[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:12] 4 is a quorum, because we're second, right? Yes. Well, it looks like we have sex, but even then. Yeah. I guess we have a vacancy? I guess.
[0:31] I think he was probably just not expected to attend it.
[0:38] Well, are we ready?
[0:39] Would you please go out at home, if you could look at it at home?
[0:42] I did.
[0:48] You ready?
[0:49] Okay, well, let us call to order the meeting of the Community Development Law Grant Commission.
[0:57] And could we begin, please, by starting with the roll call.
[1:03] Okay, Harry Colomore.
[1:06] Present.
[1:07] Karina O'Brien, absent.
[1:10] Walter Rich Richardson.
[1:13] Here.
[1:13] Robert Vanderfeld.
[1:15] Here.
[1:16] Virginia Young, here.
[1:18] Richard Tippett, absent.
[1:20] And Guillermo Rosas, absent.
[1:23] Staff members present.
[1:25] Jessica Miras, here.
[1:26] John Sakamoto.
[1:28] Here.
[1:29] Okay. Here.
[1:32] And we have a quorum, so the first item on our agenda is to review the agenda.
[1:40] We have a motion to approve the agenda, do we need that?
[1:46] Anything else?
[1:48] The only thing I would like to add for the agenda and for today and for future meetings, John,
[1:54] is I think it'd be helpful for us to have a staff update under the administrative report.
[1:59] And so for example, what happened with our recommendations last time, I know there have been some changes at least with one of the grant recipients.
[2:08] And so just a general update, if we could add that into the agenda for this meeting and for future meetings as well, and let us mark Karina as present.
[2:19] Now public
[2:25] comments, I don't see any members of the public present any longer, so we don't have any.
[2:30] Do we have on the consent agenda, we only have one item which is the approval of the minutes of April 27th, 20th, 20th, 26th.
[2:38] Do we have any changes or suggestions, additions to the minutes of the April 27th meeting?
[2:55] Well, hearing none. All in favor of approval? Say aye.
[2:59] Hi.
[3:00] Hi.
[3:02] Oh, okay.
[3:03] I move that we accept the minutes as written.
[3:05] I'll second it.
[3:06] Good.
[3:07] Okay.
[3:08] Move the second.
[3:08] All in favor?
[3:09] Aye.
[3:10] Opposed?
[3:12] Okay.
[3:12] Great.
[3:14] So on to, as I said, the staff update, could you give us an update, please, John, on the status
[3:21] of our recommendations.
[3:22] And also, I believe there have been at least one change with one of the grant recipients.
[3:28] Yes.
[3:28] So, recommendations were made to HUD during for the annual action plan for the current year we're in fiscal year 2627, program year 2026.
[3:38] I have not had a response from HUD yet or grant agreement, but that's typical timing wise it typically won't come until October or November of the soonest.
[3:46] For the program year that we're reporting on the paper, I could provide the update that on the move who was awarded a public service grant decided to walk away from said grant.
[3:56] But it came so late for them they had concerns physically about doing journal entries to account for it, even though they could and we advised them that that was definitely possible wouldn't be a violating of any of HUD stance, they had enough private donation funds that they chose to do that rather than make the change.
[4:15] So I understand there's also been a change with NAPA fair housing.
[4:19] Are you aware of that?
[4:20] NAPA fair housing as an entity is changing, changing leadership and going through some changes.
[4:27] They're still providing service to the Valley, very similar to what they had been doing before.
[4:31] But they are under a new, working with a new group to provide some of the service.
[4:36] More on that to come as things flesh out and finish up.
[4:41] So I have a question about, so I don't recall, I could look it up, but I'd rather just ask.
[4:47] So we approved how much for on the move and what was done with the funds that we had allocated to them.
[4:56] I don't have the exact number, but I will look it up shortly.
[5:00] What is need to be done is it will need to be reprogrammed. Because it's public service, though, and it is, in the year in the past, it'll have to be reprogrammed to some sort of community development type project. We won't be able to meet the criteria in order to stay within the gap to add it to this year's current public service agency. So it'll have to be reprogrammed and so we'll come to you with options. We'll likely try to meet with you again sooner before the end of the year, unlike usual to come up with a plan.
[5:29] to fix this.
[5:31] Thank you.
[5:32] That's very clear.
[5:36] Any other questions?
[5:39] Okay.
[5:40] Moving on to the paper, the Consolidated Annual Performance
[5:45] Evaluation Report.
[5:47] John, you want to step us through this, please?
[5:52] Yes, so this year we still had some fair bit of success.
[5:56] We were able to complete some projects for owner-occupied housing
[5:59] rehabilitation. It's seven projects this year with CDBG funds. We did eight with home funds,
[6:05] so the program's operating well, doing what it's needs to be doing. The public service entities,
[6:10] they were all the rest of them besides on the move, fully expending, delivering fair numbers,
[6:18] which was good to see. The two nonprofit capital improvement projects, we are still waiting for
[6:25] environmental and enough bids to make sure that we can meet the criteria to satisfy HUD before
[6:30] those can take off and start going under construction. That's the short of it, but were there any
[6:37] questions that came up in your review this year from the prior? The boys they can
[6:44] arrange with the report? Yeah, there's a reason I can't find it anymore. There was a listing of
[6:52] of the types of services, I can't seem to find that.
[6:56] I thought it was right at the beginning, but anybody
[7:00] know off the top of their head what page that was?
[7:02] It's weird.
[7:03] What is it that you're referring to?
[7:05] Never mind, it's not critical that I find it to ask my question.
[7:09] It was a good thorough list that was comprehensive.
[7:12] All the types of programs and housing that are addressed
[7:16] in the paper and in community services.
[7:18] There was one that I felt was missing from what
[7:21] that I think of as a typical housing continuum of services, which is transitional housing, the 18-month type of housing that's for people who are homeless and at risk of homelessness, and so I didn't see it listed as one of the types of services slash housing that we provide, but I believe we actually at times in the past have, I know that I forget the name of the program, but there was the program for mentally ill adults that was
[7:51] was up off of redwood road up there, kind of where biographies used to be, that had to close.
[8:00] It was in the former Motel 6, and I believe that one of the problems was that there were a variety of issues, apparently, with that site.
[8:08] But I believe that that was operating under a transitional housing umbrella.
[8:14] So having operated such programs, I would say that they have value with the
[8:21] And in a continuum, they're useless standing on their own because just what happened to the folks at the Motel 6 is what happens if you don't have enough supported housing stock for folks to move into and then they reach the limit of the time during of 18 months when they can get the support sometimes you can extend it a little bit, but basically you do end up booting right back out onto the street and you're right back to where you started.
[8:49] Anyway, simple question is, is there any particular policy reason why it was left off the list or was it more just slip the mind kind of thing or something?
[8:59] No particular policy reason why it probably would have fit under homeless shelters.
[9:05] I would assume actions taken for institutional in the homelessness section.
[9:11] We could certainly talk about it in there.
[9:18] The other area would probably be in
[9:24] the helping homelessness kind of section would that be page 1113.
[9:33] I'm sorry, are you referring us to page 13 of the paper?
[9:36] Of the paper. I know we've got sort of this double numbering thing that always drives me nuts.
[9:41] Yeah, I do apologize for that.
[9:42] okay, 13 of the caper which that's okay sorry this always gets me this double
[9:55] numbered. Okay, that's...
[10:00] 22 of 33. Okay. Yes, that is exactly right. I mean, even the word transition is right there. And I'm just, I just would suggest that as a bode and homeless coordination look at service spectrums over the years, transitional housing is a typical, for one thing, there are under certain administrations. There are funding opportunities that show up for
[10:29] that specific type of housing that it would be a shame not to go be able to go after.
[10:36] That's that comment. I have other comments, but I will wait and let other people speak.
[10:43] What else?
[10:45] Okay. I will, oh, you'll go ahead because I have two more things, but I can wait.
[10:49] If you turn your mic off and then we'll, well, I wasn't sure if I was.
[10:55] Okay. So page five of the paper, 14 of the document that was the PDF. This is the
[11:05] kind of thing that Harry says I always bought, but in the second column under source, public
[11:10] is lower case for like the first five, and then uppercase for the bottom two. I just
[11:16] feel like it should be consistent either way. Oh, thank you, Sam.
[11:22] Sorry, and then I had a
[11:23] question, which I feel like I should, this should be evident, but it's just not to me.
[11:29] The one page earlier, on the top of page four, page 13 of the PDF about the racial and
[11:37] ethnic composition of families assisted, it has the families 4, 13, 5, 6, and then at
[11:44] the bottom the amount that's Hispanic and not Hispanic.
[11:47] And I just don't understand as the top, like those numbers obviously don't add up, what
[11:52] What is one individual's and one is families or what is that?
[11:57] Happy to work through this one.
[11:59] The problem with this particular table as it is provided by HUD is that when it's populating
[12:05] the race category, it's leaving off other or multiracial.
[12:10] And so the reason why that number of Hispanic is so high on the bottom one is because some
[12:15] of our public service agencies, people identify as other or multiracial and not white.
[12:21] And so it's not captured in this table, and that's why the number shows such a big
[12:26] variance.
[12:26] There's that many people selecting other or multiracial rather than white Hispanic.
[12:30] It's not captured in the top part of the world.
[12:31] It's captured in the lower part.
[12:33] But it's captured in the lower.
[12:33] Okay.
[12:34] That makes sense.
[12:35] But the totals don't add up.
[12:37] And it's because of the way in which the federal government categorizes race and
[12:42] Hispanic origin as two different categories, right?
[12:46] So you have a race category, and as you said, they emit other.
[12:50] But then separately, you have a Hispanic, non-Hispanic, and so I think in the narrative you put in there a very nice explanation this year, I really appreciate that because it is confusing.
[13:03] It looks like we only had 434 families. When in fact it was 4,500 families.
[13:09] Right. Exactly.
[13:10] Yeah, and it's just an unfortunate shortcoming of the way this table populates for them, they could easily solve it by adding other at the bottom and it would all match and be very easy to read.
[13:21] But when it goes into the caper, when it goes into the system, this is how it will look and we have to have the narrative to explain why the variance is there.
[13:34] Okay, so on page 9, you talked about zoning standards and barriers to group homes.
[13:42] I just wanted to make a editorial note about that, which I've actually mentioned to Rob
[13:49] at Mantis as well, since they've started to finally engage in supported housing.
[13:54] The key that unlocks that problem is master leasing.
[14:00] The limit, as you probably know, is the residence is six before you have to call it a licensed
[14:07] facility.
[14:08] So, six or below, you can master lease a house with multiple bedrooms anywhere you want
[14:14] and you can move people in.
[14:16] It doesn't mean you shouldn't spend some time talking to the neighbors and softening
[14:20] the ground, but there's not a formal complaint procedure that can block it and it's a mechanism
[14:30] that's extremely useful.
[14:33] The key, especially now, is getting funds in order to do the leasing.
[14:40] I mean, I could get into the whole programmatic structure, I won't do that.
[14:44] But it is a great work around.
[14:47] It's harder if the population you're working with does need a license facility,
[14:52] which is sometimes the case with certain populations.
[14:55] but with folks who are basically
[15:00] It's really somewhat independent and can get by with visiting staff, you cannot have an office, you cannot have staff who live on site, but you can have staff visiting a lot to provide support. Which allows you to work with a fairly disabled population. So anyway, it's a model that works. We've just finally started to do a little bit of it in this community. We're about 40 years behind the curve.
[15:29] on it, but it's still, it's cartoning to see Mentus beginning in particular, dipping their tones of the water.
[15:38] I think progress knows exactly how this works, but the economics may be a barrier.
[15:42] But I did want to note that that's the work around, that works when there's understandable NIMBY opposition to licensed group homes in various neighborhoods.
[15:55] I have only one more.
[15:59] Oh, it's a request rather than a note.
[16:04] On page 13 you talk about HMIS stats.
[16:07] And I know what you guys are new,
[16:10] so you won't consider me a broken record.
[16:12] But pretty much every year, I ask if we could please have access to
[16:17] or be able to see the most recent years HMIS stats.
[16:22] I find them very informative and helpful to truly understand, you know, how we're doing on all those indicators.
[16:32] When would it be appropriate time to bring that to the committee, the kind of the early meeting of the year, will we do the calendar?
[16:39] Yeah, because it's informational, it doesn't necessarily lead to decision-making.
[16:47] I think I will speak for myself.
[16:50] It enlarges my understanding of how we are doing that along with things like the point in time count.
[16:57] It's a snapshot, but there are indicators, at least as I recall, that kind of give a little bit broader idea of how people are actually moving through the system.
