that ensure the affordability of units acquired with HOME funds as required in 92.254 (a)(4). Plans for using HOME funds to refinance existing debt secured by multifamily housing that is rehabilitated with HOME funds along with a description of the refinancing guidelines required that will be used under 24 CFR 92.206(b), are as follows: The City is not proposing to use HOME funds to refinance existing debt secured by multifamily housing rehabilitated with HOME funds. Thus, since the City does not propose to undertake refinancing, the City is not required to discuss its financing guidelines required under 24 CFR 92.206(b). HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26—2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 180 APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX B FIGURES Figure 1 2020 Census Tracts and Block Groups Figure 2 Low- and Moderate-Income Areas Figure 3 Population in Poverty Figure 4 Severe Renter Overpayment Figure 5 Severe Renter Overcrowding Figure 6 Hispanic Population Figure 7 Asian Population HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX C FY 2025/26 CERTIFICATIONS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX D APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL ASSISTANCE (SF 424) FOR CDBG PROGRAM HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX E ASSURANCES - NON-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS (SF 424-B) FOR CDBG PROGRAM HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX F ASSURANCES - CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS (SF 424-D) FOR CDBG PROGRAM HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX G APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL ASSISTANCE (SF 424) FOR HOME PROGRAM HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX H ASSURANCES - NON-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS (SF 424-B) FOR HOME PROGRAM HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX I ASSURANCES - CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS (SF 424-D) FOR HOME PROGRAM HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX J PUBLIC NOTICES HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN APPENDIX K AGENCY AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION COMMENTS HUNTINGTON BEACH 2025/26-2029/30 CONSOLIDATED PLAN RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 EXHIBIT "C" 2025-2029 ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING 10 25-16272/375024 , • i . . ....._ •.N...4,.. . .. aaika,,, „,_—•--- . . . . . . , . .... -.. - .., • ' ,.C.; : • .....•. . 11 .,.. Meal ;.' -, .. „ ... •:•••-• ••;. •-a ,ititi ,!mow ..., wortil -i BBL...manta _ {.1V, 01 IMP". 1.' _ ..., . . C. ' ' '-;•', - '","-, ;, 'J:1.11I1 t• ! 4 -„.__ • ;7.-' 1 11 I ...,- , ,......-... L. - '1. .yuce,....q, 1 • .,.0 .."':77-7 • I .I:' liiiNI . II , tl . • , . '---,--,4:ill I I':i l; ••- till] : 1 • .• , ......,, • .. ....x...,... SA' Il , ... ,1123 „ 1 .... _...., , • )14 / . ,•.......„ii — . 4111111h N, r itti , A 111111;1 A .::.."...., —,...._. _ • ' . illi .1, pi,'.-• IA .:-,'.•• • • ,, ., .. r--,.... .r-. ,f.. . : . , •••7 • Tt 4,II• lot . ••• 4 ,...' • • t. r • .• • * :4:t•ei N • . • • -•.... 4 i , ilki. . . ., • . • . • ..,, ., .. .i , T - • . . .u. V. „;••••; • ".• ,.. , ,. ..:' ---,• 1 -- ser-wit, ,.... ., ...I.:. . .. 11/11k : -••..... .. ,',,,.:'. ••••• -•.' „A : ie 6 a 'i 1--- , ;. -,, -ki . . . p‘ , s,....._,_.... ,. , , 1 1 ti t 1. f. •,, . ., I •] 1 .. _ . ,. . ,,,,,,..., bilim , _, ,,i 4 , , a. ia ___——.1 , ,' .,. • gilla --— • 4. .,. ,., _ i ' I - '',.,aii.„7:1___.--1:17,:_.....iii*•:'• '. • - : . .Orange County Regional Ci Assessment of Fair Housing ......0 .1UAL HOUSING) OPPORTUNITY 2025 -2029 _...-- . ._ _ ,. ..... . .. ...__ ____ . ..... .. . ... ... 4 . Acknowledgements Special thanks to all individuals and organizations that contributed to the planning process, including, but not limited to, the following: The individuals and organizations (including Equus Workforce Solutions, Project Hope Alliance, Alianza Translatinx, Human Options, Illumination Foundation, The Eli Home, The Cambodian Family, and Orange County Families Forward) who attended the in-person and virtual community meetings. The organizations that participated in the stakeholder interviews and focus groups, including Fair Housing Council of Orange County, Fair Housing Foundation, Orange County Families Forward, Orange County United Way, Family Assistance Ministry, The HUB OC, National Core, NeighborWorks Orange County, Thomas House Family Shelter, Domus Development, Dayle McIntosh Center, CalOptima, and Assistance League of Orange County. Staff from all jurisdictions that participated in the planning effort, with additional thanks to staff from: • The Cities of Costa Mesa, La Habra, and Santa Ana,for hosting in-person community meetings. • The County of Orange and the Cities of Anaheim, Aliso Viejo, Buena Park, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Irvine, Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, San Clemente, Santa Ana, and Rancho Santa Margarita for advertising the in-person and virtual community meetings through various channels. • The City of Santa Ana,which served as lead agency responsible for coordinating the development of this report. Document Version Last updated: March 27, 2025 Orange County i 25-29 Regional AFH Cover Photo Credit The cover photograph for this report was provided courtesy of C&C Development. The photograph features Terraces at Santiago in the City of Santa Ana's Station District. Terraces at Santiago is an award-winning 36-unit urban infill transit-oriented multifamily affordable rental housing development featuring a mix of two-, three-, and five-bedroom apartments. In keeping with surrounding neighborhoods,this property was designed with Spanish/Santa Barbara architectural influences. Exterior detailing accents include wrought iron, decorative gables, wall sconces, decorative arches, decorative wood rafter rails, decorative painted wood shutters, and recessed stucco elements with wrought iron lattice. The building is LEED Gold Certified. Orange County ii 25-29 Regional AFH Table of Contents I. Executive Summary 1 II. Community Participation Process 3 A. Stakeholder Consultation 3 B. Community Meetings 3 Ill. Fair Housing Analysis 6 A. Demographic and Housing Summary 6 B. Segregation/Concentration and Integration 38 C. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) 60 D. Disparities in Access to Opportunity 66 1. Education 66 2. Employment 80 3. Transportation 92 4. Access to Low Poverty Neighborhoods 99 5. Access to Environmentally Healthy Neighborhoods 112 6. Disability and Access 120 7. Patterns in Disparities in Access to Opportunity 124 E. Disproportionate Housing Needs 129 F. Local and State Policies and Practices Impacting Fair Housing 143 IV. Fair Housing Issues and Action Plan 146 A. Orange County Urban County 146 1. Unincorporated Orange County 149 2. Brea 156 3. Cypress 159 4. Dana Point 161 5. La Palma 165 6. Laguna Beach 170 7. Laguna Hills 174 8. Laguna Woods 179 Orange County iii 25-29 Regional AFH 9. Los Alamitos 182 10. Placentia 184 11. San Juan Capistrano 189 12. Seal Beach 191 13. Stanton 193 14. Villa Park 194 15. Yorba Linda 196 B. Aliso Viejo 199 C. Anaheim 201 D. Buena Park 206 E. Costa Mesa 209 F. Fountain Valley 213 G. Fullerton 215 H. Garden Grove 225 I. Huntington Beach 228 J. Irvine 229 K. La Habra 240 L. Laguna Niguel 244 M. Lake Forest 249 N. Mission Viejo 251 O. Newport Beach 253 P. Orange 255 Q. Rancho Santa Margarita 258 R. San Clemente 261 S. Santa Ana 264 T. Tustin 268 U. Westminster 272 Orange County iv 25-29 Regional AFH I. Executive Summary The Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) provides communities an opportunity to assess their progress toward the goals of eliminating housing discrimination and promoting access to housing opportunity for both current and future residents. Jurisdictions that receive funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), including Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds, complete an AFH at least once every five years, consistent with the Consolidated Plan cycle, as part of their obligations under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 and the Cranston- Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act. As a fair housing planning document, the AFH facilitates HUD grantee compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements to affirmatively further fair housing. Affirmatively furthering fair housing entails taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. The duty to affirmatively further fair housing applies to all activities and programs within a jurisdiction related to housing and urban development. This AFH is a collaborative effort among the following jurisdictions: • Orange County and the Urban County Program participating cities of Brea, Cypress, Dana Point, La Palma, Laguna Beach, Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, Los Alamitos, Placentia, San Juan Capistrano, Seal Beach, Stanton,Villa Park, andYorba Linda. • The HUD Entitlement Cities of Aliso Viejo, Anaheim, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, La Habra, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach, City of Orange, Rancho Santa Margarita, San Clemente, Santa Ana,Tustin,Westminster. To prepare the AFH,jurisdictions first must identify fair housing issues. A fair housing issue refers to a condition within a specific geographic area that restricts fair housing choice or limits access to opportunity. Fair housing issues may include ongoing local or regional segregation/concentration or lack of integration, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to opportunity, disproportionate housing needs, and evidence of discrimination or violations of civil rights law or regulations related to housing. To identify fair housing issues, HUD recommends that jurisdictions gather and analyze data. For this AFH, the jurisdictions analyzed data on the following topics: • Demographics • Segregation or Concentration/Integration • Racially and/or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty • Disparities in Access to Opportunity Orange County 1 25-29 Regional AFH • Housing Needs • Discrimination Complaints The data utilized in the analysis are from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS), HUD's AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer 2.0, housing discrimination complaint data provided by HUD's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), and information gathered through the community participation process (described below). The ACS data utilized in the assessment are from the 2018-2022 five-year estimates, which were the most current data across all participating jurisdictions at the time the analysis was conducted. After analyzing the data and identifying fair housing issues,jurisdictions then must identify contributing factors. A contributing factor is any condition that creates, contributes to, perpetuates, or increases the severity of one or more fair housing issues. For each fair housing issue and its contributing factors, jurisdictions must then develop fair housing goals. A fair housing goal is a specific, meaningful action that can reasonably be expected to create meaningful positive change that affirmatively furthers fair housing by increasing fair housing choice or reducing disparities in access to opportunity. For the contributing factors and fair housing goals in this AFH, the jurisdictions built upon the extensive work they have already done preparing their most recent Housing Elements, which cover an eight-year planning period. As part of the state-mandated Housing Element, California jurisdictions must conduct a fair housing assessment that includes an analysis of fair housing issues, identification of factors that create and/or contribute to those issues, and development of goals and meaningful actions to affirmatively further fair housing. Progress toward reaching the goals identified in the Housing Element must then be periodically reported to the state. A summary of the fair housing issues, significant contributing factors, and fair housing goals for each jurisdiction can be found in Section IV of this AFH. Orange County 2 25-29 Regional AFH II. Community Participation Process To develop the AFH, information was also gathered from residents, housing professionals, and service providers. Incorporating information from these sources is important for ensuring that the AFH reflects community needs and knowledge that may not be discernible from other data sources. The community participation process for this AFH involved the following efforts: A. Stakeholder Consultation Four one-on-one interviews, and two focus groups were conducted during January and February 2025 with organizations that provide fair housing services and/or housing and services to protected class groups throughout the County. The interviews and focus group sessions discussed the fair housing issues frequently encountered by the organizations, the underlying causes for those issues, and ongoing efforts currently to address them. Participants also discussed additional actions their organizations would recommend. Invitations to participate in the stakeholder consultation activities were sent to approximately 78 organizations identified by the jurisdictions involved in the planning process. Fourteen organizations, as well as staff from two of the participating jurisdictions, participated in these consultations, including: Fair Housing Council of Orange County, Fair Housing Foundation, Orange County Families Forward, Orange County United Way, Family Assistance Ministry, The HUB OC, National Core, NeighborWorks Orange County, Thomas House Family Shelter, Domus Development, City of Garden Grove, City of Lake Forest, Dayle McIntosh Center, CalOptima, and Assistance League of Orange County. Information gathered through these consultations is incorporated throughout this report. B. Community Meetings A total of six community meetings were held in March 2025 to gather public input on the fair housing issues impacting residents of Orange County, and the factors that create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of those issues. These meetings included two virtual meetings and four in-person meetings held at the dates, times, and locations listed below. In-person community meetings: • March 5, 2025, from 10:30 a.m. — 11:30 a.m. at Santa Ana City Council Chamber, 22 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701 • March 5, 2025, from 6:30 p.m. — 7:30 p.m. at Santa Ana City Council Chamber, 22 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701 • March 6, 2025, from 10:30 a.m. — 11:30 a.m. at La Habra City Hall, Festival Room, 110 E. La Habra Boulevard, La Habra, CA 90631 Orange County 3 25-29 Regional AFH • March 6, 2025,from 6:30 p.m.—7:30 p.m. at Costa Mesa City Hall, Community Room, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Virtual community meetings: • March 7, 2025, at 6:00 p.m.,via MicrosoftTeams • March 13, 2025, at 1:00 p.m.,via MicrosoftTeams Outreach to advertise the community meetings included the following efforts: • City of Anaheim notified the 250 members of their Homeless Collaborative and community stakeholders. • City of Aliso Viejo posted a copy of the notice to their City website and shared on social media and city newsletters. • City of Buena Park posted the public notice on the City website and City Hall bulletin board. • City of Fountain Valley posted the public notice on the City website • City of Fullerton published the public notice in the Fullerton Observer newspaper, placed the notice on the City of Fullerton website, and placed copies of the notice at various public facilities and libraries as well as over 25 affordable housing sites. • City of Irvine sent copies of the notice to subrecipient partners and other interested parties. • City of Laguna Niguel posted the public notice on the Citywebsite and social media channels. • City of Mission Viejo posted the public notice on the Citywebsite. • City of San Clemente posted the public notice on the City website. • City of Santa Ana published the public notice for the public meetings in six languages (English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Korean, Chinese, and Arabic) including the following publications: Orange County Register, La Opinion, Nguoi Viet Daily News, Korea Times,World Journal, and BeirutTimes. • City of Rancho Santa Margarita posted the public notice on bulletin boards outside City Hall, OCFA Station 45, and Trabuco Canyon Water District. • County of Orange sent information regarding the virtual community meetings to community centers in the unincorporated areas of the County. A total of fifteen individuals participated in these meetings to share their knowledge on fair housing issues and contributing factors in Orange County. These included representatives from the following organizations: Equus Workforce Solutions, Project Hope Alliance, Alianza Translatinx, Human Options, Illumination Foundation, The Eli Home, The Cambodian Family, Orange County Families Forward, City of Fountain Valley, and City of Buena Park. Information gathered through these meetings is incorporated throughout this report. Orange County 4 25-29 Regional AFH Orange County 5 25-29 Regional AFH Ill. Fair Housing Analysis A. Demographic and Housing Summary Table 1 — Demographics, shows demographic information for the population of Orange County overall, the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions.', the participating HUD Entitlement Cities, and the region. These data are from the Census Bureau's 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates. Table 2 — Demographic Trends, shows similar data over time, dating back to 1990. These tables indicate the following: Population Orange County has a population of 3,175,227. The largest cities in the County are Anaheim (population 347,111), Santa Ana (population 311,379), and Irvine (population 304,527). The Urban County population is 585,178. Race/Ethnicity Orange County's population is majority-minority; however, the largest population group is White (38.46%). Hispanic residents comprise the second largest population group (33.93%), followed by Asian American and Pacific Islanders (AAPI), who make up 21.77% of the County population. African Americans account for 1.54% of the County population. Compared to the region, Orange County has a higher proportion of White and AAPI residents, and a smaller proportion of Hispanic and Black residents. Among the participating HUD Entitlement Cities, in comparison to the County overall: • The Urban County,Aliso Viejo, Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach, Rancho Santa Margarita, and San Clemente have a significantly higher' proportion of White residents. • Anaheim, La Habra,and Santa Ana have a significantly higher proportion of Hispanic residents. • Buena Park, Fountain Valley, Garden Grove, Irvine, and Westminster have a higher proportion of AAPI residents. Since 1990, the County population has become more diverse, transitioning from a White majority in 1990 to a majority-minority population today. The number of White residents in 1 The Orange County Urban County comprises the County unincorporated area, twelve (12) cities with populations under 50,000 (participating cities) and two (2) cities, Placentia andYorba Linda,with populations over 50,000(metropolitan cities). 'The region is defined by HUD as the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which comprises Los Angeles and Orange counties. 3 For this analysis, "significantly higher" means that the percentage of residents of a particular race/ethnicity in a city is at least 10% higher than the percentage of residents of the same race/ethnicity in the County overall. Orange County 6 25-29 Regional AFH the County declined each decade, while the number of Hispanic and AAPI residents grew. The number of Black residents increased between 1990-2010 but declined over the past decade. These same trends are generally shared with the region and across the Urban County and HUD Entitlement Cities, with the following exceptions: • In the region, the Black population has been declining since 2000. • In Aliso Viejo, the population of all racial/ethnic groups, including White, has increased in each decade. • In Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, and Newport Beach, the AAPI population has declined over the last decade. • In Fountain Valley and Garden Grove, the Black population has been declining since 2000. • In Irvine, the White and Black populations have been increasing since 2000, in addition to growing Hispanic and AAPI populations. • In La Habra, the Black population continued to grow after 2010. • In Laguna Niguel and Lake Forest, the White population increased during the 1990s before declining over the subsequent decades, and the Black population has continued to grow over the last decade. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, the White population increased during the 1990s before declining over the last two decades. • In San Clemente, the White population grew between 1990-2010, before shrinking slightly over the last decade; and the AAPI population fell over the last decade. • In Santa Ana, the Black population has been falling since 1990, and the Hispanic population has been declining since 2000. • In Tustin, the Black population has been declining since 1990. National Origin Orange County has a foreign-born population of 937,254 (29.52% of the total population4). The primary countries of origin for the foreign-born population are Mexico (9.17%) and Vietnam (4.69%). In the region, 32.52% of the population is foreign born, which is slightly higher than in Orange County. Among the participating HUD Entitlement Cities, in comparison to the County overall: • Huntington Beach, Laguna Niguel, Newport Beach, Orange, and San Clemente have significantly lower percentages of foreign-born residents. 4 Source: U.S Census Bureau, 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates,Table B05006 Orange County 7 25-29 Regional AFH • Garden Grove, Irvine, Santa Ana, and Westminster have significantly higher percentages of foreign-born residents. In these cities, the main countries of origin for the foreign-born population are: o Garden Grove:Vietnam and Mexico o Irvine: China (excluding Taiwan), Korea, and India o Santa Ana: Mexico and Vietnam o Westminster:Vietnam and Mexico Since 1990, the County's foreign-born population has increased in each decade, with the most dramatic increase occurring during the 1990s. In comparison, • The foreign-born population in the region grew between 1990-2010 and has been declining since 2010. • The foreign-born population has declined in the following jurisdictions: o The Urban County,Anaheim, La Habra,Orange, and San Clemente,where the foreign-born population has been declining since 2010. o Costa Mesa and Santa Ana, where the foreign-born population has been declining since 2000. However, in Santa Ana,foreign-born residents still make up approximately half of the total population. • In Irvine,the foreign-born population has continued to grow rapidly, nearly doubling since 2010. Limited English Proficiency Individuals who have Limited English Proficiency (LEP) are those who primarily speak a language other than English and speak English "less than very well." In Orange County, there are 539,484 LEP individuals', which is equal to approximately 16.99% of the population.The primary languages spoken by the LEP population in the County are Spanish (11.72%) and Vietnamese (3.45%). In the region, 21.95% of the population is LEP, which is slightly higher than in Orange County. Among the participating HUD Entitlement Cities, in comparison to the County overall: • Aliso Viejo, Newport Beach, and San Clemente, have significantly lower percentages of LEP residents. • Anaheim, Buena Park, Garden Grove, Santa Ana, and Westminster have significantly higher percentages of LEP residents. In these cities, the primary languages spoken by the LEP population are: o Anaheim: Spanish and Vietnamese 5 Source: U.S Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates,Table S1601 Orange County 8 25-29 Regional AFH o Buena Park: Spanish and Korean o Garden Grove:Vietnamese and Spanish o Santa Ana: Spanish and Vietnamese o Westminster:Vietnamese and Spanish Between 1990-2010, the County's LEP population increased. Since 2010, the County's LEP population has declined, though it remains well above the 1990 LEP population. In comparison: • The LEP population in the region grew during the 1990s but has been declining since 2000. • The LEP population has grown each decade since 1990, including since 2010, in the Urban County jurisdictions, Aliso Viejo, Fountain Valley, Irvine, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, Mission Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita, and Westminster. • The LEP population has been declining since 2000 in Anaheim, Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, and Santa Ana. • In Garden Grove, Newport Beach, and San Clemente, the LEP population declined between 2000-2010, but has increased since 2010. Age Approximately 63.2% of the Orange County population is between the ages of 18 and 64; 15.38% are aged 65 and older, and 21.42% are younger than 18. The age distribution of the population in the region is similar. In comparison to the County overall, the Urban County, Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, and Newport Beach all have slightly older populations, with over one-fifth of their population aged 65 and older. Since 1990, the County's population has been getting older. Currently, the County's population has a smaller proportion of the population (when compared to 1990) in both the "Under 18" and "18-64" year-old age categories, and a higher proportion of the population in the "65+" age category. The same general trend is evident in the region and all other jurisdictions, except for Aliso Viejo, where the percentage of the population under age 18 has increased, and the percentage of the population aged 65 and older has decreased,since 1990. Families with Children In Orange County, approximately 41.56% of families have children. This is slightly higher than the region, where 40.02% of families have children. Among the participating HUD Entitlement Cities, in comparison to the County overall: • Aliso Viejo and Tustin have significantly higher percentages of families with children (52.06% and 52.64%, respectively), and in Irvine, over half (50.45%) of families have children. Orange County 9 25-29 Regional AFH • Laguna Niguel, Huntington Beach, Newport Beach,and Westminster have the lowest percentages of families with children, although the percentages are not significantly lower than those for the County overall. The percentage of families with children in the County is lower today than it was in 1990, when 48.04% of families had children. This is also true in the region and the other jurisdictions, with the following exceptions: • AlisoViejo, Newport Beach, and Tustin,where the current percentage of families with children is higher than it was in 1990. Table 1 - Demographics Los Angeles-Long BeacdArahelm,CA MA Orange County,CA I Orange County Urban County Race/Ethnicity N % R % N % White,Non-Hispanic 3.726,353 28.42% 1.221,176 38 46% 293,264 50.12% Black Non.fispanic 802.053 6.12% 48,898 1.54% 9,107 1.56% Hispanic 5,914,961 45.11% 1,077,367 33.93% 142,980 24.43% Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 2.164,634 16.51% 691,391 21.77% 111,761 19.10% Native American,Non-Hispanic 22,433 0.17% 3,771 0.12% 804 0.14% Two Of More Races,Non.Hlspanlc 420,05S 3.20% 121,149 3.82% 25,007 4.27% Other,Nor Hispanic 61,428 0.47% 11,475 0.36% 2,255 0.39% National Origins a1 country of origin Mexico 1,443,693 11.01%`Mexico 291,025 9.17%Mexico 87,088 14.88% 82 country of origin Philippines 284,338 2.17%Vietnam 149,014 4.69%Korea 16,930 2.89% 83 country of origin El Salvador 280,320 2.14%Korea 65,922 2.08%Vietnam 14,149 2.42% 84 country of origin China,excl.Taiwan 271,037 2.07%Philippines 54,628 1.72%Philippines 11,413 1.95% IS country of origin Vietnam 249,604 1.90%China,excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan 51,957 1.64%China,excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan 8,443 1.44% 86 country of one I n Korea 203,026 1.55%India 37,109 1.17%India 6.686 1.14% 87 country of origin Guatemala 192,515 1.47%Iran 29,601 0.93%Taiwan 5.013 0.86% 98 country of origin Iran 137,414 1,05%Taiwan 23,424 0.74%Iran 4,063 0.69% 89 country of origin India 94,541 0.72%El Salvador 19,991 0.63%ElSalva4or 1,472 0.25% 110 country of origin Taiwan 83,909 0.64%Guatemala 13,266 0.42%Guatemala 957 0.16% Limited Erick!.Proficiency(LEP(Language 41 LEP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole: 1,970,148 15.99%Spanish or Spanish Creole:: 342,794 11.72%Spanish or Spanish Creole. 35,150 4.55% 42 LEP Language Chinese: 254,682 2.07%Vietnamese: 100997 3.45%Korean 10.730 1.39% 43 LEP Language Korean: 155,641 1.26%Korean: 44,665 1.53%Vietnamese: 9,860 1.27% 04 LEP Language Vietnamese: 149,579 1.21%Cinese: 34,770 1.19%Chinese: 5,904 0.76% 85 LEP Language Tagalog: 86,250 0.70%Tagalog: 12,853 0.44%Tagalog: 2,265 0.29% 4/6 LEP Language Armenian: 85,608 0.69%Persian: 11,575 0.40%Persian: 1.846 0.24% 87 LEP Language Persian: 42,504 0.34%Arable: 7,553 0.26%Arable: 967 0.13% e8 LEP Language Japanese: 33,228 0.27%Japanese: 7,371 0.25%Japanese: 957 0.12% 49 LEP Language Russian: 27,784 0.23%Mon-Khmer,Cambodian: 2,939 0.10%Non-Khmer,Cnmbodian: 411 0.05% 010 LEP Language Arabic: 24,662 0.20%Other Indic languages: 2,905 0.10%Other Indic languages: 336 0.04% Disability Type Hearing difficulty 327,938 2.50% 79,275 251% 19,027 3.25% Vision difficulty 254,941 1.94% 49,469 1.57% 9.354 1.60% Cognitive difficulty 523,200 3.99% 109,210 3.46% 20,087 3.43% Ambulatory difficulty 686,925 5.24% 138,750 4.39% 30,261 5.17% Self.ca re difficulty 351,827 2.68% 70,216 2.22% 14,167 2.42% Independent living difficulty 566,545 4.32% 115,032 3.64% 22,514 3.85% Sea Male 6,515,114 49.69% 1,578,013 49.70% 283,470 48.44% Female 6,596,803 50.31% 1,597,214 50.30% 301,708 51.5696 Age Under 18 2,773,113 21.15% 680,041 21.42% 125,846 21.51% 18.64 8,434,589 64.33% 2,006,827 63.20% 339.409 58.00% 65. 1,904,215 14.52% 488359 15.38% 119,923 20.49%'. Family Type Families with children I 1,210,691 40.73%1 313,429 41.56%1 I 73,3601 gf58% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region,except family type,which is out of total families. Note 2:10 most populous places of birth and languages at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level,and are thus labeled separately. Note 3:Data Sources:LEP Language data from U.S.Census Bureau,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates;All other data from U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5- Year Estimates. Orange County 10 25-29 Regional AFH Table 1 - Demographics (continued) Aliso Viejo,CA I Anaheim,CA Buena Park,CA Rau/Edwlclty 8 % 4 % 8 % White,Non-Hispanic 28,827 55.55% 81,889 23.5996 13,558 2221% Black,Non Hispanic 1,344 2.59% 8,241 237% 1,795 2.15% Hispanic 10,392 20.02% 185,162 53.34% 33,448 40.04% Asian or Pacific Islander,Non.Hispanic 8,287 15.97% 61,721 17.78% 27.327 32.71% Native American,Non Hispank 0 0.00% 313 0.11% 27 0.03% Two or More Races,Non.Hispanic 2,847 5.49% 8,637 249% 2,301 2.75% Other,Non.Hspank 199 0.38% 1,078 0.31% 86 0.10% National origin 41 country of origin Mexico 1,739 3.35%Mexico 57,566 16.58%Mexico 7,934 9.50% 42 country of origin Iran 1,699 3.27%Vietnam 14,160 4.08%Korea 6,779 8.11% 43 country of origin Philippines 1,001 1.93%Philippines 9,783 2.82%Philippines 4,394 5.26% 44 country of origin India 907 1.75%Korea 4,604 1.33%India 1,652 1.98% 1$5 country of orilin Korea 489 0.94%El Salvador 3,627 1.04%Vietnam 1,304 1.56% 46 country of origin Vietnam 477 0.92%India 3,251 0.94%Taiwan 578 0.69% 47 country of origin Taiwan 392 0.76%Guatemala 2,823 0.81%China,end Taiwan 501 0.60% 48 country of origin Japan 382 0.74%Iran 1,806 0.52%Japan 436 0.52% 49 country of origin Lebanon 340 0.66%China,cod Taiwan 1,498 0.43%Peru 426 0.51% 110 country or origin Canada 305 0.59%Egypt 1,220 0.35%El Salvador 341 0.41% Uaidt.d English Proficiency(1EP)Language a1 LEP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole: 943 2.04%'Spanish or Spanish Creole: 62,112 19.37%Spanish or Spanish Creole: 12,535 16.26% 42 LEP Language Korean: 545 1.18%Vietnamese: 8,262 2.58%Korean: 6,233 8.089E 43 LEP Language Chinese: 534 1.16%Korean: 3,496 1.09%Tagalog: 2,252 2.92% 44 LEP Language Persian: 524 1.14%Tagalog: 2,472 0,77%Chinese: 767 0.99% 45 LEP Language Vietnamese: 339 0.74%Chinese: 2,323 0.72%Vietnamese: 614 0.82% 46 LEP Language Tagalog: 133 0.29%Arabic. 1,446 0.45%Thai: 386 0.50% 47 LEP Language Japanese: 127 0.28%Persian: 676 0.21%Other Indic languages: 375 0.49% 48 LEP Language Other Asian languages: 83 0.18%Other Indic languages: 584 0.18%Gujarati: 329 0.43% 49 LEP Language Russian: 77 0.17%African languages: 403 0.13%Arabic: 179 0.23% 410 LEP Language French(Intl.Patois,Cajun): 69 0.15%Hindi: 402 0.13%Other Pacific Island languages: 175 0.23% Disability Type Hearing difficulty 689 1.33% 8,319 2.40% 2,166 2.59% Vision difficulty 1,002 1.93% 5,994 1.73% 1,662 1.99% Cognitive difficulty 1,502 2.89% 13,316 3.84% 3,577 4.28% Ambulatory difficulty 1,436 2.77% 16.547 4.77% 4.325 5.18% Self-care difficulty 1,075 2.07% 3.339 2.40% 2,221 2.66% Independent living difficulty 1,469 2.83% 14,042 4.05% 3,502 4.19% Sec Male 25,069 48.31% 169,425 48.81% 41,846 50.09% Female 26,827 51.69% 177,6116 51.19% 41,696 49.91% Al. Under 18 12,826 24.71% 79,516 22.91% 18,424 22.05% 18-64 34,016 65.55% 225,077 64.84% 53,652 64.22% 65. 5,054 9.74% 42,518 12.25% 11,466 13.72% "sanity Type families with dsd*en I I 6,160152.06%I 32.802 43.23%1 7,636 38.40% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region,except family type,which is out of total families. Note 2:10 most populous places of birth and languages at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level,and are thus labeled separately. Note 3:Data Sources:LEP Language data from U.S.Census Bureau,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates;All other data from U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5- 'Year Estimates. Orange County 11 25-29 Regional AFH Table 1 -Demographics (continued) Costa Mesa,CA I Fountain Valley,CA I FJIartco.CA Race/Eth*chy 8 % 8 % I % White,Non•Hispanic 54,367 48.76% 21,830 38.46% 44.905 11.56% Black,Non-Hispanic 1,425 1.28% 406 0.72% 2,763 1.94% Hispanic 40,388 36.23% 9,692 17.08% 54,090 38.0296 Asian or Pacific Islander,NomHispank 10,136 9.09% 21,711 3825% 35,662 25.06% Native American,Non Hlspank 74 0.07% 82 0.14% 209 0.15% Two or More Races.Non-Hispanic 4,480 4.02% 2762 4.87% 4,158 2.92% Other,Non-lespank 620 0.56% 271 0.48% 493 0.35% National Origin #1 country of origin Mexico 11,599 10.40%Vietnam 8,447 14.88%Mexico 12,017 8.45% 12 country of origin Vietnam 1,934 1.73%Mexlco 1,646 2.90%Korea 10,956 7.70% 43 country of origin El Savador 1,248 1.12%Egypt 906 1.60%Philippines 2,433 1.71% 44 country of origin Philippines 1,097 0.98%Philippines 1100 1.41%India 1.846 1.30% 45 country of origin Guatemala 1,004 0.90%Taiwan 673 1.19%China,excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan 1845 1.30% #6 country of origin Japan 661 0.59%China,excl.Taiwan 645 1.14%Vietnam 1,686 1.18% #7 country of origin China,excl.Taiwan 627 0.56%Japan 576 1.01%Taiwan 1,236 0.87% 88 country of origin Canada 525 0.47%Korea 535 0.94%El Salvador 811 0.57% 89 country of origin Iran 489 0.4f%India 507 0.89%Iran 656 0.46% #10 country of ongm Colombia 479 0.43%El Salvador 343 0.60%Peru 617 0.43% Limited English►rofiden cy(LIP(language #1 LEP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole: 12,104 11.54%Vietnamese: 5,435 10.04%Spanish or Spanish Creole: 13,5313 10.39% 82 LEP Language Vietnamese: 711 0.68%Spanish or Spanish Creole: 1,303 2.41%Koran: 7,929 6.09% 43 LEP Language Japanese' 580 0.55%Chinese: 1,148 2.12%Chinese: 2,713 2.08% 44 LEP Language Tagalog: 335 0.32%Korean: 320 0.59%Vietnamese: 888 0.68% OS LEP Language Chinese: 312 0.30%Japanese: 296 0.55%Taping: 514 0.39% 86 LEP Language Korean: 264 0.25%Arabic: 251 0.46%Gujarati: 359 0.28% #7 LEP Language Persian: 139 0.13%Portuguese or Portuguese Creole: 104 0.19%Hindi: 310 0.24% 48 LEP Language Other Pacific Island languag 114 0.11%Persian: 95 0.18%Arabic 295 0.23% 49 LEP Language Arabic: 88 0.08%Mon-Khmer,Cambodian: 87 0.16%Persian: 262 0.20% 410 LEP Language Mon-Khmer,Cambodian: 86 0.08%Thai: 84 0.16%Japanese: 253 0.19% Disability Type Hearing difficulty 2,252 2.02% 1,575 2.78% 2,902 2.04% Vision difficulty 1,555 1.39% 787 1.39% 2,155 1.51% Cognitive difficulty 3,673 3.29% 2,151 3.79% 5,084 3.57% Ambulatory difficulty 4,740 4.25% 2,680 4.72% 5,894 4.14% Self.care difficulty 2,259 2.03% 1,422 2.51% 2,794 1.96% Independent Haug difficulty 4,029 3.61% 2,388 4,21% 5,064 3.56% Sex Male 57,468 51.56% 28,478 50.18% 70,148 49.30% female 54,002 48.44% 28,276 49.12% 72,132 50.70% Ace Under 18 21,103 18.93% 10,939 19.27% 31,836 22.38% 18.64 75,939 68.11% 34,526 60.83% 90,840 63.85% 65+ 14,448 12.96% 11,289 19.89% 19,604 13.78% family Type Families with children I 10,010 4L1536t 5,138 37.40%1 13.780 41.67% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region,except family type,which is out of total families. Note 2:10 most populous places of birth and languages at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level,and are thus labeled separately. Note 3:Data Sources:LEP Language data from U.S.Census Bureau,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates;All other data from U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5- Year Estimates. Orange County 12 25-29 Regional AFH Table 1 -Demographics (continued) Garden Grove,CA I Huntington Beach,CA I Irvine,CA Race/Ethnicity I % * % I % White,Non-Hispanic 29,648 17.27% 118,060 59.79% 108,636 35.67% Black,Non-Hispanic 1,724 1.00% 2,246 1.14% 5,275 1.73%I Hispanic 64,048 37.32% 38,959 19.73% 34,237 11.24%' Asian or Pacific Islander,Non.Hispanic 72,135 4203% 25,116 1272% 135,560 4451%, Native American,Non-Hispanic 227 0.13% 435 022% 364 0.12%. Two or More Races,NomNispanic 3,221 1.88% 11,729 5.94% 19,072 6.2696' Other,Non-Hispank 634 0.37% 916 0.46% 1,383 0.45% Natlonal Origin • 81 country of origin Vietnam 39,594 23.07%Vietnam 6,752 3.42%China,excl.Taiwan 26,311 8.64% 82 country of origin Mexico 19,384 11.29%Mexico 4,859 2.46%Korea 13,665 4.49% 83 country of origin Korea 3,369 1.96%Philippines 1,521 0.77%India 12,658 4.16% 84 country of origin Philippines 2,812 1.64%China,excl.Taiwan 1,284 0.65%Iran 9,640 3.17% 85 country of origin El Salvador 1,435 0.84%Taiwan 1,150 0.58%Taiwan 7.052 2.32% 86 country of origin Guatemala 1,053 0.61%Canada 1,048 0.53%Vietnam 6,631 2.18% 87 country of origin China,excl.Taiwan 755 0.44%Korea 850 0.43%Philippines 4,839 1.59% 88 country of origin Cambodia 514 0.30%El Salvador 791 0.40%Japan 4,201 1.38% 89 country of origin India 433 0.25%England 657 0.33%Mexico 3,773 1.24% 810 country of origin Peru 424 0.25%Egypt 646 0.33%Canada 1,949 0.64% limited English ProfkWwy(LEM Laoguae 81 LEP Language Vietnamese: 29,899 18.16%Spanish or Spanish Creole: 3,333 4.43%Chinese: 30,868 4.83% 82 LEP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole: 19,694 11.96%Vietnamese: 2,922 1.55%Korean: 6,292 2.79% 83 LEP language Korean: 2,948 1.79%Chinese: 1,293 0.69%Persian: 3,977 1.77% 84 LEP language Chinese: 1,640 1.00%Arabic: 632 0.34%Spanish or Spanish Creole: 2,969 1.32% 85 LEP Language Tagalog. 692 0.42%Korean: 619 0.33%Japanese: 2,724 1.21% 86 LEP Language Moo-Khmer,Cambodian: 385 0.23%Japanese: 466 0,25%Vietnamese: 1,870 0.83% 87 LEP Language Arabic: 343 0.21%Tagalog: 186 0.10%Arabic: 1,790 0.80% 88 LEP Language Other Pacific Island langual 210 0.13%Portuguese or Portuguese Creole: 153 0.08%Russian: 737 0.33% 89 LEP Language That: 203 0.12%Thai: 151 0.08%Tagalog: 665 0.30% a10 LEP Language _ Laotian: 153 0.09%Other Indo-European languages: 145 0.08%Other Indic languages: 604 .0.2.726. Disability Type Hearing difficulty 4,012 2.34% 5,577 2.82% 4,587 1.51% Vision difficulty 3,500 2.04% 3,076 1.56% 3.081 1.01% Cognitive difficulty 7,551 4.40% 7,071 3.58% 7,130 2.34% Ambulatory difficulty 8,995 5.24% 8,728 4.42% 7.092 2.33% Self•care difficulty 4,754 2.77% 3,684 1.87% 4,489 1.47% Independent living difficulty 8,377 4.88% 6,990 3.54% 7,198 2.36% Sot Male 86,329 50.30% 99,061 50.16% 150,761 49.51% Female 85,308 49.70% 98,420 49.84% 153,766 50.49% Age Under 18 36,449 21.24% 35,292 17.87% 66,314 21.78% 18.64 110.716 64.51% 125,355 63.48% 206,414 67.78% 65. 24,473 14.26% 36,834 18.65% 31,799 10.44% Family Type Famallas with children I 1t050 47.97%1 17,495 36.25%1 35,129 50.45% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region,except family type,which is out of total families. Note 2:10 most populous places of birth and languages at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level,and are thus labeled separately. Note 3:Data Sources:LEP Language data from U.S.Census Bureau,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates;All other data from U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5- Year Estimates. _ - - Orange County 13 25-29 Regional AFH Table 1 - Demographics (continued) I La Habra,CA I Laguna Niguel,CA I Lake Forest,CA Race/Ethnicity I % 4 % 8 % White,Non•Nispanic 15,549 24.72% 41,226 64.16% 41,811 48.85% Black,Non.Hispanic 1,091 1.73% 1,134 1.76% 1,818 2.12% Hispanic 37,583 59.75% 10,346 16.10% 20,073 23.45% Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 7,379 11.73% 7,218 11.23% 16,885 19.73% Native American,NonHispank 36 0.06% 8 0.01% 116 0.14% Two or More Races,Non.HIspanic 1,159 1.84% 3.866 6.02% 4,407 5.15% Other,Non-Wspank 107 0.17% 461 0.72% 473 0.55% National ONgin N1 country of origin Mexico 8,114 12.90%Iran 2,869 4.46%Mexico 4,998 5.84% 42 country of origin Korea 2,060 3.27%Mexico 2,173 14.50%Philippines 2,017 2.36% 43 country of origin Philippines 1,039 1.65%Philippines 866 5.78%China,excl.Talwan 1,731 2.02% e4 country of origin Guatemala 662 1.05%China,excl.Taiwan 813 5.43%Vietnam 1.527 1.78% 1/5 country of origin China,excl.Taiwan 489 0.78%Vietnam 667 4.45%Iran 1,298 1.52% 46 country of origin El Salvador 463 0.74%United Kingdom,excluding England and 5 662 4.42%India 1,026 1.20% 47 country of origin Taiwan 252 0.40%Germany 622 4.15%Taiwan 926 1.08% NB country of origin India 201 0.32%Korea 554 3,70%Korea 879 1.03% 49 country of origin Vietnam 169 0.30%Taiwan 416 2.78%Japan 698 0.82% 1110 country of origin Ecuador 147 0.23%Canada 401 2.68%Egypt 630 0.74% Limited English Proficiency(LEP)latlguace 41 LEP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole: 10,755 18.84%Spanish or Spanish Creole: 2,330 3.82%Spanish or Spanish Creole: 5,408 7.18% 42 LEP Language Korean: 1,244 2.18%Persian: 878 1.44%Tagalog: 622 0.83% 43 LEP Language Speak English"very well' 304 0.53%Chinese: 680 1.11%Chinese: 524 0.70% N4 LEP Language Chinese: 239 0.42%Korean: 121 0.20%Vietnamese: 436 0.58% 45 LEP Language Other Pacific Island langoag 70 0.12%French(Intl.Patois,Cajun): 83 0.14%Korean: 410 0.54% 46 LEP Language Russian: 46 0.08%Other Slavic languages: 79 0.13%Persian 342 0.45% 47 LEP Language Persian: 45 0.08%Russian: 76 0.12%Arabic: 238 0.32% N8 LEP Language Japanese: 42 0.07%Vietnamese: 75 0.12%Other Pacific Island languages: 174 0.23% 49 LEP Language Mon-Khmer,Cambodian: 31 0.05%Japanese: 74 0.12%Japanese: 163 0.22% 410 LEP Language Other Indic languages: 30 0.05%Gujarati: 70 0.11%ScandinaWan languages: 78 0.10% ONablllty Type Hearing difficulty 1,569 2.49% 1,702 2.65% 1,886 2.20% Vision difficulty 1,368 2.17% 811 1.26% 1,045 1.22% Cognitive difficulty 2,550 4.05% 1,853 2.88% 2,771 3.24% Ambulatory difficulty 3,328 5.29% 2,683 4.18% 3,195 3.73% Self-care difficulty 1,927 3.06% 1,385 2.16% 1,547 1.81% independent living difficulty 2,696 4.29% 2,055 3.20% 2,664 3.11% Sea Male 31,681 50.36% 31,080 48.37% 42,347 49.48% Female 31,223 49.64% 33,179 51.63% 43,236 50.52% Al. Under 18 13,799 21.94% 10,919 16.99% 17,484 20.43% 18 64 40,264 64.01% 40,277 6268% 56,050 65.49% 65- 8,641 14.05% 13,063 20.1346 12,049 14.08% Family Type Families with children ) 6,074 40.01%1 6,011 33.79%I 9,452 43.00% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region,except family type,which is out of total families. Note 2:10 most populous places of birth and languages at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level,and are thus labeled separately. Note 3:Data Sources,LEP Language data from U.S.Census Bureau,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates;All other data from U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5- Year Estimates. Orange County 14 25-29 Regional AFH Table 1 -Demographics (continued) Mission Viejo,CA J Newport Beach,CA I Orange,CA Race/Enkfld y 8 % B % I % White,Non.Hispanic 56,825 60.95% 64,785 76.08% 56,896 41.01% Black,Non-Hispanic 1,072 1.15% 553 0.65% 1,801 1.30% Hispanic 18,341 19.67% 8,912 10.47% 54,176 39.05% Asian or Pacific Islander,Npo-l6spanic 12,749 13.67% 6,902 8.10% 13,712 13.49% Native American,Non.Hlspank 17 0.02% 42 0.05% 301 0.22% Two or More Races,Non•Hispanic 3,979 4.27% 3,406 4.00% 6,488 4.68% Other,NowHlspank 250 0.27% 559 0.66% 354 0.26% National Origin #1 country of origin Mexico 3,380 3.63%Iran 1,293 1.52%Mexico 11,955 8.62% 82 country of origin Iran 2,755 2.95%Meoro 1,039 1.22%Philippines 2,858 2.06% 43 country of origin Vietnam 1,855 1.99%Canada 953 1.12%Vietnam 2,741 1.98% 444 country of origin Philippines 1,284 1.38%Vietnam 733 0.86%China,excl.Taiwan 1,278 0.92% #5 country of origin China,excl.Taiwan 1,060 1.14%Taiwan 732 0.86%Korea 1,268 0.91% 86 country of origin India 902 0,97%India 605 0.71%Guatemala 960 0.69% 87 country of origin Taiwan 899 0.96%Korea 604 0.71%India 922 0.66% 88 country of origin Canada 549 0.59%China,excl.Taiwan 576 0.68%Taiwan 921 0.66% #9 country of origin Korea 539 0.58%France 448 0.53%El Salvador 909 0.66% 110 country of origin Guatemala 405 0.43%England 420 0.49%Iran 603 0.43% Limited English Proficiency{LEP)language 81 LEP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole: 3,617 3.97%Spanish or Spanish Creole: 933 1.17%Spanish or Spanish Creole: 16,693 12.73% 82 LEP Language Persian: 1,378 1.51%Chinese: 332 0.40%Vietnamese: 1,474 1.12% e3 LEP Language Chinese: 705 0.77%Persian: 306 0.37%Korean: 1,162 0.89% #4 LEP Language Vietnamese: 373 0.41%Korean: 271 0.32%Chinese: 792 0.60% e5 LEP Language Tagalog. 246 0.27%Japanese: 188 0.22%Tagalog: 501 0.38% a6 LEP Language Arabic: 241 0.26%Russian: 167 0.20%Arabic: 247 0.19% 87 LEP Language Japanese: 218 0.24%Other Slavic languages: 111 0.13%Persian: 215 0.16% 88 LEP Language Korean: 175 0.19%Tagalog: 104 0.12%Gujarati: 207 0.16% e9 LEP Language Russian: 123 0.13%French find.Patois,Cajun): B0 0.10%Japanese: 168 0.13% 810 LEP Language Other Pacific Island largual 88 0.10%Vietnamese: 74 0.09%Mon-Khmer,Cambodian: 142 0.11% Disability Type Nearing difficulty 3,005 3.22% 2,689 3.16% 2,803 2.02% Vision difficulty 1.438 1.54% 838 0.98% 1,785 1.29% Cognitive difficulty 4,203 4.51% 1,811 2.13% 3,750 2.70% Ambulatory difficulty 4,989 5.35% 3,282 3.85% 4865 3.51% Self care difficulty 2920 3.13% 1,625 1.91% 2,455 1.77% Independent living difficulty 4,320 4.63% 2,770 3.25% 4,350 3.14% Sea Mate 46,397 49.76% 41,980 49.30% 70909 51.11% Female 46836 50.24% 43,179 50.70% 67,819 48.89% Age Under 18 18,379 19.71% 14,297 16.79% 28,400 20.47% 18.64 54,279 58.22% 51,037 59.93% 90,276 65.07% 656 20,575 22.07% 19,1125 23.28% 20,052 14.45% family Type Families with children I 10.186 44.01%1 7,9.32 3653%1 13,121 4180% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region,except family type,which is out of total families. Note 2:10 most populous places of birth and languages at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level,and are thus labeled separately. Note 3:Data Sources:LEP Language data from U.S.Census Bureau,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates;All other data from U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5- year Estimates. Orange County 15 25-29 Regional AFH Table 1 - Demographics (continued) Rancho Santa Margarita,CA 1 San Clemente,CA I Santa Ma,CA Race/Ethnicity I % 8 % I % White,Noe hispanic 28,334 59.40% 46,139 71.83% 28,223 9.06% Black,Non.Hispanic 819 1.72% 1,057 1.65% 2.897 0.93% Hispanic 9,734 20.41% 10,964 17.07% 239,624 77.02% Asian or Pacific Islander,Noe-Hispank 5,801 12.16% 3,098 4.82% 36,906 11.85% Native American,Non-Hispanic 75 0.16% 34 0.05% 295 0.09% Two or More Races,Non.Hispanlc 2,790 5.85% 2,821 4.39% 2,789 0.90% Other.Non:Hispanic 149 0.31% 119 0.19% 445 0.14% National Origin 81 country of origin Mexico 1,657 3.47%Mexico 2,089 3.25%Meeko 90,066 28.93% 82 country of origin Philippines 1,185 2.48%India 565 0.88%Vietnam 16,542 5.31% 83 country of origin Canada 817 1.71%Iran 458 0.71%El Salvador 4,685 1.50% 84 country of origin Iran 705 1.48%Philippines 377 0.59%Guatemala 2,845 0.91% 85 country of origin India 701 1.47%England 279 0.43%Philippines 2,064 0.66% 86 country of origin Brazil 463 0.97%Canada 264 0.41%China,excl.Taiwan 940 0.30% 67 country of origin El Salvador 447 0.94%Germany 245 0.38%Cambodia 881 0.28% 88 country of origin England 304 0.64%Australia 241 0.38%Korea 782 0.25% 09 country of origin Vietnam 251 0.53%Taiwan 145 0.23%India 669 0.21% 410 country of origin Peru 221 0.46%China,excl.Taiwan 136 0.21%Bolivia 612 0.20% Limited English Proficiency(LOP)Language 41 LIP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole: 2,373 5.19%Spanish or Spanish Creole: I,762 4.49%Spanish on Spanish Creole: 113,477 37.06% 42 LEP Language Chinese. 286 0.63%Thal: 194 0.32%Vietnamese: 14,211 4.64% 43 LEP Language Persian: 194 0.42%Korean: 105 0.17%Chinese: 1,435 0.47% 84 LEP Language Arabic 177 0.39%Armenian: 98 0.16%MossKhmer,Cambodian: 743 0.24% IS LEP Language Vietnamese. 163 0.36%Vietnamese: 91 0.15%Tagalog: 651 0.21% 46 LEP Language Tagalog: 159 0.35%Chinese: 56 0.09%Korean: 427 0.14% 47 LEP Language Korean: 85 0.19%Other Slavic languages: 49 0.08%Laotian: 287 0.09% 88 LEP Language Other Slave languages: 81 0.18%Other Pacific Island languages: 38 0.06%Japanese: 235 0.08% 89 LEP Language Japanese: 77 0.17%Japanese: 37 0.06%Other Pacific Island languages: 171 0.06% 810 LEP Language Thur 43 0.09%Persian: 37 0.06%Other Indic languages: 171 0.06% Disability Type Hearing difficulty 1,059 2.22% 2,302 3.58% 6,809 2.19% Vision difficulty 634 1.33% 752 1.17% 5,829 1.87% Cognitive difficulty 1,522 3.19% 2,043 3.18% 11,316 3.63% Ambulatory difficulty 1,519 3.18% 2,450 3.81% 13.423 4.31% Selo.care diffkulty 926 1.94% 1,114 1.73% 7,204 2.31% Independent living difficulty 1,393 2.92% 2,138 3.33% 10,456 3.36% See Male 23,675 49.63% 32,907 51.23% 160,488 51.54% Female 24,027 50.37% 31,325 48.77% 150,891 48.46% Age Under 18 10,932 22.92% 14,013 21.82% 75,074 24.11% 18.64 31,793 66.65% 37,684 58.67% 203,263 65.28% 65, 4,977 10.4394 12,535 19.5244 33,042 10.61% Family Type Families with children I 5,919 46.09%I 6,677 39.64%1 8,312 45.61% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region,except family type,which is out of total families. Note 2:10 most populous places of birth and languages at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level,and are thus labeled separately. Note 3:Data Sources:LEP Language data from U.S.Census Bureau,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates;All other data from U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5- Year Estimates. Orange County 16 25-29 Regional AFH Table 1 —Demographics (continued) Tustin,CA Westminster,CA Race/Ethnicity # % # % White,Non-Hispanic 22,538 28.34% 18,846 20.79% Black,Non-Hispanic 1,649 2.07% 681 0.75% Hispanic 32,131 40.41% 21,887 24.15% Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 20,208 25.41% 46,117 50.88% Native American,Non-Hispanic 128 0.16% 114 0.13% Two or More Races,Non-Hispanic 2,548 3.20% 2,682 2.96% Other,Non-Hispanic 312 0.39% 311 0.34% National Origin #1 country of origin Mexico 9,208 11.58% Vietnam 27,493 30.33% #2 country of origin India 2,126 2.67% Mexico 6,287 6.94% #3 country of origin Korea 2,100 2.64% Philippines 978 1.08% #4 country of origin Vietnam 1,786 2.25% China,excl.Taiwan 586 0.65% #5 country of origin China,excl.Taiwan 1,738 2.19% Egypt 424 0.47% #6 country of origin Philippines 1,565 1.97% Korea 362 0.40% #7 country of origin Taiwan 675 0.85% Peru 360 0.40% #8 country of origin Guatemala 563 0.71% Cambodia 350 0.39% #9 country of origin Iran 424 0.53% El Salvador 309 0.34% #10 country of origin Colombia 382 0.48% Guatemala 293 0.32% Limited English Proficiency(LEP)Language #1 LEP Language Spanish or Spanish Creole: 9,311 12.79% Vietnamese: 21,871 30.05% #2 LEP Language Vietnamese: 1,400 1.92% Spanish or Spanish Creole: 6,404 8.80% #3 LEP Language Chinese: 1,146 1.57% Chinese: 1,073 1.47% #4 LEP Language Korean: 1,090 1.50% Arabic: 291 0.40% #5 LEP Language Tagalog: 378 0.52% Tagalog: 230 0.32% #6 LEP Language Other Indic languages: 219 0.30% Mon-Khmer,Cambodian: 227 0.31% #7 LEP Language Other Asian languages: 210 0.29% Korean: 199 0.27% #8 LEP Language Persian: 194 0.27% Japanese: 171 0.23% #9 LEP Language Other Pacific Island languag 150 0.21% Other Pacific Island languages: 149 0.20% #10 LEP Language Arabic: 98 0.13% Other Indic languages: 142 0.20% Disability Type Hearing difficulty 1,192 1.50% 3,153 3.48% Vision difficulty 1,050 1.32% 1,753 1.93% Cognitive difficulty 2,527 3.18% 3,722 4.11% Ambulatory difficulty 2,680 3.37% 5,618 6.20% Self-care difficulty 1,393 1.75% 2,516 2.78% Independent living difficulty 2,304 2.90% 4,313 4.76% Sex Male 39,440 49.60% 45,034 49.69% Female 40,074 50.40% 45,604 50.31% Age Under 18 18,980 23.87% 19,219 21.20% 18-64 50,239 63.18% 55,722 61.48% 65+ 10,295 12.95% 15,697 17.32% Family Type Families with children 9,228 52.64% 7,877 36.92% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region,except family type,which is out of total families. Note 2:10 most populous places of birth and languages at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level,and are thus labeled separately. Note 3:Data Sources:LEP Language data from U.S.Census Bureau,2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates;All other data from U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5- Year Estimates. Orange County 17 25-29 Regional AFH Table 2-Demographic Trends I Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim,CA MSA Orange County,CA 1990 Trend 2000 Treed 2010 Trend 1022 1990 Trend 2000 Treed 2010 Treed Nal Rao/et4.6r1ty i % a % I % • % • % I % • x I % White,Non-56spank 5,166,768 45.86% 4,417,595 35.72% 4,056,220 31.626 3,726,353 21.12% 1,535,945 64.37% 1,438,150 51.12% 1,107,843 41.96% 1,221.176 38.46% Stark 5009600nin 971,105 8.62% 1.001,103 8.10% 932,431 7.27% 802,053 6.12% 38,784 1.63% 50149 1.8016 55.619 13774 49.898 1.54% Hispanic 3,914.001 34.74% 5,117,049 41.38% 5,700.862 44.44% 5,914,961 45.11% 559,267 23.44% 165,093 30.75% 1,000.427 33.63% 1,077,367 33.93% Asian or Pacific islander,Non Hispanic L146,691 10.12% 1.651,1106 13.35% 2,046.111 1595% 2,164,614 16,51% 239,937 10.06% 422,352 15.01% 518,425 19.71% 691,391 21.77% Halton American.Non.Hispaor 36,210 0.32% 66,029 0.53% 54,362 0.42% 22.433 0.17% 19199 0.31% 17,973 0.64% 15,117 0.51% 3,771 0.12% Netkrol 04t4in 709e140 born 1 3,469,567 30.80% 4,299,323 34.77% 4,3110,850 34.15% 4,249,090 32.41% 570,423 23.91% 842,151 29.93% 194.935 30.09% 937,251 29.52% LEP Limited English Proficiency 1 2,430,630 21.57% 3,132,663 15.33% 3,053,077 23.60% 2.694,100 20.55% 322,261 16.02% 514,961 20.79% 594,061 19.97% 539.484 1699% Sept Male 5.626,077 49.94% 6,107,286 49.39% 6,328,433 49.33% 6,515,114 49.69% 1,201,026 50.33% 1,397,364 49.67% 1,471,211 49.46% 1.579013 49.70% Female 5,640,051 50.06% 6.251,058 50.61% 6,500,402 50.67% 6,596,801 50.31% 1,115,153 49.67% 1,416,071 50.33% 1,503,527 50.54% 1,597,214 50.3011 As• under 18 2,911,031 25.64% 3,518.245 21.45% 3.138,866 24.47% 2,773,111 21.15% 511,593 21.37% 773,246 27.66% 727,819 24.4711 680,041 21.12% 18 64 7.280.517 64.62% 7,641.369 61.20% 8,274,592 64.50% 2,414,589 6433% 1,538.417 66.57% 1.760,632 62.58% 1,902,669 63.96% 2,036,417 63.20% 65. 1.074,5/0 9.54% 1,205,730 9.75% 1,415,376 11.03% 1,904.215 14.51% 216,169 9.06% 274,552 9.76% 344.245 11.57% 410,359 15.38% Fam0y Type Fa mikes with children 1318,473 50.20% 1,143,221 63.64% 1,3118,564 47.84% 1.210,291 40.73% 280,598 48.04% 300987 52.05% 331,767 47.40% 113,129 41.56% Orange County Urban County Aliso Viejo,CA 1990 Tend 2000 Treed 2010 Trend 2011 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 MN 1022 Race/Ethnicity • % • 1/ 0 % • % 0 % • % • % • % White,Nan Hispanic 326,911 75.98% 115,458 65.51% 298.754 57.34% 293,264 50.12% 6,879 64.66% 27,672 70.57% 28,600 62.53% 26.817 55.55% Black Non Hispanic 5,662 1.32% 1,495 1.76% 10,003 1.94% 9,107 1.56% 29 1.10% 957 2.44% 1,142 2.50% 1.321 2.59% Hispanic 58.439 13.51% 88,070 11.29% 112,461 21.51% 142,940 24.43% 612 7.55% 4,891 12.47% 7.451 16.29% 10.392 20.01% Asian or Pacific islander,Non.Hlspanic 37,112 8.62% 63,114 13.11% 95,452 U.32% 111,761 19.10% 465 5.74% 5,066 12.92% 8,144 1711% 1.287 15.97% Native Arnerinart Non Hispanic 1,116 0.33% 3,240 0.67% 2,913 0.56% 804 0.14% 29 0.36% 222 037% 223 0.49% 0 0.00% wtlmal 04565 70606n born 1 67,976 15.79% 99,148 20.60% 116,970 22.45% 107,654 1135181 1,225 14.94% 7,817 19.95% 10,876 23.78% 12.488 2406% Up limited English Proficiency 1 36,389 8.45% 57,012 11.54% 61,603 12.40% 69,409 11.86%1 399 4./7% 2.760 7.04% 3841 8.40% 4.315 •33% Sea Male 209,940 41.76% 232,553 48.31% 252,314 46.42% 283,470 48.44% 3,949 41.16% 12,712 47.75% 21,871 47.64% 25,069 48.31% Female 220.643 51.24% 248,7% 51.69% 261,744 51.51% 301,708 51.56% 4,247 51.42% 20,471 5215% 23,151 52.16% 26,127 51.69% Me Under 16 97,547 22.66% 122,617 2547% 120,9112 23.22% 125,146 21.51% 1,244 15.11% 10,061 25.69% 11,444 25.02% 12,126 24.71% 1864 275822 64.06% 219,632 60.17% 317,776 60.99% 339,409 51.00% 6,001 73.22% 27,494 70.17E 31,274 61.31% 34,016 65.55% 65• 57,174 13.21% 69,101 14.36% 42,300 15.79% 119,923 20.49% 951 11.60% 1,622 4.14% 3,011 6.60% 9054 9.74% Family Te9 Families with children 50,340 44.34% 47,227 41.00% 58.769 44.09% 73.360 37.51% 761 35.56% 4,378 55.47% 6,393 55.21% 6,U0 52.06% Anaheim,CA Buena Park,CA 1980 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Treed 2022 1990 Trend 2107 Trend 2010 Treed 2022 Race/[Onidoy • % 0 % • % • % • 31 0 % • x I % White,Non-I61panic 150,775 5601% 117,083 35.77% 92,711 27.53% b1,889 23.59% 39,286 51.15% 29,077 37.27% 21,298 26.61% 18,558 22.21% Stack Non Wspanin 6,095 2.26% 8,787 2.68% 9,214 2.74% 8,241 2.37% 1,774 2.63% 3,290 4.22% 3,272 409% 1,795 2.15% Hispanic 96,323 3307% 153,366 46.85% 177,414 52.68% 125,162 53.34% 16,909 25.03% 26,955 M.55% 32,282 40.34% 33,441 80.04% Asian or Pa0fic Blander,Non Hispanic 24,423 9.07% 43,565 13.31% 55,173 16.37% 61,721 17.78% 9,116 13.49% 17,392 22.19% 22.574 22.20% 27,317 32.71% Native American,Non 975 0.36% 2,003 0.61% 1,528 0AS% 383 0.11% 327 0.48% 642 0.12% 431 0.54% 27 0.03% Netla0106212 Foreilmborn 1 76,749 21.52% 123,280 37.67% 127,374 37.82% 120,206 34.63%1 15,352 22.79% 26,072 33.42% 19,903 37.36% 29.914 35.81% UP Limited English Proficiency 1 56,097 20.25% 93,227 2/.49% 92,604 27.50% 78,235 22.71%I 9.976 1130% 17,635 22.61% 20.122 26.01% 16,557 19.82% Su Male 136,577 50.75% 163,753 5004% 167864 49.84% 169,425 48.61% 33,549 49.78% M.549 49.42% 39,425 49.25% 41.846 5009% Female 131533 49.2514 163,517 49.96% 169910 50.16% 177,626 51.19% 33,052 5022% 19,460 50.58% 40.622 50.75% 41,696 49.91% A. Under 13 70,562 26.22% 101.391 30.98% 92,249 2739% 79,516 2291% 17,690 26.25% 23,458 30.07% 20,320 2535% 18A24 22.05% 16 64 176,654 65.64% 199,264 60.19% 213,036 63.26% 215,077 64.84% 44,315 65.15% 47,533 60.93% 51,321 64.11% 53,652 64.22% 65- 21,195 3.14% 26,608 2.11% 31,482 9.35% 42,516 12.25% 5,325 7.90% 7,011 9.00% 1,404 10.50% 11,466 13.72% Family Type 7177,lle,with chl0r0n 32,255 50.0/16 37,325 57.02% 32,170 51.44% 32,802 43.23% 6,496 49.42% 1,540 53.26% 0916 4683% 7,636 38.40% Costa Mesa,CA Fountain Valley,CA 1990 Treed 2000 Trend 20102,0d 202 1900 TEN 2000 Trend 1010 Tend 2622 Rete/EtMkaly I % • % •• x •• % • % I •% • % • % White,No,Hispanic 70,0% 1.2.30% 62,305 57.04% 56.961 5193% 54,367 48.76% 38,1101 71.91% 31,316 57.39% 26,642 47.98% 21,130 34.46% Black 629.1453990 1,132 1.17% 1,645 1.51% 1,874 1.71% 1,425 1.28% 508 0.94% 731 1.34% 691 1.25% 406 0.72% 037140 19,268 19.17% 34,462 31.55% 39,230 35.76% 40318 36.23% 4,134 9.05% 6,490 11.87% 8,071 14.54% 9,692 170e% Asian or Pack Islander,NonWspanic 6,004 6.19% 9,170 8.40% 10.647 9.71% 10,136 9.09% 9.405 17.43% 15.167 27.73% 11,632 35.36% 21,711 3825% Native American,No0WspaNc 331 0.34% 771 0.71% 673 0,61% 74 0.07% 257 0.41% 134 0.79% 350 0.63% 12 0.14% limbed Owl& 10,611n6000 1 20,791 21.46% 31,634 21.96% 19,511 26.90% 25,863 23.20%1 10,916 20.20% 15,516 2131% 16,514 29.74% 18,055 3111% LE9 Um Red E0l655 Proficiency 1 11,615 13.03% 21,770 19.93% 17,444 15,90% 13,672 12.26%1 5,757 10.65% 9.813 17.94% 9,881 17.80% 10,091 1778% See Male 49,361 50.97% 55,803 51.02% 55,812 50.18% 57,188 51.56% 26214 49.63% 26,709 4614% 27.076 42.76% 28.478 50.11% Female 47,493 49.03% 53,447 4192% 53,891 49.12% 54,002 48.44% 27,215 50.37% 27,900 5116% 28,451 51.24% 21.276 49.82% N4 Under 10 111.806 19.41% 25,290 23.70% 23,674 21.53% 21,103 38.93% 12,767 23.63% 13,344 24.40% 11,794 21.24% 10,939 19.27% 16.64 70,162 72.43% 74,095 67.82% 75,667 69.17% 75,939 64.11% 37,304 69.04% 14,951 6192% 34.068 61.35% 34,526 60.83% 65- 7,905 1.16% 9,265 /1114 10,142 9.24% 14,441 12.96% 3,958 7.33% 6,317 11.6901 9,664 17.40% 11,289 19.09% 9ao01y Type Families with children 1 9,614 43.59% 10,789 S0.57% 11,130 47.99% 10.010 41.15%1 6,674 47.04% 6,115 43.95% 5,656 39.90% 5,131 37.40% Note 1,411%represent a share of the total population within the lurlsthttlan a region,eacept family type,which B out 01 total families. Nam 7.10 most populous places of birth and languages at the heist/titian level may not be the lore as the 10 most populoot at the Reidrs level.and are thus labeled separately. Note 3 Date Sources U S.[cm.Bee>0.2013/022 Amencan Community Surrey 5 Year Estimates.HUD AFFH T0ol,Table 2.Version AFFH700416.Released July 10,2020. Note 4:Refer to the Data 00rvmentatkn la details(www.hadeachange.pians0ace/4841/aflhdal4documenUuonl. Orange County 18 25-29 Regional AFH Table 2—Demographic Trends (continued) Fullerton,CA Garden Grove,CA 1990 Trend 0000 Trend 2010 Trend 2027 1990 Trend 2000 Trard 2010 Twnd 2021 72422/0%46d9' a % • % 1 % • % • % • % • % I• 94 White,Non l949ano 73,639 65.17% 62,015 49.24% 51,151 38.57% 44,905 3156% 79,762 54.42% 54,147 32.25% 311,904 22.45% 29.640 1757% Black Non Hispanic 2,273 201% 3,059 2.43% 3,310 2.45% 2,763 1.94% 2,146 1.46% 2,474 167% 2,376 1.37% 1.724 1.40% Hispanic 23,892 21.14% 38,320 30.43% 47232 34.10% 54,090 3102% 34.491 23.54% 55,501 13.06% 64,712 37.34% 64,048 37.32% Asian or pacific slander,NOn Hisp.Nc 12,607 11.16% 20,61E 16.43% 31,108 23.43% 35,662 25.06% 29,211 19.93% 53,800 1205% 66,279 31.25% 72,135 42.01% Native American,Non Wtpadc 364 0.32% 927 0.74% 707 0.52% 201 0.15% 631 0.43% 1,107 0.66% 725 0.42% 227 0.11% Nada%011M 790711,60rn j 25.946 22.98% 35,892 28.49% 39,904 29.40% 41,122 21.90161 41,676 30.4% 72,353 43.10% 74,763 43.14% 75,419 43.94% LOP Um Ned English Proficiency I 16,187 14.14% 24,574 19.51% 25,535 18.81% 14,436 17.17%1 32,720 22.32% 57,745 34.40% 56,670 32.70% 47,215 33.33% Salt Male 56,372 49.92% 62,447 49.57% 66,647 49.10% 70,141 4930% 74,2% 50.67% 14,04 50.06% 86,3117 49.45% 86.329 50.30% Female 56,549 50.08% 63,537 50.43% 69,090 50.90% 72,132 50.70% 72,311 49.13% 83,832 49 94% 46,903 50.15% 85,30E 4.70% 044 under 18 25,54 22.6416 32.933 26.16% 31,951 23.54% 31,836 22.31% 34,176 26.04% 48,574 28.93% 44,241 25.53% 36,449 21.24% 18.64 75,650 66.99% 78,107 62.55% 47,893 64.75% 90,84 63.15% 95,198 65.06% 103,266 61.51% 110,119 63.55% 110,715 6451% 65. 11,703 10.36% 14,224 11.29% 15,693 11.71% 19,604 13.71% 11,014 188% 16,039 9.55% 18,930 10.92% 24,473 14.26% Fenedy Type Families with children 11,503 44.91% 11,0% 48.22% 14,582 46.38% 13,710 4107% 17,110 4.90% 19,505 63.21% 10,050 47.97% 11,050 47.97% Huntington Beach,CA Irvine,CA 1990 Tend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 24e2 19M Trwd 2000 Tn.% 1010 Trend 1022 8w/NM1ly • % • % 1 % • % • % 1 % 1 % 8 % White,Non l0spanic 144,462 79.16% 137,053 71.79% 127,955 6700% 111,080 59.79% 92,174 73.1%6 85,970 57.41% 96,463 45.61% 108.636 35.67% Black Non Hispanic 1,602 0J/% 1,904 100% 2.377 1.24% 2,246 1.14% 3,261 2.59% 2,572 1.72% 4.513 2.13% 5.275 1.73% 91074n0 20,522 11.25% 27,944 14.64% 32.552 1705% 31.959 19.73% 9,681 7.69% 12,166 119% 20,394 9.64% 34237 11-24% Asian Cl pacific klander,Non-Hispanic 14,731 8.07% 20,716 10.19% 25,886 13.55% 25,116 12 72% 20,255 16.0496 46,267 30.90% 88,66E 41.92% 135,560 44.51% Native American,Non-Hispanic 096 049% 1,925 1.01% 1,669 0.87% 435 0.22% 316 0.25% 611 0.41% 755 0.36% 364 0.12% Natb4 Od81n Faolsn ban I 27,066 14.84% 32,413 16.99% 10,902 16.18% 32.142 16.28%1 26,296 20.88% 47,109 31.46% 67,880 32.09% 120,511 39.57% LOP Limited English proficiency 1 13,562 7.41% 11167 9.52% 15,869 1.31% 13,674 6.92%1 11,045 1.77% 21,331 14.25% 28.607 13.52% 45,787 15.04% Sea Male 91,951 50.40% 95,766 50.18% 94,732 4.60% 99,061 50.16% 62,967 50.00% 73,015 4.77% 103,025 48.71% 150,761 49.51% Female 9045 49.60% 93062 49.11% %,243 50.40% 911,420 4984% 62.970 50.00% 76,711 51.23% 10,489 51.29% 153,766 50.49% 411 Under 18 37,779 20.71% 43,524 22.8114 39,352 20.61% 35,292 1717% 30,331 24.08% 16,549 24.41% 45452 21.68% 66,314 21.78% 10-64 129,498 70.98% 117,217 66.70% 124,399 65.14% 125,355 63.48% 61654 70.40% 102,347 68.36% 146,741 69.38% 206,414 67.78% 65. 15,159 8.11% 20,017 1049% 27,224 14.26% 36,134 11.65% 6,952 5.52% 10,830 7.23% 18,921 895% 31,799 10.44% F4re1y Type Families with Children 20,213 43.80% 19,930 44.46% 20,031 41.45% 17,195 36.25% 17,135 55.14% 16,167 52.72% 25,571 49.80% 35,129 50.45% La Habra,CA Laguna Niguel,CA 1940 Trend 240Trend 2010 Trend 1022 1990 Tr•d 2000 Tmd 2010 Trend 2022 1%2/Ethicty I fi • % • % / % IF % • % * % • % Whi7e,Nan Wspanc 31.642 60.03% 24,473 41.16% 11.304 30.41% 15,549 24.72% 17,991 83.58% 49,243 77.33% 46.192 72.62% 41,226 64.16% Black Non Hispanic 421 0.80% 939 1.58% 994 165% 1,091 1.73% 517 1.14% 936 1.47% 966 1.62% 1,134 1.76% mspanu 17389 32.99% 21,404 47.91% 33,484 5562% 37,513 59.75% 3,422 7.53% 6,591 10.15% 1442 13.8812 10,146 16.10% Asian or pacific klander,Non Hispanic 2,958 561% 4,779 104% 6,939 11.53% 7,379 11.73% 3,364 7.40% 5,875 9 23% 7.203 11.31% 7.218 11.23% Native American,NonWspanic 201 0.31% 374 0.61% 325 054% 36 0.06% 93 0.20% 310 0.49% 331 0.52% B 0.01% Natio%Orb& F0reijn.born I 10,642 1056% 16,361 27.54% 17,218 28.60% 15,502 24.64%1 6,194 13.60% 11,286 17.67% 13,355 10.97% 14,964 2332% Lip Limited Erylloh proficiency 1 7,646 14.57% 12.523 21.06% 13,156 21.86% 10,777 17.13%1 2,169 4.76% 4,23E 6.64% 4,317 6.70% 5,290 1.24% So Male 26,231 49.75% 29.107 41.99% 29,642 49.24% 31661 50,36% 22.303 4194% 31,200 40.85% 30,893 48.50% 31.080 4637% Female 26,502 50.25% 30,305 51.01% 30,556 50.76% 11,221 49.64% 23,269 51.06% 32,665 51.15% 32,83 51.50% 33.179 51.63% 142 Under 10 13,347 25.31% 17,638 29.69% 16,001 26.58% 13,799 21.94% 10,922 23.97% 17,406 27.26% 14,421 22.65% 10,919 16.99% 1864 33,842 64.17% 35.311 5965% 37,507 62.31% 40,264 64.01% 31,371 61.1% 41,029 64.24% 41,100 64.5314 40,277 62.68% 65. 5,550 10.52% 6,456 10.17% 6,690 11.11% 1,641 14.05% 3,280 7.20% 5,429 150% 1.161 12.82% 10063 20.31% Fondly Type Famines with children 6,416 47.13% 6,143 54.74% 6,176 47.15% 6,074 40.01% 6.211 48.60% 7,957 51.94% 7,7% M.73% 6,011 33.79% Lake Forest,CA Mission Viejo,CA t910 Thai 0000141411 2010 Trend 2021 1990 Tn.% 0000 Trend 2031 Tw% 2022 Ileot/EtMdty I Y • % • % • % it • % ■ Y • % White,Non Hispanic 42,174 7147% 50,433 67.52% 43,702 5148% 41411 4.15% 67,49* 13.86% 69,953 75.14% 63,306 61.39% 51825 60.95% Black Non Hispanic 908 1.70% 1,596 2.14% 1,566 2.02% 1814 2.12% 759 0.94% 1,331 1.44% 1,638 1.77% 1072 1.15% Hispanic 5,491 10.28% 12,968 17.36% 19,165 24.77% 20,073 23.45% 6.484 6.11% 11,246 11.19% 16,281 17.59% 14341 19.67% Asian or pacific Islander.Non44spanic 4,560 1.54% 4665 1160% 11,232 14.01% 16,015 19.71% 5,328 6.62% 8,514 9.23% 10,599 11.45% 12,749 13.67% Native American,Npn Hispanic 178 031% 451 0.40% 411 0.62% 116 0.14% 198 0.25% 507 055% 475 0.51% 17 0.01% %%o%Oe18M faelbn ban 1 7,305 13.69% /4,986 20.06% 17,450 22.55% 24975 26.15961 10,817 13.44% 15,121 16.39% 1442/ 17.75% 20,661 21.16% LIP Limited English Pn01tde7,y 1 3,511 0.58% 7,915 10.5916 1219 10.62% 9,762 1141%1 4,189 5.21% 6,071 651% 4251 6.7S% 146 9.53% See Male 26,304 49.29% 11511 41.117% 31,359 49.511% 42,147 49.41% 19,992 49.69% 44,957 4.71% 45374 49.01% 46,397 4.76% Female 27,061 50.71% 34202 51.13% 39.011 50.42% 43,236 5032% 40,485 50.31% 47,194 51.27% 47,190 5099% 46,816 50.14% 10 000118 13,165 2594% 21,34 2837% 19,017 24.54% 17,484 10.43% 12,605 20.09% 26,102 2129% 21,379 23.09% 11.379 19.71% 11-64 35956 67.19% 47,998 64.24% 51,306 66.31% 54050 65.49% 51,807 64.17% 46,707 61.47% 51164 6305% 54,279 6872% 65. 3,643 6.63% 5,372 7.19% 7,047 9.11% 11,049 14.08% 6,065 7.54% 9,416 10.24% 12.12E 13.86% 20,575 21.076 family Type Families with Children 1 7,705 53.61% 10,230 56.61% 9,541 41.85% 9,452 41.00%1 11,973 51.71% 1149 51.7/% 10,886 44.01% 10,886 44.01% Note 1:All%npesea a share of the 1%21 popdation wlsMn the jurisdiction or region,except family type.which H out of total fanolles. Note 2 10 most populous plates of b4rth and languages at the ion4daron level may not be the same as the 10 most%%Ian at the%41ron level,and are thus labeled 44parstehr. Nam 3 Data Sources.U S.Census Bureau,2011 2022 Ammon Commun.,Suvey S tom(somates,12U)A0FH Tod,Table 7,%%Non AFF100006.Released July 10,2020 Nat 4:Refer to tM Data Documentation for details(www.Mdexher%e.info/msa,ice/464/alfMdata•dauneM2uas). Orange County 19 25-29 Regional AFH Table 2- Demographic Trends (continued) Newport Beach,CA Orange,CA 1990 Trend 2003 Trend 2010 Trend 2021 8980 Tmet6 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 2022 Raa/Hleddty 8 % 1 % I % I % I % 8 % I % 1 % Whi1e,Non-9118an0 64139 92.10% 69,097 17.72% 69,999 82.15% 64,715 76.0114 76,645 68.05% 71,441 54.70% 64,165 46.97% 56,896 41.01% Black Noo.701anic 221 0.32% 502 0.64% 811 095% 553 0.65% 1,401 1.24% 2,246 1.72% 2,476 181% 1,801 1.30% Hispanic 3,055 4.30% 4,032 5.12% 6,306 740% 8.912 10.47% 25,104 21.91% 42,112 32.30% 52.210 31.2296 54.176 39.05% Asian or Pacific Islander,Non Nis panic 2.003 2.97% 4,373 5.5S% 7,492 1.79% 6,902 8.10% 1201 7.21% 13,123 10.05% 16,630 12.1M 18,712 1349% Native American,Non-Hispanic 155 0.22% 362 0.46% 316 0.45% 42 0.05% 420 0.17% 140 0.64% 794 0.58% 301 0.22% Na01W Origin F9%gnborn 1 6,475 9.28% 9.306 1181% 11.250 13.20% 12,725 14.94%1 21,517 20.06% 33,024 25.29% 35,211 25.78% 19136 21.5816 LOP Limited Eiyllsh Proficiency 1 2,051 2 91% 2,861 3.64% 2,M0 3.33% 3,271 3.64%1 15,424 13.75% 22,701 17.39% 24,253 11.19% 17.388 11.53% Sea Male 34,616 49.59% 31,424 4939% 41.9115 49.27% 41,980 4930% 56,459 50.15% 64,984 49.77% 61722 50.31% 70,909 51.11% Ferrule 35,116 50.41% 39,943 50.71% 41,221 50.73% 43,179 50.70% 56,127 49.15% 65,579 50.23% 67,311 49.69% 61,819 41.89% 71[e Under 18 9,401 1347% 13,226 16.79% 14,721 17.21% 14,297 16.79% 27,171 24.13% 35,689 27.33% 31.811 23.29% 28,400 204M 18.64 49,703 71.21% 52,551 66.72% 54.357 63.79% 51,037 5993% 75,359 66.94% 81,857 62.70% 89168 65.72% 90,276 65.07% 654 10,691 1533% 12,990 164994 16,128 1893% 19,125 23.28% 10,055 1.93% 13,017 9.97% 14,931 10.9394 20,052 144594 Fan6y Type Families with Children 5,493 31.63% 6,037 36.00% 7121 37.15% 7,992 36.53% 12,153 46.10% 12,234 49.01% 14.299 45.65% 13121 41.10% Rancho Santa Margarita,CA San Clemente,CA 1930 Tend 2000 Trend 2010 Toad 2022 1990 TnM 2000 Trend 2010 Tend 2022 Race/1tMdty I % • % • % • % 0 % I % I % 8 % White,Non Hispanic 9,721 10.59% 35,728 74./2% 32,644 67.21% 21,334 5940% 35,093 8145% 40,021 78.55% 47,349 7601% 46,139 7113% Block Non Hispanic 147 1.22% 1,014 2.12% 1111 2.29% 119 172% 250 0.59% 442 0.87% 577 093% 1057 1.65% Hispanic 1,183 9.11% 6,019 12.60% 1,150 11.24% 9,734 2041% 5,435 12.92% 8.028 15.76% 10,511 1611% 10.964 17.07% Asian or Pacific inlander,Non Hispanic 932 7.73% 4,350 9.11% 5,521 1131% 5,101 12.16% 1,074 2.55% 1,802 3.54% 3,236 5.19% 3,098 482% Native American,Non-Wspank 43 0.36% 325 0.68% 270 0.56% 75 0.16% 140 0.33% 419 08M 481 0.79% 34 0.05% F4alle161 Origin Foreign born I 1,753 14.49% 6,404 13.40% 7,746 15.97% 9,905 20.76%1 5,069 12.11% 6,797 13.34% 7,605 12.21% 7,241 1117% LOP Limited En9114h Proficiency 1 653 5.40% 2,595 5.43% 2.723 5.61% 1,213 6.74%1 2,552 6.09% 3,666 7.20% 2,694 4.32% 2.753 4.29% Sri Male 6.055 5006% 23.5I7 49.21% 23,611 41.81% 23,675 49.63% 21,017 50.19% 26,076 51.18% 31,315 50.27% 32,907 51.21% Female 6,041 49.94% 24,241 50.79% 24,139 51.19% 24,027 50.37% 20,056 49.81% 24,871 48.12% 30,980 49.73% 31725 41.77% Under 18 3,118 25.71% 15,327 33.10% 13,719 21.21% 10,932 22.92% 9,037 21.51% 12,640 2481% 14,972 24.01% 14,013 21.12% 18.64 11,519 70.43% 29,814 62.36% 31,402 64.72% 31,793 66.65% 27,570 6584% 31,879 62.57% 39,094 62.76% 37,614 58.62% 65. 459 3.79% 2,161 4.53% 3.399 7.01% 4,977 10.43% 5,267 12.5191, 6,421 12.62% 1,221 1311% 12,535 19.52% Family Type l amities with children 1,619 54.54% 7,149 64.49% 7,256 56.76% 5,919 46.0916 4,973 43.73% 4,960 45.52% 7,482 45.56% 6,677 19.64% Santa Ana,CA Tustin,CA 1990 Trawl 2000 Trend 2010 Tend 2022 1990 Trawl 2000 Trend 2010 Trent 2022 Ran/31MI43ry 8 % • % * % 1 % • % 1 % 1 % • % White,Non Hispanic 69,328 23.66% 43,100 12.78% 31,171 9.63% 28,223 9.06% 31,210 64.04% 29,938 45.69% 26.745 36.01% 22.538 28.34% Black Non99spamc 6,295 2.15% 4,842 1.44% 3.680 1.143E 2,897 0.93% 2,541 4.91% 2,002 3.06% 1,810 2.53% 1,649 2.07% wsparor 190,056 64.15% I55,418 75.76% 252,363 77.93% 239.824 7703% 10,690 20.61% 22,112 3315% 28,180 31.111% 32,131 40.41% Asian or Pacific Islander,Non8itpanlc 26.160 1.93% 31,594 9.37% 35,275 1089% 36,906 1115% 5,106 9.15% 10,453 1595% 16.246 2187% 20,208 2541% Native American,Non-Hispanic 673 0.23% 1,331 0.40% 1195 0.21% 295 009% 197 0.31% 402 061% 314 042% 121 0.16% Netl1W Wed Forniln born 1 148,406 50.66% 178.953 53.01% 159.134 49.36% 154,143 49.50%! 11,253 21.67% 21,584 32.92% 24476 3295% 25,025 3147% LOP Limited E79045 Proficiency 1 125,797 42.94% 155,953 46.26% 147,740 45.62% 99,416 31.61%1 6,116 13.13% 13,973 21.31% 14.941 20.12% 13.919 17.59% Sea Male 155,693 53.14% 174.439 51.74% 165.285 51.04% 160,418 51.54% 26.411 50.17% 32.168 49.07% 36,272 4383% 39.440 41.60% Female 137,273 46.86% 1E1,703 44.26% 158,530 4196% 150,291 44.46% 25,508 49.13% 33,390 5093% 34.005 51.17% 40,074 50.40% AP Under 13 89,262 30.47% 118.211 35.09% 99,552 30.74% 75,074 24.11% 12,608 24.1/% 17,181 27.2994 19,346 26.05% 18,980 2317% 18.64 1117472 63.99% 200,121 5957% 202,204 62.44% 103.263 65.28% 35,519 6141% 43,004 65.60% 44,716 65.59% 50.239 61.11% 65. 16,231 5.54% 18,032 5.35% 22,060 681% 33,042 10.61% 3,792 7.30% 4,666 712% 6,214 I37% 10,295 12.95% Faintly Type Families with children 32,222 54.39% 35,644 64.61% 34,136 57.03% 1.112 45.61% 6,636 51.65% 2,045 5400% 9.221 5264% 9,221 52.64% Westminster,CA 1990 Trawl 2000 Vend 2010 Trend 2022 Rw/FeNrlly 8 % 0 % I % • % WI9te,640.41s490i1 45,552 57.77% 32,550 36.89% 23,627 26.31% 18,846 20.79% Black Non Hispanic 775 0.91% 915 1.12% 1047 1.17% 681 0.75% Hispanic 15,131 19.19% 19,678 22.30% 21,709 24.17% 21.887 24.15% Asian or Pacific Islander,Non Hispanic 16,918 21.45% 33,809 31.32% 42129 47.68E 46,117 50.88% Native American,Non-Hispanic 357 045% 756 0.16% 454 0.51% 114 0.13% Na0nnel Origin Foreign born I 22,711 21.16% 37,094 42004 39,806 44.32% 41,076 45.32% LOP Ul,t.E English Proficiency I 16,594 21.01% 26427 32.22% 30,447 33.90% 31,726 35.01% 51a Male 40,162 51.03% 44,216 50.11% 44,523 49.57% 45,034 49.69% Female 31,546 41.97% 44,019 49.19% 45,295 5043% 45,604 5031% 818 Under 11 19,745 25.09% 23,221 2700% 21,014 13.40% 19,219 21.20% 18164 51,871 6590% SA.970 62.30% 56,236 62.61% 55,722 61.48% 65. 