[00:00:12]
KIMBERLY, WE PRESENT JAMIE SCHEUER PRESENT.
AND THEN JUST A REMINDER FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, UM, YOU ARE ABLE TO, UH, GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER EACH AGENDA ITEM.
IT IS LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES, AND THERE IS A SIGN IN SHEET IN THE BACK, OR WE'LL CALL TO SEE IF ANYBODY WANTS TO, UH, PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT.
AND THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY AT THE END FOR NON AGENDA ITEMS AS WELL.
UH, BEFORE WE START THE AGENDA, WE'RE GONNA HAVE, UM, ELECTIONS.
SO WE, WE CAN GO AHEAD WITH AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE.
FIRST AGENDA ITEM WILL BE TO RECOMMEND AND APPROVE FOR THE CARE MEETING FOR TUESDAY.
COULD WE GET A FIRST AND A SECOND PLEASE? PAT? THANK YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? YEAH, I WAS ABSENT FROM THAT MEETING, BUT IN THE NOTES, IT, IT DOESN'T SHOW THAT I WAS PRESENT ABSENT.
ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NONE.
CAN WE GET, WE CAN DO A SHOW OF HANDS.
UH, WELL, IT WOULDN'T, THIS MOTION WOULDN'T PASS IF YOU ABSTAIN.
NO, IT'S THE FORM OF THE MOTION.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO WILL BE RECOMMENDATION TO REAPPOINT TAMIKA BOYS AND EEL TAM FOR A SECOND TERM.
AND TO REAPPOINT T, TRAYVON CHAMBERLAIN, JACOB MUNOZ AND VALERIE WILLIAMS FOR A FIRST TERM.
ALL BEGINNING ALL BEGINNING JULY 1ST, 2026, AND ENDING JUNE 30TH, 2029.
CAN WE GET A MOTION FIRST? I SECOND.
CAN I GET A, ANY BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS? YES, I DO.
UH, UH, MR. TRAYVON CHAMBER MEMBER, UM, WHERE HAS HE BEEN? UH, SO THE THREE NEW BOARD MEMBERS THAT WE HAVE, TRAYVON, UH, JACOB AND VALERIE.
THEY'RE NOT FULLY ONBOARDED YET.
WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR THEM TO COMPLETE SOME TRAINING AND THEN THEY CAN BEGIN.
THAT'S, I WANNA THANK, UM, VALERIE AND JACOB FOR BEING HERE, YOU KNOW, COME TO THESE MEETINGS WHILE Y'ALL, I APPRECIATE THAT.
ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, SEE NONE.
GIVE A MOTION OF HANDS TO APPROVE
[00:05:01]
THIS MOTION.NUMBER THREE, RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE A PRESENTATION ON THE FISCAL YEAR.
IS THAT, I'M SORRY, 2026 CONTINUUM OF CARE PROGRAM.
NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY.
CAN WE GET A MOTION? CAN WE GET A MOTION A SECOND, KIM? THANK YOU.
UH, JOSEPH, ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR, UH, HOMELESS SERVICES BUREAU.
UH, I'M GONNA KICK OFF TODAY WITH THE ANTICIPATED ON THE 2026 CC PROGRAM.
NOFO, UH, I'LL START BY SAYING THAT MY PRESENTATIONS GET, UH, THEY STEP DOWN IN, IN SIZE SO THEY GET PROGRESSIVELY SHORT AS WE'LL GO ALONG.
SO THIS WILL BE THE LONGEST ONE YOU SEE TODAY.
UH, I'M GONNA BEGIN WITH JUST SOME, UH, BACKGROUND.
SLIGHTLY, UH, BACKGROUND ON THE SAFETY PROGRAM COMPETITION.
THEN, UH, I'M GONNA DO A SUMMARY OF THE NOFO AS WELL AS PROVIDE SOME PRELIMINARY FUNDING ESTIMATES.
UH, PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF, UH, LOCAL SCORING, RANKING, REALLOCATION FUNDING, PRIORITY UPDATES, AND THEN, UH, PROVIDE NEXT STEPS FOR THE 2026 COMPETITION.
UH, THIS IS A WRONG SLIDE DECK.
UH, YEAH, CAN YOU GO, WHICH ONE'S? THIS? THIS IS THE HAACK ONE.
AND THEN, UH, CARD DO YOU HAVE HERE? DO YOU HAVE IT UP ON? UH, YEAH.
THAT WAS LAST WEEK'S PRESENTATION.
SUMMARY OF THE NOTEBOOK, PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES, AND THEN NEXT STEP FOR THE COMPETITION.
ALRIGHT, AND APOLOGIES THAT THE, WE TRIED TO FIX THIS BEFORE THE MEETING.
IT LOOKS A LITTLE BIT OFF, SO APOLOGIES FOR THAT.
UM, THE 2026 NOTEBOOKS RELEASE ON JUNE 1ST, 2026, THERE'S $4.4 BILLION AVAILABLE.
OF THAT $4.4 BILLION, 104 MILLION IS AVAILABLE FOR NEW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BONUS PROJECTS, WHICH INCLUDES 52 MILLION IN 2026 APPROPRIATION FUNDS, AND THEN 52 MILLION IN CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, UH, FUNDS FROM 2025 SINCE THERE WAS NO 2025 COMPETITION.
UM, A SET ASIDE OF 1.3 BILLION FOR NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SUPPORT OF SERVICE ONLY PROJECTS, AND THEN TARGETED MINIMUM FUNDING OF 430 MILLION FOR PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECTS TO SERVE FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN.
UH, WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT THAT MAY MEAN.
UH, THE DUE DATE IS AUGUST 26TH, WITH AN ESTIMATED AWARD DATE OF THE FIRST, UH, HIGHLIGHTS IS THAT TIER ONE WAS SET AS 60% OF THE ANNUAL RENEWAL DEMAND COMPARED TO 90%.
SO THIS IS GENERALLY CONSIDERED FUNDING THAT WE'RE GUARANTEED TO RECEIVE 60% OF TIER ONE.
UH, THE REST IS, UH, COMPETITIVE, COMPETITIVELY RENEWED.
UM, THERE IS NOT A PERMANENT HOUSING CAP OF 30% OF RD.
SO WE DID SEE THAT IN THE 2025 AND JOIN NOFO THAT, UH, ULTIMATELY, UH, THE COURTS DID NOT ALLOW, HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.
UM, AND THERE IS THE CONTINUED INCREASED EMPHASIS ON UN HOUSING OUTCOMES, UM, CRISISES
[00:10:01]
AND COORDINATION WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PUBLIC SAFETY AND THOSE SUPPORTIVE SERVICE PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS.SO, UH, THE BIG TAKEAWAY IS EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NOT A CAP ON PERMANENT HOUSING, THERE'S STILL A BIG RENEWAL RISK BECAUSE TIER ONE IS ONLY 60% OF OUR RENEWAL DEMAND.
TIER TWO IS VERY COMPETITIVE, AND THERE'S A 1.3 BILLION PRIORITIZATION FOR NEW PROJECTS.
WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS, UH, A LITTLE BIT LATER IN THIS PRESENTATION IN THE NEXT, UM, SO HIGH LEVEL, I'LL READ THROUGH ALL OF THESE, BUT HUD DID UPDATE THEIR POLICY PRIORITIES.
UM, POLICY PRIORITIES FOR 2026, UM, IMPROVING OUTCOMES.
SO AGAIN, MISERABLE REDUCTIONS IN HOMELESSNESS, ESPECIALLY UN SHELTER HOMELESSNESS.
UM, UH, EMPHASIZING USING REALLOCATION AND TRANSITION TO IMPROVE YOUR PORTFOLIO'S PERFORMANCE.
UM, CREATE COMPETITION TO IMPROVE, UH, INNOVATION.
SO HUD AUTOMATICALLY, YOU KNOW, RENEWING A LOWER AMOUNT, UH, AUTOMATICALLY IN THIS COMPETITION RATHER THAN 90% DOWN TO 60%, UH, IS FRAMED AS INTENDING TO DRIVE, UH, PERFORMANCE INNOVATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
SO, HU ESSENTIALLY SAYING THERE'S A LOT OF PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECTS, PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, RAPID REHOUSING PROJECTS IN THE CONTINUUM OF CARE PORTFOLIO NATIONWIDE.
AND SO THAT BALANCE IS CREATING NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICE ONLY PROJECTS INSTEAD OF PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECTS.
UH, CONTINUING, UH, PROJECTS AND TREATMENT AND RECOVERY AS A MEANS FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY.
SO, PRIORITIZING PROJECTS THAT PROVIDE TREATMENT AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICES.
UM, THEY DO, HOWEVER, STATE THAT THEY DO NOT CONDITION ASSISTANCE ON SOBRIETY NEW TREATMENT, BUT THEY DO PROVIDE SOME SUGGESTED GUIDELINES, ESSENTIALLY FOR, UH, FOR SUPPORTING FOLKS, UM, WITH SOBRIETY, NEW TREATMENT, UH, PROMOTING ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY.
SO AGAIN, REALLY TRYING TO, UH, FOCUS ON GETTING FOLKS OFF OF SUBSIDIZED HOUSING PROGRAMS BACK INTO THE WORKFORCE IF THEY CAN, UH, IF THEY CAN DO THAT.
UM, AND THEN ADVANCING PUBLIC SAFETY FOR ALL.
UH, SO AGAIN, COORDINATION, LAW ENFORCEMENT, PUBLIC ENCAMPMENTS, PUBLIC DRUG USE.
UM, FURTHER, THEY INCLUDE MINIMIZING TRAUMA CONTROL POPULATIONS.
UM, SO CALLING OUT, UH, FOLKS, UH, EXPERIENCING
AND THEN EXPANDING ACCESS BASED ON AMERICAN, NOT IDEOLOGY.
SO, UH, THE PRIORITIES HAVE BEEN SHIFTED AROUND OUTCOMES, COMPETITION, TREATMENT RECOVERY, PARTICIPANT SAFETY, AND MERIT BASED ACCESS.
AND SO ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE REFLECTED IN THE NEW SCORING AND REVIEW CRITERIA.
UM, THERE ARE NEW FEDERAL EXPECTATIONS AND PRIORITIES.
SO THAT INCLUDES OUTCOMES, AWARD CONDITIONS, UH, NEW PROJECT REVIEW, THE CHANGES TO THE COMPETITION PROJECT, UH, PROCESS, INCLUDING TIER ONE, SHIFTING, AS WELL AS, UH, TIER TWO CONDITIONAL SELECTION ORDERS, UH, AND FUNDING AND RENEWAL RISK.
UH, AND WE'LL GET INTO THAT AGAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE CLOSELY AS WE'RE LOOKING AT ALL THE FUNDING THE MOMENT.
AND, UM, FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE, I BELIEVE ALL THE BOARD HAVE RECEIVED IT, BUT THERE'S ALSO A, A MEMO THAT'S POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE, SO IT DIVES INTO ALL OF THESE, UH, SECTIONS IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL AS WELL.
UM, SO HUD UNFORTUNATELY HAS NOT YET RELEASED WHAT THEY CALL A GRANT INVENTORY WORKSHEET THAT TELLS US HOW MUCH OUR GRANTS ARE UP FOR RENEWAL IN THIS, UH, UPCOMING COMPETITION, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE, UH, SOME NEW PROJECTS THAT WERE RENEW FOR THE FIRST TIME THAT WERE FUNDED ORIGINALLY UNDER THE SPECIAL UN SHELTER FUNDING OPPORTUNITY.
SO WE HAD TO DO SOME ESTIMATE.
SO OUR ESTIMATED ANNUAL RENEWAL DEMAND IS ABOUT 12 POINT, UH, ONE 6 MILLION, WHICH MEANS OUR TIER ONE IS ABOUT 7.3 MILLION, UH, COC BONUS AND DB BONUS.
THIS IS THE AMOUNT THAT WE ESTIMATE WE'LL BE ABLE TO APPLY FOR, UH, IN NEW PROJECT FUNDING, NOT COUNTING POTENTIAL REALLOCATED FUNDING.
SO WE'RE ESTIMATING THAT WE COULD SUBMIT NEW PROJECTS TO 1.8 MILLION UNDER THE COC BONUS.
AND THEN 1.9, UH, SIX UNDER THE DV BONUS.
AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT FUNDING PRIORITIES A LITTLE BIT LATER, UM, WE'LL GET INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE OF WHAT THAT MEANS.
UH, COC PLANNING AND BEFOR COSTS AT THE END ARE ADDITIONAL, UH, GRANTS THAT THEY AWARD TO, UH, COC LEADS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENTITIES OR OVERSEE PROJECTS.
SO THOSE ARE, UH, THOSE TWO ESSENTIALLY GO TO HSB FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF GRANTS.
UH, HERE WE'RE GONNA SEE JUST A HIGHER LEVEL BROKEN DOWN BY PROJECT COMPONENT.
SO ON THE LEFT YOU CAN SEE THE VAST MAJORITY, 7.2 MILLION OF OUR FUNDING GOES TO PERMANENT SUPPORT, A THOUSAND, UM, GOING DOWN RAPID REHOUSING AT 11%, UM, AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING RAPID REHOUSING, WHICH I'M POINTING OUT SOLELY BECAUSE THAT IS
[00:15:01]
SOMEWHAT CONSIDERED, UH, PERMANENT HOUSING WITH THAT RAPID REHOUSING COMPONENT, UH, 5.1%, UH, ON THE RIGHT YOU'LL SEE THAT DIFFERENCE.SO I THINK I REMEMBER I COULD DO THIS.
