Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch HCDC PacketIf you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this program or event, please contact Brianna Thul at brianna- thul@iowa-city.org or 319-356-5230. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Upcoming Housing & Community Development Commission Meetings Regular: April 21 / May 19 HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (HCDC) March 24, 2022 Regular Meeting – 6:30 PM The Center Assembly Room 28 S Linn Street AGENDA: Call to Order Consideration of Meeting Minutes: February 17, 2022 Public Comment of Items not on the Agenda Commentators shall address the Commission for no more than 5 minutes. Commissioners shall not engage in discussion with the public concerning said items. Question and Answer Session for FY23 Emerging Aid to Agencies (EA2A) Applicants Submissions can be found online at icgov.org/actionplan. At this meeting, HCDC will host a question and answer session with FY23 EA2A applicants. Applicants are encouraged to send a representative to answer any questions. EA2A applications do not have a scoring criteria. Discuss FY23 Emerging Aid to Agencies (EA2A) funding requests and consider budget recommendation to City Council FY23 EA2A applications are available online at icgov.org/actionplan. At this meeting, HCDC will discuss applications and funding amounts. HCDC will consider a recommendation to City Council for FY23 EA2A funding of up to $36,600. Applicants are strongly encouraged to attend. City Council will approve final funding allocations in May. Discuss FY23 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Program funding requests and consider budget recommendation to City Council FY23 CDBG/HOME applications are available online at icgov.org/actionplan. At this meeting, HCDC will discuss applications, rankings, and funding amounts. HCDC will consider a recommendation to City Council for FY23 CDBG/HOME funding of up to $500,000 CDBG and $425,000 HOME. These numbers may be subject to change as the City has not received its formal allocation from HUD yet. Applicants are strongly encouraged to attend. City Council will approve final funding allocations in May. Discuss National Community Development Week National Community Development Week 2022 is April 11-15. The National Community Development Association (NCDA) provided a toolkit with suggestions on how to acknowledge and celebrate the week. Staff would like input from HCDC on how to acknowledge the week in Iowa City. Duties of HCDC include actively publicizing community development and housing policies and programs. If you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this program or event, please contact Brianna Thul at brianna- thul@iowa-city.org or 319-356-5230. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Upcoming Housing & Community Development Commission Meetings Regular: April 21 / May 19 8. Iowa City Council Meeting Updates Commissioners volunteer each month to monitor Council meetings. This agenda item provides an opportunity for brief updates on City Council activity relevant to HCDC business. Commissioners shall not engage in discussion with one another concerning said items. 9. Discuss Public Comment Procedures HCDC Chair Drabek has requested feedback from other Commissioners on the procedures for public comment such as the total length of the public comment period. This item is a discussion to assist the Chair with procedural decisions and will not require a vote. 10.Staff Updates 11. Adjournment Housing and Community Development Commission March 24, 2022 Meeting Packet Contents Agenda Item #2 February 17, 2022 HCDC Draft Meeting Minutes Agenda Item # February 28, 2022 Staff Memo – FY23 Staff Funding Recommendations March 17, 2022 Staff Memo – HCDC Scoring Summary for the FY23 Funding Round Agenda Item #7 National Community Development Week Toolkit Agenda Item #10 Climate Action Grants Press Release Fair Housing Training Press Release Community Police Review Board Community Forum Flyer MINUTES PRELIMINARY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2022 – 6:30 PM FORMAL MEETING ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Kaleb Beining, Maryann Dennis, Matt Drabek, Nasr Mohammed, Becci Reedus MEMBERS ABSENT:Peter Nkumu, Kyle Vogel STAFF PRESENT: Tracy Hightshoe, Erica Kubly, Steve Rackis Brianna Thul OTHERS PRESENT: Badereldin Ahmed, Ismail Alnoun (Mount Mercy University), Simon Andrew (The Housing Fellowship), Lata D’Mello (Monsoon Asians and Pacific Islanders in Solidarity), Charlie Eastham (Center for Worker Justice), Khalid Farah, Fatima, Kristie Fortmann-Doser (DVIP), Michelle Heinz (Inside Out Reentry), Hariz Mohamedein, Ashlee Hopkins (DVIP), Hallsae Mohammad, Mohamed Mohamed, Jane Murphy, Mazahir Salih (Center for Worker Justice), Fatherahman Siddig, Abu Tahir, Barbara Vinograde (Free Medical Clinic) (via Zoom), There were two public comments submitted via phone through Mazahir Salih (Anthony Smith with New Creations International Church and Ayman Sharif with A & W Sustainable Planning). RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 3-2 (Dennis and Beining dissenting) the Commission recommends Council revise Section 2.3(H) of the ICHA Administrative Plan to extend absences from 30 to 60 days to allow participants flexibility for vacations without requiring permission in advance. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Drabek called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 20, 2022: Reedus moved to approve the minutes of January 20, 2022, Dennis seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the minutes were approved 5-0. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. DISCUSS REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO THE IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY (ICHA) ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL: Hightshoe explained that in early February staff received a request from the Center for Worker Justice regarding the Housing Authority policy regarding extended absences for those in the housing voucher program. In the current policy, under the administrative plan, there's a policy called absence from unit policy that allows tenants to be gone for 30 days. Hightshoe noted many of the Commissioners are Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 2 of 16 2 familiar with the Housing Choice Voucher program as it's a program where based on income the City will pay for percentage, could be all or a portion, of someone's rent. Tenants have to qualify and so in the policy it states if someone is gone for more than 30 days unless it is a reason typically beyond someone's control (such as a prolonged medical care hospitalization or a death in the family) they risk losing their voucher. Staff had a conversation with the Center for Worker Justice and some of the immigrant community and they maintain that in some families 30 days is hard to do especially for immigrants who have to travel overseas to see their families and then have to have the decision of whether they stay extended periods and risk losing their voucher. The Center for Worker Justice requests that the City amend the policy and basically either move that 30 days up to 60 days or add a reason that visiting family outside the United States once a year be an allowable reason for over 30 days. Hightshoe noted the federal regulations allow the Housing Authority to allow someone to be gone for up to 180 days if the reason is something like an incarceration or for placement in a nursing home. However, over the 180, the voucher is terminated no matter what. Housing authorities are allowed to choose a smaller period of time as what they consider brief absences, and a lot of housing authorities use that 30-day benchmark with exceptions for those unforeseen circumstances. The Center for Worker Justice’s request is allowed by federal grant, the City can extend that period but it comes with a trade-off and that's why staff wanted to have this go to HCDC to make a recommendation to Council. The City has 27,000 applications on the housing choice voucher waiting list and of those 1300 meet the preference criteria. The current wait list for those 1300 families is well over three years, in calendar year 2021 98 households requested a level more than 30 days to travel overseas and the average amount of assistance that the City pays is about $556 so based on 98 households the Housing Authority pays about $54,000 for each month where the unit was not occupied by a member of the household. Therefore, the City has to balance the needs of the entire program and of those waiting on the waiting list to those who need to travel for various reasons. She acknowledged staff totally understands reasons that families, especially immigrant families who have to travel for a long ways, want extended absences but they're trying to balance that with the needs of the entire program so therefore the Housing Authority believes the current policy to be fair but if HCDC might want to recommend to Council that the Housing Authority amend the policy, then staff recommends the Center for Worker Justice recommendation to go up to 60 days. Council discussed this request and wanted to refer it to HCDC and are asking for a recommendation by March 1 st, their next meeting. Drabek asked how many of the 98 requests were granted and how many were denied. Hightshoe believes they were all granted. Rackis noted the data that they compiled was actually families that had requested to travel who are still active participants in the program and the 98 was the number requested in 2021, which was the biggest year, but the number of requests from 2019 coming forward is 121 requests which were granted. Drabek asked as far as the two options that the Center for Worker Justice laid out in the letter are either the blanket permission for visiting immediate family or going to 60 days, staff has clearly expressed a preference for the going to 60 days but as he read that letter his first thought was to prefer the other option though hearing staff give some compelling reasons not to he found himself wondering about that idea of immediate family and who would count as immediate family under that policy so is now favoring the 60 day option as it eliminates making judgments about who is family. Hightshoe agreed, staff does not want to have to get into justifying who travels, how long they travel, when they travel and who all counts because then they're not being fair to everyone. Staff would rather just have the longer period and basically say anything of over and above that longer period has to be due to some unforeseen circumstance. She noted again, once they start getting into three, four, five months that means they're paying rent on a unit that's not being occupied and also not occupied by somebody else who needs it. Reedus asked in terms of how they make the decision about an emergency request, if a father, mother or somebody in the family gets sick and they want to make a trip to go see them or help with health care that would be granted in the emergency request and could be for a longer period of time correct. Hightshoe confirmed that yes, it has to be approved and could be up to 90 days. The request here is just for a normal visiting trip which can take much longer for people who live outside of the country. Dennis asked if the recommendation that the Commission is supposed to provide to Council whether or not the 60 days is for voucher holders who are traveling outside of the United States or is it for any Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 3 of 16 3 voucher holder. Hightshoe stated staff would prefer any voucher holder, so they do not have to administer different rules for different people. Drabek also asked if Council is asking the Commission to recommend approval of one of these two options or can the Commission choose neither and suggest another option such as the 120 days. Hightshoe stated Council is looking to the Commission to decide whether they feel that the current policy needs to be modified and if yes, then what is the recommendation to modify it to and that's the recommendation that goes to Council. Reedus is in favor of modifying this noting she would refer to this policy as something left behind and it's one that needs to be updated with the changing world. She comes from a background of human resources, and this is not new with people needing extended time away from work it