7,093 9.01% 9,443 10.70% 12,561 13.99% 15,697 1732% Fan0y Type Families withllldren 1 9,049 46.90% 9,753 49.37% 9,079 44.54% 7,177 36.92% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population wlthln tie ludsdittlpn or re/1on,except holly type.which Is Out of total Families, Note 1:10 most populous daces of birth and longue/es at the lurhdictlon level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Repo.level,and Are thus labeled separately. Note 3.Data Sources U 5,Census Bureau,2018 1021 American Community Survey 5 Year 7.Urnatet,MID AFFH Tool,Table 2,Version AF1H70006.Released Judy 10,2020. Note 4:Ref et to the Data Documentation for details iwww.h,Mac6augwinlo/reaourca/48447anh.dala.docunen42Uon1. Orange County 20 25-29 Regional AFH The following paragraphs describe housing patterns, including tenure, cost burden, and the location of renters and owners. Tenure Table 3 - Housing Tenure, shows data on housing tenure for the region, Orange County, the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, and each HUD Entitlement City. These data are from the 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. This table indicates the following: In Orange County overall, the homeownership rate is 56.5%. This is higher than the homeownership for the region, which is 48.7%. Among the jurisdictions, • The following have a comparable homeownership rate (within five percentage points of the County's rate) o Aliso Viejo o Buena Park o Fullerton o Garden Grove o Huntington Beach o La Habra o Newport Beach o Orange o Westminster • The following jurisdictions have a homeownership rate that is lower than the homeownership rate for the County overall by at least five percentage points, indicating a higher percentage of households are renters: o Anaheim o Costa Mesa o Irvine o Santa Ana o Tustin • The following jurisdictions have a homeownership rate that is higher than the County overall by at least five percentage points: o The Urban County jurisdictions o Fountain Valley o Laguna Niguel o Lake Forest o Mission Viejo o Rancho Santa Margarita o San Clemente Orange County 21 25-29 Regional AFH Table 3-Housing Tenure Los Angeles-Long Beach- Urban County Anaheim,CA MSA Orange County,CA _ Jurisdictions Aliso Viejo,CA Tenure # % # % # % # °r6 All Occupied Units 4,429,379 1,066,286 210,864 19,300 Owner-Occupied 2,155,123 48.7% 602,959 56.5%r 147,382 69.9% 10,851 56.2% Renter-Occupied 2,274,256 51.3% 463,327 43.5%r 63,482 30.1% 8,449 43.8% Anaheim,CA Buena Park,CA Costa Mesa,CA Fountain Valley,CA Tenure # % # % # % # % All Occupied Units 104,671 24,283 _ 41,407 18,906 Owner-Occupied 48,806 46.6% 13,721 56.5% 16,427 39.7% 12,455 65.9% Renter-Occupied 55,865 53.4% 10,562 43.5% 24,980 60.3% 6,451 34.1% Fullerton,CA Garden Grove,CA Huntington Beach,CA Irvine,CA Tenure # % # % # % # % All Occupied Units 47,014 48,183 77,641 110,465 Owner-Occupied 24,259 51.6% 26,039 54.0% 43,236 55.7% 48,451 43.9% Renter-Occupied 22,755 48.4% 22,144 46.0% 34,405 44.3% 62,014 56.1% Laguna Niguel,CA La Habra,CA Lake Forest,CA Mission Viejo,CA Tenure # % # % # % # % All Occupied Units 25,239 20,188 _ 30,298 32,650 Owner-Occupied 16,669 66.0% 11,500 57.0% 21,300 70.3% 25,312 77.5% Renter-Occupied 8,570 34.0% 8,688 43.0% 8,998 29.7% 7,338 22.5% Rancho Santa Margarita, Newport Beach,CA Orange,CA CA San Clemente,CA Tenure # % # % # % # % All Occupied Units 38,636 44,336 16,798 23,646 Owner-Occupied 20,277 52.5% 26,103 58.9% 12,240 72.9% 15,338 64.9% Renter-Occupied 18,359 47.5% 18,233 41.1% 4,558 27.1% 8,308 35.1% Santa Ana,CA Tustin,CA Westminster,CA Tenure # i % # % # % All Occupied Units 77,553 26,508 27,700 Owner-Occupied 34,749 44.8% 13,318 50.2% 14,526 52.4% Renter-Occupied 42,804 55.2% 13,190 49.8% 13,174 47.6% Note 1:Data Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Orange County 22 25-29 Regional AFH Cost Burden Table 4 — Cost Burden shows data on housing cost burden for the region, Orange County, the Orange County Urban County, and each HUD Entitlement City. These data are from the 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Cost burden is defined as spending more than 30% of monthly gross income on housing-related costs. This table presents the following: In Orange County overall, over half (53.2%) of all renters are cost burdened. The rate is significantly lower for homeowners (30.3%). These rates are comparable to the experience of owners and renters across the region. Among the jurisdictions, • The following have a comparable rate of cost burdened renters (within five percentage points of the County's rate) o The Urban County jurisdictions o Aliso Viejo o Buena Park o Costa Mesa o Fullerton o Garden Grove o Huntington Beach o Irvine o Laguna Niguel o La Habra o Mission Viejo o Orange o Rancho Santa Margarita o Santa Ana o Westminster • The following jurisdictions have a renter cost-burden rate that is lower than the rate for the County overall by at least five percentage points: o Newport Beach o San Clemente • The following jurisdictions have a renter cost-burden rate that is higher than the rate for the County overall, by at least five percentage points, meaning a higher percentage of renters in these jurisdictions are cost burdened compared to the County overall: o Anaheim o Fountain Valley o Lake Forest o Tustin Orange County 23 25-29 Regional AFH Table 4-Cost Burden Los Angeles-Long Beach- Urban County Anaheim,CA MSA Orange County,CA Jurisdictions Aliso Viejo,CA Cost Burden # % # % # % # % All Occupied Units 1,954,525 44.1% 429,231 40.3% 79,513 37.7% 7,740 40.1% Owner-Occupied 722,015 33.5% 182,888 30.3% 45,935 31.2% 3,049 28.1% Renter-Occupied 1,232,510 54.2% 246,343 53.2% 33,578 52.9% 4,691 55.5% Anaheim,CA Buena Park,CA Costa Mesa,CA Fountain Valley,CA Cost Burden # % # % # % # % All Occupied Units 47,204 45.1% 9,383 38.6% 17,292 41.8% 7,432 39.3% Owner-Occupied 14,566 29.8% 3,703 27.0% 4,942 30.1% 3,369 27.0% Renter-Occupied 32,638 58.4% 5,680 53.8% 12,350 49.4% 4,063 63.0% Fullerton,CA Garden Grove,CA Huntington Beach,CA Irvine,CA Cost Burden # % # 1 % # % # % All Occupied Units 19,977 42.5% 20,778 43.1% 29,166 37.6% 45,440 41.1% Owner-Occupied 7,025 29.0% 8,395 32.2% 12,458 28.8% 14,595 30.1% Renter-Occupied 12,952 56.9% 12,383 55.9% 16,708 48.6% 30,845 49.7% Laguna Niguel,CA La Habra,CA Lake Forest,CA Mission Viejo,CA Cost Burden # % # % # % # % All Occupied Units 9,729 38.5% 8,359 41.4% 11,618r 38.3% 11,096 34.0% Owner-Occupied 5,086 30.5% 4,164 36.2% 6,204 29.1% 7,156 28.3% Renter-Occupied 4,643 54.2% 4,195 48.3% 5,414 60.2% 3,940 53.7% Rancho Santa Margarita, Newport Beach,CA Orange,CA CA San Clemente,CA Cost Burden # % # % # % # % All Occupied Units 15,470 40.0% 17,207 38.8% 5,495 32.7% 9,096 38.5% Owner-Occupied 6,780 33.4% 8,134 31.2% 3,106 25.4% 5,134 33.5% Renter-Occupied 8,690 47.3% 9,073 49.8% 2,389 52.4% 3,962 47.7% Santa Ana,CA Tustin,CA Westminster,CA Cost Burden # % # % # % All Occupied Units 33,523 43.2% 11,381 42.9% 12,332 44.5% Owner-Occupied 10,668 30.7% 3,706 27.8% 4,713 32.4% Renter-Occupied 22,855 53.4% 7,675 58.2% 7,619 57.8% Note 1:Data Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Orange County 24 25-29 Regional AFH Location of Renters and Owners Map 1 — Housing Tenure. is a series of maps showing the distribution of renter households in the region, and in northern, central, and southern Orange County. These maps were produced by California HCD to facilitate the fair housing planning process'. On the maps, the darker shaded areas have a higher proportion of renter households. These maps reflect the following: • In Orange County overall, renters are concentrated in the north, west, and central parts of the County. Moving east and south from the border with Los Angeles County, a higher percentage of housing units are owner-occupied. Within the participating jurisdictions, there are concentrations of renter-occupied and owner-occupied housing in the following areas: • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions there are relatively few areas with a high percentage of renter households,with the exceptions of Placentia,which has high concentrations of renter households in the southwest corner of the city and in parts of the city near CSU-Fullerton; and Los Alamitos, which has a high concentration of renters in the neighborhood north of Joint ForcesTraining Base Los Alamitos and west of Lexington Drive. Conversely, there are various parts of the Urban County jurisdictions with relatively high concentrations of owner households, includingYorba Linda and the unincorporated area to the east ofYorba Linda, North Tustin, Seal Beach (outside the Naval Weapons Station), Rossmoor, Villa Park, Orange Park Acres, and Northwest Brea. • In Aliso Viejo there is a relatively high percentage of renter households south of SR- 73 between Aliso Viejo Parkway and Woodfield Park, and a relatively high percentage of owner households along the southern and western edges of city, south of SR-73 and west of Pacific Park Drive and Wood Canyon Drive. • In Anaheim there are relatively high percentages of renter households in the Census Tracts north of SR-91 in Northeast Anaheim; between the Convention Center and I- 5, and around Angel Stadium, in the southeastern part of the city; and in the Census Tract south of 1-5 bounded by Lincoln Avenue and Brookhurst Street, in the northwestern part of the city. There is a relatively high percentage of owner households in Anaheim Hills. • In Buena Park there is a relatively high percentage of renters in the Census Tracts just north of 1-5. 6 The maps were downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer, which can be accessed at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing Orange County 25 25-29 Regional AFH • In Costa Mesa there are relatively high concentrations of renter households north of SR-55 in the downtown area, and west of Orange Coast College; and there is a relatively high percentage of owner households north of Adams Avenue. • In Fountain Valley there are relatively high percentages of owner households in the neighborhoods south of Talbert Avenue and west of Brookhurst Street, and in the neighborhood just to the west of Mile Square Regional Park. • In Fullerton there are relatively high percentages of renter households in and around CSU Fullerton and along Highland Ave between SR-91 and Orangethorpe Avenue (adjacent to the Fullerton Metrocenter shopping mall); and there are relatively high percentages of owner households in Census Tracts between CSU Fullerton and Brea Boulevard, and between Harbor Boulevard and the Robert E.Ward Nature Preserve. • In Garden Grove, there is a relatively high percentage of owner households in West Garden Grove, compared to the rest of the city. • In Huntington Beach there are high percentages of owner households in the eastern half of the city, as well as in the area surrounding the Huntington Club country club. • In Irvine there are relatively high percentages of renter households in the southwestern part of the city—specifically in the CensusTracts west of Harvard Ave, around San Remo Park, and north of UC Irvine in UniversityTown Center; and near the 1-5/1-405 interchange—specifically in the CensusTracts encompassing the Irvine Medical and Science Complex, the Irvine Spectrum Center, and East Irvine. • In La Habra there are a relatively high percentage of owner households in the neighborhoods south of SR-90 and west of Euclid St. • In Laguna Niguel there are relatively high percentages of owner households in the southeast corner of the city (bordering San Juan Capistrano and Dana Point), adjacent to the El Niguel County Club, and in the neighborhoods between Crown Valley Pkwy and Alicia Pkwy. • In Lake Forest there are relatively high percentages of owner households in the northeast of the city (to the north of SR-24) and in the southwest of the city (south ofTrabuco Rd and west of Ridge Route Dr). • In Mission Viejo there are relatively high percentages of owner households throughout the city,with some renters located in the southern part of the city. • In Newport Beach there is a relatively high percentage of owner households in the Newport Coast community, and a relatively high percentage of renters around the Newport Beach Country Club. • In the City of Orange there are relatively high percentages of renter households in the southwestern corner of the city, west of SR-57 and 1-5, and relatively high percentages of owner households in the eastern half of the city. • In Rancho Santa Margarita there is a relatively high percentage of owner households throughout the city,with some renters located in the neighborhoods just to the east of SR-241 between Antonio Pkwy and Santa Margarita Pkwy. Orange County 26 25-29 Regional AFH • In San Clemente there is a relatively high percentage of renter households in the neighborhoods south of Max Berg Plaza Park, and relatively high percentages of homeowners in a number of neighborhoods to the north and northwest. • In Santa Ana there are relatively high percentages of renter households in the downtown area and in the neighborhoods southeast of downtown. • In Tustin there are relatively high percentages of renter households in the neighborhoods adjacent to SR-55 south of 1-5, and relatively high percentages of owner households in the northeast part of the city. • In Westminster there are relatively high percentages of renters in the neighborhoods just north and south of Westminster Blvd between Hoover St. and Beach Blvd. Map 1 -Housing Tenure- Region i.144 : -.. • ` .., t44 '-- :--• "":�`" tam ,1.t .e s'7-1, a /' ' - r .• „..,......., ... l.t iA j' it ` t x., ,, 4 ,..._ �°./ ' ' '�' 'L ,� R ' '-of ` ._� B , II 10 fL _ e HE fr r.y 4i. t'i_ 'r. I �►"'r '1 I. , 124.2024.2 42 27 PM 1513.045 W!nia Orr,,nd Horsrn Ur41s IAC1,201/70211 IfniI-40„ _60, 5 +0 AI row L.—.40% IIM 0 5 .,is 20Iw. 803..804:. '201: 40'-. MO s rn. 100'. E ms.MEPE.ur.,a^.rw+WM..c•G-, L..a E�;J Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 27 25-29 Regional AFH Map 1 — Housing Tenure— North Orange County It ___ ,-r j� rt Fy ��g` �� av Yil iqqi 4 .(4L -- 1' ___,, rl. Li �J v., k .� .15,....)„,,, \,..- r A E 73 1'• Remo,E MmEI Haca k<� nw Units(AC.�.7017.]lYlt) Trad MI40ne BEY',. ( ti ..20% all00%.80`0 o E 101, 40'.,, _80% 100':., Ew•i ExtaE.t r rw as rn aw Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 28 25-29 Regional AFH Map 1 —Housing Tenure—Central Orange County I 5)I L w r�_ , fI � 7y�u u, i IQ ,. A., ,...., r, -,,,,, . , i.1-- X , s 4 1.1 " )4 cv7.17. 7q\INi.;>')\11 „,,, 'Mil' -I—Lig L Alloir frr *NM • 142,4024 1 54 11 P1l I f ill 3,17 14,0t,,On UPNfi 1 Winos;I1nIs INS,2017 2021) I'M"-40% 00% o t rs is 20°. 1111e0+c.e0x 0 276 55 111' El in, Atr:. lllll sox 101W; e.,.p.a.mn urns M.'.:...: ,K..Wet OMMIV Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 29 25-29 Regional AFH Map 1 —Housing Tenure—South Orange County \ e ;.tom j am Pa ei r #4LW L. 0. •Ria 12,211024,1001 OO AU 1 151,,541 Wallet Otupmd}lousing Undo(AC670112021) 11161 MI 40% so% a 17s 15 tml .20% 00% 00% o r+ + ism1 1 N1^: 40% M1%. 100% aw+•..a ce..,aawlu.•zrocwn in..(OS Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 30 25-29 Regional AFH The following analysis describes the demographics of residents of publicly supported housing. Table 5 — Publicly Supported Households by Race/Ethnicity, provides the demographics of residents of different types of publicly support housing programs, including Public Housing, Project-Based Section 8, Other Multifamily, and the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program. This table shows that, in Orange County: • The majority of publicly supported housing is provided through the HCV Program (over 20,000 households with HCVs countywide). Additionally, there are approximately 4,000 units in Project-based Section 8 properties and approximately 100 units in Other Multifamily properties.There are no Public Housing units in the County. • A significant portion of households with HCVs are headed by an AAPI individual (41.16%), followed by households headed by a White individual (25.32%), then Hispanic-headed households (21.12%), and then Black households (7.06%). • Project-based Section 8 units have a similar racial composition to the HCV Program overall; however, the percentages of households headed by AAPI and White individuals are higher (47.11% and 33.06% respectively), and households headed by Hispanic and Black individuals are lower (15.19% and 1.77% respectively). Within the participating jurisdictions, the racial/ethnic composition of publicly supported housing units varies: • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, the racial/ethnic composition of households in the HCV Program and in Project-based Section 8 units matches the County overall, with the one exception being that the number of AAPI and White households in Project-based Section 8 units are equal (each comprise 36.75% of those units). • In Aliso Viejo, the only publicly supported housing available is through the HCV Program.Two-thirds of households using HCVs in the city are White. • In Anaheim, there are Project-based Section 8 developments in addition to households using HCVs. In the Project-based Section 8 units, the majority of households are AAPI. In the HCV Program, Hispanic households make up the largest single group of voucher recipients, followed by AAPI and White households. • In Buena Park, the overwhelming majority of households in Project-based Section 8 units are AAPI. In the HCV Program, approximately one-third of households are Hispanic, 25% AAPI, 25%White, and nearly one-fifth of households are Black. • In Costa Mesa, the majority of households in both Project-based Section 8 housing and the HCV Program are White, and there are no Black households in Project-based Section 8 units. Orange County 31 25-29 Regional AFH • In Fountain Valley, the majority of households in both Project-based Section 8 housing and the HCV Program are AAPI, and there are no Black households in Project-based Section 8 units. • In Fullerton, nearly all of the households in Project-based Section 8 units are AAPI and the majority of households in Other Multifamily program units are White. In the HCV Program,White and Hispanic families each make up approximately one-third of households, and Black and AAPI families each make up approximately 14% of households. • In Garden Grove, a large majority of households in both Project-based Section 8 housing and the HCV Program are AAPI (over 80% in each program). • In Huntington Beach, over 50% of households in Project-based Section 8 units are AAPI and around one-third are White. In the HCV Program, over 40% of households are White and around one-third are AAPI. • In Irvine,White households are the majority in Project-based Section 8 and Other Multifamily program units and are the largest share of households in the HCV Program (46.76%). In the HCV Program, Black households are the second largest racial/ethnic group, comprising approximately one-fifth of households. • In La Habra, Hispanic households are the majority of HCV Program participants.The second largest racial/ethnic group is White households, who comprise 25% of households in the program. In Project-based Section 8 units, Hispanic,White, and AAPI each comprise approximately one-third of households. • In Laguna Niguel, the majority of households in both Project-based Section 8 housing and the HCV Program are White. • In Lake Forest, the majority of households in the HCV Program are White.There are no other types of publicly supported housing in the city. • In Mission Viejo, the majority of households in the HCV Program are White.There are no other types of publicly supported housing included in the HUD-provided data. (However, per the City's Housing Element and other local sources, there are various publicly supported housing developments in the city.) • In Newport Beach, the majority of households in both Project-based Section 8 housing and the HCV Program are White. • In Orange,White and Hispanic households each comprise a slightly more than 40% of households in Project-based Section 8 units, and approximately one-third of households in the HCV Program. AAPI households make up around 25% of households in the HCV Program. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, the majority of households in the HCV Program are White.There are no other types of publicly supported housing in the city. • In San Clemente, the majority of households in both Project-based Section 8 housing and the HCV Program are White. Orange County 32 25-29 Regional AFH • In Santa Ana, the majority of households in Project-based Section 8 units and in the HCV Program are AAPI.The second largest racial/ethnic group in each of these programs is Hispanic households. • In Tustin, the majority of households in Project-based Section 8 units are AAPI (over 70%) and approximately one-fifth are White. In the HCV Program, Hispanic households are the largest group (38%), followed by White households (33%). • In Westminster, AAPI households are the majority in both Project-based Section 8 units and in the HCV Program. Orange County 33 25-29 Regional AFH Table 5-Publicly Supported Households by Race/Ethnicity Race/Ethnicity - Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim,CA MSA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 653 6.67% 2,696 27.54% 6,055 61.84% 374 3.82% Project-Based Section 8 9,108 23.49% 6,733 17.37% 10,666 27.51% 12,058 31.10% Other Multifamily 1,706 32.43% 450 8.55% 1,173 22.30% 1,909 36.29% HCV Program 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Total Households 1,741,265 40.51% 332,330 7.73% 1,458,220 33.92% 666,628 15.51% 0-30%of AMI 242,025 29.00% 96,395 11.55% 355,100 42.55% 122,168 14.64% 0-50%of AMI 425,645 28.94% 149,340 10.16% 661,570 44.99% 203,018 13.81% 0-80%of AMI 682,980 30.49% 208,645 9.31% 990,690 44.22% 310,058 13.84% Orange County,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 1,362 r 33.06% 73 r 1.77% 626 r 15.19% 1,941 47.11% Other Multifamily 71r 68.27% 8r 7.69% 10r 9.62% 6 5.77% HCV Program 5,776r 25.32% 1,610r 7.06% 4,819w 21.12% 9,390 41.16% Total Households 537,517r 51.84% 16,903' 1.63% 241,657' 23.30%. 186,863 18.02% 0-30%of AMI 63,893w 40.68% 2,935r 1.87% 52,308r 33.30% 34,051 21.68% 0-50%of AMI 119,885• 41.29% 5,251r 1.81% 102,916r 35.45% 55,867 19.24% 0-80%of AMI 206,268r 43.82% 8,396r 1.78% 160,512r 34.10% 85,187 18.10% Orange County Urban County White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 154 36.75% 11 2.63% 96 22.91% 154 36.75% Other Multifamily 21 87.50% 0 0.00% 3 12.50% 0 0.00% HCV Program 729 31.81% 164 7.16% 420 18.35% 969 42.30% Total Households 123,567 64.87% 3,074 1.61% 30,302 15.91%. 29,493 15.48% 0-30%of AMI 14,141 57.02% 339 1.37% 5,608 22.61% 4,234 17.07% 0-50%of AMI 27,749 57.61% 644 1.34% 10,983 22.80% 7,883 16.36% 0-80%of AMI 46,897 59.09% 1,298 1.64% 17,045 21.48% 12,551 15.82% Aliso Viejo,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 109 66.09% 17 10.60% 23 13.90% 14 8.60% Total Households 12,570 67.58% 380 2.04% 2,120 11.40% 2,830 15.22% 0-30%of AMI 960 67.37% 85 5.96% 100 7.02% 205 14.39% 0-50%of AMI 1,675 66.07% 180 7.10% 195 7.69% 385 15.19% 0-80%of AMI - 3,540 65.98% 250 4.66% 555 10.34% 770 14.35% Anaheim,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 58 21.48% 14 5.19% 51 18.89% 146 54.07% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program - 1,273 26.52% 430 8.96% 1,788 37.25% 1,290 26.89% Total Households 36,390 36.39% 2,688 2.69% 41,509 41.51% 17,464 17.46% 0-30%of AMI 5,410 26.79% 670 3.32% 10,364 51.32% 3,345 16.56% 0-50%of AMI 10,610 27.99% 1,214 3.20% 19,969 52.68% 5,429 14.32% 0-80%of AMI 17,010 28.83% 1,723 2.92% 30,514 51.72% 8,554 14.50% • Buena Park,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 13 11.40% 1 0.88% 5 4.39% 95 83.33% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 174 24.25% 127 17.65% 232 32.25% 184 25.54% Total Households 7,540 32.34% 835 3.58% 7,705 33.05% 6,830 29.29% 0-30%of AMI 885 21.74% 250 6.14% 1,545 37.96% 1,300 31.94% 0-50%of AMI 1,820 22.28% 315 3.86% 3,590 43.94% 2,270 27.78% 0-80%of AMI 3,180 25.68% 515 4.16% 5,020 40.53% 3,440 27.78% Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census,APSH,and CHAS;accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 6,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Numbers presented are numbers of households not individuals. Note 3:Refer to the Data Documentation for details(www.hudexchange.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentation). Orange County 34 25-29 Regional AFH Table 5-Publicly Supported Households by Race/Ethnicity (continued) Costa Mesa,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 69 65.09% 0 0.00% 19 17.92% 18 16.98% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 376 57.17% 23 3.50% 107 16.24% 149 22.64% Total Households 25,230 61.75% 695 1.70% 10,105 24.73% 3,870 9.47% 0-30%of AMI 3,720 54.35% 105 1.53% 2,380 34.77% 480 7.01% 0-50%of AMI 6,395 51.45% 175 1.41% 4,680 37.65% 955 7.68% 0-80%of AMI 10,960 53.71% 285 1.40% 6,955 34.08% 1,800 8.82% Fountain Valley,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % it % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 10 14.29% 0 0.00% 1 1.43% 59 84.29% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 99 19.23% 6 1.21% 44 8.55% 363 70.42% Total Households 10,409 55.16% 175 0.93% 2,166 11.48% 5,794 30.70% 0-30%of AMI 1,305 49.25% 0 0.00% 227 8.57% 1,015 38.30% 0-50%of AMI 2,299 51.26% 25 0.56% 472 10.52% 1,539 34.31% 0-80%of AMI 4,214 52.51% 70 0.87% 1,036 12.91% 2,529 31.51% Fullerton,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 5 5.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.00% 94 94.00% Other Multifamily 38 79.17% 3 6.25% 5 10.42% 2 4.17% HCV Program 264 38.23% 96 13.99% 232 33.64% 95 13.71% Total Households 20,005 44.40% 1,448 3.21% 11,890 26.39% 10,615 23.56% 0-30%of AMI 3,305 37.49% 344 3.90% 2,835 32.16% 2,100 23.82% 0-50%of AMI 5,515 37.14% 434 2.92% 5,350 36.03% 3,205 21.58% 0-80%of AMI 9,305 38.61% 789 3.27% 8,375 34.75% 4,965 20.60% Garden Grove,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 34 13.28% 3 1.17% 4 1.56% 215 83.98% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 133 4.98% 35 1.30% 219 8.24% 2,270 85.23% Total Households 14,254 29.92% 592 1.24% 13,550 28.44% 18,417 38.66% 0-30%of AMI 2,160 20.26% 165 1.55% 3,100 29.08% 5,054 47.42% 0-50%of AMI 3,865 20.48% 204 1.08% 6,200 32.86% 8,244 43.69% 0-80%of AMI 7,080 23.55% 303 1.01% 10,125 33.68% 12,043 40.06% Huntington Beach,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 133 35.00% 4 1.05% 41 10.79% 200 52.63% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 461 42.58% 50 4.61% 166 15.36% 399 36.88% Total Households 53,650 71.15% 753 1.00% 10,855 14.40% 8,114 10.76% 0-30%of AMI 5,730 60.89% 115 1.22% 2,140 22.74% 1,220 12.96% 0-50%of AMI 11,035 62.66% 183 1.04% 3,905 22.17% 2,105 11.95% 0-80%of AMI 20,055 65.89% 323 1.06% 6,110 20.08% 3,205 10.53% Irvine,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type It % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 428 59.03% 24 3.31% 42 5.79% 231 31.86% Other Multifamily 12 52.17% 5 21.74% 2 8.70% 4 17.39% HCV Program 682 46.76% 282 19.34% 246 16.84% 243 16.67% Total Households 45,515 50.61% 1,800 2.00% 6,788 7.55% 33,230 36.95% 0-30%of AMI 6,055 45.27% 230 1.72% 1,145 8.56% 5,260 39.33% 0-50%of AMI 9,580 46.56% 510 2.48% 1,939 9.42% 7,670 37.28% 0-80%of AMI 16,010 49.11% 625 1.92% 2,959 9.08% 11,750 36.04% Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census,APSH,and CHAS;accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 6,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Numbers presented are numbers of households not individuals. Note 3:Refer to the Data Documentation for details(www.hudexchange.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentation). Orange County 35 25-29 Regional AFH Table 5- Publicly Supported Households by Race/Ethnicity (continued) La Habra,CA I White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type * % 4 % 8 % N % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 44 30.34% 1 0.69% 51 35.17% 49 33.79% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 46 24.39% 19 10.22% 110 58.51% 13 6.89% Total Households 7,363 38.84% 304 1.60% 8,870 46.80% 2,260 11.92% 0.30%ofAMI 1,213 35.16% 85 2.46% 1,760 51.01% 355 10.29% 0.50%of AMI 2,253 35.62% 120 1.90% 3,240 51.23% 625 9.88% 0-80%of AMI 3,803 36.31% 159 1.52% 5,555 53.03% 855 8.16% Laguna Niguel,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific islander Housing Type 8 % 8 % It % it % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 127 82.47% 4 2.60% 12 7.79% 11 7.14% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 77 74.80% 6 5.82% 12 11.63% 7 6.78% Total Households 18,280 73.56% 395 1.59% 3,210 12.92% 2,350 9.46% 0.30%ofAMI 1,785 72.12% 30 1.21% 310 12.53% 215 8.69% 0.50%of AMI 3,210 68.96% 65 1.40% 775 16.65% 400 8.59% 0-80%of AMI 6,165 69.62% 145 1.64% 1,605 18.13% 665 7.51% Lake forest,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type I % 8 % ft % 8 % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 191 60.78% 46 14.61% 46 14.51% 31 9.89% Total Households 18,234 66.17% 540 1.96% 4,370 15.86% 3,865 14.03% 0.30%of AMI 1,629 57.18% 65 2.28% 690 24.22% 365 12.81% 0.50%of AMI 3,364 59.18% 180 3.17% 1,460 25.69% 535 9.41% 0 80%of AMI 6,014 58.59% 225 2.19% 2,605 25.38% 1,185 11.55% Mission Viejo,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type N % • % * % N % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 175 69.74% 22 8.69% 34 13.57% 19 7.47% Total Households 25,265 74.89% 389 1.15% 4,099 12.15% 3,050 9.04% 0-30%of AMI 1,990 69.58% 19 0.66% 554 19.37% 185 6.47% 0.50%ofAMI 4,320 70.94% 129 2.12% 1,014 16.65% 480 7.88% 0.8096 of AMI 7,490 71.03% 189 1.79% 1,814 17.20% 800 7.59% Newport Beach,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific islander Housing Type I % if % ff % if % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% ProjectBased Section.8 88 88.00% 0 0.00% 4 4.00% 8 8.00% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 92 61.86% 25 16.75% 22 14.73% 10 6.66% Total Households 31,580 83.86% 184 0.49% 2,340 6.21% 2,718 7.22% 0.30%ofAMI 3,185 79.92% 15 0.38% 335 8.41% 360 9.03% 0-50%of AMI 6,030 81.05% 15 0.20% 600 8.06% 564 7.58% 0.80%of AMI 9,390 80.36% 69 0.59% 990 8.47% 874 7.48% Orange,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type I % a % a % a % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project.Based Section 8 80 43.96% 2 1.10% 77 42.31% 22 12.09% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 203 32.15% 60 9.48% 209 33.17% 154 24.42% Total Households 24,095 56.85% 530 1.25% 12,030 28.38% 4,979 11.75% 0 30%of AMI 2,960 48.93% 65 1.11% 1,945 33.28% 775 13.26% 0.50%of AMI 5,465 48.17% 225 1.98% 4,220 37.20% 1,165 10.27% 0-80%of AMI 9,790 49.51% 325 L65% 7,340 37.16% 1,910 9.67% Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census,APSH,and CHAS;accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 6,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Numbers presented are numbers of households not individuals. Note 3:Refer to the Data Documentation for details(www.hudexchange.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentation). Orange County 36 25-29 Regional AFH Table 5-Publicly Supported Households by Race/Ethnicity (continued) Rancho Santa Margarita,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 87 62.31% 21 14.87% 24 17.06% 6 4.50% Total Households 11,890 69.59% 285 1.67% 2,674 15.65%. 1,855 10.86% 0-30%of AMI 1,095 66.57% 0 0.00% 440 26.75% 60 3.65% 0-50%of AMI 1,855 61.22% 50 1.65% 805 26.57% 215 7.10% 0-80%of AMI 3,525 65.58% 65 1.21% 1,295 24.09% 355 6.60% San Clemente,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 52 73.24% 0 0.00% 9 12.68% 9 12.68% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 100 72.35% 5 3.82% 26 18.61% 6 4.62% Total Households 19,495 79.56% 130 0.53% 3,264 13.32% 965 3.94% 0-30%of AMI 1,820 67.16% 20 0.74% 605 22.32% 35 1.29% 0-50%of AMI 3,980 70.76% 20 0.36% 1,264 22.47% 65 1.16% 0-80%of AMI 6,420 72.62% 55 0.62% 1,809 20.46% 225 2.55% Santa Ana,CA White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 44 5.47% 9 1.12% 202 25.12%. 462 57.46% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 191 10.86% 69 3.89% 537 30.49% 958 54.41% Total Households 12,430 16.55% 899 1.20% 50,935 67.83% 9,959 13.26% 0-30%of AMI 1,570 8.63% 159 0.87% 13,565 74.59% 2,745 15.09% 0-50%of AMI 3,405 9.76% 299 0.86% 26,460 75.88% 4,400 12.62% 0-80%of AMI 6,150 11.63% 529 1.00% 39,210 74.16% 6,440 12.18% Tustin,CA I White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 20 19.42% 0 0.00% 10 9.71% 73 70.87% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 192 33.12% 86 14.95% 219 37.88% 79 13.70% Total Households 10,485 40.69% 604 2.34% 7,710 29.92% 6,084 23.61% 0-30%of AMI 1,480 39.31% 160 4.25% 1,465 38.91% 589 15.64% 0-50%of AMI 2,660 34.08% 240 3.07% 3,535 45.29% 1,134 14.53% 0-80%of AMI 4,595 34.93% 375 2.85% 5,965 45.34% 1,874 14.25% Westminster,CA 1 White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # % Public Housing 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Project-Based Section 8 3 3.03% 0 0.00% 1 1.01% 95 95.96% Other Multifamily 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% HCV Program 122 5.13% 21 0.87% 103 4.33% 2,131 89.46% Total Households 9,270 34.01% 203 0.74% 5,165 18.95% 12,121 44.47% 0-30%of AMI 1,595 22.62% 14 0.20% 1,195 16.95% 4,154 58.92% 0-50%of AMI 2,800 23.64% 24 0.20% 2,260 19.08% 6,599 55.71% 0-80%of AMI 4,685 27.38% 79 0.46% 3,630 21.22% 8,397 49.08% Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census,APSH,and CHAS;accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 6,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Numbers presented are numbers of households not individuals. Note 3:Refer to the Data Documentation for details(www.hudexchange.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentation) Orange County 37 25-29 Regional AFH B. Segregation/Concentration and Integration The following analysis describes segregation/concentration levels, identifies the racial/ethnic groups that experience the highest levels of segregation/concentration, and explains how these levels and patterns have changed over time. Table 6 - Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends, displays how segregated/concentrated or integrated various racial/ethnic groups are in the region,the Orange County Urban County, and the HUD Entitlement Cities using a Dissimilarity Index, which is calculated using data from the 2010 Decennial Census. The Dissimilarity Index measures the degree to which two groups are evenly distributed across a geographic area and is commonly used for assessing residential segregation/integration between two groups. Dissimilarity index values indicate the following: • Values between 0 and 39 generally indicate high integration (low segregation/concentration) • Values between 40 and 54 generally indicate moderate segregation/concentration • Values between 55 and 100 generally indicate a high level of segregation/concentration Please note two key shortcomings of these data: 1. The data only measure segregation between Black and White, Hispanic, and White, and AAPI and White residents. As a result, no conclusions can be drawn regarding segregation among Black, Hispanic, and AAPI residents. 2. The data measure segregation only within each jurisdiction and do provide insights into racial/ethnic segregation across jurisdictional boundaries. Table 6 shows that, in the region, there are high levels of segregation between Black and White residents and between Hispanic and White residents, and there is moderate segregation between AAPI and White residents. Since 1990, segregation between Black and White residents has declined, while segregation between Hispanic/White and AAPI/White has increased. In Orange County the following jurisdictions are highly integrated, indicating low levels of segregation/concentration among the groups analyzed: • The Urban County jurisdictions -While segregation levels are higher compared to 1990, they have trended downward since 2000 for Black/White and Hispanic/White residents. • Aliso Viejo - Since 1990, concentrations of Hispanic and AAPI residents have been increasing but remain low. Orange County 38 25-29 Regional AFH • Anaheim — Segregation levels between Black/White and AAPI/White have been increasing since 1990. Segregation level between Hispanic/White were high in 2000 but have since declined. • Buena Park— Segregation levels have increased since 1990 but remain low. • Fountain Valley — Since 1990, segregation levels between Hispanic/White and between AAPI/White have been increasing but remain low. • Fullerton — Segregation level between AAPI/White is increasing but remains low. • Garden Grove — Segregation levels have increased since 1990 but remain low. • Huntington Beach — Segregation level between Black/White increased between 2000-2010 but remains low. • Irvine — Segregation levels between the groups analyzed decreased between 2000- 2010. • La Habra — Since 1990, segregation between Black/White residents has increased, though remains low, and segregation between Hispanic/White and between AAPI/White has decreased. • Laguna Niguel — Between 1990-2010, concentrations of Black and Hispanic residents increased, though remain low. • Lake Forest—Between 1990-2010,segregation between Hispanic/White and between AAPI/White increased, though remains low. • Mission Viejo — Between 1990-2010, concentration of Hispanic residents increased, though remains low. • Newport Beach — Between 1990-2010, segregation between Hispanic/White and between AAPI/White increased, though remains low. • Orange — Between 1990-2010, segregation between AAPI/White increased, though remains low. • Rancho Santa Margarita — Concentration by race/ethnic group has increased since 1990 but remains low. • Westminster— Segregation levels have increased since 1990 but remain low. In Orange County the following jurisdictions have moderate levels of segregation between at least two of the racial groups analyzed (no jurisdictions in the County have high levels of segregation): • Costa Mesa —There is moderate segregation between Hispanic and White residents. Segregation levels declined slightly between 2000-2010 but remain moderate. • Santa Ana —There is moderate segregation between Hispanic and White residents, and between AAPI and White. Segregation levels between Hispanic/White residents declined slightly between 2000-2010 but remain moderate. Since 1990, segregation between AAPI/White residents has increased. • Tustin —There is moderate segregation between Hispanic and White residents. Segregation levels declined between 2000-2010 but remain moderate. Orange County 39 25-29 Regional AFH Table 6- Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends 1 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim,CA MSA I Orange County Urban County I Aliso Viejo,CA Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Non-White/White 55.32 55.50 54.64 30.48 36.54 35.55 1.79 6.49 8.90 Black/White 72.75 68.12 65.22 32.90 35.33 34.07 15.82 12.66 11.59 Hispanic/White 60.12 62.44 62.15 36.26 42.43 39.52 0.19 14.88 15.67 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 43.46 46.02 45.77 32.65 36.76 37.16 0.31 4.86 7.94 Anaheim,CA Buena Park,CA Costa Mesa,CA Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Non-White/White 29.33 31.57 31.56 18.17 22.07 21.40 29.84 36.88 34.33 Black/White 22.16 25.87 27.69 21.76 23.51 25.25 30.17 27.07 27.67 Hispanic/White 38.77 40.24 38.70 26.64 33.21 30.85 34.52 45.33 41.88 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 13.23 17.28 21.53 11.56 13.87 16.44 30.36 31.94 30.59 Fountain Valley,CA Fullerton,CA Garden Grove,CA Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Non-White/White 14.25 22.27 23.54 25.53 31.16 30.52 25.05 31.79 32.16 Black/White 27.24 27.57 26.28 30.60 31.84 26.53 22.19 23.11 23.45 Hispanic/White 21.64 28.33 29.59 33.72 39.98 38.28 27.67 32.64 33.20 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 13.85 22.12 23.58 30.41 33.48 35.24 27.45 34.97 33.98 Huntington Beach,CA Irvine,CA La Habra,CA Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Non-White/White 21.11 23.44 21.58 16.49 21.55 18.01 28.18 26.72 24.14 Black/White 21.45 19.99 24.20 42.99 27.84 19.37 12.56 13.25 19.36 Hispanic/White 28.10 33.37 30.09 21.98 22.79 17.88 33.93 30.96 28.59 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 22.86 20.11 18.25 18.18 22.57 18.73_ 40.48 38.69 36.53 Laguna Niguel,CA Lake Forest,CA Mission Viejo,CA Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Non-White/White 9.17 12.98 16.34 9.39 15.38 17.28 13.67 15.17 15.75 Black/White 13.82 22.75 16.24 12.43 12.16 9.52 18.03 20.63 16.83 Hispanic/White 13.34 20.76 22.79 15.72 26.10 27.63 12.26 18.75 20.96 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 13.37 12.68 13.82 8.84 11.06 13.46_ 20.00 16.83 13.98 Newport Beach,CA Orange,CA Rancho Santa Margarita,CA Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Non-White/White 13.20 15.04 17.04 23.75 24.25 22.59 5.43 12.26 14.07 Black/White 21.92 19.85 15.96 24.17 24.63 24.89 7.18 12.64 13.35 Hispanic/White 14.33 18.29 18.21 30.31 29.99 26.95 5.73 19.52 23.13 Asian or Pacific Islander/White _ 22.99 23.74 25.92 19.44 22.28 22.53 6.70 8.56 9.55 San Clemente,CA Santa Ana,CA Tustin,CA Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Non-White/White 21.89 25.93 16.76 47.77 49.28 46.49 26.33 36.73 32.93 Black/White 13.86 19.08 14.93 36.53 27.91 25.15 42.49 35.11 29.02 Hispanic/White 27.16 32.90 23.71 53.09 53.61 50.00 31.13 48.20 42.54 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 14.66 14.76 16.56 43.10 46.77 46.87. 19.20 17.74 19.76 Westminster,CA Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index - 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Non-White/White 24.58 28.05 31.59 Black/White 11.56 14.18 17.62 Hispanic/White 30.31 29.74 31.83 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 23.15 29.73 34.65 Note 1:Data Source:Decennial Census,accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 3,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Refer to the Data Documentation for details(www.hudexchanae.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentationl, Orange County 40 25-29 Regional AFH The following analysis identifies areas with relatively high segregation/concentration and integration and indicates the predominant groups living in each area. Race/Ethnicity Map 2 — Racial/Ethnic Concentration, is a series of maps showing racial/ethnic concentrations in the region, and in northern, central, and southern Orange County. These maps are published by California HCD using methodology from the Othering & Belonging Institute, which combines various measures of segregation and integration (including a dissimilarity index), and uses data from 2020. On these maps, dark red indicates areas where people of color (POC) experience high levels of segregation/concentration; green indicates areas where White residents experience high levels of segregation/concentration; yellow indicates areas that are racially/ethnically integrated. Map 3 — Predominant Population by Race/Ethnicity, is a series of maps showing the predominant racial/ethnic group by Census Tract in the region, and in northern, central, and southern Orange County. The colors indicate different racial/ethnic groups, and the relative strength of the shading indicates the extent to which one group is dominant over the next most populous group (with darker shading indicating a higher concentration of that racial/ethnic group). These maps were created by California HCD using 2017-2021 ACS data, to facilitate fair housing planning.? Collectively, the maps illustrate that in Orange County overall, there are areas of high POC segregation/concentration in the central and northern parts of the County (including the cities of Santa Ana, Westminster, Garden Grove, Anaheim, and Fullerton), and there are areas of high White segregation/concentration along the entire coast(including Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Dana Paint, Capistrano Beach, and San Clemente) and in the southern part of the County (including Mission Viejo, Aliso Viejo, Laguna Niguel, and Rancho Santa Margarita). Within each participating jurisdiction, there are areas of high segregation/integration in the following locations: • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, o There are areas of high White segregation in Dana Point, Laguna Beach, Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, the unincorporated areas east of Rancho Santa Margarita, North Tustin, Seal Beach,Yorba Linda, northern Placentia, Villa Park, and Orange Park Acres. o There are areas of high POC segregation in Stanton (which are predominantly Hispanic or AAPI), Cypress (which are predominantly AAPI), northern Yorba The maps were downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer, which can be accessed at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing Orange County 41 25-29 Regional AFH Linda (which are predominantly AAPI), La Palma (which are predominantly AAPI), and San Juan Capistrano (which is predominantly Hispanic). a There are areas of integration including the Atwood neighborhood in Placentia, which is predominantly Hispanic; Brea just northwest of the SR- 90/SR-57 interchange, which is a predominantly Hispanic area; and in Los Alamitos, in the neighborhood north of Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos and west of Lexington Drive,which is predominantly Hispanic. • In Aliso Viejo, most of the city is considered an area of high White concentration, with the exception of a few neighborhoods with low-medium concentration (which are predominantly White) in the northern and eastern parts of the city. • In Anaheim,the map shows integrated areas in Southeast Anaheim (where Hispanic residents are the predominant group), in western Anaheim west of Brookhurst Street (where Hispanic residents are the predominant group in many neighborhoods, and AAPI residents are the predominant group in a few others), and in the neighborhoods between Modjeska Park and Palm Lane Park in the Hermosa Village community (where Hispanic residents are the predominant group).The map shows another integrated area in Northeast Anaheim, to the north of SR-91. However, this is primarily an industrial/commercial area.The city also has neighborhoods of high POC segregation, including the neighborhoods north of downtown and along SR- 91, and neighborhoods south of downtown and adjacent to Disneyland.These areas are predominantly Hispanic. The Anaheim Hills area demonstrates a high White segregation. • In Buena Park, most of the city is considered an area of low-medium segregation with the exception of the following areas: the northeast corner of the city is considered an area of high POC segregation and is predominantly AAPI; the neighborhood between 1-5, Artesia Boulevard, Beach Boulevard, and the Los Angeles County border is also considered an area of high POC segregation, and is predominantly Hispanic; and the neighborhoods south of Boisseranc Park between Dale Street and the nurseries, is considered a racially integrated area. • In Costa Mesa, the neighborhoods between downtown and the Costa Mesa Country Club are areas of high POC segregation,with a predominantly Hispanic population. The neighborhoods in East Side Costa Mesa (east of SR-55 and south of Mesa Drive) are all areas of high White segregation, as are the neighborhoods north of the Country Club and the neighborhoods between Estancia High School and Canyon Park. • In Fountain Valley, the majority of Census Tracts are considered areas of high POC segregation, and many have a predominantly AAPI population (particularly north of Warner Avenue). The neighborhoods surrounding the intersection of Magnolia Street and Ellis Avenue in the city's southwest, and between Brookhurst Street and Ward Street south of 1-405, are considered areas of high White segregation. Orange County 42 25-29 Regional AFH • In Fullerton,there are various neighborhoods that are considered racially integrated, including in the area around CSU Fullerton and extending west to Fullerton College, and in the southwest area of the city.There are also areas considered to have high POC segregation, including most of the neighborhoods west of Harbor Boulevard and north of Malvern Avenue,which are predominantly AAPI areas. • In Garden Grove, the majority of the city is considered an area of high POC segregation except for West Garden Grove. In West Garden Grove, the residential neighborhoods west of Knott Street are considered areas of high White segregation. East of Knott Street is primarily industrial and commercial land uses. In the high POC segregation areas, AAPI residents are the predominant group west of 9th Street and Hispanic residents are the predominant group east of there. • In Huntington Beach, most of the city's neighborhoods are predominantly White, with the exception of one CensusTract in the center of the city that is predominantly Hispanic. • In Irvine, there are a number of Census Tracts considered to be areas of high POC segregation, some of which are predominantly AAPI and others are predominantly White.These areas include the neighborhoods between 1-405 and UC Irvine, the Westpark community north of 1-405,the neighborhoods between Como Channel and 1-5, and the Northwood community north of I-5.There are also areas of high White segregation in Irvine, including the neighborhood bounded byTurtle Rock Drive the area surrounding the Strawberry Farms Golf Club,the Woodbridge community north of 1-405, and the neighborhood west of the Oak Creek Golf Club. Please note that data was unavailable for many parts of the city, as indicated by the grey shading. • In La Habra, there are various neighborhoods considered to have high POC segregation, including neighborhoods in the center of the city north of Guadalupe Park and between Idaho Street to the west and Sonora High School to the east.These neighborhoods are predominantly Hispanic.The city also has two racially integrated areas, one that extends across its border to the west (between SR-90 and the railroad tracks) and another that extends across its border to the south (south of SR-90 and east of Euclid St). • In Laguna Niguel, most of the city is considered an area of high White concentration, with the exception of a few neighborhoods with low-medium concentration (which are predominantly White) in the northeastern and eastern parts of the city. • In Lake Forest, most of the city's neighborhoods have a predominantly White population. There are predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods in the southeast corner of the city, along El Toro Road, and the northwest corner of the city is predominantly AAPI. • In Mission Viejo, most of the city is considered an area of high White concentration, with the exception of a few neighborhoods with low-medium concentration in the southern, northern, and western parts of the city. Orange County 43 25-29 Regional AFH • In Newport Beach, the entire city is classified as an area of high White segregation. • In Orange, most of the city to the north and east of Villa Park is considered an area of high White segregation, and most of the city to the south and west of Villa Park is considered an area of low-medium POC segregation. In the low-medium segregation areas, the neighborhoods are predominantly Hispanic west of Glassel Street with a high concentration of Hispanic residents in the neighborhoods north of Walnut Avenue. The neighborhoods between Glassel Street and SR-55 are predominantly White, and the neighborhoods east of SR-55 and south of Villa Park are predominantly Hispanic. There is one area in the city that is considered integrated.This area lies to the south of Villa Park and runs south along Santiago Creek and east along the northside of Chapman Avenue toward El Modena. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, most of the city is considered an area of high White concentration, with the exception of a few neighborhoods with low-medium concentration (which are predominantly White) in the neighborhoods east of SR-241 between Antonio Parkway and Santa Margarita Parkway. • In San Clemente, the majority of the city is considered an area of high White concentration,with the exception of one CensusTract encompassing neighborhoods north and east of Max Berg Plaza Park, which is classified as low-medium concentration with a predominantly White population. • In Santa Ana, the majority of the city is considered an area of high POC segregation and has a predominantly Hispanic population except for the Riverview West community which is predominantly AAPI.There are some areas of low-medium POC segregation in the city, including the neighborhoods north of 1-5, Floral Park,West Floral Park, Fisher Park, Morrison/Eldridge Park, Riverglen, Casa de Santiago, and neighborhoods south of Warner Avenue.There is one integrated area in the southern part of the city between Segerstrom High School and the Bristol Place Shopping Mall,where White residents are the predominant group. • In Tustin, there are racially integrated neighborhoods just to the north of I-5.These are surrounded by neighborhoods of low-medium segregation that are a mix of predominantly White, Hispanic, and AAPI. • In Westminster, the majority of the city is considered an area of high POC segregation and has a predominantly AAPI population with a few exceptions.The northwestern corner of the city, between 1-405 and Boise Chica Road is an area of high White segregation. Across 1-405 from those neighborhoods is an integrated area with a predominantly Hispanic population (west of Edwards Avenue).This area includes mobile home parks near the intersections of SR-22 and 1-405. Orange County 44 25-29 Regional AFH Map 2—Racial/Ethnic Concentration —Region ,q •. pi 7.404, }}2L�j f�. Mt_',; 1IlA,Ait 01I88 • 1 M r .' Alsol y 1 Ares ,- NA !� • ', to d \ +� ' ` q F, wb q t per u l,a.� A374t.K EI 1.444 Ott:; . 1 -w 12 '1O.4.30548PM 1Su:•'a, HxtW:uh7:geM1mhlkiryrllnn l(>F11.702111 Berlc• tr, p... t I,,[Into ApPIlcnWa to 2021 Conv Tr act act Bounder),lull'Mqh 0 S 1.in Ye 1w WV $9111111 nhon I;.:.,.i:ly In,,Ilal,1 ININ 1.4,WnAn.....«ytLm Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 45 25-29 Regional AFH Map 2-Racial/Ethnic Concentration -North Orange County Ira ,. �.. ,., . . r= lei j ro 4111. R5 W{u ' lir rik I likr4 - 441ij Y 16 1,01,404.164 . t .:. r �.� A. . \,rr f Of Jr./' . 122)2024.10 49 1A1.A'.I 1 119.200 Harm;tiapatatntitnioy..I:an(WI.iU2) hat _t ow Ahnfuan,,a1YagMMn, 11 )5 10. 1-7 no DM APPIKaN*to 2021 fwnsln Tract B0ulMnry a 3 6 I:.m �H¢+Piti;Sxyl�fEun i _i Nati N ha a{9nNnt MN HA,WWI,..s41..1,tainx+ ,,,v*r,..v.r M'a'"'''r..nar.�,-.i �..as,.y.....,cr,ate....ion,a;a may.+bay.✓u.a Y,+.y.un.ev,nlMf. Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 46 25-29 Regional AFH Map 2—Racial/Ethnic Concentration —Central Orange County v _ po _ :,, t' • d lir . .t:' ",f1..-is______ li ..,,, ,,,,, '..t. ; - - , t--L__r_4.t.L,m,p,N,H' - I ' ' ii .,... . lic,alt , IVI, ..`. 5111k 'Q ...,, Q. ,,,,..., .4., . : ' _ • _ I fir , . ... , / �.f�� .: r / 12,24024,12+1 57 PM WinN tigyngnrnniim mothon'OBI,70201 Traci o 1 t, 1 ,i. _--.311 Dn tin la Aah:aWe to 2071(*Ism No Bol:rr.,,� T, ve __1 1: P.wily Mn+0lalnd Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 47 25-29 Regional AFH Map 2- Racial/Ethnic Concentration -South Orange County tt� " C 1 19t UI! fLx iat%ow.)t ot„tnktonst m KAJI!UN)) Itact I:,w R1eK41.m`0owe,. _1 I In porn Aoola.Ytlx to 2021 roost's Tract Bo*Awwy { 1.m Has,GI M;Se9tNtN'OCM, _...j ILK'alty ImrptalM -14gh Moto knt101):ll;n, r..k a i,~rw.w..wee..a t+ro•warmret MU!.Oan?.U9n'.EN.'as h-.IIUt. Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 48 25-29 Regional AFH Map 3—Predominant Population by Race/Ethnicity— Region 6:a.;R OM, 0N33110.3:53 yl411, tau 003l tr>crm IGaL0?irepti e4:.:wM, d1T.,10-a a�d38a> ' a0�'' sm.may,,,.. a � ar pia,;IX:, 11-as30x kz30411143333 agora'I*, elliihia.) ry.'Lua &x"y 12:2,21>4:5il 34 PM 1 5 i 3.045 Predomn rO Pop.Ma0on(ACS.2017.2y111.Traci EMIAmeti,+m 1r4lnn and IMOW alone col Hsg00t or Immo +0 70333, -N130o.00o Iwi lMprr or l rtm MI I on>or nowo on on.riot INap nst or I alwM> 4 5 t0 M kr.. WII tfispwwc or Lartro 11-13 tu,iN'010.Aam.,4 1,..n%n.N.,•ar4awn.rvr RENA IV AOwuan AM I<au IAwo,I00 tptlw%011,Ywro tow M IK CUTS.VW .05 11111 Avan 0kw..net Hr.Innx or Latin, I3.91 0/ 100 Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 49 25-29 Regional AFH Map 3-Predominant Population by Race/Ethnicity- North Orange County .17------7 ,I____,,,g7a,C4:(.. 1 n^-ra ra \ maw \- x Fes; o...., , _J— V NN ,,,,t, ..., 1-----. mac>3 +ci -w-aza PC, . tl k t it OW Iliewlas aces+/ --1 `s, ... (//' 4,4, 12.L2024.10 14 31 AM 1.179.20t VreOomnant 1'olndalron)ACS.2017 2021) Tract -Amman Indian and Kiska 1 wnve 81000,nol 11npane a l abno 0 1 75 7 0 r�.� 1 -, --- —WIte alone.not Kspanc at Lamm 0.13 a ? 1/1m MN 7I pane 01 l Moto %Kit or Alncan Arneb all alone.not KapeniC 01 tatno re aS.rr -...ra;.a,a 1W* COI"a:w 17 97 euw 0 Ora MNowroo+., .sw_. -Asraim.,n a nob Kspann-o,t alInn 47.100 Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 50 25-29 Regional AFH Map 3- Predominant Population by Race/Ethnicity- Central Orange County T y;rasa 11..., 1 a- l�I"T.,I t 411, fit. .. .rd-'—t, -'", fl000 be. , '4 ve i...� Y. tt lodAa R�� sa u..wt.�, n-rc •�t � i.Yi O 12.2.2024.12 24 36 PM 1.179.20E Predominant PocM ation(ACS.2017 2021) tract IIIIIAgnomen kakan and Alaska llaEvo alone.not Havana.a Latina ; I it, 15 /xn as Mate HPona,not!Isr. w orLalmo 0.19 0 ] 5 ~ 1/Om MN Pticrylnlc Of I.atmn Wt Aronet,a, 0 lt.n. �M .97 Ow.olio!rNovo.em.. ,.OK NO De,tent BIOt.k a Ahem n(do ne, W,root HISnx OF13 LOW° ,a,„.,t�iwSeM.W teso+wso ono in a; -Aoian Hbno,not hk n7.Inn "'^"". 50anx a I.elnxl Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 51 25-29 Regional AFH Map 3-Predominant Population by Race/Ethnicity-South Orange County 111lYirlr, '„ nm 1,smu In,.air Aia e i I P.Z •• elC I 1 = 4 YJG.L.IFY P.1PYt.v Ya Su.t.� it 112£K2024.2 44 54 PM I!8u it, f rodomv,.,4 10744a1,n IAC.S,201/2021) Inn , n 'n , 1,4 1 ti �y -While alone,nol Flown(or Latino 0 l 121.m -11r:11.1nf or .'dmo (I.S !I/ -Asian alone not!t wine or L0W10 1/ 11M1 art. is t 12P. Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer The following analysis compares the locations of publicly supported housing with the areas of concentration. Map 4 - Publicly Supported Housing, is a series of maps showing the location of federal- and state-subsidized housing in the region, and in northern, central, and southern Orange County. These maps were created by California HCD to facilitate fair housing planning, using data from California Housing Partnership8. On the maps, the size of each dot correlates to the number of publicly-supported housing units in an area—larger dots indicate higher numbers of units. The shading of the Census Tracts indicates the percentage of renter occupied housing units in that Tract that are supported by a HCV, including both tenant-based and project-based vouchers. The darker shading indicates higher percentages of vouchers. The locations of publicly supported housing on these maps align with the areas of segregation and integration on Map 2 (Racial/Ethnic Segregation/Integration), in the following places: 8 The maps were downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer, which can be accessed at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing Orange County 52 25-29 Regional AFH • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, o There is overlap between the location of publicly supported housing, including a high rate of voucher use, and areas of high POC segregation in the following places: • Cypress— in the neighborhood around King Elementary School, in the north of the city. • Placentia — in the southwest corner of the city • Stanton —throughout the city • San Juan Capistrano — in the Census Tract that encompasses the interchange between 1-5 and the Ortega Highway (SR-74) o There is overlap between areas without any publicly supported housing and either low HCV use or no data on HCV use, and areas of high White segregation, the following places: • Rossmoor, Seal Beach, North Tustin, Villa Park, Orange Park Acres, North Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, and Dana Point • In Aliso Viejo,there are publicly supported units and higher percentages of units with vouchers in the south of city,which is an area of high White concentration. • In Anaheim, there are multiple publicly supported housing developments downtown and north of downtown,which are high POC segregation areas.The map also shows a concentration of vouchers in the high POC segregation area between Santa Ana River and Orangethorpe Avenue, east of Anaheim Canyon Metrolink station and west of Imperial Highway (SR-90). However, this is largely a commercial/industrial area with few housing units. In the western part of the city, around Western High School, there is also a cluster of publicly supported housing developments in a racially integrated area. • In Buena Park, most publicly supported housing units are located in between 1-5 and the Artesia Freeway (SR-91), which is a low-medium segregation area like most of the city. • In Costa Mesa, the largest number of publicly supported housing units and the highest concentration of vouchers is in high POC segregation area located downtown and west of downtown. • In Fountain Valley, the location of publicly supported housing units and highest concentrations of vouchers mirrors the high POC segregation areas. • In Fullerton, publicly supported housing units are mostly clustered in the center of the city,which is a low-medium segregation area. • In Garden Grove, there are lots of publicly supported housing units in the center of city along Garden Grove Boulevard, which is a high POC segregation area. There are no publicly supported housing units in West Garden Grove,which is an area of high White segregation. Orange County 53 25-29 Regional AFH • In Huntington Beach, the map shows publicly supported housing units located in the center of the city. Local data identify affordable housing projects distributed broadly across the city. • In Irvine, the high POC segregation areas north of 1-405 overlap with the location of publicly supported housing units. In other parts of the city where there is high voucher use and multiple publicly supported housing developments, there is no segregation data available. • In La Habra, publicly supported housing units are located in the city's center and north neighborhoods,which are all low-medium or high POC segregation areas. • In Laguna Niguel, the map shows one public supported housing development (near the intersection of Pacific Park Drive and La Paz Road) and a small concentration of voucher use in northwest part of city, which is a low-medium concentration area.City staff report that another development in the western part of the City also receives vouchers. • In Lake Forest, there are publicly supported housing units in the northwest, near the intersection of SR-241 and Alton Parkway.There are a smaller number of units in the south of the city, along ElToro Road. • In Mission Viejo, the map shows two publicly supported housing developments in the southern part of the city. One of these developments, in the southeast, aligns with a low-medium concentration area. City staff report that there are additional publicly supported housing developments that are not reflected in the HUD-provided data. • In Newport Beach, there are two publicly supported housing developments (one east and one west of Newport Center), both of which are in high White segregation areas. • In Orange, all publicly supported housing units and households with vouchers are located to the west and south of Villa Park (which are low-medium segregation areas).There are no units or vouchers in use to the east of Villa Park, where it is a high White segregation area.The largest publicly supported housing development (biggest blue dot) is in the integrated area to the south of Villa Park, running south along Santiago Creek and east along the northside of Chapman Avenue towards El Modena. • In Rancho Santa Margarita,there are no publicly supported housing units.There are some vouchers in use in the northeast part of the city that is a low-medium concentration area • In San Clemente, there is a cluster of publicly supported housing units in the low- medium concentration area north and east of Max Berg Plaza Park. • In Santa Ana, a significant number of publicly supported housing units are located downtown and southeast of downtown, both of which are high POC segregation areas. There is a higher concentration of vouchers, as well as some publicly Orange County 54 25-29 Regional AFH supported housing units, west of the Santa Ana River, which is also a high POC segregation area. • In Tustin, there is a large concentration of publicly supported housing units in the south. Segregation data for this area are unavailable; however, according to Map 3 (Predominant Population by Race/Ethnicity) the population is predominantly AAPI. • In Westminster, the location of publicly supported housing units and areas with highest concentration of vouchers aligns with the high POC segregation areas in the central part of the city.There are no publicly supported housing units, and fewer vouchers in use, in the western parts of the city that are high White segregation, racially integrated, and low-medium segregation areas. Map 4- Publicly Supported Housing -Region "-' ..:0 .1. rrv- -- '''40, 4 6 i.16.i" l''u,..t 4.106 '611'.4,-$41 mu I 41'2, a.....srAdia----= ----ce f: '—'1' '''' Iff'IS TX, ' ' 1 ' •. ', ' i.26101.•l F { "°ecs �y i r ' �' _1 �.. I 1. Ih9M : 7 . .iti ;r_. ~ '_fir,_- "►. . Mt... ' ;.; 5 .--- .• ' --I ••• 11 • V. ' \ iliMmg .I drh .,, 19.s,,_j /, .,, ......_ N, r lF A :\Oule. JI `�_ ' ? I t 2'3 202E,12 tit,27 PM 1 820,946 i<su.dwro.c.s+c s.a..x.s.cu.n r+�_swc-mro::.,:r..acN_0 x._.., r sc.MN....._3.•. 5 16 'Om • tkmld,m �wc NU _J:•..LGK C 5 to Nkm • w-•x:r,e 1110,,,,CX,It.o=I O•. MI a.w,-r a: tn met as'n.i o oanxwu+w z.r,.^n.st,:x.o.w • -a.20 u:,n �t•.- .w. :c.,,-,, .,,..s--.E.A.rm. Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 55 25-29 Regional AFH Map 4- Publicly Supported Housing —Region (HCV Only) r. Allr'74-41ll'i1 1/rf.'1,0jl410- til �i1iMj �K �,7�r 1 . rTiT�.: .a.a,� .ter ,www�w.lair ra z aril, �'. • �i�{ jl"R*; I�i:.! ig+r i q rs•r�4p••rs ::lsli i y�! 1Tr171 gyp 1p� 'T raw 1 `4r .rr1,' lrf :O _ s ue. . -.t�rilll1' 641 2a11 P`^-�J mil}t �� ./� mil,4fit 1,i 1� bp:i. �s`�r '1 •ter ._-. •r,-- el,,.:: +�.�.:�:€I �r C--iih.r"Rj ` • H Zr'■T r Y ►4y 4"ria�e,►i ce �u iri..4.0. ..-ii-, „:..d1,-,-,._. .7;.,7440", KS Or 'pie uu. AWE a✓7•� ��{t>~,.,,yam ��^'r ii 4 01r. N /14%,....04,....1„. i.1 1'!�ibg.J 2132025,12 11 21 PM 1 820,946 tO He ng Chace Vouchers(HUD.20:11.Trad—15',-?C', I .1. 5, 1 d. + _ ' 2L`rrvl ar E3 No Data OM,',-F-,7', 3 S 'C 20 un' O SJt Vs it,HIM Yt1,,O ChL^:MGW r./{-,V1 MI r I i:... -r_JCaICr a dr'I..,`: cOttrA.y to”Utt...,,Jiv:.VA At... -5%-PA Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 56 25-29 Regional AFH Map 4- Publicly Supported Housing -North Orange County \-- - 11 /lii it- ""tiourtir- l-- - - is s '"?=. =,..-:, t , , 111liiiiik [[�� ,ice .` ; j S w , nily 41,.: ^` to,it e. __ may ' f i drAl till ?. E? a C i A'Alf a_____111411411: , 0 a iii , . ,k . ,1/4,, , .... . • %4....,,, ,. ., Vic. 111411.11musim illpH, r „ _ 4 or: \t''''''.47-jt 11161 ''' ' r'' ' ° °ffir,,,,,' -„„illiallihr' . ‘Ier'As ': '''' 21342025,12 0128 PM 1 205 236 s.sau0 housma t:MK 2023, •. 0 t.5 !mi Sub 250 Oo'J Unfi -ePo'•0a: I 1 J ..-• ,' , • UP to 50 Unb hous,np C40,0e`10::cMn ihU0.2321I-Tract-•5%,30% 0 225 4.5 9.n: • so-,00 Uo.. 77,,n 00;a -3D%-00re tr..Meee ormn,a 00nscwotw t r,,..t. av sw a:as. 46,-ISS1 CA O.%a. F^P•Y C.lM A Nex.b..:c.Land 0 100.250Unts I___is• -ayatr man 00% Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 57 25-29 Regional AFH Map 4- Publicly Supported Housing —Central Orange County ✓ •i f MI -As ,err.': coo D _ , ifil _0 o' ir- it, 1 .,........ .,.,,, "C; boil Iii cl,'"- 0 , _r,a,.,'_I il. 4, NINO f a G ,-0 1 , _ IIt1ji,4ra ,.c.t� C' •. ►xuu / , I _.t.„. ...,___ _k C /, - ' r,• �. e+ wC.xk .$ ' toillip 2,32025,12 04 27 PM 1 205 236 Suaca•C•a+,.rp';C.-C :3•• 6Y uvs•aus,o Pa»v.:n.:rt.....:i_ -r-�.--.,..,•,,,... i , �`- .-• B m • Itm 53u-ro Otoan =,n•,_.ry a zzs a.s ewn • .0 •cc--a •rsz•x.1- d`. 1.1Mexe'r.,e:•••'M•Mum. -T.•13`, diu 3JW'e Stt:f-r,ti. l:. R o:w+:,w9:,rnu, Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 58 25-29 Regional AFH Map 4- Publicly Supported Housing —South Orange County, . -/ --/:(117,-- .-. 7 ' '1111r ' 1 i t, .� r ', '�' •..k�w tf ""likliZik' :;‘,„,, rill% ;lam 'r;4/, )i Pal # t�hiwe Poll ... r ��I•IrW r V • 1 ,7),„ 2i 3'2025,12 07 4G PM 1 205.236 0 1.5 3 6cd SatnozlA ho ICSPC,26231 0 2so-5,Uri1.1 s•.:-15% 1 r r r , • • Uo to 5c I. is K..mz,Crlolce Votxhers,MUD.202,1-Trxt IMI 1 sk-30ti c 2 25 .4 5 (#km • ..2-13C lt'llt3 1 1 I b Data -'.M;7w'.3.•= f.f 14- M.ei�•.'=vw�gerrt � ,rgallr Inan 50%� et _�F Gt•rid nJ..w: Ell WS'. Efr h...E. n't 1. 5 • Ia.2.5"Url:s 0 s5• Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer The following analysis describes the public or private policies or practices, demographic shifts, economic trends, or other factors that may have caused or contributed to the patterns described above (including siting decisions of private or publicly supported housing or the location of residents using Housing Choice Vouchers). Broadly speaking, the patterns of residential segregation/concentration by race - both between and within jurisdictions in Orange County and across the United States-are due, in part, to: • Historic practices of redlining and legal racial segregation, which created many of the residential patterns that still exist today. • Local land use and zoning laws that have perpetuated patterns of racial segregation, some of which remain in place,while others which have been removed but continue to have lasting effects. • Market factors, including the high cost of land and existing housing throughout Orange County, constrain the development of new affordable housing and limit access for families to existing housing. Orange County 59 25-29 Regional AFH • Discrimination in the private housing market, including source-of-income discrimination, driven in part by a lack of knowledge of state and federal fair housing laws and regulations,which in turn limits housing mobility. • There are numerous ethnic enclaves of Hispanic,Vietnamese, Chinese, and other groups throughout Orange County.These enclaves provide a sense of community and a social network that may help newcomers preserve their cultural identities. However,these active choices should not obscure the significant impact of structural barriers to fair housing choice and discrimination. Through the stakeholder consultations and community meetings, it was also reported that segregation/concentration patterns in the County are due to: • In addition to landlord resistance to renting to HCV Program participants, the gap between HCV subsidy amounts and housing costs further inhibits HCV Program participants from accessing housing in higher cost (and higher opportunity) areas. • Lack of housing mobility for some minority groups based on a lack of credit history coupled with high demand for affordable housing across the County,which permits landlords and property management companies to prioritize applicants based on credit history. Detailed lists of the public or private policies or practices, demographic shifts, economic trends, and other factors that have caused or contributed to segregation/concentration in each of the jurisdictions are included in Section IV. C. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) The following analysis identifies R/ECAPs and/or groupings of R/ECAP tracts. HUD defines racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs) as Census Tracts that meet both of the following criteria: • a non-White population of 50 percent or more, and • a poverty rate that exceeds 40% or a poverty rate that is three or more times the averageTract poverty rate for the metropolitan area,whichever threshold is lower. The analysis in this report uses a measure of segregation and concentrated poverty created by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) and California HCD. The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map's poverty concentration and racial segregation filter aligns with HUD's R/ECAP methodology but is designed to more effectively reflect the level of racial and ethnic diversity in many parts of California. This measure uses the following criteria to define Census Tracts as "High Segregation and Poverty" areas: • Tracts and rural block groups where at least 30 percent of the population is living below the poverty level (note that college and graduate students are removed from Orange County 60 25-29 Regional AFH the poverty calculation in the filter in CensusTracts where they comprise at least 25% of the population); and • Tracts that have a Location Quotient (LQ) higher than 1.25 for Black, Hispanic,Asian, or all people of color.The LQ measures relative segregation by calculating how much more segregated a Census Tract is relative to a larger area (in this case, the County). Compared to the measure used by HUD (which is an absolute threshold of non- White population in a Census Tract), this measure better captures inequality operating on individuals at the neighborhood level. Map 5 — High Segregation and Poverty Areas, indicates racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty in Orange County (note that the only R/ECAP areas are located in the central part of the County). This map was created by California HCD to facilitate fair housing planning, using the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map data. This map shows R/ECAPs in the following areas: • Placentia — in the southwestern corner of the city, south of Orangethorpe Avenue • Anaheim — northeast of Disneyland, along Ball Road and 1-5 • Garden Grove — in the northern part of the city to between Brookhurst Street and Gilbert Street, north of Chapman Avenue • Santa Ana — covering multiple Census Tracts in the downtown • Costa Mesa — on the west side of downtown and the area southwest of downtown (between Newport Avenue (SR-55) and Placentia Avenue, south of 19th Street). Orange County 61 25-29 Regional AFH Map 5—High Segregation and Poverty Areas—Central Orange County ?j Irl p ,lam ,g st- 411111010 1, A ( p IWw 1,4 J Gorr r1� +'+tib{tl ll� arr.. K *. O gime row Nid rho ♦ = ` 4 owL 12 2'2024,12 20(3 PM 1 175 2011 '..§crK;(:,tgpgpfry I(AGINn r>fKKetumryMoorM. 11.o,bnme4lhr+a 1 l4N.x1v(lM;h 201i) 1rw:1 o trs 75 1w 1 ti e 1 F ,2Im CaHrN4aaw MyrY.*ow o,YV Mo m s Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer The following analysis describes and identifies the predominant protected c/asses residing in R/ECAPs, and how these demographics compare with the overall demographics of the area. To identify the predominant protected classes residing in R/ECAPs and compare them to the overall demographics of the surrounding areas, we look at the areas designated as "High Segregation and Poverty" on Map 5 (High Segregation and Poverty Areas) in relation to the demographic information on Map 3 (Predominant Population by Race/Ethnicity).The analysis finds that R/ECAPs in Orange County are predominantly Hispanic. Specifically, • In Placentia, the R/ECAPTract is predominantly Hispanic, as are the neighborhoods to the west and south in Fullerton and Anaheim.The neighborhoods to the east are predominantly White. • In Anaheim, the R/ECAPTract is predominantly Hispanic, as are all the surrounding neighborhoods. • In Costa Mesa, the R/ECAP area is predominantly Hispanic, as are the adjacent neighborhoods to the north and west.The CensusTracts to the east, across Newport Avenue, are all predominantly White. • In Garden Grove, the R/ECAPTract is predominantly Hispanic and is surrounded by CensusTracts that are predominantly AAPI. Orange County 62 25-29 Regional AFH • In Santa Ana, the R/ECAP Tracts are predominantly Hispanic, as are all the surrounding neighborhoods. The following analysis describes how R/ECAPs align with the location of publicly supported housing. Map 6 - Publicly Supported Housing and R/ECAPs, shows the location of public-supported housing in Orange County in comparison to the location of the R/ECAPs (outlined in red). This map shows no overarching patterns between the location of publicly supported housing and R/ECAPs. • In Placentia, the R/ECAP area is home to one public housing development of 50-100 units, and between 5-15% of renter-occupied units in the Tract utilize a voucher— which is similar to otherTracts in the city. • In Anaheim, there are no publicly supported housing units in the R/ECAPTract, and fewer than 5% of renter-occupied units in the R/ECAPTract utilize a voucher. • In Costa Mesa, the largest publicly supported housing development in the city is located on the northern boundary of the R/ECAP area.There is no data on voucher usage in theTract. • In Garden Grove, 15-30% of renter-occupied units in the R/ECAP tract utilize a voucher, which is similar to a number of other non-R/ECAPTracts in the city.There are no publicly supported housing developments in the R/ECAPTract. • In Santa Ana, fewer than 5% of renter-occupied housing units in the R/ECAP areas utilize a voucher; however, there are various publicly supported housing developments within the boundaries of the R/ECAP area. Orange County 63 25-29 Regional AFH Map 6- Publicly Supported Housing and R/ECAPs , 1 x '11 -,-•41 W. . AIP.,.. .s or .., ,,,:„. , 1 e. illy -,� ,. dIra N r_ • : L : Millit rl 1 — eea.er I _Maul. . U.,..4.-iir, a 6. . .._. , , s o, n rumill "� 11_• .... ill 3 -t • ,. 1 ±S� -w ..... . , a ti� a u_. •. / ...4,----- L t. ,_,..,... ,, ,� • ip am^-�J' J ^�i _ , .: 2/3/2025.12 54 53 PM ax,ea.a Ho..;;ewvc_:a ru..-Nc e:ra..a»n MUD:C2 r.., 1 102.618 • U.5,..• lea Data 0 0 75 1 5 3 m, • w•.a4nis cJ 1. ! t % T ti N. N. • :00•2e0Jos. NIV,•:r. 0 1.26 2.6 5km •:so-e90Jac MI'3s,.sr Gq:rr/of Los A+,eiea.Bueeu et lane Me-acemem,Esa,'£RE 111.3;, .ea. Ga rdn.GeoTearmec era I .USGS.EPA •akn tv..,, SEC•aaN•rot NM Eer,HERE.Game,4 ChselSteetMap cc-1:•64.1ors,aN the G6 :ner cvm+mmty I=LDD eon,sOnr TC..4,0CJ7,---.,,,Ws...on urro ry Pow..MCD.=6's11 NM Source: Created by authors using map from California HCD,AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 64 25-29 Regional AFH The following analysis describes the public or private policies or practices, demographic shifts, economic trends, or other factors that may have caused or contributed to the patterns described above. In the most recent Housing Elements prepared and adopted by each jurisdiction, the following factors were identified that contribute to the existence of R/ECAPs in these jurisdictions. In Placentia: • Lack of affordable housing,which limits housing mobility. • Limited participation in the Housing Choice Voucher Program. • Land use and development practices that constrain affordable housing development. • Private discrimination in housing, due in part to a lack of fair housing knowledge and enforcement. In Anaheim: • Historic practices of redlining and legal racial segregation have created many of the residential patterns that still exist today. Additionally, the high cost of land and existing housing in Anaheim (and throughout Orange County) are significant constraints to the development of new affordable housing and access for families to existing housing. In Costa Mesa: • Housing discrimination,which limits mobility for families. • Lack of affordable housing due to both governmental and market constraints. In Garden Grove: • Lack of affordable, accessible housing in a range of unit sizes, due to high land and development costs in the region, public opposition to new development, and land use and zoning laws. • Housing discrimination,which limits mobility for families. • Limited access to financial services. • Lack of meaningful language access for individuals with limited English proficiency. • Lack of private investment in specific neighborhoods. In Santa Ana: • Lack of fair housing education and outreach. • Lack of affordable housing. Orange County 65 25-29 Regional AFH D. Disparities in Access to Opportunity The following paragraphs analyze disparities in access to opportunity for education, employment, transportation, poverty, environmentally healthy neighborhoods, disability and access, and patterns in any disparities to access to opportunity. 1. Education Table 6 - Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity (below), includes a School Proficiency Index, which measures the proximity various racial/ethnic groups have, based on where they live,to neighborhoods with high-performing schools. School proficiency is measured using school-level data on the performance of 4th grade students on state exams.The index is based on a range of 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better proximity to high- performing schools. Table 6 shows the following disparities in access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools in each of the participating jurisdictions: • In the region, there are significant disparities in access to neighborhoods with high performing schools. Access is lowest for Black and Hispanic residents, and highest for White and AAPI residents. Access is especially low for Black residents living below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, Hispanic residents have the least access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools, and this disparity is even more pronounced for Hispanic residents living below the FPL. Compared to the region, access is better across all groups and there are smaller disparities between groups. • In Aliso Viejo, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is high for all groups and there is little disparity between race/ethnic groups. • In Anaheim, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is relatively low for all groups in the city and there are significant racial/ethnic disparities. Hispanic residents have the least access, followed by Native American and Black residents. Access also tends to be worse for residents living below the FPL, with Hispanic residents living below the FPL having the least access to neighborhoods with high- performing schools. • In Buena Park, Hispanic and Black residents have less access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools than other groups, and this disparity is even greater for Hispanic residents living below the FPL. Residents in the city have better access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools than their counterparts regionwide, and there are fewer disparities in access by race/ethnicity when compared to the region. • In Costa Mesa, Hispanic residents have less access to neighborhoods with high- performing schools than other groups, and this disparity is even greater for Hispanic Orange County 66 25-29 Regional AFH residents living below the FPL. Generally, residents in the city have better access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools than their counterparts regionwide, and there are fewer disparities in access by race/ethnicity when compared to the region. • In Fountain Valley, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is high for all groups, with little disparity between race/ethnic groups, except for Native Americans living below the FPL,who have relatively poor access. • In Fullerton, access to neighborhoods with high performing schools is comparable to the region, with relatively low access and evidence of racial/ethnic disparities. Hispanic residents have the least access, followed by Native American and Black residents. • In Garden Grove, Hispanic residents have less access than other groups to neighborhoods with high-performing schools, though these disparities are less pronounced than in the region as a whole. • In Huntington Beach, Hispanic and Black residents have less access than other groups to neighborhoods with high-performing schools, and these disparities are more pronounced for residents living below the FPL. • In Irvine, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is high for all groups. • In La Habra, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is relatively low for all groups and there is little disparity between race/ethnic groups. • In Laguna Niguel, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is high for all groups. • In Lake Forest,access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is moderately high for all groups, though residents living below the federal FPL have less access to these types of neighborhoods. Hispanic residents living below the federal FPL, in particular, have the least access compared to other groups. • In Mission Viejo, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is moderately high for all groups and there is little disparity between groups. • In Newport Beach, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is high for all groups. • In Orange, there are some disparities in access to neighborhoods with high- performing schools,with Black and Hispanic residents having less access than other groups.These disparities are less pronounced than in the region overall—this is because, Hispanic, Black, and Native American residents of Orange have better access to these kinds of neighborhoods than their counterparts in the region overall, while White and AAPI residents of Orange have less access. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is high for all groups. Orange County 67 25-29 Regional AFH • In San Clemente, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is moderately high for all groups with few disparities between groups. • In Santa Ana, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is relatively low for all groups and there are significant disparities between race/ethnic groups. Hispanic and Native American residents have the least access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools. • In Tustin, Hispanic and Native American residents living below the FPL have significantly less access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools than other groups. • In Westminster, access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools is moderately high for all groups and there is little disparity between groups. Orange County 68 25-29 Regional AFH Table 6-Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim,CA MSA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 65.19 68.03 67.43 77.63 73.13 54.59 21.35 Black,Non-Hispanic 36.07 33.82 35.34 87.25 79.02 40.72 11.92 Hispanic 35.53 39.72 35.73 86.48 77.78 43.70 12.36 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 55.03 61.94 57.64 85.13 75.98 51.11 13.13 Native American,Non-Hispanic 48.40 50.70 48.58 81.04 75.36 45.88 17.68 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 53.66 60.62 59.62 83.19 78.51 56.98 18.46 Black,Non-Hispanic 24.12 28.03 26.41 88.34 81.07 36.90 11.74 Hispanic 25.05 33.70 29.50 89.09 80.94 44.63 10.63 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 45.45 57.59 51.41 88.58 80.61 52.88 11.05 Native American,Non-Hispanic 33.63 39.10 36.05 84.43 78.22 47.65 16.22 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Orange County Urban County,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 76.48 81.89 74.59 60.92 67.05 46.96 24.39 Black,Non-Hispanic 69.50 75.53 68.16 74.64 71.50 44.07 15.23 Hispanic 58.20 67.52 59.65 75.35 73.08 45.50 15.65 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 69.64 76.68 67.46 77.05 70.10 43.85 13.93 Native American,Non-Hispanic 68.87 73.43 68.92 69.65 69.78 46.01 19.49 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 68.31 77.99 69.03 62.05 71.85 49.98 24.26 Black,Non-Hispanic 57.08 70.54 60.65 74.14 71.46 42.77 13.74 Hispanic 40.26 56.48 46.97 79.38 77.74 45.63 12.87 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 59.82 72.84 58.95 82.14 75.35 40.98 10.57 Native American,Non-Hispanic 59.71 78.50 58.72 80.71 75.06 48.72 12.85 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Aliso Viejo,CA CDBG Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 86.40 83.80 89.60 25.37 76.58 67.81 44.39 Black,Non-Hispanic 85.66 83.41 89.02 26.10 79.11 67.21 44.13 Hispanic 84.11 84.55 88.33 26.59 79.32 68.55 43.87 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 87.35 84.31 89.76 24.91 75.76 67.91 44.68 Native American,Non-Hispanic 86.17 83.12 88.93 26.36 79.02 67.87 44.33 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 82.37 81.49 87.38 28.15 80.65 67.31 43.92 Black,Non-Hispanic 96.00 90.96 92.00 20.00 71.00 68.85 44.00 Hispanic 87.11 86.95 88.83 25.18 80.76 67.92 44.61 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 79.67 82.36 87.60 28.86 79.35 68.30 43.19 Native American,Non-Hispanic 89.00 73.76 91.00 20.00 71.00 64.40 46.00 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Anaheim,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 57.74 51.16 55.99 86.30 72.67 43.78 11.42 Black,Non-Hispanic 42.85 39.66 45.37 89.16 78.00 36.96 8.52 Hispanic 36.00 27.30 39.83 90.59 79.51 50.51 7.89 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 49.75 44.50 50.68 87.98 75.45 37.02 9.49 Native American,Non-Hispanic 44.95 36.79 46.32 89.37 77.46 48.18 8.95 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 45.90 40.49 46.79 89.04 77.96 42.96 9.09 Black,Non-Hispanic 31.74 34.14 37.42 89.65 79.84 31.61 7.85 Hispanic 29.41 22.31 35.78 91.71 81.27 52.65 7.32 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 45.63 44.33 47.94 88.35 76.64 30.85 9.12 Native American,Non-Hispanic 28.04 34.19 30.87 92.22 79.80 57.77 8.38 Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census;ACS;Great Schools;Common Core of Data;SABINS;LAI;LEHD;and NATA;all accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 12,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Refer to the Data Documentation for details(www.hudexchange.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentationl. Orange County 69 25-29 Regional AFH Table 6-Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity (continued) School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Buena Park,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 60.45 68.12 55.62 88.37 74.04 32.63 5.85 Black,Non-Hispanic 46.36 56.49 50.18 88.38 76.06 36.64 5.75 Hispanic 45.66 56.38 48.40 87.86 75.87 38.65 5.61 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 55.66 65.85 56.16 88.51 74.65 34.48 5.98 Native American,Non-Hispanic 54.49 66.44 52.73 88.12 74.89 31.49 5.74 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 53.80 63.19 53.10 88.01 75.46 34.13 5.82 Black,Non-Hispanic 34.70 61.54 49.56 89.06 79.09 51.37 6.30 Hispanic 36.05 49.35 44.29 87.95 77.28 40.67 5.51 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 52.60 62.69 52.02 88.88 76.16 33.32 5.99 Native American,Non-Hispanic 66.17 70.34 82.13 88.84 71.20 32.56 6.92 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Costa Mesa,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 60.10 72.71 73.56 89.69 81.33 83.04 28.03 Black,Non-Hispanic 55.04 70.24 69.80 90.47 83.27 83.47 25.72 Hispanic 40.06 60.53 56.72 90.42 83.05 78.57 30.24 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 61.51 71.28 73.20 90.57 82.88 87.44 22.65 Native American,Non-Hispanic 53.54 70.81 68.03 90.49 82.74 81.69 28.26 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 53.85 69.80 68.91 90.07 82.43 80.51 28.58 Black,Non-Hispanic 61.70 78.78 82.00 91.46 84.89 87.37 19.50 Hispanic 33.36 56.69 51.57 90.56 83.60 78.70 31.40 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 55.36 71.81 73.29 90.38 83.08 84.52 24.46 Native American,Non-Hispanic 50.53 67.96 56.06 91.85 77.66 85.70 19.03 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Fountain Valley,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 72.99 77.95 66.97 88.74 72.84 63.54 10.36 Black,Non-Hispanic 63.35 74.50 64.34 89.00 77.04 67.34 9.23 Hispanic 61.51 73.48 61.11 89.32 76.51 64.27 9.44 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 68.19 74.62 62.14 88.86 73.78 61.25 9.43 Native American,Non-Hispanic 71.09 77.77 66.67 88.24 73.04 61.75 9.83 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 73.72 79.47 71.04 88.66 70.86 60.63 12.98 Black,Non-Hispanic 59.12 85.62 60.95 89.98 80.00 64.77 7.03 Hispanic 62.05 75.52 64.05 88.78 73.78 52.61 10.82 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 64.02 71.44 61.18 88.82 76.72 64.70 8.84 Native American,Non-Hispanic 25.00 58.70 39.00 91.00 79.00 33.65 9.00 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Fullerton,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 62.61 56.65 61.50 87.07 76.65 55.54 8.66 Black,Non-Hispanic 49.62 47.75 52.52 88.60 79.69 50.90 7.95 Hispanic 42.72 39.02 45.92 88.92 79.56 48.09 7.72 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 59.92 66.82 67.55 86.58 74.57 45.70 8.74 Native American,Non-Hispanic 52.94 46.15 50.35 88.41 78.82 50.79 7.98 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 55.56 50.27 55.74 89.34 80.78 56.42 8.27 Black,Non-Hispanic 36.98 38.56 45.43 90.92 83.87 43.50 7.52 Hispanic 37.93 36.39 41.66 89.84 80.77 46.43 7.60 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 59.46 64.03 66.38 88.24 78.20 51.50 8.57 Native American,Non-Hispanic 66.11 42.19 54.89 87.14 77.59 36.66 7.59 Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census;ACS;Great Schools;Common Core of Data;SABINS;LAI;LEHD;and NATA;all accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 12,Version AFFKf0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Refer to the Data Documentation for details(www.hudexchanae.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentation). Orange County 70 25-29 Regional AFH Table 6-Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity (continued) School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Garden Grove,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 51.61 62.62 46.45 89.02 75.00 36.85 5.30 Black,Non-Hispanic 41.29 55.63 41.33 89.90 78.05 34.48 5.93 Hispanic 38.31 49.57 38.53 90.25 78.44 36.49 6.55 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 36.53 57.58 38.40 89.26 78.09 26.41 6.31 Native American,Non-Hispanic 42.49 57.15 40.82 89.84 77.88 33.27 6.01 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 43.98 59.78 40.82 89.70 77.12 33.92 5.82 Black,Non-Hispanic 31.36 52.83 42.46 88.39 77.73 22.40 6.08 Hispanic 33.96 47.89 37.29 90.91 80.88 38.03 6.46 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 34.39 57.31 37.26 89.10 78.63 24.49 6.43 Native American,Non-Hispanic 25.46 59.54 38.35 90.71 82.88 20.33 5.55 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Huntington Beach,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 73.22 76.09 73.40 86.19 75.11 39.88 27.16 Black,Non-Hispanic 66.28 64.48 68.38 86.93 77.62 44.20 22.24 Hispanic 56.39 62.72 61.50 86.96 78.62 46.28 19.14 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 70.78 72.77 69.79 85.78 74.36 43.09 23.36 Native American,Non-Hispanic 69.29 73.74 70.28 86.49 76.42 41.44 25.86 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 70.07 73.38 72.99 86.92 77.44 38.84 27.86 Black,Non-Hispanic 46.90 56.51 58.56 88.62 80.11 43.69 17.85 Hispanic 42.73 56.09 51.58 87.45 81.23 47.75 14.39 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 61.40 65.76 67.00 86.92 78.76 42.40 23.92 Native American,Non-Hispanic 72.02 78.94 63.69 86.00 64.39 36.61 26.65 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Irvine,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 75.51 91.83 85.86 86.03 75.70 82.98 24.62 Black,Non-Hispanic 71.46 90.47 85.50 87.62 77.90 85.02 24.34 Hispanic 71.82 91.30 84.30 87.17 77.18 84.06 24.32 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 74.27 91.74 86.27 86.36 76.01 81.99 24.03 Native American,Non-Hispanic 73.19 91.00 86.39 86.51 77.19 85.15 24.45 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 74.06 91.44 81.96 88.76 79.32 87.44 26.01 Black,Non-Hispanic 70.68 91.56 89.17 86.53 76.94 79.65 24.23 Hispanic 72.33 89.99 77.69 89.76 80.78 89.91 26.12 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 75.04 93.12 76.85 88.34 80.05 88.66 27.79 Native American,Non-Hispanic 75.05 92.63 64.82 92.82 83.98 89.60 26.21 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental La Habra,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 54.95 45.37 49.14 85.13 74.94 24.60 9.57 Black,Non-Hispanic 51.87 41.91 49.43 85.67 76.39 21.77 9.50 Hispanic 49.15 38.57 41.33 85.10 76.65 25.54 9.56 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 63.20 44.08 62.32 84.33 71.22 22.13 9.44 Native American,Non-Hispanic 51.76 43.96 45.26 84.53 75.07 26.27 9.56 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 56.10 47.10 49.00 84.46 74.26 24.56 9.48 Black,Non-Hispanic 52.83 41.39 42.26 87.37 77.76 28.47 9.43 Hispanic 46.12 36.01 37.54 85.25 76.92 28.33 9.70 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 52.15 40.10 53.86 86.17 73.95 25.19 9.48 Native American,Non-Hispanic 53.40 39.69 33.09 88.64 77.34 23.54 9.00 Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census;ACS;Great Schools;Common Core of Data;SABINS;LAI;LEHD;and NATA;all accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 12,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Refer to the Data Documentation for details iwww.hudexchange.info/rrsource/4848/affh-data-documentation Orange County 71 25-29 Regional AFH Table 6-Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity (continued) School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Laguna Niguel,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 76.15 78.68 81.92 20.01 65.30 24.83 44.29 Black,Non-Hispanic 75.53 78.56 81.05 20.78 66.76 27.40 43.54 Hispanic 74.16 77.79 80.90 21.60 68.64 26.05 42.93 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 76.21 79.74 81.58 21.17 67.10 30.29 43.17 Native American,Non-Hispanic 73.38 78.54 81.49 20.46 66.97 23.45 45.40 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 76.39 77.56 79.65 20.30 66.57 26.91 43.73 Black,Non-Hispanic 71.95 74.35 89.13 22.25 72.54 11.92 43.47 Hispanic 75.89 78.28 79.36 21.25 67.62 30.40 44.20 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 75.56 80.73 75.10 23.52 71.49 42.28 41.54 Native American,Non-Hispanic N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Lake Forest,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 76.36 72.36 81.64 32.24 69.42 71.33 42.33 Black,Non-Hispanic 73.27 69.65 81.67 32.34 70.96 72.67 42.25 Hispanic 67.04 66.07 76.36 31.35 73.18 70.57 39.94 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 73.63 72.58 82.39 32.16 69.56 73.34 42.56 Native American,Non-Hispanic 75.43 68.97 79.14 32.03 71.55 69.17 41.59 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 70.42 68.73 79.06 32.70 72.03 71.31 41.04 Black,Non-Hispanic 80.40 60.52 86.90 25.18 69.16 38.16 45.46 Hispanic 63.26 57.73 67.26 26.85 71.64 76.10 35.45 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 61.70 65.12 73.73 35.90 75.46 69.11 39.66 Native American,Non-Hispanic 27.00 62.47 60.00 31.00 85.00 71.40 34.00 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Mission Viejo,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 81.64 76.96 76.49 20.23 60.25 21.34 46.11 Black,Non-Hispanic 79.61 72.77 76.94 20.85 64.05 27.65 45.55 Hispanic 77.56 73.46 73.81 20.70 64.44 27.95 44.61 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 80.69 77.17 77.29 20.55 60.53 22.69 45.63 Native American,Non-Hispanic 79.23 74.24 74.50 21.07 62.03 22.20 46.25 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 80.70 78.05 76.43 20.42 61.66 22.41 46.10 Black,Non-Hispanic 70.69 76.42 81.54 21.23 69.77 27.61 43.31 Hispanic 73.93 74.29 66.28 20.00 66.08 35.01 41.77 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 74.62 76.39 81.02 20.31 65.65 30.45 42.20 Native American,Non-Hispanic N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Newport Beach,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 81.31 90.17 82.88 86.59 75.16 90.40 41.36 Black,Non-Hispanic 78.86 89.72 81.85 86.92 76.61 90.54 40.65 Hispanic 79.04 88.93 81.76 86.93 76.81 89.82 40.55 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 84.48 91.60 85.94 83.05 68.64 89.19 38.80 Native American,Non-Hispanic 79.22 88.29 81.86 88.35 78.06 91.17 40.73 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 78.99 89.20 83.30 87.76 78.81 90.38 43.27 Black,Non-Hispanic 78.71 86.38 78.21 89.58 85.43 87.99 48.46 Hispanic 82.46 87.75 81.41 88.28 77.88 89.87 41.76 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 84.34 88.97 82.79 88.43 76.05 92.09 39.15 Native American,Non-Hispanic 77.00 89.17 88.00 93.00 85.00 95.55 40.00 'Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census;ACS;Great Schools;Common Core of Data;SABINS;LAI;LEND;and NATA;all accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 12,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Refer to the Data Documentation for details lwww.hudexchanae.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentationl. Orange County 72 25-29 Regional AFH Table 6-Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity (continued) School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Orange,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 59.85 60.76 61.19 87.39 72.03 69.31 10.04 Black,Non-Hispanic 52.12 48.57 51.47 89.40 77.99 78.41 8.77 Hispanic 48.30 50.65 52.77 88.89 76.83 76.42 9.01 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 59.06 58.78 59.94 87.51 72.50 67.82 9.94 Native American,Non-Hispanic 54.37 55.48 56.10 88.33 74.75 73.95 9.39 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 57.04 52.92 58.45 89.18 76.75 78.49 9.16 Black,Non-Hispanic 32.85 42.16 41.19 83.58 78.05 89.55 9.52 Hispanic 45.47 53.35 53.02 89.09 76.93 73.57 9.08 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 52.82 43.86 48.07 89.57 79.90 81.30 8.42 Native American,Non-Hispanic 64.21 51.31 53.78 90.52 79.37 86.78 8.55 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Rancho Santa Margarita,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 87.82 84.08 87.29 19.01 61.49 12.75 54.08 Black,Non-Hispanic 85.22 82.80 86.30 20.39 66.64 13.57 53.73 Hispanic 84.08 80.19 85.16 21.29 69.41 11.83 54.01 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 86.50 84.59 87.52 19.55 63.25 12.85 53.44 Native American,Non-Hispanic 86.05 82.04 86.50 20.09 66.32 11.54 53.88 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 83.99 77.97 85.14 20.86 67.77 9.82 54.55 Black,Non-Hispanic N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a Hispanic 79.71 72.25 79.75 22.39 74.90 7.51 54.71 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 92.08 91.03 89.00 16.53 50.91 17.71 53.51 Native American,Non-Hispanic N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental San Clemente,CA CDBG Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 76.02 73.91 77.79 15.18 58.61 30.53 54.50 Black,Non-Hispanic 75.72 74.47 77.50 15.14 58.28 33.23 53.99 Hispanic 64.41 66.23 74.88 16.13 64.05 28.18 54.33 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 77.00 75.99 77.85 14.57 56.60 36.23 53.93 Native American,Non-Hispanic 70.21 72.47 77.11 16.20 60.72 31.36 54.49 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 72.53 69.89 77.05 15.87 60.90 29.70 54.94 Black,Non-Hispanic 33.81 63.97 69.04 14.71 67.68 30.34 53.00 Hispanic 64.44 65.67 75.42 15.59 64.76 30.60 54.22 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 75.99 79.46 77.89 13.66 59.13 42.42 53.36 Native American,Non-Hispanic 69.92 82.92 81.47 13.38 53.61 35.91 53.08 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Santa Ana,CA Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 43.58 40.95 48.31 92.62 80.95 74.89 10.29 Black,Non-Hispanic 37.22 34.86 40.19 92.78 81.04 67.18 10.60 Hispanic 27.34 28.45 33.05 92.92 80.41 62.17 11.06 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 37.32 41.90 37.03 92.43 79.82 52.24 10.44 Native American,Non-Hispanic 30.92 33.84 37.35 92.65 79.81 61.51 10.65 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 36.59 35.69 45.31 92.55 81.75 72.63 10.59 Black,Non-Hispanic 30.40 34.66 39.64 91.94 82.25 76.57 10.44 Hispanic 22.21 27.00 30.56 93.36 82.18 60.87 10.98 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 36.22 40.88 35.66 92.11 80.53 46.13 10.05 Native American,Non-Hispanic 22.28 21.56 35.82 93.35 79.06 60.67 11.72 Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census;ACS;Great Schools;Common Core of Data;SABINS;LAI;LEHD;and NATA;all accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 12,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Refer to the Data Documentation for details lwww.hudexchanee.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentation) Orange County 73 25-29 Regional AFH Table 6-Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity (continued) School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Tustin,CA CDBG Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 63.67 71.61 73.97 89.66 78.12 75.92 12.00 Black,Non-Hispanic 49.37 60.11 64.18 92.75 83.81 83.31 10.82 Hispanic 44.93 51.70 59.55 93.52 85.08 86.73 9.74 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 54.59 67.08 73.12 90.92 80.48 78.28 12.30 Native American,Non-Hispanic 58.55 62.31 69.02 91.12 81.54 81.61 10.47 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 50.82 67.17 68.54 92.03 82.78 82.13 11.15 Black,Non-Hispanic 53.03 52.08 60.97 93.61 85.87 88.59 9.55 Hispanic 33.68 38.03 51.91 95.23 88.33 88.99 8.87 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 51.22 62.44 67.76 91.95 82.30 84.23 11.07 Native American,Non-Hispanic 21.99 34.26 62.35 95.29 87.57 92.46 8.78 School Low Jobs Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Proximity Environmental Westminster,CA CDBG Index Index Index Index Cost Index Index Health Index Total Population White,Non-Hispanic 49.67 72.09 47.64 86.39 76.49 42.87 6.57 Black,Non-Hispanic 40.88 69.65 44.06 86.96 78.34 40.93 6.86 Hispanic 35.08 63.82 39.25 87.10 78.73 37.10 6.50 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 35.42 65.32 39.47 87.81 79.49 29.74 7.51 Native American,Non-Hispanic 43.72 69.82 44.55 87.26 77.82 41.17 6.24 Population below federal poverty line White,Non-Hispanic 42.88 69.22 42.57 86.90 77.90 37.35 6.79 Black,Non-Hispanic 32.08 67.37 41.25 85.75 77.20 41.57 7.92 Hispanic 32.07 60.97 36.24 86.89 78.84 40.17 5.44 Asian or Pacific Islander,Non-Hispanic 31.20 62.98 38.17 87.91 80.04 31.20 7.13 Native American,Non-Hispanic 37.94 63.01 34.15 89.90 81.79 23.92 8.00 Note 1:Data Sources:Decennial Census;ACS;Great Schools;Common Core of Data;SABINS;LAI;LEND;and NATA;all accessed through the HUD AFFH Tool,Table 12,Version AFFHT0006,Released July 10,2020. Note 2:Refer to the Data Documentation for details(www.hudexchange.info/resource/4848/affh-data-documentation). By comparing the School Proficiency Index in Table 6 to the demographic data in Table 1 (Demographics), a pattern emerges showing that cities where all residents have access to neighborhoods with high-performing schools, have a lower percentage of Hispanic residents than the County overall. In other words, Hispanic residents are concentrated in cities with fewer high-performing schools. Specifically, in the following cities, the School Proficiency Index is 70 or higher for every racial/ethnic group, and the percentage of the population that is Hispanic is lower than the countywide percentage of 33.93%: • Aliso Viejo,where the School Proficiency Index is over 83 for all groups, and 20.02% of the population is Hispanic. • Fountain Valley, where the School Proficiency Index is over 73 for all groups, and 17.08% of the population is Hispanic. • Irvine,where the School Proficiency Index is over 90 for all groups, and 11.24% of the population is Hispanic. • Laguna Niguel, where the School Proficiency Index is over 77 for all groups, and 16.10% of the population is Hispanic. • Mission Viejo, where the School Proficiency Index is over 72 for all groups, and 19.67% of the population is Hispanic. Orange County 74 25-29 Regional AFH • Newport Beach, where the School Proficiency Index is over 88 for all groups, and 10.47% of the population is Hispanic. • Rancho Santa Margarita, where the School Proficiency Index is over 80 for all groups, and 20.41% of the population is Hispanic. Map 7 — Education Score, is a series of maps showing the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map's Education Composite Score for north, central, and south Orange County, and the region. These maps were created by California HCD to facilitate fair housing planning, using the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map data9. The Education Composite Score for a particular Census Tract is based on four indicators, all of which are based on enrollment-weighted averages of the three schools closest to the tract's center point10: • Math and Reading Proficiency, where "Proficiency" is the percentage of students performing at grade-level in the 4th grade. • High School Graduation Rate, which is calculated using California Department of Education data on the percent of students who graduate in four years. • Student Poverty, which is measured as the percentage of students that do not receive free and reduced-price lunch. A tract's composite score is determined by whether it falls above or below the median (50th percentile) tract or block group value within each region. Each indicator that falls above the regional median adds one point to the final score. On the maps, the categories equal the following scores: • Highest: >3-4 • High: >2-3 • Moderate: >1-2 • Low: 0-1 These maps, along with Map 3 showing the predominant race/ethnicity in each area, show the following relationship between residency patterns and proximity to proficient schools by race/ethnicity: • In the County overall, o Cities in the central County have the lowest education scores, indicating that residents in these areas are less likely to live near high quality schools.Areas in the southern County, along the coast, and in the unincorporated areas in the north and east parts of the County, have the highest education scores. 9 The maps were downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer, which can be accessed at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing 10 Detailed descriptions of the methodology used to measure each indicator can be found on the CTAC website, https://www.treasurer.ca.govictcac/opportunity.asp Orange County 75 25-29 Regional AFH Low education score areas generally correspond to areas where the population is predominantly Hispanic. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, o Brea and Los Alamitos have high education scores and are predominantly White in most but not all areas. o Cypress has high education scores and a predominantly AAPI and White population. o La Palma has high education scores and a predominantly AAPI population o Yorba Linda,Villa Park,Orange Park Acres, NorthTustin, unincorporated areas of the County, Laguna Woods, Laguna Beach, and Laguna Hills, all have the highest education scores and are predominantly White. o Dana Point has a mix of education scores, all areas are predominantly White. o Placentia has low education scores in the southeast, which align with the predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods. o San Juan Capistrano has low education score areas that are a mix of predominantly Hispanic and predominantly White neighborhoods. • In Aliso Viejo, all neighborhoods in the city have the highest education score and are predominantly White. • In Anaheim, most of the city's neighborhoods have low education scores and are predominantly Hispanic. The exception is Anaheim Hills, which is both predominantly White, and has the highest education scores. • In Buena Park,there are neighborhoods with low education scores in the city's center and southeast,which are also areas of predominant Hispanic population. • In Costa Mesa, the southwest quarter of the city has low education scores.This area is a mix of predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods in and around downtown, and predominantly White neighborhoods to the west. • In Fountain Valley, almost all of the city's neighborhoods have high education scores. These neighborhoods are a mix of predominantly White and AAPI. • In Fullerton, neighborhoods in the south of the city have low education scores and are also the areas with the highest concentrations of Hispanic residents. • In Garden Grove, the neighborhoods with low education score areas in the east are predominantly Hispanic, and the neighborhoods with low education scores in the northwest are predominantly Hispanic and AAPI. • In Huntington Beach,the neighborhoods with the highest education scores correlate to areas that are predominantly White,which is most of the city. One area of the city with low education scores has a predominantly Hispanic population. • In Irvine, neighborhoods across the city have the highest education score.These neighborhoods are a mix of predominantly White and AAPI. Orange County 76 25-29 Regional AFH • In La Habra, neighborhoods with low education scores are located in the center and eastern part of the city,which are also the areas with the highest concentrations of Hispanic residents. • In Laguna Niguel, all neighborhoods have high education scores and are predominantly White. • In Lake Forest, all neighborhoods have high education scores and most are predominantly White, except in the southeastern corner of the city, along El Toro Road,which is predominantly Hispanic. • In Mission Viejo, all neighborhoods have high education scores, and most are predominantly White except in the southern part of the city. • In Newport Beach, all neighborhoods have high education scores and are predominantly White. • In Orange, neighborhoods in the western half of the city have low education scores and are predominantly Hispanic.The neighborhoods with the highest education scores are in the eastern half of the city.The high education score areas north and west of Villa Park are predominantly White, and the high education score areas south and west of Villa Park are predominantly Hispanic. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, all neighborhoods have high education scores and are predominantly White. • In San Clemente, all neighborhoods have high education scores and are predominantly White. • In Santa Ana, neighborhoods with low education score areas comprise most of the city, and are areas where population is predominantly Hispanic. • In Tustin, the neighborhoods with low education scores are predominantly Hispanic and White, and the neighborhoods with the highest education scores are predominantly AAPI. • In Westminster, there is a mix of moderate, high, and highest education score areas. There is one part of the city with low education scores, in the north.This area is predominantly Hispanic. Orange County 77 25-29 Regional AFH Map 7-Education Score-Region E. 4 ,.p ialkiMilit „ . t ere r Ckyrtown eoundanee COG GeprepAy TUC HCD OpporhmNy Map-Education(HCD,2025) bEducatton Composite Score(Eduw:wn MdFYors Shags wok ent, , .gM nst 'H, I!* Mo,,, , Moth,Share Pmficprnt in Rearing.High School Grad Rate.5t,:oenta\g.• Poverty) Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Map 7- Education Score- North Orange County • • t .14, 1, 1 4 a ,„-; ,, ..,. 1-11. • urio liirl#1111r -,S7 A ;:4-•-•r"--""----.,„„,....-LftLij , Te � ' Q g r `-t,, `.., -14 4 r L_, ) ,1\://1 O r , t— — ir 1 dam � , Cayrtevm/Mundane* COG Geography TCAC HCD Opportunity Map-Education IHCD.2025) bEdtatwn Composite Sc.'.tEducahon indaxors Shate Profiaent m ,r, `,,.,, r r a, t;. Math,Share Pgohc.erg.Reading,rrgh Schoo,Grad Rate Sn.,dentc Not-.n Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 78 25-29 Regional AFH Map 7— Education Score—Central Orange County , _ _i v - . tit• O -411.b. L f w ,,, r- fr City/Town Bandana COG Geography TCAC 11CD Opportunay Map•Education CNCD.20251 Educt Coo.pos, S ,.!Educu.un ind o.o•+Sh er.Ruhc.m.,, µ Math Sara Atoka,' Reading.N,gh Soho&Grad Rat.Students Not ra Portray) Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Map 7—Education Score—South Orange County i ,,,,,,,r y„ u, r r" si 1.1 r( , , . ;r J \ N..,.7 , `^ J ��� ) _. \ i \ / Crty/Town Sound,,,,: COG Geography TCAC NCO Opportunay Map-Educwto.(NCO 20251 bEducw,on Co.poaa.Scar.(Education h,d¢.io,,Sh.ro Pahang In Math.Shane Praia..m Re.drng,high School G,.d Rio,,Students Not:n I'N,gh`u ,k:gh Nmr r t:. Poverty) Source: California HCD,AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 79 25-29 RegionalAFH 2. Employment Table 6 includes a Jobs Proximity Index, which measures the physical distance between where residents of different races/ethnicities live and the location of jobs. A higher index value indicates better access to employment opportunities. Table 6 also includes a Labor Market Index, which measures the unemployment rate, labor-force participation rate, and percentage of the population aged 25 and above with at least a bachelor's degree, by neighborhood. A higher index value indicates that residents live in a neighborhood with higher labor force participation and human capital. Table 6 shows the following regarding disparities in access to neighborhoods close to jobs and with high labor force participation and human capital in each of the participating jurisdictions: • In the region, there are significant disparities in both the Jobs Proximity and the Labor Market Index.The Jobs Proximity Index is the lowest for Black residents, especially those living below FPL. It is also low for Hispanic residents. White residents are most likely to live in neighborhoods close to jobs.The Labor Market Index is lowest for Black and Hispanic residents, especially those living below FPL, and highest for White residents. Generally, the Labor Market Index is lower for individuals living below FPL. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, there is relatively low access to neighborhoods close to jobs for all races/ethnicities, with no large disparities between groups. Compared to the region, residents of all races/ethnicities have better access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. However, there are disparities between racial/ethnic groups, with Hispanic residents having significantly less access than other groups, and White residents having more access. • In Aliso Viejo, access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is high for all races/ethnicities, with no large disparities between groups.This is also true for access to neighborhoods close to jobs. On both indices, the city performs significantly better than the region overall. • In Anaheim, there are significant disparities in access to neighborhoods close to jobs, and with high labor force participation and human capital. Hispanic residents have the least access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Black and AAPI residents have the least access to neighborhoods close to jobs. On both indices,the city is comparable to the region overall,with low- to-moderate scores and significant disparities between groups. • In Buena Park, there is relatively low access to neighborhoods close to jobs for all races/ethnicities,with no large disparities between groups. Compared to the region, residents of all races/ethnicities have less access to neighborhoods close to jobs. There is moderate access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and Orange County 80 25-29 Regional AFH human capital,with slight disparities between races/ethnicities—Hispanic residents have the least access to these neighborhoods. Compared to the region, access is higher for Hispanic and Black residents in the city. • In Costa Mesa, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is high for all races/ethnicities, with only slight disparities—Hispanic residents have the least access. Access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is also high for all races/ethnicities, but with significant disparities between races/ethnicities—again Hispanic residents have the least access. On both indices, the city performs better than the region overall for all racial/ethnic groups. • In Fountain Valley, access to neighborhoods close to jobs, and with high labor force participation and human capital, is relatively high for all groups except for Native American residents living below the FPL, who have very low index values for each measure. • In Fullerton, all race/ethnicities have moderate access to neighborhoods close to jobs, with slight disparities between groups—AAPI residents have the least access of any group. Regarding access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital, there are some disparities between groups (with Hispanic residents having the least access), and index values for Hispanic, Black, and AAPI residents are higher than their counterparts regionwide. • In Garden Grove, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is low for all groups, with some disparities between groups—AAPI residents have the least access. Compared to the region, all groups in Garden Grove have less access.Access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is also relatively low for all groups in the city,with slight disparities between races/ethnicities. Access is lowest for Hispanic and AAPI residents. Compared to the region, the Labor Market Index in the city is higher for Black and Hispanic residents, and lower for all others. • In Huntington Beach, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is relatively low for all groups, with few disparities between races/ethnicities. Overall, groups in the city have better access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital; however,there are large disparities between groups. Hispanic residents, and especially those living below the FPL, have the least access to these neighborhoods. • In Irvine, access to neighborhoods close to jobs and with high labor force participation and human capital is high for all groups (and higher than the region). The only significant disparities are for Black residents living below FPL, who have less access to neighborhoods close to jobs, and Native American residents living below FPL, who have less access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. • In La Habra, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is very low for all groups,with no disparities between groups. There are disparities, however, in access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Hispanic Orange County 81 25-29 Regional AFH residents and Native American residents living below FPL have the least access of all groups. Compared to region, Hispanic, Black and AAPI residents in the city have more access,while White residents have less access. • In Laguna Niguel, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is lower than the region for all groups,with little disparity between groups. Access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is high for all groups,with little disparity between groups. • In Lake Forest, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is relatively high, and higher than region, for all groups.There is very little disparity between groups, except for Black residents below FPL, who have very low access to neighborhoods close to jobs.Access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is higher than in the region for all groups, with little disparity except for Hispanic, AAPI,and Native American residents living below FPL,all of whom have significantly less access. • In Mission Viejo, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is low for all groups,with no disparities between groups. Access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is high for all groups,with little disparity except for Hispanics living below FPL,for whom access is relatively low compared to other city residents but is still higher than in the region. • In Newport Beach, access to neighborhoods close to jobs, and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital, is high for all groups, with very little disparity between groups. • In Orange, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is higher than the region, but there are some disparities—access is lowest for AAPI and White residents.There are also disparities in access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Black and Hispanic residents overall, and Black and AAPI residents living below FPL have the least access. However, access is higher for all groups (except White residents), in comparison to the region. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is very low for all groups, with no disparities between groups. Access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is high for all groups, with some disparities—Hispanic residents living below FPL have the least access. • In San Clemente, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is low for all groups, with very little disparity between groups. Access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is high for all groups (and higher than in the region), with some disparity—namely, Hispanic residents living below FPL have less access. • In Santa Ana, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is higher for all groups than in region,with some disparities—access is lowest for AAPI residents, especially those living below FPL. Access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is lower than in the region for all groups except Black residents, and Orange County 82 25-29 Regional AFH there are significant disparities in access—Hispanic residents have the least access, and access is also lower for individuals living below FPL in each racial/ethnic group. • In Tustin, access to neighborhoods close to jobs is higher for all groups than in region, with some disparities between races/ethnicities—White residents have the least access. Access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital is higher than in the region,with some disparities—Hispanic residents have the least access, and access is also lower for individuals living below FPL in each racial/ethnic group. • In Westminster, there are disparities in access to neighborhoods close to jobs by race/ethnicity. Native American residents living below FPL, and AAPI residents, have the least access.There are some disparities in access to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital by race/ethnicity—Native American residents living below FPL and Hispanic and AAPI residents overall, have less access. Compared to the region, access in the city is slightly better for Black and Hispanic residents,worse for all other groups. The following analysis describes how a person's place of residence affects their ability to obtain a job. Map 8 — Economic Score, is a series of maps showing the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map's Economic Composite Score for north, central, and south Orange County, and the region. These maps were created by California HCD to facilitate fair housing planning, using the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map data 11.The Economic Composite Score for a particular Census Tract is based on four indicators12: • Poverty Rate— Measured as the percentage of theTract residents who live above 200 percent of the FPL (the 200 percent threshold is used to account for the higher cost of living in California compared to other regions of the United States). • Adult Education Rate — Measured as the percentage of adults aged 25 years and older in eachTract,who have earned at least a bachelor's degree_ • Employment Rate- Measured as the percentage of individuals in each Tract ages 20 to 64 who are employed in either the civilian labor force or the armed forces. • Home Value — Measured as the median home value (dollars) of owner-occupied housing units in each tract. " The maps were downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer, which can be accessed at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing 12 Detailed descriptions of the methodology used to measure each indicator can be found on the CTAC website, https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp Orange County 83 25-29 Regional AFH The composite score for each Tract is determined by whether it falls above or below the median (50th percentile)tract or block group value within each region. On the map,a higher numerical score indicates more positive economic outcomes. These maps show the following relationship between residency patterns and economic outcomes, including employment: • Countywide, there is a similar pattern to the education scores, with cities in the central County tending to have lower economic scores than cities and unincorporated areas along the coast and in the southern, northern, and eastern parts of the County. Low score areas generally correspond to areas where the population is predominantly Hispanic of AAPI, whereas the high score areas correspond to predominantly White areas. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, o There are generally good economic outcomes in Cypress,Yorba Linda, North Tustin, La Palma, Los Alamitos, unincorporated areas east ofYorba Linda, Brea, North Tustin, Orange Park Acres,Villa Park, Seal Beach (except for the Tract where Leisure World, a retirement community, is located), Rossmoor, Laguna Beach, Dana Point, Ladera Ranch, and Capistrano Beach. o There is a mix of economic outcomes in the following places: • Placentia, where there are lower economic scores in the southwest corner of the city,which is predominantly Hispanic. • Laguna Woods and North Laguna Hills, which are predominantly White and have lower economic scores. • San Juan Capistrano, where there are lower economic scores in the Census Tract that encompasses the interchange between 1-5 and the Ortega Highway (SR-74), which is also a high POC segregation area and predominantly Hispanic. • In Aliso Viejo, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores, are predominantly White, and are mostly areas of high White concentration. • In Anaheim, neighborhoods with lower economic scores include neighborhoods considered to be areas of high POC segregation, including those north of downtown and along SR-91, and south of downtown and adjacent to Disneyland.These areas are predominantly Hispanic. Conversely, Anaheim Hills has high economic scores and is predominantly White. • In Buena Park, the neighborhoods between 1-5 and SR-91 have the lowest economic scores in the city.These areas are predominantly Hispanic.The northeastern corner of the city,which is predominantly AAPI, has the highest economic scores in the city. • In Costa Mesa, the neighborhoods in and surrounding downtown, on the west side of Newport Boulevard have the lowest economic scores.These are also areas that are predominantly Hispanic. Orange County 84 25-29 Regional AFH • In Fountain Valley, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores. • In Fullerton, there is a general north/south divide between areas with higher and lower economic scores.The southeastern neighborhoods,which are predominantly Hispanic, have the lowest economic scores, while the northern half of the city, predominantly White and AAPI neighborhoods, have the highest economic scores. • In Garden Grove, economic scores are moderate north of Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) and are higher in West Garden Grove. Economic scores are generally lower south of SR-22. • In Huntington Beach, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores. • In Irvine, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores except in the area surrounding UC Irvine, and in the neighborhoods east of the intersections of SR-133 and I-5—these are predominantly AAPI. • In La Habra, the areas with the lowest economic scores are the same areas with high POC segregation, including the neighborhoods in the center of the city north of Guadalupe Park and between Idaho Street to the west and Sonora High School to the east.These neighborhoods are predominantly Hispanic. • In Laguna Niguel, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores, are predominantly White, and are mostly areas of high White concentration. • In Lake Forest, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores except for in the southeastern corner,which is a predominantly Hispanic area. • In Mission Viejo, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores, are predominantly White, and are primarily areas of high White concentration. • In Newport Beach, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores, are predominantly White, and are all areas of high White segregation. • In Orange, neighborhoods across the city have good economic scores.The best economic scores are in the neighborhoods north and east of Villa Park, where the population is predominantly White and classified as an area of high White segregation.The neighborhoods with lower economic scores are located west of Glassel Street and north of Walnut Avenue,which is a predominantly Hispanic area. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores, are predominantly White, and are generally areas of high White concentration. • In San Clemente, neighborhoods across the city have high economic scores, are predominantly White, and are primarily areas of high White concentration. • In Santa Ana, there are neighborhoods with low economic scores in much of the central and western parts of the city, which correspond to the areas of high POC segregation and are predominantly Hispanic, except for the Riverview West community, which is predominantly AAPI. Neighborhoods with higher economic scores are in the northern and southern parts of the city, which are areas of low- medium segregation. Orange County 85 25-29 Regional AFH • In Tustin, all neighborhoods have good economic scores except for one neighborhood south of I-5 and west of SR-55, adjacent to Santa Ana.This is also a predominantly Hispanic area and is classified as an area of high POC segregation. • In Westminster, economic scores are lowest in the central part of the city, in the neighborhoods south of Westminster Boulevard, east of Hoover Street, and north of Bolsa Avenue.These are all areas of predominantly AAPI population. Map 8— Economic Score—Region fillgre"R . -�'" _,cW..u, terra g*m ''?-1 01 � -yc� R�� s� . � Ai"'IC"•���' .�• � may. !„a„ ,� „, [ Y 413,1ev 1s- � a x'! ' 11 11i4,2014,2 32 48 11,4 1 510.500 God Onocirephy rCACAICU°motpuuty Map f.rmmmu.Stow 111C1).20291 1MO ,04-00 4 In �m 1 I qY11111 0-021less Poswve Ecowmrc Qoxoroxs) Ell,0o-Os n S io roam ,0) 04 IMO•0 A-11Mor0 I'0,ao 1 ta+om(1T4cor mrs) F..ran...-.,s;+...s•.a.<n.n.s.,..n ne ws.+..:o...+1.to Mtn an.•:te.. w w Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 86 25-29 Regional AFH Map 8- Economic Score- North Orange County .' 4 .-_--me - -. .______ -._._..._ ._...._..... --__ - ice' a..it.- ,,, jr., ,,_,, R#ve ,y aPWs ., . ...,‘ n. r4 1J AAA x. ..c..s' l�. ..•.ass., an ii. , , t. ... L—L...,1 , ii!liAlii-- J- - e•, „,,,,41.1111 ._ , -'. , 1,,V ill r ,,,, L ' i �.,. v o.e r r_+�t..u: • l a 122/2024,1127139M 1!70.208 COG Geography TC.AC1HCA Opportunity Map Economic Scan PICO.20211 Tract; .1 r- 1= s04-08 rn IIII 0-02(Less Postve Economic Outcomes) IIIIIs 0.8-0 8 i'lon 0 2_0 4 11111.08 1(More Positive[kmam c.Outcomes) .awc ..r.. ,.. L,,0 4,1.r,r Or ate.. .•.�».I. x cos w.+.r*.*[+-we, Source: California HCD,AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 87 25-29 Regional AFH Map 8-Economic Score-Central Orange County -- - "ii .11 • e .r 0 x ._� 4 _ .... ■ 441 , .,... . ' 1e2,244,I u7 h.PM i 70.301 CO(;(o7ra,hy((:AG4ICII 1)M0550515 M , ("maw Scan 0101,2021) IMid I.0 4,00 0 175 75 i00 ♦ ! I -0-02(Lass Po1Rve E(n0.oIw(+Worhms) �.0b-06 a zra as 111m WA•07 04 IIIII-0 8 1 n P0Mwo A rmm,t Oulrlarrwx) I..ma lv..oa.Ras+.a.w uso.M .. Source: California HCD,AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 88 25-29 Regional AFH Map 8-Economic Score-South Orange County -i----1- )l `\\,._ :,- `' 17 4, t, ' L nji""s), .,. (.Fr ri , /1 7 11931 tr MsC. Cl, .___, L 122:2924,94`222 AM --------'I'59531 ---_ COI:t430901I1y 14 A(:hl(XlOpinrn„0 Watt t enanw icon tINXt,2071) linrl I.04 06 b 1/ti 35 11111 0-021ess Posrovo Ec,onw �dr(Warms) •06-06 R 15 5 ZG t M Or 0 2 04 MI.0 6 t(Moo Poservo 1.,mMn,,tAdnnns) m w ra rabw,w«r.�'r +.ww+..,. ice;•'re...r:.0001.W`p..own. Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer The following analysis describes the groups that are least successful in accessing employment. Table 7 - Labor Force Participation and Unemployment, shows 2018-2022 ACS data on labor force participation rates and unemployment rates in the region and Orange County, for the overall population and by race/ethnicity, disability status, and sex. The table shows that: • Orange County has lower unemployment rates than the region for every group measured in the table, except for Pacific Islanders. • Labor force participation rates are generally higher in Orange County than the region, except for White individuals (lower in the County than the region) and Asian individuals (same rate in County and region). • Similar to the region overall, Black individuals have the highest unemployment rate in Orange County. In the County, Pacific Islanders have the second highest unemployment rate. Orange County 89 25-29 Regional AFH Table 7-Labor Force Participation and Unemployment Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim,CA MSA Orange County,CA Aliso Viejo,CA Labor Force Unemployment rate LaborLabor Force Force Unemployment rate Unemployment rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Population 16 years and over 65.00% 6.60% 65.60% 5.40% 75.30% 3.80% Race/Ethnicity . White,Non-Hispanic 63.40% 6.30% 62.80% 5.10% 75.50% 3.50% Black 60.70% 10.40% 70.60% 7.70% 84.90% 8.90% Hispanic 67.60% 6.60% 70.70% 5.50% 78.00% 3.00% Asian 62.70% 5.30% 62.70% 5.10% 71.00% 3.00% Pacific Islander 66.40% 7.00% 68.70% 7.30% 100.00% 0.00% Native American 66.20% 7.90% 70.60% 5.20% 100.00% 0.00% - Sex(population 20 to 64 years) Male 84.10% 6.10% 85.90% 4.70% 91.10% 2.90% Female 72.80% 6.50% 73.50% 5.40% 79.00% 4.10% Disability Status With any disability 46.80% 13.30% 51.00% 10.80% 68.50% 2.90% Anaheim,CA Buena Park,CA Costa Mesa,CA Labor Force Labor Force Unemployment rate Labor Force Unemployment rate Unemployment rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Population 16 years and over 67.40% 5.40% 69.00% 5.40% 73.20% 5.00% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 62.70% 5.00% 61.40% 6.40% 71.20% 5.00% Black 72.30% 9.30% 77.70% 3.30% 91.60% 5.90% Hispanic 70.80% 5.40% 72.40% 5.00% 76.50% 5.80% Asian 64.20% 4.70% 70.90% 5.00% 64.10% 2.60% Pacific Islander 66.80% 2.50% 63.30% 33.50% 92.80% 2.80% Native American 73.70% 4.10% 67.80% 18.30% 72.90% 3.70% Sex(population 20 to 64 years) Male 86.20% 4.70% 87.00% 5.60% 89.50% 4.00% Female 73.90% 5.50% 77.00% 4.90% 78.50% 5.00% Disability Status With any disability 47.50% 13.40% 50.10% 13.70% 57.80% 11.50% Fountain Valley,CA Fullerton,CA Garden Grove,CA Labor Force Labor Force Unemployment rate Labor Force Unemployment rate Unemployment rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Population 16 years and over 61.80% 6.00% 65.40% 6.90% 64.30% 5.80% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 57.40% 6.90% 60.40% 6.60% 59.70% 6.70% Black 70.50% 27.80% 63.10% _ 17.80% 57.80% 0.00% Hispanic 72.90% 3.90% 71.10% 6.60% 72.90% 4.90% Asian 62.10% 5.10% 63.60% 6.90% 59.60% 6.40% Pacific Islander 65.20% 20.40% 83.50% 0.00% 65.60% 13.00% Native American 66.00% 0.00% 73.20% 8.30% 78.70% 5.90% - Sex(population 20 to 64 years) Male 83.30% 7.40% 85.00% 5.50% 83.30% 5.00% Female 75.30% 4.80% 71.80% 7.50% 74.00% 5.80% Disability Status With any disability 37.40% 12.10% 52.00% 10.50% 46.40% 10.70% Huntington Beach,CA Irvine,CA Laguna Niguel,CA Labor Force Labor Force Labor Force Participation Rate Unemployment rate Participation Rate Unemployment rate Unemployment rate Participation Rate Population 16 years and over 66.30% 5.40% 65.60% 5.50% 66.20% 5.50% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 63.80% 5.10% 66.90% 6.30% 63.50% 4.70% Black 80.90% 13.10% 73.10% 5.20% 63.40% 9.80% Hispanic 75.70% 5.70% 68.10% 5.50% 74.10% 3.00% Asian 63.40% 5.40% 63.40% 4.50% 69.40% 9.60% Pacific Islander 77.70% 6.40% 79.30% 0.60% 93.10% 0.00% Native American 56.00% 4.00% 65.20% 4.00% 89.70% 0.00% Sex(population 20 to 64 years) Male 85.70% 5.50% 83.10% 4.10% 86.70% 4.30% Female 77.40% 4.60% 70.10% 6.40% 75.00% 6.80% Disability Status With any disability 53.80% 13.00% 54.10% 11.20% 37.80% 10.50% Note 1:Data Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Orange County 90 25-29 Regional AFH Table 7-Labor Force Participation and Unemployment (continued) La Habra,CA Lake Forest,CA Mission Viejo,CA Labor Force Labor Force Unemployment rate Labor Force Unemployment rate Unemployment rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Population 16 years and over 68.30% 7.20% 69.20% 5.00% 63.60% 4.40% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 63.60% 7.60% 67.20% 5.20% 60.30% 4.70% Black 76.00% 3.60% 54.70% 3.50% 71.10% 2.80% Hispanic 71.20% 7.70% 75.20% 5.50% 71.50% 3.20% Asian 65.30% 4.30% 67.50% 3.30% 66.20% 5.00% Pacific Islander 100.00% 0.00% 60.70% 0.00% 89.50% 0.00% Native American 57.70% 0.00% 94.90% 0.00% 72.80% 0.00% Sex(population 20 to 64 years) Male 88.90% 6.20% 88.90% 4.30% 88.60% 3.50% Female 76.60% 7.50% 73.80% 5.00% 75.10% 4,60% Disability Status With any disability 49.80% 15.90% 57.30% 7.50% 53.90% 3.70% Newport Beach,CA Orange,CA Rancho Santa Margarita,CA Labor Force Labor Unemployment rate Force Force Unemployment rate Unemployment rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Population 16 years and over 62.40% 4.10% 66.10% 4.70% 74.30% 3.30% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 60.50% 4.70% 64.00% 4.00% 73.60% 3.00% Black 54.80% 0.00% 60.90% 5.60% 82.10% 1.60% Hispanic 76.80% 2.70% 69.20% 5.40% 80.20% 3.80% Asian 57.50% 0.80% 64.90% 3.10% 72.70% 3.40% Pacific Islander 100.00% 0.00% 59.60% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% Native American 65.40% 0.00% 76.50% 0.00% 95.00% 21.60% Sex(population 20 to 64 years) Male 88.70% 3.80% 82.30% 4.20% 92.90% 3.50% Female 68.60% 3.90% 75.60% 4.20% 77.10% 2.20% Disability Status With any disability 60.30% 10.40% 52.40% 5.10% 62.10% 5.20% San Clemente,CA Santa Ana,CA Tustin,CA Labor Force Labor Force Labor Force Unemployment rate Unemployment rate Unemployment rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Participation Rate Population 16 years and over 63.10% 5.30% 66.70% 5.50% 69.00% 5.90% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 61.90% 5.80% 59.90% 3.90% 65.90% 7.30% Black 71.50% 0.00% 70.50% 6.60% 74.00% 8.00% Hispanic 70.70% 4.70% 68.50% 5.30% 72.50% 6.50% Asian 52.20% 3.90% 61.70% 7.40% 67.80% 4.00% Pacific Islander 30.90% 0.00% 42.10% 24.90% 63.50% 14.80% Native American 100.00% 0.00% 70.00% 6.40% 68.20% 0.00% Sex(population 20 to 64 years) Male 85.40% 4.80% 85.00% 4.90% 89.70% 4.40% Female 71.60% 5.30% 71.60% 5.20% 75.80% 6.50% Disability Status With any disability 52.60% 4.40% 51.70% 9.60% 51.40% 11.20% Westminster,CA Labor Force Participation Rate Unemployment rate Population 16 years and over 59.90% 7.50% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 58.00% 5.80% Black 71.40% 3.80% Hispanic 66.60% 9.00% Asian 57.40% 7.20% Pacific Islander 36.30% 25.60% Native American 47.60% 15.40% Sex(population 20 to 64 years) Male 82.10% 7.20% Female 71.20% 7.60% Disability Status With any disability 42.10% 12.90% Note 1:Data Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Orange County 91 25-29 Regional AFH 3. Transportation This analysis describes any disparities in access to transportation related to costs and access to public transit by protected class groups. Table 6 includes a Transit Index, which measures the likelihood that residents will utilize public transportation. Higher index values indicate better access to public transit in a neighborhood. Table 6 also includes a Low Transportation CostIndex,which measures the cost of transportation in a neighborhood. Higher index values indicate lower transportation costs. Transportation costs may be low in a neighborhood due to better access to public transportation, or to the density of housing, services, and employment, or contributing factors. Table 6 shows the following regarding disparities in access to transit and to neighborhoods with low transportation costs in each of the participating jurisdictions: • In the region, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are relatively high for all groups, though there are significant disparities between racial/ethnic groups. Both indices are lowest for White residents and highest for Black residents and are higher across all groups for individuals living below the FPL. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, access to transit is slightly lower for all groups compared to the region but is still relatively high. There are also significant disparities, with AAPI residents having the best access, and White residents having the least access. Access is slightly higher across groups for people living below the FPL.Access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs is lower for all groups compared to the region overall but is still relatively high.There are some disparities between groups, with Hispanic residents having the best access, and White residents having the least access. Access is slightly higher across groups for people living below the FPL, except for Hispanic residents living below the FPL who have similar access to the overall Hispanic population. • In Aliso Viejo, access to transit is low for all groups, and lowest for Black and Native American residents living below the FPL. Access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs is relatively high for all groups, with small disparities between groups—access is lowest for Black and Native American residents living below the FPL. • In Anaheim, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. • In Buena Park, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. • In Costa Mesa, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. Orange County 92 25-29 Regional AFH • In Fountain Valley, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. Black residents living below the FPL have the highest access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs. • In Fullerton, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. • In Garden Grove, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. • In Huntington Beach, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. Native American residents living below the FPL have relatively low access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs, compared to other groups in city and the region. • In Irvine, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. • In La Habra, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. • In Laguna Niguel, access to transit is low for all groups. Access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs is slightly lower for residents of the city in comparison to the region. • In Lake Forest, access to transit is low for all groups, and lowest for Black and Hispanic residents living below the FPL. Access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs is slightly lower for residents of the city in comparison to the region. • In Mission Viejo, access to transit is low for all groups.Access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs is slightly lower for residents of the city in comparison to the region. • In Newport Beach, access to transit is high for all groups. Access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs is comparable to the region for most groups, except for AAPI residents in the city,who have less access than other groups and compared to the region. • In Orange, access to transit is high for all groups and slightly better than access in the region. Access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs is relatively high for all groups and is comparable to the region as a whole. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, access to transit is low for all groups. Access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs is also lower in the city compared to the region, and there are significant racial/ethnic disparities. AAPI residents living below the FPL have significantly lower access than other groups. • In San Clemente, access to transit is low for all groups, and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs is also lower in the city compared to the region.There are some racial/ethnic disparities in access to neighborhoods with low Orange County 93 25-29 Regional AFH transportation costs—Native American residents living below the FPL line, and AAPI residents of all income levels, have less access compared to other groups. • In Santa Ana, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. • In Tustin, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. • In Westminster, access to transit and access to neighborhoods with low transportation costs are high for all groups. The following analysis describes how a person's p/ace of residence affects their access to transportation. Map 9— High Quality Transit Areas, is a series of maps showing the areas of north, central, and south Orange County, and the region, that have access to "high quality" public transit, defined as having scheduled frequencies of 15 minutes or less. These maps were created by California HCD to facilitate fair housing planning, using data from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)13. On the maps,the outlined areas are those within half a mile of a transit stop that is served by public transit with scheduled frequencies of 15 minutes or less. These maps show the following relationship between a person's place of residence and access to transportation: • Countywide, high quality transit areas (HQTAs) are concentrated in central County cities, and there are no HQTAs in the southern or northeast parts of the County. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, there are HQTAs in the following places o In Brea, there is a HQTA in the center of city, overlapping with the racially integrated CensusTract that has a predominantly Hispanic population. o In Cypress, there is a HQTA on the southern edge of the city. o In Stanton, HQTAs cover the entire city. o In Seal Beach, there are HQTAs along Seal Beach Boulevard north of US-1. o In Rossmoor, the southeastern corner of the city is a HQTA, along Seal Beach Boulevard. o In Los Alamitos, the northern edge of the city is part of an HQTA. o In Laguna Woods, the eastern half of the city is a HQTA, along ElToro Rd. o In Laguna Hills, the part of the city adjacent to the HQTAs in Laguna Woods and Lake Forest is a HQTA. 13 The maps were downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer, which can be accessed at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing Orange County 94 25-29 Regional AFH o The following areas have no HQTAs: Placentia,Yorba Linda, unincorporated areas east ofYorba Linda, La Palma,Villa Park,Orange Park Acres, El Modena, North Tustin, Laguna Beach, Dana Point, Capistrano Beach, San Juan Capistrano, Ladera Ranch, and North Laguna Hills • In Aliso Viejo, there are no HQTAs • In Anaheim, there are HQTAs in the western part of city along Beach Boulevard; in the central and southern part of city along Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue, including the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center near Angel Stadium; and in the eastern part of the city near the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink station. These areas overlap with both high POC segregation areas and racially integrated areas. • In Buena Park, there are HQTAs in the eastern half of city, along Beach Boulevard and La Palma Avenue. • In Costa Mesa, HQTAs cover most of the city's area except for the high White segregation areas in the northwest (the neighborhoods north and west of the Country Club) and in East Side Costa Mesa (east of SR-55 and south of Mesa Drive), which do not have HQTAs. • In Fountain Valley, there are no HQTAs • In Fullerton, there are HQTAs in downtown Fullerton and up to Fullerton College, including the area around the Metrolink station. • In Garden Grove, there are HQTAs south of SR-22, in West Garden Grove, and in the eastern part of the city.There are no HQTAs in the city's north-central area. • In Huntington Beach, most of the city is not a HQTA.There is one HQTA around the intersection of Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway (US-1). • In Irvine, there are HQTAs located near UC Irvine and John Wayne Airport, and the Irvine Medical and Science Complex.The majority of the city does not have HQTAs. • In La Habra, the western half of the city is a HQTA. In the eastern half of the city, which is a high POC segregation area and has a concentration of predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods, there are no HQTAs • In Laguna Niguel, there are no HQTAs except in a small area in the northeast corner along Crown Valley Parkway, adjacent to Mission Viejo. • In Lake Forest, most of the city is not a HQTA.There are two HQTAs in the city: one in Foothill Ranch, north of SR-241(aroundTowne Center); and the other in the city's southeastern corner along El Toro Rd (which is a predominantly Hispanic area). • In Mission Viejo, most of the city does not have HQTAs.There are two HQTAs in the city: one in the southern part, along Crown Valley Parkway (which is a low-medium concentration area with a predominantly Hispanic population); and the other in the northern part of the city, around the intersections of Santa Margarita Parkway with Los Alisos Boulevard and Marguerite Parkway (which are low-medium concentration areas with predominantly White populations) Orange County 95 25-29 Regional AFH • In Newport Beach, there are HQTAs just south of Costa Mesa and around the Civic Center. Much of the city does not have HQTAs. • In Orange, there are HQTAs downtown, in the neighborhoods west and northwest of downtown, and along the westside of Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) north of Katella Avenue.There are no HQTAs east of the Costa Mesa Freeway. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, there are no HQTAs • In San Clemente, there are no HQTAs • In Santa Ana, most of the city is covered by HQTAs, except for northeast and southeast corners. • InTustin, most of the city does not have HQTAs.There are two HQTAs in the following areas: one HQTA is in the racially integrated neighborhoods just to the north of 1-5, in and around downtown; the other HQTA is in South Tustin, around the Metrolink train station. • In Westminster, most of the city is considered a HQTA, with the exception of the western and southeastern areas. Map 9— High Quality Transit Areas—Region , • il i Ai temp" LL _ .1,' �I��NU•Il'illi 1},r g �` yam. P. I i �.. h. ,gymm��y sl f l , ��I'pi'I��W'" i frm r 1 Cii ` 1 oil ,. 1 ,1:. "�1A nm 1 IN.is I _,",, ry qb ,'i :Ill 1ii:b aurualM pliers ti . ,...„.....dr./.1 {; dr"c 12,.2o.4 2.,.2.Psi 1 510 590 Ea1/2 MM frwn MOQQa5Iy I,l,1 lMm s 1r F_. 1. 1 til .hl min T.kY wv:aw y.fM llBf Oa n 905, !K WS Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 96 25-29 Regional AFH Map 9—High ❑Quality Transit Areas—North Orange County �i I �fj � r • 1t �I11ja1'1 �1: qi,a; Ili ....,.,, i � 1 ' r ! liiluII? " IRS `+ r Ilk-4 hht --- *IT of I arriA ni •tot i;.. ��'1. �,o, I ...A.. ' ,:till, , , n 1 '1" ,!;I '���ji , . p j� '►' .1 'j i jmil� 111 t �" ,<,i,,;IA j ��''� ''° ' �� �nl Irlr. I tip ; ( f ' 1;1 ( ,. 01 jriliklir i ill, I ) I I Alt lWa' ' un , 1 H t.1 ,;r 1r •1N'A. ,„, , ! C] Few, n..v,!„e,t ., lulinit . Ili li. iiir fir:.! ;,:.ram= 1�1q ye .v , . 1�1 t' . r 1 I ihr* ,ri11;11 .100.101011 ��� ,A ,n 'i1 Y Abliffillikiv4/ Alliiii _ l22j20.4.1'26 air ASi I t19.2W (®10 I k,6.0111egle MIFly 1..11,0 New, ! 1 Ts 7 5 gym; 1 s ti D ? 6 ,7 Am ltiC 3.ew .1:b 1riwr N.a MGM M64.a 1Lr4eaT+✓0+,..11P1. 4i+h w.h fM N.5 Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 97 25-29 Regional AFH �II Map 9— High Quality Transit AArre`a�s''-Central Orange County MIIIII 11 I . t .1 o JL1 I ll� l 1.h I,. hna� ; i( t 1 lkli II Ilir ., ��� `����� I`�I IlIj I11� ' 7r � HI jl;lip �1fr./�1+1� 1' co. , II !� it �In .11u�l. li ht � II itl �11 �i,, h i,1. II'w. ' 110 a- 1lllllll Orll lll I1111f11 � t� a....x.w A', r it"!7", 14' 'Ill I III ' ' ...... "Ill i it I L fi_ f`1, sIwo ito 7 )- Ipl , " t2/2,2024,t 34 40 PM 1 170.397 ®10 1440 from High()unity 109n.0 Nra 0 1IS 3k• r tNp 0 77S hS 111m . s Lsn , MAWS 1. wN imwuMr Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 98 25-29 Regional AFH Map 9—High Quality Transit Areas—South Orange County 415 -1 1j :, 63.1333 rr row lbw*loi• 3 �, err 113033110 911, Ir I Yrr lei r Yoma.* 4� AV S l�� � i{ OY 1�2'22024 9 52 38 AM 1150.537 ( 1 r' 1,?PAI,trim (Amity 11dn5lt AIr, in 15 D 15 5 1D ti, w.ww1+•n..,.awwp....c Oa «ipe�r,S. .scs.w n d.,', 9.vmn 1 Q�6Y.I,AYp awP'Ab.ea N 4+4 s r�nrsM. Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer 4. Access to Low Poverty Neighborhoods The following analysis describes any disparities in exposure to poverty by protected class groups. Table 6 includes a Low Poverty Index, which measures the level of poverty in a neighborhood. Higher index values indicate less exposure to poverty in a neighborhood. Table 6 shows the following regarding disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods in each of the participating jurisdictions: • In the region, there are significant disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods. Hispanic and Black residents have the least access, and White residents have the most access. Individuals living below the FPL also have less access to low-poverty neighborhoods, compared to the overall population. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region, including for individuals living below the FPL. However, there are significant disparities in access. Hispanic residents have the least access. White residents have the most access. Individuals living below the FPL also have less access to low-poverty neighborhoods, compared to the overall population. Orange County 99 25-29 Regional AFH • In Aliso Viejo, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region, including for individuals living below the FPL, and there are no major disparities by race/ethnicity. • In Anaheim,there are significant disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods. Hispanic residents have the least access. White residents have the most access. Individuals living below the FPL also have less access to low-poverty neighborhoods, compared to the overall population. Compared to the region,White, AAPI, and Native American residents of the city have less access to low-poverty neighborhoods; and Black residents of the city have better access. • In Buena Park, there are similar disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods as in the region, though at a smaller scale because Hispanic, Black, and Native American residents in the city have better access than their counterparts in the region. Access in the city is lowest for Hispanic and Black residents, and highest for White residents. Individuals living below the FPL have less access across all groups, except for Native American residents. • In Costa Mesa, there are similar disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods as in the region, though at a smaller scale due to the fact that all groups, except for White residents, in the city have better access than their counterparts in the region as a whole. Access in the city is lowest for Hispanic residents and highest for AAPI residents. Individuals living below the FPL have less access across all groups, except for Black residents • In Fountain Valley, all residents have relatively good access to low-poverty neighborhoods compared to the region.There are some disparities by race/ethnicity, with Hispanic residents, and Native American residents living below the FPL, having the least access. • In Fullerton, all residents have relatively good access to low-poverty neighborhoods compared to the region.There are some disparities by race/ethnicity,with Hispanic residents, including those living below the FPL, and Black residents living below the FPL, having the least access. • In Garden Grove, there are significant disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods. AAPI and Hispanic residents have the least access.White residents have the best access.The population living below the FPL has less access across all groups. Compared to the region, disparities in the city are less pronounced due to lower index values for White and AAPI residents in the city, and higher index values for all other groups in the city, as compared to values in the region. • In Huntington Beach, all residents have relatively good access to low-poverty neighborhoods compared to the region.There are some disparities by race/ethnicity, with Hispanic residents having the least access and White residents having the most access. Individuals living below the FPL have less access across all groups, except for Native American residents. Orange County 100 25-29 Regional AFH • In Irvine, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region, including for individuals living below the FPL, and there are no major disparities by race/ethnicity. • In La Habra, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region, except for White residents.There are significant disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods by race/ethnicity. Hispanic residents have the least access. AAPI residents overall have the most access, however, the AAPI population living below the FPL has significantly less access compared to the overall AAPI population in the city. • In Laguna Niguel, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region, including for individuals living below the FPL, and there are no major disparities by race/ethnicity. • In Lake Forest, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region. However, some racial/ethnic disparities exist,with Hispanic residents having the least access. For the population living below the FPL, access is much lower for Native American residents compared to any other group, access is lower for AAPI residents compared to the overall AAPI population, and access is higher for Black residents compared to the overall Black population. • In Mission Viejo, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region. However, some disparities exist for individuals living below the FPL, with Black residents living below the FPL having less access than other groups in the city (though still with better access compared to the region). • In Newport Beach, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region, including for individuals living below the FPL, and there are no major disparities by race/ethnicity. • In Orange, there are similar disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods as in the region, though at a smaller scale because all groups, except for White residents, in the city have better access than their counterparts in the region as a whole. Hispanic residents in the city have the least access to low-poverty neighborhoods. Additionally, Black residents living below the FPL have significantly lower access. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region, and there is little racial/ethnic disparity. For the population living below the FPL, racial/ethnic disparities are larger, mainly because the AAPI population below the FPL has the most access to low-poverty neighborhoods of any group in the city. • In San Clemente, access to low-poverty neighborhoods is higher for all groups compared to the region. However, some racial/ethnic disparities exist,with Hispanic residents experiencing the least access. Disparities are larger for the population Orange County 101 25-29 Regional AFH living below the FPL, with Black residents living below the FPL having the least access in the city. • In Santa Ana, there are significant disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods. Hispanic residents have the least access overall, and White residents have the most access overall. For the population living below the FPL, access is lower across all groups. Compared to the region, all groups in the city have less access to low-poverty neighborhoods, except for Black residents, who have access comparable to the region overall. • In Tustin, there are similar disparities in access to low-poverty neighborhoods as in the region, though at a smaller scale due to the fact that Hispanic, Black, and Native American residents in the city have higher access relative to the region, and White and AAPI residents have lower access relative to region. In the city, Hispanic residents have the lowest access. For the population living below the FPL, there are also significant disparities. Access to low-poverty neighborhoods is lowest for Native American and Hispanic residents living below the FPL, and access for White residents living below the FPL is significantly lower than access for the overall White population. • In Westminster, access to low poverty neighborhoods is lower than in the region for all groups, except for Black residents, and there are significant racial/ethnic disparities. Hispanic and AAPI residents have the least access, overall. For the population living below the FPL, access is lower across all groups and is lowest for AAPI residents. Map 10—Poverty Status, is a series of maps showing the percent of households, by Census Tract, living below the FPL in north, central, and south Orange County, and in the region. These maps were created by California HCD to facilitate fair housing planning, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey, 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates14. These maps show the following relationship between an individual's place of residence and their exposure to poverty: • Countywide, higher poverty areas are in the central County cities,whereas the areas along the coast, in the south, and in the northeast are low poverty areas. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, there are high poverty areas (i.e., with poverty rates above 20%) in the following places: o In Placentia, in the southwest corner of the city, which is a high POC segregation area that is predominantly Hispanic. o In Stanton, in the neighborhoods on the south side of Katella Avenue and on the eastside of Beach Boulevard north of Katella Avenue. 14 The maps were downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer, which can be accessed at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing Orange County 102 25-29 Regional AFH o In San Juan Capistrano, there is one tract between Camino Del Avion, Del Obispo Street, and Alipaz Street, which has a poverty rate over 20% and is predominantly Hispanic. • In AlisoViejo, all Census Tracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Anaheim, the highest poverty area is located downtown north of Lincoln Avenue (in a predominantly Hispanic area).There are other areas of concentrated poverty south and west of downtown, which are also predominantly Hispanic.The areas of lowest poverty are downtown south of Lincoln Avenue, east of downtown (including the racially integrated areas), in Northeast Anaheim, and in Anaheim Hills. • In Buena Park, all Census Tracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Costa Mesa, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Fountain Valley, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Fullerton, there are high poverty areas in the southeast (predominantly Hispanic, low-medium segregation areas) and surrounding CSU Fullerton (likely due to the presence of college students). • In Garden Grove, there are high poverty areas in the industrial area in West Garden Grove, in the Census Tract between Brookhurst Street and Gilbert Street north of Chapman Avenue (a low-medium segregation area that is predominantly Hispanic), and in the Census Tract in between SR-22 and Garden Grove Boulevard west of Gilbert Street (a high POC segregation area that is predominantly AAPI). • In Huntington Beach, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Irvine, the highest poverty area is surrounding UC Irvine (likely due to the presence of college students).There is also a high poverty area west of San Diego Creek north of I-405.This is primarily an industrial/commercial area encompassing the Irvine Business Complex. • In La Habra, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Laguna Niguel, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Lake Forest, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Mission Viejo, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20°/0. • In Newport Beach, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Orange, all Census Tracts have a poverty rate below 20%, and all neighborhoods east of Villa Park have poverty rates below 10%. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In San Clemente, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Santa Ana, high poverty areas are concentrated in downtown and southeast of downtown where land use is primarily industrial and commercial, and in western Santa Ana, specifically the Census Tract northwest of the intersection of McFadden Avenue and Harbor Boulevard,where Kona Kai Mobile Home Park is located. All of these areas are high POC segregation areas with predominantly Hispanic populations. Orange County 103 25-29 Regional AFH • InTustin, all CensusTracts have a poverty rate below 20%. • In Westminster, there are high poverty areas between Edwards Street and Beach Boulevard along Westminster Boulevard, and south of Bolsa Avenue west of Bushard Street.These areas are high POC segregation areas with predominantly AAPI populations. Map 10— Poverty y�Status—Region ` ,..' ?' ` Yl� 1� r'div lA C-• if �1 i r t.i-T-T. 1 I^ +7�f 0 11l: , '... ...- ,'.} ....( i rw • ,.y 011 t i' +1 1*. it.i Iaftli.•5... jiiii .i rys�p,�-+ii11YY t att �W f I �.'I 'ass/." �Ay _ r 1,0 ,,,:,, ,:,if;,.. ��� rj1P ti {ti1� f v .,. . '` '1 I„ - :\e,....... ,,,, _tie _ f y 1.,4.d¢.I 2.r,_I F1.1 1510.MII Vnvaly'ui,.IN s All/70111 4.1-.q'^ .WN - 41,4 ' . ''•101:.7111r in-40% VA 11 Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 104 25-29 Regional AFH Map 10— Poverty Status— North Orange County I r.:ar cr. - -- n-- Vt61) _ W t ... w VVV .cam, r 't Poverty Stools IACS.2017 20211 hod_70% 30% a 1 76 )s :•10% -30%.60% e 3 6 rn, LJ 10% 20% -.40% se x W rp Rmu of tam.I?rr+yr Er nEr!i Ir -. GSlp.n15 Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 105 25-29 Regional AFH Map 10— Poverty Status—Central Orange County if i G . e ... ,,,,. 0 , ,. ,__, q/ � � .� a 4,Jii :5,to ;, fi L Itii344E014 '' ' y` 1. t^ t1p1111r 41 Oa .4,.._as ,.,2.„o?4,1 41 4 1 PM 1 170,307 Poverty StaWS INS.20112071) had-20% 30% 1. 115 35 rn. ri.I0k -30%,40% 0 ?Pr S5 11 km rE.10% 2051 Ell.d0'n, t.....,M ins...r.....oft.,u..l...... tot 404 um.,¶4L,OO 51,15 I.11Mt. favor,t'V.+ w w.+az.a an V.4 a ro om..+.1y Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 106 25-29 Regional AFH Map 10—Poverty Status—South Orange County * ..r . awn r r c\ . it Is W W r,• 1212%2024.4l55 35 MI 1159 537 Poverty SWtrt ACS 701/20211 lrad-70% 30% t' '/`' 1< 1 pi4 1-7" 10% -30%-40ti - 411% lam.,140t Drum.1545,!M,rPS h+,.11,2 1n+n,f Op.^S..waNa evnu:�Ae rvr.4S Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Table 8 - Poverty by Race/Ethnicity and National Origin, shows data from the 2018-2022 ACS on poverty rates by race/ethnicity and national origin, for the region, Orange County, the Urban County jurisdictions, and the HUD Entitlement Cities. The table shows the following: • Countywide, the poverty rate is lower than region for all groups except AAPI residents (who have a poverty rate comparable to the region).There are significant racial/ethnic disparities.The Black poverty rate is highest and is nearly double the White poverty rate, and the foreign-born population is more likely to live below poverty than the native-born population. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, the poverty rate is lower than the County overall. Similar to the County overall, the Black poverty rate is highest and is nearly double the White poverty rate, and the foreign-born population is more likely to live below poverty than the native-born population. • In Aliso Viejo,the overall poverty rate is lower than the County. Similar to the County, the foreign-born population is more likely to live below poverty than the native-born population. (Note that the Black and Native American populations may be too small for the sample data to be accurate.) • In Anaheim, the overall poverty rate is higher than the County and is comparable to the region poverty rate. Black and Hispanic residents have the highest poverty rates. Orange County 107 25-29 Regional AFH Similar to the County overall,the foreign-born population is more likely to live below poverty than the native-born population. • In Buena Park, the overall poverty rate is lower than in the County. Similar to the County overall, Black residents have the highest poverty rate. • In Costa Mesa, the overall poverty rate is similar to the County and there are much larger racial/ethnic disparities.The Black poverty rate in the city is over 20%,which is nearly three times as high as the White poverty rate and double the AAPI poverty rate. Similar to the County overall, the foreign-born population is more likely to live below poverty than the native-born population. • In Fountain Valley, the overall poverty rate is lower than the County. Similar to the County, the foreign-born population is more likely to live below poverty than the native-born population. (Note that the Black and Native American populations may be too small for the sample data to be accurate.) • In Fullerton, the overall poverty rate is higher than the County and is comparable to the region poverty rate, and there are much larger racial/ethnic disparities than in the County overall.The Black poverty rate is over 22%,which is almost three times higher than the White and AAPI poverty rates.The Hispanic poverty rate is above 17%, which is more than double the White and AAPI rates. Similar to the County overall, the foreign-born population is more likely to live below poverty than the native-born population. (Note that the Native American population may be too small for the sample data to be accurate.) • In Garden Grove, the overall poverty rate is higher than the County and is comparable to the region poverty rate. There are relatively small disparities by race/ethnicity, with Black residents experiencing the highest poverty rates, and foreign-born residents more likely to live below the FPL than native-born residents. • In Huntington Beach, the overall poverty rate is lower than the County and the foreign-born population is much more likely to live below poverty than the native- born population. (Note that the Native American population may be too small for the sample data to be accurate.) • In Irvine, the overall poverty rate is higher than the County and is comparable to the region poverty rate. Black, Hispanic, and AAPI residents experience similar poverty rates, which are all higher than the poverty rate for White residents. Foreign-born residents are more likely to live below the FPL than native-born residents. • In La Habra, the overall poverty rate is similar to the County. Foreign-born residents more likely to live below the FPL than native-born residents, and Hispanic residents have a higher poverty rate than other groups. (Note that the Black and Native American populations may be too small for the sample data to be accurate.) • In Laguna Niguel, the overall poverty rate is lower than the County. However, there are disparities between groups. Hispanic residents have the highest poverty rate in Orange County 108 25-29 Regional AFH the city, and foreign-born residents are more likely to live below the FPL than native- born residents. • In Lake Forest, the overall poverty rate is lower than in the County. However, there are disparities between groups. Hispanic residents have the highest poverty rate in the city, and foreign-born residents are more likely to live below the FPL than native- born residents. • In Mission Viejo, the overall poverty rate is lower than the County.The data show the Black poverty rate to be much higher than other racial/ethnic groups, however the population size may be too small for the data to be accurate. • In Newport Beach, the overall poverty rate is lower than the County. Unlike the County overall, foreign-born residents in the city are less likely to live below the FPL than native-born residents. Poverty rates for Black, AAPI, and Native American residents are the highest. However, note that the Black and Native American populations may be too small for the sample data to be accurate. • In Orange, the overall poverty rate is similar to the County. In the city, Native American and Hispanic residents have the highest poverty rates, and foreign-born residents are more likely to live below the FPL than native-born residents. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, the overall poverty rate is lower than the County.The data show the Native American poverty rate to be much higher than other racial/ethnic groups, however the population size may be too small for the data to be accurate. • In San Clemente, the overall poverty rate is lower than the County and foreign-born residents are more likely to live below the FPL than native-born residents.The data show the Black poverty rate to be much higher than other racial/ethnic groups, however the population size may be too small for the data to be accurate. • In Santa Ana, the overall poverty rate is higher than the County but lower than the region poverty rate. Black residents have the highest poverty rate (nearly 20%). • InTustin, the overall poverty rate is higher than the County but lower than the region poverty rate. Hispanic residents have the highest poverty rate (nearly double the White poverty rate), and foreign-born residents are more likely to live below the FPL than native-born residents. • In Westminster,the overall poverty rate is higher than the County and the region.The Black poverty rate is over 20% and more than double the White poverty rate.The AAPI poverty rate is over 18% and is also more than double the White poverty rate. Foreign-born residents are more likely to live below the FPL than native-born residents. (Note that the Native American population may be too small for the sample data to be accurate.) Orange County 109 25-29 Regional AFH Table 8- Poverty by Race/Ethnicity and National Origin Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim,CA MSA Orange County,CA Urban Countylurisdictions Population Population Population Population Population Population Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate (#) (%) (#) (%) (#) (%) Total Population 12,920,085 1,647,788 12.8% 3,137,483 303,810 9.7% 582,174 43,112 7.4% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 3,668,661 323,497 8.8% 1,210,102 85,075 7.0% 292,262 15,698 5.4% Black 811,104 159,065 19.6% 51,984 6,751 13.0% 9,465• 1,027 10.9% Hispanic 5,846,585 884,177 15.1% 1,063,284 125,597 11.8% 141,632 13,808 9.7% Asian or Pacific Islander 2,162,068 239,538 11.1% 689,672 76,196 11.0% 112,985 11,023 9.8% Native American 128,664 19,497 15.2% 19,436 1,999 10.3% 2,701 138 5.1% National Origin Foreign Born 4,215,010 604,310 14.3% 930,789 112,838 12.1% 135,078 14,304 10.6% Native 8,705,075 1,043,478 12.0% 2,206,694 190,972 8.7% 447,096 28,808 6.4% Aliso Viejo,CA Anaheim,CA Buena Park,CA Population Population Population Population Population Population Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate (#) (%1 (#) (%) (#) (%1 Total Population 51,292 2,536 4.9% 343,102 43,311 12.6% 83,085 7.313 8.8% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 28,566_ 1,463 5.1% 80,534 8,896 11.0% 18,453 1,509 8.2% Black 1,378 11 0.8% 8,888 1,316 14.8% 1,957 272 13.9% Hispanic 10,262 546 5.3% 183,520 26,222 14.3% 33,314 3,184 9.6% Asian or Pacific Islander 8,204 378 4.6% 61,686 6,252 10.1% 27,521 2,193 8.0% Native American 54 0 0.0% 2,917 269 9.2% 721 44 6.1% National Origin Foreign Born 12,434 1,072 8.6% 119,493 15,929 13.3% 28,957 2,617 9.0% Native 38,858 1,464 3.8% 223,609 27,382 12.2% 54,128 4,696 8.7% Costa Mesa,CA Fountain Valley,CA Fullerton,CA Population Population Population Population Population Population Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate (#) (%) (#) (%) (#) l%) Total Population 110,499 10,459 9.5% 56,467 3,940 7.0% 139,420 17,089 12.3% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 53,986 4,029 7.5% 21,679 1,399 6.5% 43,928 3,528 8.0% Black 1,569 316 20.1%_ 408 12_ 2.9% 2,995 672 22.4% Hispanic 40,007 4,890 12.2%, 9,620 851 8.8% 53,149 9,389 17.7% Asian or Pacific Islander 10,182 974 9.6%_ 21,740 1,525 7.0% 35,218 2,974 8.4% Native American 1,199 136 11.3% 253 30 11.9% 766 144 18.8% NationalOrigin Foreign Born 25,700 3,009 11.7% 18,014 1,442 8.0% 40,515 5,355 13.2% Native 84,799 7,450 8.8% 38,453 2,498 6.5% 98,905 11,734 11.9% Garden Grove,CA Huntington Beach,CA Irvine,CA Population Population Population Population Population Population Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate (#) (%1 (#) (%) (#) (%) Total Population 170,314 21,492 12.6% 196,462 14,268 7.3% 294,174 36,705 12.5% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 29,306 3,125 10.7% 117,697 7,779 6.6% 106,519 10,083 9.5% Black 1,878 258 13.7% 2,371 190 8.0% 5,450 812 14.9% Hispanic 63,619 7,808 12.3% 38,440 3,341 8.7% 31,876 4,652 14.6% Asian or Pacific Islander 71,977 9,834 13.7% 25,548 2,254 8.8% 131,790 18,819 14.3% Native American 1,340 10 0.7°h 879 157 17.9% 616 26 4.2% National Origin Foreign Born 75,026 10,677 14.2% 32,025 3,644 11.4% 118,575 18,364 15.5% Native 95,288 10,815 11.3% 164,437 10,624 6.5% 175,599 18,341 10.4% Note 1:Data Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Orange County 110 25-29 Regional AFH Table 8- Poverty by Race/Ethnicity and National Origin (continued) Laguna Niguel,CA La Habra,CA Lake Forest,CA Population Population Population Population Population Population Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate (#) (%) (A) (%) (#1 (%) Total Population 64,011 4,749 7.4% 62,463 6,123 9.8°, 85,280 6,234 7.3% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 41,043 2,292 5.6% 15,442 927 6.0% 41,699 2,687 6.4% Black 1,299 45 3.5% 1,218 69 5.7% 1,858 154 8.3% Hispanic 10,330 1,668 16.1% 37,307 4,373 11.7% 19,916 2,200 11.0% Asian or Pacific Islander 7,326 275 3.8% 7,635 627 8.2% 17,133 860 5.0% Native American 98 8 8.2% 628 237 37.7% 697 40 5.7°% National Origin Foreign Born 14,975 997 6.7% 15,451 1,976 12.8% 22,911 2,397 10.5% Native 49,036 3,752 7.7% 47,012 4,147 8.8% 62,369 3,837 6.2% Mission Viejo,CA Newport Beach,CA Orange,CA Population Population Population Population Population Population Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate (#) (%I (#) (%) (#) (%) Total Population 92,779 4,550 49% 84,875 6,741 7.9% 132,780 12,263 9.2% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 56,531 2,764 4.9% 64,620 5,070 7.8% 55,043 4,266 7.8% Black 1,095 190 17.4% 663 154 23.2% 1,708 122 7.1% Hispanic 18,286 774 4.2% 8,861 568 6.4% 51,508 6,009 11.7% Asian or Pacific Islander 13,114 666 5.1% 6,901 745 10.8% 18,190 1,193 6.6% Native American 415 19 4.6% 284 33 11.6% 1,116 164 14.7% National Origin Foreign Born 20,553 1,066 5.2% 12,667 919 7.3% 29,177 3,073 10.5% Native 72,226 3,484 4.8% 72,208 5,822 8.1% 103,603 9,190 8 9% Rancho Santa Margarita,CA San Clemente,CA Santa Ana,CA Population ' Population Population Population Population Population Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate (#) (%1 (#) (%) (#) (%) Total Population 47,659 1,864 3.9% 63,979 3,554 5.6% 307,413 35,391 11.5% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 28,312 1,047 3.7% 46,057 2,356 5.1% 27,332 2,868 10.5% Black 819 22 2.7% 1,057 159 15.0% 3,181 630 19.8% Hispanic 9,720 492 5.1% 10,804 619 5.7% 237,341 26,855 11.3% Asian or Pacific Islander 5,983 156 2.6% 3,144 238 7.6% 36,979 4,716 12.8% Native American 210 36 17.1°,6 205 10 4.9% 3,394 265 7.8% National Origin Foreign Born 9,905 425 4.3% 7,227 560 7.7% 126,835 14,705 11.6% Native 37,754 1,439 3.8% 56,752 2,994 5.3% 180,578 20,686 11.5% Tustin,CA Westminster,CA Population Population Population Population Total Living Below Living Below Total Living Below Living Below Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate Population Poverty Rate Poverty Rate (#) (%) (#) (%) Total Population 79,119 7,952 10.1% 90,136 14,164 15.7% Race/Ethnicity White,Non-Hispanic 22,406 1,500 6.7% 18,687 1,789 9.6% Black 1,826 134 7.3% 901 186 20.6% Hispanic 31,997 4,241 13.3% 21,775 3,107 14.3% Asian or Pacific Islander 20,308 1,893 9.3% 46,108 8,601 18.7% Native American 561 56 10.0% 382 177 46.3% National Origin Foreign Born 24,951_ 2,987 12.0% 40,320 7,320 18.2% Native 54,168 4,965 9.2% 49,816 6,844 13.7% Note 1:Data Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Surveys-Year Estimates Orange County 111 25-29 Regional AFH 5. Access to Environmentally Healthy Neighborhoods The following analysis describes any disparities in access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods by protected class groups. Table 6 includes an Environmental Health Index, which captures the potential exposure to harmful toxins in a neighborhood. Higher index values indicate less exposure to harmful toxins, and therefore better environmental quality, in a neighborhood. Table 6 shows the following regarding disparities in access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods in each of the participating jurisdictions: • In the region, there is relatively low access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods for all groups, and racial/ethnic disparities exist. Access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods is highest access for White residents, and lowest for Black residents followed by Hispanic and AAPI residents. Access is lower for all groups living below the FPL, with the least access experienced by Hispanic residents living below the FPL. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, there is relatively low access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods for all groups, and racial/ethnic disparities exist. Access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods is highest access for White residents, and lowest for AAPI residents followed by Black and Hispanic residents. Access is lower for all groups living below the FPL, except for White residents who have comparable access to the overall population. • In Aliso Viejo, there is relatively high access to environmentally health neighborhoods for all groups compared to the region, and no racial/ethnic disparities. • In Anaheim,there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents, regardless of race/ethnicity. • In Buena Park, there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents, regardless of race/ethnicity. • In Costa Mesa, residents have better access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods than residents of the region, but access is still low.There are some racial/ethnic disparities in access. Overall, AAPI residents have the least access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods, and Hispanic residents have the best access. For the population living below the FPL, Black and Native American residents have the least access. • In Fountain Valley, there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents compared to the region.There are small disparities in access for the population living below the FPL. Specifically, Black residents living below the FPL have the least access. Orange County 112 25-29 Regional AFH • In Fullerton,there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents, regardless of race/ethnicity. • In Garden Grove, there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents, regardless of race/ethnicity. • In Huntington Beach, residents have better access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods than residents of the region overall, but access is still fairly low and there are some racial/ethnic disparities. Access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods is lowest for Hispanic residents, and even more so for Hispanic residents living below the FPL. • In Irvine, residents have better access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods than those of the region, but access is still low for all groups regardless of race/ethnicity. • In La Habra,there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents, regardless of race/ethnicity. • In Laguna Niguel, residents have better access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods than residents of the region overall, but access is still limited for all groups regardless of race/ethnicity. • In Lake Forest, residents have better access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods than residents of the region overall, but access is still limited and there are some disparities among the population living below the FPL—specifically, Native American residents living below the FPL have the least access. • In Mission Viejo, residents have better access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods than residents of the region overall, but access is still limited for all groups regardless of race/ethnicity • In Newport Beach, residents have better access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods than residents of the region overall, but access is still limited for all groups regardless of race/ethnicity • In Orange, there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents, regardless of race/ethnicity. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, there is relatively high access to environmentally health neighborhoods for all groups compared to the region and other jurisdictions in Orange County, and no racial/ethnic disparities. • In San Clemente, there is relatively high access to environmentally health neighborhoods for all groups compared to the region and other jurisdictions in Orange County, and no racial/ethnic disparities. • In Santa Ana, there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents, regardless of race/ethnicity. • In Tustin,there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents, regardless of race/ethnicity. Orange County 113 25-29 Regional AFH • In Westminster,there is very poor access to environmentally friendly neighborhoods for all residents, regardless of race/ethnicity. Map 11 —Environmental Health, is a series of maps showing data from the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen 4.0). These maps were created by California HCD to facilitate fair housing planning, using CalEnviroScreen data from OEHHA15. The CalEnviroScreen tool is designed to identify communities most affected by pollution, and those where residents may be especially vulnerable to its effects. To do this, it uses a composite score based on 13 different indicators of pollution burden — such as exposure indicators (e.g., diesel particulate matter levels and lead risk from housing and environmental effect indicators (e.g., location of solid waste facilities) - as well as eight indicators of population characteristics including sensitive population indicators (e.g., asthma rates) and socioeconomic factor factors (e.g., poverty and linguistic isolation). More detailed information on the mapping methodology is available on the OEHHA website.16. On these maps, green areas represent regions with more positive environmental factors, while red areas indicate regions with more negative environmental factors. These maps show the following relationship between an individual's place of residence and their access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods: • Countywide,the areas with more positive environmental factors are along the coast, in the south, and northeast.The areas with more negative environmental factors are in the central parts of the County north of 1-405 and west of the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55). • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, most neighborhoods have primarily positive environmental factors. The areas with more negative environmental factors are located in the following places: o Stanton. o Southwest Placentia, next to Fullerton, which is an area of high POC segregation and is predominantly Hispanic. o San Juan Capistrano, in the CensusTract that encompasses the interchange between 1-5 and the Ortega Highway(SR-74),which is a high POC segregation area and is predominantly Hispanic. • In Aliso Viejo, all neighborhoods in the city have positive environmental factors. 15 The maps were downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer, which can be accessed at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing 16 https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen Orange County 114 25-29 Regional AFH • In Anaheim, Anaheim Hills (a high White segregation area), has positive environmental factors. Much of the rest of the city is affected by negative environmental factors,with the severe environmental factors located in and around downtown, along 1-5 cutting across the city, and along Riverside Freeway (SR-91) on the northern edge of the city. • In Buena Park, there is one CensusTract with a score lower than 40 (indicating more positive environmental factors).This area is between La Palma Avenue and Crescent Avenue, on either side of Knott Avenue. Areas of the city with more negative environmental factors include the neighborhoods north of the Artesia Freeway (SR- 91) and adjacent to 1-5, and the western part of the city, which includes numerous warehouses and distribution facilities. • In Costa Mesa, areas with more positive environmental factors include neighborhoods east of Newport Boulevard (SR-55), which are high White segregation areas, as well as neighborhoods along the western edge of the city and north of 1-405, which are also predominantly White.The areas with more negative environmental factors include neighborhoods downtown,which are predominantly Hispanic. • In Fountain Valley, areas with more positive environmental factors include the neighborhoods in the southwest corner of city,which have a high concentration of White residents, and those surrounding Mile Square Regional Park, a high POC segregation area that is predominantly AAPI. The rest of the city experiences moderate environmental factors. • In Fullerton, areas with more positive environmental factors include the neighborhoods near the Panorama Nature Preserve in the city's northeast. Areas with more negative environmental factors include the neighborhoods in the southeast part of the city,which are predominantly Hispanic—this area includes the commercial/industrial area along the Riverside Freeway(SR-91); and neighborhoods in the southwest part of the city, around Fullerton Municipal Airport and to the south, which are also predominantly Hispanic. • In Garden Grove, residential neighborhoods in West Garden Grove, west of Knott Street have more positive environmental factors and are areas of high White segregation.The rest of the city experiences less positive environmental factors,with the most negative factors located in West Garden Grove, east of Knott Street an industrial and commercial area, and along Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22), in the city's southeast. • In Huntington Beach, most of the city — particularly along the coast and in the southeastern region — has more positive environmental factors. However, an area with less positive environmental factors is in the industrial/commercial area between Beach Boulevard (SR-39) and Gothard Street, spanning from Talbert Orange County 115 25-29 Regional AFH Avenue to Edinger Avenue.This area overlaps with the one predominantly Hispanic CensusTract. • In Irvine, most of the neighborhoods in the city have positive environmental factors. The few places with more negative environmental factors include the area west of San Diego Creek north of 1-405 (which is primarily comprised of industrial and commercial land uses, including the Irvine Business Complex),the area between UC Irvine and 1-405 (which is a high POC segregation area and is predominantly AAPI), and the eastern part of city along 1-5 near Lake Forest, where Irvine Industrial Complex East and IrvineTechnology Center are located. • In La Habra, most of the city is affected by negative environmental factors,with the most negative factors concentrated in the central and southeast areas of the city/ This is likely due to the proximity to warehouses, distribution centers, and Imperial Highway (SR-90).These areas overlap with the high POC segregation areas, which are predominantly Hispanic. • In Laguna Niguel, all neighborhoods in the city have positive environmental factors. • In Lake Forest, most neighborhoods in the city have positive environmental factors, except for those south of Serrano Creek, which experience more negative environmental factors. • In Mission Viejo, all neighborhoods in the city have positive environmental factors. • In Newport Beach, all neighborhoods in the city have positive environmental factors. • In Orange,the neighborhoods east of Villa Park,which haver high White segregation, experience more positive environmental factors. Neighborhoods west of Glassel Street, which are predominantly Hispanic, are affected by more negative environmental factors. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, all neighborhoods in the city have positive environmental factors. • In San Clemente, most neighborhoods in the city have positive environmental factors, except for one area with moderate environmental factors. This area encompasses the neighborhoods north and east of Max Berg Plaza Park, and is classified as a low-medium concentration area with a predominantly White population. • In Santa Ana, most of the city has negative environmental factors, with the most negative factors located in the east and southeast side of the city along the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55), where many of the commercial/industrial land uses are located. Other highly impacted areas include downtown and neighborhoods west of downtown.These are all areas of high POC segregation,and most are predominantly Hispanic, except for one of the Tracts to the far west of downtown, which is predominantly AAPI.There is one Census Tract with positive environmental factors located in the southern part of the city, within a racially integrated area between Orange County 116 25-29 Regional AFH Segerstrom High School and the Bristol Place Shopping Mall,where White residents are the predominant group. • InTustin, neighborhoods north of 1-5 have more positive environmental factors, and neighborhoods south of 1-5 have more negative environmental factors. • In Westminster, most of the city has negative environmental factors, with the most negative factors located in the central neighborhoods, from 1-405 north, between Beach Boulevard and Edwards Street. Map 11 — Environmental Health—Region +Ism ,., i it 11 --ram - ... , . 4 , 1,-..,„,,,,. t, - LL; :- ! 't' a 4 oil 40 v y r vs 4 ds , Ali * "' A numb `;' rt' ^►4, M 8. y r -,. a�x !� C. , iiiii _ I 1?;4,4024,4 40 01 PM 7.513,045 CMMvu.W bMm 40(II IIIIA 40/t1 tent •III 0 10 70.1.1 00 11111 0.20{Mre p environmental Moors)i, , to , 0 0 to 40:.- . MIN.70 40 -.00 500(Mom n.xxt"evo nrvtonnlnnt.d h"tns) tip:."w.a..r+.,sco.+...w„:+.rewn am e.444..r.a.....•to 14e41 o.rrr.Ursn,. tM,nM Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 117 25-29 Regional AFH Map 11 — Environmental Health —North Orange County 11 / , . J ''t\ . It ■ a I Lt Um iii - As1.4 aim Mb [ �' / . _,cv..7 , '.' : 1 N 7 Cj.i..,,,r_._, J -. 1...-1 \-.„.„ - C5 . . 'c p.,.....:J h 0,..421-et . , /� �' _• ' ....,4 Rt2.2„.„ 11;ut 20 AU 1179.208 Call-nvfhtirmm140(Ol IpIA Nl.l itarl .,n 00 0 r Jn rrx -0•101MIea posana envitoomenlW hale,I 00.00 0 0 111m 10 40 111111,no 100(Woo wooing,environmental Word 1:...S.a..mrO%o 1010 *aara,r1 r1 Y+QisWMol00 tMA pwro.C10 M e l.prw?Nw M I+a eMgrwr fr e!•1. •..+M.o.v rM nos Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 118 25-29 Regional AFH Map 11 - Environmental Health -Central Orange County 3 Ilk t.r kir , ‘11011 III ,r, i 1. ; -."'"...e'L'''''''''''''Ll-\'' - / " It E4 i9 _, 1 ilk ow' : ill F. ,,,.. • ti tI 1.'',.�n. . t. cox arc • ( 12,2,2024,1 46 11 PM 1 .. (:elEnvrnSr eo 4 0(t UItiA,2021) l mr.1 I. ,,40 00 ° r(e . i no 0.20 More pos*ve envtomwntel Maxs1 Pam",60 9D i 2 is ,,,. r it Ion Ea '° 40 ME .00 ¶0O(Mar;n.r10101(mvtnnmonnal I:Irla<) .y alIns Ann..a ro..Mt,. wn+M tn.reot.Um*,+.r0$,V.,.F IN,eent. Gumv,,4 oww..eue on..no ev uu Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 119 25-29 Regional AFH Map 11 - Environmental Health -South Orange County 40) ,r. .' I) J • !N; N..„...., , ,„5„.,. Di , ,,_ 0, A, 1 122,'_K124 41 5•.(0A 4 1 150 537 (:ulEmarnScreen 4.0(011141A,20i1) I.,rI 1n Idr 0 1/6 IS ,..r 111ll'0.20 More posurve environmental factors) __.. .IA1 HO is 74• i 7)) 40 ♦tn ®o 00.,,,.nr^rieloli environmental lnrl.x0 r.+la a.y.o-.,[e..«.ar r..a•w„..... IS...eiee Gem*,4K05.1* 15 MMl. 6ernv 4.0,1,..•.ro cngrn.n»ano.+.‹o Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer 6. Disability and Access The following analysis describes the barriers that deny individuals with disabilities access to opportunity and community assets. Table 7 - Disability by Type, presents the percentage of residents with various disabilities living in the region, Orange County, the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, and in HUD Entitlement City. In the region and Orange County overall,the most prevalent form of disability is ambulatory difficulty, followed by independent living difficulty. Ambulatory difficulty is also the most prevalent form of disability in the Urban County jurisdictions and all HUD Entitlement Cities except for Aliso Viejo and Rancho Santa Margarita, where cognitive difficulty is most prevalent, and Irvine,where independent living difficulty is most prevalent. Orange County 120 25-29 Regional AFH Table 7—Disability by Type Los Angeles-Long Orange County Beach-Anaheim,CA Orange County,CA Aliso Viejo,CA Anaheim,CA Urban County MSA Disability Type Hearing difficulty 327,938 2.50% 79,275 2.51% 19,027 3.25% 689 1.33% 8,319 2.40% Vision difficulty 254,941 1.94% 49,469 1.57% 9,354 1.60% 1,002 1.93% 5,994 1.73% Cognitive difficulty 523,200 3.99% 109,210 3.46% 20,087 3.43% 1,502 2.89% 13,316 3.84% Ambulatory difficulty 686,925 5.24% 138,750 4.39% 30,281 5.17% 1,436 2.77% 16,547 4.77% Self-care difficulty 351,827 2.68% 70,216 2.22% 14,167 2.42% 1,075 2.07% 8,339 2.40% Independent living difficulty 566,545 4.32% 115,032 3.64% 22,514 3.85% 1,469 2.83% 14,042 4.05% Buena Park,CA Costa Mesa,CA Fountain Valley,CA Fullerton,CA Garden Grove,CA Disability Type Hearing difficulty 2,166 2.59% 2,252 2.02% 1,575 2.78% 2,902 2.04% 4,012 2.34% Vision difficulty 1,662 1.99% 1,555 1.39% 787 1.39% 2,155 1.51% 3,500 2.04% Cognitive difficulty 3,577 4.28% 3,673 3.29% 2,151 3.79% 5,084 3.57% 7,551 4.40% Ambulatory difficulty 4,325 5.18% 4,740 4.25% 2,680 4.72% 5,894 4.14% 8,995 5.24% Self-care difficulty 2,221 2.66% 2,259 2.03% 1,422 2.51% 2,794 1.96% 4,754 2.77% Independent living difficulty 3,502 4.19% 4,029 3.61% 2,388 4.21% 5,064 3.56% 8,377 4.88% Huntington Beach, Irvine,CA La Habra,CA Laguna Niguel,CA Lake Forest,CA CA Disability Type Hearing difficulty 5,577 2.82% 4,587 1.51% 1,569 2.49% 1,702 2.65% 1,886 2.20% Vision difficulty 3,076 1.56% 3,081 1.01% 1,368 2.17% 811 1.26% 1,045 1.22% Cognitive difficulty 7,071 3.58% 7,130 2.34% 2,550 4.05% 1,853 2.88% 2,771 3.24% Ambulatory difficulty 8,728 4.42% 7,092 2.33% 3,328 5.29% 2,683 4.18% 3,195 3.73% Self-care difficulty 3,684 1.87% 4,489 1.47% 1,927 3.06% 1,385 2.16% 1,547 1.81% Independent living difficulty 6,990 3.54% 7,198 2.36% 2,696 4.29% 2,055 3.20% 2,664 3.11% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region. Note 2:Data Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Rancho Santa Mission Viejo,CA Newport Beach,CA Orange,CA San Clemente,CA Margarita,CA Disability Type Hearing difficulty 3,005 3.22% 2,689 3.16% 2,803 2.02% 1,059 2.22% 2,302 3.58% Vision difficulty 1,438 1.54% 838 0.98% 1,785 1.29% 634 1.33% 752 1.17% Cognitive difficulty 4,203 4.51% 1,811 2.13% 3,750 2.70% 1,522 3.19% 2,043 3.18% Ambulatory difficulty 4,989 5.35% 3,282 3.85% 4,865 3.51% 1,519 3.18% 2,450 3.81% Self-care difficulty 2,920 3.13% 1,625 1.91% 2,455 1.77% 926 1.94% 1,114 1.73% Independent living difficulty 4,320 4.63% 2,770 3.25% 4,350 3.14% 1,393 2.92% 2,138 3.33% Santa Ana,CA Tustin,CA Westminster,CA Disability Type Hearing difficulty 6,809 2.19% 1,192 1.50% 3,153 3.48% Vision difficulty 5,829 1.87% 1,050 1.32% 1,753 1.93% Cognitive difficulty 11,316 3.63% 2,527 3.18% 3,722 4.11% Ambulatory difficulty 13,423 4.31% 2,680 3.37% 5,618 6.20% Self-care difficulty 7,204 2.31% 1,393 1.75% 2,516 2.78% Independent living difficulty 10,456 3.36% 2,304 2.90% 4,313 4.76% Note 1:All%represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region. Note 2:Data Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Orange County 121 25-29 Regional AFH According to data from HUD, in Orange County, a total of 398 housing discrimination cases were opened between January 2019 and November 2024 (when this report was prepared). As shown in Table 8, below, the majority (65.33%) of cases alleged discrimination based on disability. (Please note, the total number of cases in the table below equal more than 398, and the percentages equal more than 100% because one case can involve allegations of discrimination based on multiple protected classes). Table 9 shows the number of cases by jurisdiction, and the number and percentage of cases that included allegations of discrimination based on disability status. As the table shows, in nearly all jurisdictions, discrimination based (in whole or in part) on disability status comprises most cases. Table 8-Discrimination Complaints, Orange County, 2019-2024 Basis for Case Number of Percent of (Summary by Protected Status) Cases Cases Color 23 5.78% Disability 260 65.33% Familial Status 39 9.80% National Origin 52 13.07% Race 62 15.58% Religion 10 2.51 Sex 44 11.06% Source: HUD FHEO Orange County 122 25-29 Regional AFH Table 9-Discrimination Complaints by Jurisdiction, Orange County,2019-2024 Number of Cases with Percent of Number of Disability Cases based Jurisdiction Cases as Basis on Disability Aliso Viejo 12 10 83.33% Anaheim 46 34 73.91% Brea 5 2 40.00% Buena Park 7 2 28.57% Capistrano Beach 1 1 100.00% Corona Del Mar 4 2 50.00% Costa Mesa 30 23 76.67% Cypress 5 3 60.00% Dana Point 8 7 87.50% Foothill Ranch 2 2 100.00% Fountain Valley 4 2 50.00% Fullerton 18 10 55.56% Garden Grove 7 4 57.14% Huntington Beach 40 31 77.50% Irvine 50 33 66.00% La Habra 4 3 75.00% Laguna Beach 3 2 66.67% Laguna Hills 2 1 50.00% Laguna Niguel 10 7 70.00% Laguna Woods 3 2 66.67% Lake Forest 6 2 33.33% Los Alamitos 2 0 0.00% Midway city 1 1 100.00% Mission Viejo 14 11 78.57% Newport Beach 14 8 57.14% Orange 8 8 100.00% Placentia 7 4 57.14% Rancho Santa Margarita 3 1 33.33% San Clemente 6 3 50.00% San Juan Capistrano 8 7 87.50% Santa Ana 25 17 68.00% Seal Beach 4 3 75.00% Silverado 1 0 0.00% Stanton 6 3 50.00% Tustin 17 6 35.29% Westminster 12 4 33.33% Yorba Linda 3 1 33.33% Grand Total 398 260 65.33% Source: HUD FHEO Orange County 123 25-29 RegionalAFH The fair housing challenges facing individuals with a disability were described during the stakeholder consultations and community meetings. Participants in these meetings reported the following barriers that deny individuals with disabilities access to opportunity and community assets: • Individuals with disabilities often seek affordable housing in older buildings that may not meet accessibility standards, creating additional barriers. • Affordable housing options are concentrated in areas of Santa Ana and Anaheim, with fewer options in higher opportunity areas of the County. • Individuals with disabilities often face barriers in accessing necessary modifications in housing. Tenants must provide a doctor's letter to request modifications, yet landlords are often resistant to approving accommodation requests. In many cases, tenants are responsible for covering modification costs, unless the property is government-owned. Additionally, low-income individuals with disabilities struggle to afford the necessary modifications. 7. Patterns in Disparities in Access to Opportunity The following analysis identifies and discusses any overarching patterns of access to opportunity and exposure to adverse community factors, including how these patterns compare to patterns of segregation, integration,and R/ECAPs. The analysis also identifies areas that experience:(a)high access;and(b)low access across multiple indicators. In Orange County,there is a general pattern of disparities in access to opportunity between the cities in the central part of the County, and the cities and unincorporated areas along the coast and in the southern and northeastern parts of the County. Cities in central Orange County tend to have higher poverty areas, lower educational scores, lower economic scores, and worse environmental health factors. These cities are also comprised of many areas of high POC segregation, with predominantly Hispanic populations. Except for Garden Grove and Westminster, which have neighborhoods with predominantly AAPI populations. Conversely, the cities and unincorporated areas along the coast and in the south and northeast experience lower poverty rates, higher educational scores, higher economic scores,and better environmental health factors.These areas correspond to areas of high White segregation and predominantly White populations. In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, • The following racial/ethnic groups experience disparities in access across multiple indicators: o Hispanic residents, and particularly those living below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), have the least access to low poverty neighborhoods, neighborhoods in close proximity to high performing schools, and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Orange County 124 25-29 Regional AFH • The following areas experience low access across multiple indicators: o Southwest Placentia neighborhoods have low access to environmental health, high poverty, low economic scores, and are not located in a high- quality transit area.This part of the city is a high POC segregation area that is predominantly Hispanic. o Stanton residents experience low access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods and high exposure to poverty on the south side of Katella Avenue and on the east side of Beach Boulevard north of Katella Avenue. o In San Juan Capistrano, the neighborhoods surrounding the 1-5 and the Ortega Highway (SR-74) interchange experience poor environmental health and have low economic scores.This is a high POC segregation area and is predominantly Hispanic. • Apart from the areas above, the rest of the Urban County jurisdictions experience high environmental quality and have relatively low poverty. In addition, the following areas have access to educational and economic opportunities, as reflected in high education and economic scores on the maps analyzed above: o Brea, Cypress, La Palma, Laguna Beach, Los Alamitos, North Tustin, Orange Park Acres,Villa Park,Yorba Linda, and the unincorporated areas east ofYorba Linda In Aliso Viejo, residents have high access across multiple opportunities, including high education scores, high economic scores, high environmental quality, and low exposure to poverty. However, residents generally do not have good access to transit and neighborhoods with low transportation costs. In Anaheim, Hispanic residents have the least access to low-poverty neighborhoods, neighborhoods close to high performing schools, and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Geographically, neighborhoods near the downtown have low environmental health, low education scores, low economic scores; but good access to HQTAs. Conversely, Anaheim Hills, which is a predominantly White area, has the best access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods with low poverty rates, high education scores, and high economic scores. In Buena Park, Hispanic and Black residents have less access than other groups to neighborhoods with low poverty rates and high performing schools. Geographically, the neighborhoods in the center of the city, between 1-5 and the Artesia Freeway (SR-91), have poor environmental health, lower educational scores, and lower economic scores. In Costa Mesa, Hispanic residents have the least access to low-poverty neighborhoods, neighborhoods close to high performing schools, and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Geographically, neighborhoods downtown and west of downtown are less environmentally healthy and have lower education and economic Orange County 125 25-29 Regional AFH scores. These are also predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods. Conversely, neighborhoods east of Newport Boulevard (SR-55), which are predominantly White, have higher education and economic scores, are more environmentally healthy, and have lower poverty rates. In Fountain Valley, neighborhoods across the city have relatively high economic and educational scores, and relatively low poverty rates. White or AAPI residents comprise the predominant population in all neighborhoods. In Fullerton, Hispanic residents have the least access to low-poverty neighborhoods, neighborhoods close to high performing schools, and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Geographically, neighborhoods in southeast Fullerton (which are predominantly Hispanic), have relatively low economic and education scores, poor environmental quality, and relatively high poverty rates. Conversely, neighborhoods in the northern part of the city, which are predominantly White or AAPI, have higher education and economic scores, better environmental health, and lower poverty. In Garden Grove, Hispanic and AAPI residents have the least access to low poverty neighborhoods and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Additionally, Hispanic residents also have the least access to neighborhoods with high performing schools. Geographically, the neighborhoods with access to the most opportunities are in West Garden Grove, where education and economic scores are high, environmental quality is high, and poverty is low. West Garden Grove is a predominantly White area. In Huntington Beach, Hispanic residents have relatively low access to neighborhoods with good environmental health, low poverty, high education scores, and high economic scores. Overall, access to opportunities in the city is high compared to the region. In Irvine, residents across the city have relatively high access to opportunities. Geographically, the neighborhoods surrounding UC Irvine have relatively low economic scores and relatively high poverty rates, but this is most likely due to the concentration of college students in this area. In La Habra, neighborhoods in the city's center and southeast of the center have poor environmental quality, low education scores, and low economic scores. These neighborhoods are also predominantly Hispanic. In Laguna Niguel, residents have high access across multiple opportunities, including high education scores, high economic scores, high environmental quality, and low exposure to poverty. However, residents generally do not have good access to transit and neighborhoods with low transportation costs. Orange County 126 25-29 Regional AFH In Lake Forest, residents overall have relatively good access to opportunities, compared to the region. However, residents living below the FPL in the city generally have less access to opportunities than the rest of the population. In Mission Viejo, residents across the city have relatively high access to opportunities(apart from transit and low-cost transportation). Most of the city's neighborhoods are predominantly White, except in the south. In Newport Beach, residents across the city have relatively high access to opportunities. All of the city's neighborhoods are predominantly White. In Orange, Hispanic, and Black residents (especially Black residents living below the FPL) have relatively low access to neighborhoods close to high performing schools, and to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Geographically, neighborhoods west of Glassel Street (which are predominantly Hispanic), have lower education and economic scores, and worse environmental quality. Conversely, neighborhoods to the north and east of Villa Park (predominantly White), have high education and economic scores, and good environmental quality. In Rancho Santa Margarita, residents across the city have relatively high access to opportunities. All of the city's neighborhoods are predominantly White. In San Clemente, residents have relatively high access to opportunities compared to the region. Geographically, compared to the rest of the city, neighborhoods north and east of Max Berg Plaza Park have lower environmental quality, lower economic scores, and slightly higher poverty rates. In Santa Ana, Hispanic residents are more likely than other groups to be exposed to poverty in their neighborhoods and are less likely than other groups to live in close proximity to high performing schools, or in neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Geographically, neighborhoods downtown, west of downtown, and southeast of downtown have low economic scores, low education scores, high poverty rates, and poor environmental quality. Neighborhoods in the north and south of the city have better economic and education scores. In Tustin, Hispanic residents (especially those below FPL) are less likely than other groups to live in close proximity to high performing schools, or in neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital; and are more likely to be exposed to poverty in their neighborhoods. In Westminster, AAPI residents are more likely than other groups to be exposed to poverty in their neighborhoods and are less likely than other groups to live in close proximity to high performing schools or jobs. Native American residents living below the FPL are also less likely to live in close proximity to high performing schools or jobs. Orange County 127 25-29 Regional AFH This section describes the public or private policies or practices, demographic shifts, economic trends, or other factors that may have caused or contributed to the patterns described above. Broadly speaking, disparities in access to opportunities between and within jurisdictions in Orange County are due, in part, to: • Lack of affordable (market or publicly subsidized) housing in high opportunity areas, due to market factors, governmental constraints, and community opposition to high density zoning. • Lack of public and private investment in low-opportunity neighborhoods. • Displacement of residents is due to rising housing costs. Through the stakeholder consultations and community meetings, it was also reported that disparities in access to opportunities in the County are due to: • In addition to landlord resistance to renting to HCV Program participants, the gap between HCV subsidy amounts and housing costs further inhibits HCV Program participants from accessing housing in higher cost (and higher opportunity areas). • Many seniors are on fixed incomes and cannot keep up with the rising cost of housing. • The high cost of land,which makes it hard to build new affordable housing in high opportunity areas. • The California Coastal Act,which limits development in high opportunity areas along the coast. • Lack of accessible housing for individuals with disabilities. Detailed lists of the public or private policies or practices, demographic shifts, economic trends, and other factors that have caused or contributed to disparities in access to opportunities in each of the jurisdictions are included in Section IV. Orange County 128 25-29 Regional AFH E. Disproportionate Housing Needs The following analysis describes which groups experience higher rates of housing cost burden, severe housing cost burden, overcrowding, or substandard housing when compared to other groups. Housing Problems Table 10— Disproportionate Housing Problems, shows 2017-2021 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data on the percentage of households experiencing at least one of the following four housing problems, organized by race/ethnicity: • Lacks complete kitchen facilities: Household lacks a sink with piped water, a range or stove, or a refrigerator. • Lacks complete plumbing facilities: Household lacks hot and cold piped water, a flush toilet, and a bathtub or shower. • Overcrowding: A household is considered overcrowded if there are more than 1.01 individuals per room. • Cost burden: A household is considered cost burdened if the household spends more than 30% of its total gross income for housing costs. For renters, housing costs include rent paid by the tenant, plus utilities. For owners, housing costs include mortgage payment, taxes, insurance, and utilities. A disproportionately greater need exists when members of a racial or ethnic group in a certain income range experience housing problems at a rate that is least 10 percentage points higher than the rate experienced by all households within that income level. Table 10 reports the following: • American Indian or Alaska Native households, and Pacific Islander households have disproportionate housing needs within the 80%-100%AMI range. • It is also worth noting that Hispanic households in the 30% AMI and below range experience housing needs at a much higher rate than the overall population in that income range, though the rate is slightly less than 10 percentage points. Orange County 129 25-29 RegionalAFH Table 10 - Disproportionate Housing Problems,Orange County Percent of households experiencing at least one housing burden, by income range Race/Ethnicity Less than 30%-50% 50%-80% 80%-100% 30% AMI AMI AMI AMI Orange County as a whole 79.8% 78.9% 63.3% 42.6% White 77.4% 72.4% 61.6% 43.8% Black/African American 81.5% 85.9% 70.9% 37.5% Asian 72.5% 78.5% 61.7% 44.1% American Indian or Alaska Native 59.7% 60.7% 56.5% 54.2% Pacific Islander 78.1% 76.5% 71.7% 55.1% Hispanic 89.5% 86.0% 65.4% 39.3% Source: CHAS 2017-2021 Severe Housing Problems Table 11 — Disproportionate Severe Housing Problems, shows 2017-2021 CHAS data on the percentage of households experiencing at least one of the following four severe housing problems, organized by race/ethnicity: • Lacks complete kitchen facilities: Household does not have a stove/oven and refrigerator. • Lacks complete plumbing facilities: Household does not have running water or modern toilets. • Severe overcrowding: A household is considered severely overcrowded if there are more than 1.5 individuals per room. • Severe cost burden: A household is considered severely cost burdened if the household spends more than 50% of its total income for housing costs. For renters, housing costs include rent paid by the tenant, plus utilities. For owners, housing costs include mortgage payment, taxes, insurance, and utilities. According to Table 11, the following groups experience disproportionate need as defined above: • Hispanic households have disproportionate severe housing needs within the 0%- 30%AMI range. • American Indian or Alaska Native households, and Pacific Islander households have disproportionate severe housing needs within the 50%-80% AMI range. • American Indian or Alaska Native households have disproportionate severe housing needs within the 80%-100%AMI range. Orange County 130 25-29 Regional AFH Table 11 - Disproportionate Severe Housing Problems, Orange County Percent of households experiencing at least one severe housing burden, by income range Race/Ethnicity Less than 30%-50% 50%-80% 80%-100% 30% AMI AMI AMI AMI Orange County as a whole 71.2% 55.5% 28.0% 14.8% White 68.7% 52.5% 22.9% 10.5% Black/African American 72.9% 55.5% 25.2% 4.3% Asian 62.4% 52.5% 27.7% 15.5% American Indian or Alaska Native 59.7% 17.0% 44.4% 30.6% Pacific Islander 58.1% 59.3% 40.7% 19.2% Hispanic 82.2% 60.3% 34.6% 23.0% Source: CHAS 2017-2021 The following analysis identifies which areas experience the greatest housing burdens and describes which of these areas align with segregated areas, integrated areas, or R/ECAPs, and the predominant race/ethnicity or national origin groups in such areas. Map 12 - Housing Problems, is a series of maps illustrating concentrations of households experiencing housing burdens in Orange County. These maps were created by California HCD to facilitate fair housing planning, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey, 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates". On these maps, areas with darker shading have a higher percentage of households experiencing a particular housing problem (i.e., cost burden, overcrowding, incomplete plumbing, and incomplete kitchen facilities. The maps show that the areas experiencing the greatest housing burdens are the following: • Overcrowding is an issue that is generally only experienced by the residents of cities in the central and northern parts of the County. Overcrowding is not a significant concern in the coastal areas, the areas south and east of Irvine, or the northeastern region, including Yorba Linda and the unincorporated areas to the east Conversely, more than 20% of all units are overcrowded in the following areas: o In Santa Ana, in most of the city,which are also areas of high POC segregation and are predominantly Hispanic. o In Garden Grove, in the eastern and southeastern neighborhoods,which are areas of high POC segregation and are predominantly Hispanic in the east. 17 The maps were downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer, which can be accessed at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing Orange County 131 25-29 Regional AFH o In Anaheim, in the neighborhoods north and south of downtown, and around Disneyland. These are also areas of high POC segregation and are predominantly Hispanic. o In Fullerton, in the neighborhoods south of downtown, which are predominantly Hispanic. • Overpayment by renters is an issue everywhere in the County. In most neighborhoods in the County, over 40% of renter households are struggling with overpayment. • Overpayment by owners is less of an issue than overpayment by renters but is also widespread throughout the County. In many neighborhoods, 20-40% of homeowner households struggle with overpayment.There are only a few areas where more than 60% or fewer than 20% of homeowner households struggle with overpayment. • Incomplete plumbing is not a significant concern in the County, as fewer than 2% of homes experience this issue. However, one exception is Fountain Valley, where 5- 10% of housing units are affected.This area includes the neighborhood surrounding Fountain Valley High School and north to Warner Avenue, which is an area of high POC segregation. • Incomplete kitchen facilities are also not a significant concern in the County. In most of the County less than 10% of homes experience this issue.The areas where more than 10% of homes experience this issue are: o In Anaheim, in the western neighborhoods,which are racially integrated and predominantly Hispanic, except for one Census Tract that is predominantly AAPI. o In Orange, in the predominantly Hispanic area west of Glassel Street and north of Walnut Avenue. o In La Habra, in one CensusTract in the north central part of the city. o In Irvine, near UC Irvine (which may reflect a concentration of student housing). Orange County 132 25-29 Regional AFH Map 12—Housing Problems—Overcrowding Ai d a ,► op. , Al 0,-,, ,. Ito,i r FL .., ir.4„,.., A ..4", , _, , i if -114 lit Ay iiii%, ri-17,-. — - .ar talk ' kiwi e‘b I) 1, )---If it ,..... , . ._ ,.... 1 City/Town serand.4.. Oeercrowding(ACS.2011.2022).Tree bnn/-o,>o a'II , .1g tta lhN ate overcrowded(1 to 15 peoplepn' ,...e ''ZC% , •s% _Qt eci ,0% ti% ,% t0% .cnt.en5% 'Mn,l Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Map 12— Housing Problems—Overpayment by Renters r � S r 'Ott vivo vt 1 % 1_, ' 1 . ., I ,4:115"' t___,, ileted,„}_tic '-i le,I_A,1I,'11 1 -k.,,,,,,?1 .- t PO / 1"y1,7 ' cibi soond.rie. Oerterprpnent by Renews(ACS.2011.2022).tract bPercent at Renter Hcusehoks for whom Gross Rent'Connect Rent Plus p •ea. ,nos an+ lb ac% ear- 2 4 ar ss Tenant.Perd 011;ue.),s 300 Percent or More of Ho:Behold lnco'.. Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 133 25-29 Regional AFH Map 12- Housing Problems-Overpayment by Owners '411111r11W, PrAllgiiiifir jr71.111111111111111116111;i: IV _.Z"M . i illt. iiVim, tr 4 'f0 r.., .a... ll ��ir. I �r t J . L �� 1 F-- GryRown Bounden.. Overpayment by Homeowners(ACS,2018.20221•Tract bPercent of Owner Households wrth Mortgages whose Monthly Owner Costs h, 'r` ii,,. ea% ih,acs eo% _ 2r, 40* Ant are 30.0 Percent or More of Household Income Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Map 12-Housing Problems- Lacking Complete Plumbing Wel/ ' "IIIEAISCIIFWIMSMIIKIIF , ',:t,'"C„X-4$\:-'''')° -- "J. 1•1 . __ Fr C./.. — 11.111 eis' S • , to/kji ,........_ , \ 1``vc'N., ,M�.e,NM 1.. 1 Crtyltown Bounder., Percent of Urns lackmq Complete Plumblrg(ACS.2918 2022)-Tract ,..r`. ,More than 20% \10%20% ,5%10% b 2% 5% '1 Tester.2.0% 121) Source: California HCD, AFFH Data Viewer Orange County 134 25-29 Regional AFH Map 12—Housing Problems— Lacking Complete Kitchen IR tionle-lit .1.- ji: - — ,.....:, ., 0 I .. . q damr. a ..d,'4. A , , , . ,,,,,,, . - . . .... ,, , ,,„,, , _ — 4111 __:-.21� - It( , . ram._,. C.ITR.wn lounde,ies Percent of t,t,L.hinp Compl.te IUCMn(ACS.201$-2022) hM o!Ur,,dck nqacomp etc Arcdmn Source: California HCD,AFFH Data Viewer The following analysis describes the differences in rates of renter and owner-occupied housing by race/ethnicity. Table 12 - Housing Tenure by Race/Ethnicity, shows the percentages of households that are renters and homeowners by race/ethnicity, based on data from the 2018-2022 American Community Survey. The table shows that, • Countywide, the homeownership rate is 56.5%, which is higher than the homeownership rate in the region.There are large disparities in homeownership by race/ethnicity. Black households have the lowest homeownership rate (32.4%). Less than 40% of Hispanic households own their home, and approximately 42% of Native households own their home. White and AAPI households have the highest homeownership rates. • In the Orange County Urban County jurisdictions, homeownership rates are higher overall and for each group compared to the County. The same disparities in homeownership by race/ethnicity exist as in the County. • In Aliso Viejo, homeownership rates for AAPI, Black, and Hispanic households are higher than in the County overall, and homeownership rates for White households are lower. • In Anaheim, homeownership rates are lower for all groups compared to the County, and similar racial/ethnic disparities exist. Orange County 135 25-29 Regional AFH • In Buena Park, homeownership rates and racial/ethnic disparities are similar to the County overall; however, the disparities are even larger due to a higher homeownership rate for White households compared to the County,and a lower rate for Black households compared to the County. • In Costa Mesa, homeownership rates are lower for all groups compared to the County, and similar racial/ethnic disparities exist. • In Fountain Valley, homeownership rates are higher compared to the County for all groups, except Black households. However, it is important to note that the small sample size for Black households may affect the accuracy of the data is not accurate. • In Fullerton, homeownership rates are lower for all groups than the County overall, except for AAPI households. Racial/ethnic disparities exist, with Native American households the least likely to own their home, and AAPI households most likely. • In Garden Grove, the Black and Hispanic homeownership rate is half the White homeownership rate.The AAPI homeownership rate in the city is lower than the AAPI homeownership countywide. • In Huntington Beach, homeownership rates are lower for White, Black, and Hispanic households compared to the County overall, and higher for AAPI and Native American households. Similar racial/ethnic disparities exist in the city as in the County. • In Irvine, homeownership rates are lower for all groups compared to the County overall, and racial/ethnic disparities are similar to the County, with Black and Hispanic households experiencing the lowest homeownership rates (15.7%and 18% respectively) • In La Habra, homeownership rates are higher for all groups compared to the County, and similar racial/ethnic disparities exist as in the County. • In Laguna Niguel, homeownership rates are higher for all groups compared to the County, and racial/ethnic disparities exist—the Hispanic homeownership rate is the lowest, followed by the Black homeownership rate.The AAPI homeownership rate is the highest, followed by the White homeownership rate. • In Lake Forest, homeownership rates are higher for all groups compared to the County, except Native American households. Racial/Ethnic disparities exist, with AAPI and White homeownership higher than Black and Hispanic homeownership rates. • In Mission Viejo, homeownership rates across all groups are much higher than in the County overall, though racial/ethnic disparities still exist. The Black homeownership rate is the lowest in the city, though it is above 60%. • In Newport Beach, homeownership rates are lower for all groups compared to the County overall, except for AAPI households, who have slightly higher homeownership rate in the city.The Black and Native American homeownership Orange County 136 25-29 Regional AFH rates are very low in the city. However, due to the small sample sizes for these groups, the data may not be entirely accurate. • In Orange, homeownership rates are comparable to the County overall, and similar disparities exist. However, the disparities are slightly larger in the city than in the County, as White, AAPI, and Hispanic homeownership rates are higher than in the County overall,while the Black homeownership rate is lower. • In Rancho Santa Margarita, homeownership rates are higher for all groups when compared to the County. However, there are still racial/ethnic disparities. Hispanic households have the lowest homeownership rate, and it is 20 percentage points lower than the AAPI homeownership rate,which is the highest rate in the city. • In San Clemente, homeownership rates are higher for White, AAPI, and Hispanic households compared to the County overall, while rates are lower for Black and Native American households. Due to the small sample size for Black and Native American households, the data may not be accurate.This causes the racial/ethnic disparities in homeownership rates to be larger than at the County level. • In Santa Ana, racial/ethnic disparities in homeownership rates are similar to the County overall, but less pronounced.This is because homeownership rates in the city are lower for White and AAPI households, and higher for Black, Hispanic, and Native American households compared to the County overall. • In Tustin, homeownership rates are very low for Black and Hispanic households, equaling less than half of the homeownership rate for AAPI and White households. The AAPI homeownership rate is higher in the city than in the County overall, and the White homeownership rate is lower in the city than in the County overall. • In Westminster, there are large racial/ethnic disparities in homeownership. Black, Hispanic, and Native American households have the lowest rates (30%), and these rates are less than half the homeownership rate for White households,which is the highest in the city.The AAPI homeownership rate in the city is lower than in the County overall and is nearly 20 percentage points lower than the White homeownership rate in the city. Orange County 137 25-29 Regional AFH Table 12 - Homeownership and Rental Rates by Race/Ethnicity Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim,CA MSA Orange County,CA All Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # °% # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 4,429,379 2,155,123 48.7% 2,274,256 51.3% 1,066,286 602,959 56.5% 463,327 43.5% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 1,656,053 944,998 57.1% 711,055 42.9% 520,993 334,107 64.1% 186,886 35.9% Black 330,603 107,271 32.4% 223,332 67.6% 19,013 6,156 32.4% 12,857 67.6% Hispanic(any race) 1,556,438 613,265 39.4% 943,173 60.6% 264,817 102,954 38.9% 161,863 61.1% Asian or Pacific Islander 752,806 429,742 57.1% 323,064 42.9% 228,293 142,507 62.4% 85,786 37.6% Native American 39,496 16,871 42.7% 22,625 57.3% 5,856 2,442 41.7% 3,414 58.3% Urban County Jurisdictions Aliso Viejo,CA All Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # °% # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 210,864 147,382 r 69.9% 63,482 30.1% 19,300 10,851 56.2% 8,449 43.8% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 126,765 95,582' 75.4% 31,183 24.6% 12,417 7,024 56.6% 5,393 43.4% Black 3,390 1,552 r 45.8% 1,838 54.2% 429 193 45.0% 236 55.0% Hispanic(any race) 36,948 18,619 r 50.4% 18,329 49.6% 3,071 1,351 44.0% 1,720 56.0% Asian or Pacific Islander 37,128 27,038 72.8% 10,090 27.2% 2,754 1,986 72.1% 768 27.9% Native American 882 437' 49.5% 445 50.5% 43 2 4.7% 41 95.3% Anaheim,CA Buena Park,CA All Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # % # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 104,671 48,806 46.6% 55,865 53.4% 24,283 13,721 56.5% 10,562 43.5% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 34,058 20,183 59.3% 13,875 40.7% 6,521 4,616 70.8% 1,905 29.2% Black 3,424 943 27.5% 2,481 72.5% 675 111 16.4% 564 83.6% Hispanic(any race) 44,777 14,692 32.8% 30,085 67.2% 7,890 3,318 42.1% 4,572 57.9% Asian or Pacific Islander 20,082 11,781 58.7% 8,301 41.3% 8,807 5,454 61.9% 3,353 38.1% Native American 698 207 29.7% 491 70.3% 200 87 43.5% 113 56.5% Costa Mesa,CA Fountain Valley,CA All Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # °% # % # # °% # % All Occupied Housing Units 41,407 16,427 39.7% 24,980 60.3% 18,906 12,455 65.9% 6,451 34.1% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 24,557 11,359 46.3% 13,198 53.7% 8,961 6,005 67.0% 2,956 33.0% Black 617 92 14.9% 525 85.1% 129 33 25.6% 96 74.4% Hispanic(any race) 9,988 2,345 23.5% 7,643 76.5% 2,235 1,057 47.3% 1,178 52.7% Asian or Pacific Islander 4,183 1,825 43.6% 2,358 56.4% 6,808 4,913 72.2% 1,895 27.8% Native American 297 54 18.2% 243 81.8% 144 130 90.3% 14 9.7% Note 1:Data presented are numbers of households,not individuals. Note 2:Data Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Orange County 138 25-29 Regional AFH Table 12 - Homeownership and Rental Rates by Race/Ethnicity (continued) Fullerton,CA Garden Grove,CA All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # % # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 47,014 24,259 51.6% 22,755 48.4% 48,183 26,039 54.0% 22,144 46.0% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 19,000 11,504 60.5% 7,496 39.5% 12,035 8,558 71.1% 3,477 28.9% Black 1,100 309 28.1% 791 71.9% 453 159 35.1% 294 64.9% Hispanic(any race) 13,835 4,442 32.1% 9,393 67.9% 14,262 5,288 37.1% 8,974 62.9% Asian or Pacific Islander 11,817 7,505 63.5% 4,312 36.5% 20,542 11,467 55.8% 9,075 44.2% Native American 312 39 12.5% 273 87.5% 348 185 53.2% 163 46.8% Huntington Beach,CA Irvine,CA All Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # % # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 77,641 43,236 55.7% 34,405 44.3% 110,465 48,451 43.9% 62,014 56.1% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 52,207 30,911 59.2% 21,296 40.8% 46,565 18,960 40.7% 27,605 59.3% Black 1,174 301 25.6% 873 74.4% 2,049 321 15.7% 1,728 84.3% Hispanic(any race) 10,930 4,086 37.4% 6,844 62.6% 10,380 1,867 18.0% 8,513 82.0% Asian or Pacific Islander 9,561 6,213 65.0% 3,348 35.0% 46,466 26,065 56.1% 20,401 43.9% Native American 389 191 49.1% 198 50.9% 281 145 51.6% 136 48.4% Laguna Niguel,CA La Habra,CA AB Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # % # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 25,239 16,669 66.0% 8,570 34.0% 20,188 11,500 57.0% 8,688 43.0% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 18,002 12,359 68.7% 5,643 31.3% 6,827 4,737 69.4% 2,090 30.6% Black 507 272 53.6% 235 46.4% 502 230 45.8% 272 54.2% Hispanic(any race) 3,202 1,390 43.4% 1,812 56.6% 9,717 4,554 46.9% 5,163 53.1% Asian or Pacific Islander 2,675 2,036 76.1% 639 23.9% 2,875 1,812 63.0% 1,063 37.0% Native American 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 214 92 43.0% 122 57.0% Lake Forest,CA Mission Viejo,CA All Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # % # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 30,298 21,300 70.3% 8,998 29.7% 32,650 25,312 77.5% 7,338 22.5% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 17,370 12,681 73.0% 4,689 27.0% 22,405 17,745 79.2% 4,660 20.8% Black 641 245 38.2% 396 61.8% 438 265 60.5% 173 39.5% Hispanic(any race) 5,512 3,011 54.6% 2,501 45.4% 4,606 2,995 65.0% 1,611 35.0% Asian or Pacific Islander 5,809, 4,603 79.2% 1,206 20.8% 4,398 3,681 83.7% 717 16.3% Native American 219 41 18.7% 178 81.3% 104 65 62.5% 39 37.5% Note 1:Data presented are numbers of households,not individuals. Note 2:Data Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Orange County 139 25-29 Regional AFH Table 12 - Homeownership and Rental Rates by Race/Ethnicity (continued) Newport Beach,CA Orange,CA All Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # % # # % # ok All Occupied Housing Units 38,636 20,277 52.5% 18,359 47.5% 44,336 26,103 58.9% 18,233 41.1% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 31,448 16,950 53.9% 14,498 46.1% 22,472 15,221 67.7% 7,251 32.3% Black 224 22 9.8% 202 90.2% 612 172 28.1% 440 71.9% Hispanic(any race) 2,933 964 32.9% 1,969 67.1% 12,747 5,329 41.8% 7,418 58.2% Asian or Pacific Islander 2,827 1,858 65.7% 969 34.3% 6,481 4,294 66.3% 2,187 33.7% Native American 119 18 15.1% 101 84.9% 326 134 41.1% 192 58.9% Rancho Santa Margarita,CA San Clemente,CA All Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # % # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 16,798 12,240 72.9% 4,558 27.1% 23,646 15,338 64.9% 8,308 35.1% Race/Ethnicity of Householder _ White,Non-Hispanic 11,588 8,859 76.4% 2,729 23.6% 18,705 13,047 69.8% 5,658 30.2% Black 258 178 69.0% 80 31.0% 317 22 6.9% 295 93.1% Hispanic(any race) 2,564 1,389 54.2% 1,175 45.8% 2,866 1,157 40.4% 1,709 59.6% Asian or Pacific Islander 1,822 1,440 79.0% 382 21.0% 832 632 76.0% 200 24.0% Native American 95 74 77.9% 21 22.1% 60 0 0.0% 60 100.0% Santa Ana,CA Tustin,CA All Occupied All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Units # # % # % # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 77,553 34,749 44.8% 42,804 55.2% 26,508 13,318 50.2% 13,190 49.8% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 12,014 6,630 55.2% 5,384 44.8% 9,494 5,855 61.7% 3,639 38.3% Black 1,083 465 42.9% 618 57.1% 582 145 24.9% 437 75.1% Hispanic(any race) 51,956 20,966 40.4% 30,990 59.6% 8,826 2,421 27.4% 6,405 72.6% Asian or Pacific Islander 12,004 6,408 53.4% 