Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-03-14 Info PacketI P AM � Eq� CITY 01� 1OVVA CITY www.icgov.org City Council Information Packet March 14, 2019 IP1. Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Miscellaneous IP2. Email from Mayor: Proposed Bills - SSB 1201 / HSB 185 [Previously distributed in 3/12/19 Late Handouts] IP3. Email from Council member Thomas: Mann Elementary - Parent Drop-off on Fairchild St. [Previously distributed in 3/12/19 Late Handouts.] P4. Copy of report from National Low I ncome Housing Coalition from City Manager: The GAP, A Shortage of Affordable Homes IP5. 2019 Building Statistics IP6. Civil Service Entrance Examination: Maintenance Worker II - Horticulture Draft Minutes IP7. Historic Preservation Commission: February 14 IP8. Housing and Community Development Commission: February 21 IP9. Human Rights Commission: February 19 March 14, 2019 City of Iowa City Page 1 Item Number: 1. a< r 1 1p - CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org March 14, 2019 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule ATTACHMENTS: Description Council Tentative Meeting Schedule r I City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule _I Subject to change rAp- N � rAl�®r�11 March 14, 2019 CITY OF IOWA CITY Date Time Meeting Location Tuesday, April 2, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Monday, April 15, 2019 4:00 PM Reception ICCSD 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting TBA Tuesday, April 23, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 7, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 21, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, June 4, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, June 18, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, July 2, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, July 16, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Item Number: 2. a< r 1 1p - CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org March 14, 2019 Email from Mayor: Proposed Bills - SSB 1201 / HSB 185 [Previously distributed in 3/12/19 Late Handouts] ATTACHMENTS: Description Email from Mayor: Proposed Bills - SSB 1201 / HSB 185 [Previously distributed in 3/12/19 Late Handouts] Previously distributed in the 3/12/19 Late Handouts Kellie Fruehling From: Jim Throgmorton Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2019 10:12 AM To: Council Cc: Mazahir Salih; Bruce Teague; Pauline Taylor; Susan Mims; John Thomas; Rockne Cole; Geoff Fruin Subject: SSB 1201 / HSB 185 Fellow Council members, We should discuss whether the City should take a formal position on these proposed bills. On first glance, it appears the bills would, if enacted, undermine the ability of small businesses, homeowners, and farmers to generate electric power with small-scale solar panels and sell any excess power they generate back to the electric utility. Here's a link to one perspective on the bills. Other perspectives, including that of MidAmerican, would need to be considered. https: //www.bleedingheartland.com/2019/03/o8/midamericans-bid-to-crush-small-solar-creates-strange- lobbying-bedfellows/?f bclid=IwARo Cevj UZVkFsGghvs5PATMHMtj oThWFpELkTd66ggyiCOQRagUFw_CjZvs Mayor Jim Throgmorton Iowa City City Council, At -Large Bleeding Heartland Bleeding Heartland A community blog about Iowa politics About Highlights Wildflower Wednesday MidAmerican's bid to crush small solar creates strange lobbying bedfellows ® Friday, Mar 8 2019 1 Laura Belin 1 5 Comments 10 New! Tweet MidAmerican Energy's effort to crush small-scale solar generation made it through the Iowa legislature's first "funnel" and will be eligible for floor debate in both chambers. The House Commerce Committee on March 4 approved House Study Bill 185 (now renamed House File 669) without amendment on a party -line 12 to 10 vote. The Senate Commerce Committee amended the companion Senate Study Bill 1201 before advancing it on March 7. The bill will likely pass the upper chamber, where Republicans have a 32 to 17 majority. Although Republicans outnumber Democrats by 54 to 46 in the House, and MidAmerican's political action committee donated to dozens of incumbents' campaigns last year, getting the solar bill through the lower chamber will be no easy task. A utility -backed bill to undercut energy efficiency programs was one of the heaviest lifts during the 2018 session. Only after several concessions did supporters cobble together 52 Republican votes in the House. The GOP held 59 seats at that time. More than three dozen corporations, industry groups, or advocacy organizations have lobbyists registered for or against MidAmerican's solar bill. While it's not unusual for a high-profile bill to draw that kind of attention, the two camps seeking to persuade legislators on this issue reflect alliances rarely seen at the statehouse. CORPORATE MONOPOLIES, BUSINESS GROUPS AND ORGANIZED LABOR Pagel of 8 Username Password ❑ Remember Me Contin Forgot S Search Recent Posts Mar 14@9:21 am Three words By Bruce Lear 10 Commen Mar 13 @ 11:36am Iowa lawmakers pass anol 'Ag Gag' bill By Laura Belin I 1 Commer Mar 12 @ 7:28pm College admissions bdben sports betting bill By JohnMorrissey 10 Comi Mar 12 @ 3:28pm Reynolds takes solid step t voting rights By Laura Belin 10 Commer Mar 12 @ 8:1 Dam BIII targeting Iowans on pu cost $40 million by 2021 By mattchapman 10 Comn Mar 11 @ 5:34pm Iowa's defense of (whose) By r.richardson@mchsi.coi Mar 11 @ 12:10pm On polling eleven months i_ caucuses By Dan Guild 13 Comment: Mar 1l @ 8:45am Steve Bullock's testing the: Iowa Democrats By Laura Belin 10 Commer Mar 10 @ 10:18pm Dream big again https://www.bleedingheartland. com/2O l 9/03/08lmidamericans-bid-to-crush-small-solar-cr... 3/14/2019 Bleeding Heartland The sixteen entities registered for MidAmerican's bill at this writing fall into three categories. Utilities and related industries MidAmerican Energy, a monopoly provider to hundreds of thousands of Iowans, helped write the bill and was the first to have lobbyists sign on, right after the text was published on February 20. The following day, the Iowa Association of Municipal Utilities registered in favor. As monopoly providers in many Iowa communities, municipal utilities also benefit from limiting "distributed generation" by small-scale users of solar or wind power. The Central Iowa Power Cooperative, Iowa Association of Electric Cooperatives, and ITC Midwest (which operates transmission lines) are also supporting the bill. Mouthpieces for big business Four organizations that typically favor whatever large corporations want are lobbying for the solar bill too. Iowa Association of Business and Industry Americans for Prosperity Greater Des Moines Partnership Iowa Chamber Alliance (that group was registered "undecided" until March 4) I asked representatives from the Greater Des Moines Partnership why they are backing a bill that would in effect block small businesses from using solar power to reduce future energy costs. Joe Murphy, the partnership's senior vice president of government relations and public policy, provided this statement. The Partnership has supported pro -renewable energy policies for many years as part of our state legislative agenda. Iowa needs a pro -growth statewide policy that allows solar energy to thrive in the same way that wind energy has for many years in our state. We've seen tremendous economic development benefits from our innovative focus on wind energy and we can continue that pattern of new business growth, rural development, newjobs growth and more by supporting the SOLAR Act. First glaring flaw in that reasoning: the initial growth of wind energy stemmed from net metering policies the Iowa Utilities Board adopted during the 1980s. MidAmerican boasts about its large-scale wind farms now, but the company had to be dragged kicking and screaming to invest in renewables. With state policy resembling the current proposal, the industry might never have gotten a strong foothold in Iowa, because it would not have been economical for smaller users to install wind turbines. Second glaring flaw in the Partnership's logic: MidAmerican presented similar arguments to the Iowa Utilities Board a few years ago, when that board invited comments on distributed generation, including "the benefits and challenges" for utilities. The three-member utilities board, composed entirely of corporate -friendly Terry Branstad appointees, rejected the idea of imposing new charges on solar users and concluded that "additional information is needed in order to move forward with the implementation of changes to net metering.' To that end, the board ordered MidAmerican and Iowa's other investor-owned utility Alliant to set up pilot net metering projects, which won't be completed for more than a year. During the March 4 House Commerce Committee meeting, Democratic State Representative John Forbes called for putting off any policy change until lawmakers can review the results of the utilities' net metering pilot projects. Neither MidAmerican nor its allies have provided any compelling reason to pass this bill now. Labor and groups benefiting from construction projects MidAmerican is rumored to be planning to build a large solar array if state lawmakers approve and Governor Kim Reynolds signs this bill. That is presumably why SSAB, formerly known as IPSCO Steel, is registered for the legislation. Six organized labor groups are also supporting the effort: Page 2 of 8 By Bronxinlowa I 1 Commr Mar 10 @ 6:04pm Dead reckoning By garykroeger 11 Comme View More Tags - Barack obama - Terry Branstad - Chuck Grassley - Joni Ernst Rod Blum Dave Loebsack David Young Steve King State Legislature Iowa Suprwne Court Environment LGBT Media Iowa Wildflowers - Throwback Thursday view More Election Coveragr - Absentee ballot numbers Iowa caucuses IA -Sen IA -01 IA -02 IA -03 IA -04 - Iowa House races Iowa Senate races https://www.bleedingheartland.coml20l 9/03/08lmidamericans-bid-to-crush-small-solar-cr... 3/14/2019 Bleeding Heartland IBEW [International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers] Iowa State Conference International Union of Operating Engineers—Local 234 • Central Iowa Building Construction Trades Council Laborers International Union of North America • Iowa State Building and Construction Trades (their lobbyist is Mike Gronstal, the longtime Democratic Iowa Senate majority leader) North Central States Regional Council of Carpenters I sought comment from most of the lobbyists representing labor unions. Iowa stands to lose hundreds of middle-class jobs for solar installers under MidAmerican's proposal. If this bill were good for working people, wouldn't the Iowa Association for Business and Industry and Americans for Prosperity be against it? The only lobbyist to respond to my inquiry was Threase Harms, who provided this statement on behalf of IBEW State Conference President Patrick Wells. This bill does not diminish the ability for the development and/or use of solar energy. A sound infrastructure is critical to the distribution of all sources of energy. Building and maintaining that infrastructure requires resources. Currently, private generation customers benefit from the sale of their excess energy but burden none of the costs associated with building and maintaining the lines it goes out on. That cost falls back onto all other customers. As private generation grows, this system will become less sustainable, either further increasing the costs to all consumers or creating deficiencies in the integrity of the infrastructure through lack of resources which in turn will compromisejobs. This bill gives the utility the ability to justly recover costs associated with the distribution of power from those who choose to benefit from the generation of excess power for distribution back onto the grid. This will help keep costs down and maintain the ability to ensure a sound infrastructure going forward. Notice how closely Wells' comment tracks with the dark money ads promoting this bill and what MidAmerican's spokesperson told me last month: Today, not all electric grid users pay for the costs that support the electric grid that serves all customers. Under current state policy, private generators don't always pay grid costs, which creates the cost shift. The SOLAR Act would address the customer fairness issue by eliminating the shifting of costs from one customer onto another, while maintaining the affordable and predictable energy that Iowans expect and deserve. With the passage of the SOLAR Act, Iowa can capitalize on a policy that will encourage solar growth through community solar, subscription -based solar and utility -scale solar, while also advancing private generation in a responsible and fair way. [...] Iowa's current policy creates a subsidy that forces customers who don't have private generation to pay for those who do. We support customers having private generation, but not the cost shift that's created when they don't pay for their use of the grid. [...] The Cedar Rapids Gazette's James Q. Lynch reported on last month's House subcommittee meeting. [F]ormer Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal said the bill would "usher in a dramatic era in solar energy." He disputed earlier claims that solar generators are already contributing to the cost of maintaining the grid. Their monthly service charge only covers the cost of the electric meter and billing, he said. Page 3 of 8 https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2019/03/08/midamericans-bid-to-crush-small-solar-cr... 3/14/2019 Bleeding Heartland This bill is an excellent case study in how labor unions are not always reliable progressive allies. During the past two years, no environmental organizations gave cover for corporate -backed Republican bills that hurt working Iowans by reducing their wages or workers' compensation benefits or collective bargaining rights. But when large companies want to build environmentally destructive pipelines, some labor unions become loud boosters, echoing exaggerated projections on job creation. Now we see labor advocates regurgitating talking points that "rely on average Iowans not understanding how the grid works.` It would be more refreshing for them to admit they don't mind if MidAmerican monopolizes future solar power development here. Most of the 800 estimated jobs in Iowa's solar industry, which will be at risk if this bill passes, are not union jobs. I was relieved that all Democrats on the House Commerce Committee opposed House Study Bill 185 on March 4.1 haven't heard of any Senate Democrats supporting this bill either. CORRECTION: Democratic Senators Liz Mathis and Jim Lykam voted the bill out of Senate committee. Labor lobbying can put Democratic legislators in a difficult position; that's the main reason U.S. Representative Dave Loebsack occasionally voted for bad Keystone XL pipeline bills. Even if labor lobbyists can't deliver many Democratic votes on this issue, their backing could help MidAmerican if it dissuades Democrats from putting up a big fight during House or Senate floor debate. SOLAR INDUSTRY, ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES...AND BIG AG Twenty-one entities are registered against MidAmerican's bill. They fall into three categories: Solar industry or companies using solar panels MidAmerican's bill threatens businesses that install PV systems as well as their potential customers. • Iowa Solar Energy Trade Association (one of their lobbyists is former Republican House Speaker Chris Rants) Renewable Energy Group (REG) Iowa chapter of the National Electrical Contractors Association Iowa 80 Group, Inc (at least one 1-80 truck stop has solar panels) Waste Management, Inc. (my understanding is they are concerned the logic behind this bill could be applied later to methane) Rural School Advocates of Iowa Urban Education Network of Iowa The last two groups registered against the bill on March 6. Changing current net metering policy would in effect prevent school districts from installing solar panels on school buildings, which often have high energy costs and tend to have large, flat roofs. Environmental advocates The Iowa Environmental Council and Environmental Law and Policy Center were first to register against House Study Bill 185, within hours of its publication on February 20. Other groups working on related issues have since joined the fight: Center for Rural Affairs Raccoon River Watershed Association Izaak Walton League—Iowa Division Citizens for a Healthy Iowa Iowa Chapter of Sierra Club Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement Action Fund Iowa Interfaith Power & Light Iowa Farmers Union I put the Iowa Farmers Union in this category, because more often than not that group aligns with environmental advocates, not industry groups representing conventional agriculture. Page 4 of 8 https://www. bleedingheartland. coml20 l 9/03 /08lmidaynericans-bid-to-crush-small- solar-cr... 3/14/2019 Bleeding Heartland Heavy -hitters in the agricultural sector When the Iowa legislature considers water quality or soil conservation bills, the environmental community and leading voices for Big Ag land in opposite camps. But some biofuels companies and many farmers with confined -animal feeding operations (CAFOs) have installed solar panels to reduce costs in an energy -intensive business. Largely for that reason, the following four entities registered against MidAmerican's bill: Iowa Pork Producers Association Archer Daniels Midland Company Iowa Renewable Fuels Association* Iowa Biodiesel Board Those players have a lot of pull with Republican lawmakers. During the Senate Commerce Committee's March 7 meeting, Republicans adopted an amendment (enclosed below) that exempts the following types of operations from additional costs: cogeneration facilities producing combined heat and power; renewable fuel producers registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as manufacturers; facilities that use less than 10 percent biomass; and private generators with a capacity greater than one megawatt (larger than any home or small business). Kerri Johannsen, energy program director for the Iowa Environmental Council, provided this comment to Bleeding Heartland on the special carve out for big players. The amendment adopted in today's Senate Commerce Committee highlights a big problem with MidAmerican's claim that customers with distributed generation are increasing costs for other customers. If that were the case, it would make absolutely no sense to exempt the largest customers from the new policy. While we agree that the exempted types of projects are valuable and should be able to net meter, it is incredibly unfair to small businesses, farmers, communities, churches, schools, and individuals who want to make their own investments in solar generation. Distributed solar has measureable benefits for all customers and all customers should be fairly compensated. This amendment makes it even more clear that MidAmerican's intent is not to "solve" an issue of one customer subsidizing another, but to kill Iowa's growing, independent solar industry and shut down customer choice. MidAmerican did not respond to Bleeding Heartland's inquiry about the Senate amendment, which undermines the company's stated case for the bill (the so-called "cost shift" to other grid users). UPDATE: Tina Hoffman, director of corporate communications for the utility, sent the following comment on March 9. Co -generation customers already take service under a multi -part rate as their standard rate. The demand charge they pay as a part of their standard rate already covers their infrastructure cost. The amendment simply clarified that difference. The rate for private generators — who are almost exclusively residential customers and small commercial customers — is a two-part rate that doesn't recover infrastructure costs if the private generation equals the customer's usage. While the amendment makes no sense if you accept MidAmerican's rhetoric at face value, it's a brilliant tactical move. When last year's big energy bill stalled in the Iowa House, backers amended the legislation to remove a proposed new energy efficiency fee on solar customers. That change prompted the Pork Producers to switch their lobbyists from "against" to "undecided," which shook loose a few Republican votes. The Senate amendment is a transparent bid to get the Pork Producers and biofuels industry to drop their opposition to MidAmerican's bill. At the close of business on March 8, all four big ag interests listed above are still registered against the Senate version. Watch this space, though. Page 5 of 8 https://www.bleedingheartland.coml2019/03/08lmidamericans-bid-to-crush-small-solar-cr... 3/14/2019 Bleeding Heartland Page 6 of 8 Bleeding Heartland welcomes tips on other bills that have created unusual alliances in the lobby *UPDATE: The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association lobbyists switched to "undecided" first thing in the morning on March 9. LATER UPDATE: Bills often receive new numbers after committee approval. MidAmerican's solar bill is now known as House File 669 or Senate File 583. The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association and Archer Daniels Midland are registered undecided on the Senate bill and against the unamended House bill. The Pork Producers are still opposing both versions. The Biodiesel Board has not registered on the renumbered bills. https://www.legis.iowa.gov/lobbyist/reports/declarations?ga=88&ba=SF583 Appendix: Amendment to Senate Study Bill 1201, adopted before Republicans on the Iowa Senate Commerce Committee voted to advance the bill on March 7 our W pCyi.y �vror5 Senate Study Bill 1201 K4f4WV& GAS f 1 Amend Senate Study Bill 1201 as follows: 6V �` •II 2 1. Page 1, line 16, by striking <Such> and inserting 3 <private generation> W S 4 2. Page 1, by striking lines 23 through 25 and inserting 5 <cogeneration facilities and small power production facilities 6 and in accordance with section 476.43.> 7 3. Page 1, line 28, after <c.> by inserting <(1)> 8 4. Page 1, line 29, by striking <facility that> and 9 inserting <facility, as defined in section 476.42, that> 10 5. Page 1, after line 33 by inserting: 11 <(2) Private generation facility- does not include any of 12 the following: 13 (a) A cogeneration facility as defined in 18 C.F.R. pt. 292, 14 subpt. B, including without limitation combined heat and power 15 facilities. 16 (b) A facility that produces renewable fuel as defined 17 in section 214A.1, which is registered with the United 18 States environmental protection agency as a manufacturer, in 19 accordance with the requirements set forth in 40 C.F.R. 679.4. 20 (c) A facility that utilizes a de minimus amount of biomass 21 in its operations. For purposes of this subparagraph division, 22 de minimus- means less than ten percent of all fuel utilized in 23 the generation processes. 24 (d) A private generation facility with a nameplate 25 generating capacity greater than one megawatt.> 26 6. Page 2, line 4, after <utility'B> by inserting <actual> 27 7. Page 3, by striking lines 22 through 25 and inserting 28 <the tariff as filed or docket the tariff for review in a 29 formal proceeding pursuant to section 476.6, and thereafter 30 either approve the tariff or modify the tariff to meet 31 compliance with this section within six months of the date of 32 docketing. If the board fails to complete a review of the 33 tariff within six months of the date of filing, the tariff 34 shall be deemed approved. A tariff approved pursuant to> 35 S. Page 4, after line 6 by inserting: SSB1201.743 (1) 88 -1- gh/rn 1/2 https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2019/03/08lmidainericans-bid-to-crush-small-solar-cr... 3/14/2019 Bleeding Heartland 1 c6. Nothing in this section shall preclude a customer 2 from entering into a contract with an electric utility as an 3 alternate energy production facility, cogeneration and small 4 power production facility, or a standby and supplemental power 5 service customer under the terms of the electric utility's 6 separate alternate energy production facility, cogeneration and 7 small power production facility, or standby and supplemental 8 power service tariffs filed pursuant to the federal Public 9 Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, 16 U.S.C. 52601 at 10 seq.