HomeMy WebLinkAboutHCDC 9.20.18 PacketAgenda
Housing & Community Development
Commission (HCDC)
Thursday, September 20, 2018
6:30 P.M.
Senior Center, Assembly Room
28 S. Linn Street, Iowa City
Use the Washington Street entrance or
2nd floor skywalk via Tower Place parking garage
1.Call meeting to order
2.Approval of the July 10, 2018 minutes*
3.Public comment of items not on the agenda
4.Sara Barron to present on the Affordable Housing Coalition
5.Consideration of Amendments to the Iowa City Housing Authority’s Housing
Choice Voucher Program Administrative Plan *
6.Tentative schedule of HCDC monitoring updates in FY19
7.Update on annual input for the 2016-2020 CITY STEPS Consolidated Plan
8.Update on Racial Equity Analysis for the South District Investment Partnership
9.Introduction to the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
10. Consider approval of the FY18 Consolidated Annual Performance & Evaluation
Report (CAPER)* – online at www.icgov.org/actionplan
11.Staff/commission comment
12.Adjournment*
* Indicates Action Item
If you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this program or event, please
contact Kirk Lehmann at kirk-lehmann@iowa-city.org or 319-356-5230. Early requests are strongly
encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs.
Date: September 13, 2018
To: Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC)
From: Neighborhood Service Staff
Re: September 20, 2018 meeting
The following is a short description of the agenda items. If you have any questions about the
agenda, or if you are unable to attend the meeting, please contact Kirk Lehmann at 319-356-
5247 or Kirk-Lehmann@Iowa-City.org.
Item 5. Consideration of Amendments to the Iowa City Housing Authority’s
Housing Choice Voucher Program Administrative Plan*
The Iowa City Housing Authority is proposing amending its Administrative Plan to convert
100 tenant-based vouchers to project-based voucher program and to add sections
distinguishing Primary Preferences from Secondary/Targeted Preferences.
Item 6: Tentative schedule of HCDC monitoring updates in FY19
November 15
• Little Creations Academy, FY18 Daycare Rehab
• Crisis Center, FY18 Food Bank Rehab
• Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County
o FY19 Aid to Agencies
o FY19 Siding Improvement
• Successful Living
o FY18 Rental Acquisition
o FY18 Rental Rehab
o FY19 Rental Acquisition
January 17
• Domestic Violence Intervention Program, FY19 Aid to Agencies
• Shelter House
o FY17 FUSE land acquisition and construction
o FY19 Aid to Agencies
o FY19 Rental Acquisition
• The Housing Fellowship
o FY17, FY18, and FY19 Rental Rehab
o FY19 Rental Acquisition
o FY19 CHDO Operating
• Habitat for Humanity
o FY17 Property acquisition and construction on N. Governor Street
o FY18 Property acquisition and construction on Blazing Star Drive
o FY19 Property acquisition and construction of 2 homes on Blazing Star Drive
February 21
• Mayor’s Youth Empowerment Program, FY19 Rental Acquisition
• Prelude, FY19 Transitional Housing Improvements
• Arthur Street Healthy Life Center, FY19 Clinic Rehab
• 4Cs, FY19 Daycare Technical Assistance
2
March 21
• City of Iowa City
o FY17 Tenant Based Rental Assistance
o FY18 and FY19 Park Improvements
o FY18 and FY19 Homeowner Rehab
o FY19 South District Investment Partnership
Item 7: Update on annual input for the 2016-2020 CITY STEPS Consolidated Plan
Every year, the City solicits input about its five-year Consolidate Plan, the current titled
2016-2020 CITY STEPS. This year staff is soliciting input regarding racial equity impacts.
Item 8: Update on Racial Equity Analysis for the South District Partnership
Staff has completed a review of the South District Partnership using the City’s Equity
Toolkit. We will go through the Toolkit review process and present our findings and
recommendation.
Item 9: Introduction to the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
Every five years, the City updates its Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing (AI) to ensure
compliance with the federal directive that entitlement communities affirmatively further fair
housing. This presentation will introduce the City’s current AI process, and provide an
opportunity for HCDC input.
Item 10: Consider approval of the FY18 Consolidated Annual Performance &
Evaluation Report (CAPER)* – online at www.icgov.org/actionplan
The CAPER is a HUD-required document that the City must submit to HUD within 90 days
of the end of the plan year. The report describes the federally funded activities undertaken
by the City and its partners, and the accomplishments for City Fiscal Year 2018 (federal
FY17). A draft of the CAPER is online at www.icgov.org/actionplan for your review and
comment. At this meeting, we will ask HCDC to approve the document for submission to
HUD.
Item 10: Staff/Commission Comment
3
Revised FY19 HCDC Calendar (as of 8/30/18)
Meetings typically held on the 3rd Thursday of each month
Meeting Date Agenda Items
July 10, 2018
(rescheduled) • Welcome new members
• Officer nomination
• Overview of HCDC/Neighborhood Services
• HOME additional funding round
• Aid to Agency process recommendation
• Affordable Housing Location Map memo
August 16, 2018 Meeting cancelled – Summer break
September 20, 2018 • Public meeting on CAPER
• Approval of FY18 CAPER
• Timeline review of 2016-2020 CITY STEPS
• Receive “Legacy” Aid to Agency funding applications for review
• Introduction to Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing process
October 11, 2018 • Fair Housing presentation by Human Rights
• Review CDBG projects without agreements
• Consolidated Plan amendment (if needed)
• Discuss commissioner ranking of Aid to Agency applications
• Evaluate and Recommend LITHC projects
November 15, 2018 • Update on projects that have not entered into a formal agreement
• Approve FY20 CDBG/HOME application forms
• Continue discussion on Aid to Agency applications
December 20, 2018 • Review Aid to Agency applications; Q & A with invited agencies
January 17, 2019 • Pro forma basics
• Aid to Agency budget recommendations to City Council
February 21, 2019 • Q & A discussion with FY20 CDBG/HOME applicants
March 21, 2019
(May reschedule due to Spring
Break)
• FY20 CDBG/HOME budget recommendation for housing and public facilities
to City Council
• Presentation on Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
April 18, 2019 • Review FY20 Annual Action Plan and recommendation to City Council
• Discuss projects not conforming with Unsuccessful/Delayed projects policy
• Adoption of Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
May 16, 2019 • Annual Action Plan (updates with funding)
• Introduction to 2021-2025 CITY STEPS process
• Discuss summer schedule (possible Summer Break in June)
June 20, 2019 TBD – Summer Break?
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
JULY 10, 2018 – 6:30 PM
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Megan Alter, Mitch Brouse, Charlie Eastham, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz,
Christine Harms, John McKinstry, Maria Padron and Paula Vaughan
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bob Lamkins
STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Erika Kubly, Tracy Hightshoe
OTHERS PRESENT: Sara Barron, Kari Wilken, Roger Lusala, Vicki Rush, Crissy Canganelli,
Erin Sullivan, Heath Brewer, Tracey Achenbach, Maryann Dennis
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends that the final recommendations for the Aid to Agencies
process discussed in the meeting and summarized prior to the motion be sent to Council for review and
approval.
By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends the FY19 Round 2 HOME Investment Partnerships
Program funds be allocated as follows: $4,000 to The Housing Fellowship for operating expenses,
$87,034 to The Housing Fellowship for rental rehabilitation, and $93,966 to Shelter House for the
Fairweather Lodge project.
By a vote of 8-0 the Commission recommends to modify the sentence in the Annexation Comprehensive
Plan Amendment beginning “In determining the most desirable option” to conclude with “preference shall
be weighted toward options that support economic, educational, and community building opportunities for
all residents and help achieve better socioeconomic balance among Iowa City neighborhoods and among
schools in the Iowa City Community School District.”
CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
Vaughn called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM and welcomed the new members Alter and Brouse.
APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 21, 2018 MINUTES:
Eastham moved to approve the minutes of June 21, 2018 with corrections. Fixmer-Oraiz seconded the
motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Sara Barron (Executive Director, Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) first welcomed Alter and
Brouse to HCDC, second she wanted to announce that the Affordable Housing Coalition is starting its
membership drive, July through September, and wanted to extend the invitation to members of HCDC. If
HCDC members are worried about quorum issues, they can become a nonvoting member to avoid any
conflicts. Finally Barron stated she came today straight from a meeting in Des Moines where they were
Housing and Community Development Commission
July 10, 2018
Page 2 of 8
having a meeting for a coalition that is forming across the state that is called The Iowa Housing
Partnership and they provide a summary of housing costs across the state. Barron shared that right now
in Johnson County the average hourly wage necessary to afford an honest fair-market rate two-bedroom
apartment is $18.32 per hour. Barron closed by saying thank you to the Commission for the work they
are doing to create reasonable affordable housing options in Iowa City.
NOMINATE AND ELECT OFFICERS:
McKinstry moved that Paula Vaughn be nominated chair and Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz be nominated as
vice chair, Harms seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0.
OVERVIEW OF HCDC PURPOSE, FUNDING SOURCES, AND SCHEDULE:
Kubly and Lehmann gave an overview of the purpose and funding sources for HCDC. Kubly began
reviewing the City’s Neighborhood Services Division, which is part of the Neighborhood and Development
Services. The Neighborhood Services Division in made up for four groups (1) Community Development
(2) Housing Authority (3) Housing Inspection Services and (4) Neighborhood Outreach. Most of the items
HCDC sees are through Community Development which administers CDBG, HOME and other similar
funding sources and policies (i.e. inclusionary housing, fee in lieu of, low income tax credits, etc.). They
also have housing rehab programs and the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership. The Housing Authority
assists over 1200 low income families to acquire and maintain affordable housing with rental and home
ownership programs. They have Housing Choice Vouchers, Veteran’s Housing Choice Vouchers, 81
Public Housing units, and also offer homeownership and family self -sufficiency programs. Housing
Inspection Services oversees rental permits and the Housing Code, inspecting over 4500 rental
properties and over 19,000 units. They also deal with complaints and nuisance issues (i.e. tall grass or
snow removal). Finally, Neighborhood Outreach coordinates 30-some neighborhood associations and
the Neighborhood Council program that seeks to improve neighborhoods.
Kubly explained that the CDBG program started with the Housing and Community Development Act of
1974, the goals include providing safety and sanitary housing, provide a suitable living environment and
expand economic opportunities. Iowa City receives these funds as an entitlement community because
we have a population greater than 50,000, so it receives annual grants from HUD. One key with CDBG is
that recipients must meet one of the three national objectives (1) benefit low- and moderate-income
persons (2) prevent or eliminate slums or blight and (3) assist with an urgent need (disaster situation).
The HOME Investment Partnership is the other main source of funding and it developed out of the
Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 and it also provides formula grants to
affordable housing activities such as rental and/or homeownership acquisition, rehabilitation, or
construction, in addition to direct rental assistance. Households that receive HUD assistance must be at
or below 80% of the area medium income and 90% of those must below 60% of the area medium
income. There are also numerous other requirements. Regarding this year’s funding, the City received
around $685,000 in CDBG and $585,000 in HOME funding. The City also contributes about $280,000 to
Aid to Agencies, which is enhance with CDBG funds, and they also contribute $200,000 to the GRIP
rehab program and $180,000 to the UniverCity program. While that is not all the City does, it provides a
few highlights. Kubly next shared the income and rent limits. Currently, a household of four in Iowa City
would have to make less than $69,600 to qualify for CDBG or HOME and a three bedroom home
maximum rent would be about $1400 per month.
Kubly noted they do a lot of planning and reporting related to the Federal funding, including the
Consolidated Plan (CITY STEPS) which is updated every five years. The most recent is CITY STEPS
2016-2020, and the City will begin updating that next year. It is a framework for community wide dialogue
to identify housing and community development priorities and is used to determine where the City will
allocate their federal entitlement funds. The priorities the Commission sees when they get applications for
funding (high, medium, low priorities) all come from Consolidated Plan. Kubly stated the Annual Action
Plan, which was just completed, is a summary of actions, resources and activiti es to address priorities
and goals in the Consolidated Plan each year, typically done 45 days before the start of the program
Housing and Community Development Commission
July 10, 2018
Page 3 of 8
year. The City is also required to do a CAPER which is a report at the end of the fiscal year that
assesses progress made towards achieving strategic plan goals and it is due 90 days after June 30. A
couple additional documents Staff will be working on are the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing,
which reviews laws, regulations and administration of policies, procedures and practices and how those
may affect the location availability and accessibility of housing. This is done every five years. It also
assesses conditions, both public and private, affecting fair housing choice for all protected classes and
assesses the availability of affordable, accessible housing in a range of unit sizes. The other document is
the Citizen Participation Plan which lays out public hearing requirements, amendments and adoption
procedures, and public comment periods to assure the City allows residents, particularly low income
residents, an opportunity to participate in the planning of how the City uses the funds.
Lehmann stated this review of policies and procedures is important to understand all the factors that go
into the allocation decisions. He then reviewed the FY19 Commission calendar which was included in the
agenda packet.
Eastham requested that during the Analysis of Impediments process the Commission be kept informed of
what the Staff is discovering and including as they go through the process and perhaps have some
chance for input on the final report. Lehmann agreed and noted his plan is to involved a steering
committee for the process and include some members of HCDC on that committee to help direct the
process. Hightshoe added that in the past consultants have been hired to help with the process, five
years ago the City hired The University of Iowa to assist, this is the first time they will be doing it all in-
house so they are working out the process.
