Meeting Transcription Disclaimer:
Note: The following is the output of transcribing from a video recording. Although the transcription, which was done with software, is largely accurate, in some cases it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or [software] transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the meeting, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
To listen to the meeting alongside a transcript, please visit:
For a transcript of the meeting, please read below:
Let’s start the meeting. Let’s bring the meeting to order. So we’re going to start with public invited to be heard. And I believe we do have one member of the public.
Yes, chair. We have one guest.
If you would like to speak during this item public invited to be heard. Would you please hit star nine otherwise we’ll
take that as a declined to speak.
Let me go ahead and unmute them just in case he’s just in case. Okay. Yeah.
Eric, Is this you?
Yeah, it’s really, there’s no, I have nothing to say. Just here to listen. Thank you. Awesome. Thank you so much. I’m going to mute you again.
The minutes have been distributed. I think everybody should have had a chance to read them. Are there any questions or discussions on the minutes any corrections to make from anybody? If so, just go ahead and unmute yourself and weigh in. Okay, without any discussion or questions, is there a motion to accept the minutes?
I’ll go ahead and move approval of the march 12th 2020. Housing Human Services Advisory Board meeting minutes.
Caitlin, was that you? Yes. Okay, thank you. So we have a motion in a second to approve the minutes. What we’re going to do in order to vote is if you are in favor, then you will raise your hand to the cameras so we can see your hands And give Nicola a chance to leave it up long enough that Nicole can count. And then she’ll give us the heads up and then we’ll ask for any Any nays to do the same thing? So if, if you are an approval of approving the minutes, please raise your hand.
And has is your hand raised?
I wasn’t at the last meeting, so I didn’t think I could vote.
Oh, fair enough.
Okay, we’re good. I got everybody Chair. Thank you.
Okay. Is there anybody who
declines approving the minutes? Please raise your hand.
Okay, the minutes are passed. Thank you.
I want to do an abstention Brian. Can Can Yeah.
I’m sorry. Did you say
Someone wants to abstain.
Oh, thank you. Any abstentions? Please raise your hands.
Okay, thank you for the reminder.
Deanna abstaining. Yep.
Deanna and Caitlin, Okay, perfect. Thank you. The minutes
are approved yet and
Oh, you’re right.
We’ll help you out there, bro.
Please, it’s gonna take a village.
Okay, our next agenda item is selecting the housing and Human Services Advisory Board member to serve as the TRG liaison and then to recommend TRG members. Kathy, would you please lead that discussion?
Sure. So in your packet, there was a memo kind of explaining everything that we actually went over in the Was your March meeting it seems like it. That’s a long, long time ago. But it really wasn’t
too in order to continue the TRG in their work in reviewing affordable housing applications, we need to reappoint five members that were had their terms expiring. If you remember, our intention was to analyze the work of the TRG and how we might if our if we might want to make some changes to the process and how the TRG interacted with the housing advisory board as well as with staff, because of a various number of things we didn’t get that analysis done last year. Obviously, we didn’t get to it at the first part of this year. And probably, it’s going to be towards the end of probably second or third to fourth quarter. This year. Hopefully We’ll get back to enough normal that we can can complete that I did make some changes, just FYI, to the way the affordable housing applications are going to be reviewed. So in light of our discussion in March, we have aligned the presentations for any applications that we get with the juice. I think it’s the June housing advisory board meeting. So instead of the TRG, hearing the presentations on their own separately, we’re going to have a combined meeting so that everyone can hear the presentation, then the TRG will go back and review, get additional information from the developers and then make a recommendation which will come to you and I’ll have to let you know I think it’s the May June meeting or the June July meeting. I should have had that in front of me and I do But it is on the website, it does outline that. So that was one of the indicator changes that we made as a result of the discussions that we had in March. So now we need to get a recommendation on filling those five positions, as well as assigning or nominating somebody from the housing advisory board to serve as the liaison to the TRG. The five existing members that whose terms were expiring are good with staying on for another year. In case we do need to make adjustments to the the process, further adjustments, and I did include in the packet who those folks are, they’ve all been on the TRG for at least a couple of years, if not a longer time period in the case of Laurie Walker. So if you have any questions about any of them, Then you can consider your h. h s AB liaison member and make a formal recommendation I can take to council at their may 26 meeting.
Okay, thank you, Kathy. Any questions for Kathy?
Oh, you go ahead and unmute yourself you.
Sorry, I thought I did that. I just wanted to disclose that one of the potential board members was my realtor several years ago. I don’t think it’s a conflict, but I just wanted to point it out. I don’t have any ongoing relationship with her. But if you guys don’t want me to vote on it, I would be okay with that, too.
Thank you. I don’t know that there’s any conflict there just seems like familiarity. Thank you for letting us know.
Okay, any questions?
Great if there is, so let’s do this. If there is a question I like Ghana did raise your hand and then I’ll be able to call on you. And if we have several I’ll be able to order everybody. Okay, we just lost two people to the refrigerator.
Karen, did you have a question? No. Okay. All right. So here’s my only question. Well, I’ll start. So Diane Groff and Jennifer are not listed as proposed. Have they timed out?
No, they are. Their term goes through the end of next year. So they Oh, they don’t need any action.
Okay, so we need to
do we need two votes here, Kathy one to approve the reappointments as presented and then the other one for the ladies. Honor, can we do them together?
You can do them together if you want.
Thank you. Okay, so do we have any members who are interested in functioning as liaison to the TRG for this next term?
I’ll just say that I’ve done it for the last year. I have really enjoyed the work. I’ve really enjoyed getting the chance to listen to those smart people. I would be happy to continue doing that if there’s someone that was really burning to take it up.
I’m happy to have that conversation as well, but I’m willing to serve.
Great, thanks, Jake.
Anybody have that burning desire? Caitlin?
I just had a quick
To that point as Jake, can you, I think you discussed this at our March meeting, but it would be helpful to maybe get a quick like bullet points of what the liaison does is sort of an Attending those meetings? Sounds like we’re gonna have a maybe joint presentations with them. But it’d be helpful to hear that again. I was, I thought I had seen it and I am maybe just clipping a little too fast through
all of my papers here.
Yeah, the liaison functions in kind of a very similar way to how Councilmember Christiansen functions here. attend the meetings. Listen, I don’t know if I’m officially considered a voting member or if the liaison is or not, I don’t know. Yeah, that’s what that’s what I thought so. So no, not not necessarily a voting member, but someone who’s able to be there at the meetings, communicate back to this board, have kind of a full picture of each application. It’ll be really helpful. It’d be a little different this year, if we are going to have those joint meetings, which I think is wonderful, and that’s great. If we are going to have those, it makes it a little different. But yeah, essentially it’s being able to attend the meeting. Go through the material that’s presented. Ask questions, perhaps if there are any, but primarily It’s kind of a sit and listen to the smart folks on TRG and communicate kind of be a go between for this group
please correct me if I’m wrong Kathy or or if that
was a good summary.
Great. Okay, well then I would like to nominate Jake Narsing as our TRG liaison. Is there a motion for that?
All motion Porter Jagran marching to be the liaison to the TRG group from h h. AV
All right. And and are you seconding
Okay, we have a second from Ann Baldwin.
All right, I saw two fingers I seen that was code for seconding. Okay, so all in favor of non approving Jake parsing as the H H s a b liaison to the TRG. Please raise your hand.
I got it. I just can’t see Madeline.
I think she left the room.
Okay, just making sure it wasn’t just my view.
Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. So we’ve got everybody. Any opposed, please raise your hand.
All right, Jake. Thanks, Barry. Thank you for doing it. Appreciate it.
Do we need to do Myers And the Brian you need to vote on the
the other. The other
is going to try to get that in as one and I totally. Okay. Is there a motion to accept the reappointment recommendations as made by staff for the TRG members?
So moved on on that front?
A second. Deanna? A second. Thank you. All in favor, please raise your hand to the camera.
Okay, I got you guys up. Who seconded I’m sorry,
Okay, Any opposed? Raise your hand.
Okay, the Motion passes. Thank you.
Boy. All right. item five updates and feedback on Consolidated Plan, human needs assessment and 2020 Action Plan, all of which Kathy is going to take us through these three items after the three items will have an opportunity to ask questions, get clarification and otherwise have discussion. So take it away Kathy.
Hey, um, so, I did provide a summary of the Consolidated Plan. We are going right up to the wire with this unfortunately this year. Good thing we started our public input process and community engagement, actually last year to get all of that in because with everything that has hit, it’s been quite exciting to to work on this with everything else. I am still editing the actual Consolidated Plan even up until About an hour ago. So, but generally speaking, the summary that I is in your packet is, is still valid and is a good summary. So the consortium area that manages are the home funds that come into the consortium as well as the three communities that get CDBG funds we combine together to have one Consolidated Plan that HUD requires. that directs our it assesses the needs in the communities for the upcoming five years and then sets strategic goals and then every year we update it with our annual action plan goals for specifically how we’re going to spend our CDBG funding. So this is a Consolidated Plan the big planning document plus the 2020 action plan that gets submitted to HUD
after the May 26 council meeting and the final public hearing that will be held at that at that council meeting.
We already had made a lot of recommendations and funding approvals for the 2020 action plan. And I’ll get into that in more detail when we hit five see. And then when COVID hit, we got an additional allocation. So we are making some recommendations around reallocating some of the 2020 funding and doing something a little different. And then new recommendations on the the COVID relief funding. Generally, this summary of the Consolidated Plan, there’s an analysis of housing market data and affordability gaps. We can did a lot of community engagement and Qt including a resident survey of over almost 1200 over 1100 70 Longmont residents. We had several open community meetings. where residents could attend. We did individual interviews with stakeholders who work with residents who have low income to talk about policy and program changes. And then this will be the public comment period from May 20, to the 26th. So some of the findings were that everybody is aware that there’s low vacancy rates and rising housing prices and rents throughout the region. rents and for sale home prices reach new heights, humongous increases in cost of housing across the board, in all of the communities. home values more than double the increase in rents. We increased about 64% over the time period, and but we still remain in the most Affordable jurisdiction and the Consortium for what that’s worth at this point in time. Interesting thing that seems to be poking up is that incomes have gotten a lot higher in Longmont in the consortium as a whole
with rental incomes increasing,
which have drive driven up rent prices, obviously. But it also increased the gap in very low income rental units needed. So what has happened as people with higher incomes have come in, they have taken over more of the units that used to be affordable. The folks, property owners are charging higher rents. So well, Jen in general, incomes have increased in the renter population. There’s a greater need for very low income rental housing. The other interesting phenomenon is that rental, the number of renters with lower incomes has decreased from the last Consolidated Plan, which we think indicates that folks just couldn’t afford to live here and have moved to a certain extent. So it wasn’t a huge but it was noticeable that the change in incomes in the renters there are vague, essentially no vacant rentals. We lost a significant number of privately provided affordable rentals that kind of gets to what I was just talking about. As the private rental market now serves renters earning higher incomes than then what they did under the last housing market analysis. This shows that the table that was included in your packet showed a gap of about 2300 units affordable to folks with incomes below 35,000.
