[1:29] Okay, ready? Thank you all for
[1:32] your patience and welcome to
[1:35] our meeting of the Housing and
[1:36] Homelessness Committee. Today
[1:37] is August 5th. I'm joined by my
[1:40] colleagues, council members
[1:42] Blumenfield, McCosker and Hutt.
[1:44] If you could call the roll,
[1:45] Miss Jen. Yes, madam chair.
[1:49] Madam chair Raman, I am here.
[1:55] Madam, Council member
[1:57] Blumenfield present, Council
[2:00] member Hutt here. Council
[2:03] member McCosker here. Four
[2:06] members present and a quorum.
[2:08] Madam chair. Great. And welcome
[2:11] to Miss Girardeau as well. Here.
[2:15] Great. Thank you so much. So,
[2:18] thank you everyone. Today we
[2:20] have 12 items to consider on
[2:22] the agenda, but it should. Okay.
[2:27] I just wanted to, I know
[2:29] there's going to be a change in
[2:31] this committee. There was a
[2:32] motion put forward in city
[2:33] council which will bifurcate
[2:35] this committee again, one
[2:36] focused on housing and the
[2:37] other on homelessness and
[2:39] health, which is similar to the
[2:41] structure that was there before,
[2:45] 2022. I'm not sure of all the
[2:48] changes and who's going to be
[2:49] on what committee, but I really
[2:51] did want to take an opportunity
[2:52] to thank every member of this
[2:54] committee for all the work that
[2:56] we've done over the last few
[2:57] years. It's really been a lot.
[3:01] Councilmember Blumenfield and I
[3:02] have been on this committee
[3:03] longest, but all of you have
[3:04] been on board for some really,
[3:06] really big changes, including
[3:07] passing some really big tenant
[3:10] protections in the city,
[3:12] changing how much our rent
[3:15] stabilized units can increase
[3:17] their rent. We've streamlined
[3:20] mixed income and affordable
[3:21] housing development. We've put
[3:23] forward lots of money for
[3:25] eviction, defense and
[3:25] affordable housing and
[3:27] preservation. And on the
[3:28] homelessness front, for the
[3:29] very first time here in the
[3:31] city of Los Angeles, we
[3:32] actually have brought greater
[3:33] accountability and data
[3:35] transparency. So a question
[3:36] that was asked over and over
[3:38] again, which is where is our
[3:39] money going and what is it
[3:41] doing? And using that data,
[3:42] which is now available for
[3:43] every month, repeated. And it
[3:47] is overseen by the Cao and the
[3:51] Homeless strategy Committee and
[3:53] used to actually make our
[3:54] system better. We've filled
[3:57] hundreds of empty beds,
[3:59] bringing our shelter beds from
[4:00] being, empty to now being only
[4:04] 6% empty, 94% full. On any
[4:06] given night, we've filled
[4:08] permanent supportive housing
[4:09] units that we were building
[4:10] through H.h.h. They used to be
[4:13] 72% full. Now they're over 90.
[4:16] We've made sure every Eehv
[4:19] voucher was used that we got
[4:20] from the Biden administration
[4:23] and housed thousands of people
[4:25] when we had fallen far behind
[4:27] on using those vouchers. And we
[4:29] ensured that people who were
[4:31] housed and dealing with
[4:33] potentially enormous funding
[4:34] clips during a really, really
[4:37] unpredictable environment,
[4:38] we're able to stay housed,
[4:40] including people who lost time
[4:41] limited subsidy vouchers. This
[4:44] committee's work actually
[4:45] ensured that they were able to
[4:46] stay housed. So I really want
[4:47] to lift up the work that we've
[4:49] done. I know there's a lot more
[4:51] to do. And I look forward to
[4:54] seeing how this council takes
[4:55] it on over the coming years.
[4:57] The agenda items today are
[5:00] fairly straightforward. We have
[5:01] a number of reappointments of
[5:03] people to the rent adjustment.
[5:05] That's items one through four.
[5:08] Item five is an agreement with
[5:11] a provider, to give us real
[5:14] estate and property ownership
[5:16] data for, for the housing
[5:19] department. And that's to
[5:22] essentially implement the Scap,
[5:24] the so and just cause ordinance
[5:27] program, among others. Item six
[5:29] is amending loan agreements for
[5:31] the Avalon Terrace and Nicolet
[5:34] Apartments. We're going to be
[5:35] able to use this change to keep
[5:38] those units affordable into the
[5:39] future, which is very exciting.
[5:41] Item seven is a temporary
[5:43] staffing services contract for
[5:45] enforcement operations under
[5:47] the. So Just Cause and Tenant
[5:50] anti-harassment ordinance,
[5:51] housing codes. Because there
[5:53] are still some vacancies at the
[5:54] housing department. Item eight
[5:56] is a motion from Councilmember
[5:59] Gerardo about Careplus
[6:01] operations during areas during
[6:03] times of environmental
[6:05] emergencies. Item nine is
[6:07] another motion from Council
[6:09] member Colorado, reporting on
[6:11] the handiwork or program that
[6:12] can provide support for senior
[6:14] citizens, with smoke, dealing
[6:17] with smoke remediation issues.
[6:18] Item ten is a motion from
[6:22] Council Member Rodriguez and
[6:24] Councilmember Blumenfield to
[6:25] report on the impacts of the
[6:27] county's Department of Homeless
[6:28] Services and Housing, becoming
[6:30] the lead of the region's
[6:31] continuum of care and Rs. In
[6:34] item 11 is a verbal update
[6:36] about the Emergency Housing
[6:37] Voucher program, which was
[6:40] about to see a funding cliff.
[6:42] We've managed to make sure that
[6:43] people who have those vouchers
[6:44] are able to stay housed, so
[6:46] we're just providing a positive
[6:48] update here. And finally, a
[6:51] discussion item about the
[6:52] continuum of care Nofo and some
[6:55] changes from HUD that will
[6:56] impact our city's ability to
[6:58] get funds potentially. And an
[7:00] update from our partners at
[7:01] LAHSA, the CLA and others
[7:03] across the city on that. So
[7:04] with that, we can move to
[7:06] public comment. So if you'd
[7:08] like to provide us our
[7:10] instructions, we have our
[7:11] Spanish interpreter here. Hello.
[7:14] And to members of the public,
[7:16] you'll be provided your
[7:18] guidance to members of the
[7:20] public. When it is your turn to
[7:21] speak, please state the name
[7:23] you signed up under. Which of
[7:24] the agenda items you would like
[7:26] to speak on, and or whether you
[7:28] would like to provide general
[7:29] public comment. You have one
[7:31] minute per item, up to two
[7:33] minutes total for items on the
[7:35] agenda and one minute for
[7:36] general public comment. If you
[7:38] wish for a maximum speaking
[7:40] time of up to three minutes per
[7:42] person, please speak to the
[7:44] agenda items before beginning.
[7:46] General public comment. We will
[7:48] inform you when your time is up.
[7:50] When speaking on the agenda
[7:52] items, you must be on topic.
[7:53] When providing general public
[7:55] comment. You must only speak on
[7:57] items that are under the
[7:58] subject matter jurisdiction of
[8:00] this committee. Our goal is to
[8:02] get through as many speakers as
[8:03] we can. If you are not speaking
[8:05] on topic or if we cannot tell
[8:07] whether you are on topic,
[8:08] you'll get one brief warning
[8:10] from me or from the committee
[8:11] chair. If you do not
[8:13] immediately get clearly on
[8:14] topic, or if you stray off
[8:15] topic, you will forfeit the
[8:17] rest of your time. And we will.
[8:19] And we will move on to the next
[8:21] speaker. Thank you. Great. So
[8:23] if anyone wants to make public
[8:25] comment, please move to the
[8:27] left hand side of the chambers.
[8:29] And Sergeant will direct you to
[8:32] the podium. So my name is
[8:38] Kenneth Michael. Sorry, your,
[8:41] what items are you speaking on
[8:42] today? The homeless,
[8:44] everything's relevant. And, I
[8:48] don't understand why you,
[8:50] deleted my one on 711. You gave
[8:53] me no warning, so it
[8:55] contradicts. So go ahead. You
[8:56] have two minutes. Okay, well,
[9:03] 7-Eleven. You deleted my
[9:04] statement, which tells me you
[9:06] don't work for the people, but
[9:07] the hierarchy of your system
[9:10] that screams communism. There
[9:12] are dangerous times we are
[9:14] living in. And if you can't
[9:16] even research without being
[9:18] attacked, like myself, because
[9:20] I got a punch and I fell on a
[9:23] fence, almost. Excuse me.
[9:25] Speaker, please stay on topic
[9:27] to what this committee deals
[9:28] with homelessness and housing.
[9:29] I'm trying to expose your lies.
[9:35] Without being attacked, by your
[9:38] cartel, the police, all you,
[9:41] your smith-mundt act is the
[9:43] only thing that saves you. And
[9:46] the news you spread and
[9:49] misinformation. Because I see
[9:50] police bus covering up, things
[9:54] that you're trying to hide out
[9:56] in a community that's trying to
[9:58] survive and working together
[10:01] because you left us on the side
[10:03] of the road, and you just look
[10:05] and drive past us every minute.
[10:08] Like ultimate, 1 billion, $700,
[10:15] and, it goes to the mayor's
[10:18] fund, $1 billion, 700 million.
[10:23] And that goes to a spa, a
[10:26] different spa. AM I speaking on
[10:28] subject? Your your police cover
[10:32] up? I say you are incompetent.
