Loading...
HousingPartnershipMinutes1999NORTHAMPTON HOUSING PARTNERSHIP Minutes February 9, 1999 Members Present: Richard Abuza, AnnaMarie Russo, Yvonne Freccero, Don Bianchi, Joel Feldman, Peg Murray, Clare Higgins, Nola Reinhardt, Carl Guepel, Netti Anderson. Also present, Carol Kincaid, Northampton Housing Authority, Janis Gillian, Valley CDC, Gerry Joseph, Community Builders, Fran Schwarzenberg, interested citizen, Peg Keller, staff. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Abuza called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. He introduced Carol Kincaid, the Leased Housing Administrator for the Northampton Housing Authority responsible for working with the tenants at Hampton Gardens during the prepayment transition. Members discussed how the transition was going. Carol said it was rough in the beginning, but it is much smoother now. The conforming rule from the Federal government makes certificates and vouchers virtually the same. There had been an option for tenants to make up the difference for rents over the fair market rent. The NHA opted not to pursue that programmatic option 8 years ago because it was felt that then tenants would pay more than they could afford and end up in financial trouble. She said rents are kept more reasonable with certificates. She said that Hampton Gardens will now have to adhere to local housing authority occupancy standards. There were problems with that during the transition. Many families were over and under housed. The NHA has given the tenants a grace period during the rehab process rather than have them move twice. After rehab, families will be relocated to the appropriate sized units. Gerry Joseph said that many 236 projects did not enforce occupancy standards. Gerry then described the effort underway to craft the agreement to maintain some affordability at the complex. He started with some history. -20 years ago through the 236 program, 40 year mortgages wereoffered at 1%, with the opportunity to opt out after 20 years-opting out releases the owners from being obligated to providelow income housing-the furor erupted in the 80's when some of the loans started tomature-tenant advocates lobbied for changes in the national laws andincentive programs were created but shortlived-the stay-in plans that were available, and that Mr. Spearapplied for, are no longer in place-after a period of moratoriums on prepayment, the option to getout was reinstated 2 -locally, when Mr. Spear notified the City of his intention topre-pay, the Mayor convinced him to hold off for a year inorder for us to have time to develop a strategy to retain someof the affordability-he did not want to sell the property which eliminated somepossible strategies-we worked for a year to negotiate an alternate solution tomaximize the affordability-we did not have much leverage in the process, except for rentcontrol which did seem to have an impact on the discussions-several models were proposed, including tax credits-we ended up with 75% of the units being preserved at some levelfor 15 years Gerry then distributed a handout describing the three tiers. Additional comments: -one of the few things Congress did when the preservationprograms were eliminated was to guarantee the tenants receiveda Section 8 voucher if their owner prepaid-if one earned up to 80% of the median, they were entitled to acertificate-in summary, what will be lost is the deep subsidy attached tothe property-residents will be protected annually as long as thecertificates get renewed, and they can take them and move ifthey desire-description of tiers/#l Section 8 at less than 50% of median/ always strive to keep20% (41 units) available for very low if they have certificates#2 mid tier/ in addition to the 15 year period and in additionto the Section B's Mr. Spear agrees to rent to 60% of median,which totals to 55% of the units-when it falls below 93 units (55%) the affordable housing fundkicks in/ the agreement with Spear says the City will create atrust fund for funding the difference between the market rentand the affordable at 60% of median rent rate-the calculation will be done annually-assumptions made regarding attrition rate, 10% annually, saysit will take 7 years for it to drop below the 55%-Mr. Spear did agree to freeze the rental rates for the firstthree years-in order to get money to seed the fund, the City applied to theState for Housing Stabilization funds ($500,000) which Mr.Spear will use for rehab and in exchange he will donate thatsame amount to the fund (since we could not apply for Statefunds to seed the account). 3 Discussion followed about how many people have already moved and where people are going. Carol said about 14 have moved, going to Springfield, Holyoke, Westfield, where families can rent houses or duplexes for the same cost. A few have gone to Meadowbrook. There seem to be about 30 vacancies overall. Without much leverage, what was accomplished was limited. Looking at the alternatives, nothing was available but sticky vouchers, which are all gone at some point. Mr. Spear did not have to enter into an agreement. With the capitalized trust fund and the HSF money, the affordability will be extended a little beyond the 15 years without Federal support. Discussion followed regarding the Federal glitch with the vouchers. Evidently, whatever a household's income was at the time of recertification remains the base for the rent regardless of what happens with that income later. Congress has recognized this problem and is working on regs but they are not out yet. Mike Vito of Sen. Kerry's office wants letters from tenants who are impacted by this. Joel stated that the public perception about this undertaking is more favorable than what the actual deal accomplishes. He said we are losing a significant number of units, which the public does not realize. Discussion about the area FMR was revisited. Carol confirmed that it would take an act of Congress to remove Northampton from the Hampden county SMSA. Carol and Gerry were thanked for their illuminating presentation. Gerry was the consultant for the city in this process. 2.Northampton state Hospital Gerry, now wearing another hat as the selected Developer for the Northampton State Hospital, gave an update on that project. He said that 200 units of housing will be built over a five year period. He said the composition will be mixed income, 50% affordable, 50% market, half rental and half homeownership. He said the targeted population for the affordable units, would be the mid-tier of the Hampton Gardens schedule, those with 60% of median income. He said he has heard different things from different people regarding the housing needs of the community and asked the Partnership to provide input into the planning process. 4 Don said that this is a major opportunity to create this number of units. He asked about the role of Valley CDC. Gerry said the CDC is regearing up, but no discussion has taken place in the past few months. He feels that the Housing Partnership is a good place to get started on balancing different issues and objectives. Gerry said the Community Builders will be working on the Master Plan over the next three months and would appreciate specific input from the Partnership within that time frame. The members agreed to provide assistance. Mr. Joseph said he would return in the future to continue the discussion. He was thanked for his presentation and willingness to include the Partnership. 3.Election of Chair After serving as chair for 5+ years, Richard Abuza said he is stepping aside. He asked for nominations to replace him. Nola nominated Don Bianchi, seconded by Yvonne,. there was no further discussion, vote was unanimous. Richard was thanked for all his years of service. Don asked if anyone was interested in serving as vice-chair and agreed to revisit this request at the next meeting. 4.Needs Assessment Committee Nola and Yvonne expressed the need for some help in carrying out the task put before the Partnership this evening regarding the State Hospital. Nola has little time now, which leaves only Yvonne. Yvonne suggested meeting more regularly and getting more people on the committee. Peg K. agreed to collect relevant date from existing publications to distribute to members to digest and review. She will also do a survey to area housing providers. AnnaMarie suggested tying in public awareness around these issues with the visioning process. Members talked about getting outside help for some of these tasks. s.Adjourn Yvonne expressed dismay over the rescheduling of the meeting at the last minute. She said this week is problematic each year and should be addressed ahead of time. Don agreed. Joel made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Peg Murray. The meeting concluded at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Peg Keller. NORTHAMPTON HOUSING PARTNERSHIP Minutes March 16, 1999 Members Present: Don Bianchi, Yvonne Freccero, Carl Geupel, Luis-Orlando Isaza, Clare Higgins, AnnaMarie Russo, Peg Murray, Jack Hornor, Richard Abuza, Nola Reinhardt. Also present, Peg Keller, staff. AGENDA/ 1.Call to OrderChairman Bianchi called the meeting to order at 7 :05 p.m. Members introduced themselves to Mr. Isaza, who is a new member to the Partnership. No one was present for the Public Comment Period. Members asked for updates on the Market Square project anci on 96 Pleasant Street. Peg noted that a funding request form was sent to Market Square and they were asked to submit a proposal. It has been determined that CDBG funds can be utilized to reimburse for rehab and re-financing costs. Peg has asked them to think about what they would be willing to guarantee in the way of time periods for retaining affordability in exchange for some funding. She has not heard back. The 96 Pleasant street agreement is in the hands of HAP, no comments have been received since we submitted our last draft proposal. 2.Committee StructurePeg and Don explained the revisions made from the existing committee structure. There were too many groups for the number of members, so they have been reduced to 2. Yvonne said she liked the proposal, we also need to see financials. It was suggested that a "funds available" update be given each month. Peg Murray asked that Partnership vs. staff responsibilities be outlined as well. She offered to redo the chart to make sure all tasks were assigned somewhere. Carl made a motion to accept the new structure, seconded by Clare. Vote was unanimous. Members then picked their respective committees and meeting dates were chosen. Committee number one, Yvonne, Jack, AnnaMarie, Nola; Committee number two, Peg Murray, Orlando, Carl, Richard and Don. Peg will call Joel and Netti to see which they prefer. The committees were asked to meet, select coordinators review the charge and identify relevant tasks. Don thanked people for their willingness to commit to the additional monthly meeting in order to move things ahead. 