So that’s that’s an increase over I think it was
1800 to 2000. Under the last housing market analysis.
We have a lot of folks with severe cost burdens where they’re paying more than 50% of their income towards their housing costs. And a lot more that are paying over 30% of their income for their housing costs. So cost burden and severely cost burden is has increased across the consortium. So basically long months primary housing needs include filling the short 2300 units, which would be affordable at $625. a month or less, we’ve got a shortage of homes to buy priced at less than 375,000. housing subsidies to assist 3700 persons with disabilities, many of whom are whom are seniors. That is going to be hard to take on. But there’s housing subsidies needed for 600 large families with housing cost burden, and 1400 female households with housing cost burden as well. And then 1500 Hispanic households. So some of those might be getting some subsidies or are in they’re just not in units that they can afford. So what we’re looking at for strategic goals is to increase the amount and affordability of rental housing for our lowest income renters. And then we added A little bit to this just today to also add in that we want to preserve our existing affordable rental housing as well. That’s really important that we don’t backslide. We want to preserve our existing affordable housing stock, which is primarily served by our rehab program keeping existing owner occupied housing stock in good shape, in good repair, helping folks who are struggling a little to keep up with those repairs with the rehab programs and preserving the existing that existing housing so that was a high priority outcome in our community engagement process. We also want to support low and moderate income homebuyers and increase the supply of affordable housing units. That’ll primarily be done through the inclusionary housing program versus using CDBG funds. To do this, it is very difficult to use CDBG funds to help folks purchase or to construct housing at all. So using our inclusionary housing program is a good alignment and, and fit to meet these overall goals. Obviously, we want to reduce homelessness within the construction geographic area through the work of the homeless solutions for Boulder County and continuing to prioritize permanent housing for folks as we move forward in the next five years, providing community development and economic assistance to businesses, residents and neighborhoods in needs. So this will address some of the COVID related funding as we get into that in a little bit. helping small businesses with some of the needs that they’re having being impacted by with the COVID Shut down, economic shut down. And then also around community development, if we need if there’s any of the facilities like the COVID release center that we created in order to address the needs of homeless folks who were experiencing symptoms of COVID-19. That is something that we can fund with our CD CV funds, and is included here as well as rental assistance or direct assistance to individuals. So that is a quick brief summary. The document is probably over 170 pages in total. It will go up on the website, probably early next week. Again, the notice will be in the newspaper for the advertising, the public hearing and the comment period on May 20 So I would be more than happy to answer any questions that anyone has around this particular topic area.
Thank you, Kathy. Any questions for Kathy?
I have a question, Kathy. I did read an email from that was sent by Nicole from a representative from Boulder County talking about these these various needs associated with COVID funding and the COVID effect on this human service organizations. And I guess I’m just wondering, you know, in light of an anticipated shortfall and all government budgets next year, it would be smarter to allocate those funds to shore up shortfalls in the foreseeable future for you know, just status quo, budgetary concerns rather than expensive Doing what we’re funding now. Does that question Make sense?
I think so if you’re asking, Can we use CDBG funds to replace lost government revenue?
Yeah, we cannot. Okay. Yeah. That is prohibited under. Yes. CDBG. program. Yeah.
Kathy. I’m wondering, it seems to me over the last since 2008. there’s been very little detached housing build it’s almost home homes to buy, particularly in the middle income and lower use is that seemed like a trend that’s going to keep up because that’s a huge part of the problem.
I would say yes, that is a trend that’s going to continue that probably we’re going to be seeing more attached product for homeownership, just based on what we’re seeing coming through, you know, the development pipeline right now.
And do we know how much of our previously available homes for purchase and for rent are now being used for Airbnb ease? I can tell you a lot in my neighborhood are. Well,
anything that we invested in or subsidized is not because every year, folks have to certify that you know, it is owner occupied. And we do check utility bills as well. That doesn’t mean they are, you know, occasionally maybe renting something out. But we haven’t really heard that and usually folks that are in either Under the previous inclusionary housing program or well, habitat units are generally not used that way, which is our primary investment of CDBG funds in for sale housing product, as well as blue Vista, they have quite stringent occupancy requirements and use requirements on them as well. So I I would feel pretty comfortable saying I doubt if there’s any of that happening in the in the in the unit that the city has invested in or subsidized.
Just maybe I’ll ask Shona, your
dad about that. If you’re looking at if just in general in the market affordable, um, and what is going on with that? That would probably be quite a different story. Yeah,
I think it’s usually about you lose about 2% of your housing overall.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, Jake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Kathy, just quickly, it’s not necessarily on this topic. Thank you for the thorough presentation. I am curious about if staff at this point has any rough estimation of COVID impact on the affordable housing fund in general. I’m curious specifically about the progress of any development that had been in progress, where what are developed, what’s the tenor from developers that have been working with the city? I’m curious about, you know, we were on this kind of trajectory with with the ice that seemed fairly friendly. And as we talk about these issues that this plan works with, so many of them are connected to affordable housing, and so I’m just curious if there’s any sense that you have about where we’re at.
Well, So, developers and developments under that were underway under inclusionary housing before. We went into, say, stay at home orders appear to still be moving forward. At this point in time, we haven’t had anybody that I am aware of withdraw anything. Things might have slowed somewhat. I’m thinking as some of the smaller developers, that they might not be moving as quickly as they they were. But so far, nobody has stopped anything that I’m aware of. And I’m also hearing from planning that they really haven’t seen any big decline in new applications or they’re still holding pre applications are still holding DRC meetings, development review, committee meetings. So things at least at this point seemed to
be moving along as as normal,
the things the projects that we funded that have been approved for funding over the past year or so, are moving forward. The Inbetweeners looking for something to purchase, they actually had an offer on one property and decided it was too expensive in our I think trying to go under contract on another property. So they’re moving forward. We just received word that the cinnamon Park, senior independent apartments, just got tax credits. So they’re moving forward. So we’re moving on to our agreement with them for affordable housing funds. So nothing that I have heard of yet is in jeopardy or won’t go forward at this point in time. Now something you know happened. There’s another project that’s in for tax credits that we haven’t heard if they’ve received or not. So we’ll, we’ll wait and see on that. But if we have allocated funding for it, everything that we’ve allocated is moving forward if they’re if they’re ready to go. We’re not in danger of having my understanding, and Karen can correct me of having any of the affordable housing funds that have been allocated to the fund to date, are not in danger of being recaptured or recalled. The 2021 budget maybe another story, obviously marijuana tax that we get the 50% of that maybe down I’ve heard that marijuana sales are down I that doesn’t really make too much sense, but that’s what I’ve heard. So we’re planning on a lesser amount from from that source. And then you know, we just go through The budget process like everyone else and see where we fall out for 2021.
That’s, that’s great. Karen. Kathy, thank you so much. That’s especially good news on the planning side as well, if that’s the case, so much better than I was hoping when I was thinking. So thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, Kathy, sort of along the same lines, but I guess the other side of that, you know, we’re see what what you showed here is like, we’ve got a pretty big gap in the rental market. Have we seen any changes in terms of folks looking and applying for, like city into that we’ve got some like affordable housing projects, but also we’ve got community partners, and we got a sense from any of those. If there’s an increase in folks that are looking for assistance right now, what those kinds of increases look like
from from sort of like the coast related things
as well. So if you’re asking around
if there is a need for assistance for people to make rent or mortgage payments as a result of layoffs due to COVID or job loss due to COVID or whatever, yeah, I would say that quite a bit. The our center has been the main area in Longmont for folks to go to for that that assistance. Boulder County has stood ups to stand up they have started a housing helpline to make referrals for folks and they have also repurposed a lot of the their emergency shelter grant money as well as what’s the other source Karen that they there? Tanis mini emergency TANF money To help residents with that. So that has been a real help. For folks being able to get assistance, it is still not enough, if there probably isn’t enough. Well, at some point, there’s enough money in the world, but we’re probably not going to reach that point. To be able to do that. My understanding is that a lot of the unemployment money is now coming through the 1200 dollar. direct assistance is coming through and actually some folks that are already in subsidized housing that might have somewhat of a gap, because of the loss of a job are between those two funding sources, if it if they get both of them are probably actually going to be better off unemployed than they were when they were employed. So that’s kind of a different phenomenon. For those folks So people that are in the under Housing Choice Voucher, that amount that the voucher pays increases as their income decreases. So they are in effect covered by that increased amount. So that is not harming people. So, in Longmont because we have our housing authority has such a skew toward senior housing. It, they are in a particularly good situation, because the seniors are not losing income. They don’t depend on you know, jobs for the most part. I mean, some of them have still work, but most of them are on some type of subsidy that or pension or, you know, retirement that isn’t impacted by COVID. So, that has been a real actual benefit for the long run housing 30 in particular,
Thank you, Roberto.
So I just wanted to concur what Kathy said I’ve, I’ve had monthly meetings with Dr. Center. And I just had my monthly meeting with him yesterday and basically said the date when there was a huge increase at the beginning of the crisis, but now that the UAE unemployment benefits have started kicking in, has slowed down, they’re concerned about later on this year. But the UAE is really helping people through through these this month and next month, they feel that they’re
those are really helpful.
Yeah, it’s good news. Kathy, I’m wondering, just looking at the big picture. So this we’re going to have an ongoing economic issue for the next several years. So we’re going to have increased need, like we’re seeing already starting We know that local revenues are going to be lower from sales tax and other taxes. Are you seeing with some of the packages that are have been proposed or are still being proposed at the federal level, that there may be funds coming that will help fill in that gap? Or is that just really unknown at this point?