YEAH, UH, YOU'LL SEE THAT HERE, OUR 12.1, UH, 6 MILLION IN RENEWAL WITH OUR TIER ONE MEANS THAT 4.9 MILLION HERE IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TIER ONE AND TIER TWO.
SO THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AS THE MOST COMPETITIVE PORTION OF OUR APPLICATION, ABOUT 4.9 MILLION IN RENEWAL PROJECTS.
UH, SO HERE WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT THE FUNDING RISKS.
SO A LITTLE BIT OF MATH HERE THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT.
SO, UH, WHEN WE LOOKED AT ALL THE 2025 COC AWARDS THAT HUD RENEWAL RENEWED UNCONDITIONALLY, UH, DUE TO THE NOS BEING ENJOINED, UH, THAT TOTAL ABOUT $3.85 BILLION, THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR 2026 IS 4.04 BILLION.
SO THAT DIFFERENCE IS ONLY 193 MILLION, UH, BETWEEN THE AMOUNT THAT WAS AWARDED IN 2025 THAT IS UP FOR RENEWAL.
UH, ONE THING TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT I HAVE DOWN HERE, THE KEY TAKEAWAYS IS ANY PROJECTS THAT ARE RENEWING FOR THE FIRST TIME, WHICH COULD BE, UH, YOUTH PROJECTS, UNSHELTERED PROJECTS, AND THEN ANY COST OF LIVING AND FAIR MARKET RENT ADJUSTMENTS, THEY MAY FURTHER INCREASE THIS RENEWAL, DEMAND, THIS 3.85 BILLION ACROSS THE COUNTRY, UH, WHICH WOULD MEAN THAT THERE WOULD BE EVEN LESS NEW FUNDING AVAILABLE.
AND NOW WE HAVE TO REMEMBER, UM, THAT HUD HAS STATED THAT 1.83 BILLION IN TOTAL WILL BE SET ASIDE SPECIFICALLY FOR A DV BONUS PROJECTS.
AND THESE ARE ALL NEW PROJECTS.
UM, WHAT THEY DO NOT CALL A SET ASIDE, BUT THEY DO CALL A FLOOR, WHICH IS 430 MILLION IN PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECTS, SPECIFICALLY THAT SERVE FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN.
AND THEN 1.3 BILLION WILL BE FOR NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICE ONLY PROJECTS.
UM, WHICH GENERALLY THEY, THEY STATE THAT THEY WILL FUND, UH, OVER, UH, SOME OTHER FUNDING.
SO YOU CAN STILL APPLY FOR SOME PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECTS, UH, RAPID REHOUSING PROJECTS.
BUT THE PRIORITY THERE IS REALLY TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICES ONLY.
UM, ONCE THEY RUN OUT OF THOSE PROJECTS TO FUND WITHIN THAT CAP, THEY'LL THEN MOVE ON TO OTHER PROJECT TYPES.
UM, SO ONCE THOSE FLOOR AMOUNTS ARE CONSIDERED, THAT MEANS THAT ONLY 2.21 BILLION REMAINS AVAILABLE FOR OTHER SELECTIONS COMPARED TO 3.85 BILLION.
SO IF YOU DO A LITTLE MATH, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE DIFFERENCE, UH, BETWEEN TIER ONE, UH, WHICH IS 60% OF THAT 4.04 BILLION SHOULD HAVE LISTED IT HERE.
BUT, UM, AND THEN THE PRIORITY FLOOR AMOUNT IS VERY LOW, WHICH MEANS THAT THERE JUST ISN'T A LOT OF FUNDING GENERALLY AVAILABLE FOR TIER TWO FUNDING, UH, TIER TWO PROJECTS AT ALL.
AND ONCE WE GET INTO FUNDING PRIORITIES AND SCORING AND RANKING, WE'RE GONNA TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HOW WE CAN MAKE SOME STRATEGIC MOVES TO POTENTIALLY MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, UH, IN A GOOD POSITION TO AT LEAST GAIN NEW FUNDING IF WE LOSE SOME OTHER FUNDING THAT MAY HELP BALANCE THE PORTFOLIO OVERALL.
UM, SO NEXT STEPS, UH, IN THE COMPETITION OVERALL.
UH, ONE I'M GONNA ASK THE AD HOC COMMITTEES, SOME OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEES TO RECONVENE, FINALIZE SOME POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, THE RENEWAL PROJECTS WILL BEGIN THEIR EVALUATION PERIOD AS WELL AS, UH, AN INTENT TO RENEW, WHICH IS WHEN SOME INFORMATION WILL HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE PROJECTS TO HSB TO SUPPORT THE RENEWAL APPLICATIONS.
UH, WE'LL RELEASE OUR NEW PROJECT AND TRANSITION GUIDANCE.
SO THIS IS A LOCAL PROCUREMENT PROCESS TO SELECT NEW PROJECTS TO SUPPORT, UM, THE APPLICATION, UH, TO SUBMIT THE HUD UH, HUD WILL EVENTUALLY OPEN E SNAPS, WHICH IS THE GRANT SYSTEM THAT THEY USE SPECIFICALLY FOR COC FLOODING AND RELEASES APPLICATION MATERIALS.
SO DESPITE THE FACT THAT YES, THE NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY IS RELEASED, THINK OF IT AS A VERY, VERY LONG SYLLABUS WHERE THE TEST HAS NOT YET BEEN, UM, PRESENTED.
SO WE WON'T ACTUALLY KNOW THE EXACT QUESTIONS THAT HUD IS ASKING US, UM, FOR OUR MAIN APPLICATION, WE JUST KNOW HOW THEY'RE GOING TO SCORE US AND HOW THEY'RE GOING TO WEIGH US.
UM, AND THEN FINALLY IN JULY, MOVING FORWARD, UH, APPROVAL OF ANY REMAINING NOFO POLICIES AND GUIDANCE.
UH, AND THEN CONSIDERING THE FINAL UPDATES BASED ON HUD GUIDANCE.
SO COMPETITION, COMPETITION NEEDS FOR FUNDING AND AVAILABILITY.
UM, SO THAT IS THE FIRST PRESENTATION, JUST HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF THE NOFO.
UH, HAPPY TO OPEN THINGS UP NOW.
ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION.
DO WE CONTINUE TO FIND RAPID REHOUSING? I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS PHASED OUT.
UH, SO HUD HAS, UH, ESSENTIALLY, UM, HAS IT BEEN PHASED OUT? THEY ORIGINALLY WERE GONNA PLACE A PERMANENT HOUSING
[00:20:01]
CAP.AND SO THE STRATEGY WE WERE DISCUSSING AT THAT TIME WAS, WELL, RAPID REHOUSING IS ESSENTIALLY 24 MONTHS LIMITED.
UH, SO IS TRANSITIONAL HOUSING.
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING CAN BE SINGLE SITE, MEANING THAT TECHNICALLY FOR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING YOU COULD HAVE YOUR OWN UNIT.
SO IF THERE WAS A CAP ON PERMANENT HOUSING THAT RAPID REHOUSING IS CONSIDERED A PART OF THE NATURAL INSTINCT WOULD BE, WELL, LET'S TRY TO TRANSITION SOME OF THESE RAPID REHOUSING TO TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECTS TO KEEP THEM.
ESSENTIALLY WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE WOULD BE THAT THE INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN THOSE APARTMENTS WOULD HAVE TO BE GIVEN A NOTICE.
THE PROJECT OPERATOR WOULD HAVE TO TAKE OVER THE LEASE AND THEN RE-ENROLL 'EM AS IMMINENT RISK OF HOMELESSNESS WITHIN 14 DAYS.
WHICH CATEGORY TWO INTO THAT TRANSITIONAL HOUSING.
AND THAT WOULD BE A WAY TO TRY TO PROTECT THE PSH AND THE PORTFOLIO.
HU DIDN'T PLACE A CAP ON THE FUNDING AMOUNTS, BUT WHAT THEY'VE EFFECTIVELY DONE IS MAKE IT SO, UH, ALL THE MAJORITY OF PROJECTS IN THAT TIER TWO, SO 40% OF PROJECTS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES ARE GONNA BE AT A VERY, VERY LOW, UM, UH, LOW CHANCE OF BEING FUNDED THROUGH RENEWAL FUNDING BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING THEY'RE PLACING TOWARDS THOSE NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SSO.
SO THEY BASICALLY IMPLEMENTED A CAP WITHOUT IMPLEMENTING A CAP.
THEY'RE SAYING, WELL, YOU CAN HAVE AS MANY PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECTS AS YOU WANT, BUT ONCE WE FUND A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF YOUR PORTFOLIO, IT'S VERY, VERY LIKELY YOU'RE GONNA LOSE THE REST OF THAT FUNDING AND HAVE TO PROPOSE BRAND NEW PROJECTS THAT MORE CLOSELY ALIGN WITH OUR FEDERAL PRIORITIES, WHICH INCLUDE, UH, UH, ENSURING THEIR SUPPORTIVE SERVICE REQUIREMENTS.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE SOBRIETY AS I, I, I THINK I MENTIONED WHILE THEY SAY, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT BANNED FROM SERVING SOMEONE THAT MAYBE HAVE SOBRIETY ISSUES, BUT THE LANGUAGE MAKES IT SEEM AS IF THOUGH YOU'RE BASICALLY GIVING THEM A ONE CHANCE.
SO YOU CATCH 'EM AND THEY'RE USING SUBSTANCES IN YOUR FACILITY.
THE EXPECTATION SEEMS TO BE THAT AFTER THAT WARNING, YOU WOULD THEN DISCHARGE 'EM, UH, BASED ON THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE NO VOTE.
UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S HOW WE'VE INTERPRETED IT.
SO IT'S A MORE OF A, UM, DEFUND AND REPLACE STRATEGY.
SO DEFUND FOLKS, AND THEN MAKE YOU APPLY FOR FUNDING THAT HAS MORE CONSTRAINTS, BECAUSE ALL PROJECTS THAT OPERATE UNDER NOVOS TYPICALLY ARE BEHOLDEN TO THE NOFO THAT THEY'RE FUNDED UNDER.
BUT A LOT OF THE RENEWAL PROJECTS ARE NOT BEHOLDEN TO THE SAME BARRIERS THAT THE NEW PROJECTS ARE.
SO YEAH, HOPEFULLY THAT KIND OF, I KNOW I WENT AROUND A LITTLE BIT, BUT
I THOUGHT IF I STOPPED AT MY LEAVING.
SHOW OF HANDS TO APPROVE MOTION.
THAT NEXT ITEM ON THAT AGENDA IS NUMBER FOUR, RECOMMENDATION TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THE PHYSICAL YEAR 2026 SCORING AND ARRANGEMENT POLICY.
SORRY, COULD I GET A JAMIE? YES.
CAN YOU GO BACK? THIS IS THE ALL AFTERNOON EVERYONE, JUST PATELLO ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR, THE SERVICE BUREAU.
I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT OUR SCORING AND RANKING POLICY.
FIRST, I'M GONNA SUMMARIZE, UH, THE PURPOSE AND FUNCTION BRIEFLY REVIEW OUR POLICY, UPDATE RECOMMENDATIONS, DISCUSS SOME ADDITIONAL REVISIONS, AND THEN SUMMARIZE OUR NEXT STEPS.
SO, UH, VERY BRIEF, A HUNDRED REQUIRED COCS TO REVIEW, ASSESS FOUR PROJECT APPLICATIONS FOR PERFORMANCE.
UH, TYPICALLY RENEWAL PROJECTS AS PART OF THE COMPETITION, ALTHOUGH WE DO USE
UM, BUT SCORES US ON OUR USE AND EXTENDED USE OF OBJECTIVE CRITERIA AS WELL AS SYSTEM PERFORMANCE MEASURES, UH, THAT SPECIFICALLY CALLS OUT
[00:25:01]
RETURNS TO HOMELESSNESS, UH, INCREASED EMPLOYMENT INCOME AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICE REQUIREMENTS, PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS.UM, AND SO THEY WANT THOSE THREE, UH, TO BE METRICS, WHICH WE HAVE INCLUDED.
UH, SUPPORTIVE SERVICE FOR PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS.
RETURNS TO HOMELESSNESS ARE NEW.
UH, EMPLOYMENT INCOME IS ONE THAT WE DID HAVE PREVIOUSLY.
UM, AND SO WE'RE GONNA TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HOW THAT, UH, HOW THAT FITS WITHIN OUR LOCAL SCORING.
UM, SO AGAIN, IN OUR SCOPE IN METHODOLOGY REVISIONS, WE ADDED SOME GUIDANCE FOR THOSE PROJECTS.
ORIGINALLY FUNDED UNDER THE SPECIAL AND CHILDREN NOFO THAT ARE REVIEWING FOR THE FIRST TIME, UH, ADDED THE DESCRIPTION FOR SL SEAL SCORING.
UM, AND THEN ADDED FISCAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW GUIDANCE DUE TO THE COMBINATION OVERLAP WITH THE EVALUATION PERIOD.
SO THIS IS SOMETHING NEWER THAT WE DID NOT DISCUSS LAST MONTH.
SO BECAUSE THE NOFO WAS RELEASED EARLIER THAN ANY OTHER NOFO IN PROBABLY, WHO KNOWS SINCE MAYBE SINCE THEY'VE LEASING THE NOFO.
SO AT LEAST SINCE THE TWO THOUSANDS.