REVIEW AND CONSIDER FINAL RECOMMENDATION FOR THE AID TO AGENCIES PROCESS:
Lehmann note the subcommittee drafted a memo to City Council (included in the agenda packet) that
HCDC can use to clarify any final items before the memo is ready to be sent to Council. In the memo,
highlighted items still need to be addressed. Some questions remaining include a discussion of emerging
agency funding and the size its set-aside, what the funding minimums will be, the criteria needed for
application materials, and finally what percentage to dedicate to high, medium, and low priorities.
Eastham stated the subcommittee recommended a set-aside for emerging agencies of $15,000 per year,
and he personally would be comfortable with that. Padron asked how many of last year’s applicants were
emerging versus legacy. Lehmann said six of the applicants last year were new. Vaughn noted if they do
the $15,000 that is divided as $5,000 minimum then they would be able to fund three agencies. She
added they should perhaps put in a contingency that if there are not three emerging applicants in a year
than the leftover funds should be allocated to legacy agencies. Eastham agreed noting any set-asides
that are not used should go back to the main allocation purposes. Fixmer-Oraiz stated HCDC could also
recommend allocating more than $5,000 to an emerging agency if the application deemed appropriate
and funding was available. Padron suggested it should be a percentage rather than set dollar amount for
the set-aside because if the federal allocations could go up or down significantly. Lehmann noted if using
a percentage, $15,000 would have been around 3.8% of this year’s funding allocation. Eastham agrees
that a percentage might be better. Fixmer-Oraiz said stating 5% would be fine, they just want to make
sure they are not taking a huge amount of funding away from the other agencies. Eastham noted it is
important to fund the emerging agencies so the community of agencies can keep growing.
The Commission next discussed if emerging agencies should have to have been funded for two years of
a five year period prior to being able to be considered for legacy funding. Or perhaps an agency must
have been in business for five years prior to being considered for legacy funding. Eastham feels it would
be hard for a new organization to maintain existence with unknown funding over a five year period.
Fixmer-Oraiz noted that the funding amounts for emerging agencies is not enough to make or break an
agency, it is just enough to help with a small project or simple things like office supplies, equipment, etc.
HCDC agreed on a 5% set-aside for emerging agencies, with minimum application amount of
$5,000. If not all set-aside funding is not used it will be used in legacy funding allocations.
Emerging agencies must be funded from emerging funds for two years prior to being able to apply
for legacy funding.
Housing and Community Development Commission
July 10, 2018
Page 4 of 8
Additionally the legacy funding will be guaranteed for a two-year period moving forward so they can plan
accordingly. Hightshoe noted that if funding is decreased significantly in year two, the allocations to each
legacy agency would be adjusted accordingly, that disclaimer would be made known to the agencies.
Eastham noted the amounts of federal funding haven’t changed drastically over the past few years.
Fixmer-Oraiz stated that when the subcommittee met with the agencies it was noted that these funds they
receive from the City are unrestricted and very beneficial to the agencies, even in the smaller amounts, so
the overall good of what HCDC is doing is important and with the updated application process it is more
streamlined and she feels the overall process is improved and beneficial for the agencies and not a
burden on staff.
Lehmann suggested there be staggering of legacy allocations in the first two years of this process
so that all legacy funding is not on the same cycle. Additionally legacy funding could be prorated
accordingly if funding has significant increase or decrease. Agencies must exist for a two-year
period and have received Aid to Agency funding in the past five-year period to be eligible for
legacy funding. HCDC agreed.
The next highlighted area to discuss concerned the dedication of percentages to high, medium and low
priorities to spread funding throughout the groups. Lehmann said the subcommittee suggested 60% to
high, 30% to medium and 10% to low and he looked at what the allocations in the past had been and it
came out to be around 63% to high priorities, 36% to medium and 1% to low, so perhaps low and medium
priorities should be together in one percentage group and just do a 60/40 split. Eastham suggested 70%
for high priority, there is a reason why they are listed in the high priority category. McKinstry agrees and
supports that suggestion. Fixmer-Oraiz also supports the 70% but would like to keep medium and low
priorities separated. Hightshoe raised the concern regarding setting these percentages and pigeonholing
allocations, perhaps there would not be a low priority application the Commission would deem
appropriate to fund in a given year, then what. Eastham said those percentages can be treated as set-
asides and if not used for medium or low priorities, could be used for high priorities. Brouse noted that
the historical allocations show this approximate percentage split so is there a need to set it. Fixmer-Oraiz
said the feeling was low priority applications would never get funded due to all the high and medium
priority applications and this was a way to acknowledge the low priorities are still priorities and should be
considered. McKinstry doesn’t feel these need to be hard and fast percentages, but rather just guidelines
of what HCDC is trying to accomplish and have some flexibility to follow the vision of the citizens and
community needs. Padron noted that one of the comments from meeting with the agencies was it
seemed as if HCDC was just funding agencies that all do the same work, so by splitting up the allocation
it may help give funding opportunities to other types of agencies. Lehmann noted that when reviewing
applications staff will make a first blush on what category each application fall s into and HCDC can agree
or move around the priority categories. By using language that these percentages are a guideline, then
they would not need the language regarding the number of points an application must have to be in
consideration.
HCDC agreed on setting a goal of an allocation split of 70% of funds to high priorities, and set-
aside 25% to medium and 5% to low priorities. If not all set-aside funding is not used it can be
used in other priority funding allocations.
The final area to discuss is the ranking criteria to be used. Eastham noted one change is Staff will be
making an initial recommendation of rankings of priority levels. Vaughn asked about “project will be
sustained after CDBG funds end”, if the funds are used for a repair project, it is a one-time project.
Hightshoe said that would be a public facility project (such as a rehab) and these are just for public
service funding (staff, utilities, etc.). Other points on the application were discussed and reviewed by the
Commission for clarification. There was discussion on whether leveraging should be a deciding factor for
the legacy agencies. Eastham noted he is not in favor of keeping leveraging as part of the scoring
criteria, all agencies will be applying and receiving funds from multiple sources, no agency can exist on
the City funding alone. Harms thinks it is good to ask what other funding sources an agency has and
expect to receive any given year. Fixmer-Oraiz stated as agencies move from emerging to legacy it may
be informative to have this information and could be helpful in decision making. Vaughn said that is often
something HCDC asks of the agencies when they come to present their applications.
Housing and Community Development Commission
July 10, 2018
Page 5 of 8
HCDC agreed the funding criteria questions will be answered as such: number 2.1 will remain,
number 2.3 will be sustained and number 3.1 be clarified as it is the area medium income amount.
Additionally the language will be changed from project to agency in the legacy application.
Eastham moved that the final recommendations for the Aid to Agencies process discussed in the
meeting and summarized prior to the motion be sent to Council for review and approval. Fixmer-
Oraiz seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0.
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING APPLICATIONS FOR THE FY19 ROUND 2
HOME INVESTMENT PART NERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME) FUNDING – applications available online at
http://www.icgov.org/actionplan :
Lehmann noted they had received two letters in advance, Habitat for Humanity as well as Mayor’s Youth
responded. He said when reviewing the applications it might be easiest to start where there are federal
requirements, and in this care there is a requirement that at least $87,034 go to a community housing
development organization, and that in this round, the only eligible housing development organization is
The Housing Fellowship. The $87,034 allocation cannot be for operation expenses, it has to be for the
production of units, which would include rental rehabilitation.
Eastham stated he would support allocating $87,034 to The Housing Fellowship for rental rehabilitation.
All other Commissioners agreed.
Vaughn then asked about the operating grant. Lehmann said there is a maximum for that, but The
Housing Fellowship’s request for the $8,000 for salary support is within that limit. This will be in addition
the funds already allocated to them for CHDO operating expenses.
Maryann Dennis (Executive Director, The Housing Fellowship) stated when discussing scoring the
application she thinks the CHDO operating score is used in the leveraging of the funds and for this project
The Housing Fellowship is putting in almost half a million dollars of their own money for operations. The
request for salary support for the CFO is because they have five separate audits each year to complete
each year and she doesn’t believe there is any other agency in Johnson County that does what they do
and any other agency that receives HOME funds and has five separate audits each year. Having so
many audits means the financial officer has be skilled.
Alter noted her question was to understand how to apply the application criteria to a situation where the
funds were not going directly for a project and rather a salary. Dennis agreed that scoring these
applications can be very difficult.
Eastham recommends funding for two projects. One is The Housing Fellowships rehab and the other is
the Shelter House Fairweather Lodge project. He recommends an allocation of $97,966 to the Shelter
House, as the Shelter House program as a clearly established purpose and fits in very well with the
needs of the community for group living. With regards to The Housing Fellowships CHDO operating
application, it is meritorious but this is supplemental funding and The Housing Fellowship received
$21,000 in operation funding in the earlier funding round. Harms agrees and feels the Shelter House
should be allocated the remaining funds. Padron and Brouse also agree.
Fixmer-Oraiz agrees the Shelter House project has great merit and deserves the funding, however would
like to allocate some funding, not necessarily the entire $8,000 to The Housing Fellowship operating
costs. McKinstry agrees and suggests to fill in the additional $4,000 that wasn’t part of the allocation in
the previous funding round.
Brouse moved that the FY19 Round 2 HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds be allocated
as follows: $4,000 to The Housing Fellowship for operating expenses, $87,034 to The Housing
Fellowship for rental rehabilitation, and $93,966 to Shelter House for the Fairweather Lodge
project, Harms seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0.
Housing and Community Development Commission
July 10, 2018
Page 6 of 8
CLARIFY REVIEW OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING LOCATION MODEL INTENT:
Hightshoe stated as the subcommittee drafts the memo to Council they need clarification from the
Commission on the specific questions being asked. The Commission indicated a need for racial equity
analysis or tool kit for the Affordable Housing Location Model, but is there a specific question to be
answered.
Eastham noted he wrote a brief memo that he circulated to the Commission and the question he is
interested in having answered is with the population currently within the Affordable Housing Location
Model current map areas, are those areas disproportionately black, Hispanic, and Asian resident. He
pointed out in his memo the equity tool kit application that Stephanie Bowers describes in her memo
could answer his question and go a step further to identify the impact and to ensure any negative impacts
are mitigated.
Fixmer-Oraiz was on the subcommittee as well and noted it became apparent there are overlays of policy
that are contradictory and impact where affordable housing is being located. Lehmann said that has
some clarity that he was unaware of earlier, because the Affordable Housing Location Model only affects
new general rental properties (it doesn’t affect projects for those with disabilities), there is also a fee in
lieu that developers can take for inclusionary zoning polices. This is in place because there is a lot of
land in southeast Iowa City that may be developed soon, but it is already heavily populated with low
income areas and the Affordable Housing Location Model won’t allow new general purpose rental units in
that location.
Eastham noted that census data does not show that the southern part of Iowa City is predominately low
income, it shows it is a bit different than the rest of Iowa City, but not drastically different. Eastham feels if
there was a more in-depth analysis of distribution of lower income students within currently established
school attendance areas, is actually less than percentage of students in those schools. The
Superintendent of Schools has directed the School Board to change the school’s enrollment policies so
families cannot so readily move from one attendance area to another attendance area. If that was done
then the free lunch program numbers at the schools would actually decrease. Eastham believes the
relationships between lower income residents and students in free lunch programs is not as
straightforward as it is portraying.
Hightshoe noted as staff that is not something they can change, the Council’s directive is to look at the
free lunch program in attendance areas as an indicator for the Affordable Housing Location Model.
Hightshoe also noted the fee in lieu policy is only for the inclusionary zoning in the Riverfront Crossings
District. If a fee in lieu of is proposed in an annexation it has to be approved by Council and then the fees
go into the affordable housing fund.
REIVEW ANNEXATION POLICY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT:
Hightshoe noted staff took this amendment to Council at the last meeting with regards to the annexation
policy and affordable housing goals. It was brought up in HCDC last month that perhaps the statem ent
should be noting there was a sentence the should be revised to have a positive tone and not negative
(removing the word burden). Mayor Throgmorton suggested the following amendment to modify the
sentence to “In determining the most desirable option preference shall be weighted toward options that
help achieve better socioeconomic balance among Iowa City neighborhoods and among schools in the
Iowa City Community School District.”
Eastham suggested an edit to the Mayors sentence and stated he feels it is important the wording
recognizes opportunities for people to live across the community as one and doesn’t divide it into
neighborhoods.
Eastham moved to modify the sentence beginning “In determining the most desirable option” to
conclude with “preference shall be weighted toward options that support economic, educational,
and community building opportunities for all residents and help achieve better socioeconomic
balance among Iowa City neighborhoods and among schools in the Iowa City Community School
District.” McKinstry seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0.
Housing and Community Development Commission
July 10, 2018
Page 7 of 8
STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT :
Lehmann noted there is no meeting in August.
Hightshoe announced the Best Health Symposium went well.
ADJOURNMENT:
McKinstry moved to adjourn. Alter seconded. Passed 8-0.
Housing and Community Development Commission
Attendance Record
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Vacant
Name Terms Exp. 8/17 9/21 10/30 11/16 12/18 1/23 2/15 3/15 4/19 5/24 6/21 7/10
Alter, Megan 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X
Brouse, Mitch 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X
Conger, Syndy 6/30/18 X X X O/E X X X X X X X --
Eastham, Charlie 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X
Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa 6/30/20 X X X X X X O/E X O/E X X X
Harms, Christine 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X X X X X
Lamkins, Bob 6/30/19 X O/E X O/E X X O/E X O/E X O/E O/E
McKinstry, John 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X X O/E X
Olmstead, Harry 6/30/18 X X O/E X X X X X X X X --
Padron, Maria 6/30/21 O/E X X X X X O/E O/E X X X X
Vaughan, Paula 6/30/19 X X X O/E X X X X X X X X
Date: September 12, 2018
To: Housing and Community Development Commission
From: Steven J. Rackis, Housing Administrator
Re: Amendments to the Iowa City Housing Authority’s (ICHA) Housing Choice Voucher Program
(HCVP) Administrative Plan.
Introduction:
The purpose of the HCVP Administrative Plan is to:
• Establish policies for issues not covered under Federal regulations for the HCVP and Family Self -
Sufficiency (FSS) programs administered by the ICHA.
• The provisions of this Administrative Plan govern administration of the HCVP and FSS programs
administered by the ICHA.
Background:
The need for affordable housing in Johnson County, Iowa, is well-documented, as is the lack of resources
to develop “brick and mortar” solutions to meet our county’s affordable housing demand. Absent “brick
and mortar” development, affordable housing providers need to maximize existing resources to make
housing affordable for very low-income, extremely low-income, and homeless individuals/households with
a disabling condition. To this end, the ICHA proposes creating a project-based voucher program (PBV) by
converting up to 100 tenant-based vouchers to PBV.
Amendment 1: Create a project-based voucher (PBV) program:
The ICHA manages the Federally-funded HCVP. These vouchers are “tenant-based,” meaning families can
use them to rent any private apartment that meets program guidelines. PBV vouchers, in contrast, are
attached to a specific unit whose landlord contracts with the local public housing agency to rent the unit to
low-income families. Families in both programs contribute 30 percent of their income for rent and utilities;
the voucher pays the difference between the tenant contribution and the unit’s total rent and utility costs.
Benefits of the Iowa City Housing Authority’s PBV program:
1. Provide supportive services to voucher tenants. Some tenants, like the chronically homeless,
elderly, and people with disabilities, might need additional services to maintain stable housing and
their health. Attaching PBVs to a number of units in the same property can enable service providers
to work more efficiently with residents and improve access to services. PBVs are particularly well
suited to create permanent supportive housing.
2. Help families secure units where it may be hard to use vouchers. Living in lower-poverty
neighborhoods can benefit both voucher holders and their children, but families with vouchers may
be unfamiliar with such neighborhoods or have difficulty finding willing landlords, or their voucher
may not pay the going rent in these neighborhoods. In neighborhoods with low vacancy rates, stiff
competition for available units exacerbates these problems. PBVs lower many of those barriers by
creating dedicated units for low-income families.
Goals of the Iowa City Housing Authority’s PBV program:
1. Collaborate with local agencies participating in the Continuum of Care/Coordinated Entry service
delivery system to promote the development of Permanent Supportive Housing options and ensure
prioritization of placement for individuals/households demonstrating highest need.
2. Provide incentives to affordable housing developers to build scattered site housing for extremely
low-income and very low-income families on land “banked” by the City of Iowa City.
Amendment 2: Replace Chapter 5.2 Preferences with Chapter 5.2.1 Primary Preferences and
Chapter 5.2.2 Secondary/Targeted Preferences:
Chapter 5.2.1 Primary Preferences:
This is a non-substantive title change with no modifications to ICHA’s HCVP Primary Preferences. When
processing applications for eligibility, ICHA will continue to prioritize families with children under the age
of 18 or elderly or disabled families who are residents (have a legal domicile or work) in our jurisdiction.
Chapter 5.2.2 Secondary/Targeted Preferences:
This is a non-substantive title change with one modification: Replace individuals referred by Housing First
FUSE with individuals referred by Shelter House for HUD funded Permanent Supportive Housing (e.g.,
Fairweather Lodge, Cross Park Place).
Action:
The ICHA requests that the City of Iowa City Housing and Community Development Commission
considers and recommends these amendments for City Council consideration.
1
2
Equity Impact Review Toolkit
This tool, which consists of 3 Stages, will offer a systematic way of gathering information to inform
planning and decision-making about public policies, services and programs which impact equity in Iowa
City. The 3 Stages are as follows:
Stage I What is the impact of the proposal on determinants of equity?
The aim of the first stage is to determine whether the proposal will have an impact on equity or not.
Stage II Assessment: Who is affected?
This stage identifies who is likely to be affected by the proposal.
Stage III Impact review : Opportunities for action.
The third stage involves identifying the impacts of the proposal from an equity perspective. The goal is
to develop a list of likely impacts and actions to ensure that negative impacts are mitigated and positive
impacts are enhanced.
3
Stage I: Selecting a policy, procedure, program
or service.
To be effective, a policy, procedure, program or service should impact a determinant(s) of
equity?
Department and/or division: Neighborhood & Development Services
What is the policy, procedure, program or service?
South District Home Investment Partnership Program
A. Describe the proposal (include objectives and general geographic area of focus):
The City plans to purchase two rental duplexes on Taylor Drive/Davis Street, rehabilitate the homes and sell the
improved homes to income eligible homebuyers at a price point comparable to the cost of renting the homes.
B. Why is this being selected to evaluate?
This evaluation was requested by the Housing & Community Development Commission to review racial equity
implications of the program.
The Taylor/Davis area is being selected for the South District Partnership due to nuisance complaints, police calls,
and stagnant property values.
C. What are the intended outcomes?
The intended outcome of the program is to encourage reinvestment in the housing stock, increase
homeownership opportunities, and promote neighborhood stabilization. Homeownership can provide a number
of social and financial benefits for households, including better health outcomes and higher test scores in
children.1
1 https://www.forbes.com/sites/lawrenceyun/2016/08/12/why-homeownership-matters/#6588d177480f
4
Stage I: Highlight or check the determinant(s) of equity that may be affected by the proposal.
If the proposal does not have any possible effect on a determinant of equity, another policy,
procedure, program or service should be selected.
Equity in City practices that eliminates all forms of discrimination in city activities in order to provide
fair treatment for all employees, contractors, clients, community partners, residents and others who interact
with the City;
Jobs that provide all residents with the knowledge and skills to compete in a diverse workf orce and
with the ability to make sufficient income for the purchase of basic necessities to support them and their
families;
x Community economic development that supports local ownership of assets, including homes and
businesses, and assures f air access for all to business development and retention opportunities;
x Housing for all people that is safe, affordable, high quality and healthy;
Education that is high quality and culturally appropriate and allows each student to reach his or her
full learning and career potential;
Early childhood development that supports nurturing relationships, high-quality affordable child care
and early learning opportunities that promote optimal early childhood development and school readiness
for all children;
Healthy built and natural environments for all people that includes mixes of land use that support:
jobs, housing, amenities and services; trees and forest canopy; clean air, water, soil and sediment;
Community and public safety that includes services such as fire, police, emergency medical services
and code enforcement that are responsive to all residents so that everyone f eels safe to live, work and
play in any neighborhood;
A law and justice system that provides equitable access and fair treatment for all;
Neighborhoods that support all communities and individuals through strong social networks, trust
among neighbors and the ability to work together to achieve common goals that improve the quality of life
for everyone in the neighborhood;
Transportation that provides everyone with safe, efficient, affordable, convenient and reliable mobility
options including public transit, walking, carpooling and biking.
Food systems that support local food production and provide access to affordable, healthy, and
culturally appropriate foods f or all people;
Parks and natural resources that provide access for all people to safe, clean and quality outdoor
spaces, facilities and activities that appeal to the interests of all communities; and
Health and human services that are high quality, affordable and culturally appropriate and support
the optimal well-being of all people;
Proceed to Stage II
5
Stage II: Equity Assessment.
This stage identifies who is likely to be affected by the proposal by using data to identify the population
group(s) that may experience a differential impact. At the end of this stage, you will be able to identify
which communities will benefit and which communities are burdened. For example, are the impacts
disproportionately greater for communities of color, communities that are low income, or limited
English proficiency? Detailed descriptions using maps, charts, tables, or graphs work best for this
assessment.
Some of the following resources may assist in determining who may be impacted.
Iowa City Census data;
Geographic Information System Mapping Technology;
Department or division specific data;
Data on consumers of services;
Data on community partners or contractors who provide services (they may also be a source
of data);
Surveying community members;
Relevant research or literature.
Highlight or check the type of proposal:
☐ A city-wide proposal If yes: Go to S.II.A.1
X A proposal focused on a specific geographic area If yes: Go to S.II.A.2
☐ A capital project If yes: Go to S.II.A.3
☐ A proposal focused on a special population If yes: Go to S.II.A.4
☐ An internal city proposal If yes: Go to S.II.A.5
Stage II – A. Who is Affected?
S.II.A.1. IF CITY-W IDE PROPOSALS: identify population characteristics and maps relevant to the
population most directly affected (attach maps or other data as necessary).
[When S.II.A.1 is complete, proceed to S.II.B.1]
6
S.II.A.2. IF SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIC REGION(S): identify the demographics of the area, particularly by
race/ethnicity, income level and limited English proficiency (attach maps or other data as
necessary).
Race & Ethnicity - Data on race and ethnicity is available at the Census Block level from the 2010 Census. Blocks
2002, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 were selected to represent Taylor/Davis Streets. (Note: 2016 Census data is
available at the Block Group level, however this includes a broader area than the proposed project.)
Census Blocks Representing the Taylor/Davis Area
The table below shows that the Taylor/Davis area has a higher portion of Black or African American residents
compared to Iowa City as a whole.
Selected
Block
Groups
Percent
of Total
Iowa City,
IA
Percent
of Total
Total population: 1,126
67,862
White alone 583 51.8% 56,004 82.5%
Black or African American
alone
389 34.6% 3,912 5.8%
American Indian and Alaska
Native alone
1 0.1% 144 0.2%
Asian alone 27 2.4% 4,680 6.9%
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander alone
1 0.1% 28 0.0%
Some Other Race alone 70 6.2% 1,395 2.1%
Two or More Races 55 4.9% 1,699 2.5%
Not Hispanic or Latino 989 87.8% 64,235 94.7%
Hispanic or Latino 137 12.2% 3,627 5.3%
7
Rental vs. Owner-occupied
The Taylor/Davis project area consists primarily of rental duplex units. There are 96 total parcels, including 94
duplexes and two single-family homes, which amounts to 188 units. Based on rental housing permit data, 168 of
the 188 or 89.4% of total units are rentals. The scope of the proposed project (4 units) would reduce the
percentage of rentals in the area to 87.2%.
8
Housing Tenure by Race
The Taylor/Davis area is located within Block Group 2 of Census Tract 18.02. shown below. Housing tenure by
race is shown in the table below. In this Census Block Group 63% of the White population owns their home,
while only 9% of the Black or African American population owns.
Population in Occupied Housing Units by Tenure
Block Group 2, Census Tract 18.02 Iowa City, IA
Rent Own Total % Own % Own
White 352 594 946 63% 54%
Black or African-
American
374 37 411 9%
17%
American Indian or
Alaska Native
2 6 8 75% 36%
Asian 24 22 46 48% 39%
Native Hawaiian or
Pacific Islander
0 0 0 - 60%
Some Other Race 50 57 107 53% 47%
Two or More Races 34 6 40 15% 32%
Assessed Values
There are 71 rental duplex properties located within the proposed project area. Staff reviewed property
assessment values from 2008-2018 and found that 22 properties increased in value and 49 decreased. The
average change in assessment over the past ten years is -$2,420.
Housing Choice Vouchers
According to the Iowa City Housing Authority, there are 25 households in the Taylor/Davis area who receive
assistance through Housing Choice Vouchers. Ten of those households may be able to obtain a loan based on
income level.
9
Neighborhood Outreach/Interviews
South District Neighborhood Meeting
Staff attended a South District Neighborhood meeting on July 10, 2018 to discuss the proposed project and ask
for feedback from resident attendees. Four residents in the South District were in attendance along with city
staff and police officers. The comments received from residents are as follows:
• Would like to see a balance of renter and owner-occupied properties.
• Minimize displacement of residents.
• One person indicated that owner-occupancy is the best situation, while another had concerns with
owner-occupancy because if there is a nuisance, the City may not have as much authority to abate the
nuisance (deny the rental permit).
• Suggested a program where the owner lives on one side of the duplex and rents out the other side.
Neighborhood Walk-Through
On Wednesday, August 22, 2018, Henry Harper (Community Outreach Assistant) and Tracy Hightshoe (NDS
Director) walked the neighborhood and met with 10 households (11 adult residents) living on Taylor Drive or
Davis Street.
Question posed: The City received funds to assist with housing quality in the City. The City plans to use these
funds specifically for Taylor Drive and/or Davis Street. Which of the two housing activities would neighbors
prefer?
1. Rental rehabilitation where the City would work with the landlord to remodel/make repairs to homes
and the City would require that the landlord couldn’t raise rents for a specific period of time, or
2. Homeownership where the City would buy two duplexes (4 homes), make repairs/remodel and sell the
homes at approximately what it takes to rent the homes – goal would be about $850/month if possible.
Household Responses:
• 6 preferred homeownership
• 2 preferred rental
• 2 OK with both as long as investing in this neighborhood
Of the adult neighbors, 9 were black (seven women, two men), 2 were white (one man, one woman).
Additional comments:
• Many stated they had always wanted their own home. One stated that if you are a homeowner you are
more apt to care about the home and surrounding neighborhood.
• One stated some landlords didn’t care who they rented to and sometimes leased to bad tenants.
• A couple were concerned about credit scores and the need to improve their credit to be eligible to
purchase a home.
• One resident stated she would love if we purchased her home so she would have an opportunity to
purchase instead of rent. She had lived in the same home for years.
• One noted a concern about making repairs. She preferred renting as her landlord was responsive to
service calls.
• Residents were asked if they had any concerns about homeownership and converting from rental. No
one noted concerns about gentrification. A couple asked what was the process. If the unit wasn’t vacant
or with tenants who already planned to move, the City would provide relocation (moving expenses and
10
payment of increased rent, for a set number of years, for a comparable home, ideally in the same
neighborhood) for a home the City planned to purchase. No one noted a concern and felt you could find
another place in the neighborhood. One expressed an interest in moving to another neighborhood.
Most people had a preference, but either way, they were very happy the City wanted to invest in this
neighborhood. We also received a comment that there need to be more activities in the area for local youth.
[When S.II.A.1 is complete, proceed to S.II.B.2]
S.II.A.3. IF CAPITAL PROJECT: identify both population characteristics and maps relevant to the entire
City, as well as geographic areas or specific populations that are specifically targeted in this
proposal (attach maps or other data as necessary).
[When S.II.A.3 is complete, proceed to S.II.B.3]
S.II.A.4. IF SPECIAL POPULATION(S) (not defined geographically): identify the demographics of the
population, particularly by race/ethnicity, income level and limited English proficiency (attach
maps or other data as necessary).
[When S.II.A.4 is complete, proceed to S.II.B.1]
S.II.A.5. IF INTERNAL CITY PROPOSAL: identify the demographics of the department, division, or area
of focus for the proposal, particularly by race/ethnicity and income level as the data is available.
[When S.II.A.4 is complete, proceed to S.II.B.1]
11
Stage II - B. Analysis.
Using the assessment information above, review and interpret your findings to determine which population
group(s) will benefit and which will not. (These are the groups identified above in responses to SII.A.1, 2,
3, or 4). Any research, data, analysis and community feedback would be placed here.
S.II.B.1. Please list race/ethnicity and low-income groups positively or negatively affected by the proposal.
S.II.B.2. If the proposal is not city-wide, provide information for why you selected this geographic area
instead of other areas of the City where the impact on low-income communities, communities of color,
and LEP communities may be equal or greater.
The Taylor/Davis area was selected for neighborhood stabilization and to provide the opportunity for
homeownership at an affordable price point. It is estimated that homes sold through this program will be priced
between $90,000-$125,000, which would allow for a monthly housing payment that is less than the HOME Fair
Market Rent. Due to land and housing costs, this would not be possible in other areas of the community without
significant additional subsidy. The City hopes that residents from the neighborhood will be able to purchase the
homes. The program’s goal is to sell the homes at a price point that is not readily available in Iowa City so that
households who have not been able to afford a home previously may now be able to purchase their own home.
The neighborhood was also selected to encourage reinvestment in housing and to address stagnant property
values. The City hopes to duplicate the outcome of the UniverCity program in the Douglass Court neighborhood.
Since 2011, ten homes in the Douglass Court/Douglass Street neighborhood were purchased, renovated and sold
as affordable homeownership. Property values were in decline before the program. As of 2018, property values
have increased by more than $590,000 since 2011.
Douglass Court Neighborhood Assessed Values
2006 2011 2018
$4,104,800 $4,004,220 $4,595,900
Change ($100,850) $591,680
S.II.B.3. For capital projects, will this project have a negative or positive impact on the surrounding
community or increase the current burdens to that community? (YES or NO) If yes, please describe.
Proceed to Stage III
12
Stage III: Actions to mitigate/enhance negative/positive
impact.
This stage involves identifying the impacts of the proposal from an equity perspective. The goal is to
develop a list of likely impacts and actions to ensure that negative impacts are mitigated and positive
impacts are enhanced.
Complete Column 1 of the Stage III.A Worksheet by using the responses listed in Stage II.B.1, B.2,
or B.3.
Columns 2 and 3 are a detailed discussion of the positive and negative impacts of the proposal on
the identified population by groups, for example, race/ethnicity, or income and limited English
speakers. In Column 4, describe any recommendations or actions which arise from your discussions
about impact.
These might include:
• W ays in which the program/policy could be modified to enhance positive impacts, to reduce
negative impacts f or identified population groups;
• W ays in which benefits of modifying program/policy to remove differential impacts outweigh
the costs or disadvantages of doing so;
• W ays in which existing partnerships could be strengthened to benefit the most affected.
p. 8
Stage III.A. WORKSHEET
(1)
Population(s)
Affected
Disproportionately
(populations from S.II.B.1 list)
(2)
Describe
Potential Positive Impact
(Beneficial)
(3)
Describe
Potential Negative Impact
(Adverse)
(4)
Actions to enhance positive or
mitigate negative/other comments
(these responses also complete the first
colum n of S.III.B worksheet)
• Black or African American
residents
• Hispanic residents
• Low income residents
• Renters
• Affordable
homeownership
opportunities
• Neighborhood
improvements (housing
quality, fewer housing
code violations, reduced
police calls and nuisance
complaints, increased
property values)
• Displacement of current
residents
• Gentrification - current
residents will no longer be able
to afford living in the
neighborhood.
• Preference for acquisition of
vacant properties to avoid
tenant displacement
• Provide relocation assistance if
properties are not vacant and
occupied by tenants
• Limit number of properties in
program
• Prioritize current residents in the
South District for
homeownership opportunities
• Partner with Community
Outreach Assistant &
Neighborhood Assoc. for
ongoing communication with
neighborhood residents
Proceed to Stage III.B
p. 9
Stage III.B: Prioritization of Actions.
In this stage, participants are encouraged to prioritize or rank the actions based on the likelihood
to impact equity. It may prove impossible to consider all potential impacts and identified actions.
For each of the actions the following should be considered:
The costs of the action;
Is the impact on equity high or low;
What needs to happen to increase the feasibility of the action;
What other resources are needed;
Who will implement the action;
The timing of the actions.
All Actions listed in Stage III.A will be high priority.
Proceed to Stage III.C
p. 10
Stage III.C: Recommendation(s) and Rationale.
The goal of Stage III.C is to propose a set of recommendations for modifying the proposal. When
modifications are not possible, the option of not proceeding with the proposal needs to be addressed.
Occasionally, it is possible to find a single, clear solution which will provide the optimum impact. However,
in most cases a series of options will be def ined and presented. Recommendations should be prioritized
as appropriate.
S.III.C.1. Based on your review of actions in Stage III.B, please list your recommendations for the
policy/program and why you chose them. Please describe the next steps for implementation.
Based on the Equity Toolkit review of the South District Home Investment Partnership Program, staff
recommends proceeding with the project as proposed with the following actions:
1. Pursue vacant properties or properties where the tenant has indicated they are not renewing the lease
to limit displacement of tenants.
2. Provide relocation assistance to any tenants displaced by acquisition of properties through the program
according to the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as
amended (URA).
o This includes giving proper notice to tenants (minimum 90-day notice), providing payments for
moving expenses, and providing replacement housing payments for rental assistance of a
comparable unit if more expensive than the displaced unit.
o Ensure that no individual or family is displaced unless decent, safe and sanitary housing is
available within the displaced person’s financial means.
o Work with the tenant to lessen the emotional and financial impact of displacement. For
example, assist the tenant in finding a comparable residence near their work or within the same
school district if they desire.
3. Give current residents of the South District neighborhoods preference in purchasing renovated homes.
4. Continue to work with Henry Harper, Community Outreach Assistant, and the South District
Neighborhood Association to communicate with residents about program progress and ownership
opportunities.
5. Seek partnerships with Horizons and Habitat for classes on consumer credit and basic home
maintenance for those interested in this program.
6. Look for additional funds to pursue continued investment in this neighborhood (in no case will the City
assist with rental conversions of more than 35% of the total homes on Taylor and Davis to
ensure/preserve affordable rental opportunities).
7. Review the Equity Toolkit prior to undertaking any additional phases of the program in the future.
S.III.C.2. Who participated in the equity impact review process?
• City Staff
o Tracy Hightshoe, NDS Director
o Erika Kubly, Neighborhood Services Coordinator
o Kirk Lehmann, Community Development Planner
o Steve Rackis, Housing Administrator
p. 11
o Stan Laverman, Senior Housing Inspector
o Stefanie Bowers, Equity Director and Human Rights Coordinator
o Henry Harper, Community Outreach Assistant
• Johnson County Assessor’s Office
• South District Neighborhood Association
• Residents of the Taylor Drive/Davis Street area (see Stage 2 neighborhood outreach)
S.IV.C.3. Is the recommendation realistic, adequately funded, with mechanisms to ensure
successful implementation? Are there provisions to ensure ongoing data collection, public
reporting, and community participation?
Federal HOME dollars have been allocated to the project as proposed. The project shall comply with federal
HOME requirements, including relocation if necessary. City staff will complete reporting requirements and
ensure opportunities for neighborhood participation if changes are made to the program in the future. City staff
will also track data including number of housing code complaints, police calls, and property values over time for
this neighborhood.
Currently, the City only has enough funds to renovate two duplexes (four homes). This represents 2% of the
homes in the neighborhood. While not statistically significant, the hope of the program is to encourage
reinvestment in the neighborhood over time for both rental properties and to create affordable homeownership
opportunities.
S.V.C.4. What are the success indicators and progress benchmarks?
Success Indicators:
• No displacement of current residents who wish to remain in the neighborhood.
o If a household is displaced, the appropriate relocation assistance is provided.
• Provide homeownership opportunities to residents with low incomes and increase the diversity of
homeownership in the South District. Currently 63% of white people in the South District own their homes
compared to 9% of non-white households (data includes Block Group 2, Census Tract 18.02).
• Increase communication and trust between neighborhood residents and City
• Neighborhood stabilization
o Decreased housing complaints
o Decreased police calls
o Increased property values
o Fewer housing code violations
Progress will be evaluated as each property is made available to residents and at the completion of the proposed
project. Any additional feedback from the neighborhood during the project will be taken into consideration.
Additional information for this toolkit was taken from the Diversity and Inclusion Toolkit produced by the Better Bridges Institute.
City of Iowa City
Consolidated Annual Performance & Evaluation Report
Federal Fiscal Year 2017 (City Fiscal Year 2018)
Neighborhood and Development Services
CDBG - Community Development Block Grant
HOME - HOME Investment Partnerships Funds
Neighborhood Services
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
hone: 319.356.5230
www.icgov.org/commdev
Version: September 2018
Adopted: TBD
City Council of Iowa City, Iowa
Jim Throgmorton, Mayor
Pauline Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem
Rockne Cole
Susan Mims
Mazahir Salih
John Thomas
Housing and Community Development Commission
Paula Vaughan, Chair
Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz, Vice-Chair
Megan Alter
Mitchell Brouse
Charles Eastham
Christine Harms
Bob Lamkins
John McKinstry
Maria Padron
Neighborhood & Development Services
Tracy Hightshoe, Neighborhood and Development Services Director
Erika Kubly, Neighborhood Services Coordinator
Kirk Lehmann, Community Development Planner
CAPER 1
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-05 - Goals and Outcomes
Progress the jurisdiction has made in carrying out its strategic plan and its action plan.
91.520(a)
This could be an overview that includes major initiatives and highlights that were proposed and
executed throughout the program year.
Assessment of Five–Year Goals and Objectives
The majority of the projects described in this report are carried out by local organizations in partnership
with the City. All Annual Action Plan projects are consistent in addressing the needs identified in the
CITY STEPS Consolidated Plan. Each year the City, Housing and Community Development Commission
(HCDC), and staff work to meet the five-year goals of CITY STEPS through the annual allocations of CDBG
and HOME funds.
In accordance with the main priorities outlined in CITY STEPS, the City utilized CDBG and/or HOME funds
in the following ways:
1) Provide housing opportunities that are decent and affordable.
In Federal Fiscal Year 2017 (City Fiscal Year 2018), the City of Iowa City allocated funds to housing
projects to provide new and/or improved permanent housing opportunities for low- and moderate-
income households in Iowa City. The recipients were:
• City of Iowa City – Owner-occupied housing rehabilitation with CDBG and HOME
• The Housing Fellowship - CHDO Operations
• The Housing Fellowship – Rental rehabilitation of four units
• Successful Living – Rental acquisition of one property providing 4 SRO units (Hollywood)
• Habitat for Humanity - Property acquisition for one new homeowner unit (Blazing Star)
• Mayors Youth Empowerment Program - Rental acquisition of one property providing three SRO
units (Downey)
• Successful Living – Rental rehabilitation of one property providing five SRO units (N. Johnson)
2) Provide a Suitable Living Environment
Public Facilities
• Mayors Youth Empowerment Program – paving of new facility parking area to increase access to
services and increase attractiveness
• Little Creations Academy – renovations to increase the capacity and comfort of the day care
• Crisis Center – interior renovations to increase the capacity of the food bank
• Villa Park – a new playground and trails to increase access and enjoyment of the park
CAPER 2
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Public Services
• Shelter House – operating expenses for homeless shelter services
• Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County – licensed day care for low income children
• Domestic Violence Intervention Program – shelter operations (homeless activity)
3) Expand Economic Opportunities
CDBG Economic Development Fund was created to stimulate private sector investment that results in
the creation of permanent, private sector jobs with living wages for low-to-moderate income persons in
Iowa City. The City received no CDBG Economic Development Fund applications in FFY17 (CFY18). The
City currently plans to continue offering this fund, but may move towards providing technical assistance
in the future as many individuals interested in utilizing the funds are not yet ready to begin a business,
and need additional guidance.
The tables below show some accomplishment data for the program year a nd strategic plan to-date,
though they are auto-generated by HUD's Integrated Dispersement and Information System. The se
attached tables further provide data that supplements and clarifies this information:
• CITY STEPS Outcome Tracking Through City Fiscal Year 2018 (Federal Fiscal Year 2017)
• Annual Action Plan Outcome Tracking City Fiscal Year 2018 (Federal Fiscal Year 2017)
• Activities Completed in City Fiscal Year 2018 (Federal Fiscal Year 2017)
• Activities Underway in City Fiscal Year 2018 (Federal Fiscal Year 2017)
CAPER 3
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Comparison of the proposed versus actual outcomes for each outcome measure submitted with the consolidated plan and
explain, if applicable, why progress was not made toward meeting goals and objectives. 91.520(g)
Categories, priority levels, funding sources and amounts, outcomes/objectives, goal outcome indicators, units of measure, tar gets, actual
outcomes/outputs, and percentage completed for each of the grantee’s program year goals.
Goal Category Source /
Amount
in FFY17
Indicator Unit of
Measure
Strategic Plan Program Year
Expected Actual Percent
Complete
Expected Actual Percent
Complete
Improve
access to
affordable
owner housing
Affordable
Housing
HOME:
$70,000
Direct Financial
Assistance to
Homebuyers
Households
Assisted 5 4 80.00% 0 0
Improve
access to
affordable
renter housing
Affordable
Housing
Homeless
HOME:
$40,250
Tenant-based rental
assistance / Rapid
Rehousing
Households
Assisted 50 41 82.00% 0 41
Improve and
maintain
public facilities
Public and
neighborhood
facility
improvement
CDBG:
$103,852
Public Facility or
Infrastructure
Activities other than
LMI Housing Benefit
Persons
Assisted 0 2,420 12,319 802 6.51%
Other Other 8 4 50.00% 0 2
Improve
quality of
affordable
rental units
Affordable
Housing
Homeless
CDBG:
$30,000
/ HOME:
$22,387
Rental units
rehabilitated
Housing
Unit 18 2 11.11% 10 0 0.00%
Improve the
quality of
owner housing
Affordable
Housing
CDBG:
$208,174
/ HOME:
$44,595
/ Local:
$118,901
Homeowner
Housing
Rehabilitated
Housing
Unit 90 66 73.33% 22 22 100.00%
CAPER 4
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Improve/
maintain
public
infrastructure/
amenities
Public and
neighborhood
facility
improvement
CDBG:
$89,730
Public Facility or
Infrastructure
Activities other than
LMI Housing Benefit
Persons
Assisted 0 85,755 300 12,985 4,328.33%
Other Other 10 4 40.00% 0 1
Increase the
supply of
affordable
rental housing
Affordable
Housing
CDBG:
$50,000
/ HOME:
$365,000
Public Facility or
Infrastructure
Activities for LMI
Housing Benefit
Households
Assisted 0 15 8 12 150.00%
Rental units
constructed
Housing
Unit 10 0 0.00% 0 0
Planning and
administration
Program
admin
CDBG:
$108,451
/ HOME:
$40,923
Other Other 1 1 100.00% 1 1 100.00%
Provide public
services
Non-
Homeless
Special Needs
CDBG:
$97,700
Public Facility or
Infrastructure
Activities other than
LMI Housing Benefit
Persons
Assisted 0 8,450 1,070 2,497 233.36%
Other Other 15 9 60.00% 0 3
Remove slum
and blight
Non-Housing
Community
Development
CDBG:
$0
Facade
treatment/business
building
rehabilitation
Businesses
Assisted 6 4 66.67% 0 1
Strengthen
economic
development
Non-Housing
Community
Development
CDBG:
$22,852 Businesses assisted Businesses
Assisted 5 17 340.00% 2 16 800.00%
Table 1 - Accomplishments – Program Year & Strategic Plan to Date
CAPER 5
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Assess how the jurisdiction’s use of funds, particularly CDBG, addresses the priorities and
specific objectives identified in the plan, giving special attention to the highest priority
activities identified.
The activities undertaken by the City of Iowa City in the fiscal year are consistent with the documented
priorities established in the 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan (CITY STEPS) for both HOME and CDBG. The
priorities, goals and objectives of the CITY STEPS Plan are designed to assist lower income citizens
needing housing, jobs and services. As such, the priorities established within our CITY STEPS Plan and
relevant activities completed in this reporting year with CDBG/HOME funds are as follows:
• Expanding Affordable Rental and Homeowner Housing Opportunities
• The Housing Fellowship Sabin Townhomes
• The Housing Fellowship Community Housing Development Organization Operating Funds
• Mayor’s Youth Empowerment Program Acquisition of Downey
• Mayor’s Youth Empowerment Program Acquisition of Dartmouth and Raven
• Preserving Existing Affordable Rental and Homeowner Housing Units
• CDBG Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation
• HOME Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation
• Housing and Related Services for the Homeless and Those at Risk of Homelessness
• Shelter House Rapid Rehousing
• Public Facility Improvements
• Mayor’s Youth Empowerment Program Public Facility Improvements
• Arc of Southeast Iowa Public Facility Rehabilitation
• Public Service Activities
• Shelter House Aid to Agencies (also fits under Housing and Related Services for the
Homeless and Those at Risk of Homelessness)
• Domestic Violence Intervention Program Aid to Agencies (also fits under Housing and
Related Services for the Homeless and Those at Risk of Homelessness)
• Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County Aid to Agencies
• Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement
• Wetherby Park Sports Court Improvements
• Economic Development Initiatives
• 4Cs Childcare Techical Assistance for Microenterprises
• Airliner Façade Improvements
• Planning & Administration
• HOME Administration
• CDBG Administration
While this list includes activities completed this year, ongoing projects also align with these priorities.
They will be reported in subsequent CAPERs in the year when they are completed.
CAPER 6
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 7
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 8
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 9
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 10
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 11
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-10 - Racial and Ethnic composition of families assisted
Describe the families assisted (including the racial and ethnic status of families assisted).
91.520(a)
CDBG HOME
White 4,217 15
Black or African American 2,912 6
Asian 126 0
American Indian or American Native 60 0
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 10 0
Total 7,325 21
Hispanic 904 11
Not Hispanic 6,421 10
Table 2 – Table of assistance to racial and ethnic populations by source of funds
Narrative
As required by HUD, the City of Iowa City and its subrecipients (public and private) follow affirmative
marketing rules. The City’s Affirmative Marketing Plan is attached. Both public and private subrecipients
of HOME funds are also required to follow the affirmative marketing requirements in 24 CFR 92.351.
City staff reviews these efforts during annual monitoring visits. An evaluation of these efforts shows that
both the City and its subrecipients have met HUD requirements. Note, the above table is auto-generated
from HUD's Integrated Dispersement and Information System. The table below further provides data
that suplements and clarifies this information, and is used as the basis for the conclusions drawn.
Beneficary data suggests that the City of Iowa City and its subrecipients successfully market to
minorities. According to the 2016 American Community Survey 5-Year estimates, approximately 76
percent of Iowa City’s population is non-Hispanic white, compared to only 47 percent of CDBG
beneficiaries and 30 percent of HOME beneficiaries for projects completed in FFY17. Similarly, 6 percent
of Iowa City’s population is Hispanic, compared to 9 percent of CDBG beneficiaries and 10 percent of
HOME beneficiaries for projects completed in FFY17. The City and subrecipients will continue to
encourage everyone, including minority groups, to take advantage of CDBG- and HOME-assisted public
services, public facilities, infrastructure, and housing.
CAPER 12
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 13
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-15 - Resources and Investments 91.520(a)
Identify the resources made available
Source of Funds Source Resources Made
Available
Amount Expended
During Program Year
CDBG CDBG 664,925 660,758
HOME HOME 607,009 583,156
HOPWA HOPWA
ESG ESG
Other Other 200,000 118,901
Table 3 - Resources Made Available
Narrative
In FFY 2017 (CFY 2018), the City had approximately $664,925 in CDBG funds, $607,009 in HOME funds,
and $200,000 in general funds made available for projects. Of those available resources, 99 percent of
new CDBG funds were expended and 96 percent of new HOME funds were expended. This still leaves a
backlog of past funds that will be utilized next fiscal year. The general funds are used exclusively for the
City’s General Rehabilitation and Improvement Program (GRIP), of which 59 percent were expended.
Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments
Target Area Planned
Percentage of
Allocation
Actual Percentage
of Allocation
Narrative Description
Citywide 100 100
All funds were used within the City
of Iowa City
Table 4 – Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments
Narrative
All projects funded by CDBG and HOME are located in Iowa City and serve individuals and families living
city-wide according to their needs, especially public service and public facility projects. However, the
City strives to invest HOME and CDBG funds in areas primarily home to non-student low- and moderate-
income (LMI) persons, defined as those making less than 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI).
This includes areas that are home to families, the elderly, the disabled, and the homeless.
The 2006-2010 American Community Survey (ACS) indicates 53.4 percent of Iowa City’s population is
considered LMI, as are 18 Census areas, defined as tracts or block groups comprised of at least 51
percent LMI persons. Several of the City’s LMI census areas are located downtown and include rental
housing stock predominantly occupied by University of Iowa students. The City first utilizes resources
other than CDBG and HOME funds in these areas to maintain and preserve housing, infrastructure, and
public services. This includes UniverCity project funds that help create a healthy balance of owner
occupied and renter households within downtown/university neighborhoods, tax increment financing,
and other program funds. This policy provides the greatest impact to those who need it most
CAPER 14
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Iowa City defines minority concentrations as census areas (tracts or block groups) where minority
persons are at least 10 percentage points greater than in general population. Based on the 2010 Census
data, eight census block groups meet this criterion. The attached maps display LMI areas and minority
concentrations in Iowa City.
The City’s Housing Rehabilitation Program serves residents citywide as well, distributing resources via
individual projects located anywhere in Iowa City. However, staff sets aside a portion of CDBG
rehabilitation funds to assist targeted neighborhoods with older homes and a higher percentage of LMI
residents. The set-aside provides low interest, no-interest, and forgivable loans to homeowners to make
exterior, emergency and comprehensive repairs to their homes. Targeted neighborhoods include the
College Green, Northside, Miller Orchard, Towncrest, Twain, and Grant Wood areas.
The development and acquisition of rental housing is governed by the City’s Affordable Housing
Location Model (AHLM). The model uses three factors – distance to existing subsidized family rental
housing, elementary school poverty, and crime density – to determine where funding for new city-
assisted rental housing is available. This serves three goals of the City:
• Avoiding further burden on neighborhoods and elementary schools that already have issues
related to a concentration of poverty,
• Promoting diverse neighborhoods in terms of income levels, and
• Incorporating factors important to the Iowa City Community School District in affordable
housing siting as it relates to educational outcomes.
The AHLM, now cited as a best practice, has successfully achieved its objective of not placing additional
assisted rental housing in areas with concentrated poverty or other factors. The City does not restrict
funding for the location of owner-occupied housing, rental rehabilitation, or projects for the elderly or
persons with disabilities. The AHLM Map can be found in the attachments.
In FFY17 (CFY18), these policies directly reflect where funded projects were located.
CAPER 15
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Leveraging
Explain how federal funds leveraged additional resources (private, state and local funds),
including a description of how matching requirements were satisfied, as well as how any
publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that were used to address the
needs identified in the plan.
The City actively encourages applicants and subrecipients to obtain other public and private
resources. For activities allocated funds in FFY17, the City of Iowa City and its subrecipients
leveraged CDBG & HOME funds at a rate of over $0.64 in non-formula funds for every $1 of
formula funds, excluding private funds leveraged for staff due to public service and CHDO
operations activities and other resources from the City. The CDBG program does not have
federal match requirements, however leveraging for the HOME and CDBG programs are based
on activities completed during the reporting period. The calculations for the City’s match
contributions are found in the attachments.
Fiscal Year Summary – HOME Match
1. Excess match from prior Federal fiscal year 3,133,338
2. Match contributed during current Federal fiscal year 304,962
3. Total match available for current Federal fiscal year (Line 1 plus Line 2) 3,438,300
4. Match liability for current Federal fiscal year 43,133
5. Excess match carried over to next Federal fiscal year (Line 3 minus Line 4) 3,395,167
Table 5 – Fiscal Year Summary - HOME Match Report
CAPER 16
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year
Project No. or
Other ID
Date of
Contribution
Cash
(non-Federal
sources)
Foregone
Taxes, Fees,
Charges
Appraised
Land/Real
Property
Required
Infrastructure
Site
Preparation,
Construction
Materials,
Donated labor
Bond
Financing
Total Match
FY17 THF
Sabin
Townhomes 06/30/2018 0 276,312 0 0 0 0 276,312
FY18 MYEP
Rental
Acquisition 06/30/2018 0 28,650 0 0 0 0 28,650
Table 6 – Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year
HOME MBE/WBE report
Program Income – Enter the program amounts for the reporting period
Balance on hand at
beginning of reporting
period
$
Amount received during
reporting period
$
Total amount expended
during reporting period
$
Amount expended for
TBRA
$
Balance on hand at end
of reporting period
$
113,128 184,966 104,957 0 193,137
Table 7 – Program Income
CAPER 17
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Minority Business Enterprises and Women Business Enterprises – Indicate the number and dollar
value of contracts for HOME projects completed during the reporting period
Total Minority Business Enterprises White Non-
Hispanic Alaskan
Native or
American
Indian
Asian or
Pacific
Islander
Black Non-
Hispanic
Hispanic
Contracts
Dollar
Amount 74,194 0 0 0 50,401 23,793
Number 3 0 0 0 2 1
Sub-Contracts
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dollar
Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Women
Business
Enterprises
Male
Contracts
Dollar
Amount 74,194 0 74,194
Number 3 0 3
Sub-Contracts
Number 0 0 0
Dollar
Amount 0 0 0
Table 8 - Minority Business and Women Business Enterprises
Minority Owners of Rental Property – Indicate the number of HOME assisted rental property owners
and the total amount of HOME funds in these rental properties assisted
Total Minority Property Owners White Non-
Hispanic Alaskan
Native or
American
Indian
Asian or
Pacific
Islander
Black Non-
Hispanic
Hispanic
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dollar
Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 9 – Minority Owners of Rental Property
CAPER 18
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Relocation and Real Property Acquisition – Indicate the number of persons displaced, the cost of
relocation payments, the number of parcels acquired, and the cost of acquisition
Parcels Acquired 0 0
Businesses Displaced 0 0
Nonprofit Organizations
Displaced 0 0
Households Temporarily
Relocated, not Displaced 0 0
Households
Displaced
Total Minority Property Enterprises White Non-
Hispanic Alaskan
Native or
American
Indian
Asian or
Pacific
Islander
Black Non-
Hispanic
Hispanic
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cost 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 10 – Relocation and Real Property Acquisition
CAPER 19
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-20 - Affordable Housing 91.520(b)
Evaluation of the jurisdiction's progress in providing affordable housing, including the
number and types of families served, the number of extremely low -income, low-income,
moderate-income, and middle-income persons served.
One-Year Goal Actual
Number of Homeless households to be provided affordable
housing units 0 41
Number of Non-Homeless households to be provided affordable
housing units 6 25
Number of Special-Needs households to be provided affordable
housing units 12 9
Total 18 75
Table 11 – Number of Households
One-Year Goal Actual
Number of households supported with Rental Assistance 0 41
Number of households supported by Production of New Units 1 0
Number of households supported with Rehab of Existing Units 10 22
Number of households supported by Acquisition of Existing Units 7 12
Total 18 75
Table 12 – Number of Households Supported
Discuss the difference between goals and outcomes and problems encountered in meeting
these goals.
Differences between goals and outcomes can largely be explained by mismatches between the year the
activity originated and the year in which it was completed. Affordable housing goals not met for FFY17
will be met as the following underway activities – including rental assistance, affordable rental and
homeowner units, and assistance for homeless residents – provide an additional 115 affordable units.
These activities will be reported in subsequent CAPERs when they are completed.
1. Bilam Properties (Walden Ridge); FY16 CDBG project; 40 units; 99 percent complete
2. Shelter House FUSE; FY17 CDBG; 24 units; 90 percent complete
3. Iowa City Housing Authority TBRA; FY17 HOME; 34 units; 15 percent complete
4. Comprehensive homeowner rehab; FY18 HOME; 1 unit; completion expected 2019
5. The Housing Fellowship rental rehab; FY17 and FY18 HOME; 5 units; 40 percent complete
6. Habitat for Humanity; FY17 and FY18 HOME; 2 units; 80 percent complete
7. Successful Living Rehabilitation; FY18 HOME; 5 SRO units, procuring contractors
8. Successful Living Acquisition; FY18 HOME and CDBG; 4 SRO units, expecting completion late
summer 2018
CAPER 20
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Problems encountered during FFY17 include waiting for integral secondary grant financing, difficulty
finding available units within appropriate price points due to the strength of Iowa City's housing market,
and rehabilitation needs beyond initial expected amounts. These have all been largely resolved through
patience and amendments to the Annual Action Plan, and all activities are now back on track.
Discuss how these outcomes will impact future annual action plans.
Based on the projects completed to date and currently programmed with funding, the city is on track to
exceed all strategic plan goals that are related to the provision of affordable housing. Future annual
action plans will continue to implement the goals and priorities outlined in the Consolidated Plan, with
additional public input planned each fall to tweak funding priorities as needed.
Include the number of extremely low -income, low-income, and moderate-income persons
served by each activity where information on income by family size is required to determine
the eligibility of the activity.
Number of Households Served CDBG Actual HOME Actual
Extremely Low-income 11 33
Low-income 6 16
Moderate-income 8 1
Total 25 50
Table 13 – Number of Households Served
Narrative Information
Nearly 90 percent of households served are low-income, which is consistent with the consolidated plan.
HOME funds tend to serve a higher proportion of those at the lower end of the income spectrum. These
results demonstrate housing subsidies are being directed to those with highest need.
Housing Rehabilitation staff also works closely on other locally funded owner-occupied housing
programs through the General Rehabilitation and Improvement Program (GRIP) and the UniverCity
Neighborhood Partnership. Five homes took part in GRIP and five homes were renovated and sold as
owner-occupied housing to income qualified homebuyers in FFY17. Additional homes are under
rehabilitation and awaiting rehab. Most UniverCity homes have the following items addressed through
replacement or repair:
• Demolition and replacement of bathrooms and kitchens.
• Updating the plumbing and electrical systems, including the outlets, fixtures, and wiring.
• Installation of high-efficiency heating and air conditioning systems.
• Interior and exterior painting.
• Re-grading of yards to enable proper drainage away from the home and/or structural
improvement.
CAPER 21
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-25 - Homeless and Other Special Needs 91.220(d, e); 91.320(d, e); 91.520(c)
Evaluate the jurisdiction’s progress in meeting its specific objectives for reducing and ending
homelessness through:
Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their
individual needs
In light of the limited amount of CDBG and HOME funds available, not all of the area’s homeless needs
can be addressed with CDBG and HOME funds. The City does not receive Emergency Shelter Grant or
HOPWA entitlement funds, so it primarily relies on a variety of community agencies to provide basic
needs assistance and other support.
In FFY17, the City contributed funds to the operation and improvement of public facilities for several
non-profit organizations that assist the homeless or near homeless in Iowa City including the Crisis
Center, Shelter House, Domestic Violence Intervention Program (DVIP), Prelude Behavioral Services,
Free Medical Clinic, United Action for Youth, and the Free Lunch Program. The City also continued to
support the Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board (LHCB), the region’s Continuum of Care
organization. Generally, these partners conduct direct outreach to homeless individuals.
The City worked to advocate for human services coordination. The LHCB is still pursuing a single
application for service system entry and is standardizing assessment practices such as the use of
the Vulnerability Index - Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI-SPDAT). This, in addition to
the use of the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), has allowed agencies to better
connect clients with services and assists with inter-agency referrals, especially between Shelter House
and the Domestic Violence Invervention Program.
Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons
The City primarily addresses emergency shelter needs in partnership with the Shelter House. Shelter
House provides daily drop-in services to the public facilities include laundry, bathrooms with showers, a
training room, a Job Lab for to help clients develop skills, research jobs, and complete applications, a Job
Club, and two dedicated outreach offices to assist Shelter House clients and walk-ins. Sample services
include a weekly Psychological Clinic, Veteran outreach, free legal counsel for individuals seeking
application for Social Security, and spiritual counseling provided by local clergy. Shelter House also has a
Privacy Room with bed space for patients discharged from the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics,
in addition to fourteen beds designated for veterans experiencing homelessness. Participating veterans
may stay for up to two years as long as they are participating in Shelter House's Case Management.
In additional to operational funding support, the City provided funds for Shelter House's Rapid
Rehousing program for homeless individuals and continued to aid Shelter House in the development of
Cross Park Place. This Permanent Supportive Housing project is Iowa's first Housing First shelter,
CAPER 22
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
meaning it does not impose conditions on tenants' behavior but instead provides subsidized housing
with the ongoing option to participate in supportive services. Residents will primarily work with a
housing case manager who assists with independent living skills, connects them with outside resources,
and works with residents to ensure they uphold requirements of the lease. Additional onsite support
will include regular check-ins with a medical professional, mental health counselor, and psychiatrist.
Data from these kinds of projects consistently demonstrate that this model both enhances the quality of
life of the individuals and reduces the financial costs to the community.
The City also provides operational funding to DVIP which serves youth and adult victims of domestic
abuse. This includes an emergency shelter available to women, men and youth when staying in their
current situation is no longer safe. It also operates a 24-hour hotline, housing and financial services,
advocacy, counseling and support groups, education, and other related support for victims of domestic
violence.
Iowa City typically supports transitional housing through the Hawkeye Area Community Action Program
(HACAP). However, as HUD has dropped other transitional housing supports in favor of a Rapid
Rehousing approach, HACAP is shifting towards traditional affordable housing units that have a
preference for homeless clients instead of the having the stricter requirements of transitional housing,
and the City is actively working with them through that process.
To assist individuals establish permanent housing, the City also partners with Habitat for Humanity to
administer a program that diverts household furniture such as dressers, beds, etc. from the landfill to be
provided free of charge to families transitioning out of homelessness.
Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely
low-income individuals and families and those who are: likely to become homeless after
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); and, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that
address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs
Income and housing affordability are major factors that can lead to homelessness. The City consistently
works with community partners to provide affordable housing and promote economic self-sufficiency. It
also provides funds to organizations that carry out poverty relief efforts. This is carried out through
several programs currently in place and actions taken that are designed to further the affordable
housing goals set forth in CITY STEPS.
Of the CDBG and HOME dollars spent in FFY17, approximately 63 percent of funds supported affordable
housing by increasing the stock of affordable units, assisting households to afford their homes,
improving the quality of housing for low and moderate income households, or supporting affordable
housing providers. Many of these are targeted for extremely low-income families and those disabilities,
as they more vulnerable and are often more at risk of homelessness.
CAPER 23
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Another 9 percent went to organizations directly providing homelessness supports, including shelter
diversion activities, food assistance, and other forms of education, in addition to direct emergency
shelter. These efforts have been mentioned in earlier sections.
A final 2 percent went towards providing low income individuals support in starting up day care
microenterprises. Increasing the income of low income individuals leads towards greater economic self-
sufficiency, which can help prevent homlessness.
These projects all help low-income households avoid becoming homeless and provide valuable services
to the City of Iowa City. The City also coordinates with the Local Homeless Coordinating Board and other
service providers to help target services at those most in need, such as Inside Out which helps those
discharged from prison find housing.
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 is committed to the Continuum of Care and has funded a cross-section of projects within the
continuum. Affordable housing and overcrowding for homeless and non-homeless persons with special
needs is continually being addressed by the City and local human service organizations.
Support of Shelter House's Housing First Cross Park Place project is one example of helping homeless,
specficially chronically homeless individuals and families, to faciliate access to affordable housing units.
The Iowa City Housing Authority has been especially useful in this regard, working with Shelter House to
create priority for the project. Similarly, support of Shelter House's efforts to assist veterans has
continued to provide relief to veterans experiencing homelessness.
The Local Homeless Coordinating Board is actively trying to prevent homelessness before individuals and
families are caught in the system, such as through diversion and prevention. This approach emphasizes
problem solving and sharing resources to prevent the loss of housing. The City is also currently working
with the Iowa Balance of State Continuum of Care to identify better ways to transition people already
experiencing homelessness towards housing. This project will continue into the next fiscal year.
CAPER 24
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-30 - Public Housing 91.220(h); 91.320(j)
Actions taken to address the needs of public housing
The Iowa City Housing Authority (ICHA) works to improve the quality of life for those around Iowa City,
acting as a community leader on affordable housing and providing information, education, housing
assistance, and partnership opportunities. ICHA is a division of the City of Iowa City established in 1969
to administer housing assistance programs throughout its jurisdiction, including all of Johnson County
and portions of Iowa and Washington Counties.
ICHA assists low-income families to acquire and maintain affordable housing through rental and
ownership programs. Rental assistance includes 1,215 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) recipients, 83
Veterans' Supportive Housing (VASH) vouchers, and 81 Public Housing units. ICHA also administers
Tenant Based Rental Assistance projects when award - its most recent was $200,000 awarded in City
FY17. In tital, ICHA works with approximately 400 landlords and oversees Housing Assistance Payments
of around $7.6 million. ICHA also paid out more than $300,000 to private contractors for capital
improvements and maintenance of Public Housing Properties in 2017. Homeownership opportunities
also exist under the HCV Homeownership Program. Participation in all programs requires the family be
within federally established income guidelines.
ICHA continues to operate a "best practices" Family Self-Sufficiency Program (FSS) that helps motivated
families build assets and become economically self-sufficient. The FSS Program helps remove barriers to
economic self-sufficiency and connects participants with ICHA-leveraged resources within the
community. The coordination of services, combined with an escrow savings account, promotes
increased earnings and asset building among families receiving housing assistance. As of March 2018,
193 households participated in the Family Self-Sufficiency program. Of these, 179 (93%) participants had
escrow savings balances. The average monthly deposit was $290 per month with an average balance of
$3,601. The highest escrow savings account balance was $26,513.
Actions taken to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in
management and participate in homeownership
Since at least 2009, ICHA has continually tried to establish a Resident Advisory Board (RAB) to encourage
public housing residents to become more involved in management of public housing. However, ICHA -
participating families show little interest in serving on an RAB focusing solely on ICHA programs and
services. Most comments received via 3 separate surveys are beyond the scope, power, and authority of
ICHA to impact, or other City Departments and Community-Based Agencies are better suited to meet
these concerns. Examples include fixing streets, repairing abandoned homes, empowering
neighborhoods, dealing with perception of City-wide increase in criminal activity, safety, events,
neighborhood development and clean up, and other similar issues.
CAPER 25
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
As a result, ICHA partners with Neighborhood Services to continue the "Good Neighbors—Strong
Neighborhoods" initiative. The idea is to partner with Neighborhood Associations to develop strategies
that promote the peaceful enjoyment of the neighborhood for all residents. The goal is increased
participation of ICHA clients in activities sponsored by the City's Neighborhood Associations. The City
supports and encourages neighborhood action and provides ideas and resources that can help shape the
future of a neighborhood. ICHA will again survey public housing residents when citizen input is collected
for CITY STEPS, Iowa City’s Consolidated Plan for Housing, Jobs, and Services for Low-Income Residents
2021 – 2025, and the ICHA’s 5-year plan for 2021 – 2025.
ICHA has successfully encouraged its clients to participate in homeownership through its HCV
Homeownership Program. The program allows HCV clients currently utilizing their voucher for rental
assistance, to convert that payment to mortgage assistance. The family secures a mortgage loan from a
private lender, with the lender determining the loan amount. The family may purchase a unit anywhere
in Johnson County. Non-disabled families may receive mortgage assistance for up to 15 years, and there
is no time limit for disabled families. Forty (40) HCV vouchers have been used to purchase hom es since
January 2003. Of these, sixteen (16) are still active. FSS programs have also allowed 59 FSS graduates to
move to homeownership.
Actions taken to provide assistance to troubled PHAs
ICHA has an excellent track record as a PHA, but has continually networked and shared its knowledge
with other PHAs through the National Association of Housing and Rehabilitation Officials.
CAPER 26
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-35 - Other Actions 91.220(j)-(k); 91.320(i)-(j)
Actions taken 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. 91.220 (j); 91.320 (i)
Affordable housing is a top priority of the City. In 2016, the 15-step Affordable Housing Action Plan was
adopted to promote affordable housing This complements the goals set in CITY STEPS and work with
other partners on affordable housing projects. The following summarizes some of the City's efforts.
Housing First Shelter. In 2016, Council amended City Code to enable the Shelter House to proceed with
the Cross Park Place project. This Housing First project will provide subsidized Permanent Supportive
Housing with supportive services that does not place conditions on tenants' behavior. Project
completion is expected in FY19.
Regulatory changes. The City actively reviews its codes to eliminate barriers to affordable housing. Past
changes included requirements for new city-funded housing to use universal design features, allowing
smaller lot sizes and attached homes in single family residential zones, and density bonuses for 1-2
bedroom apartments, among others. However, the City recognizes that regulatory barriers still impact
the affordability of housing. Staff is working to identify additional barriers by reviewing the existing
codes and initiating discussions with the development community and stakeholders on topics including:
• Waiving parking requirements for affordable housing units (completed for RFC in 2016).
• Reviewing changes to the multi-family design standards.
• Eliminate minimum size requirements for PUDs.
• Increase allowable bedrooms outside the University Impact Area.
• Permit more building types by right.
Riverfront Crossings (RFC) and Annexation Affordable Housing Requirement. In 2014, the City adopted
form-based zoning for the RFC district to allow higher density development near downtown and the
University. In 2016, the City adopted a housing policy in the district so 10% of residential units must be
affordable to renters at 60 percent AMI or owners at 110% AMI. In 2018, the City amended the
annexation policy for residential developments with a goal that 10% of units annexed must also be
affordable for the same targeted groups.
Residential Tax Increment Financing (TIF). Iowa Code allows residential TIF districts if 10% of captured
funds are set-aside for affordable housing. Other captured funding would assist with providing public
infrastructure. The City entered into such a development agreement on Foster Road in 2018.
CAPER 27
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Tax Abatement. A six-member committee and staff began meeting in 2017 to determine the viability
and potential parameters of a tax abatement program that would support affordable housing. A
recommendation is expected in FY19.
Additional form-based codes. The City is investigating a form-based code for the Alexander Elemenary
neighborhood, currently an LMI Census tract. City staff is currently developing a scope of services and
cost estimate to develop the code.
Affordable Housing Location model (AHLM). The City adopted the AHLM to prevent further
concentrating affordable housing in neighborhoods with concentrations of poverty. In 2017, Council
exempted the RFC district from the AHLM and expanded areas eligible for City financial assistance for
new affordable rental housing.
Tenant Displacement and Rent Abatement. In 2017, Council began requiring a City-approved transition
plan and comprehensive and site plan ordinance amendments for site plans that will displace 12+
households that do not require a rezoning. This will better inform residents and the public. The City also
adopted rent abatement for emergency orders when vacation of property is not necessary, in addition
to trying to better educate the public about housing code violations and how to report them.
Actions taken to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
All of the City's Community Development programs seek to reduce the number of poverty-level families.
The following describes several of the Cities programs.
Housing Rehabilitation. The Office of Housing Rehabilitation provides guidance and financial assistance
to low and moderate income homeowners to maintain and update their homes. The repairs enable
owners to stay in their homes while maintaining the City’s housing stock. Housing Rehab includes two
major programs:
Federally-Funded Homeowner Rehab. CDBG and HOME-funded owner rehab funds six specific programs:
• Comprehensive Rehab. Assists homes to meet the City's Housing Code ($3,000-$24,999 per
project).
• Emergency Assistance. Helps correct major housing code violations ($100-$6,000 per project).
• Exterior Repair. Covers the cost of exterior repair to main structures ($1,000-$15,000 per
project).
• Accessibility. Makes homes accessible for owners with disabilities ($1,000-$16,000 per project).
• Manufactured Home Repair. Funds the repair of manufactured housing ($500-$6,000 per
project).
• Energy Efficiency. Helps purchase high efficiency heating and insulation ($500-$6,000 per
project).
CAPER 28
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
During FY18, the City expended $282,368.23 to complete 19 CDBG-funded and 3 HOME-funded
homeowner rehabilitation projects.
General Rehab and Improvement Program (GRIP). GRIP complements federally-funded homeowner
rehab. It is designed to stabilize and revitalize targeted neighborhoods through the broader applicability
of the Housing Rehabilitation and Historic Preservation programs. This program provides low -interest
loans that are repayable over a 20-year term, funded by the City through general obligation bonds.
Assistance ranges from $10,000-$40,000 per project. In FY18, the City spent $118,901 on GRIP to
complete five projects.
UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership Program. UniverCity was created to stabilize neighborhoods near
the University in areas where rental units were increasing but it was single family in character.
Rehabbed homes are sold to income qualified buyers and renovation costs are forgiven over 5 years.
The homes must remain owner-occupied for up to 30 years. To date, the City purchased 65 homes, 16 of
which were sold to households under 80 percent median household income and another 46 of which
were sold to households over 80 percent AMI. The City rehabbed and sold five homes in FY18.
Affordable Housing Fund. The City budgeted $650,000 for affordable housing projects in FY18:
• $325,000 to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC) in August 2017. The HTFJC
reports annually to Council to inform them of how they allocated funding.
• $162,500 for land banking per the City’s land banking policies. Currently $461,000 is available.
Staff is evaluating sites.
• $32,500 for emergent situations, to be shifted to landbanking if not used.
• $130,000 for LIHTC support. A total of $330,000 was available in FY18, to be allocated by the
Housing and Community Development Commission via a competitive request for proposals. All
funds were allocated to Del Ray Ridge, which will create 33 units, including 29 income-restricted
units.
Leveraging Other Funds. The City is leveraging $2,500,000 in unused ICHA funds to create affordable
housing. In 2015, the City agreed to pay $1,000,000 to purchase 5 units in the Chauncey for affordable
rental units. Completion is expected at the end of 2018. In 2017, Council agreed to purchase six units for
permanent affordable rental housing at Augusta Place for $1,080,000. Some $420,000 remains to
develop or acquire low income replacement housing.
Actions taken to reduce lead-based paint hazards. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
The Housing Rehabilitation Office provides code and lead paint inspection services and guidance to
other City departments and sub-recipients of the CDBG and HOME funds. As such, it continues to
implement all aspects of HUD’s lead-based paint regulations. In its efforts to reduce lead-based paint
CAPER 29
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
hazards in all of its CDBG- and HOME-funded rehabilitation projects, they provided outreach on the
dangers, identification, and reduction of lead-based paint hazards to all program participants.
Rehabilitation and inspection staff members are certified lead inspector/risk assessors and conduct
visual risk assessments and clearance tests on all applicable projects. The City does not own an XRF
device, XRF testing is done by a consultant.
Rehabilitation and inspection specialists continue to receive lead educati on and training that they pass
on to all contractors, sub-contractors, and others affiliated or working with the rehabilitation program.
Due to prior City-sponsored training, the Rehabilitation Program has access to 100+ workers
representing a multitude of different companies that provide services (i.e. electrical, plumbing, painting,
roofing, general contracting, cleaning companies, etc.) in a safe and responsible manner.
Actions taken to reduce the number of poverty -level families. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
Activities that a limited clientele to low and moderate-income persons were undertaken by several
agencies. All agencies documented the household income of its beneficiaries at the time of program
entry through income verifications. All of these helped serve families in poverty.
Public services
1. Shelter House provided accommodations to people experiencing homelessness.
2. Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County provided licensed child care and youth programming
to low income children.
3. Domestic Violence Intervention Program provided shelter services and programs for victims of
domestic violence.
Public facilities
1. ARC of Southeast Iowa City renovated its interior operating space to better provide daycare to
youth with disabilities.
2. Mayor’s Youth Empowerment Program paved over a vacant lot to improve the aesthetic and
provide better access to its services for individuals with disabilities.
3. The Wetherby Sports Courts in a low- and moderate-income area were improved to provide
better recreational amenities.
The City also provided funds to 4Cs to provide microenterprise daycare providers with technical
assistance to register their operations and help improve their economic security.
CAPER 30
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Actions taken to develop institutional structure. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
The City of Iowa City has developed a robust institutional structure to address housing and community
development needs within the community.
The City itself is organized under the Council-Manager form of government. Iowa City citizens elect
seven Iowa City residents to the City Council for overlapping four-year terms. Four Council Members are
nominated and elected by the eligible electors of the City at large. The other three are District Council
Members, nominated by the eligible electors of their respective districts and elected by the qualified
voters of the City at large. The Council, in turn, selects one of its members to serve as mayor for a two-
year term. The Mayor presides at the City Council meetings and has one vote on the Council - the same
as the other six members.
The City administers housing and community development programs through the Neighborhood
Services Division – comprised of three subdivisions: Community Development, Housing Inspection, and
the Iowa City Housing Authority. Neighborhood Services coordinates all Consolidated Planning initiatives
of the City, including plan preparation with community participation and management of all activities
funded with CDBG and HOME funds.
The City created a citizen advisory group, the Housing and Community Development Commission
(HCDC), in 1995, to assess Iowa City’s community development needs for housing, jobs and services for
low and moderate income residents, and to promote public and private efforts to meet such needs.
HCDC leads the CDBG/HOME allocation process to determine what projects will be awarded funds based
on priorities established in CITY STEPS. Each year the City and HCDC reviews applications on a
competitive basis. HCDC also serves as a general advisory committee to Council on policy that similarly
affects low to moderate income individuals.
Staff also actively engages numerous boards, committees, working groups, and organizations. By
participating in groups such as the Local Homeless Coordinating Board, the Affordable Housing Coalition,
Livable Communities of Johnson County, and the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, the City
supports in the coordination and communication of those groups. In addition, the City annually
contributes funds to many of those groups, providng further incentive for collaboration. However, the
City encourages agencies to pursue outside funding as indicated in the CITY STEPS. Many of the housing
providers used private mortgages for their activities which provides private partnerships and
coordination as well.
CAPER 31
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Actions taken to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service
agencies. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
Because of its institutionional structure, fragmentation and duplication of services in Iowa City is a minor
obstacle. The City also undertakes extensive consultation as part of its consolidated planning efforts,
particularly in association with the Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board (LHCB) planning
process as the Continuum of Care. The LHCB represents over 25 agencies in Iowa City providing services
to the homeless and low-income persons in Johnson County. The City works closely with the LHCB to
increase coordination between housing providers, health, and service agencies in addressing the needs
of persons that are chronically homeless.
The City also facilitates coordination among its partner agencies that results in a broadly shared
understanding of community needs, collaborative and complementary approaches to addressing needs,
and responsiveness to changes in conditions. Additionally, resources such as Aid to Agencies and City
General Funds available for economic development indicate a real commitment to leveraging all
possible resources to meet needs.
The Iowa City Housing Authority administers housing vouchers awarded by HUD from the Housing
Choice Voucher (HCV) Program. Housing Inspections staff also oversees rental permits which must be
renewed annually or bi-annually. These roles also provide the City frequent contact with private housing
providers. The City is also trying to be more active about soliciting their ideas for improving the
affordability of housing in Iowa City.
Certifications of Consistency
The City supports the efforts of organizations that seek to provide supportive services and outreach or
housing to low-income, elderly or disabled persons. Upon request, the City will consider issuing a
Certificate of Consistency with the Consolidated Plan (CITY STEPS) for any program benefitting this
clientele and meeting the goals of the Consolidated Plan.
Identify actions taken to overcome the effects of any impediments identified in the
jurisdictions analysis of impediments to fair housing choice. 91.520(a)
Racial and ethnic concentrations in Iowa City . The City primarily tries to prevent racial/ethnic
concentrations by developing new affordable housing. The City adopted incentives and policies to
increase affordable housing, per the Affordable Housing Action Plan. As of July 2018, 87 percent of the
plan is implemented. The City also tries to prevent concentrations through its AHLM.
AHLM disperses some assisted housing but reduces areas where new assisted housing is
allowed. Council revised the model in 2017 to increase the number of properties where new assisted
CAPER 32
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
rental projects can be funded. The City also created additional affordable housing units through efforts
detailed above. Further review may continue in FY19 depending on Council direction.
Possible unfair treatment in mortgage loan denials for African Americans and Hispanics. Membership
in the National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC) provided the Office of Equity and Human
Rights access to resources to evaluate lending practices regarding African-American and Hispanic loan
seekers. Where past reporting indicated possible unfair treatment, internal procedures at some
institutions were found to skew results; loan files opened but not completed for any reason were coded
as denials, including cases where the loan-seeker did not provide paperwork or follow through with the
loan. This created an artificially high rate of “denials” for African-American and Hispanic households.
This closer analysis did not find the same discrepancies in loan rates.
Barriers to mobility and housing choice for protected classes and persons of low income. In June 2016,
Council made HCV status a protected class under the City's Human Rights ordinance. To address
landlord-side problems, the City expanded landlord education programs. Since 2016, 92 new owners are
participating in the HCV program. To address tenant-side problems, a more liberal voucher extension
policy has mitigated incidents of failed searches. The cumulative voucher utilization for Calendar year
2017 is 101.2%. In 2017, over 900 households receiving vouchers were surveyed regarding their
experiences in renting with an HCV.
Unreported fair housing violations due to attitudes and/or lack of knowledge of available resources .
The City has attempted to address this as follows:
• Participated in “Fair Housing and Communities Against Hate,” four fair housing trainings, and
the National Fair Housing Alliance webinar “Using Data to Assess Fair Housing”
• Presented for Fair Housing Trainings and sponsored trainings delivered by Iowa Civil Rights
Commission
• Staffed table at “Renting 101” program hosted by University of Iowa Student Legal Services
• Sent mailers to landlords on Animals in Housing and on Religious Discrimination in Housing
• Created media releases for online Fair Housing materials for landlords and the Fair Housing
Discrimination Survey results
• “Know Your Rights” brochures translated into Swahili (already in Spanish, African French,
Mandarin Chinese, and Arabic)
• Placed ads in Daily Iowan and Daily Iowa Rental Guide
• Placed new Fair Housing signs in English and Spanish in Iowa City buses
• Continued monthly audits of housing sites for discriminatory ads
• Joined the NCRC and renewed with the National Fair Housing Alliance and Affordable Housing
Coalition
CAPER 33
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-40 - Monitoring 91.220 and 91.230
Describe the standards and procedures used to monitor activities carried out in furtherance
of the plan and used to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs
involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning
requirements
Organizations are required to provide at least one project update to the Housing and Community
Development Commission (HCDC) during the Fiscal Year in which they were added to the Annual Action
Plan. These reports are made either in-person or in writing, and they ensure HCDC remains informed
about the progress of the activities to which it allocates funds.
Community Development staff also conduct at least one on-site monitoring visit for each activity. It is
the goal of the City to conduct the monitoring visit within the same fiscal year the award is made. These
visits allow staff to review the policies and procedures of organizations, ensure finances match project
records, review submittals for consistency, and ensure the project complies with all federal
requirements, including outreach to minority businesses.
Unsuccessful or Delayed Projects
From time-to-time, CDBG and/or HOME activities may not meet the anticipated schedule for
implementation as intially presented to the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC).
These circumstances may be due to unforeseen events (e.g. unfunded applications for other financing),
optimistic timelines, or organizational issues.
HCDC recognizes the need to utilize CDBG, HOME, and other funding as effectively and efficiently as
possible to meet the needs of low-moderate income household for housing, jobs and services within
Iowa City. To assist HCDC in evaluating an activity's status and ability to proceed, the
attached Unsuccessful or Delayed Projects Policy was adopted in 2003. If activities do not show progress,
HCDC may reallocate their funding per the policy.
Initial and Ongoing Reports and Monitoring
The City requires each organization receiving Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to
submit quarterly reports for each activity until the project is completed. The City also requires
organizations to submit a year-end report for each activity. The quarterly and year-end reports include
information on the number of clients served, income level, and race/ethnicity. All counts are
unduplicated. If quarterly and year-end reports do not reconcile, the year-end report numbers are
utilized for reporting.
For HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) and CDBG housing projects, each organization
receiving funds must submit a project completion report and on-going annual tenant rental housing
reports during their periods of affordability or as required by agreement. These reports document all
CAPER 34
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
units' compliance with all applicable regulations, including household income and fair market rents.
Annual monitoring also includes a reviews of each property's insurance and compliance with other
HOME requirements, including those related to affirmatively furthering fair housing and adequately
verifying income. For rental projects, Housing Inspections staff also inspects properties at least every
other year to ensure they comply with local property codes; this is required for them to maintain a valid
rental permit.
Citizen Participation Plan 91.105(d); 91.115(d)
Describe the efforts to provide citizens with reasonable notice and an opportunity to
comment on performance reports.
Notices regarding the availability of the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
(CAPER) and the public hearing were published in the Iowa City Press Citizen on September 4, 2018.
Copies of the CAPER were available for public review at the Iowa City Public Library, City Hall, and online
on the City’s Neighborhood and Development Services website (www.icgov.org/actionplan). A public
comment period for longer than the required 15-day period was held from September 4 to September
19. HCDC then held a public meeting on September 20. No comments were received during the public
comment period.
In addition, HCDC requires CDBG and/or HOME funded project sponsors to attend an HCDC meeting and
provide an update on their progress. The agendas are all posted per the public input and the public is
welcome to attend.
CAPER 35
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-45 - CDBG 91.520(c)
Specify the nature of, and reasons for, any changes in the jurisdiction’s program objectives
and indications of how the jurisdiction would change its pro grams as a result of its
experiences.
The City may be modifying it's approach to economic development by providing funds for technical
assistance for microenterprises rather than through direct financial assistance. This will be further
explored in FY19.
Does this Jurisdiction have any open Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI)
grants?
No
[BEDI grantees] Describe accomplishments and program outcomes during the last year.
CAPER 36
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CR-50 - HOME 91.520(d)
Include the results of on-site inspections of affordable rental housing assisted under the
program to determine compliance with housing codes and other applicable regulations
Please list those projects that should have been inspected on-site this program year based upon
the schedule in §92.504(d). Indicate which of these were inspected and a summary of issues
that were detected during the inspection. For those that were not inspected, please indicate
the reason and how you will remedy the situation.
The City of Iowa City has an existing inspection program that systemically inspects every rental unit in
the community. The Department of Neighborhood and Development Services (NDS) oversees rental
inspections and insures compliance with all local requirements, including Iowa City’s Housing Code
which establishes the minimum health and safety standards necessary to protect and promote the
welfare of tenants and the public. Local codes are generally stricter than HUD’s Housing Quality
Standards (HQS), the comprehensive program that ensures subsidized housing remains safe.
Inspections are conducted by the Housing Inspection Workgroup, which includes six full-time inspectors
inspecting nearly 20,000 rental units. The issuance of a valid rental permit depends upon properties
complying with local codes. The following rental unit types are annually inspected through the City’s
regular inspection program:
• single family dwellings with four or more bedrooms
• duplexes where the unit has four or more bedrooms
• multi-family dwellings with an initial certificate of occupancy before January 1, 1996
• fraternity, sorority, and rooming houses
• transient housing units
• family care units and group homes
• public housing units
The following rental unit types are regularly inspected every two years:
• single family dwellings with no more than three bedrooms
• duplexes where the unit has no more than three bedrooms
• multi-family dwellings with an initial certificate of occupancy after January 1, 1996
Rental inspections are also conducted upon request and complaint. Results of inspections are written
and corrective actions noted in individual property files, stored and maintained by the NDS. The City
actively works with owners, property managers and tenants to ensure conformance.
All HOME-assisted properties are subject to this inspection cycle and various informal, on-site
inspections made by Community Development Division staff throughout the year. Tenants receiving a
CAPER 37
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Housing Choice Voucher or Tenant Based Rental Assistance must also have their units regularly
inspected by the Iowa City Housing Authority at least bi-annually. These units must meet HQS
requirements.
Two projects in the City’s HOME rental housing portfolio have 25 or more HOME-assisted units,
Lexington Place and Concorde Terrace. Each has 30 fixed HOME-assisted rental units. The City also used
HOME funds to assist Regency Heights with 24 of their 37 units. Assisted units are inspected on a
schedule maintained and completed by the City’s Housing Inspection Workgroup in compliance with
HUD property standards and onsite inspection requirements.
• Lexington Place, 1229 Shannon Drive. NDS systemically inspected 100 percent of the units at
Lexington Place in FY18. Minor issues were found and the rental permit was renewed within 30
days of the initial inspection. The rental permit is valid through January 31, 2020.
• Concorde Terrace, 1259 Shannon Drive. NDS completed 3 HQS inspections or 10 percent of the
total units during FY16. The rental permit is valid through September 30, 2018.
• Regency Heights, 1010 Scott Park Road. There are 37 rental units in this project with 24 floating
HOME-assisted units. HUD and the City require this project to be inspected every other year.
The rental permit for the building is valid through September 30, 2018. The systemic inspection
of this property has been scheduled for October 16, 2018.
Provide an assessment of the jurisdiction's affirmative marketing actions for HOME units.
92.351(b)
The actions outlined in the following section were undertaken by the City of Iowa City during the
reporting year to affirmatively further fair housing. More information can be found in the attached
Human Rights Commission’s Annual Report (www.icgov.org/humanrights), which provides specific
accomplishments for the program year. Additionally, the City's adopted Affirmative Marketing Plan can
be found in the Consolidated Plan or online at www.icgov.org/actionplan.
• Participated in “Fair Housing and Communities Against Hate.”
• Media release regarding Fair Housing materials online for landlords.
• Attendance at National Fair Housing Alliance webinar “Using Data to Assess Fair Housing.”
• Membership in Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition.
• Attendance at four Fair Housing trainings.
• Mailer on assistance Animals in Housing sent to over 440 area landlords participating in the
Housing Choice Voucher program.
• Mailer on Religious Discrimination in Housing sent to area landlords.
• Media releases on Fair Housing Discrimination Survey results.
• Staffed table at “Renting 101” program for new renters hosted by University of Iowa Student
Legal Services.
CAPER 38
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
• Sponsored Fair Housing Trainings delivered by Iowa Civil Rights Commission.
• Presented Fair Housing Trainings.
• Renewed membership in National Fair Housing Alliance.
• Joined National Community Reinvestment Coalition.
• Placed new Fair Housing signs in English and Spanish in Iowa City buses.
• Placed weekly ads in Daily Iowan as well as an ad in Daily Iowa Rental Guide.
• “Know Your Rights” brochures translated into Swahili in addition to existing translations in
Spanish, African French, Mandarin Chinese, and Arabic.
• Continue to do monthly audits of housing advertisement sites for discriminatory
advertisements.
• Collected Affirmative Housing Marketing plans from CDBG/HOME housing projects that required
them
• Monitored CDBG/HOME projects for compliance with City affirmative marketing requirements
• Conducted a racial equity analysis for housing complaints around Iowa City
• Updated FY19 Annual Action Plan to require racial equity analyses for certain housing projects
funded by HOME/CDBG
Refer to IDIS reports to describe the amount and use of program income for projects,
including the number of projects and owner and tenant characteristics
The City received $181,162.68 in Program Income in Federal FY17. $15,038.56 drawn for HOME admin in
FFY17. Another $15,621.00 was drawn in FY17 for other projects. The remainder is budgeted for FFY18
and will be used for the upcoming Successful Living project.
Describe other actions taken to foster and maintain affordable housing. 91.220(k) (STATES
ONLY: Including the coordination of LIHTC with the development of affordable housing).
91.320(j)
Actions to foster and maintain affordable housing are primarily guided by the City's Affordable Housing
Action Plan. This is detailed in previous sections.
CAPER 39
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Attachments
General and Required Attachments
CAPER 40
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 41
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 42
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 43
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 44
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 45
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 46
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 47
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 48
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 49
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 50
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 51
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 52
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 53
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 54
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Human Rights Commission Annual Report
CAPER 55
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 56
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 57
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 58
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 59
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 60
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
CAPER 61
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)