Um, I haven’t heard anything specifically to fill in government funding at this point or the loss of, you know, tax revenue or anything. There’s been talk about it, but I have not seen anything proposed. And I have to admit, I have no idea what’s in the recently proposed $3 trillion bill that just came out or was just proposed earlier this week. So whether that has something in there or not? But it’s it’s gonna be bad. You know, unless the economy gets up and going, we are looking at using the CDBG CV funds for kind of later activities, because of what Alberto just mentioned that some of the federal funding is kicking in for individual residents. And so as that expires, then there may be if they aren’t back to working, there may be assistance as needed is where we think that will come in that we will come in kind of more at the back end or in several months versus, you know, immediate kinds of assistance for the businesses as well. There’s a new program starting called strong Mont, where we’re going to be providing with partnership with the DDA and the city The Longmont Economic Development Partnership and the community foundation grants to businesses to help them over the hump and get open again. And we’re thinking of using the CDBG funds that we’re proposing to be set aside, that again, that would come in a little bit later, when because we have to show that we’re not duplicating other funding. So if businesses can show that they’ve been turned down by other funding that will help with that. But also, it is a resource that there’s no strings attached to it. So it might be more palatable for businesses and a better use of funds to come in a little bit later. As a kind of funding of last resort, I guess you you might do it.
Thank you. Any other questions or comments?
Thank you, Chair I looking at those numbers and looking at the burning,
see what the actual terminology was for that. But um, you know, what are
we going to do the people who are not really who are renting and do not qualify
you know, public services. And of course the rent is, you know, has increased in long mine. Is there a plan to retain the people because the residents that are here who are contributing to our community? What are we doing to retain those veterans who are like in the middle, you know, who are barely making it. are not making 75,000 a year. But yet, they’re barely making it and every year rate increases. And how many times can they How many times are they able to go in ask for assistance with rent coming to those people are just packing up and leaving when the rent is over, you know, when the lease is done, how are you retaining these people? I mean, I don’t know if there’s a program that I don’t know about. is beautiful here and everything and it’s nice, but if you get people who may gain $200,000 that’s coming in and moving in, is going to be like another boulder and people are moving out to less expensive places, although I understand Longmont is supposedly, you know, less expensive to rent here and to live here but for the people who are in the middle who may not be really low income and may not be making $75,000 a year? What about those people? I think they’re kind of getting, you know, pushed under under the rug or pushed in the closet. I don’t know. It’s a common asking a question, but yeah, that’s just how I feel in listening to everyone and I’m thinking because I’m like one of those people, you know, like, I’m ready to get out of here because like, it’s hard. It’s really hard to afford it. to afford living in Colorado, in Longmont was used to be when I lived here when I moved here. Eight years ago. It was affordable, even as a single mom, but now is increasing in what are what what programs are out here to retain people like me.
I don’t, I don’t have a good answer for you. We try and have a range Have services and, you know, understand that the funding that the city has control over is is small in the overall scheme of things. And so, we within the regional Affordable Housing Partnership plan which all of Boulder County communities have bought into and have approved and is using that as their goal, we do have a full range of services and housing that we’re trying to provide. So the plan calls for everything from no income up to 120% of area median income, for home ownership on the on the top side and everything in between. Right now the city’s rental assistance programs where we are funding develop projects can go up as a up to 60% of area median income to be served, which is getting closer to that area that you’re that you’re talking about 75,000 is probably 70 to 80% of area median income. At this point, the how homeownership programs are generally between 70 and 120%. And rental is generally between nothing 200 or 60% area median income. So, we do try and offer that wide range. When you get into competitive funding situations, you are usually trying to prioritize
the highest priority needs I guess, which you know, according to the market analysis is Probably 40% area median income and below for rental housing. So it’s a real balancing act. I have to say that a lot of the rental, the private sector rental market, especially if it’s a tax credit project is usually hitting at that 60% ami level. So there theoretically there should be more units that are affordable. But again, and and there’s income limits to be in those units. But the competition is just so great across the board for that, that they’re just I would say, across the board, there just aren’t enough units and how do we how are we ever going to you can’t you keep saying you can’t build your way out of it. But that’s a How else do you create new units without building them but it costs so much to build this one. Well, so I really don’t have a good answer for you. I think at this point, it is something that we are cognizant of and we’re working on and we’re including, but
I would say that’s one area, we’re not doing a great job in. Unfortunately,
because of a lack of sufficient funding. I think it’s
really difficult in an area that has a wealth gap this large to get traction on some of those issues, because a lot of people fall in between.
Yeah. Yeah. Well, I mean, and the other thing is if we had gotten been able to get to the point with a ballot measure, and 2020, which is where we were heading as part of the regional Affordable Housing Partnership, before everything changed. You know, that might have helped a lot because we were looking at trying to raise million a year I think it was it was a good sum of money. And we hadn’t tested yet to really know if it was going to be successful. But that is the ultimate.
About the only
main way to raise a significant amount of funding is if we are able to pass some kind of ballot measure where it’s a whether it’s a property tax or sales tax. And then what are people going to be able to support coming off of this? You know, it’s, it’s a very bizarre situation we find ourselves in.
Thank you, Kathy. Jake, were you wanting to say something?
Yeah, I was just gonna thank Chiquita for the comment and and offer one little point because you hit the nail on the head. That is, for me, at least the core question kind of facing the city is how do you make sure that working class folks can make it in Longmont folks who built the community. That’s the challenge, and I don’t know that there’s a good answer. And then I would just I just wanted to add that part of the bill that’s been proposed. Kathy includes a trillion dollars for state funding for state relief. How that trickles down to local governments is, I think there’s an might be an additional appropriation, but they need to talk to that to the gooses people. He had a spill that kind of got folded into the big package. So that that is certainly on the minds of some folks in Congress whether it happens or not. We’ll see.
Thank you, Jake. And thank you Chiquita for the comments. Appreciate it.
Okay, there’s no further questions or discussion Kathy, you are you? Did you make it through all of your items?
Not five. See. So I would like to put that up and just go over a little bit of what we’re recommending, because normally we would get you guys’s input and sign off before and because of The quickness that we were trying to move this through in the new allowances and citizen participation.
You get my thing back here.
were taking staff recommendations right to counsel. So getting some kind of feedback here would be would be good. I don’t know that you have to take a formal vote or formal recommendation but I would like to kind of walk this through and hear your comments. So what we over on the far left, cop my left I guess that your left as well looking at it, where it says 2020 CDBG approved funding. That is where we the last approval for 2020 that you guys recommended and actually Council approved. So it had funding 304,000 for rehab program. The money For the housing counseling program, the security deposits for folks coming out of homelessness, and then competitive housing funds that were approved for the in between and the Longmont Housing Authority, Aspen Meadows apartments refinance and rehab for a total with reallocated money and estimated program income, a total of 1,021,000 that was recommended and approved. So what we are recommending in light of COVID is to repurpose some of the 2020 funding and basically taking the the rehab money here in the middle, the 304,000 and repurposing that for additional funding for COVID related activities. So we’re showing in this next column in moving to the right still retaining 50,000 for housing counseling and the security deposit assistance, but then allocating 258,000 for individual assistance, which is likely to be a grant to the Art Center to then turn around and give out for rental or utility assistance again, maybe a little bit later, as things pick up. And then 70,000 being set aside for long month share of the COVID Recovery Center, operations funding. We hope to get some FEMA funding to offset this but in case we don’t or in case we have to match it. We’re setting aside our share of those operating costs. So that would be the bulk of the repurposed rehab funding, everything else stays the same. And then the additional CDBG CV funding you You’re kind of in the middle, we got just under $360,000 in a special allocation. And we are recommending that we use an additional 87, five for individual assistance, and an even 200,000 for small businesses assistance. And again, we’ll be doing that either through providing loans or grants to businesses as part of the strong Mont. Business grant program. Or we might do something. Actually, I need to change this because it’s not for sure, we might do something with Colorado enterprise fund CF to help offset some of the Longmont businesses that have outstanding loan payments to help do some forgiveness, especially for micro enterprises, businesses that are five or fewer employees. We are still gathering information Colorado enterprise fun, so I’m not sure yet. What the This split would be, or even if we would do anything with them, we have some time together that information, but generally 200,000 being set aside to help small businesses. So then the column title totals just adds everything together with the CDBG funding 2020 and the new COVID money. The orange highlighted column is just what we are allocating or that would go for COVID relief, which includes the special funding as well as the repurposed funding. And then I added some information on the households or persons or businesses that would be we’re estimating we would serve with this funding. So about 240 households would be served through the housing counseling program, which could be eviction prevention, or foreclosure prevention or their normal funding with
housing counseling and
debt relief counseling,
estimating 230 households would be assisted at about 1500 each I just had away there on the individual assistance. The CRC operations I think we served for folks in the covert Relief Center that might be a little bit more I’m not quite sure on that. But I plugged in for there. And then an estimated 20 businesses with a small business assistance funding eight, at least eight for the in between when they finally purchase a project and then preserving 50 units through the SM meadows, refinance and rehab. So a total of a little over 550 total households, persons or businesses would be served and then under this allocation Over $15 million would be leveraged in other public or private funding. So I think, Susan, you can take this down and then I would be more than happy to answer any questions. You should have gotten this today. I think maybe sorry about the lateness of it. I think Nicole sent it out today, but I’d be more than happy to answer any questions about what we’re proposing.
Thank you copy. Graham.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think most all that looks great. I think the only one question I have is about the around a quarter million dollars you’re giving to the Care Center for individual assistance. And I just am curious how, how that’s going to be administered. How do we ensure the money goes where we want it, and then it doesn’t just get wrapped up into the our centers day to day business as usual, and Maybe just like why why them? Why didn’t you know staff administer that money? Those are my questions.
Yeah, good questions. So we think it’s, it’s usually better to fund a program that’s already operational, as opposed to standing up something new and particularly staff taking on yet another new venture right now. So that’s it, but we would have an agreement with your center CDBG funds, like I have mentioned many times before are quite different than other funding the Human Service Agency funding or any other private funding that they might be raising or even the the county Tanna funding funding that they have gotten. So we’ll have to have a clear understanding with them and we would have a sit down before to make sure they understand all of the requirements that they have to meet what they would have to do to income qualify folks to determine eligibility To ensure they’re not duplicating other benefits, and then we would have all that wrapped up in a contract and there would be ongoing reporting, and probably a little bit heavier oversight and more often oversight of how things were going for that. So I think we can be fairly directive. It doesn’t necessarily have to go to the center, but they are really the agency that is most prepared and is already serving folks and is well known in the community as the place to go for this type of assistance. That was a reasoning for that.
I think if I could add is that
you know, most of the communities that are getting the in Boulder County that are getting the CDBG COPPA relief dollars, are really trying to invest that in those existing Family Resource Centers. So sister Carmen F. in Boulder, and then our center as because as Kathy indicated, they are already providing rental assistance and individualist systems. And so it just, it just bolsters their ability to serve more people faster.
Thank you, Karen.
Um, thanks for asking. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Thanks for asking that.
Graham as well. I have the same questions. Um, one thing I’m curious about is the repurposing of the monies that were previously allocated for like rehab funding that which helped keep people in their homes. And then also about the Small Business assistance and why, you know, sort of looking at the number of folks served by the Small Business assistance versus the individual assistance, and why go through a small business assistance rather than giving more individual assistance
The reason we chose to repurpose the rehab funding is because with COVID people didn’t want people in their homes and quite rightly so. So the rehab program was put in a bands when this started. So it’s probably going to be quite a while before it comes back. So we felt that with those two things, keeping in mind and the funding that we still have available in 2019, funding rehab funding that hasn’t been allocated yet for specific projects that we could easily and repurpose that money. We are probably not going to even open up applications for rehab. Funding until later in the summer. Anyway, we are continuing to serve the folks that were in process and that we halted when stay at home went into effect. It’s just now starting to open back up. So we are starting to work on exterior items, we’re still holding on interior items until things get a little more clear around protocols and stuff like that. But then finishing up what we have in process will continue to process emergency situations. So somebody water heater goes out or furnace goes out or something like that. We’ll continue to do those. But to open up the program again, I think we it would be prudent to wait until later into the summer before we even start taking applications again. Sometimes immersions sorry, those emergencies are coming from the 2019 funding that has not been fully spent, yet.
Correct. Okay. Yes. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah, that’s helpful. I remember we had talked about there being a carryover. I just think you Yeah, it helps with that piece six. Yeah,
exactly. And then
I think with assisting small businesses, what makes sense to me is that
for every job you can bring back, you have helped a family. It may not be included in this total, because it’s really the business we’re assisting. But there’s many more families that are being assisted when you help a business come back, and they can bring their employees back. And it’s kind of a
housing assistance, if you will. So that’s why we were thinking with with the small businesses, that it’s another way of supporting families as well, the more employees they can bring back That’s another family that doesn’t need rental assistance necessarily when they can. They’re employed again.
Kathy, that small business piece, are those loans are they grants?
We’re looking at grants, I think, as opposed to loans when it makes it simpler, and there’s no long term reporting then. And, you know, when we did this before, many years ago, we did a small business revolving loan fund and the purpose was to provide loans and generate income that would come back through loan payments and revolve it and support more businesses. So it’s an ongoing kind of thing. This is seems different and
you know, to
have a business take on more debt during this time just doesn’t seem right. The strong month fund is set up to be a grant so we thought we would just do it. The same thing, and we’re allowed to we can choose to do grants or loans.
And these funds. I think he’s at this, but just to make sure these would be, you know, available if there’s not other funding available for these small businesses.
That’s correct. We can’t duplicate or supplant other funding.
Got it. So if they qualified for federal assistance for some piece of their operations, we wouldn’t, you know, essentially give a grant that would cover that those same costs, it would have to refer something different if they Okay, exactly. Okay.
Yeah, I certainly support the grants versus the loans. I think going into a major recession is a tough time to take on extra debt. So that’s just going to lead to more mental health issues, more stress and more failures. So I’m glad to hear that. Any other feedback for Kathy? Yes, Madeline?
Yes, I Before I have to go, I wanted to ask, how are people? If we are making available grants for the small businesses that are experiencing what everybody else is experiencing right now? How would they go about how do they find out about it? How would they find out about the requirements? And just more about it?
Where would I, for instance, be able to direct someone to write? So I’m the, like I said, the long run Community Foundation is administering the funds called the strong Mont. fund. I think it’s called strong mob Ben, I know it strong Mont I can’t remember if it’s programmer fun anyway. So it will be on the Longmont Community Foundation website. I think they’re going to open applications Monday, maybe the 18th and it should also be On the Longmont Economic Development Partnership website, the DDA website, the chamber website. And I would imagine the city website since the city’s also contributing to that some of their direct funding. So all of those should be open. I think it is only going to be open for a very short period of time, though. So if you know of somebody that might be interested, I would start telling them and have them ready to as soon as they applications open to to submit.
All right, thank you. Yeah. The night.
Night. Good night, Madeline. Yes, Jake.
Just a quick question. Kathy, do you have a no on that fund if nonprofits or religious organizations qualify for those dollars, which is, you know, just whether they it’s the same as the cares act in that way is that the Community Foundation would know that that I’m sure they
would know that it shouldn’t be on the thing, but I believe it is.
does not include nonprofits. Okay. Cool. Thank you.
Yes. Caitlin, one more question on
that. fun being administered by the long month Community Foundation is the 200,000. That is reflected here. Is that the only money that the city is putting into that fund? Or is the city contributing from other sources? in the budget or otherwise?
Yeah. So the city is putting in I think it’s 50 or 60,000. I think that they had allocated for to support economic development efforts. So they’re repurposing city funds. The general funds I think, basically are we have
a little more than that. Okay. But I think it’s close to 100, maybe 90,000 or 100, something like that.
Okay, but it’s from money they had set aside for economic development. They’re repurposing into into this fund.
And they’ll and also then the llama Community Foundation is is raising private dollars for that, you know an Eric’s listening in if he wants to it we’re saying something wrong stop us but but yeah so it I think there’s there certainly drawing from different sources from throughout the community to bolster the amount of dollars that’s available for these small businesses.
council is also contributing $30,000 which I wanted to go to individuals but it’s going to businesses so we’re trying to pull money from every place we can. And, oh, there’s also the Community Foundation is also going to administer a fund called neighbor to neighbor which is really just for individuals. So if any of you have spare money, Kevin To the Community Foundation, and that goes directly to individuals and they’ll be administering that. Thanks.
If only we had had a member a somebody from the Longmont Community Foundation who had been on the line and spoke during the public invited to be heard. Oh, many of these questions could have been answered.
shaming, Mr. Chair
simply reflecting the possibilities, Eric. Okay, any other questions or comments feedback for Kathy? Okay, I think Kathy, everybody seems to be in pretty widespread approval of your reallocations and redirection of money.
Okay, great. I will convey that to counsel.
I think it makes sense. Good.
Right, thank you.
Okay, we’re on to agenda item six, update on human services need assessment and review 2021 human service funding options. Alberto is going to walk us through that.
getting bored. Before jumping into the presentation, I did want to give an update that I just got today and I have not had a chance to send it out to the board for your information from route policy, who is the consultants that are doing the Human Services needs assessment? They just sent me the timeline.
And so I you know, their their goal is to really start
stakeholder engagement and stakeholder by stakeholder engagement. They’re really talking about agencies that serve low and moderate income residents and in services in Longmont. And they’re thinking about doing that week’s we the weeks of June 2 and eighth doing several focus groups. They may reach out or they would like to reach out starting May 26. June 5, potential residential resident focus groups post to gauge interest on hosting virtual resident engagement.
doing that through June 8 through the 30th and July 1 to July 31, really developing the Human Services needs draft for in preparation for a board presentation in August. Just received that timeline today and I want to share that with the board.
But now we can.
Susan as you if you don’t mind, we could jump into the presentation. We want to have we want to get some as Karen And earlier, we want to get some direction from the board around the 2021 human ages agency service funding, just because of the reality of COVID. And what that will mean for Human Services funding. So if you want to go to the next slide, one more please. So as you can imagine, COVID-19 crisis has impacted several essential components of the human service funding in particular, we don’t know yet come in complete detail what this crisis How is going to impact of our available funding for 2021. And of course, we I just shared you the timeline to complete the Human Services needs assessment. That was not our original goal to be finishing in August. We’re hoping to be finishing closer to this meeting. Actually. And of course, this has not happened. So this, of course puts us in a situation where we have to rethink what we do for 2021. Susan, if you might want the next slide, please. So just as a as a reminder, this is what was allocated in 2020 789,000 was to the human services and 815 was around homelessness and homelessness prevention work through the Art Center, the home study program. So second, one second, the next one, please. One more. So for some of our new members, just a quick background. So in 2018, this board decided to align our human services needs assessment with the comp plan that Kathy has been talking about, and this would really help us coordinate resources and timeframe. So in doing this community wide assessments so that the board thought it was a good idea to put these in alignment, and so we started that process. So we do have some human services needs information. Now, that was part of getting the content, but but we wanted a little deeper dive. And so this is why we have extended our contract with root policy and are working on a much depth Human Services needs assessment. So one more slide, please. So we’re about to jump into the options where we’re going to ask for some feedback from the board. A few things that you need, the board needs to be contemplating as we look at this, again, reiterating that we don’t know what the final financial impact is in 2021 Also, while we’re, we are not sure we believe that this impact will likely suspends counsels decision to have the incremental percentage increase to human service funding. Karen, I think we were, we were going to be going up to 2.75 in 2021, is my understanding. And the Human Services needs assessment will not be complete in time for an early summer release. We were hoping to release the RFP, if everything was going as planned. We were going to release it in June after our main meeting. And the other thing to consider is our EC impact partners. ec impact for those that don’t know is that we is how we run the application process. It’s an online platform that agencies used to fill out the application and we used to review and Also judge the applications where board members get to score and we use those scores to help us determine what final allocations are. They already have city of Boulder for sure has already has a plan to suspend their annual RFP due to COVID impacts. So we know that for sure, we’re not sure what Boulder County is going to do. I think they’re waiting on us, and what our direction will be before making a final decision. So those are things to keep in mind as we go through these options. And then we can have a conversation. If you want to go to the next slide, Susan.
So there’s four options, I’m going to go over pretty quickly and then we can have a conversation. Option one is simple. We know that we’re not going to have the new priorities are set. But we could decide that that we are just going to go ahead with what our 2020 priorities are The percentages that we have placed on them and just, you know, release an RFP that way, things to consider is that again, I know for a fact that city of Boulder is not planning to release an RFP. I did talk to city of Boulder and they’re willing to support us if we decided to go this option. With the ECM back process. I am not an expert at ECM fact. But the city of Boulder has some folks that could help me. We would need to figure out how we would do this process, in particular around the hearings, would they be virtual, you know, all of these things we’d have to figure out pretty quickly as as staff and as a board. Can you get an option to so often too, we could postpone the 2021 application until fall. We are expected to get our final Human Services needs assessment done by others. list. And really the things to consider is how late would we be comfortable releasing the application to provide recommendations to counsel Karen did tell me that it doesn’t have to be in December. It could be after. It’s just been traditionally been in December. But there’s no there’s no regular saying it has to be that way.
