Housing and Planning Committee Meeting Transcript – 05/12/2020 Title: City of Austin Channel: 6 - COAUS Recorded On: 5/12/2020 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 5/12/2020 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [10:11:39 AM] >> Casar:we're all compressing gratitude for each other as we figure it out, the struggle here figuring it out. It's 10:13 A.M. And I'm going to call the meeting of today's housing and planning committee meeting to order. It is may 12. We are doing this via video conference. All members of the committee are present and so I'll call the meeting to order. Our first item of business is to approve the minutes from the last meeting. Is there a motion to do that? Moved via vice chair Ellis, sended by councilmember Renteria. Nobody signed up to speak so next item is briefing and discussion on emergency housing resources related to the covid-19 administrator. Director truelove, take it away. >> Yes. So is the powerpoint up and [10:12:41 AM] loaded? Can folks see it? We get the powerpoint up? >> Casar: And councilmember tovo joined us. >> Renteria: No powerpoint yet. >> Yeah, I'm not seeing it either. I could always try sharing my screen if that helps keep us moving. Adam? >> I apologize [indiscernible]. So, councilmember harper-madison, my best suggestion is to call in for the meeting. As far as the lines getting crossed, that must have been -- I'm not sure but perhaps a staff situation where the emails got -- I [10:13:41 AM] really don't know. But I'm going to try to find the city clerk real quick and then I want to get the ball rolling and go from here. >> Casar: I think we'll get the ball rolling. Councilmember harper-madison said it's okay. >> Leave it as is and move forward? >> Casar: Yeah, leave it as is. >> Yes. If you could just -- >> Casar: Run this powerpoint. >> Thank you. >> If you could load the powerpoint, that would be great. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Just to be clear, you guys can all hear me, right? >> Yes, we can hear you perfectly. >> So we're in the same meeting. It's fine. Thank you, Adam. >> You're welcome. >> Can you advance the slide, please? Adam? Is there something that -- I'm going to request control over the powerpoint. [10:14:52 AM] Can we progress the slide, please? >> Guys, the presentation will be on your computer now sharing. There might be a delay so give it a minute. Sorry about that. >> Okay. We should be -- if we can get to slide three, that would be fantastic on your screen. I will go ahead, councilmembers of the committee, I will go ahead and start talking and hope the powerpoint caught up with me. As the committee probably knows, we launched the rent program a little more than a week ago, rent standing for release of emergency needs for tenants program. This is a $1.459 million contract with 1.259 going to the allocated for emergency rental assistance for people that are experiencing pressures related to covid. [10:15:53 AM] The housing authority for the city of Austin or haca is the vendor and program administrator for this contract. We're using currently local funds, namely the house trust fund to provide this assistance. This is onetime emergency rental assistance. If you could advance the slide, please. So eligibility for the rent program, you must be able to -- you must have been able to demonstrate your household has been impacted by covid-19 and that you are at a household at 80% median or below. Applications were received may 4-6 and in the military of the lottery process for that right now. We accepted open applications may 4-6 and then we will conduct a lottery to be able to disperse funds. Rent payments to landlords [10:16:54 AM] by may 15. We expect serving 1,000 plus households in this initial ro round and perhaps more importantly we'll be getting a lot of data that will help us to understand and determine the scope of the unmet need that we have for rental assistance in Austin. What I want to do now is to share my screen so that I can share with you the dashboard data we have currently for the people that applied for the rent program. And so I'm going to do that and I'm going to hope that I do this right. So is the dashboard coming up? >> We can see the summary [10:17:54 AM] report. >> Yes, that's it. That's what I wanted to make sure. I said this was going to -- my first time of sharing my screen so I'm pretty excited I didn't screw it up entirely. This is the information we have currently from the housing authority. This is on the applications that have been received and we will continue to analyze the data and see what we can learn from it. But I wanted to share with you what we have right now. So the lottery was open from may 4 at 9:00 A.M. Until may 6 at 11:59. Requirements, applicants must have been unable to pay may 2020 rent, they had to live in the city of Austin, they had to have an income of less than 80% median family income and they have to have face aid job loss or loss of income due to covid-19 and were not receiving any other government assistance. Again, the goal is to have rent payments go out no later than Friday, may 15 to landlords willing to participate in the program. [10:18:57 AM] So we had in total -- we had 10,738 applications submitted in total over the three-day lottery. The 11 -- 1,142 of those came in by phone, 360 -- these are questions. We had a significant number of questions that came in by phone, 455 says by S and 366 by email. >> Director truelove, if everybody could mute their phones and everybody on the line here too. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember. You should be able to see right now the summary of the needs that were presented P.M. It's broken down by day so you can see the number of applications we received on each day with 10,738 total applications [10:19:57 AM] over the three days with a total rental need or request coming in at a little less than $6.9 million. The average -- with an average rental request of $1,185 per household. We had -- you can see the average rent requested by bedroom size for those that are interested in that. We had 25 mentioned in media, in news media, and we had more than 26,000 views of the atx rent health info web page. We will be conducting the lottery. Haca is in the process of doing that right now, qualifying people, working with landlords and getting rent checks out by this Friday to the folks that are going to be eligible through the lottery. [10:20:58 AM] We're very excited about this. We recognize that -- about the success of this program, in that we are hoping to help a thousand people at least or a thousand households. The demonstrated need as expected far outweighs the support that we have to offer right now, but we hope to use this data and the data for who receives the lottery award to help them form up how we might be able to further supplement this program with coronavirus relief funds or other funds to help with future months' rental assistance. >> Are there questions about the slide? >> I would open it to questions. >> Councilmember kitchen. >> And I'll leave this -- I'm going to leave this up on the screen for now in case we need to refer to it again. >> Kitchen: Okay. Thank you very much. The data that you just went over is not in backup so if [10:21:59 AM] y'all could be sure and email that to us. >> Yes. It will be going to the full mayor and council via memo later today. We'll put it in backup. >> Kitchen: We will get it today, okay, that's great. So a couple quick questions. So can you speak to -- two things. Your time line for the further analysis of unmet needs, and the data points that are included, will you be including in the unmet needs the mfi levels of the folks that were not eligible, as well as those we weren't able to cover? And will you be including data about the size of the places that people are living, in other words, are we talking about -- I'd like to understand the range. Are we talking about small landlords or big apartment complexes? That's two questions, your time line forget us -- [10:23:03 AM] forgetting us the analysis and the data elements you're going to include specifically about the mfi levels for people not eligible and the size of the [indiscernible] >> To answer your first question, we hope to get that out by the end of the week. We are -- we will have information about median family income levels. I'm not sure if we have data on the size of the complex where the applicants are living. I can check on that and get back to you if we have that data, we'll include it. But that is a good data point to see for future iterations to be able to report back. It may not have been in the application as it was requested. >> Kitchen: I would suggest that would be useful for the future. >> Yes. >> Kitchen: Because we've got our small business program, we're looking at it from both perspective of people who need rental assistance and the perspective of folks who are [10:24:03 AM] providing housing. So thank you. That's my questions. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Casar: Vice chair Ellis. >> Ellis: Thank you, director truelove. Could you combo -- go into more detail about not receiving other government assistance. Is this specific to coronavirus efforts or other governmental support issues like snap or wic or things like that? >> Predominantly we were looking to make sure that there was not other government-provided coronavirus relief, if you were enrolled in another -- receiving rental assistance from another entity. And that you also were not a resident of, like, a public housing property where your rent that you would normally be charged is something that scales with your income. >> Ellis: Okay. Thank you. >> Casar: To be clear with that, director truelove, it [10:25:04 AM] might be useful to update this to make it clear that it might say not receiving other government assistance to pay this month's rent. >> That's a good point of clarity, thank you. >> Casar: If somebody went to the food bank funded by the city, that wouldn't disqualify you from this program? >> Correct. >> Casar: Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: And thank you for the opportunity to ask a question. Excuse me. I look forward to getting the powerpoint. There was a slide that talked about the number of applications, and I think, Rosie, you said it was 10,738. I wondered if -- >> That's correct. >> Tovo: Thank you. I wonder also on that slide if you had quantified for us the amount of rental assistance represented by those 10,000 -- more than 10,000 applications? So if we were able to identify -- thank you. I thought I had seen it. [10:26:04 AM] >> Yes. >> Tovo: If we were able to identify more funding, that additional funding would be -- >> The total request, yes, $6,893,030. >> Tovo: Let's call it 7 million. And we allocated 1.5 million. Is that correct? I'm sorry, what was the amount we allocated? >> It was a little more than 1.2 million, like, 1.25. >> Tovo: Okay. I hope that we can allocate more funding to this. There's clearly a tremendous amount of need. Thank you very much for this. >> This is -- yeah. This is a program that we are reviewing and that there should be recommendations associated with when we come for the larger coronavirus relief spending plan, for lack of a better word, at the may 21st council meeting as council has already [10:27:06 AM] requested. >> Tovo: Great. Thank you. Did I hear you say -- I'm sorry, I had another side note going on but I think I heard you say you were hoping to get that additional data by this week and that there was some challenges -- >> Yes. >> Tovo: -- Providing addresses or information about location, but that to the extent you could you would be providing us with some sense of the geographical, where these people live geographically by district? >> We'll be able to demonstrate where they are by zip code to get to the council district level my understanding based on how the data was collected we'd have to geo code each individual application which might be time prohibitive between now and Friday. The other piece that we don't -- I don't know that we're going to have is the size or -- you know, relative size of the complex or the facilitate that folks are living in to be able to gauge if the payments are going to small landlords or [10:28:08 AM] to what we consider larger landlords. >> Tovo: The zip code information is really valuable. I mean, we get zip code information for unemployment grants and other things, and it doesn't match our directs always but I think that gives us some sense of where the requests are coming from. Thank you. >> Yes. You bet. >> Casar: Mayor has joined us. Hi, mayor. Let me see if there are other questions. Before I get back to you, councilmember kitchen, councilmember harper-madison, because I can't sigh, I wanted to see if you had any questions. Then I also would love to test out the raise hand button to see if that works as a way for me to call on you. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. I really appreciate that because I have not found the raise hand button. Where exactly -- I looked -- there's a button that has three little dots and it [10:29:09 AM] says copy meeting, audio connections, speaker microphone and camera, connection, but I don't see this raise hand button you make reference to. >> Casar: If you have the participant side bar up, and I know that you can potentially close that and that is corrected be it. But there's a participants side bar where you can see everybody in the meeting, you can see our names, and if you highlight your own name you'll see a mute, unmute button, video button and then a hand. And so then if you click that hand, then I think that I should be able to see that. But if you can't find that it's okay. I've got my phone here and you can just text me. >> Harper-madison: That's what I'll do. I can't find what you're talking to me about. Getting me over my technological lack of advancement, we don't need to do that today. >> Casar: Why don't you text me a hand emoji and I'll call on you. Did you have a question, councilmember harper- madison? >> Harper-madison: No, no. Thank you. I appreciate you asking. >> Casar: Councilmember kitchen. [10:30:09 AM] >> Kitchen: Yes. I wanted to circle back around. It would be interesting as we move forward to think about the extent to which we can coordinate our assistance program with our small business program so that we're best leveraging dollars. You know, we need to put -- I believe that we need to put enough money into rental assistance for everybody that needs it, but I also think it would be interesting to think about the extent to which we can coordinate this. I would hate for us to not be providing rental assistance to people that need it. And also not helping smaller businesses that may be smaller landlords and then having people left out in the cold, whereas we could have in one program or the other have been helpful to a particular situation. So I know that adds a level of complexity but I would just ask you guys to think about it and maybe have some conversations with Veronica [10:31:11 AM] to see if there was an approach that makes sense to at least understand the data in a context that gives us a broader picture about what's going on. Does that make sense, Rosie, about what I'm asking? >> It does, it does. Yeah, it does completely. Veronica and I have been in close conversation and we're all going to be looking towards the data we get to make sure we're meeting the objectives that we want to meet. >> Casar: And I have a follow-up point to that. You know, a lot of our small business program is about retaining salaries and employees. But the -- you know, for small landlords, that may have to do with, you know, keeping your tenants in place and keeping that property from getting foreclosed on and not charging exorbitant rent. We have far market rent requirements for this program. So potentially instead of just giving a landlord a [10:32:14 AM] $12,000 grant to -- to maintain maybe a maintenance person they might have across a few properties, putting those $12,000 to rental assistance that keeps that tenant in place and keeps that landlord afloat may make sense, at which point that small business -- those 12,000 small business loan dollars might be best delivered to the tenant through the rent program. I'm not saying that's what we should do but that might be an idea because on the landlord side if we help the tenants we're supporting tenants. >> Kitchen: We just need to make sure it's coordinated. So we're stretching our dollars appropriately and we're solving the problem. >> Casar: Are there other questions? >> I agree. >> Harper-madison: Chair, I do have a question. I don't know this is the particular moment to ask the question or if there might be more that gets presented to us throughout the course [10:33:14 AM] of the presentation, but I'll go ahead and put it out here. I have some questions around folks who are living in extended stay hotel situations. And what our options are there. So when that's appropriate, director truelove, for us to have that conversation. I don't know if it's now or later, but I do have a lot of questions around what are our options there? >> I'm not sure that -- and I know there's some staff on the call online that might have more information about this. I'm not sure that we had any applications or the extended stay hotel scenarios were contemplated or available underneath this particular contract or this particular program. Is there anyone on the staff line that can help answer that question or is that something we're going to have to get back to the councilmember on? >> Rosie, this is Mandy. We did have a couple of [10:34:15 AM] questions from the public about extended stay hotels, as well as sublease arrangements and informal lease arrangements, and unfortunately this program is not accommodating those folks. One of the requirements is that there is a lease, a standard lease between the tenant and the landlord in order to participate in this program. But it is something that we will want to look at moving forward. And, again, as Rosie mentioned, we are looking forward to a deep data dive. But from the questions we received, the applications that we received, and who the ultimate recipients will be to determine who we were able to serve, not able to serve, and how we can adjust the program moving forward. >> Harper- madison: Thank you very much. I really appreciate that that's already on your radar. The truth of the matter is I'm getting a lot of calls about folks for whom that's a reality and moving forward they just have so much in [10:35:15 AM] the way of uncertainty. So anything that we can be offering our constituents for more certainty, more clarity about what things look like for them moving forward would be very helpful. Turns out it's really, really expensive to be poor, and a lot of people existing in the margins and in poverty are paying a lot in the way of rent just because it's what they're eligible and able to secure. So any advice and/or suggestions you could be offering moving forward would be very helpful because we are certainly getting the questions. >> Thank you. >> Casar: And I appreciate councilmember harper-madison raising that because I think it's -- I wouldn't be surprised if folks that are suffering more are more likely than not -- are more likely than the average person to be in those informal arrangements. So I would hate to leave out some of the folks who may need it the most and be impacted the most right now. So if -- even if it means [10:36:15 AM] that we create some priority post money that helps provide gift cards or other financial supports or arrangements for lottery winners that -- whose lease we can't easily pay for, let's just be thinking creatively about how those people don't get kicked off the list before they even get a chance. My only other question I think left here is, it would be useful or interesting to know what the most common things were that made someone be determined to be ineligible. I don't know if you know that off the top of your head. >> I don't have that information off the top of my head but I can see if we can include that in our data analysis to pull from the data set that we're getting. >> Casar: That would be great. And while you're going to help -- we're going to help over a thousand households and while we're saying that there are about 5500 eligible folks, households here, it looks like you're [10:37:16 AM] talking about -- you also have the family members listed. So is it right that I would add the eligible family members into the eligible column if I wanted to know how many people we would be serving? >> That would be my interesting. >> Casar: For about $7 million we could serve about 18,000 people. >> That is my understanding of the data. >> Casar: I mean, there's a really strong case there. That would be a program at really major scale that could be deployed really quickly and the fact y'all started talking about this at the end of April, announced it at the end of April and we're going to be helping people here in the next few days, the ability to scale that and help nearly -- what would that be? 18,000 people if we put some more money in this I think speaks really well to the program. Calibrate finding those gaps to cover would make a lot of sense. >> And I just want to take a [10:38:18 AM] moment to express our appreciation to our partners in this, mainly haca, who was helped us. You're absolutely right, we had preliminary conversations with haca about can we do something like this and two weeks later were launching the program. It was a huge lift and speaks to the testament of the quality of folks that we have in our housing authority and in our housing department. And I also want to thank the Austin apartment association that has helped us in providing outreach to landlords and getting this information in front of folks so that they're aware it's a benefit. >> Casar: Councilmember kitchen, one last question here before we move on? >> Kitchen: If you need to move on I can ask it off- line. >> Casar: Okay. I see councilmember tovo as well. >> Kitchen: Okay. So quickly, Rosie can answer this off-line if it's a long question. I'm curious about the way in which coordinating with the [10:39:19 AM] apartment association and landlords, are they allowed -- how can they participate to help their residents apply? >> I think they're primarily providing information about the program to their residents. I can -- we can provide more information off-line about how that communication has gone out, but we've seen them as a way to get information about the program to landlords and to make sure that landlords are able to share that information with their tenants. >> Casar: Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Thanks. I don't know if you can see my hand raised with the hand raised thing. It's unclear when it's actually raising the hand and when it isn't. Very quickly, to get back to the extended stay housing