3.Board RecruitmentDon talked about the need for a few more members . Carl noted that he will be leaving in the summer for one year. Don encouraged members to think of people. Jack suggested that a job description would be helpful. He will work on one with Peg K. 4.Project Review CriteriaDon reported that he, Carl and Peg M. met several months ago to develop a formalized process for project submi�sion and evaluation. The draft was reviewed. Don said that 2 levels were present, a minimum threshold to gain entrance for consideration and once that is met, what we expect. We can demand less if additional underwriting procedures from additional funding sources are involved. Members suggested some changes which Don took note of. Carl said the application procedure should not be daunting, thus being a disincentive. A cover letter with a flow chart and a checklist were suggested as well as having it available on disc. Richard suggested that a local bank or OPD staff could provide technical assistance. Yvonne suggested the possibility of having different forms dependent on the scale of the project. Don said he appreciated the feedback, would take it back to the Committee and then present to the full Partnership for final approval. It was also stated that formal application cycles are not necessary due to the small amount of money available, and the dearth of developers making requests. Yvonne pointed out that the lack of requests is indicative of a larger problem, the lack of the response to the need. 5.CDBG Update/ Misc.Peg Keller reported that the annual planning process had begun for the CDBG cycle. Peg reviewed the data collection survey that had been sent out in order to gain information to help Community Builders with the plan for the State Hospital. Members noted that it is still difficult to get information on the private sector housing and Richard stated that "affordable housing" does not usually connote what is offered by the private sector. He said that those units are hard to numerically quantify and added that there are many long term landlords providing affordable units. AnnaMarie noted that the media descriptions that there is no affordable housing produce anxiety. Members revisited "Richard's idea" about having the elders in the community sell their homes to an entity that would keep them permanently affordable. Possibly when the CDC becomes viable again, this could be pursued. 6.Community Preservation ActMembers discussed the statewide movement to pass legislation to allow local communities to enact real estate transfer or surcharge taxes to fund open space preservation, affordable housing and historic preservation activities. Don feels this would be a great way to provide a continued income stream into our newly created housing trust fund. Members agreed that more information is needed to ascertain where it is in the process for passage and what supporters at a local level can do to impact the process. Peg K.will research. Jack noted that presentation is important due to the reaction that any taxusually elicits. Richard said the first task is to get it passed at the State level, the issue oflocal timing can come later.Don reiterated the need for additional funding sources to contribute to the Trust. Richard said that the time could be appropriate for lobbying for commitments through the CRA process as a result of the planned merger of Fleet and BancBoston. Don agreed this could be a golden opportunity and feels confident statewide organizations will be lobbying for this. Jack agreed to research this to see what the input channel might be, since the time to impact the process is before the actual merger takes place. 7.AdjournDue to the lateness of the hour, the meeting concluded at 9:05 p.m. Don asked members to think about selecting a vice-chair at the next meeting. Copies of materials were made available to members to assist them with their research into what types of housing should be included in the State Hospital redevelopment plan. Respectfully submitted, Peg Keller NORTHAMPTON HOUSING PARTNERSHIP Minutes April 20, 1999 Members Present: Don Bianchi, Clare Higgins, Peg Murray, AnnaMarie Russo, Yvonne Freccero, Carl Geupel, Jack Hornor, Joel Feldman, Orlando Luis Isaza, Netti Anderson, Nola Reinhardt. Also present, Gerry Joseph, Community Builders, Dave Reed Union News, Peg Keller, staff. AGENDA 1.Call to Order/ Chairman Bianchi called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. No one waspresent for the public comment period.2.State Hospital Discussion/Gerry Joseph of the Community Builders was introduced. He is gathering input fromvarious sources for the development of the Master Plan. Highlights of Gerry's commentsare as follows:-general goal for the "urban section" high level of density with commercial andresidential mix-20 units of cluster single family homes are planned for an out parcel 1.5 miles away-200 units are planned for the campus, 50% homeowner 50% rental50% affordable 50% market -25% of the homeowners would be 1st time Homebuyers-25% of the rental would be market with 75% affordableaffordable would be in the tax credit range, 50-60% of:rhedian income/ family of fourin a 2 bedroom would pay $500-600 monthly rent-rent structure would be built in, tax credits and market rates would balance each otheradditional factor, requirement that 15% of units made available for DMH clients-he has met with providers and advocates and concluded that those with very lowincomes needing deeper subsidy will need Section 8 certificates-he advocates a scattered site integrated placement approach for the affordable units-the 15% jobs and housing requirement for clients of the DMH system can be satisfiedon or off campus-homeownership/ 80% of median, mortgage at 7% sell for $80-90,000 with deedrestriction-leans towards a subsidy recapture rather than a limited profit upon sale-he is open to suggestions regarding the mechanism-he will be looking to the Partnership for CDBG funds for the sewer line for Parcel Efor a connection from the jail/Clare suggested two family houses owner-occupied with rentalallows for lower $ for purchase, income stream and reflects what exists elsewhere-current plan segregates rental from single family, it could be blendedalso considering live/work space in lower campus -2-additional elements were discussed; density, scale, smaller lots, neighborhoods, open space, community space, bike paths and linkages, pedestrian friendly circulation, conservation restricticns, retail, village centers 5-10 year build out, need critical mass before retail will succeed/ there will not be alot of housing to support a lot of storesfront will be built out first, hard to market with lots of vacant structuresother comments regarding housing component/ the recapture model doesn't alwayswork, not enough funding to seed projects later, equity limitation creates 2nd classownership, less restrictions increase marketabilityPeg Keller distributed copies of the questionnaire sent out to service providers asking for ideas for NSH development. No overriding consensus was indicated, other than "affordable housing". Gerry summarized some of the comments that have been expressed by immediate abutters. Gerry laid out the timetable. May 5th will be two community meetings, final plan will be formalized, presented to the Citizens Advisory Council and the State the first week of June. Next comes the MEP A ( environmental) review process and the disposition agreement. Site plan approval may begin in July with development starting in early 2000. Gerry agreed to continue the dialogue with the Partnership around the affordability issues and said he will need endorsement for the CDBG request. He noted that if the affordability figure were greater than 50%, it would impact the overall financial feasibility of the project. He said 50-50 works. He said the public perception of the affordable units is that it imports people into the area, increases school costs and taxes services. He said the planned scenario does not address the need of the very low income households. He said the cost of the housing development has to be offset by the commercial. Clare emphasized that the discussion is around the issue of housing vs. commercial, not affordable housing vs. market rate. Gerry said advocates need to attend public meetings. The Tax Credit is the only real resource these days. Parcel E will help finance other parcels. Clare noted that Community Builders is committed/obligated to deal with the Citizens Advisory Council throughout the term of the project. Joel asked who makes final decisions on the project. Clare said that once the Master Plan is approved by the CAC and the State, it gets translated into the Disposition Agreement with conditions. The CAC will monitor the plan and the State monitors the Agreement. Nola noted that with the loss of units at Hampton Gardens and the 75 units planned for the State Hospital, it does not amount to much of a gain. - 3 - Gerry was thanked for his attendance and his commitment to include affordable housing. He said to call his office with any additional thoughts or ideas. 3.Sub-Committee Reports Don said that each committee should take its own notes and give them to Peg to be sentout with the mailings. Committee number one will meet April 26th at 5 :00 and Com. #2May 10th at 5:30 p.m. Committee reports were reviewed. Updates will be given at the next meeting on the Community Preservation Act and local projects. Joel asked ifhe could present information about landlord tenant bills before the State legislature, Don agreed. Members asked for some financial reports on the CDBG funds for the next meeting. 