> PROPOSED COMMITTEE AMENDMENT SS812D1.743 (1) 88 2/2 _2_ gh/rn Tweet Tags: 2019 session, Agriculture, Biofuels, Chris Rants, Energy. Iowa ABI, Iowa CCI. Iowa Environmental Council, Iowa House, Iowa Senate, Jim Lykam, John Forbes, Kim Reynolds, Labor, Liz Mathis. Lobbying, MidAmerican Energy, Mike Gronstal, Sierra Club, Solar 5 Comments Leave your comment below Page 7 of 8 https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2019/03/08lmidamericans-bid-to-crush-small-solar-cr... 3/14/2019 Bleeding Heartland Thanks, again (' -: / 0-) View voters So much work goes into your posts. I bet even legislators learn a lot when they read them. They should recognize you as a real news reporter. Tweet By iowavoter @ Fri 8 Mar 9:42 PM thanks (0+/ 0-) View voters Legislators have sometimes told me they learned from my work. Tweet By Laura Belin @ Fri 8 Mar 10:47 PM I am kind of drop -jawed... (1+/ 0-) View voters - by all the things I've learned from this post. So it turns out I agree with the Iowa Pork Producers Association about something, at long last. And my opinion of the Greater Des Moines Partnership, always tentative, just went way down. If you're going to lobby for a bozo bill like this, at least provide an explanation that isn't intelligence -insulting. Tweet By PrairieFan @ Fri 8 Mar 11:58 PM the Pork Producers (0+/ 0-) View voters were big supporters of extending the solar tax credit as well. Tweet By Laura Beiin @ Sat 9 Mar 6:32 PM Thank you, that is interesting too. (0+/ 0-) View voters I also wonder what MidAmerican Energy has in mind for their "large solar array" in terms of siting, size, design, etc. Their record so far does not inspire trust. Tweet By PrairieFan @ Sun 10 Mar 1:41 AM You need to signin or signup to post a comment. Page 8 of 8 About Join Us Contact Us Bleeding Heartland is a community blog about Iowa Join our community, past your thoughts as General: info@bleedingheartland.com politics: campaigns and elections, state comments or diaries, help keep our leaders honest government, social and environmental issues. and hold them accountable. Latest Posts RSS - Latest Comments RSS About Privacy Policy -Terms of service 1 201 5 — 2019 m Bleeding Heartland https://www.bleedingheartland. coml2019/03/08lmidamericans-bid-to-crush-small-solar-cr... 3/14/2019 Item Number: 3. a< r 1 CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org March 14, 2019 Email from Council member Thomas: Mann Elementary - Parent Drop-off on Fairchild St. [Previously distributed in 3/12/19 Late Handouts.] ATTACHMENTS: Description -mail from Council member Thomas: Mann Elementary - Parent Drop-off on Fairchild St. [Previously distributed in 3/12/19 Late Handouts.] Previously distributed in the 3/12/19 Late Handouts Kellie Fruehling From: John Thomas Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 8:09 PM To: Jim Throgmorton; Pauline Taylor, Rockne Cole; Susan Mims; Mazahir Salih; Bruce Teague Cc: Geoff Fruin; Kellie Fruehling; Council Subject: Mann Elementary: Parent Drop-off on Fairchild St. Attachments: Plan A.pdf, Plan B.pdf, Pruecil Drop -Off Zone Jpg Council Members, I would like to discuss with you tomorrow, perhaps at our Work Session, the proposed design of the parent drop-off at Horace Mann Elementary School. The current design, which accommodates approximately six vehicles, significantly alters North Market Square's east entry. That entry, which serves as the "front door" to the park (and as a secondary entry to Horace Mann), is essentially converted into a drop-off zone by the current plan. Furthermore, the alignment and roughly symmetrical entry treatments of the four park entries with Johnson and Fairchild Streets are character -defining features of the North Market Square, the oldest park in Iowa City. The ensemble of entries needs to be preserved in the provision of a parent drop-off zone. The scope of work is entirely in the City right-of-way and affects the frontage of City property. In the current proposal (see attached Plan A sketch), existing paving, trees, street lighting, and other park features will be demolished or relocated. The alternative I have sketched out (see attached Plan B) accommodates parent drop-off for approximately three vehicles (6 total) in two locations, conveniently flanking the park entry. It retains approximately half of the current proposal along Fairchild St., and includes a drop -off -only zone along the east frontage of the park that is similar in concept to the parent drop-off in front of Preucil School of Music (see attached photo). By preserving the existing park conditions, the scope of work is significantly reduced. If the ICCSD has concerns with the drop-off along the park's east frontage, other options for accommodating three vehicles can be considered that will not damage the park. A related concern with the design of the parent drop-off zone is the preservation of the mature ash tree that is currently located within the affected parkway. The ICCSD has concerns about the use of chemical treatment near school property, including treatment of ash trees. The decision about the ash is a separate matter, and can addressed subsequent to the resolution of the parent drop-off. Kellie, Please include as a late hand-out. John John Thomas City Council - District C r� !. -� t � � t i � � ,� '14 �� --� 'i¢t l■S �(� ti .� '� ,�'� I' 3 ,• .."`; r . `4C ' y ': y � ,,,�� • t �:; F � + i a .� Y t 'i 4 S i t t '"�, .i I l�J �� Item Number: 4. a< r 1 1p - CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org March 14, 2019 Copy of report from National Low Income Housing Coalition from City Manager: The GAP, A Shortage of Affordable Homes ATTACHMENTS: Description Copy of report from City Manager: The GAP, A Shortage of Affordable Homes A Shortage of Affordable Homes MARCH 2019 j. MADE POSSIBL YT OSITY OF: THE FOUNDATI ^� J� NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION Presidee7t for DAN Eb1MANU_EL,__MaV\V Senior Research Analyst ELLEN .. in'Met6-eyvkbs Manager Research Intern ABOUT NLIHCA9 The National Low Income Housing Coalition is dedicated solelyto achieving sociallyjust public policy that assures people with the lowest incomes in the United States have affordable and decent homes. Founded in 1974 by Cushing N. Dolbeare, NLIHC educates, organizes and advocates to ensure decent, affordable housing for everyone. Our goals are to preserve existing federally assisted homes and housing resources, expand the supply of low income housing, and establish housing stability as the primary purpose of federal low income housing policy. The National Low Income Housing Coalition 1000 Vermont Avenue, NW • Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005 202-662-1530 • https:Hnlihc.org © 2019 National Low Income Housing Coalition 2019 Dara Baldwin, Washington, DC Russell "Rusty" Bennett, Birmingham, AL Delorise Calhoun, Cincinnati, OH Emma "Pinky" Clifford, Pine Ridge, SD Yanira Cortes, Toms River, NJ Lot Diaz, Washington, DC Chris Estes, Washington, DC Daisy Franklin, Norwalk, CT Dora Leong Gallo, Los Angeles, CA Deirdre "DeeDee" Gilmore, Charlottesville, VA Aaron Gornstein, Boston, MA Moises Loza, Alexandria, VA Rachael Myers, Seattle, WA Marla Newman, Winston-Salem, NC Karlo Ng, San Francisco, CA Ann O'Hara, Boston, MA Crishelle Palay, Houston, TX Bob Palmer, Chicago, IL Eric Price, Washington, DC Nan Roman, Washington, DC Shauna Sorrells, Kensington, MD Michael Steele, New York, NY Martha Weatherspoon, Clarksville, TN Sim Wimbush, Richmond, VA N V 1 Iq 1 I"%,I F.il Sonya Acosta, Policy Analyst Andrew Aurand, Vice President for Research Victoria Bourret, Housing Advocacy Organizer Josephine Clarke, Executive Assistant Dan Emmanuel, Senior Research Analyst Ellen Errico, Creative Services Manager Ed Gramlich, Senior Advisor Paul Kealey, Chief Operating Officer Mike Koprowski, Director, Multisector Housing Campaign Joseph Lindstrom, Manager of Field Organizing Lisa Marlow, Communications Coordinator Sarah Mickelson, Senior Director of Public Policy Khara Norris, Director of Administration Catherine Reeves, Development Coordinator Brooke Schipporeit, Housing Advocacy Organizer Elayne Weiss, Senior Housing Policy Analyst Chantelle Wilkinson, Multisector Housing Campaign Coordinator Renee Willis, Vice President for Field and Communications Diane Yentel, President and CEO TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction.............................................. 1 Shortage of Affordable Rental Homes ....................... 2 Affordable, but Not Available .............................. 3 Cost Burdens.............................................5 The Housing Shortage for Extremely Low -Income Renters by State ............................... 7 The Housing Shortage for Extremely Low -Income Renters in the 50 Largest Metros ................ 8 Who Are Extremely Low -Income Renters?......................................9 Racial Disparities and Extremely Low -Income Renters ........ 10 A Systemic National Shortage of Rental Housing for Extremely Low -Income Households ............. 11 Federal Policy Solutions for the Lowest Income People ....... 13 The Case for Affordable Homes ............................ 15 Conclusion..............................................16 About the Data .......................................... 16 For More Information ..................................... 17 References..............................................18 Appendix A: State Comparisons ........................... 20 Appendix B: Metropolitan Comparisons .................... 21 i Made Possible By The Generous Support Of THEA FOUNDATION THE GAP INTRODUCTION Affiordable, decent, and accessible housing of critical importance to our well-being, providing a stable foundation for child and parental health, childhood cognitive development, educational achievement, and employment (Brennan, Reed, & Sturtevant, 2014; Desmond & Gershenson, 2016; Newman & Holupka, 2015; Sandel et al., 2016). Yet the supply of affordable homes in America is woefully inadequate, especially for the nation's lowest -income families and individuals. Each year, NLIHC examines the American Community Survey (ACS) to determine the availability of rental homes affordable to extremely low-income households — those with incomes at or below the poverty line or 30% of the area median income (AMI), whichever is greater - and other income groups (Box 1). The annual report provides a picture for the nation, each state plus the District of Columbia (DC), and the largest metropolitan areas. This year's key findings include: Extremely low-income renters in the U.S. face a shortage of seven million affordable and available rental homes. Only 37 affordable and available homes exist for every 100 extremely low-income renter households. Seventy-one percent (7.8 million) of the nations 11 million extremely low-income renter households are severely housing cost -burdened, spending more than half of their incomes on rent and utilities. They account for 73% of all severely cost -burdened renters in the U.S. A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 Extremely low-income renters are much more likely to be severely housing cost -burdened than other income groups. Thirty-two percent of very low-income, eight percent of low-income, and two percent of middle-income renters are severely cost -burdened.' Forty-eight percent of extremely low-income renter households are seniors or disabled, and another 44% are in the labor force or in school, or are single -adult caregivers. Native American, black, and Hispanic renters are more likely than white renters to have extremely low incomes. Among renters, 38% of American Indian or Alaskan Native households, 35% of black households, 28% of Hispanic households, and 22% of white non -Hispanic households have extremely low incomes. No state has an adequate supply of affordable and available homes for extremely low-income renters. The current relative supply ranges from 19 affordable and available homes for every 100 extremely low-income renter households in Nevada to 66 in Wyoming. • The shortage of affordable homes ranges from 5,800 in Wyoming to one million in California. The private market provides too few homes affordable to the lowest -income renters. What extremely low- income renters can afford to pay for rent does not cover the development and operating costs of new housing, and it often is not sufficient to provide an incentive for landlords to maintain older housing. On average, the most an extremely low-income family DEFINITIONS AREA MEDIAN INCOME (AMI): The median family income in the metropolitan or nonmetropolitan area EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME (ELI): Households with income at or below the Poverty Guideline or 30% of AMI, whichever is higher VERY LOW-INCOME (VLI): Households with income between ELI and 50% of AMI LOW-INCOME (LI): Households with income between 51 % and 80% of AMI MIDDLE-INCOME (MI): Households with income between 81 % and 100% of AMI ABOVE MEDIAN INCOME: Households with income above 100% of AMI COST BURDENED: Spending more than 30% of household income on housing costs SEVERELY COST BURDENED: Spending more than 50% of household income on housing costs 1 We use renters and renter households interchangeably to refer to renter households throughout this report. NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP of four could afford, without housing assistance, in monthly rent was $660 in 2018; the average cost of a modest two-bedroom rental home at the fair market rent was $1,149 (NLIHC, 2018d). Meanwhile, three out of four low-income households in need of federal housing assistance do not receive it because of insufficient funding (Fischer & Sard, 2017). We must build the political will for a large-scale and sustained commitment to affordable housing programs designed to serve the lowest -income families, those with the greatest and clearest need. These programs include the national Housing Trust Fund (HTF), Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs), and public housing. We also should expand and improve other programs, like the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, to better serve the lowest income renters with the greatest need for assistance. A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 SHORTAGE OF AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOMES Eleven million of the nation's 43.3 million renter households have extremely low incomes, but only 7.4 million rental homes are affordable to them, leaving an absolute shortage of 3.6 million affordable rental homes .2 Extremely low-income renters are the only income group to face this absolute shortage of affordable homes. The shortage of affordable homes for extremely low- income renters becomes a surplus for households with higher incomes (Figure 1). Nine million rental homes are affordable specifically to the 6.6 million very low- income renter households with incomes higher than the extremely low-income threshold (poverty level or FIGURE 1: RENTERS AND RENTAL UNITS IN THE US, MATCHED BY INCOME CATEGORIES AND AFFORDABILITY, 2017 (IN MILLIONS) ■Extremely Low -Income ■Very Low -Income LLow-Income Middle -Income ■Above Median Income Households Cumulative Units (By Income Category) (By Affordability Category) Source: NLIHC tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS data. 2 Affordabflity is based on the common standard that households should not spend more than 30% of their income on housing. 2 NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP 30% of AMI), but less than 50% of their area median income (AMI). These very low-income renters can also afford the 7.4 million rental homes affordable to extremely low-income renters. In total, 16.4 million rental homes are affordable for the 6.6 million very low-income renter households. These 16.4 affordable homes are not a sufficient supply, however, for all extremely low-income and very low-income renters combined. Nearly 19 million rental homes are affordable specifically for the nine million low-income renters with incomes between 51% and 80% of AMI. Low-income renters can also afford the rental homes affordable to extremely low-income and very low-income renters, resulting in a total of 35.3 million affordable rental homes for the nine million low-income renters. Approximately 5.6 million rental homes are affordable specifically for the 4.5 million middle- income renter households with incomes between 81% and 100% of AMI. Including the rental homes A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 affordable to lower-income groups, the supply of affordable rental housing for middle-income renters is 40.9 million units. AFFORDABLE, BUT NOT AVAILABLE Higher -income households are free to occupy rental homes in the private market that are affordable to lower income households, making them unavailable to lower-income households. Rental homes are both affordable and available for households of a specific income group if the homes are affordable to them and are currently vacant or are occupied by households with incomes at or below the group's defined income level. Of the 7.4 million affordable rental homes for 11 million extremely low- income renter households, only four million are available to them because the others are occupied by households with higher incomes. The result is a shortage of seven million affordable and available homes for extremely low-income renters. 11 million extremely low-income renter households occupy or have access to only 4 million affordable and available units, leaving a shortage of 7 million rental homes FIGURE 2: AFFORDABLE AND AVAILABLE RENTAL HOMES PER 100 RENTER HOUSEHOLDS, 2017 0 to Extremely I�� Low -Income threshold 0 to 50% of AMI 58 0 to 80% of AMI 94 0 to 100% of AMI "1102 Source: NLIHC tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS data. AMI = Area Median Income The relative supply of affordable and available rental homes improves as incomes increase. Only 37 rental homes are affordable and available for every 100 extremely low-income renter households (Figure 2). Fifty- eight exist for every 100 renter households with incomes at or below 50% of AMI. Ninety-four and 102 affordable and available rental homes exist for every 100 renter households earning at or below 80% and 100% of AMI, respectively. NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 3 THE GAP The shortage of affordable and available rental homes for renters with incomes over 50% of AMI can be explained by the shortage of affordable and available rental homes for those with incomes below 50% of AMI. Figure 3 illustrates the incremental change in the cumulative number of renters at increasingly higher levels of income and the cumulative number of rental homes affordable and available to them. The figure shows a cumulative shortage of affordable and available rental homes at lower levels of income and an eventual surplus at higher levels. Represented on the far -left of Figure 3, 11 million extremely low-income renter households occupy or have access to only 4 million affordable and available A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 units, leaving a shortage of 7 million rental homes. Moving up the income ladder to include all renter households earning up to 50% of AMI adds 6.6 million renter households and 6.2 million affordable and available rental homes, leaving a shortage of 7.4 million affordable and available rental homes for households with incomes at 50% of AMI and below. Renters with extremely low incomes face the most severe shortage hof affordable homes) by far Going further up the income scale to include all renters earning less than 80% of AMI adds 9 million to the cumulative total of renter households, but 14.7 million to the cumulative total of affordable and available rental homes, significantly reducing the cumulative shortage of affordable and available rental homes. At median income the cumulative shortage disappears. FIGURE 3: RENTER HOUSEHOLDS AND AFFORDABLE & AVAILABLE RENTAL HOMES, 2017 ■ Incremental Increase in Households '//, Incremental Increase in Affordable & Available Rental Homes 2 4.5 6.6 4.5 6.6 At Extremely < 50% AMI < 80% AMI < 100% AMI Above Median Low -Income Household Income Income Source: NLIHC tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS data. 4 NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP Figure 4 illustrates the incremental change in the cumulative deficit and eventual surplus of affordable and available rental homes with each step-up in income. Renters with extremely low incomes face the most severe shortage by far, and the cumulative shortages of homes available and affordable for households with higher incomes are largely attributable to the shortage for the lowest income renters. COST BURDENS Households are considered housing cost -burdened when they spend more than 30% of their incomes on rent and utilities. They are considered severely cost -burdened when they spend more than half of their incomes on their housing. More than 9 million extremely low-income renters, 5 million very low-income renters, and 4 million low-income renters are cost - burdened (Figure 5). Combined, extremely low-, very low-, and low- income renters with incomes below 80% of AMI account for 92% of all cost -burdened renters. Of the 10.7 million severely housing cost -burdened renter Low -Income households, approximately 7.8 Source: NLIHCta million are extremely low-income, 2.1 million are very low-income, and 684,000 are low-income. Extremely low-income renters account for nearly 73% of all severely cost - burdened renters in the U.S (Figure 6). Combined, extreme low-, very low-, and low-income households account for more than 98% of all severely cost - burdened renters. A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 FIGURE 4: INCREMENTAL CHANGE TO SURPLUS (DEFICIT) OF AFFORDABLE AND AVAILABLE RENTALS, 2017 (IN MILLIONS) 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 -2.0 -4.0 -6.0 -8.0 -7.0 Extremely > ELI to 50% 51%to 80% 81%to 100% Above Low-Income(ELI) of AMI of AMI of AMI median FIGURE 5: RENTER HOUSEHOLDS WITH COST BURDEN BY INCOME GROUP, 2017 Low -Income Median Income bulations of 2017 ACS Extremely low-income renters have little, if any, money remaining for other necessities after paying their rent. A severely cost -burdened extremely low-income family of four with monthly income of $1,8393, for example, has $690 remaining for all other non -housing expenses after renting an average two-bedroom apartment at the fair market rent 3 The weighted average of 30% of HUD Median Family Income for Fair Market Rent (FMR) areas (NLIHC, 2018d). NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 5 THE GAP A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 FIGURE 6: SEVERELY HOUSING COST -BURDENED RENTERS BY INCOME, 2017 Middle -Income 0.8% Above Source: NLIHC tabulations of 2017 ACS of $1,149.4 The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (2018) thrifty food budget for a family of four (two adults and two school -aged children) is $640 per month, leaving only $50 for transportation, child care, and other necessities. Severely housing cost -burdened and poor renters make significant sacrifices to pay for housing. Poor families with children who are severely cost - burdened spend 46%, or $354 per month, less on food, transportation, and healthcare than poor families who are not housing cost -burdened (joint Center for Housing Studies, 2018). Even with these sacrifices, severe housing cost burdens make it difficult for poor renters to keep up with their rent. The 2013 American Housing Survey (AHS) indicates severely cost -burdened poor renters are more than twice as likely to fall behind on their rent, and be threatened with eviction, than poor renters with no cost burden. 4 The weighted average of two-bedroom FMRs by FMR area (NLIHC, 2018d). Financial hardships and housing instability caused by the lack of affordable housing have significant consequences for the health and well-being of poor families. Cost - burdened adults are more likely to cut-back on needed prescription medications or healthcare treatments (Magbool, Viveiros, & Ault, 2015). A recent study of more than 22,000 families with children found that those who were behind on paying their rent were at higher risk of fair or poor health for both the children and their caregivers (Sandel, et al., 2018). These families were also at higher risk of other hardships like food insecurity and foregone healthcare. Children's cognitive development and academic achievement also suffer from the lack of affordable housing. A national study found that children of cost -burdened families perform worse on cognitive development tests than children of families in affordable housing, likely due to lower expenditures on child enrichment (Newman & Holupka, 2015; Newman & Holupka, 2014). Families who cannot keep up with their rent may be more likely to experience forced moves because of eviction or fear of eviction. This housing instability disrupts learning and negatively impacts academic achievement, especially among elementary and middle -school students (Brennan, Reed, Sturtevant, 2014; Herbers et al., 2012; Voight, Shinn, & Nation, 2012). Housing instability and homelessness can cause significant disruptions to critical health services, especially for chronically ill individuals, and increase adverse mental health outcomes related to stress (Magbool, Viveiros, & Ault 2015). And a study of 6 NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP almost 10,000 mothers found that the infants of mothers who were homeless during pregnancy were at higher risk of low birth weight and pre -term delivery than babies of mothers stably housed (Cutts et al., 2014). THE HOUSING SHORTAGE FOR EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME RENTERS BY STATE No state has an adequate supply of rental housing affordable and available for extremely low- income households (Figure 7 and Appendix A). The shortage ranges from 5,799 rental homes in Wyoming to more than one million in California. A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 The states where extremely low-income renters face the greatest challenges finding affordable homes are Nevada, with only 19 affordable and available rental homes for every 100 extremely low-income renter households, California (22 for every 100 extremely low-income renter households), Arizona (25/100), Florida (26/100), and Oregon (28/100). The states with the greatest relative supply of affordable and available rental homes for extremely low-income renters still have significant shortages. The five top states are Wyoming, with 66 affordable and available rental homes for every 100 extremely low- income renter households, Mississippi (64/100), Alabama (62/100), West Virginia (61/100), and Arkansas (56/100). FIGURE 7: RENTAL HOMES AFFORDABLE AND AVAILABLE PER 100 EXTREMELY LOW INCOME RENTER HOUSEHOLDS BY STATE ID 48 r4 MT ND 45 53 1" MN SD 39 WY 48 09 66 FIA �44 KS MO L 43 00 42 TN OK 46 47 AR 56 MS AL R64 62 LA OR! 44 10 0 30 or Fewer Between 31 NH VT 31 ME 35 ` \ 52 NY / MA -46 40 37 RI -54 PA lz;'` CT -38 OH 42 NJ -33 43- DE -38 WV VA 61 40 MD -33 KY 40 `DC -40 53 NC 43 SC GA 48 Between 41 and 45 More than 45 Note: Extremely low income (ELI) renter households have incomes at or below the poverty level or 30% of the area median income. Source: NLIHC tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS Data. NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 7 THE GAP A majority of extremely low-income renters are severely housing cost -burdened in every state. The states with the greatest percentage of extremely low-income renter households with severe cost burdens are Florida (80%), Nevada (79%), Arizona (78%), California (76%), and Colorado (76%). Maine has the smallest, but still significant, percentage of extremely low-income renters with severe cost burdens (53%). The state shortages of affordable and available rental homes declines for households higher up the income ladder. Forty-eight states and DC have a cumulative shortage of affordable and available rental homes for renters with household incomes below 50% of AMI. Fourteen states and DC have a cumulative shortage for all renters with household incomes below 80% of AMI, and nine states have a cumulative shortage for all renters with household incomes up to the median income. These states, which include California, Hawaii, New York, Oregon, Florida, Washington, and Massachusetts, tend to be home to high-cost metropolitan regions. A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 THE HOUSING SHORTAGE FOR EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME RENTERS IN THE 50 LARGEST METROS Every major metropolitan area in