Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-06-2004 -----~-~--- IOWA CITY SCATTERED SITE HOUSING TASKFORCE MEETING AGENDA 6 December 2004 Senior Center, Lower Level Classroom 5:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes from November 22, 2004 3. Taskforce Deliberation Regarding Recommendations to the City Council 4. Discuss Future Meeting Dates 5. Adjournment Please Note Meetine: Location MINUTES SCATTERED SITE HOUSING TASKFORCE NOVEMBER 22, 2004 CITY HALL, LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Anciaux, Jerry Anthony, Darlene Clausen, Matthew Hayek, Jan Left, Sally Stutsman, Joan Vandenberg MEMBERS ABSENT: Jan Peterson STAFF PRESENT: Steve Nasby, Steve Rackis OTHERS PRESENT: Maryann Dennis, Charles Eastham, Tracy Glaesemann, Frank Gluck, Patti Santangelo, Vanessa Miller CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Hayek called the meeting to order at 4:40 pm. Approval of the October 4. 2004 and November 8. 2004 Minutes: Se~~ral revisions. in spelling and grammar were noted for the Minutes. Vandenberg also noted that an IndIvidual EducatJon Plan (IEP) is a plan, not a program. Anthony. asked if there is a tape of the public hearing. Nasby replied that there is an audiotape, which he thought IS kept for 30 days after the minutes are approved. MOTION: A motion was made by Leff, seconded by Stutsman, to approve the October 4 and November 8 Minutes as amended. The motion carried unanimously. DELIBERATIONS REGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL Hayek recapped the last meeting by saying the Taskforce was on track in discussing the list of points that had been written on the board, and the members were to come to this meeting with thoughts and suggestions about the definition of concentration. Anthony asked about the "No Child Left Behind" program, and asked for confirmation that schools with greater than 20% of students on free/reduced lunch are given additional resources for a special education teacher or counselor. Vandenberg answered that the percentage is not greater than 20%. Anthony also noted, "No Child Left Behind" does not talk about additional resources so much as sanctions for schools that do not score well enough. Anthony asked if there are any other programs that give resources for schools, with populations of students greater than 20% of which are on free/reduced, for additional teachers or programs. Vandenberg answered that would be the Title I program. Left concurred, adding that Title I is a federal reading program. Vandenberg said that financial support is given to Title I schools with the highest free/reduced numbers. Currently there are nine schools in the district that receive funding. Left noted that these schools included Twain, Wood, Penn, Hills, and Coralville Central. Anthony asked what the required percentage is for receiving funding. Vandenberg replied that she believes it is given to schools that are above the district average for free\reduced lunch. As such, it changes from year to year, and is the nine schools with the highest free/reduced numbers. Anthony asked where the funding comes from. Vandenberg replied it comes from the federal government, and is targeted to reading support. Stutsman asked for confirmation on what the funding from this program supplies to the schools. Left replied that the school receives a teacher. Vandenberg added that the district also receives State money to reduce classroom size, and five schools have been targeted for that funding. Anthony asked if the guidelines use numbers of free/reduced students. Vandenberg answered yes, but also test scores. -'~------,-.__..._._-- Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes August2,2004 Page 2 Hayek asked if Anthony's questions have been answered. Anthony replied yes, and that it would be good to have the percentages for each of the schools during the discussion. Leff reported that of the schools getting the extra resources the highest percentage of freelreduced students in 2003 was 63% at Twain and the lowest was 24%. Anthony suggested that funding becomes available when the number of students on free\reduced lunch reaches 20%. Leffagreed that is how it appears. Anthony asked for confirmation that students may choose to transfer out of a school that does not meet the standards under "No Child Left Behind." Vandenberg said yes. She added that the first year the school does not meet the standard, the school is put on a watch list. If progress is not made, then students have a right to transfer out in the second year. Leff noted that the two schools that are currently on the watch list are the two junior high schools. Hayek asked about the status of the junior high schools in terms of their probation. Leff replied that they are currently on the watch list, and the two demographic groups that put them on the watch list are special education and English language learners. If the performance at both schools does not improve in the next year, the schools will be labeled "in need of improvement." Stutsman asked if those are the only schools in the district on the watch list. Leff replied that West High has been added to the list, though she is unsure about City High. Vandenberg said that she thought that Twain