[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> I'd like to call to order the Tuesday, January 27th HRA board meeting. First item is the approval of the agenda. Are there any edits or changes? Okay, hearing none, may I have a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. Moved by Commissioner Huqeen. Second. >> And second by Commissioner Doblinger. Uh we need to do a roll call vote, so all in favor? Commissioner Esaie? I. Commissioner Huqeen? I. Commissioner Carter? I. Commissioner Doblinger? I. Via WebEx, Commissioner Wooten? I. Chair Mueller? I. Right. Motion passes 6 to 0. Um next are the consent items. We have the We have two consent items. Would anyone like to pull an item for discussion? Okay, hearing none, I need a motion to approve the consent items. So moved. Moved by Commissioner Wooten. Second. And second by Commissioner Esaie. May we have the roll call vote? Commissioner Esaie? I. Commissioner Huqeen? I. Commissioner Carter? I. Commissioner Doblinger? I. Commissioner via WebEx, Wooten? I. Chair Mueller? I. Motion passes, excuse me, 6 to 0. Um next item is There's no organizational business, no new business, so we are on to discussion items. Bring It Home project-based voucher discussion. May we have the staff report? Oh, this is thick. Uh good evening. I'm going to move Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. Anna Salvador, Assistant HRA Administrator. Um I'm here this evening to talk about project-based vouchers under the Bring It Home program. There's no formal decision-making needed tonight. This is more just a discussion and a request for feedback from the board. Um These are key questions that um we're hoping to uh go through this evening. Um And the goal of this discussion is really focused on preparing for issuing a request for proposals um by March of this year for the first round of project-based vouchers. Um our goal is to do this in two rounds, so a round in 2026 and then an another round in 2027. Um so I'll bring these back up after I kind of provide a little more background and context, but I just wanted you to have these um in the back of your mind as we go through this presentation. Can you go next slide, please? Thank you. Okay. So, a little background just in general about what project-based vouchers or PBV are. Um under a project-based voucher, the rental assistance is tied to a specific unit. So, in regardless of the unit that they're living in, whereas to receive assistance um through a project-based voucher, you need to be residing in a specific unit. And these are um as- assigned through a a contract that um is signed by both the HRA and the property. Generally, these contracts last at least 10 years, but they can um go for upwards of 20 without um and that's an initial contract, so those often times get renewed and things like that as well. Um in a project-based voucher unit, the household only ever pays 30% of their monthly income towards rent, and the HRA pays the remainder of that contract rent. Um once they've resided in the unit for 12 months, um that household is then then becomes eligible under the Housing Choice Voucher program for a traditional voucher if they do decide to move. Um this is something that we've moved away from with the Bring It Home program just because of the limitations with those vouchers that they have to be used in Bloomington. Um but what something I wanted to flag with uh project-based vouchers. Um also, households are selected from a waiting list that's managed by the HRA. And I think a something that's important to remember about project-based vouchers is there's no separate pool of funds, so this is just coming out of our overall allocation for the program. So, anytime we issue a project-based voucher, it means we're not issuing a Housing Choice Voucher if that makes sense. Um Why do we like project-based vouchers? They often times can help achieve a deeper level of affordability in a property. So, we've seen this with 100% affordable projects that have applied for project based vouchers. It's a way of meeting that 30% area median income need in a way that's not typically always possible with other funding sources. Just due to the nature of the populations that we tend to serve with our vouchers. Um it also helps to streamline the lease up process cuz we're removing that housing search component um that is a is a part of the traditional voucher process. We've already identified the units. We're really just screening for eligibility for both the program and the property. Um and then it project based vouchers help to expand affordable housing opportunities in properties that would otherwise be market rate. An example of this would be Indigo here in Bloomington that has eight project based vouchers but is otherwise market rate property. And then you can also target specific populations um or tides specific services at a property with project based vouchers and I think an example where we see this is the Roslyn which will be opening in the next couple of months. That property overall is targeting seniors or those 55 or older. So that was a way we were able to again target a specific population that we know there's a a growing need and demand in Bloomington. Um one other thing I I'll just say about project based vouchers is because the tenant portion is capped at that 30% of their monthly income over the course of their tenancy they tend to pay they can end up paying less um in rent over time than