5,596 46.6% 6,959 4,494 64.6% 2,465 35.4% Native American 823 426 51.8% 397 48.2% 115 52 45.2% 63 54.8% Westminster,CA All Occupied Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units # # % # % All Occupied Housing Units 27,700 14,526 52.4% 13,174 47.6% Race/Ethnicity of Householder White,Non-Hispanic 7,582 5,321 70.2% 2,261 29.8% Black 409 126 30.8% 283 69.2% Hispanic(any race) 5,572 1,713 30.7% 3,859 69.3% Asian or Pacific Islander 13,463 7,002 52.0% 6,461 48.0% Native American 187 63 33.7% 124 66.3% Note 1:Data presented are numbers of households,not individuals. Note 2:Data Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Orange County 140 25-29 Regional AFH Charts 1 and 2, below, show denial rates for home purchase loans by race/ethnicity in Orange County and California between 2010-2021. In both Orange County and California, denial rates are highest for Black loan applicants, followed by Hispanic then Asian applicants. White applicants have the lowest denial rates. Denial rates are lower in Orange County for all groups compared to the state, except for Hispanic applicants who have the same denial rate in both geographies. Since the Great Recession, denial rates have fallen for all groups. Chart 1: Home Purchase Loan Denial Rates by Race/Ethnicity,Orange County 20+; c Hispanic,9% Asian,B% Whne,7% 5% 0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Year �Btack ..Asian �14I5panc: ��Wh.te Source: Analysis of Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data by the Federal Reserve Banks of Philadelphia and Cleveland. Orange County 141 25-29 Regional AFH Chart 2: Home Purchase Loan Denial Rates by Race/Ethnicity,California 2C, Black,12% .,. \ HiSDanK'8% � Asian,7% White,6% 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 201A 2019 2020 2021 Year ��0L,ck �ASian �95pa ric -WI,:te Source: Analysis of Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data by the Federal Reserve Banks of Philadelphia and Cleveland. This section describes the public or private policies or practices, demographic shifts, economic trends, or other factors that may have caused or contributed to the patterns described above. Broadly speaking, disproportionate housing needs across and within jurisdictions in Orange County are influenced by several factors, including: • The age of housing stock in some neighborhoods, and the high cost of home repairs/rehabilitation relative to incomes. • Insufficient number of Housing Choice Vouchers or other types of publicly subsidized housing • Land use and zoning laws that have led to the dominance of single-family housing, which is typically more expensive than multifamily housing. Through stakeholder consultations and community meetings, it was also reported that disproportionate housing needs in the County are due to: • Eviction notices have a particularly adverse impact on tenants, especially on families who are fleeing or those with a history of domestic violence. While the judicial system is making efforts to address these issues, barriers such as language and understanding legal terminology continue to pose challenges. Orange County 142 25-29 Regional AFH • Lack of adequate shelter for individuals experiencing homelessness, particularly for the most vulnerable groups such as trans women. • Insufficient homebuyer education for minority homebuyers. • Lack of resources for organizations providing education and services to protected class groups. • Language and digital literacy barriers that make it hard for LEP populations to locate and access housing resources. Detailed lists of the public or private policies or practices, demographic shifts, economic trends, and other factors that have caused or contributed to disproportionate housing needs in each of the jurisdictions are included in Section IV. F. Local and State Policies and Practices Impacting Fair Housing The following analysis describes how local laws,policies, ordinances, and other practices impede or promote fair housing (including how they impede or promote the siting or location of affordable housing in well-resourced neighborhoods, and equitable access to homeownership and other asset building and economic opportunities). In general, land use and zoning laws across Orange County have led to the dominance of single-family housing, which is typically more expensive than multifamily housing and has contributed in various ways to reinforcing longstanding patterns of segregation, concentration of poverty, and disparities in access to opportunities. Through the Housing Element process mandated by the State of California, each jurisdiction has identified various public and/or private policies and practices that have contributed to the fair housing issues identified in this AFH, as well as efforts they are making to promote fair housing. These items are detailed in Section IV. This section describes any state or local fair housing laws and the characteristics protected under each law. In the State of California, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and the Unruh Civil Rights Act prohibit discrimination in housing based on the following characteristics: • Race • Color • National origin (including language use restrictions) • Religion • Sex • Familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal custodians; pregnant women and people securing custody of children under 18) • Handicap (disability) • Age • Ancestry Orange County 143 25-29 Regional AFH • Citizenship • Gender Identity and Gender Expression • Genetic Information • Immigration Status • Marital Status • Primary Language • Sexual Orientation • Source of Income • Military or veteran status This section describes efforts to increase fair housing compliance and enforcement capacity, and to ensure compliance with existing fair housing and civil rights laws and regulations. Orange County jurisdictions rely on the state and local nonprofit fair housing providers to ensure fair housing compliance and enforcement, including the following organizations: California Civil Rights Department The California Civil Rights Department (CRD), formerly known as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), is responsible for enforcing state fair housing laws that make it illegal to discriminate against or harass someone because of a protected characteristic, that require reasonable accommodations for disabilities, and that prohibit retaliation against someone for exercising their rights. The CRD receives and investigates complaints and provides mediation and conflict resolution services throughout the state. Fair Housing Council of Orange County The Fair Housing Council of Orange County (FHCOC) is a nonprofit with a mission of ensuring access to housing and preserving human rights. FHCOC provides a variety of services in multiple languages, including community outreach and education, homebuyer education, mortgage default counseling, landlord-tenant mediation, and limited low-cost advocacy. In addition to these client services, FHCOC investigates claims of housing discrimination and assists with referrals to the state. FHCOC currently works in Anaheim, Santa Ana, Fountain Valley, Lake Forest, Laguna Niguel, Rancho Santa Margarita, the City of Orange, and Orange County. Fair Housing Foundation The Fair Housing Foundation (FHF) serves parts of Los Angeles County and several cities in Orange County, including Aliso Viejo, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, La Habra, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach, Orange, San Clemente, Tustin, and Westminster. FHF provides landlord-tenant counseling and mediation, rental housing counseling, and community outreach and education. In addition, the FHF screens Orange County 144 25-29 Regional AFH fair housing complaints, investigates through testing, and either engages in conciliation or mediation efforts or refers the complaints to the appropriate administrative agencies. This section describes the status of any unresolved findings, lawsuits, enforcement actions, settlements, or judgments in which the program participant has been a party related to fair housing or other civil rights laws in the jurisdiction. There are no unresolved findings, lawsuits, enforcement actions, settlements, or judgments in which the program participants have been a party related to fair housing or other civil rights laws in the jurisdictions. Orange County 145 25-29 Regional AFH IV. Fair Housing Issues and Action Plan For each participating jurisdiction, this section outlines (1) the issues identified in the preceding analysis; (2) the factors that create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of each fair housing issue; and (3) the actions each jurisdiction has taken or will take to address those contributing factors in order to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing. The actions listed below are included in the most recently approved and adopted Housing Element for each jurisdiction, and include actions taken to affirmatively further fair housing since the adoption of the Orange County Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice in 2020. A. Orange County Urban County Across the Urban County jurisdictions, the preceding analysis identified the following fair housing issues: • Disparities in Access to Opportunities: Hispanic residents, and particularly those living below the FPL, have the least access to low poverty neighborhoods, neighborhoods in close proximity to high performing schools, and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. • Disproportionate Housing Needs: Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in the Urban County jurisdictions. Additionally, there are racial/ethnic disparities in homeownership. Specifically, Black, Latino, and Native American households have low homeownership rates compared to White and AAPI households. The Black homeownership rate, the lowest among all groups, is approximately half the White homeownership rate,which is the highest. Within the jurisdictions that make up the Urban County, the following additional fair housing issues were identified: • Unincorporated Orange County o Segregation:There are areas of high White segregation in the unincorporated areas east of Rancho Santa Margarita, in NorthTustin, in Orange Park Acres, and in Rossmoor. • Brea o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. • Cypress o Segregation: There are areas of high POC segregation (which are predominantly AAPI neighborhoods), and there is overlap between the location of publicly supported housing, including a high rate of voucher use, Orange County 146 25-29 Regional AFH and areas of high POC segregation in the neighborhood near King Elementary School, in the north of the city. o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. • Dana Point o Segregation:There are areas of high White segregation in the city. o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. • La Palma o Segregation:There are areas of high POC segregation in the city, which are predominantly AAPI neighborhoods. • Laguna Beach o Segregation:There are areas of high White segregation in the city. o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. • Laguna Hills o Segregation:There are areas of high White segregation in the city. o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. • Laguna Woods o Segregation:There are areas of high White segregation in the city. o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. • Placentia o Segregation and R/ECAPs:There are areas of high White segregation in the north of the city, and high POC segregation areas in the southwest corner of the city.The high POC segregation area also has several publicly supported housing units, including a high rate of voucher use. Additionally, in this part of the city, the neighborhoods south of Orangethorpe Avenue are a R/ECAP. The R/ECAPTract is predominantly Hispanic, as are the neighborhoods to the west and south in Fullerton and Anaheim. o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Geographically, southwestern Placentia neighborhoods have low access to environmental health, high poverty, low Orange County 147 25-29 Regional AFH economic scores, and are not located in a high-quality transit area. As noted above, this part of the city is a high POC segregation area that is predominantly Hispanic. • San Juan Capistrano o Segregation: There is a high POC segregation area that is predominantly Hispanic. There is overlap between the location of publicly supported housing, including a high rate of voucher use, and the areas of high POC segregation in the CensusTract that encompasses the interchange between 1-5 and the Ortega Highway (SR-74). o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Geographically, the neighborhoods around the 1-5 and the Ortega Highway (SR-74) interchange experience poor environmental health and have low economic scores.This is a high POC segregation area and is predominantly Hispanic. • Seal Beach o Segregation:There are areas of high White segregation in the city. o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. • Stanton o Segregation:There are areas of high POC segregation in the city, which are predominantly Hispanic or AAPI neighborhoods.There are overlaps between the location of publicly supported housing, including a high rate of voucher use, and areas of high POC segregation throughout the city. o Disparities in Access to Opportunity: Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Additionally, all Stanton residents experience low access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods, and residents in the neighborhoods on the south side of Katella Avenue and on the eastside of Beach Boulevard north of Katella Avenue also experience high exposure to poverty. • Villa Park o Segregation:There are areas of high White segregation in the city. • Yorba Linda o Segregation:There are areas of high POC segregation in the northern area of the city, which is predominantly AAPI, and areas of high White segregation elsewhere The contributing factors to each of the fair housing issues listed above, along with each jurisdictions' fair housing goals and actions, are outlined as follows: Orange County 148 25-29 Regional AFH 1. Unincorporated Orange County Issue: Segregation and R/ECAPs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of investment in certain neighborhoods, including lack of community revitalization strategies, lack of private investment, and lack of public investment, including in services and amenities. 2. Limited quantity of affordable housing due to community opposition, land use and zoning laws, and occupancy codes and restrictions. 3. Private discrimination, including source of income discrimination. 4. Limited knowledge of fair housing laws due to: limited resources to pay for outreach; increasingly fewer people rely on newspapers to receive information, and public notices or printed flyers are costly and ineffective means to reach the community at large; unknown language barriers and resource barriers to accessing information. Actions: Timeframe: Facilitate Affordable Housing Development through the following actions: 1. Create a Housing Opportunities Overlay Map and webpage Within 18-months of providing information about the Housing Opportunities Overlay adoption/certification of and identify areas where higher density projects would be the Housing Element. permitted with expedited processing, and which may be eligible for density bonuses. 2. Develop informational materials on the County's website Within 18-months of regarding the County's lot consolidation incentives and density adoption/certification of bonus program. the Housing Element. 3. Update the "Orange County Housing Opportunities Manual"and Within one year of will also create and distribute promotional materials explaining adoption and certification the County's expedited permit processing and incentives for of the Housing Element. affordable housing to be provided to developers in the region. 4. Publish and review the Affordable Housing Rental List. Annually 5. Review the County Housing Authority's participation in the Annually Housing Choice Voucher Section 8 Rental Assistance Program and pursue additional vouchers/funding when available. 6. Work with applicants who propose for-rent residential projects to As proposals are received encourage four-bedroom units for large families as part of the (ongoing) proposed developments. 7. Meet with Developers and DPRC to identify potential constraints Within one year of to the development of affordable housing and housing for those adoption. Address within with special needs in the County's zoning regulations. six months. Coordination with Affordable Housing Stakeholders through the following actions: 8. Provide letters of support to affordable housing developers' Initiate by January 2025 applications to local, State, and federal agencies for funding, Orange County 149 25-29 Regional AFH provided the proposed projects are consistent with the goals and policies of the Genera/Plan. 9. Work with cities and LAFCO to ensure that new planned Annually communities in sphere of influence areas provide adequate sites at appropriate densities for affordable housing. 10. Conduct meetings with stakeholders, including the development Annually community and property owners to facilitate housing development. 11. Attend and promote development incentives at the monthly Twice annually Housing Opportunities Committee meeting and the bi-monthly OC Housing FinanceTrust meetings. 12. Meet with owners of the religious properties identified in the By January 2025 inventory of sites and provide information on regulatory changes, development standards and affordability requirements and incentives and/or assistance available through the County for development of housing on religious institution properties. 13. Meet with nonprofit developers and housing organizations to Annually evaluate projects for acquisition and rehabilitation/new construction of new shelters, and long-term affordable housing, including senior housing. Increase knowledge and enforcement of fair housing laws through the following actions: 14. Implement Restrictive Covenant Modification Plan (RCM) By July 2027 including Phase III, examination of remaining handwritten documents for unlawful languages and process. 15. Continue to work under contract with the FHCOC and/or other Annually qualified fair housing service providers to provide fair housing services for all segments of the community. Evaluate and adjust the scope of services to ensure the County addresses any emerging trends in fair housing. 16. Provide federal/state/local information regarding discrimination Annually to residents, including applicable Fair Housing Information and Discrimination Complaint Forms. 17. Maintain bilingual staff to assist non-English speaking families Annually and ensure handicap accessible offices. 18. Work with the fair housing agencies to provide information Annually regarding housing discrimination and intervention to resolve complaints. 19. Use non-traditional media (e.g., social media,County website) in Annually outreach and education efforts in addition to print media and notices. Orange County 150 25-29 Regional AFH 20. Update the Affordable Housing Rental List(translated in multiple Annually languages) on the County website. 21. Inform community members of the existence of the Orange By December 2025 County Fair Housing Council (FHCOC) and its oversight of fair housing practices by posting on the County's website and at the Planning counter. 22. The County shall work with local resource agencies to implement Annually an outreach program informing families within the County of housing and services available for individuals with developmental disabilities. Amend the zoning code and other local ordinances to facilitate new housing opportunities and increase housing mobility, including: 23. Allow emergency shelters without a Use Permit or other By October 2024 discretionary permit in the commercial and industrial portions of the Housing Opportunities Overlay Zone. 24. Remove the Site Development Permit requirement for By October 2024 multifamily developments of one to four units and any developments with 20% affordable units and allow by-right. Amend the Site Development Permit requirements for objective findings for developments of units or more. 25. Adopt Objective Design Standards (ODS). By October 2024 Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Contributing Factors: 1. Unaffordable rents and sales prices in a range of sizes. 2. Displacement of residents due to economic pressures. 3. Lack of private and public investment in specific neighborhoods. Actions: Timeframe: Increase accessible and affordable housing opportunities for persons with disabilities through the following actions: 1. Review Definition of Single Housekeeping Unit. To promote By December 2026. flexibility to accommodate residents with different living conditions, the County will review and adopt revisions as appropriate to its zoning code to provide greater flexibility in consideration of accommodating a variety of household situations for related and unrelated individuals living together. 2. The County will review and revise its group home and zoning By December 31, 2025. ordinances as needed to ensure ongoing compliance with state and federal fair housing laws. For example,the ordinance will be reviewed to ensure that a group home that operates as a single Orange County 151 25-29 Regional AFH housekeeping unit is permitted in any zoning district in the same manner as other residential uses in that zone (e.g., multifamily, single family).The definition of single housekeeping unit as to group homes will be revised to eliminate (1) the reference to residential activities that do not occur on a nonprofit basis and, (2) the requirement that the residents share lease agreements or ownership. In addition, the standards for group homes shall be objective and not unnecessarily constrain approval of group homes in that zoning district. 3. Seek State and Federal monies, as funding becomes available, Annually. for permanent supportive housing construction and rehabilitation targeted for persons with disabilities, including persons with developmental disabilities. 4. Develop a program /ordinance to provide regulatory incentives, Within 2 years of adoption such as expedited permit processing and fee waiver, to projects of the Housing Element. targeted for persons with disabilities, including persons with developmental disabilities. 5. On an ongoing basis, enforce building code provisions requiring Annually. accessible design. 6. On an ongoing basis, implement reasonable accommodation Ongoing. ordinance. 7. On an ongoing basis, ensure the permitting requirements for Ongoing. group homes and care facilities for seven or more persons are consistent with State law and fair housing requirements. Increase affordable housing opportunities in high opportunity areas through the following actions: 8. Sites Rezoning — Amend the HOO to accommodate a higher Adopted by the Board of density of development, establish a minimum density for R2, R3, Supervisors on June 25, R4, RP, and MX zones, rezone C1, C2, CC, CH, CN, RP to MX, and 2024. expand the HOO. 9. No Net Loss — Identify and make available additional adequate By end of 2024,if required. sites to accommodate the share of housing need by income level. 10. Review incentives for density bonuses, expedited permit Every two years. processing procedures, development standards, tax-exempt conduit financing, infrastructure financing assistance, and direct financial assistance. Orange County 152 25-29 Regional AFH 11. Review with DPRC members the existing and proposed codes, Within 1 FY of approval. procedures, and fees to ensure that they do not unreasonably hinder housing production. 12. Review funding opportunities and aggressively pursue, as the Bimonthly. County has been, all state and federal housing grant funds for which the County is eligible 13. Approve affordable housing projects in Rancho Mission Viejo Ongoing. administratively. 14. Coordinate with the City of Newport Beach for development and By November 2024. shared RHNA credit of the identified parcels on the County- owned Coyote Canyon site. 15. Implement an informational program to disseminate information By end of 2025; annually about developing ADUs. thereafter. 16. Prepare pre-approved ADU plans. July 2024. 17. Implement the Affordable ADU Loan Program Policy Manual. Within 2 years of adoption. 18. Initiate consideration of an Inclusionary Housing Program/Policy. By December 2026. 19. Leverage available funding sources, such as Homekey funds, to Annually. purchase or rehabilitate housing, including hotels,motels,vacant apartment buildings, and other buildings and convert them into interim or permanent, long-term housing. Orange County 153 25-29 Regional AFH Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Unaffordable rents and sales prices in a range of sizes. 2. Shortage of subsidized housing units. 3. Cost of repairs and rehabilitation. 4. Dominance of single-family housing,which is typically more expensive than multifamily. Actions: Timeframe: Rehabilitate and Preserve Existing Residential Units through the following actions: 1. Use available housing funding to finance housing rehabilitation, focusing in Annually. Central and North County. 2. Implement and review the County's code enforcement and graffiti removal Ongoing. programs. 3. Provide infrastructure maintenance in existing residential neighborhoods, Annually. including through the Capital Improvement Program (CIP),focusing in Central and North County. 4. Participate in the CDBG, HOME and related programs as a means of providing Annually. passthrough funding to affordable housing projects and efforts to rehabilitate existing affordable units or projects, focusing in Central and North County. 5. Site Replacement — Comply with site replacement requirement pursuant to As Government Code Section 65583.2(g)(3). Replace sites identified in the necessary inventory that currently have residential uses,or within the past five years have (ongoing). had residential uses that have been vacated or demolished, and: a. Were subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of low or very low- income; or b. Subject to any other form of rent or price control through a public entity's valid exercise of its police power; or c. Occupied by low or very low-income households for the purpose of this program "previous five years" is based on the date the application for development was submitted. 6. Monitor projects with expiring affordability covenants and take appropriate Annually. action to preserve these affordable units whenever possible. Promote funding and other opportunities to owners considering conversion of units through existing outreach programs and the County's website. 7. Enforce the provisions of the County's condominium and mobile home park Annually. conversion ordinance. Make neighborhood improvements in low opportunity areas in Central and North County, including the following: Orange County 154 25-29 Regional AFH 8. Implement the County CIP plan including ADA, roadway, and infrastructure Annually. improvements in the Unincorporated County. Improvements may include: a. Curb ramp, sidewalk, and driveway upgrades and improvements to satisfy current ADA standards and requirements. b. Parkway, sidewalk, and intersection improvements. 9. Facilitate the development or improvement of parks and open space under the By 2029. County's CIP plan or other implementation plan benefiting residents of Unincorporated communities, particularly communities with reduced access to environmental opportunities. Projects may include: a. Development of Mile Square Regional Park in Fountain Valley b. Santa Ana RiverTrail c. Ted Craig Regional Park improvements d. Yorba Regional Park improvements Increase housing opportunities, with a focus in Central County, for persons experiencing homelessness through the following actions: 10. Facilitate the development of one interim or permanent, long-term housing Annually. project using available funding sources,such as Homekey funds (provided it is made available through the State), during the planning period which is anticipated to assist 50 persons experiencing homelessness annually. Orange County 155 25-29 Regional AFH 2. Brea Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunity and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of community revitalization strategies. 2. Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services and amenities. 3. High cost of housing rehabilitation and repairs. 4. High levels of overpayment create displacement risk. 5. Limited availability of affordable housing in all areas of the city, including those where rents and sales prices have become exclusive. 6. Community concern about housing densities. 7. Lack of knowledge of fair housing laws. Actions: Timeframe: Increase knowledge of fair housing laws through the following actions: 1. By the end of 2022, post additional fair housing information at the By the end of 2022 Family Resource and Senior Centers and on their digital platforms. Starting in 2022, conduct an informational workshop at these locations once every two years. 2. In 2023, conduct a fair housing information session for the City Council. By the end of 2023 Invite local nonprofits (including the Orange County Human Relations Commission, the Kennedy Commission, and People for Housing O.C.) to attend. 3. Publish Fair Housing information, including any community meetings Annually in Brea Line (city newsletter), as well as non- traditional media, such as Instagram and Facebook, and conduct targeted outreach to tenants, mobile home park residents, and other lower-income populations. 4. Increase the distribution of fair housing materials by at least 25 percent Annually, between to increase awareness of fair housing options among residents, 2021-2029 including special needs groups and low-income residents. Seek to increase the number of Brea residents counseled through the Fair Housing Council of Orange County from an average of 70 to 75 annually. Increase quality of affordable housing and access to opportunities in low opportunity areas through the following actions: 5. Include information about rehabilitation resources in City newsletters Annually and on the City website, including the availability of funds for accessibility improvements. Include translated information when feasible. Seek to assist 12-15 households annually. Starting in 2023, conduct targeted outreach in identified Low and Moderate Resource Orange County 156 25-29 Regional AFH Census Tracts, utilizing the Housing Conditions Survey and Code Enforcement information to further target assistance. 6. Identify apartments in need of rehabilitation and cooperate with Between 2021-2029 nonprofit providers to acquire and rehabilitate units and provide as long-term affordable housing. Seek to complete at least two projects, including the 47-unit Walnut Village in partnership with Jamboree Housing. 7. Continue to improve access to individuals with disabilities through ADA Ongoing improvements to streets, sidewalks, and public facilities. Dedicate or seek funding, including annual CDBG allocations, to prioritize infrastructure and accessibility improvements in Low and Moderate Resource opportunity areas. 8. Increased public and private investment in Low and Moderate Resource 2021-2029 Census Tracts, including $2,000,000 allocated for a variety of ADA, park facilities, transportation, water, and sewer line improvements in these CensusTracts during 2021-2029. Increase housing opportunities in high opportunity areas through the following actions: 9. Starting in 2023,work with the FHCOC to contact landlords of affordable Every two years; multifamily complexes every two years and provide fair housing 2021-2029 information and assistance.This outreach will focus on promoting the Section 8 voucher program to landlords who have not previously participated in the program and should include multi-lingual materials. Through landlord outreach in coordination with the FHCOC and housing mobility programs through the Orange County Housing Authority, the City's goal will be to increase Housing Choice Vouchers by 10%, from 114 to 125 vouchers, including a 10% increase in high resource neighborhoods. 10. Rezone sufficient parcels to provide geographically dispersed sites for 2022 over 1,100 lower-income units,fostering a more inclusive community. 11. Provide significant new housing opportunities in Highest Resource 2021-2029 eastern Brea through development of a diverse mix of 1,100 new units in the Brea 265 project, including an estimated 76 deed restricted affordable units as required through the City's inclusionary ordinance. Pursue the introduction of workforce housing on Amazon's 31-acre warehouse site in eastern Brea. 12. Update Brea's Affordable Housing Ordinance in 2022 to integrate low- 2022 and moderate-income units in market rate projects throughout the community Orange County 157 25-29 Regional AFH 13. Coordinate with the Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA) in 2023 2023-2029 to utilize the mobility counseling program.This OCHA program informs Housing Choice Voucher holders about their residential options in higher opportunity areas and provides holistic support to voucher holders seeking to move to higher opportunity areas. 14. Initiate a marketing program for homeowners on the benefits of ADUs Annually, starting and the availability of funds to support development through the City's in 2022 Newsletter and posting of the ADU application checklist on the City website,thereby expanding housing opportunities in areas traditionally limited to single-family ownership. Promote and support the development of ADUs and seek to issue permits for 16 units annually throughout Brea. 15. Adopt an Ordinance by 2022 to expand the housing supply in High 2022-2025 Resource single-family zones by allowing for lot splits and duplexes under the parameters of SB 9. In coordination with research being conducted at the State level, pursue opportunities to incentivize and provide funding assistance for homeowners to provide affordable units under SB 9. 16. Require affordable developers receiving public funds to prepare an Ongoing affirmative marketing plan and encourage private developers with affordable units in their projects to prepare an affirmative marketing plan.The affirmative marketing plan shall ensure marketing materials for new developments are designed to attract renters and buyers of diverse demographics, including individuals of any race, ethnicity, sex, handicap, and familial status. Prevent displacement through the following actions: 17. Continue anti-displacement programs including limits on rent increases Ongoing and prohibiting evictions without just cause for tenants that have resided in their units for more than 12 months; relocation assistance where public funds are utilized; and replacement requirements when affordable units are removed. 18. Assist mobile home park resident organizations interested in Ongoing purchasing their parks to access funds through the state HCD Mobile Home Park Resident Ownership Program (MPROP). Provide available local funds for leverage and assist with the subdivision map waiver process consistent with the Subdivision Map Act. Orange County 158 25-29 Regional AFH 3. Cypress Issue: Segregation and Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of City-specific data on fair housing inquiries/complaints. 2. Lack of effective outreach strategies. 3. Concentration of lower- and moderate-income households. 4. Limited understanding of regulations surrounding acceptance of HCV tenants. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Advocate to receive reports from the Orange County Fair Housing Council Ongoing that include data specific to the City of Cypress to allow the City to better assess fair housing issues within the community. 2. Create an updated webpage on the City's website with information on fair 2023 housing rights and resources by 2023. 3. Publish information about fair housing resources in the City's quarterly Ongoing newsletter. 4. Implement requirements for developers to submit an Affirmative Action 2023, ongoing Marketing Plan for density bonus projects by 2023. thereafter 5. Expand outreach and education of Source of Income Protection laws (SB Ongoing 329 and SB 222), which include HCVs and other public assistance as legitimate sources of income for housing. 6. Provide information on Source of Income Protection laws in ADU Ongoing informational packets. 7. Increase affordable housing stock in high opportunities through the following actions: a. Promote key lower income housing opportunity sites for Ongoing affordable housing development as a means to bring new housing opportunities to high resource areas. b. Conduct a feasibility study on the implementation of an 2024 inclusionary housing ordinance by 2024. c. Support funding applications by nonprofit developers for Ongoing affordable housing in high resource areas. Orange County 159 25-29 Regional AFH Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Presence of a higher proportion of older multi-family rental units. 2. Limited income available for home repairs/maintenance. 3. Older single family housing stock. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Implementation of a Neighborhood Preservation Pilot Program to Ongoing identify and address code violations and needed right of way improvements. 2. Expand outreach and education efforts to neighborhood residents on Ongoing resources available to address code violations and property maintenance issues. Orange County 160 25-29 Regional AFH 4. Dana Point Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity,and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Low rates of HCV use. Despite high rates of overpayment for rental households, the use of housing vouchers is low.This may be due to stigma associated with the use of Housing Vouchers, both by property owners and tenants. 2. School performance. Disadvantaged students at schools serving Dana Point residents may be falling behind other students in the school and compared to those across the state. Both elementary schools in Dana Point are ranked much lower compared to other elementary schools that serve Dana Point residents. 3. Income and Diversity.The City lacks a substantial number of suitable housing sites in moderate /high / highest opportunity areas; many of these areas are largely built out with single-family homes.The majority of available housing sites are in CensusTracts that already have a higher concentration of low-income residents. 4. Lack of regional coordination and lack of public/private investment. Dana Point and surrounding cities generally address the need and solutions for affordable housing and homeless shelters in an independent manner, which causes them to compete against one another for funds and eliminates opportunities to pool resources. 5. Potential community opposition. While there is little community opposition to a proposed affordable project (e.g., there was community support for Silver Lantern), additional regional collaboration can help to mitigate community opposition that may arise in the future(whether an affordable housing project or homeless shelter). Actions: Timeframe: Increase knowledge and enforcement of fair housing laws through the following actions: 1. Educate the community about fair-housing and equal housing Ongoing opportunities, providing housing counseling services and family resource information and referral. Topics include, but are not limited to tenant rights, legal resources, rehabilitation grants and loans, first-time homebuyer programs, and Section 8 programs. Distribute materials in English and Spanish through City Hall, City libraries,City websites, and the Fair Housing Council website. 2. Track fair housing issues and identify patterns in the City, including Annually meeting annually to check on the status of active cases. 3. Promote fair housing opportunities through various financial Ongoing assistance initiatives and affordable housing/neighborhood revitalization programs. Orange County 161 25-29 Regional AFH 4. Actively recruit residents from neighborhoods in low resource Ongoing areas to serve or participate on boards,committees,and other local government bodies. 5. As part of the City's Housing Element Annual Report, continue to Ongoing annually monitor zoning regulations to ensure compliance with fair housing laws. Increase use of Housing Choice Vouchers through the following actions: 6. Coordinate with OCHA to generate a detailed understanding of 2022 where overpayment rates and displacement risks are highest in the city(as of latest available Census data),where vouchers are and are not used, and how many tenants could potentially qualify at each multifamily property in target areas. 7. Coordinate with Orange County United Way on the 2022 WelcomeHomeOC program to identify opportunities to assist Dana Point residents. 8. Apply affirmative advertising policy to income-restricted units to 2022 be built in the Victoria Apartments development in the Doheny Village area. Apply the policy to all future income-restricted projects, as permitted by state and/or federal funding programs. 9. Coordinate with OCHA to develop an outreach plan and materials 2023 to communicate the benefits of vouchers and tenant rights regarding just cause evictions, limitations on rent increases, and replacement housing requirements if any existing residential units would be removed, based on state law. 10. Complete study of options to augment/adjust current in-lieu fee 2024 program for possible application of funds for those overpaying and/or at risk of displacement; evaluate how the City can prioritize or facilitate mixed- income housing through potential use of in-lieu fees or other resources (e.g., determine which federal and state grant or loan programs are structured to score mixed-income projects as more competitive compared to 100 percent lower income developments). 11. Distribute outreach materials through means that reach target 2024 populations (e.g., those receiving subsidized school lunches). Conduct direct outreach to 10 properties (tenants and owners) in Census Tracts illustrating high rates of rental overpayment and conduct mailer outreach to all renter occupied units and rental Orange County 162 25-29 Regional AFH property owners in the Town Center and Doheny Village Census Tracts. 12. Bring forth appropriate in-lieu fee provisions for adoption. 2024 13. Establish strategies to use City resources (technical support and/or 2024 in-lieu fees as appropriate) to encourage mixed-income housing developments. Improve educational outcomes for lower income and underserved students at schools in or serving Dana Point, through the following actions: 14. Continue annual assessment of effectiveness of Sparkpoint OCwith Annually Orange County United Way. 15. Negotiate with the Victoria Apartments property owner to dedicate 2024 substantial funds toward schools in Dana Point, specifically Dana Hills High School (which serves residents in the low resource areas). 16. Coordinate with United Way to continue and or expand Sparkpoint Annually effort on annual basis,with modifications to provide better or more effective assistance and/or to reach more families. 17. Coordinate with United Way to expand Sparkpoint effort to 2025 Palisades Elementary School. Increase affordable housing opportunities through the city, and especially in moderate, high, and highest resource areas, through the following actions: 18. Adopt a pre-approval review process for ADUs. 2023 19. Initiate a general plan update with an explicit objective to identify 2023 additional housing opportunities in moderate, high, and highest resource areas,with additional emphasis on Census Tracts that can help improve patterns of greater diversity, promote a broader distribution of households with a range of incomes, and lowers displacement risk. 20. Coordinate with the OCHA to inform Housing Choice Voucher Annually holders about their residential options in moderate, high, and highest resource areas. 21. In coordination with research being conducted at the state level, Ongoing pursue opportunities to incentivize and provide funding assistance Orange County 163 25-29 Regional AFH for homeowners to provide affordable units under SB 9 provisions (adopted by ordinance in February 2022). 22. Coordinate through the Orange County Housing Finance Trust Ongoing (OCHFT) on the use of funding sources (e.g., REAP) and potential to apply for additional funding. 23. Coordinate through OCHFT on year two notice of funding Ongoing availability (NOFA), and subsequent NOFAs for years three, four, and five;advocate for the use of funds in Dana Point as appropriate and in surrounding jurisdictions when such location would yield better benefits (more units, deeper level of subsidy, more target populations, etc.). 24. Assist in the update of the OCHFT five-year strategic plan. 2024 Orange County 164 25-29 Regional AFH 5. La Palma Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Some residents who are in need of fair housing resources, including low-income households, individuals with disabilities, racial/ethnic minorities and other protected classes, may be unaware of the fair housing resources that are available. Although information about fair housing services is posted on the City website and in public offices, more could be done to make this information available. 2. Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing costs is a significant contributing factor to fair housing throughout the region. All areas of La Palma are classified as high opportunity. Increasing housing availability in areas with good opportunity make it easier for lower-income households to access the types of services and amenities that further economic and social mobility. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Expand fair housing outreach through the following actions: a. Continue directing fair housing inquiries to the Fair Housing Ongoing Council of Orange County. b. Post and update information annually regarding fair housing Every two years and request FHCOC to conduct a presentation every two years about services available. c. Contact all apartment complexes annually to provide Annually education and materials about the Section 8/Housing Choice Voucher program including multi-lingual materials. Coordinate to develop an outreach plan and materials to communicate the benefits of vouchers and tenant rights regarding just cause evictions, limitations on rent increases, and replacement housing requirements. Conduct direct outreach to 30 properties (tenants and owners) in Census Tracts with LMI concentrations by December 2026. d. Publish and update links to fair housing information on the Annually City website and via social media annually. 2. Improve Access to Opportunity and Mobility through the following actions: a. Conduct fee study annually and adopt City planning fee Annually, fee reductions for new deed-restricted low-income housing reductions adopted projects and fee waivers for lot consolidation by June 2025 by June 2025 b. Update Municipal Code for large residential care facilities and By December 2024 remove any unreasonable conditions of approval or other Orange County 165 25-29 Regional AFH requirements by establishing objective development standards to eliminate subjective components of the discretionary CUP process and ensure barrier free housing choices for individuals with disabilities by December 2024. c. Continue to support the provision of housing for individuals December 2023 with disabilities through updates to zoning regulations in compliance with fair housing law by December 2023. d. Encourage and facilitate housing development commensurate Ongoing with the City's identified housing need in the RHNA allocation on a continuous basis. e. Apply for CDBG funding through the County of Orange Urban October 2025 County program and seek third-party grant writing assistance for City's Meals on Wheels senior program and ADA improvements for streets and sidewalks by October 2025. f. Establish Economic Development/Land Use Committee by Report to Council by February 2024 to implement the following programs: December 2024. i. Review City-owned properties annually and identify Implement short and any surplus land that could be made available for midterm programs in affordable housing development by June 2024. Plan by 2027. ii. Explore options to allow and incentivize missing middle and special needs residential uses in the R-3 as part of the development standards amendments for increased story count, parking, and lot coverage by December 2024. iii. Pursue strategies to facilitate housing development of at least 10 housing units on religious, institutional,and quasi-institutional lands, and adaptive reuse of underutilized properties for affordable housing by December 2024. Include potential residential development and conduct targeted outreach to interested parties for City-owned parcel on 5062 La Palma Avenue and conduct outreach to the three large churches within La Palma. Evaluate opportunities for adaptive reuse as part of outreach to Centerpointe property owners by December 2024. iv. Report back to City Council on findings, recommendations and provide update on program implementation by December 2024. By 2027, implement short term and midterm programs identified in the Strategic Plan. Orange County 166 25-29 Regional AFH g. Work cooperatively with the County of Orange and cities to Ongoing create a regional housing bond program to help fund affordable housing and permanent supportive housing. h. Work with Orange County Housing & Community 2021-2029 Development to conserve existing affordable housing units at- risk of converting to market rate. Contact owners of the City's low-income apartment complexes (Camden Place, Seasons at La Palma,and Casa La Palma)and offer funding from the City's affordable housing asset fund toward rental rehabilitation of at least 20 units during the planning period. i. Work with the Fair Housing Council to expand knowledge of Ongoing first-time homebuyer programs, and promote available programs on the City'swebsite, newsletters and through social media. j. Affirmative Marketing and Regional Registries: Require, Ongoing provide incentives, and utilize other strategies to promote affirmative marketing plans in all new housing developments. The affirmative marketing plans will consider regional housing registries and ensure marketing materials for new developments are designed to attract renters and buyers of diverse demographics, including individuals of any race, ethnicity, income, disability, and familial status. k. In collaboration with OCHA, expand the use of housing choice Ongoing vouchers in high resource areas through the following actions: i. Develop an outreach plan and materials with targeted outreach to Census Blocks of LMI concentrations to communicate the benefits of vouchers and tenant rights regarding just cause evictions, limitations on rent increases, and replacement housing requirements if any existing residential units would be removed, based on state law. ii. Gain a better understanding of where overpayment and overcrowding rates are highest in the city,where vouchers are and are not used, and how many tenants could potentially qualify at each multifamily property in target areas in order to develop strategies to expand use of vouchers with the goal of increasing voucher use (63 vouchers in 2023) by at least two per year in La Palma. iii. Inform voucher holders about their residential options in high-resource areas by developing a Housing Orange County 167 25-29 Regional AFH Resources Directory available on the City's website and updated annually. I. Expand production of accessory dwelling units in high- 2021-2029 resource single family neighborhoods and address potential overcrowding by promoting the City's ADU ordinance, application, look-up tool, preapproved plans, and educational resources through the Housing SoCal page by June 2024. Target direct outreach to areas of LMI concentration and Census Tracts south of La Palma Avenue with promotional materials annually. Increase ADU production by two units per year for a total of at least 30 units during the planning period. m. Enhance City's existing proactive code enforcement program 2021-2029 by targeting areas of concentrated owner rehabilitation needs, resulting in repairs to minimize displacement and relocation impacts. Re-initiate volunteer home painting/repair program with local churches and home improvement stores,which was successful in the last planning period. Provide owner rehabilitation assistance to at least a total of 16 residential units rehabilitated within areas of LMI concentration during the planning period. n. Distribute direct mailers and applications to apartment Annually complexes for La Palma Citizens'Academy to recruit residents from areas of concentrated lower income and renters to serve on boards, committees, and other local government decision- making bodies annually. o. Initiate joint use agreement between City and Centralia December 2026 Elementary School District to create a public playground at Miller Elementary School and Edison Right-of-Way to benefit the LMI concentration in the eastern portion of the City. Seek grant funding opportunities by December 2026. p. Continue place-based strategies toward community 2024-2025 revitalization including: i. Invest and prioritize City beautification projects, including 3.85 miles of street medians, trees, and drought-tolerant landscaping,along corridors of areas with LMI concentrations (La Palma Avenue, Moody Street, and Walker Avenue) by June 2025. ii. Complete water infrastructure projects related to four (4)water main interconnections to provide emergency and contingency water supply to 4,270 units; and Orange County 168 25-29 Regional AFH replacement of large water meters for 36 residential units by June 2024. iii. Seek grant funding for the La Palma Avenue Slurry Seal Project, which includes sidewalk ADA improvements from west to east City limits,centralized in area of higher percentage (10-20%) of population with a disability by December 2024. q. In cooperation with the Orange County Transportation December 2027 Authority, provide community education regarding transport services for individuals with disabilities. Partner with OCTA, OC Health Care Agency, and local school districts to implement OC Safe Routes to Schools Program in its Countywide initiatives through participation in Next STEP (ATP and REAP 2.0 funding) by December 2027. Orange County 169 25-29 Regional AFH 6. Laguna Beach Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of knowledge and enforcement of fair housing laws due to the following: a. Insufficient fair housing monitoring and limited outreach capacity. b. Lack of a variety of media inputs. c. Lack of marketing community meetings. d. Lack of regional coordination. 2. Lack of affordable housing in high opportunity areas due to the following: a. Historical land use development patterns and zoning, and lack of vacant land limit opportunities for larger and higher density project types. b. Past national, state, and regional racial/ethnic discriminatory practices. c. Current high cost of housing limits access to lower income households of all races/ethnicities. d. Lack of affordable housing and need for greater access to opportunities. e. Regional coordination affects transit services, funding sources, and allocation of housing resources including vouchers. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Increase fair housing knowledge and enforcement through the following actions: a. Ensure that all laws, programs,and activities affirmatively further Ongoing fair housing in accordance with state law.As the General Plan and Zoning Code are updated or amended, review and revise policies and code provisions to promote an inclusive community. b. When considering specific plan or rezoning proposals, evaluate Ongoing whether the change in zoning will help achieve fair housing goals. c. Include fair housing information on the City's website, including Provide link to up-to-date fair housing laws,FHCOC services,and information on services on City filing discrimination complaints. Proactive announcement of fair website by 2023 housing resources on Community Newsletter (weekly text and make service messaging system). announcements at least annually. d. Continue to publish a Housing Assistance Guide informing Update annually community members of the Orange County Fair Housing Council (FHCOC) and its oversight of fair housing practices, for availability on the City's website and at the Planning counter. Orange County 170 25-29 Regional AFH e. Develop interest list for update on fair housing and affordable By the end of 2022 housing projects. and updated annually. f. Update the City website with affordable housing projects. Update website semi- annually. g. Utilize non-traditional media (i.e., social media, City website, Beginning in 2023; Community Newsletter) in outreach and education efforts in ongoing addition to print media and notices. thereafter h. As a participating City in the County of Orange Community Annually Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, continue to support the annual contribution of CDBG funds to the Orange County Fair Housing Council (FHCOC). i. Participate in regional efforts to address fair housing issues and Quarterly monitor emerging trends/issues in the housing market. Attend quarterly OCHA Housing Advisory Committee meetings. j. Petition to Orange County, administrator of the City's CDBG Beginning in 2023. program, for the fair housing provider (FHCOC) to expand landlord education on source of income discrimination and voucher programs. k. Expand outreach and education on recent state laws (SB 329 and Begin in 2023 SB 222) supporting source of income protection for publicly assisted low-income households (HCVs). 2. Increase affordable housing in high opportunity areas through the following actions: a. Establish a new Housing Program Coordinator planner position Beginning in 2023. to oversee and expedite Housing Element program implementation. b. Create a comprehensive ADU Handbook with tools to facilitate 12/1/2022. ADU production. c. Require that 25% of the total number of units or lots, whichever Initiate is greater, in new subdivisions of two or more residential units or inclusionary lots and 25% of new development of three or more units on housing policy existing building sites be affordable to extremely-low-,very-low- update in 2023 , low- or moderate-income households or individuals. with a market feasible study. d. Update inclusionary housing policy to enhance feasibility and production of affordable housing. Orange County 171 25-29 Regional AFH e. Amend the Zoning Code to provide more flexible development Complete standards and the built form for affordable housing and facilitate amendments by development of densities at or above 30 units per acre. 2024. f. Conduct outreach to religious institutions to provide information In 2023. and technical assistance on state law regarding developing housing units on religious-use parking spaces. g. Monitor financial assistance programs administered by the Annually explore California Department of Housing and Community Development funding options and apply for funding that the City is eligible for and can available. competitively vie for. h. Amend the Zoning Code to create a new zone where emergency Zoning Code shelters all allowed by right,then apply the zone to the Friendship revision adopted Shelter site. by the City Council on December 13, 2022. i. Amend Zoning Code to address Low Barrier Navigation Center, By June 2023. transitional housing, and supportive housing, SRO, and reasonable accommodation. j. Review Zoning Code to accommodate large group homes (7+ By June 2023. individuals) as a residential use to be conditionally permitted in residential zones and to establish conditions for approval that are objective and provide for certainty in outcomes. k. Establish an Affirmative Marketing Plan, to include advertising Establish plan by and community outreach designed to reach underrepresented the end of 2023. households to be implemented when affordable units become available. I. Initiate an update to the Laguna Canyon Specific Plan to evaluate Complete plan by suitability for expansion of sites, through code amendments or 2023. rezoning, to where live-work, residential, or mixed-use development is permitted. m. Continue to evaluate potential for mixed-use and work/live Establish strategy spaces along the Coast Highway Corridor and on vacant or by 2024. underutilized commercial properties. n. With adoption of Phase 2 of the DSP, include incentives such as: Adoption of Phase increased densities, increased height limits, higher lot coverage, 2 in 2025. lower parking requirements, allowances for off-site parking, allowances for lot assemblage and, and removal of upper story Orange County 172 25-29 Regional AFH residential use limitations to assist in the development of housing 3. Make neighborhood improvements to increase access to opportunity, and preserve housing affordability,through the following actions: a. Pursue the development of an amnesty program for unpermitted By 2023 residential units. b. Laguna Canyon Road (SR-133) Improvements: place overhead By end of 2025 utilities underground; active transportation improvements; reconstruct drainage channel; add dam to control storm flows. c. Coast Highway ADA South Improvements (Moss Street to Fifth By end of 2025 Avenue): add new sidewalks; widen existing sidewalk; reconstruct existing curb ramps and driveways to meet current ADA standards; add audible pedestrian crossing systems; repair, resurface, and restripe roadway. d. Laguna Canyon Road Median Landscaping: Replant the 2023-2024 landscaped median along Laguna Canyon Road between Forest Avenue and east of Canyon Acres Drive. e. Continue to provide Senior Housing Repair program. Ongoing f. Monitor implementation of the Short-Term Lodging Ordinance. Annually Restrictions to short-term lodging are intended to help preserve rental housing stock by limiting their use for vacation rental purposes. g. Continue to support aging in place through amortization and Ongoing abatement agreements which allow residents to remain on the property under specified conditions to improve the property. h. Where safety concerns can be addressed, allow residents to By 2023 remain in unpermitted spaces while they are adapted to meet work/live code If funding is available, develop incentives and funding programs to assist building owners and tenants to make the building modifications necessary to conform with work/live ordinances. Orange County 173 25-29 Regional AFH 7. Laguna Hills Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Concentration of more affordable housing (e.g., multifamily, mobile home park) in north Laguna Hills and the Via Lomas neighborhood. 2. Neighborhoods in south Laguna Hills are more desirable, therefore more costly, than neighborhoods in central and north Laguna Hills. 3. Availability of affordable units in a range of sizes. 4. Cost of rehabilitation or repair. 5. Availability of rentals that accept Housing Choice Vouchers. 6. Linguistic isolation of non-English speaking households. 7. Availability of high-ranked elementary schools to serve north Laguna Hills and the Via Lomas neighborhood. 8. Housing shortages regionally in Orange County. 9. Unaffordable rents and home prices. 10. Lack of partnerships with affordable housing developers 11. Concentrated areas of poverty in low-resource areas. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Coordinate local housing efforts with federal, state, regional, and Ongoing local government and/or agencies and cooperate in implementation of intergovernmental housing programs; including the following actions: a. Submit CDBG applications to assist in preserving existing Annually affordable housing stock; b. Continue to publicize programs, such as energy-efficiency Ongoing programs and state and federal funding programs; c. Encourage local housing advocates to make presentations to Biannually local builders and developers, Chamber of Commerce, civic groups, and the local community re: affordable and multifamily/higher density development. 2. Encourage the development of ADUs throughout the City to expand Ongoing housing opportunities for all income levels within existing neighborhoods, particularly for lower-income seniors, single individuals, individuals with disabilities, and small households; through the following actions: a. Update the City's current ADU Ordinance 2023 b. Promote development of ADUs through City website 2023 c. and informational material Orange County 174 25-29 Regional AFH d. Identify and implement potential incentives to encourage Ongoing production of affordable ADUs. e. Monitor the production and affordability of ADUs annually to Annually ensure the City will meet the assumption of 18 ADUs during the planning period. f. Explore funding options to create an ADU forgivable Loan 2024 Program. 3. Increase affordable housing in high opportunity areas through the following actions: a. Establish objective design standards for residential By August 2024 development and analyze opportunities to permit multifamily residential in an existing commercial center. b. Analyze opportunities to permit multifamily residential in an 2024 existing commercial center in north Laguna Hills. c. Mitigate regulatory constraints on the production of housing through the following actions. i. Consider adaptive reuse ordinance by June 2024 and 2024-2025 implement, if appropriate, by June 2025. ii. Consider inclusionary housing ordinance and present 2024-2025 findings to City Council by June 2024 and implement, if appropriate, by June 2025. iii. Consider congregational overlay by June 2024 and 2024-2025 implement, if appropriate, by June 2025. iv. Conduct initial review of development standards and 2025 permitting requirements by June 2025 and update Zoning Ordinance as needed. v. Amend the General Plan and Zoning Code,as needed, 2024 to provide adequate sites for 413 lower-income units. d. Provide incentives (e.g., expedited processing, fee waivers, Ongoing and density bonuses) to facilitate set-asides for planned low- income units, and for mixed-use development. e. Promote lower-income housing development incentives on Ongoing the City website. f. Enact new measures that will raise local funding for June 2025 construction of affordable and other needed housing types. Orange County 175 25-29 Regional AFH g. Develop and implement strategies to encourage and facilitate Ongoing lot consolidation and phasing of residential and mixed-use developments on large sites. h. Explore the potential to partner with a nonprofit organization 2025 to offer a program based on the Community Land Trust model. i. Work with stakeholders to identify nongovernmental Ongoing constraints that may impede the construction of housing. j. Increase participation in the Housing Choice Voucher Program through the following actions: i. Provide referral services and information to City Ongoing residents on HCV program. ii. Study the feasibility of a landlord incentive program 2024 for landlords that choose to accept voucher holding tenants. 4. Increase housing opportunities for special needs populations through the following actions: a. Pursue homeless assistance grants through the Continuum Annually of Care. b. Assist public and private nonprofit housing developers in Annually preparation of funding applications for special-needs populations. c. Conduct outreach to service providers to discuss ways the Annually City can assist in the development of housing for lower income households. d. Work with local organizations that provide assistance to Ongoing individuals with disabilities to implement an outreach program that informs individuals with disabilities and their families about housing and available services. e. Prepare and distribute informational material on the 2024 reasonable accommodation ordinance,that will direct people to service information on the City website. f. Encourage developers to provide universal design features in Ongoing housing developments. Orange County 176 25-29 Regional AFH g. Provide fair housing education and information to apartment Ongoing managers and homeowners associations on why denial of reasonable modifications/accommodations is unlawful. 5. Promote development opportunities in the Urban Village Specific Plan (UVSP) area, encouraging affordable housing development, through the following actions: a. Add promotional material re: UVSP housing opportunities on 2023 the City's website. b. Meet with prospective developers to encourage Annual incorporating housing for multiple income levels. c. Consider amending UVSP to incorporate inclusionary 2024 housing requirements. d. Provide regulatory incentives on a case-by-case basis Ongoing consistent with Chapter 9-72 of the Zoning Ordinance. 6. Preserve existing affordable housing through the following actions: a. Cooperate with owners of existing affordable units to secure Annually appropriate federal funding necessary to maintain existing affordability. b. Enforce the Municipal Code and address matters related to Ongoing property maintenance that pose threat to public health, safety, or welfare. c. Develop informational materials to help educate property 2023 owners on available funding programs to assist with rehabilitation. d. Notify the State Franchise Tax Board if substandard rental Ongoing housing is identified. e. Work with Orange County Housing and Community Services Ongoing Department to receive rehabilitation loans and grants for low and moderate-income homeowners and rental property owners; Use CDBG funds as funding becomes available and pursue other funding sources; f. Prepare and distribute informational material advertising the 2024 rehabilitation program g. Continue to pursue the extension of affordability controls for Annually 51 units that are set to expire in 2032; prepare a "Risk Orange County 177 25-29 RegionalAFH Assessment" report provided by the California Housing Partnership Corporation h. Provide technical assistance to preserve at-risk units; Ongoing i. Apply for state or federal funding on behalf of interested non- Ongoing profit entities, if necessary, to protect the affordability of rental units j. Provide foreclosure information on City website 2023, update annually k. Refer residents to external agencies to assist in reducing Ongoing incidents of foreclosures I. Require replacement housing units subject to the Ongoing requirements of SB 330 on sites identified in the sites inventory when any new development occurs on a site that has been occupied by or restricted for the use of lower- income households at any time during the previous five years; m. Prevent tenant displacement by considering the feasibility of 2024 a local Just Cause Eviction ordinance, a Local Rent Stabilization ordinance, and a multi-lingual Right to Counsel program; 7. Increase services to special needs populations through the following actions: a. Allocate CDBG funds to nonprofits providing shelter for the Annually homeless b. Contract with Mercy House or other housing services Annually providers to help residents experiencing homelessness obtain services. Orange County 178 25-29 Regional AFH 8. Laguna Woods Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of affordable housing.The availability and price of land represents a significant market constraint to housing production in Laguna Woods, where there is very little residentially designated vacant land. 2. Displacement risk for existing lower-income residents due to economic pressures/motivators on property owners/managers 3. Limited access to opportunities for individuals with disabilities and other special needs due to underimproved housing stock potentially resultant of financial or physical challenges. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Conduct a market study and then amend the existing inclusionary housing ordinance to modify the minimum percentages of new housing units that must be deed-restricted for extremely low, very low, and low-income households, as feasible and advantageous to promote the development of affordable housing. 2. Investigate potential incentives for property owners to extend and/or expand existing affordability covenants beyond the planned expiration date and/or current number of housing units, with an emphasis on incentivizing (i) affordability covenants for extremely low and very low-income housing units, and (ii) affordability covenants that apply to housing units in a range of sizes. If feasible and economical, adopt such incentives. 3. Adopt an ordinance waiving or reducing City building permit fees for improvements to the home of a person at least 60 years of age with a qualifying disability that are made to accommodate that disability, as provided for by California Health and Safety Code Section 17951.7. Consider including provisions allowing for similar building permit fee waivers or reductions for improvements to the home of a person with a qualifying disability that are made to accommodate that disability, regardless of age. Prepare and maintain a flyer with related information. Conduct annual outreach to nonprofit organizations known to provide medical or social services to residents with disabilities. Conduct biennial outreach to residents residing in Census Tracts 626.22 and 626.48 due to their comparatively lower economic domain scores from theTCAC/HCD Opportunity Map. 4. Provide opportunities for reimbursements, grants, or other forms of financial assistance to support home improvements that increase accessibility or functionality for individuals with special needs. Conduct annual outreach to nonprofit organizations known to provide medical or social services to residents with special needs. Conduct biennial outreach to residents residing Orange County 179 25-29 Regional AFH in CensusTracts 626.22 and 626.48 due to their comparatively lower economic domain scores from theTCAC/HCD Opportunity Map. 5. Formalize a proactive code enforcement program that focuses on housing- related rehabilitation needs, results in repairs,and seeks to mitigate potential cost, displacement, and relocation impacts on residents. 6. Improve pedestrian accessibility on sidewalks, curb ramps, crosswalks, and other public property connecting housing with transit stops, public buildings, businesses, and educational institutions. Prioritize improvements based on factors including: a. The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment's California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool ("CalEnviroScreen") scores for individual Census Tracts, with an emphasis on undertaking improvements in and around Census Tract 626.47 due to its comparatively higher CalEnviroScreen score, as feasible and economical; and b. Education domain scores from the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee ("TCAC")/HCD Opportunity Map, with an emphasis on undertaking improvements in and around CensusTract 626.22 due to its comparatively lower scores, as feasible and economical. 7. Pursue partnerships and seek funding to provide Laguna Woods-based housing mobility counseling services. If feasible and economical, implement such services. 8. Adopt an ordinance waiving or reducing City building permit fees, or providing other incentives, for housing projects that prepare and implement an affirmative marketing plan designed to attract renters or buyers of diverse demographics, including individuals of any race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. Prioritize incentives based on factors including racial concentrations from U.S. Census Bureau data products, with an emphasis on avoiding the creation of geographically discernable patterns of segregation or racially concentrated areas of poverty. 9. Prepare and maintain a webpage with information on housing mediation, foreclosure assistance, tenant legal counseling services, and vocational counseling services.Train City staff to make referrals using the webpage. 10. Pursue partnerships and seek funding to provide Laguna Woods-based housing mediation, foreclosure assistance, and multilingual tenant legal counseling services. If feasible and economical, implement such services. 11. Investigate potential hazard mitigation measures that would reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of residential displacement as a result of future disasters. If feasible and economical, implement such hazard mitigation measures. Prioritize improvements based on factors including economic Orange County 180 25-29 Regional AFH domain scores from theTCAC/HCD Opportunity Map for individual Census Tracts,with an emphasis on undertaking improvements in and around Census Tracts 626.22 and 626.48 due to their comparatively lower scores, as feasible and economical. 12. Investigate potential incentives for property owners of apartment and cooperative housing units for which tenants pay usage-based energy costs to make energy efficiency improvements that exceed the minimum requirements set forth in the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards. If feasible and economical, implement such incentives. Prioritize incentives for residents residing in Census Tracts 626.46 and 626.47 due to those areas being identified in this Housing Element as susceptible to displacement and having the highest renter vulnerability indices, as feasible and economical. 13. Investigate opportunities to provide rental relief for residents at risk of homelessness. If feasible and economical, implement such opportunities. Prioritize rental relief for residents residing in CensusTracts 626.46 and 626.47 due to those areas being identified as susceptible to displacement and having the highest renter vulnerability indices, as feasible and economical. Orange County 181 25-29 Regional AFH 9. Los Alamitos Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunity and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of housing for special needs population. 2. Lack of knowledge of fair housing laws. 3. Local land use and zoning laws. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Encourage development of housing for special needs populations Establish incentive through the following actions: program and a. The City shall encourage and facilitate development of housing publish on City for families and large households, the elderly, farmworkers, website by June individuals experiencing homelessness and individuals with 30, 2023. disabilities, including physical and developmental disabilities. b. The City will assist developers in identifying outside funding sources and support efforts to pursue those opportunities— either as group homes or in single family homes, when appropriate and feasible. c. The City will develop a menu to offer incentives such as density bonuses, regulatory concessions, and expedited processing. d. The City will develop and disseminate informational materials annually to developers regarding the incentive program and identified funding sources to potentially assist 5 special needs residents annually through the planning period. 