Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-18-2019 Housing and Community Development CommissionAgenda Housing & Community Development Commission (HCDC) Thursday, April 18, 2019 6:30 P.M. Senior Center, Room 202 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 March 14, 2019 minutes 3. Public comment of items not on the agenda 4. Discussion of projects that have not complied with the `Unsuccessful or Delayed Projects Policy' • FYI Little Creations Academy Daycare Rehab • FY19 Aid to Agencies: Domestic Violence Intervention Program • FY19 Arthur Street Healthy Life Center • FY19 Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County Siding Improvement • FY19 Prelude Transitional Housing Improvement 5. Begin Aid to Agencies process modifications discussion 6. Monitoring Report • City of Iowa City 7. Review and consider recommendation to City Council on approval of FY20 Annual Action Plan — plan available online at http://www.icyov.ory/actionplan 8. Discussion of the Community Development Celebration 9. Staff/commission comment 10. Adjournment If you will need disability -related accommodations to participate in this program or event, please contact Kirk Lehmann at kirk-lehmarm(4dowa-city.org or 319-356-5230. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. r =_•. -4 CITY OF I O WA CITYMEMORANDUM Date: April 12, 2019 To: Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) From: Neighborhood Service Staff Re: April 18, 2019 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.ore. * Indicates Action Item **Indicates Action Possible but not required Item 1. Call Meeting to order Item 2. Approval of the March 14, 2019 minutes* Item 3. Public comment of items not on the agenda Item 4. Discussion of projects that have not complied with the `Unsuccessful or Delayed Projects Policy'** For subrecipients that have not spent 50% of their awarded funding by March 15, the `Unsuccessful or Delayed Projects Policy' allows HCDC to recommend recapturing unspent funds or to allow them to retain project funds. The following projects are have not complied: FYI Little Creations Academy Daycare Rehab FY19 Aid to Agencies: Domestic Violence Intervention Program FY19 Arthur Street Healthy Life Center FY19 Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County Siding Improvement FY19 Prelude Transitional Housing Improvement Item 5. Begin Aid to Agencies (A2A) process modifications discussion City Council approved changes to the A2A process for FY20. However, after HCDC provided their funding recommendation, Council requested that HCDC again revisit the process. This meeting will be the first of multiple discussions on the process for FY21 and beyond. Item 6: Monitoring Reports Staff will provide updates on CDBG and HOME projects undertaken by the City of Iowa City Item 7: Review and consider recommendation to City Council on approval of FY20 Annual Action Plan* - plan available online at http://www.icgov.orgjactionplan At their January 17 and March 14 meetings, HCDC approved City Fiscal Year 2020 (CFY20) budget recommendations for Aid to Agencies and CDBG/HOME housing and public facilities projects. Staff will provide an overview of the draft CFY20 (Federal FY19) Annual Action Plan (AAP) which incorporates these recommendations for the upcoming fiscal year, followed by discussion, proposed changes, and consideration of recommending the Plan to Council. The AAP summarizes actions and resources to help address the needs and goals in the 2016- 2020 CITY STEPS for CFY20. The Plan includes the budget for CDBG and HOME funds, a description of the projects to be funded, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) -required information. Upon approval by Council, the Plan is submitted to HUD for approval. Final CDBG and HOME entitlement amounts are currently unknown, and the City cannot submit an AAP to HUD until the allocation is finalized. However, the 2 draft's allocations will be adjusted proportionally if the final allocation is within 20 percent of estimated grant amounts, subject to federal caps/requirements and requested amounts. A 30-day public comment period for the AAP will begin May 3 and run through June 4, 2019. The City Council is scheduled to hold a public meeting and formally approve the Plan on Tuesday, June 4, 2019. Public copies will be available at the Iowa City Public Library, Neighborhood Services Department at City Hall, and online at www.icgov.org/actionplan. Item 8: Discussion of the Community Development Week Staff has planned a tour of certain CDBG and HOME -funded projects for HCDC during Community Development Week, April 22-26. Item 9: Staff/Commission Comment Item 10: Adjournment* MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2019 — 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ROOM 202 PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Megan Alter, Charlie Eastham, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz, Christine Harms, John McKinstry, Maria Padron and Paula Vaughan MEMBERS ABSENT: [vacant position], Mitch Brouse STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Enka Kubly OTHERS PRESENT: Ryan Hoist, Elias Ortiz, Craig Moser, Jake Kundert, Shirley Tramble, Brenda Nogaj, Kan Wilken, Roger Lusala, Roger Goedken, Brianna Wills, Heath Brewer, Ashley Gillette, Anthony Smith, Sara Barron, Michi Lopez, Martha Norbeck RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 5-0 (Eastham and Fixmer-Oraiz recused) the Commission recommends to City Council the following allocation of FY20 Emerging Aid to Agencies funds: $9,000 to Grow Johnson County, $5,000 to the Center for Worker Justice, and $5,000 to Successful Living. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends to City Council the following allocation of FY20 CDBG/HOME funds: CDBG HOME Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program - Lot Acquisition/Rental Construction $176,000 Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity - Lot Acquisition/Homebuyer Assistance $50,000 Successful Living - Rental Acquisition $164,000 The Housing Fellowship - Rental Rehabilitation $70,000 Successful Living - Rental Rehab $59,000 The Housing Fellowship - CHDO Operating $21,000 Domestic Violence Intervention Program - Shelter Repair $90,000 Old Brick—ADA/Structural Fortification Improvements $10,000 In the event federal funds are higher or lower than budgeted by 20% or less, these amounts will be prorated accordingly, subject to federal caps/requirements and requested amounts; in the event federal funds are higher or lower than budgeted by more than 20%, another funding round will begin. Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 2 of 11 CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Vaughan called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 21, 2019 MINUTES: Eastham moved to approve the minutes of February 21, 2019 with corrections. Alter seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0- PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FY2020 EMERGING AID TO AGENCIES APPLICATIONS: Eastham excused himself from this agenda item as he is on the Board of one of the applicants. Fixmer Oraiz also recused herself as she is employed by one of the applicants. Lehmann presented the Commission with a summary of the six applications and the requested funding amounts and discussed clarifications about the Forest View Mobile Home Park application. The applicant, Center for Worker Justice, is not able to be present at this evening's meeting but Lehmann can try to answer any questions regarding the application. Padron began by stating she recommended $9,500 for Unlimited Abilities and $9,500 for Grow Johnson County. Vaughan recommended $7,000 for Grow Johnson County. Harms recommended $5,000 for Grow Johnson County. McKinstry recommended $5,000 for Grow Johnson County and $5,000 for Successful Living and $9,000 for the mobile home park redevelopment. Alter recommended $3,800 to all the applicants except for Little Creations Academy. Padron noted the minimum allocation should be $5,000 so Alter reconfigured her allocations to $5,000 for Center for Worker Justice, $5,000 for Johnson Clean Energy and $5,000 for Successful Living. Lehmann added all recommendations into a spreadsheet and calculated the averages McKinstry noted there is the most consensus for Grow Johnson County so that allocation should be at least the minimum of $5,000. Given the total amount of funds the Commission has to allocate to emerging agencies, they can only fund at most two other organizations. Padron noted the next two top vote getters were Successful Living and Center for Worker Justice (Forest View). If both those were awarded $5,000, the total allocated would be $15,000 which leaves $4,000. Padron asked why McKinstry and Alter wanted to fund the mobile home association. McKinstry noted that Forest View has a tremendous potential for affordable housing in the future. Lehmann clarified the request was not for people to attend the meetings but rather Center for Worker Justice costs which included helping the tenant association start by providing space for them to meet, occasional transportation, some translation for public meetings and childcare. The applicant stated that the most important of these functions is for meeting space rent so this association can meet. McKinstry noted this Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 3 of 11 is a true startup, it is an emerging organization. Vaughan said her concern was that the organization seemed temporary, project based, and not an emerging agency. Padron noted they are funding the Center for Worker Justice which is an agency, for their project of helping this neighborhood association. However the Center for Worker Justice has been around for more than two years and has received funding from the City so wouldn't they be excluded from this. Lehmann clarified the Centerfor Worker Justice has not received Aid to Agencies funds which makes them eligible for this funding. Alter supports this application because the Center for Worker Justice is lending aid to a group in community outreach and is helping a neighborhood association. Vaughan questioned the allocation to Successful Living which appeared to be an allocation to pay employees but that would not be an ongoing payment, it would only be for one year. Her concern is if they are having difficulty paying their employees then perhaps the model for their organization should be reviewed. Harms agreed and noted all the agencies are having difficulty with payments from Medicaid and not getting paid as much as they thought and this may start a trend of all agencies coming forward. The change in Medicaid payment was known to the agencies and some likely prepared for it better than others. Alter feels this application was a creative attempt at a solution to the problem at least for the year and was thinking of the people who are impacted by the care from Successful Living but acknowledges Harms' point that this is not a permanent solution. Padron noted these funds are for emerging agencies and Successful Living has been around for 20 years and some of the other applicants, like the energy project (Johnson Clean Energy), is