UM, TYPICALLY, YEAH,
SO THAT LEAVES US IN A LITTLE BIT OF DILEMMA OF WHAT DO WE DO WITH FISCAL PERFORMANCE WHEN TECHNICALLY THESE PROJECTS THAT EXPIRED AT SIX 30 CAN STILL SUBMIT INVOICES TO HSB BY 7 21.
AND SO 7 21 IS FAR TOO LATE TO LOOK AT THAT.
SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE LOOKED AT PAST COUPLE YEARS AND LOOKED AT THE INVOICES FOR THE LAST MONTH.
GENERALLY, WE DIDN'T FIND ANY MAJOR TRENDS WHERE PROJECTS WERE REALLY PUSHING LIKE HEAVY INVOICE BILLING THAT WAS FAR ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THEY TYPICALLY BILL ON THE YEAR ON AVERAGE.
SO WHAT WE ADDED WAS ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT ESSENTIALLY SAYS, UH, WE'VE NOTIFIED, UH, PROJECT OPERATORS THAT WE'RE DOING THIS IS ESSENTIALLY OKAY, BECAUSE WE NEED TO EVALUATE YOUR PROJECTS EARLIER.
WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GONNA TAKE YOUR INVOICES TO THE END OF MAY, SO 11 MONTHS WORTH OF INVOICES, AND THEN COMPARE THOSE TO 11 TWELFTHS OF YOUR BUDGET.
SO 11 MONTHS OUT OF THE BUDGET.
UM, AND WHAT WE'LL PROBABLY DO WHEN WE COME BACK, UH, NEXT MONTH WITH SCORES IS WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENS IF WE JUST DO ACTUAL SPENDING AT 11 MONTHS VERSUS 1112.
UH, AND THEN THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE DOING AN AVERAGE OF THOSE 11 MONTHS AGAINST THE FULL BUDGET.
SO WE'RE GONNA DO THOSE BOTH AND WE'RE PROBABLY GONNA SELECT THE ONE THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE BENEFICIAL TO PROJECTS.
WE DON'T THINK THERE'S GONNA BE A MAJOR DIFFERENCE, SO THERE'S A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE.
UM, WE'LL PROBABLY SELECT THAT ONE.
BUT WHEN WE COME BACK WITH SCORES, WE'LL SOLIDIFY THAT AND THEN THAT'LL BE, THAT'LL BE HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.
BUT AS, AS OF THIS TIME WE'RE GOING WITH THE 11 TWELVES, 'CAUSE IT SEEMS A LITTLE BIT MORE PRACTICAL 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT CREATING AN AVERAGE, WE'RE JUST USING ACTUAL COSTS FOR THOSE 11 MONTHS.
UM, WITH THE METRIC AND SCORING REVISION, UM, REVISE THE METRIC SCORING TO AWARD THOSE POINTS ON A SLIDING SCALE.
SO AGAIN, YOU'RE BETWEEN HALF AND FULL POINTS.
INSTEAD OF ONLY GETTING HALF POINTS OR FULL POINTS, YOU'LL FALL WITHIN THAT RANGE.
UH, REBALANCE SOME POINT ALLOCATIONS TO BETTER ALIGN WITH THE NO FOOT REQUIREMENTS, ADDED RETURNS TO HOMELESSNESS AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICE PARTICIPATION.
AND THEN REMOVE LOWER VALUE METRICS THAT WERE NOT ONLY LESS TIED TO PROJECT PERFORMANCE, BUT ALSO WERE BASICALLY AWARDED TO EVERY SINGLE, OR ACTUALLY AWARDED TO EVERY SINGLE PROJECT.
AND SO, UH, THE WEIGHT OF THOSE JUST DIDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO KEEP 'EM IN BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T, THEY WEREN'T DOING A WHOLE LOT SINCE EVERYONE WAS EARNING THOSE POINTS.
UM, I DO WANT TO GET INTO PROJECT RANKING.
SO, UH, WE HAD PREVIOUSLY SPOKEN ABOUT THIS, BUT BECAUSE THIS NOFO WAS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WE PREVIOUSLY EXPECTED, UM, WE NOW REALIZE THAT WE COULD TECHNICALLY STACK A LOT OF PROJECTS, PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROJECTS IN TIER ONE TO PROTECT 'EM, AND THEY MAY BE AUTOMATICALLY FUNDED.
NOW HOW FAIR IS THAT IF YOU'RE TRYING TO ALSO, AS PART OF THE SCORING AND RANKING SYSTEM, CONSIDER, UH, PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS? SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE WENT BACK, UH, WE HAD KIND OF STARTED TO PROPOSE THIS AND WENT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA PROPOSE THIS ANYMORE.
NOW THAT THE NOFO IS OUT, WE THINK MAYBE IT'S A GOOD IDEA IS, UH, USING A PROJECT TYPE PRIORITY RANKING.
SO RANKING THE PROJECTS FIRST IS JUST PUTTING THE PROJECTS IN ORDER, UH, TO SUBMIT TO HUNDRED FUNDING CONSIDERATION.
AND THEN ONCE YOU START TOTALING UP THE PROJECT AMOUNTS, ONCE YOU GET TO 60%, THAT'S YOUR TIER ONE, EVERYTHING ELSE FALLS INTO TIER TWO.
UM, THE WAY WE RANK NOW IS BY OVERALL WEIGHTED RANKING.
[00:30:01]
UH, PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING RAPID REHOUSING, THOSE PROJECTS CAN EARN UP TO 140 POINTS IN THEIR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION.THEY NATURALLY, BECAUSE THEY CAN EARN MORE POINTS, WOULD BE RANKED HIGHER BECAUSE WE DON'T RANK ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS.
SO WE RANKED ON A POINT BASED SYSTEM.
SO NATURALLY IF YOU CAN EARN MORE POINTS, YOU'RE MORE LIKELY TO BE RANKED HIGHER, UH, SUPPORTED, UH, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, UH, IS DOWN AT 1 25, SO IT'S A PORTION OF THAT.
AND THEN SUPPORTIVE SERVICES ONLY DOWN AT ONE 20.
UM, LAST YEAR I WILL SAY THE HIGHEST RANKING PROJECT WAS ACTUALLY A TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECT WHO I THINK ONLY MISSED MAYBE TWO POINTS OUT OF ALL THE POINTS AVAILABLE TO THEM.
AND THEY RANKED HIGHER THAN ALL THOSE PSH THAT COULD EARN A LOT MORE POINTS TO THEM.
SO WE COULD CONTINUE THAT METHOD.
UM, WHAT WE'RE NOW LEANING TOWARDS IS A PROJECT TYPE PRIORITY RANKING.
AND SO WHAT WE WOULD DO WITH A PROJECT TYPE PRIORITY RANKING, UH, AND I'M ACTUALLY GONNA SKIP AHEAD A LITTLE BIT AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GO BACK, UM, WOULD BE, UH, HAVING A MINIMUM THRESHOLD.
SO LET'S SAY WE WENT TO 70% OF POINTS AVAILABLE.
SO INSTEAD OF, AGAIN, LOOKING AT THE NUMBER OF POINTS WE WENT WITH 78% OF POINTS AVAILABLE, AND WE SAY WE'RE GONNA RANK ALL OF OUR PSH ON TOP, BUT ONLY IF YOU SCORE 70% OF THE POINTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO YOU, THEN WE WILL RANK ALL THE RAPID REHOUSING ON TOP, BUT ONLY IF YOU SCORE 70% OF POINTS AVAILABLE.
AND THEN THAT WOULD BE FOLLOWED BY TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, FOLLOWED BY SUPPORTIVE SERVICE ZONING PROJECTS.
UM, THEN WHAT WE WOULD DO IS RANKED THE PROJECTS THAT SCORED BELOW 70% IN THE SAME ORDER, ESH ON TOP AND RAPID REHOUSING TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SSO.
UM, SO THIS ESSENTIALLY JUST ESTABLISHES THAT MINIMUM PERFORMANCE THRESHOLD, SO 70% OF THE POINTS THAT YOU'RE AVAILABLE.
AND SO DOING THIS WILL PRESERVE THOSE HIGH PERFORMING PROJECTS, BUT WILL REFLECT OUR LOCAL PRIORITIES OF PRESERVING THAT PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.
UH, IT DOES SUPPORT THAT STRATEGIC TIER ONE PLACEMENT FOR THAT HARDER TO REPLACE FUNDING, INCLUDING, UH, PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING RAPID REHOUSING.
UM, AND IT DOES RESPOND A LITTLE BIT TO THAT FUNDING RISK.
WE'RE GONNA TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION TODAY IS GONNA BE, UH, THAT YOU ALL APPROVE THIS POLICY AS IT STANDS, BUT THEN NEXT MONTH WE COME BACK AND WE LOOK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IMPLEMENTING A PROJECT TYPE RANKING.
NOW NEXT MONTH IT COULD BE THAT WE DECIDE THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA DO THIS.
IT DOESN'T FUNCTIONALLY MATTER FOR THE SCORING PORTION.
THE RANKING PORTION'S NOT GONNA BE DONE UNTIL AUGUST.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO SET THINGS UP A LITTLE BIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
WE CAN TALK MORE ABOUT THIS NEXT MONTH.
THE COMMITTEE CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THIS.
UM, NOW I'M GONNA GO BACK BECAUSE HUD HAS TOLD US HOW THEY'RE GONNA SELECT PROJECTS FOR FUNDING.
AND THIS IS THE REASON WHY WE'RE A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED WITH LOSING FUNDING.
SO HUD HAS STATED WITH THEIR $4.04 BILLION, THE FIRST THING THEY'RE GONNA DO IS AWARD ALL ELIGIBLE COC IN YOU FOR COST.
SO AS YOU SAW OUT OF OUR $12 MILLION PORTFOLIO, IT'S ABOUT 900,000 TO US.
UM, IT ENDS UP BEING A PORTION OF YOUR PRELIMINARY PRORATED IN NEED OR FINAL PRORATED IN NEED, I BELIEVE.
UM, SO THIS IS A, A CHUNK EVERY COC ACROSS THE COUNTRY, UH, GETS THIS, THIS IS NOT A COMPETITIVE, UM, A COMPETITIVE AMOUNT.
YOU BASICALLY GET THIS FUNDING JUST FOR DOING ALL THE OPERATIONAL COC THINGS.
SO THAT'S THE BOARD, THE HOMELESS COUNT, UM, 'CAUSE THAT'S UNDER COC AS WELL.
UM, THE, UH, FUNDING, APPLICATION MONITORING ADMINISTRATION THAT COVERS ALL THOSE.
THEN HUNT'S GONNA GO AND THEY'RE GONNA FUND TIER ONE.
SO EVERY PROJECT THAT PASSES THEIR REVIEW IN TIER ONE 60% OF EVERY CO C'S ANNUAL RENEWAL DEMAND IS GONNA BE THE NEXT THING THAT THEY FUND.
THEN THEY'RE GONNA FUND THAT 104 MILLION IN NEW DV BONUS PROJECTS.
SO THEY'RE JUST GONNA GO THROUGH AND IF THEY HAVEN'T ALREADY BEEN SELECTED, AND HOW THEY MAY ALREADY BE SELECTED IS IF SOME CRCS DECIDE TO PLACE DV BONUS IN TIER ONE.
TYPICALLY THAT'S NOT THE STRATEGY THAT WE EMPLOY, WHICH IS PROTECT YOUR FUNDING FIRST AND PLACE NEW PROJECTS TOWARDS THE BOTTOM BECAUSE WE'D RATHER GET, UH, RENEWAL FUNDING FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY SUPPORTING FOLKS THAN NEW FUNDING FOR PROJECTS THAT DON'T EXIST YET.
SO, UH, AFTER THAT, HUD'S GONNA LOOK AND SAY, OF ALL THESE PROJECTS WE'VE ALREADY FUNDED, HAVE WE SPENT 430 MILLION ON PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECTS THAT SERVE FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN? IF WE HAVEN'T, WE'RE GONNA START GOING THROUGH THOSE TIER TWO 40% AND FUND THOSE UNTIL WE HIT
[00:35:01]
THIS GOAL.BECAUSE THIS COULD BE RENEWAL PROJECTS, NEW PROJECTS, WE, YEAH, WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS AFFECTS THE RENEWAL DEMAND FOR TIER TWO.
IF THESE ARE ALL NEW PROJECTS, THIS, THAT WOULD, WHICH IS, WOULD PROBABLY WOULD NOT BE THE CASE.
'CAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME FAMILIES THAT SOME PROJECTS THAT SERVE FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN.
BUT IF LIKE HALF OF THIS, LET'S SAY, OR A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN HALF OF THIS FOUR 30 IS NEW PROJECTS, THAT MEANS THAT ALL RENEWAL PROJECTS IN TIER TWO BASICALLY WOULD NOT HAVE ANY FUNDING AND NONE OF THEM WOULD GET FUNDED BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT'S AVAILABLE VERSUS THE AMOUNT OF RENEWALS THAT'S OUT THERE.
AND WHAT THEY PRIORITIZE FOR NEW SSO AND AND TH.
SO AFTER THEY'VE DONE THIS, THEY HAVE SET ASIDE 1.3 BILLION FOR NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SSO.
SO THEY'RE SAYING WE'RE GONNA LOOK IN TIER TWO AND WE SPECIFICALLY WANT NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SSO PROJECTS.
THEN IF ANYTHING'S LEFT OVER, THEY SAID THEY'RE GONNA SELECT OTHER ELIGIBLE NEW PROJECTS RANKED IN TIER TWO.
