Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 07/13/2021 - WORK SESSION City of Fort Collins Page 1 Jeni Arndt, Mayor Emily Gorgol, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem Susan Gutowsky, District 1 Julie Pignataro, District 2 Tricia Canonico, District 3 Shirley Peel, District 4 Kelly Ohlson, District 5 City Hall West 300 LaPorte Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 on Connexion Channel 14 and 881 on Comcast Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Tammi Pusheck City Attorney City Manager Interim City Clerk Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have limited English proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City services, programs and activities. Contact 221-6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Please provide 48 hours advance notice when possible. A petición, la Ciudad de Fort Collins proporcionará servicios de acceso a idiomas para personas que no dominan el idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que puedan acceder a los servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al 221-6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione 48 horas de aviso previo cuando sea posible. City Council Work Session July 13, 2021 6:00 PM (Amended 7/12/21) Spanish interpretation is available at this meeting using the Zoom link below: Interpretación en español está disponible en esta reunión usando el siguiente enlace de Zoom: https://zoom.us/j/98241416497  CALL TO ORDER. 1. Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update. (staff: Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Meaghan Overton, Caryn Champine; 15 minute presentation, 30 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to: 1. Provide background information on the history of the City’s housing policies; 2. Summarize current housing policy direction as adopted in the Housing Strategic Plan (HSP, 2021); 3. Summarize community feedback about housing and share input from the April 2021 Community Summit; 4. Provide updates on early implementation progress for specific HSP strategies; and 5. Outline next steps and future Council involvement. City of Fort Collins Page 2 2. Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program. (staff: Caryn Champine, JC Ward, Emily Olivo; 10 minute presentation; 45 minute discussion) The Mobile Home Park (“MHP”) Residents’ Rights Team is currently developing a comprehensive enforcement program for mobile home parks to improve livability in parks across Fort Collins, improve the City’s relationship with MHP managers and owners, and increase manager and owner accountability. An education program with community clean-up days leading up to regular proactive Code Compliance patrols would be implemented over the next three years, with a concentrated engagement effort in 2021 and 2022 that would enable staff to learn the full scope of the work, build relationships with residents and management, and support MHP’s compliancy prior to any official inspection. In 2021, we have already begun this engagement effort with senior (55+) MHP’s and have two grant-funded, volunteer-based clean up and resource fair events planned in each senior MHP this fall. Other engagement techniques planned include mock inspections and neighborhood walks with code enforcement staff to answer questions and prepare managers. The final MHP enforcement program is anticipated to include regular proactive patrols and investigation of complaints, an annual inspection, annual park registration, and annual MHP property manager certification. Priority enforcement focus areas will be periodically reviewed and updated to ensure emerging and important issues are addressed. 3. Fort Collins Connexion Update. (staff: Colman Keane, Chad Crager; 10 minute presentation; 20 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to provide to Council and the public an overview and update of the Connexion municipal fiber build-out.  ANNOUNCEMENTS.  ADJOURNMENT. DATE: STAFF: July 13, 2021 Meaghan Overton, Housing Manager Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer Caryn Champine, Director of PDT WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to: 1. Provide background information on the history of the City’s housing policies; 2. Summarize current housing policy direction as adopted in the Housing Strategic Plan (HSP, 2021); 3. Summarize community feedback about housing and share input from the April 2021 Community Summit; 4. Provide updates on early implementation progress for specific HSP strategies; and 5. Outline next steps and future Council involvement. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED What feedback do Councilmembers have on early implementation of the Housing Strategic Plan? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Fort Collins developed its first Affordable Housing Strategic Plan in 1999 to stimulate housing production for residents who make under 80% of the area median income (AMI). An update in 2015 set ambitious goals to have 10% of the City’s housing inventory designated as affordable by the City’s buildout, which is anticipated to be in the next 20-25 years. The Housing Strategic Plan (HSP, March 2021) is the most recent update to the City’s adopted housing policy. The HSP brought forward the 10% affordability goal from the 2015 plan and expanded the scope of the City’s housing policy to include the entire housing spectrum. Fort Collins has an extensive history of addressing housing affordability in adopted plans and policies: • Affordable Housing Redevelopment Displacement Mitigation Strategy (2013) • City Plan (2019) • Council Priorities (2019-2021) • Housing Affordability Policy Study (2014) • City Strategic Plan (2020) • Affordable Housing Strategic Plan (2015) • Social Sustainability Gaps Analysis (2020) • Social Sustainability Strategic Plan (2016) • Our Climate Future (2021) • Housing Strategic Plan and Home2Health (2021) As a City and with our community partners, these plans and policies have led to a range of interdependent implementation actions since 2015 including, but not limited to, the following: • Regulations – Reduced the minimum house size required by the Land Use Code; established a manufactured housing zone; implemented development incentives for affordable housing; and revised metropolitan district policy. • Partnerships – Supported the completion of two permanent supportive housing projects by Housing Catalyst at Redtail Ponds and Mason Place; supported development and construction of more than 600 affordable homes (2015-2021); solidified new partnerships such as Elevations Community Land Trust. 1 Packet Pg. 3 July 13, 2021 Page 2 • Investments – Annual investment of $1.5 - $3 million annually via the competitive process; secured $4 million over ten years via the Affordable Housing Capital Fund (CCIP); activated the Land Bank program for 96 new permanently affordable rental units and acquisition of a new five-acre land bank parcel. More information about the City’s affordable housing efforts can be found on the Social Sustainability webpage. Council has also reviewed detailed information about t he City’s housing policy direction at several work sessions and hearings, a selection of which is included below: • July 2019 Work Session – Affordable Housing and Mobile Home Preservation Council Priorities • April 2020 Work Session – Affordable Housing Priorities, Inclusionary Zoning, Linkage Fees • July 2020 Resolution – Establishment of Ad Hoc Housing Committee • August 2020 Work Session – Housing Strategic Plan • December 2020 Work Session – Housing Strategic Plan • January 2021 Work Session – Housing Strategic Plan • February 2021 First Reading – Housing Strategic Plan • February 2021 First Reading – Off-Cycle Appropriation for Land Use Code (LUC) Phase 1 • March 2021 Second Reading – Housing Strategic Plan • March 2021 Second Reading – Off-Cycle Appropriation for Land Use Code (LUC) Phase 1 • August 2020-April 2021 – Monthly Council Ad Hoc Housing Committee Meetings Policy Direction: Housing Strategic Plan The HSP brings forward the City’s goal to achieve 10% affordable housing by 2040 and establishes a community vision that everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford. The HSP vision includes four components: • Everyone: Challenges Fort Collins to assess who does (and does not) have healthy, stable, or affordable housing today and to design strategies to ensure a person’s identities are not predictors of whether they, or our community, achieve this vision. • Healthy Housing: Addresses physical and mental well-being inside and outside of the home. • Stable Housing: Recognizes housing is the most important platform for pursuing other life goals (i.e. “Housing First”), and that a secure place to live is a fundamental requirement for well-being. • Afford(able) Housing: Ensures an adequate supply so community members do not spend more than 30% of their incomes on housing. Existing Conditions, Strategies, and Key Outcomes To identify the greatest challenges to achieving the HSP vision, staff compiled an Existing Conditions Assessment based on existing data and community feedback to summarize the current state of housing in Fort Collins. Seven greatest challenges were identified: 1. Price escalation impacts everyone and disproportionately impacts BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) and low-income households. 2. There are not enough affordable places available for people to rent or purchase, or what is available and affordable is not the kind of housing people need. 3. The City does have some tools to encourage affordable housing, but the current amount of funding and incentives for affordable housing are not enough to meet our goals. 4. Job growth continues to outpace housing growth. 5. Housing is expensive to build, and the cost of building will likely continue to increase over time. 6. It is difficult to predict the lasting effects of COVID-19 and the impacts of the pandemic. 7. Housing policies have not consistently addressed housing stability and healthy housing, especially for people who rent. The 26 strategies included in the HSP are designed to take the first steps to overcome the grea test challenges outlined above. The strategies are designed to achieve multiple outcomes: 1 Packet Pg. 4 July 13, 2021 Page 3 • Increase Housing Supply and Affordability (12 Strategies): Examples include removing barriers to accessory dwelling units (ADUs), updating the LUC, creating a new revenue stream. • Increase Housing Diversity and Choice (12 Strategies): Examples include recalibrating existing incentives, exploring innovative housing development, removing barriers to allowed densities via the LUC. • Increase Stability and/or Renter Protections (11 Strategies): Examples include exploring a rental registry or licensing program, exploring revisions to the City’s occupancy policy, and supporting resident organizing in manufactured home communities. • Improve Housing Equity (11 Strategies): Examples include promoting inclusion and affordability as community values, supporting foreclosure/eviction prevention, assessing displacement risk. • Preserve Existing Affordable Housing (9 Strategies): Examples include extending the required affordability term for new developments, and right or option of first offer/refusal for public and tenants, respectively, when affordable housing developments go up for sale. • Increase Accessibility (2 Strategies): A visitability policy that increases accessibility for people w ith mobility challenges and advances the 2020 Analysis of Fair Housing Choice Action Steps. Housing Needs Data compiled for the HSP illustrates that the housing needs in Fort Collins are concentrated at the lower end of the income spectrum. For renters, the need is greatest at 60% AMI and below ($41,880 for a 2-person household); for owners, the need is greatest at 120% AMI and below ($83,760 for a two -person household). However, it is important to acknowledge that there are also gaps in housing supply th roughout the entire housing system. City Plan estimated a housing shortage of approximately 2,000 units by 2040, assuming that growth and housing production remained relatively consistent over time. In short, housing price escalation and limited availability of housing in Fort Collins will likely continue to worsen unless we can increase the overall supply of housing while also seeking to increase the community’s inventory of deed-restricted, affordable housing. 1 Packet Pg. 5 July 13, 2021 Page 4 Progress Toward 10% Goal In 2015, affordable housing made up 5% of the City’s housing stock. Between 2015 -2019, the City and its partners added 373 new affordable homes. In 2020 and 2021 to date, an additional 246 homes were added to the city’s affordable housing inventory. However, the tota l number of housing units has also increased proportionally, which means that affordable units still make up only 5% of our overall housing stock. To get back on track to achieve our 10% goal by 2040, we need to increase the amount of affordable housing by 282 or more units every year from 2020 onward. This is more than double the City’s average annual production of affordable housing. Housing as a Community Priority In addition to the data shared above and in the Existing Conditions Assessment, commu nity members regularly identify housing affordability as a top priority for action in citywide engagement efforts. Home2Health engagement further clarified areas of focus for the HSP, which are reflected in the vision for the plan, in the 26 prioritized strategies for implementation, and in the key outcomes the strategies are designed to achieve. 1 Packet Pg. 6 July 13, 2021 Page 5 Community Survey Results (2019) In the most recent annual Community Survey (2019), availability of affordable quality housing was the lowest rated characteristic of our community. Only 12% of respondents rated the availability of affordable quality housing as ‘very good’ or ‘good,’ which is lower than both national and Front Range benchmark data. The same survey also asked residents to identify in their own words the one item or focus area the City should improve upon in the next few years, and 20% of respondents who provided a written answer cited housing affordability in their feedback. City Plan Engagement (2018-2019) During the extensive engagement effort for the most recent update to City Plan - which included thousands of residents, more than 175 public events, and countless Plan Ambassador and Community Partner hours of small - group meetings - housing affordability was frequently mentioned as a high priority for the future of Fort Collins, including the following: • City Plan kickoff (400+ participants) - “Housing access” identified as the highest priority focus. • Visioning (769 participants) - When asked what should be prioritized in the City Plan vision, “housing choices, attainability, and affordability” were most frequently mentioned. • Scenarios (1022 participants) - In general, 77.2% of respondents were open to “moderate” or “big” changes to improve housing attainability and provide more housing choices. Community members also supported a greater diversity of housing types in future neighborhoods (74.2%) and in existing neighborhoods (58.7%). Home2Health Engagement (2019-2021) Home2Health was a two-year, grant-funded project built around partnerships, community dialogue, and capacity building to ensure that the voices and ideas of community members who are experiencing the day -to-day reality of housing instability can influence the City’s policy decisions. Approximately 700 people participated in Home2Health engagement over a two-year period. Demographics collected at events show engagement and recruitment led by Home2Health Community Partners helped reach a more representative group of people including renters, residents of Hispanic/Latinx heritage, students, and residents who make less than $50,000 a year. This partnership-based approach successfully closed persistent engagement gaps that have been identified in previous City-led efforts. Areas of focus for the HSP identified through Housing Strategic Plan Fall 2020 Engagement Report included: • Stability. The cost of housing is a major source of stress and instability for many households. People wan t options for stable rentals and home ownership. • Equity. A diverse community where equity guides how we fund, build, and manage housing. • Choice. People recognized that different households have different housing needs. They prioritized having options for the types of housing they rent or buy. This calls for increasing the total supply of housing, revamping the housing we have, and improving access to amenities like public transportation and parks. • Collaboration. Housing is a complex problem, and one organization cannot do it alone. Community members want the City to take a lead role, but also want the community and local organizations to step up and be part of the solution. • Creativity. People want new and innovative solutions. They want the City and the comm unity to be willing to do things differently. Transition to Implementation Implementation of the Housing Strategic Plan has been designed to follow a two-year cycle that is aligned with the HSP guiding principles. A two-year cycle allows responsiveness to change in the market and in the policy landscape, encourages regular community dialogue, and creates opportunities to be adaptive and agile as we assess our progress toward a future where everyone has 1 Packet Pg. 7 July 13, 2021 Page 6 stable, healthy housing they can afford. The Implementation section of the HSP is included for reference. (Attachment 1) Implementation is both what we do and how we do it. While cross-departmental teams throughout the City and our partners are working to implement specific strategies in the HSP, we will a lso be learning, identifying future opportunities, building partnerships, and acknowledging that there is no single strategy that will solve all our community’s housing challenges. Everyone has a role to play, and we will need to continually navigate the work in front of us alongside a long-term commitment to create a more equitable housing system for everyone in our community. Community Summit In alignment with the HSP 2-year implementation cycle, the public kickoff for plan implementation was a virtua l four-day Community Summit in April/May. The Summit provided opportunities for community to engage in dialogue with each other, learn from others’ experiences and expertise, discuss how each policy could be implemented, help define metrics for success, and build collective understanding of the different strategies in the HSP. Each day of the Summit had a different theme: • Increasing Housing Supply and Choice (6 strategies) • Improving Housing Stability and Health (8 strategies) • Building and Preserving Affordable Housing (6 strategies) Participants were able to attend one, two or all three of the Community Summit workshops and the Community Wrap-Up on the fourth day. About 100 people participated in the Summit, with about 40 attendees at each event. Demographics reflected a diverse population including about 30% Hispanic/Latinx attendees, 25% renters, and about 30% attendees making less than $50,000 per year (not all attendees completed demographic questions). Spanish/English language justice interpretation was provided to enable mixed-language small-group discussions. CSU’s Center for Public Deliberation provided a full report summarizing community concerns, barriers to implementation, and ideas for successful implementation for each of the three Summit work shops. (Attachment 2). A recording of the Community Summit Wrap-Up Night is available here. Completed Strategies In the three months since HSP adoption, several strategies have been completed: Strategy Description Update Next Steps Timeline Future Council Involvement 9 Off-cycle appropriation to advance Phase One of the Land Use Code (LUC) Audit. This appropriation was approved by City Council in conjunction with HSP adoption in March 2021. A consultant team has been selected for this project and work is underway. Implementation of LUC Phase 1 Updates (more detail below). Completed None required 10 Refine local affordable housing goal While the HSP brings forward the City’s established goal to achieve 10% affordable housing by 2040, the plan also Continue to prioritize rental affordability that focuses on 60% AMI and below, and ownership Completed None required 1 Packet Pg. 8 July 13, 2021 Page 7 identified a need for further refinement and clarification of the goal in the context of Fort Collins’ housing needs. (Attachment 3) affordability that reaches 80% AMI and below. Acknowledge the gap in ownership affordability for households earning between 80% and 120% AMI and consider incentives or tools for middle- income housing. 17 Reconsider affordable housing requirements/ funding as part of metro districts. This strategy was completed with Council’s adoption of a revised metro district policy in April 2021. This revised policy requires a pre- application meeting with Council and adds and evaluation points system for public benefits including housing, energy conservation, water conservation, and neighborhood livability. The policy will be reviewed every 2 years. Completed Medium (Council will consider new Metro Districts if proposed and review the adopted policy in 2 years) Priority Strategies Currently Underway Of the 17 HSP strategies that are already in progress, several projects have been identified as priorities for implementation through community engagement and/or by the Council Ad Hoc Housing Com mittee. A detailed update for each of these priority initiatives (some of which address multiple strategies) is included below: • Equity and Opportunity Assessment (Strategy 1 – Assess Displacement and Gentrification Risk): To ensure that equity remains at the center of policy decisions, LUC changes, and the overall implementation of the HSP, the Ad Hoc Council Housing Committee identified a need for assessment of displacement and gentrification risk as a “quick(er) win” for implementation. This work is bei ng incorporated as a task within the LUC Phase 1 updates and is expected to be complete by September 2021. (Attachment 4) Implementation will include an assessment of displacement vulnerability, creation of an opportunity index to identify high - amenity areas, and an analysis of gentrification by Census tract. Staff will be able to regularly maintain and update these analyses in future years with readily available data. Future Council involvement in this effort is low. Staff proposes to share progress throug h memo updates and/or a staff report if desired. • Land Use Code (LUC) Phase 1: Housing (Strategies 7, 13, 14, 15, 16): The LUC Phase 1 updates will reorganize the Land Use Code to improve readability and usability, and will also begin implementation for fi ve different strategies in the HSP: o Strategy 7 – Remove barriers to the development of Accessory Dwelling Units . o Strategy 13 – Recalibrate existing incentives to reflect current market conditions. o Strategy 14 – Create additional development incentives for affordable housing. o Strategy 15 – Explore financing and other barriers to missing middle and innovative housing. o Strategy 16 – Remove barriers to allowed densities through code revisions. 