4.AdjournJack made a motion to adjourn, Yvonne seconded, all in favor, vote unanimous. Themeeting concluded at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Peg Keller Northampton Housing Partnership/ Sub-Committee #2 Meeting April 8, 1999 Members Present: Peg Murray, Richard Abuza, Orlando Isaza, Carl Geupel, Don Bianchi. AGENDA 1.Peg Murray agreed to serve as the Coordinator, but would be interested in seeing ifanother Committee member wants the position.2.Members discussed the proposal for 96 Pleasant Street. The recommendations will beforwarded to HAP for their consideration.3.The Committee temporarily set the next meeting date as Monday, May 10th, to beconfirmed at the 4/20 Partnership meeting.4.The tentative agenda will be: follow-up on 96 Pleasant Street, review of the ProjectReview Criteria/ Next Steps, confirmation of the Committee priorities and focus andsetting a schedule of meetings.5.The Committee adjourned at 6:15 p.m.Respectfully submitted, Don Bianchi COMMITTEE #1/ Primary purpose identify housing needs set priorities for the year community outreach and education Tasks/ conduct and/or participate in annual data gathering from which to set Partnership's priorities for the year -evaluate needs of different populations based on resourcesavailable or not availablepick two or three needs and develop strategies-state need-identify existing resources-identify gaps-develop strategy for impacting the problemdetermine topics for Partnership meetings to educate members about community's needs/ i.e. if transitional family housing is identified,invite service providers or funders to meeting to learn more about how to impact the problem identify what resources are needed to meet the need refer to committee #2/staff to develop an RFP write a position paper about the problem. and what the Partnership's strategy for addressing it over the next year will be/ provide updates about progress thoughts/ this may help members really grab hold on a couple of things and follow it through/ this should help give continuity to the meetings, help members feel that they are accomplishing something, rather than flip flopping all over the place each month/ focusing the efforts in beneficial ways and achieving results proactively COMMITTEE #2/ Primary purpose Tasks/ developing implementation plans for the strategies affordability mechanisms project review/ review criteria RFP's -coordinate with #1/ understand prioritiescreate implementation strategiesoutreach to development community/ forums, etc.translate that input into specific zoning ordinance changes/departmental policiesreview/ create RFP's to meet identified needsreview specific CDBG proposals and make recommendations to fullPartnershipcommunity education to get the word out/ press, forums Northampton Housing Partnership / Sub-Committee #1 April 26, 1999 meeting Members Present: Yvonne Freccero, Nola Reinhardt, AnnaMarie Russo. Also present for part of the meeting, Peg Keller Meeting Notes (produced by AnnaMarie Russo) 1.Discussion about Orlando's suggestion, from our previous meeting, that we prepare a report for thePlanning Board aimed at increasing PB member's awareness of available planning tools that encouragethe development of"affordable" housing.•Yvonne took a copy of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance. She'll contact Wayne for input onincentives that encourage developers to produce mixed income housing.2.Yvonne referred to a Gazette article about a new 27-acre housing development (Beaver Brook) beingplanned in Leeds. The issue is that these plans are well underway, making it more difficult for the HP toeffectively intervene at this point in advocating for mixed-income units. How can the HP get includedearly on in the development application process so as to increase our advocacy opportunities? (A relateddiscussion came up at our committee's last meeting.)•AnnaMarie will pull together an outline of the City's development application process so that we canidentify steps in the process where the HP could be effectively involved.•Peg will talk with Wayne and John to see about inviting someone from the Beaver Brookdevelopment to talk with us at our next HP meeting.3.A related issue, which also came up at our previous Committee meeting, concerns how the HP caneffectively encourage housing developers to include "affordable" units in their plans.•Peg will have copies av8:,ilable at our next HP meeting of an informational letter on housingaffordability that the HP prepared for developers and mailed out last February (1998).•Yvonne will contact Pat Goggins to discuss how and why he was motivated to develop Pine Ridge asmixed-income housing4.How do we go about figuring housing "needs"?•Yvonne will ask Pat Goggins how Realtors and housing developers assess housing need. Thereshould be a Realtor on the HP. Yvonne will ask Pat ifhe can do it, or ifhe knows a Realtor whomight be interested.•AnnaMarie will work with Peg in compiling monthly reports for our Committee on the housingneeds noted by public and nonprofit low-income housing agencies.5.Discussion about the various, sometimes loaded, meanings of the term "affordable housing." We'llcontinue to work on this issue because it impacts public perceptions and attitudes.6.Spurred by Gerry Joseph's recommendation that the HP will need to publicly advocate for mixedaffordability in housing at NSH, we're working on a piece for the Gazette that endorses the affordabilitygoal of the plan and explains why mixed affordability is important to the City.7.Our Committee needs to reschedule its meeting time so as to better accommodate member's schedules.•Nola will generate an email message to Committee members (after talking with Peg about herschedule) so that we can all figure out our most optimal meeting time. NORTHAMPTON HOUSING PARTNERSHIP Minutes May 18, 1999 Members Present: Don Bianchi, Richard Abuza, Joel Feldman, Carl Geupel, AnnaMarie Russo, Orlando Isaza, Jack Hornor, Nola Reinhardt. Also present, Peg Keller. Members excused were Yvonne Freccero, Clare Higgins, Peg Murray. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Bianchi called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. No members of the public were present for the public comment period. 1.Review of Block Grant financials Peg reviewed sheets from the Block Grant office that listed all the project line items. Members said they primarily were interested in figures describing the amount of money, how much has been expended and what remains, on a monthly basis. Peg said she would talk to Lorrie O'Brien to see what can be worked out. 2.Project Updates Peg reported on the following projects: Vernon Street/ site plan drawings were viewed showing the placement of the house from 45 Federal Street on the Vernon Street lot. Final work is occurring on the affordability restriction. The house will be moved June 29th • Verona Street/ final rock cropping analysis is being done. Huntley Associates has done the wetlands and the ledge investigation work and we be compiling final maps. Sample house placements will be drawn and the map will be given to Tighe and Bond for reference during the capping plan preparation. A neighborhood meeting will be held when all the information is mapped. 96 Pleasant Street/ HAP is working on securing other funding sources. The Implementation Sub-Committee is close to a deal with HAP and will be meeting soon to finalize the proposal. State Hospital/ Jack reported on a neighborhood meeting he attended where the developer presented the current plans. He said more of the discussion focused on traffic than any other component. 3.Update on State Legislative Activity/ Anti-Tenant Eviction Bills and Rent Escrow Bills Joel reported that several bills are being presented at the State level that impact tenants rights. He began his presentation by saying that he is a tenant, has a bias, does work in the area of tenant advocacy and would like to begin a dialogue at the Partnership which involves hearing all points of view. He distributed a packet of information that describes Anti­Tenant Eviction bills that have been filed this year. He described the primary reasons why people can be evicted­non-payment, good cause and no lease. He said that tenants facing eviction can raise counter claims. In attempting to work things out, the Judge established the value of the claims each party is making. It is Joel's opinion that the bills proposed make it more difficult to raise counter claims which might result in more evictions. He reviewed the basics of the bills proposed. He added that data gathered by Western Mass. Legal Services shows that evictions on the average get resolved quickly. There already exists a workload burden on the Board of Health in most communities. He said the landlord currently has a fairly easy eviction route and the law already allows for tenant escrow accounts. He said that the House may report out favorably and that the City of Cambridge has passed a resolution opposing the bills. He posed that this may be an option for this Partnership. He said that his purpose in bringing it up before the group was to inform people that this is taking place, to see if the Partnership wants to take a position and to hear the opposing view. He said the process is moving quickly with the session ending in July. He said the bills are opposed by tenant groups and supported by (among others) the Small Property Owners Association of Cambridge, the group responsible for repealing rent control. Don asked for comments. Jack asked about whom might be able to articulate a different perspective. AnnaMarie asked if any local group was discussing it and would it be possible to conduct an educational forum around the issue. Nola said if the proposed legislation hurts low income households, then the Partnership should take action. AnnaMarie wondered where our local legislators stood on the issue. Joel said it is still in committees and not yet headed to the floor. Jack and Nola agreed that we should hear both sides. The process was then discussed. Members asked that it would have been helpful to get the material ahead of time. Nola said we should check with the legislators and invite someone representing the other viewpoint to come to a meeting. The local property owners group was mentioned and Richard (who serves as the President of HARP) said the Cambridge group would probably be a better resource. Orlando relayed his own negative experience as a landlord and said it is important to ask questions about the eviction process, how many claims and counter claims are valid vs. frivolous and get more information before forming an opinion about the bills. AnnaMarie agreed that in order to understand the local impact, we must hear both sides. Don concluded that it seems to be an important issue, one worthy of additional time and continued discussion. Peg was asked to identify someone who could articulate the other position. Jack agreed to research the status of the legislators positions and get the information out before the next meeting. 