very new and interesting. Vaughan noted she would like to see more details on what Johnson Clean Energy will be using the funding for and be able to target their ideas, they appear to have a lot of goals, which are all great, but it is a lot to accomplished and they need to be more focused. Padron suggested allocating $5,000 to Successful Living and $5,000 to Center for Worker Justice and the remaining $9,000 to Grow Johnson County. Grow Johnson County has never been funded before and is helping many people. Harms noted Grow Johnson County had come before the Commission before but set aside their funding request when hearing another agencies needs and acknowledging that agency needed the funding more. Harms moved to recommend to City Council the following allocation of FY20 Emerging Aid to Agencies funds: $9,000 to Grow Johnson County, $5,000 to the Center for Worker Justice, and $5,000 to Successful Living. Alter seconded the motion, a vote was taken and motion passed 5.0 (Eastham and Fixmer-Oraiz recused). RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FY2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME INVESTMENTS PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (HOME) APPLICATIONS: Lehmann shared a handout with the Commission that had the CDBG/HOME allocations ordered by average score, projects with more than $50,000 should get first consideration and per the City's Consolidated Plan they can only fund two public facilities projects. Additionally, there are staff comments, one is Successful Living has unspent funds from the past fiscal year and if additional funds are allocated they may have difficulty meeting their commitment deadlines, therefore staff recommends not funding Successful Living until they spend down the current funding. Also for new organizations without a lot of history, staff recommends starting with small funding amounts as there may be concerns with compliance and the five year reversion of assets requirement. If a new organization does not last for five years, then the City has to pay back those funds to the federal government and if the organization doesn't own their facility they must be able to lease it for the five year compliance period. Lehmann said this may affect the applications from Little Creation Academy and Old Brick. City Staff will monitor all CDBG/HOME funded projects and work with agency staff to make sure they meet compliance. Eastham asked about the Successful Living application and how much were they allocated and have left unspent. Lehmann said they have approximately $30,000 from the FY18 rehab allocation unspent, forthe FY19 acquisition they have spent around $60,000 and will spend approximately $75,000 shortly which Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 4 of 11 leaves approximately $60,000 in additional funds they have not spent. The rehab project is the one they have had more delays on, not as much with acquisition projects. Lehmann noted this is a concern staff wanted the Commission to be aware of as they award funds, the Commission can still allocate funds as they see best and staff will work with those agencies to make sure there are no issues moving forward. Eastham noted that the new Successful Living rehab project could get funded and move forward even though the current rehab project is having issues. Roger Goedken (Successful Living) stated with regards to the FY18 rehab project they anticipate the work being done in April, weather has been some of the hold-up. With the home acquisition funds they have purchased one home and have residents moving in, the other they just closed on and they anticipate to spend those remaining funds by the end of the fiscal year as they are actively looking at houses. He explained there were many issues with the rehab project including when federal agencies shut down, rental moratorium, and issues with finding contractors. He added that even when they have acquisition projects they sometimes have to do limited rehab to those houses to make them accessible for their clients. Lehmann stated there were also some delays with the FY18 acquisition but staff had amended the Annual Action Plan for it and it was completed a couple months back. Goedken said the current application is for a kitchen/bathroom remodel and new HVAC on a house they purchased a few years ago, they do have residents currently living there but the repairs are needed. Lehmann stated regarding the HUD guidance forthe boiler issue for Little Creations Academy, HUD requested additional clarification and Lehmann supplied it but has yet to hear back. Vaughan began with the public facilities projects (CDBG) and noted they can fund no more than two projects. Lehmann noted they have $100,000 to allocate and also that CDBG funds can be used for housing projects but HOME funds cannot be used for public facility projects. Vaughan stated when looking at the commissioner's allocations it appears everyone was in favor of funding Domestic Violence Intervention Program - Shelter Repair and additionally the Old Brick—ADA/Structural Fortification Improvements. Alter proposed allocating $90,000 to DVIP and $10,000 for Old Brick. Eastham noted the DVIP application is strong in terms of the need to repair the shelter as well as the need to repair the parking lot however he feels financing the repair to the parking lot could be done in another way and the Commission's priority should be on the repairs to the shelter interior. He noted Council has the ability to provide additional funds to these organizations and the Council should pay for the parking lot repair. Alter