SO WHAT THIS TELLS ME IS THEY'RE NOT VERY CONCERNED WITH RENEWAL PROJECTS IN TIER TWO.
THEY'RE PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING IN SSO, BUT IF THERE'S NOT 1.3 BILLION IN THIS, THEN THEY'LL FUND NEW PSH AND RAPID REHOUSING.
AND AGAIN, THE REASON WHY YOU MAY SAY, WELL, WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT? WHAT WOULD THE POINT BE? THE POINT WOULD BE THAT THE NEW PROJECTS HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED UNDER THE NEW HUD PRIORITIES WHERE THE OLD PROJECTS WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE REVAMPED.
SO AGAIN, IT'S A DEFUND AND REPLACEMENT STRATEGY FOR TIER TWO.
SO THE ONLY EXISTING PROJECTS THAT MAKE SENSE TO KEEP INTERIOR TWO, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IS PERMANENT HOUSING FOR FAMILIES, IF IT'S ANY OTHER TYPE OF PROJECT, LIKELY BE FUNDED, LIKELY BE FUNDED.
UH, SO MOVING FORWARD, UM, NEXT STEPS WOULD BE SCORING, UH, NEW PROJECTS.
SO AS I STATED, WE HAVE ALREADY NOTIFIED, UM, WE ALREADY NOTIFIED SOME RECIPIENTS THAT WERE REMINDED THEM, HEY, CONTRACTUALLY, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO SUBMIT ALL YOUR INVOICES BY THE 21ST OF THE MONTH.
WE'RE GONNA ASK THE BOARD TO APPROVE THIS SCORING STRATEGY FOR SPEND DOWN USING 11 TWELFTHS OF YOUR BUDGET 11 MONTHS BECAUSE OF THE, THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE, THE, UH, NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY TIMELINE AND THE TIMELINE OF EVALUATIONS.
UM, OR THE TIMELINE OF, I'M SORRY, NOT EVALUATIONS, BUT THE TIMELINE OF CONTRACTS.
UM, THEN WE'RE GONNA SEND 'EM THE SCORE REPORTS.
AND THE REASON WHY WE HAVE TO DO THAT IMMEDIATELY IS BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO APPEAL.
SO SCORE REPORTS IN REALLOCATION.
YOU MAY, YOU MAY AT SOME POINT THINK THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS AND YOU MAY SAY, WELL, WHY DON'T WE WAIT A LITTLE BIT LONGER SO MAYBE WE CAN DISCUSS IT MORE IF PEOPLE HAVE MORE TIME.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE REASON WHY WE DON'T HAVE TIME IS 'CAUSE WE HAVE THESE BUILT IN PERIODS, NOT ONLY WHERE WE NEED TO REVIEW, BUT THEY NEED TO REVIEW AND POTENTIALLY APPEAL IN CASE THEY WANNA, YOU KNOW, MAYBE CORRECT THE MISTAKE OR IN THE, IN THE POINT OF REALLOCATION, WHEN YOU MAKE PRELIMINARY REALLOCATION, UH, UH, DECISIONS NEXT MONTH IN JULY, WE NEED TO GIVE THEM 10 DAYS.
SO THEN COME BACK TO US AND TELL US, YOU KNOW, WHY MAYBE THEY SHOULDN'T BE REALLOCATED, WHICH WE WOULD THEN RETURN TO THE BOARD WITH THAT INFORMATION IN AUGUST WHEN WE'D BE MAKING THE FINAL DECISIONS.
SO A LOT OF, A LOT OF THE EARLIER DECISIONS YOU MAY SAY, THINGS MAY SEEM A LITTLE BIT RUSHED.
SIMPLY DO THE COMPETITION LINE TIMELINE AS WELL AS THE BOARD AND APPEALS AND REVIEW PERIODS ESSENTIALLY.
UH, AND THEN FINALLY IN THE JULY MEETING, CONSIDER AN APPROVE ANY FINAL PROJECT TYPE RANKING PRIORITIZATION BEFORE THAT PRAIRIE LIST IS FINALIZED IN AUGUST.
SO THAT WAS COMING BACK TO TALK ABOUT ARE WE GONNA PLACE THOSE PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AT THE TOP AS LONG AS THEY SCORE OVER 70% VERSUS A POINT BASED SYSTEM JUST TO TRY TO PROTECT THEM.
UH, OBVIOUSLY, AS MOST PEOPLE PROBABLY KNOW, IT'S A LITTLE BITTY, I'M NOT GONNA SAY A LOT EASIER BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY FUNDING IS GETTING CUT ALL OVER THE PLACE.
BUT, UM, IT'S A LOT EASIER GENERALLY TO REPLACE, UH, A PROJECT THAT IS NON-PERMANENT HOUSING THAN IT IS TO REPLACE A PROJECT THAT IS PERMANENT, SPECIFICALLY PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, UM, AND NOT DISPLACING A LOT OF THOSE FOLKS.
UM, AND WITH THAT, I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THE SCORING RANKING POLICY.
SO THESE, UH, THESE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WE ARE FINDING, ARE THEY ON BOARD WITH THIS SO FAR FROM YOUR CONVERSATIONS? YEAH, SO WE HAVEN'T HAD, WE HAVEN'T REACHED OUT.
THERE'S, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT.
ONCE THE NOTEBOOK COMES OUT, YOU HAVE TO BE A LITTLE BIT CAREFUL 'CAUSE THIS, IT'S A COMPETITION, RIGHT? UM, WE ARE
[00:40:01]
PROBABLY GONNA HAVE ANOTHER OFFICE HOURS.WE DID HAVE AN OFFICE HOURS, UM, A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO WHERE WE DISCUSSED SOME OF OUR STRATEGIES.
IT OBVIOUSLY WASN'T WHEN THIS NOTEBOOK CAME OUT, BUT IT INCLUDED THE KIND OF REPLACEMENT STRATEGY WHERE WE WOULD REALLOCATE RAPID REHOUSING PROJECTS AND PROPOSE NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECTS.
AND THERE WERE A BUNCH OF PROVIDERS ON THERE.
WE DID SEND IT OUT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, BUT WE INCLUDED ALL THE PROVIDERS ON THERE.
AND TO BE A HUNDRED PERCENT HONEST WITH YOU, WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY FEEDBACK AT ALL DURING THOSE OFFICE HOURS.
NO ONE PUSHED BACK AT ALL AGAINST THAT STRATEGY, WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN TO, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY REALLOCATE AND TRY TO PROPOSE NEW PROJECTS.
UM, NO ONE HAS YET REPLIED STATING THAT, UH, THE MEMO THAT WE COMPLETED LAST WEEK THAT WE SENT OUT, OR, UH, THE CONCERNS WITH, UM, SPEND DOWN, UH, YOU KNOW,
UH, NO ONE HAS PROVIDED ANY PUSHBACK YET.
I DO WANT TO HOLD AT SOME POINT DURING THIS MONTH, UH, ANOTHER, UH, PROVIDER FOCUS, BUT PUBLICLY OPEN MEETING TO DISCUSS THIS NEW STRATEGY.
UM, I THINK THAT BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING AVAILABLE AND THE REALITY OF, UM, OF THE COMPETITION AS WELL AS THE, UH, CONTINGENCY LANGUAGE, SOME OF THE CONTINGENCY LANGUAGE THAT WE INCLUDED IN OUR ORIGINAL RENEWALS WHERE WE WOULD ATTEMPT TO FIND SOME REPLACEMENT FUNDING FOR, YOU KNOW, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECTS, FOR EXAMPLE, AROUND PROJECTS THAT ARE DEFUNDED.
UM, I THINK PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THEY CAN HAVE SOME PUSHBACK, BUT IT'S NOT REALLY THAT WE'RE IMPLEMENTING A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE CONTROVERSIAL.
IT'S MORE SO THAT WE'RE HAVING TO REACT TO THEM AND TRY TO DETERMINE THE BEST WAY TO SAVE A LOT OF FUNDING.
SO I THINK THERE'S SOME CONCERNS, BUT YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK THE AREA FOR FEEDBACK FROM PROVIDERS IS THE RANKING OF, YOU KNOW, PRIORITIZATION WITHIN TIER ONE VERSUS TIER TWO.
THE STRATEGY AROUND TIER TWO, IT, IT WOULD BE A DEATH SENTENCE FOR A PROVIDER TO SAY, NO, I JUST WANT TO ROLL WITH MY EXISTING PROJECT INTO TIER TWO PLAY.
BASED ON WHAT THEY'VE SAID, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET THAT FUNDING, WE'RE NOT GONNA GET THAT FUNDING BACK.
SO IT WOULD BE A MISSED OPPORTUNITY FOR, YOU KNOW, OUR COMMUNITY TO PUT EXISTING PROJECTS INTO TIER TWO.
AND I DO WANNA, UM, INCLUDE THAT WE DID, UM, WHILE WE ARE PREPARING WHAT WE HOPE IS GONNA BE, UH, A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, UM, MAY MINIMALLY BE, UM, A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION, BUT MAYBE THE FULL PROCUREMENT, UM, WE'LL GET TO THAT LATER.
BUT WE DID INCLUDE THE ABILITY TO TRANSITION PROJECTS AS WELL.
SO IF FOLKS ARE LOOKING AT THEIR PROJECT AND THEY FEEL AS IF THOUGH MAYBE THIS IS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THIS RAPID REHOUSING PROJECT, MAYBE THIS TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECT IS GONNA BE RANKED A LITTLE BIT LOWER, MAYBE I CAN'T, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY JUST SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, JUST REALLOCATE THIS AND I'M GONNA SUBMIT A NEW PROJECT PROPOSAL.
UM, TECHNICALLY YOU CAN'T REPLACE ABOVE, FOR EXAMPLE, A RAPID REHOUSING PROJECT THAT NO LONGER EXISTS THAT TURNS INTO A NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECT, RIGHT? THAT'S, THAT'S FINE.
YOU COULD TRANSITION A TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECT TO SUPPORTIVE SERVICES ONLY AND THEN FUND YOUR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING YOURSELF AND THEN USE THOSE SUPPORTIVE SERVICES TO PROVIDE SUPPORTS TO THE PEOPLE IN TRANSITIONAL HOUSING.
BUT AGAIN, YOU WOULD THEN HAVE TO DO THE REQUIREMENTS.
SO THEY DID REDUCE, I DIDN'T GET INTO LIKE THE HEAVIER THINGS ON THE NOFO AS WE DISCUSSED LAST YEAR, BUT IF YOU REMEMBER, THEY HAD ORIGINALLY HAD A 40 HOUR PER WEEK LIMIT, UH, OR REQUIREMENT FOR SUPPORTIVE SERVICES.
SO THEY REDUCED THAT DOWN TO 20 HOURS A WEEK IN THIS S NOFO.
SO INSTEAD OF SAYING 40, THEY'RE SAYING 20, THEY'RE STILL CALLING OUT, UM, A PREFERENCE FOR OLDER ADULTS OVER 62 WITH PHYSICAL, UH, DISABILITIES OR DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES FOR PRIORITIZATION PERMANENT HOUSING.
THEY'RE STILL NOT REALLY ACKNOWLEDGING FOLKS, UH, THAT ARE EXPERIENCING MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES.
UM, AND AGAIN, ARE CONTINUING TO KIND OF STIGMATIZE THOSE THAT HAVE SUBSTANCE USE ISSUES AND KIND OF FRAMING THAT AS THE REASON FOR EVERYTHING ESSENTIALLY.
BUT, UM, YEAH, THERE, THERE ARE CLEVER WAYS IF YOU FEEL AS IF THOUGH YOUR PROJECT PERFORMANCE ARE NOT, IT'S NOT THAT GOOD IF YOU'RE ABLE TO PROPOSE A NEW PROJECT THAT WE SUBMIT TO HUD, PROBABLY A BETTER CHANCE OF THAT BEING FUNDED OUT OF THAT 1.3 BILLION.
UH, ONE, NOT REALLY AWARE OF THE FEEDBACK FROM THE PROVIDERS YET, BUT I DELETE THAT ALL OF OUR CC SUB RECIPIENTS ARE ALSO RECIPIENTS UNDER THE LA CONTINUUM OF AFFAIRS NOTICE OF FUNDING AS WELL.
SO THAT'S WASA, WHO'S THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE LA COC.
WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH, UM,
[00:45:01]
PASA CITIES OF GLENDALE AND PASADENA AROUND STRATEGY REGARDING TRYING TO OPTIMIZE OUR TYPE RESPECTIVE APPLICATIONS TO BE AS COMPETITIVE AS POSSIBLE, PRESERVE AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE, AND OURSELVES ALSO, AND PASADENA, I THINK ARE ALL IN PRETTY GOOD ALUMNI ALIGNMENT AROUND THIS.AND GLENDALE STILL KIND OF EVALUATED THEIR STRATEGY.
UM, I THINK THEY WERE IN POSSIBLY A DIFFERENT APPROACH, BUT I THINK, UM, THE, I THINK THEY HADN'T BEEN FULLY AWARE OF THE, THE RISK BASED OFF OF, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE TIER TWO REALLY LOOKS BE PRIORITIZING NEW PROJECTS AS OPPOSED TO RENEWABLES.
SO I THINK THEY UM, I THINK THEY'RE LIKELY POINT OF ADOPTING SOMETHING WEB US.
ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS? ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, A MOTION TO APPROVE.
FIVE IS RECOMMENDATION TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THE LONG BEACH CONTINUUM OF CARE REALLOCATION POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.