if they were to have a traditional voucher just because of how the calculation is completed. So something to note as a as a pro on the um participant side of the coin. So currently we have in Bloomington under the housing choice voucher program a total of 39 active project based voucher units and again we have eight more that will be active by the end of this year at the Roslyn property which is really exciting. Um this is really a small percentage of our overall program though. It's only about 8%. And I think there's two contributing factors why we don't have a larger pool excuse me of project based vouchers right now and that's due to the limited budget budget capacity that we currently have in the housing choice voucher program. But also staff capacity. Um administering project based vouchers and going through the selection and award process under the housing choice voucher program almost requires a special expertise beyond just the traditional program administration and so over time there's just been limitations um with building out a more robust program under the housing choice voucher program specifically. Um and then just another kind of context data point per unit right now we're paying an average of about $898 in housing assistance for a project based unit which is only slightly lower than a traditional voucher but just some um numbers to be aware of. The board approved these flexibilities in the appendix for the administrative plan appendix last board meeting so I won't spend a ton of time on these but um really the goal with these flexibilities that were made available through um the Bring It Home program is to relieve some of that administrative burden that I was alluding to in the prior slide. I'm trying to make the process as streamline and straightforward for both staff administering the program but also applicants potential like properties and developments that would apply for these project based vouchers to be in their properties. Um so just a couple things to think about as we're um talking through this potential first round of RFP really where the HRA has the discretion in this process is to identify the number of vouchers we'd like to make available. Um the types of units that we want considered whether that's unit size or certain populations um and one thing I will just flag under the Bring It Home program there are some priority populations that we do need to serve which are households in general at or below 50% of area median income and then a special priority given to households with children at or below 30% of area median income. So that will be incorporated in our RFP. Um but we are able to add additional priorities um as we have defined them. Um based on our current program allocation we anticipate between the two rounds awarding up upwards of 80 units total across um the city. So um and then a couple other things to think about these could be uh preserving existing units in in properties in the city but we could also prioritize new construction or maybe do a combination of both between the two rounds. Um but we staff just wanted to flag those as kind of ideas or things we've already started discussions around. Um next steps for this again we hope to release that RFP um sometime in March with um any selection of those units and awarding of those units to projects coming back to the board in April or early May. So I'm going to go ahead and throw the questions back up on the screen and just open it up in general uh for comments feedback don't think we need to walk through all of questions maybe like line by line but just open to any general feedback. So thank you. So I have a question. Mhm. Commissioner Wooten. So who um is eligible for the RFP for project based vouchers? Um so the entities that would be eligible um would be either properties that we based on the criteria selection criteria we set but it's generally either properties or developers who are um like have a project in mind to build in Bloomington. And if I have a follow up question to that. Yes. Give given the nature of some of the shutdown programs um that have occurred at the state level how we vetting these these individuals organizations in regards to their ability to handle and deliver services. Yeah I think that's something that we would define in the RFP. Um generally um what we look at is in these in in these types of circumstances are other funding that they've already been approved for. We look at their track record of delivering affordable units in other properties that they've worked on. Um and that's part of the section of the RFP that's about qualifications and eligibility. Yeah. Do you have any way of matching I'm sorry. Do you have any way of matching that up with any organizations that the state have determined no longer have a ability to do business with the state as far as who's who who was licensed and now is no longer licensed to do business at the state level. Mhm. Typically through these processes part of our checks are making sure our checking for debarred business owners both through the state and the federal government. Okay. Other questions? Comments? I have two. >> So okay go ahead. Um is new do new developments are they required to have some project based voucher units in Bloomington? Like I know the Roslyn you said will have. Are they required? Um they're not required to specifically have project based voucher units but through the opportunity housing ordinance they have