2. Increase fair housing knowledge and enforcement through the following Ongoing actions: a. The City shall continue to provide referrals to the Fair Housing Council of Orange County for fair housing services including counseling services for tenant-landlord disputes and cases of alleged discrimination. b. The City shall continue to publicize fair housing and complaint referral information at local community centers and in the Recreation & Community Services Schedule of Classes.The City will also provide information at City Hall and on the City's website. c. The City shall work with government agencies (e.g., Fair Housing Council of Orange County) and nonprofit groups (e.g., Habitat for Humanity) on anti-discrimination during housing processes for residents in protected classes,such as those with disabilities and families with children. Advertise workshops and events held by these organizations on anti-discrimination on the City's email newsletter and Housing Element webpage. Orange County 182 25-29 Regional AFH 3. Collaborate and coordinate with government agencies and nonprofit Annually groups such as the Fair Housing Council of Orange County to support outreach and expansion of lending programs for homeownership among minority populations. 4. The City currently requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application By December 2022 for a residential care facility for seven or more individuals in the R-3 zone. To remove any potential constraint to housing for individuals with disabilities, the City shall remove the CUP requirement for the R-3 Zone or allow residential care facility for seven or more individuals by right in another zone as appropriate. 5. The City will annually review its policies and zoning laws relating to fair Annually housing and reach out to the community through surveys and workshops as appropriate. The outreach efforts will be advertised via multiple channels, such as City email newsletter, posting at City website, print material at City Hall, local community centers, and social media. Orange County 183 25-29 Regional AFH 10. Placentia Issue: Segregation and R/ECAPs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of affordable housing limits housing mobility 2. Limited participation in Housing Choice Voucher Program 3. Land use and development practices 4. Lack of fair housing knowledge and enforcement Actions: Timeframe: 1. Disseminate information on the City's website and conduct Annually beginning in community outreach meeting with local stakeholders and August 2024. affordable housing developers to promote affordable housing development throughout the city and discuss other City- incentives to create affordable housing. 2. Conduct marketing to increase participation in the Housing Ongoing Choice Voucher Program. 3. Collaborate with developers to develop a mechanism to develop Annually affordable housing in highest-opportunity areas. 4. Annually review existing policies and programs for potential Annually restrictive practices that would limit diversity within racially concentrated areas of affluence (RCAAs). If restrictive practices are identified, address prior to adoption of the new policies and programs or within six months for existing policies and programs. 5. Establish incentives for affordable developments (including By March 31, 2025 ADUs and JADUs) in RCAA and high opportunity areas. 6. Establish specific incentives for the development of affordable By June 2025 units the RCAAs and high opportunity areas. 7. Conduct Affirmative marketing to increase diversity within Every 2 years, beginning in RCAAs. This may include, but is not limited to, noticing of August 2024. affordable units/projects through direct mail targeted outreach to lower income CensusTracts, publishing advertising materials in multiple language, informing service agencies, outreach to community organizations or places of worship. 8. Facilitate the development and/or legalization of over 84 ADUs 2021-2029 during the planning period by a variety of methods, including but not limited to: Orange County 184 25-29 Regional AFH a. Annually pursuing funding to adopt permit-ready ADU plans to minimize design costs, expedite permit processing, and provide development certainty. b. Developing an ADU Manual guiding applicants through the construction of an ADU by December 2024. c. Developing an ADU webpage informing the community on ADU related codes, processes, and incentives December 2024. d. Developing and implementing a public awareness campaign for construction of ADUs and the City's incentives utilizing all forms of media and outreach distribution December 2024. e. Establishing incentives for ADUs, with an emphasis on affordable ADUs by December 2024. 9. Research and establish home sharing program(s) and/or 2025 policies. 10. Coordinate with local organizations to assist with matching Annually tenants with existing homeowners. The City will assist with outreach, facilitate annual presentations, and conduct outreach to eligible and potential homeowners. 11. Facilitate the development of at least 30 units on publicly- 2021-2029 owned properties, with an emphasis on areas with relatively higher opportunity, higher median income and RCAAs. 12. Increase fair housing knowledge and enforcement through the following actions: a. In partnership the city's fair housing provider, conduct Ongoing multi-faceted fair housing outreach to tenants, landlords, property owners, realtors, and property management companies. Methods of outreach should include workshops, informational booths, presentations to civic leaders and community groups, staff training, and distribution of multi- lingual fair housing literature. b. Provide general counseling and referrals to address Ongoing tenant-landlord issues and provide periodic tenant- landlord walk-in clinics at City Halls and other community locations. c. Include testing/audits within the scope of work for each Annually city's fair housing provider. Orange County 185 25-29 Regional AFH d. Support enforcement activity and publicize outcomes of Ongoing fair housing litigation. e. Provide and maintain multi-lingual informational Develop by August 2024; materials on tenant legal counseling and resources. disseminate annually; update as needed. f. Work collaboratively with local housing authorities to Ongoing ensure affirmative fair marketing plans and de- concentration policies are implemented. Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunity and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. High cost of housing in high opportunity areas 2. Limited accessible housing opportunities for individuals with disabilities 3. High cost of housing repairs/rehabilitation 4. Displacement of residents due to economic factors 5. Lack of public investment in lower opportunity areas Actions: Timeframe: 1. The City will seek to improve access to opportunity for lower-income households and other protected classes through the following actions: a. Providing adequate sites for affordable housing Update candidate sites list development annually b. Reduce governmental constraints to encourage Review ADU procedures the production of ADUs annually and revise as needed to reduce cost and time and comply with state law. c. Facilitating the production of housing for Ongoing individuals with special needs by providing technical assistance to developers proposing affordable housing. d. Work with federal, state, and local agencies to try Annually to identify and secure funding for homeowners who are interested in building an ADU and are willing to offer it as an affordable rental. 2. Increase community integration for individuals with Ongoing disabilities. Orange County 186 25-29 Regional AFH 3. Continue to help develop housing projects for special Ongoing needs households by providing technical assistance with tax credit applications, tax-exempt bond financing and other public funds, including ESG,CDBG, and HOME. 4. Review reasonable accommodation standards and Annually procedures annually and update within 6 months of annual review if not compliant with state or federal law. If not compliant, the City will process reasonable accommodations in compliance with state or federal law in the interim. 5. Enhance the proactive code enforcement program that Review and revise annually targets areas of concentrated rehabilitation needs, resulting in repairs and mitigating potential costs, displacement and relocation impacts on residents. 6. The City shall develop a program to collaborate with non- Develop strategy by 2024, apply profit housing providers and develop a preservation for funding annually thereafter. strategy.The preservation strategy will allow the City to act quickly if, and when, it receives notice of conversion. As part of the strategy, the City shall ensure compliance with noticing requirements; conduct tenant education and pursue funding to preserve the units. 7. Explore anti-gentrification policies and regulations to Report to Council by October combat displacement, which especially affects low- 2025. income residents and communities of color.These may include, but are not limited to foreclosure assistance, community land trusts, and housing trust funds. 8. Provide housing mobility counseling either directly or Ongoing through referrals.This counseling may include, but is not limited to, information on opportunity areas, housing search skills and tools, workshops, search assistance, referrals, structured support for a time after a move to the City, landlord-tenant mediation, and retention counseling. 9. Engage community health workers to conduct ground Ongoing level site visits and meetings within areas of lower income to better understand resident and business barriers, resources, and needs. 10. Seek funding and will review Capital Improvement Annually Program in order to prioritize projects in areas of lower income, to improve living environments and reduce the risk of displacement. Examples of projects include street Orange County 187 25-29 Regional AFH improvements, multi- modal investments, safe routes to school, parks, community facilities and amenities, infrastructure, and other investment toward community revitalization. 11. The City will continue to encourage and emphasize public Ongoing art in areas of lower income and diversity. Orange County 188 25-29 Regional AFH 11. San Juan Capistrano Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Limited local private fair housing outreach and enforcement 2. Overcrowding in Capistrano Villas 3. Limited affordable and accessible low-income housing 4. Inability to afford and take advantage of local educational, recreational activities 5. Private discrimination against protected classes (in violation of federal Housing Law) directly limits housing choice and mobility. 6. Zoning standards that limit the ability to achieve the maximum permitted density. 7. Lower and moderate households may face displacement pressures as rents rise due to high overall housing costs. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Contract directly with a fair housing services provider to provide specific Annually services for San Juan Capistrano residents 2. Continue increased bilingual translation and interpretation services as well Ongoing as alternative events and workshops times, locations, and formats to enable and facilitate meaningful participation from the Community of Focus 3. Provide tenant/landlord training about fair housing laws, requirements, Annually services, and resources. 4. Pursue development of a program to increase maintenance and necessary Ongoing repairs and safety of overcrowded rental units through voluntary owner certifications and randomized inspections in a manner that does not rely on tenant complaints or lead to increased threat of retribution or displacement. 5. Update Density Bonus Ordinance Ongoing 6. Continue to coordinate and support community-based organizations that Annually support after school programs, self-help training, food-assistance and counseling and access to other resources. 7. As part of the Capital Improvement Plan, coordinate with Public Works to Annually prioritize Environmental Justice/Community of Focus areas for actions and capital improvements. 8. Rezoning to permit high density residential development in higher resource Ongoing areas, 9. Increase housing choices through removal of regulatory and procedural Ongoing barriers to higher density housing; increased incentives and requirements for construction of affordable housing, Orange County 189 25-29 Regional AFH 10. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to increase the minimum 2023 and percentage of lower-income affordable housing units (or in-lieu fees) to the ongoing extent feasible based on current economic analysis. 11. Review Architectural Control process to ensure objective design standards. 2024 12. Continue Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program. Ongoing 13. Continue to implement the mobile home park rent increase limits ordinance Ongoing and the senior mobile home park overlay, 14. Consider new forms of rent stabilization and price control for older 2024 multifamily units to ensure existing residents are not priced out of their homes. 15. Ensure compliance with and education regarding the Tenant Protection Act Ongoing of 2019 (AB 1482), including maximum annual rent increases, just cause evictions, and financial compensation requirements to stabilize residents living in areas at risk of displacement. Orange County 190 25-29 Regional AFH 12. Seal Beach Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity,and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of affordable housing in high opportunity areas due to local land use and zoning laws. Actions: Timeframe: 1. The City will process zoning and General Plan 2025 amendments for sufficient sites with appropriate densities as identified in the City's Housing Element, to fully accommodate the City's remaining housing need. 2. Create a mixed-use zone that meets state requirements for 2025 RHNA site designation,specifically to facilitate housing for lower income households. The zoning code update process will accommodate all relevant state requirements regarding density and affordability and will engage with all relevant stakeholders to ensure the development standards can result in the development of the maximum number of units allowed and facilitate the inclusion of affordable units. 3. Make information on available incentives and concessions Ongoing available and evaluate their efficacy regularly. 4. Provide a streamlined and understandable process for the Revise ordinance by development of ADUs and JADUs, supported by September 2024 and adopt incentives and resources as they may be available. Adopt pre-approved plans by June pre-approved plans. Permit 10 ADUs during the planning 2025. period. 5. Reduce barriers to housing development by streamlining By January 2024 permit processing consistent with SB 35. 6. Implement SB 9 requirements-Reduce barriers to housing Process 2 SB 9 projects development through simplified processing and creating between 2021-2029. incentives to make units created affordable. 7. Amend the Zoning Code to allow employee housing August 2025 consistent with Health and Safety Code §17021.5 and 17021.6. 8. Allow housing at select locations in the Main Street By October 2025 Specific Plan. Permit two residential units in the Main Street Specific Plan during the planning period. Orange County 191 25-29 Regional AFH 9. Reduce minimum unit size constraints to housing By August 2025 development, especially to promote affordable housing. 10. Allow SROs as uses allowed by-right in the RHD Zone. By December 2026 11. Reduce Parking Requirements for Studios and 1-Bedroom By December 2026 Units. Orange County 192 25-29 Regional AFH 13. Stanton Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations. 2. Displacement of residents due to economic pressures. 3. Location and type of affordable housing, including availability of affordable units in a range of sizes. 4. Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing costs. 5. Quality of affordable housing information programs. 6. Access to transportation for individuals with disabilities. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Support fair housing services provider and efforts to minimize Ongoing discriminatory housing practices. 2. Maintain and monitor the residential sites inventory to ensure sufficient sites 2021-2029 remain to accommodate the RHNA allocation throughout the planning period. Receive and process development applications for residential projects. 3. Maintain adequate capacity to accommodate the City's RHNA obligations at 2021-2029 all income levels throughout the planning period. Report as required through the HCD annual report process. 4. Collaborate with the development community annually, including affordable Annually housing developers, to evaluate the viability of developing city-owned land as affordable housing. 5. For all project applications, identify the need for replacement of affordable Ongoing housing units and ensure replacement, if required, occurs. 6. Monitor the City's existing affordable housing stock and support affordable 2021-2029 housing developers in their efforts to develop new affordable units in Stanton. Monitor the City's options for special needs housing and likewise support special needs housing developers. 7. Understand the potential for market-force economic displacement and 2021-2029 consider programs to address the issue, if necessary. 8. Ensure that the City's parking standards for residential uses are adequate 2021-2029 while not unduly constraining housing development. Orange County 193 25-29 Regional AFH 14. Villa Park Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity,and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of local private fair housing outreach and enforcement may be a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County.Although Orange County is served by two high- quality private, nonprofit fair housing organizations, they are underfunded and understaffed in comparison to the total need for their services.Victims of discrimination would be more able to exercise their rights, thus deterring future discrimination, if the capacity of existing organizations grew to meet the scale of the problem. 2. Lack of local public fair housing outreach and enforcement may also be a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County.There are no local public entities that conduct fair housing outreach and enforcement, with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and HUD constituting the only public enforcement bodies that operate in Orange County. Advocates across Orange County and the state of California have reported issues with the timeline of the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing's investigations and the standards that it applies in making probable cause determinations. A local public enforcement agency, if created,would have the potential to be more responsive to victims of discrimination in Orange County than either the state or HUD. 3. Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing costs may be a significant contributing factor to fair housing issues in Orange County. Increasing housing affordability would make it easier for low-income households to access the types of services and amenities that further social mobility. 4. General lack of a range of affordable housing opportunities, including limited affordable housing options for families 5. Limited opportunity for residential development in sites accommodating multiple family development. Actions: Timeframe: 1. The City will continue to disseminate information regarding fair housing Ongoing in a variety of locations including City Hall, the City website and the library,and conduct ongoing, proactive outreach to engage members of all socio-economic groups and recruit members of underrepresented groups to participate in City meetings.The City will continue to seek funding to support the Fair Housing Council of Orange County (FHCOC), which provides community education, individual counseling, mediation, and low-cost advocacy with the expressed goal of eliminating housing discrimination and guaranteeing the rights of all people to freely choose the housing for which they qualify in the area they desire. The City will invite FHCOC to conduct annual fair housing outreach targeted to Villa Park residents and landlords. 2. The City will seek to improve access to opportunity for lower-income households and other protected classes by providing adequate sites for affordable housing development, encouraging the production of ADUs, Orange County 194 25-29 Regional AFH and facilitating the production of housing for individuals with special needs. 3. Recruit at least five landlords to become a participating voucher 2021-2024 property during three-year period. 4. Coordinate with the County to assist with improving voucher mobility at local level by: a. Identifying local staff to commit to 25% administrative function June 2024 to support voucher mobility programs. b. Establishing a customer service framework including dedicated June 2024 phone number, email and contact information. c. Establishing an annual monitoring program to evaluate the By June 2024, success of voucher mobility program. Provide for annual annually thereafter program amendments, as necessary. 5. Annually review the Sites Inventory and the location of new, affordable Annually housing development to ensure equal and fair housing development practices throughout the whole City. 6. Annual meetings with developers to explore affordable housing and Annually non-traditional single-family housing opportunities. Orange County 195 25-29 Regional AFH 15. Yorba Linda Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunity,and Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of effective fair housing outreach to seniors due to digital divide 2. Private discrimination 3. Lack of knowledge of existing resources among the public 4. Low number of HCVs in the City compared to the County overall 5. Lack of affordable housing opportunities throughout the city, including in areas where rent and sale prices have become exclusive, and for special needs groups such as persons with disabilities and female-headed households 6. Need for more public investment in infrastructure and accessibility improvements in moderate resource opportunity areas 7. Challenges for housing/property upkeep due to financial/physical constraints and age of housing stock. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Increase the distribution of fair housing materials and increase awareness of fair housing options among residents, including special needs groups and low-income residents,through the following actions: a. By the end of 2022 have additional fair housing information posted 2022-2025 at theYorba Linda Senior Center site and on their digital platforms. Hold an informational workshop in 2023 and 2025 b. By December 2022, conduct a fair housing information session for 2022 the City Council. Invite local nonprofits(including the Orange County Human Relations Commission, the Kennedy Commission, Making Housing Happen and People for Housing O.C.) to attend c. Publish Fair Housing information, including any community Annually meetings, on non-traditional media such as Facebook or Instagram, and conduct targeted outreach to tenants, mobile home park residents and other lower income populations. 2. Increase public and private investment in areas ofYorba Linda that have been identified as moderate resource areas and portions of the City with higher percentages of special needs groups, through the following actions: a. Starting in 2022, work with the FHCOC to contact landlords of Every 2 years affordable multifamily complexes every two years and provide fair housing information and assistance. This outreach will focus on promoting the Section 8 voucher program to landlords who have not previously participated in the program and should include multi- lingual materials. Orange County 196 25-29 Regional AFH b. Adopt an ordinance to expand the housing supply in High Resource Completed in single-family zones by allowing for lot splits and duplexes under the 2023 parameters of SB 9. In coordination with research being conducted at the State level, evaluate opportunities to incentivize and provide funding assistance for homeowners to provide affordable units under SB 9. c. Continue to improve access to persons with disabilities through ADA Annually improvement to streets, sidewalks and public facilities. Dedicate or seek funding, including annual CDBG allocations, to prioritize infrastructure and accessibility improvements in the moderate resource opportunity areas d. Coordinate with the Orange County Housing Authority in 2023 about 2023 utilizing the mobility counseling program inYorba Linda. This OCHA program informs Housing Choice Voucher holders about their residential options in higher opportunity areas and provides holistic support to voucher holders seeking to move to higher opportunity areas. 3. Increase affordable housing options throughout the city through the following actions: a. Adopt the Affordable Housing Overlay, Commercial Mixed-Use Completed in Overlay and Congregational Land Overlay, providing geographically 2024 dispersed sites for over 600 lower income units which foster a more inclusive community. Initiate rezoning and the Measure B election in 2024 and pay for all costs associated with the ballot measure. b. Increase the allocation of units in Savi Ranch from 200 to 790 high Completed in density units, creating a better geographic distribution of 2024 development between the eastern and western areas of the community. c. Promote and support the development of Accessory Dwelling Units Ongoing (ADUs), including pursuing funding for rent-restricted ADUs, and seek to issue permits for over 50 units annually throughout Yorba Linda d. Expand information available on affordable housing inYorba Linda, Ongoing including any community meetings on non-traditional media such as Facebook and Instagram. e. Require affordable developers receiving public funds to prepare an Ongoing affirmative marketing plan and encourage private developers with affordable units in their projects to prepare an affirmative marketing plan.The affirmative marketing plan shall ensure marketing materials Orange County 197 25-29 Regional AFH for new developments are designed to attract renters and buyers of diverse demographics, including persons of any race, ethnicity, sex, handicap, and familial status. f. During the public hearing processes for the Affordable Housing Completed in Overlay, Mixed-Use Housing Overlay, and Congregational Land 2024 Overlay, as well as the outreach process for the Measure B election (in November 2024), utilize tools such as the "Myths and Facts About Affordable & High-Density Housing" currently on the City's website to show what affordable housing means and who it benefits. Contact Kennedy Commission, Making Housing Happen and People for Housing O.C. for potential input. Conduct at least five educational events for the public in locations throughout the community. g. By the end of 2022, research the development of a program that 2022-2025 would provide low interest loans to single-family homeowners and grants to homeowners with household incomes of up to 80% of the Area Median Income to develop accessory dwelling units with affordability restrictions on their property.This research should also explore outside funds. If funding is available, establish a pilot program by December 2023 with a goal of achieving at least two deed-restricted ADUs annually; evaluate the program by the end of 2025. 4. Preserve the existing housing stock through the following actions: a. Include information about rehab and maintenance resources Annually (including the Residential Rehabilitation Program and Community Preservation Program) in City newsletters and on the website. Include translated information when feasible. Seek to assist 10 households annually. Starting in 2022, conduct targeted outreach through annual mailings to Census Tracts 218.20 and 218.26. about available rehabilitation assistance. Orange County 198 25-29 Regional AFH B. Aliso Viejo Issue: Concentration Most of the city is considered an area of high White concentration,except for a few neighborhoods with low-medium concentration (which are predominantly White) in the northern and eastern parts of the city. Since 1990, levels of concentration have been increasing but remain low. Contributing Factors: 1. Location and type of affordable housing. 2. Limited access to opportunity due to high housing costs. 3. Insufficient fair housing outreach and enforcement. 4. Availability of affordable housing. 5. Availability of affordable units in a range of sizes. 6. Insufficient Housing Choice Vouchers. 7. Displacement of residents due to economic pressures. Actions: Timeframe: Expand access to opportunity for all protected classes Annually and ongoing. through the following actions: 1. Identify sites in high opportunity areas for new hous ing development. 2. Review policies and programs that increase the sup ply. 3. Conduct a landlord/tenant education campaign on fair housing laws. 4. Encourage development of a range of affordable housing types. 5. Encourage the development of ADUs. 6. Promote Housing Choice Vouchers. 7. Educate renters about their rights. Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities may disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of outreach and education regarding supportive services for individuals with disabilities. 2. Lack of education regarding resources available in the City and County, such as schools, transportation, and other in-home or community resources, for individuals with disabilities and single female-headed households. Actions: Timeframe: Bring existing resources to protected classes through the following actions: Orange County 199 25-29 Regional AFH 1. Review and amend (if necessary) Reasonable Review and amend regulations and Accommodation regulations and procedures. procedures by the end of FY 25/26. 2. Provide information on supportive services for Conduct annually by Dec. 31st of each individuals with disabilities, single female-headed year. households, and homeless individuals via the OC Social Services Agency. 3. Partner with OCTA and publish public transit Conduct bi-annually by Dec. 31st of each program info (OC Flex, OC ACCESS Service, and year. youth rider free pass). Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs The City's 2021-2029 Housing Element identified substandard housing conditions for low-income households as an issue facing low-income residents in the city. Additionally, housing cost burden is an issue for renters throughout Orange County. Contributing Factors: Substandard housing conditions due to: 1. Insufficient affordable and healthy homes for very-low incomes. 2. Lack of insufficient outreach and education on code enforcement. 3. Insufficient funding for repairs or rehabilitation. 4. Via Iglesia neighborhood has homes in need of repairs Actions: Timeframe: Reduce existence of substandard housing conditions through the following actions: 1. Add information about the City's Code Information added on City's website to be Enforcement service on the City's website completed by the end of FY 25/26. Annually, for renters and owners. conduct one informational campaign on Code Enforcement services with the goal of reaching at least 10 renters and 10 owners. 2. Create educational materials about Educational materials to be completed by the end healthy homes, and post information on of FY 25/26 and posted to the the City's website. City's website annually. Orange County 200 25-29 Regional AFH C. Anaheim Issue: Segregation, including R/ECAPs; and Disproportionate Housing Needs. While segregation levels overall in Anaheim are low, the city has neighborhoods considered to be areas of high POC segregation north of downtown and along SR-91, and south of downtown and adjacent to Disneyland. These areas are predominantly Hispanic. The neighborhoods north and south of downtown also have a higher percentage of overcrowded units than other neighborhoods in the city, and the areas north of downtown are home to multiple publicly supported housing developments. Additionally, housing cost burden is an issue for renters throughout Orange County. Anaheim also has one R/ECAP to the northeast of Disneyland, along Ball Rd and 1-5. This Census Tract is predominantly Hispanic, as are all the surrounding neighborhoods. Additionally, Anaheim Hills is considered an area of high White segregation. Contributing Factors: Historic practices of redlining and legal racial segregation have created many of the residential patterns that still exist today. Additionally, the high cost of land and existing housing in Anaheim (and throughout Orange County) are significant constraints to the development of new affordable housing and access for families to existing housing. Actions: Timeframe: Increase the supply of affordable housing in high Opportunity areas through the following actions: 1. Disseminate on the City's website, Develop webpage,including housing element information material to promote and facilitate candidate site list, and developer database implementation of state and City regulations and hold first annual workshop by October and incentives to create affordable housing. 2024. 2. Develop and maintain a database of affordable housing developers working in Update housing element candidate site list California; and hold an annual workshop to annually in conjunction with Housing engage and collaborate with affordable Element Annual Progress Report. housing developers on these topics. Review by October 2025, and revisions, if necessary, by October 2026. 3. Disseminate on the City's website, Develop information and database and information material to promote and facilitate participate in annual affordable housing AMC 18.38.215 Residential Uses of Motels, workshop by October 2025. Commercial, and Office Structures. 4. Develop and maintain a database of existing motels, commercial, and office structures for which conversion could be feasible. 5. Encourage the production of ADUs. Continue to refine existing review process for 6. Continue to seek opportunities to defray costs ADUs not using pre-approved plans. associated with construction to homeowners. Orange County 201 25-29 RegionalAFH 7. Develop, subject to funding availability, a Continue to refine existing review process for program to facilitate the construction of deed- ADUs using pre-approved plans and expand restricted ADUs. pre-approved plan catalog. Continue to support and promote programs such as the Orange County Housing Finance Trust's Affordable ADU Loan Program, when offered. Continue to seek potential local, state, and/or federal funds to establish an Anaheim Housing Authority affordable ADU grant/loan program. In conjunction with Annual Progress Report, identify and track ADU construction in high and highest resource areas/Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs). Conduct review by October 2025, and if ADU construction is disproportional to the number of units, develop targeted outreach with a goal of improving the ADU/overall dwelling unit metric for the areas relative to other residential areas in the City. 8. Continue to regularly monitor deed- Continue monitoring all deed-restricted restricted, affordable housing units that exist affordable housing units annually and add citywide. new properties as applicable. 9. Collaborate with nonprofit housing providers and develop a preservation strategy to meet Develop preservation strategy for 60 units the City's Quantified Objective for preserving converting in 2027—2031. 60 At-Risk Units (30 Very Low- and 30 Low- Income). Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Hispanic residents have the least access to low-poverty neighborhoods, neighborhoods close to high performing schools, and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Geographically, neighborhoods near the downtown have low environmental health, low education scores, low economic scores; but good access to HQTAs. Conversely, Anaheim Hills, which is a predominantly White area, has the best access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods with low poverty rates, high education scores, and high economic scores. Additionally, based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Orange County 202 25-29 Regional AFH Contributing Factors: A lack of affordable housing in high opportunity areas (due to the factors discussed above) contributes to the disparities in access to opportunities. Additionally, specific groups in the city face the unique housing challenges that impact access to opportunity, including: • Seniors: o Having limited and fixed incomes. o Disproportionately higher healthcare costs, adding monthly living costs. o Require customized housing features due to mobility and self-care limitations. o Transit dependency. o Limited in-home support, due to living alone. • Individuals with physical and developmental disabilities: o Need for specialized housing to accommodate disabilities. o Higher incidence of dependent living needs. o High incidence of unemployment and having fixed income. o Need for supportive services. • Large person households: o Lack of affordable housing with sufficient bedroom counts. o Options for larger bedroom counts in rental units. o Higher monthly cost burden. o Affordable options for large family households. o Childcare needs for working families. • Single parent households o Affordable housing options. o Rental and for sale housing options. o Higher monthly cost burdens with single-income families. o Childcare needs for working families. • Farmworker households o Affordable housing options. o Higher incidents of cost burden for housing. o Rental and for sale housing options. • Extremely Low-Income households: o Need for increased affordable housing options. o Markedly higher incidents of cost burden for housing. o Need for smaller housing unit options such as SRO's. o Rental assistance. o Higher incidents of homelessness. o Higher likelihood for transitional and supportive housing. • Residents experiencing homelessness: o Need for increased affordable housing options. o Need for smaller housing unit options such as SRO's. o Rental assistance. o Higher likelihood for transitional and supportive housing. o Need for emergency shelters. o Need for stable health care. Orange County 203 25-29 Regional AFH Actions: Timeframe: The city will ensure equal access to housing, expand access to opportunity for all protected class groups, and increase community integration for individuals with disabilities through the following actions: 1. Continue to provide an estimated 6,500 Section 8 Rental Continue to award all funded Assistance Vouchers annually, subject to federal funding Section 8 Rental Assistance availability,to qualified tenants. Vouchers annually. 2. Develop and maintain a database of existing housing in high and highest resource areas/Racially Concentrated Areas of Develop database and conduct Affluence (RCAAs) which has the potential to provide first annual outreach program voucher-based unit(s), including ADUs. by October 2025. 3. Develop a targeted outreach program to recruit potential Target and increase the portion additional landlords in these areas. of Section 8 Rental Assistance Vouchers leased in high and highest resource areas/Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs) in planning period. 4. In partnership with the Fair Housing Council of OC, Include in Scope of Services for disseminate and display for public viewing information Fair Housing Council of OC no regarding fair housing law applicable to landlords, tenants, later than October 2026. sellers, buyers, real estate professionals and others in the housing industry at City Community Centers / Family Resource Centers/Youth Centers. 5. Continue to implement the Homelessness Action Plan, Ongoing with update to the including the four overarching principles: Homeless Action Plan for July • Housing First:The City of Anaheim commits to following 2024—June 2028. nationally recognized best practices in addressing homelessness including Housing First practices and the The Homeless Action Plan has belief that housing and housing support services are the the following metrics: solutions to homelessness. Decrease unsheltered Person-Centered:All programs funded by the City strive homelessness by 70% and • overall homelessness by 50%. to be person- centered, including prioritizing trauma- informed care and acknowledging that people experiencing homelessness understand best what services and supports are needed to help them gain and keep housing that will resolve their homelessness. • Equity:The City commits to incorporating equity into service delivery systems and using data to evaluate gaps in service and identify areas of improvement so that every household in City- funded programs receives Orange County 204 25-29 Regional AFH relevant and affirming support from the City's network of providers. • Data-Driven Solutions: The City commits to the utilization of data to drive funding decisions and solutions to homelessness.This includes evaluating the efficacy of programs and continual monitoring of the City's portfolio of interventions to ensure collective efforts are meeting the needs of the community while making gains against agreed upon community goals. The Plan identifies Unsheltered Households,Chronically Homeless Individual Households, Families, Veterans, Transition-Aged Youth, and Seniors as unique populations experiencing homelessness within the City. 6. Increase community integration for individuals with On-going, with annual review disabilities by continuing to assist in the development of and adjustments, if housing projects for special needs households by providing adjustments are required and technical assistance with tax credit applications, tax-exempt applicable. bond financing and other public funds, including, ESG, CDBG, and HOME. 7. The City shall continue to monitor to ensure the On-going, with annual review effectiveness of reasonable accommodation standards and and adjustments, if procedures and maintain compliance with federal and state adjustments are required and housing laws. applicable. 8. In partnership with the Fair Housing Council of OC, provide Continue to provide estimated and maintain multi-lingual informational materials on annual allocation of $100,000, tenant legal counseling and resources with the goal of based on program funding eliminating housing discrimination and guaranteeing the availability. rights of all people irrespective of race religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, age, family size or Annually evaluate program disability to freely choose the housing for which they qualify effectiveness and adjust Scope in the area they desire. of Services as appropriate and 9. Continue to participate in City of Anaheim Neighborhood based on available funding. Services Mobile Family Resource Centers as well as Target an increase in the agencies and associations who specialize in supporting number of households served disabled tenants including those with hearing, vision, per funding dollar. cognitive, ambulatory, self- care, and independent living difficulties consistent with data from Anaheim residents reporting a disability. Orange County 205 25-29 Regional AFH D. Buena Park Issue: Segregation Segregation levels in the city have increased since 1990 but remain low overall. However, the following areas in the city are considered to have high POC segregation: the northeast corner of the city, which is predominantly AAPI; and the neighborhood between 1-5, Artesia Blvd, Beach Blvd, and the LA County line, which is predominantly Hispanic. Contributing Factors: 1. Concentration of Hispanics/Latinos of any race and non-Hispanic Asian groups experiencing limitation to housing opportunities. 2. Barriers to mobility. 3. Lack of opportunities for residents to obtain housing in higher opportunity areas. 4. Housing Choice Vouchers. Actions: Timeframe The city will increase affordable housing opportunities in high opportunity areas through the following actions: 1. Amend the city's Zoning Ordinance to establish provisions for Low Barrier By the end Navigation Centers (LBNC) consistent with state law. of 2023 2. Continue to annually monitor and facilitate the preservation of at-risk affordable Ongoing housing units throughout the community. Facilitate new housing developments accessible to the elderly and disabled individuals throughout the community. Through these steps, the city's goal will be to preserve 130 units considered to be "at-risk" of market-rate conversion. 3. Facilitate new housing developments accessible to the elderly and disabled individuals throughout the community, with efforts targeting Census Tracts 086801, 086803, 110201, 110202, 110302, and 110500.Through this step, the city's goal will be to increase the supply of accessible units by at least 25 percent. 4. Continue to administer city-operated programs to assist households with disabilities with architectural modifications to their homes and continue to implement the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 5. Provide information in public places regarding the city's reasonable accommodation ordinance and make information available on this program more widely available. 6. Continue to facilitate/process Reasonable Accommodation requests to ensure equal housing opportunities.Through this step, the city's goal is to ensure approval of 100 percent of the reasonable accommodation applications submitted. 7. Support Infill, Site Recycling and ADU construction throughout the community. Through this step, the city's goal will be to reach its RHNA obligation to meet the community's needs. Orange County 206 25-29 Regional AFH 8. Continue to provide outreach and education to housing providers and potentially qualified residents regarding Housing Choice Voucher program,with efforts targeting CensusTracts 086801, 110110, 110116, 110201, 110202, 110303, 110401, 110402, 110500, 110603, and 110606.Through these steps, the City's goal will be increasing participation in the voucher program by 20 percent. Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities, including Homeownership. Hispanic and Black residents have less access than other groups to neighborhoods with low poverty rates and high performing schools. Geographically, the neighborhoods in the center of the city, between 1-5 and the Artesia Freeway (SR-91), have poor environmental health, lower educational scores, and lower economic scores. Large disparities in homeownership rates exist between White households,who have the highest rate, and Black households, who are least likely to own their own home. Additionally, housing cost burden is an issue for renters throughout Orange County. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of affordable housing in a range of sizes. 2. Land use and zoning laws. Actions: Timeframe: The city will increase affordable housing opportunities in high opportunity areas through the following actions: 1. Amend the zoning code to enable and promote residential development By end of through use of the mixed-use overlay zones, religious congregation and 2024 fraternal site overlay zones, and housing opportunity overlay zones, among other planning tools.These initiatives provide new opportunities for a variety of residential development types and prices and includes areas where residential development was previously not allowed. 2. Prepare educational material, develop pre- approved site/floor plans, and By early establish a monitoring program to ensure city is on track to meeting ADU 2025 construction goals.Through these steps, they will be to facilitate construction of at least 16 ADUs throughout the community. 3. Provide technical and financial (subject to availability) assistance for single- Ongoing family residential additions to eliminate overcrowding conditions, with efforts targeting CensusTracts 110402, 110603, and 110606.Through these steps, it will be the city's goal to provide residential rehabilitation assistance to approximately 160 units. 4. Continue to promote use of the state Density Bonus Law through website materials and counter assistance. 5. Promote, increase, maintain homeownership for LMI households, as well as residential rehabilitation assistance for senior and down payment assistance Orange County 207 25-29 Regional AFH programs for young families with assistance throughout the community,with efforts targeting CensusTracts 086803, 110201, 110202, 110302, 110401, 110402, 110500, 110603, 110607).Through these steps,the city's goal will be to increase assistance to eligible residents by 25 percent. 6. Continue to enforce city codes to eliminate and prevent unsightly or hazardous conditions in residential areas throughout the community,with efforts targeting CensusTracts 110603, 110500, 110301, 110302, and 110401 located adjacent to limited access freeways.Through these steps, the city's goal will be to reduce blighted conditions by 20 percent. 7. Continue to participate in Orange County assessments and programs as a participating city in the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing. 8. Continue to promote fair housing among all income categories throughout the community. Orange County 208 25-29 Regional AFH E. Costa Mesa Issue: Segregation and R/ECAPs There is moderate segregation between Hispanic and White residents in the city, though these levels declined slightly between 2000-2010. Geographically, the neighborhoods between downtown and the Costa Mesa Country Club are areas of high POC segregation, with a predominantly Hispanic population. The largest number of publicly supported housing units and the highest concentration of vouchers in the city is in this area. The city's one R/ECAP is also located here, in the neighborhood between Newport Avenue and Placentia Avenue, south of 19th Street. The neighborhoods in East Side Costa Mesa (east of SR-55 and south of Mesa Drive) are all areas of high White segregation, as are the neighborhoods north of the Country Club and the neighborhoods between Estancia High School and Canyon Park. Contributing Factors: 1. Housing discrimination. 2. Lack of affordable housing due to governmental and market constraints. Actions: Timeframe: The City will take the following meaningful actions, in addition to resisting discrimination, to overcome patterns of segregation based on protected characteristic, as defined by California law: 1. Continue to contract with the Fair Housing Foundation or other Ongoing fair housing service provider and provide information regarding the Public Law Center to address Housing Discrimination and unfair lending, including promoting mediation services, foreclosure assistance and/or multilingual tenant legal counseling services. Promote available services on the City's webpage. 2. Continue to enforce the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, Ongoing which was approved on August 6, 2024, and became effective on September 6, 2024. 3. Support the development of affordable housing through the Ongoing following efforts: • Continue to evaluate programs and incentives to encourage the development of affordable housing. • Make materials available to applicants regarding the City's affordable housing ordinance. • Develop additional incentives and materials as state legislation provides additional incentives. • Continue to pursue funding and partnerships with affordable housing builders. Orange County 209 25-29 Regional AFH 4. Amend the City's Zoning Code to meet requirement set forth in Revise Zoning Code in the California Health and Safety Code Sections 17021.5 and 2025 17021.6, which requires the City to permit farmworker housing by-right,without a conditional use permit, in single-family zones for six or fewer individuals and in agricultural zones with no more than 12 units or 36 beds. Until the zoning code is updated, the City will process any proposed farmworker housing by-right in single-family zones pursuant to State Law. 5. Review and update the Zoning Code to comply with the State Revise Zoning Code in Density Bonus Law as part of the City's rezone program. In the 2025 meantime, continue to process State Density Bonus Law requests and project in compliance with state law. 6. Review planning application fees to avoid creating a constraint Revise Zoning Code in to the development of affordable housing, as part of the City's 2025 rezone program. 7. Reduce barriers to construction of housing for extremely low and Ongoing lower-income households through the following actions: • Subsidize up to 100 percent of the City's application processing fees for qualifying developments where all units are affordable to 80 percent AMI or lower, as funding is available. • Annually promote the benefits of this program to the development community by posting information on its webpage and creating a handout to be distributed with land development applications regarding development opportunities and incentives. • Proactively reach out to developers at least once annually to identify and promote development opportunities. • Adopt priority processing and streamlined review for developments with units affordable to lower income households. • Support funding development applications throughout the planning period for projects proposing units affordable to lower income households. 8. Review and revise the Zoning Code's requirements for residential Revise Zoning Code in off-street parking for multi-family projects to facilitate the 2025 development of multi-family housing,and specifically affordable housing. 9. Promote the development of ADUs through the following Complete the update to actions: ADU regulations in municipal code by April Orange County 210 25-29 Regional AFH • Review and revise the City's ADU ordinance as necessary to 2025. Maintain web page comply with state law. on ongoing basis. • Maintain a dedicated web page that promotes ADU development. Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Hispanic residents have the least access to low-poverty neighborhoods, neighborhoods close to high performing schools, and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Geographically, the neighborhoods downtown and west of downtown are less environmentally healthy and have lower education and economic scores. These are also predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods. Conversely, neighborhoods east of Newport Boulevard (SR-55), which are predominantly White, have higher education and economic scores, are more environmentally healthy, and have lower poverty rates. Additionally, Black, Hispanic, and Native American residents are less likely to own their home than White and AAPI residents. Additionally, based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Contributing Factors: 1. Unfair lending practices 2. Approximately 86 percent of housing units were built prior to 1989 before the Fair Housing Act and state laws regarding accessibility requirements for individuals with disabilities were adopted. Actions: Timeframe: The City will take the following meaningful actions, in addition to resisting discrimination, to foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristic, as defined by California law: 1. Continue to contract with the Fair Housing Foundation Ongoing or other fair housing service provider and provide information regarding the Public Law Center to address Housing Discrimination and unfair lending, including promoting mediation services, foreclosure assistance and/or multilingual tenant legal counseling services. Promote available services on the City's webpage. 2. Continue operating the Owner-Occupied Housing On an annual basis, provide Rehabilitation Program, which may be used to assist informational materials on the qualified property owners in improving single-family Owner-Occupied Housing residential properties, including health and safety Rehabilitation program; encourage repairs such as mechanical plumbing, electrical, the participation of seniors, roofing, security, medical emergency requirements, veterans, and disabled residents in Orange County 211 25-29 Regional AFH and/or aid the mobility of the physically disabled and/or this program; and evaluate the elderly. effectiveness of this program and, if necessary, modify program characteristics. 3. Increase the availability of accessible housing for The City is currently in the process individuals with disabilities through the following of reviewing its Reasonable actions: Accommodation procedures and • Review and revise the Reasonable Accommodation anticipates bringing any procedure to promote access to housing for recommendations to Planning individuals with disabilities, address potential constraints and establish potential objective Commission and City Council in standards, and provide guidance and amend as 2025. Other efforts are ongoing. necessary to promote greater certainty on how approval findings will be implemented. • Meet with local organizations and developers to promote access to housing for individuals with disabilities and address potential constraints. 4. Increase the availability of transitional and supportive Revise Zoning Code in 2025. Other housing through the following actions: efforts are ongoing. • Amend the Zoning Code to include transitional and permanent supportive housing within the City's land use matrix in compliance with Senate Bill 2 and Government Code Section 65651. • Monitor the inventory of sites appropriate to accommodate transitional and supportive housing. • Proactively engage relevant organizations to meet the needs of individuals experiencing homelessness and extremely low-income residents, including the Costa Mesa Network for Homeless Solutions, which aims to provide a comprehensive system programs and services for residents experiencing homelessness and those at risk of homelessness. 5. Review and revise the City's Zoning Code and The City is currently in the process application procedures applicable to group homes to of reviewing its Group Homes promote objectivity and greater approval certainty procedures and anticipates similar to other residential uses. bringing any recommendations to Planning Commission and City Council in 2025. Orange County 212 25-29 Regional AFH F. Fountain Valley Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Housing cost burden is an issue for renters throughout Orange County, including Fountain Valley. Contributing Factors: 1. Stigma associated with Housing Vouchers: A large percentage of rental households in Fountain Valley spend more than 30 and 50 percent of household income on monthly rent and utilities.While this may be due in part to residents being willing to pay more for access to high performing school districts, there may also be a stigma associated with the use of Housing Vouchers, both by property owners and tenants. 2. Lack of additional housing options.The City's housing supply has not increased at a rate commensurate with regional demand, driving costs higher and limit housing choices for existing residents looking to remain in Fountain Valley (adult children eager to move out of their parent's house and older adults looking to downsize)and potential new residents looking for more affordable options in Fountain Valley. Actions: Timeframe: Expand voucher use by 50 tenants by 2028, and extend affordability term of 70 units in the Guadalupe Manor an additional 20-30 years by 2029, through the following actions: 1. Coordinate with OCHA to generate a detailed understanding of where By 2028 overpayment rates are highest in the city (as of latest available Census data), where vouchers are and are not used, and how many tenants could potentially qualify at each multifamily property in target areas. 2. Update Development Code consistent with state law and produce residential By 2026 project flow-chart and/or informational sheets, consistent with SB 35 and SB 330. 3. Coordinate with OCHA and FHCOC to develop an outreach plan and materials By 2026 to communicate the benefits of vouchers. 4. Complete study of options to augment/adjust affordable housing preservation By 2026 program for possible application of funds for those overpaying. 5. Distribute outreach materials through means that reach target populations By 2026 (e.g., those receiving subsidized school lunches). Conduct direct outreach to five properties (tenants and owners) in CensusTracts illustrating high rates of rental overpayment. 6. Secure extended affordability for Guadalupe Manor through at least 2058. By 2029 Orange County 213 25-29 Regional AFH Increase supply of affordable housing through the following efforts: 1. Evaluate options to apply affirmative advertising requirements to income- By 2026 restricted units in the Slater Avenue project. 2. Adopt Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. By 2024 3. Establish procedures and requirements that will ensure affirmative advertising By 2026 requirements are applied to and conducted for all future income-restricted housing developments. 4. Adopt 2045 General Plan. By 2024 5. Adopt appropriate pre-vetted ADU site plans,with the goal of permitting 100 By 2026 ADUs affordable to lower income households in high and highest resources areas by 2026 (as measured from June 30, 2021). Orange County 214 25-29 Regional AFH G. Fullerton Issue: Segregation Areas of the city considered to have high POC segregation include most of the neighborhoods west of Harbor Blvd and north of Malvern Ave, which have predominantly AAPI populations. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of resources for fair housing agencies to conduct more rigorous testing and audits, outreach,training, public education campaigns. 2. Lack of language access. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Provide informational seminars to area residential real estate Provide training to at least agents and brokers on fair housing laws and regulations. 15 real estate agents and brokers annually. 2. Workwith tenants,tenant advocates to identifyviolations of fair Annually housing federal and state fair housing laws and support prospective and existing tenants who are experiencing discrimination. 3. Provide trainings for property owners/managers on the Provide training to at least requirements of federal and state fair housing laws to prevent 15 property owners and discrimination. managers annually. 4. With the Fair Housing Foundation, support an annual Fair Review methodology for a Housing Audit Report that assesses typical or timely market- Fair Housing Audit by based suspected areas of discrimination. January 2025 5. Affordable Rental Housing Counseling Services: Provide Hold at least four funding for information and referral services that direct families informational events and individuals with financial resources for housing rental or between 2025-2029; assist purchase, locating suitable housing, and obtaining housing at least 50 residents and with special needs facilities such as disabled-accessible units. landlords annually. 6. Create a Language Access Plan based on HUD guidelines and Create a Language Access publish on the City's website:The goal of the Language Access Plan by January 2025. Plan is to survey, maintain and publish a list of multi-lingual Maintain multilingual staff staff capacity at City Hall so that staff may respond to the needs capacity at City Hall on an of Limited English Proficiency households. ongoing basis. 7. Ensure that local housing programs respond to the needs of a Review the existing fair culturally diverse community that includes multi-generational housing marketing plan families, a variety of living arrangements, and Limited English every two years to ensure Proficiency households. Collaborate with community groups, compliance with current including faith-based and nonprofit organizations, to provide City policy to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing and Orange County 215 25-29 Regional AFH outreach on housing resources to all types of households and make necessary changes those households with Limited English Proficiency. within six months. 8. Add information on fair housing laws and resources on the By January 2025 City's website regarding housing programs in several languages. 9. Seek opportunities to expand outreach and public education 2021-2029 strategies on available tenant protection,fair housing services, and homeownership education to reach vulnerable households by offering information in multiple languages, targeted social media efforts, combining information with other assistance programs, distributing resources through local schools and colleges, and partnering with community-based organizations. Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Hispanic residents have the least access to low-poverty neighborhoods, neighborhoods close to high performing schools, and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Geographically, neighborhoods in southeast Fullerton (which are predominantly Hispanic), have relatively low economic and education scores, poor environmental quality, and relatively high poverty rates. Conversely, neighborhoods in the northern part of the city, which are predominantly White or AAPI, have higher education and economic scores, better environmental health, and lower poverty. Additionally, based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Contributing Factors: 1. Location, type, and supply of affordable housing. 2. Land use and zoning laws. 3. The availability,type, frequency, and reliability of public transportation. 4. Location of environmental health hazards 5. Lack of investment in community-based infrastructure and services 6. Lack of access to housing mobility Actions: Timeframe: 1. Implement changes to the in-lieu fee Complete a feasibility study on in-lieu structure and the desire and ability of payments to a Housing Trust Fund by developers to contribute to an affordable January 2026. If feasible, amend the housing trust fund. Adopt incentives such as municipal code to allow for an in-lieu fee increased densities, increased height limits, structure by December 2027 and implement reduced parking standards, and ministerial an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance by review for projects that incorporate increased December 2029. affordable units or deeper levels of affordability. Orange County 216 25-29 Regional AFH 2. Facilitate the development of housing for Develop 25 housing units for special needs individuals with disabilities (including households between 2021-2029. developmental disabilities) through incentives for affordable housing development with services, resources, and assistance. 3. Provide financial support to organizations Assist at least 10 foster youth with that provide supportive housing for supportive housing between 2021-2029. emancipated foster youth (ages 18-21) who are homeless or at immediate risk of becoming homeless. 4. In compliance with recent updates to the Annually, assess the list of surplus sites and Surplus Land Act (AB 1255, 2019-Rivas; AB solicit development via a competitive RFP 1486, 2019-Ting), identify City-owned land for process or other forms of partnership such the development of affordable housing. If as land lease agreements. surplus properties are identified, pursue development via a competitive Request for Proposals or other processes. 5. Acquire funds from local, state, and federal Partner with at least one nonprofit housing grant opportunities, including the HCD Infill developer biennially throughout the planning Infrastructure Grant Program, to support the period and support the entitlement of at least development of affordable housing, housing 400 subsidized housing units affordable to for special needs, and support service extremely low-, very low-, and low-income projects. When a critical mass of state households in the city during the planning (various HCD programs) and/or federal period. (CDBG, HOME) funding is available, the City will issue a competitive Notice of Funding Availability with objective criteria to transparently identify the best non-profit affordable housing developer to partner with on new affordable housing developments in the city. 6. Partner with Orange County Housing Finance Conduct feasibility study for an affordable Trust to secure funding for affordable housing trust fund by January 2027. housing in Fullerton. 7. Develop a web-based Housing Development Publish Housing Development Toolkit on Toolkit that outlines a step-by-step process City's website by December 2026. for residential development, including identifying steps in the entitlement and building permit process, detailed information on development incentives, and funding Orange County 217 25-29 RegionalAFH programs and resources for affordable housing development. 8. Review the General Plan, applicable Specific Review the General Plan, applicable Specific Plans, and Zoning Code and Zoning Map to Plan, and Zoning Code and Zoning Map by evaluate opportunities for removing barriers June 2025 and implement any changes by to housing production such as adding January 2026. Following adoption of zoning housing capacity and accommodating a code changes, monitor at least 1,801 greater mix of dwelling types and sizes in moderate-income units and 2,238 lower- High and Highest Resource areas identified income units to be constructed annually in by the California Tax Credit Allocation High and Highest Resource areas as Committee (TCAC), focusing efforts in designated by TCAC. Permit the northeastern and northwestern Fullerton. development of at least 150 moderate- Recommend amendments, as necessary, to income dwelling types in the neighborhoods accommodate added housing capacity in of E Las Palmas Dr/N Sunnywood Dr, Craig these areas. Additionally, review the Zoning Park, Sunny Hills, Bastanchury Rd/Fairway Code to identify opportunities to increase and Isles Dr,Acacia Park, and Byerrum Park encourage a greater mix of dwelling types (Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence) by and sizes,specifically housing types that may the end of 2029. accommodate moderate-income households (e.g., duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhouses, courtyard buildings), in lower- density residential areas and mixed-use zones citywide and amend the Zoning Code as needed (i.e., implementation of LTD). 9. Identify and advertise housing opportunity On an ongoing basis, consult with interested sites within one-quarter mile of public transit developers on the TOD Housing Program. stops in northern Fullerton. Educate Conduct a study with OCTA to identify capital developers on the Transit Oriented projects to increase transit infrastructure by Development (TOD) Housing Program, 2026. Apply for TOD Housing Program funds and/or pursue funding to increase transit as NOFA becomes available. infrastructure in northern Fullerton. 10. Monitor lot splits and two-unit developments Beginning in 2025, meet with at least one under SB 9, provide technical assistance to homeowners' association annually in the homeowners, and develop or adjust areas of northwest Fullerton and the development standards as needed. Provide neighborhoods of E Las Palmas Dr/N easily accessible information and resources Sunnywood Dr, Craig Park, Sunny Hills, about SB 9 on the City website. Conduct Bastanchury Rd/Fairway Isles Dr, Acacia Park, outreach to homeowners' associations in the and Byerrum Park to provide education on neighborhoods of E Las Palmas Dr/N SB 9 implementation. Amend the Zoning Sunnywood Dr, Craig Park, Sunny Hills, Code to comply with SB 9 by December Bastanchury Rd/Fairway Isles Dr,Acacia Park, 2025. and Byerrum Park, and the neighborhoods in Orange County 218 25-29 Regional AFH northwest Fullerton, and provide information on SB 9. 11. Conduct outreach to religious institutions and Starting in 2025, annually mail or email provide technical assistance for interested resources on developing affordable housing parties to develop affordable housing on sites to all religious institutions in the city with zoned religious institution. underutilized land. Conduct follow up calls with institutions with sites that hold the most potential based on location and size, prioritizing potential sites in the neighborhoods of E Las Palmas Dr/N Sunnywood Dr, Craig Park, Sunny Hills, Bastanchury Rd/Fairway Isles Dr, Acacia Park, and Byerrum Park since they are Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence. By December 2026, present information during at least one meeting with the board and/or members of OC United. By the end of 2027, provide technical assistance for the potential development of at least one affordable housing development on a religious institution site. 12. Conduct outreach to people experiencing Annually allocate funding and City resources homelessness with the Illumination to support outreach efforts in coordination Foundation and the OC Health Care Agency, with the Illumination Foundation and the OC focusing efforts in areas where there is a high Health Care Agency to provide information concentration of homeless individuals in the and resources to those experiencing neighborhoods of Independence Park, Santa homelessness. Annually fund the Fullerton Fe District/SoCo, and Gilbert Park, and along Police Department's Homeless Liaison arterial boulevards and commercial centers. Officer Unit, and as funding is available and Provide resources to connect individuals with based on need, increase the number of shelter space in Fullerton and as needed, to officers to provide services for residents services in surrounding cities. experiencing homelessness. 13. Adopt an ordinance for new development Adopt the ordinance by July 2025. standards to allow additional ADUs that meet basic setbacks and square footage requirements on properties exceeding one acre in the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts.The ordinance shall allow at least two ADUs on qualifying properties if such properties can safely accommodate two ADUs (e.g.,that the properties have adequate sewer/septic and water capacity, can construct the ADUs in Orange County 219 25-29 Regional AFH compliance with all building code and fire prevention requirements, and can meet parking requirements). 14. Reduce minimum unit sizes and update the Amend the Zoning Code by July 2025. Zoning Code, as necessary, to accommodate Conduct stakeholder outreach with alternative housing types such as housing co- developers and community groups and operatives, Single-Room Occupancy (SROs), service providers on alternative housing at dormitories, tiny homes, and collective home least once by January 2026,with the goal of ownership models in more areas of the city, achieving 30 units of alternative housing including religious sites and publicly owned types by the end of 2029, with at least half of land. Stakeholder outreach shall include those units in the neighborhoods of E Las discussions with for-profit and non-profit Palmas Dr/N Sunnywood Dr, Craig park, housing developers. Sunny Hills, Bastanchury Rd/Fairway Isles Dr, Acacia Park, and Byerrum Park since they are Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence. 15. Encourage the development of both smaller Develop incentives and mitigations to rental and owner units (studio and one- constraints by July 2025. Starting in 2025, bedroom) and larger rental units (3 to 4- hold an annual workshop with developers bedroom units) in residential and mixed-use and provide education about technical development. In consultation with assistance and incentives for larger and developers, identify and provide incentives smaller rental units,with a goal of and reduction of constraints to encourage the supporting the development of 50 large (3-4- construction of these housing types and bedroom) units and 100 studio/1-bedroom develop a work plan to implement any units by December 2029. At least 50 percent proposed changes to development of large and small rental units should be in standards,City programs, and so forth. neighborhoods of greater degrees of overcrowding, including Woodcrest Park, Artesia Blvd/N Gilbert St, Valencia Park, W Oak Ave/Lambert Dr, E Wilshire Ave/N Raymond Ave, Rancho La Paz. 16. Prioritize public health, education, economic, Increase participation in the City's first-time and safety programs in lower resource areas homebuyer seminars and owner-occupied as defined byTCAC in coordination with area housing rehabilitation grant program 5 public health entities, school districts, percent annually from lower income and workforce development groups, and the minority concentration areas between 2021- police department. Identify addresses and 2029 (data collection via surveys conducted compile mailing list and email addresses to at the seminars). focus outreach to neighborhoods with higher concentrations of low-income and minority residents to prioritize services in these areas. Orange County 220 25-29 Regional AFH 17. Assess potential preference policy for Establish a community working group that affordable housing opportunities, land use, meets annually to prioritize funding for transportation, urban design, public facilities community investments. and services, and economic development strategies. The City will seek involvement from community organizations and advocates, business councils, and residents to further refine the program scope. 18. Apply for funding and coordinate with the Establish partnership for Safe Routes to OCTA Safe Routes to School program to School and apply for grant funding by the establish at least one partnership in the city end of 2025. Initiate at least one project or for active transportation projects and/or campaign by the end of the planning period. safety education campaign, prioritizing school routes within and from the neighborhood of E Imperial Highway and N Harbor Boulevard. Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in Fullerton. More than 20% of all units are overcrowded in the neighborhoods south of downtown, which are predominantly Hispanic. Contributing Factors: 1. Displacement of residents due to economic pressures. 2. Location, type, and supply of affordable housing 3. Land use and zoning laws Actions: Timeframe: 1. Develop an outreach strategy in multiple Develop an outreach strategy for "mom and languages for property owners who own pop" property owners by January 2026. fewer than 10 residential units (either in After the strategy is adopted, conduct single-family or multi-family rental housing) outreach to at least 15 property owners with to assess needs and connect them with less than 10 units and assist at least 5 resources,such as housing unit rehabilitation property owners with a combined total of 20 and financing programs. The intent of this units or more by December 2029. program is to preserve Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (i.e., not currently regulated with affordability restrictions), particularly in the neighborhoods of Woodcrest Park and Rancho La Paz. The program will seek to prioritize communities vulnerable to displacement, generally in the Orange County 221 25-29 Regional AFH southern areas of the city, a focus on neighborhoods with lower median income. 2. Review the City's Tenant-Based Rental Update the City's Tenant-Based Rental Assistance program with input from tenants Assistance program by January 2027. and property owners/managers, ensuring Prepare and present a report on representation across the economic recommendations for programs that would spectrum, and update as appropriate. provide relief to tenants and landlords to Outreach to be conducted to all vulnerable avoid the displacement in vulnerable communities during the update process and communities by December 2026. If a rental after final adoption in 2027. Fill any gaps assistance program is approved and between Section 8 assistance and rent, or to implemented as a result, the program will aid those who may not qualify for Section 8 assist at least 10 lower income renter but need one-time emergency assistance, to households annually. provide relief to tenants to avoid the displacement in vulnerable communities. 3. In consultation with fair housing service Assess if additional protections are needed providers and community-based by January 2026. If warranted, recommend organizations, evaluate existing state and adoption of a local tenant protection federal "just cause for eviction" (AB 1482; ordinance to City Council by December 2026. 