A EVERYONE CAN I GET A MOTION?
OKAY, JUSTIN, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
UH, JOSEPH PATELLA, ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR SERVICES BUREAU.
I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT THE 2026 EOC REALLOCATION POLICY AND PROCEDURES.
UH, SUMMARIZE THE PURPOSE AND FUNCTION, PROVIDE OVERVIEW UPDATES AND SUMMARIZE NEXT STEPS.
UM, REALLOCATION BRIEFLY IS WHEN THE COC SHIFTS, FUNDS AND PART AND HOLD FROM EXISTING PROJECTS PREVIOUSLY BEEN RENEWED TO CREATE NEW PROJECTS.
'CAUSE I KNOW THAT BEFORE 12 MONTHS AGO, UM, HAD APPROVED A ONE TIME REALLOCATION TO HELP SPEND DOWN FUNDS, WHICH THAT LED, THAT WAS APPROVED BY US.
SO WE'RE THAT WE THINK THAT'S GONNA IMPROVE SPEND ON THE SHARE.
UM, REALLOCATION IN THIS CONTEXT THROUGH THE COMPETITION IS PERMANENT REALLOCATION.
SO THERE ARE TWO TYPES INVOLUNTARY WHERE THEY DON'T MEET A COMMUNITY STANDARD.
A PROJECT DOESN'T MEET A COMMUNITY STANDARD OR VOLUNTARY, BUT THE SUBRECIPIENT DECIDES TO GIVE, DO THE COC IS SOLID AND RETURN ALL A PART OF ITS FUNDS TO BE ABLE TO FUND THE PROJECT.
UM, HUD REQUIRES THAT COC IS EITHER A HAVE LOCATION PROCESS THAT YOU CAN ARTICULATE OR THAT YOU DEMONSTRATE THAT 20% OF YOUR ANNUAL RENEWAL DEMAND HAS BEEN REALLOCATED BETWEEN THE 2021 AND 2026 COMPETITIONS.
WE FALL INTO THE FORMER BECAUSE WE TRY TO IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE AND MAINTAIN OUR PROJECT RATHER THAN REALLOCATE THEM IN.
THEY INCLUDE FFY 26, WE MIGHT MAKE THAT.
UM, DRAFT UPDATES TO THE POLICY.
UM, SO WE INCLUDED, THIS IS KIND OF SEPARATE FROM THE, UM, THE, THE COMPETITION, BUT WE INCLUDED THE, UH, YOU FOR FUNDING SHIFT AND REALLOCATION OUTSIDE OF THE NOVA PROCESS.
AGAIN, THAT WAS ALREADY AUTHORITY THAT THE BOARD HAD.
IT JUST WE HAD, BUT WE WANTED TO OUTLINE THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEARLY SO FOLKS LIKE HAD A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF LIKE WHEN WE WERE MAKING THOSE SHIFTS, UM, EXACTLY HOW AND WHY THOSE SHIFTS MAY BE MADE, UM, EXPANDED THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, FOR BOTH TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT.
SO AGAIN, JUST ENSURING THAT WE'RE KEEPING SUB RECIPIENTS IN THE LOOP SO THEY'RE INFORMED AND THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH FUNDING.
UM, AND THEN ADDED SOME LANGUAGE TO THE VOLUNTARY AND VOLUNTARY ALLOCATION REVISION SUMMARY.
BASICALLY ALLOWING REALLOCATED FUNDS TO SUPPORT TRANSITION OR REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND PERMITTED BY THE NOVO, UH, SEPARATED PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT AS WE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED FROM REALLOCATION THRESHOLDS.
AND THEN CLARIFY THRESHOLDS FOR PARTIAL FULL, UH, PARTIAL AND FULL REALLOCATION AS WELL AS RANKING ADJUSTMENTS.
SO, UH, VERY BRIEFLY, UM, UH, AND WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE, BUT I'LL SAY AT A VERY HIGH LEVEL THERE'S BASICALLY FIVE DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE REALLOCATE FIVE REALLOCATION, UH, TRIGGERS IF YOU WILL.
UM, ONE IS PERFORMANCE BASED AND THIS IS JUST BASED ON AN OVERALL SCORE.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, WHAT I WILL POINT OUT IS 70% OR HIGHER, THIS IS ELIGIBLE FOR FULL RENEWAL.
IF YOU'LL KNOW THIS IS ALSO WHERE I CHOSE TO SET MY EXAMPLE THRESHOLD FOR HIGHER RANKING.
UH, THIS MIDDLE GROUND 50 TO 69 MAY BE CONSIDERED FOR PARTIAL REALLOCATION OR RANKING ADJUSTMENT.
THIS WAS ALREADY IN THE POLICY.
AND THEN 50% OR BELOW, UH, I DID CHANGE THIS LANGUAGE SLIGHTLY BECAUSE I FELT THE BOARD WOULD PROBABLY WANNA MAINTAIN THIS IN THE DISCUSSION.
[00:50:01]
SAID THAT IF YOU SCORED UNDER 50%, YOU WERE, UH, INELIGIBLE FOR RENEWAL AND YOU WOULD BE FULLY REALLOCATED PERIOD.AS WE KNOW IN THE 2025 COMPETITION, THAT DID NOT HAPPEN.
THERE WASN'T A 2025 COMPETITION, BUT WE SUBMITTED THOSE FOR RENEWAL ANYWAY.
SO I FELT AS IF THOUGH JUST CHANGING THIS TO SAY THAT YOU'RE SUBJECT TO FULL REALLOCATION, ESSENTIALLY PLACING THE POWER BACK IN THE BOARD TO APPROVE THAT REALLOCATION JUST KIND OF FELT APPROPRIATE.
SO FUNCTIONALLY IT DOESN'T WORK MUCH DIFFERENTLY, UM, BECAUSE THEY WOULD STILL BE SUBJECT TO THAT FOR REALLOCATION.
THE DIFFERENCE IS THE WORDING DOES NOT SAY WILL DEFINITELY GUARANTEE HAPPEN.
UM, UTILIZATION, UH, SO THIS HAS BEEN UTILIZATION BASED ON WHAT'S CONTRACTED.
UH, IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO PERFORMANCE BASE EXCEPT A MUCH HIGHER THRESHOLD BECAUSE WE DO WANT THE MAJORITY OF BEDS OR UNITS FILLED, UH, CHRONIC UNDER UTILIZATION.
SO THIS IS WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT MULTIPLE YEARS OF UNDER UTILIZATION.
AND THEN THERE'S EITHER PARTIAL OR FULL REALLOCATION DEPENDING ON THE EXTENT OF UNDER UTILIZATION OVER MULTIPLE YEARS.
UM, AND THEN, UH, WE'RE LOOKING AT SPEND DOWN AND CHRONIC UNDERSPENDING.
SO SPEND DOWN BEING ENSURING THAT YOU'RE SPENDING AT LEAST 90% OF YOUR GRANT AMOUNT.
UM, IF YOU'RE SCORING BETWEEN 70 AND 89%, YOU MAY BE CONSIDERED FOR THAT PARTIAL REDUCTION AND THEN THE LOW 70% SUBJECT TO FULL REALLOCATION.
BUT AGAIN, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY A BOARD DECISION.
UH, CHRONIC UNDERSPENDING, VERY SIMILAR TO THE CHRONIC UNDER UTILIZATION WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THREE CONSECUTIVE YEARS.
AND DEPENDING ON IF YOU'RE HAVING UH, EITHER 15 OR 25%, YOU MAY BE SUBJECT TO A PARTIAL REALLOCATION BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF UNEXPECT FUNDS OR PARTIAL REALLOCATION BASED ON THAT AVERAGE UNDERSPEND.
AND THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A CLAUSE THERE WHERE IF YOU HAVE, UM, BETTER UNDERSPENDING IN THE CURRENT YEAR THAN YOU HAD IN PREVIOUS YEARS, UH, ESSENTIALLY YOU WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM REALLOCATION OF THAT SECTION.
UH, NEXT STEPS FOR THE REALLOCATION POLICY.
SO AGAIN, DID NOT MAKE SUBSTANTIVE UPDATES TO THE REALLOCATION POLICY.
THEY WEREN'T REALLY NEEDED, UH, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THE BOARD MAY SIT DOWN IN A MONTH AND DECIDE THAT THERE ARE PROJECTS FOR COMPETITIVE REASONS THAT MAY NEED TO BE REALLOCATED.
UM, AND THAT YOU DO HAVE THAT AUTHORITY WITHIN THAT POLICY.
SO, UH, WE'RE GONNA APPLY THE REALLOCATION POLICY AFTER SCORING, UH, BECAUSE WE NEED, UM, SOME OF THAT PERFORMANCE DATA TO DETERMINE WHICH PROJECTS MAY BE SUBJECT TO REALLOCATION.
UM, AND THEN WE'RE GONNA REVIEW ALL OF THOSE, UH, ALL OF THOSE SEPARATE CATEGORIES AS WELL AS NOFOR RELATED FUNDING RISKS.
YOU'RE GONNA LOOK AT SCORING RESULTS FOR PRELIMINARY REALLOCATION ANALYSIS AND THEN MAKE THOSE PRELIMINARY REALLOCATION DETERMINATIONS AND THEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO USE THAT TO ANTICIPATE HOW MUCH MAY BE AVAILABLE FOR NEW PROJECT PROJECTS.
SO LET'S SAY OUT OF THE PORTFOLIO, $2 MILLION IS REALLOCATED AND LET'S SAY IT'S ALL COC BECAUSE IF IT'S A DV PROJECT, IT HAS TO CONTINUE SERVING THOSE POPULATIONS.
THAT $2 MILLION THEN BECOMES ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT YOU CAN APPLY FOR IN NEW PROJECT.
SO THAT 1.8 UH, MILLION IN NEW PROJECT FUNDING FOR REGULAR COC PROJECTS, THAT WOULD THEN BECOME 3.8 MILLION IN NEW PROJECT FUNDING THAT WE COULD APPLY FOR.
THAT JUST MEANS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO SEND THAT MONEY, UH, OR WE BASICALLY GIVE THE MONEY BACK TO HUD AND THEN THEY UP THE CAP OF PROJECTS WE CAN APPLY FOR.
UH, FINALLY WE WILL NOTIFY THOSE SUBRECIPIENTS SO THEY CAN SUBMIT APPEALS AND THEN REVIEW THOSE APPEALS IN AUGUST WITH THE BOARD AND APPROVE THE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO SUBMIT TO HUD.
UM, AND NOW HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE REALLOCATION OFFICER AND IT'S NOT ON HERE TODAY, BUT FOR SERIOUS CONSIDERATION, IF IT IS NOT A FAMILY PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECT IN TIER TWO, IT MAY BE WHO US TO JUST TAKE A REALLOCATION APPROACH.
AS MUCH AS THAT FEELS REALLY TERRIBLE, IT FEELS HARSH.
THE REALITY IS PUTTING IT INTO TIER TWO, IT'S JUST DELAY THE INEVITABLE.
AND IF IT IS DEFUNDED THAT DOES, WE HAVE TO VOLUNTARILY REALLOCATE IN ORDER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO REAPPLY FOR THAT FUNDING.
SO IF WE DON'T, FOR EXAMPLE, REALLOCATE 2 MILLION, I'M JUST USING A $2 MILLION, IF WE DON'T REALLOCATE THAT 2 MILLION AND HUD JUST TAKES IT AWAY, THEN 1.8 IS STILL THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF NEW FUNDING WE COULD GET.
BUT IF WE REALLOCATE THAT AMOUNT THAT UPS THE AMOUNT OF NEW FUNDING WE CAN THEN APPLY FOR.
UM, THE DIFFICULT THING ABOUT REALLOCATION IS, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHEN WE REALLOCATED HERE AS A UFA, RIGHT, WHERE WE'RE ONE OF A COUPLE OF DOZEN CRCS THAT COULD DO THAT, THAT ONE TIME REALLOCATION, WHEN WE DO IT DURING THE YEAR, WE GET TO KEEP THAT MONEY
[00:55:01]
'CAUSE WE'RE JUST SHIFTING IT BETWEEN OUR PROJECTS.WHEN WE DO IT IN A COMPETITIVE WAY, WE'RE BASICALLY TAKING THE WALLET OUT, GIVING IT BACK TO HUD AND THEN REAPPLYING STARTING ALL OVER AGAIN.
SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY GIVING UP MONEY AND THEN HAVING TO FIGHT TO GET IT BACK.
THE, THE TIMING OF THE REMINDERS, THIS IS FOR CONTRACTS THAT WOULD START JULY 1ST, 2027.
ANYTHING THAT'S REALLOCATED THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE BASICALLY HAVE A ONE YEAR, WE'RE SUPPOSED TIMELINE TO TRY TO IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVE SOURCES, SUSTAIN, HOW MANY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT IN TIER TWO THAT WE DON'T KNOW YET? BECAUSE IT'S BASED NOT ON THE NUMBER OF PROJECTS, BUT THEN THE AMOUNT OF THE PROJECTS.
SO WE HAVE SOME PROJECTS THAT ARE 200,000.
WE HAVE SOME PROJECTS THAT ARE A MILLION.
SO THE PROJECTS THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY MORE PROJECTS THAT HAVE A LOWER A RD, THEY CAN BE FRANK WITH YEAR ONE.
THE OTHER THING IS PROJECTS CAN STRADDLE TIER TWO AND YOU CAN ALSO CHOOSE, YOU COULD CHOOSE AS A BOARD TO SAY, AND THIS WAS A FUNDING STRATEGY WE KIND OF SPOKE ABOUT LAST YEAR TOO.
DO WE RIGHT DEFUND THE NUMBER OF PROJECTS OR WE SLIGHTLY DEFUND A BUNCH OF PROJECTS AND THEN DOING THAT COULD HAVE THEN, YOU KNOW, PUSHED THEM BACK UP.
SO ONE THING YOU MAY WANNA LOOK AT IS, LET'S SAY WE LOOK AT REALLOCATION AND THE BOARD MIGHT SAY, WELL WHATEVER AMOUNT THAT YOU DIDN'T SPEND DOWN LAST YEAR WE'RE REALLOCATING THAT.
AND SO YOU CAN HAVE THE SAME FUNDING THAT YOU SPENT LAST YEAR TO OPERATE YOUR PROJECT, BUT WHATEVER YOU DIDN'T SPEND, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE BACK.
'CAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT EVERYTHING AND THEN TRY TO APPLY FOR NEW PRICE.
SO THAT'S ANOTHER STRATEGY WE COULD TAKE AS WELL.
AND WE'RE TALKING TIER TWO SLIDE FIVE $5 MILLION.
MY ONLY COMMENT WOULD BE THAT IF YOU WANT THAT, IF YOU'RE GOING TO PRESENT THINGS TO THE BOARD OR VOTE, JUST MAKE SURE TO SEND US AN EMAIL TELLING US HOW IMPORTANT IT IS FOR US TO COME.
SO THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE ALL OF OUR MEMBERS WHO CAN COME TO SHOW UP AND ALSO GIVE US PLENTY OF TIME TO REVIEW WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON.
YEAH, I AM, UH, I CAN SAY, SO WE CAN PREPARE.
ONE, UM, I HAD ALREADY STARTED DRAFTING AN EMAIL THAT'LL GO OUT IN THE NEXT DAY, JUST LIKE STRESSING THE IMPORTANCE PARTICULARLY OF THESE MEETINGS.
UM, TWO, UH, WE DIDN'T GET FULL CONSENSUS.
UM, 'CAUSE A A LOT OF FOLKS DIDN'T, UM, RESPOND, BUT I WAS TRYING TO EXTEND THESE MEETINGS.
WE DIDN'T GET ENOUGH RESPONSES.
UM, BASED ON KIND OF THE LATE STARTS, I THINK I'M GOING TO JUST UNILATERALLY SAY THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TWO HOUR MEETINGS JUST TO MAKE SURE TO MAKE SURE THE TIME IS RESERVED BECAUSE ULTIMATELY WE'RE GOING OVER ANYWAY, RIGHT? UM, AND THREE, YEAH, I I THINK THAT, UH, THAT'S A PERFECT POINT THAT, UM, IT'LL BE MAYBE A LITTLE BIT HARDER TO GET EXACT DETAILS SINCE WE'RE PUSHING UP AGAINST THE TIMELINES.
BUT IF I CAN AT LEAST PREPARE FOLKS WITH AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT, WHERE WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS.
EVEN THOUGH, FOR EXAMPLE, JUST LIKE I GAVE THE EXAMPLE OF, I CAN READ THE NOFO, I KNOW WHAT HUD GENERALLY IS GONNA BE SCORING ITSELF.
I DON'T HAVE THE QUESTIONS YET.
SIMILARLY, I CAN KIND OF PROVIDE YOU ALL WITH A LITTLE MORE LEVEL SETTING AND UM, FORTUNATELY I DON'T HAVE, UH, ACCESS TO THE SAME THING.
I CAN TRY TO THROW TOGETHER A COUPLE OF PRESENTATIONS THAT I THEN SCREEN RECORD DISSEMINATE AND ALSO POST ON THE WEBSITE TO THE PUBLIC.
SO RATHER THAN YOU HAVING TO READ, YOU KNOW, MY NINE PAGE MEMO WITH A FIVE PAGE DANONE THAT I RELEASED LAST WEEK AS HOW MUCH WAS IN THE NOFO, YOU CAN MAYBE WATCH A FIVE TO 10 MINUTE VIDEO, KIND OF WALK YOU THROUGH A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT.
SO I'LL, I'LL JUST TRY TO GET THAT PREPARED FOR NEXT MONTH IN AUGUST AS WELL.
JUST SO, SO THAT WE'RE PREPARED.
TO UNDERSTAND THE SUBJECT MATTER WHEN WE GET HERE, THAT THAT MOVES THINGS ALONG MUCH MORE RAPIDLY AND WE, YOU'LL GET, UH, A CLEARER MESSAGE FROM THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SPENDING OUR TIME.
HOPEFULLY FEWER ITEMS TOO, RIGHT? UM, FOCUS IN ON FEWER ITEMS, RIGHT.
PROBABLY
TIME IS OF ESSENCE RIGHT NOW AND, UH, TWO YEARS, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT GONNA BE CRAZY.
[01:00:03]
YEAH.I MEAN, EXPECT PROVIDERS TO SHOW UP AND NOT BE TOO HAPPY.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT.
I MEAN, WE'RE PUTTING OUR PROJECT UP IN THE SCORING AS WELL, SO WE MAY BE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, WITHIN OUR BUREAU OR LOCATION AS WELL.
SO IT'S DEFINITELY NOT A FUN PROCESS OR PLACE TO BE IN.
SO, WELL THEY NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE CHANGING ATMOSPHERE THAT YOU DEAL GET.
I'M HOPING THAT, YOU KNOW, YOUR COMMUNICATION WITH PROVIDERS IS ADEQUATE TO GET THEM TO UNDERSTAND, UM, THAT IT'S NOT YOUR CHOICE TO DO THIS.
BECAUSE I DON'T WANT YOU GUYS TO TAKE THE HIT FOR IT.
YOU REMEMBER I WAS COMING FROM LA THIS IS LIKE A, THIS IS LIKE A, YOU KNOW, IS LIKE A DISNEYLAND TO ME PLACE ON EARTH
THERE IT IS ACTUALLY, IT ACTUALLY WORSE.
THINK ABOUT 4.8 INSTEAD OF 4.8 MILLION.
YOU'RE TALKING A HUNDRED PLUS MILLION BUCKS.
THEY'RE PROBABLY GONNA LOSE AND THEY'RE NOT GONNA GET, SEE THE, THE THING IS THEY CA THE AMOUNT OF NEW BONUS FUNDING, SO THEY WILL HAVE TO REALLOCATE THAT MONEY IF THEY'RE EVEN GONNA COME CLOSE TO A REPLACEMENT STRATEGY.
UM, SO YEAH, THERE'S A LOT OF, AND THEY'RE MOSTLY PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECTS BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITIES THAT ARE OPERATING A LOT OF RENTAL ASSISTANCE.
SO THERE'LL BE REGIONAL IMPACT.
ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS? NONE.
ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NONE TO APPROVE.
RECOMMENDATION TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THE PHYSICAL YEAR CONTINUED FAIR NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY FUNDING.
CAN WE GET A RECOMMENDATION? THANK YOU.
OH, ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR.
UH, I HAVE THAT, THAT, UH, WHAT IS IT? THAT HUNDRED YARD STAIR
WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS NOTE FOR TOO LONG.
UM, SO TODAY I'M GONNA START BY SUMMARIZING THE PURPOSE AND FUNCTION OF FUNDING PRIORITIES.
PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF UPDATES AND SUMMARIZING ACCEPT FOR APPROVAL.
UH, FUNDING PRIORITIES ARE, UH, ARE ESSENTIALLY PROVIDING FORMAL SELECTION PROCESS FOR NEW AND EXPANSION PART OF THE PROGRAM.
SO CS HAVE TO HAVE A SINGLE COORDINATED INCLUSIVE, OUTCOME ORIENTED COMMUNITY PROCESS TO SOLICIT REVIEW, RANK, AND SELECT PROJECT APPLICATIONS.
THERE'S ALSO SOME DOCUMENTED PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS AND SPECIFY DEADLINES THAT RELATED TO COMPETI ELEMENTS AS WELL, WHICH IS WHAT I REFERRED BEFORE.
AS FAR AS TIMING ELEMENTS, UM, WE HAVE TO EVALUATE PROJECTS BASED ON, UH, HOW THEY IMPROVE THE COC SYSTEM PERFORMANCE.
AND WE HAVE TO USE OBJECTIVE CRITERIA TO DO THAT.
UM, THROUGH THE RELEASE OF THE NOFO HU SPECIFIES THE ELIGIBLE PROJECT TYPE BASED ON FUNDING PER TO GUIDE THIS ELECTION PROCESS AND PROVIDES A MAXIMUM DOLLAR AMOUNT EACH COC IS ELIGIBLE TO APPLY FOR.
SO OUR FUNDING PRIORITIES GUIDANCE FIRST, OOPS, SORRY.
UH, FIRST WE REVISE THE COC AND DB BONUS TABLES TO ALIGN WITH THE NOFO PROJECT.
THAT ELIGIBILITY, UH, CLARIFY THAT THE 2026 DB BONUS SOLICITATION WILL BE LIMITED TO THIS SHOULD SAY, UH, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SSO, APOLOGIES FOR THAT.
UH, ADDED IN NEW LANGUAGE BASED ON REVIEW RATIONALE FOR THE PROJECT TYPE PRIORITIZATION TABLE, UH, CLARIFIED THAT THE SOLICITATIONS DO NOT CHANGE THE CO C'S BROADER PRIORITY AND ADDED THAT CONTINGENCY LANGUAGE FUNDING AND PROJECT TYPE STRUCTURE OR FUNDING, UH, STRUCTURING PROJECT TYPE PRIORITIES.
UM, IN THE NEW PROJECT PRIORITIES FOR 2026 AND TRANSITION GUIDANCE, WE ADDED THE LANGUAGE FOCUSING THAT FUNDING ON PH AND SSO ADDED A FLEXIBILITY TO SUBMIT OR RECOMMEND NEW PROJECTS FOR PH SERVING FAMILIES, UM, TO, UH, EITHER PRESERVE FUNDING OR COMPETITIVENESS AND ADDED TRANSITION PROJECT LANGUAGE, UH, WHEN RENEWAL PROJECTS MAY BE UNLIKELY TO BE FUNDING AS SUBMITTED.
SO OUR APPROACH FOR 2026 IS THIS.
UM, WE'RE GONNA SOLICIT APPLICATIONS
[01:05:01]
FOR NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICES ONLY AND FOCUS ON OUR LOCAL REVIEW ON THOSE PROJECTS TYPES THAT ARE MOST COMPETITIVE.SO REMEMBER, HUD IS FIRST LOOKING AT NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SSO, UH, FOR, UH, THAT 1.3 BILLION.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA FUND OTHER NEW PROJECT TYPES UNTIL THEY'VE GONE THROUGH ALL OF THESE ALREADY.
UM, FOR DB BONUS IN REALLOCATED FUNDING UNDER THE DB BONUS TRANSITIONAL HOUSING ONLY, BASICALLY BECAUSE THE ONLY COMPONENT TYPES THAT ARE AVAILABLE UNDER DB BONUS TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, GRAVITY REHOUSING, COORDIN ENTRY, COORDINATED ENTRY HSB WOULD APPLY FOR.
UM, BUT UH, THAT WAY WE CAN TRACK THAT SPECIFIED, UM, REALLOCATED FUNDING SEPARATELY FOR THE BONUS APPLICATIONS.
SO IF YOU REMEMBER, THERE IS THAT NA, NATIONAL TARGETED FUNDING FOR PROJECT SERVING FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN.
BUT WE DON'T WANNA ONE WASTE PROVIDER'S TIMES IN SUBMITTING A FULL SOLICITATION IF IT MAY NOT GET AWARDED BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT PERCENTAGE THAT ALREADY EXISTS IN THE COUNTRY VERSUS WHAT WOULD BE FUNDED AS NEW PROJECTS.
SO BECAUSE OF THAT, HSB IS LIKELY GOING TO SUBMIT A PROJECT FOR PERMANENT HOUSING SERVING FAMILIES AND THEN PROCURE IT OUT AFTER THE COMPETITION.
SO THE PROVIDERS, THIS WAY, THEY DON'T HAVE THE OPTION.
WE DON'T WANNA LIKE DANGLE SOMETHING 'CAUSE MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT IN THESE MEETINGS AND MAY JUST LOOK AND SAY, OH, OKAY, I CAN APPLY FOR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, SUPPORTIVE SERVICES ONLY, OR PERMANENT HOUSING.
WELL, I'M GONNA SUPPORT, I'M GONNA APPLY FOR PERMANENT HOUSING.
THAT'S WHAT WE NEED, BUT THAT MIGHT NOT BE WHAT THE MOST COMPETITIVE IS.
SO WE WANT PEOPLE TO APPLY FOR NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING.
AND SSO IF THERE'S ANY MONEY LEFT OVER, WILL THEN SUBMIT APPLICATIONS FOR PERMANENT HOUSING.
IF THOSE END UP BEING AWARDED, WE'LL THEN EITHER FIGURE OUT A WAY TO OPERATIONALIZE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND GET A PARTNER TO PROVIDE THE SUPPORTIVE SERVICES OR PROCURE IT OUT IN, IN WHOLE IF THE AGENCY IS EQUIPPED TO ADMINISTER RENTAL ASSISTANCE, FOR EXAMPLE.
SO THERE, IT COULD BE, IT COULD BE A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.
IT COULD BE A MILLION DOLLARS, JUST DEPENDING ON YEAH, WHAT WE GET IT.