to provide some affordability and so a project based voucher would be one way of achieving that affordability. Okay. And then my second question is do landlords want to participate in the project based vouchers? Is it something they want or is it hard to get those units? Um I would say in general both existing properties and new construction are interested in project based vouchers because it often makes them more competitive for other funding sources if they have an award from the city for those project based vouchers. Partially because with a project based voucher you essentially have guaranteed rent of some capacity cuz of that housing assistance payment um and it also shows that like that project's been vetted by like the local government and and is generally supportive of that project. So I would say in general there's support um an interest for more project basing in in Bloomington. Um and I think we we try to do our best to make the process as straightforward for the end user at the property manager at the end of the process who would be leasing up these units um in collaboration with our office. Thank you. Commissioner Wooten. Oh sorry. Commissioner Wooten then Commissioner Wooten. Okay thanks. Thank you chair. Um quick question, um, regarding like property type or yeah, property types. Um, you were saying there are some existing, correct? Um, so then my question is since there's many properties in Bloomington that already accept like the whole housing choice voucher program, would that make them eligible for this as well just because they're already managing something? I'm I'm trying to understand if they're pretty comparable and if it would be, you know, something we'd want to definitely bring, especially some of our NOAH properties and stuff like that on board with as well just because they many of those properties do already have housing joy choi housing choice vouchers. So, I'm just kind of wondering is there a comparison Yeah, absolutely. I think um, yeah, participating in the housing choi I know this wasn't your question, but housing participating in the housing choice voucher program wouldn't preclude them from also project basing through Bring It Home. I think in general we anticipate there's going to be a lot of overlap between properties that are participating between those two programs. I do think we, um, through this RFP process would see that as a benefit cuz they already have some ex- experience working with our office, some general understanding of how the program runs, and like what those day-to-day interactions would look like. So, yeah. Commissioner Wooten. No questions. One has to do with the second, uh, item which is identifying key opportunities and limitations. The question I have is what do you think the limitations are to this particular, um, approach? Um, I think some limitations are just coming down to timing, um, because especially for new construction projects, for example, it can be um, one to two years before those those units come online. And so, um, that's something we want to be aware of is if we award these project based vouchers now, they they probably won't actually be out in the community for a couple of years. And how do we kind of balance that with still issuing vouchers in other ways. So. And then the second question I had, if I can ask, is in relationship to once the about PBVs are are are, um, distributed, what type of follow-up mechanism do we have to ensure that the services that they are supposed to be delivering are delivered, um, at the standard we want or need to have based on the, uh, reason RFP. Yeah. Um, so after they are awarded a project based voucher, they actually enter into two separate agreements with us. So, the first agreement is a like right after they receive the award and that's guaranteeing kind of what they promised in the RFP, giving giving them a certain, um, time frame to to be compliant with what they proposed in their, um, response to the RFP. And then once those units are ready to be leased or, um, issued a voucher, we enter into a separate agreement that's more about the ongoing program of requirements and obligations. And so, that contract is essentially how we enforce um, requirements related to both housing quality, but also expectations around enforcing the lease and things like that. Um, so they have separate purposes and the the content within them is slightly different because of that. Commissioner Carter. Thank you. So, I'm just kind of wrapping my head around how all of this works. Um, so I'm looking at the pri- the kind of the examples of priorities and if we were to get a proposal for, say, rehabilitation of an existing property, so they may come to us and say, "Okay, we want to participate in the project based voucher. We're also applying to be a TIF district. We're also applying for a the affordable housing trust or like the opportunity housing ordinance, um, uh, my um, not modifications, but exemptions and all of that. Um, so is that are those the kinds of proposals that we might receive? Yeah, I think it's very likely that, um, projects that we see have either already requested other sources of funding or have been funded, um, locally in other ways. Okay. Um, and then you said some of these projects like they may be like if it's new construction, they may be being built and they wouldn't those units wouldn't be available for quite a while. Okay. Okay. Um, do we have any sense of so that we've had