REAP 2.

0 Workshop
Wednesday, May 17, 2023
 Introductions

Terri King Jennifer Morales George Buell Edith Medina, Ph.D.

www.kingscog.org/REAP2
We’d like to
learn about
Your name
you!
Please tell us:
Agency and/or
organization

Why you are attending

our workshop
Agenda
• Brief Background on REAP 2.0
• REAP 2.0 Funding Program
• What KCAG Has Done and is Doing
• KCAG’s Draft Suballocation and Scoring
Methodology
• Poll and Group Discussion
• Announcements
• Q&A
5

5/17/23
Brief Background
on REAP 2.0
REAP 2.0 Background
• Builds on the success of REAP 1.0
program
• The program was established as part of
the 2021 California Comeback Plan
under AB 140
• REAP 2.0 expands by integrating housing
and climate goals, and allowing for
broader infrastructure investments that
support infill development to improve 7

housing supply, choice, and affordability.

5/17/23
 REAP 2.0 seeks to do the following:

1 2 3 4 5
Accelerate infill Reduce vehicle Increase housing Affirmatively Help implement
housing miles traveled supply at all further fair adopted regional
development (VMT) affordability housing (AFFH) and local plans to
achieve these goals
levels

8
Program Partners
REAP 2.0 Funding
$600 million
from coronavirus state/local fiscal recovery funds
and state general fund

85% of the REAP 2.0 funds

will be allocated directly to Metropolitan Planning
Organizations; like KCAG

KCAG’s share is $2.06 million.

After program management, administrative and
outreach funding is deducted, $1.8 million is
proposed to be suballocated for eligible activities

10
REAP 2.0 FUNDING PROGRAM
REAP 2.0 Program Overview
• Funding eligibility: Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (MPOs) or ”Eligible Entities”
• Flexible grant program to fund both planning and
implementation activities
• Funding explicitly intended to meet multiple
objectives (Nexus Requirement) that lead to
“transformative Policy Outcomes and accelerate
the implementation of regional and local plans to
achieve these goals” (HCD, p. 4)
 Accelerate infill development that improves housing
supply, choice and affordability

Reduce vehicles miles travelled (VMT)

Affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH)

REAP 2.0 Objectives AKA Nexus Requirement

All Proposed Uses Need to Include:
• REAP 2.0 objectives:
1. Accelerating infill development
2. Affirmatively furthering fair housing
3. Reducing VMT

• Primary factors:
1. Housing Element compliance
2. Transformative planning and implementation activities
3. Benefit to disadvantaged populations
4. Significant beneficial impacts
5. California State planning priorities
Significant Beneficial Impact
Suballocation applicants must demonstrate that each Proposed Use advances all
REAP 2.0 Program goals and objectives, meets the definition of a Transformative
Planning and Implementation Activity, and provides a “significant beneficial impact.”

Significant Beneficial Impact Defined:

Significant beneficial impacts must lead to substantial changes in land use patterns and
travel behaviors.
In demonstrating significant beneficial impacts, applicants may consider:
o rates of change (e.g., percent increase over a baseline)
o magnitude of impact relative to variables or targets
o proportion of need achieved
o impact relative to past trends, policies, and practices
Variable or Targets
May include but are not limited to:
• Benefitting households by income group
• Regional Housing Needs Assessment
• Housing units (new construction,
preservation/conservation, and
rehabilitation)
• Density (multifamily housing)
• Infrastructure
• Infrastructure capacity and accessibility
• Public space
• Community amenities
• Investments
• VMT reduction goals or targets
• Regional or local equity policies and
programs included in an adopted RTP/SCS
• GHG reduction goals or targets
ELIGIBLE Uses
Guidelines, Section 204A – Activities generally
include:
• Technical assistance, planning, staffing,
consultant needs (program-related)
• Administration costs
• Outreach and engagement activities
Eligible uses, Section 204(E) – Meet one or more of
the following categories of allowable uses:
• Accelerating infill development that improves
housing supply, choice, and affordability
through planning programs, services, or
capital expenditures
• Realizing multimodal communities through
programs, plans, and implementation actions
• Shifting travel behavior by reducing driving
through programs, ordinances, funds, etc.
• Increasing transit ridership through funding,
implementation actions, and planning
ELIGIBLE Uses
Guidelines, Section 204A – Activities generally
include:
• Technical assistance, planning, staffing,
consultant needs (program-related)
• Administration costs
• Outreach and engagement activities
Eligible uses, Section 204(E) – Meet one or more of
the following categories of allowable uses:
• Accelerating infill development that improves
housing supply, choice, and affordability
through planning programs, services, or
capital expenditures
• Realizing multimodal communities through
programs, plans, and implementation actions
• Shifting travel behavior by reducing driving
through programs, ordinances, funds etc.
• Increasing transit ridership through funding,
implementation actions, and planning
Examples for “Accelerating infill development
that improves housing supply, choice, and
affordability through planning programs,
services, or capital expenditures”