doesn't fit into the three weeks’ time off and in the world today with people living outside the country that they were born or a far distance away from family this would help. She does realize that during this time they don't want these apartments empty and the City paying rent but the cost to the City being $54,000 compared to the whole City budget is a drop in the bucket so she is going to be in favor of modifying the policy. Dennis noted she has a history of property management and while she doesn’t remember the exact number of days but if a unit is vacant for a certain number of days the landlord protector insurance that the owner of the home carries will not cover a claim so she would want to check on that. Additionally, if this commission recommends modifying the policy she would not approve the 60 days, she is not going to approve a change to the Housing Authority's administrative plan. She feels it's reasonable for families to get approval for longer out of country travel, the 98 households that requested it were approved and the 27,000 plus households waiting a seemingly long time for assistance may think the request of change isn't equitable to them. Beining agrees with a previous comment and what he had noticed in her time in HUD housing is that they had a lot of people on that three-year wait list and moving from 30 days to 60 days may take resources away. However, he would like to see the second portion regarding allowing the visitation of the family out of country to be a reason to go past those 30 days approved. Mohammad noted as an immigrant he knows the importance of visiting friends and family overseas and they usually don't do it every year for obvious reasons, it's very expensive to travel to Africa for example, for a small family the cost is probably over $10,000 and they cannot afford to do that every year, so they do that every other year or every three years. He acknowledged there are various reasons to have frequent visits for example they need to preserve their customs, their values and their traditions and to pass them to the second generation so traveling is very important as an immigrant, but it is also very difficult. Extra time is needed to travel as well because for example, the closest airport is in Chicago, and it takes four hours to get there, from there they board a plane for 14 hours for a different destination and then from there they go to their home country and most have to take a bus to their final destination so the process of traveling overseas takes about two days and then they need like three days to switch their biological hour because it's different time zoning and then when coming back they have to repeat the process so they need probably a week just for traveling and that is the reason he supports the two months motion. Mohammad asks everyone on the Commission to join him in supporting the motion. Drabek wanted to hear more about this idea of if a person is gone for two months that the City is paying for unoccupied space, it makes a certain amount of sense but at the same time as long as the intention is to return it really seems like that person is still housed by the City. There are all kinds of reasons people leave their unit, there are 24 hours in a day and they work for eight of them so the unit is not utilized for those eight hours but they're going to come back at the end of that day so if a person goes out of the country for two months but they're intending to come back and return to the unit, the unit is still housing them and if they come back and they don't have the voucher anymore then that’s another person in the community who needs housing. He is not sold on the idea that it's costing the City some amount of money. Hightshoe states that it’s not about the cost of the money, it's basically those 1300 folks that are in precarious housing situations and call daily to find out where they are on the waiting list. She noted it’s Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 4 of 16 4 about 16 families that could be pulled off the waiting list for a year. She also asked that the Commission does recommend a time frame because otherwise they could go up to six months and the City is paying for rent for someone who's only there half the year. She feels the 60 days would fit most requests and then continue the policy about absences beyond control. Rackis noted from the Housing Authority perspective they prefer objective criteria and the best example he can give as to why they use objective criteria is just this past week he received an email from a gentleman who's 61, just moved to the area for the university hospitals, he has cancer and is undergoing chemotherapy. In his email he stated that he may not be alive in three years when his name comes up on the wait list and Rackis had to tell him that because the preference category is elderly families, disabled families and families with children under the age of 18 who live or work in the jurisdiction, then it's date and time of application, they couldn’t use most in need criteria to move this gentleman to the top of the list. There are families on the waitlist who are homeless with kids in the car. The Housing Authority has to have objective criteria because they don't want to be making determinations of is the applicant with a liver transplant receiving chemo most in need, or the family with children living in their car. So, it's better to have a preference category, date and time of application. That is also why if the Commission supports a 30 to 60 day leave that is criteria that is objective and better for the Housing Authority to follow. Mazahir Salih (Executive Director, Center for Work Justice) wanted to respond to some of the comments that has been made about the policy. She noted normally they see federal policies stronger than local policy and the federal policy states not more than 100 consecutive calendar days but the City policy is 30 days. A family may be absent for a period of less than 30 calendar days without notifying the Housing Authority unless the absence will interfere with a scheduled annual recertification or annual unit inspection in which case the family must call and make appropriate arrangements. If an absent will be for 30 calendar days or more the family must notify the Housing Authority in writing 14 calendar days in advance and show written notice of absence example, vacations, and if they don't have that the City will reject the application. Salih stated taking a vacation to care for a family member and they saying family member, HUD did not say how household member, but the City says household. Salih considers her mom in the family but they saying household here means the household will live on that system unit. HUD states vacation clearly and Iowa City Housing Authority say hospitalization, death of the household or illness of the household, or any another reason, the mean necessity by Iowa City Housing Authority. So if the federal rule said not more than 80 days, but you can do it for vacation, the City should also at least put vacation there. In a recent application that has been filed to the City of Iowa City the applicant stated he is traveling because he has not traveled for the past three years and his mother and my father are sick, they are over 80 years of age, and them being sick he has to go and care for them. His wife does not drive, so if they said somebody has to be in the unit and he stayed at the unit, his wife cannot do the job over there. This gentleman’s application has been denied. The mother and father are ill and they can prove it, they can get documentation from the hospital, but the request has been denied. Salih also noted even for the people who have family in this country, but not in Iowa, this is really something good for the people that they have. If they have family around they could then vacation to Mexico or something like that, but spend time with family. For example she is from Sudan and when they go to Sudan the only airport is in the capital, her husband is from East Sudan, and her mother from North Sudan so when she goes there she likes to visit her side of the family, so her kids can know her mom and her cousins. It takes us a long time to drive around. As Commissioner Mohammad mentioned just travel to the home country can take 24 hours or more. And once there, they spend a week just driving around the country to visit all the family. She believes this policy needs to be changed so they can make immigrants in the community feel welcome. Salih ask Rackis when this policy was created. Rackis replied the current plan was approved by Council in 2003. The plan language that exists right now in the plan is the same language. He believes it was probably in the administrative plan when the Housing Choice Voucher Program was created. There used to be a certificate program, there's been several different tenant based rental assistance programs, but the Housing Choice Voucher Program was created in the late 80s, so that's been in the plan probably Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 5 of 16 5 ever since they've had the Housing Choice Voucher Program. He is not sure when the federal regulations was last updated. Salih acknowledged then this was created over 20 years ago and the community today does not look like 20 years ago, there are more immigrants and whoever created this policy in the past did not know how many immigrants would be here. The policy was likely created thinking about people in America, no one needed 60 days to visit Virginia, Miami or Chicago. And to be honest how do they know even the people who are from this country may go for vacation and if they add all the vacations some take, it will be more than 60 days, it’s just that they aren’t consecutive. Many people will be out of their assisted unit more than 60 days, but just not consecutive. Salih called the manager at Pheasant Ridge today, which is governed by HUD, and he said their policy was two months because he knows those people and knows this is important for them, most of his tenants are immigrant. So if a project governed by HUD can do it, the City can do it too. Salih acknowledged there is a waiting list, she knows of people living in their car right now because they are homeless, they know there are many in this community suffering but they cannot prioritize anyone on the waiting list so she doesn’t think they can use this as an argument for this. The City spends a lot of money to make people feel welcome, so please spend this money and make people feel welcome and change this policy to 60 days without having to request an absence. Having to ask permission is not easy for immigrants, they don't know how to do it, they don't know how to write in English, or maybe they don't know the policy. The rejection from the Housing Authority just comes as “we regret that we deny your application” and if they need to travel for more than 30 days they need to state why, like for hospitalization and all the things that they have in their current policy, it makes people confused. Salih urges this change so people don’t have to go through this. She also noted when the whole household leaves, 98% of the time the father always come back before the 60 days, because of his job, they don't want to lose it. Like when her husband goes they visit his family first and then her kids and her stay on and her husband comes back. Please make those people feel welcome. Lata D’Mello (Monsoon Asians and Pacific Islanders in Solidarity) is an advocate and works with victims of domestic violence, sexual assault in Asian and Pacific Islander communities, but marginalized communities as well. The work they do is addressing the needs of the community, not just serving them for their cases involving gender-based violence. One of the things that she hears is that unfortunately the racism that's embedded in how we issue our comments or our policies. If they say something like, oh, it happened in 2003, without looking at the history of what happened, post 911 is the policies that came up, post 911. If you say well, there are so many people waiting for housing so we will just shuffle people around, some people will still be on the streets, and we are okay with that. That's a huge problem. D’Mello encourages them to all think about what racism really means, what softer or nice racism means. What it means when it comes to becoming a stain policy, becomes a stain on the Iowa City character