4.Committee Reports AnnaMarie reported out for Committee #1. They discussed the 27 lot subdivision planned for Route 9 across from the Linda Manor nursing home near the Williamsburg line. She has spoken to the Planning Board secretary about notifying the Partnership about meetings held prior to submission of these bigger projects. Notices for public hearings will be given to Peg and NHP members can actually attend the site plan review meetings (staff and applicant meet early in the process, prior to board review) when relevant projects are under discussion. Members discussed the need for a meeting between the three chairs (Partnership, Planning and Zoning) and the Planning Director. Members also felt it would be important to attend a Planning Board meeting to have a direct discussion with Board members. The idea of a workshop was mentioned at which to discuss zoning tools available to encourage the creation of affordable housing (new ones in addition to the ones we already have in the ordinance). All agreed that the Partnership needs to be more proactive and communicate better to insure that the need for affordable housing gets on everyones agenda. Committee #2 reported their activity on reviewing the CDBG Block Grant project review criteria and committee structure. The last meeting was spent discussing the HAP proposal for 96 Pleasant and preparing a counter proposal. The next meeting will be held June 7th at 5:00 p.m. 5.Adjourn Due to the lateness of the hour, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully, Peg Keller Implementation Committee Meeting Minutes/ June 7, 1999 Members Present: Richard Abuza, Orlando Isaza, Don Bianchi Others Present: Janis Gillian, Joann Campbell, Valley CDC and Janet Gezork, Marketplace Associates Call to Order The meeting convened at 5:10 p.m. Valley CDC/ Ms. Campbell and Ms. Gillian gave a brief overview of Valley CDC Real Estate properties. They will schedule a time to give the full Partnership an update. The Committee discussed the longterm affordability proposal for Walnut Street. Mr. Bianchi made the following motion, seconded by Mr. Abuza: 1."The City will accept affordability restrictionsconsistent with State HOME Restrictions, as long as theCity's funds are subject to the same provisions and samearrangement is made between the two funding sources;2.The City would like to review the homebuyer selectionprocess and requests that preference be given to largerfamilies, consistent with law and State HOME Programregulations." The Committee voted 3 in favor, none in opposition, no abstentions to make that recommendation to the full Partnership. Marketplace Associates Ms. Gezork presented a proposal to preserve the 6 subsidized units for two years in return for CDBG funding. Mr. Abuza made the following motion, seconded by Mr. Isaza: "The City provide $5,952 per year for 2 years to cover the cost of improvements subject to the following: 1.Project commits to maintaining the 6 subsidized unitsuntil at least November, 2001' such commitment survivingany sale or refinancing; 2.CDBG commitment contingent upon; (a) available funds,(b)determination that funds can be provided consistentwith the CDBG regulations The vote was three in favor. The questions members had were, is there a 51% low mod requirement for tenants, and would this activate Davis Bacon wage rates/ Also, Ms. Gezork was asked to consider whether the owners would be willing to commit beyond two years and to get back to Peg Keller with that information prior to next weeks meeting. Adjourn/ The meeting concluded at 6:30 p.m. Notes taken by Don Bianchi NORTHAMPTON HOUSING PARTNERSHIP Minutes June 15, 1999 Members Present: Jack Hornor, Richard Abuza, Yvonne Freccero, AnnaMarie Russo, Neti Andersen, Clare Higgins, Peg Murray, Don Bianchi, Nola Reinhardt. Also present Janis Gillian, Valley CDC, Larry Farber, Attorney and Rob Fields, Attorney, Peg Keller, Staff. 1.Call to Order Chairman Bianchi called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. During the public comment period Richard Abuza declared that he would be taping the meeting. Attny. Fields objected to having his presentation taped, Ms. Higgins stated that according to open meeting law, public meetings can be taped if so publicly declared. 2.Discussion/ Tenant Rent Escrow Bills Mr. Bianchi introduced Attny. Farber who was asked to come speak in favor of the concept put forth by the proposed bills being considered by the State legislature regarding rent escrow accounts. Highlights of his comments were as follows: -he has a large 13 year old tenant landlord practice in Hampshire and Franklincounties/mostly landlord 10% tenant-purpose of legislation is to level the playing field. Tenant Escrow bill introduced in 1979, 239 Section BA passed. In the 1st year it had requirement for tenant escrow, next year it was removed from the statute-feeling is that the law is skewed towards the tenant, need to bring it back to the center-without the requirement, the time delay could be substantial in resolving cases/ the 3 week resolution period referred to in materials distributed by member Feldman at last month meeting refers only to uncontested cases/stats quoted are only for Housing Courts in the State, not for District Courts which locally only schedules such cases for Thurs. afternoons/ if tenant has no obligation to escrow rent, if landlord eventually wins, often there are no funds to collect-difficult for the tenant to come up with$ at the end-landlord usually grants a grace period when rent is first late, 2-3 weeks into the month, then a 14 day notice to quit is issued, summary process takes 3 weeks, the discovery request can take up to three months -with escrow accounts, if the tenant wins they can get the money back, if the money is not there, and the landlord wins, they get nothing-regarding due process, this is a fairer way than attachments (cannot attachreal estate in a rental situation), trustee process doesn't allow tenant to pay bills if there is a hold or lien on the bank account, so requiring the money upfront is the most fair method-it does not impact the ability to be heard, it only impacts counterclaims-if tenant says rent is paid, they can still present information, can still presentdefense whether the money is escrowed or not-focus is on creating parity, making sure the money is available, it does notsay who should get it, only the court can determine that, but this insures thatit is there when that decision is made-in 1,000 cases he has heard, he has never seen a judge require interimpayments prior to judgement Attny. Fields was then invited to present the counter argument opposing the concept behind these bills. Highlights of his comments: -Mass. Law Reform did get District Court stats, large #'s end in default as aresult of tenant no-shows95-99% end in favor of the landlord, and get judgement the same day as the trial/ this bill will not address the default problem239 Section Ba creates parities, there are other ways to address the problem/ an expedited process, other good business practices such as requiringsecurity deposits, better tenant screening/ being a landlord needs to be viewed as a business and all businesses have associated costsoften the amounts claimed owed are incorrect, difficult for tenants to escrow those amounts, prohibiting their day in courtthis would over burden an already burdened system, i.e. Board of Health regarding due process, no other processes require putting $ up front, this isdifferent, no individual is asked to do that in other instances bills are attempting to apply a broad stroke to address horror stories, this isnot the right approach the ability to get rent escrowed already exists along with the ability for thetenant to bring defenses and counter claims. he suggests the Partnership get more information/ as a Northamptonresident, this would impact tenants in affordable housing, would encourage members to vote down the bills and advocate for a better approach Mr. Bianchi invited brief rebuttals. Attny. Farber: yes, most cases end in default and this will not address that problem. Most tenants are good tenants, this will force parity on tenants that abuse the law/ all that is proposed is that the rent normally owed be placed in escrow while contesting/ Attny. Fields: feels these bills will not let people be heard, he only takes cases with merit, real parity is asking for landlord escrow accounts Member Hornor thanked both for coming and for the civility of their presentations. He asked if judges currently have the ability to require escrow accounts, why don't they see it in District Court? Attny. Farber answered that this is a time delay, and they do not want a separate hearing to determine the escrow, due to the size of the docket, there is no time for a 2 step process. Sections of 239 Ba were read to determine whether the ability to require escrow actually exists. Different interpretations resulted. Ms. Reinhardt asked how we can determine which is right, Attny. Fields suggested contacting the author in order to gauge true intent. Attny. Farber said to read the text of the bills themselves, not a summary from an advocacy agency._ He said the idea is to create fairness, these bills may not be perfect, he encouraged discussion to refine. Ms. Higgins reemphasized the need for housing court locally stating that the Partnership has supported that in the past. Mr. Bianchi asked the attorneys what they would suggest the next step be for the Partnership, given its role as an advocate for affordable housing. Attny. Fields responded that any bills making it tougher for tenants should be analyzed to insure not all tenants are hurt, and that any bills making it tougher for tenants to survive are not the answer and should not go forward. Attny. Farber concluded by saying that when a small percentage of tenants abuse the system, they drastically effect other low income tenants in affordable housing. It stresses the system to cover costs for those not paying their way. He gave the example of the demise of the State's 707 family housing program. He said the Partnership should advocate for positions that will entitle landlords to rent escrow processes. Both were thanked again and they departed. Mr. Abuza stated that these are bills about affordable housing. He has done research and advocates for Partnership support of the bills. He reviewed the materials in the packet distributed by member Feldman. Richard feels that the building inspection offices are more burdened by the current system, and pointed out that on the 2nd page of the letter from the Springfield code enforcement office that they actually supported the proposal. He said that when a tenant withholds rent, as justification for doing that, the tenant needs a housing code violation to point to, which can exist in reality or be created. It then automatically becomes the landlord's responsibility to deal with it regardless of the origin. If the landlord has no income stream to address it, no resources for repair, the stock deteriorates. The "better business practices" suggested, i.e. better screening, requires more up front expense, which results in higher rents, which is disadvantageous to affordable housing/ then landlords get out of the business. Loss of rent hugely impacts small property owners, particularly 2-3 unit property owners ( a large portion of our inventory). This is seen in other urban areas resulting in property abandonment. He added that homeowners have to pay the full amount of taxes assessed before ,they can ask for an abatement. He said that John Hite, Housing Authority Director asked for mandated rent escrow at a hearing before area legislators. Mr. Bianchi then asked for comments from all members. The consensus was that it was necessary to read the text of the bills proposed before opinions could be finalized. Peg K. will access them. Ms. Reinhardt made a motion to contact the legislators and tell them that the Partnership opposes any rent escrow measure that does not allow for initial hearings at which tenants present defenses and offsets. There was no 2nd• Ms. Higgins made a motion to get the texts of the bills. Mr. Hornor seconded the motion, all in favor. At this point, Mr. Abuza terminated his taping of the meeting. 