1 Packet Pg. 9 July 13, 2021 Page 8 A draft scope of effort for this project is currently being finalized, and a draft engagement plan is included. (Attachment 5) A Council work session tentatively planned for November to discuss proposed code changes. Adoption is anticipated in early 2022. Because Council will need to formally adopt any proposed changes to the LUC and this project includes significant community engagement/dialogue, future Council involvement in this effort is high. • Occupancy and Rental Programming (Strategies 20, 21, 26): One of the HSP greatest challenges identified that City policies have not consistently addressed housing stability and healthy housing, especially for people who rent their homes. This Occupancy and Rental Programming effort will explore updates to the City’s occupancy ordinance (commonly called U+2), propose a range of options for a rental registration and/or licensing program, and pursue funding and other incentives for small landlords to encourage them to keep housing healthy, safe, and affordable. The specific HSP strategies addressed by this effort are: o Strategy 20 – Explore the option of a mandated rental license/registry program for long-term rentals and pair with best practice rental regulations. o Strategy 21 – Explore revisions to occupancy limits and family definitions o Strategy 26 – Small landlord incentives. This effort is expected to take several years. Initial steps include peer cities research to learn about different approaches to occupancy and rental programming as well as demographic analysis of Fort Collins’ current rental housing occupants. A Council work session is tentatively planned for October to discuss potential scope, sequencing, and approaches. Because Council will need to formally adopt any proposed changes to the Municipal and Land Use Codes and this project includes significant community engag ement/dialogue, future Council involvement is high. • Revenue Options for Housing (Strategy 11 – Create a new dedicated revenue stream to fund the Affordable Housing Fund): Though Fort Collins invests $1.5 - $3 million into affordable housing production and preservation annually, the HSP estimates that the total annual funding need is closer to $10 - $11 million. Exploring a range of options (sales tax, impact fees, inclusionary housing fees -in-lieu, etc.) to generate consistent, dedicated, and flexible revenue for affordable housing will be a critical piece of HSP implementation. In addition, the current Community Capital Improvement Program quarter-cent sales tax that funds the Affordable Housing Capital Fund and other capital improvements will expire in 2025. There are multiple community priorities that require new or additional sources of funding, and these priorities should be discussed in context with one another. Accordingly, staff will begin discussions with the Council Finance Committee this fall about revenue generation for community priorities around housing, transit, and parks maintenance. Because Council will need to approve any proposed ballot language and/or formally adopt any additional fees for housing and this project will include significant community engagement/dialogue, future Council involvement in this effort is high. Other Strategies Underway Strategy Description Update Next Steps Timeline Future Council Involvement 4 Implementation, tracking and assessment of housing strategies Housing dashboard is currently under development. Staff is working to identify key metrics and indicators with Root Policy Research, consultant for the HSP. Select metrics and indicators, begin design of housing dashboard. If possible, consider integration with other City dashboards (e.g. Equity Indicators). Quick(er) win, <1 year Low 8 Extend the City’s affordability term Staff has begun researching peer Share proposed affordability term Quick(er) win, <1 Medium (would 1 Packet Pg. 10 July 13, 2021 Page 9 communities’ affordability terms and having discussions with affordable housing providers. changes with housing providers and other stakeholders. year require adoption of changes) 24 Support community organizing efforts in manufactured home communities and increase access to resident rights information, housing resources, programs In conjunction with Strategy 23, staff in Neighborhood Services are actively building relationships and partnering with residents in the city’s manufactured housing communities. Council work session in July to discuss manufactured housing enforcement, needs assessment to support development of enforcement program. Quick(er) win, <1 year Medium (needs assessment and education/ engagement incorporated into 2022 budget process) 25 Foreclosure and eviction prevention and legal representation A grant program for foreclosure and eviction prevention was funded through the CARES Act to address the impact of COVID-19. This program is funded through 2021. If funded through 2022 Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process, continue providing grants for legal services to prevent eviction and foreclosure. Quick(er) win, <1 year Low (incorporated into 2022 budget process) 5 Advocate for housing-related legislation at state and federal levels The passage of HB1117 enables municipalities to adopt inclusionary housing ordinances for rental housing. The measure will take effect in September 2021. Update the 2020 Inclusionary Housing and Impact Fee Nexus Study as needed, memo update if requested, evaluate potential options and feasible timelines. Transfor- mational, 2+ years High (will require policy development, stakeholder engagement, Council adoption) 6 Visitability Policy 2021 updates to the International Residential Code are underway, and interior visitability changes are being considered as part of this effort. Exterior changes will be considered as part of the 2024 updates. Code Adoption Committee meetings through August 2021, presentations to Boards and Commissions, Council adoption of Building and Energy Codes Transfor- mational, 2+ years Medium (will require Council adoption of changes) 23 Tenant right of first refusal for cooperative ownership of multifamily or manufactured housing communities In conjunction with Strategy 24, staff in Neighborhood Services are actively building relationships and partnering with residents in the Explore options for a consistent Resident-Owned Community (ROC) policy; future Council Work Session Transfor- mational, 2+ years Medium (will require development of consistent approach and future Council engagement) 1 Packet Pg. 11 July 13, 2021 Page 10 city’s manufactured housing communities. In May 2021, Council authorized $200,000 to support the conversion of Hickory Village to a Resident-Owned Community (ROC). Next Steps Staff will share regular implementation updates with Council via memo as deliverables for HSP strategies are completed. Work sessions for Occupancy and Rental Programming (October) and LUC Phase 1 (November) are both tentatively scheduled for this fall. Council Finance Committee will also begin a discussion about revenue for community priorities including housing, transit, and parks this fall. A graphic summary of next steps is below: ATTACHMENTS 1. Housing Strategic Plan - Implementation (PDF) 2. Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (PDF) 3. Strategy 10 - Goal Refinement Memo (PDF) 4. Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (PDF) 5. Strategies 7, 13, 14, 15, 16 - LUC Phase 1 Engagement Plan (draft) (PDF) 6. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 12 HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN | 2021 63 Implementation Housing and shelter are fundamental community needs. This plan recognizes that achieving the vision that “Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford” requires contributions from the entire community. This work also acknowledges that no single community in the United States has solved this issue, and the Fort Collins housing system is influenced by systems beyond city boundaries—whether that is our regional workforce, statewide policies, or the national housing market. Therefore, we will need to be in a continual testing mode to assess which strategies can work, pilot them where appropriate, and then bring viable solutions to scale. Adapting to changing conditions—both within the broader market and the community—will be critical as we proceed in the decades it will take to reach the vision. Based on these assumptions and this plan’s commitment to being centered in equity, the following framework is offered as a starting point for how to lead this work into the future: •Immediate next steps as we transition from planning to implementation in 2021; •A biennial lifecycle for assessing progress, revisiting priorities, checking in with the community and with City leadership; and •Guiding principles for future decision making. The following sections describe each of these elements in more detail. Immediate Next Steps in 2021 The final step in the planning process is just the beginning of the work to ensure that everyone has stable, healthy housing they can afford. Implementation is when community, Council and City staff will transition from “what” to “how” we achieve this vision. The following elements are key next steps: •Community Summit (Spring): To support moving from the planning phase to implementation, staff is working with Home2Health partners to design a community summit that will focus on mapping out implementation of the prioritized strategies in the Plan. More details on this summit will be available at www.fcgov.com/housing. •Implementation Roadmaps (Spring/Summer): With the community summit complete, staff and community partners will develop an overall implementation strategy and specific implementation roadmaps. These roadmaps will include metrics and indicators to evaluate progress; an explanation of how projects will ensure accountability and embed equity for all, leading with race; and clarification about specific roles required to implement the prioritized strategies. –To align with Strategy 10 to Refine the Affordable Housing Goal, the implementation roadmaps will include more specific subgoals to achieve the vision. •Council Work Session (Summer 2021): After the Community Summit, staff will present the outcome of the Summit and roadmaps for implementation and ongoing tracking to City Council in a Work Session. As noted on page 10, centering this work in equity includes both process and outcomes: Equity in process: Ensuring everyone has meaningful opportunities to engage and provide input into the Housing Strategic Plan process. Equity in outcomes: Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford. ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan - Implementation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN | 2021 64 It is important to note this plan does not commit dedicated funding for implementation. As with any policy change, new program, or code revision, future City investments in moving the priority strategies forward need to follow standard budget processes. These processes include evaluation of costs and benefits, examination of relative cost effectiveness, and consideration of community costs. And while cost effectiveness is a critical piece of future investment in implementation, it must also be considered alongside other City priorities including equity and sustainability. As noted above, in summer 2021 the City will lead a process to finalize implementation roadmaps with specific metrics and indicators for success. Though additional indicators may be identified for specific projects, the general indicators below be used to guide the development of all implementation efforts. These indicators specifically address equity in process and outcomes and are intended to ensure continued transparency and accountability as strategies are implemented. Indicator Area Indicator Equitable Process • Evaluate engagement in ongoing programs, processes, and services by income and race • Allocate resources in project budgets to achieve equity in process, e.g., language justice and compensation for community members’ time and expertise • Consistently provide language justice and access to interpreters/ translators at City events and in materials and programs, especially in Spanish, and consider other languages • Consistently provide childcare and other resources to remove engagement barriers for all community members • Develop and apply a consistent approach to embedding equity in implementation Equitable Outcomes • Affordable housing inventory • Fort Collins’ Housing Opportunity Index (HOI) compared to western states region HOI • Housing stock in comparison to income levels (will be refined with the subgoal development addressed in Strategy 10) • Homeownership rates, disaggregated by race and income • Accessible units • Distribution of affordable housing throughout the city • Percentage of cost-burdened homes (renters and owners) • Jobs/housing balance • Long-term homeless exits and entries • Level of funding dedicated to affordable housing 1.1 Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan - Implementation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN | 2021 65 Biennial Planning Lifecycle This work will be ongoing for decades. The steps below illustrate how the City will assess progress and move forward to implementation on a biennial basis. 1. Assess Progress: Work with community members, including community partners, stakeholders, and historically underrepresented groups, to measure progress against established metrics. What is working? What could be improved? What did not work? Who benefitted and who was burdened? 2. Revisit Priorities: As noted above, the housing market and system will always be evolving, and community priorities should evolve with these changes. Based on iterative assessment, revisit the full strategy list. Ask if new strategies should be considered. With community partners and stakeholders, apply the guiding principles to consider annual priorities and work plans. 3. Confirm Priorities: Create space for community members and City leadership to confirm priorities and assess if others should be considered. Note tensions and opportunities as they arise, especially from groups impacted by strategies, that should be considered in implementation. 4. Design Summit Every Two Years: Continue efforts to partner with community members to co-create work plans with community partners, stakeholders, and City staff. Create new metrics to assess progress, as applicable, for new priorities. These steps are just a starting point for checking in every two years—they will evolve as the City and community partners gain more experience in equity-centered planning and implementation. 1.1 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan - Implementation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN | 2021 66 Guiding Principles To support this work moving toward implementation, the plan includes a set of guiding principles to document how the City and community will make decisions in the future. They will support future strategy selection and overall prioritization to determine annual work planning. While the housing strategies may be updated or changed on an annual basis, the guiding principles will continue throughout the lifecycle of this plan. Why have guiding principles? Guiding principles recognize that the prioritization of strategies will continue to evolve as they are tested, evaluated, and adapted. In addition, new strategies will arise and initial ideas may prove not to have the intended impact. Finally, Fort Collins’ work on housing is bigger than one person, one entity, or any one project, and transparently documenting how decisions will be made going forward is critical for ongoing accountability. When will the guiding principles be applied? These principles will largely be a tool for overall prioritization of strategies in any given two-year period. While individual strategies will continue to be assessed against the evaluation criteria, the guiding principles will support a holistic approach to evaluating overall priorities for the housing system. How will the guiding principles be applied? In the biennial planning lifecycle, the community and the City will partner to apply the guiding principles, and decision makers will review the subsequent priorities established at each design summit. 1.1 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan - Implementation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN | 2021 67 Guiding Principles for the Housing Strategic Plan Guiding Principles What the Principle Means Center the work in people • One outcome, targeted strategies: achieving the vision that “Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford” will require a suite of strategies that target different income levels, geographies, and identities; the portfolio should support the entire system of impacted players. • Value of both content and context experts: prioritize strategies from technical and lived experiences. Both forms of expertise should contribute to prioritization. Be agile and adaptive • Review priorities annually for progress and overall work planning • Priorities and strategies must be specific enough to generate real solutions and flexible enough to address the changing landscape of the community, the region, and the market. • Evaluate when citywide solutions are needed and when place-based solutions are best. Balance rapid decision making with inclusive communication and engagement • Be clear that the work requires action while also prioritizing time and space for all community members, businesses, and stakeholders, especially those most impacted by the decisions, to engage with and influence the outcome. Build on existing plans and policies – and their engagement • Review adopted plans and policies for informing policy priorities. • Also review the feedback community members have already shared on a topic before asking again – respect their time and prior engagement. • Identify opportunities to complement and amplify existing goals, priorities, and where strategies can advance the triple bottom line. Expect and label tensions, opportunities, and tradeoffs • Recognize and name where limited resources impacted decision making, where stakeholders are impacted differently and have different perspectives, and the tradeoffs in moving forward with a given solution. Focus direct investment on the lowest income levels • Target limited financial resources for housing the lowest income households. Policy should be used all along the continuum to stimulate a wide range of housing choice for residents of all ages, income levels and life stages. • Exceptions can include when an innovative technique or strategy is being applied at higher AMI levels but generally should not exceed 120% AMI. Commit to transparency in decision making • Be clear regarding how the decision maker came to their conclusions and what they did or did not consider. Make decisions for impact, empowerment, and systems (not ease of implementation) • Prioritize strategies for outcomes, not necessarily ease of implementation. However, where high impact and ease of implementation overlap, take swift action to move these efforts forward. • Prioritize strategies that advance multiple priorities, the triple bottom line, and partnerships that recognize all community members, businesses, and stakeholders are needed to achieve the vision. • Assess the entire portfolio of prioritized strategies for a mix of quick wins versus longer-term transformational solutions that may require more dialogue and investment to implement 1.1 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan - Implementation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN | 2021 68 WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY “I think any collection of new tools or adjustments will need to be coupled with an aggressive public education campaign that addresses the cognitive dissonance in the voting public that says they want affordable housing, but don’t actually want the solutions that would get us there, at least not in their neighborhood.” “There needs to be a systemic change to both wage and housing laws in order to address the challenges. Responsibility for this would come down to legislators and elected officials, which to an extent means the population that votes for them.” “I don’t have a notable experience with housing because I am only 15, and my parents were lucky when they bought our house years ago because we got a good deal. From hearing from my peers, I think decision-makers need to know that we need more affordable housing in Fort Collins and low-income housing as well.” “I think affordable housing is long overdue and I am extremely in favor. I would be proud of FoCo if it made plans to take care of more citizens. I love this city and the phenomenal ways I see my tax dollars at work.” “I’m a big fan of the language in the Draft Strategic Plan around accessory dwelling units and missing middle development. While I like the idea of (subsidized) affordable housing, I think increasing the housing supply will be a much bigger hammer. I’d like to see more changes to zoning code to allow higher density without requiring parking. As a homeowner in an already- dense neighborhood I understand that that will be politically difficult, but it’s necessary to keep people living in the city they love.” “As someone who is privileged enough to be able to afford to own a home in Fort Collins, I support efforts by the community to improve affordable housing options. I support them even more if they are creative, I’m not scared of co-housing and community gardens. I understand and am fine with the fact that this might cost homeowners a little more. Our community is only as strong as the most vulnerable and I’m more than happy for my city to make that a little more equal.” “I understand that the city of Fort Collins may not have enough funding allocated to put more money into housing, but I think there are other avenues that can be explored. People should advocate for further investment in housing and the city needs to change the u+2 law.” 1.1 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan - Implementation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN | 2021 69 CONCLUSION City Plan’s Vision calls for our community to “take action to address the needs of all members of our community and strive to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to thrive. As a community, we commit to building a healthy, equitable, sustainability city – for our families, for our neighbors, and for future generations.” The Housing Strategic Plan responds to this vision by advancing twenty-six strategies designed to overcome the greatest housing challenges facing Fort Collins today. With this Plan’s adoption, we move into learning and testing mode and begin the commitment to revisiting the prioritized strategies every two years. If any place can do this, it’s Fort Collins. Together, we will create a future where everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford. 1.1 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Housing Strategic Plan - Implementation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 1 About the Center The Colorado State University Center for Public Deliberation (CPD) serves as an impartial resource to the northern Colorado community. Working with students trained in small group facilitation, the CPD assists local government, school boards, and community organizations by researching issues and developing useful background material, and then designs, facilitates, and reports on innovative public events. The interpretations and conclusions contained in this publication have been produced by CPD associates without the input of partner organizations to maintain impartiality. ATTACHMENT 2 1.2 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 29   HOME2HEALTH COMMUNITY  SUMMIT.       1.2 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 30 Event Recruitment and Design To solicit broader feedback on the Housing Strategic Plan (HSP) the Center for Public Deliberation, in partnership with the City of Fort Collins and the Home2Health Core Team, designed a series of three Community Summit events that addressed a different topic area each night. City partners on the Home2Health Core Team examined the HSP and crafted three distinct nightly themes that would encompass various strategies within the plan. The nightly themes were:  Increase Housing Supply and Choice  Improve Housing Stability and Health  Build and Preserve Affordable Housing These themes were created to ensure that residents felt they did not need to attend all three events to respond to the strategies that may most impact them or others in their communities. However, many residents still opted to attend all three of the events. To encourage wider diversity of participation and to honor the time our community members spent in conversation with one another, we offered $40 stipends for each night of the summit. Approximately 30% of participants who attended declined the stipend. We created an RSVP survey and distributed it to the community with help from the Home2Health Core Team and other City partners. During the RSVP process, we asked participants to select two strategies to discuss as well as share certain demographic information. When then used the information provided in the RSVP form to create breakout groups of between 8- 10 based on which strategies each participant had chosen to discuss. We attempted to make sure each participant was able to discuss their top choices, though some strategies were collapsed into other groups due to limited interest. The breakout groups consisted of community members with a variety of expertise on housing issues. Some were developers or builders, some were landlords, some were in local business, and many were community members with context expertise who lived in manufactured housing communities, affordable developments, and a variety of other housing situations. Numerous breakout groups included both English and Spanish speakers and we utilized a Language Justice Model of interpretation provided by the Community Language Co-Op. Language Justice allowed all participants to communicate in the language they were most comfortable with and provided real- time interpretation to both English and Spanish speakers. Prior to the event, we provided all participants with an informational handout that contained specific details about each of the strategies they would discuss at their Community Summit. Handouts were provided in both English and Spanish. You can find links to these handouts in the Appendix. Process Each Community Summit was held on Zoom due to continued gathering restrictions. At the events, small groups were facilitated by a Student Associate at the Center for Public Deliberation and supported by a partner with the City of Fort Collins or a member of the Home2Health Core Team. These support staff provided a ten-minute introduction about specific strategies in their unique breakout groups and stayed in the groups to provide information and resources as needed to participants. There was also a note-taker in each group tasked with recording all comments, questions, and information shared by participants. Student facilitators guided the conversation by asking a series of questions in two parts. Part one was aimed at building community understanding and consisted of the following questions: 1.2 Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 31  What are the key issues impacting your community in relation to this strategy?  How might this strategy impact your community?  What would successful implementation of this strategy look like? Part two focused more specifically on the strategy participants had chosen to discuss and asked the following questions:  How might these strategies be adapted to better suit community needs and ensure equity?  How might you or others in your community help implement these proposals?  Are there barriers you can imagine to achieving successful implementation? How might we address those? Because there were both English and Spanish speakers present at the event, we had to coordinate up to five additional Zoom meetings for breakout room discussions. These breakout groups were created during the introduction of the event to ensure the meeting stayed within the proposed time and to minimize lag time between the introduction and facilitated conversations. To facilitate sending all participants to the correct breakout group, they were first sent to breakout rooms in the main Zoom meeting. For the groups with Spanish speakers, their facilitator then posted a link to the new meeting and remained in the breakout room until all other participants had joined the new meeting. Once all members were present in their correct breakout groups, students facilitated a 50-minute discussion about the group’s first selected strategy. After the first 50-minutes had elapsed, all breakout groups were sent to the main Zoom. For those in groups with interpretation, this meant sending another link to the main Zoom. All participants were then given a 10-minute break to allow for the creation of new breakout rooms. When participants returned from their break, they were again sent to their own unique breakout groups to discuss the second strategy they had chosen for that evening. This second strategy was also discussed for 50- minutes with the same question prompts provided above. After the second 50-minutes had elapsed all groups were sent once more to the main Zoom for closing remarks from the City of Fort Collins and other partners. Once the three Community Summit events were complete, a small team of students compiled notes from each event into one document. After the notes were compiled, each comment in the notes was thematically coded and we compared themes across strategies and breakout groups. In the sections below, we share brief demographic breakdowns for attendance at each Community Summit, as well as major themes we identified. These themes are organized roughly according to the frequency with which they appeared in the event notes.   