Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.19.22-APPROVED_SKHHP-EB-MinutesP a g e | 1 SKHHP Executive Meeting August 19, 2022 MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Dana Ralph called the virtual meeting to order at 1 PM. Welcome to SKHHP Advisory Board member and liaison, Uche Okezie. a. ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM Executive Board members present: Colleen Brandt-Schluter, City of Burien; Kristina Soltys, City of Covington; Traci Buxton, City of Des Moines; Sarah Bridgeford, City of Federal Way; Dana Ralph, City of Kent; Sean P. Kelly, City of Maple Valley; Amy Arrington, City of Normandy Park; Ryan McIrvin, City of Renton; Cynthia Delostrinos-Johnson, City of Tukwila. Other attendees: Dafne Hernandez, City of Covington; JC Harris, alternate for City of Des Moines; Nicole Nordholm, City of Des Moines; Merina Hanson, City of Kent; McCaela Daffern, King County; Hannah Bahnmiller, City of Renton; Jason Gauthier, SSHAP; Marty Kooistra, Civic Commons; Bambi Chavez, HDC; Nora Gierloff, City of Tukwila; Uche Okezie, Advisory Board liaison; Elsa Kings, ARCH; Alexis Rinck, King County Regional Homelessness Authority; Angela San Filippo, SKHHP. II. REVIEW AGENDA/AGENDA MODIFICATIONS No agenda modifications. III. APPROVAL OF JULY 15, 2022 MINUTES Traci Buxton moved to approve the July 15, 2022 minutes as presented; Ryan McIrvin seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously (9-0). [Maple Valley representative, Sean P. Kelly joined at 1:20]. IV. EDUCATIONAL ITEM a. A Regional Coalition for Housing (ARCH) Housing Trust Fund SKHHP was modeled after ARCH and since the beginning of SKHHP’s formation we have looked to ARCH as a successful model of regional collaboration. Hearing from ARCH’s Housing Trust Fund Manager is an opportunity to learn from their staff’s experience from an organization that has been doing this work for almost 30 years. Especially as the SKHHP Advisory Board will be reviewing funding applications and the Executive Board will be making a funding recommendation this fall. Elsa Kings, ARCH Housing Trust Fund Manager. Elsa provided brief introduction and overview of her experience with Impact Capital, Beacon Development, City of Seattle, and ARCH. Overview of ARCH and the growing housing need on the east side. ARCH’s focus has been to serve households earning 50% or less of Area Median Income (AMI), but they prioritize 0 -30% AMI. ARCH is part of public funding ecosystem and utilize leverage from lots of public sources. Presentation will focus on housing trust fund, underwriting process and lessons learned. ARCH tries to align their Housing Trust Fund cycle with public funders and in an effort to have one application that developers can present to all public funders they use the combined funders application. Applications are typically due in September, review and underwrite applications October through December. Applications are reviewed with help of their Advisory Board with final recommendations to Executive Board in December. During January through May they seek final approval from City Council of their 13 member cities. Start process again in July to set guidelines, which focuses on which populations to serve for the funding round, how they will be analyzed in the competitive round. In the past several years they have been incredibly over prescribed. P a g e | 2 During the first meeting with the Advisory Board they establish underwriting timeline and divide applications amongst advisory board members with interest and expertise in particular projects. ARCH staff makes an initial review of the application and provides short summary that Advisory Board uses to underwrite, make recommendations, and obtain more information as necessary. Prioritize by guidelines for that year, for example: permanent supportive housing, homeless projects, seniors, and transit oriented development (TOD) projects. Leveraging private investment is also very important, they like to see that other public funders are in support of the project. Advisory Board uses a matrix of evaluation criteria to determine whether projects fall within the criteria, don’t underwrite for points but make sure they meet criteri a which includes things like: feasibility, relevance to local needs, and experience. Feasibility includes making sure that project can be built within cost projection and project is financeable. Cost estimate is evaluated based on meeting development and for any discrepancies between third party estimate and construction estimate. Also look at whether the project can be built within the zoning, potential geotechnical issues, ecological cleanup, etc. Also look at whether there is a sufficient construction period to be able to build the project identified in the timeline. Advisory Board wants to understand that member cities are comfortable with the project, know that it addresses local needs and priorities, and positive community. Question about garnering community support. They don’t always have community support and can expect some level of opposition, but developers show they have thought through issues, ARCH can be a liaison to make sure project is successful in garnering community support. Sponsor and project management experience includes looking at whether the developer built projects of a similar size and serving similar populations or do they have a partner to assist. One of the major factors is the partnerships for service model to provide services that the population needs. Also ensure services are properly funded – operation and maintenance. Some of the lessons learned include the insufficient funding to meet the need. Recently projects have found themselves with funding gaps and have to come back to public funders to get them to construction. As a result , this year funders are prioritizing funding gaps. For example, this year ARCH has $4.5 million available but could have projects come