and that really reflects on everyone. It's not like people are going off and it’s the City who has to pay, it's not the City paying, it's taxpayer money, everyone is paying into that and it's people who are committed to assisting people. Iowa City claims to be so progressive, so City Council really needs to take that seriously. As Ms. Salih stated, people might be traveling for a week somewhere, coming back, and going again, spending a whole lot of time away which might amount to six months and the City is still paying for the assistance. D'Mello asked the Commission to please consider this, this is what housing justice should be, people should be allowed the freedom to come and go when they want to, to have this space to consider a home and not say we’ll talk about housing justice or social justice in Iowa without considering this. There are a whole lot of people who have come here and have made this their home and it's important not to neglect the others who are not housed too, but to think about what housing would mean in a city like Iowa City, not to deny housing development, that really is important, affordable housing that goes beyond HUD. Jane Murphy (43-year resident of Iowa City) wanted to simply state here tonight she stands in support of the 60-day travel. Fatima is as a daughter with immigrant parents, they moved to the States when she was three years old in 1999. In 2013 was the first time she went Sudan for two months with her whole entire family. At that time the family was on Section Eight housing. In 2015 they went a second time for her graduation gift and stayed there for two months. The third time that was in 2019 for a cousin's wedding and they airport Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 6 of 16 6 shut down so they had to stay longer for her cousin's wedding. Regarding the cost of $54,000 costs for the entire program, or per unit cost of $556, the question comes down to is this burden worth it to the City. The reasons she personally thinks it is because families that are on Section Eight housing tend not to be able to afford the traveling as it costs about $1,200 per ticket depending on the season, so if a family of five travels they are paying like $6000 just for travel and they still need spending money over there, so it is actually expensive. Families spend three, four or five years saving the money to be able to go to whatever country they're from and be able to afford that kind of vacation. They also have to think about their bills here because the water doesn't stop, rent doesn't stop, etc. Her whole life living in the States her family was able to travel three times. She can now afford to travel more because of her work and does go more often but her mom and siblings have not been to the Sudan since 2019. Also these families don't all go traveling together especially when the kids get older, because the moms now can go travel and leave them here and the father can go travel and come back here. But it's really important for the kid’s development to go back home, it's really hard growing up, sometimes they are Sudanese and sometimes they are American. There's an identity crisis that every immigrant kid that goes through and it's really important for development that they go and they learn about their culture. They need a sense of belonging and it's really important for the development. Lastly, as Iowa City truly is intending to do a better together for 2030 and integrating all immigrant communities, this is a one sign to show one can go spend 60 days in their home country and come back and are still welcome here. Fatima also asked how many of the people on the waiting lists will also be affected by this policy change and how many of those people are actually immigrants that do travel back home that would need those 60 days. Ismail Alnoun (Mount Mercy University) stated he is here to support the 60 days as most people here have mentioned the 60 days for travel is the minimum time needed to travel oversees. He also wants to point out most people will not travel every year, maybe every two years. He has had a friend that have had their request rejected, he doesn’t know if there's like specific rules to follow either in the request to be accepted, most do not know exactly what the rule says, it just says to write a letter but they don’t know what to write. Therefore, he is supporting the 60 days. Salih translated for Badereldin Ahmed and he stated he is the household member and the only one working and paying for his family but they haven't gone to the Sudan for seven years, he has with applied to go now after seven years to leave the country and they denied his request. The reason he did not go for the seven years is because he didn’t have money and was just saving during this time. His father and mother are over seventy years old and he needs to see them. He noted the City said they had a lot of requests in 2020 for vacations. Rackis confirmed in the memo 98 families made requests in 2019, 2020, and 2021. Most of the requests were in 2021 due to COVID-19 effect. Ahmed noted a lot people request to travel in 2021 because 2020 was COVID-19 and nobody traveled 2020, some of them they didn't even travel in 2019. So that is why it was such a high number, but that doesn't mean it's going to be like this always. If they compare this year they will see is way less than 2021 because most of the people who went last year, most of them are not going to leave this year. He also noted as someone said earlier regarding the cost when the people leave and how terminating them from Section Eight because they were staying there more than 30 days will just add more to the waitlist because they will then become homeless. It also takes time to fill out the Section Eight application, sometimes more than two months, and by that time they are here they are not solving the problem. Drabek agreed, they are simply shifting around who's getting the voucher and there's still another case of a person who needs housing. Ahmed added he came here when his kids was really young and they have been here for seven years and have never seen their grandmother. He and his wife are from different regions of Sudan and when they go they have to of course visit both sides and that takes long. He feels it is not fair that they have not seen their family for like seven years and they can lose their Section Eight because they want to go for more than 30 days. Charlie Eastham (Center for Worker Justice Board of Directors and ICCSD School Board) had a couple of points. One in terms of funding that's been mentioned here, it hasn’t been mentioned that the participants in the program continue to pay their share of the rent while they're traveling or while they're absent. So, if Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 7 of 16 7 the voucher assistance for the 98 participants totaled the City paying $54,000 or so those participants also paid close to $30,000 in rent from their own pockets. That is something that should definitely factor into the deliberations tonight. The other thing is that the federal government actually provides 180 days of absence from a rental subsidized unit under the regulations and HCV program. As a school board member he pays attention to what all the regulators that are involved in district programs have to say, and he would say, as a member of this community, the Commission should pay attention to what all the regulators have to say too. The federal government's giving people permission to be gone up to 180 days so they should be very careful in local decision making, if they’re deciding to reduce that number. In closing he wants to be clear that they're looking at a cultural considerations here that were not before us 20 years ago, and this is an opportunity to be clear that this housing program is intended for the support of families and that's how it should be administered. Eastman believes at the least they should adopt a 60-day modification of absence period, as well as potentially considering a longer period. Anthony Smith (Pastor of New Creations International Church) wanted to speak about the extension of the time period people can be out of housing. One of the issues he sees is it becomes a moral issue to him because no person should have to ask permission to leave the country and then worry about having their housing in jeopardy. That is just punishing people because of their poverty. Others don’t have to ask to leave or ask permission to leave their homes. They need to look at the integrity and understand people's dignity and make this a moral issue that no one should have to ask if they can leave the country and worry about losing their homes. Khalid Farah stated he is here to voice his support for people who are looking for two months instead of one. He invites them all to visit his family in Sudan and to see themselves how their parents to meet their kids and if they saw that, they would give them this time. Ayman Sharif (A & W Sustainable Planning) is a resident of Iowa City and would like to speak here regarding the issue of the absence of Section Eight. This issue is important, and he urges the Council to consider the absence time of 30 days and extend that because the families benefiting from the housing are also the same people who benefit from having the trip outside or the absence more than 30 days. This is because of so many facts, including that those people are still having connections with their country of origin, which is often very far away, and they spend a lot of time collecting and saving money to do this trip far away and it doesn't make sense for them to return within the period of 30 days. He asks the Commission to reconsider this period of time into a more suitable period of time that can accommodate the very important needs of this group of people who are using Section Eight service. Salih asked also if in the rules they use the term family instead of household, saying to visit immediate family because when they say a household that means somebody has to be sick from the household that they live here or somebody died from the household that live here. Reedus made a recommendation that they change the rule and that Council adopt the revision of the policy which is 20 years old and a policy that's been left behind, it should have been changed. She agrees with what everybody said so it's clearly time to change this policy. Her recommendation is to move it from the 30 day to a 60 day time period that people can be gone for vacation. Drabek asked if they want to only make a motion on the time period, or should they look at the immediate family language as well because it's more targeted and it addresses the problem more effectively but he doesn’t want staff to have to figure out what is immediate family and what is not. Rackis noted the HUD policy states the cities can define what brief is, right now the Housing Authority has defined it as 30 days. Then it's also if the entire household is out of the unit, so that's what they're talking about with household. In terms of a parent, a grandparent that, yes, is certainly a rationale for why the entire family to be out of the assisted household for 30 or 60 days, to visit a parent or grandparent who is ill. What they mean by household is who's in the assisted household, whether all are going to be gone, or just a portion. Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 8 of 16 8 Drabek understands but in the original letter Ms. Salih laid out two possible routes for changing the administrative plan, one was the change from 30 to 60 days and the other was changing it so that visiting an immediate family member is a reason to go more than 30 days. Drabek doesn’t think they are going to be able to decide on that basis as it doesn’t give objective criteria and staff will have to spend too much time deciding the merits of individual cases, so he is more supportive of the 30 days to 60 days. Reedus doesn’t want to make a bunch of rules with this, as someone commented, it’s a poverty issue, they shouldn’t have layers of regulations. They need to make it easy enough for City staff to monitor it or to approve it, or to whatever they have to do. Basically, it's a request or notification to housing authority stating a household will be gone 45 days and the dates they are traveling, as simple as that. She doesn’t understand why they have to get into what kind of family member they're going to go visit. Dennis asked if the current policy is that the entire household can leave for 30 days and they don't have to say where they are going or why. Rackis stated if it is for 30 days or more they do need to notify the City in order to maintain compliance with HUD regulations, and to know when they will be back so they can document. Dennis wants to know however if they have to give a reason of caring for a family member or if they can just be gone on vacation. Rackis confirmed if under the current policy and someone wants to be gone more than 30 days, they City does ask why. If the policy changes to 60 days, then a household could be gone for up to 60 days without stating the purpose of the travel. Reedus motioned to recommend that Council revise Section 2.3(H) of the ICHA Administrative Plan to extend absences from 30 to 60 days to allow participants flexibility for vacations without requiring permission in advance. Seconded by Mohammed. A vote was taken and the motion passed 3-2 (Dennis and Beining dissenting) QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION FOR FY23 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS (HOME) APPLICANTS: Dennis noted a couple applicants are applying for public facilities and there are $500,000 available for public facilities correct. Thul confirmed CDBG could be public facilities or housing projects. The estimates right now are $500,000 of CBDG funds and $450,000 of HOME but the City has not received the actual funding allocation yet. Drabek noted the first application is DVIP. Reedus noted DVIP is not eligible for HOME correct, Thul confirmed that is correct. Reedus noted DVIP is asking for $750,000 which exceeds what is available from CDBG. Kristie Fortmann-Doser (Executive Director, DVIP) and Ashlee Hopkins (Development Coordinator, DVIP) came forward to answer questions. Dennis asked if they have a site picked out. Fortmann-Doser replied they do, in the application it talks about the site that they've already purchased, they purchased it in 2015 or 2016 and have been paying on the property. Reedus noted when reading the staff summary she had a question about the funds leveraged and if her memory serves her correctly, DVIP has 80% of funds leverage. That means of the total cost of the project much of those funds are not committed yet and that’s a concern she has be quite honest. In a $6 million project they've got about $100,000 committed. Hopkins stated they have $830,000 committed and another $900,000 committed in individual requests and in grant requests. Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 9 of 16 9 Reedus stated however, in the application they listed around $3.3 million that they would be seeking in donations from the community. Fortmann-Doser noted that is correct, they are currently in the silent phase of the capital campaign and are doing very well based so far, but they do know that it's going to be about a 10-to-12-month capital campaign with a target date of breaking ground in the fall of 2022. Reedus noted she has done capital campaigns before and $3.5 million is a huge amount of money to for a nonprofit to raise an Iowa City without some sort of government grants and things like that. Reedus is really concerned about failure and if they can't raise that much money. Even raising a million dollars in the community is not easy so what is their backup plan should they not raise $1 million or $2 million because she wants to make sure that whatever money is approved through here isn’t lost because this project fails. Dennis asked if they're allocated CDBG funds for this, how long do they have from when they would be awarded, which would be in July. Thul replied the timeline policy states the funds are to be spent in that fiscal year, so by the end of June. Reedus acknowledges they have the fiscal year to spend the CDBG money but overall with the whole project what if they fail because $3.5 million is a lot of money to raise in the community and nonprofits get the leftovers, there's not a lot of foundation money, there's not a lot of corporate money, so what is the backup plan. Fortmann-Doser stated they've been working on this for an extended period of time, for about the last eight years, and have been working on this strategically. They have relied heavily on professionals within the state of Iowa to assist in evaluating whether or not this was a project that could be completed, and whether or not the resources existed. The company that they worked with, Eden+, is out of Des Moines, and this is what they do, they evaluated DVIP resources, they evaluated the community, they evaluated the potential fundraising and supported this project and said they should be able to succeed without difficulty. Fortmann-Doser also noted where they are right now, four months in, and what they have on the table, they're expecting to be at $2 million with the grants and the asks that they have out in the silent phase. Reedus acknowledged that is truly commendable. She also acknowledged she has been very vocal about the problem with the lack of available capital money for nonprofits unless they get a HUD grant or something, it's very difficult to raise money. Fortmann-Doser noted they are working on grants in addition to the $4 million because the project is a $6 million project. Reedus acknowledged all the good they have done, but still has the question of if the project falls short significantly does it mean the project may not be completed because they don't have the money. Fortmann-Doser replied in terms of their options, they do have options related to mortgage, and could certainly go that route. They can look at extending their process for how long it will take to pay it out. There isn't any question that the building that they're in right now cannot sustain at the level that it is currently so if all else fails, they would have to do renovations to that building at minimum to be able to maintain the current services that they have. They know that that's not enough and do believe they have the community support to back them up. Fortmann-Doser is happy to share the research Eden+ did for them, they were actually surprised at the level of support that they were able to ferret out. They were surprised at the level of volunteer support that was coming through in just their research. Fortmann-Doser is not trying to gloss over the question, she is just trying to say they've done due diligence and have really worked at this for the last eight years to make sure that they are in a position to do it. They have collateral, they have a property that is worth itself, quite literally, and they have the resources and support in the community. Are they going to rely on grants for this as well, absolutely, there's no question, but she wouldn't move forward if she didn't believe she had the right team to do it, the professional experience to match it and move forward and the resources in the community to do it. Fortmann-Doser also noted while the bulk of their fundraising is going to happen in Johnson County, they do serve eight counties so their fundraising is happening in a much broader context than just the community of Johnson County. They are working with some statewide and multi-statewide corporations. Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 10 of 16 10 Dennis stated she has a lot of respect for DVIP and knows they been hit over the last several years with some really serious funding losses, but have been around for a long time, Dennis was around when the current building was built. Dennis’s question is the City only has $500,000 to allocate so can DVIP fill the gap to get to the $750,000 requested. Fortmann-Doser replied they know that when they ask for a portion that the likelihood that they're going to get the whole amount that they asked in any grant application is not always based in reality. Reality is that you all are going to evaluate the efficacy of a project, you're going to evaluate the capacity of the project recipients, and you're going to evaluate your risk, and you only have a pool of money to work with. Fortmann-Doser states they ask for what they want and what they feel is going to be the most helpful for the project. If she gets $400,000 from the City, that means she is going to find another resource for the rest and find a way to fill that hole. Mohammad asked if they are willing to defer the project for certain period of time if they cannot raise the money. Fortmann-Doser replied that it is something that they can look at but because of the support they have not only in terms of expectations around the goals for fundraising, they do also have support through the banking system and mortgage possibilities. They have many things to consider when putting a project together and one of the things they consider is how to use the funding they get, what's the best way to use that money in that moment acknowledging they're going to have restrictions on some of it based on grants, such as this, or with the donations and the support that they get from the community. It really is about structuring the timing for that support, so could it be pushed back a little bit, yes, does she believe that's going to happen, no. Reedus noted in the grant application North Liberty had committed $25,000, are there any other commitments from local governments. Fortmann-Doser cannot release that information in a public fashion but can say they aware of at least one similar donation that is potentially going to be voted on. Reedus is interested in the residential numbers because they do operate eight counties so she is interested in taking a look at maybe the past couple years what the numbers have been. She also has some questions about their capacity to expand or to double. Fortmann-Doser stated part of their strategic planning process in getting to this point was expanding their development team and development options within the organization. As Dennis noted, they have had recent cuts, for example they have a particular grant that they get monies from for Victims of Crime, it's called the Victims of Crime Act, and it has a limit that was put on it many decades ago and it's been slowly dwindling, and the federal government hasn't dealt with it. So there was an automatic cut over the last four years. In the last two years, those cuts did happen but because of the work they've done, around engagement within the community, and engagement within all eight counties, they sustained those cuts without any changes to services and have actually expanded. Next application is the Free Medical Clinic. Reedus noted this looks like it is in three phases and it will be $340,000 for all phases and they are asking for support for phase two and $75,000. Barbara Vinograde (Free Medical Clinic) confirmed that is correct. Vinograde noted the Free Clinic's last CDBG project was in 2012. While this is a three phased larger project, to take place over the next several years, they will be working with a contractor and she is confident that it can be completed successfully. In addition, one of the Clinic's Board members is the former Executive Director of Habitat for Humanity and brings valued experience and expertise to this project. She sent in a copy of the estimated budgeted costs for phase one, most of the labor and supplies are being donated so it's a very low cost. At this time, she does not have a written estimate for phase three, she is working on that right now, with what exactly they're going to do in the lower level, the plan is to move the ophthalmology clinic downstairs, the physical therapy clinics downstairs and have one administrative office downstairs. They will also provide diabetic education downstairs. The architect knows that they want to be below $200,000. She applied for this Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 11 of 16 11 phase as a project on its own and because the request was for $75,000, she did not think she needed more than one bid. She contacted Hodge Construction, as the Clinic has successfully worked with them in the past but has not signed a contract with Hodge Construction and can and will ask for at least two additional bids as required. She now understands that the project falls under small purchase procedures. They will comply with Davis Bacon rules. Another question was how many of their patients are Iowa City residents, and consistently it is between 55% and 60% of clinic patients are from Iowa City. As an example, in FY22 they served 1222 