3.Valley CDC/ 5 Walnut Street Mr. Bianchi reported that Janis Gillian and Joann Campbell came to the Implementation Committee with a proposal for the affordability restriction for 5 Walnut St. The motion made at the subcommittee was reviewed. Mr. Hornor made a motion to accept the recommendation of the sub-committee which is as follows: "The City will accept affordability restrictions consistent with the State HOME program restrictions, so long as the City's funds are subject to the same provisions and some arrangement is made between the two funding sources. The City will review the homebuyer selection process and requests that preference be given to larger families consistent with law and HOME program regulations." The vote was unanimous. Ms. Gillian explained that VCDC will draw up a document that meets the spirit of the model created by the Partnership, and will include the parameters that the unit will be sold to a low income family, if they stay in the unit for 15 years, the property will become free of the restriction, if they sell within that time period, the property will be sold to an eligible purchaser and the restriction will continue, a recapture provision will be included. Mr. Abuza added that the VCDC is making progress as an organization and staff agreed to come to the full Partnership at a later date to update on that progress. Peg K. said that she had not been able to find a legal way to implement the suggested strategy created to retain affordability at Market Square and members asked that she call HUD directly before terminating the effort. The idea of paying for improvements already made without proper bidding procedures is the problem. Peg agreed to call HUD to strategize any other possibilities. 4.NHP Priorities Mr. Bianchi asked all members to bring three priorities.to the next meeting in order to focus NHP work in the near future. He asked that they be submitted to Peg prior to July 6th• Discussion will occur at the July 20th meeting. 5.Adjourn Due to the lateness of the hour, the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Peg Keller Northampton Housing Partnership Minutes July 20, 1999 Members Present: Don Bianchi, Chair, Richard Abuza, Netti Anderson, Yvonne Freccero, Jack Hornor, Orlando Isaza, Peg Murray, AnnaMarie Russo. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Bianchi called the meeting to order at 7: 10 p.m. 1.Public Comment Period:No members of the public were present for the public comment period. 2.Discussion of Partnership PrioritiesChairman Bianchi suggested that each member take five minutes to talk about their ideas forthe Partnership's priorities for next year (July 1999 through June 2000). He said the goal wasto arrive at a consensus that would inform the work of the committees. Members elaboratedon priorities they had submitted to Peg Keller prior to this meeting (See list attached). Afterall members had their say, there followed a general discussion on various current issues andtrends that could impact the Partnership's ultimate decision on priorities. These included: Public housing -Yvonne reported on a conversation she had with Carol Kincaid of the Northampton Housing Authority (NHA). Carol said that HUD is concerned about people staying in public housing for long periods of time instead of moving on into homeownership, thus freeing up public units for others. Orlando reported that HUD has been pushing to get new Section 8 vouchers, but that it wants the new vouchers to be tied to work. Peg commented that the Partnership needs to have more interaction with the NRA than it has had in the past. Consequences of the Partnership's decision on priorities -Jack asked what results might be expected from choosing certain priorities over others. Don noted that the Partnership has limited time and energy -that it needs to be focused instead of trying to do everything. He thinks the current committee structure is good, but would like to see the Partnership putting its ideas into action. He talked of the Partnership setting out a few goals to achieve over the next six month. He said that people had felt too much time was spent on issues that weren't really the Partnership's mission. Richard gave as an example the agenda item of the Rent Escrow bills currently pending in the state's legislature. Jack gave as example the reports from developers that did not seem all that useful. Richard explained that hearing from developers was crucial in helping the Partnership make informed decisions on the allocation of CDBG funds for housing. Don suggested that Committees should do as much work as possible on their own, before the full Partnership meeting. Peg voiced concern about how to understand materials mailed to members in their meeting agenda packets that never gets discussed at Partnership meetings. ACTION: Don will speak with Peg Keller about marking up (as "FYI" or as "Action") materials that go out in members monthly mailings Following the discussion, Chairperson Bianchi proposed the following list of priorities, to which the membership agreed: PRIORITY # 1 -Northampton State Hospital ACTION: Don will talk with Gerry Joseph before the next Partnership meeting about where in the development process the Partnership can advocate most effectively for affordable units. Should the Partnership have a seat at the decision-making table? (Clare Higgins is already there, but not specifically on behalf of the Partnership.) Don will follow-up with Gerry by putting the results of their discussion in writing. PRIORITY #2 -Community Education This has three parts: a) general education of the public about the need for affordable housing, b)educating people about the role of the Housing Partnership, and c) landlord/ tenant andhomebuyer education. ACTION: The Planning Committee will develop a strategy foreducating the community about the continuum of housing. PRIORITY #3 -Developing Resources for Affordable Housing ACTION: The Implementation Committee will think about strategies to get more money into the Housing Trust Fund. PRIORITY #4 -Preserving Existing Affordable Housing ACTION: The Implementation Committee will think of strategies to preserve three types of affordable housing in Northampton: a) small private landlords, b) larger publicly subsidized complexes, such as Hampden Gardens, and c) public housing. 3.Strategy for Outreach to Other Boards Planning Committee (AnnaMarie reporting, Richard taking notes) • • The Committee has been working on its Needs Assessment Report, collecting statisticaland anecdotal information with the objective of making the Report a useful tool for thePartnership's goals.Jack and AnnaMarie have so far attended two Preliminary Site Plan Review meetings .Peg Keller has been attending also. This is one of the earliest opportunities to have inputinto the development process. As a consequence of their presence at the first meeting,Senior Planner, John Bennett, asked the developer ifhe would consider includingaffordable units in his proposed project in exchange for the city waving certain set-backrequirements, which the plan did not meet. Orlando suggested that affordable housingshould be a routine consideration for all city boards involved in housing decisions.Yvonne noted that, in anticipation of Partnership discussions with the Planning Board,she had already pulled together and passed out to the Partnership a list of zoningordinances pertinent to affordability. ACTION: Don and Orlando will meet with theChair of the Planning Board to discuss these ordinances. ACTION: AnnaMarie willcontact John Bennett about meeting with the Partnership's Planning Committee tohelp members become more familiar with affordability provisions in the city'szoning ordinance. Implementation Committee •MOTION: Richard moved to accept the recommendation of the ImplementationCommittee regarding their "Criteria for Proposals for CDBG Funds." Jack seconded.Motion passed unanimously.•Report and Recommendations of the Northampton Desegregation Task Force -MOTION: Jack moved that the Partnership write a letter of support for therecommendations. Peg seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 4.Other Reports Rent Escrow Bills -Presentations by lawyers on both sides of this issue took up much of the time at the Partnership's June meeting. Peg Keller has been trying to get the text of these bills to distribute to members of the Partnership. As of this meeting, the bills had not arrived. MOTION: Richard moved to take the rent escrow bills off the agenda and to concentrate on the Partnership's priorities. Peg seconded. Vote was four in favor, four opposed. Motion did not carry. 5.Other Business Yvonne reported that members of the Partnership should be aware of an unwritten rule that anyone who serves on a city board must be a resident of Northampton. She found this out in a most unpleasant circumstance. With the full knowledge and support of the Partnership, Yvonne had approached Realtor John Pourier about becoming a member. Ultimately, John agreed to do so. It was only afterwards that Yvonne learned of the unwritten residency rule. She then had to call John to tell him that he would not be allowed to serve. ACTION: Don will express to Peg Keller the Partnership's frustration on this issue. 6.AdjournThere being no other business to discuss, Jack made a MOTION to adjourn; Peg seconded;all agreed. Meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by AnnaMarie Russo NORTHAMPTON HOUSING PARTNERSHIP Minutes August 17, 1999 Members Present: Joel Feldman, Clare Higgins, Peg Murray, AnnaMarie Russo, Richard Abuza, Nola Reinhardt, Orlando Isaza. Also present, Peg Keller, staff CALL TO ORDER In the absence of chair Don Bianchi, Peg Keller chaired the meeting. No one was present for the public comment period. 1.Approval of Minutes Ms. Keller asked for a motion to approve the minutes of June 15, 1997. Ms. Russo made the motion, seconded by Joel Feldman, vote unanimous. Mr. Isaza made a motion to approve the minutes of July 20, 1999, seconded by Ms. Murray, vote unanimous, Ms. Higgins abstained. 