quite a few buildings with affordable units built over the last five years. Um, do we have a sense of whether those units are full? Are are they renting out most of those affordable units at this point? Um, and similarly, do we have any idea kind of how the NOAH properties I'm I'm asking because I'm kind of thinking about like how do we prioritize and do we have any sense of how NOAH properties are doing and if they're at capacity or if they have a lot of units, you know, just Yeah. Yeah, I appreciate the question. Um, I don't like I can't say I can just say based on things I've heard and think people who have talked to our office. So, these aren't exact data points, but um, at least in terms of new construction, um, lease-up has gone relatively well. I would say, um, ones and two bedrooms tend to lease up a lot faster than, um, some of the larger units depending on like the affordability requirements and things of that nature. Um, and then I think it's kind of an ebb and flow from my experience at our, um, at our NOAH properties. I think there's just a lot more turnover with, uh, tenants where they're filling the units, but the tenants just don't stay as long. So, there's a lot more lease-up that's happening. Um, and that's just based on where we're seeing vouchers moving. Um, kind of that's where I'm drawing this information from. And so, you said when a project has project based vouchers, if they're also looking for other kind of financial assistance from different sources, it does it make it more competitive? It makes the project more competitive, yes, in other funding, uh, cycles if they've been awarded project based vouchers. NOAH property proposals, uh, they would they are looking to re- probably rehabilitate the property and then this would help them. It would make that project more likely. That's correct, yeah. Mhm. Yeah, that's correct. Oh, I'm so sorry. Was I talking the whole time without my mic on? Oh, okay. Okay. Um, so I was just saying it's kind of a double win if we go for a NO- if we prioritize NOAH rehab- sorry, rehabilitation of an existing property because it's reinvestment in that property and the infrastructure we have in our community, but it's also allowing more project based vouchers. So, um, I guess when I look at this, that that, um, kind of stands out to me. Uh, I think it would be helpful to have like a bit more data because the other question I have is, you know, you I used to hear a lot that we needed more three bedroom, four bedroom, um, affordable units for families and I just don't know what that looks like now. I don't know if that's still a high demand. Um, so, um, I would say if I I guess I would [clears throat] say wherever the data is showing us there is the greatest demand and need is probably where we should prioritize. Commissioner Hooking. Thank you, Chair. Um, I'm going to piggyback off, um, what Carter has said here tonight. Um, I definitely agree with the rehabilitation of an existing property. It kind of gives a little bit more opportunity, um, and opportunity to keep existing properties, which I think we are in demand of. Um, there is a high need to keep keep properties um, existent here. Um, and I also agree with the I I piggyback off of that. I've heard the mix too of three and four bedrooms were high needs, um, but it's sounding like that's not the priority of what's being requested. So, maybe um, yeah, if obviously where the request is coming in would I would also agree with that would be where we would want to put our priority at is where the high demand is. But I also have a priority of if there's people that need it and they're not as high of a priority, I also feel like, well, what does it hurt to put them as a priority and then I mean, it's you know what I mean, it's kind of a give and take cuz I do feel that families should be prioritized maybe. Maybe that's cuz that is part of I know that certain population as they were talking about, um, especially children with the and um, the 30% or below. So, I definitely agree with keeping that as a priority is, you know, the families in the highest need. Um, sticking with that. So. Are there comments? Questions? Last minute ideas? All right. Um, well, I appreciate thank you for this presentation. Oh, Commissioner Hooking. Thank you, Chair. Um, I do want to highlight that there was an example of priorities of projects that partner with service providers to provide support services on site. Can you expand on that a little bit more to give give us a little bit more feedback on that? Yeah, um it's not something we've necessarily seen or done in Bloomington yet, but I know um other housing authorities often will prioritize um projects that have services included um or wrap-around services as part of their um project offering. And so examples would be um if it's um transitional or unit for someone transitioning from um homelessness, like offering or having a service provider that comes regularly and works with that household. Um and so that's a model that we've seen in neighboring communities. Okay. Thank [snorts] you. Um All right, appreciate your presentation. All right, and next is our HRA administrator updates. Okay, good evening, Chair and Commissioners. I have a couple updates for you tonight. Um first of all, I'll note that in the last couple of weeks, and especially in the last week, we've been hearing from community partners that there's a very high increase in demand for emergency rental