patients and of those 703 were Iowa City residents. The final question was whether they could document the private funds they've raised already. She can say that they did a fundraiser last year, to kick off the lower-level project, and set a goal of $50,000 in honor of their 50th year of operation. They met this goal through contributions from 112 donors. These funds will be utilized specifically for the lower-level project. As far as the additional monies that are needed for phase three, she will be applying for ARPA funding for the third phase from both Iowa City and Johnson County. Vinograde also wanted to clarify they are looking at this as a three-phase project, which will take place over three years, each phase is independent of the other. At the same time, each phase will build on the previous one and will progressively increase accessible space for patient care on the lower level. In phase one, when it's completed it will provide the means for them to have all their supplies in one area. Currently, clinic supplies are stored in four rooms downstairs on the lower level. Completion of phase one will immediately open up more space for services such as patient consultations, patient education and physical therapy, but only for patients who are able to use our stairs that lead downstairs. Phase two will provide patient parking and this is the funding they're applying to CDBG for. Phase two will provide a patient parking area and a wide, safe new entryway on the east side of the lower level. This will provide the means for patients who cannot use the stairs to receive patient services. Finally, phase three will allow staff and volunteers to provide more comprehensive services as sinks, new lighting and doors will be installed, and improvements will be made in air circulation and to the bathroom. Drabek moved on to the next application, Inside Out Reentry. He had a question on risk assessment and feels on the cover sheet 4-10 might be a misleadingly wide range for that moderate risk category. Really the reason that Inside Out Reentry ended up here was because it is a first-time application and then the scope and the size of the project and that was that was five points. But had they added a couple of extra things to that like a fiduciary or capital issue that would have been three points and felt like an entire new universe of risks to him. He is wondering if there's should be a 4-7 versus 8-10 or maybe be in a different category. Reedus noted her issues was in the funds leveraged, it’s more like a funds that they hope to leverage. She looks at what money they've got committed so far versus the total cost of the project and what the likelihood is that they're going to be able to raise the funds and if not then what's the backup plan. Drabek raised the risk assessment issues because Inside Out was in the moderate risk category and also an organization that scored a nine or a ten on that rubric what would be in that same category and they could be very different. Reedus has a couple of funding questions, one is they referenced a quasi-endowment and what is that and what funds make up that entity. Michelle Heinz (Inside Out Reentry) stated they are an organization that was basically founded by a church and when the church closed, they were gifted a quasi-endowment through the Community Foundation, and they have some funds committed from that for this project. Reedus asked if they have any private dollars going into this, have they done any kind of fundraising in addition to the endowment. Heinz stated they also have the grant/slash forgivable loan from the Housing Trust Fund in Johnson County and that's committed. They are still in the phase of a capital fundraising Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 12 of 16 12 and securing more funds from private donors. Since they've done this application, they have received another smaller gift about $7500. They are very actively in that phase of securing more funds. Dennis asked if in talking about private funding, is she talking at all about any kind of bank loan. Heinz replied yes, they have also spoke with their financial institution about a potential mortgage if they aren't able to raise the funds required. Dennis asked how big of a property are they are looking for. Heinz replied a four-to-six-bedroom house. Dennis asked if this new for Inside Out Reentry to become like a landlord. Heinz confirmed this project is very new to them and they haven't done this yet. Dennis wondered then what is their capacity to have maintenance done, tenant section, leases, property management and all that. Heinz acknowledged they haven't had direct experience with that previously, they have administered for a few years with the Housing Trust Fund Johnson County rental assistance, so they have a lot of familiarity with reviewing the financial income limits for folks to see if they're eligible for receiving the pass-through grant funding. Heinz acknowledged there was a question about their staffing levels and they have very recently just secured funding to increase one of their staffing positions from part time to a full time. Hopefully increasing that staffing will gain them some capacity to be able to take on some of these larger projects. Reedus asked once they would receive funds, what are the reporting responsibilities, overseeing ongoing responsibilities, because that's where at least one of the agencies in that memo got into trouble was in their ability, or lack thereof, to submit reports or at least work with the City on the reporting piece. What would Inside Out have to do. Thul stated there's quite a bit of monitoring that goes into a project. For instance, halfway through a project, they'll do monitoring to check financial records and those kinds of things. Once the house is acquired, it’s required that the property is leased up within six months and Inside Out would have to fill out a report that says who's occupying each unit, and that gets sent to HUD. And then following that each year, for all federally assisted units, anyone who gets federal funding has to report to the City on an annual basis. So for the period of affordability, they would be reporting at least annually on their tenants. Reedus acknowledged that and wondered with this being a new project and expansion for Inside Out, do they have the capacity to meet all that. Heinz feels pretty confidently that they do, especially since they're going to be doing some reporting for their other credit funder. They will also welcome conversations on how they could do it as accurately and efficiently as possible. Reedus noted her last question is this part of a strategic plan. Heinz confirmed it has been part of their plan for years now and prior to doing this they did a lot of touring of other reentry houses are that are available across the state and learned from them to try to figure out what will work, obviously Iowa City is quite a bit different than a lot of these other communities, but yes, this has been a long-term goal. Dennis asked how hard it is to find permanent housing for their customers. Heinz acknowledged it is incredibly difficult and it's actually gotten worse recently, just being able to find housing. A lot of landlords have been unwilling to rent to people and that puts them in a really tenuous situation. So their real focus with this population, particularly folks that are coming directly out of incarceration, is to really try to interrupt that pathway, where a lot of times right when they're released they're going to homelessness. Being able to get out and know they have a rental and a landlord that they can use as a reference to find housing afterwards. Dennis noted she had the experience to go to the round table thing where you get a package, and it gives a scenario of being a convicted murderer and trying to do all these things. She just went back to jail it was just too hard. Reedus also acknowledged that from working in HR, you'd be surprised how few companies do it right, in terms of looking at past criminal behavior and it's unfortunate, because it's hard to climb out of that hole when they keep taking the steps away. Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 13 of 16 13 Mohammad had a question about project affordability and the rent being $500, he is not sure the people who are coming from the jail have the money. Heinz agreed and noted that is something they're figuring out how that will work but it will likely be some sort of grace period before their paying rent. Mohammad also asked how they expect these people to get along because they are from different backgrounds and ages. Heinz noted that's been a big conversation, they actually looked at some facilities where people bunked together and that was something they decided they weren't going to do. Folks are going to each have their own individual space. After long periods of incarceration and being in close quarters with others having one’s own private room where they can lock the door and no one can enter is really important. So people will have that individual bedroom space. There will be staff checking in on the property regularly to see how folks are doing. Some of the programmatic aspects of the property as well is helping folks with some of that peer component stuff, building some social skills, conflict management, etc. They want folks to get together and really form a community and they've seen some really successful examples of this. Beining was under the understanding that the City Code didn’t allow more than three unrelated occupants in a single family. Drabek thinks that was gone, the City did for some time have that regulation but it’s gone. Drabek moved to the final applicant, The Housing Fellowship. Reedus stated she didn’t have many questions for The Housing Fellowship except same question they asked almost every single time, this for two houses with larger bedroom size, which is something they’ve talked about in the past. So, if they get less funding from the City, it's possible they might only do one or what would be their plan. Simon Andrew (The Housing Fellowship) stated if they get less than the full request, they have looked at getting one house instead of two, and just prorate it, he noted this is basically the same application they submitted last time around except for two houses instead of one. Their main interest is the amount that is forgettable, at the end of the day, that's really what makes the difference for them, the more debt they take on for that property is more that has to be reflected in the rent that we charge for that property. So in order to keep it at the $950 that they're projecting for these does require that it doesn't have the debt load that typically would be on a rental property like that. But then after that, they're just looking at size of the house, location or whatever and trying to find a house that's less expensive on the market. Therefore, that may result in a two to three-bedroom house rather than three to four-bedrooms. The biggest thing they're seeing in applicants right now is larger families, so they are trying to serve them, they do have vacancies in one- and two-bedroom units but that is not enough space for larger families. Mohammad acknowledged the issue is the bigger houses, three to five bedrooms, in Iowa City, are hard to find. He notes in the application they're utilizing 27% for CDBG funds, if they get less funding how they will overcome that. Andrew replied if they get less than full funding for this year, they can explore using their line of credit or a private bank loan to try and fill that gap. In most cases, they do have enough cash on hand to fill that gap so he doesn’t expect they're going to take out a private loan for the home. Again if they have to take out a separate interest bearing loan to complete the acquisition then that just gets reflected in the rent. Reedus asked again what the funding was the Commission will have to allocate. Thul reiterated there is $500,000 of CDBG and $450,000 of HOME estimated. Thul also confirmed that DVIP and The Free Medical Clinic are not eligible for HOME funds. Drabek stated at next month's meeting they will make the funding decisions. QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION FOR FY23 EMERGING AID TO AGENCIES (EA2A) APPLICANTS: Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 14 of 16 14 Drabek noted this agenda item has been deferred and Thul sent an email out to the Commission as