[17:09] Because one thing point in time just tells us that on that day, this is how many people we found over in Kennedy or down by the creek or wherever it's, I think, more useful to have a better picture of, okay, fine and abode staff went out and talk to them and this person, you know, we managed to move seven to this and that, you know, yeah, I can work with the continuum of care to provide the system performance measures when they come out.
[17:39] Thank you.
[17:39] Absolutely.
[17:39] That's it.
[17:40] I'm done with my comments.
[17:44] Anything else?
[17:45] Rich?
[17:45] Oh, good.
[17:46] Thank you.
[17:46] I had on page 22 of the document.
[17:51] I talked about receiving the public of the paper, page 20, not the PDF, page 22 of the
[17:59] paper.
[18:00] It says during the public comment period, this is about the paper.
[18:04] The city received to be completed in public comments and so you just want to highlight
[18:09] that that's obviously a blank that you need to fill in?
[18:12] Yes, absolutely.
[18:13] And I assume as of today we haven't received any.
[18:16] Yeah, we haven't received any and it's open
[18:18] until the city council meeting.
[18:20] So once council meetings over,
[18:22] I will fill in that to be completed
[18:24] with however many comments we've received.
[18:26] Okay.
[18:27] September the 15th.
[18:31] So do you need a motion to approve this
[18:35] to recommend to council?
[18:36] Or is this more of an information item?
[18:38] I believe it's a motion to present the information so I'll entertain a motion to approve
[18:44] We have a motion approved
[18:48] Yes, but rich is moving yes, do we have a second?
[18:52] See we have to go to the sector step now. Yeah, I'll second every second very good any any discussion
[18:58] All in favor say aye. Hi. Hi
[19:03] I as well, so it is approved. Thank you
[19:08] Thank you, Camille.
[19:09] Jonathan, I have just one kind of side note question to all of this in planning for next
[19:15] year and I know the city plan is coming up as well, another version of it.
[19:21] But with the economy, the local economy, and with the wine industry really being challenged
[19:30] it was when I ran into someone today who just kind of brought it up.
[19:33] So, are you noticing any impact on some of these issues?
[19:40] Are you hearing financially any sort of funding by private sources to some of the sources we're looking at being affected at all?
[19:53] That's a huge question, I don't know.
[19:55] So, in looking at the financials for some of our nonprofits, I can see that there's a fair bit.
[20:00] There are a lot of private donations happening out there, but it's not feeling the gap that the federal government left behind on several of our nonprofits. So the need for additional funding, other sources more help still very much exists. In doing some research for this paper, looking at the statistics in our area, I can tell you that the fair market rents since 2019 is skyrocketed and it's almost double. And the average median income is also risen
[20:28] by 70 something percent. So while those numbers are rising quite rapidly, impacting what's
[20:36] available on the market, those working folks, which I'd like to see a study on was
[20:41] I don't think that's changing as rapidly as the average median would indicate.
[20:50] Okay, do we have anything else for the good of the order?
[20:56] Yeah, I just wanted to note which I did informally that four of us sitting at this place,
[21:01] So I think you too, right, Karina?
[21:03] I have re-applying.
[21:06] Oh, are we all up?
[21:08] Yes, all four of us.
[21:09] Are everyone except Richard?
[21:12] Richard and Richard.
[21:15] Richard and Guillermo?
[21:17] Yeah, and Guillermo.
[21:18] But the four of us are all, and I believe we've all re-applied,
[21:24] yes?
[21:25] I did.
[21:25] I haven't heard anything beyond the re-applying.
[21:27] No, I spoke with Tiffany today.
[21:28] and she was, I guess they just closed a week ago or so, anyway, there are more applicants
[21:37] than spots, so we will have to go through the interview process to be determined.
[21:43] Okay.
[21:46] But I think all of us, our terms expire at the end of the month.
[21:50] And we know, is Guirama still joining us?
[21:54] I haven't seen much of him in a couple of meetings.
[21:56] He did respond to our email, letting us know that he had an appointment come up that he wouldn't be able to.
[22:02] But he's still interested.
[22:04] Okay, great.
[22:05] Good.
[22:06] Very good.
[22:08] Well, we have nothing further for the agenda.
[22:10] I will call the meeting adjourned.
[22:12] Thank you all very much.
[22:14] Thank you all.
[22:15] Our next meeting date is?
[22:17] Thank you.
[22:21] I'm going to have to send you guys an email.
[22:23] No.