And I think just to clarify that, the council authorizes the amount set aside for human service funding as part of their budget process. So that amount would be allocated and available. And then you know, so but we could wait another couple months and go back to calculate this is how we want to distribute the money but the money would be allocated into in the early fall.
And again, as in the first option, we’d be proceeding without our partners as far as you know, the ECM system and of course, we have to rework our hearing and scheduled our hearing our hearings scheduled to meet tight deadlines.
So Susan, can you go next to option three.
So option three is we the board could just recommend that staff just continue the 2020 contracts and modify the scopes of work based on funding availability. This would provide time for the Human Services needs to be completed and allow it to be considered for 20 to 2022 funding. There has been precedent this has happened at least as far as I know that at least once Yeah, I happen to have partook of that one where I just renewed my contract with the city last month, so that it has happened in the past. So that that is an another option that we can do. And then finally, when you get to the fourth option, so this is a this this option is a little different, but it could go in line with with option to be this way. would be the board asking us as staff to use the information that we’ve been gathering. And I’m gonna share a little bit a little bit I don’t, I don’t think you’re gonna be able to see it. But I do have some recent survey results from our funded agencies and really respond to the COVID peace with difference that we’ve gotten in funding could be redirected from current ages that are not meeting emerging needs. So the idea would be, what needs are coming up that are coming out of this COVID prices that we want to fund. So this could help us address some of the emerging needs that we’re seeing. I can tell you that the city of Boulder is looking at a model like that potentially creating a logic model saying here are the activities and outcomes that we want to see based on what we’re learning during this COVID emergency. Somebody who we got to consider is do we want to create a new hearing process or a new knew some type of nother if not RFP, some other process to do it, or when we want to.
We want to negotiate the contracts.
So those are things to consider. We want to create a separate process based on the merging needs a lot of questions that are not on here that we need to answer as well. But, you know, I think it’s a way that we could address the needs. But it would look different than what we’ve done in the past. So we could also combine option four and three, to say, you know, within our funding agencies right now, we want to look at those that are meeting the needs that are emerging, and just renegotiate the contracts that way without having to open other process, asking agencies to to apply and explain how they’re meeting this emerging needs. So that’s, I guess, a fifth option. It’s combining those two. So those are the four options that we’ve created. Susan, if you want to move on to the next one, if you all have any other thoughts, we could we could also entertain those as well tonight. I think what we’re looking for tonight more than anything is direction on where the board wants us to, to do more research into look into what the possibilities are. Yeah, that’s that’s what we’re asking for tonight. So I think that that’s it. There’s the next slide is just a question slide. So I think we can turn this off Susan and jump into the discussion.
Can I ask a question,
Would we, I’m more interested in in number four, just because I’d like the money to go to the highest needs, but we know who’s received Funding extra funding or whatever through this process? Because I think that some agencies probably, you know, have benefited by donations and others have not at all. So we know
what question. So Karen and I and Eric who’s on the phone, too. We are part of the Boulder County funders collaborative. And while we don’t know private funding, we have the most local government and foundation funding we’ve been recreated with call a master tracker, a very large spreadsheet that has tracked where funding has gone. So for example, in the city of Longmont, what we did is we didn’t have any extra funding, but we were willing and able to expedite second and third quarter payments, fourth quarter payments that needed to agencies that needed the funding upfront, and we released some fun Funding early for some of these agencies were dealt with some, you know, immediate needs, increases demand and, you know, just lack of resources. So we have released some of their funding early. But, you know, the neighbor to neighbor fund that the Community Foundation they’ve released 185,000 so far to agencies, Boulder County Community Foundation, I think has released I’m not exactly sure. But I think it’s in the realm around three or $400,000
we do know some of that but we you know, when it comes to private donations, so we don’t know what that was some agents are receiving and others are not. Karen, do you wanna?
I think? Yeah, so I think as Ella Greco mentioned, so we have this big mothership spreadsheets, big master spreadsheet. So we are tracking Like all the federal dollars that have come through the county so so we are tracking Where are those funds going and who’s receiving those so we will have will have all that information you know other than what Ellie Berto mentioned in terms of any private donations that come in directly to the agencies but we have a pretty good system of tracking all the rest of it
one of the things that’s been frustrating for me is that just you know when I go to if I go to do a donation somewhere is I have no idea like does the our center they flesh oh cool matej you know who where’s the need? Um, it’s just difficult and I I just would like the money to go to the places that can use it the most, I guess I
think everything that we add, add to that and is that
we have also been
distributing or asking agencies to give us feedback from surveys and saying, you know, what, what are your needs? What are you struggling with? So we actually have a lot of data at our disposal that we’ve been tracking around, you know, which which agencies are are struggling in what what areas and just as a as an example with them with a Family Resource Center’s So, we kind of have an idea of they’ve indicated how much money that they have available for, say direct financial assistance. And and so you can really see who has been more successful in raising additional monies. And actually, it’s the our center that we’ve had chats about is probably the agency that has the smallest amount of money available right now for individual assistance needs. So So we do, we do have a lot of data. And that can help inform the advisory board, if you wanted to go with this option that helps to focus money on the impact of the pandemic. We do have a lot of data at our at our disposal that will help inform that.
It just wouldn’t be so nice if they put that in the paper for just regular people that want to, you know, help with this or that, you know, it’s very confusing, like even if it’s $25 or brings some food or whatever. Um, it just, it’s not really been there and I think it’s a missed opportunity.
Thank you. I’m so let’s go with Jake and then Councilmember Christiansen
Just a quick question, Karen. Hello, Berto. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Are we just on that big spreadsheet? You mentioned? Are we just tracking agencies that we’ve funded or applicants are we tracking every dollar that comes down from the nonprofit’s from the feds
so you know we’re tracking and
get we’re checking the dollars had that have come to the cares act to save the Boulder County government so all so we’re tracking There’s our CDBG CV dollars we’re tracking the the additional dollars that have come through for Canada and you know for the snap the nutrition program for rapid rehousing so so the monies over which Boulder County, City of Boulder City belong mine, that boulder Community Foundation and the Lamont Community Foundation. Those are the dollars that we are tracking.
Great, thank you. I was just curious if we were we were tracking everything it sounds like not just the 25 or some odd funded agencies
Everything that’s coming through Right,
right, right. Thank you.
Thank you, Paulie.
Sorry. Um, I guess I see what you’re doing. I like the fact that you’re giving us four choices.
I think there’s a great deal of money coming in from hither and yon, that has to do with COVID. For the sake of the agencies, I think it would be best to go with number one, so that they, they don’t have to stress out on top of everything else, that they’re going to lose their funding because of whatever, you know, every year this is incredibly stressful for them. And
there are organizations that may not be appearing to be affected by COVID. But I think for Every single human service agency and provider is going to be stressed out by this, I would suggest that we just go with this so that they know that they are going to have we hope, what they had last year. And then they can apply for extra funding and grants
two different agencies that are doing that. For example,
you know, most of these agencies have fundraisers. Our Center has a big fundraiser. Hope has a big fundraiser. They’ll call me today has a big fundraiser. They had to call that off so they have no no big excise tax. You know, no big bucks coming in. Meanwhile, what they’re dealing with is people who household will come in to members of that household have already died. kovan they’re living together because some of them lost their jobs. They are, because these are jobs that are maybe gig economy, they’re not going to be eligible probably for the 1200 dollar health are the unemployment or any of this stuff. So people are living people who are low income are in this community and everywhere else in this country, particularly minority people are losing are much more highly impacted by this. And the service agencies that do that are working even harder. And so I would suggest that we just give them a break and say, Okay, we’re just going to fund you the way we did last year, if we can, and we’ll deal with it next year. But here are these other agencies, other places you can get supplementary funds. For all the stuff that you’re doing, relative to COVID focusing on COVID for the next two years, is, to me, kind of short sighted. I mean, I, I know it’s big, serious thing, but it will not last forever. And then we will have made a commitment of money to something that we don’t know from day to day. What’s, how this is gonna play out. So. So what
do you mean number one or number? That’s gonna be more like number three where we just Oh, alright, the
one where we? We said, I don’t have your slides right here. The one where we said we will just for this year, we’re not going to review you. We’re going to give you what we did last year.
Right dependent on funding availability. Okay.
Okay, so let’s let’s do this. So and GRAEME and then I would like to hear from some of the board members who haven’t weighed in on some of these issues. Karen and Deana, if you could think about it if you have questions as well. So go ahead. And
I just wonder, and maybe this is just
outside of the box are the responsibilities we have, but you know, I stopped giving any money recently because I don’t know who to give it to. And it just, I don’t know if there’s some way that the city or the county or someone could say these are the agencies like I, I understand what Polly is saying that yes, I mean, I get that now. But if we want to take all the money away from all those agencies, they won’t be up and running. So I can understand that part of it. But for me, just as a citizen, I don’t know who to give my $25 or my hundred dollars to because there’s no one that says, These are the agencies that are really hurting, and maybe just creating that, along with what we’re going to do. I don’t know. I just like that, like, these are the agencies like alcohol matej, or whoever it may be that really does need help. And then maybe I guess we can’t track that because it’s private. But I just that’s frustrating for me not knowing who’s flush with money and not
so echoing Ryan’s statement, if only we had somebody from the local community foundation that talks to these agencies on a daily basis, knows what they’re going through.
So I On that note, Alberto, I Is there any reason we can’t invite Eric to weigh in on some of these issues after we’ve all had At our discussion, I’m unaware of any procedural elements that would prevent that.
I think that’s up to the chair to determine. So if you want to invite, invite comment, I think that’s fine.
I know the chair pretty well. So we’ll probably do that. So let’s go with Graham and then Karen in Indiana.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I feel like there has to be some kind of process of accountability to check in with these organizations before we give them money. I’m fine with using last year’s sort of priorities as a good baseline and not sort of overreacting to the COVID thing and restructuring human service funding. But I do think there needs to be some manner of check in some application process. I think we should probably try to simplify it, you know, make it simpler on the organization that’s going to be stressed and us and not try to force this was the ICU system and certainly give them enough opportunity to, to voice increase needs as a result of COVID. But, yeah, my vote is to have some kind of application process still in place. I guess my question about the postponing is one is that going to help organizations that might otherwise struggle to meet the deadline and two would postponing the application process postponed and receiving the funds? So, if organizations are injured by postponing I would not vote for that. But if there’s no net negative impact on the nonprofit’s by postponing, I, my vote is to postpone have an application and review process using, you know, technology or not at the time. It doesn’t matter. But Yep, that’s what I got. Thanks. Thank you, Graham. Karen.