to why it was deferred but to note, Drabek is on the board of directors of one of the agencies and since they only have five people here and he would have to recuse himself so that would not leave a quorum. This item will be put on next month's agenda. Reedus would like to communicate to City Council that of her reaction to them thinking it wasn't a big deal and this Commission can operate with the members that they have but as with this meeting they can't do some business. So she would like to urge Council that they appoint some new members. IOWA CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS UPDATES: Two Commissioners are assigned each month to monitor Council meetings and this agenda item provides an opportunity for brief updates on City Council activity relevant to the HCDC business. Commissioners will not engage in discussion with one another concerning said items. Drabek noted that the majority of Council updates were already included in item #4 and shared that Council deferred the HCDC appointments again at their February 15 meeting. Reedus will review the March meetings. STAFF UPDATES: Thul noted the next meeting is March 24, staff’s goal is to get the Commission staff recommendations for CDBG and HOME but need to know when the Commission might be able to get their score sheets to staff for them to put them together. Thul suggests staff get their recommendations to the Commission by February 28 and the Commission submit their score sheets to staff by March 11. The Commission agreed that seemed reasonable. Thul also asked if for the Emerging Aid to Agencies the decision was just to invite them to the next meeting. Drabek confirmed that is what they should do. Reedus questioned why the agenda item for The Housing Authority just came up at the last minute and she is just wondering why came up in such an urgent way and why it had to be addressed so quickly. Kubly stated the requests for that policy change came from the Center for Worker Justice, it didn’t come from staff, and the urgency was that people are planning their travel right now for the summer so they're interested in the policy changing quickly so people could plan ahead for the summer. Therefore, Council felt that urgency and wanted to act. Dennis noted Steve Rackis mentioned that the administrative plan was written in 2003, but doesn't the Council approve the Housing Authority Administrative Plan every year. Kubly stated they do have an annual plan that's approved every year, but the administrative plan only goes to Council when they have a substantial change. Reedus stated again, adding in that agenda item at the last minutes disrupted everything, if they had the Emerging Agencies agenda item the meeting would be over 3 hours long. She just wishes it came to them in a timelier manner because even there was a letter that came out late today and she didn’t have time to before the meeting so that is far from ideal. She is sympathetic and wants to make those kinds of changes as they should but doesn’t think they should be changing everything at the last minute just to accommodate something that could have been done a little bit more systematic manner. She understands the request came from Council but why couldn’t it wait a month, the agenda was already set. Kubly noted the question raised earlier regarding the three unrelated people for occupancy changed in January 2018 from the State legislation. Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 15 of 16 15 Reedus had a question about that report staff sent out, which she thought was very helpful, about the two agencies and why those monies have to be sent back, is that because of the length of time which they were awarded. Kubly replied no, it’s because they're in default of the agreement and didn't complete the project as proposed. The money doesn't go back to Iowa City it goes back to HUD. Dennis noted that the memo gives the Commission some good information about what decisions they make and if people are allocated money for projects, and they don't have the capacity to complete them, it really behooves them to make sure they are making really good funding decisions, so they don’t lose money going back to HUD. Kubly confirms that staff is also looking to how they can look at maybe doing some monitoring on the front end of projects rather than just in the middle or close out so before they fully commit those funds. Additionally, they are looking at other things they can do at orientation for new sub recipients. ADJOURNMENT: Reedus moved to adjourn, Dennis seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. Housing and Community Development Commission February 17, 2022 Page 16 of 16 16 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record 2021-2022 Resigned from Commission Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant Name Terms Exp. 8/19 9/16 10/21 11/18 1/20 2/17 Beining, Kaleb 6/30/24 X X X X X X Drabek, Matt 6/30/22 X X X X X X Dennis, Maryann 6/30/22 -- -- X X X X X Vacancy 6/30/23 Mohammed, Nsar 6/30/23 X X X O/E X X Nkumu, Peter 6/30/22 X X X X O/E O/E Reedus, Becci 6/30/24 X X X X X X Vogel, Kyle 6/30/23 X O/E X X X O/E Vacancy Date: February 28, 2022 To: Housing and Community Development Commission From: Erika Kubly, Neighborhood Services Coordinator Brianna Thul, Community Development Planner Re: FY23 Staff Funding Recommendations Summary of Staff Scores & Funding Recommendations for CDBG/HOME: Agency and Project Score (320 Points Total) Request HOME Funding CDBG Funding Total Funding Domestic Violence Intervention Program Shelter New Construction 255 80% $750,000 NA ineligible $425,000 $425,000 Free Medical Clinic Facility Improvements 223 70% $75,000 NA ineligible $75,000 $75,000 Inside Out Reentry Rental Acquisition 230 72% $100,000 $100,000 $0 $100,000 The Housing Fellowship Rental Acquisition 245 77% $320,000 $320,000 $0 $320,000 Total $1,245,000 $420,000 $500,000 $920,000 Staff Comments on Funding Recommendations for CDBG/HOME: General Comments The City received four submissions for CDBG/HOME funds. All four proposals clearly explain how the project will address a specific goal from the City’s consolidated plan, City Steps 2025. Each project addresses a high priority need. Domestic Violence Intervention Program (DVIP) – Shelter New Construction DVIP has undertaken numerous federally funded projects through the City in prior fiscal years including both public facility improvements and public service activities. The agency is subject to the single audit requirement as they annually expend more than $750,000 in federal funds each fiscal year. The scope of the proposal is larger than prior projects, which does present additional risk. The budget submitted in the project proposal also notes that a large portion of the project funds are not officially committed. As the highest scoring application, staff recommend that the largest portion of funding be awarded to DVIP ($425,000). However, the agency and HCDC should be aware that any delays in the project timeline could have an impact on the City’s timeliness status if the federal funds awarded are not expended as scheduled. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) limits the amount of CDBG funds that the City can have on hand at a specific checkpoint each year (typically the beginning of May). If federal funds are not spent in a timely manner, the City may be required to undertake additional reporting to HUD, and/or the total amount of CDBG funds granted to the City could be reduced in future years. Free Medical Clinic (FMC) – Facility Improvements FMC has successfully completed similar public facility projects with CDBG funds through the City in the past, although not within the last five years. This project was identified as an anticipated capital improvement in the City’s consolidated plan, City Steps 2025 (p.39). Staff had initial concerns regarding procurement, but the agency has indicated they have not executed a construction contract and that they plan to follow federal procurement guidelines if awarded. Staff recommend full funding of the project ($75,000). February 28, 2022 Page 2 Inside Out Reentry (IOR) – Rental Acquisition IOR is a first-time applicant for City CDBG/HOME funds meaning that the agency has not undertaken a project of similar scope in the past. The key staff concern for this proposal is a new agency learning and administering the federal HOME requirements for the full period of affordability. Noncompliance with federal requirements can result in repayment of federal funds invested in the activity. In the event of repayment for noncompliance, funds must go directly back to HUD and cannot be reinvested in other activities. The agency indicates that they plan to hire a housing case manager and that they are able to comply with the requirements for the period of affordability. The proposal scored well and staff recommend full funding of the proposal ($100,000). If funded, staff will provide increased technical assistance for the first-time applicant and comprehensive underwriting and monitoring to ensure compliance. The Housing Fellowship (THF) – Rental Acquisition THF is the City’s only active Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO). Maintaining CHDO status requires annual certification. CHDOs are a critical component of the HOME program as HUD requires a minimum of 15% of the City’s annual HOME grant to be set aside for CHDO activities, a portion of funds known as the CHDO reserve. THF has a long history of successfully undertaking federally funded activities of similar scale and scope. The main staff concern regarding this proposal is that THF does have several other federally funded activities currently underway. THF has indicated that rehab project delays can be attributed to pandemic related construction challenges such as supply chain issues. These challenges have resulted in the agency pivoting to rental acquisition projects less likely to experience delays. Staff recommends full funding of the proposal ($320,000). Summary of Emerging Aid to Agencies (EA2A) Requests: Agency and Project Request Houses into Homes Staff Support to Organize Donations $8,625 National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) Johnson County Outreach to Latinx and African American Communities in Iowa City $10,000 Healthy Kids School Based Clinics Free Medical Services for Children without Insurance $15,000 Total $33,625 Staff Comments on EA2A: In the interest of hearing the upcoming EA2A question and answer session scheduled for the March 24, 2022 HCDC meeting, staff have not included funding recommendations for EA2A applicants at this time. The maximum available budget for EA2A applicants is anticipated to be about $36,600. This amount gives HCDC the flexibility to recommend full funding of all proposals. As a general reminder, it is not required to award the full amount available - any remaining funds not allocated to Emerging Agencies will be returned to the pool of funds available for Legacy Agencies. Date: March 17, 2022 To: Housing & Community Development Commission From: Brianna Thul, Community Development Planner Erika Kubly, Neighborhood Services Coordinator Re: HCDC Scoring Summary for the FY23 Funding Round Staff Comments: The following data provides a summary of scores submitted by the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) for the FY23 CDBG/HOME competitive funding round. Staff scores are available in a separate memo and are not included in the calculations below. 1. Summary of Commissioner Scores by Project: March 17, 2022 Page 2 2. Average Commissioner Scores by Question and Project: March 17, 2022 Page 3 3. Commissioner Scoring Range by Question and Project: Note: Range is calculated by subtracting the smallest score from the largest score for each question. Larger numbers indicate the most range between Commissioner scores. National Community Development Week Tool Kit #CDWeek2022 #CDBGworks The 2022 National Community Development (CD) Week will be celebrated April 11-15. This tool kit was developed by the CDBG Coalition to help communities with the planning and implementation of their National CD Week activities. 