1.2 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 32 Thursday, April 22nd Increase Housing Supply and Choice     Key Information The tables on this page share only two demographic categories we asked on the RSVP survey. You can find a full accounting of the demographic information from participants of Community Summit 1 in the Appendix Non‐ Hispanic/Latinx Hispanic/Latinx ETHNICITY HOUSING STATUS Rent Own 1.2 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 33 Summit 1 Strategies Strategies for the first Community Summit focused on issues related to building codes, builder incentives, and resources tied to building costs. The following strategies were discussed:  Evaluate implementation of a visitability policy.  Remove barriers to allowed densities through code revisions.  Remove barriers to the development of Accessory Development Units (ADUs)  Recalibrate existing incentives to reflect current market conditions.  Explore/address financing and other barriers to missing middle and innovative housing developments.  Increase awareness and opportunities for creative collaboration across water districts and other regional partners around the challenges with water costs and housing. Based on participant selections, the most popular strategies from this event are italicized above. This was determined by the number of overflow groups required for each of those strategies. What follows is a discussion of major themes that arose during these conversations which are divided into three specific sections: community concerns, barriers to implementation, and successful implementation. Community Concerns At each summit, participants began their facilitated conversations by focusing on their current experience with housing and concerns they had about the strategy itself or their current conditions. Across all breakout groups and strategies, themes tied to concerns about resources, current definitions of affordable housing, and potential impacts on current housing were identified. Current affordable housing is inaccessible. Numerous participants at Summit 1 expressed confusion and concern over how the City of Fort Collins defines what affordable housing is. They also felt there weren’t enough affordable units being built in new developments and expressed a desire for an increased percentage of required affordable units in any new development. Some participants went so far as to say 75%-80% of housing in new developments should be set aside as affordable housing. However, there was a great amount of confusion and disagreement over the City’s definition of Affordable Housing with numerous residents saying they currently don’t make enough money to even afford those units. Many participants across breakout groups felt that affordable units still catered to higher income earners because of the current state of the local housing market. There were also numerous participants living in mobile home communities who shared that owning a home is unattainable and they were not interested in affordable apartments because of space issues, they just wanted more stability in their current living situation. As one participant said: “Housing is practically unreachable for us which is why we live in mobile homes. It would be nice to have a house, but we need to be realistic as well. For me, I would not be willing to pay for an apartment. I would be willing to invest money in a house.” In addition to the above noted concerns, participants also noted their feelings that much of the affordable housing being built, or on track to be built, in the City was not benefiting residents who wanted single-family homes and was more often being built for Colorado State University students. Overall participants were concerned that even with increased affordable housing being built in the City, it still would not be accessible to the people who need it most. 1.2 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 34 Impacts on current housing. Participants in their breakout groups also expressed concern that code changes or allowing innovative types of housing might have an impact on their current housing situation. Some worried about the changing landscape of their current neighborhoods if specific building codes (especially those related to height restrictions) were relaxed. Many felt there are certain neighborhoods in the City that are not well-suited for things like ADUs because of the lot sizes, so they expressed a need for the City to make sure these codes are re-evaluated with that in mind. Residents in mobile home communities expressed a deep fear that continued development of affordable and innovative housing might eventually mean their communities would disappear, which would put many in a precarious situation as mobile homes are currently the only types of housing they can afford. As one participant said: “The City’s strategies are not thinking of the population with low resources, so their strategy is thinking big but [not] thinking in terms of increasing the number of resources needed. We don’t have disposable income to access them [affordable units]. Keep people with low resources in mind when developing. Growth will make mobile home parks disappear. Growth should be applicable to us too, take us into consideration. Not everything needs to be super expensive, conserve things that people with low resources can pay for.” Other residents noted that relaxing codes could lead to fewer available single-family homes, especially if the occupancy codes were changed. This was coupled with a concern for currently existing homes being removed and replaced with newer housing that could potentially lead to gentrification. Residents wanted assurance that changes to codes would still work to preserve currently existing housing. Concern for resources. In several groups, participants continually discussed concerns around where additional resources would come from to fund many of the suggested changes or updates to code. The term resource in this conversation encapsulates not only financial resources, but also building resources, natural resources that determine the cost of new builds, and community resources like transportation. Numerous participants had questions about the funding mechanisms for strategies and expressed concern there would be an impact on the cost of living in the form of increased taxes to create these additional funding mechanisms. Additionally, participants noted that simply building more housing and providing more choice will not necessarily solve any problems if community resources like grocery stories and transportation lines weren’t also in proximity to this housing. As one participant noted, regarding potential costs: “Regarding fee waivers and subsidies: someone always has to pay for it. What the City may not be considering is the value added to the tax base when you’re providing to income levels not served by the market.” Participants across numerous breakout groups discussed a desire for the City to be sure these changes do not increase financial burden of other community members. Barriers to Implementation Participants were also asked to consider what barriers might prevent successful implementation of their selected strategies. In these conversations, two clear barriers revealed themselves: current community attitudes about affordable housing, and lack of education and awareness about housing issues and the Housing Strategic Plan. Lack of education/awareness. One of the largest themes cutting across all breakout groups was that many participants did not understand what numerous strategies were proposing. This 1.2 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 35 was especially true for strategies that were more technical in nature. Participants expressed a need for more information and more opportunities to be educated not only on the specific strategies within the HSP, but also about housing issues more generally. While all the participants were able to self-select into their strategy groups, it was clear many attended this event in hopes it would be an informational session lead by the City rather than a small group conversation soliciting community feedback. While resources were provided in advance, they didn’t appear to provide enough background information for some of the strategies participants were discussing. At times this led to conversations in breakout groups becoming question and answer sessions, rather than focusing on the discussion questions. One participant noted that limited access to education on housing issues was a larger problem in some communities than others: “Lots of people don’t know about rules or grant opportunities. [They] may not be able to get information unless they have a younger person or community leader that can help them with that sort of thing. People often feel intimidated by the process. People of color even more so. There’s a trust issue. Take information to them.” There were numerous questions to context experts about current codes, rules surrounding ADUs, and what was already happening in the community regarding many of these issues. Participants also mentioned they had a hard time understanding where to access current information about the HSP or housing issues generally. Some participants expressed hesitance about moving forward with any of the strategies until more research had been done by the City of Fort Collins and builders/developers. Though English-speaking community members had access to the entire Housing Strategic Plan, it may not have been accessible (participants in Phase 4 of Community Guides noted some of the language was challenging). There also was not a Spanish version of the HSP available before the event itself. Providing more accessible information about the various strategies in the HSP will likely help many of these issues. Community attitudes about affordable housing. Echoing one of the barriers identified in Phase 4 of Community Guides, participants identified negative attitudes and social stigmas as one of the biggest barriers to pushing many of these strategies forward. Numerous residents reflected on how their neighbors are either reluctant or completely against having affordable housing or innovative housing built near where they live. Mentions of NIMBY attitudes happened across several breakout groups. In addition to community member attitudes in general, many participants also felt that HOAs and their attitudes about neighborhood appearance would create barriers to meaningful change. Many of the conversations seemed to acknowledge that residents in Fort Collins, especially those who have lived here for many years, don’t want to see the character of their neighborhood changed due to updated codes that allow for more housing types. Some participants noted that many neighborhoods throughout the City are not well-suited for increased density because of these aesthetic concerns. Participants also acknowledged that desire for open space and nice views were likely driving many of the negative attitudes toward the proposed changes and there was a conversation about how to get the community on board. Some also acknowledged that open space does not benefit everyone in the community equally. As one participant noted: “People have an ‘I was here first’ attitude. [We] need to point out the advantages of changes to the community. Why is it so important for people to ‘lock in’ when they move here? We 1.2 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 36 need to understand what that is to move the conversation on change. [There is a] tension with open space. Who do open spaces benefit? Not usually poor folks. Green space is nice, but you can’t enjoy it if you can’t find a place to live.” Many participants noted the importance of keeping community involved and informed to potentially address this barrier. Increased collaboration is seen as a key factor in changing community attitudes. Successful Implementation Participants and their groups were also asked to consider what successful implementation of their chosen strategies would look like and how they might change or improve the current state of building or attaining more affordable housing in the City. Three main themes were identified in participant notes: reduced bureaucracy, increase collaboration within the City, and increased housing choice and diversity. Limiting bureaucracy. Conversations around successful implementation focused heavily around making building affordable housing and creating innovative housing a more streamlined process. Participants noted that a decrease in “red tape” would be a positive outcome of many of the strategies discussed. Many of these discussions focused on how reducing the amount of City involvement in decisions about what owners can do with their own land would create much more opportunity for a variety of housing types and more people would be willing to experiment without fear of violating the building codes. The reduced fear associated with more relaxed building codes was also discussed often by participants. There was a clear understanding that many residents in the City are currently violating codes to make their housing more affordable, but constantly worry about being caught. Many noted they rely on others in the area being “good neighbors”, so they don’t get reported to code compliance. As one participant said: “People often reach out and talk to neighbors versus reporting them to the City. It’s hard to stay in compliance all the time—it’s tough to keep up with everything! Codes are there, but it’s difficult to know all the rules. People simply need to continue living and often don’t have the time to know, understand, and follow all the rules.” While most participants felt that reducing bureaucracy was a net benefit, many also mentioned the City would need to work hard in the face of these changes to ensure neighborhoods were still safe. Some of the codes participants appreciated were those tied to neighborhood safety. There was also a strong desire to make sure neighborhoods didn’t become segregated and that there could be diverse neighborhoods while also creating a community that honored where people had chosen to live. Increased collaboration within the City. Another marker of success for participants was a potential for increased collaboration between the City, residents, developers, and other community players who have a role in housing in the community. Many participants felt that ongoing community engagement efforts and previous conversations have opened the door to create less of an “us vs. them” mentality between residents and City leaders and they were excited about the potential to continue increasing collaboration. Participants also noted that for many of these strategies to be successful, creating a Resident Council would help keep the community involved and maintain collaborative links while also getting communities access to information about housing policy within the City. Participants liked the idea of 1.2 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 37 allowing a diverse group of community members to be on this Council and able to represent community needs at City Council meetings and in other places where decisions are being made. They also noted this would allow for more residents in the community to get to know each other and understand the unique experiences of various residents. Finally, participants discussing the strategy tied to collaboration across water districts recognized how important the City’s role is in building and maintaining these relationships. Some expressed concern that as water districts currently operate, they are mostly suited to serve agriculture, and to have success there would need to be increased collaboration to equip them to better serve urban and suburban areas. In addition, participants expressed hope that bringing water districts together in conversation may have a positive impact on the cost of water, not only as it relates to new builds, but also for current residents who are feeling the strain of rising water costs where they live. Increased housing choice and diversity. A final theme in the discussion about successful implementation focused on how many of these strategies could result in more diverse neighborhoods and a wider variety of housing types for people to choose from. Like participants in Phase 4 of Community Guides, participants in these breakout groups expressed excitement about the idea that new people may be able to live in their neighborhoods. Numerous participants were also curious about how inclusionary zoning may help make new neighborhoods more accessible to people across the income spectrum. Additionally, participants discussed how relaxed barriers on density and ADUs would be beneficial for residents who wanted to age in place, or for families who wanted to be able to support their adult children transitioning into college. One participant said: “One positive would be senior housing. With families wanting to put a residence in the back yard for parents or grandparents. College students that want to move out but not be in mom and dad’s home. This could be an opportunity.” It’s important to remember, however, that participants also expressed a desire to maintain their current neighborhoods and living situations, so for them housing diversity also means preserving what is already there while allowing for continued innovation. 1.2 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 38 Saturday, April 24th Improve Housing Stability and Health Key Information The tables on this page share only two demographic categories we asked on the RSVP survey. You can find a full accounting of the demographic information from participants of Community Summit 2 in the Appendix. Non‐ Hispanic/ Latinx Hispanic/ Latinx ETHNICITY HOUSING STATUS Rent Own 1.2 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 39 Summit 2 Strategies Strategies for the second Community Summit focused on issues related to renter protections and landlord education, expanding family definitions and occupancy limits, and increasing access to housing assistance and equal opportunities for housing across the City. The following strategies were discussed:  Explore the option of a mandated rental license/registry program for long-term rentals and pair with best practice rental regulations.  Explore revisions to occupancy limits and family definitions.  Fund foreclosure and eviction prevention and legal representation.  Support community organizing efforts in manufactured home communities and increase access to resident rights information, housing resources, and housing programs.  Develop small landlord incentives.  Implement the 2020 Analysis of Fair Housing Choice Action Steps Based on participant selections, the most popular strategies from this event are italicized above. This was determined by the number of overflow groups required for each of these strategies. Themes identified in event notes are organized in the following sections: community concerns, barriers to implementation, and successful implementation. For this Summit we have also added an additional section tied to the U+2 ordinance and Colorado State University’s role in affordable housing issues in the City. This section was added to more fully address the robust conversations had by our participants surrounding these topics. Community Concerns Strategies at this Summit were more directly tied to resident rights and healthy housing. As such, common themes aligned closely with these concepts and we identified three specific areas of concern: accessibility of affordable housing, lack of residents’ rights, and impacts on small landlords. Some of these themes are echoed from Summit One, others are new. In the sections below we provide more detail for each theme. Accessibility of affordable housing. Much like participants at Summit One, participants across breakout groups had numerous conversations about how in its current state, even housing deemed affordable by the City is unattainable for many residents. These conversations touched on financial accessibility and physical accessibility. Some participants noted current rents are rising faster than wages and people are struggling to keep up and maintain their housing. Participants in these conversations mentioned the stress tied to continued price increases negatively impacts their health in many ways. Like conversations in previous phases of Community Guides, participants discussed how many residents in the City are having to choose between paying their housing costs or taking care of other necessities, and because they do not want to be displaced, they choose the housing costs. This choice then leads to other negative outcomes in their ability to pay for health services, utilities, and healthy foods. As one participant said: “They need support in the form of direct credit, not from a bank with a high interest rate. The cost of their housing is increasing putting them at risk for displacement, with more money needed for housing they cannot afford other bills.” Concerns tied to affordability of current housing were also raised by residents of Hickory Village mobile home park, some of whom attended all three nights of the Summit. Many feared they would not be able to afford the purchase on their low incomes and were struggling to decide what choice would be 1.2 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 40 most beneficial for them. Residents noted they did not have any other housing options so if they could not afford the purchase, they weren’t sure what would happen with their housing situation. Finally, residents addressed concerns tied to the physical accessibility of affordable housing in the City. Many participants said there are numerous places throughout the City that are not accessible to people with disabilities. Some even mentioned things like the steps at their own home being a barrier for older family members visiting without difficulty. In addition, residents discussed the state of sidewalks throughout the City and said it would be important for certain accessibility requirements to be met on any new affordable structures built. While difficulty accessing affordable housing was a problem discussed across incomes and ability levels, most participants acknowledged this was an even greater challenge for residents with mobility issues. Lack of resident’s rights. Numerous participants at Summit Two shared stories about their experiences specifically with either renting a home/apartment or renting a lot in a manufactured home community. Many of these stories demonstrated a concern for their lack of rights in the City. In several groups, unsafe living conditions were discussed. Residents said they had lived in homes without heat every time it snowed, experienced insect infestations, and struggled to get their landlords to take care of basic maintenance in their homes. In addition to this, many participants noted that residents will continue to live in unsafe conditions or homes in disrepair because they fear retaliation from their landlords and do not feel protected by the City. Participants also mentioned they felt it was a common occurrence for landlords to raise rents in response to maintenance requests. One participant said: “My home state had better landlord/tenant laws. I feel like here they don’t care as much because they know someone else will rent the property.” In manufactured home communities, residents mentioned feeling victimized by landlords who continue to increase rents and create strict rules about how they can access amenities in their own community. For example, one participant discussed rules about when and where their children could play in the neighborhood. In addition to concerns about landlords, many residents in manufactured home communities felt they were not sufficiently protected from displacement if their communities were turned into other types of affordable housing. Some participants, though they recognized the burden on smaller landlords, expressed frustration that landlords weren’t financially prepared to take care of properties and provide safe housing for their tenants. They felt that if owners were going to rent homes to other residents of the City, they should be held accountable for making sure they could take care of regular maintenance in a timely manner and that residents weren’t living without heat or in dangerous conditions with pests or mold. Overall, there seemed to be a concern that low vacancy rates, high costs, and lack of oversight and education for landlords created problems for tenants. These problems ranged from unsafe housing and hidden charges for maintenance visits, to what was perceived as a general apathy for maintaining properties for their tenants. Impacts on small landlords. While many participants across breakout groups discussed power dynamics between tenants and landlords as a major concern, there were also many conversations acknowledging that smaller landlords often had limited resources and experienced their own challenges. Some worried how changing policies or requiring more affordable rents would impact those landlords who just own one additional home and rent it out or inherited a property from family with limited knowledge on how to properly maintain it. Participants