agrees however noted that Council just funded a larger allocation in the Aid to Agencies based on Commission recommendation and may point to the fact the Commission indeed has funds to support this application in this case. McKinstry noted with the recent consolidation, DVIP now has to cover a larger geographic area and that is stretching their already dwindling funds. If they had the money to do these repairs, such as the parking lot, they would have done it— they do not have additional funding to support this repair. Padron agreed with McKinstry and noted that what Eastham stated about DVIP is how she feels about Old Brick, perhaps Old Brick could find funding elsewhere. Fixmer-Oraiz agreed with Alter and noted if we send any of these applications to Council they may not fund anything. She also agrees with Padron that Old Brick could have more avenues for funding. Harms feels the Commission should support Old Brick and noted it is always hard for the Commission because there are applications for historical preservation and others for necessary community services. For that reason she feels comfortable with the allocation of $90,000 to DVIP and $10,000 to Old Brick. Vaughan noted the Commission is to only review what is in the application before them, they are not here to make recommendations on how other agencies might run their business, they are to look at the applications and make recommendations based on the information in those applications. Eastham noted he is fine with the allocation of $90,000 to DVIP and $10,000 to Old Brick but will keep advocating for City Council to step up and help agencies, we should not solely rely on federal funding. Lehmann noted that Old Brick is also applying for local and state historic preservation grants as well. Vaughan next moved to housing applications, there are $540,000 in HOME funds to allocate. Looking at the Commission's individual allocations it appears if they went with the averages for application they Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 5 of 11 would be slightly under their allocated amount. Eastham noted he is uneasy allocating money to Habitat for new homes when there are other agencies such as Successful Living and MYEP who have clients living in homes in need of repair. Padron agrees Lehmann noted The Housing Fellowship - Rental Rehabilitation would need to be allocated $70,000 based on the estimated funding required for CHDO reserve funds. Eastham stated Successful Living and MYEP had a clear plan and need for adding to their group homes, they both have waiting lists, both run stellar group home programming for the residents, the rehab amounts seemed reasonable. Eastham added he would be fine not allocating any CHDO operating funds to The Housing Fellowship, he feels that organization would be fine without those funds and would prefer giving MYEP and Successful Living amounts closer to what they applied for. Vaughan noted her concern with Successful Living having challenges meeting timeframes and payroll (since they requested paying employees from the emerging agencies grant). She is also concerned about the future of Medicaid funding from the State and feels more local aid will be needed for these agencies. McKinstry agrees with Eastham on the issue of need for affordable rental versus affordable ownership and noted he did not allocate as much to Habitat for Humanity because the money could help more individuals in rentals rather than ownership. He also values the need for affordable homeownership and it addresses historic imbalances and therefore would want to see some homeownership in the mix which should be supported by some public funds as well as private funds. Fixmer-Oraiz was swayed by the presentation Habitat gave at the last meeting and learned about the overall impact homeownership has on the community. She allocated the full amount but equally can see the need for assisted living as well and will support those as well. Alter noted that Habitat said they could purchase a lot and get started on a new home with a $50,000 allocation so that is what she feels they should be awarded. That will open up more monies for Successful Living or MYEP. She does strongly support funding Habitat for the reasons McKinstry noted. Eastham asked if there was any support from other commissioners to reduce The Housing Fund allocation and therefore not fund their CHDO operating request. He stated he has seen their budget and feels this amount requested is not a make or break amount in their overall budget. Those funds from the CHDO operating request could better be served in Successful Living and MYEP to expand the number of residents they could serve. Fixmer-Oraiz did not agree and felt CHDO operating funds should be funded. Padron agreed and also feels the Habitat allocation should be lowered to $50,000 and any additional funds be split amongst Successful Living and MYEP. The Commission discussed the reallocations and staff presented a new allocation table for the Commission to vote on. They also discussed what to do in the event the federal funding was different than what they based the allocations on. Lehmann said in the past, staff has prorated the allocations among the agencies unless it was more or less than a 20% difference. Eastham suggested no positive prorated amounts be added to The Housing Fellowship. Vaughan noted they could add if prorated up but to make sure the allocation is not more than the asking amount. McKinstry moved to recommend to City Council the following allocation of FY20 CDBG/HOME funds: CDBG HOME Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program -Lot Acquisition/Rental Construction $176,000 Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 6 of 11 Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity -Lot Acqu is ition/Homebuyer Assistance $50,000 Successful Living - Rental Acquisition $164,000 The Housing Fellowship - Rental Rehabilitation $70,000 Successful Living - Rental Rehab $59,000 The Housing Fellowship - CHDO Operating $21,000 Domestic Violence Intervention Program - Shelter Repair $90,000 Old Brick —ADA/Structural Fortification Improvements $10,000 In the event federal funds are higher or lower than budgeted by 20% or less, these amounts will be prorated accordingly, subject to federal caps/requirements and requested amounts; in the event federal funds are higher or lower than budgeted by more than 20%, another funding round will begin. Fixmer-Oraiz seconded. Passed 7.0 PRESENTATION ON FAIR HOUSING STUDY: Lehmann presented the Fair Housing Choice Study staff began working on some time ago, beginning with introduction, public input received and initial observations. Fair Housing Choice is the ability to choose housing free from unlawful discrimination, it applies to owners and renters, and to people providing other housing services as well such as financing. There are many protected classes based on Iowa City's Human Rights Ordinance including age, disability, color, class, race, nation of origin, creed or religion, sex, gender or identity or sex orientation, marital/familial status, presence or absence of dependents and most recently added public assistance as a source of income including Housing Choice Vouchers. The City strives to furtherfair housing in everything it does, it is a requirement of HUD funds but also applies to all the City's programs. This means the City tries to take meaningful actions to overcome patterns of segregation, promote fair housing choice and ultimately to foster inclusive communities. Lehmann pointed out that fair housing is different than affordable housing although there is a lot of overlap because often affordability is a barrier to housing choice. However, fair housing is the idea that housing is available to all residents of the community whereas affordable housing is housing costs that match incomes. Often protected classes have lower incomes so providing affordable housing is important to fair housing but it is not sufficient to affirmatively further fair housing. The Fair Housing Choice study is being conducted by Neighborhood Services and the Office of Equity and Human Rights. It includes both qualitative (getting narrative) and quantitative (looking at data) components. In terms of public input so far (qualitative) City staff held a public meeting and six focus groups of different representative groups (a total of 83 attendees), and then also did a public survey for broader public perspectives, which got 234 responses. For the quantitative analysis they looked at private and public data, most of which is from the census. The goal is to complete the study in May 2019 so it is ready for review when the Consolidated Plan is updated. Staff will share a copy of the study draft with Commissioners in May. For the survey, 234 individuals responded, skewing towards higher incomes. The survey was made available online and hard copies were provided through the public library and social service agencies. They received good feedback in terms of getting representation of protected classes. 70% of respondents were females, 17% were nonwhite or Hispanic, 5%were foreign -born, 20% had a disability, 12% spoke another language, 12% had a Housing Choice Voucher. One big thing that stuck out were only 43% of respondents said they felt they understood their fair housing rights while 26%felt they experienced discrimination. Somewhat shocking but not surprising, was only 3% of those filed a complaint. Most stated they didn't know what good it would do (70% of respondents) while others were unfamiliar with Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 7 of 11 how to do it or afraid of retaliation. In terms of barriers cited, affordable housing was overwhelmingly cited as the primary barrier to fair housing choice, including all for types of households (large families, small families, persons with disabilities, etc.) and the most common source of discrimination people noted was having a Housing Choice Voucher. In terms of public policies that were identified as barriers none received a majority, but the top ones were City funding practices followed by zoning and housing codes. At focus groups and the public meeting, the comments mirrored many results from the survey. Iowa City was noted as an expensive housing market, and incomes don't necessary match the cost of the market and it is especially problematic where there is not a diversity of housing choices within a neighborhood (if it is all single family it can be challenging for different groups to find housing). This includes both City assisted housing and privately affordable housing because it is just not City assisted housing that is affordable. For the housing stock it was also mentioned that there are low quality rentals, especially near downtown, which can be problematic for persons who are in protected classes as well as accessibility challenges in older parts of the City with properties not built to visitability standards. There were several public policy challenges raised, development codes can increase costs and limit flexibility, especially where design review is involved. Policies need to better align with goals and funding that is allocated