the U.S. has a shortage of affordable and available rental homes for extremely low-income renters (Table 1 and Appendix B). Of the 50 largest metropolitan areas, extremely low-income renters face the most severe shortages in Orlando, FL, with 13 affordable and available rental homes for every 100 extremely low- income renter households, Las Vegas, NV (14/100), Riverside, CA (17/100), Los Angeles, CA (18/100), and Houston, TX (19/100). Of the 50 largest metropolitan areas, those with the least severe shortages of rental homes affordable and available to extremely low-income renters are Pittsburgh with 51 for every 100 extremely low- income renter households, Providence, RI (49/100), Boston, MA (46/100), Cincinnati, OH (44/100), and Louisville, KY (43/100). TABLE 1: LARGE METROPOLIAN AREAS WITH THE LEAST AND MOST SEVERE SHORTAGES OF RENTAL HOMES AFFORDABLE TO EXTREMELY LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS LEAST SEVERE MOST SEVERE Pittsburgh, PA 51 Orlando -Kissimmee -Sanford, FL 13 Providence -Warwick, RI -MA 49 Las Vegas -Henderson -Paradise, NV 14 Boston -Cambridge -Newton, MA -NH 46 Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA 17 Cincinnati, OH -KY -IN 44 Los Angeles -Long Beach -Anaheim, CA 18 Louisville/Jefferson County, KY -IN 43 Houston The Woodlands -Sugar Land, TX 19 Cleveland -Elyria, OH 41 San Diego -Carlsbad, CA 20 Buffalo -Cheektowaga -Niagara Falls, NY 40 Dallas -Fort Worth -Arlington, TX 20 Virqinia Beach -Norfolk -Newport News, VA -NC 39 Austin -Round Rock, TX 21 Baltimore -Columbia -Towson, MD 38 Tampa -St. Petersburg -Clearwater, FL 21 Jacksonville, FL 37 Phoenix -Mesa -Scottsdale, AZ 21 Source: NLIHC tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS data. 8 NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP Each of the 50 largest metropolitan areas has a shortage of rental homes affordable and available for renters with household incomes below 50% of AMI. The shortages begin to disappear at higher incomes. Twenty-six of the 50 largest metropolitan areas have a cumulative shortage of affordable and available rental homes for all renters with household incomes up to 80% of AML Only 11 of them have a cumulative shortage for all renters with household incomes up to the median income. WHO ARE EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME RENTERS? Renters with special needs and seniors are more A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 renter households who are disabled and 33% who are senior households have extremely low incomes.' The Trump Administration proposes higher rents, ineffective work requirements, and other rent reforms to encourage work among low-income recipients of housing assistance. The vast majority of extremely low-income renters, however, already work in low-wage jobs or they are unable to work. Thirty-nine percent of extremely low-income renter households are in the labor force, while 26% are seniors, 22% have a disability, and another 5% are not in the labor force, but are students or single - adult caregivers to a young child or household member with a disability (Figure 8). likely than other renters to have extremely More than three-quarters of extremely low-income low incomes. Twenty-five percent of all renter households in the labor force work more than 20 households have extremely low incomes, but 45% of hours per week, but low-wage employment does not FIGURE 8: EXTREMELY LOW INCOME RENTER HOUSEHOLDS Single non -disabled non -elderly caregiver of person w/ disability or young child School 2% LA 40+ hours / week 43% 20 to 39 hours / week 34% < 20 hours / week 10% Unemployed 12% Note: Mutually exclusive categories applied in the following order: senior, disabled, in labor force, enrolled in school, single adult caregiver of a child under 7 or of a household member with a disability, and other. Senior means householder or householder's spouse (if applicable) is at least 62 years of age. Disabled means householder and householder's spouse (if applicable) are younger than 62 and at least one of them has a disability. Unemployed means household and householder's spouse (if applicable) are younger than 62 and both are unemployed. Working hours is usual number of hours worked by householder and householder's spouse (if applicable). Enrolled in school means householder and householder's spouse (if applicable) are enrolled in school. Fifteen percent of extremely low-income renter households include a single adult caregiver, more than half of whom usually work more than 20 hours per week and 2% of whom are in school. Source: 2017 ACS PUMS. 5 A disabled household is one whose householder and householder's spouse (if applicable) are younger than 62 and at least one of them has a disability. A senior household is one whose householder or householder's spouse (if applicable) is at least 62 years of age. NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 9 THE GAP provide them adequate income to afford housing. The national average of what a full-time worker, working 40 hours per week for 52 weeks of the year, needs to earn to afford a modest one -bedroom or two-bedroom apartment is $17.90 or $22.10 per hour, respectively (NLIHC, 2018d). Low-wage employment will continue to grow. Seven of the ten occupations projected to add the most jobs over the next decade, including medical assistants, home health aides, janitors, and food servers, provide a lower median wage than what is needed to afford modest rental housing (NLIHC, 2018d). Fifteen percent of extremely low-income renters are single -adult caregivers of a young child or of a household member with a disability. More than half (53%) of these caregivers also participate in the labor market. More than one-quarter of these caregivers work full-time and another one-quarter usually work between 20 and 39 hours per week. Without housing assistance or an increase in their hourly wage, they cannot rely on their work hours to afford their homes. RACIAL DISPARITIES AND EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME RENTERS Black, Native American, and Hispanic households are more likely than white households to be extremely low-income renters. Twenty percent of black households, 18% of American Indian or Alaska Native (AIAN) households, and 16% of Hispanic households are extremely low-income renters. Six percent of white non -Hispanic households are extremely low-income renters. This racial disparity is the result of higher homeownership rates and higher incomes among white households. Decades of racial discrimination in real estate, lending practices, and federal housing policy have made homeownership difficult to obtain for minorities (Rice & Swesnik, 2012). While overt discrimination was outlawed by the Fair Housing Act, today's credit scoring system and lending practices continue as barriers to minority homeownership (Rice & Swesnik, 2012; Bartlett, A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 Morse, Stanton, & Wallace, 2018). Racial disparities in income are the result of historical and current discrimination, and differences in educational attainment and wage and employment rates, among other factors. Blacks continue to have lower rates of upward mobility than whites (Chetty, Hendren, Jones, and Porter, 2018). In 2016, the median black and Hispanic worker earned 65% and 63% of the median white worker, respectively. The lowest - income black and Hispanic workers earned 54% and 66% of the lowest -income white workers, respectively (Kochhar & Cilluffo, 2018). Black, Native American, and Hispanic households are more likely than white households to be extremely low-income renters Racial disparities also exist among renters alone. Thirty-eight percent of AIAN renter households, 35% of black renter households, and 28% of Hispanic renter households have extremely low incomes, compared to 22% of white non -Hispanic households (Figure 9). Regardless of race, the majority of extremely low-income renters are severely housing cost -burdened: 71.5% of Hispanic, 70.9% of non -Hispanic black, and 69.6% of non - Hispanic white extremely low-income renters are severely cost -burdened. Sixty-three percent of AIAN extremely low-income renters are severely housing cost -burdened, but poor housing conditions like low quality and overcrowding are also significant concerns in tribal areas (Pindus et al., 2017). White renters are more likely than non -Hispanic black, Hispanic, and AIAN renters to have household incomes greater than 80% of AMI. At the same time, white renters (1.1%) with these higher incomes are more likely to be severely housing cost -burdened than Hispanic renters (0.6%), non -Hispanic black renters (0.3%) and AIAN renters (0.1%) with similar incomes. As a 10 NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP result, the majority (73%) of the 88,000 severely housing cost -burdened middle-income renters and 78% of severely cost -burdened above -median income renters are white (Figure 10). In comparison, the racial distribution is more diverse among severely cost -burdened extremely low-income renters: 43% are white, 26% are black, and 21% are Hispanic. A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 ASYSTEMIC NATIONAL SHORTAGE OF RENTAL HOUSING FOR EXTREMELY LOW- INCOME HOUSEHOLDS The severe shortage of affordable homes for extremely low-income renters is systemic, affecting every state and metropolitan area. Absent public subsidy, the private market is unable to produce new rental housing affordable to these me households, because the rents that the lowest -income households can afford to pay typically do /o not cover the development costs and operating expenses of such /ohousing. New rental housing, 12% therefore, is largely targeted to the iiihigher -price end of the market. The average asking monthly rent in a new apartment building in 2017, for example, was $1,550, more than twice as much as what Other ulti Multiple an extremely low-income renter could afford (joint Center for Housing Studies, 2018). FIGURE 9: INCOME DISTRIBUTION OF RENTERS BY RACE AND ETHNICITY 0Extremely Low -Income Very Low -Income -dLow-Income Middle -Income ®Above Median Inco 100% 90% .Bodo33° 70% 8% 9% 10% 19 $ a 60% 19° 024% 9% 110/4 50% � I r___ 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% American Indian or Black, Hispanic Alaska Native non -Hispanic Source: NLIHC tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS data. Asian White, non -Hispanic FIGURE 10: RACE AND ETHNICITY OF SEVERELY COST -BURDENED RENTERS BY INCOME 100% 90% Bodo 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% White, non -Hispanic Black, non -Hispanic Hispanic Other 10% 10% 12% 11% 9% Extremely Very Low -Income Middle -Income Above Median Low -Income Low -Income Income Source: NLIHC tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS data. The lack of new affordable rental construction in the private market and insufficient housing assistance force extremely low-income renters to rely on private -market housing that filters down in relative price as it becomes older. The filtering theory suggests that new market - rate development for higher - income households results in a chain of household moves that helps lower-income households: higher -income households move into new, more expensive homes, leaving behind their older and presumably less expensive NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 11 THE GAP housing, which is then occupied by other households who leave even older housing behind, and so on. This process is assumed to increase the availability of older and lower-priced housing for low-income renters. The filtering process, however, fails to produce a sufficient supply of rental homes inexpensive enough for the lowest -income renters to afford. In strong markets, owners have an incentive to redevelop their properties to receive higher rents from higher -income households. In weak markets, owners have an incentive to abandon their rental properties or convert them to other uses when rental income is too low to cover basic operating costs and maintenance. Approximately 60% of low-cost rental units in 1985 were lost by 2013 through permanent removal (27%), conversions to other uses (18%), or upgrading to higher rents (12%) (Joint Center for Housing Studies, 2018). The years between 1990 and 2016 saw a net loss of 2.5 million occupied rental units priced below $800 per month, but a gain of 2.6 million occupied rental units priced above $2,000 per month (joint Center for Housing Studies, 2018). The systemic, national shortage of affordable housing for extremely low-income renters is evidence of the need for deeply income - targeted federal housing subsidies to serve them. Public subsidies are needed both to subsidize the production and operation of affordable homes for the lowest - income renters and to provide rental assistance that low-income families can utilize to afford rental housing in the private market. Unlike those of extremely low- income renters, the housing needs of middle-income renters are largely met in most areas of the country. The shortages of affordable and available rental housing for middle-income renters with A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 incomes above 80% of AMI are predominantly found in high-cost pockets of the country where new housing development has not kept pace with the growth in demand. Eleven of the 50 largest metropolitan areas (25 of the largest 100) have a shortage of homes affordable and available to renters with household incomes up to the median income. Even in these housing markets, however, the cumulative shortage of affordable and available rental homes is largely attributable to the significant unmet housing needs of people with the lowest incomes who must occupy rental homes in the private market that would otherwise be affordable and available to higher -income renters. More than 750,000 extremely low-income households occupy rental homes they cannot afford that would otherwise be affordable and available to middle- income renters (Figure 11). Housing advocates and scholars across the ideological spectrum agree that local zoning and other requirements of the development approval process can artificially constrain housing development and, in turn, limit the ability of the FIGURE 11: EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME RENTER HOUSEHOLDS OCCUPYING UNITS AFFORDABLE TO HIGHER INCOME GROUPS Very Low -Income Renters Low -Income Renters Middle -Income Renters Median Income Renters (30.1%to50%of AMI) (50.1%to80%of AMI) (80.1to100%of AMI) (Over 100%ofAM1) Source: NLIHC tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS data. AMI = Area Median Income 12 NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP private market to serve middle-income renters (Axel -Lute, 2017; Jacobus, 2017). Reducing the local barriers to the production of multifamily housing through reform of local zoning and upscale design standards could result in a greater supply of housing and alleviate rent pressures in the market for households with moderate incomes. these reforms alone, however, will not sufficiently improve the ability of extremely low-income renters to afford the rents landlords need to operate and adequately maintain housing. FEDERAL POLICY SOLUTIONS FORTH LOWEST INCOME PEOPLE A significant and sustained federal commitment to affordable housing programs targeted to meet the affordability needs of the lowest -income families is necessary, including a large investment in the national Housing Trust Fund (HTF). First funded necessary in 2016, the HTF is an annual block grant to states for the creation, preservation, or rehabilitation of rental housing for the lowest -income renters. the distribution of HTF funds is determined by the shortage of rental housing affordable and available to extremely low-income and very low-income renters and the extent to which these renters are severely housing cost -burdened. At least 90% of HTF funds must be used for rental housing and at least 75% of the funds for rental housing must benefit extremely low-income households; 100% of HTF funds must benefit extremely low-income households while the HTF is capitalized under 81 billion per year. A review of the first projects awarded HTF money indicate that the new program provides homes for some of the most vulnerable people, including people experiencing homelessness, people with disabilities, and seniors (NLIHC, 2018c). A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 Expanded rental assistance like the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program is a substantial component of any strategy to address the severe housing shortage and instability faced by extremely low- income renters. Seventy-three percent of current HCV recipients are extremely low-income (HUD, 2018). Voucher recipients find rental housing in the private -market and contribute 30% of their adjusted gross incomes toward housing costs. The voucher pays the remaining costs up to the local housing agency's payment standard. Vouchers typically cost less than new production, making them an efficient and effective form of housing assistance in markets with an abundant supply of vacant, physically adequate housing that the lowest -income _ renters cannot afford without help. A ban on discrimination against voucher holders by landlords would improve the effectiveness of this rental assistance. Asignificant and sustained federal commitment to affordable housing programs targeted to meet the affordability needs of the lowest - income families is We must also protect the existing supply of affordable homes for the poorest renters. Significant capital investment is needed for the rehabilitation and preservation of public housing, which provides a stable home to some of the country's most vulnerable renters. Seventy- one percent of households living in public housing are extremely low-income. The average annual household income of public housing residents is $14,753 (HUD, 2018). Public housing provides a deep subsidy to these households: their contributions toward rent are 30% of their adjusted gross incomes with a congressionally appropriated Public Housing Operating Fund covering the remaining operating costs. A Public Housing Capital fund is appropriated for capital improvements, but, due to decades of declining Capital funds, the public housing stock faces a backlog of capital repair needs of as much as $53 billion, threatening the quality and even the existence of these homes (NLIHC, 2018e). NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 13 THE GAP Project -Based Rental Assistance (PBRA) must also be adequately funded for preservation. PBRA consists of rental contracts between HUD and private -property owners who provide subsidized housing for low-income renters. Tenants contribute 30% of their adjusted gross incomes toward the rent, and HUD's contribution covers the rest. The average annual income of households living in housing supported by PBRA is $12,505 (HUD, 2018). Without adequate and timely appropriations to renew expiring contracts, some of these rental homes could be lost from the affordable housing stock. Sufficient funds should also be appropriated to preserve the affordable housing stock supported by the USDA's Section 515 loan program, expanding whose rural tenants have an average annual household income of $12,588 (Housing Assistance Council, 2018). A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 Congress should also create a National Housing Stabilization Fund to provide emergency assistance to poor households facing housing instability or homelessness after an economic shock. Temporary assistance can help households stay in their homes after a short-term job loss or unexpected emergency expense, which reduces the long-term negative impact of these events. The political will for significant investments in solutions like these is expanding. NLIHC co -leads the Opportunity Starts at Home campaign, a diverse coalition of nearly 100 national organizations from a wide range of fields, including education, health, mental health, food policy, faith -based, social work, civil rights, and housing, that calls for bold investments in deeply affordable housing supply, in rental assistance, and in emergency assistance for housing stability and homelessness prevention (NLIHC, 2019). The political will for significant investments in solutions like these is Reforms to the federal tax code could also improve our nation's ability to stably house the most financially vulnerable renters. A deeply income -targeted fully refundable renters'tax credit for housing cost - burdened renters would help address the gap between housing costs and the incomes of the poorest renters. The credits could be based on the difference between 30% of a renter's household income and their actual housing costs up to a modest price. Congress should also expand and reform the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program to better target the housing needs of extremely low-income households. LIHTC is the largest production subsidy for affordable housing in the U.S. LIHTC rents, however, are not typically affordable to extremely low-income renters without additional rental assistance. NLIHC supports reforms to better serve people with the lowest incomes, including a 50% basis boost in tax credits for developments that set aside at least 20% of their housing for extremely low-income renters. Growing Congressional support for these investments is evident. In the last Congress, the "American Housing and Economic Mobility Act" was introduced in the Senate by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D -MA) and in the House by Representatives Cedric Richmond (D -LA), Gwen Moore (D WI), Barbara Lee (D -CA), and Elijah Cummings (D -MD) to invest $445 billion over 10 years in the national HTF, implement a federal ban on source -of -income discrimination against voucher holders, and increase funds in existing affordable housing programs serving tribal lands and rural areas, among other provisions (NLIHC, 2018a). The "Ending Homelessness Act of 2017" was introduced by Representative Maxine Waters (D -CA) to invest $13.27 billion over five years to address the shortage of affordable housing and to combat homelessness. The bill included permanent funding of $1 billion annually to the national HTF and $50 million each year for rental assistance to be 14 NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP used in conjunction with HTF housing (U.S. House Committee on Financial Services, 2017). The "Rent Relief Act" introduced by Senator Kamala Harris (D -CA) and the "Housing, Opportunity, Mobility and Equity Act" introduced by Senator Cory Booker (D -NJ) proposed fully refundable renters' tax credits for housing cost -burdened renters (NLIHC, 2018b). These proposals would help millions of extremely low-income renters afford their homes. THE CASE FOR AFFORDABLE HOMES Investing in affordable housing solutions, like the national HTF, the HCV program, public housing, and other deeply income -targeted programs, is inextricably linked to an array of positive outcomes beyond housing. Low- income children in affordable homes perform better on cognitive development tests than those in unaffordable homes, because their parents can spend more money on enrichment activities (Newman & Holupka, 2014, 2015). Affordable housing also prevents housing instability that disrupts learning and negatively impacts academic achievement (Brennan, Reed, Sturtevant, 2014; Herbers et al., 2012; Voight, Shinn, & Nation, 2012). Affordable housing options located in high -opportunity areas with low poverty and economically -diverse schools can raise the academic performance of low-income students and narrow the achievement gap between them and their more affluent peers (Schwartz, 2010). A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 and their caregivers (Sandel, et al., 2018). Previous studies by Children's HealthWatch found that children who experienced pre -natal homelessness were 20% more likely to be hospitalized since birth. Children who experienced post -natal homelessness as an infant or toddler were 22% more likely to hospitalized since birth (Sandel et. al., 2016). Children's HealthWatch estimates that the cost of hospitalizations attributable to homelessness among children younger than five is more than $230 million per year (Sandel et. al., 2016). A study in Oregon found that when people obtained subsidized affordable housing, their primary care visits increased by 20%, emergency room visits decreased by 18%, and Medicaid expenditures decreased by 12% (Wright, Li, Vartanian, & Weller, M., 2016). Affordable homes can also help children climb the economic ladder as adults. Economist Raj Chetty and his team found that children of families who used housing vouchers to access affordable homes in lower -poverty neighborhoods were more likely to attend college, less likely to become single parents, and likely to earn more as adults. Younger poor children _ who moved to lower - poverty neighborhoods with a housing choice voucher will earn an average of $302,000 more in lifetime earnings than their peers who didn't (Chetty, Hendren, & Katz, 2015). Decent, stable, and affordable homes are a major social determinant of health. Families with children who are behind on paying their rent are at higher risk of fair or poor health for both the children and their caregivers Decent, stable, and affordable homes are a major social determinant of health. Families with children who are behind on paying their rent are at higher risk of fair or poor health for both the children Affordable homes are critical to the criminal justice system, as well. Individuals transitioning out of the criminal justice system face significant housing obstacles. Formerly incarcerated people are nearly ten times more likely to be homeless than the general public, partially due to the shortage of affordable housing, discrimination, and large security deposit requirements (Couloute, 2018). A study in NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 15 THE GAP New York City found that criminal defendants who were homeless were more likely to be re -arrested than those who were not homeless, indicating that permanent housing is associated with lower rates of re -arrest (Peterson, 2016). CONCLUSION The shortage of seven million rental homes affordable and available to households with the lowest -incomes is a national problem affecting nearly every community. As a result, families lack the foundation of a stable, secure