assistance. So, because this is an eligible use of our local affordable housing aid dollars, the LAHA funds, and because that is a City Council grant and requires approval from the City Council, we did a walk-on item last night in front of the City Council to um designate up to 350,000 of LAHA dollars for emergency rental assistance and to um allocate 50,000 of that to VEEP immediately so that we can get dollars out in the community. So, the HRA is the administrator of those funds and um so we'll be bringing to the HRA um selection and some um framework for continuing to distribute the emergency rental assistance out into the community. Um and then moving on, uh a couple of upcoming events. We have Our annual meeting is our next meeting on February 10th. So, I'm excited about that. Um we will have We've invited the new city manager to come for an introduction and um the staff will be joining us as well. Uh we'll having a reception um just before, so planning to start that around 5:15, so I'll be sending out an invite for your calendars. So, um just note that to come a few minutes early and have some time to um meet some of the staff. And then this year is a home fair year, so um we are working on doing some planning for the home fair. We currently have it tentatively scheduled on April 25th and uh location TBD, but more to come on that. I wanted to get it on your calendars uh right away. And then um at the meeting in March, um we have some business coming up that's relevant to City Council, Port, and Planning, which is our um 10-year comp plan planning process. And so um we're looking at doing a joint meeting on that night. That's the regular HRA meeting night, so we could do uh regular HRA business before or after, but we're tentatively looking at that date for a joint meeting. Um so just wanted to get that on your calendars as well. And then uh the last thing that I will note is um just a a quick federal funding update. So, um there was a funding bill that passed at the House and most of the HRA programs did receive a slight increase in 2020 in spending from the 2025 budget. Um it's it's an increase that doesn't quite match inflation, so we're not looking at adding more vouchers, but it does get us close to being able to sustain the level of services that we currently have. Um so that passed the House, it has not yet passed the Senate, and I know we have a continuing resolution until the end of this month, so still keeping an eye on potential for shutdown, but the initial um indication is that the the bill that was passed at the House does maintain the funding for most of our HRA programs. And that is it. Rather a lot of announcements tonight. Any questions? Yeah. Yeah, one. Commissioner Who Kim. Thank you, Chair. Um if I'm understanding correctly, though, this federal bill um that's looking to pass the Senate is also, and I'm just going to be blunt, it's also is including the ICE funding, and there has been a lot of pushback recently. So, I'm wondering what is the cuz I know that the the HUD HUD is specifically um in this. So, what is there any concern and what does that look like if it does not pass Senate, what does that look like for us in the future? Like how how long can we maintain funding? Kind of if you know. Yeah, Chair and Commissioners, good question. Um I will say that in the the past, it would be a shutdown if there's not the spending bill passed through the Senate. It would be a shutdown for those portions of the government that are not yet funded, which would include HUD, assuming that it stays grouped in the same. Lots of ifs, you know. Um but that being said, HUD has been uh we've had a couple of shutdowns in the past few years, and um HUD has planned ahead for that and has uh basically planned to send our funding anyway. So, despite uh the past shutdowns, we've still gotten our housing choice voucher funding on time. Um so I I would I currently don't anticipate any issues with service or uh funding coming through, but if it does become an issue, then I could raise it to the board. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure we had the transparency on that. So, thank you for the clarification. Commissioner Wooten, did you have a comment or question? I did. I I This is only a general night, but I'm just curious as to the status of the Heights project. Yes, uh Chair and Commissioners, they have started demolition. So, um they're moving forward on that project. They will likely not be Sorry. Sorry about that. Um I had my I had my hand on the the mute button, so I kept turning on and off. Um so they they started demolition this winter. They likely They're still on schedule. They were planning to start construction in the spring, um and so I believe that they are still on schedule for that to um complete construction next year. Next spring of '27? Yes. No, sorry. This year, spring of '26. Okay. And to uh complete construction by the end of '26. Okay, thanks. Yep. Thank you. All right, that is the end of our agenda. May I have a motion to adjourn the Tuesday, January 27th HRA Board meeting. So moved. Moved by Commissioner Who Kim. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Wooten. Um may we have the roll call vote. Um Commissioner Esaie? I. Commissioner Who Kim? I. Commissioner Carter? I. Commissioner Doblinger? I. Via WebEx, Commissioner Who Kim? I. Via WebEx, Commissioner Robertson? I. Chair Mueller? I. Motion passes 7 to 0. Thank you, everyone. Thank you.