options and why they're not eligible, is it because of the way the funding -- did it have to do with the funding that you were utilizing or was it about [10:40:20 AM] the documentation? Because it seems to me that somebody who is doing that could show you a receipt for the previous weeks to show that -- to show that was where they were living. So I guess I just needed to understand whether it was a documentation issue or a funding stream issue? >> It's not a funding stream issue. I think it's more of a documentation issue. We can certainly get you a more concrete answer on that off-line, unless Mandy is able to jump in and answer that. >> Off-line is fine. I think that, you know, I would agree with my colleagues who raised that as an important group of individuals, to make sure are eligible for the assistance during this period of time. I'm not sure how to deal with the more informal arrangements unless they have receipts or checks or something else in those informal relationships, but it seems to me in both of those cases we could come up with a way of documenting [10:41:21 AM] those payments that just is different from a lease, from showing a lease. And if the funding contributor - - I mean, if it's not a funding restriction, then that eliminates our need to be creative on that. We just need to figure out the documentation piece. >> That's true. I would note that moving forward we will likely be using federal funds, potentially with a combination of federal and local funds, and so it might be an issue with federal funds. I can't speak to that without doing some research. But for the local there's not a requirement there. I think, again, it's more on the documentation and the substantiation of the lease commitment. >> Tovo: Where did the funding for this come from? Was it the -- >> Housing trust fund. >> Tovo: Is it, too, late to swap out federal money so we can preserve the trust fund dollars? >> That's always something we can do. We acted quickly as we knew that was something available [10:42:21 AM] to us and is an eligible use for the housing trust fund. We can certainly look to reimburse the housing trust fund with those federal dollars and that's something that could be potentially considered as we're talking about the larger spending plan for the coronavirus relief fund. >> Tovo: . I applaud nhcd for working quickly to get this immediate relief but it would be a high priority to make sure we're using our federal dollars to replenish the federal housing trust fund since it is our most unrestricted set of housing dollars, I would absolutely want to see that money replaced and then it could be used for -- just in those circumstances that we've been describing. So thanks so much. >> Casar: Thank you, all. >> I'm happy to answer any other questions off-line if it's helpful. >> Casar: Great. It would be. Sounds like we can work out creative arrangements for hotels, try our best to do that. [10:43:22 AM] I appreciate this data being out there. If we help over a thousand households that might mean we end up helping over 2,000 people with just this first round of money and we can keep on looking at the next round. Director truelove, will you take us to your next presentation then? Which is item 3, the briefing on the status of 2018 housing bond projects. >> So if I could ask Adam to pull up the presentation again. I don't think we'll be doing anymore screen sharing from my side. So if we go to the next slide. Next. Then we're going to be turning it over to -- keep going, please. So now I'm going to turn it over to Mandy Demayo, community development administrator in the housing department and ask her to go through the briefing on the housing bond. >> Absolutely. [10:44:22 AM] Good morning, everyone, Mandy Demayo, neighborhood housing and community development. We're going to be talking about the status of the 2018 affordable housing bond. If I can get Adam to move on to slide 8, actually, we'll see a breakdown of the 2018 affordable housing bond. This is a reminder back in 2018 city council recommended and citizens overwhelmingly approved $250 million for affordable housing. The 250 million is roughly divided into four different programs. Those include rental housing development assistance or rhda, ownership housing development assistants, home repair program and land acquisition. Rhda funds were identified as -- at $94 million, [10:45:27 AM] ohda28000000, home repair 28 million, and land acquisition at 100 million. These are flexible so they can be responsible to both market conditions as well as opportunities that present themselves. If we go on to the next slide we're going to go look at the actual status of the funding, how the spend-down is going. I will say with the general obligation bonds we're looking at a five-year spend plan. The funds were first appropriated, so voters approved in November of 2018. And then we went ahead, city council appropriated the first tranche of funds in spring of 2018 -- of 2019. And then subsequently in the regular budget cycle for fy 2020. Between those two years of funding, $101 million has been appropriated. So you'll see the four different programs, land [10:46:27 AM] acquisition, ohda, rhda and go repair. The top bar is showing you the full amount of the 2018 general obligation bonds. The second bar is showing you what has been appropriated between 2019, so our first year of the spend plan and this year, our second year of the spend plan. And then the bottom bar in each of the programs is showing you what has been obligated thus far. So I will note that the go repair program has been fully obligated to date and our seven nonprofit profits are marking on home repairs. The current contract runs through the calendar year, so December of 2020. But I will note that home repairs have been impacted and slowed down by covid-19. But we will be monitoring and working with our home repair partners as they catch up on much needed home repairs throughout city of [10:47:27 AM] Austin. If you look at those ohda and rhda, essentially those funds have been fully obligated over the two-year spend plan thus far. Want to dig down a little bit deeper and talk through our housing development assistance programs as well as the land acquisition program, as those are fully subscribed and oversubscribed. So if we go to the next slide, and that should be slide 9 -- I'm sorry, breakdown of housing development assistance. We -- as you all know, over the last year we moved to a quarterly application process to increase predictability and transparency of our funds. Housing development assistance is seriously oversubscribed. In fact just last week we closed our final application round for this fiscal year, [10:48:28 AM] so our fourth quarter. We received nine applications for both rhda and ohda, six for [indiscernible] The total request was more than $22 million. I will point out, as demonstrated on the previous slide that we are essentially fully obligated for both ohda and rhda for this fiscal year. A few really important things were included in those fourth quarter applications. The four -- we received four applications that were -- are 9% hihtc, low income housing tax credits. We won't know which of those four will be funded. That determination will happen in July 2020. The lihtc cap amounts, requests range from 3.5 million to 6.5 million [10:49:29 AM] per application. I will point out that three of the four applications are supportive housing applications and represent a potential for more than 200 continuum of care units. So very crucial applications. Typically we fund or fully fund our 9% lihtc awards because they really provide the most compelling leverage of our funding. I will also note that we can -- we're looking at the possibility of spreading the funding into next fiscal year but then of course that impacts next fiscal year's funding availability. Another final thing I want to mention about our ohda applications, coming this summer we will have the first tranche of funding due for the go development in district 10. This is to secure the affordability for some ownership housing units. And we anticipate that that funding amount will be [10:50:30 AM] approximately 3.2, $3.3 million. So if we can go to the next application -- the next slide, which will be slide 11, want to dig down a little bit into our land acquisition dollars because we heard a lot of questions from the public and from some councilmembers about our priorities around land acquisition. You'll see the pie chart that we're looking at. That shows the 50 million out of 100 million that has been appropriated thus far. Again, in fiscal year -- last fiscal year and the current fiscal year. Of that amount, about a third of it has either been encumbered or will be presented to the Austin housing finance corporation board on may 21st. So it's the next council meeting. This represents three projects, already approved is a project in district 6, with an acquisition at 11225 [10:51:34 AM] pecan park boulevard, 4.265 million. And that is near lakeline mall. The two acquisitions that y'all will be contemplating as Austin housing finance corporation board on may 21, one is an acquisition on district 5 at 1212 slaughter lane. That is representing about $10.7 million. And we have a memorandum of understanding with the parks and recreation department. They're going to be taking nearly half of that site for a neighborhood park. We're really excited about leveraging their dollars with our dollars to ensure both affordable housing and open space in district 5. And then also we are coming to the ahfc board with a contract to purchase 20 scattered site homes, contract with the housing authority of the city of Austin, for a little over [10:52:34 AM] $4.7 million. This represents single-family homes in districts 1, 2, 6 and 7. And we will be purchasing, rehabing those homes and putting them into our community land trust for affordable ownership. So ife go to the next slide, the slide 12, just to talk a little bit through what our priorities are as neighborhood housing community development staff when we look at land acquisition. We are of course guided by the Austin strategic housing blueprint and all of the priorities laid out in that blueprint, which was approved by council in 2017. Those priorities include but are not limited to looking for housing -- affordable housing opportunities in high-opportunity areas. And then looking for housing opportunities in gentrifying areas, per the uprooted study, UT uprooted study, and I'm also looking at [10:53:35 AM] leveraging our dollars to ensure access for low and moderate income folks, access to public transportation. So we really have looked at leveraging our affordable housing dollars with the funding from the 2016 mobility bond. As well as the project connect vision. So I will note that really -- and the reason that gentrifying areas in the 2016 mobility bond and project connect, the reason I've circled that is just to highlight that these are really part of our displacement mitigation strategy. When we look at focusing our dollars in gentrifying areas and we look at focusing our -- our dollars in areas that are going to receive additional dollars in transportation investment, we want to make sure we ensure opportunities for low and moderate income folks to stay or live in proximity to high capacity transit. [10:54:36 AM] Just so you all know, we currently have several properties under negotiation. One is in district 2. It's an opportunity near pleasant valley, aligns