acknowledged that while access to affordable housing was particularly challenging for renters, landlords also faced unique struggles 1.2 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 41 and could often not afford to keep rents lower because of the costs associated with maintenance and general upkeep of their properties. In some groups, participants tried to differentiate between large property management companies who had numerous properties and strong financial stability and smaller landlords who did try their best to maintain properties and keep rents affordable for their tenants. Many noted that while there are issues related to lack of residents’ rights, there are also limited supports available for these smaller landlords which often puts them in difficult situations. One participant shared: “The landlords I know it is a question of financial resources. I know mom and pop landlords. They may not have the money to replace all these things. I’m concerned what it would be like to have the City come in and tell them they need to fix a lot of things they can’t afford. How could they do this?” Finally, some participants expressed concern that additional requirements for landlords would be overly burdensome for those landlords who already have limited resources and time. They noted that those with property management companies and other supports would likely have an easier time with rental registries and other updated requirements, but small landlords would likely bear most of that burden. Barriers to Implementation In conversations about potential barriers to implementing strategies from Summit Two, we identified two clear themes: lack of education/awareness (which was echoed throughout each of these events) and landlord reluctance or unwillingness. In the sections below, we provide more detail on these themes. Lack of education/awareness. This barrier encompasses not only lack of education about the specific policies in the HSP, but also a general lack of knowledge and awareness about the various housing programs and resources available for renters, landlords, and homeowners. Strategies at Summit Two were considerably less technical than the other two events, so there were fewer instances of extended question and answer conversations, but there was still a lot of confusion about potential impacts of the strategies. In terms of tenant supports, numerous participants shared they were not aware of many of the resources available throughout the City. Often, support staff in the breakout rooms shared information about specific programs or resources and most participants said they didn’t even know about them. Further, many noted there was difficulty even knowing where to access information about programs and resources, especially for Spanish speakers or those without reliable access to internet. This lack of education was especially salient around issues of resident rights. As we discussed in earlier sections, many participants expressed concern that tenants were being forced into unsafe living conditions and did not hold landlords accountable for fear of retaliation. Because many participants were not aware what resources were available to them, they stayed in unsafe or unaffordable situations. As one participant said: “If I had known about the resources available, that would have helped me as a renter. You have to have the bandwidth to deal with these problems. I wish I would have known before signing a lease how the landlords were rated by their past tenants.” Furthermore, residents in manufactured home communities posed many questions about how community organizing efforts would be supported by the City and mentioned they do not have enough 1.2 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 42 information about what is going on in their own communities to feel secure in their housing. Spanish speakers in those communities expressed a desire for more bilingual education opportunities to help close the accessibility gap. Most participants tended to agree that without increased education, many of these policies could not be successfully implemented because the residents who need the support most would still not know how to access the appropriate supports and resources. Landlord reluctance/unwillingness. In earlier sections, we discussed community concerns about the resources and bandwidth of landlords—especially small landlords without the support of property management companies. In conversations about barriers, many participants felt that on the flipside of this, many landlords are either reluctant or completely unwilling to engage in new programs or systems. These residents noted that without buy in from landlords and property management companies, many of these strategies would be difficult to implement well. Participants also mentioned landlords may feel overly burdened by additional steps they might need to take to participate in a registry program or educational classes about best practices. Many asked if there could be ways to streamline these processes so landlords would be more willing to participate. Some even went so far as to say these increased requirements would discourage landlords from renting their properties entirely. In addition to landlords, property management companies were also discussed as a specific barrier to implementing many of these strategies. Some participants felt property manager apathy or reluctance was an even bigger issue than the reluctance of landlords to participate in new programs. There were landlords present in several breakout groups who expressed their frustration with poor communication and service from property management companies. They said many of these companies would simply not participate in registry programs or educational programs. This feeling seemed especially true in discussions about high-volume property management companies. Some participants shared they felt property managers were not even following required guidelines now, so it seemed unlikely they would get on board if additional requirements were added to their plates. They felt most property managers were simply doing the bare minimum to avoid legal ramifications and didn’t put much effort in otherwise. One participant said: “I live in an apartment complex with an on-site property manager. There is not training for the property manager. It is a low-income housing complex with diverse people living there and sensitivity training would be so important for property managers who interact with these people.” Based on the conversations across these various groups, it seems clear that the City will need to consider steps to bring landlords and property managers alike on board for any future changes. Successful Implementation Participants at Summit Two shared various examples of what successful implementation might look like for their chosen strategies. We identified two major themes in these conversations: Increased support and resources, and increased collaboration and connection between the City and community. These are discussed in more detail below. Increased support and resources. It was clear throughout the event notes that participants saw an increase in support and resources as one of the biggest benefits to implementing many of these strategies. They focused not only on resources for tenants, but also on resources for landlords. 1.2 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 43 Residents felt that true success would mean folks across the housing spectrum would have access to all the resources they needed to live in healthy, stable housing and that landlords would have access to necessary supports to take care of their properties and their tenants. In terms of resident rights, some shared ideas for streamlining the complaint process for tenants or potentially creating an app or other resource where tenants could share information about their experiences with landlords and specific housing developments. Participants felt this would increase transparency and give them valuable information necessary to make the best housing choices for their families and their financial situation. Additionally, participants felt that increased access to education for both landlords and tenants would be a key marker of success for these strategies. It was clear in numerous conversations that both tenants and landlords struggled to understand where to find the information they needed about resources, support programs, and requirements. Participants noted that to achieve success all this information should be readily accessible, available in English and Spanish, and that increased transparency and communication between landlords and tenants was key. Some participants also expressed excitement about the possibility for the community to become more involved in the education process. One resident said: “There are huge benefits to living in a college town in addition to the drawbacks. I would love to see neighbors help educate students on the impacts they can have on the neighborhood/community. For first time renters living on their own they may not know this, so having members from that neighborhood who can help teach them would be a great idea.” Landlords in several groups mentioned that increased access to these resources and supports would address many of the burdens they face currently in regard to maintaining their properties and staying connected to their tenants. Many participants also expressed a desire for more opportunities for tenants and landlords to access education together. Residents felt this would create stronger community connections and support networks. In addition to this, participants said the City could help encourage landlords to form an educational collaborative where they could share knowledge about rental practices, their experiences, and provide support to one another. Finally, some participants noted that providing some incentives to landlords and property managers to make them more willing to participate in education opportunities and learn new rental practices would be key. As we noted in the sections above, some companies and landlords in the City already feel burdened by the current rental practices, so participants felt extra encouragement may be helpful in bringing more people on board. Increased collaboration and connection between the City and community. Participants at this Summit also expressed a lot of excitement around how these strategies could improve the way communities are connected to each other, and to City leaders. Many shared a desire for the City to be more actively involved in conversations between landlords and tenants, rather than acting as a passive source of information. For many, this looked like increased community engagement on a variety of levels that was accessible to residents across the City. Some mentioned opportunities for the City to have one-on-one conversations with various community leaders to learn more about their experiences and provide information and support that was tailored to their needs. Participants also noted how important it would be for the City to be proactive in their engagement and outreach rather than reactive. They 1.2 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 44 mentioned how often, the City doesn’t intervene between landlords and tenants until situations are already tense. Participants envision a scenario where the City can step in before relationships are strained and provide appropriate resources to help both parties. Additionally, residents discussed potential for numerous coalitions to form across the City to make sure all communities are involved in decision-making processes and conversations about affordable housing. Participants wanted the City to make a concerted effort to recruit culturally competent community leaders to bring information to residents who have historically been excluded from these efforts. One resident shared the benefit of empowering these community leaders: “Would be good to have folks who understand about our culture. Many times people speak Spanish, but they criticize or judge us. If we are asking for help it is not because we want them to make us feel like we are less or they are superior.” Participants also had conversations about the best ways to recruit community leaders and culturally competent community members who would be willing to help build bridges and provide vital information. Because many of these residents are volunteers, there are numerous barriers tied to their full investment. One participant suggested: “Maybe community leaders could get paid for their time. People are busy and have other responsibilities. [It] might be fair for the City to offer some kind of payment to people who are there to serve and learn to support our community.” Overall, participants expressed a desire for the City to become more actively involved as a bridging institution between communities, residents, landlords, and other groups who are working on issues tied to housing affordability. U+2 and the Role of CSU While we attempted to keep consistent categories across all three nights of the Community Summit, discussions at this event contained a lot of information and feedback about not only the U+2 ordinance, but also Colorado State University’s role in addressing affordable housing issues. We felt the sheer volume of these comments warranted their own section to discuss community concerns, barriers mentioned, and what successful updates might look like. Community Concerns: Participants identified various negative impacts they felt U+2 was having on housing in the City. One of the most frequently discussed was the perception that this ordinance was one of the major drivers of increased housing costs because fewer residents could occupy one home without violating the ordinance. Participants stated this caused vacancy rates and housing stock to be lower because residents who would typically choose to live with numerous people—like students and multi-generational households—were unable to do so legally and had to occupy additional housing that would otherwise be available to other residents. Additionally, participants said the current occupancy limits put a strain on lower-income residents who would benefit from splitting rent across several tenants in housing that can accommodate them safely. They expressed frustration that they were not able to utilize space more efficiently in their current housing. This frustration was shared by owners and renters alike. Another issue discussed by numerous participants was the feeling that U+2 was pitting students and families throughout the City against one another and making it more challenging for diverse people in neighborhoods to build relationships and community with one another. Ultimately, participants felt 1.2 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 45 U+2 was overly restrictive and hampered the ability for neighborhoods to have diversity in race, income, age, and ability. Participants did acknowledge and understand the original reason for the current ordinance, but many of them felt it did not appropriately address the problems it sought to solve, namely student partying and parking issues in neighborhoods. Residents said these problems still exist, and because many across the City are willingly violating the policy in order to make ends meet, it may make more sense to shift more responsibility onto landlords or management companies to address these issues rather than a City-wide ordinance. Some potential solutions discussed the option for family definitions to incorporate multi-generational households or additional family members who may not be related by blood or marriage. Another option proposed was to make occupancy limits based on the number of bedrooms in a house rather than a set number across all types of housing. One participant provided a few more specifics: “Are there factors which can be considered to adjust it? Size, driveways, parking, etc.? These factors could be considered. Bedrooms are not the only factor. I have friends with huge houses but only three bedrooms. Balance factors such as parking availability, size, space, bedrooms, rental licensing factors, etc.” Participants in these breakout rooms grappled with the complexity of changing or updating the current ordinance, acknowledging there is no easy answer or solution. However, most did feel that U+2 was overly restrictive, and a more case-by-case approach should be taken by the City. CSU’s role in housing students. In most conversations about occupancy limits and student populations, the role of Colorado State University becomes an additional topic of discussion. Summit Two was no exception to this. While participants discussed potential adjustments to U+2, they also talked about how CSU could play a bigger role in making sure students had access to housing that wouldn’t deplete housing stock throughout the rest of the City. Some participants felt that up until recently, CSU had not been appropriately involved in matters tied to student housing and overall affordability issues in the City. Additionally, some expressed sentiments that CSU was not a “good neighbor” for many residents in the City, especially those who live near campus or the stadium. They expressed frustration especially tied to parking—permits required to park near their own homes, lack of parking on game days, etc. Many felt that CSU needed to play a more active role in making sure single-family homes did not get rented out by students due to a lack of available student housing. Many also wondered how Off-Campus Life and other resource centers at the university might be able to take a more active role in housing policy throughout the City, especially in conversations about occupancy limits and relationships between families and students who may live in the same neighborhood. Participants felt that in terms of student behavior and accountability, CSU should be a stronger partner with the City to enforce certain rules and expectations. There were employees of CSU in these conversations. They noted there were certain resources already in place but said it may be beneficial for CSU to work harder on educating students about being good neighbors. Overall, Participants struggled with balancing the desire for diverse neighborhoods including students and families with the desire for single families to have access to affordable housing as well. They were hopeful CSU could play a bigger role in future conversations about these issues. 1.2 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 46 Monday, April 26th Build and Preserve Affordable Housing Key Information The tables on this page share only two demographic categories we asked on the RSVP survey. You can find a full accounting of the demographic information from participants of Community Summit 3 in the Appendix. Hispanic/ Latinx Non‐ Hispanic /Latinx ETHNICITY HOUSING STATUS Rent Own 1.2 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 47 Summit 3 Strategies Strategies for the third Community Summit focused on issues related to building and preserving affordable housing. Things like financing for development, the ability for tenants or non-profits to buy affordable housing and examining the City’s current affordability term. The following strategies were discussed:  Create a new dedicated revenue stream to fund the affordable housing fund.  Expand partnerships with local Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) to offer gap financing and low-cost loan pool for affordable housing developments.  Require public sector right of first offer/refusal for affordable developments.  Extend the City’s affordability term.  Allow tenants right of first offer/refusal for cooperative ownership of multifamily or manufactured housing communities.  Assess displacement and gentrification risk. All strategies at this event had at least one overflow group, indicating many participants wanted to discuss them. What follows is a discussion of major themes that arose during these conversations which are divided into three specific sections: community concerns, barriers to implementation, and successful implementation. Community Concerns The concerns identified by participants at Summit Three were similar to those discussed at our first Summit on Thursday, April 22nd. These themes cut across each night of the Summit in unique ways and were explained somewhat differently depending on the strategy participants discussed. Participants again shared concerns about the inaccessibility and cost of affordable housing and numerous concerns about how changes might impact their current housing or financial situation. Affordable housing is inaccessible to many. A common refrain in numerous breakout groups across all three Summit events was the acknowledgment that affordable housing in its current state is still unattainable for many residents who live in the City of Fort Collins. Participants noted that in the last several years, more people have been pushed out of the City due to increasing housing prices and that residents with accessibility issues are often even more impacted by these issues. Additionally, participants mentioned knowing numerous people in the City who have been on waitlists for affordable housing units for years and still have not been able to get into housing. One participant noted a particular concern about lack of choice: “I currently live in an affordable housing community. One thing about this strategy that concerns me is the City giving Housing Catalyst all the affordable housing properties/projects. There would be little equity in this approach as it gives those that depend on affordable housing little option in terms of choice.” Some participants expressed frustration at people outside the City who buy smaller, more affordable housing to fix up and sell at an increased cost, further reducing the available stock of affordable housing. Many acknowledged that simply building more housing would not necessarily guarantee it was affordable to all—the City would need to take steps to ensure that would be the case. A few participants who lived outside the City shared their frustration that they cannot live where they work and that most affordable housing is either too expensive, or already occupied. 1.2 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 48 In groups that discussed the right of first offer/refusal for affordable developments and multi-family communities, some participants expressed concern that even that is unaffordable for many who live in those communities. Many wondered what mechanisms would be in place to make sure these residents had enough time to secure the funding to complete these purchases, and additionally, what might happen years down the road if many of the cooperative owners could no longer afford their share of the payment. Overall, participants seemed to realize affordability is an issue that cuts across the income spectrum. There was also much discussion about wages in the City, with many noting that the issues tied to affordable housing may not be solved unless there is an increase in the minimum wage. As one participant said: “I don’t know if the City can solve it. I think it’s an income issue more than anything else. I think minimum wage is too low and has been for a long time. It just adds to the overall problem long term. Perhaps the City can raise the minimum wage within the City. That could help but would require a lot of political will and would face a lot of opposition.” Impacts on current housing/neighborhoods. In breakout groups discussing the strategy tied to assessing displacement and gentrification risk, participants expressed numerous concerns about how continued changes and improvements to the City would permanently change the shape of some neighborhoods. Participants noted concerns about historic districts and changing views if high rises were allowed in the downtown area or in other places throughout the City, some noted these continued improvements may eventually make currently affordable areas unaffordable. One participant said: “I have previous experience with gentrification. People with lots of disposable income came in, purchased and renovated to drive up the price. This was previously an artist community.” Many homeowners participating in the conversation shared concerns that adding funding to a land bank or trying to find additional resources to build affordable housing would have the consequence of increasing their already high property taxes. Participants understood that additional resources were needed but were concerned about their ability to pay more. Additionally, residents in mobile home parks were concerned that cooperative ownership would make their living situation more expensive. Some participants noted that owning a home does not necessarily mean you are more financially secure and that additional costs added on to owning a home would impact those with the lowest incomes the most. One participant noted: “You could argue that tax would be tougher equity-wise. The idea that a big home was already paid for once, could not keep going at the current rate. It would be detrimental for people who are money-insecure.” Across all three nights of the Summit, it became clear that residents in manufactured home communities are deeply concerned about how the changing landscape of affordable housing and the City itself would impact their current living situation. Many noted they feel the City does not give them enough information or resources to understand what could happen to their homes in the future. Some expressed concerns that if Hickory Village became a cooperative and then residents eventually wanted to move, they would not be able to do so. 1.2 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 49 Barriers to Implementation Participants at the third Summit discussed clear barriers tied to a lack of education and awareness and overall lack of resources, support, and collaboration throughout the city for affordable housing needs. These barriers are similar to those shared in the previous Summit events. Lack of education/awareness. The strategies at this Summit were the most technical of all the strategies discussed over the three events, which created much confusion in breakout groups. As we explained in the previous section about event design, there was a representative from the City or the Home2Health Core Team in each breakout group to provide background information about each strategy and answer any questions participants had. In reading the notes from this Summit it was often clear that participants had more questions than answers. In many groups we noted that facilitators struggled to keep the conversation tied to discussion questions, and often time was spent in question and answer with the City representative. Participants asked clarifying questions about everything from property taxes, definitions of gentrification, land banks, and many topics in between. They seemed to struggle to come up with definitive answers to many of the discussion questions because they did not have enough information about the strategy being discussed or the specifics tied to many of the more technical approaches. Additionally, many participants noted there are many residents in the City of Fort Collins who do not have access to education or resources that would help them maintain their current housing. One participant was discussed helping a person at risk of losing their home and how lack of awareness can be harmful for renters: “He was cratered financially, and my desire was not to throw him out but figure out how we can get him and his two kids to the next step. The property management company went to Neighbor to Neighbor, which was great. The other thing I would say is that when he rented the house, he didn’t know what renting the housing meant. [He] didn’t realize utility payments, property maintenance, etc.” Regarding the strategy addressing cooperative ownership of manufactured home communities, participants noted the City would need to do a lot of work to properly communicate to residents on the front end of these potential transactions. Participants wondered what the process would be for informing residents their community is going up for sale and how much time they would have to pool their money and put in an offer before it was released to the wider market. Numerous participants noted a need for the City to examine the practices in other states that had been successful and work to model their programs off those successes rather than starting with a blank slate. Lack of resources and collaboration. Similar to conversations at the other Summits, participants again noted their concern for a lack of resources throughout the City to meet its affordable housing goals and how it would be possible for the City to increase those resources without creating an additional burden on residents. Additionally, they noted that lack of collaboration across sectors and within the City itself made it difficult to make progress on many of these issues. Numerous participants said that land is one of our most valuable and scarce resources, so while it is important to continue building affordable housing, if we don’t look at innovative ways of doing so, we will eventually run out of space to build. One participant said: “While increasing supply is one thing, we can’t build ourselves out of the problem. We will sooner run out of resources and the prices will still go up. We need to consider land capacity.” 