I don’t know how this works. I don’t know how you know, so until I have something to base this on. I’m not even sure what going on, you know, as far Okay, I would make a decision. And so this kind of new to me and I don’t quite have anything to base this on. So I’m not sure. Okay, that’s fair. So if you if there are specific questions, so I would only invite you to think about how we could help make sure that you have your questions answered. So that, you know, as you move along, it’ll be a little bit clear. But I completely understand that position.
Do you know
I guess I don’t know if I’m allowed to ask this. But I’m sort of wondering if staff who prepared these options, have an opinion on which of these make the most sense in a couple of different ways. First of all, what’s workable from the staff perspective and from a board perspective, and what makes the most sense in terms of satisfying needs of these organizations and to echo both what grandma and Polly said I am concerned also about making I’m sure that organizations that really, really need the money right now, actually get the money. But I also know that probably they’re spinning right now trying to get everything taken care of, and maybe if we can delay application without delaying receipt of money, that does make sense to me, but I don’t know if that’s workable from a board perspective.
Thank you. So just for my own input. I also have a concern about the loss of continuity in what agencies are providing and those are underlying foundational needs that we’ve identified in the community. And
you know, as soon as we break
that continuity, it really puts future risk for these foundational ongoing needs. So I almost see this more like a this kind of weird like,
chart almost where
there’s these nice We’ve identified and and I think COVID is actually going to the the impacts are very much in alignment with what agencies are already providing, right? It’s just more. We need more housing, we need more health care, we need more mental health services, whatever it is. So I wonder, Ella baritone, Karen, if it makes sense to consider just if we can identify some of those areas that have clearly increased needs. Not that they’re the only it maybe that just helps us identify if like, you know, this agency that need isn’t quite as high as this need is temporarily so we move a little bit but we still figure out what that critical mass is to maintain that continuity. That’s a pretty big theoretical ask, but I’m just trying to visualize it in a way that that makes sense. I keep thinking of the organization that does the visitations with children and their parents. I forget what the organization
first did the Rockies.
Yes, thank you. You know, and that’s one of those things that it’s like that need is it’s there to all circumstances. And it’s such a critical function that it would it’s hard for me to think about displacing that and underfunding and allowing children to maintain that contact in a safe manner, and we just need more money, but it’s going to be pretty nuanced. I think.
You Let’s go.
Oh, go ahead.
I was gonna say, I think, just to I would echo what Graham has said. I think the concerns that Councilwoman Christiansen had about the stress on these organizations, I think that the idea of delaying The applications and then doing a simplified process for these organizations so that we continue to have some measure of oversight or accountability on them. But also recognizing that like, getting them to maybe put together a full package when they’re trying to apply for five other grants to supplant, you know, to supplement them because they can’t do their usual annual fundraiser. Like that’s a lot that’s on their plate trying to find ways to do that. I think that that makes the most sense, is to try to find a way to do that. reducing the burden but also making sure that we’re not just sort of like handing funds. I would also be somewhat curious if, you know, if we wait till the fall, whether there are any of these organizations that don’t, don’t make it and I don’t mean that in like I’m not trying to be pessimistic about that. But I do think that we’re in a very unique time, and that some of these organizations, you know, some of the smaller ones, some of the smaller amounts that we’ve given, may not. And so continuing the funds maybe doesn’t make sense from that sense, but also understanding like if there are organizations that are essentially going to be wrapping down their operations,
letting us be sort of Agile to respond to some of that.
Thank you, Caitlin. Karen.
So I guess what I am hearing I just want to check is that it sounds like that the advisory board is is interested in releasing some kind of application process for so that gives everyone a shot at being able to ask for ask for money, not just say we’re just going to, we’re going to change our priorities because that’s the thing I heard you talk about Brian was that we could certainly look at some priority shifts doesn’t mean that we wouldn’t consider some agencies that maybe were in a lower part. But we would kind of move our, our waiting in our priorities a little bit. So it sounds like there’s still some interest in doing a competitive application process, and not just continuing what we had in 2020 into 2021. And not just focusing on COVID. So if I if I’m hearing correctly, and and then I think really the question is, if if you want to have application process, might it make sense for us to schedule that application process later in the year? We will, we will have a few more months of finding out how What our world is continuing to look like with recovery from working on recovery from from the pandemic, plus, if in August that we will have our, our updated needs assessment information, then that gives us a chance to kind of look at a whole whole picture and and reset what we think our priorities. We want those those to be. The The, the question about how much longer if we went if we, if we waited until the fall, to release our application and go through that process, probably what would happen is that it would be it would take a little while longer for us to get there 2021 applications and contracts. It might be a month or two delay and getting the contracts in order but you No, we would work really hard to, to move that along. So it sounds like that there’s a desire to have some application process. And so whether that is based basing that on the use of the previous target areas or whether you want to wait, you know, a couple, three months and habit incorporate the new needs assessment data that we’re collecting.
Okay. And then Councilmember Christiansen
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Karen. I think you’re you’re hearing us right I do have one thing that I just wanted to mention I’m I’m seeing every day
that there is a lot of money going out because of COPPA. There’s a lot of money connected to, to the virus, a good chunk of that probably the vast majority of it is going to the for profit sector, right going to support small business going through. Although nonprofits can apply for PPP. Can there there’s a there’s a blend there. I think ultimately what this process is in the Human Services funding is it’s designed to support nonprofit agencies who are meeting community need here in the city of LA. So from my perspective for this one very unique funding cycle, I think it would be a mistake for us to not in some way incorporate COVID into that conversation. I came into this kind of very much set on option for but I think Councilmember Christiansen made a great point, which is we need to support agencies that that are continuing to that are having a hard time. So my preference just to get it out would be that we do an application process that we delay that application process until we can get the Human Services needs assessment back. But that that process also in some part of the matrix, it doesn’t have to be the number one priority. It doesn’t have to be an Where I would like agencies to be able to at least communicate to us how they’re dealing with the COVID, how they how they’re addressing need in the community. And then we can decide as a board, how we want to weigh that into the overall decision on funding. That’s ultimately our decision. So I think it would be delayed the application process, absolutely have an application process. Graham is 100%. Right? I do not want to just extend contracts. Without being able to check in with some of these folks. Some of those agencies were right on the right on the line, and I want to see how folks are doing, Nick. Caitlin has a great point about, you know, seeing where folks are at in two to three months. So I think my preference would be, you delay it, you incorporate COVID into the overall picture of funding without necessarily totally changing the structure. And make sure that’s part of the application. And then we as a board to do a competitive funding process. So
that’s my entry.
Great Councilmember Christiansen?
Yes, unlike what Jake said, it’s to just include as part of the application process a question on what their how COVID has impacted them in their provision of services and what their new needs are. I also want to remind people, though, if we delay it too much, these agencies are using our funding to get leverage for other funding. So if we delay it, then they they can’t apply for anything else because they can’t say that, you know, we got this amount of funding from the city of Longmont. And so when we delay things too long, it’s going to cause them yet more stress and more economic problems. So let’s try not to delay it too long.
And I guess to Councilmember Christiansen point so I mean, I think what would what that would look like is probably the earliest, because we have a needs assessment data and then you know, we have to go through the process of waiting and, and what is going to be a priorities. So, so it’s probably a lie first, I’m just making a guess that it’s probably, you know, a mid to late September release of that of that RFP.
Um, so before before, just really quickly, um, so something that would change, though, I mean, in what I’m hearing, and that would help is a simplified, you know, application process, where we may or may not use EC impact, we will use something else that’s easier. You know, so that would also help speed up the process. If we’re not Doing the full on grant application that we do through impact. So that’s just something to throw out there to think about. Not that we couldn’t do it. In fact, I’m just talking about how if we could simplify it that would speed up the process. And when we think about we also think about the hearings as well. You know, they will also if if we remove that, or modify it to make it easier, then they will also speed up the process, because that does take time.
All right, Jake. Thank you, Alberto.
Just a quick Yeah, I completely agree. I think. I think it’s a simplified application. That includes kind of, you’re probably gonna have to restructure a good deal with a logic model to incorporate COVID and all sort of way, shrink it down. And then also, I think a hearing process that is as much as hard on us, perhaps condense it and kind of stack it to instead of I don’t know how long how many how long it took us to get through hearings last year, you know, a month basically have a once a week long hearings, maybe we condense that down and say, Can we get these done in two weeks or what have you? And then, I mean, I’m curious from a question as well from Councillor Christian again makes a point from Karen earlier Berto. What the timeline would be for us for when we needed to have the process done so that we’re not having that negative impact on our agencies. What when roughly would like when do they need to have that info? I know it’s kind of all up in the air. But I’m curious.
I guess how I would answer that. Jake, is that if tonight if the advisory board wanted to give us direction on where you would like to head with this, then we would come back to you. In the obvious monster. Just roll to get at the June meeting. And and we could flesh out more details. So I think really what we’re looking for is, is is there one option you really want one or two that you want us to pursue, we could then come back with, with more detail about what that would look like.
Okay, I think I think I’ve said my piece my I think people kind of get a sense for where I’m at with it. I think that’s the approach that makes the most sense. So that is that if everybody understands that the format, so thanks,
I have two questions. And I’m not sure exactly where to direct them. But the first is regarding waiting for the human for the needs assessment. What I heard was it that if we want to take that into account, we have to wait until we get that to determine to actually put out the RFP for these. Is that actually a blocker? Do we have to have that needs assessment before we can ask agencies until agencies that we’re accepting applications
I think that’s really up to you. So that’s really the difference between option one and option two. So, option one is release an application use the same funding priorities as we had the last three years. And option two is, is have an application process, but use the new funding priorities from from the assessment and then plus the either one of those, you could incorporate the COVID impact questions. So it’s really about do you want to wear Ruby a couple of months away from having fresh data about the needs in Longmont? So do you want to wait for that for a couple months or you want to move forward with the, with the data that is is about three and a half years old. And that’s
it are those priorities incorporated in The application process to help applicants understand what the priorities are. And how we’re waiting them is that the gist of it is that we sort of have to specify what those priorities are to allow them to customize their applications accordingly.
It’s really for you to determine how when you look at what are the needs in the community, what are we going to ask for? Or what do we want to fund, we want to fund services that target x what we had six areas of need that came out of the last needs assessment. So this is really to inform you as the advisory board. What are the most critical and compelling needs in our community that we think the these dollars that we’re responsible for should be invested in and then if it then then that informs what the application looks like and the areas that we are considering funding.