[10:38] You need to leave now. Call the
[10:41] National Guard. You do not know
[10:43] what you're doing. Your system,
[10:45] your AI systems. I went through
[10:48] epic Eleanor through the
[10:51] healthcare system. And, I, last,
[10:56] statement I did on 711. I like
[10:59] to, I can, I, can I finish. I'm
[11:04] sorry, speaker, we have to move
[11:06] on to the next well, Tory said.
[11:11] Thank you, speaker, if there's
[11:13] any other speakers, if you can
[11:15] make your way to the left side
[11:17] of the chambers. Going once.
[11:27] Going twice. Okay. I think we
[11:29] can close public comment. And.
[11:37] I was going to recommend that
[11:39] we take items one through ten
[11:42] on consent, unless members have
[11:45] comments or questions, Madam
[11:47] Chair. Oh, sure. Yes.
[11:49] Councilmember Hutt, go ahead. I
[11:50] would like to call item seven
[11:53] for separate vote item seven.
[11:58] For a separate vote. Okay,
[12:02] great. Any other. Yes.
[12:04] Councilmember Blumenfield go
[12:05] ahead, call ten special for an
[12:08] amendment item ten special for
[12:09] an amendment. Okay, so let's do
[12:12] items one through six, eight
[12:16] and nine on consent unless
[12:19] there's any issues. Okay. Miss
[12:23] Jan, if you could call the roll
[12:25] on those items. Yes, madam
[12:27] chair, shall I, read the agenda
[12:31] descriptions for one items one
[12:33] through six, as well as eight
[12:34] and nine before calling the
[12:36] roll if or. Okay, well, if
[12:40] you'd like to, yes, I can
[12:43] summarize real quick. Items one
[12:46] through four are commission
[12:49] reappointments to the Rent
[12:50] Adjustment Commission. Item
[12:52] number one is for Doctor
[12:54] Loraine Lundquist. Item two is
[12:57] for, Mr. Gerard Gunzburg. Item
[13:02] three is for, miss Carol
[13:05] Brogdon. Item four is for miss
[13:09] Dash stellaris, and item number
[13:12] five is a city administrative
[13:15] officer report, for an
[13:18] agreement with first Data.
[13:20] First American Data Tree, LLC,
[13:24] item six. Is a Los Angeles
[13:29] Housing Department report, and
[13:31] this is amending loan
[13:33] agreements for the Avalon
[13:36] Terrace and Nicolet Apartments
[13:37] in council districts ten and 15.
[13:42] Item number eight is motion
[13:44] head Otto Hernandez. And that
[13:47] is, regarding care plus
[13:51] operations. And item nine is
[13:54] motion had Otto Lee. And that
[13:57] is regarding instructing the
[13:59] Los Angeles Housing department,
[14:02] with the community investment
[14:04] department to report back on
[14:07] the handy worker program
[14:10] funding. And those are those
[14:12] items. So it's one through six,
[14:14] eight through nine. And I shall
[14:16] call the roll, Madam Chair
[14:19] Gerardo, I mean, Madam Chair
[14:21] Raman. Yes. Council member Otto
[14:26] here. Yes. Council member Blum.
[14:29] Blumenfield Blumenfield. Aye.
[14:31] Council member hut! Aye.
[14:34] Council member Mcosker. Yes.
[14:37] Five. Aye. Items one through
[14:40] six, eight and nine are
[14:41] approved. Okay, let's do item
[14:43] seven then. Item seven. For the
[14:47] record, let me just describe it
[14:49] real quick. Item seven is a
[14:55] city administrative officer
[14:57] report relative to a contract
[15:01] for temporary staffing services
[15:03] for the Los Angeles Housing
[15:05] Department rent division. And
[15:07] I'll call the role now, Madam
[15:10] Chair Raman. Yes, Madam Chair,
[15:14] I mean, Council member Hurtado.
[15:17] Yes. Council member.
[15:20] Blumenfield. Aye! Council
[15:22] member. Hut! No. Council member.
[15:26] Mcosker. Yes. Four ayes one. No.
[15:31] Item seven is approved. Great.
[15:34] Thank you very much. Let's move
[15:35] on to item ten. I don't think
[15:37] there's a discussion, just an
[15:38] amendment. So if you want to
[15:40] write. What's that. Did you
[15:41] want a discussion on item ten.
[15:43] I just wanna make a few
[15:44] comments and then I'll tell you
[15:46] what the amendment is. And I
[15:47] mean, great, let's, let's, we
[15:49] can read item ten into the
[15:50] record and then yeah. Miss Jen.
[15:54] Yes. So item ten. Item ten is
[16:07] motion Rodriguez aye
[16:09] Blumenfield relative to the
[16:10] chief Legislative analyst, with
[16:12] the assistance of the city
[16:14] administrative Officer, Los
[16:15] Angeles Housing Department, and
[16:17] the Los Angeles Homeless
[16:19] Services Authority to report on
[16:21] the impacts of the county's
[16:22] Department of Homeless Services
[16:24] and Housing, becoming the lead
[16:27] of the region's continuum of
[16:29] care and the coordinated entry
[16:33] system. Okay, Councilmember
[16:35] Blumenfield, this is actually
[16:37] your your motion, is that
[16:40] correct? I'm second on the
[16:42] motion. Okay, great. Maybe I
[16:43] could. Yeah, please, please go
[16:46] ahead. So part of this is
[16:48] understanding how much funding
[16:49] the city will potentially lose
[16:51] if the county becomes the lead
[16:52] for the LA region and trying to
[16:54] get information to understand
[16:55] that, good, bad, indifferent.
[16:58] We want to know the realities.
[16:59] It's we know there's going to
[17:00] be administrative efficiencies,
[17:03] because the county contracts
[17:04] with the same providers that we
[17:05] do in the city and the LA COC
[17:08] and the county has measure a
[17:09] funding for staffing to
[17:11] administer contracts. But we
[17:13] need to hear from the service
[17:15] providers, although it may be
[17:15] unlikely that they're going to
[17:17] share their concerns so clearly
[17:19] because, they're also their,
[17:23] their funding depends on, on,
[17:24] on this. So I wanted to just, I
[17:28] have a report back to get a
[17:30] little bit more in depth on
[17:31] some of the questions that we
[17:33] need to know. It's, you know,
[17:34] often whoever controls the
[17:35] money controls the beds. When
[17:36] it comes to the regional, the
[17:40] region. I mean, I just
[17:41] experienced this this weekend.
[17:42] There was somebody I was trying
[17:43] to get into housing, right,
[17:45] right near my house who was out.
[17:46] And, we wanted to put them in
[17:48] the bridge home that we, we
[17:50] spent money on as a city and
[17:51] partnered with the county for,
[17:53] but we were informed that now
[17:55] because of the changes, now
[17:57] LAHSA is no longer matching.
[17:59] It's now the county that does
[18:00] the direct matching. So all of
[18:02] a sudden we don't have control
[18:04] over who can go into the bridge
[18:07] home that we've been using for
[18:08] years. And that we as a city
[18:10] put a lot of money into. So in
[18:13] order for the LA to respond to
[18:15] this motion and the governance
[18:16] issues in general, we need as a
[18:18] council to establish goals,
[18:20] that we want to achieve, which
[18:21] gives us a framework to
[18:22] negotiate with the county on a
[18:24] future MOU or JPA. So for me,
[18:26] there's critical things
[18:27] accessing PSH beds built in the
[18:31] city, sometimes with city money
[18:32] not being locked out of those
[18:34] beds because the county funds
[18:35] the Icms dealing with the SES
[18:38] policy set by the city and the
[18:40] county. Getting an assessment
[18:42] tool for PSH that is
[18:43] established by the city and the
[18:45] county. Co-equal status with
[18:46] the county and decision making,
[18:49] city involvement in the
[18:50] development of the nofo and
[18:51] selection city, access to data.
[18:55] And if the county does take
[18:56] over LA COC, does it make sense
[18:59] for the city to also access
[19:01] champ and other county data
[19:02] sources from an accountability
[19:04] standpoint? So in order to help
[19:06] get it, all of that I have
[19:07] asking for an amendment which
[19:09] will include a report back that
[19:11] specifically includes, but not
[19:13] limited to the impacts to
[19:15] funding and the city's direct
[19:16] access to that funding.
[19:18] Accessing PSH beds built in the
[19:20] city, report back also on the
[19:23] co-equal status board
[19:24] representation between the city
[19:25] and the county and also a
[19:27] report back on, on as part of
[19:29] that, the shared decision
[19:30] making in establishing the
[19:32] assessment tool for PSH, the
[19:34] SES policy nofo and selection
[19:36] process and the data sharing
[19:38] policy. Again, this is all
[19:39] report backs. It's just to
[19:41] flesh a little bit more out on
[19:42] what we want to get answered.
[19:44] Council member Blumenfield, I
[19:45] believe you're the amendment
[19:46] that you shared here also
[19:47] includes referrals to interim
[19:49] sites. Yes. Okay. Which is I
[19:52] don't think that was on this
[19:53] note, but definitely because
[19:54] that that's what just came up
[19:55] recently. Yes. Adding that in
[19:57] there. Thank you. Great. So
[19:58] I'll second that amendment. And
[20:00] unless there's any other, I
[20:01] think this is a really
[20:03] important motion and really
[20:06] important questions that you're
[20:08] asking. And, we have been
[20:13] realizing over the past few
[20:14] weeks that as we've kind of
[20:15] dealt with the city's
[20:16] administration of shelter beds
[20:17] in our own district, that
[20:19] suddenly matching is just no
[20:21] longer with LAHSA. And we were
[20:23] just informed of that. We
[20:24] weren't after we were asking
[20:26] about specific individuals and
[20:29] changes and things like that.
[20:30] We weren't proactively informed
[20:31] about that. So I think this
[20:33] kind of, motion is going to be
[20:35] really important to help us
[20:36] make sure that we're best
[20:37] positioned to manage the system.
[20:39] So with that, I'd like to call
[20:41] the roll. Madam chair. Raman.
[20:47] Yes. Council member Hirano yes.
[20:51] Council member. Blumenfield.
[20:52] Aye. Council member. HUD. Aye.
[20:56] Council member. Mcosker. Yes.
[20:59] Five ayes. Item ten is approved
[21:03] as amended. Okay, great. Let's
[21:07] move on to item 11. If you want
[21:10] to read that into the record,
[21:11] Miss Jen. Yes. Item 11 is a
[21:14] verbal update from HR and A
[21:18] advisors and the Housing
[21:20] Authority of the City of Los
[21:22] Angeles regarding identifying
[21:24] funding solutions to ensure
[21:26] that families and individuals
[21:29] housed can remain housed, and
[21:31] the feasibility of implementing
[21:34] a local subsidy program that
[21:36] does not rely on federal
[21:39] funding sources to keep
[21:41] individuals. House colleagues.
[21:44] I wanted to bring this to the
[21:45] committee because this is
[21:47] another moment in which the
[21:48] kind of the advanced work done
[21:50] by both the departments and
[21:52] this committee was able to
[21:54] allow us to have some good news,
[21:57] just like people who lost time,
[21:59] limited subsidy funding. LAHSA.
[22:03] Hacla, and the housing
[22:06] department, CLA cao were all
[22:08] able to work with our providers
[22:10] to make sure that those time
[22:11] limited subsidy reductions did
[22:14] not result in people moving
[22:15] back to the streets. It
[22:16] actually ended up resulting in
[22:18] people moving into permanent
[22:19] housing or into
[22:21] self-sufficiency. In a
[22:22] coordinated effort. We were
[22:23] able to plan for that and do
[22:24] that. And I'm really, really
[22:26] excited about that. This is
[22:27] another instance where we have
[22:28] some good news, which is that
[22:30] our emergency housing vouchers
[22:32] program, a Covid era program
[22:34] that was about to run out of
[22:36] money and potentially leave
[22:37] 3000 plus people in the city,
[22:39] 7000 people across the entire
[22:41] county without funding for
[22:43] housing that they had moved
[22:44] into. That crisis has been
[22:46] averted. So I just wanted to
[22:47] make sure Hecla was able to
[22:49] report back, since that was
[22:50] something that this committee
[22:51] had asked about. This
[22:53] presentation will be brief. But
[22:56] I just, you know, I think it's
[22:58] important to close the loop on
[22:59] these questions. So take it
[23:02] away. Hacla and HR, a great.
[23:06] Thank you. Good afternoon,
[23:07] Madam Chair and council members.
[23:09] My name is Marcy Vega. I am the
[23:11] director of the assisted
[23:12] housing programs for the
[23:14] Housing Authority of the City
[23:15] of Los Angeles. And I'm here
[23:18] today with my I was going to
[23:21] say colleague, but friend,
[23:23] Sarah Salon from HR and a
[23:24] advisors to provide an update
[23:26] regarding our emergency housing
[23:28] voucher program and what is the
[23:31] status with respect to items
[23:32] that have been discussed here
[23:34] previously. So we have a brief
[23:36] slide presentation that we can
[23:37] walk through with you. And so I
[23:40] think first what I'd like to do
[23:41] is just kind of take us all
[23:43] back, and just kind of frame
[23:45] the challenge. So Hacla
[23:49] administers the second largest
[23:51] emergency housing voucher
[23:54] program that supports
[23:55] approximately 2700 families
[23:58] households, which includes over
[24:01] 4300 individuals. And as you
[24:03] all are well aware, federal
[24:05] funding for this program was
[24:06] set to expire this year. It
[24:09] would have cost our agency
[24:12] approximately $57 million to
[24:15] continue rental assistance for
[24:17] these households once this
[24:18] funding expired and without
[24:21] intervention again, this group
[24:22] of individuals would have
[24:26] essentially faced eviction and
[24:28] return to homelessness. Next
[24:31] slide please. What was our
[24:34] response? And I really want to
[24:35] lift up this work that was
[24:37] carried out by our leadership.
[24:38] Our Chief Executive Officer,
[24:41] Lourdes Castro Ramirez, and our
[24:43] chief programs officer,
[24:44] Margarita Lara's. Immediately,
[24:47] our Board of commissioners
[24:49] promptly determined that
[24:51] addressing the needs of our ihv
[24:53] households would be a key
[24:54] priority for the agency. I
[24:57] joined Hacla on February 2nd,
[24:59] and on that day, chair CEO
[25:02] Castro Ramirez sat with me and
[25:04] gave me what my top five items.
[25:07] And this was one of them. In
[25:08] fact, it was number one to find
[25:10] a solution for our Ihv families.
[25:13] Following this, on July 1st,
[25:16] the City Council adopted a
[25:18] motion that directed Hacla to
[25:21] collaborate with local partners
[25:23] to explore and assess financial
[25:26] or other alternative financial
[25:28] solutions and options. Hacla
[25:30] also raised awareness with La
[25:32] Casa and as well as the
[25:34] leadership table of the
[25:35] regional impact of the number
[25:36] of individuals, not just for
[25:39] Hacla but for other housing
[25:40] authorities in the county that
[25:42] would be faced with eviction
[25:43] and a return to homelessness.
[25:45] As a result of these
[25:47] discussions and our work, we
[25:48] were very fortunate that La
[25:50] Casa granted 5000 $500,000 to
[25:54] HRA and associates to assist
[25:56] Hacla and other housing
[25:58] authorities in LA County region
[26:00] to develop a transition plan to
[26:03] support impacted households in
[26:06] stabilizing, enrolling in
[26:08] benefits and accessing services.
[26:11] Our leadership continued to
[26:13] aggressively advocate across
[26:15] federal, state and local
[26:17] government levels, as well as
[26:18] at a national level, with the
[26:21] U.S. Conference of Mayors,
[26:23] where our our mayor led a
[26:26] discussion on the Ihv program,
[26:28] as well as through our National
[26:29] Housing Authority advocacy
[26:32] organizations. And lastly, I
[26:33] want to highlight that during
[26:35] this period of real uncertainty
[26:37] for families, we were very
[26:40] fortunate that we were able to
[26:42] utilize our AmeriCorps
[26:44] volunteers who began their time
[26:47] with Hacla at the beginning of
[26:48] this year to provide ongoing
[26:51] direct support, to the
[26:54] households during this period
[26:55] of uncertainty. And if you
[26:57] would allow me to have the
[26:59] AmeriCorps volunteer stand up.
[27:01] Wow. If you are familiar with
[27:09] AmeriCorps, these are young
[27:11] individuals who are this is
[27:13] their first opportunity in
[27:15] public service. And so these
[27:17] are all individuals that really
[27:19] had the direct connection.
[27:22] Taking the phone calls from Ihv
[27:24] clients, meeting them in the
[27:26] lobby, doing all that work to
[27:29] assure Ihv household members
[27:31] that we were going to find a
[27:33] solution. They were essentially
[27:35] issuing, sending out
[27:37] newsletters, directing them to
[27:38] other resources, groceries.
[27:41] Here's another housing
[27:42] authority that can assist you
[27:43] doing a lot of that direct
[27:45] client work that our advisors
[27:47] at times do not have that time
[27:48] to do and, and do that high
[27:49] level of engagement. Thank you
[27:52] so much to our AmeriCorps
[27:53] volunteers, AmeriCorps team.
[27:56] I'm really, really grateful for
[27:57] you. I knew about your work
[27:58] when it was happening, from
[28:01] Hacla. And, we're just, we're
[28:05] very, very proud to have had
[28:06] you as part of this process. So
[28:08] thank you very much. Thank you
[28:09] so much. And I think only
[28:12] through their efforts, we were
[28:13] able to stay in close contact
[28:16] with our ahv households. You
[28:17] know, the work of addressing
[28:20] homelessness and providing
[28:21] housing to individuals who are
[28:24] cycling through homelessness.
[28:26] Oftentimes, individuals become
[28:28] disengaged from the program.
[28:29] And I think with our AmeriCorps
[28:31] volunteers, we were able to
[28:32] keep our households
[28:35] overwhelmingly engaged with
[28:36] Hacla. And so it meant that as
[28:38] we are transitioning, we are
[28:40] able to account for everyone
[28:42] because of the work that our
[28:44] AmeriCorps volunteers did. So
[28:45] thank you for allowing me to
[28:48] recognize them. And for many,
[28:49] this is probably their first
[28:50] time here in this setting. So
[28:52] thank you. Next slide please.
[28:55] So, with all of that, pleased
[28:57] to announce, and I think you
[28:59] already are well aware that,
[29:01] our agencies funding shortfall
[29:03] has ended. HUD officially
[29:06] determined that we are no
[29:07] longer in a funding shortfall
[29:10] due to higher than anticipated,
[29:13] appropriation levels and HUD
[29:15] funding for our tenant based
[29:16] renewals. Therefore, with that,
[29:20] that equaled a 976 million that
[29:23] we are set to receive this
[29:24] calendar year. Based on our
[29:27] calculations, we are able to
[29:29] transition all eehv households
[29:32] into our regular tenant based
[29:34] housing choice voucher program.
[29:37] Therefore, we are keeping
[29:38] families stably housed. That
[29:40] work began this week. We are
[29:43] able to essentially capture all
[29:45] of the eehv households, and we
[29:47] are now in the process of doing
[29:49] the administrative work to
[29:50] bring them into the hacla,
[29:54] portfolio. I'm also pleased to
[29:56] announce that our partner, LA
[29:58] County Development Authority,
[29:59] is able to do the same. So
[30:01] between the city and the county,
[30:03] we are able to provide housing
[30:05] stability for thousands of eehv
[30:08] households. I also just want to
[30:12] call out to that as a result of
[30:14] our shortfall in 2025, we
[30:17] unfortunately had to suspend
[30:18] application processing for 3000
[30:21] individuals who had come off of
[30:22] our waiting list. And I'm also
[30:24] pleased to announce that we are
[30:26] also restarting the application
[30:27] review for these individuals as
[30:29] well. Right now the big lift is
[30:32] moving all of the eehv
[30:35] households into the tenant
[30:36] based program. And right now we
[30:38] are designing the plans on how
[30:39] we're going to now restart
[30:41] application processing for
[30:42] these 3000 applicants. Next
[30:46] slide please. I think I also
[30:49] just want to call out that the
[30:51] work of transitioning our eehv
[30:54] households was made largely in
[30:56] part by the funding, but also,
[30:59] by the work that HUD did to
[31:03] make the process very easy for
[31:05] both the recipient and for the
[31:07] housing authority. I'm pleased
[31:09] to announce that with its
[31:11] guidance, HUD essentially
[31:13] allowed Eehv household members
[31:15] who are going to remain in
[31:17] place not to really essentially
[31:19] do anything. In other words, we
[31:21] are able to do a couple of
[31:23] clicks of the, of our,
[31:26] processing, but the families
[31:27] will not need to undergo an
[31:30] inspection, will not need to
[31:32] reverify their income. They
[31:34] will not need to go through
[31:35] background screening. The
[31:37] contract with the owner will
[31:38] remain the same. And so that
[31:40] type of flexibility makes it
[31:43] extremely, extremely, easy for
[31:46] the housing authority to
[31:48] complete this task and relieves
[31:50] our eehv families of a burden
[31:52] of having to provide additional
[31:54] paperwork and become reverified
[31:56] all over again. I also want to
[31:59] say, lastly, that those eehv
[32:02] households that are perhaps
[32:03] still trying to get some
[32:05] paperwork in or are delinquent,
[32:07] our AmeriCorps volunteers are
[32:08] on the phone with those
[32:10] families, trying to get them
[32:11] and encourage them to come in,
[32:13] get your papers corrected, get
[32:14] in good standing so that you
[32:16] can become part of Hackley's
[32:18] HCV program. This is just a
[32:21] point of information in terms
[32:23] of the impact to each of the
[32:26] council districts, in terms of
[32:27] the number of eehv households
[32:30] who are going to remain stably
[32:32] housed. I think many of you
[32:33] have seen other iterations of
[32:35] this when it was the opposite,
[32:37] right? The potential impact of
[32:39] families in your respective
[32:41] council districts that were
[32:42] going to become homeless? Well,
[32:44] this is a reverse. These are
[32:46] individuals who are going to
[32:47] remain stably housed as a
[32:48] result of the work that we're
[32:50] currently doing. Lastly, I'm
[32:55] going to turn it over to, Sarah
[32:58] Salon to provide a brief update
[33:00] on exactly who it is that we
[33:02] are helping based on the work
[33:04] that HR conducted with Hacla
[33:06] during this effort. Thank you
[33:08] so much, Marcy, and good
[33:10] afternoon, council members. So
[33:12] as part of the technical
[33:14] assistance that we have been
[33:15] doing to support Hacla, during
[33:17] this moment, we were able to
[33:18] learn a lot more about this
[33:20] population. Part of what we
[33:21] were trying to do was
[33:23] understand, their income, their
[33:24] likely ongoing housing needs,
[33:26] their ongoing service needs in
[33:28] order to, begin to build plans
[33:31] for them to possibly transition
[33:33] to other housing opportunities
[33:35] in the event that they were
[33:36] displaced, if there was no
[33:38] funding. So what we learned is
[33:41] that, these households
[33:44] currently supported by
[33:45] emergency housing vouchers are
[33:46] some of LA's most vulnerable
[33:48] renters. So nearly all
[33:50] households are 96% meet the
[33:52] criteria for low income or very
[33:53] low income, with 73% relying on
[33:56] a fixed income. A significant
[33:59] portion over a third include a
[34:01] person with a disability. Most
[34:04] of these households include
[34:05] just one adult, but seven, but
[34:07] about a quarter include more
[34:09] than one family member. And
[34:11] there are over a thousand
[34:13] children who are being
[34:14] supported through this program
[34:15] right now housed through this
[34:16] program. We also learned that
[34:20] nearly 75% of households
[34:22] currently supported by we were
[34:24] experiencing homelessness at
[34:25] the time of their program
[34:27] admission into the eehv system.
[34:30] And that when they were
[34:33] enrolled in an Eehv in the Eehv
[34:35] program, 50% had been assessed
[34:37] and were eligible for permanent
[34:39] supportive housing, meaning
[34:40] that they had high acuity
[34:41] service needs. So this is just,
[34:43] I think, a really helpful
[34:45] picture of how vulnerable this
[34:47] population is, how wonderful it
[34:49] is that Hacla is able to
[34:51] sustain housing for them, and
[34:54] by implication, how difficult
[34:55] it would have been in our
[34:57] current system to be able to
[34:58] find, other existing
[35:00] opportunities for these, these
[35:01] families to remain housed. And
[35:04] I'll just close by saying, I
[35:05] think our work with Hacla is
[35:07] ongoing. We're hoping to be
[35:08] able to, after these households
[35:11] transition over to, to hcbs to
[35:14] be able to help with some
[35:16] stability, some benefit
[35:17] enrollment, some service
[35:19] connection. And also now
[35:21] helping Hacla think about how
[35:23] they might be able to prepare
[35:24] for any other households that
[35:26] could be displaced by, federal
[35:28] funding or other housing
[35:30] changes. So we think we're
[35:31] developing a little bit of a
[35:33] replicable model here to deal
[35:34] with, shortfalls when we, when
[35:37] we know that they're coming.
[35:38] Thank you, thank you. That
[35:41] concludes our report. Thank you
[35:42] so much. And, are there
[35:46] questions from. Yes. So lots of
[35:48] questions. Great. Councilmember
[35:51] McCosker, go ahead. Thanks.
[35:53] Thank you very much for this.
[35:55] So with the probably two
[35:58] grossly simplified version of
[35:59] this, be that under the
[36:01] American Rescue Plan, we have
[36:02] the emergency vouchers. The
[36:04] vouchers were ending early
[36:05] because of the bad stuff
[36:08] happening 3000 miles away or.
[36:10] And we converted emergency
[36:13] vouchers into housing
[36:14] assistance. And so we we. The.
[36:17] So the 500 grand that came from
[36:19] the Casa was to advocate for
[36:23] allowing us to take the pot of
[36:25] money that we get for housing
[36:27] assistance and use that pot of
[36:29] money, which was maybe larger
[36:30] than we expected to do to
[36:32] convert folks from emergency
[36:34] vouchers under the under the
[36:37] former Program to Housing
[36:39] Assistance program. I'll go
[36:42] I'll go ahead and address the
[36:43] first part. What, the funding
[36:45] that we received from the Casa
[36:47] for the technical assistance
[36:49] was exactly to actually help us
[36:50] draw up the plan B in the event
[36:54] that we did not receive enough
[36:56] funding to convert Ahv
[36:59] households to our regular HCV
[37:02] program. And we engaged in that
[37:04] work because of the delay in
[37:08] appropriations, we had several
[37:09] continuing resolutions. And
[37:11] then even after passage of that
[37:14] appropriations bill, HUD took
[37:16] longer than usual to provide
[37:18] housing authorities with any
[37:19] idea of what their funding was
[37:21] going to was going to be. And
[37:23] so we felt that we were
[37:24] essentially running out of time.
[37:26] And so La Casa was helping us
[37:28] develop what was going to be
[37:29] that other off ramp for
[37:31] families in the event that we
[37:33] could not support them to
[37:34] transition over to our program.
[37:36] Yeah. I wasn't questioning the
[37:37] value of LAHSA and what they
[37:38] did that I will quite often,
[37:41] but I'm not right now. But the
[37:44] short version is that the
[37:45] American Rescue Plan got
[37:47] depleted fast. Yes. And we put
[37:50] ourselves in a position where
[37:51] the $900 million for the Hap
[37:54] program allowed us to convert
[37:56] emergency vouchers to Hap. That
[37:58] is correct. Program dollars.
[38:00] Okay. Thanks. Great. Yeah. And
[38:05] I think the when we when the
[38:07] motion was first introduced in
[38:10] 2025, we were looking at
[38:11] potentially these, individuals
[38:16] not having the ability to
[38:17] sustain their housing or really
[38:19] working with them. Another
[38:21] place where this did happen was
[38:23] the TLS funding cliff. So we
[38:24] had like two buckets of
[38:26] individuals that were about to
[38:28] lose funding. The TLS funding.
[38:29] Cliff did happen. We lost that
[38:31] money from Hap and from was it
[38:35] Hap money that was gone? All
[38:37] kinds. Yeah. We there was a
[38:39] number of vouchers that were
[38:40] lost for a tranche of TLS folks
[38:44] that and now I can't remember
[38:47] which committee that was
[38:48] reported back in, whether that
[38:49] was HCC and whether it came
[38:51] here or not. But these were the
[38:52] two kind of groups of people
[38:54] that we were worried about in
[38:56] this committee last year around
[38:58] this time, one is one group
[39:00] ended up getting the money from
[39:02] the federal government to be
[39:03] able to stay housed, which was
[39:04] great for the other group. Our
[39:07] city departments, as well as
[39:11] LAHSA, worked with the service
[39:13] providers to ensure that people
[39:15] who were losing their time
[39:15] limited subsidy vouchers, about
[39:17] 50% of them moved to. We did
[39:19] have a brief update on this,
[39:20] right, but 50% of them ended up
[39:22] moving into self-sufficiency.
[39:24] And about half of them ended up
[39:26] moving to other forms of
[39:27] housing, including PSA and
[39:30] other affordable units to be
[39:31] able to stay housed. And we
[39:32] basically work to ensure that
[39:33] those people didn't fall back
[39:35] into homelessness. So sometimes
[39:36] we talk about these funding
[39:38] cliffs, which feel very
[39:40] abstract and far away. But what
[39:43] has happened over the past year
[39:45] and a half or so is that there
[39:47] has been real work done to
[39:48] ensure that, these funding
[39:51] cliffs didn't come to pass and
[39:53] that people weren't, weren't
[39:54] left homeless, which is good. I
[39:55] mean, we, we have a lot of work
[39:57] to do on this system, but this
[39:59] is one of one this and the
[40:01] other instance where we
[40:02] prepared early and we were able
[40:03] to do some work. Council Member.
[40:05] Blumenfield. Great, thanks. And
[40:06] I was trying to get the same
[40:08] kind of clarification. So it
[40:09] sounds like a crisis was
[40:10] averted. So thank you. And that
[40:12] that's awesome. And it sounds
[40:14] like it was, basically one, one
[40:16] pot of federal money was, was
[40:18] swapped for another pot of
[40:19] federal money. At the end of
[40:20] the day is how we made it
[40:22] happen was the, if you compare,
[40:24] you said it would have, it
[40:25] would have cost us 57 million
[40:27] if we had just had to replace
[40:29] the vouchers straight out. Yeah.
[40:31] Was it more or less when, when
[40:34] we did the swap with the other
[40:36] federal money to make everybody
[40:38] whole, did that end up costing
[40:40] us more than the 57 million or
[40:42] less than the 57 million? Or
[40:43] was it an even swap? It was.
[40:45] Yeah, it was the same because
[40:47] Hap is continuous for the
[40:49] families. So what we pay out in
[40:51] housing assistance will not
[40:53] change. And so it was, it was
[40:55] an even swap of one, one one
[40:57] pot of federal money for the
[40:59] other pot of federal money. And
[41:01] fortunately, I guess because
[41:02] that other pot was growing, we
[41:03] didn't have to cut anybody else.
[41:06] That's correct. Because as a
[41:08] shortfall agency, we were very
[41:10] diligent in following the
[41:12] shortfall action plan. And so
[41:14] by the time we did see our
[41:16] calendar year 26 Hap renewal
[41:18] amount, because of essentially
[41:20] the savings we achieved because
[41:22] we were following that plan, we
[41:24] were able to subsume the Hap
[41:27] that we were paying for ihv
[41:29] into roll it into our regular
[41:31] tenant based renewals. Right.
[41:34] But it's still vouchers. It's
[41:36] still a voucher. Yeah, it is
[41:37] still a voucher. Okay. And then
[41:40] you said, I think I heard you
[41:41] say the county was able to do
[41:43] the same thing. Correct. The
[41:44] county is doing the exact same
[41:46] thing and transitioning their
[41:47] Ihv voucher holders to their
[41:50] regular tenant based voucher
[41:51] program as well. Great. And is
[41:52] there any long term implication
[41:54] for all this? That's a good
[41:56] question. I think we will be
[41:57] assessing this as we go along.
[41:59] We do. We are aware that there
[42:01] are other housing authorities
[42:02] that are not as fortunate, who
[42:05] continue to be in a shortfall
[42:06] funding situation even after
[42:08] receiving their federal,
[42:10] calendar calendar year 26
[42:11] funding. And so these agencies
[42:13] are still in a position of
[42:15] trying to find a solution. And
[42:17] so it was uneven. And so we
[42:19] actually are speaking with
[42:21] other agencies, sharing what we
[42:24] are experience, trying to see
[42:27] where we can provide some type
[42:28] of assistance, but it is, it is
[42:32] unfortunate that there are
[42:33] still agencies here locally as
[42:35] well as in the state that may
[42:37] not have a plan for their
[42:39] families. Right. And then the
[42:40] federal money that we did get,
[42:41] is that also under threat for
[42:43] this next year? That remains to
[42:45] be seen. Right now we're
[42:46] following it closely. Okay.
[42:48] Thank you. Great. Thank you so
[42:53] much for being here and barring
[42:54] any other questions. Thank you
[42:56] again to our AmeriCorps. Are
[42:58] they volunteers or what's the
[43:00] what's the word volunteers.
[43:03] Okay, awesome. Thank you again
[43:04] to our AmeriCorps volunteers
[43:05] for your hard work in this. And
[43:07] thank you to Hacla and HR for
[43:09] the update. About one thing
[43:12] that we didn't have to worry
[43:13] about quite as much as we did
[43:15] worry about last year. So thank
[43:16] you. Let's move on to item 12,
[43:19] which is our last item today.
[43:22] Item item 12 is a verbal update
[43:25] from the Los Angeles Homeless
[43:27] Services Authority regarding
[43:28] the United States Department of
[43:31] Housing and Urban Development
[43:34] Year 2026 continuum Care Notice
[43:38] of funding. Opportunity. Okay,
[43:42] great. And we have Paul
[43:44] Rubenstein here from LAHSA and
[43:46] Meg Barkley from the CIO, to
[43:48] provide us more context around
[43:49] the city's response to HUD's
[43:51] actions around the COC Nofo
[43:54] this is a discussion item only.
[43:57] And just on background, HUD
[44:01] announced it would suspend
[44:02] funding to LAHSA on June 11th
[44:04] of this year, I believe. Is
[44:06] that right? There's about
[44:08] 11,000 people who are currently
[44:10] sheltered, housed or receiving
[44:12] outreach with these funds.
[44:15] Since HUD's announcement, this
[44:16] council passed a resolution
[44:18] opposing the federal
[44:19] government's decision to
[44:20] withhold funding. And, and then
[44:25] there has been other
[44:27] developments that have taken
[44:28] place, including actions by the
[44:31] county. The mayor and council
[44:33] president writing a letter to
[44:34] the COC board, and a court
[44:37] hearing tomorrow. So I just
[44:38] thought it would be useful for
[44:39] this committee to hear about
[44:40] what is going on in a
[44:42] consolidated manner. Have your
[44:43] questions answered, and just
[44:47] allow for committee members to
[44:48] stay up to date on the C, O, C
[44:50] and, and any changes to it. So
[44:53] take it away. Paul and Meg.
[44:56] Sure. Paul Rubenstein Chief of
[44:58] Staff at LAHSA. So I wanted to
[45:00] start with just a quick
[45:01] overview of where the 2026COC
[45:05] nofo process stands right now.
[45:09] Despite the notice of
[45:11] suspension from HUD, which, as
[45:13] Councilmember Raman noted,
[45:14] LAHSA is contesting in court.
[45:18] We have been proceeding with
[45:21] the local COC nofo competition
[45:24] process as we do every year.
[45:28] The deadline for that
[45:29] submission is coming up on
[45:32] August 26th. And at this point,
[45:34] the, the county, the city of La
[45:37] LAHSA and the COC have sent
[45:39] multiple joint communications
[45:41] to providers, encouraging them
[45:43] to continue with the local
[45:46] competition process, for
[45:48] multiple reasons, primarily no
[45:51] matter what happens, the work
[45:53] that they're doing will be used.
[45:55] Even if in the scenario that
[45:57] HUD has outlined that providers
[45:59] would submit individual
[46:01] applications, the work that
[46:02] they're putting together now
[46:03] would still be used. And then
[46:07] importantly, by putting
[46:08] together a local competition
[46:10] package, we maintain our own
[46:12] local control over
[46:14] prioritization of projects as
[46:16] opposed to if it does end up
[46:17] going to direct application to
[46:19] HUD. Then HUD would be the one
[46:21] making the decisions about
[46:22] which projects are funded. The
[46:25] critical thing there is that
[46:27] under the terms of the 26 Nofo
[46:29] that HUD outlined, only 60% of
[46:34] funding is what's called the
[46:35] protected tier, which is
[46:36] basically almost guaranteed
[46:38] renewal. In the past, that has
[46:40] been 90% of the renewal funding.
[46:43] So it's a significant reduction,
[46:46] which would leave, people that
[46:49] are currently housed with COC
[46:52] dollars without a form of
[46:54] subsidy, which is obviously
[46:56] deeply concerning. I also want
[46:59] to note that while LAHSA has
[47:02] taken action legally, here,
[47:05] there are also two national
[47:07] lawsuits that are contesting
[47:09] the entire 2026 Nofo. There's
[47:13] one that is a coalition of
[47:15] states which the state of
[47:16] California is part of. And then
[47:18] there's one that the National
[47:19] Alliance to End Homelessness
[47:20] and other nonprofit, advocacy
[47:24] groups and local entities are,
[47:29] participating in, it's been
[47:30] filed in Rhode Island before
[47:31] the same judge that ruled
[47:32] against HUD, regarding the 2025
[47:36] Nofo. And they are essentially,
[47:41] making similar arguments they
[47:43] had made against the 2025 Nofo
[47:46] against the 2026 Nofo in terms
[47:47] of its legality and the funding
[47:50] shifts that it's trying to put
[47:52] forward. So there is really a
[47:53] lot in play. We are, like I
[47:58] said, currently engaged in the
[48:01] local competition process. We
[48:03] have received applications. The
[48:06] COC board forwarded a ranking
[48:12] methodology proposal to the
[48:14] LAHSA commission, which is
[48:15] actually discussing that right
[48:17] now. And then there will be
[48:20] subsequent meetings of the COC
[48:21] board. I know Meg serves on the
[48:23] board, so I'm sure she can
[48:25] speak to it a little bit as
[48:26] well. But there will be
[48:28] subsequent meetings between now
[48:29] and the, submission to HUD to
[48:33] finalize those rankings. And
[48:36] then it's worth also noting
[48:39] that HUD has not actually
[48:40] released the application yet.
[48:42] And not just to us, but to, to
[48:44] anyone. And this is typically
[48:46] something that the narratives
[48:48] and the, all the pieces that
[48:49] have to be put together, that
[48:51] there are at least a couple
[48:52] months to work on. And at this
[48:54] point, you know, with the
[48:55] stated deadline of the 26th,
[48:57] we're looking at more like
[48:58] weeks to put everything
[48:59] together and not just us, but
[49:00] really Cox around the country.
[49:02] So there will be a significant
[49:04] time crunch. But obviously a
[49:06] lot will ride on what happens
[49:07] in court tomorrow. Just because
[49:10] it is pending litigation, we
[49:12] don't want to get into it too
[49:14] much. But I'll note a few
[49:16] things that, a after we filed,
[49:21] Judge Carter ordered the
[49:24] parties, the parties to the
[49:25] alliance lawsuit to appear as
[49:27] well. So, we'll see them
[49:32] tomorrow, including you
[49:34] technically. And then also at
[49:36] the end of last week, the COC
[49:40] filed to join the case as a
[49:42] plaintiff. And so the judge
[49:46] also, without ruling on adding
[49:48] them as a plaintiff, he did
[49:50] order them to appear as well
[49:52] tomorrow. Meg, do you want to
[49:57] provide an update? Thank you.
[49:58] Paul, just on how the city has
[50:00] been engaging in this process
[50:01] and how it impacts us. Sure.
[50:05] Shortly after the first letter
[50:09] on June 11th, the city of the
[50:12] county and LAHSA entered into a
[50:14] letter of common interest and
[50:16] discussed, to so that the city
[50:19] was able to discuss losses
[50:21] strategy around the, the
[50:24] lawsuit while being all jointly
[50:26] protected by privilege, that
[50:28] that letter is still in effect.
[50:31] Also a declaration in support
[50:34] of the lawsuit was filed, by,
[50:38] or a declaration by Matt Zabo
[50:40] that the city administrative
[50:41] officer was filed also in
[50:43] support at, as authorized by
[50:46] counsel. And so that showing
[50:49] the city's report, support for
[50:51] the lawsuit, the County of Los
[50:53] Angeles also filed a
[50:55] declaration in support at that
[50:56] time. So we are not a party to
[50:59] the lawsuit, but have been
[51:01] remaining up to date on the
[51:04] status of the various filings
[51:06] since, since it was initiated.
[51:09] And how does this impact? I
[51:11] know that there's been some
[51:13] discussions and at least a
[51:14] letter back and forth related
[51:16] to this and kind of, ownership
[51:19] of data. And I think I just
[51:21] want to make sure that this
[51:23] committee is aware of changes
[51:24] that are happening. So we have,
[51:28] potentially a movement of
[51:32] measure H to another location.
[51:34] And I just, you know, I like,
[51:36] we find it hard to get access
[51:37] to our data at the city. We did
[51:39] a lot of work to finally get
[51:41] access to it through LAHSA. And
[51:43] we're grateful for LAHSA
[51:44] partnership. Now it's being
[51:45] regularly reported. Council
[51:46] offices have access to it, but
[51:48] now there's a potential for
[51:49] that to move again. So I just
[51:51] want to make sure committee
[51:52] members are aware of that
[51:53] because it impacts our ability
[51:55] to manage our shelters, manage
[51:57] our street homelessness and
[51:59] Council Member Blumenfield, to
[52:00] your point earlier, it also
[52:01] impacts our ability to move
[52:03] people through our shelter
[52:04] system effectively. So I wanted
[52:06] to make sure committee members
[52:07] knew about this because I do
[52:08] think it's really important.
[52:10] Sure, I can talk a little bit
[52:11] about that too. So thank you
[52:13] for a little closer to you.
[52:15] Sure. Thank you for, for
[52:18] clarifying that. I can
[52:18] definitely talk about that. The,
[52:21] there was a letter on June 18th
[52:23] that was sent to the chair of
[52:24] the Continuum of Care Board,
[52:27] notifying them that they were
[52:28] out of compliance because the
[52:30] collaborative applicant for the
[52:31] Continuum of Care application
[52:34] had been declared or suspended
[52:37] by HUD. And therefore HUD is
[52:40] authorized to take remedial
[52:42] actions against the COC board.
[52:44] The COC board is an
[52:47] organization formed under a
[52:49] charter that represents a
[52:51] broader COC, which is basically
[52:54] any stakeholder within the
[52:55] boundaries of the continuum of
[52:56] care that has an interest in
[52:59] addressing and solving
[53:00] homelessness. So there's a
[53:02] smaller board of 21
[53:04] representatives that are,
[53:06] sourced based on different
[53:08] representation, whether it's
[53:09] spar by spar service planning
[53:12] area within the COC or at large.
[53:16] There are at large participants,
[53:18] there are participants from the
[53:21] city administrative officers
[53:22] office. I sit on the board,
[53:25] representing the CIO. There's
[53:26] also a representative from
[53:27] Hacla. And from the county side,
[53:30] there is a county HSH
[53:32] representative and a
[53:33] representative from LAC, d a
[53:36] the continuum of Care board,
[53:40] has been, is, is the
[53:42] organization that sets the
[53:45] prioritization policy that the
[53:46] LAHSA commission is, reviewing
[53:49] right now. And would also
[53:53] ultimately recommend to the
[53:55] broader COC membership, not
[53:57] only the collaborative
[53:58] applicant, but the H S and CES
[54:01] leads for the continuum of care.
[54:03] And this is all established
[54:05] according to, statute and
[54:07] regulation that are
[54:08] administered by HUD. So when
[54:12] the administration notified
[54:14] when HUD notified the COC board
[54:16] that they were out of
[54:17] compliance, they noted they
[54:19] have sort of two options. And
[54:20] that is to take remedial action.
[54:22] One would be to designate an
[54:24] alternate collaborative
[54:25] applicant, and another would be
[54:27] to require or allow all
[54:30] eligible applicants within the
[54:32] continuum to apply directly to
[54:33] HUD. And that's what Paul was
[54:34] referring to. Local
[54:37] prioritization flies out the
[54:38] window. At that point, all of
[54:39] the decisions about what to
[54:41] fund come, directly from HUD,
[54:44] and that's within the 60% that
[54:46] would normally be that is would
[54:47] be protected as renewals and
[54:49] the 40% that's under the
[54:51] national competition. So HUD
[54:54] took the latter, option of
[54:57] allowing eligible applicants to
[54:59] apply directly. And, in that
[55:02] situation, if that stands, if
[55:05] the court does not intervene.
[55:07] And, both reverse LAHSA
[55:11] suspension and require, require
[55:14] HUD to lift the remedial
[55:17] actions against the COC board,
[55:19] then the COC will need to make
[55:22] the COC board will need to make
[55:24] a recommendation. And the COC
[55:26] itself will need to vote to
[55:30] establish a new collaborative
[55:31] applicant, a new measure H lead,
[55:32] a new SES lead. And so the
[55:36] County of Los Angeles sent a
[55:37] letter about a week and a half
[55:40] ago, almost two weeks ago, to
[55:42] the COC board offering to, take
[55:46] on having the la CDA the Los
[55:51] Angeles County Development
[55:53] Authority. Did I get that right?
[55:55] To serve as the collaborative
[55:56] applicant and the housing or
[55:59] homeless services and housing.
[56:01] Did I get that right? I think
[56:03] HHSH at the county to serve as
[56:06] the, my s and SES lead. They
[56:09] did note that that would be on
[56:11] an interim basis for a year
[56:13] only was the offer that they
[56:14] were making that the COC board
[56:16] could then make a decision for
[56:18] a longer term after that year.