1.2 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 50 In relation to this, many participants also discussed the recent Hughes Stadium vote which focused on what the City should do with the new parcel of land left by the vacated stadium. Participants understood the importance of open space to many in the community but felt that setting aside such a large parcel of land for open space was a “missed opportunity”. Discussions centered around the tensions between open space and utilizing land for additional housing. Many participants also noted that code changes would be necessary to make sure we could utilize land more efficiently. Additional discussions focused on how the City could conserve resources by updating and repurposing housing and areas that already have certain infrastructure in place rather than focusing solely on new builds. This was identified as one possible solution to the lack of resources. While discussions about land and other natural resources happened across multiple groups, discussions about financial resources also happened frequently. Many participants noted that the cost of building housing continues to increase, and the City is already struggling to provide enough funding and incentives to developers and builders of affordable housing. Across numerous groups participants acknowledged this challenge and hoped the City could find creative ways to increase their funding sources without placing excess burdens on residents in the community. To this end, participants talked often about the need for increased collaboration across many sectors in the City to address this challenge. Some discussed a potential solution tied to bringing private businesses on board who might be willing to pay an increased tax to create more funding for affordable housing. Additionally, they noted that the cost of housing is often made more expensive because of insurance and liability issues for builders. A few participants noted that it’s often a challenge to get the proper insurance to begin building housing developments like condominiums and wondered how the City might be able to provide more financial support for those builders and developers. Ultimately, participants acknowledged that lack of financial resources and figuring out how to secure more of those resources would be a considerable barrier to implementing many of these strategies. Many felt that additional changes to codes and the way the City prioritizes money would need to be made to address this barrier. As one participant said: “All the approaches that will be taken by the City are going to cost money and the City doesn’t prioritize enough to reduce the disparity between incomes, largely due to zoning and policies. The City needs to prioritize budgeting to address this disparity ahead of ‘feel good outcomes.’” Successful Implementation As with the other major themes noted above, most of the themes about successful implementation were similar to previous conversations at the Summit events. Participants at this event identified three major markers of what successful implementation of these various strategies might look like in the community: increased access to affordable housing, increased community support and collaboration, and more access to education and awareness. Increased access to affordable housing. Many participants discussed how they feared Fort Collins was becoming a resort town like Vail with lots of great things in the community, but limited housing options. They noted many strategies at Summit Three would work to ensure the City could have great jobs, a great university, and great housing stock to match the demand. An ideal scenario for many of the participants was housing growth to match the job growth in the City. 1.2 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 51 Numerous participants also discussed the need for workforce specific housing to address continued job growth. Across several groups participants felt that bringing in businesses to help make this a reality would be beneficial. One participant said: “I would suggest that if you have Habitat [for Humanity] be your developer to do workforce housing, they should stay as workforce housing for 50-60 years. If they sell it, it still has to remain workforce housing.” In one group, the conversation focused on how increased partnerships with local Community Development Financial Institutions would provide more funding to create new developments. They argued that even if not all housing in a given development was affordable, increasing the inventory overall would be a net benefit for affordable housing in the City. Many noted more flexible funding that didn’t rely heavily on grant cycles would also allow the City to build and maintain more housing. As participants continued to discuss the increase of affordable housing that may happen as a result of these strategies, they also focused on how true success would be marked not only by more affordable housing, but more accessible housing as well. This meant many things for participants: housing that can be accessed by people with disabilities, housing that is closer to community resources like grocery stores, bus lines, and open spaces, and diverse types of housing that can meet the needs of each unique resident in the City. Participants did stress however, that the City needed to make sure to focus on making affordable housing available not only to owners, but to renters as well. There was consensus among the groups that these strategies would only be fully successful if affordable housing was available across income spectrums and housing types. Increased community support and collaboration. At each night of the Summit, and in numerous discussions during our Community Guide conversations, residents and participants noted lack of community support as a major issue. In these groups, participants felt many of the strategies they were discussing would solve this problem and they felt that in order to fully achieve success, it would take an increase in support programs and collaboration across many sectors. Participants in the group discussing displacement and gentrification risk noted that increased community supports for those with mental health conditions or those suffering from addiction would be vital to success. Many felt the current support structures were not designed to help these residents, rather to penalize them. They discussed that support systems were available in other cities that could be implemented in Fort Collins. One participant noted how challenging it can be when you’re experiencing homelessness with limited supports: “When people lose their homes, they are abused by police here. That’s making it impossible for them to get back on their feet. You need to make $2,000 a month to get help from Habitat. They’re being blamed for a situation we are creating.” This group discussed a model from Pueblo that sends social workers out with police officers to assist with calls related to people experiencing homelessness. The social worker can then help 1.2 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 52 residents connect to resources. Numerous participants felt a similar model would be beneficial here as well. In addition to community supports for those having trouble maintaining housing, participants discussed how important it would be for the City to provide more support for builders and developers. As mentioned in the previous section about barriers to implementation, for many builders and developers there is an incredible liability risk that drives up the cost of building housing. Numerous participants felt that in order for any of these strategies to be successful the City would have to collaborate with diverse groups and funding institutions to provide support to make building housing more affordable so developers could then pass those savings on to owners or tenants. Overall, participants acknowledged that strong collaborative ties across the City would be one of the most helpful ways to ensure the success of the various strategies they discussed. They were hopeful these new collaborations would not only provide more funding to build housing, but also help people throughout the City have greater access to vital resources they need to stay housed and healthy. More access to education and awareness. Finally, participants again discussed the importance of education and awareness in making any of these strategies successful. It was especially clear at Summit Three that many participants did not have all the information they needed to fully discuss the more technical strategies. They noted true success would be dependent on continued education efforts throughout the City. When participants discussed cooperative ownership for multi-family units or manufactured housing communities, they expressed a desire for some entity within the City to teach them how to complete the process of purchasing. They said information would need to be readily available for them to be willing to take on such a risk. One participant shared some things that would be helpful for them regarding education: “Printed materials in English and Spanish. People from the community to spread the information to others. Meetings to explain and debrief on what the documents mean. Helpful to have people that speak both languages as well.” Other participants noted that while there may be information and resources available throughout the City, there needs to be an improvement in how that information is shared with the community so everyone is aware they have access to it. Participants also continued to express interest in being more involved in the implementation of many of these strategies. Noting they would be willing to attend more educational events, community conversations, and be involved in various ways if the City provided them with accessible opportunities to do so. 1.2 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 53 NEXT STEPS.    1.2 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 54 Next Steps In the sections above we presented information that highlights many important insights for the City of Fort Collins to consider as they move forward with implementing various strategies in the Housing Strategic Plan. Below, we detail some potential next steps and lessons learned.   Education is key. Across all three Community Summit events, it was clear that more information is needed about various strategies included in the Housing Strategic Plan. Numerous participants expressed a need for more information and many others shared confusion about what specific strategies were proposing to change or fix. Participants self-selected the strategies they discussed, but this did not always mean they had a clear understanding of those strategies. More likely, many participants attended these events hoping to get more information from the City. To have fuller, more informed conversations about the HSP and its various strategies, we suggest that the City of Fort Collins continue to provide education and awareness about the plan and offer a variety of ways for residents to engage with and learn information about the strategies within it. A desire for more robust and accessible community engagement was articulated throughout each Phase of the Community Guide process as well as during the Community Summit events. Providing educational opportunities, especially for the more technical scenarios in the HSP, would be beneficial to making sure the community has a full understanding of the document itself and feels more confident staying involved in future engagement efforts. The need for change needs to be balanced with the unique needs of neighborhoods. There is also still a considerable tension around the need for expanded affordable housing options and the needs of neighbors and neighborhoods. Many of these needs are diverse and change depending on which neighborhood you’re discussing. However, most participants across all phases of Community Guides and at the Community Summit events were aware that lack of affordable housing was a problem and recognized a need for change, but many were also reluctant to have that change happen in or near their neighborhoods. They expressed many concerns tied to their property values, the changing landscape of the area, decreasing amounts of accessible green space, and potential changes to the skyline. Many residents are also concerned about how affordable housing developments will be funded without creating and additional cost burden on them through increased taxes. Additionally, many residents were aware that NIMBY attitudes would create a significant barrier to implementing numerous strategies within the HSP, but also seemed to feel those attitudes could be changed with additional community conversations and more intentional City outreach. Continue to reflect on the impacts of COVID-19 on community engagement. Most of the engagement during this two-year process was completed during the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting economic shutdowns and gathering restrictions. We noticed a measurable drop-off in Community Guide participants and engagement during Phase 2 which coincided with the beginning of the pandemic. It was clear throughout the remaining phases of this process community members were overwhelmed. Many experienced personal issues tied to housing, health, job security, and childcare. The result of these stresses often meant fewer participants in Community Guide conversations, and fewer attendees at the Community Summit events, as well as the Community Summit Wrap-Up event held on May 3, 2021. At each event, we experienced between 30%-50% attrition when comparing attendee lists to RSVP lists. There are likely many intersecting factors causing this, but one of the most prevalent was “Zoom Fatigue”. While residents expressed a strong desire to be part of this engagement process and create partnerships for implementation, they made it clear that online conversations were challenging and often less rewarding than face-to-face interactions. 1.2 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Home2Health Project Report 55 We are hopeful that more robust face-to-face engagement becomes possible as many of these strategies move toward implementation. We would also encourage the City to consider unique forms of community engagement that could address many of these barriers as we move toward more normalcy. Hybrid options for the community will likely be helpful going forward as numerous residents may still feel unsafe or uncomfortable with in-person events in the coming months. Address concerns and fears in manufactured home communities. At each Community Summit event, several residents in mobile home parks across the City attended so they could voice their concerns and opinions. We would be remiss to not highlight that here, as often residents in these communities are not represented in conversations about affordable housing. Residents of these communities expressed fear that increased building of affordable housing may annex some of their mobile home communities and confusion and concern about the current topic of the Hickory Village purchase. Most often, we noted that residents in mobile home parks feel they don’t have access to important information they need about their rights as tenants, how to access legal and other housing support, and what the future holds for manufactured home communities across the City. It is key to make sure future engagement efforts continue to include these residents and that increased education opportunities are provided. Accessibility is vital. As we mentioned above, there continue to be numerous barriers to fully engaging the Fort Collins community on issues that directly impact them. Language is one of the biggest barriers, and funding from the Health Disparities Grant allowed us to see what truly is possible with community engagement when we utilize interpretation and translation services from professionals who are embedded in these communities. While the logistics of accommodating two languages in breakout groups were challenging to navigate, this work is essential for authentic and inclusive community engagement. The Language Justice Model is a transformative tool for these conversations and we heard from Spanish-and English-speakers alike who appreciated the experience of being able to communicate together in the language of their hearts. We hope to have created a model for the City and other partners showing what is possible as they look toward the future and implementation of strategies in the Housing Strategic Plan. We also hope to continue this work by examining what other languages we can incorporate into our future events to make them as accessible as possible. We would encourage the City to continue their efforts toward language accessibility and also consider how to address other barriers to community engagement to improve equity and inclusion. Continued community involvement is necessary. Finally, there is a clear desire among many residents to stay involved in conversations about implementation. These desires were echoed throughout the two-year process. Based on community input, it seems vital that any future community engagement efforts be coupled with an educational component. As mentioned in the sections above, many participants, including those who had more technical expertise on the various strategies, needed more information about many of the strategies in the HSP. There is also interest among many communities to build a stronger collaborative relationship with the City of Fort Collins. We see this as an opportunity to continue engagement processes like the Community Guide program, and potentially implement educational workshops that the community can attend to learn more about the HSP and provide additional input about the strategies within it. 1.2 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Home2Health/Center for Public Deliberation - Community Summit Report (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) MEMORANDUM To: City of Fort Collins From: Mollie Fitzpatrick, Root Policy Research Re: Affordability Goal Refinement Date: May 6, 2021; revised June 10, 2021 In 2015, the City of Fort Collins adopted the following affordability goal: 10% of housing stock be deed restricted and affordable [to households earning less than 80% AMI1] by 2040. This goal provides a clear target and an important benchmark for the City as it works to ensure that everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford. However, as noted in the 2021 Housing Strategic Plan, “the goal, as it is currently defined, reflects a broad approach to affordability and does not address targeted needs by price point or tenure… The nuances in housing needs, as well as the importance of tailoring new tools and strategies to achieve the city’s affordability goal, suggest that the City should consider defining subgoals.” To that end, the Housing Strategic Plan prioritizes refining the local affordable housing goal. Specifically, goal refinement would set more specific housing goals by income level so that it is easier to track progress and convey housing goals to developers.2 It is important to note that the primary objective is not to fundamentally change the current goal, but to refine the income targeting to ensure effective implementation of policies, programs, and funding designed to achieve the goal. City staff evaluated each of the following considerations to determine effective refinements to the goal:  Current housing needs (by income) and gaps in supply/demand for housing;  AMI requirements (and/or constraints) of critical non-local funding sources;  AMI targets of key partners in housing development (and service provision); and  The City’s sphere of influence (existing and new tools to achieve the City’s affordable housing goal). This memo documents the considerations outlined above and the City’s refinements. It begins with an overview of goal progress to date. 1 AMI or “Area Median Income” is set annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for local areas and is generally the metric by which households qualify for various housing programs. 2 https://www.fcgov.com/housing/files/20-22913-housing-strategic-plan-no-appendices.pdf?1618855189 ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Strategy 10 - Goal Refinement Memo (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Page 2 How Are We Doing So Far? Are We Meeting Our Goal? In 2015, affordable housing made up 5% of the City’s housing stock. Over the past five years since Council adopted the 2015 plan, the City and its partners have added 373 new affordable homes with 240 under construction. However, the total number of housing units has also increased proportionately to 70,692, which means that affordable units still make up only 5% of the overall housing stock. Overall, Fort Collins has 3,534 affordable units in its affordable housing inventory, which falls short by 708 units of where we should be by now. To get back on track to achieve our 10% goal by 2040, we need to increase the amount of affordable housing by 282 units every year from 2020 onward. Every year the community is unable to reach its annual affordable housing target requires current and future generations to make up the difference. -- 2021 Housing Strategic Plan, page 26 Figure 1, below, summarizes the excerpt above from the City’s Housing Strategic Plan. Figure 1. Goal Tracking: How are we doing so far? Source: City of Fort Collins Housing Strategic Plan and Root Policy Research. In total, there are about 3,500 affordable housing units in the City of Fort Collins. The majority of these (3,131) are rental units and the remainder (337) are ownership units. On average, the city has built about 120 affordable units per year (111 rental units and 9 ownership units) since the year 2000. This means the City will need to more than double its annual affordable production (or preservation) to reach the target of 282 units per year required to achieve the goal by 2040. Figure 2 (on the following page) displays annual affordable unit production by tenure since 1972 (it does not include units currently in the pipeline). The City acknowledges that current resources and incentives for affordable housing are not sufficient to meet the city’s affordability goal. 1.3 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Strategy 10 - Goal Refinement Memo (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Page 3 Figure 2. Affordable Units Built by Year and Tenure Source: City of Fort Collins and Root Policy Research. As shown in Figure 3, 60 percent of affordable units are designated for households earning less than 50% AMI. However, affordable units built in recent years are more likely to target households at 60% or 80% AMI. Figure 3. Affordable Inventory by AMI Source: City of Fort Collins and Root Policy Research. 