• Affordable housing development programs, can

include mixed-uses (minimum 65% of total floor
area is residential use)
• Rezone and guiding development by updating
planning documents, development standards,
general plans (includes Housing Elements), etc.*
• Infrastructure planning and investing in upgrading
infrastructure (sewers, water systems, transit, etc.)
Examples for “Realizing Multimodal Communities”

Developing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure plans

Investing in infrastructure projects and other programs to expand

active transportation and implement bicycle or pedestrian plans
Examples for “Shifting
travel behavior by reducing
driving through programs,
ordinances, funds, etc.”
• Funding the establishment of a local
VMT impact fee
• Catalyzing a regional VMT mitigation
bank (seed funding for mitigation is
ineligible)
• Accelerating infill housing production
near jobs, transit, and resources
Examples for “Increasing transit
ridership”
• Funding and implementing actions to establish more
seamless regional transit systems between and
across communities
• Planning for additional housing near transit*
More on ELIGIBLE Activities
• Eligible activities under technical assistance may be broad but
must meet all REAP 2.0 objectives
• Eligible activities must have a significant geographic or
regionwide benefit (not intended to fund projects that are
relatively small in scope)
• Outreach and engagement activities to be used as a
component for Proposed uses (not a stand-alone proposed
use
• Administration activities cannot use more than 5% of funds
• All proposed uses must AFFH
INELIGIBLE Uses
• Definition: uses that are inconsistent
with REAP 2.0 goals and objectives

• As a reminder, REAP 2.0

objectives are:
1. Accelerating infill development
2. Affirmatively furthering fair housing
3. Reducing VMT
INELIGIBLE Uses include:
• Roadway or highway capacity increases
• Advocacy work (direct lobbying for specific bills or local propositions)
• Bonus payments of any kind
• Ceremonial expenses
• Commission fees
• Real estate brokerage fees or expenses
• Stewardship of legal defense funds
• In-lieu fees for local inclusionary housing programs
• Updates to the RTP
• Organizational membership fees
• Street construction or repair to benefit vehicular traffic
• Other items unrelated to the REAP 2.0 Program or application
INELIGIBLE Uses include:
• Costs associated with ongoing provisions of internet service
• Services, materials, or equipment obtained under any other state program
• General meetings that do not specifically discuss or advance implementation of awarded
REAP 2.0 funds
• Using funds for mitigation activities already mandated by local or state governing bodies or
agencies
• Ongoing expenses (e.g., routine maintenance or operations of transportation infrastructure
associated with transit service expansion)
• Costs associated with automobile or motorcycle parking (excluding EV charging
infrastructure). Proposed uses with a surface parking component are not eligible.
• Costs associated with infrastructure related to fossil fuels, including connections to natural
gas infrastructure
Funded REAP 2.0 Projects from another MPO
What KCAG Has
Done and is Doing
Applied for the REAP 2.0 MPO Applications

Advance Advance Full

Application Funding Application
KCAG submitted an Advanced funding will be KCAG submitted a Full
Advance Application for used for education and Application for
10% of available funding in outreach campaigns, $1,854,531.
the amount of $206,059 program management and
administrative expenses
 REAP 2.0 Timeline

Winter 2022
Stakeholder and
Public Engagement
• In-person and online workshops
provided by KCAG