2019-Chiu) and other similar legislation with provisions to determine if additional protections through a local ordinance is warranted. 4. Partner with Cal state Fullerton to develop a Develop a city-wide student housing plan by plan to address the need for off-campus December 2029. affordable housing for students. 5. Prioritize public health, education, economic, Increase participation in the City's first-time and safety programs in lower resource areas homebuyer seminars and owner-occupied as defined byTCAC in coordination with area housing rehabilitation grant program percent public health entities, school districts, annually from lower income and minority workforce development groups, and the concentration areas between 2021-2029 police department. Identify addresses and (data collection via surveys conducted at the compile mailing list and email addresses to seminars). focus outreach to neighborhoods with higher concentrations of low-income and minority residents to prioritize services in these areas. Orange County 222 25-29 Regional AFH Issue: Disparities in Access to Homeownership Homeownership rates are lower for all groups than the County overall, except for AAPI households. Racial/ethnic disparities exist, with Native American households the least likely to own their home, and AAPI households most likely. Contributing Factors: 1. Racial discrepancies in loan origination. 2. Lack of funding for consumer rights and responsibility education on Fair Lending practices and identification of predatory lending practices. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Work to promote fair lending practices throughout the Annually conduct and publish city, including: third party review of City or a. Ensure that low-income and minority residents regional HMDA data to identify have fair access to capital resources needed to areas of need regarding fair acquire and maintain housing. access to lending. b. Prevent predatory lending through information and referrals to the Fair Housing Foundation. 2. Add information on fair housing laws and resources on By January 2025 the City's website regarding housing programs in several languages. 3. Seek opportunities to expand outreach and public 2021-2029 education strategies on available tenant protection, fair housing services,and homeownership education to reach vulnerable households by offering information in multiple languages, targeted social media efforts, combining information with other assistance programs, distributing resources through local schools and colleges, and partnering with community-based organizations. 4. Partner with the County and/or community-based Facilitate homeownership organizations to increase participation in homeownership workshops, counseling, and/or education and assistance programs for historically education campaigns by January underrepresented residents in the homeownership 2025. By October 31, 2029, market.Organizations may include teachers'associations, connect at least 30 residents to school districts, and community-based service providers education on homeownership- to increase awareness of, and access to, housing related topics. resources and financial planning services. 5. Prioritize public health, education, economic, and safety Increase participation in the programs in lower resource areas as defined byTCAC in City's first-time homebuyer coordination with area public health entities, school seminars and owner-occupied districts, workforce development groups, and the police housing rehabilitation grant department. Identify addresses and compile mailing list program 5 percent annually from Orange County 223 25-29 Regional AFH and email addresses to focus outreach to neighborhoods lower income and minority with higher concentrations of low-income and minority concentration areas between residents to prioritize services in these areas. 2021-2029 (data collection via surveys conducted at the seminars). Orange County 224 25-29 Regional AFH H. Garden Grove Issue:Segregation and R/ECAPs,Disparities in Access to Opportunities,and Disparities in Access to Homeownership The majority of the city is considered an area of high POC segregation except for West Garden Grove. In West Garden Grove, the residential neighborhoods west of Knott St are considered areas of high White segregation. In the high POC segregation areas, AAPI residents are the predominant group west of 9th St and Hispanic residents are the predominant group east of there. Additionally, there are lots of publicly supported housing units in the center of city along Garden Grove Boulevard, which is a high POC segregation area. There are no publicly supported housing units in West Garden Grove, which is an area of high White segregation. There is a R/ECAP in the northern part of the city to between Brookhurst St and Gilbert St, north of Chapman Ave.The R/ECAP tract is predominantly Hispanic and is surrounded by Census Tracts that are predominantly AAPI. Hispanic and AAPI residents have the least access to low poverty neighborhoods and neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Additionally, Hispanic residents also have the least access to neighborhoods with high performing schools. Geographically, the neighborhoods with access to the most opportunities are in West Garden Grove,where education and economic scores are high,environmental quality is high,and poverty is low. West Garden Grove is a predominantly White area. The Black and Hispanic homeownership rate in the city is half the White homeownership rate. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of affordable, accessible housing in a range of unit sizes. 2. Inadequate supply/production of affordable housing. 3. Displacement of residents due to regional economic pressures. 4. Housing discrimination. 5. High land and development costs in the region. 6. Public opposition to new development and land use and zoning laws. 7. Access to financial services. 8. Lack of meaningful language access for individuals with limited English proficiency. 9. Lack of private investment in specific neighborhoods. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Continue to contract with the Fair Housing Foundation to promote public Ongoing awareness of federal, state, and local regulations regarding fair housing. Provide information to the public about local, state, and federal housing programs and fair housing law. Maintain referral information on the City's website,social media, newspaper ads,and at a variety of other locations such as community and senior centers, local social service offices, in City utility bills, and at other public locations including City Hall and the library. Add or Orange County 225 25-29 Regional AFH translate resources and information in Vietnamese, Korean,and Spanish and make available to the public through communications materials and online. 2. Direct homebuyers and property owners with property deeds, covenants, Ongoing and other real estate property documents that contain restrictions intended to limit where certain people could live or buy property, based on race, religion, or other characteristics, to the Orange County Clerk-Recorder's Office to have such discriminatory language removed at no charge. 3. Continue to target dissemination of Fair Housing Outreach information and Ongoing notices of available services and workshops in neighborhoods identified with disproportionate housing needs and displacement risks. Fair Housing Foundation holds regular workshops and 1-on-1 counseling sessions at the City's Senior Center and Family Resource Centers. 4. Ensure that all development applications are considered, reviewed, and Ongoing approved without prejudice to the proposed residents, contingent on the development application's compliance with all entitlement requirements. 5. Pursue funding and target neighborhoods of concentrated poverty for Annually investment in rehabilitation, parks, transit, active transportation, and other needs identified in the City's Environmental Justice Element.To the extent possible, ensure funding plans reflect the needs of lower-opportunity neighborhoods. 6. Continue to implement the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Annually and HUD Consolidated Plan. 7. Annually monitor building and home sales activities in historically under- Annually market neighborhoods to identify any adverse trends. 8. Investigate ways to incentivize housing developers to increase the number Ongoing three-bedroom units in their developments. 9. In concert with Code Enforcement, develop a proactive cooperative code Ongoing compliance program that targets areas of concentrated rehabilitation needs, results in repairs, and mitigates potential cost, displacement, and relocation impacts on residents. 10. Implement programs to increase housing choices and affordability (e.g., Ongoing duplex, triplex, multifamily, accessory dwelling units, SB 9 housing developments,transitional and supportive housing, and group homes),with a particular focus in High Opportunity Areas. Establish a protocol to annually monitor development progress towards housing creation that increases housing choices and affordability in High Opportunity Areas. Should monitoring reveal a shortfall in development progress towards housing creation of increased housing choices and affordability, the City will commit to developing additional actions, as necessary, including, but not limited to Orange County 226 25-29 Regional AFH incentives,waivers,concessions,expedited processing,and other regulatory approaches, including examination of development standards)to ensure the City satisfies its identified housing need (RHNA). Orange County 227 25-29 Regional AFH I. Huntington Beach Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities and Disproportionate Housing Needs In Huntington Beach, Hispanic residents have relatively low access to neighborhoods with good environmental health, low poverty, high education scores, and high economic scores. Overall, access to opportunities in the city is high compared to the region. Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in Huntington Beach. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of knowledge of fair housing and associated laws. 2. High cost of housing limits access to lower income households of all races/ethnicities. Actions: Timeframe: Promote fair housing practices through the following actions: Ongoing 1. Continue to contract with the Fair Housing Foundation to provide fair housing services, including fair housing and discrimination investigations, tenant and landlord counseling, education and outreach activities, and affirmatively further fair housing activities. Preserve quality and affordability of existing housing through the following Ongoing actions: 1. Provide financial assistance to low-income households for home repairs through the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program. 2. Provide rental assistance to extremely low (ELI) and very low income (VLI) households through the Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program. Orange County 228 25-29 Regional AFH J. Irvine Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunities, and Disproportionate Housing Needs There are several Census Tracts considered to be areas of high POC segregation, including the neighborhoods between 1-405 and UC Irvine, the Westpark community north of 1-405, the neighborhoods between Como Channel and 1-5, and the Northwood community north of 1-5. There are also areas of high White segregation in Irvine, including the neighborhood bounded by Turtle Rock Dr,the area surrounding the Strawberry Farms Golf Club,the Woodbridge community north of 1-405, and the neighborhood west of the Oak Creek Golf Club. Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in Irvine. Homeownership rates are lower for all racial/ethnic groups compared to the County overall, and racial/ethnic disparities are similar to the County,with Black and Hispanic households having the lowest homeownership rates (15.7% and 18% respectively). Contributing Factors: 1. Shortage of affordable rental and homeownership options due to market and governmental constraints 2. Underutilized properties (i.e., retail centers and hotels) could provide new affordable housing opportunities for Irvine residents, but current land use and zoning laws inhibit this development 3. Lack of supportive housing in community-based settings 4. Lack of renter protections and economic uncertainty from pandemic increased risk of displacement for lower income households Actions: Timeframe: 1. The City will continue to pursue alternative options for meeting the Annually RHNA through preservation, legislative changes, and regional cooperation.The City will apply for all available funding to pursue acquisition/rehabilitation of affordable housing projects and preservation of at-risk housing. 2. The City will incorporate changes in State law(particularly affordable Completed housing, employee housing, emergency shelters, and transitional/supportive housing, ADUs) into the Land Use Element and Zoning Ordinance. This will involve allowing for increased densities or FAR in both residential and non- residential areas to adhere to RHNA requirements. Other General Plan elements will be updated to ensure consistency with the updated Housing and Land Use Elements, as well as the Zoning Ordinance 3. The City will establish zoning overlays to allow for multifamily By October 2024 residential in nonresidential areas (which may include properties Orange County 229 25-29 Regional AFH designated for religious institutions and schools) to provide flexibility in land use and development standards, including mixed- use developments.These flexible standards shall be directed toward meeting the physical, social, and economic needs of the community. The City will adhere to the requirements of California Government Code,Section 65583.2,subdivisions(h)and (i),as part of the rezoning program, including applicable by-right provisions, and the residential overlay zones in nonresidential areas will allow for densities of 30 units/acre, allow for 100 percent residential use, and will require residential use to occupy 50 percent of floor area on mixed use projects. 4. The City will encourage the subdivision of sites that are 10 acres or City will conduct a more to provide more opportunities for development of affordable review every 2 years housing, which the HCD has determined is more feasible on sites between 0.5 and 10 acres in size. 5. The City will work with UCI to draft an agreement regarding By January 2022, and approving, permitting, certifying occupancy, and/or reporting new ongoing units to the California State Department of Finance (DOF). The agreement will involve documentation from UCI on planned housing that has been approved to be built as well as information on the timing of the project construction and unit affordability by household income category. 6. The City will seek to amend the fee collection process for land Within 12 months of divisions and lot line adjustments resulting in parcel sizes that Housing Element facilitate multifamily developments affordable to households with certification lower incomes (including extremely low income and farmworkers) in light of State, Federal, and local financing programs (i.e.,2-10 acres). 7. The City will also identify potential property owners and nonprofit Within 12 months of developers by the end of FY 2022-23 and work with them on an Housing Element annual basis to target and market the availability of sites with the best certification potential for development. In addition, the City will offer incentives for the development of affordable housing. 8. The City will expedite development of housing projects for seniors, As projects are people with disabilities,and lower-income people and/or households proposed 9. The City will review the current Development Standards and update By October 2022 as appropriate to encourage residential, mixed-use, and transit- oriented developments Orange County 230 25-29 Regional AFH 10. To expedite the process of finding resources and incentives, the City Within one (1) year of will gather information on the available incentives/concessions for Housing Element developers within a year of the City's Housing Element Update certification certification.The City will then develop and post an overview of the available incentives/concessions for developers on the City's website and updates will be performed on an annual basis.The goal of this program is either expedite the time it takes to obtain development approvals and/or incentives that provide cost savings on housing projects,thereby improving and increasing the financial feasibility of affordable housing projects 11. To decrease the entitlement and construction process, following the By October 2022 adoption of the Housing Element the City will designate a dedicated planner, plan checker, and building inspector(s) to provide expedited processing for affordable housing projects, with an emphasis on projects that include extremely low-income units.The goal of this program is to expedite the affordable housing development process to accelerate the availability of affordable housing units in the community,which also has the effect of reducing development costs 12. Hold one (1) outreach meeting or survey with affordable housing October of each developers and providers each year after the state budget funding program year for the next fiscal year are made public (by October of each year) to discuss available funding sources (City, state and federal), sites identified in the Housing Element sites inventory that are available, developer needs and opportunities for affordable housing projects. Provide technical assistance to developers regarding City's lower income sites,funding opportunities, as well as mixed use zoning and density bonus incentives 13. The City will establish streamlined, ministerial review procedures By May 2023 and processes for qualifying multi-family residential projects consistent with SB 35 14. The City will update the current Zoning Ordinance to establish higher By October 2024 density in areas with underdeveloped/underutilized property,such as Planning Areas 32 (adjacent to the Irvine Station served by Amtrak/Metrolink passenger rail services and Orange County Transportation Authority bus services), 33, and 36 (a.k.a., Irvine Business Complex or "IBC" near John Wayne Airport).This update will maximize land utilization for residential development to accommodate RHNA requirements, including allowing residential overlays in commercial areas to allow for residential to be added to commercial areas or to allow existing underutilized commercial uses to be converted to residential (i.e., hotels) Orange County 231 25-29 Regional AFH 15. Multiple State laws have been passed since 2019 establishing By January 2023 statewide standards for local regulations governing ADU development. State law requires that ADUs be allowed in residential and mixed-use areas despite local ordinances or homeowner's association rules and requirements. Additionally, State law requires jurisdictions to develop a plan to encourage and incentivize ADUs in an effort to address the current California housing crisis. 16. Assembly Bill (AB) 671 requires local agencies' Housing Elements to By October 2024 include a plan that incentivizes and promotes the creation of ADUs that can offer affordable rents for households with very-low-, low-, or moderate-income households. As part of the ADU ordinance update (including public outreach), the City will research feasible options to facilitate affordable housing options for ADUs 17. Housing Elements to include a plan that incentivizes and promotes By the end of 2022 the creation of ADUs that can offer affordable rents for households and begin providing with very-low-, low-, or moderate-income households. As part of the incentives by January ADU ordinance update (including public outreach), the City will 2023 research feasible options to facilitate affordable housing options for ADUs 18. The City will provide financial and other available assistance to By June 30, 2025 affordable housing property owners to preserve units. The committed assistance may consist of both financial and non- financial,in-kind services to incentivize the preservation of affordable units.The total number of units to be preserved are seven extremely low, 517 very low and 299 low-income units 19. The City will continue to monitor and preserve the affordability of all Ongoing publicly assisted housing units, and support applications by nonprofits 20. The Sites Inventory includes four non- vacant sites with existing As development residential uses. The sites are currently combined and house an 880- projects are proposed unit apartment building. In considering a demolition and new (timing dependent on construction of residential development at the site(that increases the development total number of units),the City is proposing the incorporation of 465 community) deed- restricted units affordable to very low- and low-income households on this site, generating replacement units for any units that may be inhabited by very low- and low-income families. 21. In addition to providing funding opportunities related to HUD Ongoing programs on the City's website, funding opportunities will be disseminated via targeted email notifications and may also be posted Orange County 232 25-29 Regional AFH on all City social media accounts and include information on vacant land currently owned by the City. 22. The City will access information from HCD and other State agencies Timing dependent on to identify grant application opportunities for affordable housing. State HCD and other When grant opportunities are known, the City will reach out to departments affordable developer stakeholders to identify projects and/or opportunities to include on grant applications.The City will apply or support a minimum of three (3) grant application each year.The goal of this program would be to increase the amount of funding available for affordable housing projects,which require public subsidies to be built. 23. The City will retain a consultant to conduct a feasibility study on By October 2024 increasing the inclusionary housing requirement from 15 percent (5 percent very low, 5 percent low, and 5 percent moderate) to 20 percent (9 percent very low, 6 percent low, and 5 percent moderate). The policy changes proposed to Planning Commission and City Council, if deemed feasible in the study, will include increasing the inclusionary requirement to 20 percent with corresponding updated in-lieu fee 24. The City will identify and analyze local funding options for affordable Annually housing and monitor new funding and financing resources each year. This program will also include using State and Federal funding received by the City to partner with nonprofit organizations (such as the ICLT),as the commitment of City funding can enhance the scoring of 100 percent affordable projects to secure important funding sources, such as low- income housing tax credits (LIHTCs) that have become highly competitive. 25. The City will identify and utilize State programs and/or potential Ongoing public/private partnerships with major employers to acquire existing market rate housing units or develop new housing units to create moderate or workforce housing (available to households with incomes at 80 percent to 120 percent of AMI) 26. The City will follow all requirements of the Surplus Land Act, Article Surplus Land Act 8 (commencing with Section 54220) of Chapter 5 of Part 1 of Division activities to be 2 of Title 5, including holding a public hearing designating the completed by October properties as "surplus properties" under California Law.The City will 2024 and Notice of also conduct an analysis to determine, based on market conditions, Availability by if selling or leasing the properties would maximize the development December 2025 of affordable units. The City will then send a Notice of Availability to all required parties regarding the availability of County-owned land available for purchase or lease. It is the City's intent to facilitate the Orange County 233 25-29 Regional AFH development of 100 percent affordable housing projects on vacant or underutilized City- owned sites. The City will also coordinate with the public entities that own a site (or sites) to ensure that the legally mandated surplus property process is followed 27. The City seeks to continue to strengthen its relationship with the ICLT As opportunities arise to collaborate and partner on efficiently and effectively maximizing for acquisition, affordable housing opportunities. development, and legislative initiatives the City will work with ICLT. Additionally, City will meet at least quarterly with ICLT starting in November 2021 to coordinate efforts. City will document progress on these items in its Annual Progress Report. 28. The City will coordinate with public agencies to facilitate the Coordination with development of affordable housing projects on vacant and County of Orange,the underutilized sites, including sites owned by the County of Orange, State, and the Irvine the State,and the Irvine Ranch Water District.Activities could include Ranch Water District collaboration with public agencies on master-planning and and any other disposition efforts for large vacant and underutilized sites. relevant public agencies in connection with the Land Use Element Update and Zoning Ordinance amendment from 2022 through October 2024 29. The City's Land Use Element allows for the entitlement of affordable As development housing units beyond the maximum unit counts established in the projects are proposed Zoning Ordinance, thus considered additive to the General Plan (timing dependent on intensity thresholds, which allows additional units to be developed development under the City's established land use designations. community). 30. The City will amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance By October 2024 31. Encourage and incentivize ADUs through various programs By January 2023 Orange County 234 25-29 Regional AFH 32. Encourage innovative design prototypes and/or construction,such as On an ongoing basis smaller units with increased energy efficiency (i.e., sustainable designs and operations), modular units or other innovative building types 33. Streamline permitting to encourage a diverse housing stock On an ongoing basis 34. The City will make appropriate zoning changes as part of the General By October 2024. Plan - Land Use Element Update and Zoning Ordinance Amendment to bring the City's Zoning Ordinance in compliance with State law changes related to parking, by right uses, and other requirements. 35. The City will work with UCI to draft agreement regarding approving, By January 2022 and permitting, certifying occupancy, and/or reporting new units to the ongoing tracking. California State Department of Finance (DOF). 36. The Federal Housing Choice Voucher Program extends rental Ongoing subsidies to extremely low and very low-income households, including families, seniors, farmworkers, and the disabled. 37. The City will study the benefits associated with creating an Irvine By January 2023 Housing Authority with the ability to allocate Federal Housing Choice Vouchers 38. The City will analyze incentives to encourage affordable housing By January 2023 developers to consider extending the terms of affordability in perpetuity 39. The City will monitor legislative changes to ensure that City policies Annually and regulations comply with State and Federal laws 40. The goal of this program is to ensure that fees (both the dollar Annually amount and timing), incentives, development standards/review processes do not constrain the development of housing units or render housing development infeasible 41. The City will develop and establish specific written procedures for 6/30/2023 requesting and granting a reasonable accommodation for housing for persons with disabilities. 42. The City will update the Zoning Ordinance and related policies Completed by pertaining to emergency shelters, Low- Barrier Navigation Centers October 2024 (LBNCs), transitional and supportive housing, and group care facilities to conform to State requirements, as established by AB 139, AB 2162,and Senate Bill 48. Generally,this update would allow these land uses in all of the City's residential zones and with fewer conditions. Orange County 235 25-29 Regional AFH 43. Any funding sources have specific eligibility criteria or other Ongoing as funding is requirements that may not always align with potential projects in released and Irvine. The City will pursue relevant State and Federal funding available. sources to provide additional options for developers of lower-income housing that serve veterans, individual, and families at-risk of and currently experiencing homelessness in the City.The City will ensure that such housing options will include reasonable accommodations and transitional and supportive services for people with disabilities. 44. The City will explore the feasibility of joining the Orange County Explore by October Housing Finance Trust (OCHFT), a joint power authority composed 2023 of many Orange County cities. 45. The City will ensure that housing options will include reasonable Explore by October accommodations and supportive services for people with 2023 disabilities. 46. The City will continue to make information about services for people Ongoing experiencing homelessness available on the City's website and at City facilities. 47. The City will continue to provide resources for non-profits that provide transitional housing, motel vouchers, food pantry, emergency rent and utility payment assistance, life-skills counseling Ongoing and clothing. 48. The City will continue to provide CDBG grant funding to non-profits Ongoing such as Families Forward, South County Outreach, Human Options, and Stand Up for Kids that provide these services. Information on these resources is included in the City's Affordable Housing Guide and the City's website. 49. The City will explore establishing a crisis response protocol for local By October 2022 service providers to render rapid crisis support, including after-hour services for people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. 50. The City will reach out to other California cities currently Explore by October implementing shared housing programs that help match individuals 2024 experiencing or at risk of homelessness and seniors for a mutually beneficial living situation. Individuals in need of housing can provide needed physical assistance around the home for seniors. 51. Compile a list of local organizations and reach out to inquire about possible collaborations. This will help the City cooperate with community-based organizations that provide services or information Ongoing about services to any special needs or linguistically isolated groups. Orange County 236 25-29 Regional AFH 52. The City's primary (and very effective) effort in displacement prevention is facilitating the development of affordable housing in the community, as referenced in the AFFH section of this HEU. Ongoing Displacement prevention activities will also include connecting residents to resources to minimize the displacement of households with lower incomes and special needs whenever possible and where necessary to ensure that displacement is carried out in an equitable manner. 53. The City will participate in the Orange County United Way's Eviction Ongoing Task Force and associated study.This work includes identifying and coordinating community resources to support households facing eviction. 54. The City will provide a link on its website to landlord/tenant Annual meditation services and landlord/tenant rights and responsibilities, which may include information from service providers such as the Fair Housing Foundation.The City will also add information on the City's website and provide resources on non-profits such as Community Legal Aid SoCal and the Legal Aid Society of OC. 55. The City will encourage homeownership through education, sharing Ongoing basis and information, and links to existing nonprofit, County, State, and updated annually for Federal resources on the City's website accuracy 56. This existing program provides financial assistance to lower-income Ongoing basis and Irvine homeowners for critical home improvement projects. updated annually for accuracy 57. The City will update its Land Use Element and amend the Zoning Ordinance by October Ordinance 2024 58. The City will continue implementation of its One Irvine program to By January 2023. revitalize individual neighborhoods through a work program uniquely developed with community input for each neighborhood. 59. The City will reach out to community organizations and collaborate By January 2023. with them on outreach to different communities 60. The City will provide links to Fair Housing Foundation (a nonprofit Within six months of the City currently contracts with) to provide Irvine residents with Housing Element information regarding fair housing law, tenant and landlord rights certification. (including information on mediation services) 61. Compile a list of local organizations and set up an annual meeting or Within six months of meetings to discuss community housing needs and potential Housing Element solutions. Cooperate with community-based organizations that certification. Orange County 237 25-29 Regional AFH provide services or information about services to any special needs and linguistically isolated groups. Meet annually with identified organizations starting in fiscal year 2022- 23 (meetings will be conducted by June 30 of each year). 62. The City will connect developers of projects with affordable density Within three months bonus units and local non-profits/community organizations to of a density bonus coordinate efforts and determine if the units could be set aside, project application. where feasible, for special groups including but not limited to veterans and special need adults. 63. The City will provide translations or interpretation in all applicable Ongoing languages to ensure access to programs, services, and materials 64. The City will conduct an internal audit at a minimum of every other Annually or as year to evaluate that we are addressing all language needs for the needed City. 65. The City is in the process and has taken several steps to identify Completed by climate impacts, reduce pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions December 31, 2022 (GHG), and prepare for a climate resilient future 66. Continuing to require added greenery throughout the City to reduce Annually exposure to environmental pollution such as vehicle emissions through the City's Zoning Ordinance (Section 3-15-4) 67. Irvine Cool City Challenge will reduce climate emissions and utility The Cool Block bills while building resiliency and local emergency preparedness Challenge was against climate disasters such as extreme heat,floods,wildfires,and initiated in January extreme storm events. 2022 and will be 2 years in length. There will be a new team established roughly every 4.5-5 months. In year 3 of the Cool City Challenge,the City will present a game plan to the Empowerment Institute. After that, the City will work to implement the carbon Orange County 238 25-29 Regional AFH neutrality plan. 68. Provide adequate parks and open space to all parts of the By December 2024. community, the City will prepare a comprehensive design strategy to include passive urban park setting for every project and include other placemaking strategies.This program, as implemented, will reduce unsustainable energy use, reduce pollutants, improve air quality, reduce extreme heat events and improve the health outcomes of residents, employees and others in the community. 69. The City will contact the Irvine Unified School District to inquire about Within six months of expanding access to enrollment in the district's schools for residents Housing Element that may not be within the district's boundaries certification. 70. The City will conduct a bi-annual survey of homeowners to obtain At least one survey input on existing programs and to identify additional ways to support every two years the City's homeowners and their unique needs 71. The City shall strengthen its relationship with the local fair housing Ongoing with check in provider and explore ways to expand services and mutually pursue meeting one time per additional funding resources for that expansion. year Orange County 239 25-29 Regional AFH K. La Habra Issue: Segregation There are various neighborhoods considered to have high POC segregation, including neighborhoods in the center of the city north of Guadalupe Park and between Idaho St to the west and Sonora High School to the east. These neighborhoods are predominantly Hispanic. Publicly supported housing units are in the city's center and north neighborhoods, which are all low- medium or high POC segregation areas. Contributing Factors: 1. Zoning Code regulations and land use controls that constrain/ restrict housing opportunities. 2. Historic limited available land for new development of multiple-family housing. 3. General lack of affordable housing for low-and moderate-income residents. Actions: Timeframe: Increase production of affordable housing through the following Adopt 8 ordinances by actions: 2024. By 2025, approval of at least 2 multiple-family 1. Adopt streamlined ministerial approval process to expedite the residential projects and development of housing. permitting of at least 2 care 2. Revise density bonus ordinance and remove CUP requirement facilities. to facilitate higher density housing. 3. Remove 1-acre minimum for mixed use projects and 20% standard for multiple-family on a block. 4. Adopt objective design standards to facilitate multi-family and mixed-use production. 5. Remove the CUP neighborhood compatibility finding in the design review process. 6. Adjust story height and parking requirement to facilitate multiple-family housing production. 7. Allow transitional, supportive housing, and low barrier navigation centers in accordance with state law. 8. Allow residential care facilities req. by state law and remove filing fee for reasonable acc. request. Orange County 240 25-29 Regional AFH Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Neighborhoods in the city's center and southeast of the center have poor environmental quality, low education scores, and low economic scores. These neighborhoods are also predominantly Hispanic. Contributing Factors: 1. Lower ranking schools compared to wealthier districts in the County. 2. Lower graduation rate among Hispanics and other groups compared to County results. 3. Lower incomes due to either under- employment and or unemployment. 4. Need to continue investments in the children and youth of La Habra. Actions: Timeframe: Improve access to opportunities in low resource areas through the following actions: 1. Operate the Child Development Division programs and assist up to 600 La Ongoing Habra children from lower-income families 2. Administer City workforce training and employment programs for 600 Ongoing participants in the County; increase staff fourfold 3. Continue to support La Habra Boys and Girls Club,serving 3,000 La Habra Ongoing residents each year 4. Continue to work with housing, employment, and community service Quarterly or as partners, as needed, evaluate, and expand partnerships and resources needed 5. Retrofit two parks or recreation facilities (e.g., El-Centro-Lions,Vista) in By end of 2025 low-mod resource areas in central La Habra 6. Remediate landfill hazards with vapor devices underneath the Vista Ongoing Grande Park 7. Continue to support the children's museum, accommodating nearly Ongoing 95,000 visits each year 8. Update safety element to address climate change, EJ, and resiliency; By June 2023 implement programs to address hazards 9. Operate the Hillcrest Health and Wellness Center to serve residents in Ongoing need, including Central La Habra 10. Ensure 25% Love La Habra projects in Central La Habra Complete NTMP Annually projects in K, M, F Neighborhoods 11. Expend $2.5 million to install East Bishop storm drain By end of 2024 12. Apply for SR2S grants citywide for all schools; if received, develop plan, By 2029 make improvements during planning period 13. Market services to eligible lower income residents through affirmative By end of 2023 marketing at Hillcrest Center Orange County 241 25-29 Regional AFH Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in La Habra. More than 10% of homes have incomplete kitchen facilities in one Census Tract in the north central part of the city. Contributing Factors: 1. High levels of overcrowding and overpayment; mismatch with housing needs. 2. Rising prices and rents for housing far exceed recent increases in incomes. 3. Several affordable housing projects remain at risk of conversion. 4. Age of housing stock; most homes were built more than 50 years ago. 5. Housing rehabilitation and repairs are expensive, especially for retirees. 6. Limited staff for building/code compliance make it difficult to address needs. Actions: Timeframe: Reduce housing instability through the following actions: 1. Encourage ADUs, including 20% in higher Permit 30 ADUs; 20% in high resource resource areas through annual publication areas by the end of 2022 citywide. 2. Support and advertise HCV program to increase Ongoing participants. 3. Assist up to 200 lower-income households over Assist 200 households by the end of the planning period with ARPA-funded bill 2023. assistance. 4. Retain affordability and condition of mobile home Preserve affordability of 50% of units in parks and deed-restricted apartments affordable to the two city-owned mobile home parks lower income households. between 2021-2029. 5. Require replacement units per Gov't Code 65915 Ongoing, as projects are proposed for lower income units demolished. 6. Implement inclusionary housing ordinance and Develop all 100 inclusionary units, 25% prioritize funding (fees) for affordable housing. of which are in highest income tracts, between 2021-2029. 7. Target affirmative marketing in low resource areas Prepare and distribute fliers on City at the Hillcrest Center, Boys & Girls Club, and programs by 2023. others. Improve quality of existing housing through the following actions: 8. Hold regular Love La Habra events to assist Annually in September income-qualified residents with home repairs Orange County 242 25-29 Regional AFH 9. Hire additional code enforcement staff to address By end of 2023 backlog and provide capacity for proactive work 10. Purchase Land Management System (LMS) to By end of 2023 track code compliance, building and planning permits 11. Issue housing rehabilitation grants/loans for 25 Make 3 grants per year households over the planning period 12. Evaluate feasibility of rental housing inspection By end of 2023 program and, if feasible, develop program 13. Seek collaborative partnership which can assist in Annually addressing local housing rehabilitation needs 14. Target affirmative marketing in low resource areas By end of 2023 at the Hillcrest Center, Boys & Girls Club, and others Orange County 243 25-29 Regional AFH L. Laguna Niguel Issue: Concentration Most of the city is considered an area of high White concentration,except for a few neighborhoods with low-medium concentration (which are predominantly White) in the northeastern and eastern parts of the city. Contributing Factors: 1. Historical land use development patterns and zoning, environmental constraints, and lack of vacant land limit opportunities for larger and higher density project types. 2. Current high cost of housing limits access to lower income households of all races/ethnicities. 3. Lack of affordable housing and need for greater access to opportunities. 4. Regional coordination affects transit services, funding sources, and allocation of housing resources including vouchers. 5. Community resistance to development. Actions: Timeframe: Increase fair housing knowledge through the following actions: 1. Promote Fair Housing Council programs and expand knowledge of By December 2025, first-time homebuyer programs on the City's website, newsletters, and review annually through social media. thereafter 2. Promote affirmative marketing plans in all new housing developments Ongoing that are designed to attract renters and buyers of diverse demographic backgrounds, including race, ethnicity, income, disability, and familial status. 3. Develop an outreach plan and materials to communicate the benefits By December 2025 of vouchers and tenant rights regarding just cause evictions, limitations on rent increases, and replacement housing requirements if any existing residential units would be removed, based on state law. Increase housing opportunities in high opportunity areas through the following actions: 4. Incentivize multi-family and mixed- use development in the Gateway Specific Plan area (northeast portion of city) through the following actions: a. Amend the Gateway Specific Plan to mandate that any public By July 2025 benefit provided to achieve a density of higher than 50 du/ac shall include a provision of affordable housing, and to encourage the production of workforce housing and missing middle housing. Orange County 244 25-29 Regional AFH b. Allocate CDBG or other available funding assistance to projects Annually in the Gateway Specific Plan area that include multi-family units targeted for extremely-low-income households, as feasible. c. Provide administrative assistance to affordable housing Ongoing developers in preparing grant applications. d. Post and maintain a current inventory of vacant sites in the Ongoing Gateway Specific Plan area suitable for multi-family residential or mixed-use development on the City website. e. Contact local developers and publicize development Annually opportunities within the Gateway Specific Plan area at least once each year. f. Assist in facilitating subdivision of large parcels where Ongoing necessary to create building sites through concurrent processing and project coordination. 5. Contact the property owners of vacant properties to assist Annually development of the site for residential purposes. 6. Continue to implement state Density Bonus Law as amended from time Ongoing to time. 7. Engage and assist developers seeking funding and/or tax credits for the Annually construction of low- and moderate-income housing. 8. Incentivize affordable housing development through modified Ongoing development standards, expedited processing, or other financial incentives for affordable housing projects. 9. Provide administrative assistance to developers of low- or moderate- Ongoing income projects. 10. Promote options for assistance to developers on the City website. Ongoing 11. Prioritize funding assistance for Extremely Low-Income units. Ongoing 12. Review City-owned properties annually to identify any surplus land Annually that could be made available for affordable housing development and distribute list of suitable sites to regional affordable housing developers. 13. Work cooperatively with the County of Orange and other local cities to Ongoing, create a regional housing bond program to help fund affordable consultation with housing and permanent supportive housing. County at least annually Orange County 245 25-29 RegionaLAFH Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Contributing Factors: 1. Insufficient fair housing monitoring and limited outreach capacity 2. Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations 3. Limited understanding of fair housing laws Actions: Timeframe: - Improve fair housing education and outreach through the following actions: 1. Direct fair housing inquiries to the Fair Housing Council of Orange Ongoing County (FHCOC). 2. Post and update information annually regarding fair housing and Annually request that FHCOC conduct a presentation every two years about the services available. 3. In cooperation with the FHCOC, contact all low-income apartment By July 2025 and complexes annually to provide education and materials about the annually thereafter Section 8 program, including multi- lingual materials. 4. Publish and update fair housing information on the City website and Annually via social media annually. Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in Laguna Niguel. Contributing Factors: 1. Historical land use development patterns and zoning, environmental constraints, and lack of vacant land limit opportunities for larger and higher density project types. 2. Current high cost of housing limits access to lower income households of all races/ethnicities. 3. Lack of affordable housing and need for greater access to opportunities. 4. Community resistance to development. 5. Regional coordination affects transit services, funding sources, and allocation of housing resources including vouchers. 6. Age of housing stock. 7. Cost of repairs/rehabilitation. Actions: Timeframe: Encourage the development of ADUs and SB 9 units through the following actions: Orange County 246 25-29 Regional AFH 1. Monitor the production and affordability of ADUs every three Perform review in years to ensure the City is meeting ADU production targets and December 2026 act if projections are not consistent. 2. Conduct increased outreach and education on ADU and SB 9 Ongoing unit/lot split opportunities. 3. Continue to promote ADUs on the City's website, social media, Ongoing and at City offices. 4. Promote SB 9 units and lot splits on the City's website, social Ongoing media, and at City offices. 5. Expedite ADU permit processing. Ongoing Provide support to individuals experiencing homelessness through the following actions: 6. Participate in meetings of the Orange County Homeless Issues Ongoing Task Force as they occur 7. Allocate an appropriate level of CDBG funding in relation to the Annually local need. 8. Explore and consider Project Homekey and opportunities to Ongoing work with the County. 9. Assist applicants proposing permanent or interim supportive Ongoing housing by helping to apply for funding. Expand the use of Housing Choice Vouchers through the following actions: 10. Contact all low-income apartment complexes annually to By July 2025 and annually provide education and materials about the Section 8 program thereafter including multilingual materials. 11. Encourage the development of missing middle housing types Between 2021-2029, and evaluate specific methods to encourage their production in facilitate 80 "missing RCAAs, areas of higher density, and in the central areas of the middle" units, with at least City. 20% located in targeted areas, including RCAAs, higher density areas, central areas of the City. Preserve existing affordable housing units and prevent displacement through the following actions: 12. Monitor assisted units to assess the risk of conversion to market Annually rate. Orange County 247 25-29 Regional AFH 13. Offer financial incentives to encourage owners of at-risk Three-year,twelve-month, properties to maintain their rental units as affordable housing. and six-month coordination with at-risk property owners and OCHCS. 14. Allocate a portion of CDBG funds to assist in extending Annually affordability covenants for at-risk units. 15. Provide educational materials to tenants of properties with Ongoing expiring covenants regarding options for securing other affordable housing. 16. Continue the City's active property maintenance program run by Conduct windshield the Code Enforcement Division of the Community Development surveys covering all Department. properties in the City every six months. 17. Seek CDBG funding for housing rehabilitation. Facilitate rehabilitation of 15 housing units between 2021-2029. 18. Survey older areas of the City and connect property owners to Six property owner rehabilitation programs. contacts per year. Orange County 248 25-29 Regional AFH M. Lake Forest Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities While residents overall have relatively good access to opportunities, compared to the region, residents living below the FPL in the city generally have less access to opportunities than the rest of the population. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of opportunity due to high housing costs. 2. Lack of access to public transportation. Actions: Timeframe: Increase housing supply in high opportunity areas through the Between 2021-2029,the City's following actions: goal is to promote the development of 1,648 new 1. Implement Program 1: Land Use Policy, Entitlements, and units (including 303 lower Development Capacity (Shortfall Program), to rezone sites income units and 167 moderate to accommodate new residential and mixed-use income units, consistent with development at densities consistent with the City's General the City's Quantified Objectives Plan (adopted in 2020) to meet the City's RHNA at all for 2021-2029) with 75% of the income levels. new units located in areas of 2. Implement Program 2: Monitor Residential Capacity (No moderate or high opportunity; Net Loss), to ensure that replacement sites identified to rezone 158 acres to allow for continue to accommodate the City's remaining RHNA the development of up to 2,965 throughout the planning period are consistent with the multifamily units, with 75% of City's duty to affirmatively further fair housing. the units located in areas of 3. On an ongoing basis, actively recruit residents from moderate or high opportunity; neighborhoods of concentrated poverty to serve or and increase the number of participate on boards, committees, and other local applications from residents government bodies as positions are made available due to living in low or moderate the regular appointment process or vacancies. resource areas for open Board and Commission positions by 20%. Preserve existing affordable housing opportunities and prevent Between 2021-2029, the City's displacement through the following actions: goal will be to maintain at least 202 affordable housing units in 4. Implement Program 4: Replacement of Affordable Units,to the City; increase the ensure that affordable units that are removed from the proportion of new multifamily City's housing stock are replaced in accordance with state units that are 3 or more law. bedrooms by 10%; promote the 5. Implement Program 5: Facilitate Affordable and Special develop of 70 new extremely Needs Housing Construction, to encourage the low income housing units development of housing units to serve the needs of larger (consistent with the City's Quantified Objectives for 2021- Orange County 249 25-29 Regional AFH households, including large extremely low-income 2029); and commit$70,500 to households. implement programs and 6. Implement Program 23: Economic Displacement Risk improvements serving the Analysis, to proactively identify potential issues related to Southwest Lake Forest economic displacement as a result of new development. neighborhood with a focus on programs and improvements that protect existing residents from displacement. Increase access to opportunities for individuals with disabilities Between 2021-2029,the City's through the following actions: goal will be to rezone 158 acres to accommodate the 7. Implement Program 1: Land Use Policy, Entitlements, and development of up to 2,965 Development Capacity (Shortfall Program), to rezone sites new units with a focus to adjacent to transit corridors and activity centers to allow for promote the development of higher density residential development, suitable for units affordable to lower affordable and special needs housing, including new income households in areas of opportunities for individuals with disabilities. moderate or high opportunity; 8. Implement Program 5: Facilitate Affordable and Special increase the number of local Needs Housing Construction, whereby the City will individuals with disabilities proactively reach out to developers of housing for special taking transit by 10% by needs populations to share details about special needs encouraging the development groups in Lake Forest and promote the development of of new housing for individuals housing for special needs groups in areas of moderate and with disabilities to be located high levels of opportunity. close to transit routes; increase 9. Implement Program 6: Monitor and Implement Changes in the proportion of new federal and state Housing, Planning, and Zoning Laws to multifamily units that are 3 or proactively identify changes in federal and/or state more bedrooms by 10%; and regulations required to be implemented at the local level to resolve 100% of reasonable improve access to opportunity for individuals with accommodation requests disabilities. consistent with the requirements of state law. Orange County 250 25-29 Regional AFH N. Mission Viejo Issue: Concentration and Disproportionate Housing Needs Most of the city has a high concentration of White residents, although there are neighborhoods in the southern, northern, and western parts of the city where there's more diversity. Overall, residents have good access to opportunities, though getting around on public transit or finding affordable transportation can be a challenge. Additionally, data on fair housing complaints shows that people with disabilities often face challenges when it comes to housing. Renters across Orange County, including in Mission Viejo, are also struggling with housing costs. Contributing Factors: 1. Limited affordable housing overall due to land use designations and zoning regulations. 2. Limited availability of affordable units in a range of sizes and types. 3. Displacement of residents due to economic pressures. 4. Lack of affordable, integrated housing for individuals who need supportive needs. 5. Regulatory barriers to providing housing and supportive services for individuals with disabilities. 6. Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods. 7. Housing discrimination in the private market. Actions: Timeframe: Increase housing opportunities through the following actions: 1. Proactively outreach to developers about development Annually opportunities. 2. Actively market Site 3 and reach conclusion regarding the By July 2026 importation of dirt to be able to deliver a Pad-ready site to potential developers. 3. For Site 3 development, establish a priority processing By July 2026 procedure,with fee waivers and grant other incentives and concessions as appropriate, including the need and applicability for CDBG Funding. 4. Conduct an outreach and education program regarding SB By December 2025 4 opportunities for religious facilities and nonprofit colleges. 5. Promote funding available from Orange County Housing Annually FinanceTrust's Affordable ADU Loan Program. 6. Apply for funding available at the state to assist lower and Annually moderate-income homeowners to develop ADUs. 7. Prioritize funding for projects that set aside units for special Annually needs populations and those with extremely low incomes. Orange County 251 25-29 Regional AFH 8. Assist OCHA, FHF, and United Way in promoting the HCV Hold promotional workshops program annually. 9. Study and pursue a home sharing program Establish program in 2025 and begin implementation in 2026. Improve conditions in neighborhoods through the following actions: 10. Assess and expand MV Shuttle services and Safe Routes to Assess transit services at least School program to serve new developments and every three years. Assess and underserved neighborhoods. expand Safe Routes to School program to align with new developments. 11. Target outreach to two neighborhoods where there are Annually issues of housing conditions. 12. Study and develop appropriate strategies for adaptive reuse By the end of 2026. of underutilized commercial properties. Preserve existing affordable housing units through the following actions: 13. Monitor status of all affordable units. Annually Increase fair housing education and enforcement through the following actions: 14. Provide fair housing and tenant/landlord dispute resolution Annually services 15. Expand promotion of housing resources, including fair Annually housing services, via a multi-media approach, such as eNewsletter with circulation of 20,000, message boards, senior newsletter, and other social media outlets. Orange County 252 25-29 Regional AFH O. Newport Beach Issue: Segregation and Disparities in Access to Opportunity Residents across the city have relatively high access to opportunities, however, all of the city's neighborhoods are predominantly White and are classified as areas of high White segregation. Homeownership rates are lower for all groups compared to the County overall, except for AAPI households,who have slightly higher homeownership rate in the city. Housing cost burden is also an issue for renters in the city. Additionally, based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Contributing Factors: 1. High cost of housing and limited supply of affordable housing. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Adopt and codify accessory dwelling unit (ADU) By June 2023,the City will adopt regulations that facilitate and incentivize ADU revised ADU regulations. By development beyond state law minimum requirements, December 2023,the City will create new housing development incentives and fee conduct two community waivers, and that provide for access into areas of high workshops. The City will seek to opportunity that contribute to the following community produce 20 to 30 ADUs per development actions: calendar year within higher a. Increase residential development opportunities; resource areas. b. Maximize infill development in "built out" neighborhoods; and c. Increase affordable housing options. 2. Conduct two community workshops that will accomplish the following: a. Identify local issues that are influencing access to opportunity; b. Identify potential solutions to address those local issues; c. Identify opportunities to increase the housing supply for all income levels; and d. Establish economic development priorities to help stimulate the creation of jobs and access to services. 3. Adopt an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to ensure lower By December 2026,the City will income units are developed in conjunction with new aspire to have approved market-rate development equitably throughout the City between 750 and 1,000 and higher resource CensusTracts. affordable housing units or to have collected a commensurate in-lieu affordable housing fee for Orange County 253 25-29 Regional AFH use to subsidize future affordable housing projects. 4. Maintain and promote the City's Business Ambassador The City will improve upon its Program to residents to support local businesses and existing Business Ambassador entrepreneurship. Program and will seek to assist 5. Target outreach to two low-access Census Tracts via at least 35-45 individuals mailers or by other means including social media to annually with establishing their provide website information about local entrepreneurship own business opportunities. and educational opportunities. The Business Ambassador Program will be advertised within the lower-opportunity Census Tracts with a goal of reaching at least 50% of the households. 6. Continually update the City's housing-related webpages to Starting 2023, the City will ensure current available data. annually review and update its housing-related webpages. 7. Improve access to mortgage loans through the following By June 2023,the City will actions: provide information to the a. Disseminate online information to the community community about home loans about home loans and the loan application and and the loan process. By approval process. December 2023,the City will b. Conduct biannual affordable housing workshops conduct its first biannual with invited guests from the local lending industry affordable housing workshop and local affordable housing advocates. with affordable housing lenders c. Conduct annual report of loan dispositions in the and local affordable housing City and identify any trends or issues. Provide advocates. The City will seek to findings to local lenders and financial institutions. reach between 10,000 and 15,000 households with loan information and will further seek to reduce any occurrence of loan disposition discrimination, if found to be prevalent. Orange County 254 25-29 Regional AFH P. Orange Issue: Segregation and Disparities in Access to Opportunities Most of the city to the north and east of Villa Park is considered an area of high White segregation, and there are concentrations of predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods west of Glassel Street. Additionally, all publicly supported housing units and households with vouchers are located to the west and south of Villa Park.There are no publicly supported housing units or vouchers in use to the east of Villa Park, where it is a high White segregation area. Geographically, the neighborhoods west of Glassel Street, have lower education and economic scores, and worse environmental quality. Conversely, neighborhoods to the north and east of Villa Park, have high education and economic scores, and good environmental quality. Related to this geographic distribution of opportunities, Hispanic and Black residents (especially Black residents living below the FPL) have relatively low access to neighborhoods close to high performing schools,and to neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Additionally, based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of public investment in certain neighborhoods 2. Lack of sufficient affordable housing due, in part, to community opposition to affordable housing and land use and zoning regulations 3. Lack of fair housing knowledge Actions: Timeframe: Improve access to opportunity through the following actions: 1. The City will continue to utilize the Public Works and Community Services Ongoing Departments for the as-needed removal of graffiti and other deferred maintenance issues on public property, including sidewalks, parks, bus shelters signs and other structures adjacent to the public right-of-way, to enhance the quality of Orange's residential neighborhoods. 2. Provide public information related to housing development and how the Ongoing provision of affordable housing benefits the community. 3. The City will continue gathering community input on affordable housing, Ongoing housing for special needs populations, and ADUs.The continued outreach will be City-wide with a focus on traditionally under-represented communities. 4. Continue to follow current state Density Bonus law. Ongoing 5. Update the Transitional Housing Ordinance that establishes guidelines and 2025 regulations for the development and operation of transitional housing in the city. Orange County 255 25-29 Regional AFH 6. Prepare and adopt a Single Room Occupancy Ordinance that sets regulations 2025 for buildings designed for single room occupancy. 7. Prepare and adopt a Residential Care Facility Ordinance that establishes 2025 regulations and standards for non-medical care facilities providing care to individual requiring assistance. 8. Prepare and adopt a Farmworker and Employee Housing Ordinance that sets 2025 standards and regulations for housing provided to farmworkers by their employers. 9. Adopt a program to subsidize application processing fees for qualifying Ongoing developments where all units are affordable to 80%AMI or lower when funding is available. 10. Continue providing CDBG funds to the Fair Housing Foundation to provide fair housing activities to the community. Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in the City of Orange. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of sufficient affordable housing Actions: Timeframe: 1. The City will assist in preserving at-risk units by, but not limited to, supporting Ongoing non-profit applications for funding to purchase at-risk units,work with property owners to maintain affordability and develop preservation strategies,and assist with funding when available. 2. The City will continue to seek qualified non-profit organizations for acquisition, Annually construction, and rehabilitation of affordable housing. Funds will be available annually, contingent on funding availability. 3. The City will continue to encourage through outreach to private and non-profit Ongoing housing developers, the development of rental and for-sale housing for larger (5 or more individuals) families.The City will support developers/builders that incorporate larger bedroom counts (3 or more bedrooms)to accommodate the needs of larger families and reduce incidents of overcrowding in the existing housing stock.The City will evaluate providing regulatory incentives such as density bonuses that encourage and support the development of housing for large families on a project-by-project basis. 4. The City will develop a program to subsidize application processing fees,when Ongoing funding is available, for qualifying developments where all units affordable to 80%AMI or lower.The City will also promote the benefits of this program to the Orange County 256 25-29 Regional AFH development community by posting information on itswebpage and creating a handout to be distributed with land development applications. Orange County 257 25-29 Regional AFH Q. Rancho Santa Margarita Issue: Concentration Most of the City's population is predominantly White,with greater diversity in the neighborhoods east of SR-241. There are no publicly supported housing units. Some vouchers are in use in the northeast part of the city,which is a low-medium concentration area. Contributing Factors: 1. Location and type of affordable housing available 2. Land use and zoning laws that limit affordable housing development 3. Limited resources for fair housing agencies and organizations. 4. Lack of local private fair housing outreach and enforcement. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Continue to serve as a liaison between the public and appropriate agencies in Ongoing matters concerning housing discrimination within the City. 2. Provide annual fair housing literature to schools, libraries, and post offices. Annually Make information available via the City's fair housing service provider. Review annually to ensure that the posters and literature being provided are up to date. 3. In coordination with OCHA and fair housing services provider,conduct biennial Biennial landlord education campaign to educate property owners about state law campaigns; prohibiting discrimination based on household income. Provide public annual information and brochures regarding fair housing/equal housing opportunity review of requirements, including how to file a complaint and access the investigation information and enforcement activities of the state Fair Employment and Housing on website Commission. Make said information available on the City's website and at City Hall. Review information annually to ensure that any materials, links, and information provided are current. 4. In collaboration with the Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA): Ongoing a. Attend quarterly OCHA Housing Advisory Committee to enhance the exchange of information regarding the availability, procedures, and policies related to the Housing Assistance Voucher program and regional housing issues. b. Support OCHA's affirmative fair marketing plan and de-concentration policies by providing five-year and annual PHA plan certifications. 5. Monitor FBI data annually to determine if any hate crimes are housing-related Annually and if the City's fair housing service provider can take action to address potential discrimination linked to the bias motivations of hate crimes. Orange County 258 25-29 Regional AFH Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Residents across the city have relatively high access to opportunities, except for access to transit. Homeownership rates in the city are higher for all groups when compared to the County. However, Hispanic households have the lowest homeownership rate, and it is 20 percentage points lower than the AAPI homeownership rate, which is the highest rate in the city. Contributing Factors: 1. Location of employers 2. Availability,type, frequency, and reliability of public transportation 3. Location and type of affordable housing available Actions: Timeframe: 1. Request the Orange County Transportation Authority explore bus route Ongoing options to ensure neighborhoods with concentration of low-income or protected class populations have access to transportation services. 2. Update the City's Circulation element to better facilitate multimodal By mid-March transportation to/from the lower opportunity Census Tracts to goods and 2025. services. 3. In cooperation with the Orange County Transportation Authority, provide Ongoing community education regarding transport services for individuals with disabilities. Orange County 259 25-29 Regional AFH Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in Rancho Santa Margarita. Contributing Factors: 1. Economic displacement 2. Environmental hazards such as wildland fires and the interface with urban areas Actions: Timeframe: 1. Support local eviction prevention strategies Annually to reduce the number of homeless individuals and families (homelessness prevention services). 2. Update the City's Local Hazard Mitigation By mid-2025 Plan by December 2024 to ensure community resiliency from hazards. 3. Conduct outreach to landlords and support Increase Housing Choice Vouchers through the OCHA's mobility counseling program to Orange County Housing Authority by 5% increase Housing Choice Vouchers in the between 2021-2029. city. Orange County 260 25-29 Regional AFH R. San Clemente Issue: Concentration, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs The majority of the city is considered an area of high White concentration, except for one Census Tract encompassing neighborhoods north and east of Max Berg Plaza Park,which is classified as low-medium concentration. There is a cluster of publicly supported housing units in this low- medium concentration area. Based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities may disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in San Clemente. Contributing Factors: 1. Unaffordable rents and sales prices in a range of sizes, the location and type of affordable housing, and an overall shortage of subsidized housing units 2. Displacement of residents due to economic pressures 3. Cost of repairs or rehabilitation 4. Dominance of single-family housing, which is typically more expensive than multi-family housing 5. Lack of fair housing education and outreach Actions: Timeframe: 1. Annually promote equal access to fair housing information for Annually,with the goal to all residents. Expand outreach methods beyond traditional increase distribution of media (newspaper or City website) to include other social information by 20% media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. between 2021-2029 Focus fair housing outreach efforts in the area along the western side of Interstate 5 where racial/ethnic minorities and LMI households are concentrated. 2. Continue to work under contract with the Fair Housing Serve at least 50 Foundation (FHF) and/or other qualified fair housing service households each year. providers to provide fair housing services for all segments of Annually evaluate and the community. adjust the scope of services to ensure the City address any emerging trends in fair housing issues. 3. In coordination with OCHA and fair housing services provider, Conduct outreach and provide outreach and education to landlords and tenants education annually; regarding the state's new source of income protection (SB 329 increase vouchers from and SB 229) that recognizes public assistance such as Housing Orange County Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) and Veterans Assistance Supportive Authority by 10% between Housing (VASH) as legitimate source of income for rent 2021-2029. Orange County 261 25-29 Regional AFH payments. Specifically, provide fair housing responsibility to new ADU applicants. 4. Help non-profits acquire and convert market-rate housing to Ongoing affordable housing 5. Work to preserve the City's affordable housing inventory Ongoing 6. Offer a variety of housing opportunities to enhance mobility Goal of creating 446 among residents of all races and ethnicities by facilitating affordable units for lower affordable housing throughout the community through the income households following actions: between 2021 and 2029 a. Promote by-right approvals to facilitate at least one new 2021-2029 multi-family housing project with at least 20% of units for lower income households b. Promote Lot Consolidation program and incentives to 2021-2029 at least three developers. c. Implement the City's Affordable Housing Overlay to 2021-2029 facilitate at least one new multi-family housing project d. Promote the City's Inclusionary Housing Program to 2021-2029 facilitate at least one multi-family housing project with units affordable for lower income households 7. Provide rehabilitation financing assistance through the Assist at least two Neighborhood Revitalization Program and advertise this homeowners per year program to the western and southern areas of the City with older housing units and overpaying households. 8. Increase public outreach to at least once a year and encourage Annually residents to learn about available housing programs. 9. Through the City's fair housing service provider (FHF) increase materials distribution by 25%through the following actions: a. Provide fair housing education and information to Annually apartment managers and homeowner associations on why denial of reasonable modifications/ accommodations is unlawful through fair housing service contract at least once a year. b. Conduct multi-faceted fair housing outreach at least Annually once a year to tenants, landlords, property owners, realtors, and property management companies. Methods of outreach may include workshops, informational booths, presentations to community Orange County 262 25-29 Regional AFH groups, and distribution of multilingual fair housing literature. c. Provide general fair housing counseling and referral Ongoing services to address tenant landlord issues and investigate allegations of fair housing discrimination and take appropriate actions to reconcile cases or refer to appropriate authorities. d. Periodically monitor local newspapers and online Annually media outlets to identify potentially discriminatory housing advertisements. e. Include testing/audits within the scope of work with fair Ongoing housing provider. Orange County 263 25-29 Regional AFH S. Santa Ana Issue: Segregation and R/ECAPs There is moderate segregation between Hispanic and White residents, and between AAPI and White. The majority of the city is considered an area of high POC segregation and has a predominantly Hispanic population except for the Riverview West community which is predominantly AAPI. There are lots of publicly supported housing units downtown and southeast of downtown,which are high POC segregation areas. There is a higher concentration of vouchers, as well as some publicly supported housing units, west of the Santa Ana River, which is also a high POC segregation area. There is a R/ECAP covering multiple Census Tracts in the downtown area. These tracts are predominantly Hispanic, as are all the surrounding neighborhoods. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of fair housing education and outreach 2. Lack of affordable housing Actions: Timeframe: 1. Ensure all City programs and activities relating to housing and Ongoing community development are administered in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing. 2. Hold annual small apartment managers' workshop to train and Annually educate property owners, HOAs, property managers, and tenants about best practices in property management, neighborhood safety, and landlord/tenant responsibilities. 