So my follow up question to that is, do we have a sense from any of the draft or the information that we have so far? If there is a any kind of dramatic shift in what those are? Or would be because it seems to me like those areas that we’ve talked about that are the needs, I could see maybe them shuffling a little bit in terms of like, which one is the top one, but not necessarily something one of those six things dropping off completely and being replaced by some need that we have not previously prioritized?
And I would say an Ellie Berto may I have not done a deep dive into the I mean, there are pages and the good news is we have over 1000 respondents to the surveys, there’s a lot of status. There’s a lot of data in there. So I can’t answer that question yet. But the thing that we are interested in, that we had to wait on because of the pandemic is the focus groups. So we will have the data that the the additional work that we are contracting group policy to do is to really help us dive in a little deeper and try to get the story behind the data that really helps inform what are the types of services that we might want to be funding. So it just it makes the data richer by helping our community members interpret with that really
got it. The second question that I had was when we were talking about this about the hearing process, and I’m curious if we have the ability to, for example,
I guess if we have to condense it down to change who we hear from So for example, if an agency comes in and it’s sort of like, everything’s basically the same or meeting the same needs, everything is fine. Like, we’re asking for the same amounts. Do we necessarily need to hear from those folks who are the folks where it’s changing a lot? Do we have the ability to sort of make that determination? Or do we have to hear from everybody as part of that process?
So, Karen, again, so I would say that the, the hearing process is really up to the advisory board to determine, I would say that for consistency sake, again, that because these are these are city and tax dollars, dat that whatever you decide to apply in terms of your funding process, that you really do that consistently and equitably among the agencies, how you how you want to do that, and the process you want to develop is really up to you.
Great, thank you very much.
Thank you. So we are running out of time, Deanna.
Just quickly, I’m not sure I really understood the answer this question, but in terms of delaying the application, impacting the receipt of funds by organizations, if we delay the application by a couple months, are we automatically delaying receipt of funds by a couple of months? Or can we compact the hearing process? And maybe the gathering of information through the application process sufficiently to sort of offset that delay? Or is it just unavoidable from a staff perspective that that delay is gonna happen?
You know, if you give us some direction, we will certainly look at that most of the the challenge is with me is in the contracting process. So it takes a while because we have to create individual scopes of work for each of the individual agencies. There’s a negotiation back and forth, then that then we get every contract review by our city attorney’s office. So it just takes us a little while to move through that. We do that as fast as we can, but we’re not the only ones. have a hand in that. So it depends on how fast the agencies get back to us. And sometimes that doesn’t, we have to wait in terms of, you know, their work. And then our attorney’s office also has to approve all the contracts. But so that’s really it takes it takes a little while to, to once we get the approval from counsel that they’re good with what we’re recommending. It doesn’t mean that we can’t expedite it on the front end. So we can certainly work in the front end with the boiler plate contract with our attorneys for 2021 that we could get done early. And then it’s really just around the negotiation of the scopes of work for each of the individual agencies. And like this year we had, I don’t know 3035 contracts. So it just takes a little takes a little while. So that’s that’s it. That helps.
Thank you, Karen. Jake.
Famous chair. So just to prepare application, do you need a motion? And a vote on one of these options? Is that what staff is asking for?
Your hearing? You’re muted. I’m sorry.
I was unmuted I booted. Yes, we will get some direction.
Okay, I am going to put this out. Okay. So I feel like because we had so many people, so many of our residents become a part of the survey process, because we would be a couple of months out from getting new data, which we don’t know, if it’s going to be substantially different or not, at this point, we need to make a decision. Now, I want to go ahead and move option two, which would be to delay with the assumption and the belief that there will be some COVID element as a part of that application as a part of the overall application. So that’s, that’s my motion, and I’ll look for a second
All right, is there a second? Yeah, no. Okay, we have a second. Okay, so discussion, Any discussion on the motion? And
how far are you saying to delay cuz that concerns me?
I, it was our industry, right? Yeah. Um, I would think that the lay makes sense. And like, as soon as we get that data back that as expedient as staff finds possible, once we have the Human Services needs assessment in our hands, to get that application done, get it out, begin the process. So I’m not talking about waiting, I would put some power in staff’s hands at that point to say, Alright, we have the state of back, let’s move on. It includes some COVID elements in the applications and then get it out to our agencies. So as expediently as possible after the receipt of the Human Services has
no and what I would add to that Is what would be what what we’re really looking at is some direction from you in terms of what option we’re really going to flesh out, and then bring back to you in June with more details. And then at that point time, you could say, ah, we don’t want to do that we want to do this. So but but to have at least a narrowing of options that we could, you know, flesh out and bring back to you is what we’re looking for. Nothing. You’re totally committed to that.
for my part of the discussion, I would add, just I think along the lines of what you were saying, Karen, that we’re, we’re agreed we’re going to pursue an application process simplified application that will incorporate COVID-19 questions, Jake, I think you covered that in your motion. And I was Suggest amending the language to include that the direction that direction includes staff developing as timeline benchmarks for opening applications closing, and seeing how much elasticity there is in that process. And then also just as a comment, I wonder, Karen, with the contracts, you know, I think the the interviews we need to do, it’s possible for those agencies that have existing contracts this year that maybe that could be a way we could expedite that processes, if the scope of work changes, but the contract language remains the same. And that’s just a curiosity.
What do we say, Brian, is that the contract the boilerplate contract language doesn’t really significantly change year to year. It’s really in the individual review and negotiation, but it doesn’t change significantly. Okay, unless there’s some big change in insurance requirements or you know, or some kind of change in the law, but it doesn’t change but
Okay, so any other discussion on the motion on?
I would just say that’s a brilliant point on benchmark timelines. Mr. Chair, I happily accept that as a friendly. So, so far. I think that’s a great idea.
Nicole, were you able to capture that?
Sorry, my spacebar isn’t working to unmute me. I apologize.
Yes, I believe I have it. So basically awkward. to delay until the needs assessment, funding priorities with the assumption and belief that there’ll be a COVID element as part of the application, and also a request for staff to develop a timeline benchmarks for opening and closing along with the lasticity in that.
And I would include a simplified application, please.
Great. Thank you. Okay. Let’s take a vote. All in favor, please raise your hand.
I got you guys.
Thank you. Any opposed? Raise your hand.
Okay. The Motion passes. Thank you. So we have I think the site visit updates we should table until our next meeting. The update on Longmont Housing Authority. Karen, is that something you’d like to cover quickly, and I do want to Eric to just answer a few of the questions if he chooses to do so.
So, so Mr. Chair that is that is certainly up to you it was a request of one of the advisory board members that we give an update on. On really what’s what’s happening with alumni Housing Authority. So you can tell me if you want me to move forward or not, if you say make it 10 minutes, make it five minutes. I don’t know if I got my five minutes but I probably make it attended. So whatever you want, whatever you want me to do,
let’s let’s do it in 10 minutes.
Hey, you want you want to do your timer?
Well would give me some sense of purpose.
Isn’t if you would pull up the PowerPoint, that would be fabulous.
And you can go to the next slide, please. So So So basically the the,
the background is that we had the the city and the llama Housing Authority had been in conversation since the beginning part of this year about creating some kind of a different partnerships between the two entities. You know, Gillian Baldwin, the director came in about less than two years ago, after the llama Housing Authority went through, you know, kind of a crisis. And, and she had really, she she had worked really hard to try to stabilize the Lamont Housing Authority. She made some great strides and, and the process for continuing to do that and the kind of issues that continue to come up and the the, you know, the the challenge As the agency that she was not seeing a sustainable path for the llama housing authority in without some kind of major examination or shifts or changes in the system and how it is business. So, we were in conversations with, you know, with the Lamont Housing Authority about that. We had started to put a plan together Cathy and me with our city manager. We had an you know, we had had talks with the boards with our city council. And and that that discussion with the board with a llama housing authority and Longmont Housing Development Corporation board happened that first week in March and you know what happened the second week in March so so we so that work really took went on the site burger until Julian announced The end of April that she, that she had accepted another position and she would be leaving Golan my Housing Authority. So we jumped back in with work speed around this, this work that we started. So we we looked at so this is what this slide is really, this is the vision of our city council in terms of where they see their focus and the need to make sure that folks have adequate access to housing. Next slide, please. is just a long month housing Authority’s vision to be the leader in providing affordable housing. And the next slide is, this is the work that we we we probably worked pretty intensely in February, to cut to really look at what are the challenges that are experienced as the Aloma Housing Authority was experienced? And we in front of you is really a list of things that we identified in February which really had to do with their staff capacity. They continue to have staff turnover, they, they don’t have enough ongoing revenue really coming in from their business model that that allows them to probably have all of the steps that they really need to have to provide the services that they they provide. We identified challenges within the organizational culture, within the culture of their residential facilities that really needed to be addressed. The need for the housing authority to have a really a future vision for where it where it really needed to be, and what kind of support sustainable structure needed be in place for them to reach their vision.
