Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommunity Development Block Grant Commission - Minutes - 02/12/2015COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES 215 N. MASON STREET, FORT COLLINS FEBRUARY 12, 2015, 6:30 P.M. COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Margaret Long (Chair) Holly Carroll (Vice Chair) Steve Backsen Anita Basham Catherine Costlow Jamaal Curry Taylor Dunn Stephanie Mertens Kristin Stephens COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Sharon Thomas, Beth Rosen OTHERS PRESENT: Note Taker The meeting was called to order by Chair, Margaret Long, at 6:32 p.m., with a quorum present. PUBLIC COMMENT None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Holly Carroll moved that the minutes from January 9, 2015, be approved as presented. Anita Basham seconded. Motion passed unanimously. BETH ROSEN – UNDERWRITING CRITERA FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING Sharon Thomas introduced Beth Rosen, the Affordable Housing Program Administrator for the Social Sustainability Department. Beth Rosen was present to introduce the new Underwriting Criteria document. She described the three annual funding sources for housing and the differences in how they can be used. The HOME funds can be used only for housing. CDBG funds are community development, up to 15% can be used for public service and up to 20% can be used for planning and program administration. The remaining 65% can be used for public facilities, economic development or housing. These two funding sources are federal sources and come with very specific requirements in terms of documentation and administering of the funds. 2 The third funding source, the City’s Affordable Housing Fund, is much more flexible. If a housing application will benefit low-income residents then it is eligible. These funds do not have all the federal bureaucracy in administering them. Applicants don’t choose which pool they are applying for, but not all groups can meet the federal requirements. The purpose of this Underwriting Criteria document is to act as an administrative tool for staff and a guiding tool for the Affordable Housing Board’s priority ranking, the CDBG Commission’s recommendations, and the applicants. The goal is to craft this document around the affordable housing strategies so it may help with assessing the quality of the projects going into deliberation and determine the strongest ones that meet the affordable housing priorities. Beth Rosen then walked the Commission through the January 2015 draft of the document. Sharon Thomas noted that since the 2015 Competitive Process is underway and this document is not finalized and approved it is not required for this funding cycle. CATHERINE COSTLOW AND STEPHANIE MERTENS – UNDERSTANDING FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS Applicants are required to submit a copy of their most recent audit with their funding proposal (or their CPA’s statement if they haven’t had an audit yet). Catherine Costlow and Stephanie Mertens provided the commission with an overview of an Audited Statement for a nonprofit agency. The Opening Letter - tells you what type of statement you are looking at. An Auditor statement is the highest level. An independent auditor reviewed the agency’s financial books and checked them for accuracy. The Statement of Financial Position - what people often call a balance sheet. It contains a breakdown of their assets and information about what that money consists of. The Liabilities page - states everything they owe. At the very bottom you see their net worth. Non-profits assets are different from for profits sometimes and some of those assets have restrictions on what they can be used. On this sheet you would compare year to year to see a trend. Net assets should be positive. Thomas noted that these reports capture one day and non-profits are often juggling multiple grants with very specific dates attached to them. Mertens mentioned to check that their real estate is not underwater. The Consolidated Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets - basically a profit and loss statement – it tells you where money comes from and where it gets spent. In the back there are notes detailing the expenses. They are required to show if funds are 3 restricted and in what categories. Again, you’d want to see a positive number in the bottom, not parenthesis. The Sources and Uses of Funds Worksheet - breaks down the funding sources and how they are used. Look for contingency of cost overruns, ideally 5% of the total budget. Some of the funding sources are coded. If a use is assigned multiple funding sources but doesn’t detail the percentages it is a good idea to ask them about that. Costlow also suggested looking for diversification of revenue sources so long term viability of the project is greater. The Project Operating Budget - a future look at the cash flow once a project is up and running and whether they can service the debt on the property from their expected income. Here you want the total annual debt to be less than net operating income so they can make their debt service payments. There is no required percentage. Since it is a low-income project we just want them to flow positive. Steve Backsen asked if there is a recommended percentage for housing administration like the recommended 15-25% overhead for non-profits. Thomas said she was unsure but could try to find an answer. Kristen Stephens pointed out that these projects serve residents with chronic mental health and/or addiction issues that may require greater administration. AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD REQUEST – HOUSING PRESENTATIONS Margaret Long presented an e-mail sent to Thomas by Troy Jones on behalf of the Affordable Housing Board (AHB) requesting that the AHB be allowed to sit at the table with the Commission during presentations by housing applicants and ask questions. If the full board is not amenable they would like to have a representative at the table and empowered to ask questions during the questioning period. During deliberations it was determined that having the entire AHB present would be intimidating to the applicants. There was also concern that without increasing the questioning period, the Commission could be deprived of asking applicants their questions. They chose to not allow the entire AHB to participate. The Commission discussed the option to invite one AHB member to partake in the presentation and question and answer sessions. Jamaal Curry noted that the video of the presentations is made to the AHB the following day and they may ask questions through Thomas who then distributes the question and answer to both boards. Taylor Dunn inquired why they were not allowed to see the presentations. It was pointed out that they can attend as members of the general public. They just cannot ask questions. One of the reasons they are not part of that process is to reduce the possibility of conflicts of interest. 4 Thomas responded to a question about the purpose of each board. The AHB was created as a policy board and the CDBG Commission as a funding recommending body to Council. Curry felt the current process of access to the videos after the fact keeps things more consistent and clean because any board member can ask. If they sent one representative the questions could be inconsistent. Curry made motion to keep the two boards separate and not allow the AHB to have representation at the presentations. Basham seconded. Margaret Long made a call for further questions. Taylor Dunn asked if inviting the AHB to take a more active role in the presentation portion of the funding process was going to fix something that was broken. The consensus was nothing was currently broken. The motion to not allow AHB representation at the housing presentations passed with 6 in favor, 3 opposed. STAFF REPORTS AND PROGRAM UPDATES Thomas reported that the housing applications are due next Thursday (February 19). She estimates about 1/3 of the applicants came in for technical assistance. HUD funding is expected to be about the same as last year, but there is less program income this year. In the public service category we will likely have fewer funds to distribute and more requests. April 16 th is deliberation day. Margaret Long suggested choosing one of the four days marked for public service presentations, March 24 th , 25 th , 26 th and 30 th , as an optional day. Due to a work conflict for Holly Carroll and having three consecutive days on the calendar, it was decided that March 25 th would be the optional day if the presentations can be completed in three days. The three new board members were reminded that they have 6 months to watch the required training DVD and turn in the form. Steve Backsen congratulated Thomas on the Community Snapshot roll out last month. Thomas thanked those who attended. OTHER 5 Basham & Thomas went to Bridges Out of Poverty. If you get an opportunity to attend Thomas recommends doing so. Due to the locked doors and number of possible entrances that need monitoring to let everyone in for the meetings when held in conference room 1A it was suggested that the Commission try holding regular meetings in the Social Sustainability building in the North parking lot of City Hall. It was agreed to try that. ADJOURNMENT Basham made motion to adjourn. Holly Carroll seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:27 pm. NEXT MEETING The next regular meeting is scheduled for March 12, 2015, 6:30 p.m., at 321 Maple Street.