3. Periodically prepare the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Every 5 years Choice to identify, remove, and/or mitigate potential impediments to fair housing in Santa Ana. 4. Partner with legal assistance organizations to provide legal clinics for Annually tenants on tenants' rights and recourse for intimidation and unjust evictions. Orange County 264 25-29 Regional AFH Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Hispanic residents are more likely than other groups to be exposed to poverty in their neighborhoods and are less likely than other groups to live in close proximity to high performing schools, or in neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital. Geographically, neighborhoods downtown,west of downtown,and southeast of downtown have low economic scores, low education scores, high poverty rates, and poor environmental quality. Neighborhoods in the north and south of the city have better economic and education scores. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of affordable housing 2. Lack of public investment in low opportunity areas Actions: Timeframe: 1. Publish preapproved ADU plans and publicize ADU program through Facilitate dedicated web page in various languages to facilitate ADU construction. construction of 723 ADUs between 2021- 2029 2. Enforce the City's inclusionary housing ordinance, known as the Ongoing Affordable Housing Opportunity & Creation Ordinance (AHOCO), to require eligible housing development projects of five or more units, including condominium conversions,to include at least 15 percent of the units as affordable to low-income households; or 10 percent of the units affordable to very low-income households;or 5 percent to extremely low- income households; or a minimum of 10 percent available affordable households with five (5)5 percent to low- income, 3 percent to very low- income, and 2 percent to extremely low-income households, for rental housing. Require 5 percent of the units as affordable to moderate-income households for for-sale housing. 3. Establish guidelines as part of the Comprehensive Zoning Code Update By December 2025 for new housing development projects to include a variety of unit sizes, including units for large families, that are affordable to extremely low-, very low-, and low-income families. 4. Annually monitor the status of at-risk housing projects, specifically the Annually Warwick Square, Highland Manor,and other projects that may come due. Contact owners of properties at risk of conversion within one year of expiration to discuss City's desire to preserve projects as affordable housing. 5. Assist low-income households with down payment assistance loans of Annually up to $120,000 and moderate-income households with loans of up to $80,000. Orange County 265 25-29 Regional AFH 6. Create, assist, and support neighborhood associations, especially in Annually R/ECAP and TCAC Census Tracts, to collaborate on projects and sponsor and hold annual events. 7. Complete infrastructure improvements in residential neighborhoods Ongoing consistent with the City's Capital Improvement Plan. 8. Through the City's RFP process for Affordable Housing Development(see Annually program 2), facilitate and encourage the development in the Transit Zoning Code plan area of varied housing types at a mix of affordability levels, including for lower income households using appropriate incentives, such as awarding bonus points to developers whose projects provide at least 75% or more for the units for extremely low-income families at 30%Area Median Income. Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in Santa Ana. Additionally, more than 20% of housing units are overcrowded in most of the city's neighborhoods. Contributing Factors: 1. High cost of housing in the private market 2. High cost of housing repairs/rehabilitation Actions: Timeframe: 1. Implement the City's Rent Stabilization and Just Cause Eviction Ordinance Annually for tenants facing housing instability, including ongoing outreach and education, a program monitor system, and a schedule of penalties that may be imposed for noncompliance. Provide tenant protections beyond state mandates. 2. Provide housing assistance payments to eligible households participating in Ongoing the Housing Choice Voucher Program and adhere to policies and procedures in the federal regulations and the Housing Choice Voucher Program Administrative Plan. Administer 100 percent of the funding provided to the Housing Authority annually for eligible households.This includes Special Purpose Vouchers including the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Program; Mainstream Voucher Program; Foster Youth to Independence Program; and Emergency Housing Voucher Program.The objectives are to: 1) Utilize 100 percent of the Annual Budget Authority provided by HUD for each CY; 2) Apply for new funding opportunities for additional vouchers; 3) Retain High Performer SEMAP status; 4) Communicate on a regular basis with active landlords by providing information on key program updates. Orange County 266 25-29 Regional AFH 3. Contract with a local nonprofit organization (currently Habitat for Humanity) Annually to implement the City's Residential Rehabilitation Grant Program. Provide grants for the repair and rehabilitation of single-family and mobile homes, prioritizing applicants in R/ECAP and TCAC Census Tracts and low-income households. 4. Enhance local preferences program for residents working and living in Santa Ongoing Ana who are seeking affordable housing. Explore a right-of-first-refusal ordinance for mobile home parks and publicly supported multifamily residential properties to minimize tenant displacement and preserve affordable housing stock. Evaluate and pursue collective ownership models for mobile home parks as a tool to prevent displacement. Orange County 267 25-29 Regional AFH T. Tustin Issue: Segregation There is moderate segregation between Hispanic and White residents. There is a concentration of publicly supported housing units in the south, in neighborhoods that are predominantly AAPI. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of affordable housing opportunities. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Engage linguistically isolated communities by translating official City Ongoing announcements (i.e., community meeting, hearings, etc.) to Spanish and disseminating printed copies of information to renters, property owners, and via social media, to expand knowledge of affordable housing options in High Opportunity Areas. 2. Conduct at least one community informational meeting in areas that lack Annually affordable housing opportunities and that exhibit high segregation, on an annual basis. 3. Improve housing conditions in segregated areas establishing a multi-family 2025 quality rental housing inspection program that focuses on high segregation through areas. The City will receive at least one monthly referral from the City's 2029 Neighborhood Improvement Task Force (NITF) (NITF includes Code Enforcement, Police, Social Service/County, School District representatives, City staff form various Departments) to identify households in need of this tenant protection and anti-displacement focused program; focused on improving the quality of single family and multi-family residential dwellings by providing technical assistance and funds to repairs substandard housing conditions.The City will conduct at least five multi-family quality rental housing inspections in the program's first year and will increase the number of annual inspections by 2, each year thereafter, until 2029. Orange County 268 25-29 Regional AFH Issue: Disparities in Access to Opportunities Hispanic residents (especially those living below the FPL) are less likely than other groups to live in close proximity to high performing schools, or in neighborhoods with high labor force participation and human capital; and are more likely to be exposed to poverty in their neighborhoods. Additionally, based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. Homeownership rates are very low for Black and Hispanic households, equaling less than half of the homeownership rate for AAPI and White households. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of affordable housing in high opportunity areas. 2. Lack of public and private investment in low-resource neighborhoods. Actions: Timeframe: 1. Create an ADU/SB 9 accelerator program and focus in By 2025, the City will adopt a High Opportunity Areas within the northeast portion of program and mail out the City where there are predominately single-family information pertaining to the new residences to expand housing choices. This program accelerator program for ADUs could include a permit fee waiver for affordable housing and SB 9 developments, units, permit fast tracking, and technical assistance. specifically to high opportunity areas. 2. Provide technical assistance and permit fast-tracking for Fast track a minimum of 10 ADU new ADU/SB9 development proposals and at least six and/or SB 9 developments in projects that include housing affordable to lower income high opportunity areas on an households annually through 2029. annual basis; reduce review times by 25% compared to year 2022. 3. Translate the City'sTustin Housing Authority website and Annually, 2023 through 2029 factsheets promoting affordable housing opportunities and ancillary support services, such as transit and childcare, into Spanish, and distribute to low resource areas. 4. Tustin Legacy (Tract 744.15) is a Master Planned By 2029, the City anticipates the Community being developed. Although the tract has Tustin Legacy (Tract 744.15) to be been identified as low resource, it has been substantially identified as a "high resource" enhanced with new resources within recent years. The area according to TCAC/HCD area comprises 1,500 acres,of which 800 acres remain for Opportunity Map criteria. future development of a diverse housing stock, community amenities, and resources. By 2029, the City will continue to implement projects that increase assets in the Specific Plan area as proposed by developers and identified in the Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Orange County 269 25-29 Regional AFH Program. Improvements will provide increased access to safe and decent housing, transportation, recreation, and a healthy environment. 5. Create a "Financial Assistance for Child Care" webpage By December 2022; update with information and links to Children's Home Society of annually thereafter California (CHS) and the Orange County Department of Education (OCDE). These programs provide funding to low-income families for childcare services.The City will work with Tustin Preschool, Kiddie Academy of Tustin, or other local preschool programs within Census Tract 755.14 to advertise and promote financial assistance through pamphlets, e-blasts, and other applicable online community forums (such as Facebook and NextDoor). Issue: Disproportionate Housing Needs Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in Tustin. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of affordable housing. 2. Substandard housing in low-resource areas. 3. High cost of housing repairs/rehabilitation. Actions: Timeframe: 1. The City will partner with a non-profit to develop and Starting in July 2024, the program launch a CDBG funded Housing Rehabilitation Program will facilitate four (4) rehabilitation to facilitate the repair of dilapidated housing to address projects to assist with reducing lack of plumbing,kitchen facilities and repairs to provide overcrowding per year and relief of overcrowding. Program participants will be another four (4) projects will assist provided grants and/or loans to conduct necessary with general habitability repairs, housing updates. with a total of eight (8) dwellings assisted annually. 2. The City will amend the zoning code to require all new Zoning code amended by January multi-family projects to provide at least five (5) percent 2024. Four (4) large family units large family units (3+ bedrooms) which will prevent will be generated annually, and 32 overcrowding and further cost burden, by addressing total by 2029. demand for such units and increasing the large units into the local housing inventory. 3. Improve housing conditions in segregated areas 2025 through 2029 establishing a multi-family quality rental housing inspection program that focuses on high segregation areas.The City will receive at least one monthly referral Orange County 270 25-29 Regional AFH from the City's Neighborhood Improvement Task Force (NITF) (NITF includes Code Enforcement, Police, Social Service/County, School District representatives, City staff form various Departments) to identify households in need of this tenant protection and anti-displacement focused program; focused on improving the quality of single family and multi-family residential dwellings by providing technical assistance and funds to repairs substandard housing conditions.The City will conduct at least five multi-family quality rental housing inspections in the program's first year and will increase the number of annual inspections by 2, each year thereafter, until 2029. Orange County 271 25-29 Regional AFH U. Westminster Issue: Segregation, Disparities in Access to Opportunities, and Disproportionate Housing Needs The majority of the city is considered an area of high POC segregation and has a predominantly AAPI population with a few exceptions. The northwestern corner of the city, between 1-405 and Bolsa Chica Rd is an area of high White segregation. The location of publicly supported housing units and areas with highest concentration of vouchers aligns with the high POC segregation areas in the central part of the city. There are no publicly supported housing units, and fewer vouchers in use, in the western parts of the city that are high White segregation, racially integrated, and low-medium segregation areas. AAPI residents are more likely than other groups to be exposed to poverty in their neighborhoods and are less likely than other groups to live in close proximity to high performing schools or jobs. Native American residents living below the FPL are also less likely to live in close proximity to high performing schools or jobs. Additionally, based on analysis of fair housing complaint data, individuals with disabilities disproportionately experience discrimination in housing. There are large racial/ethnic disparities in homeownership. Black, Hispanic, and Native American households have the lowest rates (around 30%), and these rates are less than half the homeownership rate for White households, which is the highest in the city. The AAPI homeownership rate in the city is lower than in the County overall and is nearly 20 percentage points lower than the White homeownership rate in the city. Housing cost burden is an issue for renters across Orange County, including in Westminster. Contributing Factors: 1. Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations 2. Land use and zoning laws. 3. Displacement of residents due to economic pressures. 4. Location and type of affordable housing. 5. Lack of private investment in specific neighborhoods. 6. Lack of community revitalization strategies Actions: Timeframe: 1. Maintain an inventory of the available sites for residential development Ongoing and post it online (with annual updates) and provide it to prospective residential developers upon request. Monitor development trends to ensure continued ability to meet the RHNA. 2. Continue to perform project-by-project evaluation to determine if Ongoing adequate capacity remains for the remaining RHNA. 3. Adopt new mixed-use zoning districts and rezone all sites identified in Completed the City's most recent Housing Element to accommodate shortfall housing need, consistent with the densities, acreages, and capacity Orange County 272 25-29 Regional AFH levels identified in the Housing Element.Complete all rezoning pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i). 4. Encourage and facilitate construction of ADUs through the following actions: a. Update the City's ADU Ordinance to reflect state law. 2025 b. Prepare pre-approved ADU design templates, tailored to meet Completed specific zoning and building standards. Use of these design templates by a potential developer would ensure that the proposed ADU meets most, if not all, required standards at the outset of the development process, minimizing and streamlining the review process.This is expected to significantly incentivize production of ADUs by removing costs, reducing approval timeframes, and providing high application certainty. c. Promote development of ADUs by continuing to provide written Ongoing information at the City's planning counter and on the City's website and update it annually. d. Monitor ADU permit applications and approvals annually through Annually the Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR) process; identify and implement additional incentives or other strategies including rezoning, as appropriate, to ensure adequate sites during the planning period.Should ADU production fall short of projections for three consecutive APR reporting periods then new incentives, strategies, and/or rezoning shall be implemented within six months of the third submitted APR. e. Promote the City's ADU Process Guide (available on the City's Ongoing website). f. Host an annual workshop on accessory dwelling units, including Annually guidance for development and common questions and answers. g. Continue requesting information on rental rates to determine their Annually affordability and review this information annually against the projects identified in the Housing Element. 5. For all project applications, identify need for replacement of affordable Ongoing housing units and ensure replacement, if required, occurs. 6. Use HOME Funds and Housing Successor Funds to increase affordable housing production through the following actions: a. Provide HOME Funds and Housing Successor Funds to assist 2021-2029 development such as for the purpose of acquisition and/or Orange County 273 25-29 Regional AFH subsidizing the cost of land acquisition and off-site improvements for construction of 100 new affordable housing units. b. Use HOME Funds and Housing Successor Funds to acquire 16 2021-2029 multifamily or single-family units to be rehabilitated by a nonprofit and restricted to low-income rental housing. c. Contact local service providers and developers annually and inform Annually them of the potential partnerships with the Housing Division through paperless methods such as phone calls, email, and online postings. 7. Encourage development of affordable and special needs housing opportunities a. Contact affordable housing providers (including non-profit Annually providers) annually to encourage them to develop affordable housing for low-/very-low-income households and the disabled in Westminster. b. Maintain on the City's website an inventory of sites suitable for the Ongoing development of affordable housing for low-income households and households with special needs and update it annually. c. Support and prepare applications for funding annually. Annually d. Provide incentives and concessions to developers to assist in the 2022-2025 development of housing for lower income households or households with special needs, such as flexible development standards, expedited processing, and support from state funding including SB 2 Planning Grants and Permanent Local Housing Allocation.The preparation of flexible development standards and expedited processing for projects including affordable units will be addressed through the City's Zoning Code Update. e. Explore additional funding sources and strategies such as Ongoing boomerang funds and financing districts to assist the development of housing for lower income households on a biennial basis. 8. Continue to make available the City's application submittal packet to Ongoing provide interested builders or service providers with Density Bonus information through paperless methods such as online postings. Provide printed copies at the front counter. Meet with developers to explain the process and requirements. 9. Maintain a Zoning Code that is consistent with state law regarding low Ongoing barrier navigation centers, supportive housing, employee housing, and Orange County 274 25-29 Regional AFH farmworker housing; and update the Zoning Code as needed to comply with future changes. 10. If an application to convert a residential development to a Ongoing condominium/stock cooperative is submitted to the City,the provisions of the City's condominium conversion ordinance shall be implemented and enforced. 11. Implement the mobile home park conversion ordinance by requiring Ongoing applicants to (a) identify the quantity and conditions of each lower- income household/unit, and (b), upon approval of a permit to convert a mobile home park, implement mitigation measures that fully mitigate the net loss of low-income households. 12. Conduct a Displacement Risk Analysis Study to identify the local 2021-2029 conditions that lead to displacement and develop and implement an action program based on the results. Identify potential partners to participate in the study that specialize in eviction-related topics related to displacement,such as the Fair Housing Foundation.Annually monitor program effectiveness. 13. Implement incentives that will facilitate lot consolidation and increase 2022-2025 for code the overall feasibility of affordable housing projects; as part of the City's update and Zoning Code Update, incorporate specific development standards that annually for grant support lot consolidation, such as a reduction in parking standards, funding shared parking arrangements in mixed-use projects, a reduction of minimum unit size, and modification of setback requirements. Apply annually for grant funding to prepare conceptual development plans on consolidated lots. 14. Address substandard housing through the following actions: a. Using the land use data generated from the General Plan Update, 2021-2029 adopted in 2020, combined with the data generated from the 2007 Housing Conditions Survey, identify multifamily projects with the most significant level of deterioration for the purpose of providing loans for rehabilitation of multifamily units,subject to the applicable funding source requirements. b. Provide funding through the Neighborhood Pride Multi-Family 2021-2029 Rental Rehabilitation Program to bring at least 14 substandard units up to code. c. Continue to conduct annual community workshops explaining code 2021-2029 compliance issues. Prepare and distribute a Good Neighbor Guide describing how residents can maintain a healthy, safe, and appealing property. Orange County 275 25-29 Regional AFH d. Continue to utilize the Community Preservation Unit to assist with 2021-2029 community education and neighborhood maintenance. 15. Increase fair housing knowledge and enforcement through the following actions: a. Continue to make available a program directory or list of housing Ongoing resources(including resources and regulatory opportunities such as the Secondary Unit Ordinance) to the public through the City's website and in City Hall. b. Continue to advertise the City's reasonable accommodations Ongoing provisions using the City's website, brochures, and other forms of appropriate media. Ensure continued use of the City's reasonable accommodation provisions, by processing in a timely manner any application requesting a reasonable accommodation. c. Continue the City's commitment to working with the Fair Housing Annually Foundation and disseminating fair housing information at City Hall, public libraries, the Chamber of Commerce, and on the City's website. Include within the annual budget adequate funding to continue the contract with the Fair Housing service provider. Orange County 276 25-29 Regional AFH RESOLUTION NO 2025-32 EXHIBIT " D" 2025-2029 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN 11 25-16272/376024 ie\ ING7 11 ttII \, ............ o O` .,`.•\NO,ORPORATT1*.,, ' \� . -57 14, v • 17, 190(1. • Nik�.�COUNTN tP,// 2025/26-2029/30 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN (with Residential Anti-Displacement and Relocation Assistance Plan) Council Approved May 6, 2025 (Pending Approval) TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 OBJECTIVES ROLE OF CITIZENS 2 GUIDELINES FOR CITIZEN PARTICI PATION 3 Citizen Participation Advisory Board(CPAB) 3 Consolidated Plan,Annual Action Plan,Assessment to Fair Housing 4 Consolidated Plan/Annual Action Plan 4 Assessment to Fair Housing 6 Plan Amendments and Revisions 7 Consolidated Plan/Annual Action Plan Amendments 7 Assessment to Fair Housing Plan Revisions 8 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report(CAPER) 9 PUBLIC COMMENT 9 BACK-UP PROJECTS 10 ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND RECORDS 11 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 11 COMMENT AND COMPLAINT PROCESS I I CHANGES IN FEDERAL FUNDING LEVEL 12 ASSURANCES 12 CODE OF ETHICS/CONFLICT OF INTEREST 12 ANTI-DISPLACEMENNT 12 RESIDENTIAL ANTI-DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PLAN 13 Minimize Displacement 13 Relocation Assistance to Displaced Persons 14 One-for-One Replacement of Lower-Income Dwelling Units 14 Disclosure and Reporting Requirements 15 Replacement not Required Based on Unit Availability 16 DEFINITIONS 17 INTRODUCTION The City of Huntington Beach (City) receives an annual entitlement of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)for housing and community development activities to assist low-income persons.In accordance with the entitlement programs,the City must create a 5Five-Year Consolidated Plan(Consolidated Plan) that addresses affordable housing and community development needs, submit an Annual Action Plan(Annual Plan) to outline spending and activities for the corresponding program years, and provide a Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report(CAPER)to evaluate the City's accomplishments and use of CDBG and HOME funds. As required by HUD regulations 24 CFR 91.105, the City must have and follow a detailed Citizen Participation Plan that specifies the city's policies and procedures for engaging citizens and encouraging them to participate in creating, evaluating, and implementing the CDBG and HOME programs and the Assessment of Fair Housing(AFH). The 2025/26-2029/30 Citizen Participation Plan (Citizen Participation Plan) was available for public review and comment between April 4, 2025 and May 6, 2025. The City published a notice in The Wave(Orange County Register)on April 3,2025 informing the public of the availability of the document for review and comment. The public had access to review the draft document at the City of Huntington Beach Community Enhancement Division and on the City's website. The public was invited to provide comments on the Citizen Participation Plan at a public hearing conducted during the regular meeting of the Huntington Beach City Council on May 6, 2025. OBJECTIVES The City's Citizen Participation Plan is designed to ensure equitable representation of all segments of the population and to aid communication between the City and its residents on matters pertaining to the use of all federal funding from HUD. The Citizen Participation Plan sets forth policies and procedures the City Council adopted to encourage citizen involvement regarding the use of federal funds, notably CDBG and HOME funds. The intent of the Citizen Participation Plan is to encourage those least likely to participate in the process, especially low-income persons living in distressed neighborhoods,in public and assisted housing developments,and in areas where CDBG funds are proposed to be used. This document outlines basic tenets of the citizen participation regulations and remains in effect throughout the implementation of the City's entitlement awards from the federal government or until these funds are closed out. The Citizen Participation Plan promotes citizen participation in the following key areas: • Preparation and review of,and comment on the: ✓ Consolidated Plan,a five-year strategic plan that outlines the strategy and goals for 4IPage the City's use of the federal funding sources. ✓ Annual Plan, which describes projects that will be undertaken in the upcoming fiscal year with the federal funding sources. ✓ Substantial Amendments to a Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan. ✓ Assessment of Fair Housing(AFH). • Provides an opportunity for residents to review and comment on the annual CAPER,which describes Huntington Beach's implementation of activities funded by the HUD formula programs, CDBG and HOME. • Provides residents reasonable and timely access to information, meetings, and records. • Provides assistance for non-English-speaking and Limited English Proficient (LEP) persons upon advance request provided such services are available. • Provides reasonable accommodations for those with disabilities upon advance request. ROLE OF CITIZENS Citizen involvement is essential in assuring that City policies,procedures,programs and activities are well suited to local needs. It fosters transparency, accountability, and inclusiveness in local governance. The City Council addresses itself to the development, review and adoption of the following areas: A. The City's Consolidated Plan and Annual Plan. B. The submission of the City's CAPER. C. City improvement strategies,programs,policies and procedures. D. The Citizen Participation Plan. Regular meetings of the City Council/Public Financing Authority are held on the first and third Tuesdays of each month, and typically begin on or preceding the hour of 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA. A Study Session used to present information to Council for discussion purposes only with no objection being taken or Closed Session may be convened subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act, and may be scheduled prior to the main,public meeting that convenes at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. If a regularly scheduled meeting falls on a holiday,the meeting will be held on the next business day. City Council Meeting agendum and supporting documentation is available for public review at 5IPage https://huntingtonbeach.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx no later than Thursday prior to a scheduled meeting. If a holiday occurs on the Monday or Tuesday prior to scheduled agenda packet release, delivery of packet material to Council and the public may be delayed by one additional day. Regular City Council meetings are broadcast live on Huntington Beach Cable Channel 3 and repeated on the following Wednesday after City Council meeting at 10 a.m. and Thursday at 6 p.m. Council meetings are webcast live and also archived on the City's website. GUIDELINES FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION The citizen participation process provides citizens of Huntington Beach with a formal opportunity to take part in the development of housing and community development programs and amendments to adopted plans at a community-wide level in a public forum during a specified City Council Meeting or Citizen Participation Advisory Board meeting. Listed below are the specific guidelines governing information access, public notices, and technical assistance, among others, that the City will follow to encourage citizen participation in the preparation of the Consolidated Plan, Annual Plan, AFH, and CAPER. Citizen Participation Advisory Board The Citizen Participation Advisory Board (CPAB) was established in October 1996. It is comprised of seven members appointed by each of the individual City Council members. The CPAB strives to represent the diverse views on the socioeconomic issues related to low/moderate income individuals. To that end, low-income residents and members of minority groups are encouraged to apply to the City for appointment to the CPAB when vacancies arise, so that members of minority groups can be substantially represented. The purpose of the CPAB is to provide citizen participation and coordination in the City's planning processes for HUD formula grants,principally the CDBG and HOME Programs. Along with staff, the Board shall assess the needs of the community particularly that of low- and moderate-income households, evaluate and prioritize projects pertaining to the required plans and provide recommendations to City Council on such plans and projects, and consider alternative public involvement techniques and quantitative ways to measure efforts that encourage citizen participation. It is the responsibility of the CPAB to review grant proposals and make recommendations to the City Council concerning federal funding, specifically for CDBG Public Services programs and activities. Committee meetings are open to the public and are held regularly during the CDBG application and deliberation period. The CPAB establishes its meeting dates by consensus. All meetings are open to the public and special meetings may be called in conformance with the Ralph M. Brown Act. The Board will hold public hearings to obtain citizen input on community needs, plans or proposals. The CPAB is encouraged to hold public meetings in areas where there is a significant concentration of low- to moderate-income persons. To ensure that all City residents have sufficient opportunity to take notice of all scheduled public hearings, all public hearing notices will include the date,time and location of the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main 6IPage Street, Huntington Beach and notification that meeting locations are accessible to the disabled. To maximize community participation by individuals served through CDBG and HOME programs, meetings may also b e held in the Oakview neighborhood, which is within an eligible low-and moderate-income area. Consolidated Plan, Annual Plan, and Assessment to Fair Housing As mandated by federal regulations, the City submits a Consolidated Plan and Assessment to Fair Housing every five years and an Annual Plan every year to HUD. The Consolidated Plan is a long- range plan that identifies community development and housing needs of low-income Huntington Beach residents, establishes priorities, and describes goals, objectives and strategies to address identified priorities. The Annual Plan is a document that lists specific activities for CDBG and HOME funding in the upcoming program year, as well as applications for both federal programs. An AFH Plan describes patterns of integration and segregation; racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty; disparities in access to opportunity; and disproportionate housing needs. The following steps will be taken to encourage all Huntington Beach citizens,including minorities, non-English speaking or limited English proficient (LEP) persons, and persons with disabilities, to participate in the development of the Consolidated Plan,Annual Plan,and AFH and afford these citizens an opportunity to review and comment on them: Consolidated Plan /Annual Plan 1. In preparation of the Consolidated Plan, the City will distribute a Community Needs Survey (and in Spanish if necessary) to local agencies, and will conduct a consultation workshop with housing, health, homeless, disabled, and other social service providers to identify key housing and community development needs and issues in the City, as well as identifying gaps in service. 2. The City will conduct a community workshop in English (and in Spanish if necessary) to solicit citizens' opinions regarding perceived community needs during development of the Consolidated Plan, and provide a written Community Needs Survey (in Spanish if necessary)to establish expenditure priorities of CDBG and HOME monies. 3. The City will distribute from time-to-time a Request for Proposals (RFP) to nonprofit organizations and City departments to carry out public service and/or housing activities. 4. The City will elicit comment from local and regional institutions, the Continuum of Care and other organizations (including businesses, developers, nonprofit organizations, philanthropic organizations, and community-based and faith-based organizations) when developing and implementing the Consolidated Plan. 5. In conjunction with consultation with public housing agencies, the City will encourage participation of residents in public and assisted housing developments while developing and implementing the Consolidated Plan, along with other low-income residents of 7IPage targeted revitalization areas in which the developments are located. The City will provide information to public housing agencies in Huntington Beach and surrounding cities about consolidated plan activities related to its developments and surrounding communities so that the PHA can make this information available at the annual public hearing required for the PHA Plan. 6. Prior to the development of the City's Consolidated Plan, the first of two public hearings will be held to solicit and consider any public comments (oral and written) on the use of CDBG and HOME funds. The public hearing will serve to obtain the views of citizens on housing and community development needs, including priority non-housing community development needs. To ensure that all City residents have sufficient opportunity to take notice of all scheduled public hearings, all public hearing notices, including the date, time and location, and summary of the proposed action shall be published in a local newspaper of general circulation at least fifteen(15) days prior to the date of the public hearing. This first public hearing is to be held by the CPAB at City Hall located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 and is accessible to the disabled. 7. Following the 1st public hearing,the CPAB will hold one or more meetings to allow CDBG applicants to present their request for funding and to talk about their programs. The CPAB will prioritize the eligible programs and projects and will prepare a recommendation on funding levels to be included in the Draft Annual Plan. 8. A summary describing the contents and purpose of the proposed Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan will be published in a newspaper of general circulation. The publication of the summary notice will commence a 30-day public comment period, during which citizens will have the opportunity to examine the proposed Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan and submit comments regarding the draft document(s) to the City's Community Development Department / Community Enhancement Division (see address below). Complete copies of the draft Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan will be available for review at the following locations and at https://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/cdbg : City of Huntington Beach Oak View Branch Library Community Enhancement Division 17251 Oak Lane 2000 Main Street, 5th Floor Huntington Beach,CA Huntington Beach,CA 92648 92648 9. The 2"d public hearing before the City Council will be held to provide citizens a final opportunity to comment on the draft Consolidated Plan and Annual Plan before the Plans are adopted by the City Council. The public hearing will serve again to obtain the views of citizens on housing and community development needs, including priority non-housing community development needs. A summary of comments or views along with a summary of any comment or view not accepted and the reasons,therefore,shall be attached to the final Consolidated Plan / Annual Plan. To ensure that all City residents have sufficient opportunity to take notice of this public hearing,a public hearing notice, including the date, time and location, and summary of the proposed action shall be published in a local newspaper of general circulation at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the public 8IPage hearing. Public hearings are held at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach and is accessible to persons with disabilities. Note: The City may opt to combine into one notice the public notices described in Steps 8 and 9, above. The public notice will, therefore, serve to summarize the Consolidated Plan/ Annual Action Plan and notify the public of the required 30-day public comment period, and will also note the public of the date, time, and location of the 2nd public hearing to approve the Plan(s). Assessment to Fair Housing Plan 1. Huntington Beach staff will at, or as soon as feasible after, the start of the public participation process, make the HUD-provided data and any other supplemental information the jurisdiction plans to incorporate into its AFH available to its residents, public agencies, and other interested parties. Huntington Beach may make the HUD- provided data available to the public by cross-referencing to the data on the HUD's website. 2. A summary describing the contents and purpose of the proposed AFH will be published in a newspaper of general circulation at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of the public hearing. The public notice will also commence a 30-day public comment period, during which citizens will have the opportunity to examine the proposed AFH and submit comments regarding the draft document to the City's Community Development Department/Community Enhancement Division. The public notice will also announce the date,time, and location of the public hearing scheduled to adopt the AFH. Public hearings are held at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach and are accessible to persons with disabilities. 3. Complete copies of the draft AFH will be available for review at the following locations, as well as on the City's website at https://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/cdbg: City of Huntington Beach Oak View Branch Library 17251 Oak Community Enhancement Division Lane 2000 Main Street, 5th Floor Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 4. A public hearing before the City Council will be held to provide citizens further opportunity to comment on the draft AFH,which must be adopted by the City Council. A summary of comments or views made along with a summary of any comment or view not accepted and the reasons,therefore, shall be attached to the final AFH. Plan Amendments and Revisions Consolidated Plan /Annual Plan Amendments Consolidated Plans and/or Annual Plans may be revised during the program year. 9IPage • Minor Amendments. Any revisions not defined below as a Substantial Amendment constitutes a minor amendment not requiring public notification or citizen participation in advance of implementing such changes. Upon completion, the City will make the amendment public by placing the amendment to the City's website and will notify HUD that an amendment has been made. The City will submit a copy of each amendment to HUD as it occurs, or at the close of program year. Minor changes and/or corrections may be made, so long as the changes do not constitute a substantial amendment. Minor changes, including but not limited to modifications of goal outcome indicators, will not be considered a substantial amendment and do not require public review or a public hearing. • Substantial Amendments. The following changes to the City's Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan constitute substantial amendments requiring public notification and public review subject to the citizen participation process described at 24 CFR 91.105 and 24 CFR 91.115. 1. The City makes a change in its allocation priorities or a change in the method of distribution of funds. 2. An addition, modification, or elimination of a Consolidated Plan goal. 3. The City carries out an activity not previously described in the Annual Plan using funds covered by the Consolidated Plan, including Program Income. 4. The City proposes not to carry out an activity described in the Annual Plan and, if funded, cancel the activity in the federal Integrated Disbursement Information System(IDIS). 5. There is a change in the purpose, scope, location, or beneficiaries of an activity in the Annual Plan. 6. There is a cumulative change in the use of CDBG or HOME funds from one activity to another activity in the Annual Plan that exceeds 30 percent of the entitlement award for the program year. If the CDBG award, for instance, is $1.0 million, then an activity budget(s) could be increased or decreased by up to $300,000. In the event that an amendment to the Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan qualifies as a substantial change, citizens will be given an opportunity to participate in the planning process.This opportunity will be afforded to the citizens by following these steps: 1. The City will publish a notice describing the contents and purpose of the proposed substantial amendment to the Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan in a newspaper of general circulation. The summary will also include a list of locations where a 10IPage complete draft of the Amended Consolidated Plan and/or Amended Annual Plan may be obtained for review. 2. The publication of the summary will commence a 30-day public comment period, during which citizens will have the opportunity to examine the proposed Amended Consolidated Plan and/or Amended Annual Plan and submit comments regarding the draft document to the City's Community Development Department / Community Enhancement Division. 3. After the close of the 30-day public comment period,the City Council will consider approving the Substantial Amendment to the City's Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan. All substantial amendments to the Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan and all amendments to the Citizen Participation Plan will be reviewed and approved by the City Council. A summary of comments or views along with a summary of any comment or view not accepted and the reasons, therefore,will be attached to the final Amended Consolidated Plan and/or Amended Annual Plan. Assessment to Fair Housing Plan Revisions An AFH previously accepted by HUD must be revised and submitted to HUD for review under the following circumstances: • A material change occurs. A material change is a change in circumstances in the jurisdiction of a program participant that affects the information on which the AFH is based to the extent that the analysis, the fair housing contributing factors, or the priorities and goals of the AFH no longer reflect actual circumstances. Examples include Presidentially declared disasters, under title IV of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), in the program participant's area that are of such a nature as to significantly impact the steps a program participant may need to take to affirmatively further fair housing; significant demographic changes; new significant contributing factors in the participant's jurisdiction; and civil rights findings, determinations, settlements (including Voluntary Compliance Agreements), or court orders. A revised AFH under this circumstance must be submitted within 12 months of the onset of the material change, or at a later date as HUD may provide. Where the material change is the result of a Presidentially declared disaster, the revised AFH submission shall be automatically extended to the date that is two years after the date upon which the disaster declaration is made, and HUD may extend such deadline, upon request, for good cause shown. • Upon HUD's written notification specifying a material change that requires the revision. Under this scenario,HUD will specify a date by which the program participant must submit the revision of the AFH to HUD, taking into account the material change, the program 11IPage participant's capacity,and the need for a valid AFH to guide planning activities.HUD may extend the due date upon written request by the program participant that describes the reasons the program participant is unable to make the deadline. On or before 30 calendar days following the date of HUD's written notification under this circumstance, Huntington Beach may advise HUD in writing if it believes that a revision to the AFH is not required. The City will state with specificity the reasons for its belief that a revision is not required. HUD will respond on or before 30 calendar days following the date of the receipt of the City's correspondence and will advise the City in writing whether HUD agrees or disagrees with the City. If HUD disagrees, the program participant must proceed with the revision. HUD may establish a new due date that is later than the date specified in its original notification. A revised AFH will consist of preparing and submitting amended analyses,assessments,priorities, and goals that take into account the material change, including any new fair housing issues and contributing factors that may arise as a result of the material change.A revision may not necessarily require the submission of an entirely new AFH. The revision need only focus on the material change and appropriate adjustments to the analyses, assessments, priorities, or goals. Huntington Beach will follow citizen participation guidelines as outlined here for a Consolidated Plan Substantial Amendment, including publishing a public notice at least thirty(30) days in advance of a public hearing to adopt the Revised AFH and a 30-day public comment period. Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) The City will prepare an annual CAPER to evaluate the progress of the Consolidated Plan and to review accomplishments for the previous program year. Upon completion of the CAPER and prior to its submission to HUD, a public notice will be published in a newspaper of general circulation announcing the availability of the CAPER for review and comment prior to a public meeting. This public review and comment period shall be for a minimum 15-day period beginning on the day of publication. During this period, citizens will have the opportunity to examine the CAPER and submit comments to the City's Community Development Department/Community Enhancement Division regarding the document. A public meeting will also serve to obtain the views of citizens about program performance. A summary of comments or views along with a summary of any comment or view not accepted and the reasons, therefore, will be attached to the CAPER. PUBLIC COMMENT Public comment, verbally or in writing, is accepted throughout the program year, and is particularly invited during the noticed public comment periods described above. Public hearings shall provide a major opportunity for citizen input on proposed neighborhood improvement programs, activities, policies and procedures. At a minimum, the City will conduct two separate public hearings annually—one for the purpose of soliciting comments from the public on needs and priorities for the development of the Consolidated Plan and Annual Plan,and review of program 12IPage performance, and a second for the purpose of adopting the Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Plan. Public hearings will be held at times convenient to potential and actual beneficiaries, and accessible to the disabled. Notices of public comment periods shall be published on the first day of the public comment period, which shall conclude with the public hearing. To ensure that all City residents have sufficient opportunity to take notice of all scheduled public hearings, all public hearing notices, including the date,time and location,shall be published in a local newspaper of general circulation at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the public hearing and thirty (30) days for the Consolidated Plan or Annual Plan. Public notices will be published in local newspapers of general circulation when pertaining to any projects proposed citywide, such as the Consolidated Plan, Annual Plan, or CAPER. BACK-UP PROJECTS The Annual Plan may contain a list of projects to be funded for the given program year under one or more of the following circumstances: • Additional funding becomes available during the program year from the close out of current projects that were completed under budget. • More program income becomes available than originally estimated and budgeted in the Annual Plan. • If, during the development of the Annual Plan, staff has not definitively decided which public facility or infrastructure improvement project to fund,the City may opt to categorize each option as a"back-up"project until further project and budget planning is performed. Initiation and funding of one or more of the "back-up" projects would not constitute a substantial amendment as defined in the Citizen Participation Plan. Preferential consideration will be given to those projects that demonstrate the ability to spend CDBG funds in a timely manner, consistent with the City's goal to meet CDBG timeliness rules, as well as those projects that meet the needs of the community as defined in the Consolidated Plan. A list of"back-up" projects can include public facility and infrastructure improvement projects can be included in the Annual Plan and be approved by the City Council to serve as back-up projects. The City may activate these back-up projects at any time when funding becomes available. The City needs to receive HUD approval for these back-up projects along with the approved and funded projects as part of its approval for the Annual Plan. Initiation and funding of these projects would not constitute a substantial amendment as defined above. ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND RECORDS 13IPage Any citizen, organization, or other interested party may submit written requests for information regarding the Consolidated Plan,Annual Plan,AFH, or CAPER, including the City's use of funds under the CDBG and HOME programs and the benefit to low- to moderate-income residents during the preceding five years. Copies of the Consolidated Plan, Annual Plan, Citizen Participation Plan, CAPER, AFH, amendments or revisions to these Plans, and documents regarding other important program requirements including contracting procedures, environmental policies, fair housing/equal opportunity requirements and relocation provisions, are available to the public during the City's regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 8:00 am— 5:00 pm, in the City's Community Development Department / Community Enhancement Division located at Huntington Beach City Hall,2000 Main Street, 5th Floor,Huntington Beach, CA 92648. Additional information may be obtained by calling (714) 374-1626. Upon request, the City will make all information available in a format accessible to persons with disabilities. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE In an effort to encourage the submission of views and proposals regarding the Consolidated Plan and Annual Plan, particularly from residents of target areas and groups representative of persons of low- and moderate-income, the City shall provide technical assistance in developing proposals for funding assistance under any of the programs covered by the Consolidated Plan or Annual Plan, if requested. Such assistance will include, but is not limited to, the provision of sample proposals, and program regulations and guidelines. COMMENT AND COMPLAINT PROCESS The City will consider any comments from citizens received in writing or orally at public hearings/meetings in preparing this Citizen Participation Plan,the Consolidated Plan,Annual Plan, CAPER,AFH, and/or substantial amendments to these plans. A summary of all comments will be attached and submitted to HUD. The City will respond to written complaints received relating to the Consolidated Plan, Annual Plan, AFH, CAPER, and/or substantial amendments. Written complaints must describe the objection and provide contact information of the complainant. The City will respond to complaints within fifteen(15)business days of receiving the written complaint, acknowledging the letter and identifying a plan of action, if necessary. Correspondence may be addressed to: City of Huntington Beach Community Development Department Charles G. Kovac, Housing Manager 2000 Main Street, 5th Floor Huntington Beach, CA 92648 14IPage Persons wishing to contact the Los Angeles Area Field HUD Office may address correspondence to: U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development Arnold Sison, CPD/HUD Representative 300 North Los Angeles Street Suite 4054 Los Angeles, CA 90012 CHANGES IN FEDERAL FUNDING LEVEL Any changes in the federal funding level after the comment period of either the Draft Consolidated Plan and/or the Draft Annual Plan has expired,the resulting effect on the distribution of funds will not be considered an amendment or a substantial amendment. ASSURANCES The City of Huntington Beach assures that the most diligent effort will be made to comply with the process and procedures outlined in this 2025/26-2029/30 Citizen Participation Plan. CODE OF ETHICS / CONFLICT OF INTEREST It shall be forbidden for any member of boards, commissions, and committees having a material interest in the outcome of decisions to participate in the review of, discussion regarding or voting upon any application on or in any way attempt to influence other members of the respective body. According to direction from the Los Angeles area office of HUD, any CPAB member with such a conflict must resign from either the board or from the position from which the conflict arises. City staff will review applications for new members and attempt to identify potential conflicts prior to appointment. ANTI- DISPLACEMENT The City of Huntington Beach strives to avoid and minimize the displacement of individuals as a result of HUD funded activities. Therefore, to the greatest extent possible,the City: • Will consider the impact of displacement in the site selection, during the project planning phase. • Will provide information to displaced individual's on available assistance and relocations benefits. 15IPage In an effort to minimize displacement of persons and to assist any persons displaced by governmental actions, the City of Huntington Beach has prepared a Residential Anti-Displacement and Relocation Assistance Plan, which is provided in this document. RESIDENTIAL ANTI-DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PLAN This Residential Anti-Displacement and Relocation Assistance Plan (RARAP) is prepared by the City in accordance with the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974,as amended; and HUD regulations at 24 CFR 42.325 and is applicable to the City's CDBG, including the Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program, and HOME-assisted projects. Section 104(d)of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974,as amended(HCD Act), and HUD's CDBG program regulations provide that, as a condition for receiving assistance, as a grantee,the City must certify that it is following a RARAP,which contains two major components: 1. A requirement to replace all occupied and vacant occupiable low/moderate-income dwelling units that are demolished or converted to a use other than low/moderate-income housing in connection with an activity assisted under the HCD Act and 24 CFR 570.606(c)(1)); and 2. A requirement to provide certain relocation assistance to any lower-income person displaced as a direct result of(1) the demolition of any dwelling unit or(2)the conversion of a low/moderate-income dwelling unit to a use other than a low/moderate-income dwelling in connection with an assisted activity. Minimize Displacement Consistent with the goals and objectives of activities assisted under the Act, Huntington Beach will take the following steps to minimize the direct and indirect displacement of persons from their homes: • Coordinate code enforcement with rehabilitation and housing assistance programs. • Stage rehabilitation of apartment units to allow tenants to remain in the building complex during and after the rehabilitation, working with empty units first. • Where feasible,give priority to rehabilitation of housing in lieu of demolition to minimize displacement. • If feasible, demolish or convert only dwelling units that are unoccupied or vacant occupiable' dwelling units,especially if units are lower-income units as defined in 24 CFR A vacant occupiable dwelling unit means a vacant dwelling unit that is in a standard condition;a vacant dwelling 16IPage 42.305. • Target only those properties deemed essential to the need or success of the project. Relocation Assistance to Displaced Persons The City will provide relocation assistance for lower-income tenants who, in connection with an activity assisted under the CDBG and HOME Programs, move permanently or move personal property from real property as a direct result of the demolitions of any dwelling unit or the conversion2 of a lower-income dwelling unit3 in accordance with requirements of 24 CFR 42.350. A displaced person who is not a lower-income tenant will be provided relocation assistance in accordance with the Uniform Act, as amended, and implementing regulations at 49 CFR Part 24. One-for One Replacement of Lower-Income Dwelling Units In accordance with section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended (HCD Act) (Pub. L. 93-383, 42 U.S. C. 5301 et seq) and the implementing regulations at 24 CFR 42.375,the City will fulfill its obligation of providing one-for-one replacement housing by replacing all occupied and vacant occupiable lower-income dwelling units4 demolished or converted to a use other than lower-income housing in connection with a project assisted with funds provided under the CDBG and HOME Programs. To that end,the City,in fulfillment of 24 CFR 42.375,will replace all units triggering replacement- housing obligations with comparable lower-income dwelling units. Acceptable replacement units that are provided by the City or private developer will meet these requirements: • The units will be located within the city and,to the extent feasible and consistent with other statutory priorities, located within the same neighborhood as the units replaced. • The units must be sufficient in number and size to house no fewer than the number of occupants who could have been housed, as determined by the City's local housing occupancy codes, in the units that are demolished or converted. unit that is in a substandard condition, but is suitable for rehabilitation;or a dwelling unit in any condition that has been occupied(except by a squatter)at any time within the period beginning three months before the date of execution of the agreement by the recipient covering the rehabilitation or demolition. 2 The term conversion means altering a housing unit to either use the dwelling for non-housing purposes, continue to use a unit for housing;but it fails to meet the definition of lower-income dwelling unit; or it is used as an emergency shelter.If a housing unit continues to be used for housing after completion of the project is not considered a "conversion"insofar as the unit is owned and occupied by a person who owned and occupied the unit before the project. 3 A lower-income dwelling unit means a dwelling unit with a market rent(including utility costs)that does not exceed the applicable Fair Market Rent 4 The term dwelling as defined by the URA at 49 CFR 24.2(a)(10)includes transitional housing units or non- housekeeping units(SRO)commonly found in HUD programs.An emergency shelter is generally not considered a "dwelling"because such a facility is usually not a place of permanent, transitional or customary and usual residence. 17IPage • The units must be provided in standard condition. • Replacement units must initially be made available for occupancy up to one year prior to the City publishing information regarding the project initiating replacement housing requirements and ending three years after commencing demolition or rehabilitation related to the conversion. • Replacement units must remain lower-income dwelling units for a minimum of tear 10 years from the date of initial occupancy. Replacement lower-income dwelling units may include public housing or existing housing receiving Section 8 project-based assistance. Disclosure and Reporting Requirements Before entering into a contract committing the City to provide funds for a project that will directly result in demolition or conversion of lower-income dwelling units, the City will make public by publishing in a newspaper of general circulation and will submit to HUD the following information in writing: 1. A description of the proposed assisted project. 2. The address, number of bedrooms and location on a map of lower-income dwelling units that will be demolished or converted to a use other than as lower-income dwelling units as a result of and assisted project. 3. A time schedule for the commencement and completion of the demolition or conversion. 4. To the extent known,the address,number of lower-income dwelling units by size(number of bedrooms) and location on a map of at the replacement lower-income housing that has been or will be provided. 5. The source of funding and a time schedule for the provision of the replacement dwelling units. 6. The basis for concluding that each replacement dwelling unit will remain a lower-income dwelling unit for at least ten years from the date of initial occupancy. 7. Information demonstrating that any proposed replacement of lower-income dwelling units with smaller dwelling units(e.g., a two-bedroom unit with two one-bedroom units), or any proposed replacement of efficiency or single-room occupancy (SRO)units with units or a different size, is appropriate and consistent with the housing needs and priorities identified in the HUD-approved Consolidated Plan and 24 CFR 42.375(b). 18IPage To the extent that the specific location of the replacement dwelling units and other data in items four through seven are unavailable at the time of the general submission,the City will identify the general locations of such dwelling units on a map and complete the disclosure and submission requirements as soon as the specific data is available. Replacement not Required Based on Unit Availability Under 24 CFR 42.375(d),the City may submit a request to HUD for a determination that the one- to-one replacement requirement does not apply based on objective data that there is an adequate supply of vacant lower-income dwelling units in standard condition available on a non- discriminatory basis within the area. 19IPage DEFINITIONS Annual Action Plan. A one-year(July 1 —June 30)planning document detailing approved funding allocations for specific eligible activities. The Annual Action Plan (Annual Plan) is submitted to HUD 45-days prior to the beginning of the program year. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The general and permanent rules and regulations published in the Federal Register by the executive departments and agencies of the U.S. government. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). Authorized under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, the CDBG Program combined multiple federal categorical grants under one regulation. The funds are a block grant that can be used to address critical and unmet community needs including those for housing rehabilitation, public facilities, infrastructure, economic development, public services, and more. The City is provided an annual grant on a formula basis as a CDBG Entitlement recipient. Funds are used to develop a viable urban community by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate-income persons. Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER). The CAPER is prepared at the end of the program year to detail how funds were actually expended and the extent to which these funds were used for activities that benefitted low-and moderate-income people.The CAPER is submitted to HUD within 90-days of the program year end. Consolidated Plan. The document that is submitted to HUD that serves as the comprehensive housing affordability strategy, community development plan, and submissions for funding under any of the Community Planning and Development formula grant programs (e.g., CDBG, ESG, HOME, and HOPWA), that is prepared in accordance with the process described in this part. HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME). HOME funds are awarded annually as formula grants to participating jurisdictions (PJs), States and localities, that are used - often in partnership with local nonprofit groups - to fund a wide range of activities including building, buying, and/or rehabilitating affordable housing for rent or homeownership or providing direct rental assistance to low-income people. HOME is the largest federal block grant to state and local governments designed exclusively to create affordable housing for low-income households. HUD.U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is the federal agency that administers and provides guidance for the Consolidated Plan process and use the federal funds such as CDBG and HOME. Low- and Moderate-Income Persons. Individuals from households with a total income that does not exceed 80 percent of the median household income for the area adjusted for family size. 20IPage Res. No. 2025-32 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, LISA LANE BARNES, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council ' at a Regular meeting thereof held on May 6, 2025 by the following vote: AYES: Twining, Kennedy, McKeon, Burns, Van Der Mark, Williams NOES: None ABSENT: Gruel ABSTAIN: None � rho City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California d TIC Public Hearingon the . . .. ,® ,, .,. . '®.e..®`.. :,:•:._tifact.P0:11A),--:' � 2025-29 Consolidated e . f 10. Plan ' and 2025-26 CDBG ,,..... ,,,:„. ...,. ,..,_, and HOME Program .r.,...,..,, „ , . ...•• . .„...:, , . .,„„ ,1., _� _ _ _ Funding " ` -:-.:.,,. -.,,-..-,--:--'::.',.:':..--.- 11''.,'7,- ..=--,-, ,':,, ).)?,' ':. !''''4.4.i..,‘:'il Mt • - ' -..a' . . ;.e..4„1.1..':..". ®. t. 17 O .' Cit Council Meetin M 2 025 g Y • ,ci.": Oil "% . • . -. .C:- --fiEll :-: `°..: , ,... ., ,. , , ......,.; . t.111%.,. ,_ , ,. r. liiiiir. u! COMMIJNTITY'DEVEI.OPMENT $AN OE.vo BLOCK GRANT 829 Background ➢ The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides annual entitlement grants to the City. • Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) • HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) ➢ On March 18, City Council and CPAB held a joint study session to review funding recommendations. '7,0* 11111111%, vC C(MMUN(TY"DEVELOPMENT ' '4' �� BLOCK GRANT <Fca oi,�<. 830 Background (cont. ➢ Every five years, the Consolidated Plan, Assessment of Fair Housing, and Citizen Participation Plan are prepared for the CDBG and HOME funding process. ➢ CDBG and HOME funding recommendations are included in the 2025-26 Annual Action Plan, a component of the 5-Year Consolidated Plan, which is the City's program budget for HUD. rap p y06. rC1UNGT < p,C90.F➢9,yE•, fa pi 44- COMMUNITY`DEVELOPMENT ,.. Q�N 4. BLOCK GRANT cAu iY ; °< 831 Background (cont. ➢ A public hearing notice was published in The Wave on April 3, starting the 30-day public review period from April 4 to May 6 for the following documents: U 2025-26 Annual Action Plan ❑ 2025-29 Consolidated Plan ❑ 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan ❑ 2025-29 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing ➢ These documents above must be submitted to HUD to receive , NT0 unding. 40 �U�z���a €, * iIiui *: C t kt, fl 4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT `. " (aq4 D v�� BLOCK GRANT �'aUN3.iY�-ef'' 832 2025-29 Consolidated Plan > The Consolidated Plan outlines the strategic plan for investing HUD funds over the next five years and is based upon local data, community feedback, and HUD requirements. > The estimated five years of funding is $9.4 million in CDBG and HOME funds. > The Consolidated Plan identifies the following priority areas: ❑ Homeless Services ❑ Community Services U Services for Special Needs Populations ❑ Housing Needs ❑ Community Facility Needs 0ENr'o ❑ Infrastructure Needs ` :' �� ❑ Other Housing and Communityoil 0CIE) 1"h ., Development Needs ;� � �" p CO MMUNIT DEVELOPMEK , - 47 INN DEO, BLOCK GRANT --rpu l G ,4 833 2025-26 Annual Action Plan ➢ The Annual Action Plan serves as the first-year implementation plan under the 2025-29 Consolidated Plan. ➢ The Annual Action Plan includes: ❑ A summary of the recommended programs and projects U Proposed outcomes and performance measures ❑ Funding levels for public services, capital projects, and administration ➢ The Annual Action Plan functions as the City's formal application to HUD. SENT P' 0 iJ' N11NGp� ��.: 1 h r,z, n\ a fi?. , CQMMUN(� `A7VELQPMEIJ e BLOCK GRANTFpui `° 834 2025-26 FUNDING CDBG HOME TOTAL Public Services $168,179 N/A $168,179 Capital & Housing 987 645 $790,595 1 778 240 J Preservation Projects $ $ $ ' ' Administration $224,239 $193,833* $418,072 Total Grant Amount $1,380,063 $984,428 $2,364,491 * Includes $140,000 of 2020-21 & 2021-22 carry over funding from HOME Administration ya4a, ,illi6111 m it �,i+�/Of!! T4t� fir * II I q.,i, it.)., C 'h Aly . COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT `Q°, � . 1� 6„. oq. BLOCK GRANT ` �UNrec ''' 835 CDBG Public Services Requested Funding Funding Recommendation City of HB - Children's Bureau $85,000 $40,530 City of HB — Senior Center Care Mgmt. $46,000 $30,530 Pathways to Independence $40,000 $20,530 Project Hope Alliance $50,000 $20,530 Robyne's Nest $75,000 $40,529 StandUp for Kids OC $33,478 $15,530 TOTAL $329,478 $168,179 Remaining Funds to Allocate = $0 A 4 ,f''iie�llNsrp i 0 cri : 0 h`' :i . . COMMUNITY'DEVELOPMEN' + 7. �° t, 646, Q 01' BLOCK GRANT cFepuHr'4 e ;�,`�+ 836 CDBG CAPITAL & HOUSING PRESERVATION PROJECTS Requested Funding Funding Recommendation Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) Program Administration $235,000 $235,000 Housing Rehabilitation Loan/Grant Program $350,000 $381 ,139 Special Code Enforcement $246,506 $246,506 ADA Curb Cuts/Ramps — Zone 3 $125,000 $125,000 TOTAL $956,506 ci $987,645 Remaining Funds to Allocate = $0 wro 4 e COMMUNIiS DEVEL QPMBHT `9'x} * `i` O` a o c9Aq ;01. BLOCK GRANT -feouNiY/ 837 CDBG ADMINISTRATION Requested Funding Funding Recommendation CDBG Administration $224,239 $224,239 TOTAL $224,239 $224,239 Remaining Funds to Allocate = $0 COMMUNITY AELQPMHNT e � s< `jt �1 1 s46 01 BLOCK GRANT �` `durutvc?�;%°':"IN DE\fe, :.. 838 HOME ALLOCATIONS Requested Funding Funding Recommendation Families Forward TBRA $200,000 $200,000 Mercy House TBRA $200,000 $200,000 Senior Mobile Home TBRA $300,000 $128,841 CHDO Reserve $261 ,754 $261 ,754 HOME Administration $53,833 $53,833 Prior FY 20-21 & 21-22 HOME Admin $140,000 $140,000 TOTAL $1,155,587 $984,428 Remaining Funds to Allocate = $0 S,ovI , � TiN�r�v COMMUNITYPAV.ELQPMENT Ty Ci 01 --from,' r 4 AN D ► ' BLOCK GRANT rom,'��; 1 > 839 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan > The Citizen Participation Plan is required to be updated every 5 years. > The purpose of the Citizen Participation Plan is to: U Reflect current engagement practices and regulatory requirements. ❑ Describe the process for involving residents, stakeholders, and community organizations in the development of HUD- related documents. ❑ Outline the role of the CPAB in the funSA1ding process. ¢ T rr 94k t,?? q ljillIl % C COMMUNI�Y'A�'VELC�PMHI�T � +± �4/DI vo, USN Y Y/J 1 6„ BLOCK F �.�A ��,,. . errs..: 840 2025-29 Regional Assessment of Fair Housing > This regional assessment included 20 Orange County cities that receive CDBG entitlement funding, along with the County and its urban areas. > The Assessment of Fair Housing includes: ❑ A summary of regional housing constraints and demographic trends U Identification of contributing factors to fair housing challenges ❑ Shared goals to guide future planning efforts xoNT ot.. 1 „„zsikt,°14.448.3„_,Lf-T,1",,' -,:t:\ 4 COMMUNITY'DEVELOPMENT 12 1,*_„.'--1,1-,,--.,-,-.--. III e1eAN DEVf - BLOCK GRANT ',.* UN1Y t '% ,1 841 Housing Rehabilitation Program ➢ This program provides one-time grants to help low-income homeowners (often seniors on fixed incomes) make essential health and safety repairs such as fixing leaky roofs, outdated wiring, or plumbing issues. ➢ Current Grant Limit: $15,000 ➢ Staff is requesting City Council approval to raise the grant cap to $20,000 (to reflect rising labor and material costs) ➢ This program helps maintain and preserve the City's existing housing stock, supporting neighborhood quality, property values, and community stability. oviieNT0,6, ' �� N': 1' "% 0 11 al CQMMUNITY'AgVELQPMENT . 6,+�" 1, G419 \ .BLOCK..GRANT '%rir' - ��', 842 i Recommendations ➢ Adopt Resolution No. 2025-32 approving the following related to the CDBG and HOME Programs: ❑ 2025-26 Annual Action Plan ❑ 2025-29 Consolidated Plan ❑ 2025-29 Citizen Participation Plan ❑ 2025-29 Orange County Regional Assessment of Fair Housing ❑ Increasing the Housing Rehabilitation Grant funding cap from $15,000 to $20,000 10017,04... xeo t T1Nar N:111111jjj 10. ° UOMMU1I'TY"DRVELOPMENP 44N Qe vO BLOCK GRANT aUt�iv ,';` 843 z n' e - tx"g m = '; 1t� r3: a4 a a 'fir: d xa ,. ••-- ...':-- „',"-.:4.4,,-„4'i1,'-',-*':*,,1',v'i,1"*c 4-;-.ri--.%,I.s,4t,lI.t.,-"'‘7,1t,.,•4,\.,4-L,4•o!,.4.,A1y-4i.-..,l-_-lmI.-4i..p--.1"?iI,4,-:.*..--.."t...v1.-.itAs.°.42l._„,,,..7,-.7..-,:, .,,,g..-a.1.-*.t*-,Or_o'-,-:-,*r--,L1..i'.b,-A-•.W--1,-.„..--'':.,.v:...-_.„,;,',-'.4'..;m,,4—..7.,t-."..'4t,4,..„-.-:4,,,T'.-c61.,„.'4.,',':..,r,4z1-,'. Questions') 43t.•.,N=,.-..-..I.,-:i--T-4-t' r,,.'-,„' , .., . ,..... .,. . ...,...,,,,,,,....,,,,,,, .,- ,, -. ,. ......X '1'.*-"V ',4,1,.. ' '1: ,::0,,;;;.f-itilftgi 4 '' 4iitfri: ',',1:4V*.lit,,,,,,,fit;',..-t, t4 P b ' moo -' „- ' .. ,aka• • • 844 CAPITOL OFFICE (California ,tat $ nxtr COMMITTEES 1021 0 STREET BANKING AND FINANCIAL SUITE 6730 INSTITUTIONS SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SENATOR TEL.(916!651 4036 ENERGY UTILITIES TONY STRICKLAND AND COMMUNICATIONS DISTRICT OFFICE THIRTY-SIXTH SENATE DISTRICT E PUBLIC 301 MAIN STREET RMPLOPLOYMENTAND RETIREMENT SUITE 212 VICE CHAIR HUNTINGTON BEACH.CA 92648 TEL 1714k 374-4000 w LL.S TRANSPORTATION VICE CHAIR SENATOR STRICKLANDSSENATE CA GOV SUBCOMMITTEES LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR RESILIENCY April 30,2025 Huntington Beach City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Dear Mayor Burns and Members of the Huntington Beach City Council, I am writing in strong support of Pathways to Independence and their recent grant application to the City of Huntington Beach through the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)program. For over three decades,Pathways to Independence has been a vital force in Orange County, empowering single young women who have faced significant adversity and are working to build stable, successful futures.The organization's proven track record of supporting clients through higher education,professional development, and trauma-informed services speaks to the transformative impact of its mission. As the proud representative in the California State Senate of Huntington Beach, I am especially encouraged by the presence of three residential buildings operated by Pathways right here in our city. These safe and stable housing options are critical to the success of the young women they serve—and to the long-term strength and stability of our community as a whole. Supporting Pathways to Independence through the CDBG program is an investment in people, in potential,and in a stronger Huntington Beach.I respectfully urge your full consideration of their application and applaud your ongoing commitment to initiatives that create lasting,positive change. Sincerely, Tony Strickland California State Senate,366'District SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 5/6/25 26 (25-272) Agenda Item No.