home from which to achieve better health, educational advancement, and economic mobility. The private market cannot and will not, on its own, build and operate homes these families can afford. We need a sustained public commitment to ensure the lowest -income and most vulnerable households in America have decent, stable, accessible, and affordable homes. ABOUTTHE DATA A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 Data Center's MABLE/Geocorr 2014 Geographic Correspondence Engine. If at least 50% of a PUMA was in a Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA), we assigned it to the CBSA. Otherwise, the PUMA was given nonmetropolitan status. Households were categorized by their incomes (as extremely low-income, very low-income, low- income, middle-income, or above median income) relative to their metropolitan area's median family income or state's nonmetropolitan median family income, adjusted for household size. Housing units were categorized according to the income needed to afford the rent Children of families who used housing vouchers to access affordable homes in lower -poverty neighborhoods were more likely to attend college, less likely to become single parents, and likely to earn more as adults This report is based on data from the 2017 American Community Survey (ACS) Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS). The ACS is an annual nationwide survey of approximately 3.5 million addresses. It provides timely data on the social, economic, demographic, and housing characteristics of the U.S. population. PUMS contains individual ACS questionnaire records for a subsample of housing units and their occupants. PUMS data are available for geographic areas called Public Use Microdata Sample Areas (PUMAs). Individual PUMS records were matched to their appropriate metropolitan area or given nonmetropolitan status using the Missouri Census and utilities without spending more than 30% of income. The categorization of units was done without regard to the incomes of the current tenants. Housing units without complete kitchen or plumbing facilities were not included in the housing supply. After households and units were categorized, we analyzed the extent to which households in each income category resided in housing units categorized as affordable for that income level. For example, we estimated the number of units affordable for extremely low- income households that were occupied by extremely low-income households and by other income groups. We categorized households into mutually exclusive household types in the following order: (1) householder or householder's spouse were at least 62 years of age (seniors); (2) householder and householder's spouse (if applicable) were younger than 62 and at least one of them had a disability (disabled); (3) non -senior non -disabled household. We also categorized households into more detailed mutually exclusive categories in the following order: (1) elderly; (2) disabled; (3) householder and 16 NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP householder's spouse (if applicable) were younger than 62 and unemployed; (4) non -senior non - disabled householder and/or householder's spouse (if applicable) were working; (5) householder and householder's spouse (if applicable) were enrolled in school; (6) non -senior non -disabled single adult was living with a young child under seven years of age or person with disability. More information about the ACS PUMS files is A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 available at https://www.census.gov/programs- surveys/acs/technical-documentation/pums/about. html FOR MORE INFORMATION For further information regarding this report and the methodology, please contact Andrew Aurand, NLIHC Vice President for Research, at aaurand@ nlihc.org or 202-662-1530 x245. NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 17 THE GAP REFERENCES Axel -Lute, M. (2017). Regulation and housing supply: Where the left & right agree (sort of). Sbelterforce, 186. Retrieved from https://shelterforce. org/2017/03/30/a-shelterforce-roundtable-on- regulation-and-housing-supply-where-the-left-a/ Bartlett, R., Morse, A., Stanton, R. & Wallace, N. (2018). Consumer -lending discrimination in the era offintech. Berkeley, CA: University of California Berkeley. Brennan, M., Reed, P., Sturtevant, L. (2014). The impacts of affordable housing on education: A research summary. Washington, DC: National Housing Conference. Chetty, R., Hendren, N. & Katz, L. (2015). The effects of exposure to better neighborhoods on children: New evidence from the Moving to Opportunity experiment. American Economic Review, 106(4), 855-902. Chetty, R., Hendren, N., Jones, M., Porter, S. (2018). Race and economic opportunity in the United States: An intergenerational perspective. Working paper. Couloute, L. (2018). Nowhere to go: Homelessness among formerly incarcerated people. Northampton, MA: Prison Policy Initiative. Cutts, D., Coleman, S., Black, M., Chilton, M., Cook, J.T., Ettinger de Cuba, S., ... Frank, D.A. (2014). Homelessness during pregnancy: A unique, time -dependent risk factor of birth outcomes. Maternal and Child Health fournal, 19(6),1276-1283. Desmond, M. & Gershenson, C. (2016). Housing and employment instability among the working poor. Social Problems, 63(l),46-67. Fischer, W. & Sard, B. (2017). Chart book: Federal housing spending is poorly matched to need. Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Herbers, J.E., Cutuli, J.J., Supkoff, L.M., Heistad, D., Chan, C., Hinz, E., Masten, A. (2012). Early reading skills and academic achievement trajectories of students facing poverty, homelessness, and high residential mobility. Educational Researcher, 41(9), 366-374. A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 Housing Assistance Council. (2018). Rental housing for a 215` century ruralAmerica: A platform for preservation. Washington, DC: Author. Jacobus, R. (2017). Why aren't we building middle income housing? Shelterforce. Retrieved from https:Hshelterforce.org/2017/02/22/housing- regulations -are-for-neighbors - not -residents/ Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. (2018). The state of the nation's housing. Cambridge, MA: Author. Kochhar, R. & Cilluffo, A. (2018). Key findings on the rise in income inequality within America's racial and ethnic groups. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Maqbool, N., Viveiros, J., & Ault, M. (2015). The impacts of affordable housing on health: A research summary. Washington, DC: National Housing Conference, Center for Housing Policy. National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2018a). American Housing and Economic Mobility Act. Washington, DC: Author. National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2018b). Bold proposals for renters' tax credits. Washington, DC: Author. National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2018c). Getting started: First homes being built with 2016 national Housing Trust Fund awards. Washington, DC: Author. National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2018d). Out of reach: The high cost of housing. Washington, DC: Author. National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2018e). Public housing. Advocate's Guide 2018. Washington, DC: Author. National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2019). Within reach: Ambitious federal solutions to meet the housing needs of the most vulnerable people. Washington, DC: Author. 18 NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION THE GAP Newman, S.J. & Holupka, C.S. (2014). Housing affordability and investments in children. Journal of Housing Economics, 24( June), 89-100. Newman, S.J. & Holupka, C.S. (2015). Housing affordability and child well-being. Housing Policy Debate, 25(1),116-151. Peterson, R. (2016). Re -arrests of homeless defendants in New York City. Research brief #39. New York, NY. New York City Criminal Justice Agency Research Brief. Pindus, N., Kingsley, G.T., Biess, J., Levy, D., Simington, J., Hayes, C. (2017). Housing needs of American Indians and Alaska Natives in tribal areas. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Rice, L. & Swesnik, D. (2012). Discriminatory effects of credit scoring on communities of color. Washington, DC: National Fair Housing Alliance. Sandel, M., Cook, J., Poblacion, A., Sheward, R., Coleman, S., Viveiros, J., & Sturtevant, L. (2016). Housing as a health care investment: Affordable housing supports children's health. Washington, DC: National Housing Conference & Children's HealthWatch. Sandel, M., Sheward, R., Ettinger de Cuba, S., Coleman, S., Frank, D.A., Chilton, M.,. . . Cutts, D. (2018). Unstable housing and caregiver and child health in renter families. Pediatrics, 141(2). Schwartz, H. (2010). Housing policy is school policy: Economically integrative housing promotes academic success in Montgomery County, MD. Washington, DC: The Century Foundation. U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2018). Oficial USDA food plans: Cost of food at home at four levels, U.S. average, November 2018. Washington, DC: Author. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2018). A picture of subsidized households [Data file]. Retrieved from https://www. huduser.gov/portal/datasets/assthsg.html#2009- 2017 A SHORTAGE OFAFFORDABLE HOMES, 2019 U.S. House Committee on Financial Services. (2017). Waters continues to fight to end homelessness in America [press release]. Retrieved from https:// financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle. aspx?DocumentID=4003 80 Voight, A., Shinn, M., &. Nation, M. (2012). The longitudinal effects of residential mobility on the academic achievement of urban elementary and middle school students. Educational Researcher, 41(9),385-392. Wright, B., Li, G., Vartanian, K., & Weller, M. (2016). Health in housing: Exploring the intersection between housing & health care. Portland, OR: Center for Outcomes Research & Evalution. NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 19 APPENDIXA: STATE COMPARISONS States in RED have less than the national level of affordable and available units per 100 households at or below the extremely low income (ELI) threshold State At or below ELI At or below 50% AMI At or below ELI At or below 50%AMI At or below 80%AMI At or below 100%AMI At or below ELI > ELI to 50% AMI 51%to 80% AMI 81%to 100% AMI Alabama (69,411) (42,967) 62 84 111 113 65% 19% 4% 0% Alaska (10,912) (14,092) 37 54 94 105 70% 40% 5% 1% Arizona (153,331) (167,050) 25 48 97 105 78% 38% 7% 2% Arkansas (48,146) (39,685) 56 76 107 109 61% 18% 2% 1% California (1,019,190) (1,452,839) 22 31 67 86 76% 50% 17% 4% Colorado (114,071) (148,264) 28 48 93 102 76% 35% 8% 1% Connecticut (79,172) (84,050) 38 62 102 107 67% 28% 6% 1% Delaware (17,114) (17,055) 38 63 102 108 70% 27% 8% 5% District of Columbia (30,438) (25,733) 40 65 92 101 67% 25% 8% 3% Florida (428,622) (599,544) 26 36 78 97 80% 53% 19% 4% Georgia (204,083) (218,093) 39 59 101 107 73% 35% 5% 1% Hawaii (24,816) (39,592) 39 41 74 90 63% 48% 24% 4% Idaho (23,348) (22,128) 48 70 104 106 66% 21% 3% 1% Illinois (295,271) (252,301) 35 65 100 104 72% 25% 5% 1% Indiana (134,485) (80,189) 37 77 107 108 73% 19% 3% 1% Iowa (51,141) (7,446) 44 95 108 108 63% 12% 2% 0% Kansas (51,084) (31,743) 43 79 107 107 71% 20% 2% 0% Kentucky (85,225) (58,250) 53 77 104 105 60% 16% 3% 1% Louisiana (110,614) (116,825) 44 58 101 107 68% 31% 6% 2% Maine (20,086) (13,578) 52 79 106 106 53% 16% 4% 0% Maryland (118,810) (137,602) 33 57 100 106 72% 29% 5% 0% Massachusetts (169,809) (186,775) 46 61 92 99 59% 30% 6% 2% Michigan (203,384) (158,899) 37 68 100 103 70% 24% 5% 1% Minnesota (107,382) (73,997) 39 74 100 102 62% 22% 3% 1% Mississippi (41,450) (39,719) 64 74 109 112 61% 29% 3% 1% Missouri (113,015) (86,010) 42 74 105 106 69% 21% 3% 1% Montana (17,420) (12,214) 45 78 101 105 62% 29% 5% 3% Nebraska (35,362) (15,200) 39 84 105 105 66% 13% 3% 1% Nevada (73,158) (94,688) 19 38 93 104 79% 43% 10% 2% New Hampshire (27,347) (25,672) 31 65 101 103 68% 22% 3% 0% New Jersey (200,619) (267,147) 33 45 89 99 72% 38% 7% 0% New Mexico (41,159) (38,271) 41 59 102 109 71% 31% 9% 1% New York (605,313) (696,791) 37 53 84 96 70% 38% 9% 4% North Carolina (196,231) (181,718) 43 67 103 107 70% 26% 6% 1% North Dakota (12,966) 6,482 53 113 125 120 66% 13% 0% 0% Ohio (248,709) (143,741) 43 80 103 104 67% 18% 3% 1% Oklahoma (66,967) (54,888) 47 72 106 109 65% 24% 5% 1% Oregon (98,406) (130,289) 28 42 88 97 75% 42% 10% 2% Pennsylvania (279,009) (206,695) 42 73 100 103 71% 24% 4% 1% Rhode Island (22,806) (19,050) 54 76 101 105 54% 23% 3% 0% South Carolina (84,056) (89,438) 48 64 102 107 70% 30% 6% 1% South Dakota (14,287) (7,342) 48 85 106 107 66% 17% 2% 0% Tennessee (126,745) (115,406) 46 68 102 106 65% 25% 4% 2% Texas (594,631) (675,254) 29 51 101 108 74% 30% 6% 1% Utah (41,266) (41,354) 36 64 101 105 71% 25% 4% 2% Vermont (11,876) (13,853) 35 55 95 99 68% 27% 4% 0% Virginia (140,992) (148,249) 40 62 102 107 69% 32% 4% 1% Washington (165,345) (200,357) 29 50 91 99 71% 34% 5% 1% West Vir inia (26,414) (21,578) 61 77 108 110 62% 19% 2% 1% Wisconsin (121,412) (74,255) 37 78 101 103 65% 20% 2% 2% Wyoming (5,799) 2,188 66 107 120 121 65% 10% 2% 2% USA Totals (6,982,705) (7,379,206) 37 58 94 102 71% 32% 8% 2% Source: NLIHC Tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS data APPENDIX B: METROPOLITAN COMPARISONS Metropolitan Areas in RED have less than the national level of affordable and available units per 100 households at or below the extremely low income threshold Metro Area At or below ELI At or below 50%AMI At or below ELI At or below 50%AMI At or below 80%AMI At or below 100%AMI At or below ELI 31%to 50%AMI 51% to 80%AMI 81% to 100%AMI Atlanta -Sand Springs -Roswell, GA (118,559) (129,938) 25 53 99 106 76% 35% 5% 1% Austin -Round Rock, TX (44,902) (57,967) 21 49 103 109 84% 34% 5% 2% Baltimore -Columbia -Towson, MD (57,997) (61,914) 38 62 99 106 70% 31% 6% 0% Boston -Cambridge -Newton, MA -NH (118,579) (137,489) 46 59 90 98 58% 32% 7% 2% Buffalo -Cheektowaga -Niagara Falls, NY (29,879) (17,304) 40 79 100 102 68% 23% 3% 2% Charlotte -Concord -Gastonia, NC -SC (46,484) (45,290) 32 62 103 107 74% 25% 5% 0% Chica o -Na erville-EI in, IL -IN -WI (234,266) (237,590) 28 56 97 103 76% 29% 6% 1% Cincinnati, OH -KY -IN (45,000) (15,313) 44 88 104 104 65% 14% 1% 0% Cleveland -EI ria, OH (54,321) (32,819) 41 77 103 105 69% 20% 4% 1% Columbus, OH (46,889) (28,718) 33 76 104 106 69% 19% 2% 1 % Dallas -Fort Worth -Arlington, TX (157,476) (181,978) 20 49 100 107 79% 30% 6% 1% Denver -Aurora -Lakewood, CO (59,158) (88,395) 26 42 92 103 78% 37% 10% 2% Detroit -Warren -Dearborn, MI (103,557) (73,323) 32 69 99 103 73% 26% 4% 2% Hartford -West Hartford -East Hartford, CT (28,158) (26,537) 36 66 104 107 71% 26% 4% 3% Houston The Woodlands -Sugar Land, TX (165,058) (183,200) 19 47 103 110 80% 30% 6% 2% Indianapolis -Carmel -Anderson, IN (48,821) (29,868) 24 73 105 107 78% 24% 3% 0% Jacksonville, FL (26,996) (31,336) 37 56 99 109 73% 31% 8% 3% Kansas City, MO -KS (44,589) (31,789) 33 73 104 105 67% 18% 2% 0% Las Vegas -Henderson -Paradise, NV (59,370) (78,112) 14 31 92 105 83% 50% 12% 3% Los Angeles -Long Beach -Anaheim, CA (399,164) (606,680) 18 23 56 77 80% 58% 21% 7% Louisville/Jefferson County, KY -IN (26,893) (14,895) 43 78 106 106 60% 19% 2% 2% Memphis, TN -MS -AR (32,126) (33,823) 33 53 104 109 77% 38% 7% 1 % Miami -Fort Lauderdale -West Palm Beach, FL (142,600) (224,469) 24 25 52 81 80% 68% 29% 7% Milwaukee -Waukesha -West Allis, WI (47,697) (29,501) 32 75 100 103 68% 24% 5% 3% Minneapolis -St. Paul -Bloomington, MN -WI (73,054) (50,983) 36 73 100 102 62% 20% 3% 2% Nashville -Davidson -Murfreesboro -Franklin, TN (40,705) (37,561) 31 63 99 103 70% 26% 4% 2% New Orleans -Metairie, LA (39,749) (46,889) 27 41 96 107 78% 40% 9% 4% New York -Newark -Jersey City, NY -NJ -PA (603,836) (809,788) 35 45 80 95 71% 42% 10% 4% Oklahoma City, OK (31,121) (18,960) 34 75 107 109 69% 23% 5% 1 % Orlando -Kissimmee -Sanford, FL (60,742) (91,029) 13 20 74 100 89% 60% 19% 2% Philadelphia -Camden -Wilmington, PA -NJ -DE -MD (175,364) (131,138) 34 67 99 103 78% 27% 4% 2% Phoenix -Mesa -Scottsdale, AZ (101,293) (114,878) 21 45 98 104 81% 37% 8% 2% Pittsburgh, PA (41,938) (22,840) 51 83 101 105 63% 23% 5% 1% Portland -Vancouver -Hillsboro, OR -WA (57,002) (78,256) 25 41 90 98 76% 42% 7% 2% Providence -Warwick, RI -MA (38,792) (29,218) 49 76 101 104 57% 21% 2% 0% Raleigh, NC (23,065) (17,559) 26 70 108 109 71% 21% 1 % 1 % Richmond, VA (25,013) (22,870) 33 66 103 107 70% 24% 3% 0% Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA (98,832) (129,834) 17 31 69 87 80% 44% 18% 5% Rochester, NY (30,359) (26,606) 30 63 101 103 76% 30% 7% 5% Sacramento--Roseville--Arden-Arcade, CA (57,494) (80,698) 22 37 83 97 78% 41% 11% 2% San Antonio -New Braunfels, TX (48,725) (65,089) 31 41 99 108 71% 37% 5% 0% San Diego -Carlsbad, CA (79,876) (136,631) 20 25 65 86 77% 57% 20% 4% San Francisco -Oakland -Ha ward, CA (118,818) (148,658) 31 47 76 90 68% 39% 12% 2% San Jose -Sunnyvale -Santa Clara, CA (38,689) (53,699) 30 43 79 96 73% 41% 11% 1 % Seattle Tacoma -Bellevue, WA (89,022) (112,678) 30 48 88 98 72% 36% 6% 0% St. Louis, MO -IL (60,020) (41,736) 34 73 106 106 73% 21% 2% 1% Tampa -St. Petersburg -Clearwater, FL (71,865) (98,359) 21 33 86 101 83% 47% 15% 4% Tucson, AZ (32,378) (30,310) 24 51 99 106 78% 39% 4% 3% Virginia Beach -Norfolk -Newport News, VA -NC (35,919) (37,480) 39 60 103 109 66% 37% 7% 2% Washington -Arlington -Alexandria, DC -VA -MD -WV (120,607) (149,254) 29 49 98 104 74% 31% 5% 1% USA Totals (6,982,705) (7,379,206)1 37 58 94 102 71% 32% 8% 2% Source: NLIHC Tabulations of 2017 ACS PUMS data TO FIND OUT MORE INFORMATION AND STATE -SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR VISIT HTTPS://N LI H C.O RG/GAP OOP IONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION 1000 Vermont Avenue, NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005 202 662 1530 https://nlihc.org a< r 1 1p - CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org March 14, 2019 2019 Building Statistics ATTACHMENTS: Description 2019 Building Statistics Item Number: 5. LU m IIS i � x I I �I m ! I! I I � o O Z Cl N O O_ -O _O_oO N N �o _OO.- ! Oo i O�_ _O-I000'O_ OIO 'vn (P Or•0. 0 0-_ -10 ,f00O I i ro � � 0 0 O O o O O 0 CD' rC14 r LO v ❑ 1 I > o a' cm G I I � r I I I � i IoM��,N A T I I 011.._—__.__ M u7O r CO O O, M. 1 y U -�O W M C. uul! I N _.�O'N1N rol 01 O N r�0 0 Lo 7 1 1 0 ''1 O r 1 _ -- -�-�-��-f-- LO 0 Cl) CD W. 001 01 O N 0 N0 CNI 0 I co c.N N O m-- - V 0 Ln N! Oi MI III O to is yI N y N'. w,i N N N N �i N N N N�,N O N 2 4NI NI � « 2 N N NII N N V m E E E €i C O N N N N 91 E NI N U N NI > N N N N N y. NII NIZ al a s i� am N N N a 0 a a ali a m ��, o `o `o oIa a= a alp o 2, 0 o� o /n N �I a s LL o� s N o� j o � o f c J � N U Cfl w N l al IN a l0 NI a 0�� N >i a Nlp l •� O ,'.N NI N u1N-N `ol N,a al a c a aIN IUI N E N a rri a �1 a a o a �n N --O N EN UI NIU Nrli'Na W m 0.0 a l a a a m E DI N d 0 a EI z E z u 6, EI 0 •E z Eal EI of z o' Nin `m o m E v> EIS E° E, El a > > > m E o z z z z E C EIYI E E E m «RI' �, z z� a z, z v z 5 E, N E of E E E >IJ IY u 01' 0, o > > cl z. z z z o Q Q c ;zla, o1zl. ala =' o ml y mll NI ,3, 2 .'z _ _ m! m, 4) o' U o 'D N 0 m o Irl n `o _ E U L z E u', N =' gl Xi m1, z �I N N N o• w'f a _ I o; 2'I� m N a L: O CO!V of 1 0 NII DIH I- o N �. vi''. EI E. EI u. c E N U 5 �I O tr 711 U «, x 0 Ia � U) N N N U 0 N o I� w ¢, U p Item Number: 6. a< r 1 1p - CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org March 14, 2019 Civil Service Entrance Examination: Maintenance Worker II - Horticulture ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Entrance Examination: Maintenance Worker I I - Horticulture March 11, 2019 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Maintenance Worker II - Horticulture Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Maintenance Worker II — Horticulture. Nathaniel Steele IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Rick W s, Chair r � 'Y! CITY OF IOWA CITY . 410 East Washington Street MAR 13 2019 Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 City Clerk (319) 356-5009 FAX Iowa City, Iowa rvww.icgov,org March 11, 2019 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Maintenance Worker II - Horticulture Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Maintenance Worker II — Horticulture. Nathaniel Steele IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Rick W s, Chair Item Number: 7. CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org March 14, 2019 Historic Preservation Commission: February 14 ATTACHMENTS: Description Historic Preservation Commission: February 14 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL February 14, 2019 MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd, Zach Builta, Helen Burford, Gosia Clore, G. T. Karr, Quentin Pitzen, Lee Shope MEMBERS ABSENT: Thomas Agran, Sharon DeGraw, Cecile Kuenzli STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: Ray Heitner, John Yapp, Michael Nolan RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: Stone Railroad Bridge. Bristow said the Development Committee asked that this item be brought before the Historic Preservation Committee as a late addition to the agenda. Bristow said Florence Stockman researched this stone railroad bridge in 2007 and her document is filed with the State Historical Society. Handouts of this document were provided. Bristow said the bridge was located on the northeast side of Iowa City. She used an 1892 Sanborn Fire Insurance map to show the railroad branch. The railroad was started around the 1870s. It was a branch line that connected a junction point called Elmira to the railroad that ran through the south side of Iowa City around the station on Wright. Boyd asked if the bridge was near the southwest corner of Taft and Lower West Branch. Bristow confirmed. She shared a 2011 aerial map from the Johnson County Property Information Viewer. She pointed out some stone abutments that were visible due to tree leaf loss. She believed there to be one on each side of the stream and another in the middle. She said she was able to trace the rail line from a 1930s aerial map. The stone bridge abutments are the last remaining visual representation of the rail line. Bristow noted that historically Iowa City and some of its subdivisions were platted to follow this train line. On a 2011 aerial map she showed the line went right through the corner by the coop. It jogged over across Iowa Avenue, followed Jefferson Street, went behind the Woodlawn District, then cut down through an area where there are still some alleys and some evidence of the rail line running through. The Chadek Green Park had a factory for many years. The rail line had a point where they could off-load material to that factory. Bristow said the newer developments in town obliterated evidence of the rail line, but the older developments show an outline of the rail line. Bristow displayed the preliminary plat for the area being discussed. In this development, where the stream jogs, the rail line was going north -south. She pointed out the general location of the limestone abutments; giant, dressed limestone. One of them has the date of 1892 carved into it. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 2 of 12 She said in order to get sanitary sewer line across this stream, the stream bed would need to be regraded, and the remaining abutments could then cause in flooding. Bristow said it was her understanding that only the middle abutment would need to be removed. The Development Committee was looking for feedback from the Commission regarding this possibility. Bristow had provided the Commission with copies of Other Planning Districts from the City's Historic Preservation Plan. She said this area was not included in the Historic Preservation Plan directly but would be included in the category other districts. She went over the objectives outlined in the plan for these other areas, which included consideration of transportation resources such as bridges and early roadways. Bristow noted the North District Plan included an image of part of the stone bridge and talked about it. The plan said according to a longtime resident, a portion of a Rock Island Railroad spur connected Iowa City with a small settlement northeast of Iowa City called Digby. This railroad spur generally followed the south branch of Ralston Creek out from Iowa City through what was now called Scott Park and cut diagonally across the Lindemann Hills SE quadrant, the area being discussed. It said although the rail spur had been abandoned and virtually disappeared as agricultural uses displaced the line, a remnant of the original stone railroad bridge over Ralston Creek was located on the Jerry Lindemann farm near Taft Avenue. Bristow explained the bridge remnant is barely visible when there is plant growth. Bristow also shared a drawing showing the planned sanitary sewer line and new trail. Bristow said the Development Committee wanted to know if the Commission felt it was important to retain any portion of the stone bridge. She said Staff recommended the idea of removing the minimal amount necessary to prevent flooding. If removed, direction is needed on what to do with the remnant. Boyd said he was a little uncomfortable having the Commission weigh in formally on something they hadn't had time to read and that members of the public weren't aware was going to be discussed. He wondered why it was added to the agenda in this manner. Bristow was not certain of the scheduled timeline for this project and deferred to representatives present at the meeting. She believed the Development Committee wanted HPC to be aware of this project to determine if it should be added to a future agenda or, if HPC did not feel it was important to look at in more depth, they could move on from here. She agreed if this needed formal discussion, it should be on the agenda so the public would know about it in advance. Ray Heitner, Neighborhood and Development Services, said this issue did have a bit of urgency, which is why it was being discussed at this time. Ray said the applicant was committed to listening to the Commission's feedback and incorporating any suggestion that might come out of discussion here. He said City engineers and the applicant's engineers have gone back and forth with several iterations, several concepts of how this site might be properly designed and engineered. Heitner said City Engineering Staff felt removal of the middle pier would probably be all that would be necessary to accommodate adequate flow level for the creek. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 3 of 12 Karr asked if they were worried about flooding houses that were being added on the lower side of the creek. He wondered if that's what made this an urgent issue now. Heitner said with the elevation change from raising the creek bed in order to accommodate the sanitary main, flooding could occur upstream from where the current stone abutments are located. Heitner wanted to know if the Commission wanted more research and discussion or if it didn't engender much thought or discussion. John Yapp, with Allen Homes, representing the developer, said he understood the concern about this not being on the agenda. Yapp said originally, when they started planning for this development, their goal was to use those abutments as a trail bridge and to preserve them in place. After inspection by their engineers, it was determined this was not possible because of the age and because there had been some scouring underneath those stones and uncertainty as to whether they could survive as a trail bridge. Yapp said their second goal was to leave them in place, maybe putting up a plaque explaining the history of them. He said the sewer line will require raising the creek bed because of City requirements for separation between water and a sewer line. Through that process, the City Engineering Staff became concerned about the flooding issue. If you raise the creek bed, that decreases the capacity of the creek. The stone piers become a pinch point in the creek. Yapp said if they had to remove the stone piers, their goal would be to create a monument adjacent to the trail to help explain the history. He said they recognize the history they provide. He noted that currently the piers are not accessible, in the middle of a creek, and not visible in summer. As a monument example, he shared slides showing a girder off the old Benton Street bridge that was turned into a trail monument with a plaque explaining its history. Boyd confirmed there were three pieces of bridge remnant and asked Yapp if he was suggesting moving all pieces to the monument. Yapp said they wanted to have the most minimal impact, removing only what was necessary to prevent flooding. Shope asked if the remaining two piers would be inaccessible to the public if left in place. Yapp believed that to be true because there is a steep creekbank with a lot of vegetation. Shope asked if there was any provision for a park along the trail. Yapp said to the south of the creek, Stonebridge Estates Part 8 will be land dedicated to the City as park space. He said the area to be dedicated goes to the creek. The east -west trail already is in place and they will be building the north -south trail all the way through and to the street. Pitzen asked if the stones were dry stacked, which would make them easier to move and restack. Yapp said they would probably need a small crane to move the stones. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 4 of 12 Bristow asked about timing. Yapp said they prefer not to wait a month. Karr asked if they were moving dirt in March and trying to get everything permitted. Yapp said they would begin when weather allows. Bristow noted that upper level City Staff asked her to find out how the Commission felt about this subject instead of waiting to put it on the March meeting agenda officially. Builta thought it might make sense to remove all the pieces to prevent flooding and because they are not serving their original purpose. He thought the pieces could be used for a better purpose, whether that be a monument or something else. Karr liked the idea of removing the middle stone and using it for a monument of some sort, while keeping the remainder intact. Pitzen agreed. Burford said she liked the idea of making a monument or incorporating it into the neighborhood. Boyd liked the idea of the monument and said if the middle piece needed to go for engineering purposes, his preference was to preserve in place the other pieces and hopefully find a way to make them more accessible in the future. He thought this would add character to the neighborhood. Clore agreed with Karr. Shope agreed with Boyd. He said it was fortunate there was a park space planned in that area. Bristow wondered if accessibility to the remaining parts might be improved with the planned regrading of the stream. Yapp said he would talk to the engineers about that. Boyd said in terms of due diligence, at the next meeting this should be a Commission Information and Discussion item. That way members of the public would be aware and could come and comment if desired, and any additional information or questions could be discussed. Boyd asked if there was any other public discussion. There was none. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 1117 Seymour Avenue — Longfellow Historic District (garage demolition and reconstruction and house addition). Bristow explained this property is the farthest west in the Longfellow Historic District. She said it was unique because it had frontage and sight line from Seymour Avenue but, because of the alley right next to it, you can also see the side of the house Bristow shared a head shot of the house. It is a minimal traditional house, a very popular post- war type of construction and infill that we had in this district and others in town. It has a side HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 5 of 12 gable with a front gable projection. She said it had a little bit of a bump -out in the back originally, but it did not have a gable there. A view showing the relationship of the house and the garage was shared. Bristow assumed the metal awnings would be removed. She said they were not original and could be approved as a minor review. She said they also plan to redo the concrete slab used as an entry stoop. Bristow explained there would be an addition to the house and removal of the synthetic siding, as well as removal of the garage and the construction of a new one. Bristow said the garage is in poor condition. Staff had worked with the architect through the idea of saving it and building another one to moving it, to finally to taking it down and building a new one. She said the whole sill plate is rotted at the bottom and has had structural issues that previous owners have unsuccessfully tried to remedy. A shot of the garage from the alley showed a typical, small garage. She said the windows do not have any trim around them and are not in good condition. The siding is a Dutch lap that is weathered and split. Bowing and warping of the structure, in multiple directions, can be seen. Bristow showed a picture of the garage interior showing the poor condition of the sill plate and some of the bracing. She said they had the roof completely redone with sheathing and shingles at one point in time, but it now needs to be replaced. She said the slab underneath is cracked and everything has shifted. She said there is a slope from one side of the overhead door to the other that is probably 4 inches or so because of the settling of this garage. Because of its condition, Staff recommends taking it down. While the new garage would be a two -car garage, they would match some of the details like siding and the same kind of windows. Bristow said on the house, a side entry door will be removed because of interior space reconfiguration. Bristow said the greatest setback of the new addition would be on the west side of the house, with some visibility from the alley. Bristow showed a picture of the rear of the house. A screened porch was added in 1996. She said removing that would not be an issue for this Commission. Bristow said the house had an interesting roof line. Instead of copying the front facing gable on the back with the projection, they just slopped the roof down further. The east side of the house is closest to the neighbor and where the foundation wall is the easiest to see. The concrete block would be replicated with a facing block on the new foundation. Bristow said in the past they had some foundation issues with this house. They had parge-coated the area below in some attempt at waterproofing. She said the buttresses were not original and were probably added to help stabilize the foundation from bowing. Bristow explained this house will have the windows replaced. It does have typical double -hung windows. She said it was right at that time when builders were moving from the minimal traditional to a ranch style, but this house does not have ranch style windows such as a big picture window in the front. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 6 of 12 Bristow pointed out the sashes have some rot. They have broken panes, broken cords; those typical things we look at to repair. She said this house also had some issues in the frames, leading to a recommendation for replacement. She said when they put the synthetic siding on, they wrapped all the frames with metal. The metal trapped in moisture and has caused the frames to rot away. Some of the metal trim cover has been removed to verify this. Bristow shared the demolition plan showing the screened porch, garage and windows to be removed. The side door would be removed because of the reconfiguration of the spaces inside. It would just be walled over. A window would be removed since the addition is going to come up there. With the addition there is a slight step-in on the east side, only about 9 inches. The corner of the house will be retained. That's also where the neighbor is the closet, so being able to see that side from the street is not possible. Bristow thought retaining the corner and stepping it in a bit would be considered acceptable. Bristow showed the other, larger step-in on the west side. A dashed line showed where the actual wall will be. She said the roof comes over this space because they want to keep it as a covered porch and entry. They will enter here into a mudroom space. Bristow said the new two -car garage would enter off the alley. Bristow shared the basement plan; a new full basement. There will be an egress window because all new basements are required to have one by code. The plan showed the existing house was 30 feet and the new addition will be 25-27 feet in length. The roofline will also be stepped down so the height of the roofline on the new addition will be lower than all of the existing roofline on the house. Bristow explained it will have a couple bedrooms and a master bath in that space. Because of the door being relocated, they are relocating the basement stairs into this new addition. On the front of the house the changes will be siding and windows, and removal of the awning. The existing trim around the door, a Colonial Revival trim, will be repaired — stripped/painted. Bristow said the garage will be further back on the property.She said they are looking at plain, flat -panel doors here. Bristow explained Sanborn maps and other evidence say this house was originally clad in asbestos siding. No one knows what is underneath the existing synthetic siding and insulation. If they find asbestos shingle siding in good condition, they may keep it. She said nothing would require that they remove it. If the original siding was completely removed or found to be in poor condition, staff recommends new cement board shingle siding to capture the original intent. Bristow reiterated that this project has a large scope: Removal of the garage, construction of a new garage, a house addition, and window and siding replacement. Staff recommends approval. Boyd asked if anyone had clarifying questions. Pitzen wanted to know if the new garage would be using Dutch lap siding because that's what the old garage had. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 7 of 12 Bristow said yes, to match what was already there. She said the garage was built at the same time as the house and was not sure why they had different siding. Pitzen thought the garage probably did not have sheeting behind it, so that's why they used the Dutch lap siding. Michael Nolan, architect with Horizon Architecture, thanked the Commission and Bristow for reviewing the project. He explained the family living in the house love the location and the neighborhood and wanted to get it to a level where it will keep the same character and style for the neighborhood, but also take the next leap to be a livable home for a slightly larger family and also add in single -level living so it can continue to grow with them as they get older. He acknowledged the many what -ifs with this project. He said they planned to use hardieplank shingle siding of some sort. MOTION: Shope moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 1117 Seymour Avenue as presented in the application and Staff report with the following conditions: • All door and window products approved by Staff. • Existing siding and trim assessed, and removal/replacement approved by Staff. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. REVIEW DRAFT_ CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT (CLG) ANNUAL REPORT. Bristow explained the annual report is the Commission's time to show the State all the great work we have done. Bristow explained the Commission should review what had been written and add or tweak the report as needed. She said the Commission had been very busy over the last year and this increased work could help demonstrate the need for additional staffing hours. In 2018 Bristow said there were 104 reviews, a 28% increase in reviews since 2015 when there were 81. There were other additions to staff time including the new preservation fund, new local landmarks, the Facebook page and increased public outreach, and the many grant projects currently underway. During 2018 Staff temporarily had an extra 10 hours per week, for a total of 30 hours per week. She said the last time they had only 20 hours per week was in 2017. Between 2017 and 2018 there was a 13% increase in reviews. Now they were back to 20 hours and had lost the assistance of the intern and the assistance of the Senior Planner, so it had been a really big cut. Bristow said that senior staff said that they will be looking at cutting back on Staff's responsibilities. Bristow noted the Commission had reviewed quite a few National Register nominations. For project reviews, Bristow said the State only counts any reviews that are for a primary structure, not a garage, and only those that are in a National Register Historic District. She said all our historic districts were also on the National Register, so we could count all of those, but we could not count the ones in the Conservation District. Bristow said certificates of no material effect were not counted because they are basically a repair or replacement with like materials. Even so, she said last year we had 28 reviews and this year we have 34. Local designations are included in the report. Bristow said the Commission did present seven local landmarks and five of them were approved. She said we did have a change to a locally designated property. That was approving the demolition of the house in the Conservation HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 8 of 12 District on South Lucas. The State wants to make sure we go through and work on protecting properties, so we have the work plan from last year. Bristow included another attachment for information. The Assistant City Manager and Tracy Hightshoe, the Neighborhood and Development Services Director asked in November 2017 for some strategic planning information just from Staff. This wasn't something that went through the Commission. This strategic planning document was included in the packet. Boyd said he had never seen this before. Bristow explained it was for overall strategic planning by upper level City management Staff. They wanted to know what we were doing in historic preservation. It does not get into the staffing shortfalls, but it does talk about the work of staff and the Commission. This Commission and historic preservation in our community have done quite a bit and will continue to do quite a bit. It includes the idea of the preservation summit held in Iowa City that they asked us to postpone. Generally, City management still wants us to try to move forward with holding a preservation summit here as soon as we can. This is not something we can do with the current staffing level, but it would be great for our community. Bristow said the next thing in the annual report to the state is to list all the ways that the Commission and Commission Staff provide technical assistance to the community and property owners. Bristow said the report talks about educational programming. She noted an outpouring of requests for interviews in the last year and said the podcast she and Agran were involved in went well. HPC former chair, Ginalie, and the former Executive Director of Friends of Historic Preservation, Alicia Trimble, presented for the Women's Club. This presentation could be repeated for other organizations. Bristow said no ordinances or resolutions were amended this year, but guidelines were updated, moving a few things from major reviews to minor reviews. Particular issues, challenges, and successes are included in the report. Bristow said she did add one because she thought it was important. The Commission approved seven potential local landmarks and five were approved by City Council this year. Two were not approved by City Council because of owner objections. No local landmarks have been approved when the owner objects. She noted some districts were approved when 20% of the owners objected, but not a local landmark, an individual property. She said recently we had a local landmark that would have protected some affordable housing which is a huge agenda for our City, but was not approved by City Council. Bristow noted that she thought Staff maintenance of the Facebook page would be cut due to short staffing. Without regular postings, she thought the Facebook page would also be at risk for removal. Bristow said a page would be filled out for each Commission member and training would be noted. She said the report is due at the State February 28th and must be signed by the Mayor prior to that. She asked that any report additions or modifications be submitted as soon as possible. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 9 of 12 DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PRIORITIES AND ANNUAL WORK PROGRAM. Bristow explained that staff feel short of time to discuss this at this meeting and requests that it be deferred to the next meeting. The Commission agreed. She said once it is discussed, she will write up the HPC work plan and give it to City Council and the City Manager, including a memo. A few things were discussed so that the Commission could consider them for the future. Local Landmarks Bristow noted the City owns three properties that are all listed on the National Register of Historic Places but are not local landmarks: The Senior Center, which is the old Post Office, the Ned Ashton House, and the City Park Cabins. The goal is to designate them as local landmarks. She said Parks is looking at having a celebration sometime in early or late May for the cabins project. We would like to have that landmark designation completed by then. That means these will need to come before you next month so they can get through City Council on a contracted schedule by the time the celebration happens. Montgomery Butler House. Bristow wanted to mention the Montgomery Butler House as something to be considered for the work plan because it has been tabled. It was mothballed years ago and the enclosure had been compromised. She said that in 2015 a meeting was held with interested people from the public and some Staff about what to do. The problem with the Montgomery Butler House is there is no potential use. It is on the hill next to Dubuque Street with the Waterworks Park. She said in 2015 it was so overgrown with poison ivy it was hard to get to. Bristow said staff suggests the Commission take it on as a project since the mothballing has been compromised. Boyd asked the Commissioners to review the plan and, if they had specific things to add, to submit those items ahead of time for discussion at the next meeting, as well as adding a timeline. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JANUARY 10, 2019 Boyd had emailed Bristow to make sure to fill in the time sheet in the back of the minutes. This has been done. MOTION: Karr moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's January 10, 2019 meeting. Pitzen seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: Iowa City Downtown Update. Bristow said City Council was onboard with the idea of pursuing the National Register nomination. The State has approved the idea of using the urban renewal boundary as long as the additional necessary research is completed. An estimate for the project has been requested HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 10 of 12 from the consultant. It will still probably be early 2020 before we have a Downtown National Historic District. The idea of a downtown steering committee was discussed. Bristow said staff recommended that specific questions were answered before the committee was formed, including: • What is the role of the committee? • How often would they meet? • What kind of agenda would they have? • Is the entire goal of that committee a potential local district or is the goal somehow greater than that? Sanxav-Gilmore House Update. Bristow said a consultant was hired to do a study, which has been completed. She said soon the report will go to the Commission and City Council. The report includes costs for preparing it to move and mothballing it, which involves monitoring it to make sure it does not deteriorate. It does provide some conjectures on possible rehab costs, but since the site and use are unknown, the rehab costs are a really wide range. It could be anything from just a rehab to make it function to a total historic rehab that makes the main staircase intact. She said they suggested completely removing the chimney on the exterior, as it had been added. All chimneys would be taken down to the roof to move the house and then rebuilt, except for this piece that runs up along the side of the house. She believed the City Manager and the Mayor were in talks with the University to just see if it could remain in place because of the costs, which are very high. 225 North Gilbert and 229 North Gilbert. Boyd noted these two houses are north of the Haunted Bookshop and just east of Dr. Smollen's office, which was a proposed landmark that was unsuccessful. The City purchased them from Mercy Hospital and put out an RFP for people interested in rehabilitating and occupying them in a commercial use. There were several proposals in. The Council gave guidance to the City Manager to start pursuing conversations with these. The house that's directly north of the bookstore would potentially go to public space one, possibly a public gallery. He said there is a broader proposal so if you want more information, it's there. The Community Foundation is interested in buying the second building, the one to the north of there that's on the corner, for their offices. They are currently renting some space in the Chamber of Commerce. Their lease is up soon, and they are probably moving out. They are looking for their own space. Boyd emailed the City Manager about the houses. The City bought them at the direction of the City Council to preserve them. If there is not enough evidence to make them eligible as local landmarks, they will be preserved in the contract. The potential future owners know they could be landmarked. Bristow said she toured the houses with the consultant. She said the one to the north at 229 could be a house museum. It has its original wallpaper and everything. She said the consultant will likely have a draft of the study by April 2"a HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 11 of 12 Preserve Iowa Summit Theme: Reinvention through Rehabilitation, Newtown IA, June 6-8. Bristow said the summit will be nearby and drivable. If interested in attending, she asked the Commissioners to let her know sooner than later, as well as if they would want to stay there or commute back and forth. Other. Boyd handed out an article with interesting ideas about natural light in the second floor and how to make older buildings more useful. He said Nancy and the Downtown District asked him to share it. ADJOURNMENT: Clore moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Karr. The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Minutes submitted by Judy Jones HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 12 of 12 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 4GRIPOW41 TERM 3/8 4/12 5/10 6/14 7/12 819 8/23 9/13 10/11 11/08 12/13 1/10 2/14 NAME EXP. AGRAN, 6/30/20 X X X X O/E X X X O/E X X O/E O/E THOMAS BAKER, 6/30/18 X X X X -- ESTHER BOYD, 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X KEVIN B U I LTA, 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X X X X X X ZACH BURFORD 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- X X O/E X O/E X X X ,HELEN CLORE, 6/30/20 O/E X X X X O/E O/E X O/E X X O/E X GOSIA DEGRAW, 6/30/19 X X X X X O/E X X X X X X O/E SHARON KARR, G. 6/30/20 X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X T. KUENZLI, CECILE 6/30/19 X X X X O/E X X X X X X O/E MICHAUD, 6/30/18 X X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- PAM PITZEN, 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- X X X X X X X X X QUENTIN SHOPE, 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- X X X O/E X X O/E X LEE SWAIM, 6/30/18 X X X X -- GINALIE WAGNER, 6/30/18 X X X X -- FRANK Item Number: 8. a< r 1 1p - CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org March 14, 2019 Housing and Community Development Commission: February 21 ATTACHMENTS: Description Housing and community Development Commission: February 21 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FEBRUARY 21, 2019 — 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ASSEMBLY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Megan Alter, Mitch Brouse, Charlie Eastham, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz, Christine Harms, John McKinstry, Maria Padron and Paula Vaughan MEMBERS ABSENT: [vacant position] STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Erika Kubly OTHERS PRESENT: Ryan Halst, Elias Ortiz, Craig Moser, Jake Kundert, Maryann Dennis, Shirley