back that were funded last year and that will significantly decrease what is available for new projects. Generally, filling funding gaps is the priority for all public funders which disadvantages new projects. ARCH has a focus on providing technical assistance to help make projects better. Staff can identify potential issues and create open line of communication with developers. Mandy affordable housing developers and managers lack of organizational capacity. Many looking to find partners to assist with the process – writing applications. Identify issues, ask questions. b. King County Regional Homelessness Authority (KCRHA) KCRHA joined us last September to provide an overview of the organization. KCRHA joining us today is an opportunity to hear an update on their work and discuss potential opportunities for collaboration. Alexis Rinck provided an overview of KCRHA, background and formation of authority, organizational structure, responsibilities, and relationships with King County and City with Seattle. Overview of some recent wins related to emergency housing vouchers, contract, contract consolidation, release of RFPs, severe weather response framework, sub-regional agreement progress, service landscape data, qualitative data, housing gaps analysis, and encampment resolutions. P a g e | 3 Update on the Point in Time County and increase in folks experiencing homelessness – over 13,000 people experiencing homelessness at one point in time. Cross systems analysis of administrative systems and how many individuals are captured in all those systems. De-duplicated number of individuals accessing services was 40,871. Keep in mind that not all folks experiencing homelessness are system connected. Highlighted the disproportionate number of BIPOC communities that experience homelessness. Review of subregional analysis with a focus on South King County (SKC) analytics and ongoing communication amongst KCRHA and SKC cities. Comment on the incredible list and that work that went into the analytics and the great resource that the datasets provide for the region and establishing accountability. Question about how KCRHA sees SKHHP being able to partner with KCRHA. Response included thinking strategically about pooling resources, similar to efforts made by SKHHP to pool resources for affordable housing. Wh at does it look like to pool homelessness response dollars? Question about communication with law enforcement and outreach out with regard to homelessness and encampments. Response included reference to Auburn based outreach and other SKC outreach teams. V. OLD BUSINESS a. Resolution 2022-04 – 2023 SKHHP Work Plan and Budget The 2023 Work Plan and Budget was developed in consultation with the staff work group and Advisory Board. Initial Executive Board review and discussion was followed by outreach to each partner jurisdiction. Resolution to adopt the 2023 Work Plan and Budget is before Executive Board for adoption. After Executive Board adoption, the work plan and budget will be brought forward for approval by each SKHHP partner jurisdiction. Angela San Filippo provided a brief reminder of the organization of the work plan and action items priorities by critical, important, and desirable action items. The Work Plan is organized with five goal areas and action items identified by priority under each goal. Prioritization includes – critical, important, and desirable. Angela asked for any outstanding questions, comments, concerns, or other feedback that should be incorporated into the work plan. Angela reviewed the budget and explained the incremental increases for all SKHHP member jurisdictions that will enable SKHHP to reach a balance budget by 2025 and asked for questions, comments, concerns, or other feedback that should be incorporated into the budget. Traci made a motion to approve Resolution 2022-04 2023 work plan and budget, Sean P Kelly seconded the motion. Motion carried (10-0). Traci commented on SKHHP’s operating costs and the ability to disperse 1406 and 1590 funds that recognizes specific needs and priorities of South King County and providing the ability to direct those funding sources locally. Acknowledgement of the added principle for allocating funds that ensures projects funded by SKHHP have the partner jurisdictions support and that e mpowers jurisdictions to have a voice. Recognition that the contribution is relatively nominal compared to other membership organizations just to have a seat at the table. SKHHP is not just collaboration but actually making decisions on funding. VI. NEW BUSINESS a. 2022 Second Quarter Progress Report Angela reviewed the quarterly progress report as required by SKHHP Interlocal Agreement which provides an opportunity for staff to provide progress update to the Board. Progress reports also serve as a tool for Executive Board members to communicate back to their jurisdictions about the work that SKHHP P a g e | 4 is doing. New in this progress report is that the budget report splits out the housing capital fund, operating budget, and department of commerce grant funding. Angela will send out final version of progress and budget report. VII. UPDATES/ANNOUNCEMENTS State legislative priority work group – volunteers are Nancy Backus, Traci Buxton, Sunaree Marshall, Ryan McIrvin, and Dana Ralph. Angela had the opportunity to review schedule, potential legislation, and outreach recommendations with a couple of the work group members. The next work group meeting is September 8 where the group will be reviewing a fairly comprehensive list of potential legislation that may come before state legislators during this next session. A draft legislative agenda will be reviewed at the September 16 meeting with consideration for adoption at the October 21 meeting. Marty Kooistra spoke about the Black Homeownership Initiative and the work that Bambi Chavez has been doing in that space. VIII. ADJOURN Ralph adjourned the meeting at 3 pm.