1.3 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Strategy 10 - Goal Refinement Memo (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Page 4 Existing Needs and Gaps The first step in refining the goal is better defining the City’s housing needs. The following figures compare supply and demand for both rental and ownership housing at different income levels (as a percentage of AMI). The figures illustrate that:  Rental needs are concentrated below 60% AMI; while  Ownership needs are concentrated below 120% AMI. A shortage of rental or owner housing at any given affordability level means the households in that income range must “rent up,” (or “buy up”), spending more than 30 percent of their income to find housing. Note that the figures show cumulative supply and demand, meaning each bar builds upon (and includes) the preceding affordability category (e.g., the 0 to 60% bar includes inventory from the 0 to 30% bar as well). Figure 4. Gaps Analysis, Fort Collins, 2019 Note: Income limits assume a 2-person household and allow for 30% of monthly income for housing costs including 30-year fixed mortgage with 4.0% interest rate and 10% downpayment. Source: 2019 ACS, Larimer County Assessor Sales Database 2020, HUD 2019 Income Limits, and Root Policy Research. 1.3 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Strategy 10 - Goal Refinement Memo (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Page 5 AMI by Program, Partner, and Funding Source In addition to targeting the City’s housing needs, it is also important to consider the AMI requirements (and/or constraints) of critical, non-local funding sources and the AMI targets of key partners in housing development (and service provision). The City’s affordability goal should help leverage existing funds and programs while targeting resources to identified needs. Refinements to the goal should not create barriers to utilizing existing funding by setting priorities in conflict with allowed use of federal or state funds and programs. Figure 5 shows the income requirement or target of the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program and the Private Activity Bond program—both state administered funding sources that drive affordable housing development. It also shows the income targets for strategic local partnerships—the organizations delivering the highest volume of affordable rental and ownership units (Housing Catalyst, Habitat for Humanity, and Elevation Community Land Trust). As indicated, most rental programs target 60% AMI and below, while owner programs go up to 80% or 150% of AMI. Figure 5. AMI by Program, Partner, or Funding Source Source: Root Policy Research. State Program or Local Partner Income Requirement/Target Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) 60% AMI (rental) Private Activity Bond (PAB) 60% AMI (rental); 115% (ownership) Housing Catalyst 60% AMI (rental) Habitat for Humanity and Elevation Community Land Trust (ECLT) 80% AMI (owner) Metro Down Payment Assistance 150% AMI (owner) AMI targets for current City of Fort Collins housing programs are shown in Figure 6. Figure 6. City of Fort Collins Program Targets Source: City of Fort Collins and Root Policy Research. City Program Income Target Incentives <80% AMI; <30% AMI for fee credit Land Bank Align with Housing Strategic Plan; rental must be <60% AMI City Funds Align with Housing Strategic Plan Conclusion: Refined Affordability Goal In conclusion:  Current needs and gaps are concentrated at less than 50%/60% AMI for rental and less than 80% or 120% for ownership;  AMI requirements by funding source and strategic partners are concentrated at less than 60% AMI for rental and either 80% or 150% for ownership; and 1.3 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Strategy 10 - Goal Refinement Memo (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Page 6  The City’s sphere of influence applies to both existing and new tools (as proposed in the Housing Strategic Plan). At present existing tools are designed to align with the Housing Strategic Plan but also specifically target less than 30% AMI rentals (through feed credit requirements), less than 60% AMI rentals for land bank developments, and less than 80% AMI units for other programs. Based on the considerations summarized above (and detailed in this memo), the City has articulated the following refinements/subgoals to the adopted affordable housing goal: Fort Collins aims to have 10% of its housing stock be deed restricted and affordable [to households making <80% AMI] by 2040.  As the City works toward this goal, it will continue to prioritize rental affordability that focuses on 60% AMI and below.  The City will continue to prioritize ownership affordability that reaches 80% AMI and below, but also acknowledges the gap in ownership affordability for households earning between 80% and 120% AMI. To that end, the City may consider future tools and incentives that help address this need outside the scope of our existing goal. 1.3 Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Strategy 10 - Goal Refinement Memo (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) EQUITY AND OPPORTUNITY ASSESSMENTFORT COLLINS, COATTACHMENT 41.4Packet Pg. 54Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic Equity & Opportunity AssessmentEquity and Opportunity Assessments (EOAs) are commonly used to identify and understand the social and economic challenges and opportunities of a city and help create policies for inclusive and equitable development.‘The concept of inclusive, equitable development is to improve neighborhood livability, while working to ensure that new development and neighborhood change does not disproportionately impact current residents.’ -Bates, 20131.4Packet Pg. 55Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic Equity & Opportunity AssessmentEOAs explore the dynamics between three important components:ŏDisplacement vulnerabilityindicators, such as race, income, housing tenure and educational attainmentŏMarket pressureindicators, such as change in housing costsŏCommunity opportunities, such as walkability, transportation access, education and employment opportunities1.4Packet Pg. 56Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic Equity & Opportunity Assessment1. DISPLACEMENT VULNERABILITY2. GENTRIFICATION RISK3. ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITIESEOAWhere might residents be at risk of displacement if investments or policy changes occur?What opportunities do certain locations provide to current and future residents? How can deficiencies be addressed?How are market pressures currently impacting vulnerable communities?1.4Packet Pg. 57Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic Gentrification and Displacement – Bates MethodologyThis methodology is adapted from a section of a 2010 study* by Dr. Lisa Bates for the City of Portland •Bates’ risk assessment is a sophisticated multi-part analysis assessing the susceptibility or risk of gentrification for different neighborhoods.•We use the methodology from her housing displacement vulnerability index, part of the first level of her analysis. •This assessment does not include a full gentrification susceptibility study* “Gentrification and Displacement Study: implementing an equitable inclusive development strategy in the context of gentrification”Bates’ analysis resulted in a neighborhood typology classification that represented different stages of gentrification.1.4Packet Pg. 58Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic Bates methodology – where used?•Portland, OR•Urban Displacement Project – City of Portland Dataset•Austin, TXBy Cascadia Partners:•Pittsburgh, PA•Salem, OR•Lake Oswego, OR1.4Packet Pg. 59Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic Benefits of Approach•Replicable•Simple / Explainable•Uses open data sources•Separate elements allow for more flexible policy use.Bates, 2013 -1.4Packet Pg. 60Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic Scale of Analysis: Census TractsRight: Census Tract Boundaries for Fort Collins1.4Packet Pg. 61Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic 1. Displacement Vulnerability IndexThe displacement vulnerability index helps us understand what neighborhoods have residents with characteristics that make resisting displacement more difficult.It is not a measure of how much displacement has occurred or is occurring. Rather it is a measure of the potentialfor displacement if market pressure increases. 1.4Packet Pg. 62Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic The displacement vulnerability index (DVI) uses a set of demographic indicators to measure resident’s vulnerability to residential displacement. These factors include:•Education: % of Pop who lack a college degree•Income: % of Pop whose income is below 80% MFI•Housing Tenure: % of Pop who rent their home•Race: % of Pop who belong to a Community of Color•Disability: % of Pop with any disabilityCensus tracts designated as vulnerable have above average populations with characteristics that make resisting displacement more difficult.1. Displacement Vulnerability IndexVulnerable tracts defined as those that have at least 2 of these 5 factors. 1.4Packet Pg. 63Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic 1. Displacement Vulnerability IndexVulnerability Factor Data Source% Renters Census ACS (2015 - 2019) 5-year estimates, Census Tracts% Communities of Color (CoC)*Census ACS (2015 - 2019) 5-year estimates, Census Tracts% Population age 25+ w/out a bachelor’s degree Census ACS (2015 - 2019) 5-year estimates, Census Tracts% Population with a disability Census ACS (2015 - 2019) 5-year estimates, Census Tracts% Households with Income at or Below 80% of Larimer County HAMFI** HUD CHAS (2013 - 2017) 5-year estimates, Census Tracts* Communities of Color defined as total population excluding “Non-Hispanic White”** HUD CHAS is not produced on the same schedule as the ACS. HUD Area Median Family Income (HAMFI) takes family size into account.1.4Packet Pg. 64Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic 2. Gentrification RiskRisk of gentrification and displacement are measured by census tract, combining the three following elements into a typology:Displacement vulnerability indexDemographic change indexHousing market appreciationEARLY STAGESMID-STAGESLATE STAGESNeighborhood Typologyrepresents stages of gentrification1.4Packet Pg. 65Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic Neighborhood Typology6 stages of gentrificationEARLY STAGESMID-STAGESLATE STAGESStage 1:SusceptibleStage 2: Early - Type 1Stage 3 :Early - Type 2Stage 4:DynamicStage 5:LateStage 6:Continued Loss- Housing market in nearby tracts are high value and/or high appreciating. - Experiencing little to no demographic change.- Above average levels of vulnerable populations.- Tract experienced high appreciation rates over the last decade but home values remain low or moderate. - Experiencing demographic change indicative of displacement. - Still has above average levels of vulnerable populations.- Housing market is high value but still potential for further loss of affordable housing. - Tract experienced gentrification -related demographic change. - Few remaining vulnerable households are at high risk of displacement.Data sources: Decennial Census, ACS, CHAS 1.4Packet Pg. 66Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic 3. Access to OpportunityŏDensity - jobs and populationŏDistance to transitŏDesign - intersection density or block sizeŏDiversity of usesŏDestinationsʊEmployment AccessʊEducational AccessʊParksʊGrocery stores or retail (if available)Factors and weights to be determined in August 20211.4Packet Pg. 67Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic 3. Access to Opportunity1.4Packet Pg. 68Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic 3. Access to Opportunity1.4Packet Pg. 69Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic 3. Access to Opportunity1.4Packet Pg. 70Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic Production ScheduleŏTask 1: Refine Methodology -JuneŏTask 2: Displacement Vulnerability Index -July 30thŏTask 3: Opportunity Index -July 30thŏTask 4: Gentrification Stages Typology -Sept 3rd1.4Packet Pg. 71Attachment: Strategy 1 - Equity and Opportunity Assessment Methodology (10447 : Housing Strategic 1 Communication & Public Involvement 215 N. Mason Street PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6882 970.221.6586 - fax fcgov.com PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PLAN PROJECT TITLE: Land Use Code Update: Phase 1 OVERALL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT LEVEL: Involve/Collaborate The City of Fort Collins Public Engagement Spectrum (Attachment 1) provides guidance for the most appropriate levels of engagement and techniques that may be employed during the LUC Phase 1 Update. Overall, staff has identified the “involve” and “collaborate” levels as the most effective approach to community engagement for this project. PROJECT PURPOSE: Through code reorganization and housing-related code updates, implement key policy direction in both the Housing Strategic Plan and City Plan. BOTTOM LINE QUESTION: How should the City update housing-related requirements in the Land Use Code to achieve the Housing Strategic Plan vision that everyone has stable, healthy housing they can afford and to align with the policy direction in City Plan? ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY: The engagement strategy for the LUC Phase 1 Update will focus on strategic outreach and communication to three primary groups of stakeholders: City leadership/decision-makers, frequent users of the LUC, and the broader community. City Leadership – Inform and educate leadership about the current state of land use regulation, the case(s) for changing the LUC, and the expected impacts, benefits, and tradeoffs of housing-related LUC changes. Communicate with leadership about the feedback we are hearing from the community on LUC topics. Frequent LUC Users – Convene focus groups of people with expertise in housing, affordable housing, real estate, finance, and/or development to align existing efforts, provide input, and advise City staff and consultants. Participants should have familiarity with the LUC in addition to content expertise. Engagement techniques may include working meetings, interviews or small-group discussions, and/or brainstorming sessions. Broader Community – Convene a working stakeholder group of people with lived experience and/or content expertise in the housing and land use system. Participants may or may not be “code experts” or frequent code users. Focus on how to reach those most affected by proposed LUC changes to understand what these issues mean to them in the context of their lived experience. This critical feedback will be integrated into community conversations about potential options for LUC housing topics (e.g. accessory dwelling units, density, parking, etc.). Clearly communicate ways for the broader community to play a role throughout the process. Engagement techniques may include monthly working meetings, expert panel discussions, and/or brainstorming sessions. All engagement efforts throughout this process will be aligned with other concurrent City efforts as much as possible. Examples of potential areas of collaboration include staff-led projects investigating Occupancy and Rental Programming, Manufactured Housing, Building Code Updates, and Impact Fee Updates. Engagement for this project will have four distinct stages: 1.Confirmation (June 2021) – confirm scope, list of potential changes, priorities 2.Information (August-September 2021) – topic-specific educational/information events 3.Input (October-November 2021) – topic-specific community dialogues about proposed changes 4.Adoption (January-March 2022) – present final draft to decision-makers for adoption ATTACHMENT 5 1.5 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Strategies 7, 13, 14, 15, 16 - LUC Phase 1 Engagement Plan (draft) (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 2 KEY STAKEHOLDERS: Leadership: • City Council • Executive Lead Team (ELT) • LUC Phase 1 Steering Committee or Affordable Housing Executive Team • Planning and Zoning Commission Frequent LUC Users: • Chamber LUC committee • Board of Realtors • Downtown Development Authority • Residential developers and builders (multiple scales – small to large) • Affordable Housing developers • Home2Health participants with LUC expertise • Members of LUC Updates Core Team or Subject Matter Experts (as appropriate) Broad Community: • Residents, both property owners and renters • Business Associations • Chamber of Commerce • Non-profit partners and service providers • Residential developers and builders (multiple scales – small to large) • Affordable Housing developers and residents • Home2Health participants with interest in LUC updates • Low-income and/or cost-burdened residents • Students • “First time/last time” development customers • HOA representatives • Homebuilders’ association or apartment association PROJECT GOVERNANCE AND MEETING FREQUENCY: Steering Commi�ee Role: Strategy, Exec Support Advisory Team Role: Guidance, Decision -Making Core Team Role: Working Team, Content Subject Ma�er Experts Role: On-Call Expertise Quarterly Monthly Weekly TBD •City Manager •Deputy City Manager •City A�orney •PDT Director •Chief Sust. Officer •U�li�es Director •Planning Manager •CDNS Director •Housing Manager •City Engineer •Deputy PDT Director •Meaghan Overton, co-lead •Noah Beals , co-lead •Planning •FC Moves •Engineering •Social Sustainability •City A�orney ’s Office •Water U�li�es •Building Department •Neighborhood Services •Equity Office •Historic Preserva�on •Finance •Light and Power •CDBG Staff •Communica�ons •Our Climate Future Team •Housing Catalyst •Larimer County •Other SME as iden�fied Advisory Commi�ees/Groups •Affordable Housing Board •P&Z Board •Econ. Advisory Comm. •Landmark Preserva�on •Home2Health Core Team •AH Execu�ve Team •AH Task Force •AH Providers Panel •Others as iden�fied 1.5 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Strategies 7, 13, 14, 15, 16 - LUC Phase 1 Engagement Plan (draft) (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 3 OBJECTIVES: 1. Succinctly explain project goals, scope, process, and purpose 2. Articulate clear topic/problem statements and provide compelling analysis that outlines potential approaches and options for land use changes 3. Improve leadership understanding and capacity for action around land use changes 4. Build community support and collaborate to identify and prioritize specific land use changes that could address existing disparities and barriers to housing stability, health, and affordability. 5. Improve community capacity to participate in policy processes and collaborate with local (City/County) government on housing affordability and health issues. TARGET POPULATIONS: The target population for this project is users of the LUC and residents who will be directly impacted by proposed changes. In particular, staff will actively engage the development community and affordable housing providers, lower- and moderate-income (up to 120% of Area Median Income) residents who spend more than 30% of their income on housing, neighborhood advocates/HOA representatives, and development customers at a range of different scales who have experienced barriers to their housing projects. For this outreach process to be successful, these populations must play an integral role throughout the community engagement process. Trust-building, capacity building, and working closely with cultural brokers and partner organizations will all be critical to reaching the target populations for this project. GOALS: 1. Participants (both online and in-person) are representative of the Fort Collins community’s geographic, ethnic, age, income, and other demographic distributions. 2. Data collection is an integrated part of every engagement strategy such as public meetings, online surveys, social media, etc. Data evaluations will be completed midway and at project close. • Data collection should include the following at minimum: i. Number of participants ii. Demographics (Income level, % of income spent on housing, renter/owner, race/ethnicity) iii. Role (developer, HOA rep, etc.) • Conduct pre- and post-survey for info sessions 3. The core team and community partners are building relationships with local community groups and individuals that represent some of the harder to reach demographics. • Outreach materials will be translated into Spanish whenever possible, and at minimum will include instructions in Spanish for contacting the City for more information on the project. • Spanish or language justice interpretation will be provided at key public meetings • Child care, food, incentives, and other best-practice engagement elements will also be incorporated into key public meetings. 4. On a quarterly basis, measure who we are reaching and take steps to improve engagement SUCCESS: 1. The engagement process will be successful if we interact with City leadership, City staff and a representative group of community members throughout the project and specifically engage traditionally underrepresented groups (low-income residents, renters, seniors, youth, Spanish- speaking residents, small developers, etc.). 2. The engagement process will be successful if participants can clearly see how their involvement and input shaped the proposed LUC changes. 1.5 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Strategies 7, 13, 14, 15, 16 - LUC Phase 1 Engagement Plan (draft) (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 4 POTENTIAL TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES •Working groups and/or technical teams •Lunch and Learn series for City Leadership and Staff •One-on-one interviews •Issue or topic-specific focus groups or tours •Targeted workshops •Board, Commission, and Council work sessions •Presentations to community groups •Design/scenario charrette •Targeted pop-up demonstrations •CSU student-focused event •Coordination with existing programs related to housing and health equity Small Group/Stakeholder Engagement Expert panels or outside speaker events Community issues forums Workshops Community tours Open houses Intercept events Surveys and questionnaires Meeting-in-a-box/outreach toolkit Design/scenario workshop Coffee chats Land Use book club (collaboration w library) Community-Wide Engagement •Direct mailings •Email newsletters -both Housing Plan specific and via other City newsletters •Business association and HOA email lists •Flyers, posters, cards, art/murals •Press releases •News article series (Coloradoan, Collegian, etc.) •Feature on local TV, radio, or movie theater •Utility bill mailers (City News) •fcgov.com spotlights •Citynet spotlights (City Staff) Broadcast Notification •FCGov.com website •Social media -Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, NextDoor, Instagram •LUC introductory or vision video •Online questionnaires •Keypad Polling at events •Videos/live event coverage (FCTV) Online + Mobile Engagement 1.5 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Strategies 7, 13, 14, 15, 16 - LUC Phase 1 Engagement Plan (draft) (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 5 DETAILED PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PLAN The detailed objectives and tasks for year 1 are further described below. This working Public Engagement Plan is intended to be revised and updated periodically throughout the planning process. TIMELINE: June 2021-March 2022 Key Messages: Key Questions for Each Outreach Meeting: • What is staff informing/educating the audience about? • How is staff asking for and using input? • How is staff communicating where they are in the process? • How is staff communicating the next step? JUNE: CONFIRMATION • Website w comment form • Finalized List of topics o ADUs o Missing Middle o Parking o Occupancy and Rental Programming o Affordable Housing Incentives o Development Review Process o Design Standards o Density/Transit-Oriented Development • Synthesis of confirmation meetings with Council, P&Z, and previous Housing Plan/City Plan engagement AUGUST/SEPTEMBER: INFORMATION • Topic specific info sessions: (virtual, online, in-person) - Record, offer live version after recording o Current State o Perspective: Speaker/panel? Video? o Barriers/reasons to change/problem statement o Options OCTOBER/NOVEMBER: INPUT • Topic specific input sessions (virtual, online, in-person) o Brief overview of options o Preferred approach o Benefits/drawbacks JANUARY-MARCH: ADOPTION • Public comment period • Council Work Session • Presentations and hearings at Boards and Commissions • Council Hearing 1.5 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Strategies 7, 13, 14, 15, 16 - LUC Phase 1 Engagement Plan (draft) (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Housing Strategic Plan: Implementation Work Session July 13, 2021 Jackie Kozak Thiel, Caryn Champine, Meaghan Overton ATTACHMENT 6 1.6 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Questions for Consideration What feedback do Councilmembers have on the early implementation of the Housing Strategic Plan? 2 1.6 Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Strategic Alignment 3 •NLSH 1.1 Improve and increase availability and choice of quality housing that is affordable to a broad range of income levels. •HPG 7.3 Improve effectiveness of community engagement with enhanced inclusion of all identities, languages and needs. •Everyone has stable, healthy housing they can afford •10% affordability by 2040 •Biennial implementation cycle •Guiding principles shape prioritization and implementation •LIV 5: Create more opportunities for housing choices •LIV 6: Improve access to housing …regardless of their race, ethnicity, income, age, ability, or background 1.6 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Key Outcomes Increase Housing Supply & Affordability (12) Increase Housing Diversity / Choice (12) Increase Stability / Renter Protections (11) Improve housing equity (11) Preserve Existing Affordable Housing (9) Increase Accessibility (2) Housing Strategic Plan 4 1.6 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 5Housing Strategic Plan Vision Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford 1.6 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Greatest Challenges Challenge #1:Price