1 Why National Community Development Week? The objective of National Community Development Week is to educate Congressional Members and the community on the importance of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, its impact on the community, and the need for increased program funding. National Community Development Week will be held April 11-15, 2022. This is a critical time for appropriations; work on the upcoming FY 2023 HUD funding bill will be in the initial stages. National Community Development Week provides a perfect forum to cement the importance of CDBG in the minds of those in Washington to increase program funding. National Community Development Week was created in 1986 to bring national attention to the CDBG Program through grassroots support at a time when the program was facing scrutiny by Congress. Grassroots support means activities by state and local CDBG grantees to recognize the program, showcase projects, and share program impact data with Congress. It provides the opportunity for communities to promote, educate, and advocate on behalf of the program. It is intentionally held during the Congressional appropriations season to allow for a concerted grassroots effort to promote the program. It is important for all communities that receive CDBG funds to participate in National Community Development Week to amplify the grassroots voice. Although spending for the current fiscal year is not yet set, National Community Development Week will occur during a critical time when Congress is making decisions about spending levels, so make sure that you are a part of the conversation by participating in National Community Development Week. The CDBG Coalition will seek increased funding for CDBG in FY 2023 and your participation in National Community Development Week helps tremendously to support those efforts. If you receive CDBG funding, then you should participate in National Community Development Week. We urge all CDBG grantees to issue a proclamation recognizing the CDBG program and program accomplishments. We urge program grantees and subrecipients to share program impact data with Congress by developing a fact sheet that includes information on recently funded/completed CDBG projects, beneficiaries served, and any facts or figures that demonstrate the program s to share that information with Congressional members in which the CDBG-funded project or program is located through a face-to-face meeting in their district office or virtually using Zoom or some other technology. Plug in the zip code of the project location here to locate the House member. Go here to locate Senators. In addition to meetings, Congressional members like to see first- hand the completed CDBG projects and meet with program beneficiaries, so consider conducting a tour of local CDBG-funded projects for the Congressional members. We also encourage you to use social media during National CD Week to post your events and activities. Social media posts and activities developed by Pasco County, FL from last year s National CD Week are available here as a reference for you in developing your own events, activities, and posts. 2 National Community Development Week Activities National Community Development Week is designed to focus local as well as national attention on the CDBG program. Public support and involvement from Congressional offices, local and state elected officials, program subrecipients, media, community leaders, and program beneficiaries in National Community Development Week is important. While communities develop a variety of activities to celebrate National Community Development Week, we urge jurisdictions to focus on at least one of the following activities. Issue a Press Release and Proclamation Issue a press release announcing National Community Development Week. Follow-up with the passage of a National Community Development Week proclamation by your local elected body. Send the press release and proclamation to local media outlets and to your Congressional delegation. These activities require minimal effort and can be undertaken by every grantee. A sample press release and proclamation are included in this guidebook. Some communities also hold special ceremonies or press briefings to announce the passage of the proclamation to gain further media attention for National CD Week. Examples Hollywood, FL invited various public service agencies such as Hope South Florida (housing and economic development assistance for the homeless or formerly homeless), Hispanic Unity (job training and placement), Russell Life Skills and Reading Foundation (youth education), the Boys & Girls Club (youth education) and other organizations to attend the City Commission meeting to accept the proclamation put forward by the Mayor and City Commission to support CDBG. Meet with Your Congressional Delegation or Send an Educational Video and Other Materials Meeting with your Congressional members or their staff is one of the most effective ways of supporting the CDBG program since it affords Congressional members the opportunity to hear first-hand how the funds are being used. Highlighting the work that occurs with CDBG dollars in your community creates a tangible connection for lawmakers between the funding they appropriate for the program and improvements to their states and districts. Events like National Community Development Week attract positive attention and publicity for CDBG, which when shared with your lawmakers, is instrumental in creating the next generation of CDBG champions on Capitol Hill. Congressional members like to hear directly from the organizations or people the program serves. If possible, put a face to your program by including beneficiaries and subrecipients in the meeting. Come prepared with a fact sheet that outlines program accomplishments: recent projects/programs funded with CDBG, the number of LMI beneficiaries served, jobs created/retained (if any), and information that relays the impact of the program. If your Congressional member or their staff are not available to meet during National CD Week, then try to schedule a meeting during August when all members of Congress will be back home 3 for the entire month or another Congressional recess period that meets your needs. You can also email your Congressional offices a short YouTube video that shows recently funded/completed CDBG programs and outline your program accomplishments in the video remarks. Make sure to include program beneficiaries in your meetings and videos to provide testimonials on the benefits of the program. Creating a video in-house using YouTube is an economical and easy method of documenting your National CD Week activities and sharing it with local media and Congressional offices. Develop a Tour of Local Projects or Focus on a Project Groundbreaking or Kick- Off Event Invite Congressional offices to tour local CDBG projects. Select projects that positively showcase the CDBG program. Develop a written project description to hand out during the tour. Please see the example below from the City of St. Louis, MO. Make sure participants meet program beneficiaries people who have directly benefitted from the program. National CD Week Past Examples St. Louis, MO bus tour packet https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/departments/community- development/events/upload/CDA-Bus-Tour-Final.pdf Clarksville, TN organized a tour of CDBG-funded homeless assistance projects. Each sub-recipient was given time to highlight their facility and discuss programs and services, how CDBG funds support their program, and how CDBG funds are leveraged. The following sub-recipients participated in the tour: Clarksville-Montgomery County Community Action Agency (Old Firehouse Day Shelter), United Methodist Urban Ministries (Grace Assistance and Safe House), Lighthouse Mission Ministries (Safe Harbor of Clarksville), and Manna Café. Quincy, MA held a ribbon cutting of the Germantown Neighborhood Center Music Clubhouse, a CDBG-funded activity which benefits low-income youth. The Honorable Mayor Thomas P. Koch joined U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and others were on hand to celebrate the opening of the program. La Crosse, WI kicked off National Community Development Week in a neighborhood revitalization area where the Mayor, State Senators, Congressional Members, members of the neighborhood association, and council members toured four homes funded with CDBG and completed in partnership by the City of La Crosse, Western Technical College and Habit for Humanity. Participate in the National Community Development Week Social Media Messaging Campaign We are asking all CDBG grantees and their subrecipients to participate with us in a national social media messaging campaign during National Community Development Week to amplify 4 our collective voices in support of the CDBG program. Please work with your communications office or the communications person in your office to post the messages through the appropriate channels. Daily CDBG Program Social Media Posts, April 11-15, 2022 Monday April 11 #CDBG attracts investment in underserved communities. Every $1.00 of #CDBG leverages another $3.68.#CDBGworks #CDWeek2022 Tuesday April 12 The need for affordable housing has never been greater. #CDBG has helped preserve over 1.25 million units of affordable housing since 2005. #CDBGworks #CDWeek2022 Wednesday April 13 #CDBG strengthens communities through infrastructure. Over 51 million people have directly benefitted from CDBG-funded public improvements since 2005. #CDBGworks #CDWeek2022 Thursday April 14 #CDBG helps create and retain local jobs having created/retained 454,961 economic development jobs since 2005. #CDBGworks #CDWeek2022 Friday April 15 #CDBG benefits the nation and is accessible to every Congressional district. #CDBGworks #CDWeek2022 5 Other National Community Development Week Activities The following list provides you with other options for National Community Development Week activities. These activities take minimal effort. Make sure to reiterate the need for increased funding for CDBG in whatever activities you choose. Ask the Mayor/County Executive or a Commissioner to write an op-ed to your local newspaper describing the importance of CDBG to the community and the need for more program funding. Email a letter to your lawmakers describing recent community development projects and the role CDBG played in making them happen and the impact of the projects on your community. Ask your local newspaper to do a story on one of your projects. Development Week and post information on CDBG funded projects on the front page. More ideas for National Community Development Week activities can be found at the following CDBG grantee links. Community Development Week - Nebraska Department of Economic Development Louisiana Office of Community Development: Resources for Local Governments Involve Program Partners and Beneficiaries The CDBG and HOME stories cannot be told without incorporating the testimony of the many subrecipients and beneficiaries who are served through the program. Subrecipients and program beneficiaries are on the front lines of providing and receiving CDBG assistance. They are essential to telling the CDBG story. Because of their connection to the program, they need to be part of National CD Week. Put a face on your programs by including beneficiaries and subrecipients in your National CD Week events. Market National Community Development Week Advertising and promotion are critical to a successful National CD Week. Communities must use a variety of methods to reach all stakeholders. Congressional Members want to hear how program dollars are being spent to improve their communities, so the use of local media (print, television, and radio) is important to documenting your National CD Week activities and ensuring your Congressional Members and the community are made aware of your program activities. 6 Marketing Ideas Issue a press release and media advisory in advance of CD Week. Include information on the impact of the CDBG program in the community. Use social media to alert followers to National CD Week activities. advertise National CD Week events and provide information on CDBG funded projects Invite the local media to cover your National CD Week events. Post public banners throughout the community including signage at CDBG funded projects Marketing Examples Burlington, VT distributed a press release and fact sheet to 125 contacts throughout Vermont, Congressional delegation. Each day of National Community Development Week, the city highlighted CDBG programs and photos on its Facebook page, demonstrating the broad spectrum of agencies, beneficiaries, and communities integral to the Burlington CDBG story. CDBG-funded agencies submitted photos and narratives of their projects. Each post contained a website and social media link to learn more about the featured organization. The city also aired a multitude of PSAs on the local radio station to provide information to residents on the use of CDBG for economic development, housing, and initiatives to serve the most vulnerable residents. In addition, a local radio show featured a 15-minute The program hosted two CDBG grantees, the Sara Holbrook Community Center, and the Burlington Police Department. The discussi youth and included a focus on reaching at risk youth. Shreveport, LA promoted National Community Development Week through PSAs at local radio ters. The city also posted Richland County, SC made the public aware of the CDBG projects in their community by providing signage at local projects. The signs had two main purposes: (1) to highlight the work that has been done in Richland County to enhance the lives of low and moderate-income people; and (2) to showcase the many ways that CDBG dollars have been spent in the community. The signs were strategically placed throughout Richland County at ten (10) different completed projects. 7 FURTHER GUIDANCE Social Media Guidance National Community Development Week, April 11-15, 2022 #CDWeek2022, #CDBGworks Importance of the # (Hashtag) - #CDWeek2022, #CDBGworks Hashtags (#) label posts for ease of searching for social media content by topic. This increases the chances of engagement with others who are posting about the same topic. investm Practical Applications o about CDBG funding in the Federal budget. o Share exciting stories in more than one format. Give readers more than a headline by writing a blog article. Share more than one photo per post to give viewers a broader perspective of the story behind the post. o Cross-reference and utilize multiple media channels. Post links or photos of newspaper articles. Include event registration links in press release or in posts if applicable. Be aware of formatting content appropriate to each platform. Make yourself familiar with each platform and how they are different. o Post familiar faces. Include photos of Mayor, other dignitaries, and participants. Use photo release for children under 18. o Engage with individuals and organizations both in person and online. Engage with other pages to drive engagement on your page. Make the request for individuals and organizations to participate in the social media campaign and provide guidance. o Consider enhanced content options such as podcasts, recorded videos, live streaming, infographics, and blogs. Advice on Personal Branding o Keep your personal and your organization voice separate. Interact between the two accounts if comfortable. For example, like and share the organization content Do not use your government email address for personal accounts, for various reasons. o Review agency social media policy, seek required communication reviews, permission to disclose public information, and permission to tag. o Participate in live events (such as Twitter Chats or Facebook Live). Join or start a group. Tweet and share using relevant hashtags. Be a thought leader. 8 How to Schedule a Meeting with Your Congressional Offices Contact their secretary/scheduler to make an appointment. Go to the links below to locate the district office information for your Congressional delegation. It is usually posted at the bottom of their web page. You will need to identify who handles scheduling for your legislator and what is required by the office to submit a formal invitation. Start by calling your most local district office - schedule exclusively through their DC office. House of Representatives: https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative U.S. Senate: https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact 9 SAMPLE DOCUMENTS (Please feel free to modify these documents) SAMPLE PROCLAMATION/RESOLUTION Present this proclamation to your Congressional Members during National Community Development Week. WHEREAS, the week of April 11-15, 2022, has been designated as National Community Development Week to celebrate the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program; and WHEREAS, the CDBG Program provides annual funding and flexibility to local communities to provide decent, safe and affordable housing, a suitable living environment, and economic opportunities to low- and moderate-income people; and WHEREAS, over the past three years, our community has received a total of $____________ in CDBG funds and has funded a variety of projects that have directly benefited our citizens and neighborhoods; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City/County of ________ designates the week of April 11-15, 2022, as National Community Development Week in support of this valuable program that has made tremendous contributions to the viability of the housing stock, infrastructure, public services, and the economic well-being of our community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that our community urges Congress and the Biden Administration to recognize the outstanding work being done locally and nationally with CDBG by supporting increased funding for the program in FY 2023. SAMPLE PRESS RELEASE The City/County of ______________Celebrates National Community Development Week; April 11-15, 2022 Mayor/County Executive _______ and the City/County Council today issued a proclamation supporting the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and recognizing National Community Development Week, April 11-15, 2022. The week- long celebration brings together citizens, elected officials, government staff, media, program subrecipients and beneficiaries through events to showcase the impact of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The CDBG program provides grants to over 1,200 local governments to create neighborhood approaches that improve the physical, economic, and social conditions in 10 communities. Every $1.00 of CDBG leverages another $3.68 in other funding, bringing additional resources to communities. The CDBG program is needed more than ever to help our most vulnerable citizens and improve the overall condition of our neighborhoods. The City/County will highlight the program during National CD Week by conducting the following activities [Describe your CD Week activities]. SAMPLE CDBG PROGRAM FACT SHEET Please complete this fact sheet and give it to your Congressional delegation and local press during National CD Week. Executive Summary Attach a brief executive summary that answers the following questions: o Why is the CDBG program important to my community? o Who is served by the program? o How is program funding used in my community? o Why is more CDBG funding needed in my community? Program Accomplishments o For every dollar of CDBG funding another $_______ in private and public funding was leveraged. CDBG assisted ________ persons in the past three years. o CDBG created or retained ______ jobs in the past three years. o CDBG funds in the amount of $_________ were spent on economic development activities (outline the types of activities and the beneficiaries assisted). o CDBG funds in the amount of $_________ were spent on public improvements (outline the types of activities and the beneficiaries assisted). o CDBG funds in the amount of $_________ were spent on public services (outline the types of services and the beneficiaries assisted) o CDBG funds in the amount of $____________ were provided for housing activities (outline the types of activities and the beneficiaries assisted). SAMPLE LETTER TO THE EDITOR Celebrate National Community Development Week! Please join me in celebrating National Community Development Week in the City/County of ___________. We have fun and informative events scheduled and will showcase projects and improvements all around the city made possible by the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. 11 City/County of __________________ is a proud partner in the CDBG program available through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. As its name implies, CDBG is a grant provided by the federal government to the city to complete various community building and development projects. The City/County of _____________ receives about $1 million annually and has utilized these funds successfully for decades to leverage private dollars and complete significant improvements. These funds touch nearly every community effort in our city/county, from delivering meals to the elderly, to the creation of community gardens, to preserving local historical landmarks, to renovating neighborhood parks, to assisting countless small businesses, and to supporting workforce development. CDBG is a versatile funding source that of CDBG funding leverages $4 in additional investment. The block grants have helped expand our affordable housing efforts, helping those most at risk from homelessness. Countless local projects would not have been possible with these federal investments. Please join me in celebrating the successes of the CDBG program and its impact on our community during National Community Development Week, April 11-15, 2022. -Mayor/County Executive/Commissioner 12 CD Week and Beyond: Meeting and Corresponding with Your Congressional Members Throughout the Year Meeting with a member of Congress, or Congressional staff, is a very effective way to convey a message about a specific issue or legislative matter. important to meet with your Congressional members to inform them of the importance of CDBG in your community. A typical meeting should go as follows: 1.Introductions introduce yourself 2.Acknowledge your Member of Congress (and their staff) and thank them for meeting with you. 3.Present your issues (e.g., importance of CDBG to your community; need for increased funding). Bring CDBG-funded project examples. Discuss the impact of CDBG in your the community. If you have brought a sub-recipient or beneficiary to the meeting, let them tell the Congressional member how the program has helped them. Be prepared to answer questions. 4.Follow-Up:Follow-up the meeting with a thank-you email. Send along any additional pertinent information and materials. Addressing Correspondence: To a Senator... The Honorable (Full Name) District Office Address Dear Senator (Last Name): To a Representative... The Honorable (Full Name) District Office Address Dear Representative (Last Name): 13 The CDBG Coalition thanks you for planning for and participating in National Community Development Week, April 11-15, 2022. CDBG Coalition American Library Association American Planning Association Boys and Girls Clubs of America Council of Large Public Housing Authorities Council of State Community Development Agencies Enterprise Community Partners Feeding America Habitat for Humanity International Heartland Alliance Housing Assistance Council International Code Council International Economic Development Council Local Initiatives Support Corporation National Association for County Community and Economic Development National Association for Latino Community Asset Builders National Association of Counties National Association of Development Organizations National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials National Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies National Association of Regional Councils National Community Development Association National League of Cities National Main Street Center National NeighborWorks Association National Recreation and Park Association National Rural Water Association National Urban League Rebuilding Together The Trust for Public Land U.S. Conference of Mayors YWCA USA About the CDBG Coalition The CDBG Coalition consists of 31 national organizations representing local elected officials, housing and community development professionals, and a wide array of non- profit organizations. The Coalition is dedicated to the preservation of the CDBG program and works to increase awareness and need for increased program funding. 14 6:00 PM DATE April 12, 2017 TIME WHERE Electronic Zoom Meeting The forum is being held via Zoom due to concerns presented by COVID-19 COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD COMMUNITY FORUM QUESTIONS & COMMENTS: - - APRIL 20, 2021 6:00 p.m. https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_eE4MscDRTRywOisMlfCXaw Meeting ID: 816 3855 9389 COMMUNICATING WITH THE CPRB WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO