Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-IURANI-2019-10-11 1 108 E. Green St. Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 274-6565 MINUTES ITHACA URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY (IURA) NEIGHBORHOOD INVESTMENT COMMITTEE (NIC) 8:30 A.M., Friday, September 13, 2019 Third Floor Conference Room, City Hall, Ithaca, NY In attendance: Karl Graham, Chair; Fernando de Aragón, Vice Chair; Tracy Farrell, Teresa Halpert. Excused: Paulette Manos. Staff: Anisa Mendizabal; Nels Bohn. Guest(s): Michaela Cortright, Samaritan Center Director, Catholic Charities of Tompkins/Tioga. I. Call to Order The Chair called the meeting to order at 8:34 a.m. II. Changes/Additions to Agenda The Chair indicated Agenda items would be reordered if needed to accommodate the presenter. III. Public Comment None. IV. Review of Minutes – October 2019 Moved by Farrell, seconded by Halpert. Approved 4-0. V. New Business A. Action Item - Discuss and Recommend - Opportunities for Project Development Mendizabal stated that the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation completed its analysis of the former City landfill site beneath Nate’s Floral Estates near the inlet and flood control channel. DEC has determined that though there is some seepage, it does not pose a threat to human health, and it does not affect the City’s drinking water. The intak e for City drinking water occurs at Bolton Point, not near the inlet. Regardless, some residents of Nate’s continue to experience issues with their drinking water, and have discussed this with 1 st Ward Alderperson Cynthia Brock. The Committee in general expressed concern over the affordable housing on the site (individually owned or rented mobile homes that pay an affordable rent for the ground beneath). Residents of affordable housing should not be subject to poor drinking water. Similarly, the site is well-located near services and walkable for residents, which is important 2 for people who live in affordable housing. However, Committee members also had numerous questions about the science and details related to the water issues to resolve before it could be determined whether more action were needed by the Committee.  Has the Water Department done its own analysis at Nate’s, and if so, what were the results?  Does the Water Department have recommendations?  Is the Board of Public Works aware of the situation, and if so, what steps have been taken?  The City has a map of where lead (intake) pipes exist in the City, has this been consulted and, if so, are their lead pipes serving Nate’s Floral Estates? Mendizabal will report back, should more information become available. B. 9:00 a.m. – Update and Discussion - 2019 Project #15 –A Place to Stay: Night/Weekend Support for Women in Transition with Michaela Cortright, Program Director, Cath olic Charities of Tompkins/Tioga (CCTT) The Chair welcomed Ms. Cortwright, who introduced herself. She has worked at Catholic Charities for four years and was recently promoted to Samaritan Center Director about time of application for A Place to Stay Night (APTS) and Weekend Coverate. She supervises five staff members and 30 volunteers. Ms. Cortwright CCTT didn’t receive anticipated funding for the proposed second site for A Place to Stay. As a result, the organization feels it would be financially irresponsible to take on a second house at this time. The second house was intended to allow for women with Substance Use Disorders (SUDs) to be able living space with women working on the particular issues that come with maintaining sobriety. For now, APTS will continue to follow its established model of providing housing to women, whether or not they have an SUD in the same house. Applicants with SUDs tend to be prevalent; it’s a cycle APTS is trying to break, according to Ms. Cortright. APTS will continue to host workshops that wi ll benefit everyone in the house. An issue that arises with CCTT’s decision to forgo establishment of a second house in the upcoming year is that the service number (number of beneficiaries) discussed in its IURA application will change. The service number anticipated at the time of application was 21. With second house tabled, CCTT estimates the service number would be closer to 10-12. Farrell asked about the average length of stay? Ms. Cortright answered: 6 mos. This year APTS had 8 women in the house. All three of current residents will be moving into permanent housing shortly - great success stories all. CCTT uses the Continuum of Care’s Coordinated Assessment Team (CAT) list to identify future residents and also has walk-in applicants at Samaritan Center. Any referrals from St. Johns Community Services (SJCS), CCTT will consider. Referrals from SJCS are also on CAT list—and people on that list have undergone vulnerability priority index assessment, but CCTT also gets direct referrals from area waiting lists. Many people need something more like a structured halfway house. CCTT does a phone screening won’t do a whole interview unless there is an actual opening 3 because they don’t want to provide applicants with an impression that space may be available prematurely. Sometimes they do have to tell people, “This isn’t the place for you,“ if, after the interview, it is determined that APTS is not a good match for the woman’s needs. Chair Graham asked about staffing. Cortright responded that the evening residential position has not been filled. (There was a candidate identified who ultimately needed to decline). Halpert asked about collaboration and/or potential for duplication. “I’m hearing you are not duplicating. It sounds like your clients are so challenged that they need a team coordinating, a backup plan, etc.” Ms. Cortright affirmed Halpert’s impression was correct. Farrell asked, “Are you still in contact with former residents?” Cortright answered, “Yes, we still provide follow up and support for them. They do reach out to us.