nicely with project connect. Another is in district 4, which is in a high-opportunity area of district 4, but also adjacent to rapidly gentrifying areas, and that's an Kramer lane. In addition, we are looking at leveraging our dollars with other taxing jurisdictions like aisd, cap metro, and the university of Texas. We have been in ongoing conversations with them over the past year, identifying parcels where it would make sense for affordable housing for low and moderate income folks. And we're also looking at assets either underutilized or currently vacant, [10:55:36 AM] city-owned assets so that we can ensure we're working closely with economic development department so we can ensure that we're maximizing community benefits, including affordable housing, on our city- owned land. So I'm happy to take any questions if we go to the next slide. It should be our questions slide. And if there are any questions about any of the priorities or the individual properties that we are pursuing or have pursued, I'm happy to discuss further. >> Harper-madison: Chair Casar, I don't know if you got my text yet. I have a hand up. I will obviously defer to whoever had their hand up before me but my hand is up just so you know. >> Casar: Go ahead. >> Harper-madison: Okay. I'm unmuted. Thank you. I appreciate it. [10:56:37 AM] Thank you so much, Mandy. I have a thousand questions. Some of those questions have to do with -- I really just am finding myself struggling to understand why we're putting so much emphasis on single- family housing as opposed to multi-family. If maybe you could expand on the thought process there? And then some of my other questions I will be able to ask subsequent to your response. >> Sure. So I will say -- >> Harper-madison: And that question -- >> Casar: Hold on, Mandy. Just to be clear, councilmember harper-madison, are you talking about the housing authority scattered sites, single- family houses described or is there another component of that? >> Harper-madison: No. I was thinking specifically to what was presented just now. >> Casar: And specifically I think -- just for my clarity, it would be useful to know if you described single-family housing -- detached single-family housing separate from the housing authority sites that [10:57:37 AM] you were thinking about purchasing, if there's something in addition to that that's single family detached, I would want to hear about that too, in addition to councilmember harper-madison's question. >> Harper-madison: So what I would say is if there's anything in addition to what my original question was, which was, like -- what I heard was single-family housing specifically as it pertained to, like, what was specifically presented. But if there's any other %-úconsideration that offers anything by way of priority to single-family housing as opposed to multi-family, especially multi-family income- restricted housing, I would really want to know why we would offer any preferential treatment to one or the other. Maybe I'm asking both, in which case I would love to get more information and more in-- incite into how we're making the decision. Does that help you? >> Casar: That's great. Mandy, take it away. >> Yeah. I hope this answers your [10:58:39 AM] question. The only single-family housing we are contemplating at the department are the haca scattered site homes. Those will be acquired, rehabbed and put into our community land trust for first-time homeownership. All of the other properties we've looked at are being contemplated for multi-family development. In fact, when we do a preliminary analysis of any site, we're looking at maximizing the number of units. So what we have purchased thus far and what we are contemplating and will come before you at the may 21st Austin housing finance corporation meeting and the what is currently under negotiation are all multi-family developments. And then I will also say -- >> Harper-madison: Thank you, Mandy. I really appreciate that. You definitely answered the question I was trying to ask so thank you, even if I wasn't able to effectively articulate my question, you answered it. [10:59:39 AM] So thank you very much. >> Okay. >> Harper-madison: If you wouldn't mind expanding on that by way of just really recognizing what the differences are, I think to some degree if I could just get a little more clarity on what the differences are in how you made the specific decisions on points of priority. >> We're balancing. So to be perfectly honest, we're balancing all of these priorities that I laid out, whether it's high opportunity or gentrifying. Those are typically mutually exclusive areas, but then we're also in both high opportunity and gentrifying areas, we are looking for access to high frequency transit. So we're really layering on whether it's the 2016 mobility bond corridor, which I will say with the 1212 slaughter lane coming before you may 21st, that is immediately on a 2016 [11:00:39 AM] mobility bond investment corridor. Or whether it's the Kramer lane properties that we are currently in negotiation with that is on project connect. It is on the Orange line. We're looking at leveraging those dollars and utilizing, walking in that income restricted housing in order to mitigate displacement and for the long-term ensure affordability along public transportation routes. >> Harper-madison: I really appreciate that. But I just want to make sure that we are taking the opportunity to recognize that -- we're not just talking Orange, we're talking blue, we're talking red, and we're eventually going to be talking about the green line, right? In my mind's eye when I'm thinking through how we address some of these needs, some of the things that I would really love to have be front and center have to do [11:01:40 AM] with, like, really recognizing that some of these locations you just mentioned aren't in the urban core. In which case if we're talking about complete, compact community, they're gonna have to be, like, recognizing that we're talking about the urban core. And affordability unlocked, like how do we address and apply affordability unlocked to some of these situations? In which case, like, project connect, on the pleasant valley and stazni location, does that route actually come online soon enough to where we can reconnect pleasant valley to Ben white? In which case I have a lot of questions. And I know a lot of this we can do off-line but I just wanted to make sure it's public-facing in that I have lots of questions about how we're going to make this work for folks. >> Absolutely. And I will say, I'm looking at my project connect map right now with all my [11:02:40 AM] scribbles on where we have other existing affordability, planned affordability, or planned acquisitions. We're in this for the long haul. Some of our acquisitions may bear immediate fruit and some may be more of a land banking as development occurs in those areas. And you mentioned the green line. I will say we do have some priority projects along the green line, as well as the purple line. We've got blue. We've got Orange. We've got the extensions. We're looking at this -- again, we're in it for the long haul, recognizing that the development cycle and the affordability cycle, we want to make sure that we align all of those with our transportation cycle. And it's all in alignment with imagine Austin comprehensive plan. [11:03:42 AM] >> Casar: Vice chair Ellis? >> Ellis: Thank you. I've got a couple of questions. One hopefully is simple. I really liked the pie chart of the current allotment of that land acquisition bond money. Could we get a breakdown even further as we head into the next council meeting to know, you know, what was done on hotel/motel strategy that's been allotted versus what may not be allotted and kind of what's coming up on this next agenda? I think it would help me to see that broken down a bit further. Then I also wanted to ask about the role of duplexes in the conversation around purchasing single family. The ones I'm thinking of are typically more market rate affordable and oftentimes along bus routes or other mobility corridors. So I just wasn't sure if that was part of the consideration of what is appropriate for -- I know we said detached single family, but seeing those considerations around duplexes I wasn't sure if that was part of the [11:04:44 AM] conversation to be able to obtain those units as well. >> Sure. Okay. So let me take these in two different parts. The first question about the pie chart we can certainly give you much more detailed breakdown. I will say I skipped over a very important piece of the pie. When I look at the pie, about a third of it, as I mentioned -- and this is what I focused on -- was either encumbered or coming before you on the may 21 agenda. Then the bottom piece of the pie really is the amount of money we feel like in the short-term is necessary in order to execute the council's vision for the hotel/motel strategy, conversion strategy. As you all know, the first piece of that was the Redway inn, which has already been purchased and we utilized federal funding for that ago -- acquisition. Those federal funds are all [11:05:45 AM] gone, they've been used by the acquisition and will subsequently be used with rehabilitation. We'll be tapping into federal funds for that. We have identified other hotel/motel, we're working with the office of real estate services on those. We can get you more details. We are very cognitive city council that is articulated a vision for at minimum, this is an ongoing plan, of 300 permanent supportive housing units through the hotel/motel conversion strategy and we want to make sure we have sufficient funding and have identified this is an appropriate funding source in order to execute that strategy. The remaining funds, remaining third of the pie, really is -- as I mentioned we are currently juggling multiple -- we have multiple offers and several properties in negotiation. We want to make sure we have sufficient funding in order to cover those acquisitions, which will of course come before Austin housing [11:06:45 AM] finance corporation for your consideration as soon as we have secured those deals. We will provide you -- all of that to say we will provide you a more detailed breakdown and more details before that comes to you on the 21st agenda. Then the second question was about duplexes, and I will say the housing authority deal, we are typically not in the business of acquiring single-family homes, partially because it's not as efficient, from our perspective, in terms of an investment, doing a kind of Oney, twosy there. It hasn't been a priority. The haca homes came to us when the housing authority they currently have a portfolio of single-family homes that they used to rent to housing choice voucher holders. [11:07:45 AM] They, recognizing that it was very hard to manage scattered site homes from afar, they decided to request from H.U.D. Approval to actually sell the homes. They were going to package all of these homes into a single portfolio and put it out on the open market. They approached us first because what we knew is that if it was portfoliod and put out on the market a private investor would purchase them and of course rehab them and put them out onto the market. We have several pockets of where these homes are that are really in high-opportunity areas. And we thought it was an excellent opportunity for our community land trust to help grow our community land trust and provide affordable first-time ownership to low and moderate-income families. So this is not a deal that we necessarily sought out. [11:08:46 AM] Again, we're not seeking out, necessarily, single family or duplex. Not to say we couldn't contemplate them, but this was a really unique deal that councilmember tovo us and we appreciate the partnership with the housing authority and them giving us first priority because it will secure the affordability for the long-term. >> Ellis: Absolutely. So is the scattered site method something that is being phased out or is there something specific about these particular homes that housing authority was willing to let go of? But they're still continuing the scattered site program? Did I ask that question in a clear way? >> Yeah. So these are the -- this is the portfolio of homes that they, the housing authority, actually own as a public housing authority. They are discontinuing that approach. Their housing choice vouchers, they're relying on [11:09:46 AM] private landlords to accept housing choice vouchers, which is a totally different conversation, rather than providing the housing themselves in a scattered site fashion. Does that make sense? >> Ellis: Yes, that's very helpful. Thank you. >> Okay. Mm-hmm. >> Casar: Thank you. Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: Okay. So, Mandy, I have two sort of related questions. One is about the time line for the appropriation of dollars. We spread it out over five years. I'm wondering if there's any utility in accelerating that. And I'm also wondering whether you are facing any kind of challenges in extending the acquisition dollars that you can share with us? >> Sure. >> Kitchen: In other words -- [overlapping speakers] In other words, why spread it out over five [11:10:47 AM] years? Is there a need to accelerate it or not? Then what kind of challenges are y'all experiencing? >> Yeah. After the 2018 bonds were approved, Rosie and I sat down to talk through the spend plan and how we would allocate the dollars. One thing we decided with the go repair dollars is that we would gradually increase the annual allocation, recognizing that our nonprofit partners needed to build their capacity over time. With both rhda and ohda dollars, our housing dollar sinks we knew demand was going to be there. We roughly divided it over five years. With land acquisition we actually front loaded it. So you'll note rather than $20 million a year, we're only two years in and front loaded $50 million, with the understanding that we wanted to be prepared should a [11:11:48 AM] large scale opportunity present itself and, you know, one of the examples in our discussions with council was the txdot parcel that subsequently became the grove. When that became available and it was a very quick time frame, the city was not positioned to cut a check, as it were, for I think it was 29 million something in the appraised value, and we wanted to position ourselves in order to take advantage of any such opportunities, large-scale opportunities like that. I see with our current spend plan and with the looming project connect, I see no problem with identifying and wisely investing the hundred million dollars over the next five years. I do see the need potentially to bring additional funding forward [11:12:48 AM] for particularly rental housing development rental assistance. That is where we are, as I mentioned, seriously oversubscribed, and we have some opportunities that we cannot turn down. So I'll use the 9% lihtc deals as an example. We have four projects that are coming before us. Three of those are supportive housing projects with an enormous number of continuum of care units. And they need -- they need the gap funding. And so we would recommend to city council, should it come down to whether or not the funding is available this fiscal year, we would certainly recommend to council that we bring forward -- we appropriate additional dollars this fiscal year in order to make those projects whole. We won't know anyone of that until June /July time frame, when we get a better handle on what the Texas department [11:13:50 AM] of housing community affairs will be recommending for funding. But that's kind of the situation where I can see moving money forward, accelerating some of the dollars. But rental housing development certainly and land acquisition, between the hotel/motel strategy and land acquisition related to project connect. And, again, focusing on high-opportunity and gentrifying areas, there are a lot of opportunities, and we're planning on taking advantage of those. >> Thank you. >> That >> And just to give some historical context, that would not be asking for -- to wholly fund the nine percent lihtc and asking for early appropriation of future bond allocations is not -- that wouldn't be a new thing. We've done that through the last bond cycle too and it's just our way to -- if we [11:14:51 AM] need to take some from a future year to be able to take advantage of really great opportunities this year, we will. But the goal would be to spend out each program before we start taking or dipping out of other programs. >> Casar: I'm trying to wrap up this item in the next five minutes or so so we have time for the last two. Are there other questions? I'm having trouble seeing highland. Anyone else? Speak up because I'm having a little trouble seeing. >> And I'm happy to meet one on one with folks and answer questions offline. >> Casar: Great. My only remaining question is if we -- when we buy the scattered site homes and likely do some rehab and sell them, does that replenish ohda? >> There are replenishment opportunities, those sales. Keep in mind that the city would be making an investment in these homes. [11:15:53 AM] We would be taking the land because it will be community land trust, we'll be taking that off, but we will be getting some funds back and yes, it will partially replenish. Not in whole, but it will partially replenish. >> >> Casar: I appreciate it but actually keeping those places affordable is powerful. And I appreciate that. >> Harper-madison: Chair Casar, I actually do have my hand up. Man, -- I'm especially cute today. I put on my head band. I'm here rocking these looks for you today and you can't even see my face! That's unfortunate. [Laughter]. I do have questions. May I please take the floor? >> Casar: Of course, please. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. So I have some questions about just generally thinking about how when we move forward and we're [11:16:53 AM] talking about a long-term vision here, we know that we're going to have different tools in the future. So we want to make sure that we get the best bang for our buck. And one of the things that's really kind of giving me a little bit of heartburn is how many dollars do we use towards these efforts and how do we do the mixed income communities? I had a great conversation yesterday with a group of our allies that were having a conversation about mixed income, mixed use communities. And the conversation came down to race, which you know me, if always comes down to race. Like everything is about race. And so when we were having this conversation, it was beautiful. This group of folks that were having this conversation about housing, complete communities and housing, it's like you can't just throw people together in a community and assume [11:17:55 AM] that we have the necessary programming and we have the necessary effort to have it so that people communicate with one another in a way that we build these complete communities. But the brilliance and the beauty of the product that is these complete communities, people that get the opportunity by way of what we produce as a municipality, as a body, like what we get to produce by way of our policy that makes it so that people get the opportunity to connect with one another. And to really be a part of this -- building these beautiful communities. So one of my concerns there is like are we taking the opportunity to think about taking these dollars and making sure that they do in fact build complete mixed income, mixed race communities? And that's the thing that I [11:18:55 AM] keep finding myself concerned about. So like thank you, Mandy, by the way. Mandy and director truelove, I appreciate both of y'all's contributions to the dialogue and I want you to know that yes, I recognize that we can have this conversation off the record in addition to this, but I want to make certain that people know we're thinking about this. How are we bringing people together by way of opportunities presented to us with this general initiative. >> That is a big question, but I can assure you that we, staff, are guided by the principles of complete communities which I think are articulated in the strategic housing blueprint. We're looking at income restricted housing and essentially all types of housing for all types of people in all parts of down. So we're constantly [11:19:56 AM] balancing housing in what we would call high opportunity areas, housing in gentrifying areas. It's a balancing act. And when we put property out -- all the parcels I mentioned, we just acquired them. We haven't put them out for solicitation, but as you know we have two parcels right now, Austin housing finance corporation, that we are getting ready hopefully in June to put out for a request for proposals. And all of our community conversations which have been virtual, it's been a fascinating experience, but our community conversations have been guided by maximizing affordability, but also maximizing the community benefit and creating those communities for all kinds of people. For families, for seniors, for folks of different [11:20:58 AM] races, ethnicities. We are trying to cultivate that through our solicitation. So I feel like we are -- maybe we're just nibbling around the edges, but I do feel like this is something that staff is certainly guided by and our community conversations are guided by. >> Casar: Thank you for raising that. >> Harper- madison: Thank you. I appreciate being observed, chair. Thank you, Mandy, that's exactly what we're seeing. I think we're saying the exact same thing. I really love that even with these virtual opportunities to have conversations with one another, we really get to be -- we're saying the same thing. So I really look forward to having us have the opportunity to expand on thinking through like the really elaborate nature of us building complete opportunities. That's exactly what we have to do and I love that the [11:22:01 AM] people like you and director truelove, I love the fact that we are all thinking along the same lines. So thank you for the recognition, chair, and thank you, Mandy. Appreciate you. >> Renteria: Just a minute. I've just got a quick question. What we're doing here in district 3, especially in the Cesar Chavez neighborhood, is that's what we're thinking about in a complete community. You know, we have the haca development at Chalmers going on. We have habitat building a 56 condo for low income people, and we have saltillo where over 180 unit for affordable housing. The biggest plan that I always envision is to try to make Austin like Mueller. Mueller is one of the perfect examples of what we can do to Austin and at the same time there's 25% of the people there are low income [11:23:02 AM] people, workforce people. And we're trying to make sure that people who live there do not get stereotyped saying these are the poor folks that live on this side of town or they live in the projects. And it's so interesting because I've