is back on the list because there were two or three special education students who did not take the test. Leff clarified that schools are also penalized if students do not take the test. Stutsman asked if students who are sick when the test is given are in the group that did not take the test. Leff replied that sick students are given a chance to make up the test. Vandenberg added that she thinks one of the students at Twain had moved and come back, so was not in residence when the test was given, and that two other students became too frustrated with the test and simply did not complete it. Vandenberg noted that Wood was on the watch list several years ago. Leff agreed, and noted that the school then raised their test scores, and was taken off the list. Anciaux asked if any students are exempted from taking the tests. Leff replied that those with severe and profound disabilities are exempt, as well as English as a Second Language (ESL) students who have been in the district less than a year. Hayek asked for confirmation that a student with one year of English has to take the test. Leff replied yes. Vandenberg added that the numbers of children that it takes to put a school on the watch list is an issue. For example, it took only three students at Twain to put the school on the watch list. Anthony aske~ it these schools are given additional funding. Leff said "no" the district needs to find t.he money by. Shl~lng students and resources around. Vandenberg noted that Twain has worked to alleviate the learning Issues as much as is possible, by reducing classroom sizes and hiring additional reading teachers. Leff added that Twain is currently the elementary school that is given the most resources. Hayek suggested discussing one of the points on the list, and to come to ag~e~ment on it.s statu~ as using it to define concentration. He said that one thing would be to talk about the difficulty tracking assisted. housing as it ties in to students on freelreduced lunch. Vandenberg agreed,. noting that there are multIple confidentiality issues involved. While it may be possible to gather the data, It would probably take a lot of time to assemble it into a presentable format. Vandenberg said that she may as well introduce ~he. topic of ~oncentrations of poverty for consider~tion. Using the inventory of assisted rental housing units In Iowa City that was supplied to the Ta~kforce In the reference section may help to narrow down the discussion. She added that at the .Iast meeting,. there was discussion about many different and broad issues, including poverty, elderly and dlsable~ housing,. and concentrations of university students. However, the physical inve~to~y list broke th~ housln~ down Into these different categories. Vandenberg said that for the school dlstn~t the largest Issues anse at th~ .end of the housing continuum which include transitional and shelter housing, because those are the families that need the most support to help their stability. Left asked which tract these two housing types are currently located in wit~in Iowa Gity. Vandenberg replied they are predominantly in tract 18. For example, HACAP has 22 Units and 18 are on Broadway, Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes August2,2004 Page 3 MECCA is also in tract 18, Shelter House is currently in tract 11 but will be moved to tract 18. She said her comments do not include Successful Living, as those are persons who are single. Also, Four Oaks is a little different because of staff support, but it is also in tract 18. She added that families that are at 80% of median income or even 50% of median income are well on their way to self-sufficiency and don't need a lot of support other than housing. Families that are homeless need a lot of support besides housing, and they also use a lot of other services. In terms of concentrations of poverty, when looking more specifically at the most needy groups, there is a concentration in tract 18. Anciaux noted that there are 217 assisted units in tract 18, which is the second highest number. Vandenberg asked if Saratoga Springs is HACAP. Nasby replied that it is through Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship and Bob Burns. Vandenberg said that she was unsure where the other HACAP units are located. Left noted that Villa Gardens is in tract 18 as well. Vandenberg agreed, though she added that families living there probably need less support overall. Clausen asked for confirmation that Vandenberg believes there is a concentration in tract 18. Vandenberg replied yes, if the kinds of housing are sorted according to level of need. Hayek said that the group is talking about what would define concentration, and it seems that Vandenberg would like to know where the shelter and transitional housing is located before deciding that question. Vandenberg agreed, saying that the question comes back to "what is concentrated?" Also, the shelter and transitional housing is something the City has more control over, though that category may be too narrow. Leff noted that she was looking at the number of children in an attendance area with multiple special needs. Looking at attendance areas rather than census tracts may focus on the school district's concerns for the schools in question, namely Wood and Twain. Anciaux said that by applying those criteria, tract 4 has 385 assisted units, which equals 16.2% of the housing. What is in tract 4? Vandenberg replied that tract includes Pheasant Ridge. Hayek and Stut$man added that there is elderly housing in that area as well. Vandenberg said that there appears to be a concentration in Pheasant Ridge, though the breakdown of that area in regards to university students versus other household types is unknown. Anthony pointed out that though the school district's concern is justified, it has nothing to do with assisted or public housing. There can be large concentrations of students with special needs in an area, but whether they are living in assisted housing is unknown. Also, the charge of the Taskforce is to determine whether assisted housing should be scattered or not, so all kinds of assisted housing should be considered. Otherwise, he believed that the Taskforce would be modifying their charge. Vandenberg suggested that her issue may be more closely related to the impact of concentration. Anthony said that impact should be part of the definition of concentration, because strict numbers don't necessarily make sense except in relation to the effects. So the Taskforce should look at negative effects of poverty and see if they are attributable to assisted housing. If so, then it should be scattered, and if not, then other options are available. There may be negative effects if numbers rise above a certain concentration, but no documented effects below that concentration. Hayek suggested that different areas in the housing or income spectrum could be examined, and impa~ts outlined at each level, along with suggestions for the City. Anthony agreed that approach could work with the consideration portion of the discussion. However, for policy purposes, the locations of assisted housing can be specified, breaking the types of housing up and designating where certaintypes can.be located would not be possible because of discrimination issues and fair housing. For example, the City could not designate that people with disabilities can only live in one area. Anciaux clarified that he thought the Taskforce can determine that there is a concentration of assisted housing south of Highway 6, and recommend that additiona~ assisted housing be put elsewhere..~nthony agreed that such a statement is viable. Anthony added that If the Taskforce can correlate a specific concentration to an undesirable social outcome, then the Taskforce can specify that above that percentage is undesirable, and recommend scattering the housing elsewhere. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes August2,2004 Page 4 Hayek said whether a recommended solution is advisable or legal, the Taskforce still needs to come up with a definition. Stutsman asked if the Taskforce is prepared to make a statement about concentration. Hayek replied that some resolution is needed with the free/reduced lunch data, and possible correlations. Stutsman suggested talking about freelreduced lunch as part of the definition of concentration. Anthony suggested looking at the data as part of the effects and examines whether they are related to the location of assisted housing. Leff added that the Taskforce should look at what is acceptable for Iowa City and not use national standards. She said that even if the overall percentage of freelreduced lunch students in Iowa City is lower than the national average, for Iowa City it may be too high. Leff said that the Taskforce should set higher standards, because the community and City Council has traditionally supported setting high standards in education. Anthony agreed. Anciaux said that if concentrations are identified, even if they are stricter than national averages, the Taskforce should specify that number and a policy could state that the percentages of assisted housing in any area should not be allowed to get higher. Stutsman added that the Taskforce report should include a statement that though Iowa City does not have a concentration according to federal standards, the Taskforce has higher expectations for the community, including that every child has the resources needed to succeed in school. Hayek asked if there is a way to look at the issue both in respect to groups with higher needs, but also being inclusive of all groups. Anthony suggested that might be possible after getting through the list and narrowing things down. Hayek asked if the Taskforce should continue talking about free/reduced lunch data. Stutsman said yes, since it can be quantified. Clausen pointed out that the Taskforce doesn't know how many students on free/reduced live in assisted housing. While the connection may exist between poverty and non-proficiency, it is not necessarily tied to assisted housing. Hayek suggested that perhaps a correlation can be drawn in a geographic area between the number of freelreduced students in the school and the number of assisted housing units in the area. Stutsman asked if that assumption can be made. Anthony replied no, because of how the assisted housing programs work. Anthony continued by explaining that people who receive housing assistance receive rental support at fair market value. Fair market rent is set at the 40th percentile of the range of rents in an area, which is typically very close to median rent. Therefore, people who receive housing assistance do not live in the poorest or most expensive neighborhoods, but in the middle of the rental housing price range. Median rent housing is not usually found in concentrated pockets of poverty. Anthony said that this information is from an article by the Fannie Mae Foundation about where people on Section 8 live. The article notes that the two reasons people in assisted housing live where they do are affordability and race. So, while poverty and freelreduced lunch can be correlated, the correlation cannot be extended to include assisted housing since people in assisted housing are not found in the poorest areas. Vandenberg suggested approaching the free/reduced data from the other direction. For example, HACAP has 60 children in 22 units. If 22 students go to Twain, whife 24 go to Wood could information like that be helpful to the Taskforce? It may be safe to assume that if they are eligible for HACAP's services, they would be eligible for free or reduced lunch. Clausen asked what determines eligibility for free/reduced lunch. Vandenberg and Anthony replied that it is determined by household income. Vandenberg noted that there may also be some people who are eligible but do not apply. Rackis said that public housing families also fall into those two schools because of the east/west division of the attendance areas for the schools. Also, though tract 18 has a high number of freelreduced lunch students, it also has a high number of owner-occupied units. He inquired what happens if the percentage of free/reduced matches the percentage of owner-occupied units? Vandenberg replied that could indicate there is not a strong correlation between free/reduced and assisted housing. Hayek asked Vandenberg to elaborate on her suggestion about a different approach to utilizing the free/reduced information. Vandenberg answered that the Taskforce could ask other assisted housing programs to supply the same sort of information that was submitted by the ICHA. It probably would not work for the Housing Choice Voucher program, because it is a large program and the addresses change continually. Anthony added that he thought the data for that particular program showed that it is scattered already. Vandenberg concurred, and continued by explaining that the idea is to find out what schools Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes August2,2004 Page 5 children in the different housing programs attend. For this type of analysis, a certain date or period would need to be selected, since where households reside is always changing. Clausen asked for more of an explanation. Is the question how many children are in these units? Vandenberg answered that this approach would look at the number of children. There would also be some children however, for example through Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship's units, who would not qualify for freelreduced lunch. Just because there are students present in these households it doesn't mean they are on free/reduced lunch. However, there may be issues with other agencies' ability to release the information. Also, some housing areas such as Pheasant Ridge would have a head count of the number of children living there, though no specific information on the number of students on the freelreduced lunch program. Anthony said that in regards to drawing a connection between schools and assisted housing, a lot of data appears to be unavailable. He suggested that the Taskforce set aside the issues of schools for the moment and focus on other issues concerning concentrations of assisted housing. Anciaux and Hayek agreed. Anciaux asked if all the assisted housing is rental. Rackis replied that there are different types of assisted housing in the city. Vouchers can be used in owner programs and a few are, but primarily they are used in private-market rentals. Anciaux noted in regards to the physical assisted housing inventory and the number of assisted housing rental units in tracts 4,14,18,21, and 105, though some of the numbers appear small, looking at the percentage of total units might be helpful. In tract 4, 25% of rental units are assisted, in tract 14, 20.7% are assisted, 18 has 16.3% assisted, 21 has 20.4% assisted, and 105 has 22.2% assisted. Can any conclusions be drawn regarding those areas? Hayek said factoring out elderly and disabled housing was discussed at the last meeting. Stutsman added factoring out student housing. Leff agreed, adding that even though married students can have children in the schools, it is temporary poverty rather than generational poverty. Clausen said she is uncomfortable with factoring out students. Factoring out elderly is fine, since most elderly do not have young children to care for. However, students and disabled do have children. Anciaux noted that some elderly do have young children, for example the individual at the public hearing that is caring for her grandchildren and also does foster care. Anthony said he does not want to factor out elderly, because they use many city services. Vandenberg said that one reason to factor out elderly/disabled is because housing for these groups does not face the same neighborhood resistance. Neighborhoods do not organize to keep out the elderly the way they do to keep out family housing. Anciaux and Stutsman disagreed. Rackis noted that there has been resistance to Systems Unlimited housing in the past and that is for persons with disabilities. Clausen suggested all groups should be left in consideration. Stutsman agreed, saying the Taskforce report could specify that the numbers include elderly, disabled, and student housing. Clausen pointed out that in tract 21 on the inventory, the only assisted housing appeared to be Capitol House. Hayek noted that is all elderly. Rackis said that when looking at the percentage of assisted housing units in tract 18, it is only 1 %. Anciaux agreed the percentage is low if looking at all units. However, since the voucher program is primarily a rental program and the other city funded projeèts are mostly rental, he suggested looking only at the total number of rental units in each tract and how many rental units are devoted to assisted housing. Rackis noted that there is also a low income housing tax credit project in tract 18, which serves a low-income population. Hayek said that even setting aside the issue of factoring in or out certain populations, this method of looking at the data has identified or targeted five tracts, which begins to narrow the discussion down on what is a concentration. Anthony added that some sort of rationale would need to be developed to explain why a particular percentage of assisted housing was used as the cutoff point. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes August2,2004 Page 6 Stutsman asked what a reasonable number may be. Vandenberg suggested using a percentage that is twice the 7.4% city average as the benchmark number, which would be approximately 15%. A Taskforce member said that they thought this number was a federal standard for desegregation in the 1970's. A school with a minority enrollment of more than twice the city average needed to desegregate. Leff noted that was why Coralville Central had to change its enrollment. Hayek said that any threshold is arbitrary, and if it involves terms that are relative to a specific community, some rationale needs to support the decision. Stutsman said that Vandenberg's rationale seems reasonable and would allow consistency. Vandenberg noted that the schools with an enrollment of twice the district average in freelreduced lunch programs are the ones that are really struggling. Anciaux said that Iowa City does not appear to have a problem with poverty according to federal government standards. Does the Taskforce want to make a recommendation of a goal not to go over a certain percentage of assisted housing in each tract, in order to prevent a problem from developing a poverty issue in the future? Anthony said that though there are no federal guidelines about assisted housing, there are guidelines about concentrated poverty levels. There are areas in Iowa City with concentrated poverty levels by federal standards. Anciaux asked if those areas of concentrated poverty were student populations. Some disagreement about this was expressed by the members of the Taskforce, though Hayek noted that student populations do impact those numbers. Vandenberg added that if the numbers are broken down into block areas, things are different than looking at whole census tracts. Anthony agreed, but noted that federal guidelines are defined according to census tracts. Hayek asked if federal standards should be used as criteria in the discussion. Anthony replied that if the goal is to reduce concentrations of poverty, then federal guidelines should be used. Clausen said that areas with concentrated poverty are tracts 4, 11, and 16, but only tract 4 falls within the other guideline the Taskforce had discussed. Anthony added that tracts 16 and 11, which both have concentrated poverty levels, are being left out. Clausen noted that is because they do not have a lot of assisted housing. Hayek replied that an argument based on student needs in those areas could be applied. Stutsman noted that though federal guidelines are a good place to start, the standards for Iowa City need to be individualized because of issues like this are up to localities to determine. Also, tracts 11 and 16 are both primarily student housing. Anthony added that federal guidelines for poverty and lowering concentrations of assisted housing are separate issues. Anciaux said that in tract 16, though there are a high number of assisted housing units, they only comprise 3.4% of the total units. Hayek replied that tract 16 has several multi-family high-rise apartments primarily occupied by students. Stutsman suggested looking at numbers and not percentages. Clausen replied that looking at the percentage indicates there is not a concentration of assisted housing in tract16, and if scattering is the goal, tract 16 may be able to take on more assisted housing. Anciaux suggested that tract 16 may have a higher housing cost than other areas, but Clausen replied that information in another chart indicated it does not. Stutsman said that there is only a difference of nine units in the numbers of assisted