Tramble, Natasha Voelker, Kari Wilken, Roger Lusala, Roger Goedken, Carla Phelps, Brianna Wills, Heath Brewer, Ashley Gillette, Anthony Smith, GT Carr CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Vaughan called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 17, 2019 MINUTES: Eastham moved to approve the minutes of January 17, 2019 with corrections. Harms seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. MONITORING REPORTS: The Housing Fellowship (FYI 7, FYI 8, and FYI Rental Rehab, FYI Rental Acquisition, and FYI CHDO Operating): Lehmann noted that Maryann Dennis with The Housing Fellowship provided a written monitoring report to the Commission. For the FYI 7, FYI 8, and FYI Rental Rehabilitation of affordable rental housing, The Housing Fellowship has awarded HOME funds in the allocation years of FYI 7, FYI 8, and FYI to rehabilitate 9 rental homes owned and managed by The Housing Fellowship, The Housing Fellowship also received an allocation from The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County for the project. To date The Housing Fellowship has rehabbed 5 of the 9 units and Dennis attached a spreadsheet that illustrated the properties and expenditures. The properties are: 1105 Pine Street, 700 S. 1St Avenue, 2110 & 2112 Taylor Drive, and 1121 Ash Street. Bid advertisements were published for the rehab of 3 properties 2510 Friendship, 1202 Kirkwood and 58 Amber Lane. The bid opening was held on January 24, 2019. Four bids were received and three contracts awarded and work will start this month. Work bids are being put together for the remaining properties at 1226 Williams Street and 125 South Lowell Street. Work is expected to be complete by this summer. The properties currently occupied by low-income tenants are 1226 Williams Street, 2110 Taylor Drive, 1121 Ash Street, 125 South Lowell Street and 58 Amber Lane. For the FYI HOME funds CHDO Rental Acquisition, The Housing Fellowship received a HOME allocation of $100,000 to acquire a rental property, The Housing Fellowship also received a State of Iowa HOME CHDO award of $450,000 to acquire three properties. The State required the properties Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 2 of 15 be less than 10 years old and move-in ready, and required the acquired properties be secured by State mortgage in first place, no private bank loan allowed, City HOME funds and State HOME funds were used to acquire a new townhome at 4940 Raleigh Lane, the cost of the townhome was $227,280 and the home is occupied by a low-income family of four. For the FY19 CHDO Operating The Housing Fellowship received $12,500 of the $25,000 in CHDO Operating HOME Grant to support the salary of The Housing Fellowship's Chief Financial Officer. Habitat for Humanity (FY17 Acquisition on N. Governor, FY18 Acquisition at 2629 Blazing Star, and FY19 Acquisitions at 2764-2774 Blazing Star). Lehmann read an email he received from Heath Brewer, director of the Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity, for this monitoring report. The FY17 Acquisition on N. Governor was completed in July 2018 and sold to an approved Habitat for Humanity applicant for under 50% of the area median income (AMI). There are five members in the family, mom and dad work for the school district as para-educators and the three children attend school in the Iowa City School District. The family utilized a homeownership assistance through the Housing Choice Voucher Program to help pay for the mortgage. The assistance administered by The Iowa City Housing Authority will allow the family to complete all payment of all mortgages on the property within 15 years of the sale all while paying less than 28% of their current income. This means the family will have an asset which is currently appraised at $250,000 in an area with consistent appreciation and real estate values. This also means they will no longer need any assistance from The Housing Authority and most importantly this opportunity has provided a stable and safe environment for the family to thrive. For the FY18 Acquisition at 2629 Blazing Star plans have been approved and the lot will be developed upon thawing of the ground. This project is slated to be the Doris Preucil Women Build project and will serve a family with an income just exceeding 40% AMI. The project timeline is March 2019 to November 2019, which allows the organization to fundraise and leverage local partnerships to develop the project for the least amount of cost. Previous women build projects raised between $50,000 and $75,000 in cash and received an average of $20,000 in free labor and materials. Finally for the FY19 Acquisitions at 2764-2774 Blazing Star plans have been approved and the lot will be developed upon thawing of the ground. This project is a zero-lot duplex project with the design highlighting two five-bedroom homes, both families building with this project have several members and will require larger than normal homes. The families have each received $25,000 from their churches to help development and are designated as the 2019 Interfaith Builds I & II. Both families have incomes under 50% AMI. It is an exciting project with a quick timeline from March 2019 to July 2019, Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program (FY19 Acquisition) Lehmann said again the Commission has been provided a handout with details of the properties and pictures and the use of CDBG funds that were a part of the project. Lehmann noted they were funded for one house for three SRO units and purchased 1311 Esther Street with $35,000 so they still have $40,000 outstanding they will use to purchase another home; they will purchase two properties instead of just one. QUESTION/ANSWER SESSION FOR FY2020 EMERGING AID TO AGENCIES APPLICATIONS: Vaughan stated they would review the applications one by one and the Commission can ask questions of any of the agencies that are in attendance. Eastham removed himself from the discussion of this agenda item as he is a board member of one of the applicants. Fixmer-Oraiz also removed herself as she is employed with one of the applicants. Redevelopment of Forest View Mobile Home Park. Lehmann said Rafael Morataya (Executive Director for the Center for Worker Justice) is unable to be here today because the Forest View Mobile Home Park is being discussed at the Planning & Zoning meeting at the same time. If there are any questions, Lehmann will relay them to Morataya and get answers back to the Commission. Padron asked about the requirements of the emerging agencies, she noted they must be less than two years old or have never had received money in the past. The Center for Worker Justice is six years old and has received funding in the past. It is unfortunate they aren't present because The Center for Worker Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 3 of 15 Justice is requesting funding on behalf of the Forest View Tenant's Association. Lehmann stated that for the Emerging Aid to Agencies they cannot have received Aid to Agencies funding in the last five years and The Center for Worker Justice has received City funding but not Aid to Agencies funding. Vaughan agreed that led to some confusion and asked Lehmann to update the application for future rounds. McKinstry asked if the entity that receives Aid to Agencies funding must be incorporated. Lehmann states the application criteria are that they do not need to be a legal entity for more than two years; it does not specify if they must be incorporated to receive funding. He noted that could be up to the discretion of the Commission as this is a new program. It was set up for new agencies, Lehmann would prefer it to be an established organization in advance of the funding, but it is not required. Padron stated she does not understand the numbers that were entered, they are requesting to pay the tenants $960 and that is $10.10 per hour which is $9,660 but they are requesting $15,000. She does not see where they explain what they will do with the rest of the funding. Lehmann said they noted the remainder would be used for general organizational funding such as communications, interpreters, child care and space rent. Lehmann said the funds are being applied for on behalf of the tenant's association so that is what the funds would be used for, not Center for Worker Justice operations. Padron asked about this tenant's association and why they are being paid to attend their own meetings. Harms agreed noting she was the chairperson for the Grant Wood Neighborhood Association for many years and never got paid, they went out and fundraised for various initiative such as the splash pad but it was all volunteers. She feels if there is an association vested in what they want done they shouldn't have to be paid. If there is a need for space, there are churches and community spaces they can use for free, and if there is a need for childcare they can find volunteers for that. Padron acknowledged that the residents of Forest View are low income residents and can see they may have difficulty getting to the meetings, she would just like to have more information from the organization. McKinstry agreed, the Commission needs more information. Lehmann said he can meet with Morataya to get answers to some of the Commission's questions and relay those back, and Vaughan as Chair can join the meeting if interested. Vaughan agreed. Padron noted that she used to work with HBK Engineering and was part of the new development of Forest View and HBK and Neuman Munson were paying for some of interpretation costs at meetings with the group so she questions how much the developer is responsible. Lehmann noted that some of those details are still being worked through as well as the relocation plan for the residents as the area is redeveloped. The reason Morataya is not here is because at the Planning & Zoning meeting tonight they are discussing those issues and he needed to be present there. Grow Johnson County. Vaughan commented that on the split of the AMI categories it has 25 persons in each category which is 100 people total and she said they likely serve many more and those numbers are important when making their considerations. She is unsure if all the recipients are low-income and it is probably hard to get those numbers but perhaps the organizations they deliver to could help get those numbers because she believes their impact is much larger than what the application states. Jake Kundert (Grow Johnson County) noted that was a technical issue and when discussed with Lehmann he suggested to just fill it out with zeros because they were having issues submitting the form. He noted because they work with a range of agencies that don't collect client data and therefore they do not have data on exact number of people served. Vaughan understands and acknowledged they do have good figures for poundage of food and number of servings that would make, etc. Johnson Clean Energy District. Vaughan asked for clarification on the structure of the organization, are they a subgroup of the Green Iowa AmeriCorps Craig Moser and GT Carr (Johnson Clean Energy District) noted they are just forming a new organization and at this point have an organizing committee that will become the board once they are set up. It will involve various persons who have worked with energy situations in other states such as architects, Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 4 of 15 homebuilders, energy auditors, etc. They are forming a 501(c) 3 this spring and their intent is to collaborate with the Green Iowa AmeriCorps team that is connected with the City and make referrals to that team as part of the process of getting the work done. Vaughan asked how far along are they in their process. Moser said their group has been meeting since October and are developing a plan and will be submitting another City grant that would help them implement a program model after the solarized Johnson County program to try and implement a large amount of energy efficiency work throughout the county next year. They are trying to coordinate with others, have met with City staff and serval other agencies, and collaborate to pull together all these efforts to meet the ambitious goals in the City Climate Action Plan. McKinstry asked about incorporation and an organization that doesn't have bylaws yet and likes the idea of corporate responsibility and insurance. He asked for clarification that the actual work done on homes is not done by the Johnson Clean Energy District. Moser confirmed that is correct. McKinstry asked where the money for the materials and labor to put into those homes would come from. Moser said some of it would come from the grant, some would come from the Green Iowa AmeriCorps (federal funds) and they are also expecting to do some significant fundraising. Moser said this is all modeled on the Winneshiek Energy District which was established seven years ago and Moser was a founding board member, and this model has been working up there and has done a great deal of energy efficiency work as well as renewable energy work. McKinstry noted it is like a clearing house for people to come to them and they do the research and investigation on what needs to be done and then someone else comes in and does the actual labor and installation. Moser confirmed and said at this point they do not have staff to do that work and would also be referring to the City rehab program which does some energy efficiency rehab work. McKinstry noted apprehension of developing capacity of telling everybody what they need to have done and needed reassurance that the ability to get it done was also available. He understands the need for a central place for people to come and get information and referrals but wanted to know there is the capacity to get work done. Moser noted part of the plan is to apply for HOME funds next year to do rehabilitation, they are just not at the point where they can do that yet. In their meetings with City staff they discovered a number of programs the City has to assist with pieces of this project but they are not well coordinated and can be confusing or difficult for clients or consumers to know which program to apply for. That this agency could play a coordinating role in steering people to the appropriate program. McKinstry asked how much it would cost to do an energy audit per household. Moser said other programs such as the one in Winneshiek County have found that a level 1 visit or audit can be competed for $125 which is a basic audit that changes out lightbulbs and aerators and a few minor things like that. A basic audit tends to create on average $100 worth of savings for a family per year. Lehmann noted they also discussed the organizations ambitions are beyond Iowa City but any use of City funds would have to be focused in Iowa City. McKinstry noted this is a way to leverage more federal funds by receiving local funds. Moser also noted there is a need for standardized data collection on amount of energy that is saved and amount energy bills are reduced and they have a program and can do this and document energy savings. Alter asked if with these funds would help with rehabilitation that would then provide the savings and they would use that data to do the fundraising. Moser confirmed that was his understanding of the purpose of these emerging agency grants, to help agencies get launched and get going so they can leverage additional funding from other services. Alter asked what else they would be using for their allocation for other than doing the $125 basic audit results. Lehmann noted the last page of the application has the full budget that shows the breakdown of how the allocation would be used. Moser noted that part of what they would do is coordinate agencies and advocate for clear air and clean energy efficiency, they need to sell the public on this whole idea. Padron noted that right now the Green Iowa AmeriCorps go to houses and do energy audits so can this agency collect data from them since they are already doing that. Moser said they would refer people to that organization to help complete the audits and do the "boots on the ground" work. Vaughan asked if both Johnson Clean Energy District and Green Iowa AmeriCorps will be doing audits Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 5 of 15 Moser said Green Iowa AmeriCorps would be doing the level 1 audits and Johnson Clean Energy District would provide level 2 audits that include things like possibly changing out a furnace or adding insulation, doing advance air sealing and ventilation, etc. These are additional services that would likely be a different income group that could afford to do them. They would do audits and hire contractors in town to do the actual work which would also strengthen the local economy by generating more market demand for contractors to do this energy rehabilitation and efficiency work. He noted that in Winneshiek County when they started doing this work there was one person doing the solar installations, at the end of a seven year period there were six electrical companies in town all doing solar installations and one actually bought solar panels by the truckload due to the high amount of business. Vaughan said they stated they would also be energy auditing and planning for homeowners, landlords and businesses and asked what percentage of their overall business they think would be for the low or middle income population. Moser said initially at least 75% with this grant fund, eventually and hopefully they will find people who can afford to pay for the audits which will help support the organization. He would also like the possibility of working with organization such as The Housing Fellowship in the future. Vaughan noted the application states the goal is to do 120 households with level 1 audits and 60 would be referred to the Green Iowa AmeriCorps. Moser said they could do some level 1 themselves but will also talk with the City rehab to see if they can assist as well. Vaughan asked if there is any charge for the audit to the low or middle income client. Moser said not the audits done by Green Iowa AmeriCorps. Vaughan asked if Johnson Clear Energy District did the audit there would be a charge. Moser said there could be some cost sharing, he is unsure since they don't have any funding as of yet, but are seeking funding to make the audits cost free. Lehmann noted that City is beginning to require that folks who receive city rehab dollars must get a Green Iowa AmeriCorps audit inspection prior to the rehab as part of the City's Climate Action Plan. Little Creations Academy. Lehmann noted a clarification, in terms of budget the amount of funds requested showed up as $56,247 but for the emerging agencies the maximum allocation is $15,000. Anthony Smith (Little Creations Academy) noted that was the amount requested for CDBG funds. Lehmann asked what the emerging funds request would be then, if it was just for the smartboard and labor costs or smartboard with labor costs per the attached bid. Smith said the request is for the cost of the smartboard and labor to install. Lehmann clarified the request is for $6,970. Vaughan said the application stated the number of people serving from the 0-30% AMI is 4 and they serve 20 children over the 80% and wondered if that was correct. Smith noted that was a mistake on the application they serve 80% at the low-income. Smith noted the smartboard will be used for the 20 children in the program plus 13 children in the afterschool program for doing assignments, lessons, etc. Padron said the daycare is in the basement of a church and wondered if the smartboard would belong to the church or to Little Creations Academy. Smith stated Little Creations Academy is a separate 501(c) 3 from the New Creations International Church and would own the smartboard. Successful Living. Vaughan asked if all clients are in residence there or if there are also outpatients. Roger Goedken (Successful Living) said at most 1/3 of the clientele live in their housing program and the rest are in an outreach program who live in their own houses or apartments. They make house visits to those clients. Vaughan noted the funding request is to pay staff. Goedken said it was to help cover additional expenses. He noted the rate the State pays for their services frankly has tightened and paperwork has increased so this request is to help cover the extra hours the staff puts in to complete their jobs. Vaughan stated that is likely a challenge they will face every year. Goedken agreed noting it has increased every year but they are working towards goals to be more efficient by developing or enhancing programs. Vaughan asked if they have a long-range plan for covering these additional costs. Goedken said there are different software programs that will be helpful and are requesting funds for those in this particular request. Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 6 of 15 Padron asked if the previous funding Successful Living has received from the City was from Aid to Agencies. Lehmann said in the past they have received CDBG or HOME funds for specifically acquiring or rehabilitating their housing, not from Aid to Agencies. Unlimited Abilities. Vaughan said the request is to look for a transitional home for four people and in the income breakdown 0-30% income nine people were listed. Shirley Tramble (Unlimited Abilities) said their organization currently serves eleven individuals who are below the 30% income level. Vaughan asked if that was the total population and Tramble confirmed it was. Tramble noted she founded Unlimited Abilities in 2017 and they are almost two years old. They currently lease two homes that house four individuals in one and three in the other, the rest of the individuals have their own homes. They are asking for funding to purchase their first home to house four individuals. Vaughan noted it appears to be an ambitious timeline and questioned how realistic the timeline was to one month close on a house, the next hire staff and her experience is these things typically take much longer. Tramble stated they have already begun the process, she already employs four staff and each house typically needs two members to staff it and they will have to hire two more staff members to work in the newly acquired home. Vaughan asked where the clients are referred from and if there is a waiting list. Tramble said she has a waiting list and gets referrals from DHS. She currently has four or five on the waiting list. The two homes she has now are transitional so there are clients that come, live for a bit and then move out and make space for others on the waiting list. McKinstry asked what the total cost was of the house they wish to purchase. Tramble said the have been looking and the house they were looking at was $150,000. Vaughan asked if they anticipate having to remodel or do any work on the house. Tramble said it was move -in ready and is working with a realtor and trying to stay within the $150,000 to $200,000 range. Vaughan asked if it was four bedrooms or was there a need for staff to live there as well. Trample said they only staff the homes Monday — Friday 9am to 5pm. McKinstry noted that finding a 4 bedroom house for $150,000 in Iowa City is difficult. Padron asked if they do not anticipate having to do any remodeling to the house so are the homes they are looking at already ADA compliant. Tramble noted the residents are diagnosed with mental illnesses and not physical ones so extra ADA needs are not necessary, they provide services under the habilitation waiver for mental illness. Harms asked if they have money in case they find they do need to do some repairs or remodeling on the home they purchase. Tramble said they do have a budget for those types of issues. QUESTION/ANSWER SESSION FOR FY2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME INVESTMENTS PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (HOME) APPLICATIONS: Eastham and Fixmer-Oraiz rejoined the meeting. Lehmann began with staff comments, concerns, and questions from the applications. He noted they have a rough budget of $100,000 CDBG funds and $540,000 in HOME funds, there are currently $730,000 in requests for housing projects and $280,000 for public facilities projects. He will send out the budget sheets to the Commission so they will have that information as they put together their rankings and funding allocations. He stated they just got the appropriations announcement so they know HOME dollars are expected to go down a bit and CDBG are expected to stay flat although based on new cities joining the program and the funding allocation process, the City does not know its final allocation yet. Hopefully they will have it by the next meeting, if not the commission must set a contingency policy. Habitat for Humanity. Lehmann had five concerns/notes. First, they will have to deal with federal procurement standards (competitive bids) depending on how the project is structured. Currently the structure is the City helps with the acquisition of the lot and some of the construction so they get those funds at the end, for that construction they would have to do it competitively. The City may also structure it as down payment assistance then Habitat would essentially float the construction until the point where Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 7 of 15 they sell it to the tenant and the City would provide the funds directly to the tenant. The City will work through this to find the best fit within the federal regulations. With regards to Section 3, it is a requirement that happens with construction and rehabilitation, if it is over $100,000 of HOME funds then they may have to provide any new jobs that are created to be focused on low AMI individuals. For new construction of housing, the construction has to be completed within one year of the signing of the agreement, which happens after the environmental review, and the house must be sold within nine months. The sales price has to be within the HUD home limits for sales price limits which is currently at $228,000. Habitat has never been close to that with appraisal so that has never been an issue. The sale has to pass underwriting standards for both Habitat as the developer and the homebuyer. McKinstry asked if Habitat for Humanity had any issues with the federal regulations. Heath Brewer (Habitat for Humanity) confirmed they have briefly discussed with City staff regarding the acquisition of properties versus down payment assistance to alleviate some federal administration. He added they can float the purchase of the lot and wait until closing to use City's funds. He believes down payment assistance is probably preferable to lot acquisition as it is more direct to the homebuyer as opposed to the organization. Brouse asked if down payment assistance rather than lot acquisition would alter the project other than paperwork. Brewer said it may make the project move faster. He noted the benefit to acquisition is it requires the home to be built within a year, but even if they use the funds for down payment assistance they will still build right away, they will not land bank. McKinstry noted that the Commission scoring looks at number of individuals served and as Habitat is a homeowner project, it generally affects fewer people though more deeply. Therefore the scoring for Habitat is generally lower than other organizations that serve rental properties. Brewer acknowledged there is a large investment required to build a home to sell to a qualified buyer and a large subsidy is part of that, however his organization helps more people in other areas. In terms of selling a home to a qualified buyer, in Habitat's case between 40% and 80% AMI, when using HOME funds they look for buyers below 50% so they are subsidizing a project for people much lower than traditionally would qualify or even consider home buying opportunities. So yes, maybe they are helping fewer people but the impact is more profound, it is more of a generational investment. Homeownership provides stability for families. Many are larger in number and have trouble finding affordable rentals. Habitat is able to sell a property to a family with all home costs under 30% of the gross income, provide a mortgage they can pay for as it is well below market value, and they have equity in the home immediately. For instance they will sell a property for $140,000 that is appraised at $200,000 so that is $60,000 in instant equity and after 15 years the homeowner has full access to all that equity. This is a wealth building tool that is provided to these families so their children won't need these programs as their parents can now provide for them. Eastham asked if Habitat works with residents and families who have not obtained lawful status yet. Brewer stated they do not, per Habitat for Humanity international rules they can only work with documented citizens. The investment Habitat is making for these families is for up to 30 years so they want to make sure the homeowners will be here for 30 years. If a family is undocumented their stay in the United States may be out of their control. Lehmann noted the source of funds also requires citizenship for individuals receiving the funding. Harms noted that of course there are never enough funds to go around to fund all the great programs the community has so could Habitat take less allocation than requested and continue with their project. Brewer confirmed they could, it would just be fewer families they could serve or more time to complete projects. For every $50,000 they receive they can develop a new project. HOME funds are essential to allow Habitat to serve a lower income population. The request of $120,000 for four properties is for low income families, which frees Habitat funds to help other families that are maybe above 50% AMI. If they receive less than they asked for they will have to slow down the development of these projects. Fixmer-Oraiz asked if they did get less how they would decide if they move forward on the less than 50% AMI projects or the over 50% AMI projects. Brewer said they would move forward with the less than 50% AMI project first. He noted they have less and less applicants in the under 50% AMI category. Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 8 of 15 Eastham noted the Forest View relocation plan that is under consideration will provide homeownership opportunities for 50-60 households in the community who are mostly under 30%-40% AMI. Lehmann noted The Housing Fellowship has also developed homeownership opportunities in the past. Brewer mentioned the holistic approach of Habitat with housing goes beyond just the monthly mortgage, insurance and tax payment, they also go well beyond Code for insulation and systems they put in homes to make them affordable to operate and live in. They are always looking for opportunities to build these homes and make them affordable to live in. The goal is for homes that are safe, healthy and affordable. Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program (MYEP). Lehmann noted this is a rental/new construction project. They are requesting $200,000 to acquire two lots and construct two three-bedroom fully accessible homes to be operated as six single room occupancy units in their supported living community program. The total project budget is $600,000. Lehman said staff notes are similar to those for Habitat, they will need to comply with sealed bids, federal procurement standards, and depending on the funds allocated section 3 may apply, they have to build within one year and occupy within six months or put together a marketing plan. Also as this is five or more HOME assisted units they will have to implement the City's affirmative marketing plan. As a rental project it must comply with City underwriting requirements and regarding that with mortgage interest rates increasing and HOME rents expected to decrease need to address any concerns about adequate cash flow or borrowing ability. The proforma should also show a 1st year loss due to applying for tax exemption and the organization has to have the cash to cover it. Alter wondered if the partner could elaborate on their services and where the 16 homes they operate are, 11 of which they own. Roger Lusala (Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program) said all of their properties are in neighborhoods and named the various locations of the houses. He noted some houses have been purchased by MYEP, HOME funds have not been used for all. Eastham noted MYEP is financed with private funding for development of other homes and if they plan to continue that practice along with HOME funds. Lusala said they always finance, it is the down payment for the homes they partner with the City to provide. If MYEP has extra cash and can afford to put a down payment on a home they will do so, because they are a nonprofit they fundraise for home purchases. Eastham asked about the demand for additional units. Lusala said the demand for wheelchair accessible homes is high, currently there are people in their 20's and 30's living in nursing homes, not because they need nursing care but because there are no accessible homes elsewhere. When MYEP built the house in 2013 one of the first persons to move in was a 39 year old who had been living in a nursing home for years. The amount of accessible units available does not meet the need for the number of people they serve, additionally the wheelchairs are now bigger, people are larger and it is hard to find builders to build ADA accessible homes. When they build these units they add track ceilings to transport someone from a bedroom to a bathroom, sinks where wheelchairs can fit under, overall functioning to meet all a person's needs. Lusala said they have people on waiting lists for these units. Harms asked if the clients are renting or owning their units in these supported homes. Lusala said the clients are renting, MYEP purchases the homes so they can modify the homes to be accessible but are not in the real estate business to turn around and sell those homes. They also provide 24-hour services to those residents of the homes. Padron asked how long most residents stay in these homes. Lusala said it is very long-term living, for most it is permanent living, only to move out if their level of needs change. Harms asked if there is a three-bedroom house is it for three individuals that need services or is it a family. Lusala said it would be three individuals that need the services with staff coming and going. Lehmann added it is categorized as single room occupancy units and each client is on a separate lease. Lusala noted they were able to use the money the City awarded them last year to acquire two units rather Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 9 of 15 than just the one requested. Harms asked then how much does MYEP really need to move forward with this project this year. Lusala said the lots they purchase to build accessible units on have to be bigger lots because they cannot build up (which is cheaper, smaller lots), they often look for corner lots and those lots run about $75,000 to $100,000 each so that is why they are requesting $200,000. If they are only awarded $75,000 for each lot they will just have to search harder for those less expensive lots or do more fundraising to get to the $100,000 threshold. He noted they really need both lots as they have over 20 people on their waiting list for accessible units. McKinstry asked about the staff comment about rental rates falling and that the reimbursement rate is based on the rental rates in a given area, so if the rental rates for the whole area fall then the reimbursement to the agency falls. Lehmann said this is a concern is because they have to pass the underwriting standards with specific thresholds and CDBG fair market rents decreased from $468 to $459; rents are becoming more affordable as vacancies increase in the market. However underwriting may mandate less units being built or purchased or their mortgage rates may not stay under the $860 per month mandate. Lusala stated they are not looking at making money by the houses they rent, they are looking at providing services to the people. He added they use seven different banks because they make them compete for his business and give him the rates he needs to stay in his margins. Eastham noted a concern about underwriting and if staff feels projects are not viable it should be shared. Lehmann said it is more a concern about making sure a project passes federal underwriting rather than a concern about financial viability. In some cases, underwriting may indicate a need for the City to subsidize a project more deeply based on federal guidelines. Eastham requested the Commission see the numbers that cause a concern to be raised so they can evaluate as well. Lehmann said he will send his numbers in a follow up email. Successful Living — rental acquisition. Lehmann said the project is $240,000 to acquire four homes, they note they will add a fifth bedroom but HOME dollars are for acquisition only, so if it is not already in the property, the City cannot count any additional bedroom. For federal dollars and underwriting it is only 16 units but there will likely be another unit added after the acquisition is complete. Lehmann added that Successful Living provided responses to all staff concerns and comments. Lehmann continued noting that competitive bids will be required for any work such as adding a bedroom if that is part of the project. Successful Living has a realtor they use who is on their board which can be a conflict of interest for CDBG funds, but not HOME funds; Successful Living prefers HOME dollars. Section 3 may apply depending on the amount of funds allocated, if they have five or more HOME assisted units they will have to implement the City's affirmative marketing plan and they already do that. They may be subject to relocation requirements for properties occupied by tenants at the time of acquisition, historically that has not been an issue as they have been unoccupied or homeowner occupied. The Proforma assumes five units per property but will have to pass underwriting for four units. Additionally with the Proforma, they are assuming a 8% vacancy loss, maintenance and repairs is about $9,000 over what Lehmann would expect (generally assume 1 % of the value of the property) but Successful Living noted that amount is because of the particular houses and client population. Property taxes will show only in the first year, for SROs utilities need to be included under miscellaneous operating expenses so that is showing in the Proforma. Operating expenses are at 8% which is within the requirements, however the City typically prefers 5-7%, and finally they may be subject to federal labor provisions depending on the amount of units they have (kicks in after 8 units). Lehmann noted that he has discussed the proforma with Successful Living staff, and indicated they would not need to update unless requested by the Commission or in the case they are awarded funds Vaughan asked how many properties Successful Living currently has. Roger Goedken (Successful Living) confirmed they have five properties. Vaughan asked the occupancy on the five properties. Goedken said they are in the upper 90's right now, around a year ago they added a new intake person who has done marvelously getting better fit clients and occupancy up. The occupancy averages around 90% depending on the time of year. Vaughan asked if they have quite a bit of turnover or if this is transitional housing. Goedken said the houses they pursue are more permanent housing situations, but they have quite a bit of transition for their other houses due to mental health and levels of care changing. Goedken noted that about six months ago they had a waiting list of about 20 people and Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 10 of 15 now have a whole new list of 20 people and the list is growing so there is no shortage of need. Vaughan noted the application states the units will be affordable for five years, Goedken confirmed the period of affordability is for five years. Vaughan asked what happens after the five years. Carla Phelps (Successful Living) stated the affordability is a HUD definition based on $15,000 per unit. However Successful Living continues to provide the affordable rates for tenants past the five years, they never change the rents they charge, and they stay at the City levels. Lehmann noted the five years is for HOME compliance where the City monitors the rents, post five years the City no longer monitors. Eastham asked how long Successful Living had been operating in Iowa City. Goedken replied 21 years. Harms noted Successful Living provides supportive services and asked if they could describe the SRO units because the population they serve has specific needs and some of the amenities would be different. Phelps said it is a regular five -bedroom house, they make it nice and welcoming which is important since most people have never lived in a nice home, they keep homes clean and well maintained. They maintain good relationships with neighbors. Staff helps residents, takes them to their psychiatric appointments, takes them to get physical activity, etc. All residents have different needs so the staff working in the homes cater to the needs of the people living there. Eastham asked about the cost for the services Successful Living provides, where the payments come from. Goedken replied payment is from Medicaid. Eastham asked if Successful Living has the ability to finance home purchases with funds other than the HOME program. Phelps said they need HOME money for down payments. Goedken added they would not be able to expand their housing without support or funding from other grant sources. Banks will only assist with loans if they have down payment funds. Successful Living — rental rehab. Lehmann said this is for an existing home they own at 3107 Village Road, five bedroom SRO units, they are asking for $75,000. Staff asked if Successful Living could proceed with rehab if they have to repay any HOME funding or if they could proceed with equity rather than City assistance. Phelps responded stating they need a grant not a loan to proceed with this rehab. Eastham asked if there was a difference between Successful Living's requests for federal funds for rehab or in this case The Housing Fellowship's use of federal funds for rehab with this round of applications. Lehmann said the differences are clientele, Successful Living is persons with disabilities, The Housing Fellowship is typically families. Another difference is SRO's typically get a better rate of return on investment for the number of units because it is smaller units and they share the house, so you can often help more people in a single household than one family, which depends more on size. Lehmann noted based on the applications, 15% of the HOME allocation has to be awarded to a community housing development organization, which The Housing Fellowship is; in this case it is roughly estimated at $70,000. Eastham stated he does not see a difference in what Successful Living is doing in their rehab project versus what The Housing Fellowship is requesting. Lehmann said they are both using HOME rehab finance dollars. The Housing Fellowship --_ CHDO. Lehmann said this request is $26,500 for operating expenses which is up to 5% of what a HOME allocation can be used for, that and developer fees are the only ways to fund operating expenses. Lehmann noted the current estimation is around $23,000. If The Housing Fellowship receives CHDO funds they have to do a CHDO set-aside project (like a rental rehab) within 24 months of being awarded the funds. The Housing Fellowship — rental rehab. Lehmann said this is the only CHDO project that has come in, the other CHDO is HACAP but they haven't done a CHDO project in a while. They are asking for $69,180 for rental rehab of one four-bedroom and one two-bedroom property. $63,000 is requested for rehab and approximately $6,000 for administration of the grant. The Housing Fellowship must remain a CHDO for the period of affordability which in this case is 10 years minimum. Staff again asked if this project could proceed with rehab using equity rather than City assistance. Maryann Dennis (The Housing Fellowship) is unsure why the City is questioning if they could proceed with equity when they are required to provide a CHDO with the HOME reserve anyway. Could they do the Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 11 of 15 rehab with equity, sure but they just spent $225,000 in predevelopment costs for the low-income housing tax credit project. Dennis noted that even though their balance sheet may show a lot of equity, they could do it but it won't help The Housing Fellowship remain solvent. The Housing Fellowship has been a Certified Housing Development Organization for the State before Iowa City was an entitlement community. Dennis also acknowledged the conflict of interest issue stating on the application it states "identity of interest" which she feels is different than conflict of interest and The Housing Fellowship knows procurement procedures, they have always followed them, her contract manager married someone that owns a contractor company and therefore she is no longer involved in any way in the procurement or award of any contract or administration of rehab award if her husband's company is competitively awarded the bid. Lehmann confirmed that the City's legal counsel cleared that. Eastham asked Dennis to describe the process or method The Housing Fellowship is using for deciding which particular properties are due for rehab. Dennis said they look at the age and condition of the properties, they have a maintenance staff that keeps apprised of the conditions of the properties, they keep a capital improvement budget they review every year for depreciation of appliances, etc. Domestic Violence Intervention Program (DVIP). Lehmann stated they are requesting $120,000 to renovate the emergency shelter for adult and youth victims of domestic violence, more specifically the parking area, youth services area and fencing. Eastham asked for priorities on the three or four parts of this project. Ryan Halst (DVIP) said the asphalt repair in the existing lots is the biggest priority as they are badly deteriorating. The fencing is to keep people out of the lot and keep victims safe even if outside. They would like to update the youth area because it is old, the flooring and whatnot, and things need replaced. Elias Ortiz (DVIP) added they are a 24 hour shelter that was built in 1993 and have served over 8,600 people and are always at capacity (which is about 40 individuals) and half the clientele at any given point is children. They have received CDBG funds in the past for renovations in the kitchen but the youth area has not been updated and it is important. They hold support groups for children in the shelter, do safety planning, etc. DVIP treats the children as their own clients, not as secondary to the parental client, and need a space for them. They wish to update the flooring, new functional cabinets for storage, and furniture to make the area functional and useful. Ortiz noted that last year they established Hoover's House which is the only shelter in the State of Iowa that has kenneling for dogs and cats so families don't have to make the tough choice of leaving their pets behind. That is why the fencing is so important but also Ortiz stated in the last year they have seen a huge increase (60-70%) in perpetrators showing up on the property, and security, safety and confidentiality are priority one. Little Creations Academy. Lehmann stated this request is for $51,968 public improvements project for the Little Creations daycare which predominately services low-income children. The project will consist of replacing some bathrooms, installing a boiler, floor tile, wall shelf and windows. Lehmann stated most of the projects are eligible but the boiler system will require funds to be proportioned and staff will work through how that can be done. The boiler is coming from another property, will be stored and then installed onsite. Because the boiler will also serve the religious portion of the property as well as the daycare they will need to apportion the funds. Padron noted this daycare is in the basement of the church and wondered if the daycare pays rent to the church. Anthony Smith (Pastor, Little Creations Academy) stated the daycare pays rent to the church. Padron stated they will be fixing restrooms and other items as a tenant and the landlord is the church. McKinstry recalls a previous application regarding a furnace for this space. Smith replied there are four furnaces in the building and a boiler. McKinstry asked how many of the other furnaces have been replaced. Smith stated they replaced two furnaces that are related to the daycare, the other two are related to the church which are the church's responsibility to replace. McKinstry asked how the boiler fits in, does it help to heat both the church and the daycare. Smith confirmed the boiler heats the church and one section of the daycare so that is why they need to apportion funds. Lehmann said they look at the square footage of the daycare versus the church and apportion the funds accordingly. Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 12 of 15 Padron asked if the church has any intention of fixing these items themselves instead of making the tenant (daycare) fix them. Smith explained it is a unique situation with the boiler as they are getting it from another location and the church is providing the labor. Alter stated the Commission awarded a lot of money before to Little Creations Academy to install floors and remove asbestos and asked if this was a different location. Smith said the location is over 5000 square feet so the previous project covered 2400 square feet, this project will be replacing the floor tiles on the other 2400+ square feet. Old Brick — ADA Improvements. Lehmann noted this is a $400,553 project with the ADA improvements looking at a kitchen renovation (which serves the event facilities as well as the Agape Cafe which is the weekly meal for the homeless), ADA restroom and handrail improvements and some new flooring. He noted a wrinkle in the project in that it will need to meet a national objective to be able to qualify for CDBG funds. City staff is currently in discussions with the HUD representative about the possibility, the question has been escalated up the chain at HUD. Lehmann said this issue is for the kitchen renovation as well as the other project that includes the installation of a retaining wall. He stated all the ADA improvements are eligible expenses because it serves a limited clientele who are presumed to primarily be low -moderate income. Lehmann informed the Commission they can still award funds and if staff discovers part of the project may not be eligible, the award would go to the parts that are eligible. Lehmann hopes to have the answers from HUD before the next Commission meeting. Harms asked about the kitchen renovation and details on why it qualifies. Brianna Wills (Old Brick) said the primary way they qualify the kitchen renovation for low -moderate income is for 25 years Agape Cafe has operated out of this kitchen which serves homeless or no/low income individuals, about 80-100 people at each serving. Wills also stated that everyone that rents the ballroom can use the kitchen as part of the deal and because they are a low-cost rental property in Iowa City most of the guests that rent Old Brick qualify as 80% or under. There are 16 nonprofits that have offices within Old Brick and are almost all human services. Those nonprofits use the facility extensively including the kitchen. Old Brick is 163 years old and a very expensive building to maintain, they are aggressively looking at environmentally friendly options as they renovate, which can add more in terms of cost, but is important for the long term. They are trying to do the right thing and upgrade Old Brick to serve all organizations that come through. Other organizations use Old Brick too, including nonprofits that are not tenants. They rent space to tenants at $2 per square foot and elsewhere in downtown Iowa City the rental rates typically run between $18 and $25 per square foot for office space, so they are substantially subsidizing those nonprofits and that is what the mission of Old Brick is, to serve as a nonprofit incubator, and those nonprofits tend to use the facilities for fundraising events, lectures, etc. Wills added that the Agape Cafe Board of Directors are committed to help fund the kitchen renovation. Alter asked if Old Brick was on the National Registry and Wills confirmed it is. Wills added it is the second oldest public building in Iowa City, second only to the capitol, and was built on the tallest hill in Iowa City which is where the request for the second grant comes in. Old Brick — structural reinforcement. Wills continued to discuss the structural reinforcement retaining wall. When she came on board at Old Brick about a year ago she decided the property needed to be "prettied up" and opened a giant can of worms. When MMS Consulting came to survey the property and agreed to a free gardening plan, they discovered the hillside by Clinton Street had eroded to dangerous levels. Over 163 years the hill has now eroded enough to where the foundation is exposed and at a critical point where they are in danger of wall cracking, water damage, etc. Therefore this information led her to take other projects off the table because it was now the primary focus. At first they thought they could put up a retaining wall but found that the drainage from the building's roof goes through this hillside and would affect the wall. Therefore drains have to be redirected and unfortunately there isn't a sewage or drainage vent into the road for a whole city block. Therefore they will have to use water permeable pavers and this project is now estimated around $100,000 because the landscaping will have to be ripped up for the wall to be built, deal with the drainage issues. To deal with drainage they will essentially end up with a large patio at the front of the building, which will add value to Old Brick as an event facility. Wills noted that Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 13 of 15 being a small nonprofit they do not have the $100,000 in reserves to pay for such a large undertaking and such a significant capital project so they need to search for funding. Brouse asked if these improvements would quality for historical renovation grants. Wills replied they applied through the State for an emergency grant and was not awarded one because all funding for the year had been depleted. They will try again, but noted most of those grants are smaller ($5,000 or $10,000) but any funding will help. She has also investigated the cost-sharing option through the City and State and will try to obtain those funds as well for the permeable patio. Lehmann stated that for items that are not CDBG eligible staff is willing to help look for other sources. Fixmer-Oraiz asked if they had media coverage of the needs for Old Brick. Wills said they implemented a few programs such as a "brick buying" program, having your name on a brick, and also the repainting of the ballroom will have a donor wall for that, so they have been doing outreach. Fixmer-Oraiz noted that many in the community just don't know these things are going on and it is important to get the word out. STAFFICOMMISSION COMMENT: Lehmann noted the opening to replace Bob Lamkins closes March 5, to be appointed March 12. Looking for someone with a financial background or receiving rental assistance, so please encourage applicants. With regards to Legacy Aid to Agencies, the funding recommendation for the full amount was approved by Council but only for a single year so the Commission will must revisit this once this funding cycle is complete. He noted support for 3% annual funding increases so that can be built into the future planning Eastham added he would like to discuss sooner rather than later, possibly April. Lehmann added Padron asked that applications be more consistent and perhaps give additional guidance to applicants (such as for demographic information). Padron added there were two applications that had no information on demographics and therefore on her chart they scored really low. Eastham agreed that demographic information should be pari of the applications for housing projects but noted that some programs, such as the food programs, don't have a way to gather demographic information. Lehmann said this can also be discussed this spring/summer after this funding cycle is complete. With regards to community development happenings Lehmann announced they are monitoring right now, they received the RFPs for City Steps and are doing rankings and will hopefully have a consultant chosen soon to begin work this spring. Staff has started a preliminary review of affordable housing programs, they are still in ongoing discussions about how those might look. On March 5 in the Iowa City Public Library meeting room A the Chamber of Commerce is putting on an Affordable Housing Forum for developers and contractors, Commissioners are welcome to attend. Lehmann noted the next meeting is March 21 and they will do the Fair Housing Study Presentation, CDBG/HOME recommendations and Emerging Aid to Agency recommendations. He acknowledged the meeting is during spring break week and wondered if Commissioners wanted to reschedule. After discussion the Commission agreed to hold the next meeting on March 14. Community Development Week is April 22-27 please let Lehmann know of any ideas. Lehmann stated that organizations are mixing different pots of funding, Aid to Agency, CDBG/HOME, Sustainability, Human Rights Commission, Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, City funds and it has been raised whether this should be coordinated. He noted staff is also discussing this, but now they are just tracking funding; they have no formal recommendations on how to better coordinate. ADJOURNMENT: Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 14 of 15 Fixmer-Oraiz moved to adjourn. Alter seconded. Passed 8-0 Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 15 of 15 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record Name Terms Exp. 7/10 9/20 10/11 11/15 12/20 1/17 F = Vacant Alter, Megan 7/1/21 X X X X X X Brouse, Mitch 7/1/21 X X X X X X Eastham, Charlie 7/1/20 X X X X X X Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa 7/1/20 X O/E X X X O/E Harms, Christine 7/1/19 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 Padron, Maria 7/1/20 X X O/E 0/E X X Vaughan, Paula 7/1/19 X X X X X X • Resigned from Commission Key: X = Present 0 = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused F = Vacant Item Number: 9. a< r 1 1p - CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org March 14, 2019 Human Rights Commission: February 19 ATTACHMENTS: Description Human Rights Commission: February 19 Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall Members Present: Jeff Falk, Cathy McGinnis, Bijou Maliabo, Jessica Ferdig, Barbara Kutzko, Noemi Ford, Adil Adams, Jonathon Muhoz. Members Absent: Tahuanty Pena. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Recommendation to Council: No. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 5:30 PM Approval of January 24, 2019 Meeting Minutes: McGinnis moved to approve the minutes with amendments; the motion was seconded by Falk. A vote was taken, and the motion passed 5-0. (Adams, Maliabo, Muhoz not present). Funding Request for Night of 1000 Dinners: The Johnson County United Nations Association requested $250.00 for its annual Night of 1000 Dinners. At the event that celebrates International Women's Day, three organizations, Legal Aid of Southeast Iowa, 100 Grannies for a Sustainable World, and the Center for Worker Justice of Eastern Iowa will be recognized for their contributions to advancing human rights and the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals. Sponsorship of this event comes with three complimentary tickets. This is an event the Commission has sponsored for several years. To date, the Commission has supported community funding in the amount of $856.00 for fiscal year 2019. Kutzko moved to approve the request at $250.00; the motion was seconded by McGinnis. A vote was taken, and the motion passed 7-0. (Maliabo not present). Falk and Ferdig will represent the Commission at this event being held on March 13. Strategic Plan and Committee Updates: There are four committees that assist in advancing the strategic plan. The four committees are Housing (*Falk, Adams, Pena); Public Safety (*McGinnis, Maliabo); Education (Falk, Kutzko); and Community Outreach (*Adams, Falk, Munoz). Asterisks designates chairs of the committees. Housing has not been active aside from a couple of affordable housing advocates that came to talk to the Commission about area programs. Public Safety is discussing and talking about hate speech and disproportionate arrests. They do not meet every month but have been meeting more recently about hate speech that has been occurring on the University of Iowa's campus. As a committee they work on how to respond to hate speech while also looking at what has already been done. Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall They hope to be able to eventually teach people how to respond to hateful rhetoric when it happens to them. There was a brief mention of fliers that were posted in downtown Iowa City that read "Be Iowa Nice and Call Ice". The public safety committee plans on following up with law enforcement to see if there are any options re: the fliers and to take note of the occurrence of such incidents. Education has attended several meetings with the Iowa City Community School District. There appears to be a lot of misinformation between students, parents, teachers, and administrators. The committee actively works cooperatively with other organizations to assist in putting accurate information out to the community. Former chair Willis thought that the Commission could serve as an intermediate to see what issues people are concerned about and work to gather information on those issues so that things would not be anecdotal. Community Outreach has primarily done outreach to the community on the vast array of services available here in Iowa City. The committee also reminds community members of their rights and what the Human Rights Commission does. The committee admittingly has not been that active but did highlight the "Know Your Rights" program at the Broadway Neighborhood Center that included information on the Community ID program. Committees should plan on meeting to determine next steps, reevaluate goals that were set up in 2018 and to see the path that should be taken in 2019. Correspondence: Pride Con is on February 23 at Tate High School. If any Commissioners are available to sit at the vendor table, it is from 10-2. Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant: The City Council will make the decision on the Social Justice Racial Equity Grant (SJRE) recommendation at its meeting of February 19. Commissioners received correspondence from Successful Living. Its authors Carla Phelps and Roger Goedken wrote that "And then you SKIPPED OVER OUR 7th RANKED APPLICATION/AGENCY in favor of two lesser ranked organizations. YOU IGNORED YOUR OWN RANKINGS. At least two members appeared very pleased at that, so as to be able to fund personal favorites, ranked highly by one or two individuals but not by all. We found this offensive". Both Phelps and Goedken were present at the meeting of January 24 when the Commission made its grant allocation recommendations. 2 Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall McGinnis said that if she had participated in the grant allocations, she would have been in support of funding Successful Living at half the requested amount. She understands their frustration and the concerns they are raising but is not sure what the Commission can do to address them at this point. Ferdig mentioned that it might not be realized by others how much they (Commissioners) must review and get every detail in reference to grant applications. Ferdig thinks that their concern needs to be thought of in the future in terms of how the Commission does its rankings. She would like it to be discussed when they meet to talk about the grant process for fiscal year 2020. Kutzko asked if the letter needs to be responded to and Falk said that is why he wants the Commission to read and then talk about the letter. McGinnis pointed out that the Commission does a lot of cooperative events with Successful Living. For example, the City's annual job fair. Ford asked what would make the Commission not want to respond. Ferdig was not sure what responding would do at this point. Staff noted that Ford and McGinnis should not participate in any formal action on the letter because they were unable to participate in the grant process due to conflicts of interests with applicants for this year's grant cycle. Ford believes that not responding to the letter is like not acknowledging them. Ford is not suggesting the content but the gesture. That the Commission should acknowledge the email which was appropriately addressed, signed, and verbally explained their (Successful Living) view. Staff did acknowledged receipt of the correspondence to Phelps and Goedken in an email and let them know it would be handed out at the Commission meeting being held that evening. McGinnis asked what the protocol is for applicants that are not recommended for funding. Staff reported that emails are sent out to all applicants letting them know of the day and time the Commission will review the applications and make recommendations. They are also kept up to date on the recommendation and City Council's decision on the recommendation through email. Munoz's only concern about responding to the letter is due to the fact that the Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council, Successful Living still can go to City Council. They can voice this concern to City Council, the Commission 3 Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall does not have the final say and so, it is missing a step for the Commission to respond to the letter. Munoz went on to point out that there are other organizations that did not get funding and he does not think the Commission should establish a precedence of responding to all organizations that send a letter because all the Commission is doing is making a recommendation as opposed to any final decision. McGinnis asked about an organization that wrote a letter last year that was unhappy with the process. Munoz remembered that it was not an organization but a Commission member who wrote the letter. Staff explained that the Commissioner had a conflict of interest and could not participate in the grant process. They voiced concerns about the process and selection of grantees. Munoz believes that the rankings are just that, a ranking, and they are not something the Commission needs to follow. When he ranks an application there is a 1 to 2 point range between applications and so they mean a lot less than what standing alone they may seem to be. Ford feels a lot of hurt feelings can be prevented if the process was more transparent. Staff mentioned that two informational sessions were held to explain the grant process to potential applicants. Ford asked whether they knew the rankings didn't mean anything, staff replied that the rankings were discussed at the sessions but cannot make assumptions on what attendees took from the information provided. Staff also mentioned that the Commission Chair asks at the meeting where applications are discussed, and recommendations are made whether any Commissioner would like to change their ranking. The Commission is not swearing off on the rankings. The rankings can be adjusted at any point in the process. McGinnis added that attendees to the informational sessions could ask questions on the process. Staff said the presentation from the informational sessions is made available to attendees and placed on the City's website. Falk feels that the confusion may be due to public meetings that (by law) require everything to be relevant to the agenda. You just can't bring things up at a public meeting and a lot of people do not understand that and that there are reasons for this. I assume in the letter (from Successful Living) in one of the things they referred to that is on the agenda, is that you can address for 5 minutes but no one has to pay attention to you and there is no discussion about what you say. I think that can be better explained to the public. McGinnis said maybe they can lay that out at the beginning of the meeting. Staff noted that in the email sent out to applicants it was stated that comments pertaining to the rd Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall grant would not be taken based on the decision of the Commission at its January 8 meeting. Chair Pena also noted this at the beginning of the meeting held on January 24. Munoz mentioned that every year we discover flaws in the process. Last year we got dinged because we over -funded, we recommended fully funding one organization that we should not have. Ford wants to know the reason the Commission would choose not to respond to the letter. Munoz responded that the reason the Commission is not responding is that they (applicants) have the ability to address the City Council directly and it is the City Council who ultimately makes the final decision and for precedential reasons. Ford asked for clarification of Munoz's comments. Maliabo, responded that if we respond to one then we have to respond to all. Ford believes the Commission is here to serve the community and if people have misinformation it is the Commission's job to correct it and promote growth. Ford, personally, would not mind answering 10 people if 10 people were hurt or confused. Ford is happy she wasn't involved in this decision-making process because it made her uncomfortable even just being present at the first meeting. Listening and feeling confused and not knowing how she could decide without feeling bad or biased. Ford wondered who she is to make this decision when all the organizations can benefit from the funding. Ford also wondered why, if there was money left over, not fund a partial use to Successful Living. Ferdig replied that there was only $500.00 left. Munoz provided that the Commission is a deliberative body and its reasoning is not singular. So, he does not know how to respond properly to the letter without each Commissioner having to describe why they individually chose a certain action. But he is open to vote on it, if there is a motion. Ford feels there is something dishonest about not replying to the letter. If the Commission is certain they followed the procedures and did what they could, then why couldn't the Commission just say we're sorry for how you feel we followed our procedures, if you have grievances design other ways to address them. Ford is nervous about next year if she has to be a decision maker in this process. McGinnis wonders if maybe in the next month or so it would be a good time to have a meeting about the grant. About how the process should be adapted for next year. Staff has sent out a survey to each Commissioner to gather all the comments and get feedback and this should make the meeting on the grant process more productive. Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall Staff also created a survey for SJRE Grant applicants to fill out to get feedback on their thoughts about the process. Munoz would like to table this discussion until after the work session is held on the grant. Ford wants to know how the City would have them do it because they're our boss. Staff responded that she believes the City Council would defer to the Commission on how it feels it should respond. But that the City Council makes the final decision on the recommendation and that the Commission is advisory to them. Falk moved for the Commission to respond by acknowledging the letter and thanking them for letting them know their thoughts and to ask them to attend the next Commission meeting to have a discussion about the process and allow non - Commission members to participate in that meeting. Falk thinks a survey will be fine and informative, but he feels that if the Commission gets a letter like this, they should respond some kind of way even if the response is kind of nebulous we just say thanks for your input and add we're going to have a discussion about this and the time and place for such discussions. Maliabo wonders if a response is sent to this letter, will that then require the Commission to respond to other letters, if more should come. Falk thinks the Commission does not have to respond individually but could have a general response. Falk noted that the Commission would be responding but not to the actual criticism. Ferdig had concerns with the last part of Falk's motion to invite them in. She does not feel it would be constructive to invite them to a meeting. This is assuming they are aware of the fact that that the meetings are open to the public. Ferdig and McGinnis think the survey will allow applicants to note any criticism or concerns with the grant process. Falk accepted a friendly amendment to remove the last part of his motion. Adams seconded. Falk asked if he can respond to the letter as an individual. Staff reported that Falk can do as he chooses as an individual. Falk withdrew his motion and will reach out to Successful Living as an individual. Ford thinks there should be a stock letter that is available to send to organizations when there is this concern. Staff will email out the presentation from the informational sessions to Commissioners who had not already received it. C Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall Black History Proclamation: Munoz was acknowledged for accepting the proclamation from the City Council and in doing so reminding the community that Martin Luther King, Jr. advocated for work equality as a matter of social justice. BlackKKlansmen: Ford thought the discussion, held at The Englert, was really good. She was able to sit in the front row. It was a full house and the speaker, Ron Stallworth, was mind-blowing. He went through the whole story in the presentation. He took comments and questions from the audience. Very encouraging. It was wonderful. Youth Awards: Save the date, May 8th at The Englert. Reports of Commissioners: Malibo has attended meetings with the University of Iowa's Public Health to discuss ways in which the medical community can create better outcomes for Congolese maternal health. McGinnis went to hear Adam J. Foss; a former Boston prosecutor and criminal justice reform advocate speak at Coe College. Very good talk and very interesting. Ford has been asked to give a talk on the effects of separating families at the border has on children and parents. The talk is part of a non-profit agency fundraiser. More details are forthcoming. Adams, spoke on a recent demonstration held in DC in support of freedom and justice in Sudan. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 6:41 PM. Handout from HRC Meeting of 2/19/2019 S.uccessfud To: The Iowa City Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 From: Successful Living Subject: SJRE Grant awards On the evening of January 24, 2019, Successful Living's Executive Director, Roger Goedken, and our Director of Grants & Development, Carla Phelps, attended your evening meeting at City Hall where you voted on recommendations for who would receive SJRE grant funds. We had applied and came to the meeting to learn if we would succeed in getting some much-needed funding. We pored over previous SJRE applications as we'd been advised, and wrote, proofed and re- wrote our proposal with high expectations. Prior to the meeting the commission ranked the applications/agencies. Our agency was ranked #7. The first 6 in rank all received full funding. After that you had around $8k left. Our application was for $16k and was to pay for tickets for our mentally ill clients, all disabled, to be able to attend events they otherwise are unable to ever attend. We clearly stated this in the narrative and on our spread sheet/budget. Our application also made clear, as one commissioner stated, that partial funding could be readily utilized in lieu of full funding. Yet we heard commissioners say they did not understand or perhaps did not believe how we would spend the money (except for one: she said she was at that moment looking at our spreadsheet and believed she did know how we would spend the money; no one much listened to her or responded). We witnessed commissioners admit that they did not actually remember the content of applications. One said there were no reference to disabilities from applicants! Meanwhile those of us observing were required to sit silently since we were given to understand in advance that our comments or questions would be unwelcome. And then you SKIPPED OVER OUR 7th RANKED APPLICATION/AGENCY in favor of two lesser ranked organizations. YOU IGNORED YOUR OWN RANKINGS. At least two members appeared very pleased at that, so as to be able to fund personal favorites, ranked highly by one or two individuals but not by all. We found this offensive. Our clients have nothing. And face ugly stigma and discrimination every day. We are used to that at our humble little agency (small but mighty — we've survived for 20 years) - but we never expected it from the Human Rights Commission. That $8k would have gone a long way toward Handout from HRC Meeting of 2/19/2019 concretely improving the lives of the people we help. They would have only been able to attend half as many events (unless we received additional funding elsewhere), but that would be so much better than none at all. It appeared that your logic was that you only want to fund 100% of any proposal and refuse to partially fund any proposal. This is very hard to understand, especially when a program like we described lends itself to partial funding. And especially since your application asked what we would do if only partially funded. It is just all very hard to understand and feel that the commission's decision lacked basic fairness and follow-through of established protocol. We feel Social Justice particularly was sorely missing the evening of January 24, 2019, and an adherence to the developed ranking protocol would have resulted in improved impartiality. 7n,,,re�g,ar CariAj. P,helps, BBA, Grad Dip -Counseling, MS-Psy. Director, Grants & Development Successful Living Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Cell: (319) 471-1809 Email: cphelps@icsuccess.org Web:.https://www.icsuccess.org/ Roger Goedken, BA, BS Executive Director Successful Living 2406 Towncrest Drive Iowa City, Iowa 52240 W: (319) 358-6800 x105 F: 319-358-6807 Email: rgoedken@icsuccess.org Web: http.//ww-mi c5uccess. o r Member Attendance Sheet Member Term Exp. 1/8 1/24 2/19 3/19 4/16 5/21 6/18 7/16 8/20 9/17 10/15 11/19 12/10 Maliabo 1/2021 Present Present Present McGinnis 1/2021 Present Present Present Munoz 1/2021 Excused Present Present Kutzko 1/2020 Present Present Present Falk 1/2020 Present Present Present Pena 1/2020 Present Present Excused Adams 1/2022 Excused Present Present Ferdi 1/2022 Present Present Present Ford 1/2022 Present Excused Present KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting — =Not a Member