should match up with the goals the City has (it doesn't always). The City should also streamline processes wherever they can including rental permitting, and the City needs to make sure they enforce their rental housing standards so there is quality housing. Coordination was also cited as an issue, between the City and surrounding jurisdictions and also with other actors (tenants, builders, landlords, etc.) or educational institutions such as the school district and university. Overall education is generally needed for tenants and landlords to better understand what fair housing rights are, what the responsibilities of different parties are in the housing market and to better information people on neighborhoods (people can be informally or formally steered towards certain neighborhoods) and the survey corroborated that. In terms of data observations, Iowa City is a college town and has more young people, fewer families, and fewer children especially near downtown. Generally, near downtown there are fewer persons with disabilities because it is a younger population, it is more ethnically, racially and culturally diverse, a lot due to immigration into Iowa City especially from Asian populations, but also black/African American populations as well. There are some racial/ethnic concentrations across the City, specifically Black/ Hispanic groups south of Highway 6 and Asian groups concentrated on the west side. None of these concentrations meet the standard HUD for being a racially and ethnically concentrated area of poverty however. Those areas do tend to have lower incomes but the lowest income areas tend to be nearer to the university where students are. There are large limited English proficiency populations, especially Spanish (3100 speakers) and Mandarin (2400 speakers). Segregation by race or ethnicity is considered low in Iowa City based on the dissimilarity index standards, but it has been increasing overtime. For the economy, it is focused around education and healthcare, there is a high proportion of low-income households due to student populations and that is increasing as well. Minority households tend to have lower incomes in Iowa City, primarily outside downtown, and LMI (low moderate income) areas are primarily to the south and west but there is a large LMI area downtown as well. The majority of housing in Iowa City is rental, concentrated in around downtown and near the university. Minority groups tend to have lower homeownership rates in Iowa City, which especially true for Black households and households of two or more races. There has been a large increase in multifamily building permits, peaking in 2016, much of it is downtown, and there are correspondingly higher vacancy rates with that. That being noted, rents have increased faster than incomes or housing values. Housing values have actually been closer to increases in income lately but rents increased more quickly. In terms of cost burden (which means they are paying more than 30% of their income on housing), 16% of homeowners and 64% of renters are cost burdened, a lot of whom are students based on non -familial status. Minority households tend to experience housing issues at higher rates including housing cost burden and other issues such as overcrowding and the quality of facilities. Lehmann noted there is limited data on fair housing because things don't get reported, but of the data they do have in Iowa City there tends to be around 10-12 fair housing complaints per year. Most of those are based on discrimination by race, disability or sex. 1/3 tend to be outside the City's jurisdiction so they Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 8 of 11 get referred to the correct jurisdiction, 1/3 get closure at the City or withdrawn due to resolution and the remaining 1/3 require further various levels of investigation. Data from the State or Federal level is even more limited, most is based on Johnson County. Progress since the last plan, there were five findings and while the City was making progress some of these findings have cropped up again. For example, racial ethnic concentrations is still there, outreach and education is still an issue and a huge need. Staff next looked at policies, public sector policies in addition to private sector policies and Lehmann discussed those and where staff found impediments. For City development codes there is no reasonable accommodation policy for persons with disabilities which is basically a streamlined approach for, say someone in a wheelchair to put a ramp outside their house in a historic district where there are many levels of complex policies to deal with. Staff is looking to adopt some sort of reasonable accommodation policy to ensure people can be housed in older parts of the City without running into bureaucratic barriers. Also staff is looking at generally increasing opportunities or choices for housing by allowing diverse housing throughout the City. That will focus on increasing density because single family can be affordable depending on construction but allowing more multifamily by right in residential areas would be good. They are also looking at bedroom caps in multifamily as that can restrict large families and student living. Finally looking at how permanent supportive housing is currently treated in the community because it is treated as separate use only allowable in specific zones (essentially the Cross Park Place project where it is long-term housing, more than a year lease). Housing Code has new requirements like rental permit cap, increased inspections, which may affect protected