escalation impacts everyone & disproportionately impacts BIPOC* and low-income households. Challenge #2:There aren’t enough affordable places available for people to rent or purchase, or what is available and affordable isn’t the kind of housing people need. Challenge #3:The City does have some tools to encourage affordable housing, but the current amount of funding and incentives for affordable housing are not enough to meet our goals. Challenge #4:Housing is expensive to build, and the cost of building new housing will likely continue to increase over time. Challenge #5:It is difficult to predict the lasting effects of COVID-19 and the pandemic’s impacts. Challenge #6: Housing policies have not consistently addressed housing stability and healthy housing, especially for people who rent. 6 *Black, Indigenous, and People of Color 1.6 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Challenges Remain 7 Median Home Price Median Income of a Family of 4 Median Income of All Households Widening gap in who can afford median home price Half as many renters can afford the median home price (23% in 2012; 11% in 2018) 1.6 Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Guiding Principles •Why: •No one has solved this –stay in testing & learning mode •Ever changing environment •Accountability & Transparency •When: Applied biennially to develop overall priorities •Evaluation criteria à Individual strategies •Overall prioritiesà Guiding Principles •How: With community, reviewed by decision makers, basis for design summit 8 •Center the work in people •Be agile and adaptive •Balance rapid decision making with inclusive communication and engagement •Build on existing plans and policies –and their engagement •Expect and label tensions, opportunities, and tradeoffs •Focus direct investment on the lowest income levels •Commit to transparency in decision making •Make decisions for impact, empowerment, and systems (not ease of implementation) 1.6 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 9Metrics and Indicators Equitable Process •Demographic analysis (e.g., by income and race) of ongoing programs and services •% of project budgets allocated to achieve equity in process, e.g., language justice and compensation for time and expertise •# of events that provide language justice and access to interpreters/translators •# of events that provide childcare and other resources to remove barriers to engagement •Develop and apply a consistent approach to embedding equity in implementation Equitable Outcomes •Affordable housing inventory # and % of units •Fort Collins’Housing Opportunity Index (HOI) compared to western states region HOI •Mix of housing stock and prices •Homeownership rates, disaggregated by race and income •# of accessible units •Geographic distribution of affordable housing •Percentage of cost-burdened renters + owners •Jobs/housing balance •Long-term homeless exits and entries •Amount of funding dedicated to housing 1.6 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Tr ansition to Implementation 2021: •Community Summit (April-May) •Implementation Planning •Council Work Session Ongoing: •Biennial Implementation Process •Evaluation framework for potential new strategies •Guiding Principles for overall Prioritization 10 2. Revisit Priorities 3. Confirm Priorities 1. Assess Progress 4. Design Summit 1 2 3 4 Implementation Process (2-years) 1.6 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) April Community Summit •Three workshops + wrap-up night: •Build and Preserve Affordable Housing (6 strategies) •Improve Housing Stability and Health (8 strategies) •Increase Housing Supply and Choice (6 strategies) •To p priorities overall: •Barriers to missing middle housing (Strategy 15) •Funding for housing (Strategy 11 ) •Revisions to occupancy limits (Strategy 21) •Successes and Lessons learned •Logistics + importance of simultaneous interpretation •Amount of pre-work and information needed •Critical role of partners 11 1.6 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 12Next Steps: Summary A S O N D Equity and Opportunity Assessment: Create indices LUC Phase 1: Analyze options, reorganization framework, engagement Revenue: Discuss with Council Finance Committee Occupancy and Rental Programming: Work Session, engagement J LUC Phase 1: Draft code changes, engagement * Next steps also include regular memo updates on implementation progress 1.6 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Early Implementation Update 13 Timelines •Quick(er) Wins: <1 year, 10 strategies •Tr ansitional: 1-2 years, 8 strategies •Tr ansformational: 2+ years, 8 strategies Progress in 2021 •3 strategies completed •18 strategies underway •$735,000 allocated to implementation LUC Phase 1, $350,000 Manufactured Housing, $200,000 Foreclosure/ Eviction Prevention, $125,000 Displacement Analysis, $35,000 Occupancy/Rental Programming, $25,000 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000 1.6 Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 14Equityand Opportunity Assessment §HSP Strategies: 1 §Greatest Challenges: §Price escalation impacts everyone & disproportionately impacts BIPOC* and low- income households. §When: Underway; completed by September 2021 §Resources Committed: $30,000 §Next Steps: Create displacement and access to opportunity indices §Future Council Involvement: Low – memo update 1.6 Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 15Land Use Code (LUC) Phase 1: Housing §HSP Strategies: 7, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16 §Greatest Challenges: §There aren’t enough affordable places available for people to rent or purchase, or what is available and affordable isn’t the kind of housing people need. §Housing is expensive to build, and the cost of building new housing will likely continue to increase over time. §When: 2021-2022; Underway §Resources Committed: Staff core team; $350,000 appropriation §Next Steps: Analysis of options; framework for code reorganization; fall engagement §Future Council Involvement: High -decision-maker 1.6 Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 16Occupancyand Rental Programming §HSP Strategies: 20, 21, 26 §Greatest Challenges: §Housing policies have not consistently addressed housing stability and healthy housing, especially for people who rent. §When: 2021-2024; Underway §Resources Committed: Staff core team, $25,000 for consultant (Root Policy Research) analysis of occupancy demographics and peer city programs §Next Steps:Focus groups with landlords to explore potential incentives,propose options for rental programming and associated costs, seek additional Council input and community engagement this fall; potential 2023 budget offer §Future Council Involvement: High -decision-maker 1.6 Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 17Revenue Options for Housing §HSP Strategies: 11 §Greatest Challenges: §The City does have some tools to encourage affordable housing, but the current amount of funding and incentives for affordable housing are not enough to meet our goals. §When: 2021-2024; Underway §Resources Committed: Staff time §Next Steps: Council Finance Committee (early fall 2021); further Council discussion §Future Council Involvement: High -decision- maker 1.6 Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) §Since 2000, we have produced or preserved about 120 affordable units per year on average. §To achieve the 10% affordability goal by 2040, our community needs to more than double the annual production and/or preservation of affordable housing to 282 or more units per year. 18Revenue Options for Housing 1.6 Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 19Next Steps: Summary A S O N D Equity and Opportunity Assessment: Create indices LUC Phase 1: Analyze options, reorganization framework, engagement Revenue: Discuss with Council Finance Committee Occupancy and Rental Programming: Work Session, engagement J LUC Phase 1: Draft code changes, engagement * Next steps also include regular memo updates on implementation progress 1.6 Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Questions for Consideration What feedback do Councilmembers have on the early implementation of the Housing Strategic Plan? 20 1.6 Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 21 BACKUP 1.6 Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Policy and Planning Foundation… •Affordable Housing Redevelopment Displacement Mitigation Strategy (2013) •Housing Affordability Policy Study (2014) •Affordable Housing Strategic Plan (2015) •Social Sustainability Strategic Plan (2016) •City Plan (2019) •Council Priorities (2019-2021) •City Strategic Plan (2020) •Home2Health (2019-2021) •Housing Strategic Plan (2021) 22 1.6 Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 23…Leads to Action Results: 373 affordable homes in last 5 years & 248 under construction (Need: ~300 /year) 2014 -2019 Minimum house size Fee waiver eligibility Land Bank Incentive Policy Affordable Housing Capital Fund (CCIP) ### units built 2019 -2021 Manufactured Housing focus Impact Fee / Inclusionary Housing Study Appropriation for Land Bank purchase Mason Place funds Housing Manager Fee Waiver Process Improvements Revised Metro District Policy Metro DPA p rogram ### units built 2021+ Buy/Sell Land Bank parcels Oak 140 AHCP funds Continue eviction and foreclosure prevention COVID recovery LUC Phase 1 Update Occupancy/rental programming Close revenue gap for housing Goal: 282+ units built per year MO10 MO11 1.6 Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Slide 23 MO10 Update these numbers, were from Dec 2020 Meaghan Overton, 6/12/2021 MO11 Get these numbers Meaghan Overton, 6/12/2021 1.6 Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Housing Strategic Plan Process 24 Step 8: Implement* (Spring +) Step 7: Consider Adoption* (Feb/Mar) Step 6: Prioritize Strategies* (Jan) Step 5: Evaluate Strategies (Dec) Step 4: ID Strategies, Criteria (Nov/Dec) Step 3: Engage Community (Oct/Nov) Step 2: Greatest Challenges (Sep) Step 1: Vision (Aug) Progress to Date 50+Strategies Identified Thus Far Consultant Support Community Engagement, Priorities Peer Cities & Leading Authors Initial Set of Prioritized Strategies (26) Evaluation Criteria Everyone has healthy, stable housing they can afford 1.6 Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Strategies by Ti meline Quicker Wins (<1 year) 1. Assess displacement and gentrification risk (New) 4. Implementation, tracking and assessment of housing strategies (Expand) 8.Extend the City’s affordability term (Expand) 9. Off-cycle appropriation to advance Phase One of the Land Use Code (LUC) Audit (New) 10. Refine local affordable housing goal (Expand) 13.Recalibrate existing incentives to reflect current market conditions (Expand) 14. Create additional development incentives for affordable housing (New) 17. Reconsider affordable housing requirements/funding as part of metro districts (Expand) 24.Support community organizing efforts in manufactured home communities and increase access to resident rights information, housing resources, and housing programs (Expand) 25. Foreclosure and eviction prevention and legal representation (Expand) 25 Summary: 10 strategies (3 new, 9 expanded) –2 completed, 10 underway Key Outcomes: Increase housing supply and affordability, increase housing diversity/choice, increase stability/renter protections, improve housing equity 1.6 Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Strategies by Ti meline Tr ansitional Strategies (1-2 years) 5. Advocate for housing-related legislation at state and federal levels (Expand) 7. Remove barriers to the development of Accessory Development Units (Expand) 12.Expand partnership(s) with local Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) to offer gap financing and low-cost loan pool for affordable housing development (Expand) 15. Explore/address financing and other barriers to missing middle and innovative housing development (New) 16.Remove barriers to allowed densities through code revisions (New) 18. Increase awareness & opportunities for creative collaboration across water districts and other regional partners around the challenges with water costs and housing (Expand) 21. Explore revisions to occupancy limits and family definitions (Expand) 22. Public Sector Right of First Refusal for Affordable Developments (New) 26 Summary: 8 strategies (3 new, 5 expanded) –0 completed, 4 underway Key Outcomes: Increase housing supply and affordability, increase housing diversity/choice, increase stability/renter protections, improve housing equity, preserve existing affordable housing 1.6 Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Strategies by Ti meline Tr ansformational Strategies (2+ years) 2. Promote inclusivity, housing diversity, and affordability as community values. (Expand) 3. Implement the 2020 Analysis of Fair Housing Choice Action Steps (Expand) 6. Visitability policy (New) 11 . Create a new dedicated revenue stream to fund the Affordable Housing Fund (Expand) 19.Bolster city land bank activity by allocating additional funding to the program (contingent on adopting additional revenue stream policy) (Expand) 20.Explore the option of a mandated rental license/registry program for long-term rentals and pair with best practice rental regulations (New) 23.Te nant right of first refusal for cooperative ownership of multifamily or manufactured housing community (New) 26.Small Landlord Incentives (New) 27 Summary: 8 strategies (4 new, 4 expanded) –0 completed, 4 underway Key Outcomes: Increase housing supply and affordability, increase housing diversity/choice, increase stability/renter protections, improve housing equity, preserve existing affordable housing, increase accessibility 1.6 Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 282022 Housing Funding (Est.) •Competitive Process •AHCF will also be replenished with $500,000 in January 2022 •To tal funding expected: $5.5 million Source Est. Amount Affordable Housing Fund $1,000,000 HOME (Federal)$725,000 CDBG (Federal)$750,000 HOME/HUD American Rescue Plan Act (Federal)$2,600,000 TO TA L $5,075,000 1.6 Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 29Manufactured Housing §HSP Strategies: 23, 24 §Responds to the greatest challenges by: §When: 2021-2024; Underway §Resources Committed: Manufactured Housing Liaison (1.0 FTE), $200,000 toward conversion of Hickory Village to a Resident-Owned Community §Next Steps: Explore options for consistent ROC policy; Council Work Session §Future Council Involvement: Medium –adoption of consistent ROC policy MO3MY2MO4 1.6 Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Slide 29 MO3 [@Marcy Yoder] here's the slide for MHC Meaghan Overton, 6/14/2021 MY2 [@Meaghan Overton] this works session is the same night. Lots happening and not enough space to share as well as probably too far into the weeds. Marcy Yoder, 6/15/2021 MO4 Excellent! I'm looking for ways to make this shorter, so I can move this to backup. Meaghan Overton, 6/16/2021 1.6 Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 30Foreclosure and Eviction Prevention §HSP Strategies: 25 §Responds to the greatest challenges by: §When: 2021-2024; Underway §Resources Committed: $125K for 2021,2022 BFO offer §Next Steps: §Future Council Involvement: Medium –work session MO5MY3 1.6 Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Slide 30 MO5 [@Marcy Yoder] here's another one - not sure if this slide will stay in or not, but want to be prepared. Feel free to pass on to JC if that's easier! Meaghan Overton, 6/14/2021 MY3 [@Meaghan Overton] JC is buried in Council prep for tonight's Immigration Fund - lots of public comment still coming in! We can add more later. Rather than next steps, maybe share a result stat. Not a lot of additional action from NS other than managing the contract and funding. Maybe Social?Sue has more to add? Marcy Yoder, 6/15/2021 1.6 Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 31Affordable Housing: Current Funding §Average annual funding: $2 million -$3 million a year §Competitive Process (CDBG/HOME) funding –$1.5-2.5 million §Affordable Housing Capital Fund (CCIP) -$500,000 §Next year: approx. $5.5 million total due to $2.6 million HOME/HUD ARPA f unding §Average subsidy, 2015-2020: ~$39,000 (yield 38-77 units per year) §Estimated annual funding need: $10-11 million (additional $8-9 million) 1.6 Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Housing Affordability Along the Income Spectrum 32 AMI 0% Below 80%AMI is City’s Definition of Affordable Housing 80% $75.3K/yr 200%100% $94.1K/yr 120% $112.9K/yr Market Housing Purchase Price Goal is defined by AHSP (188-228 units/year) Fewer attainable options are available to Middle Income Earners Goal is harder to define & City influence may be outweighed by market forces $450K$300K $375K 1.6 Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Themes We Heard –Must Absolutely Do 33 Community- centered, remove barriers §Partnerships §Engage with targeted communities –break down barriers §Equity in process and outcomes (clear commitment) §Identify innovative and disruptive actions and approaches §Clearly communicate to multiple audiences Be specific, quantifiable, and achievable §Establish goals, timelines, and accountability tools –& be agile §Establish specific, quantified housing priorities & financials §Role definition for the City And… §Recognize housing is interconnected with all systems/outcomes §Al ign with community goals and plans –build off engagement §Begin regional strategy 1.6 Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) 34Everyone Has Stable and Healthy Housing They Can Afford MO13LE1MO14 1.6 Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) Slide 34 MO13 What do you think about including this? It's a good summary of the issues/connection between housing and health. Comes out of the H2H Health Impact Assessment. Meaghan Overton, 8/11/2020 LE1 what do you think about backup slide if they ask about the connection between housing and health? We've already got a fairly long slide deck... Lindsay Ex, 8/12/2020 MO14 Yep, that works! Meaghan Overton, 8/12/2020 1.6 Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) THANK YOU! 1.6 Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10447 : Housing Strategic Plan Implementation Update) DATE: STAFF: July 13, 2021 JC Ward, Senior Planner Emily Olivo, Neighborhood Liaison WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Mobile Home Park (“MHP”) Residents’ Rights Team is currently developing a comprehensive enforcement program for mobile home parks to improve livability in parks across Fort Collins, improve the City’s relati onship with MHP managers and owners, and increase manager and owner accountability. An education program with community clean-up days leading up to regular proactive Code Compliance patrols would be implemented over the next three years, with a concentrated engagement effort in 2021 and 2022 that would enable staff to learn the full scope of the work, build relationships with residents and management, and support MHP’s compliancy prior to any official inspection. In 2021, we have already begun this engage ment effort with senior (55+) MHP’s and have two grant-funded, volunteer-based clean up and resource fair events planned in each senior MHP this fall. Other engagement techniques planned include mock inspections and neighborhood walks with code enforcement staff to answer questions and prepare managers. The final MHP enforcement program is anticipated to include regular proactive patrols and investigation of complaints, an annual inspection, annual park registration, and annual MHP property manager certi fication. Priority enforcement focus areas will be periodically reviewed and updated to ensure emerging and important issues are addressed. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED What feedback do Councilmembers have about the mobile home park enforcement options and timeline? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Community & Neighborhood Livability: • 1.5 Enhance the quality of life in neighborhoods, empower neighbors to solve problems, and foster respectful relations. • 1.8 Preserve and enhance manufactured housing communities as a source of affordable housing and create a safe and equitable environment for residents. • 1.11: Maintain and enhance attractive neighborhoods through City services, innovative enforcement techniques, and voluntary compliance with City codes and regulations. 2 Packet Pg. 116 July 13, 2021 Page 2 Economic Health: • 3.5 Invest in and maintain utility infrastructure and services while ensuring predictable utility rates. High Performing Government: • 7.2 Maintain the public trust through a high performing board, as well as organizational transparency, legal and ethical behavior and regulatory compliance. • 7.3 Improve effectiveness of community engagement with enhanced inclusion of all identities, languages and needs. HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN • Strategy 2: Promote inclusivity, housing diversity, and affordability as community values. • Strategy 20: Explore the option of a mandated rental license/ registry program for long -term rentals and pair with best practice rental regulations • Strategy 23: Allow tenants right of first offer/refusal for cooperative ownership of multifamily or manufactured housing community • Strategy 24: Support community organizing efforts in manufactured home communities and increase access to resident rights information, housing resources, and housing programs DISCUSSION Council identified mobile home park preservation and resident protections as Council priority issues in 2019 and has provided staff with guidance on programs and initiatives to improve mobile home park livability and viability as a housing option in Fort Collins. In August 2019, Council instituted a one -year moratorium on the City’s acceptance of any development application which would result in the closure or loss of housing units within existing mobile home parks. This moratorium was extended through December 2020 due to delays in public engagement activities caused by COVID-19. The moratorium on redevelopment was intended to protect residents from displacement while staff developed options for long-term preservation of mobile home parks as “naturally- occurring” affordable housing. In December 2019, staff provided an update at a work session that a new zoning district for manufactured housing communities is one of the strongest local tools availabl e to preserve existing manufactured housing communities/mobile home parks and introduced a number of new residents’ rights and livability strategies planned for implementation between 2020-2022. The cross-departmental MHP Residents’ Rights Team, established in September 2019 to support Council priorities around mobile home park livability, continues to meet monthly to implement projects that improve transparency and accessibility of resources, encourage collaboration among City departments working in the mobile home park and affordable housing spaces, provide a support network for residents, and develop or enhance enforcement mechanisms. At work sessions on July 9, 2019; December 10, 2019; and April 28, 2020, staff received guidance from councilmembers to pursue specific strategies to improve livability and address issues identified by the community, property managers, and mobile home park owners. At the December 10th and April 28th meetings, staff received Council direction to explore a licensing and/or enforcement program for coordinated response and abatement of issues in ways consistent with enforcement in other neighborhood types across the city that is also mindful of some of the special conditions in mobile home parks that do not exist in other neighborhood types. For City planning, development, and policy documents, the term “manufactured housing communities” (“MHC”) is used to align with federal housing definitions, while public-facing materials and references use the term “mobile 2 Packet Pg. 117 July 13, 2021 Page 3 home park” (“MHP”) in accordance with the State of Colorado’s preferred language in the Mobile Home Park Oversight Act and Updates and Mobile Home Park Oversight Dispute Resolution Program. Throughout these AIS materials, the term “mobile home park” will be used. Mobile Home Park Livability Projects Through public engagement work with MHP residents, property managers, MHP owners, industry associations, internal stakeholders, and staff from other Colorado cities with robust MHP programs; the Residents’ Rights Team identified the strategies in the table below as reasonably calculated to address issues and enhance livability in local mobile home parks. (Attachment 1) Completed In Progress/ Underway Long Term / Resources Req. MHP Webpage Neighborhood Liaisons (highest need parks) Enforcement of Municipal Code (Section 18) & State Legislation (Limited, Need-Based) MHP Mini-Grants LHIP & Emergency Grants Housing Unit Single Metering (water) Maintenance Responsibilities Code Changes Partner/Contractor Projects CARE; LCCC Negotiated investments Section 18 Residents’ Rights Updates MHP Handbook* Liaisons (all parks) Limitation of Required Upgrades Utility/Water Services Billing Transparency ROC support (shifted from notice of sale/opp to purchase work) Local Complaint System Education & Outreach to Support Enforcement MHP Licensing* *Project on hold temporarily to align timing and consistency with other ongoing efforts Ongoing Engagement Since August 2019 MHP Residents’ Rights Team has been conducting community engagement with r esidents, managers, and owners of MHP’s within the City and Growth Management Area (“GMA”) to better understand needs and priorities, more effectively respond to complaints and inquiries, gather input on potential long -term solutions, and to empower all with knowledge and tools. • Residents’ Associations Modeled after the Neighborhood Connections program, Staff are supporting the development of Residents’ Associations (RA’s) in MHP’s including Skyline MHP, North College MHP, and Hickory Village. Once established, RA’s have support but not guidance or input from the city and are entirely run by residents. RA’s improve outcomes for residents and managers by streamlining and strengthening communication, organizing projects and initiatives, and enhancing the sense of community within a park. • Relationship Building- Through neighborhood meetings, individual phone calls/emails/meetings, responding swiftly to resident concerns and requests for resources, as well as other engagement with managers and residents, city staff have been establishing and building relationships that will be crucial to the success of this and other MHP programs. • MHP Clean-ups and Repair Days- Neighborhood Services was recently awarded a grant to fund two kick off events for this enforcement program. In October we will host a clean-up, repair, and resource event at the senior MHP’s, jumpstarting the path to voluntary compliance while providing education and community resources. • Complaint-based Enforcement- Though proactive enforcement has not been occurring within MHP’s, Staff from Neighborhood Services, Utilities, Building Inspection, and other departments have conducted complaint - based enforcement. This has resulted in improvements to lot grading, water quality, and nuisance issues like weed overgrowth. 