2.Northampton State Hospital Update Ms. Keller reported that Mr. Bianchi had contacted Gerry Joseph of the Community Builders about mechanisms for input from the Partnership. Mr. Joseph said that the slot held by Clare Higgins was designated for a Housing Partnership representative. He agreed to keep the group informed about the progress of the project and was interested in input at any time. Ms. Higgins reported that the final Master Plan has been submitted to the Division of Capital Asset Management just last week The Community Builders (TCB) has met with many groups to revise the original concepts. Negotiation around the financial issues will now occur, which is not a public process. The Land Disposition Agreement will be finalized that will spell out the phasing, clean up activity, payments, etc. Currently, 14-19 million dollars of uncovered costs exists. Copies of the master plan are available, the use mix is the same as Mr. Joseph presented when he came to the Partnership meeting. DCAM is experiencing staff turnover which may impact the review period. Overall, however, Ms. Higgins said that the process is farther along than ever, considering the first redevelopment study was done in 1981. She will continue to keep us up to date as the project advances. 3.Sub-Committee Reports Planning/ Ms. Russo reported that the group is working on a draft of a community education plan. They are also collecting needs assessment information. Members are also attending the Planning Board's Preliminary Site Plan review meetings. This is working well, but intervention is needed even earlier to get the developers to consider affordable units in the earliest planning stages. With an extensive public education piece, this will help get people thinking. Members are becoming verse with the tools in the zoning ordinance and John Bennett and Peg Keller have committed to being prepared with information for the developers regarding the incentives for them if they include such units in their projects. Implementation/ Ms. Murray reported that the bulk of the last meeting was spent discussing the 96 Pleasant Street proposal with Karen Leveille from HAP. The group has reviewed 6 rewrites and now have a final proposal. Ms. Leveille updated them on the status of funding, reviewed floor plans and discussed the internal subsidy reserve. Ms. Murray then presented the wording for the vote they were proposing be taken by the full Partnership. Mr. Abuza made the following motion," to recommend approval by the Mayor of Hampden Hampshire Housing Partnership's request for $170,000 in CDBG funds based on the accompanying written terms and conditions for the acquisition and rehab of the SRO at 96 Pleasant Street." Ms. Russo seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. Initially it was thought that the allocation would need to come from two fiscal years, but it is possible to award the total amount at this time. Not all of the funding sources are in place and the CDBG award will not be made until the funding package is complete. Ms. Keller will forward the recommendation to the Mayor. 4.Desegregation Task Force Update Members discussed the letter Don and Peg M. drafted in response to the plan outlined by Gordon Pullen. Peg K. asked if any additional work was going to take place with regard to the plan. Members responded that it seemed that the Task Force was trying to make sure that the Housing Partnership was on top of the State Hospital project and working to insure the inclusion of as much affordable housing as possible. Members feel that they are doing that, so no additional tasks will be pursued at this time. Members also feel that the Community Builders are not quite at the stage of determining the bedroom composition of the proposed units, but at that time the NHP will communicate the need for large affordable apartments. Further discussion yielded that with many families taking their rental vouchers and moving out of Hampton Gardens, the number of minority families at the Jackson Street school may be less than originally anticipated. Peg Murray and Nola Reinhardt are both involved at the school level and will keep the Partnership informed. 5.Project Updates Peg K. informed members that the house had been successfully moved from Federal Street to Vernon Street. Work will occur over the winter and the units will be sold next year. A neighborhood meeting to update abutters on the Verona Street project is scheduled for September 15th. Partnership members reviewed the concept plan and discussed strategy for encouraging as many units as possible, considering the uniqueness of the opportunity. Members were encouraged to attend. The Planning sub-committee hopes to have a handout for the neighbors discussing the need for affordable housing. It was suggested that the meeting be jointly sponsored between OPD and the NHP. 6.Residency Requirement for NHP Membership Peg K. asked Richard to relay his past conversations with the Mayor regarding this issue. There does not seem to be a written rule, but Committee and Board members are expected to be City residents. Members felt that people either living or working in the City with the appropriate expertise should be eligible for participation. 7.Adjourn There being no further business to discuss, the meeting concluded at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Peg Keller Northampton Housing Partnership Meeting Minutes September 21, 1999 Attendance: Don Bianchi, Nola Reinhardt, Yvonne Freccero, Joel Feldman, Jack Horner, Richard Abuza, AnnaMarie Russo, Orlando Isaza. Staff: Michael Owens Chairperson Bianchi called the meeting to order at 7: 1 0pm and noted that Michael Owens was filling in this evening for Peg Keller. The Chairperson then provided an opportunity for additional agenda items from members present. None were offered. Planning Committee Report Nola reviewed the Housing Affordability Chart, which is based on a model developed by the City of Cambridge. The Chart was developed as a public information tool explaining the concept of affordable housing here in Northampton. The Chart does an excellent job with lots of complicated information. Don B. felt that the chart was a great tool for public relations but that it still needed a little refinement. Conversation focused on medium income, medium rent, down payment amounts (20% may not be realistic) and purchase prices. It was noted that a student intern at Smith might be available to gather background housing information for Northampton, research what has changed over the past few years and update information within the Chart. Nola stated that she would speak to Peg Keller about this possibility. Implementation Committee Report In the absence of Peg Murray, Don B. gave the Implementation Committee report. Don B. spoke to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, explained membership composition, and noted that a motion regarding the role of the Fund members will not be put forward at this time. Several members of the Partnership and Housing Trust Fund recognize the mission of the Trust as wide ranging and includes identifying monies to supplement CDBG resources. It was felt that the Mayor saw the Trust having a somewhat narrow fiduciary responsibility to oversee resources within the Fund. The Partnership hopes to work out these differences of opinion over the coming weeks. Richard noted that the Partnership is still attempting to identify an entity in place that can own and manage affordable rental housing in Northampton. Rental housing is a critical piece of the affordability puzzle. Is the Housing Authority, Habitat for Humanity or some other entity willing to take on this role? The answer to this question remains elusive. Verona I Garfield AnnaMarie gave a report on the Verona I Garfield neighborhood meeting held at Smith Vocational School. Issues discussed included the number of proposed units, road layout, landfill capping procedures and open space dedication to the Conservation Commission. Members who attended the meeting thought it was a very positive and productive event. Richard noted that this project might offer an opportunity to increase the affordable rental housing stock. Other members thought the Partnership should begin lobbying the City for what should be developed at the site i.e. number of units and affordability restrictions. It was decided that the Partnership would invite Mr. Feiden to the next meeting in order to discuss the project in more detail. Cot Program Yvonne gave an update on the Cot Shelter Program. Space has been secured within the Masonic Street Fire Station for this season's cot program. This will be a temporary location, as the City will eventually place the property on the market. The Management Committee will raise funds for the required renovations. The building needs a second means of egress and hard-wire smoke detectors. The City has agreed to snow plow the property. Don wondered if the proceeds for the eventual sale of the fire station could be used to support affordable housing. This is one scenario to think about. 96 Pleasant Street Michael Owens gave a brief update on this project. The Mayor is expected to sign the CDBG funding commitment shortly. The City will then prepare a CDBG subrecipient agreement and related documents. HAP is securing other sources of funding. Plans and specs have been sent to Mass Historical for review. Service Provider Forum A memo from Peg Keller indicated that everyone has waiting lists at this time and as a result no one can move on, as there are very limited transitional housing options. The system appears bogged down. It was suggested that Yvonne strategize with Peg on a newspaper story about the Service Provider Forum. Community Preservation Act The bill has passed the Senate and will move to the House where it does not enjoy the support of Speaker Finneran. The Partnership supports the bill as a good tool to support affordable housing. Phone calls of support to State Representatives by Partnership members, friends and associates were encouraged. Hampton Gardens Don suggested this topic be tabled until the next meeting. Old Business Subcommittee meetings were scheduled as follows: Implementation Committee / Oct 4th @ 5:30pm Planning Committee / Oct 4th @ 9:00am There being no additional business the meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:10 pm. Respectfully submitted, Michael Owens NORTHAMPTON HOUSING PARTNERSHIP Minutes October 19, 1999 Members Present: Don Bianchi, AnnaMarie Russo, Neti Andersen, Peg Murray, Yvonne Freccero, Orlando Isaza, Jack Hornor. Also present, Peg Keller, staff CALL TO ORDER Chairman Bianchi called the meeting to order at 7: 10 p.m. There was no one present for the public comment period. Sub-committee reports followed. Planning/ AnnaMarie reported that the group is creating a four page report to be presented in an 1 lxl 7 format . They have found that collecting up to date information is difficult. The material will include an introduction, information on housing costs, salaries, gaps and opportunities for increasing the inventory at the State Hospital. Members have discussed holding an event after the first of the year to raise awareness about housing issues. This could be timed with education about the Community Preservation Act if that becomes law. The brochure could be