been getting a lot of email and Facebook comments that we're selling off Chalmers for the developers. And I said oh my god, this is a development done by the Austin housing finance corporation of the city of Austin. You think we're developers? We're not. We're working very hard to provide as many affordable units. In my district that's what my goal is to provide as many affordable units that I can and be a mixed income, mixed race type community. So that's what I'm working on. >> Casar: I like responding to those emails too when somebody asks what the expensive condos are going up at Chalmers and getting to explain that. [11:24:05 AM] [Laughter]. Those are good emails we get to right. I'm going to move us on to the next item, but to this point I appreciate the presentation of land acquisition fund. I would say that I think continued emphasis on those project connect lines and on the gentrifying areas is really important. I appreciate that we've gone and gotten land out at lakeline and found some high opportunity land. I think that's an important step for us, but I think really we're hearing more and more apart from the covid, important work, the gentrifying areas in the project connect lines and especially where those intersect. Councilmember kitchen's resolution on that I think is important for us to keep our eye on. Mayor, I just saw you clicked your video back on. Do you have something? You're on future. >> Mayor Adler: I have been listening and I wanted to add my appreciation as well. As we go through the virus this work is the work that extends -- that helps us exit this virus in a better [11:25:07 AM] place than we entered. And I just really appreciate the work you all are doing to stay focused on that future of Austin. And I think how that relates to the project connect world, which is something that I hope also is part of our future is going to be a big [indiscernible] As we move through the next decade. So thank you. >> Thank you, mayor. >> Casar: I'll move us on to the next item, which is a briefing on our continuum of care units. >> Yes. And Jamie may is community development manager in our department and he is on the webex and he's going to run through the next two items. >> Casar: And everyone, I really would like for us to try to see ific with get through this part in, you know, 15 minutes or so, so there's enough time for the last item on the agenda. >> >> Jamie, it is up to you. If we could get the powerpoint pulled up to the next slide that would be helpful. [11:26:27 AM] Jamie, you're muted in case you're trying to talk. [Laughter]. Couldn't tell. >> Jamie is still muted and potentially frozen. Mandy, do you want to run through these slides since Jamie is having technical issues? >> Sure thing. Although Jamie, as soon as you -- as soon as you can talk, jump in and cut me off. So we wanted to talk through permanent supportive housing continuum of care and the rental housing development assistance program. [Background noise]. >> Casar: If everyone on the line could mute themselves that would be great for Mandy. >> We had talked earlier [11:27:28 AM] about the strategic housing blueprint and of course one of the goals embedded in the strategic housing blueprint is 10-year targets for permanent supportive housing. The goal at the time, again this was 2017, was to support the production of 50 permanent supporive housing units each year with half of those being housing first, which essentially translates to low barrier. Our goal since that time, because we've seen changing needs. Again, that was nearly three years ago, our goals have been updated. In terms of where we get these units, where do we get permanent supportive housing units? Well, our primary source really is the low income housing tax credit program or lihtc program. I had mentioned earlier that we have four potential lihtc deals, and three of those actually include permanent supportive housing and two [11:28:28 AM] of them are kinium of care so we'll talk about this -- continuum of care. We'll talk about this a little bit. To continue another source in the rhda program that we administer, we require folks, if applicants offer up or want to get additional points for permanent supportive housing we require they have a memorandum of understanding with echo, the continuum of care organization. And so they negotiate that one on one. And we have several projects that have in fact -- >> Hey, Mandy. >> Yeah. >> Mandy? Jamie is you want if you want to let him take over. His computer crashed and he had to log back in. >> Have at it, Jamie! >> Thank you. Sorry about that. Computer difficulties. I obviously did not hear anything that Mandy said. [Laughter]. [11:29:30 AM] >> So I will -- >> Jamie, [overlapping speakers] Our strategic housing blueprint identified the 50 permanent supportive housing units each year and half of those being housing first as a goal for our unit development. And that's so that we can meet the need that has been established. First I wanted to start with some terms that need a little bit of definition. Permanent supportive housing really means permanent like the resident lives in the unit. It is their unit. Supportive meaning that it comes with services so that the resident is successful. And whatever those services may be, whether it's addiction counseling or financial mentoring, things like that to make the resident successful in their stay. Now, housing first is put them in a unit first. [11:30:33 AM] We don't -- we want to bring the services along with them, but we want -- priority is to put someone in a unit. And reason why that is a separation of terms is because those housing first units can also be rapid re-housing. So someone coming -- someone leaving a situation where let's say their car breaks down, which means they can't get to work, which means they lost their job, which means they can't pay their rent, which means they lost their house, rather than letting that person rise to the top on a coordinated assessment, just get them in a unit as quickly as possible so you can forestall that downward spiral, give them a place to land so that that spiral ends. And that's why we shifted away from calling it housing first to continuum of care because these units are on the continuum, whether it's rapid re-housing or all the way up to the most live to serve an individual with the most co-morbidity. [11:31:33 AM] So those are the two kind of definitions that I wanted to go over first. Just to make it very clear, housing first is extremely low barrier and it is not housing ready units, it is put them in a unit. We can advance to the next slide. So how these units are developed comes from four different sources essentially. The first is tdhca with their uap for their low income housing tax credits, they provide additional points for permanent supportive housing units. Now, they have a three page definition for what that means and they bring a lot of regulation I guess along with that. We are lucky enough to have in our community multiple developers that provide actually affordable Esh units, foundation communities being one, that are very, very essential to achieving these goals. [11:32:34 AM] However, those psh units don't necessarily qualify as coc units. You will see that in just a moment. The rhd and memorandum of understanding with echo is how we have the coc units. Those units are by definition housing first. In order to -- as Mandy mentioned, I did hear her mention a couple of points on the rhda system, the more coc units, the more points you get and the better your application is in the competition. The third place that we are building these units is through the hotel converging strategy. And the rodeway inn echo said this would be the first zero barrier permanent supportive housing in Austin. So not only is it low bear remember, it is zero barrier. And it is going to be a game changer because it's not just taking someone from the top of the list, it's taking the top of the list. And then finally, echo works [11:33:35 AM] with private individuals, private landlords and property managers to coordinate with private agreements so that they go to a 20 unit apartment complex on airport boulevard and say, you know, we'd like to have two of your units, we'll pay you the voucher, we'll bring support services and the property manager says of course let's do that. So these units are being pulled from the on coc. If we can move to the next slide. So when we talk about rhda permanent supportive housing these are all the developments that have been funded through rodeo road rodeo road trip da. And this is not inclusive list, but it's the highlights from the last year. Terrace at oak springs was fully occupied in December. That's 50 units of housing first. That's also psh. That's permanent supportive units. It comes with services and the residents have those [11:34:37 AM] occupancies as their residence. Water wood terrace also has 27 units that they signed an mou with echo to identify those units as low barrier. They don't -- they didn't actually qualify as housing first because there are additional restrictions that community foundations applied to them. So it's like a housing first and a half. Roosevelt gardens is a development through project transitions. They are bringing 40 permanent supportive housing units for the population that they serve, which are individuals living with HIV and AIDS. They negotiated or they attempted to negotiate an mou with echo, but because the population that they're serving is so specific, those units won't actually qualify as coc units. Now, that's just an explanation of where things [11:35:40 AM] are kind of staying. The issue is that echo has a very clear definition of what coc and what housing first and the developers have a very clear definition of the population that they want to serve. Not always do these populations coincide. Moving down to the bottom of three. The sparrow, those are the threonine percent applications that will be coming to tdhca in July. And if they are approved they will come to ahfc board in August. We can advance one more slide? This is the continuum of care units. Those that are secured with mou that would qualify as continuum of care that are certified as housing first. You can see terrace and dove springs all 50 of those units qualify as coc. [11:36:40 AM] Waterloo terrace, that's more of a housing first and a half. So I'm not actually drafting those for this presentation. These numbers are not in scripture, nothing about this is in stone. This is just to kind of explain the situation. In the last year we have secured multiple mous for our developments, burnet place was funded this year. Decolina and city heights were funded this year. We have gotten 24 coc units committed through the rhda process. If sparrow, Rutland and armadillo are all approved by tdhca, then that would be an additional 166 coc units, or the phs definition over 300. [11:37:40 AM] So the definition is important. How we call -- what we call these units are important and how we count them are important. The reason why we have removed psh from our scoring rubric and put coc as the important metric is because we know what coc means. When echo brings an mou to us we can say this is clearly a coc unit. This is a unit that will count against the coordinated assessment and we know how to verify that. With a psh unit we don't have that. We can rely on their definition, but if property is not a nine percent tax credit or not a tax credit property, then we would have to somehow certify what is psh. And we don't have the expertise, which is why we rely on echo to make that call. Some of the conflicts that are going on internally is a lack of communication. And a lack of trust. [11:38:42 AM] On the phone call earlier Rosie mentioned earlier [indiscernible]. I'm not sure if it will solve the situation, but it's an approach that we should -- we need to try something. Echo is working on improving their communication, talking to developers will how they go through their assessment and their strategic placements. They know that they don't want to put -- they know that they want to put the right person in the right unit at the right time. So you're not going to put someone with multiple morbidities into a family development where they won't be successful. A successful resident is what everybody in this entire conversation, from echo, from the property owners, to the city. And so it's just going to take a little bit trust and more communication in order to achieve those goals. I think that we are on the right path and I think that over the next several months we can have more conversations with echo and [11:39:43 AM] with our property managers and developers to build that trust and build that collaboration. If we can go to the next slide. I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Casar: Thank you for the presentation. To members of the committee, we can ask some questions, but we do have [indiscernible] Left. So questions we ask we might have to run a little over noon and I don't want to take us too long past noon. Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: I'm just flagging this because it's a longer conversation for later. I would like to understand better what you just highlighted in terms of the trust building and the current conflicts around continuum of care. That's not for today. I'll reach out to you offline. >> Casar: Councilmember harper-madison. >> Harper-madison: I'm going to take this moment of privilege and just say councilmember kitchen's earrings are amazing right now. [Laughter]. [11:40:44 AM] I don't know if that's citrine or what, but they're beautiful. >> Kitchen: Thank you, Natasha. >> You're welcome. And I appreciate this dialogue and one of the things that makes me want to extend this conversation outside of this is something along the lines that I really appreciate that Jamie acknowledged that we are finding ourselves in a position to where we're having to make decisions about like who is eligible for what kind of a thing. And I really think if we can't like -- if we really can't put that on paper, what do we mean when we say who is eligible and under what circumstances? There's a lot of implications there in my mind's eye that put us at risk. One, just from a like recognizing that the city is just generally risk averse. I think there's a lot that put us at risk there. Then I also have a lot of questions about like who are we determining is eligible [11:41:45 AM] and based on what circumstances. So Jamie -- nice to meet you. If you and I can have a conversation moving forward about what that means when we're talking about who is eligible, that would be very helpful for my office. Thank you very much. >> Casar: Other questions? I would want to acknowledge the hard work pushing towards this coc definition, also acknowledge that even though a lot of this is really hard, we are producing so many more units for folks who otherwise would be experiencing homelessness than ever before with this housing bond. So somewhere it seems that about 500 units, if all of these different developments get approved, we would have 500 more homes for people that would most likely otherwise be experiencing homelessness. And somewhere between 250 to 500 of those are at the level of low barrier that is [11:42:47 AM] the gold standard that we want people to reach. But the fact of the matter is, and within a short time period here, thanks to the council putting this bond on the ballot and voters approving it and everybody in the community stepping up, we're talking about around 500 homes for people otherwise experiencing homelessness. And several hundred of those being at the level of low barrier that we really want, which is I think is a really powerful step and we really want to get -- we need to do hundreds more and we want to keep them low barrier so I appreciate the conversation that you are working on. And what councilmember harper-madison said because we want everybody to be able to qualify because everybody needs housing. Anyone else? >> Chair coup zilker park I just wanted to say thank you for making sure to bring that front and center. We appreciate your effort on being a strong force for this commission. [11:43:48 AM] And I really appreciate that you brought that forward and I look forward to -- I wonder if there's a way for us to build in a system where we can communicate with one another moving forward like have some sense of expectation like when is the next check-in. Do we have a timeline? >> On the coc units or on the housing bonds generally, which of the two do you think is most useful, councilmember? >> Harper- madison: I would say both if you don't mind. >> Casar: Maybe not at the next meeting, which I think is in July, but maybe the one after that just to give everybody a bit of buffer time. But if we want to do this and we can bring back this exact conversation of the meeting after the July one, which I think will be right after we pass the budget. >> Harper-madison: I just think it will be -- >> I will say in July -- [multiple voices] >> Harper-madison: Let's follow up. Let's offer ourselves an opportunity by way of really clearly defined timeline for when we follow up on both items. >> And I think just to -- if [11:44:52 AM] we came back in July we wouldn't have any different substantive numbers in that we wouldn't have kind of a quarterly cycle. So coming back quarterly might make sense to just provide an update on how things have moved through the past quarter or what things have -- what applications have we received, what's being funded. That's certainly at least for the bond purposes and for having any change in the number of coc units, that would be the soonest that we would see any difference. Having larger conversations about how we're developing the units and how we're continuing to improve relationships across the spectrum, certainly we can have those conversations any time. >> Harper-madison: That makes sense. Thank you, director truelove. Thank you, I appreciate that. >> Casar: Let's see how that works. We'll circle back here at the next quarter. So we're on the last item, which is a briefing and some discussion here on tenant selection policies regarding criminal backgrounds [11:45:56 AM] required by the rhda program and as directed by the round table. I don't know if staff want to talk about this first at all or if councilmember harper-madison, if you want to suggest a way of structuring this since you suggested this item for the agenda. >> So we have a couple of slides to set the stage for everyone to understand what is currently in our guidelines. And Jamie could probably run through those really quickly so we're all kind of coming from the same place and then where staff is available to listen in and answer any questions that might be there. >> Casar: Sounds good. >> All right. So just like the coc conversation with tenant selection, in January of 2019 we revised the rhda guidelines. One of the major shifts that we made was taking all of the tenant protections that were embedded in the guidelines and making sure that they were listed in the lease addendum. That is open for public comment right now. We've already received some [11:46:56 AM] comment. We expect more. But that's half of the conversation. The other half of the conversation is this tenant selection policy. If you can advance to the next slide. The -- we started with the lockout report that the he reentry round table distributed in 2016. That informed the Texas criminal background screening guide that was released in April of 2018. And in January of 2019 we took that criminal background screening guide and embedded it within the rhda guidelines saying that any applicant and any awardee of our fund must comply with the Texas criminal background screening guide. In the background screening guide they say that -- I won't read this, but the two things that I want to pull out is that they said the look back period should not be greater than seven years for felons. They also say it should not [11:47:58 AM] be greater than three years for misdemeanors. And then they provide a chart that offers suggested look- back periods for different types of crimes. The next slide, please. So we took the information from that screening guide and provided five -- more than five, but these are the five pertinent ones for today's conversation. First the only ones that are taken into consideration for accusations or not anything that was dismissed. We screen from the date of conviction and not from the date of incarceration nor the date of release. We screen from -- there is no such thing as a catchall category such as unclassified offenses. That was used in the past by some property managers to screen out unwanted tenants on a fairly dubious basis. And then we say no look-back period should exceed seven years for felonies and no [11:49:00 AM] look-back period three years for mezzaniners. And -- mezzaniners. And all applicants should be provided an opportunity for individualized review. This is an appeal process if you are denied based on a previous conviction, then you get to appeal that denial. And to the next slide? And one of the confusions around the conversation has been this table that was embedded into the screening guide in the criminal background screening guide. It says look back period based on type of crime and conviction. We require applicants and awardees to provide a table. This is one version of that table. And you can see the look back period on the far right column, three years for assault and battery, three years for domestic violence, those are suggested look back period based on the Texas criminal screening guide. We don't require those [11:50:03 AM] stringent look back periods. We do require to you have a table so that all applicants can see clearly what that look-back period is for each of those offenses. And if you're so inclined, then this is an easy way to build that table out. But our process would not require these look-back periods as determining. Next slide. And that's really where the conversation has landed. And I'd be happy to answer any questions about that look-back period, about how we incorporate the background screening guide into the rhda guide. >> Casar: Councilmember harper-madison, I want to hand it over to you to let us know which parts of this you want to discuss, but my only quick question that I think is useful context here is Mr. May, can you tell us when all of that went into effect? >> That was January of it 2019. >> Casar: So there's some buildings that have been built now that are recently [11:51:04 AM] opened that are using these criteria? >> I'd have to look, but that would be anything that was awarded post-january 2019. So with their lease or with their loan agreement that would be an attachment to that loan agreement so they would have to comply with that. Anything that was awarded prior to January 2019 would not have to comply with it. >> Casar: Got it. Councilmember harper-madison? >> Harper- madison: Yeah, thank you. I appreciate you recognizing me. And one of the questions I had was what you just brought up, especially from the time line perspective. January 2019, right? If we're thinking through what is transpired to date, what transpired prior to, I just have some general questions about when we're talking about the look-back period, can we speak to -- Jamie, I wonder if you can help me speak to how we find ourselves in a position to [11:52:04 AM] where we make this ultimate determination about the look-back period? Because there's multiple, you know, opportunities for us to look at what the look-back period looks like depending on what city you're in. So I'm just trying to figure out like how are we finding ourselves salient in the way that we figure out - - like what's the best way to address the look-back period? I've gotten a lot of push-back by way of the push-back period timeline. And I'm just trying to make certain that we're taking the necessary steps to be as thoughtful as possible. >> And that's exactly why we relied on the Texas background criminal screening guide. We wanted to use a reputable source. We know that they went through years of conversation and research in order to establish those limits and those background [11:53:05 AM] checks. So we didn't want to create anything new out of old law. I would much rather go on somebody else's work to inform our own. >> Harper-madison: My bad. Old lady out here muted. My bad. So then I guess the extension of that question would be like what component of the look-back period is a requirement as opposed to a suggestion? Because I don't feel like that part is clear. >> So the requirement is no more than seven years for felonies, no more than three years for misdemeanors, and you have to have a table that lists out those offenses. And in your table theoretically you could say all felonies are seven year look-backs and all [11:54:05 AM] misdemeanors are three years. That is the guidance that we received from the criminal background screening guide. Their suggested table we also included that -- we pointed to that in the rhda guidelines as a viable option. But because they did not say that that is a requirement, they said that that is a suggestion, we rely on that suggestion as well. >> Harper-madison: All right. So I will just say this, and I'll leave this for the body as a whole. There are some concerns on my end about the difference between suggestions and requirements. And I don't think I have to really like elaborate on why that feels funny that we don't have something clearly [11:55:07 AM] defined the difference between a suggestion and requirement, especially when we're talking about marginalized communities. I just want to Mike certain that we -- make certain that we don't put people in a situation where they can inadvertently find themselves in a problematic situation. And we can certainly take it offline, but I just have some concerns about making sure that we are clear about the delineation, if you understand what I mean. >> Yes. >> Casar: Councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: I share that concern councilmember harper-madison just raised. I'm wondering what's our thinking behind suggestions versus a requirement? Because we've got a standard it looks like that we're looking to from other -- from another body. Why wouldn't we just set [11:56:08 AM] that as a requirement as opposed to a requirement being -- well, in some cases quite a few years different than the suggested. >> Well, the background screening guide they do require no more than seven years, no more than three years for a misdemeanor. So we point to that as our requirement. And then a suggested table is basically an option for developers. >> Kitchen: So we are using suggestions for what our source does is uses suggestions? >> Yes. Since they did the research -- [multiple voices] They had the conversations. We're going to point to them as the experts. And say they say no more than seven for felonies, but then providing that list so that the property managers can differentiate between felonies, whether this one requires seven years or this one requires five years. [11:57:09 AM] That is something that they need to provide, but we have not given them direction as to which felony requires a lesser look-back period than another. >> Kitchen: Do we have any data -- >> Councilmember? >> Kitchen: Of people who are following the suggestions as opposed to the seven-year requirement? >> I do not have any data on that right now. This was -- this did go into effect in January 2019. So I'd have to see which developments have come online and their leases. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> And can I jump in? This is Mandy. This is Mandy de mayo. I just wanted to jump in because I was involved in those early conversations with the austin-travis county reentry round table and I will say we went through probably at least a couple of years of stakeholder conversations that included folks with [11:58:11 AM] criminal justice system as well as legal aid, as well as those non-profit on and for-profit housing providers, affordable housing providers, as well as the Austin apartment association. So it was a very broad stakeholder group. So where we landed was kind of squarely in a middle ground where everybody gave a little bit, I will say. We recognized that this is an issue that is coming to the surface again. There are some concerns. We would want to reengage the stakeholders who were involved in those original conversations. And based on some conversations with council offices, typically what we do is late fall, winter, some time november-december time frame, we gather our stakeholders to talk about changes that we are contemplating for our housing development assistance programs. And I think this is one of those conversations that is [11:59:11 AM] going to rise to the top along with the continuum of care conversation. So we recognize, we hear the concerns. We recognize -- you know, we recognize that we need to bring some folks around the table again to address those concerns. >> Casar: Other questions? >> Harper-madison: Yeah. If I may. And especially, like, if I can preface it with recognizing that -- it feels to me like there is some degree of consideration being taken around the considerations around stakeholder involvement, but this just does not feel to me like a complete process. In which case when I have to answer questions, when people are asking me questions and I have to answer them, this does not feel like a scenario where I get to effectively answer [12:00:12 PM] questions to people by way of, like, a legitimate, fully fleshed out, comprehensive process. So I just would like to be asking my colleagues, who I respect everybody on the call, I would like very much for you to offer me the opportunity to be able to respond to the questions that people are asking me. And so from a stakeholder, you know, involvement perspective, I just don't quite feel like I have the answers appropriately. So I really look forward to moving forward with a more comprehensive conversation. So looking forward to that. Thank you, everybody. >> Casar: Thank you, councilmember harper-madison. I think what I'm -- what I understand here is that, you know, after some years of work and a group of stakeholders coming together, all working in [12:01:13 PM] good faith, there was sort of a bar set higher, which is good here, and then suggestions -- and then a suggestion to say, hey, it's also suggested you go even better to here. But that this is an item of such interest out there that that initial stakeholder group may not be enough people, it may not have been public enough or understood well enough about why it was decided requirements here and suggestion here, and we have to be responsive to that. So if we need to reopen that conversation with more people in a more public way to died where the requirements should be set and where the suggestions should be set, and if that needs to be set higher we need to take that let on. --Head on. I appreciate new raising that. Two other things we didn't talk about here, I want to make sure they're part of [12:02:13 PM] the conversation, one, as these developments open up, I think it's really important for people to know that they have -- what affirmative rights they do have. And in another part of the city there's a conversation about having a civil rights officer who can more proactively make sure people know their rights to fair housing, water breaks and anti-discrimination laws and I think this would -- in fair chance hiring, I think this should be part of it so people know when they're applying to housing what the requirements have been that have been set for the city for some of these types of housing so I want to make sure that's part of that and the housing department is sort of plugged in with the deputy city manager on that conversation. And then a second part of this that I think is really important that I think is an achievement I do want there to be some kudos around is, you know, a look back period is not a ban, right? If you're within the look back period that doesn't mean that you're banned for living in that housing and the requirement that has [12:03:14 PM] been set, if I do understand it's a requirement, that each person receive an individualized assessment. Because, again, I want people to know hopefully as we open up these thousands of new homes under the new bond, low-cost homes, that even if you have a misdemeanor that falls within the look back period or felony that falls within the look back period, we have now said you can't ban that opinion even if they fall within the look back period, they are entitled to an individualized look at their case. I would want everybody to know that just because you have that misdemeanor that falls within two years, say, you still can and should apply for housing and should be able to make your case. I want people to be able to know that. If the right conversation, as councilmember harper-madison said, is to raise the bar more, I think that's a good conversation to have. I would support raising the bar more. I also want people to know [12:04:14 PM] what their rights are now because I think there's a lot of good things that we try to do and if people don't know they have that right it doesn't do anybody any good. Any -- anything else before we just talk about future items and close the meeting? Okay. Then we'll take up an item here on future agenda items. Sounds like it makes sense for us to check back in on the housing bond conversation we were having at the next quarter. Anything else we want to talk about here? Of course you can email me off- line as well. >> Harper-madison: Chair Casar, can we have the conversation about your hair? Because for what it's worth -- I'm here for you letting it grow out. I like it. Otherwise, thank you. I appreciate all the attention that you've put to these very important items [12:05:14 PM] that we had to deliberate throughout the course of the meeting. Thank you very much, chair. My colleagues are ready for some lunch, though, so I got to go. So I'm gonna run, but my vote is, if we're taking a vote, my vote is let it grow. Let it grow. >> Casar: I'll take as many private or public suggestions as people want. Someone on this call's family member is the person that cuts my hair so she might be impacted too. Okay. Any other suggestions for future items? All right. With that we'll adjourn here at 12:07 P.M. Thank you, everyone.