UM, THE, I THINK ONE THING THAT MAY BE IMPORTANT JUST TO KNOW, UM, IS I THINK THAT THE BOARD ALSO DISCUSSED THIS TOO, BUT AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL, UH, THERE WAS ALSO A DECISION NOT TO CAP THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING AN AGENCY COULD APPLY FOR.
SO EVEN THOUGH, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ONLY ELIGIBLE, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR UP TO 1.8 MILLION, UM, IT COULD BE THAT AN AGENCY SAYS, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE CAN, WE CAN USE ALL THAT 1.8 MILLION.
THERE'S A REALLY GOOD PROJECT, RIGHT? UM, AND MAYBE THAT'S THE ONLY APPLICATION WE GET AND NOW WE HAVE ENOUGH.
IT COULD BE THAT WE GET 10 THAT ARE NOT UP TO THAT CAP.
IT COULD BE THAT WE GET 10 THAT ARE OVER THAT CAP AND WE JUST SELECT THE TOP ONES.
IT COULD BE THAT WE GET 10 OVER THAT CAP AND THE BOARD DECIDES, YOU KNOW WHAT, MAYBE WE REACH OUT TO THESE PROVIDERS AND SEE IF THEY CAN ACCEPT A LITTLE BIT LESS MONEY AND THEN WE CAN FUND MORE PROJECTS.
IT CAUSES A LITTLE BIT MORE WORK FOR US AT HSB, BUT I'M WILLING TO TAKE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SUBMITTING ENOUGH PROJECTS UP TO THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY REALLOCATED FUNDING DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS.
IMPORTANT TO NOTE ANY DV BONUS FUNDING.
SO IF ANY OF THE PROJECTS THAT SERVE, UH, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS OR ANYONE OF THE CATEGORY FOUR, UH, THERE'S ONLY A FEW PROJECTS, ONLY TWO PROVIDERS, THAT FUNDING GETS REALLOCATED.
WE HAVE TO SUBMIT A NEW DV BONUS PROJECT SO THAT REALLOCATED FUNDING HAS TO GO TO ANOTHER DV PROJECT AS WELL.
AND THAT FUNDING IS ALSO ON TOP OF THAT REALLOCATED FUNDING ON TOP OF THAT 1.9 APPROXIMATELY THAT WE CAN APPLY FOR.
AND AS A REMINDER THAT 1.9, 1.8, WE DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW YET.
'CAUSE HUNT HASN'T RELEASED ANY, ANY OF THEIR FUNDING SUMMARIES.
AND WE REACHED OUT TO OUR HARD REP AND HE WAS LIKE, I DON'T KNOW.
SO UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S KIND OF THE POSITION WE'RE IN.
UM, MOVING ON TO, UH, NEXT STEPS.
I PROMISE YOU WE'RE GONNA GET SHORTER.
UM, WE'RE GONNA RELEASE THAT NEW EXPANSION, TRANSITION SOLICITATION.
UM, SO SOLICITING TARGETING SPECIFICALLY TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SSO SOLICIT TH FOR THE DB BONUS AND THE ALLOWED TRANSITION PROPOSALS FOR L ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.
SO ANY PROVIDER THAT FEELS LIKE THEIR PROJECT MAY NOT BE IN A GOOD POSITION, BECAUSE WE HAVE COMMUNICATED MANY TIMES HOW THEY SCORED LAST YEAR, AND THEY SHOULD HAVE A GENERAL IDEA OF HOW THEY'RE DOING.
UM, THEY CAN SUBMIT TRANSITIONS AND THOSE NEW TRANSITION PROJECTS ARE MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE FUNDED, PARTICULARLY IF THEY'RE TRANSITIONAL HOUSING OR SSO.
SO THIS WOULD BE VOLUNTARY REALLOCATION, ESSENTIALLY.
UM, BUT A TRANSITION PROJECT, UH, IT DOES COUNT AS A NEW PROJECT, BUT IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN REALLOCATING BECAUSE YOU'RE BASICALLY KEEPING A LOT OF THINGS THE SAME.
IT HAS TO BE THE SAME PROVIDER.
[01:10:01]
SO IF AN ORGANIZATION SAYS, I WANT TO TRANSITION MY PROJECT, BUT I'M GONNA CONTINUE TO OPERATE THIS PROJECT, THEY WOULD THEN BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPING THAT, THAT NEW FUNDING APPLICATION.UM, EVALUATE OUR NEW AND RENEWALS, AGAIN, THROUGH THAT SCORING AND RANKING TO FIGURE OUT, UH, WHICH, WHICH WE MAY, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, MOVE ON TO THE TIER SYSTEM IN JULY.
WE REVIEW THE SCORES, AGAIN, MAKE THOSE REALLOCATION DECISIONS, AND THEN NOTIFY THE FOLKS FROM THOSE REALLOCATION DECISIONS.
AND AGAIN, DEPENDING ON WHAT WE DECIDE WE'RE GONNA REALLOCATE, COULD MEAN THAT THERE WERE MORE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO SUBMIT TO A HUNDRED FUNDING CONSIDERATION, RIGHT? SO BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, UH, $2 MILLION.
AND THEN LET'S SAY, YOU KNOW, 4 MILLION IF WE END UP REALLOCATING ANOTHER 2 MILLION OR UP TO THAT FIVE, 7 MILLION, IT'S A LOT OF NEW PROJECTS.
AND LIKE I SAID, HSB IS ALSO WILLING TO WORK, SUBMIT ADDITIONAL PROJECT APPLICATIONS, WHICH WE WILL THEN ATTEMPT TO PROCURE OR POTENTIALLY REPLACE, DEPENDING ON THE FUNDING STRATEGY.
OBVIOUSLY WE'RE ABLE TO PROCURE, FOR EXAMPLE, NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING OR SSO.
IT COULD BE THAT THEN THAT IS USED FOR A PROJECT THAT HAS EITHER LIMITED OR EXPIRED IN FUNDS LOCALLY.
AS LONG AS WE DO IT IN A WAY THAT'S NOT, NOT CONSIDERED SUPPLANTING, UM, WE MAY EVEN BE ABLE TO USE SOME SHIFTS, UH, FUNDING ON THE BACK END AND FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
THEN AGAIN, IN AUGUST, UH, YOU'LL ALL REVIEW THOSE APPEALS AND LIKELY IT'S GONNA BE ME SITTING ON HERE.
WE'LL HAVE A LIST OF PROJECTS UP HERE, AND WE'LL PROBABLY JUST BE SITTING HERE TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE'RE FUNDING, WHAT WE'RE NOT FUNDING, WHAT WE'RE INCLUDING ON THAT LIST AND WHAT ORDER.
THAT'S HOW I ANTICIPATE OUR AUGUST MEETING IS LIKELY GONNA GO.
UM, AND HAPPY TO ACCEPT ANY QUESTIONS THERE? QUESTION.
I JUST WANT, I, I NEED, I NEED TO COMPLIMENT YOU ON YOUR, UH, THE WAY YOU'VE ORGANIZED THINGS AND, UM, AND YOUR SCORING AND YOUR RANKING.
AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO ME.
IT'S, UH, IT'S FAIR TO THE PROVIDERS, IT'S OPEN AND IT, UM, IT'S REASONABLE AND, UM, IT ALSO MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU'RE GIVEN.
SO I NEED TO COMPLIMENT YOU ON, ON THESE, UM, THESE ISSUES.
WELL, I HAVE TO SHARE THAT WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THINGS WERE SET UP HERE WHEN I CAME.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I GET A LOT OF INPUT FROM MY COLLEAGUES, ALL THE TEAM, UM, YOU KNOW, MY OLD COLLEAGUES IN LA AND, UM, EVEN SOME FEEDBACK DURING SOME OF THOSE, UM, AD HOC COMMITTEES.
UH, YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT SOME FEEDBACK IN THOSE COMMITTEES ABOUT WHAT TO PRESENT AND WHAT ORDER, WHAT TO HOLD BACK, WHAT TO SCALE BACK ON.
SO I, I WORKED TO, UH, NOT TO I
'CAUSE CONTEXTUALLY IT MADE A LITTLE BIT MORE SENSE.
SO I'M GLAD THAT THAT KIND OF CAME TOGETHER FOR YOU.
DOES THAT, DO ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEE NONE.
GET A MOTION TO APPROVE BY SHOW OF HANDS.
RECOMMENDATION TO REVIEW AND DISCUSS PROPOSED UPDATES TO THE LONG BEACH COC GOVERNANCE, CHARTER, AND BYLAWS.
UM, SO I'M GONNA NOT EVEN GO ON THE PRESENTATION BECAUSE THIS WAS MEANT TO BE A CARRYOVER AND WE ACCIDENTALLY INCLUDED DISCUSS INSTEAD OF APPROVED, WHICH IS MEANT TO BE AN APPROVAL ITEM.
HOWEVER, I'M GOING TO DIVERT AND CONTINUE TALKING ABOUT THE COC BOARD THROUGH THE GOVERNANCE CHARTING RELATION TO THE NOVA.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY GONNA TALK ABOUT FOR A MOMENT.
UH, SO IN THE, IF YOU REMEMBER LAST YEAR, UH, HUNT DID ORIGINALLY SAY THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THEY WERE SCORING CRCS ON WAS ON THEIR BOARD COMPOSITION.
AND SO THEY WANTED, UH, I THINK THREE ELECTED OFFICIALS, UH,
[01:15:01]
TWO INDIVIDUALS FROM PUBLIC SAFETY OR LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND THEY WERE SCORING YOU ON THAT.SO THEY CHANGED THAT A LITTLE BIT.
WE'RE UNABLE TO APPROVE THE GOVERNANCE CHARTER, UM, THIS MONTH, UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, THERE'S, UM, JUST A MISTAKE IN CARRY OVER OF THE AGENDA ITEM FROM MONTH TO MONTH.
UM, BUT I DO WANT TO GET FOLKS FEEDBACK ON, AND WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THIS, BUT WE FELT AS IF THAT WAS ONLY APPROPRIATE TO BRING TO YOU ALL TO DISCUSS.
UM, SO THE WAY THAT HUD IS SCORING THE COC BOARD REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNANCE BOARD, UM, I WILL READ IN FULL INDICATE THAT A COC DECISION MAKING GOVERNANCE BOARD REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COMMUNITY INCLUDES AT LEAST ONE PERSON WITH CURRENT OR FORMER EXPERIENCE OF HOMELESSNESS, WHICH WE, WE HAVE THAT, THAT'S FINE.
UM, AT LEAST THREE ELECTED PUBLIC OFFICIALS, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE.
UH, THEN THEY ALSO KNOW A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY SUCH AS A MEMBER OF THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, A REPRESENTATIVE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, A REPRESENTATIVE OF RECOVERY, HOUSING OR SOBER LIVING, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM A BEHAVIORAL OR PRIMARY HEALTH PROVIDER SUCH AS A FEDERAL QUALIFIED HEALTH CENTER, A-C-C-B-H-C, BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTER, UH, HEALTHCARE FOR THE HOMELESS OR OTHER ACCESSIBLE PRIMARY CARE PROVIDER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM A LOCAL WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION, OR A SYSTEM SUCH AS A MEMBER OF, UH, A BOARD FOR WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, JOB CENTERS, WORKFORCE AGENCIES, AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE LOCAL COURT SYSTEM MANAGING ASSISTED OUTPATIENT TREATMENT OR OTHER CIVIL COMMITMENT PROCESSES OR FROM SPECIALTY COURTS, INCLUDING MENTAL HEALTH AND DRUG COURTS.
UM, HUD HAS STATED THEY WILL PROVIDE THIS, WE'RE BACK UP TO A 200 POINT, UM, ALLOCATION.
AND SO FOR THAT ONE PERSON EXPERIENCING FORMERLY EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, OR CURRENTLY THAT'S ONE POINT, UH, THREE POINTS FOR EACH OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICIALS BEGAN TO HAVE THREE.
UM, AND THEN, UH, FOUR POINTS FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE REST, OR FOR ALL OF THE REST, OR TWO POINTS FOR MAJORITY.
SO EIGHT POINTS OUTTA 200 UP FOR THESE SEATS.
UM, WE DON'T THINK IT'S WORTH KIND OF REVAMPING THE ENTIRE BOARD STRUCTURE OR ATTEMPTING TO POTENTIALLY PUSH THROUGH AN AMENDMENT, WHICH WE CONVENIENTLY NEVER GET TO SEE ANY OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS
UM, HOWEVER, UH, WE DID FEEL AS IF THOUGH IT WAS ONLY APPROPRIATE, UM, IN OUR STRATEGY DISCUSSION, UH, DESPITE IT ONLY BEING EIGHT POINTS, IT IS 4% OF OUR APPLICATION SCORE.
THAT 4% COULD MEAN A PROJECT BEING FUNDED OR A PROJECT NOT BEING FUNDED.
SO, UH, OPENING UP DISCUSSION ON BOARD MEMBER SEATS, UM, INCLUDING THOSE MENTIONS.
SO THREE ELECTED OFFICIALS, BUSINESS, COMMUNITY, LAW ENFORCEMENT, SOBER LIVING, BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, COURT SYSTEM.
THOUGHTS, FEELINGS ARE, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IN ADDITIONAL PEOPLE OR ONE BEHALF? UH, I MEAN, IT IS A VERY GENERAL OPEN, I DON'T THINK WE'RE TRYING TO KICK ANYONE OUT.
WELL, I MEAN, SOME PEOPLE AREN'T HERE, SO WE COULD SURVIVOR STYLE, HOLD THEM UP, BUT
SO IT WOULD BE AN EXPANSION IN MY PERSONAL OPINION IF I WAS TO BE RECOMMENDED.
ARE WE LIMITED TO THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN ON THE, ON IN THE COURT? YOU COULD HAVE A BOARD OF 283 IF YOU WANT.
YOU NEVER DON'T DO IT HISTORICALLY.
WEARY OF UNWIELDY BOARDS WITH A LOT OF MEMBERS THAT ARE UNABLE TO GAIN CONSENSUS, RIGHT.
THAT HAVE TOO MANY DIVERGENT INTERESTS, ISSUES, CORE ISSUES.
UM, IS, IS THERE A STRATEGY ON HOW TO ENCOURAGE, UM, THE KIND OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD SCORE? WELL, IT, IT, IT WOULDN'T BE, THEY WOULDN'T BE LOOKING OTHER THAN AT THE DEDICATED SEAT, FROM MY KNOWLEDGE.
SO LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, OBVIOUSLY I DON'T HAVE TO TELL ANYONE HERE, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, BUT THIS IS THE EASIEST EXAMPLE.
A REPRESENTATIVE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.
YOU HAVE GOOD REPRESENTATIVES OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND YOU HAVE BAD REPRESENTATIVES OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.
THE SOLICITATION WOULD SIMPLY BE FOR
[01:20:01]
A LAW ENFORCEMENT REPRESENTATIVE.SO WHETHER THAT PERSON THAT APPLIED OR WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD IS SOMEONE WHO, UH, SHARES, YOU KNOW, MY VALUES AND THE VALUES OF THE GUY DOWN THE STREET OR WHATEVER, THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL.
UM, IT WOULD BE AN OPEN SOLICITATION.
UH, UNLESS THERE WAS A DECISION FOR EXAMPLES TO ADD OFFICIO SEATS WHERE WE WOULD FOLLOW UP THE LONG BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, AND SAY, HEY, WE WANT YOU AS A NEW RECRUIT, SEND SOMEBODY OVER.
THEY GET A BOARD SEAT AND YOU KNOW, WHOEVER YOU SEND, THAT'S IT.
AND IF YOU'RE NOT A MEMBER OF LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR THAT SEAT, THEN YOU'RE NOT ELIGIBLE.
MY, MY RECOMMENDATION ON THAT ONE WOULD BE TO FIRST TO REACH OUT TO THE MEMBERS OF THE QUALITY OF CARE GROUP WHO ACTUALLY DEAL WITH THE HOMELESS PEOPLE.
THOSE ARE THE ONES YOU WANT TO HAVE ON THE BOARD.
ULTIMATELY, THAT WOULD BE A VALUABLE ASSET TO HAVE.
ULTIMATELY, IT'S PROBABLY OUGHT TO BE THE CHIEF TO DETERMINE IF WE WANTED TO GO WITH A LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT.
IT COULD ALSO BE A FIRE PERSON AT AS IT'S WRITTEN.
UM, THE OTHER ONES LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE HOMELESS COURT, SO WE COULD WORK WITH THE CITY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE TO HAVE SOMEBODY FROM HOMELESS COURT.
THE CITY RUNS OUR LOCAL, YOU KNOW, WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE SPEAKING TO THE DIRECTOR THERE.
IF WE WERE TO TAKE THIS APPROACH AND SAYING, HEY, FOR THE BUSINESS, YOU KNOW, WE PROBABLY APPROACH THE, THE VARIOUS BIDS, LIKE THEY HAVE A MONTHLY MEETING WHERE THEY ALL GET TOGETHER.
I THINK THERE'S SEVEN OR EIGHT BIDS WITHIN LONG BEACH AND SAY, HEY
YOU KNOW, DO YOU WANT TO NOMINATE SOMEBODY FROM YOUR LARGER GROUP THAT COULD SIT ON THE BOARD? YEAH.
SAME THING FOR, I MEAN, RECOVERY HOUSING, THE PRIMARY HEALTH PROVIDER FROM A QUALIFIED, UH, UH, FEDERALLY QUALIFIED HEALTH CENTER.
I MEAN, THOSE ARE PROBABLY PARTNERS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE, UH,
SO I MEAN, SOME OF THESE, RIGHT, IF WE WERE CHOOSING, AND AGAIN, AGAIN CLARIFYING, WE'RE NOT SAYING THIS IS OUR RECOMMENDATION, BUT WE DID FEEL AS IF THOUGH WE SHOULD AT LEAST PRESENT IT, UM, AS AN OPTION.
'CAUSE I KNOW WE DO KNOW THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THE OTHER CS IN THE AREA IS AT LEAST HAVING THE CONVERSATION.
UM, SO WE WANTED TO, TO OPEN UP THE CONVERSATION HERE.
UM, BUT AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW THE IMPLICATIONS.
THERE'S NO WAY TO ACTUALLY KNOW, UH, HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT FUNDING YOUR SCORE IN ANY WAY.
OBVIOUSLY, IT MAY EARN US MORE POINTS SPOT, RIGHT? WE MOVING FORWARD,
AND THE HARD PART WOULD BE ELECTED OFFICIALS.
WE HAVE A PART TIME COUNSEL, SO YOU KNOW, YOU ARE COMPETING WITH THEIR TIME ON OTHER COMMITMENTS.
SO THAT'S GONNA BE A TOUGH ONE TO GET TO.
I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO MINORITY TO JUST BE IN COMPLIANCE, YOU KNOW, NO, NOTHING WHITE.
IT JUST, THIS IS JUST LIKE THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY'LL GIVE YOU POINTS.
SO, UM, AGAIN, WE CAN'T APPROVE THIS ANYWAY.
I KNOW WE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALREADY WAY PAST TIME WE'RE GONNA DO CO-CHAIR ELECTIONS, SO HAPPY TO LET OTHER FOLKS WEIGH IN.
WE COULDN'T APPROVE THIS THIS MONTH ANYWAY.
BUT IF FOLKS THINK IT IS WORTH OPENING UP TO A LARGER DISCUSSION WITH THE FULL BOARD WHEN MORE PEOPLE ARE HERE POTENTIALLY DOING THAT, UM, RELATIVELY CONFIDENT THAT WE COULD, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, JUST INCORPORATE THAT INTO THE, THE GOVERNANCE CHARTER, UM, AND, UM, AND GET THE APPROVAL RIGHT NEXT MONTH.
UH, THE SOLICITATION, I GUESS IT WOULD BE HARD.
THE ONE THING THAT I WOULD QUESTION IS ONCE THE APPLICATION OPENS, WHAT EVIDENCE ARE THEY GONNA ASK FOR? AND IF THE FACT SEATS ARE ALL EMPTY, UH,
WELL, I WOULD SAY BASICALLY IMPOSSIBLE, BUT CITY SUFFICIENT.
AND I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVEN SHARED WITH ALL OF YOU.
WE'RE ACTUALLY ALSO, UM, NEXT MONTH HUD NOTIFIED US THAT THEY'RE COMING TO MONITOR SOME PROJECTS.
SO WE ALSO ARE DEALING WITH HUD MONITORING COMING HERE DURING THE COMPETITION AS WELL.
UH, THEY, THEY WANTED TO COME DOWN AND HAVE SOME COFFEE AND HANG OUT WITH US, SEE WHAT SOME OF OUR NOTEBOOK STRATEGIES WORK.
SO, UH, WE'LL ALSO HAVE THAT COMPETING PRIORITY, UH, NEXT MONTH.
SO, UM, YEAH, WE DO, WE DO HAVE SOME, UH, SOME, SOME OTHER THINGS GOING ON AS WELL THAT MAY TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF PRIORITY OVER ATTEMPTING TO PUSH THROUGH AN ELECTION FOR SOME OF THESE SEATS.
BUT LIKE I SAID, HAPPY TO, TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION IF FOLKS THINK THAT, UM, IT'D BE BENEFICIAL.
[01:25:01]
I THINK, I THINK WE WOULD BENEFIT BY HAVING, UH, IF NOT ALL OF THOSE TYPES OF PEOPLE IN, IN ON THE BOARD, AT LEAST SOME, MAYBE NOT INCREASING IT ASTRONOMICALLY AT FIRST, BUT MAYBE GRADUALLY MOVING TOWARDS THAT KIND OF A THING.I MEAN, I THINK TAKE US THE 26 OR 27.
OH MY GOD, OFF THE TOP OF MY SIX.
WELL, WE, IF WE JUST GOT SOME THAT WOULD GIVE US SOME POINTS.
WE'RE NOT LOOKING FOR A HOME RUN, BUT YOU MAYBE GET A BASE.
I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT TO REVISIT IT AND AS WE'LL BRING IT AS A SEPARATE ITEM ON TOP OF THE OTHER GOVERNANCE AND CHARTER AND BYLAWS.
THAT WAY WE CAN APPROVE WHAT WE HAVE.
AS SOMEBODY, MAYBE AS SOMEBODY NO LONGER CONSERVE, WE CONSIDER THEIR REPLACEMENT.
THE ONLY, MY CONCERN RIGHT NOW IS THAT OUR ONLY OPEN SEAT CURRENTLY IS OUR, IS WHAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD PROBABLY WANT US TO GET RID OF, WHICH IS OUR L-G-B-T-Q REPRESENTATIVE, WHICH WE ARE NOT IN FAVOR OBVIOUSLY OF ELIMINATING THAT SEAT.
SO WE, IT WOULD BE AN EXPANSION.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY OPEN SEATS RIGHT NOW THAT WE WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE RECOMMENDING FOR ELIMINATION, BECAUSE REGARDLESS OF ALL OF THIS FEDERAL STUFF, THERE'S OBVIOUSLY VALUE IN HAVING A BOARD MEMBER THAT'S REPRESENTING THOSE COMMUNITIES, UM, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE ONLY THING THEY'RE REPRESENTING.
I'M SURE NO ONE IN THIS ROOM FEELS AS IF THOUGH THEIR DESIGNATED SEAT IS THE ONLY FRAME OF VIEW THAT THEY'RE COMING FROM.
AND WE ALSO DON'T THINK THAT THE INDIVIDUAL THAT ACCOMPANIES THAT SEE IS ONLY FOCUSED ON ISSUES AFFECTING THAT POPULATION.
I THINK IT'S LIKE THAT DIVERSITY OF VIEWPOINT.
WELL, LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN QUICKLY.
ANY MEMBERS OF THE, OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? GO AHEAD.
I, I HAVE BEEN TO KNOW OF TWO PEOPLE THAT FIT THOSE CATEGORIES, THE WORKFORCE AND WITH THE LONG BEACH PD, TALKING OF SOME INTEGRITY, NOT JUST ANYBODY.
UM, I DON'T KNOW, AM I OUTTA LINE IF I JUST DISCUSS, KIND OF SHARE WITH THEM WHAT THE BOARD'S ABOUT, MAYBE THEM TO SEE IF THEY COULD CONSIDER, AM I OUT OF MIND JUST TO BEGIN AN OPEN DISCUSSION AND SEE IF THEY YEAH.
ANY, ANY CONVERSATIONS ON NEWS STATES, UH, IS YEAH, THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE.
WE'RE NOT, IT'D STILL BE AN OPEN ELECTION PROCESS.
WE DO ENCOURAGE ALL BOARD MEMBERS TO ALWAYS SHARE THE SOLICITATIONS FOR NEW BOARD MEMBERS.
ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? SEEING NONE.
ARE WE TAKING A VOTE TO YEAH, GO AHEAD.
OVER ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? YEAH.
AND THEN WE HAVE CO-CHAIR ELECTIONS.
UM, THE SCRIPT, I LEFT THE SCRIPT RIGHT THERE.
YOU WANNA READ, I DECLARE, UH, NOMINATIONS FOR THE LONG VCOC BOARD CO-CHAIR.
EACH MEMBER MAY NOMINATE ONE PERSON FOR CO-CHAIR, INCLUDING YOURSELF.
THESE NOMINATIONS DO NOT REQUIRE A SET TO NOMINATIONS.
UM, JAMIE, YOU WANNA, WE COULD START ON THIS SIDE.
YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO.
THE F THE FIRST SEAT IS FOR, UH, O MAKE WITH VOICE AND THEN WE'LL UH, VOTE FOR MY CHIP SEAT.
THE CO-CHAIRS CAN RENOMINATE OR OTHER FOLKS CAN RENOMINATE THEM.
UM, THERE'S JUST A SELECTION, SO.
THEY HAVE PEOPLE SERVE MULTIPLE TERMS IN A ROW, SO IT'S NOT OUT OF MULTIPLE.
[01:30:04]
WE JUST WANNA HAVE A PROCESS EVERY YEAR.IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A SECOND, RIGHT? IT DOESN'T OR IT DOESN'T, DOESN'T IT DOESN'T.
ARE YOU OKAY TO CONTINUE? I EXACTLY.
WE, WE, ME AND KIM, WE DID IT WHAT, SIX YEARS? LIKE SIX YEARS? WAS IT SIX YEARS? THREE? MAYBE.
THE SECOND C WOULD BE FOR THE SECOND CO-CHAIR.
YES, I KNOW YOU, I, ALRIGHT, COOL.
NOW WE NEED A MOTION TO NO, WE DON'T NEED A MOTION.
SO CONGRATULATIONS FOR CO-CHAIR TAMIKA VOICE AND THEN, UM, ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK ON NON-AG AGENDA ITEM.
YOU WANNA CALL MEETING ADJOURN? AJOUR.