launched and a major public commitment to affordable housing made as we move forward with the new Mayor. Implementation/ Peg M. reported that a donor is willing to give $25,000 to the fund if it is matched. Any literature created for the community education effort would be helpful with fundraising. Orlando noted that the Trust should investigate all possible ways to raise funds and inquired about the legal status of the Trust. Peg said that it is a municipal body, not a separate 501C3. She said that John Musante is conducting research to see if some of the funding from the sale of property on Atwood Drive to the City can go into the fund. The other possibility is having the proceeds of the fire station sale go into the fund. The question was raised about if foundation monies can go into the fund, such as the Western Mass. Community Foundation. Peg M. will ask the Mayor to consult with the City Solicitor. Pending the information submission from John Musante (City Finance Director), a more formal proposal will be developed by the Trustees to ask that a portion of City receipts be permanently and regularly committed to the Fund. Members discussed the need to have up to date information about other City resources such as City owned land and or buildings that could be used to convert for income or use for the development of actual units. The question was raised as to who determines how monies in the City's general fund get dispersed. Peg K. will ask Wayne. In summary, after the information from Mr. Musante is received, the Trust will meet and then Peg K. will prepare a letter to the City Property Committee outlining a two pronged approach: requesting the opportunity to actively seek the development of land or buildings for affordable housing and/or allow for a portion of the profits (if these assets are disposed of in the private sector) to be donated to the fund. Also, we will ask specifically for proceeds from the Fire Station sale. Discussion then followed about the entities in the community able to develop affordable housing. Members felt it is the City's responsibility to assist with the development of such vehicles. Toward that end, it was decided that a meeting would be held with the current entities such as HAP, Valley CDC, the Housing Authority and Habitat, to discuss capacity. At that time, organizations could outline for the Partnership, what they can and cannot offer to the process. The question of land availability led members to inquire about the status of the Housing Authority's parcels at the State Hospital. It was decided that members of the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners and Mr. Hite should be invited to the next Partnership meeting so they can give us an update. The issues to be discussed should include an update on Hampton Gardens, the utilization of the State's 689 allocation, rehab progress at Hampshire Heights and ifthere are any other properties in their inventory that are under utilized due to lack of financial resources. Peg K. will extend the invitation. Additional discussion regarding the public forum yielded the desire to also have private sector developers, estate planners and the Planning Board present. Perhaps it could be co­sponsored with the Planning Board. Invitees will be brought up to date about the need for capacity, money and properties. Further discussion about the forum will be held at the next meeting. Don said it also makes sense to do some overall goal planning in January. The Planning Committee will meet November 1st to brainstorm about the forum. The Implementation Committee will also meet that day. Peg K. was asked to have Gerry Joseph of the Community Builders submit a one page update about the State Hospital for the next meeting. Community Preservation Act Update Members discussed the fact that the bill is proposed for the House without the real estate transfer tax. It was felt that the chances for a property tax override to support this fund would be slim in Northampton and the transfer tax was the only possible funding mechanism. Yvonne made a motion to send a letter to Majority Leader Nagle encouraging him to support the inclusion of the transfer tax as an option for communities to consider. The motion was seconded by Nola, vote unanimous. Members wanted their names to be listed individually in addition to Don's. Peg K. agreed to call Clare, Richard and Joel to see if they would agree to placing their names on the letter. Members were encouraged to send individual letters if they were so inclined. A separate letter will be sent to Sen. Rosenberg thanking him for his support in the Senate. Vernon/ Verona Adjourn/ Peg K. gave quick project updates. The meeting concluded at 9: 10 p.m. Respectfully submitted/ Peg Keller NORTHAMPTON HOUSING PARTNERSHIP Minutes November 16, 1999 Members Present: Chairman Don Bianchi, Richard Abuza, Peg Murray, Yvonne Freccero, Joel Feldman, Neti Andersen, AnnaMarie Russo, Nola Reinhardt, Robin Therrien. Also present, Jon Hite, Director of the Northampton Housing Authority and Dick Courtney, Chair of the Housing Authority's Board of Commissioners, Bruce Barshefsky, ServiceNet, Inc.,Wayne Feiden, Planning Director and Peg Keller, staff. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Bianchi called the meeting to order at 7: 10 p.m. No one was present for the public comment period. Mr. Hite and Mr. Courtney were introduced. 1.Northampton Housing AuthorityPeg Keller began by saying that the Housing Partnership continues to discuss the need for capacity, land and funding to develop affordable housing and that the Northampton Housing Authority owns four parcels of land at the State Hospital earmarked for affordable housing development. For that reason, the Housing Authority was invited to the meeting to discuss their plans for that development process. Mr. Hite proceeded to give a presentation about past, present and future activities at the NHA. Highlights of his comments are as follows: -public housing industry is highly regulated-when Mr. Hite was hired 7 ½ years ago, the three priorities were maintenance,modernization and management/ he has made great strides in those three areas butfeels more work is necessary-he distributed a packet that described unit numbers under management and the budgetalthough the financials were not in good shape when he came to the position, in 1998the NHA was rated 1 of the top 20 housing authorities across the state/ Federal ratingswere 100% the last two years-he described rehab activity at Hampshire Heights/ 6 buildings were lost due to roofdeterioration/ monies from the State for repairs are only available for emergencies/hard to access-the Federal properties, Florence Heights and McDonald House have been completelyrenovated-more work will occur at Hamp. Hts. The funding is there for 1.3 million additionalwork/ all roofs will be done by Christmas/ challenge in the future will be how torelocate the families while the bathroom and kitchen work is carried out-in this context, it is difficult to think about future development-"foolhardy" to begin development until all other areas are under control -2--little time for staff to begin new projects/ hope to begin dev. process in next 12-18months-the other complicating factor is that the Federal government has recently changedmuch about the Section 8 program and how it is administered and is requiringHousing Authorities to prepare 5 year plans. NHA is hiring a consultant to assist themin that process-the ability to access financial resources for the operation and programs of the agencydepends on how well they focus on the "3 M's" (management, modernization andmaintenance)-he distributed a list of former Hampton Gardens tenants (without names) describingwhy they left the complex and what their race is/ in response to questions aboutsame.Original 167 subsidized families is now down to 13 7 / 3 0 have left in the last year-Few have lost their subsidies-People have been moving for the usual reasons, i.e. Amherst complexes, back andforth to Puerto Rico-NHA salaries have been raised to competitive levels due to improved managementtechniques-Waiting lists/ State family 66 some are on both lists Federal family 45 avg, wait time 3 ½ years State elderly 46 Federal 80 Section 8 108 w/ 6 month turnover 7 year wait -presently not renting up 20 units at Hamp. Hts.-Internal policy decision to not take anyone new for Section 8 certificates until all onwaiting list have been served, some waiting since 1986Chairman Bianchi asked about their plans on the development side. Mr. Hite said they are planning to use some of the 689 units at the Laurel Street parcel and will involve neighbors in the process. -State street is operating well, no problemsState 705 properties, 8 total, 5 have been renovated in the last few years. Of the 3left, 1 doesn't need it and the other two are set to beginSummary, need for public private partnership for State Hospital development inview of lack of public resources for new family housing-Commitment to sit with neighbors prior to any planning-Partnership may be able to help with funding, leveraging to supplement other sourcesDiscussion was concluded and the guests were thanked for their presentation. - 3 -2.ServiceNet, Inc./ Cot ProgramPeg Keller began the discussion by updating members about the turn of events in siting the Cot Program. A private developer has come forward to purchase the Elks Building on Center Street and has offered to sell what will be a renovated condo space in a portion of the basement to ServiceNet to house the Cot Program. ServiceNet staff and Planning Department have been negotiating a loan agreement in the amount of $300,000 or $150,000 if State grants can be utilized. Therefore, the Memorial Hall location is on hold. Bruce Barshefksy was in attendance from ServiceNet, Inc. to answer questions regarding the proposal. Richard Abuza declared that his wife is employed by an agency affiliated with ServiceN et. Discussion followed about what activities would be allowed in the months the shelter did not operate. Members brainstormed about how to best protect the CDBG funds in view of the fact they were being awarded to ServiceNet, not the developer and what guarantees would there be that the space would be ready and usable on time. Some options were discussed. The plan is to apply for Housing Innovations Fund money in January if the timing works, in order to have more of our CDBG funds available for other projects. Mr. Abuza made a motion that the "Northampton Housing Partnership make a recommendation to the Mayor that, being that the Cot Program is a high priority activity in our community and that the proposal includes an excellent location and provides an excellent opportunity, that we commit to funding $150,000 immediately, institute efforts to secure additional funding and agree to make up the funding gap if one exists, up to the amount of $300,000." The motion was seconded by Ms. Freccero. Further discussion was about whether or not we should pledge the entire amount at this time and who would oversee the details of the sub-recipient agreements. Mr. Abuza amended the motion to add the following" that the Implementation Sub­Committee work with the City with deliberate speed to insure that the agreement is in collaboration with the goals of the Housing Partnership." Ms. Russo seconded the motion, no further discussion, vote was unanimous. 