housing in tracts 14 and 16, but the difference in percentage is large. Anciaux agreed, noting that reflects the difference in the number of rental units. Clausen noted that tract 4 is not in poverty, though 11, 16, and 21 are. Tract 21 is down town Iowa City. Rackis said that in tract 21, in the Section 8 project-based facility for elderly/disabled, the tenants generally cannot pay more than 30% of their gross income on rent. The units are all based on fair-market rent. Everyone there is on a fixed income, so those units affect the poverty level in the area, in addition to the students. Vandenberg noted Table 2 shows the percentage of all assisted units in each tract. The table does not note the number of rental units, just the percent of assisted housing in the tract. Stutsman suggested looking at tracts that appear in all of the charts, such as tracts 4 and 18. Anciaux replied that in tract 18, if all occupied units are included, the percentage of assisted housing is only 6.9%. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes August2,2004 Page 7 Stutsman asked if the Taskforce is any closer to a definition. Hayek replied that he thought it is as different criteria are being considered individually, and then examined to see what information it shows. Anthony agreed, noting that no matter what numbers the Taskforce uses, they must have a rationale. Though school needs might be a good rationale, the lack of data from that area makes developing one difficult, so looking at other areas may be more useful at this time. Rackis said that identifying differences in neighborhood density may also be a subset. He added that he has some concerns with the data that may be explained because of a high number of single-family units versus high numbers of multi-family units. For example, tract 4 has Pheasant Ridge and some dense elderly housing as well which is why the percentage of assisted units is so high and the overall density of the tract is low. Vandenberg agreed that density is an important consideration, and noted that Table 2 may help with that question. Looking at only rental units may be too specific. Anthony pointed out that rental units have higher turnover and less stability, while owner-occupied units are more stable. Hayek brought up mobility data. Vandenberg said that data is available from the Broadway study, the county, and the schools. Is there any other information that can be used for this discussion point? Anthony asked if everyone had seen the Broadway study. Hayek replied that a summary is in the packet, and Vandenberg added that she has the entire study for those who wish to have it. Clausen asked when Broadway talked to the Taskforce. Vandenberg replied they presented in June, though she handed out the study summary later. Hayek said that the school district is concerned with mobility rates, but does the Taskforce think it is generally a matter to consider? Anthony replied it is only an issue if it can be linked to assisted housing, because that is the only area of influence for the Taskforce. If mobility in assisted housing versus other housing is unknown, then it should not be considered. Hayek asked if mobility data is available in respect'to assisted housing, and asked Rackis if the data supplied includes turnover information. Rackis replied that HUD measures movers, but it is not geared specifically towards mobility. That is, the data does not distinguish whether people move within the city or elsewhere within a service area. Vandenberg noted that mobility is often an indicator of the quality of life in the neighborhood. Even among areas of assisted housing, there are different levels of satisfaction. People are more likely to move if they are dissatisfied with their neighborhoods. It would be interesting to ask people who currently live in assisted housing if they like where they live. Clausen asked how long would "a long time" be, in relation to living in a neighborhood. Many people move every 1-2 years. Vandenberg replied more than a year. Rackis added that the Section 8 tenants often move yearly in August, along with much of the rest of the population in the city. Anciauxasked about the numbers of assisted housing and where they are located. Clausen replied that she had written the tract numbers next to the unit numbers, and gave Anciaux the information. Vandenberg added that the information is in the minutes from the last meeting as well. Hayek presented input from Peterson, who was unable to attend the meeting, to consider in the definition of concentration. She is concerned with the number of assisted units, rental versus owner-occupied, the types of assisted housing, percentage of the whole and how it compares to the rest of the city, and poverty rates and gradations of poverty, as defining low income as 80% or less of median income is not specific enough. Vandenberg reported from the Broadway study summary that a little more than half of the respondents had lived there less than a year and the same number planned to stay there less than a year. Anthony asked if the study was from assisted housing or the neighborhood as a whole. Vandenberg replied it was the whole neighborhood. Hayek asked about other discussion points from the list, such as crime, property values, and cohesion. Stutsman asked if those should be defined as outcomes of concentration. Hayek replied they are things Scattered Site Höusing Taskforce Minutes August2,2004 Page 8 that the Taskforce had suggested might work into a definition of concentration, and warranted more discussion. Clausen asked about the location of services, because groups put housing where there is access to services. Anthony asked if having a concentration of services is good or bad. Vandenberg replied that it can be a good thing, because it puts the service where the people who need it are located. The answer to the question also depends on the transportation system. Anciaux noted that the articles in the reference packet present opposing views, though that may be partly because the areas discussed in the research articles are larger than Iowa City. Vandenberg noted that she was surprised that the discussion about the location and assisted housing appears to be a national trend, according to the articles. Anthony added that the other areas are usually starting from a far more negative position in regards to poverty, crime rates, and other issues an we are facing in Iowa City. Anciaux said that regarding crime rate data, he is curious how many crimes are in a quadrant when the assisted housing is factored out. Nasby replied that the data on the map shows incidences, not where the perpetrator lived. Stutsman added that retail areas have high incident rates. Vandenberg and Clausen agreed that the crime information will not add very much to the discussion. Rackis noted that the crimes are concentrated around retail areas. Stutsman said that with the crime data, the only way to gather useful information would be to have information on the person charged and the severity of the charge, for example assault versus shoplifting. Hayek agreed that the data is of limited assistance, although it could be examined in regards to where police service is going. Clausen asked if services were built where assisted housing was located, or if assisted housing was built where services were located. Stutsman replied that the Dept of Human Services in Eastdale Mall was put there because of accessibility to Broadway and other neighborhoods in the area. Vandenberg said that the neighborhood center on Broadway was started because of Cedar Wood. Anthony asked if scattering assisted housing would cause more community centers to be built around the city. Vandenberg replied that though more neighborhood centers would be great but there is the issue whether it is more cost- effective to have one neighborhood center with a cluster of housing. Vandenberg noted in an article from the Gazette included in the packet, that from June 21 through August 22, 11.5% of the City's 229 police calls for burglary, theft, vehicle theft, and assault came from Broadway, Taylor, and Hollywood areas. Stutsman said that if that could be related to the more serious crimes, it might be more helpful. This might fall under the effects of concentrations of assisted housing. Vandenberg went on to read that this rate is the same for three streets dominated by students, South Johnson, South Dodge, and College. Vandenberg asked how the Gazette was able to get such specific information. Hayek answered that the data is for short periods of time. Nasby added that data is only gathered on a very small number of specific codes, as reported by the police department on a regular basis. Vandenberg noted that the thrust of the article was that a few high-crime areas tarnish a whole neighborhood. Stutsman reported that she talked to Pat White about gathering more crime information, specifically about charges assigned to a person. However, gathering the data would be very time- and labor-intensive. Anthony noted also that crime data should be used carefully, especially as it ties to assisted housing, because neighborhoods do not want to increase their crime rates. Stutsman asked if thè policy recommendation is to concentrate assisted housing because of proximity of services, would that include a recommendation to add more resources? Vandenberg replied that the Taskforce should have thoughtful consideration in the policy recommendation for those at the very needy end of the spectrum, who need many services. Complementary services should be recommended, and transportation has not even been touched upon yet. Anthony agreed that transportation could be a large impediment to low-income families in regards to getting to work. Clausen said that one of the individuals at the public hearing said they get a jOb where they live, rather than the other way around. Vandenberg noted that there are areas of housing that don't Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes August2,2004 Page 9 have employment opportunities nearby. Rackis said that people often live in the Broadway area because if they don't have transportation, they can still walk to the grocery and other stores. Hayek said that transportation may be an argument for the beneficial impact of concentration. Vandenberg said that putting housing near entry-level employment areas would be beneficial. Stutsman suggested that if that is the case assisted housing perhaps should be built near the Coral Ridge Mall as they have a large number of entry-level jobs. Anthony noted that transportation is also a large issue among the elderly. Anciaux asked about the SEATS program for the elderly. Hayek noted that some elderly feel under serviced in terms of transportation assistance, according to a recent Housing Commission meeting where that comment was raised. Stutsman added that transportation has always been a concern that never gets addressed, whether a person drives or not. Vandenberg agreed thåt there is a need for more transportation services, even on a regional level to include the outlying communities. Stutsman noted that the more affordable housing is located in the outlying areas, which aren't accessible to people without transportation. That may be another point against scattering housing. Anthony suggested that if the policy suggestion from the Taskforce is to increase the availability of assisted housing, then Section 8 families may not congregate near Broadway or in Pheasant Ridge. Stutsman suggested starting with the recommendations and working backwards towards a rationale. Vandenberg noted that she would like to have the policy be positively stated. Stutsman agreed. Rackis said that Section 8 recipients do not necessarily congregate near Broadway or at Pheasant Ridge. Anthony answered that he meant all public housing, not just Section 8. Rackis added that in the county overall of the 1300 vouchers, about 800 vouchers are in Iowa City limits, 250 in Coralville, 70 in North Liberty, and a scattering in other communities. The percentages of the Section 8 participants tend to mirror the county population as a whole. Vandenberg asked if the Taskforce can decide what to do about the census tract information being discussed earlier. Hayek replied that he believes the Taskforce made a lot of progress in narrowing down the list of discussion points to eight items. He suggested that two or three people meet to flesh out the new list, and email it out to the Taskforce to consider for the next meeting. Also, he asked that all the Taskforce members look at the data against the discussion list and find out where the points of the list are supported or disproved in order to begin making a case. He would like to generate the definition of concentration at the next meeting Clausen said she would like to get more information on the gradations of poverty. Vandenberg asked if there is information in the packet about where jobs are located. Clausen replied that there was information in the original packet. Stutsman asked what Vandenberg means. Vandenberg replied that she has anecdotal information about people taking two or three busses to work. In an ideal situation, more assisted housing would be near employment areas as well as services. Stutsman noted the Iowa City Community Profile 2003 in the reference section provides some of this information, though it does not give the information according to census tract. It lists major employers in the city. Hayek confirmed that it gives primary employers. Clausen replied yes. Hayek asked where that information fits in with the task at hand. Stutsman replied that it gives information about where employers are located. Rackis added that The University of Iowa is the largest employer in the county, and it also employs the largest percentage of people in the Section 8 program. The school district is the second largest employer in the county. Hayek noted that the University employs as many people as the top 25 private employers combined. Rackis added that other major employers include Oral-B, Proctor and Gamble, and ACT. The problem is that most jobs for people with a high school diploma are being created in Coralville. Stutsman asked about manufacturing companies near Heinz Road. Rackis confirmed that Lear and some construction companies are located in that area. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes August2,2004 Page 10 Hayek said that while finding out about the location of employers may help while developing recommendations, it doesn't help with the question of concentration. Vandenberg agreed, but added that she is interested in what the community is hoping to achieve in terms of where affordable housing is located. She would rather to look at it positively than negatively. Stutsman asked when the next meeting is. Hayek replied December 6, and asked Anthony to assist with working on the new list of discussion points before the next meeting. Anthony declined, adding that he has many commitments coming up and hesitates to agree and then not be able to meet. Hayek suggested that he email a document to Anthony for review, and Anthony agreed. Leff and Vandenberg volunteered to meet with Hayek to look at the list. Nasby noted that four participants would constitute a quorum of the committee and would need to be an official meeting. Hayek noted that Anthony will not be present at the meeting, though he will email the finished list to Anthony for his review. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Taskforce, Anciaux moved to adjourn~ Stutsman seconded, and the motion passed uncontested. The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 pm. s:/pcd/minutes/ScatteredSiteHousi ngT askforcel11-22-04ssht.doc