“ Committee members wanted to know if residents were supportive of one another. Cortright responded there are a number of relationships that have continued once they’ve left. Can residents come back? Cortright responded it depends on the discharge. APTS staff addresses that [whether or not the departing resident would be accepted back] at time of discharge. Drug use in house would be “no” because puts others at risk. Chair Graham wanted to know if there was still a desire of CCTT to establish a second house for APTS. Ms. Cortright responded that she’s like to see that, but that the organization doesn’t know how soon-- it would depend on consistent funding. A Committee member asked Ms. Cortright to discuss about how residents pay. She responded that CCTT takes 30% of weekly income, but she has not seen it (rent) get up to $500 total (the total anticipated rent per month). There is always quite a gap between the stated rent and what actually is collected. At the time of this meeting, there were three women in house, and one was just discharged. Two women were working, one was a full - time student. A Committee member asked why there were not four women residi ng in the house currently. Ms. Cortright responded that APTS is in the interview process for another resident—this is an example of how there is a gap between when one person leaves and another can move in. Cortright explained further: The house’s rent is 2000 for 4 bedrooms. It’s low per room but above fair market value. When CCTT/APTS thinks about expanding, it’s a little tricky. They would like to find a house that is closer to HUD’s fair market rent. Chair Graham noted it sounds like the demand is there and CCTT/APTS could fill a house, if it had another one. Yes, Cortright responded, and explained she see the program as a “tier” of transitional housing. Maybe a woman lands at APTS, then move to more independence at a second [future] house, but still with case management services to help her continue to increase her stability. 4 Ms. Cortright departed. The Committee discussed the matter and indicated its inclination to continue the funding as awarded, though with a resolution to modify the contract. Mendizabal will bring the resolution to the Committee next month. C. Action Item – Resolution - 2018 Action Plan ― Authorize Assignment to Cayuga Flats, LLC from INHS of Loan Funding to the Cayuga Flats Project (2018 Project #7 & CD -RLF #45) Bohn discussed details relating to the proposed resolution. Committee members wanted to know about the LLC. Did INHS do this with the Breckenridge development? Bohn: Yes. Also, with Stone Quarry. They’ve done this different ways. Nonprofits can’t take advantage of Low Income Housing Tax Credits, so there has to be a for -profit. INHS creates an LLC, which will own the project, then there is Cayuga Flats INC (which was De Aragón’s point). Halpert confirmed: So there is always a for profit there, involved. Bohn: Yes. 210 Hancock was even more complicated. Halpert confirmed: The for-profit pays back the investor. Bohn: When INHS comes to IURA during the Action Plan application phase, they don’t know whether they will get the LIHTC funding, so therefore they don’t have an LLC set up, or have a name for the LLC, and so on. A Committee member asked: Are there tax abatements? Answer: Not automatically. The project will be taxable because INHS (nonprofit) will convey ownership to the LLC (a for- profit entity). The Chair and Bohn further summarized the resolution’s. IURA provided the funding to INHS. As the project sponsor, INHS may assign it to the LLC, however, this resolution documents the process a bit more explicitly. A benefit of the resolution includes making the monitoring process clearer, as time goes by. Bohn departed at 9:52 a.m. 2018 Action Plan ― Authorize Assignment to Cayuga Flats, LLC from INHS Of Loan Funding to the Cayuga Flats Project (2018 Project #7 & CD-RLF #45) WHEREAS, the IURA approved a total of $228,662 in CDBG and HOME loan assistance to Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc. (INHS) for the Cayuga Flats project (formerly known as INHS Scattered Site Preservation Phase 2) to reconstruct or rehabilitate 29 rental housing units at the following locations:  203-209 Elm Street  111 W. Clinton Street  406 S. Plain Street  227 S. Geneva Street502 W. State Street, (Project) and 5 WHEREAS, $128,662 in CDBG loan funding issued to INHS in 2017 has been expended to support predevelopment expenses for the project and $100,000 in HOME CHDO set-aside funding is earmarked for the project in the 2018 Action Plan, and WHEREAS, INHS has been allocated Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) to financially assist the project that requires establishment of a for-profit ownership entity to take advantage of tax credits, and WHEREAS, INHS proposes to create Cayuga Flats, LLC, a for-profit entity to own the Cayuga Flats project, and WHEREAS, the sole managing member of Cayuga Flats, LLC will be a wholly owned subsidiary of INHS, thereby satisfying HOME CHDO set -aside requirements that the rental housing project is “sponsored” and effectively controlled by the CHDO, and WHEREAS, INHS requests assignment of the CDBG loan and HOME funding award from INHS to Cayuga Flats, LLC, and WHEREAS, at their October 11, 2019 meeting the Neighborhood Investment Committee reviewed this matter and recommended the following action; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby approves assignment of the CDBG loan and HOME funding award for the Cayuga Flats project (formerly known as INHS Scattered Site Preservation Phase 2) from INHS to Cayuga Flats, LLC, and be it further RESOLVED, that the IURA Chair is hereby authorized, subject to review by IURA legal counsel, to execute an amended CDBG loan agreement and a new HOME loan agreement to implement this resolution. De Aragón motioned to approve; Halpert seconded. Carried 4-0. VI. Other Business A. IURA Grant Summary The Committee reviewed the Grant Summary and had questions about the spend-down limit. Action Item: Mendizabal will follow up with IURA Accountant Kim Cook. [Finding: The Grant Summary included in the Agenda Packet was a draft for the following month. $46,073 is required to be expended by June 1 in order to meet the spend -down limit]. B. Staff Report FLIC has notified IURA that it has located three potential City residents for ramps. VII. Motion to Adjourn Meeting adjourned by consensus at 9:59.