We wanted to look at more ongoing development opportunities and really expansion opportunities and expansion opportunities really has to do with the expansion of their Housing Choice Voucher Program. So there are opportunities, you know, along the way for for housing authorities to apply for additional, what we used to call the old section eight Housing Choice Voucher the housing vouchers, now they’re called Housing Choice vouchers, but because the Housing Authority is just kind of trying to keep their head above water, they just really haven’t been able to focus on the pursuit of new development opportunities, expansion opportunities that bring in more revenues that allows them to do their jobs better, right. And then the fourth, the fishbowl is really about looking for an opportunity to better integrate the work that the city is doing and the housing authority on on portable housing goals and strategies that are coming out of the regional Housing Partnership. Next slide, please system. And so this was the vision that we created back in the first part of March that we shared with with the Housing Authority Board. And I won’t read this out to you, but it was really about an integrated partnership model so that we could leverage resources and we could continue to have a continuum of housing opportunities available to our our, to our community. Next slide, please. So So, we, these are the we went through and we identified what are the things that we really need to focus on in the next that basically the next five, six months and this is work that we did since whenever end of April. So So We really looked at operations is, is one of the big issues. So we need to end in there is really looking at staff development staff training needs for the Housing Authority, you know, making sure that we have all the different kinds of protocols and policies and things in place. There are as well as looking at how they are in compliance with all their federal funds, had, you know what that looks like for CDBG. So making sure that we’re in compliance with that, and really looking at what would be the optimum staffing levels that the Housing Authority needs to have to to really perform their work? Well, next slide, please. This is another area that we said we wanted to look at is both in terms of their organization, culture and their residential culture. So that it is to the set of fighting fires and problems and conflicts that we’re getting How to shift to a more positive way of the residents for living together. And the first and the staff are working together that really propels the agency forward, rather than keeps us It keeps them in a crisis mode. Next slide, please. And then, and then to really look at a couple of development opportunities. So I think, as you all know, in terms of we are looking at re refinancing and rehab of the Aspen Meadows apartments. And so that we knew that we had to work on that make sure that that was successful and figuring out our project management of that without Julian in in that role. And then we also have a property. It’s really the other undeveloped portion of the suites property that the city was 51% In owner in and so we are working with lm element is the is the development group. And so we had they submitted tax credit application and to develop that parcel on the suites, and so we should hear back about whether or not that project was awarded tax credits. probably get in May or may be the first part of June, if that is awarded those tax credit funds or tax credits, then that’s another project that goes that goes on the front burner for immediate action. Next slide, please. And then you just hit all those little animations. So So then we’re also looking at the whole financial picture of the of the housing authority. And you can see you can see all of the all of the activities there. Next slide. Please, that gaps,
then this area is really looking at the level of support services needed in. In basically all of the resident, most all of their residential units are our senior units or senior developments, with the exception of one, which is a family development. And those really mean what we call like a lighter touch. So how do we support residents that are living there and create a model that they really don’t have in place now. And then the heavier touch case management is really looking at the suites, which is more permanent supportive housing model, and, and residents that are living in the suites need much more support and case management than they’re getting now. So we need to look at how to address that Next slide, please. And then, and then kind of the those are the three Things that are immediate action that we need to take care of the next few months. And then really look at the strategic planning board expectations, looking at how do we really address and repair the, you know, the the image of the housing authority, but we need to take care of all these other immediate actions first to stabilize the ultimate Housing Authority. Next slide, please.
And then continuing to look for the longer term about
development opportunities, which I talked about initially. So about your utilization expansion. How do we have the llama Housing Authority be a stronger partner in our inclusionary housing efforts as the money comes in from inclusionary housing? You know, how do we establish the Lamont housing authority as a viable development partner? And then there are a couple of other areas that we identified there. That will make Some redevelopment or and development in the in the not too distant future but it’s a little longer term down the road. Next slide please. And then this is our warp speed time frame. So, so right now and then in the next couple of weeks, we will be working on an operational agreement that that really formalizes the role between the housing authority and, and the city of long months. It will probably be a two part process I’m imagining first will be like a memorandum of understanding. And then that will identify, you know, how we’re going to work together and in essence that the city, the goal would be that the city is going to have operational oversight, if you will, of the kind of the daily operations of the Lamont Housing Authority. The housing authority board will still have its policymaking role. And, and our, our, our attorneys and their attorneys are going to structure that so that they still remain separate organizations with separate liability, but that the city will have operational oversight of other Longmont Housing Authority. So we’re trying to figure out that and then you can you can kind of see the, within the next six months to really have address some of the How to stabilize to look at some of the new operational model, and then continue to do some of the other kinds of changes with some time for evaluation. And then after three years, and again, this timeframe, I’m sure we’ll change but it’s the best timeframe we’ve come up with with the information that we have to really look at, you know, after at least a three month three year period, that that we will have a better idea of what does that sustainable model for the llama and Housing Authority look like? Is it? Do we think that we’ll be able to kind of return that back to being an independent housing authority or whether there will need to be a more permanent integration of the of that llama Housing Authority with the city of Longmont government, or or something else? So, you know, part of that because it is a small Housing Authority, it’s really hard for them to achieve the economies of scale to do what they need to do without significantly raising rents, and we really are not wanting to try to do that at this point in time. So we need to we need to explore we need to work with them to figure that out. And we do Don’t want to when this happened, you know, two years ago, and we hired and they hired Jillian. And it was really, that there were so many things that had to be stabilized that she never could get her head above water. That makes sense. And so this time, and her recommendation is, is that, hey, two years ago, it probably should have taken this step, then to get things stabilized before bringing in a new director to then position the agency for the future. So that is my work speed presentation. I think, Susan, I think that’s it. Thank you. There you go. Thank you. So you can turn it back to Brian. And I’d be happy to answer questions.
Thank you, Karen. Any questions for Karen? clarifications? council member Christian Christiansen. Jake. You’re waving off. Go ahead, Paulie.
I just want to say, Karen, I am very, very thankful we’re doing this. I’ve been advocating for us to do something about AJ for six years and
I think this is a very good move. Anyway,
I really have been shocked. At
what at Longmont Housing Authority,
you know, and I think a lot of that is well, so it’s a lot of different things. And so we just are, it’s a big heavy lift, just FYI. So, so if you ever hear from Kathy and Karen for a while you know what happened, but it’s going to take all of us really doing our best work together because we need Aloma Housing Authority. They provide housing for our most vulnerable In our lowest income residents, we need them to be successful. And that’s why we are all in.
Thank you, Jake.
Thank you, Karen. So much for the presentation. I was the one who asked for it. So I really appreciate really appreciate that. It was a very thorough, I do have one quick question. Just you mentioned it actually, just about capacity and about, you know, staffs ability to take this on, you know, I, I’m continually amazed by your ability personally to just take, keep taking stuff on and run with it and the whole department D can just talk briefly a little bit more just about kind of the plan for leadership over la j and oversight, and are you going to be the point persons really j for the next period of time or kind of what’s the, what’s roughly the, what’s the leadership
plan? Well, that’s a that’s a great question for which I do not have an answer yet. We are we are working at that. Now. I would say that we’ve identified it is It is going to be a team. It’s going to be a team approach. Okay for a while, obviously there are going to, you know, we’re going to have to have some identified point people. But we are bringing in the best of the city staff that we have in the areas that we need that we identified in terms of that discovery, an opportunity will probably bring in some consultation, some outside consultation for certain aspects. And in it, it will be several city staff members, along with law, my Housing Authority staff members. Great.
Thank you, Karen, for that and thanks for the work and for staffs work and taking that on. I’m with Councilmember Christiansen completely. Law has been in line for some reform for some time, so I’m glad to see the city
taking it on Thank you. One
sorry, um, I actually have to I thank you so much, Karen, for the additional information, really appreciate it and appreciate all the work that staff has put in for all of the presentations and keeping us up with this.
With all the changes in the world right now, so,
thanks. Thanks for hanging in there. I do want to quickly invite Eric, if you would like to try to answer a few of the questions that were thrown out about Longmont Community Foundation, your program.
Go for it.
Thank you all Actually, I want to commend you all in the enormous responsibility you have to make for dealing with the funding and the responsibility that you undertake with the with the public dollars. So thank you very much for your service. Let’s see, I think I think everybody was fairly spot on with their with their information about the strong month Fund, which Karen Strong fonder. Kathy, I think you said strong bond fund. It is indeed strong bond fund. And that is for small businesses 25 employees or fewer. And it is pending an assessment really all the businesses are encouraged to do an assessment before they actually can apply. We have received, when you look at the data, you look, you were kind of hitting the groups who want to hit. So we’re looking at minority businesses, veteran owned businesses, women owned businesses. So it’s really exciting to look at the data that has come through initially and that that application will be ready to go on the 18th. And the review committee will make those grants the turnaround time is the 26th is what we’re looking at may 26, to actually make those decisions and we’ll be granting out those dollars shortly thereafter. So we’re looking at we are indeed raising money from public private dollars. And we’re also using or being the housing or the hub for the other public dollars that are coming into that fund. And finally, the neighbor to neighbor fund. That is, we’ve actually had two rounds of funding, we raised about a quarter of a million dollars and have granted out $185,000 in two rounds of funding. And the third round will probably be some time. We actually had a board meeting this morning and we had talked about delaying the third round. The sense is that we reached a peak and donations to that and it’s it’s fallen pretty precipitously. So we are kind of in the kind of the final stage, if you will, but we want to see how things are in the environment right now for nonprofits. I think everybody aptly mentioned the fact that you know, all organizations are hurting. and human services organizations that aren’t even aren’t really directly involved in COVID-19 relief are Certainly hurting. It’s not unlike any other business. They’re having to layoff people and reduce salaries and reduce staff. So it’s not like your local restaurants or anybody else in the community that’s really suffering. So it will remain to be seen what happens to some of those organizations. But we expect that in the third round of funding, we’re probably going to be looking at maybe issues of child care, mental health, and maybe broadening it to expand to other organizations that are actually seeking general help to kind of bridge those loss of fundraising dollars right now. That’s essentially what I’d say. But I think the one thing I really am was really excited to hear is that you’re all looking at simplicity in your application, which I encourage I think, with shorten staffs and smaller staffs and overburdened staffs, I think it’s really wise to go with a shorter and simpler application. So thank you, sorry for going on to Long. No, that’s great. Eric, thank you. Any questions for Eric while we do have them on the line?
Okay, Eric, I just want to say that, you know, I feel like the profile of Longmont Community Foundation has really increased during this time. And I commend you on that. And particularly because I think that’s a function of the fact that you really acted when it was needed. And I, it’s impressive, so thank you for everything that you’re doing.
Okay, so we’re about to be ready to adjourn. I just have one question. Is there any other business council member Christiansen has one piece of business?
Well, this isn’t some recent really happy that I wanted you to know. Got an update for the last two weeks from Jim golden, the Chief Financial Officer. First we’re on a $14 million shortfall. Now we’re on an $18 million shortfall. But we don’t know. It might not be that bad. But it’s always better to be conservative when you’re talking about, you know, not to underestimate how much money you’re going to have rather than overestimate. So that’s not so, so good. But, you know, the amount of money that this organization gets is a very small amount of our overall roughly 450 million dollar budget. So, um, and it’s very important that all of these organizations be funded, because they’re doing the work of the city. So anyway,
good night, everyone. Stay
well. Thank you. And I just have one other piece of business real quick. And that is Is to congratulate Jake on his the receipt of his degree. I don’t know how long it was in the oven, but it’s it’s done. Congratulations.
Oh, thank you Miss Sherry. Yeah, I took three years off from my undergrad at CU Denver to go to sports and travel the world and do stuff and I’m finally finished it up and then I start grad school in the summer. So I am finished up with a BA in history from the University of Colorado, Denver and headed to go be a history teacher is the plan. So
congratulations. So much.
Okay, is there a motion to adjourn?
Motion to adjourn.
Well done Karen.
And a second, if there’s no other business and the meeting is adjourned. Thank you, everybody.