classes, these changes are relatively new as of 2018 so it is hard to know the impact or results but it will be tracked. Vaughan asked if those new requirements were federal requirements. Lehmann replied it was a State requirement change where a city could not distinguish between nonfamily and family households in the zoning code which was a way the City was trying to balance student housing downtown. When the State made that change the City reviewed the process and put a cap on areas near the university and also increased inspections for certain types of units. For affordable housing assistance, Lehmann stated the City put more local funding towards affordable housing initiatives but it doesn't have the same federal requirements, so staff has not been tracking protected characteristics for beneficiaries. As such, impacts are difficult to ascertain for all City assistance because more than half the units created aren't being tracked. With new funding comes new programs and lots of requirements and staff is making sure administrative rules are well coordinated. For site selection and neighborhood revitalization, Lehmann stated the Affordable Housing Location Model and rental permit cap interact in complex ways; both affect certain types of housing in certain areas at certain times. Staff is working to identify those affects for affordable housing and service providers, how they impact choices for protected classes and seeing if there are ways to streamline some of these programs as they come into play. Currently there are 1215 Housing Choice Vouchers, about 850 of which are in Iowa City. Within Iowa City, Housing Choice Vouchers are still relatively concentrated in certain neighborhoods, typically the more affordable neighborhoods thus the concentration. However based on the survey there is also some evidence landlords may still be discriminating against Housing Choice Voucher recipients. Therefore providing more information to Housing Choice Voucher recipients is needed, further alerting them of their rights and encouraging them to live in other areas of the City is something staff is recommending. Also The Housing Authority has a preference categories with families, persons with disabilities, and elderly with residency in Iowa City as the first group to receive vouchers. Staff recommends an equity analysis to make sure the policy is targeting the correct populations for service as based on the CITY STEPS Consolidated Plan. With regards to home lending, Lehmann noted the data showed Black and Hispanic households have elevated rates of denials, however a study that was conducted a year ago showed there are discrepancies in data entry and there are issues with a small sample size. Staff wants to follow up to make sure this is not discrimination and will continue to monitor. Additionally they recommend additional fair housing education for lenders and borrowers. Alter asked if the City has anyone that works with lenders and people who are applying to help them through the process. Lehmann stated the City does trainings for lenders but is unsure of how regularly it Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 9 of 11 is done. These trainings are also provided for the general public. Kubly added if a person is part of The Housing Choice Voucher program they are assigned a case worker to help them navigate the process. Eastham asked about impediments related to realtors. Lehmann said he had no data on it but based on the focus groups it doesn't seem to be much of an issue, it seems the larger issues for steering people to certain locations is word of mouth from others in the community. Eastham said he hears anecdotal statements about realtors engaging in steering certain people to certain locations of town. McKinstry noted when he has talked to realtors it appears everyone is super sensitive to steering and know it is illegal and unethical and are hypervigilant in not steering people to certain locations of town. He was startled to find there are four or five protected classes here in Iowa City more than in other areas of the State or Nation. He stated that two woman in Missouri, this year, were denied the opportunity to live in a retirement center because they were married to each other. Because of situations like that McKinstry is so glad Iowa City has these additional protected classes. Lehmann noted for the rental market there is a mismatch between the cost of rentals and incomes and staff recommends more rentals in high demand areas, especially downtown, and considering ways to reduce the cost of housing such as group living options. The also recommend more education on the protections for renters and keeping landlords apprised of the protected classes and education of best practices. Additionally staff needs to make sure all fair housing complaints are dealt with in a timely manner and resolved quickly. Since there is a lack of metrics for policy impacts staff will need to make sure they measure these fair housing impacts on protected classes. Lehmann noted staff does not do a lot of testing in Iowa City but it is one of the better ways identify discrimination or steering. Finally Lehmann talked about other observations worth noting. There are ethnical and racial concentrations so encouraging a range of housing throughout the City while continuing to invest in minority, LMI or protected class neighborhoods is important. Homeownership rates are lower for minority groups so it is important to encouraging homebuyer programs in targeted areas for protected classes. For elderly households and persons with disabilities, especially