• REAP 2.0 Community Survey

• All slides, recordings, and materials

posted on KCAG’s website
KCAG’s Next Steps
• Incorporate notes and results from workshops and Community Survey to
the scoring methodology for KCAG REAP 2.0 funding program
• Finalize program guidelines and application materials
• Scoring committee to review applications and award suballocation
grantees
• Expenditure deadline: June 30, 2026 (Final invoices 3 months prior)
• For applicants: projects do not need to be completed prior to June 30, 2026. Line
items/work for planning/implementation activities need to be expensed prior to this
deadline
KCAG’s Draft
Suballocation and
Scoring
Methodology
 REAP 2.0 Objectives
1. Accelerating Infill Development
2. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Applications 3. Reducing VMT

will be
Primary Factors
reviewed for: 1. Housing Element Compliance
2. Transformative Planning and Implementation Activities
3. Public Outreach
4. Benefit to Disadvantage Populations
5. Significant Beneficial Impacts
6. California Planning Priorities

Secondary Factors
1. Scope of Work and Budget
2. Project Risk Assessment
 KCAG’s Scoring Methodology (DRAFT)

Question: Should scoring be Pass/Fail rather than assigning a number on the degree of
evidence?
KCAG’s Scoring Methodology - Weighting
 REAP 2.0 Objectives
Which objective 1. Accelerating Infill 0.27 27
should have more Development
weight? 2. Affirmatively 0.23 23
Furthering Fair
How about the
Housing
least weight? 3. Reducing VMT 0.25 25
Subtotal 0.75 75
 Primary Factors

Which of the 1. Housing Element Compliance 0.02 2

2. Transformative Planning and 0.04 4
following primary Implementation Activities
factors should 3. Public Outreach 0.03 3
have the most 4. Benefit to Disadvantage 0.05 5
weight? How Populations

about the least? 5. Significant Beneficial Impacts 0.04 4

6. California Planning Priorities 0.02 2
Subtotal 0.20 20
Poll and Group
Discussion
Questions 1 to 3: To RHNA Population
Suballocate by Jurisdictions
or Not Suballocate by Avenal 2.94% $ 54,486 8.85% $ 164,235
Jurisdictions? Corcoran 7.58% $ 140,629 14.2% $ 263,312
Hanford 58.83% $ 1,091,002 38.9% $ 723,217
Jurisdictions must show that Lemoore 24.70% $ 458,069 17.6% $ 326,765
funds towards proposed uses County 5.95% $ 110,345 20.3% $ 377,002
will be used for meets all
100.0% $ 1,854,531 100.0% $ 1,854,531
REAP 2.0 objectives

Minimum Population Total RHNA Total

Avenal $ 100,000 $ 119,956 $ 219,956 $ 39,796 $ 139,796
Corcoran $ 100,000 $ 192,320 $ 292,320 $ 102,714 $ 202,714
Hanford $ 100,000 $ 528,231 $ 628,231 $ 796,857 $ 896,857
Lemoore $ 100,000 $ 238,666 $ 338,666 $ 334,569 $ 434,569
County $ 100,000 $ 275,359 $ 375,359 $ 80,595 $ 180,595
$ 500,000 $ 1,354,531 $ 1,854,531 $ 1,354,531 $ 1,854,531

Question 4
Which of the following
would you like to use the
state funds for? Choose one
or two.
Making existing communities and
neighborhoods more compact to
increase housing supply, choice, and
affordability
Creating walkable and bikeable
communities
Developing programs that enable
you to do activities with less driving
Building accessible, reliable, and
connected transit systems
Group Discussion
Poll

Please take the

anonymous poll and
we’ll discuss
answers as a group
Additional questions not in the poll
Question 5
In your opinion, what do you think is
the best way to develop a compact
community or neighborhood with
affordable housing choices that
requires less driving to get around?

Idea from last workshop: Mixed-used

developments and program
development for ADUs
Question 6
What current projects do
you have that could utilize
REAP 2.0 funds?
Announcements
• 2-minute Community Survey on Survey
Monkey
Please take it if you haven’t yet!
https://tinyurl.com/REAP2survey

• Office Hours
To discuss about potential projects and/or
questions about the REAP 2.0 program.
Contact Terri King and we’ll set up an appointment!

Website: www.kingscog.org/REAP2
Questions?
Thank you!
For any additional questions please contact:

Terri King
Terri.King@co.kings.ca.us
559-852-2678

Or visit:
www.kingscog.org/REAP2