3.Ryan Road Affordable Housing ProjectMr. Feiden approached the Partnership with a project in need of CDBG funding. Peg K. circulated a list detailing the CDBG fund status. Mr. Feiden is requesting up to $45,000 to assist with the purchase of property out on Ryan Rd. The City would buy the property and sub-divide out a building lot to be developed as affordable housing. -4-The Conservation Commission would contribute $10,000 to the deal, to insure open space and trail access on the rear acreage of the parcel. Further discussion occurred about how the project would be carried out. This proposal is is in keeping with the desire of the Planning Sub-Committee to develop housing on City owned parcels so the land costs are minimal. Mr. Abuza made a motion to allocate $45,000 of CDBG funding to acquire the parcel on Ryan Road and to have the proposal come back to the Partnership to further outline project goals and RFP conditions". Ms. Freccero seconded the motion. Further discussion occurred. Mr. Feiden said that the closing would need to happen in March or April and he prefers a three way closing with the selected developer. He said the Implementation Sub­Committee could write the RFP in December. Mr. Bianchi preferred that staff create the document, with Partnership input. Mr. Bianchi called for the vote, which was unanimous in favor of Mr. Abuza's motion. 4.AdjournIn bringing closure to the meeting, it was noted that the December agenda should include discussions of the Forum planned for February and review of the handout on affordable housing assembled by the Planning Committee. It was also agreed that Mr. Bianchi, Ms. Murray, Ms. Freccero and Mr. Abuza would review the draft agreement that the City has crafted with ServiceNet, get all comments to Peg K. by the end of the week and set aside a meeting time on Monday 11/22 at 5: 3 0 if people feel the need to come together for discussion. Peg K. will book the room and sent out materials. The meeting was then adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Peg Keller NORTHAMPTON HOUSING PARTNERSHIP Minutes December 21, 1999 Members Present: Chairman Don Bianchi, Richard Abuza, Peg Murray, Yvonne Freccero, Nola Reinhardt, Clare Higgins, Jack Hornor and Michael Owens, staff. Call to Order Chairman Bianchi called the meeting to order at approximately 7:10 p.m. No one was present for the public comment period. Chairman Bianchi announced a change in the agenda. Smith Internship Nola Reinhardt informed the Partnership that internship funding and an intern for the Spring semester has been secured. Smith College will contribute $1,000 to the work study intern who is a senior Economics major. The internship will begin in January and will focus on a housing and homelessness needs assessment and a housing market analysis. These are components of the HUD Consolidated plan, a five year planning document which sets priorities for CDBG resources. Nola Reinhardt, Peg Keller and Michael Owens will formulate a work plan for the intern after the first of the year. Michael Owens also informed the Partnership that a second Smith intern working for the Planning Department would be available eight (8) hours a week during the spring semester to assist with data collection for the Consolidated Plan. Jack Hornor expressed his gratitude to Nola for her work in securing an intern and to Smith College for funding the work study program. Michael Owens provided a brief overview of the HUD Consolidated Planning process. Expiring Terms Chairman Bianchi discussed a memo from Peg Keller regarding expiring terms. The terms of five current members have expired. At which time the Mayor Elect Higgins takes office Peg Keller will coordinate the reappointment of those members who would like to continue to serve. All members with expiring terms expressed their interest in continuing their work on the Partnership. Farewell to Councilor Higgins Chairman Bianchi and Partnership members thanked Councilor Higgins for her years of dedication and service to the Housing Partnership. Members offered words of advice and encouragement to Clare as she prepares to move on to the Mayor's office. Clare stated that affordable housing issues remain close to her heart but that she feels that economic development is an important piece of the housing puzzle here in Northampton. Clare also noted some of her priorities for the Partnership which include (1) maintaining good communication between the Mayors Office, City staff and the Partnership; (2) considering Housing Authority participation on the Partnership; and (3) securing broader representation on the Partnership including Chamber of Commerce and/or business sector participation. Also discussed was the appointment of a City Councilor to the Partnership, which will take place early in the new-year after the City Council is sworn in and committee assignments are determined. Planning Committee Report Jack Hornor began the Planning Committee report by reviewing the handout developed by the Committee, which includes general housing market data along with household income data for the City of Northampton. The purpose of the handout is to increase public awareness of housing issues and to provide people with a "primer" on housing issues prior to the planned forum in February. Jack distributed the draft handout and requested that comments be provided to members of the Planning Committee by e-mail before December 31st. The Committee then requested that Peg include the re-drafted handout with the January meeting agenda so members can have time to review the document. Members also requested that Peg attempt to located a housing study completed several years ago by Susan Kohler-Grey and make it available to the Planning Committee. This document might provide a historical perspective on housing issues in the City. Jack then discussed planning for the housing forum scheduled to take place in February. No specific goal is in mind for the forum although some themes discussed include focusing on using the City's limited housing resources effectively, identifying housing gaps and formulating community consensus regarding housing needs. Discussion then focused on what type of format would be used and whether a visioning process similar to the Northampton 2020 process completed last year would be appropriate. Clare Higgins felt that any housing forum must include the participation of employers in the City and the Chamber of Commerce. Partnership members echoed this thought and felt that the planned forum must be more than simply gathering the "usual suspects" together to discuss housing issues. Richard suggested that the Partnership aggressively pursue a housing piece in the Hampshire Gazette or Hampshire Life magazine with the goal of informing the public of housing issues and broadening the affordable housing constituency. The Chairman also felt that some newspaper pieces might get the housing issue on people's radar screen, increase awareness of housing issues and as a result increase participation in a forum. Members agreed that the issue should be tied to economic development as housing issues are directly related to workforce issues, especially here in Northampton. The relationship of worker availability to business success represents a great story for a reporter willing to fully investigate this topic. Nola felt that some focus should be placed on preserving existing affordable housing resources due to the lack of developable land here in the City. It was noted that Mass Inc. recently published a study funded by the Heinz Foundation linking business growth and economic development directly with affordable housing. Clare Higgins suggested that members research this study and read the executive summary available from the Massachusetts State home page. It was the general consensus of members present that other actions might have to take place before a housing forum can be held, such as increasing public awareness of housing affordability issues and bringing the business community into the process in a productive way. Don suggested that the preceding issues be considered by the Planning Committee. Jack Hornor stated that all the issues discussed would be considered and thanked the members for their input. Implementation Committee Chairman Bianchi provided an update on development of the Cot Shelter at its new proposed location on Center Street (the former Elks Lodge). The Implementation Committee had met with City staff and provided comments on the draft Subrecipient Agreement and related documents. Don reported that HIF (DHCD's Housing Innovations Fund) funding for the Cot Shelter was unlikely based on a conversation with the funding agency. He noted that the City and ServiceNet will make every effort to identify additional funding but that if needed, the entire commitment would come from the City's Community Development Block Grant program. Michael Owens reported that it was unlikely that funding agreements for the Cot Shelter would be executed by Mayor Ford and as a result Mayor Elect Higgins was brought into the process last week. At this time negotiations with ServiceNet continue with the focus being on two issues, what the building could be used for during the time the Cot Shelter is not operating and who will be responsible for overall management of the Cot Shelter program. Don then asked Michael Owens top provide updates on the following projects: 96 Pleasant Street Vernon Street Verona Street Ryan Road Don thanked Michael for the project status reports and asked if any members had questions. Peg Murray asked that a financial update on available CDBG funds be provided at the next meeting. Committee Meeting Schedule The following meeting dates were set by the respective committee Chairs. Planning Committee Implementation Committee January 3, 2000 @ 9:00 am January 10, 2000 @ 5:30 pm It was requested that Peg Keller contact Orlando to determine if he can make the Implementation Committee meeting at 5:30 pm. If Orlando can not attend, the Implementation Committee will meet one half hour earlier at 5:00 pm. Reaction to Housing Authority Presentation Chairman Bianchi suggested that the Housing Authority presentation be discussed at the January 2000 meeting. Members agreed. There being no other business the Partnership voted to adjourn at approximately 9:00 pm. Respectfully submitted: Michael Owens