those with ambulatory issues who cannot walk around easily, there is a need to focus on areas of town with accessibility barriers to help ensure aging in place is possible. Student populations have the lowest incomes, so there is a need to ensure all, especially those who are LMI or in protected classes, can afford to live in the community. In terms of next steps, Lehmann stated staff is working on the internal review of the draft of the Fair Housing Study, hoping to get a draft to stakeholders in April and start to let the document be public for adoption process, there will be a public meeting with HCDC on May 16 and then go before Council either May 21 or June 4 and have the document adopted prior to June 30. Eastham stated he wanted to see the data behind this study for the HCDC review. Harms noted that when someone has an issue, time constraints for resolving the issue is enormous, especially for working individuals. Perhaps the City could increase hours of availability to help the public. Fixmer-Oraiz noted a recurring theme in the Study is a need for education and outreach and there definitely needs to be more for renters, landlords and potential homeowners. Eastham stated if the City is going to put resources toward this education and outreach it should be for consumers, realtors and banks already have some educational opportunities. Fixmer-Oraiz noted the university does a freshman intake and perhaps the City can provide education on fair housing. Lehmann noted the university does a "Renter 101" event and Iowa City provides information at that. Vaughan suggested something otherthan just a written brochure, it doesn't often speak to a lot of people, and is easily tossed. She noted it should be written to speak to all individuals, regardless of the level of education. Padron noted it is important to remember not every resident has a computer or internet and much of what comes from the City is via email or directs one to a website. Harms noted with the elderly or others they may not want to use a computer and the City needs to be cognizant of that. Lehmann noted they did hand out hard copies of the survey in the senior living areas, agencies and also at the library for those that did not want to use a computer. The surveys were provided in multiple languages. Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 10 of 11 Vaughan asked if there was educational pieces created do they have to be done by staff or can volunteers assist. Lehmann said they would welcome volunteers and partners. McKinstry is happy to see the interest in collecting data on housing in the City. Fixmer-Oraiz asked if the City could partner with the school district and send information home in back packs. Lehmann stated the school district has tightened up on allowing things to be handed out but improved coordination between the City and schools is needed. Any additional comments or questions can be directed to Lehmann- STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT: Lehmann noted that Council has appointed Peter Nkumu to the Commission, he is the president of the Congolese Community of Iowa and will be a great addition to the Commission. Staff is interviewing consultants for the Consolidated Plan this month. Staff, Padron and the head of the Human Rights Commission had a brief discussion on the ways to revamp the Aid to Agencies process, conversations will continue in April. The next HCDC meeting will be April 18 where we will discuss projects not conforming to the unsuccessful delayed project policy which will include a report from The Arthur Street Healthy Living Center. They will also have HCDC monitoring reports and begin Aid to Agency visioning process and also a background information presentation on the Affordable Housing Model. Staff will present the Annual Action Plan and continue the Fair Housing Study review. Eastham noted he heard from an agency partner some agencies are having discussions with the City Manager on Aid to Agency funds and what those agencies feel the City should be funding. Lehmann said this will be part of the discussion at the next meeting. Lehmann stated Community Development Week is April 22-26, there will be some type of proclamation and Vaughan suggested doing some type of tour of projects that are complete, to see the impact. Lehmann noted there is a new tenant education program that the local Homeless Coordination Board is putting together, it is intended as a possible alternative to eviction for tenants. It will start April 9 in the Iowa City Public Library and be held every Tuesday through May 14 for a total of six modules. Fixmer-Oraiz had a question on monies from other sources and specifically The United Way who gives out all kinds of money to agencies. Lehmann noted the application process does go through The United Way along with Coralville, Johnson County and United Way. ADJOURNMENT: Fixmer-Oraiz moved to adjourn. Alter seconded. Passed 7-0 Housing and Community Development Commission March 14, 2019 Page 11 of 11 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record Name Terms Exp. 7/10 9/20 10/11 11/15 12/20 1/17 2/21 3/14 Alter, Megan 7/1/21 X X X X X X X X Brouse, Mitch 7/1/21 X X X X X X X O/E Eastham, Charlie 7/1/20 X X X X X X X X Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa 7/1/20 X O/E X X X O/E X X Harms, Christine 7/1/19 X X X X X X X X Lamkins, Bob 7/1/19 O/E O/E X O/E O/E , McKinstry, John 7/1/17 X X X X X X X X Padron, Maria 7/1/20 X X O/E O/E X X X X Vaughan, Paula 7/1/19 X X X X X X X X • Resigned from Commission Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant