The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-17-2021 Housing and Community Development CommissionHOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (HCDC) June 17, 2021 Electronic Regular Meeting — 6:30 PM Zoom Meeting Platform Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8) An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19. You can participate in the meeting and comment on an agenda item by going to: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN WDhTjiPzTQgxC6xArB9bbg to visit the Zoom meeting's registration page and submitting the required information. Once approved, you will receive an email message with a link to join the meeting. If you are asked for a meeting or webinar ID, enter the ID number found in the email. If you have no computer or smartphone, or a computer without a microphone, you can call in by phone by dialing (312) 626-6799 and entering the meeting ID 983 9266 8966 when prompted. Providing comment in person is not an option. AGENDA: 1. Call to Order 2. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: April 15, 2021 3. 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. 4. Review and Consider Recommendation to City Council on Approval of Iowa City Housing Authority Annual Plan for FFY21 The Iowa City Housing Authority (ICHA) is required to update the Annual Plans under the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act (QHWRA) of 1998. The Annual Report provides details about current programs, population served, annual application for grants to support improvements, and ICHA's strategy for addressing housing needs of currently assisted families and the larger community. 2 5. Project Monitoring HCDC invites CDBG and HOME recipients to provide updates on project progress and learn about the agencies' roles serving the community. Simon Andrew, Executive Director of The Housing Fellowship, will provide an update. 6. Affordable Housing Steering Committee Update from HCDC Representative Commissioner Nkumu will provide an update on the Affordable Housing Steering Committee progress to date as the representative from HCDC. 7. Iowa City Council Meeting Updates Two commissioners are assigned each month to monitor Council meetings. This agenda item provides an opportunity to review assignment schedule and for brief updates on City Council activity relevant to HCDC business. Commissioners shall not engage in discussion with one another concerning said items. 8. Housing & Community Development Information A special thank you to our outgoing commission members Maria Padron and Peggy Aguilar for their service to the community! Commissioners shall not engage in discussion with one another concerning said items. 9. Adjournment If you will need disability -related accommodations to participate in this program or event, please contact Brianna Thul at brianna-thul(aD-iowa-cit�org or 319-356-5230. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. NN� a 6W 4!!q! 7t4k CITY OF I0VVA CITY 4 10 East Wash i ngton S t ree t Iowa City. Iowa S2240- 1 S26 G 1 9) 356-5000 (319) 3S6-5009 FAX Www. icg0V, Grg Housing and Community Development Commission June 17, 2021 Meeting Packet Contents Agenda Item #2 • April 15, 2021 HCDC Draft Meeting Minutes Agenda Item #4 • Memo to HCDC from Steven J. Rackis, Housing Administrator • Iowa City Housing Authority Annual Plan for Federal Fiscal year 2021 Agenda Item #7 • City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Agenda Item #8 • April 22, 2021 HUD Press Release • Juneteenth 2021 Events and Information Agenda Item #2 MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION APRIL 15, 2021 — 6:30 PM ELECTRONIC MEETING PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Megan Alter, Matt Drabek, Lyn Dee Hook Kealey, Theresa Lewis, Maria Padron, Kyle Vogel MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Aguilar, Nasr Mohammed, Peter Nkumu, STAFF PRESENT: Erika Kubly, Brianna Thul OTHERS PRESENT: Sara Barron, Crissy Canganelli, Kathryn Davis RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 5-0 (Padron not present for the vote) the Commission recommends approval of the FY22 Annual Action Plan. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Drabek called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: MARCH 11, 2021: Vogel moved to approve the minutes of March 11, 2021. Kealey seconded and a vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0 (Padron not present for the vote). PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Sara Barron (Executive Director, Affordable Housing Coalition) wanted to bring a couple of things to the attention of the Commission. The first is that April is Fair Housing month and it's also Housing Trust Fund week. The Council is going to do a proclamation on that next week. At the Coalition's April meeting they're going to have Ellen McCabe from the Housing Trust Fund talk about its impact on the community and she has invited several recipients of Housing Trust Fund dollars to talk about how the Housing Trust Fund and other community commitments have brought some really great affordable housing programs and projects to the community. Barron invited the Commission to join and stated their monthly meetings are at noon on the fourth Friday of every month, and the zoom link for that will be in an email that she going to send out at the beginning of next week or can be found on their Facebook page. Barron also wanted to just remind the Commission that the Iowa Rent and Utility Assistance Program is now available for renters who have rent or utilities that are past due, they are helping people to apply for that assistance at several locations throughout Johnson County. In Iowa City the two best places to come for help are Johnson County Social Services where people can make a one-to-one appointment with the staff member there from 8:00 to 4:30, Monday through Friday, or they have three drop -in times each week at the Center for Worker Justice, which are Monday evenings from 4:00 to 7:00, Wednesday afternoons from 1:00 to 4:00 and Saturdays from 10:00am to 4:OOpm. Barron noted at both locations there are several languages spoken so people from certain language communities will want to check that out and make sure that they go to a place where they're able to be served in their preferred language. Barron did Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 2 of 12 add that they've been disappointed with the way that the State has rolled out the program, they've made it more restrictive than they need to and it's not in the best interest of tenants or landlords to restrict the payments to simply past due payments. The Federal program clearly lines out the opportunity for people to get some future rent in the bank which provides a much greater degree of stability, and also efficiency for the program in a time when there is a need for some real stimulus and stability in the rental housing market for both tenants and landlords. Barron stated they are working on advocacy to get that changed but in the meantime it's imperative that they help everyone who has past due bills to apply so that they can see the greatest impact possible in the community and throughout the State. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF FY22 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN (AAP): Drabek opened up the floor and see if Commissioners have any thoughts or comments on the information in the packet. Thul noted it is a long document and similar to the CAPER, most questions in the AAP are required. Alter asked from staff's perspective if there are any particular call outs that they wanted to raise since this is in their wheelhouse of having to update and to have it reflect accurately, so are there specific changes or modifications from past ones that they want to point out. Thul noted this one is the second year of the Consolidated Plan which is the umbrella and then the Action Plans fill in what steps to take to meet those goals from the Consolidated Plan. A lot of the information in the Action Plan comes straight out of the Consolidated Plan, which is called City Steps. Thul acknowledged this year is a little bit unusual because of the small amount of projects they have so staff think they'll probably have at least one amendment to this Plan when they do the second funding round in the fall, so that's different than the norm. But otherwise Thul would say it's fairly standard. Kubly added the page that they use the most is Appendix B, which has all the projects that the Commission voted on (page 70), and that's basically all of the set asides and all of the competitive projects that they awarded in one table. Drabek asked about the steering committee, it looks like there's some good representation there from nonprofit groups and developer groups but is wondering if they asked anyone else to be on the on that steering committee, maybe someone from a community group like Center for Worker Justice or the Affordable Housing Coalition. Kubly noted that Sara Barron with the Affordable Housing Coalition is on the committee but the Center for Worker Justice is not as the City Manager and City Council wanted to keep it to 12 people and it was challenging to determine who would be on it. That being said the Center for Worker Justice may be involved in the public input when the steering committee gathers that as well as some of the other local agencies. Unrelated really to the substance of the report Thul pointed out on the cover the first picture is the Mayor's Youth project from FY20 and was a construction project of two homes. The second photo is of a Neighborhood Nest that was funded with CDBG-CV dollars, it's always good to see things in action so she just wanted to point those out. Sara Barron (Executive Director, Affordable Housing Coalition) wanted to add that the Affordable Housing Coalition did ask City staff to include representatives from the Iowa City Tenants Union or other representers of renters because that is a voice that's missing and that opportunity was not extended to anyone outside of the committee members. Barron did note that Jessica Andino, from the Human Rights Commission, and Barron are two of the committee members on the public outreach subgroup and both of them have an extreme interest in putting some real work in to include more voices in the public input process. Barron noted if the Commission has suggestions about groups that should be contacted or other Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 3 of 12 concerns about how to reach people to include them in the work of the steering committee, she would love to hear them. Drabek stated the Tenant's Union was another group that came to mind as a possibility and perhaps also the Forest View Tenants Association though of course they're localized to one particular complex rather than City wide. Alter noted to that Open Heartland does a lot of work with a couple of different manufactured home areas or clients and someone from there might be someone to consider getting involved if interested at the very least through the public outreach group. Alter moved to recommend that Council approve the FY22 Annual Action Plan. Kealey seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0 (Padron not present for the vote). Kubly noted that in the 30-day public comment period people can continue to comment if they want and it will go to Council on May 4 for another public meeting. Once that's approved, it's due to HUD on May 15. At the May 4 meeting staff will also be taking the Aid to Agency and Emerging Aid to Agency projects to Council and then once those are approved, they'll notify the recipients and submit the Action Plan to HUD before the due date of the 15th. Alter asked if it helps to have HCDC Commissioners go to the Council meetings in case of questions or to show support for the recommendations. Kubly acknowledged it wouldn't hurt but doesn't think it's necessary as it is pretty routine. The only thing she could see maybe needing some consideration would be the emerging agencies so if someone wants to come, they can always speak individually or decide together to have someone speak. DISCUSS ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER NEWLY REVISED: Drabek noted this is an issue that Padron raised with City staff members about some questions about processes and how the meetings are conducted. Since Padron initiated the discussion and wanted to talk about it he suggests to either push it later in this meeting, or if Padron doesn't come later, probably to the next meeting. DISCUSS CHANGES TO CDBG AND HOME SCORING CRITERIA TO PRIORITIZE UNITS WITH RENT BELOW FAIR MARKET RENT (FM R) LIMITS: Drabek stated this is the discussion of potential changes to the CDBG and HOME scoring criteria. This is a topic that's come up a number of times. He noted this is also a topic where Padron was going to lead the discussion, but his understanding of this issue is this is something that, in particular a past Commissioner has brought up as a possible flaw in the in the scoring criteria that the fair market rent rates are high and that they might want to as a Commission consider prioritizing applicants that are lower than the fair market rate. Alter agreed this is something that in Commission's past that has been a discussion point and agrees it's definitely worth thinking about and talking about because there's no easy answer. Kealey agrees and would like to consider it and talk about it because she does feel like the fair market rent rate is pretty high. CrissyCanganelli (The Shelter House) asked if there's going to be further consideration and conversation regarding deprioritizing or lowering the priority of projects that are charging a fair market rent and that some nuanced consideration be given. She gave an example of the two projects that Shelter House has. Cross Park Place was a development of 24 one -bedroom apartments for permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless, a very high vulnerable, high need population. In financing that project they were able to use not only the local Housing Trust Fund dollars but were the first project awarded in the State of Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 4 of 12 Iowa with National Housing Trust Fund dollars, which is a source of HUD funding that is administered by the Iowa Finance Authority. The Iowa Finance Authority awarded greater points to their project because they could demonstrate that they had project -based vouchers for the project. For the 24 units, the Iowa City Housing Authority committed 24 project -based vouchers and the requirements on those project - based vouchers is that they are issued at the fair market rent, which actually helps a project like this that has limited other revenue sources. It's supporting the operations and the maintenance of the building, but also to a certain extent, the supportive services for all the tenants. The next building, to be completed in 2021, has 36 one -bedroom units for chronically homeless individuals, again, using National Housing Trust Fund dollars and again with project -based vouchers that require that fair market rent value. In this scenario, unless there are some caveats and different levels of discussion, the Commission wouldn't be looking at a project that is meeting the highest need and most vulnerable individuals that no one else will house in saying that lower priority. Therefore, Canganelli hopes that isn't the unintended consequences of a conversation like this. Alter stated that's honestly precisely the kind of input that they need because it is complicated. fPadron joined the meeting} Drabek noted there are two different things here, there's the rent paid by the tenant and then there's the rent with voucher -based projects that Canganelli mentioned and there's a big difference between those two things. A tenant on those sorts of projects, like on a Housing Choice Voucher, is not going to pay anywhere near the fair market rate, there are certain other things built into scoring criteria like 80% AMI that will often ensure that the tenant pays nowhere near the fair market rate but the rent collected often still is the fair market rate or higher. So what are they prioritizing, just what the projects for the tenant pays less than the fair market rate in which case they're not really going to do anything nor going to change much. If they are talking about total rent cost being below the fair market rate, in which case it would matter a lot to a lot of different projects, both for good and maybe in some cases, like Canganelli mentions for bad. Alter asked if they know of other municipalities that have considered or implemented these kinds of changes. Thul stated one thing that she was thinking about is if there is a rental project, specifically with some of these Federally assisted ones, the City has to do a certain amount of underwriting to make sure that the project can cash flow. Therefore, at some point, if the rent is too low, and they don't have the income to make the cash flow work, then the underwriting gets risky, and the numbers don't always work so it's hard to fund. So that's another layer of complications that are technical and hard. To specifically answer Alter's question, Kubly stated each jurisdiction, community or metropolitan area has different rents and Iowa City's rent is higher than other places in Iowa so that makes a little bit of a difference, but she can't really speak to what other communities are doing. Drabek noted there's also an underlying question of how much of a scoring change are they talking about, if one wanted to make a very small change to scoring criteria to give a couple of points that's one thing, if it were a large-scale change that would be a much bigger impact. Padron noted her main concern about this topic is they will have to go back to talking about the applications and the ranking process at some point, and review the process and the questions, and tonight there isn't time for that. Perhaps in another meeting they can review this because her main issue has always been with the ranking and they need to find a way to be consistent. Padron noted when they went to the City Council meeting a few years ago to request for more funding for the agencies and explained that the ranking process has two main components, one should be the ranking of the application and when they rank the application, they only see that numbers and not any feelings on it. For example, if an agency has put all the numbers that they put on the application and all the information and the Commission takes that and puts it in in the ranking sheet that's one part of the ranking process. But 4 Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 5 of 12 then they also have the humanitarian, the social aspect of the ranking, which is taken into account, and also what are the priorities of the City and what are the needs of the City and how are those needs ranked. Homelessness is one of the top things and then childcare is also very important and a huge issue. So there are two components, when they rank the application by the numbers, there's not much room for those numbers to be different. Padron noted when they ranked the applications last time when one Commissioner's ratings were really low because that person thought that agency didn't really qualify for funding but all the numbers from the data that the agency provided ranked it higher, so they do have to take these two factors into account, the information from the numbers that come from the application, but also the social aspect, the humanitarian or human aspect of the City needs. Then as a Commission they can debate and come to an agreement to how to allocate the funds. Alter agreed and noted there is a need to make sure that there is fairness and transparency for all of the applicants that this wasn't just some kind of scenario of who seemed to deserve it the most and that could be clarity through the numbers. She agreed there is also a component of having to see how these fits in with some of the City's larger goals and whatnot and so to take more of a holistic approach. What it sounds like to her though is with that interest in mind, maybe actually talking about fair market rents is not necessarily the place to have that conversation. They need to have a constant iterative process about and make this application process as fair and as clear to applicants as well as to Commissioners and to the public. That means there will be things that they need to revisit and should be an agenda item but will be one that would take up a good chunk of a meeting so maybe at a time when it's a little bit lighter. She also appreciated being able to get Canganelli's perspective this evening, because this is a holdover from a particular Commissioner who really made a good case on the other side to say they really do need to lower the fair market rents to be able to provide to more people in need. So it seems like this is an important piece of information that needed to come out as they talk about future considerations and really looking at the application and maybe the tweaking of that is not getting at what is needed. Padron stated that maybe the change is affordable housing needs to be their number one priority when they rank all the issues that the City has. It will also be a discussion to have when Nkumu is present because he's a representative on the Affordable Housing Committee. She noted this is always such a difficult topic because what will happen with the other agencies applying, what will happen with childcare, that is such a huge issue and for some reason it is never number one, even though The Women Foundation reviewed the research a few years ago and childcare was the number one issue for women who work, but it is number three on this list. However, that is not to say homelessness is less important, everything is so important and that is why it's so difficult. Drabek noted they have a much better understanding of the proposal itself than of the problem it's solving. He understands how the proposal would work and what they would do with it but if the problem is the number of people served by the CDBG and HOME proposals, that is something that they have a number of ways to discuss, they have that information, the number of people served, and the amount of money required. The problem he's been interested in solving for some time is the rise in overall cost of rent in the City, whether or not there is a voucher attached to the rent, because even if there's a voucher attached to the rent, the landlord is still taking in that same amount of money regardless of where the source of that money happens to be. But this proposal doesn't solve that problem. What they would need to solve that problem is some sort of competitive pressure that forces the price down. What the former Commissioner was trying to solve may have been different from that and therefore he is a little unclear on what the problem is that this proposal would solve. Alter noted again they are getting into talking through the application without having it in front of them and that's fine because it's sort of lays a lot of the issues that they've been thinking about, and obviously been wrestling with and it's fine to start that conversation tonight. But prior Commission's had created tiers of highest need, mid -range and low and then as a Commission went through and said it's not arbitrary, but it's very difficult and everything is essentially high priority and when they put things into lower priority, they don't ever get the attention that they deserve and that becomes problematic. She remembers that actually with Habitat because the impact that they have generationally is humongous, but because it wasn't serving a ton of people it always got pushed down. It seems like if they start thinking about prioritizing certain kinds of projects, before they ever see what the projects are, into categories of need they end up Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 6 of 12 almost full circle to where they started the several years ago and that wasn't necessarily the right way to go either. She also likes how Drabek put it really eloquently that they are laying the problems out but not really getting at solving them and feels fairly confident that putting something specifically in about fair market rents doesn't necessarily solve what they're trying to do and because this is CDBG and HOME, which are federal funds, it could actually impact and weaken some of the projects ability to get funding, since the City has to underwrite it and as Canganelli had said they look at fair market value. Again, she hopes they can continue this conversation and carry it forward maybe with a little bit more sense of purpose in looking at the application itself, and how they can make it stronger. Kubly noted that with changing priorities, those are all outlined in the Consolidated Plan so if the Commission is wanting to revise those that would be an amendment to the City Steps Plan. In 2019, they went through a pretty substantial public input process to develop those and as Alter mentioned they went from high, medium, and low to all high priority essentially and that's how they're identified in the plan. So, if they're going to change the priorities, they have to go through a formal Consolidated Plan amendment process, it's not something that they would just vote on at a meeting. She added they do try to have a meeting annually to review the priorities in the Plan that's intended to determine if community priorities have changed over time, like for example, there's a pandemic, and they need to prioritize response, which they've already included, but something like that where they'd want to change the community priorities to direct funding that way. Again, they do that review it annually, usually late summer/early fall, so there's opportunity to consider changes at any time. Drabek noted then it sounds like they're moving toward leaving the discussion here for now and possibly returning when they see the criteria again if they want to. DISCUSS ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER NEWLY REVISED (CONT.): Padron wanted to discuss this item because a few weekends ago she had some extra time and read the Commission bylaws and also the book Robert's Rules of Order. The Commission used to use Robert's Rules of Order more closely, which is when they have an item that is an item of action on the agenda, first they need a motion, then someone needs to second the motion, and then they bring the topic to debate to the floor. She noted when someone seconds the motion, it doesn't mean that they agree with the motion, it just means they are allowing the motion to move to the floor and then they can debate. If there is no second, the motion dies, and nobody talks about it and they move to the next item. Lately they have been talking about an item, and then they have a motion and then they vote. Padron stated the reason why she thinks it will be helpful to have it in the bylaws to follow Robert's Rules of Order is because she was born in Argentina and when she first moved to the US and came to Iowa, they started inviting her to boards. The first board that they invited her was a nonprofit organization and nobody had explained to her the rules and because she from Argentina she had never read the book and never heard of these rules. So she came to the board meeting and sat down and saw people making motions and modifying motions, and seconding motions and she had no idea what was going on so she was just super quiet and didn't know what to say. Then one day she read the bylaws and the bylaws specifically said they were following Robert's Rules of Order so that's how she knew she needed to read the book. Padron is not saying everyone is obligated to read it but does think it would be helpful because they have a lot of new Commissioners and it would be helpful. It will also be a helpful tool to empower everyone to have the same information. Additionally, when she watched the City Council meeting the other day she noticed a resident commented and said to the Mayor and the Council that they had not been consistent following the protocol of the meetings. So, having rules, naming them in the bylaws, will help the Commission avoid conflict in the future and be consistent. Having the rules stated in the bylaws will also empower everyone on the Commission to know what they're doing and to know what they're following. It can also give guidance if they ever have a conflict on how a motion processes or how they vote, and the number of people needed for a vote and things like that. Padron stated they are not going to be able to vote about this tonight because changes to the bylaws need to be discussed at one meeting and then voted on in another meeting. Alter had a question for the new Commissioners, because she thought when she got her orientation that in the packet there was a small portion that actually was photocopies of Robert's Rules of Order. Does Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 7 of 12 anybody who's newer to the Commission recall if that was in their onboarding packet. She agrees with what Padron said that they need to figure out what their rules are and go with them and observe them. Lewis and Vogel both do not recall receiving the photocopies in their onboarding packets. Thul stated the bylaws only require a majority vote. Drabek noted among the problems that Padron listed the accessibility problem is the one that stands out to him that they would want to work on. The accessibility issue is one he'd be interested in looking at and if their current procedures don't allow for accessibility, or if they need to do more for that, then he'd be interested in doing so. He is not sure if picking a rules system is the way to do that, he'd much rather have a conversation with a new Commissioner than try to explain Robert's Rules of Orders to a new Commissioner, personally. Padron noted talking too as a person of color she hears a lot that people learn in different ways so they have to consciously make an effort to give everyone the same tools. Drabek is still unsure how Robert's Rules solves that. Padron says it is more how they pass motions and how a topic gets to the floor for debate or knowing that you can amend the motion, etc. Padron doesn't like the fact that some people know this book very well but if others don't know it well then there is a difference in knowledge because information is power. She is not asking that everybody knows the book by heart, but they should at least be provided the information and then it's up to each individual if they want to read or not. Currently she feels like they are concealing the parts of how they're running the meetings and everything if they don't have that in the bylaws. Alter agrees and there should be a level playing field but feels fairly confident that most people are probably coming into these meetings not necessarily knowing Roberts Rules so it does make sense to lay it out and to say how they're going to do things and she understands about having a consistent and clear process and they're all about transparency and clarity. She just wonders to the extent of whether it needs to go through bylaws, and then go through Council, if it's more a matter of clarity and consistency in onboarding that there's just a clear understanding of how the process works and is consistent. Alter noted when Paula Vaughn was Commission Chair, she knew Robert's Rules and that was how she handled meeting. Drabek wondered if perhaps the bigger picture is orientation or onboarding and having some documentation to give to a person when they start. It can be something that is general with the very basic stuff like the chair leads the meetings, the chair goes through the agenda items, and when there is an item on the agenda that requires a motion, they can explain how that goes, that someone introduces it, someone seconds, then a there's a discussion and a vote. That is the process that everyone needs to know but doesn't necessarily commit to any particular theory or system of rules. Padron agrees that would be fine and it's a great idea to prepare a small document, like a summary, of the main points of how they conduct the meetings and almost a walkthrough or a demonstration of what a meeting is like and agrees that would be great and they wouldn't have to bother the Council Vogel asked why they do second motions, because seconding a motion is Robert's Rules of Order so in fact they've been doing Robert's Rules of Order, but at the same time they don't follow Robert's Rules of Order because they work much more on a consensus building level of rules than they do a parliamentarian system of rules. He agrees with Drabek that they don't need to put in the bylaws, they are already following Robert's Rules of Order, but Robert's Rules of Order is all about minimizing the negative and not consensus building. The idea behind Robert's Rules of Order is to put acts in place regardless of a minority decision, or a minority opinion, it's not good for committees, it's not good for commissions. He is a much bigger fan of consensus building and all they really need is either something as part of orientation or something in the bylaws that simply points to a standing order of procedures and it can be whatever the City uses as their as their de facto rules for committees. He feels going all in on something Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 8 of 12 like Roberts Rules would not behoove this Commission because all it takes is one or two sticklers for the rules type of people to ruin a meeting by focusing on the rules and not actually paying attention to the discussion that's taking place. He would be much more in favor of something like putting together a very simple orientation packet based on simple rules such as how to follow the agenda, to have a motion and a second before discussion takes place, and a discussion ends when no further input is requested by any of the panelists, or at the decision of the chair, and then a simple majority vote is taken. Padron agrees and just wants them to make sure that they give something to every new Commissioner. She does think that the City is supposed to be following Robert's Rules of Order and so that is what they are following. A guide would be nice for new Commissioners. Thul noted some Commissions have Robert's Rules in their bylaws, and some don't, probably depends on how they were established originally, but she can easily include something like that in the HCDC orientation. Drabek added also some of the ideas Padron has implemented this year has already been helpful such as the City Council meeting updates and the way that every single Commissioner has gotten involved in attending a meeting. Alter stated they in agreement and talking about the sticklers for the rules, there is the statement of how to wrangle a lot of cats, well that is by having a lot of rules. People are able to actually shut down conversation because in order to even have discussion there has to be a motion. So a whole meeting could get disrupted and shut down because somebody could actually say, rule of point of order or whatever. She loves the consensus building but yes there needs to be some standardization that people need to follow. In the spirit of creating a better process for everybody, as opposed to using it to actually sort of browbeat or beat down anyone. Padron stated she can try to put a guide together and write something and send it to the Commission for review. HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: Thul noted the deadline to reapply for HCDC is May 11. Thul updated the Commission on the Little Creations Academy project, they were able to get the SAM registration figured out and now staff is working with them on some of the logistics to get the agreement together. Kubly stated in the agenda packet staff included the Community Police Review Board Forum zoom that's going to be on May 17, it will be a discussion about the restructure of the police department towards more community policing and meeting the new police chief. Staff was notified last week that the City getting almost $1.8 million in HOME funds through the American Rescue Plan Act, they just got this notice so do not have all the rules yet but will probably be working with the partner agencies to figure out how to spend that. It's specifically for housing for homelessness prevention. The City usually gets about 500,000 annually in HOME so this is a big wave of HOME funding coming. Regarding the May meeting, staff does not have any required agenda items so was wondering if wanted to meet in May or had agenda items. Alter stated they could take a look at the application, perhaps like a work session, it's an opportunity where they don't have to have a three-hour meeting because there are no other agenda items. Padron agrees it would be great for a work session to review the application process and the ranking process. Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 9 of 12 Vogel noted he was reading an article the other day about the downtown and development that's happening there and questioned the 20 million in TIF funds and the 1.8 million that the developer is going to pay for the fee -in -lieu -of in order to not have to put affordable housing units in the properties. When those fees are paid, where do those funds go, are they used for affordable housing and who determines where those funds are used. Is that part of the HCDC process here, making those recommendations or is that just bypassing HCDC and some internal City staff or administration is making the determine how those funds are going to get spent. Kubly explained that Council determines that as well as the City manager's office depending on the project. Some TIF projects are a little different from the Riverfront Crossings fee -in -lieu requirements of how and where the money can be used depending on the project. Usually, the City gets direction from Council on how to use it or they hold it until there is a project that they can apply it towards Vogel asked if there is any kind of report from the City on how many fee -in -lieu funds have come into the City and how those have been put towards affordable housing. The fee -in -lieu has been going on for the last few years in Riverfront Crossings, even on projects like The Rise where they chose actually to offer affordable housing apartments but on The Rise's website there's no application for affordable housing or notice of affordable housing units for people that are at 80% ami or below. So is the City getting regular reports. The City has been approving these massive developments, which are not affordable housing units, they are aimed at students and higher income populations but as part of the agreement for approval to put up 12 stories downtown is they either have to offer homes and apartments in the buildings for affordable housing, or pay the City a fee -in -lieu that the City can turn around and use those funds to produce affordable housing. In the annual plan, City Steps, this should be listed but that money isn't mentioned in there and there's no mention of the funds that have been collected so far that are supposed to go to affordable housing. He acknowledged this isn't on the agenda so perhaps it can be brought up as a future agenda discussion item that the Commission can get a report from the City on. Where is the money, who's paying the money and how many affordable housing units that didn't do the fee -in -lieu are actually being rented to people that are 30% or 50% of ami. That number is important because even if the rules are only 80% ami, that is still like a $50,000 income which means not many affordable housing units are actually going to people who need affordable housing. Kubly noted staff does do an annual report with this information that she believes was distributed to this Commission a couple months ago. They're also doing a department wide annual report this year and that information will be in there as well. The information is not in the CAPER just because of the funding source but the department does an annual report on affordable housing and all the information is in there, how many units they created, how many chose the fee -in -lieu, how much money was received, how much money is left, etc. Vogel noted in regard to how many units are created though, that doesn't say how many units are actually rented, because there's a difference. A developer can set aside 30 units in a building and if that's not part of their rent or cash flow and they don't have a real interest in renting out 30 units out of 200 to lower income then there is no affordable housing. It's not really creating units unless landlords are actually putting people in those units. Kubly stated they're occupied, staff monitors them and look at leases, they have to rent for a certain amount of months of the year to affordable tenants per their affordable housing agreement and they annually monitor the projects to make sure they're in compliance. If they don't comply, they might have to pay a fee or get their rental permit revoked. Vogel acknowledged that but it still doesn't say where that money is spent or on what projects specifically and who's making the funding decisions on that. Kubly said that is a City Council decision and if City Council wants HCDC to review where to use the fee -in -lieu funds and recommend to City Council to make a decision they will decide that. They haven't spent any of the Riverfront Crossings funds yet. Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 10 of 12 Padron noted there was one time where something was straight to City Council and then HCDC found out about that they sent them a letter saying that the Commission would like that topic to come to the Commission first and so Council sent it to the Commission for review. They could always send a letter to Council saying the Commission would like to have a discussion about this funding and how to allocate the money and then send the recommendation. Council can always not follow the Commission's recommendation. Vogel asked if there been discussions internally with City staff about what the plans are for when they start putting together projects, is the idea that it is going to go through HCDC as part of that process or has the discussion been internally with City Manager and City staff that it's just going to be a completely separate path to approval. Kubly said the TIF money, which is economic development money, will not come to HCDC. Vogel is asking about the fee -in -lieu money as it specifically says that money is supposed to be put towards improving and increasing affordable housing, which is that one of the primary purposes of HCDC, to direct and make recommendations on behalf of the citizens for what those projects should be. Kubly stated she doesn't think the plan now is for that to go through HCDC, but HCDC would see reports as part of the Consolidated Plan and the Action Plan which is a regular process with HCDC. Padron would like to send a letter to Council from HCDC saying that if this fee -in -lieu is supposed to go to affordable housing the Commission would like to review how the money is spent before the City talks about it and send a recommendation to Council. Vogel would just even be happy as a start with some kind of report on how much money has been collected because they talk about affordable housing and these projects but yet the City has this pool of funds that they've been making deals for the last three years. Staff can say these places are rented, but he is seeing tons of vacancies at these places and knows they've all had issues with filling units. Drabek stated it is likely the regular priced units that are vacant, the affordable units are rented. Kubly confirmed that all the affordable units are occupied. Vogel asked for those that are rented do they know what the AMI of those tenants, are they at that 80% level or are they at the 50% level, because if they're studios, that's just one person, which has to make $45,000 a year and if he was making $45,000 a year he wouldn't consider himself in the affordable housing category. Thul will send out that report but noted again staff does spend a lot of time monitoring and auditing all the records, looking at all the leases and going through everybody's income to make sure meet the terms of the agreement and to make sure that they are providing that affordable housing. Vogel raised again the affordable housing question discussion earlier, which is, if they are looking at the 80% AMI rate for one person, for a studio, it's a pretty cheap studio but higher income so perhaps they need to request the City to bring it lower. He acknowledged there's negatives to lowering that when talking about CDBG or HOME funds, but these are City funds and a City project that's outside of those realms and is not federal money. Padron agreed this is a huge opportunity to do something different or improve it and could be serving more of the 30% and the 50% group of people. Thul noted that HOME and CDBG projects often serve populations such as people with disabilities who are almost always under 30% AMI and are projects that serve people with less than fair market rent but sometimes maybe that's not captured in the information that comes to the Commission, but those projects do serve a very low-income population. Vogel thinks the CDBG and HOME are developments that serve very low-income population. However, the funding through tax dollars and TIF based on an 80% AMI makes him have a hard time accepting that 10 Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 11 of 12 in all situations 80% AMI for a studio apartment or even a one bedroom at any of these properties is truly serving someone who is in need of affordable housing. Kubly noted this is exactly what's happening through the Affordable Housing Steering Committee, they're reviewing the City's current policies. In the Riverfront Crossings Zoning Policy it is 60% AMI, the only one that's 80% is The Rise because that was before the zoning code change. Drabek asked if they don't have a May meeting, is there talk of when these meetings might go back to in - person. Kubly stated the City Clerk have asked staff about logistics of what they would need and how many people and space. She believes Council's going to discuss that at the meeting on the 20t" about opening services but doesn't really know when they'll decide on Commission meetings or Council meetings. The Commission discussed holding a May work session meeting to go over the CDBG/HOME application form and questions. IOWA CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS UPDATES: Kealey noted first the Council had some proclamations. They had the Fair Housing Act Proclamation and Padron got the proclamation Community Development Week. There was then a Climate Action Plan update and they're going to have a meeting on 5/11 for LED lighting and resources and savings. She did want to note Council talked a long time about the annexation of the Finkbine area that the City developing with University Heights. The development is not offering any affordable housing and Sara Barron was there and spoke up two different times regarding her concern that there was not 10% or more affordable housing offered. Kealey is unsure if the development is then paying a fee to not have the affordable housing but to piggybacking on what Vogel was discussing earlier, HCDC maybe should have a voice in that. It did bother her that there's no affordable housing in that area, especially because it's close to the hospital and there's a lot of people that work at the hospital that don't make very much money and don't have the ability to pay for the housing in this area, and it would really help people that work there to be in walking distance. The development did pass zoning wise, and the annexation passed, but there were quite a few people speaking out against it. So maybe when the Commission gets together next they may want to give thoughts to writing a letter to Council stating concerns about these TIF developments that are getting Iowa City funding and are not giving an affordable housing option. Padron would support writing a letter and doesn't agree with these developments not having affordable housing and giving money as it just contributes to the problem. Kealey stated it seems like that the developers are skirting around the issue of doing affordable housing. Council voted to move the project forward so there's nothing they can do now regarding that project, but they could have a voice and at least when lend their support for affordable housing and not having developers get around the affordable housing. Padron agrees to sending a letter expressing concern, some people are going to say it may scare away the developers and nobody's going to want to invest in the City but that's likely not true. Also the tax break that developers get when they do offer affordable housing is like 10 years, such a short period and it should be much longer than that. At minimum, it should be like 20 years for stability for those renters. ADJOURNMENT: Vogel moved to adjourn. Lewis seconded the motion and a vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. 11 Housing and Community Development Commission April 15, 2021 Page 12 of 12 Housing and Community Development Commission Name Terms Exp. 7/16 8/20 9/17 10/15 11 /19 1 /21 2/18 3/11 4/15 Aguilar, Peggy 6/30/22 O/E X X O/E O/E X X X O/E Alter, Megan 6/30/21 X X O/E X X X X X X Drabek, Matt 6/30/22 X X X O/E X X X X X Kealey, Lyn Dee Hook 6/30/22 X X X O/E X O/E X X X Lewis, Thersea 6/30/23 X X X X X X X X X Mohammed, Nsar 6/30/23 X X O/E X X X X X O/E Nkumu, Peter 6/30/22 O/E X O/E X X X X X O/E Padron, Maria 6/30/21 X X O/E X O/E X X X X Vogel, Kyle 6/30/23 X X X O/E X O/E X X X Attendance Record 2020-2021 Resigned from Commission Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant 12 W Ott,, CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE hL Agenda Item #4 CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: June 10, 2021 To: Housing and Community Development Commission From: Steven J. Rackis, Housing Administrator Re: Iowa City Housing Authority's Annual Plan for Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2021 Introduction: The Public Housing Reform Act requires submission of an Annual Plan. The Annual Plan provides details about the PHA's current programs and the resident population served, as well as the PHA's strategy for addressing the housing needs of currently assisted families and the larger community. History/Background: The strategies for meeting the Housing Authorities mission, goals, and objective are stated in the Iowa City Housing Authority's 5-Year Plan for Fiscal Years 2020-2024 and are contained in CITY STEPS 2021-2025 Iowa City's Consolidated Plan for Housing, Jobs, and Services for Low -Income Residents. Recommendation: Staff recommends approving the Iowa City Housing Authority's Annual Plan for FFY21. Agenda Item #4 Annual Report — 2021 Ysin U, H a R 4TY g. 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City - Iowa - 52240 -1826 To improve quality of life, the Iowa City Housing Authority acts as a community leader for affordable housing, family self-sufficiency, and homeownership opportunities. Date: July 6, 2021 Annual Report 2021 Table of Contents Pages Staff 3 Executive Summary 4-5 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program 6 Public Housing Program 7 Family Characteristics 8 Family Characteristics and Working Families 8-9 Public Housing Waiting List 10 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Waiting List I 1 Promoting Family Self -Sufficiency (FSS) & Homeownership 12-15 Funding for Calendar Year 2019 16 Housing Authority Funding Sources Summary 17-18 Partnerships and Community Collaborations 19 Page 2 Annual Rep❑rt - 2021 Staff Housing Program Assistant Robin Butler Housing Program Assistant Denise Kinnison Housing Program Assistant Carri Fax-Rummelhart Housing Program Assistant Diana Huff Housing Program Assistant Emily Droll Office Manager Jennifer Gosch Family Self -Sufficiency (FSS) Mary Abboud Coordinator Public Housing/Homeownership Pat MacKay Coordinator Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Heidi Wolf Program Coordinator Housing Administrator Steven J. Rackis Housing Receptionist Georgia Black Housing Receptionist Vacant Page 3 Annual Report 2021 Executive Summary The Housing Authority works to improve the quality of life for clients, acting as a community leader on affordable housing by providing information and education, housing assistance, and public and private partnership opportunities.The Housing Authority is a division of the City of Iowa City established in 1969 to administer housing assistance programs throughout its jurisdiction, including all of Johnson County and portions of Iowa and Washington Counties. We currently assist more than 1,500+ disabled, elderly & low-income working families to acquire and maintain affordable housing through rental and ownership programs. The Annual Plan provides details about the Housing Authority's current pro- grams and the resident population served, as well as the PHA's strategy for ad- dressing the housing needs of currently assisted families and the larger communi- ty. The Annual Plan also serves as the annual application for grants to support improvements to public housing buildings (Capital Fund Program) Iowa City Housing Authority Rental Assistance Portfolio: Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) = 1,191 Veterans' Supportive Housing Vouchers (VASH) = 95 Mainstream Vouchers = 78 Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHV) = 69 Project -Based Vouchers Cross Park Place = 24 Public Housing Units = 86 City -Owned Affordable Rental Units = 16 TOTAL Vouchers/Units = 1,559 Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV): The Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCV) is designed with the intent of increasing affordable housing choices for elderly persons, persons with disabilities. & low-income working families. Partici- pants with a HCV voucher choose and lease safe, decent, and affordable private- ly owned rental housing. Applicant pool: Applicants are selected from a wait- ing list. Veterans Supportive Housing Vouchers (VASH): The VASH program implemented the Housing First concept for the delivery of services. Housing First places permanent housing with supports at the foundation for success and stability, including better access and outcomes with treatment services. The VASH program serves Veterans experiencing the most significant challenges to housing stability, including chronic homelessness, severe mental illness, and other significant barriers. Applicant pool: The Housing Authority receives direct referrals from Iowa City Veterans Administration Health Care System. Page 4 Annual Report — 2021 Mainstream Vouchers: Mainstream vouchers Eligible participants are non - elderly persons with a disabling condition currently experiencing homelessness, previously experienced homelessness and currently a client in a permanent sup- portive housing or rapid rehousing project, or those at risk of experiencing homelessness. Applicant pool: The Housing Authority receives direct referrals from the Continuum of Care/Coordinated Entry Service Delivery System. Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHV): EHV vouchers are a Housing First concept for the delivery of services. Eligible participants are individuals and fami- lies who are (1) homeless, (2) at risk of homelessness, (3) fleeing, or attempting to flee, domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or human trafficking, or (4) recently homeless. Applicant pool: The Housing Authority receives direct referrals from the Continuum of Care/Coordinated Entry Ser- vice Delivery System. Project —Based Voucher Cross Park Place: Cross Park Place is Housing First project providing permanent supportive housing for homeless individuals/ households with a disabling condition. The Iowa City Housing Authority con- verted 24 of our HCV tenant -based vouchers to project -based vouchers to pro- vide financial support to the project.. Applicant pool: The Housing Authority receives direct referrals from the Continuum of Care/Coordinated Entry Ser- vice Delivery System. Public Housing Units: Public housing provides affordable, decent and safe rental housing for elderly persons, persons with disabilities. & low-income work- ing families. The Iowa City Housing Authority owns and manages the units. Ap- plicant pool: Applicants are selected from a waiting list. City -Owned Affordable Rental units: City Council approved the develop- ment of 16 Affordable Rental units to serve eligible persons whose income is below 80°/ of the median income for the household size. Peninsula Apartments contains 10 units and Augusta Place contains six (6). Applicant pool: Appli- cants are selected from a waiting list. Comparing the Iowa City Housing Authority to the other 71 Housing Authorities in the State of Iowa. Effective dates included: September , 2019--December 31, 2020: ICHA participants have hfgh�r average annual incomes - $15,1 19 vs. $ 13,022; • The ICHA assists more working families — 35% vs. 27%; • The ICHA assists ewer families receiving welfare — 3 % vs. 16%; ■ ICHA participants pay a higher average monthly amount of the contract rent - $359 vs. $305. Page 5 Annual Report — 2021 Housing ChoiceVoucher Program HCV Economic Impact: For Calendar Year 2020 (CY20), the Housing Choice Voucher program paid//L\,v = Ac� =� 1 approximately $8.1 million in Housing Assistance Pay- F� Wi li ments HAP to land Iordslowners of rental properties in Johnson County. The vouchers in use as of 4/21 /21 in Iowa City (868) represents 4% of the total number of rental units (19,656) in the City of Iowa City. Following is the Johnson County breakdown by city. Overall voucher utilization in Johnson County shows sixty-five percent (68%) were households without minor chil- dren. Voucher Utiliza- tion by City As of 4/21121(total 1,200) Total Population % of Total Johnson County Incorporated Population Total Vouchers By City % Total Voucher Utilization Households without Minors % Total Vouch - ers By City Iowa City 67,862 50.00% 868 69.2% 615 70.9% C4ralville 18,901 13.90% 193 15.4% 153 79.3% North Liberty 18,228 13.40% 109 8.7% 49 44.8% Solon 2,037 1.50% 10 .008% 10 100.00% Oxford 807 0.60% 6 0.005% 6 100% Tiffin 1947 1.40% 7 0.006% 2 25.0% Lone Tree 1,300 0.96% 2 0.002% 2 100% Hills 703 0.52% 1 0.002% 1 100% Johnson County Total Population 1351736 Johnson County Incorporated 114,558 % of Johnson County Population Living in Incorporated areas = 84% * Source: U.S. Decennial Census 2010 and North Liberty Special Census 2015. 41 VASH Vouchers (3% of total vouchers) are being utilized in the Cedar Rapids Metropolitan Area. 2 HCVP Vouchers (<I% of total voucher) are being utilized in Washington, County; 2 HCV Vouchers (<I% of total vouchers) is being utilized in Iowa County. Page 6 Annual Report — 2021 Public Housing The eighty-six (86) Public Housing units are low -density and constructed to conform and blend into the existing neighborhood architec- ture. The 86 Public Housing units represent half (1 /2) of 1 % of the total number of rental units in the City of Iowa City. Public Housing Economic Impact for the City of Iowa City: • Total CY20 rental income from Public Housing properties = $260,929.57 • Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) paid to the Johnson County Assessor for the Public Housing properties in CY20 = $26,122.90 • In CY20, the Housing Authority paid $425,149.20 to private sector Iowa City contractors for the capital improvement, general maintenance and repair of the Public Housing properties. Public Housing Units by Iowa City Planning Districts Total by Location Total Occupied 5/1/2021 Occupied Units No Minors Occupied Units w/ Minors (includes non - school aged minors N o rth east 5 5 1 4 Central 7 6 0 6 Southeast 33 31 13 18 Southwest 3 3 0 3 South 33 29 4 25 Downtown 5 5 5 0 TOTAL 86 74 18 56 On 51I12021, 2 units were offline due to HUD approved modernization.. Page 7 Annual Report - 2021 Family Characteristics ICHA Participant Characteristics. Definition of Participant (participant family): A person or family that has been admitted to the Iowa City' Housing Authority's HCV, VASH or Public Hous- ing program and is currently receiving housing Household Characteristics. Total Families as reported to HUD: September 1, 2019 -- December 31, 2020 Family Type by Head -of -Household (HOH) Disabled and/or Elderly HOH Non-Elderly/Non-Disabled HOH Total Family Composition by Household Count % of Total 577 57% 559 43% 1298 100% Count % of Total Households without children 709 55% Households with Children 589 45% Total 1298 100% Race by HOH Count % of Total White HOH 636 49% Black/African American HOH 623 48% All Other Races HOH 39 3% Total 1298 100% Ethnicity by HOH Count % of Total Non -Hispanic HOH 1233 95% Hispanic HOH 65 5% Total 1298 100% Page 8 Annual Report -- 2021 Family Characteristics (continued) Income Sources: Total Families = 1,298as reported to HUD: September 1, 2019 — December 31, 2020 (All Family Members: Many Families Have Multiple Sources of Income): • Social Security (SS)/Supplemental Security (SSI) = 60% • Employment = 35% • Family Investment Program (FIP[Welfare) = 3% • With any Other Income = 22% • No Income = 8% Child Support, Self -Employment, Unemployment Insurance, Other Non -Wage Sources. January 14, 2021 point -in -time count: Only six (6) of the total 1,298 assisted households are reporting Family Investment Program (FI P) as the sole source of household income. FIP provides temporary financial and other assistance to low income families with children while they move toward self-sufficiency. This amounts to < I % of all currently assisted households. Length of Participation as reported to HUD: 1,298 as reported to HUD: Sep- tember I, 2019—December 3 I, 2020 • Less than I year = 113 (9%) • 1 to 5 years = 373 (36%) • 5 to 10 years = 345 (27 % ) 10 to 20 years = 274 (21 %) • Over 20 years = 85 (7 ) Iowa City Community School District (ICCSD) information 2018-2019; Total Enrollment & Free/Reduced (F/R) Lunch: • Total ICCSD Enrollment K- 12 = 13,990@ • Total ICCSD Eligible for FIR (38.9% of total) = 5,442 • Total ICHA (All Programs) Minors K-12 * = 1,038 • Total ICHA (All Programs) K-12 Eligible F/R = 1,004 @ Source: Page 21 of the ICCSD Enrollment, Demographics & Class Size Report, Octo- ber 2018. * Total may include children enrolled in the Clear Creek Amana School District, or chil- dren who have received scholarships to attend Reginal. Page 9 Annual Report -- 2021 Public Housing Waiting List June 3, 2021 Family Type & Composition by Head -of -Household (HOH) Family Type Count % of Total Disabled 346 50% Non -Disabled 350 50% Total 696 100% Family Type Elderly 1 1 1 16% Non -Elderly 585 84% Total 696 100% Family Composition Count % of Total Households without children 332 48% Households with Children 364 52% Total 696 100% Race Count % of Total White 313 45% Black/African American 282 41 % All other Races 101 14% Total 696 100% Ethnicity Count % of Total Hispanic 46 7% Non -Hispanic 650 93% Total 696 100% Page 10 Annual Report — 2021 HCV Waiting List June 3, 2021 Family Type & Composition by Head -of -Household (HOH) Family Type Disabled Non -Disabled Total Family Type Elderly Non -Elderly Total Family Composition Households without children Households with Children Total Race White Black/African American All Other Races Total Ethnicity Hispanic Non -Hispanic Total Count % of Total 591 46% 681 54% 1272 100% 177 14% 1095 86% 1272 100% Count % of Total 533 42% 739 58% 1272 100% Count % of Total 574 45% 530 42% 168 13% 1272 100% Count % of Total 98 7% 1 174 93% 1272 100% Page I I Annual Report — 2021 Promoting Self -Sufficiency & Homeownership The lack of safe, decent, and affordable housing undermines quality education, public health, and economic growth. Affordable housing is a contrib- uting factor to stabilizing families. Stable families are better equipped to take advantage of educational opportunities. With opportunities for and access to advanced education and training, families increase their employability. Sustainable employment offers opportunities to attain self-sufficiency. Economic self -sufficiency leads to a better society and strengthens the "sense of community." Through our Self -Sufficiency programs, the Housing Authority is helping low income families bridge the economic gap by building assets, improving employ- ment opportunities, and transitioning from renters of units to owners of homes. The Family Self -Sufficiency (FSS) Program: Promotes self-sufficiency and asset development by providing supportive services to participants to in- crease their employability, to increase the number of employed participants, and to encourage increased savings through an escrow savings program. Current FSS Enrollment Data (61312021): • Total FSS participants = 215 • Participants with an escrow savings account = 190 (88%) • Average monthly escrow savings deposit (participants with an escrow balance) = $252 • Average escrow savings account balance (participants with an escrow balance) = $5,656 • Highest escrow savings account balance = $59,312 Workshop Accreditations: • "Money Smart": Federal Deposit and Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Page 12 Annual Report - 2021 Promoting Self -Sufficiency & Homeownership (continued) FSS Program Coordinating Committee: The FSS Program Coordinating Committee has been replaced with three (3) already existing wider -reaching networks that have lessened the duplication of effort in leveraging community resources to promote self-sufficiency among FSS program participants. The FSS coordinator has joined the Community Reentry Network of Johnson County Area which includes representatives from educational institutions, em- ployment services, government agencies, housing agencies, neighborhood cen- ters, labor programs and family services. Participating entities: • Center for Worker Justice. Goodwill of the Heartland. • Inside Out Reentry. • Iowa City Housing Authority. • Iowa Department of Corrections, bth Judicial District. • Iowa Works. • Jane Boyd Community House. • Kirkwood Community College. Labor Ready. • Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County. ■ Shelter House. • Teamsters Local 238. The Iowa City Housing Authority is also a partner in the Workforce Innovation & Opportunity Act (WIOA) one -stop career center service delivery system. WIOA reinforces the partnerships and strategies necessary for one -stops to provide job seekers and workers with the high -quality career services, educa- tion and training, and supportive services they need to get good jobs and stay employed, and to help businesses find skilled workers and access other sup- ports, including education and training for their current workforce. Participating entities: • Kirkwood Community College. • Iowa Workforce Development. • Iowa Vocational Rehabilitation. • Iowa Department for the Blind. • Experience Works. ■ AARP. Page 13 Annual Report - 2021 Promoting Self -Sufficiency & Homeownership (continued) 0 Denison Job Corps. Ottumwa job Corps. ■ Proteus. ■ Hawkeye Community Action Agency. ■ Cedar Rapids Housing Authority. ■ Iowa City Housing Authority. Interagency Case Management Sub -Committee of the Local Homeless Coordi- nating Board. This group meets to ensure coordination of services provided to families, improve collaboration of services, identify unmet needs, and seek solu- tions. Participating entities: ■ City of Iowa City. ■ Domestic Violence Intervention Program. • Hawkeye Community Action Program (HACA) • Iowa City Community School District. • Iowa City Housing Authority. ■ Iowa Legal Aid. • Johnson County Social Services. Prelude Behavioral Services. • Salvation Army. • Shelter House. ■ United Action for Youth. Homeownership Programs: FSS Homeownership: Through our FSS program, many families have used their escrow savings accounts and private mortgages to attain homeownership independent of the Housing Authority programs. Sixty-two (62) FSS graduates have moved to homeownership. HCV Homeownership Program: Eligible participants have the option of purchasing a home with their HCV assistance rather than renting. • Forty-three (43) HCV Vouchers have been used to purchase homes since January 2003; Fifteen (15) HCV Vouchers are currently active. Tenant -to -Ownership Program (TOP): The Tenant -to -Ownership Pro- gram is funded by HUD. The TOP program offered opportunities for low to very low-income families to purchase single-family homes owned by the Housing Authority. Page 14 Annual Report -r- 2021 Promoting Self -Sufficiency & Homeownership (continued) • Twenty-six (26) homes have been sold and ten (10) resold since May 1998. Affordable Dream Home Ownership Program (ADHOP): The Afforda- ble Dream Home Ownership Program is operated, managed and funded solely by the ICHA. It offers opportunities for income eligible families to purchase newly constructed homes, newer homes, or resale of homes purchased through the TOPIADHOP programs. ■ Sixteen (16) homes (10 "Universal Design" homes) were built and sold since May 1999. Down Payment Assistance Program — Grant Award $187,500: Funded with Fiscal Year 2009 HOME funds. First-time homebuyers with a household income of less than 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) may be eligible for a forgivable loan for down payment assistance. At the date of this publication: ■ 20 families purchased homes (total funds expended) = $187,500 ■ Families with household income 60-80% of AMI = I i ■ Families with household income <60°I of AMI = 9 UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership: The UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership is an effort by the City of Iowa City focusing on neighborhoods located near the University campus that retain a single-family character and a demand for single-family housing, but that also have a large renter population. From May 2011 to May 2015, the Iowa City Housing Authority provided $102,276 in down payment assistance to sixteen (16) families purchasing a Unk verCity home. In FY2014, the ICHA allocated $170,000 to the UniverCity Neighborhood Part- nership for the rehabilitation of homes purchased by the City of Iowa City. In FY 2015, an additional $20,000 was allocated for rehabilitation of homes. From June 2014 to September 2015, ICHA funds in the amount of $165,164.25 were used for the rehabilitation of eight (8) homes purchased by the City of Iowa City. Page 15 Annual Report 2021 Funding for Calendar Year (CY) 2020 The United States Congress allocates funding and passes laws for all housing programs. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) role in the locally administered housing programs is to allocate money to local housing authorities and to develop policy, regulations and other guidance that interprets housing legislation. Housing Choice Voucher Program CY20 • Housing Assistance Payments = $8,060,850 • Administrative Fees = $1,1 15,810 • Family Self -Sufficiency Grant = $135,420 • Fraud Recovery = $101,044 Total HCV Pro ram CY20 = $9A 13,124 Public Housing CY20 • Operating Subsidy = $179,857 • Rental Income = $260,930 • Reimbursement of Expenses/Fraud Recovery = $12,627 • Capital Funds Program (CFP) = $180,724 Total Public Housing CY20 = $633,778 Total Housing Authority Funding CY20 = $10.046,902 Page 16 Annual Report 2021 Iowa City Housing Authority (ICHA) Funding Sources ICHA income and cash sources. The uses of the cash sources are based on relevant HUD notices and signed agreements between the Housing Authority and HUD. Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Administrative Fees Administrative fees are available to the ICHA for the operation and manage- ment of the HCV program. Starting January 31, 2004, HUD and Congress, through the approval of the Annual Appropriations Act, restricted the use of ad- ministrative fee income to activities related to the HCV tenant -based rental assis- tance and related development activities (PIH Notice 2008-15). Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) HUD provided funds to cover the housing subsidy paid to owners/landlords directly by the ICHA on behalf of the participating family. The family pays the difference between the actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program. Under certain circumstances, if authorized by the ICHA, a family may use its voucher to purchase a modest home. HUDIVeterans' Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) This is tenant based rental assistance funds targeting homeless veterans partici- pating in VA Case Management Services. Family Self -Sufficiency (FSS) The FSS program is a tenant self-sufficiency work incentive program. ICHA estab- lishes cash accounts for FSS program participants that will be available to them if they complete the program. ICHA's contributions to these accounts are funded by HUD through the ICHA's regular funding process. FSS cash is not available to ICHA for any other use. Public Housing operations Under Section 9(3) of the Housing Act of 1937, Operating Funds are available to the ICHA for the operation and management of the Public Housing program. These funds assist the ICHA in bridging the gap between the rent collected and the operating expenses of the program. Operating cash is only available for the use and benefit of public housing units and residents. Page 17 Annual Report — 2021 Housing Authority Capitol Fund Grants HUD provides funds to the ICHA to improve the physical condition, upgrade the management and operation and carry out other activities for Public Housing developments. These funds are primarily used for general maintenance and re- pair of the Public Housing units. As necessary, these funds will also be used to upgrade structures, interiors, HVAC systems and appliances. Capital Funds are calculated and allocated by an established formula. Affordable Dream Homeownership Program (ADHOP) On September 3, 1993, the ICHA entered into a Section 5(h) Agreement with HUD. The purpose of this program is to create affordable home ownership oppor- tunities throughout Iowa City. This agreement authorizes the ICHA to sell Public Housing units and use the sales proceeds to construct or purchase homes for reha- bilitation to continue the cycle. To ensure affordability, the ICHA provides a sec- ond mortgage for the homeowners. Broadway Sales Proceeds ICHA received approval from HUD for the sale of 18 units at 192611946 Broadway Street, Iowa City, Iowa. Per the approved plan submitted to HUD, the sales pro- ceeds were to be used for the development of 18 low -density scattered site re- placement units that would be more efficiently and effectively operated as lower income housing. There is no other permissible use of these funds per the agree- ment. Public Housing Tenant Security Deposits The ICHA holds security deposits until tenants vacate units. At that time, the ten- ants receive a full or partial refund depending on such factors as remaining rental or other charges outstanding and reimbursement of damage repairs. Tenant security deposit cash is not available to ICHA for any other use. Page 18 Annual Deport — 2021 Partnerships and Community Collaborations • University of Iowa School of Social Work. • Women's Resource and Action Center (WRAC). • Montessori School. • Goodwill of the Heartland. • Habitat for Humanity. • Iowa Women's Foundation. • Iowa City Junior Service League. ■ Shelter House. • Iowa State University (ISU) Extension. • Iowa City Area Association of Realtors. ■ Hawkeye Area Community Action Program (HACAP). • Foster Grandparents Program. • The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC). • City of Iowa City Parks & Recreation. • City of Iowa City Neighborhood Services. • Iowa City Public Library. • Iowa City Human Rights Commission. • Domestic Violence Intervention Project (DVIP). ■ Johnson County Department of Public Health. • Horizons Community Credit Counseling. • Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board. • Cross Park Place. • Workforce Innovation & Opportunity Act (WIC)A) Partners. • Veterans' Administration. • Kirkwood Community College. • Reentry Network of Johnson County. • Crisis Center. • ABBE Center for Community Mental Health. • Iowa City Community School District. • Community Transportation Committee. Page 19 Annual Report -- 2021 I usin 9 UTH 0 R I!TY 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City - Iowa • 52240 .1 S26 We provide: • Information and education, • Housing assistance, • Public and private partnership opportunities. Phone: (319) 356-5400 FAX: (319) 356-5459 Web: www.icgov.org/icha Page 20 City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Agenda Item #7 �''•�"�� Subject to change CITY F IW CST' June 10, 2021 Date Time Meeting Location Tuesday, June 15, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session Zoom Meeting Platform 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, July 6, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session The Center, Assembly Room 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 28 S. Linn Street Monday, July 19, 2021 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting Zoom Meeting Platform Hosted by ICCSD Tuesday, July 27, 2021 4:00 PM Special Work Session The Center, Assembly Room 6:00 PM Special Formal Meeting 28 S. Linn Street Tuesday, August 17, 2021 4:00 PM Work Session The Center, Assembly Room 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 28 S. Linn Street 6/10/2021 HUD Withdraws Proposed Rule, Reaffirms Its Commitment to Equal Access to Housing, Shelters, and Other Services Regardless of Gen... Agenda Item #8 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Home (/) / Press Room (/press) / Press Releases (/press/press—releases—media—advisories) / HUD No. 21-069 Tweet (https:#twitter.com/share) ® ihare HUD No. 21-069 FOR HUD Public RELEASE Affairs Thursday (202) 708-0685 April 22, 2021 HUD Withdraws Proposed Rule, Reaffirms Its Commitment to Equal Access to Housing, Shelters, and Other Services Regardless of Gender Identity WASHINGTON - U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Marcia L. Fudge on Thursday announced that HUD is withdrawing the previous administration's proposed rule that would have weakened the Equal Access Rule. The Equal Access Rule ensures that all individuals — regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity -have equal access to the Department's Office of Community Planning and Development programs, shelters, other buildings and facilities, benefits, services, and accommodations. "Access to safe, stable housing -and shelter -is a basic necessity," said Secretary Fudge. "Unfortunately, transgender and gender non- conforming people report more instances of housing instability and homelessness than cis -gender people. Today, we are taking a critical step in affirming HUD's commitment that no person be denied access to housing or other critical services because of their gender identity. HUD is open for business for all." https://www.hud.gov/press/press—releases—media—advisories/HUD—No-21-069 1/5 6/10/2021 HUD Withdraws Proposed Rule, Reaffirms Its Commitment to Equal Access to Housing, Shelters, and Other Services Regardless of Gen... The previous administration refused to fully implement the Equal Access Rule and proposed a rule in 2020 that would have allowed shelter programs and operators to subject transgender individuals to inappropriate and intrusive inquiries, deny them accommodations, and subject them to greater harassment. HUD has submitted its action withdrawing that rule to the Federal Register, which is expected to publish it next week. This action reaffirms HUD's mission and commitment to creating inclusive communities and quality housing for all. Excluding any eligible person from HUD's Office of Community Planning and Development funded emergency shelters, temporary housing, buildings, housing, or programs because of a person's gender identity is counter to HUD's mission. Along with this announcement, HUD is releasing technical assistance resources prepared by technical assistance providers to HUD grantees. These resources will support HUD's Office of Community Planning and Development grantees in implementing the Equal Access Rule. Read the Equal Access technical assistance materials for shelter operators here (https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/4959/equal- access-for-transgender-people- supporting-inclusive-housing-and- shelters) and here (https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/4951/equal- access-staff-training-scenarios/). Background The 2016 CPD Equal Access Rule requires that HUD grantees funded in whole or in part by any Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) program ensure equal access to community planning and development programs, shelters, other buildings and facilities, benefits, services, and accommodations. Grantees must ensure shelter access be provided to a person in accordance https://www.hud.gov/press/press_releases_media_advisories/HUD_No_21_069 2/5 6/10/2021 HUD Withdraws Proposed Rule, Reaffirms Its Commitment to Equal Access to Housing, Shelters, and Other Services Regardless of Gen... with that person's gender identity, and in a manner that affords equal access to the person's family. The 2016 Equal Access Rule further ensures that, when consideration of sex is prohibited or not relevant, individuals will not be discriminated against based on actual or perceived gender identity, and where legitimate consideration of sex or gender is appropriate -for example, for shelters that serve only one sex or otherwise operate in a sex -segregated way -the individual's own self -identified gender identity will govern. On July 24, 2020, the previous administration proposed a rule entitled "Making Admission or Placement Determinations Based on Sex in Facilities Under Community Planning and Development Housing Programs". This proposed rule, if finalized, would have significantly undermined the 2016 CPD Equal Access Rule. The proposed 2020 Shelter Rule would have allowed for HUD - sanctioned, federally funded discrimination against transgender people, who face disproportionately high rates of homelessness and extreme risk in unsheltered homelessness. First, the rule would have allowed HUD CPD-funded shelters and other facilities to create policies excluding transgender and gender non- conforming people from being placed in single -sex facilities that aligned with those persons' gender identities. This would have created insurmountable barriers to shelter access for transgender and gender non -conforming people who already face serious discrimination and difficulty in safely accessing shelters. Second, the rule would have allowed CPD grant funding recipients, subrecipients, owners, operators, managers, and providers to overrule the gender identity proffered by a person seeking shelter and make their https://www.hud.gov/press/press_releases_media_advisories/HUD_No_21_069 3/5 6/10/2021 HUD Withdraws Proposed Rule, Reaffirms Its Commitment to Equal Access to Housing, Shelters, and Other Services Regardless of Gen... determination about that person's gender. It allowed CPD funding recipients to focus solely on a person's sex assigned at birth and then assess that based on physical factors such as height and the presence of facial hair. This intrusive and humiliating inquiry would be inflicted on the especially vulnerable people experiencing homelessness, many of whom have experienced sexual assault or other trauma. Equal access to HUD programs that serve people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness is essential in addressing the challenges faced by transgender and gender non- conforming persons. National research has indicated that denials of access to shelters for transgender and gender non -conforming persons based upon gender identity are commonplace. Transgender women reported being excluded from women's shelters at high rates. In one key study, transgender housing testers called shelters in four states to ask about where they would be housed. According to a study conducted by the Center for American Progress and the Equal Rights Center, only 30 percent of the shelters contacted by the testers were prepared to house transgender women with other women, as would have been appropriate. Transgender and gender non- conforming persons face enormous safety risks in shelters. According to a national survey by the National Center for Transgender Equality, nearly half (47 percent) of all transgender respondents who accessed shelters left those shelters because of the treatment they received there - choosing to live on the streets over the abuse and indignity they experienced in a shelter. This survey further reported that 25 percent of transgender persons who stayed in shelters were physically assaulted and 22 percent were sexually assaulted in https://www.hud.gov/press/press_releases_media_advisories/HUD_No_21_069 4/5 6/10/2021 HUD Withdraws Proposed Rule, Reaffirms Its Commitment to Equal Access to Housing, Shelters, and Other Services Regardless of Gen... shelters. These assaults were perpetrated by both shelter residents and staff. HUD's mission is to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all. More information about HUD and its programs is available at www.hud.gov (https://www.hud.gov/) and h ttps://espan ol.h ud.gov (h ttps://espan o1.h ud.gov/). You can also connect with HUD on social media (/program offices/public affairs/socialmedia) or sign up for n e ws alerts on HUD's Email List (Is ubscrib e/sign up? listnam e=HUD %20News&list=HUD- NEWS-L). HUD COVID-19 Resources and Fact Sheets (/coronavirus) Agency Resources U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 7th Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20410 T: 202-708-1112 TTY: 202-708-1455 Find a HUD office near you (/localoffices) Privacy Policy (/privacy -policy) I Web Policies (/library/bookshelfll) I Accessibility (/accessibility) Sitemap (/siteindex) https://www.hud.gov/press/press_releases_media_advisories/HUD_No_21_069 5/5 6/10/2021 Juneteenth 2021 1 City of Iowa City COVID-19 & VACCINATIONS CITY GOVERNMENT SERVICES PAYMENT NEWS & MEDIA CALENDAR Agenda Item #8 REPORT A CONCERN CLIMATE ACTION City of 10WACITY A UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Q Search this site Search Home / City Government / Departments and Divisions / Equity and Human Rights Juneteenth 2021 T� I N Z ir 1"= E I TH � REEDOM DAY IL This year, the City of Iowa City is recognizing Juneteenth as an official holiday. Juneteenth commemorates the historic date of June 19, 1865, when Union soldiers arrived in Galveston, Texas to officially inform the people of Texas that the Civil War had ended, and slaves had been freed by Presidential Order of Abraham Lincoln. Union Major General Gordon Granger read aloud the order freeing the one quarter of a million slaves who were still residing in the state, and the last to hear the news. This is an important date to note, as it was two and a half years after the Emancipation Proclamation was declared by President Lincoln, in which "all persons held as slaves' within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free," according to the National Archives. Events The City of Iowa City is partnering with local organizations to support many educational and cultural events throughout July. • African American Museum of Iowa is hosting both virtual and in -person Juneteenth events o For more information, visit their web page here, or check out their Facebook page here. • Community Conversations "Real Talk" Discussion, held via Zoom, 6-8 p.m. June 14, 2021. o Register for the Zoom meeting at the Zoom meeting page. • "On Juneteenth" Virtual Book Discussion; Tuesday, June 15 from 7 to 8:30 p.m. o More details available here. • Education and Resource Fair, 4-6:30 p.m. June 16, 2021. Held virtually. More information can be found at the Iowa City Area Juneteenth Celebration's Facebook page. F Select Language https://www.icgov.org/city-government/departments-and-divisions/equity-and-human-rights/juneteenth-2021 1/5 6/10/2021 Juneteenth 2021 1 City of Iowa City • Block Party: 5-8 p.m. June 17, 2021, at Chauncy Swan Park. More info here. • Miss Juneteenth at FilmScene, Thursday, June 17 at Chauncey Swan Park. More information available here. • Cedar Rapids Opera presents a Juneteenth Concert on Friday, June 18 at 7 p.m.; Registration and information available on their web page. o Riverside Festival Stage, Lower City Park on Park Road, Iowa City. African American spirituals, art songs and opera performed by Whitney Morrison, soprano; Sidney Outlaw, baritone; and Pedro Yanez, pianist. Presentation of Lifetime Achievement Award in Opera to Simon Estes, bass -baritone. FREE. Pre -registration required at Eventbrite.com. • Blood Drive: 11 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. June 19, 2021, at the Johnson County Administration Building's parking lot. More info here. • Juneteenth meal drive-thru: 11 a.m. June 19, 2021, at Riverfront Crossings Park. More info here. • The Food of Juneteenth for Teens: 1-2:30 p.m. in the Ped Mall. Learn how to make food and learn about how farming and food are integral to Juneteenth thanks to the Iowa City Public Library's event! o Register at the ICPL's website. Resources This page will continue to be updated as we are aware of more area events. https://www.icgov.org/city-governmentldepartments-and-divisions/equity-and-human-rights/Juneteenth-2021 2/5