[56:21] That would also require HUD to
[56:24] accept a collaborative
[56:25] applicant for this nofo, which
[56:27] they've sort of already
[56:28] indicated that they're not
[56:29] going to do because they stated
[56:32] they have two options and they
[56:33] didn't take that option. So
[56:34] it's unclear whether even if
[56:36] the COC board were to recommend
[56:38] an alternate collaborative
[56:40] applicant, whether HUD would
[56:41] accept that and allow the
[56:43] application to move forward
[56:44] under this alternative
[56:45] applicant. I know this is a lot
[56:47] and I'm talking really fast,
[56:49] able to apply, since most of
[56:51] the COC funding that the city
[56:53] gets is for, vouchers. Yes. Or
[56:57] operational funds would apply
[56:59] directly for those funds to be
[57:01] able to do that. Yes. Do they
[57:02] have the capacity to. So why
[57:04] are we preparing for that? Yeah.
[57:06] Hecla is preparing to apply
[57:07] directly. And it actually with
[57:09] the, local competition that
[57:13] LAHSA has been administering,
[57:16] they've already prepared a lot
[57:17] of that application in
[57:20] responding to the local, the
[57:21] normal process that we would
[57:23] follow locally of having a
[57:24] local competition and local
[57:26] ranking applied to those
[57:28] applications. Those
[57:29] applications have, I believe
[57:30] they are entered into snaps and
[57:33] then reviewed and prioritized
[57:36] by, the collaborative applicant,
[57:39] and that those results are
[57:41] required to be announced in
[57:42] this nofo cycle by August 11th,
[57:44] I believe. So next Tuesday. And
[57:48] so that is happening. Hackley's
[57:50] applications are in and are
[57:52] subject now to the Ranking
[57:53] policy that was approved by the
[57:55] COC board yesterday that does
[58:00] prioritize project based rental
[58:03] subsidies. And, the HAC is
[58:06] expected to do pretty well
[58:08] within that 60%. It is the Nofo
[58:11] itself is very problematic even
[58:13] without the issues that we're
[58:15] facing with HUD. And the HUD
[58:17] situation is just creating a
[58:18] lot more uncertainty. And the
[58:20] court case tomorrow could make
[58:21] it so that Judge Carter decides
[58:24] that there's a collaborative
[58:25] applicant and it or like it
[58:26] could stop HUD's actions
[58:28] entirely. Is that right? It's
[58:30] possible that he could order
[58:31] HUD to lift the suspension, I
[58:33] believe, but I'm not privy to
[58:36] like what his legal options are
[58:38] as since I'm not a lawyer, I
[58:39] don't really know exactly what
[58:41] he could or could not do. But
[58:42] that is what LAHSA has been
[58:44] asked, has asked the court to
[58:45] do. Okay, so colleagues, I
[58:47] don't know if you guys had
[58:48] questions. I know this is a lot,
[58:50] but I did think it was
[58:51] important for everyone to be
[58:53] aware of what was happening, in
[58:54] case you weren't already. I
[58:55] will just want I want to state
[58:57] for the record that, you know,
[58:59] I'm, I'm, I'm hope I'm glad
[59:00] that Hacla is stepping up and
[59:02] can apply on their own. I think
[59:03] building up that capacity and
[59:05] being ready to do that is
[59:06] really important. I have
[59:07] serious concerns about losses
[59:09] to other buckets of funding. So
[59:11] I think coming back to this
[59:12] committee, with how much money
[59:13] is expected to be lost in
[59:15] interim shelter and outreach,
[59:17] and also for us to be able to
[59:18] maximize interim shelter
[59:21] applications. And who will
[59:22] apply for that within the city
[59:24] in case the city has to go. It
[59:25] alone is really important to be
[59:27] able to do, and I'm looking to
[59:29] the Cao and lead to do that and
[59:31] prepare for that, so that as
[59:33] many shelter beds as possible
[59:34] can be covered by these dollars.
[59:36] If if that's open to us, we
[59:37] should apply for it. The second
[59:39] thing I did want to say is I
[59:41] have had the opportunity to sit
[59:43] with the county on shared
[59:45] boards. And they have provided
[59:47] us more access to data than
[59:48] they have in the past. But I
[59:50] will say that the county is a
[59:52] closed book in many, many
[59:53] instances in terms of what's
[59:55] going on there. They have a
[59:57] process through which people
[59:58] are supposed to go from interim
[59:59] shelter beds to high acuity
[1:00:00] mental health beds and to rehab
[1:00:02] beds. We're supposed to have a
[1:00:04] seat at that table. And I don't
[1:00:07] know who's advocating for us. I
[1:00:09] don't, but very few people from
[1:00:10] our shelters ever move to high
[1:00:12] acuity beds. Very few. And when
[1:00:16] we ask for data on mental
[1:00:18] health support, how many people
[1:00:20] are getting it, it's very hard
[1:00:21] to get it when we ask for data
[1:00:23] on any anything from the county.
[1:00:25] It's very hard to get. I know
[1:00:26] they're in the process of
[1:00:28] improving that, but handing
[1:00:29] over control of HMIS and, to
[1:00:32] the county, without real checks
[1:00:35] and balances in place and to
[1:00:37] make sure that we're able to
[1:00:39] access at least as much as
[1:00:40] we're able to access now, but
[1:00:42] ideally even more, I think, you
[1:00:43] know, we need to be able to
[1:00:45] make sure that we have real
[1:00:47] safeguards in place if that's
[1:00:48] what's happening, even if it's
[1:00:49] just for an interim year. And
[1:00:51] I'm grateful that the county
[1:00:52] has the capacity to stand up
[1:00:54] and do this. But like, you know,
[1:00:56] we just need to be able to make
[1:00:57] sure that we're fighting for
[1:00:59] every bed, for every person to
[1:01:00] get access to the resources
[1:01:01] that they deserve, because
[1:01:02] right now they're not getting
[1:01:04] it. And I'm afraid that that in
[1:01:05] access will deepen further.
[1:01:06] Committee member. Oh, sorry. I
[1:01:08] will just just to clarify,
[1:01:09] because I didn't talk about the
[1:01:10] city letter. So the city did
[1:01:12] send also a letter requesting
[1:01:13] joint administration of
[1:01:15] HMISNCES for those exact
[1:01:17] reasons. And I as a member of
[1:01:20] the board in place right now.
[1:01:21] Right, right. No it's not, but
[1:01:23] that looking forward, if that
[1:01:25] were the the case and as a
[1:01:27] member of the COC board, that
[1:01:29] is that is my very vocal,
[1:01:32] suggestion that any
[1:01:34] administration of this go
[1:01:35] forward has to be done in
[1:01:38] collaboration and with a, an
[1:01:40] agreement in place between the
[1:01:41] city and the county about
[1:01:43] access to data, how data will
[1:01:44] be not just provided, but also
[1:01:46] presented. And I would I would
[1:01:48] underscore that we cannot move
[1:01:49] forward without that agreement
[1:01:50] in place. Like, I just don't
[1:01:52] know how we would ethically for,
[1:01:54] for the people that we are
[1:01:55] caring for in our shelters,
[1:01:57] members, any council member.
[1:01:59] And then Councilmember Mcosker.
[1:02:01] Thank you. So it seems that can
[1:02:04] you her her mic is not on. Okay.
[1:02:07] It seems like the data that we
[1:02:09] use that LAHSA owns at the
[1:02:11] moment and has ownership of for
[1:02:12] my data is at risk of being
[1:02:15] lost to either HUD, the county.
[1:02:20] So I don't think the data would
[1:02:22] be lost to HUD. I think what
[1:02:25] would have to happen is the COC
[1:02:27] would have to vote to designate
[1:02:29] a new HMIS lead. And so that's
[1:02:33] HUD would not serve in that
[1:02:35] role. But the options on the
[1:02:37] table, at least, that have been
[1:02:38] presented so far to the COC
[1:02:40] board are the letters from the
[1:02:42] city and the county. So either
[1:02:43] the county doing it solely as
[1:02:45] their letter suggested, or as
[1:02:46] the city's letter suggested,
[1:02:48] creating some sort of a joint
[1:02:50] administration joint or
[1:02:53] separate. I know the county is
[1:02:54] trying to also do it maybe on
[1:02:56] their own. And so my my thought
[1:02:59] is or my big question is, we've
[1:03:02] spent so much time in this
[1:03:04] committee developing data and
[1:03:06] metrics to create outcomes
[1:03:09] based on the existing owner of
[1:03:12] the HMIS data for like two
[1:03:15] years. And now if it's owned by
[1:03:18] someone else, where we're going
[1:03:19] to have less visibility. Do we
[1:03:22] what use is those metrics when
[1:03:25] we go through the process all
[1:03:26] over again? Do we does it just
[1:03:31] mean we start this is exactly
[1:03:33] we have to start from scratch
[1:03:34] all over again. And for. Maybe
[1:03:36] if the county becomes the owner
[1:03:38] to Councilmember Raman point,
[1:03:39] we'll have no visibility. I
[1:03:42] will say from a technical
[1:03:44] standpoint, assuming that the
[1:03:45] HMS platform didn't change, all
[1:03:47] of those pathways would still
[1:03:49] be in my S, so I don't think it
[1:03:51] would be entirely starting from
[1:03:52] scratch. But to Meg's point, I
[1:03:54] think that a a very clear
[1:03:58] agreement between the city and
[1:04:00] whoever ended up being the data
[1:04:02] administrator, either partially
[1:04:03] or completely, would be really
[1:04:05] important to ensuring because,
[1:04:07] you know, another the alliance
[1:04:08] reporting as well relies on.
[1:04:10] HMAS right. So it's all the
[1:04:11] work that this committee and
[1:04:12] other council members have done,
[1:04:14] but it's also part of the legal
[1:04:16] agreements. And so all of that
[1:04:17] would really need to be very
[1:04:19] clearly spelled out in an
[1:04:20] agreement. I hear you, Mr.
[1:04:22] Rubenstein. We had a joint
[1:04:23] powers authority with the
[1:04:25] county and the nonprofit that
[1:04:27] you're part of are LAHSA. And
[1:04:29] even then, it was a struggle to
[1:04:31] get data and clear answers. And
[1:04:34] for the past two years, we're
[1:04:35] trying to get metrics to drive
[1:04:37] better outcomes. And now you're
[1:04:39] saying that as long as we have
[1:04:41] strong legal contracts that are
[1:04:42] in place to share that
[1:04:44] information, then we should be
[1:04:45] able to get it. And just from
[1:04:48] experience, from my short time
[1:04:49] here, that's not promising,
[1:04:52] considering it may be with a
[1:04:53] new party and it's starting the
[1:04:55] relationship all over again.
[1:04:57] And even though we may have
[1:04:58] this baseline, it really makes
[1:05:00] the work that has been done
[1:05:01] null and void and really having
[1:05:03] to build it up again. So that's
[1:05:06] just really disappointing to
[1:05:07] hear, and I wish we could have
[1:05:10] figured out how these metrics
[1:05:11] maybe could have gotten us to a
[1:05:13] better COC system sooner,
[1:05:16] because the fact that we have
[1:05:17] to start over or may have to
[1:05:19] start over at this time, when
[1:05:21] we are not in a great fiscal
[1:05:24] situation and political
[1:05:26] circumstances, obviously is
[1:05:28] just not opportune. But I just
[1:05:30] that's what I'm hearing right
[1:05:31] now. And it's really concerning.
[1:05:34] I think that's another reason
[1:05:35] why, at least in the very near
[1:05:37] term, are our hope is that
[1:05:42] LAHSA lawsuit is successful
[1:05:44] because at least we have the
[1:05:46] status quo for a period of time
[1:05:49] for the city and the county to
[1:05:50] be very deliberative about
[1:05:52] whatever changes are happening
[1:05:53] instead of them happening under
[1:05:56] duress. I appreciate that, but
[1:05:59] I also know that the federal
[1:06:01] government like this comes as
[1:06:02] no surprise what they did. It
[1:06:05] was about the timing and when.
[1:06:07] And so to not have prepared for
[1:06:08] this moment sooner feels I just
[1:06:14] you know, I get I get mad. But
[1:06:17] anyways, I one thing I wanted
[1:06:18] to say before I leave the mic
[1:06:20] is that, the AmeriCorps
[1:06:22] students, thank you for your
[1:06:24] participation. Don't forget,
[1:06:25] when you apply for grad school
[1:06:27] and undergrad, you qualify for
[1:06:29] fee waivers as long as you show
[1:06:31] that you're in the AmeriCorps
[1:06:33] program. So make sure that you
[1:06:35] keep your acceptance letter in
[1:06:36] an email as a PDF, okay?
[1:06:39] Because you don't want to go
[1:06:40] back to your email and try to
[1:06:42] look for it and realize your
[1:06:43] old embarrassing email you
[1:06:44] don't have access to, because
[1:06:46] you'll need that when you apply
[1:06:48] to undergrad, and especially if
[1:06:50] you go to law school, okay, you
[1:06:52] get a fee waiver. And also you
[1:06:54] can get a scholarship at some
[1:06:56] of the schools for like 1000 or
[1:06:58] $2000, which is good. Thank you.
[1:07:02] Councilmember. And I just
[1:07:04] wanted to say before everyone
[1:07:05] ran off at the end that we were
[1:07:07] hoping to take a picture with
[1:07:08] the AmeriCorps volunteers
[1:07:09] before everyone left. So please
[1:07:10] don't run off after this
[1:07:11] meeting. Councilmember McCosker,
[1:07:12] go ahead. I'm going to let that
[1:07:16] inspirational speech hang in
[1:07:17] the air. There's nothing I
[1:07:18] could ask, most of which I know
[1:07:21] the answers to that would be
[1:07:23] helpful to the situation. We'll
[1:07:24] just watch for the federal case.
[1:07:26] I do take exception to the
[1:07:28] statement which you say and
[1:07:29] kindness that the county has
[1:07:30] the ability to stand this up.
[1:07:32] They do not. The county does
[1:07:35] not have the capacity to
[1:07:37] fulfill the false promise that
[1:07:38] they put in that letter.
[1:07:40] Looking forward to the feds
[1:07:41] response. But in my district,
[1:07:44] we're already experiencing
[1:07:45] folks in the field making calls
[1:07:48] to shelter outside the city,
[1:07:50] where the answer from the
[1:07:52] administrators of the shelter
[1:07:53] is that the county has told us
[1:07:55] no city clients, no city
[1:07:59] clients. And think of what CD
[1:08:01] 15 is. We house
[1:08:04] disproportionately more and
[1:08:05] shelter. We shelter
[1:08:06] disproportionately more than
[1:08:08] the folks that we have on the
[1:08:09] street. And when we are full
[1:08:11] and we make calls to shelter
[1:08:14] outside of the city of Los
[1:08:15] Angeles, the answer is the
[1:08:17] county has told us, take no
[1:08:20] customers from the city. So we
[1:08:24] may say that Donald Trump and
[1:08:25] the federal government is
[1:08:27] attacking us. At least they're
[1:08:30] morons. We have the county
[1:08:32] attacking us in the same way,
[1:08:34] with no regard for taking care
[1:08:37] of homelessness. They have some
[1:08:40] other agenda, and they're a
[1:08:43] little bit smarter than Donald
[1:08:44] Trump. I hope we have some time
[1:08:47] to talk about that after this.
[1:08:49] I would like to get more
[1:08:50] details on that. Yeah, you'll
[1:08:51] get it. I'll get you names and
[1:08:53] numbers. Perfect. Thank you.
[1:08:54] Because we have we have a a
[1:08:57] county agency that has declared
[1:08:59] war on homeless people. Those
[1:09:02] are the folks getting punished.
[1:09:04] They think they're hurting the
[1:09:05] city. Well, what they are doing
[1:09:08] is missing their mission. Thank
[1:09:12] you, Councilmember Mcosker. And
[1:09:14] that, why I am fixated on data
[1:09:19] ownership is because if we're
[1:09:22] in a circumstance where, you
[1:09:27] know, we have less control over
[1:09:29] that data, we don't that is the
[1:09:31] only pathway to accountability
[1:09:32] is through data. Right? And
[1:09:35] we've fought and clawed our way
[1:09:37] to filling beds that we fund.
[1:09:40] And if we lose access to even
[1:09:42] that information, then we will
[1:09:45] be worse off than we were
[1:09:46] before. So I'm, you know, I
[1:09:47] just want to be very, very
[1:09:49] cautious about how we move
[1:09:50] forward here. Councilmember
[1:09:51] Blumenfield, did you have any
[1:09:52] questions? I thought I saw, you
[1:09:54] know, I I'm on the same page.
[1:09:55] Yeah, great. I just wanted to
[1:09:57] make sure everyone on this
[1:09:58] committee was aware of, of
[1:10:00] changes because I know it's
[1:10:01] complicated. I know you're all
[1:10:02] reading news articles, but I
[1:10:03] just want to make sure we all
[1:10:05] had the same information and we
[1:10:07] know who to go to in the city
[1:10:09] if we want updates. Meg is an
[1:10:13] enormous wealth of, resources
[1:10:17] and historical knowledge as
[1:10:18] well. So I'm really grateful
[1:10:20] that, That you're on the case.
[1:10:25] Thank you. And that we can, we
[1:10:26] can move forward here. And, I
[1:10:30] think we have a lot of work to
[1:10:32] do and we'll see what happens
[1:10:34] tomorrow. So and barring any
[1:10:35] other councilmember, I don't
[1:10:37] know if you had any comments.
[1:10:38] Okay. Thank you so much to both
[1:10:41] of you for being here. We look
[1:10:42] forward to getting an update
[1:10:44] from the court hearing tomorrow.
[1:10:46] And, Miss Jen, are we all set
[1:10:48] with our agenda? Yes, madam
[1:10:51] chair, the desk is clear. The
[1:10:53] desk is clear. But if I could
[1:10:54] make a request that we keep the
[1:10:56] lights on in the council
[1:10:58] chambers, just for a few
[1:10:58] moments while we take a picture,
[1:11:00] we can adjourn. And, guys,
[1:11:03] thank you all. This has been so
[1:11:05] exciting. It's our last meeting
[1:11:08] of the Housing and Homelessness
[1:11:10] Committee. As a combined
[1:11:11] meeting. This committee was
[1:11:12] created in the aftermath of the
[1:11:15] tape's leaking. There were not
[1:11:17] enough members on that on the
[1:11:19] council at the time to chair
[1:11:20] all the committees. And this
[1:11:22] seemed like a natural
[1:11:24] intersection of issues. And
[1:11:26] I've been been very fortunate
[1:11:27] to chair it in all its
[1:11:29] iterations for, for a couple of
[1:11:30] years. So thank you all so much.
[1:11:32] It's been really a pleasure.
[1:11:34] And look forward to working
[1:11:36] with you all on these issues as
[1:11:38] we move forward. So thank you.
[1:11:39] Thank you for sharing it. Thank
[1:11:40] you. Are you all right? You
[1:11:44] want to come up? Yeah.