2 Packet Pg. 118 July 13, 2021 Page 4 Need for Local MHP Enforcement Program 1. State Mobile Home Park Oversight & Dispute Resolution Program (“MHPOP”) is not meeting the current need or urgency for Fort Collins MHP residents A. The Colorado MHPOP was implemented in May 2020 but not fully staffed until December 2020 causing a backlog of investigations into complaints which are averaging months (several Fort Collins cases filed in August 2020 have not been investigated until May 2021 or are still open). B. Renters and other non-homeowner residents cannot file complaints with the MHPOP. 2. Gaps exist in state laws related to flat-rate water billing or inclusion of water utility costs in lot rent, protections for renters, and protection of anonymity for residents filing complaints. 3. Section 18 of City Municipal Code relating to mobile home parks has limited enforcement mechanisms. 4. Current compliance programs do not cover full scope of mobile home park issues. A. Coordination of inspections and enforcement is distributed across City departments. B. Complaint-based enforcement in MHP’s is taking place through several departments, but there is no formal process for reporting, collaboration, or tracking of the reports and enforcement in MHP’s. 5. Water infrastructure beyond the master meter is owned and maintained by mobile home parks is aging and can result in clogged/compromised sewer systems and decreased potable water quality due to maintenance issues. There is limited authority for the City to inspect the system or ability to p rovide financial support to property owners to help address these issues. 6. Mobile Home Park residents do not receive bills directly from the water service provider but are rebilled by property owners/managers. This rebilling system limits auditing by ut ility providers or confirmation of charges by residents because of limitations on customer information or usage data disclosure to non -customers, including residents. A. Reports of high water bills that vary for a unit; retaliation through water rebilling; inconsistent calculations of monthly water charges; and failure to disclose the MHP’s monthly water bill, amount paid, or formula/rates used to calculate each unit’s share of the water cost required under state law are complex to investigate without resident or non-Utilities City Staff access to certain customer data. B. Because mobile home park residents are not the direct Fort Collins Utilities or other water district customer, they are ineligible for income-qualified assistance programs for water and wastewater rates. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM FOCUS AREAS 1. Local Park Registration • Each year, owners of city MHP’s would be required to register (or update their registration) with Neighborhood Services. The timing of this registration would align with the st ate registration deadline, and there would be no-cost. • Park owners would meet with City Staff and provide/confirm park details, contact information, and review MHP policy changes. • Considerations: - The Housing Strategic Plan calls for the exploration of a mandated rental license/ registry program for long-term rentals, in line with best practice rental regulations. The staff recommendation for a MHP registration program is to align implementation timelines with those of the Housing Rental Licensing Strategy Team, ensuring consistency and efficacy. - We anticipate that increased city staff time to process the registrations as well as the development of penalty structures for non-compliance are the only resources required. 2 Packet Pg. 119 July 13, 2021 Page 5 2. Manager Certification • This component would require property managers to: certify or re-certify annually with the City by acknowledging they have read the MHP Handbook (and updates), meet with members of the MHP Residents’ Rights Team at least once per year, and complete at least one City continuing education activity per year. • Continuing education opportunities would be offered in a variety of formats to be adaptive to emerging community needs while remaining accessible for all managers. Topics could include: 1. MHP 101 course on Repairs, fire code, ADA code, tree health/maintenance, environmental/sustainability initiatives, air quality; Utilities 101 on billing, repairs, legislation, conservation, xeriscaping, and stormwater 2. Interpersonal - cultural sensitivity, equity, mediation, working with senior citizens 3. Legal - Know Your Rights, legislation overviews, eviction, Fair Housing Act, Occupancy restrictions 4. City programs - Sustainable Neighborhoods, Neighborhood Night Out, Our Climate Future, FC Moves, Mini Grants, Block Parties, Healthy Homes, CityWorks, Planning Academy, City -convened collaborative meetings with other MHP managers • Certification would be required for all managers in year one of implementation, all newly hired managers, and all managers who have failed to certify or lost certification. Re-certification would be required annually for all managers who certified the previous year. • Considerations: - Under state law (Colorado Revised Statutes 12-10-101 & 12-10-201), property managers are required to hold a real estate broker's license and complete 24 hours of continuing education every 3 years. However, on-site, live-in managers (like those at most mobile home parks) are an exception to this requirement. This proposed certification program would fill that gap with locally relevant, MHP- specific education opportunities for managers. A low hour requirement and lack of fees would ensure that property management remains accessible and attainable. - Resources required will be increased city staff time to process the registrations and develop/administer the education programs, as well as the development of penalty structures for non-compliance. 3. Comprehensive Annual Inspection • Annual inspection could address typical building or site issues inspected through ot her City programs and those not generally addressed through proactive enforcement or those that could require expertise from City subject matter experts. Examples include inspection, assessment, and/or documentation of plumbing, electrical, tree health and safety impacts, utility infrastructure, street issues, signage, and site/lot grading. • The City would not have necessary allocated resources to begin annual inspections until year 3 of the enforcement program implementation at the earliest. We would begi n prior to year 3 with mock inspections, mini-grants, and other resources provided to parks in order to support them in compliance and reduce the risk that the costs of repairs would be passed onto residents. • Considerations: - This component may require significant upgrades to parks to be made, which may result in rental increases for residents. - City Staff could assist parks and/or residents in applying for grants and could provide our own mini - grant funds to help offset the costs. - Annual inspections would require the development of a penalty structure for non -compliance and increased staff time from multiple departments to develop and/or conduct the inspections. 4. Proactive Enforcement • Following the operational procedures of our Code Compliance team, proactive enforcement in MHP’s would occur in 4-6 week intervals with responsive prioritization to seasonal or emerging issues with a goal of +90% voluntary compliance. 2 Packet Pg. 120 July 13, 2021 Page 6 • The most common issues found in MHP’s, as identified by code staff, are inop erable vehicles, outdoor storage, and rubbish. • Considerations: - Proactive enforcement, along with the annual inspection, would remove the pressure that is currently on residents to report issues and would, over time, help prevent these issues from occu rring, increasing safety and livability for MHP’s across the city. - Citations issued to residents could be a financial strain, and citations issued to parks may result in those costs being passed onto residents. However, a long -term roll out of this component paired with education and funding opportunities would create higher levels of voluntary compliance and reduce potential citations prior to official implementation. - Proactive enforcement would require increased staff time from our Code Compliance Inspectors to meet the addition of 9 neighborhoods. It would also require the development of a penalty structure for non-compliance. 5. Education, Engagement, and Support • Education, engagement with residents/owners/managers, and financial support plans inc lude: - “Meet your code enforcement officer” neighborhood walks: These walks, conducted for both managers and residents, will build a relationship and familiarity between code staff and MHP’s while providing education on potential violations without a threat of penalties. These walks will begin in Fall 2021 and continue until enforcement begins in 2023. - Neighborhood clean-up and repair days: These volunteer-led events will focus on removing outdoor rubbish & household hazardous waste, repairing dilapidated fences, removing weeds & overgrown vegetation, and performing minor exterior repairs; proactively eliminating potential code violations. These programs will begin in Fall 2021 with a grant -funded event for each of the 55+ MHP’s, Skyline and North College. - Mock inspections: Mock Inspections will educate park managers and owners on what to expect from their annual inspection, available resources for addressing problem areas, and who they have as “point-person" staff for their questions and concerns. Similar to the neighborhood walks, these mock inspections will support voluntary compliance without a threat of penalties, though official complaints received by the city may still be subject to enforcement. Mock inspections would begin early 2022. - MHP Handbook: This handbook is expected to be completed in Fall 2021 and distributed to residents, managers, and owners. The handbook will provide information on MHP laws, maintenance, utilities, community and city resources, and the enforcement program. Developmen t of this handbook has been occurring since 2020 but has been delayed due to changes in legislation, utilities processes, and the development of this enforcement program. Additionally, due to the increased level of collaboration across city departments to address MHP issues, certain matters have come under the scope of different work areas. For example, lot grading complaints were previously directed to Stormwater. They are also under the purview of Building Inspection, which has different processes and enforcement capabilities. As this collective work evolves, we continue to update the plans for the handbook. • Considerations: - Education, engagement, and resource support will be critical to the success of this enforcement program. By heavily focusing on supporting parks into compliance prior to conducting inspections and enforcement, we will see greater, more consistent outcomes in livability and will prevent associated costs of park repairs and improvements from being passed onto residents or from being t oo costly for park owners and managers. - Staff will continue to conduct a pre-enforcement needs assessment to gain a complete understanding of the scope of work and what level of funding, staffing, and other resources are needed as the program evolves. Increased staff time to develop and administer the education programs will be required, along with funding for clean -up days and mini-grants. 2 Packet Pg. 121 July 13, 2021 Page 7 6. Code Changes to Address Water Services Rebilling Issues • As part of the Enforcement Program, the MHP Residents ’ Rights Team has identified potential solutions to some concerns related to water services that require further research, analysis, cost assessment, and discussions/agreements with water service providers. Several currently being explored would require Municipal Code changes that might come before City Council in the future, including: - Notice of leaks or continuous water consumption in mobile home parks to residents to encourage water conservation and decrease water costs to residents and MHP owners - Prohibiting “flat rate” water charges or inclusion of water charges in lot rent to provide residents with a monthly line item and water charges allocated - Requiring Fort Collins Utilities formula or submetering to assure consistent distribution of water charges throughout the MHP or to assess actual water usage per household via submetering - Authorizing disclosure of MHP water bills (or portions) to the public, residents, or non -Utilities City Staff to allow greater resident control over confirming accurate water charges • Considerations: In addition to possible Municipal Code changes, MHP Residents’ Rights Team discussions on improvement in water services transparency and rebilling led to consideration of metering or submetering individual mobile homes. The complex issue of mobile home park water infrastructure ownership and maintenance requirements may be a consideration for future Staff research and analysis. The central questions regarding metering or submetering individual homes revolve around the high cost (in the tens of millions of dollars per mobile home park if the City were to upgrade water infrastructure and meter homes); payment of the costs for any changes to the current ownership and maintenance structure that might be passed to residents, property owners, or other Utility ratepayers; and feasibility (the layout of some mobile home parks may result in loss of housing units to upgrade water infrastructure and questions remain about the ability of equipment necessary to upgrade water infrastructur e to access all areas of the MHP). The benefits and drawbacks of each option would be further explored by Fort Collins Utilities and other water districts and brought before Council if it is determined by Councilmembers that infrastructure changes should b e further considered as possible solutions. Timeline 2 Packet Pg. 122 July 13, 2021 Page 8 Year One (2021- 2022) • Individual and group meetings with park managers, owners, and residents (Ongoing) • Respond to complaints (Ongoing) • Park clean-up & repair days for senior parks (Q4) • Mock inspections and Neighborhood Walks (Q4 - Year 2 Q4) • Complete and distribute MHP Handbook (Q4) • Begin Needs Assessment (Q4 - Year 2 Q4) Year Two (2022-2023) • Manager Certification o Develop education components and conduct outreach (Q1-2) o Implement, with completion deadline by Q1 of following year (Q3-4) • Clean-up & repair days for all parks (Q1-4) • Provide MHP mini-grants (Q2 on) • Update Handbook (as needed) Year Three (2023) • Annual inspections (Q2 on) • Proactive enforcement (Q2 on) Resources Needed Resource Description Estimated Amount & Program Year Needed Staffing O Increased Code &/or Inspection Staff for 9 MHP neighborhoods o Increased Program Staff for certification & registration o Increased Administrative Staff for complaint intake o $50,000 in 2022 for needs assessment & community clean-up supplies (BFO offer already submitted) o TBD in 2023/24 (based on needs assessment) o TBD ongoing 2025 forward (based on program evaluations & community need) MHP Neighborhood Improvement & Community Building Grant Fund o Temporary fund for MHP residents, property managers, & owners to assist with mitigation of existing Code violations in advance of proactive Code Enforcement o Community enhancement & renewal fund for safety lighting, bike path connectivity, increased public transportation options, community gathering space,…* o $200,000 in 2023/24 ($100,000 per calendar year) Code Updates & Penalty Structures o Additional updates to applicable City Code are anticipated to address the following topics already identified as ongoing issues and currently under discussion among City departments: o Water Services Rebilling & Transparency - possible options could include: eliminating flat rate billing and inclusion in lot rent; requiring individual water submetering on each housing unit or use of a specific formula; water leak notifications disclosed to residents o Street Maintenance Standards o MHP Manager Certification Requirements o Disclosure of Documentation & Information - average lot rents, current park rules, contact o No associated additional costs for updating Code. Additional staffing required as indicated above. 2 Packet Pg. 123 July 13, 2021 Page 9 information of owners and property managers, and infrastructure maintenance o Annual Inspections o Alignment of penalty structures with existing inspection, enforcement, and certification penalties with consideration of the special circumstances in MHP’s *This grant fund would model best practices and incorporate lessons learned from the 2017-2018 Vibrant Neighborhoods Grant Fund for neighborhood-led projects throughout the city and the 2015-2016 Renewal of Neighborhoods in a State of Change funds supporting reinvestment to older neighborhoods. ATTACHMENTS 1. Mobile Home Park Residents' Rights Team Completed and Ongoing Projects (PDF) 2. Mobile Home Park Water Services Background Information (PDF) 3. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 124 1 Attachment 1 – Mobile Home Park Residents’ Rights Team Completed & Ongoing Projects Mobile Home Park Residents’ Rights Team Completed & Ongoing Projects 2019-2021 Completed Projects •Mobile Home Park Webpage https://www.fcgov.com/neighborhoodservices/mobile-home-park-communities provides up-to-date information about mobile home parks in Fort Collins, eviction avoidance programs, and links to the State MHP Dispute Resolution Program and local Access Fort Collins complaint/communication system. •Mobile Home Park Mini-Grants $50,000 allocated by City Council in 2019 as a mid-cycle budget appropriation for mini- grants awards of up to $5,000 per project to neighbors, property managers, and/or property owners through an application-based approach with selection criteria developed collaboratively by mobile home park residents, City staff, property managers, and mobile home park owners. Funded projects included replacement of windows and doors, tree trimming and removal, water quality testing, and testing of water utility submeters. •Municipal Code Changes Review of Municipal Code and enforcement processes in 2019 revealed gaps in resident protections and a need to strengthen some Municipal Code provisions. Code changes expanded protections for participation in community meetings, limited required upgrades to homes, clarified responsibility for tree maintenance and costs, and added transparency and language equity requirements to property management and emergency contact postings. •Local Complaint System State MHP Dispute Resolution complaints exclude renters and other non-homeowner residents from filing complaints. The state system does not allow anonymous complaints, which led to fear of retaliation from property managers or owners. The existing Access Fort Collins system for questions, comments, and service requests allow anonymous complaints and requests from all residents. A special section for Mobile Home Parks was added to the “Neighborhoods” topic area with submissions routed directly to the MHP Residents’ Rights Team for review, investigation, and customer service by a Neighborhood Liaison. Projects Currently Underway &/or Ongoing •Neighborhood Liaisons for highest need MHP’s Neighborhood Liaison positions are designed to build a bridge between community needs and City/community resources, with an emphasis on equity to enhance the capacity of residents to participate in public engagement activities, decision-making at all City levels, and self-determination through community organizing. North College MHP and Skyline MHP are the only 55+ MHP communities in Fort Collins and a neighborhood liaison is assigned to each. The Mi Voz community group supported through La Familia- The Family Center programming also has access to City resources and programs for residents of MHP’s in the North College corridor, Hickory Village MHP, Poudre Valley MHP, and Parklane MHP. Staff is currently building capacity for community organizing and neighborhood action planning to shift from a convenor role to a support and sustain role for resident ATTACHMENT 1 2.1 Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Mobile Home Park Residents' Rights Team Completed and Ongoing Projects (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) 2 Attachment 1 – Mobile Home Park Residents’ Rights Team Completed & Ongoing Projects associations to allow assignment of Neighborhood Liaisons to additional mobile home parks. • Larimer County Home Improvement Program (“LHIP”) & Emergency Grants Low to no interest rate loans with flexible terms are available through LHIP to meet a homeowner’s budget to repair or improve their home for low- to moderate-income Larimer County homeowners. The program includes mobile/manufactured home repairs. Emergency fund grants up to $3,000 for individuals 50% or below the area median income for emergencies such as no hot water, burst pipes, gas leaks. • Colorado’s Affordable Residential Energy Program (“CARE”) & Larimer County Conservation Corps (“LCCC”) CARE Program provides energy audits, education, and upgrades including low-flow fixtures, Energy Star refrigerators, air sealing, insulation, and HVAC upgrades. The CARE program was piloted in 2020 and funding has been requested for 2021 forward. LCCC conducts a basic inspection of your home, appliances, windows, toilets, and heating/cooling system and installs appropriate efficiency measures based on your home’s needs, such as LED light bulbs, water conserving shower-heads and aerators, smoke/carbon monoxide detectors, clotheslines and high-efficiency toilets. • Mobile Home Park Handbook This handbook is expected to be completed in Fall 2021 and distributed to residents, managers, and owners. The handbook will provide information on MHP laws, maintenance, utilities, community and city resources, and the enforcement program. Development of this handbook has been occurring since 2020 but has been delayed due to changes in legislation, utilities processes, and the development of this enforcement program. Additionally, due to the increased level of collaboration across city departments to address MHP issues, certain matters have come under the scope of different work areas. For example, lot grading complaints were previously directed to Stormwater. They are also under the purview of Building Inspection, which has different processes and enforcement capabilities. As this collective work evolves, we continue to update the plans for the handbook. • Utility Billing Transparency Through extensive outreach with residents, community partners and the City have received reports of high water bills that vary widely for a unit; retaliation through water rebilling by property owners; inconsistent calculations of monthly water utility charges; inconsistent fee structure between housing units; and failure to disclose the MHP’s monthly water bill, amount paid, or formula/rates used to calculate each unit’s share of the water cost required under state law. Fort Collins Utilities has been able to fill that gap in outreach and education related to changes in water utility rebilling transparency at the state level, but since participation in these activities is voluntary, few MHP managers or owners are taking advantage of the resources. Fort Collins Utilities is available to assist any mobile home park in their service area, including some large properties in the GMA. • Education & Outreach to Support Enforcement Since August 2019 MHP Residents’ Rights Team has been conducting community engagement with residents, managers, and owners of MHP’s within the City and Growth Management Area (“GMA”) to better understand needs and priorities, more effectively respond to complaints and inquiries, gather input on potential long-term solutions, and to empower all with knowledge and tools. See AIS section “Enforcement Program Focus Areas #5 for additional details of ongoing engagement. 2.1 Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Mobile Home Park Residents' Rights Team Completed and Ongoing Projects (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) 1 Attachment 2 – Mobile Home Park Water Services Background Information Mobile Home Park Water Services Background Information Background Through outreach to residents, property managers, MHP owners, and community groups over the last three years, the issue of water billing inconsistency and lack of transparency emerged as one of the biggest concerns impacting mobile home park livability in MHP’s throughout Fort Collins and the Growth Management Area (“GMA”). Property managers and owners are confused by the changes at the state level and do not feel they had sufficient notice or support to implement the new changes. Fort Collins Utilities has been able to fill that gap in outreach and education, but since participation is voluntary, few MHP managers or owners are taking advantage of the resources. Fort Collins Utilities is available to assist any mobile home park in their service area, including some large properties in the GMA. 12 MHP’s are in a Fort Collins Utilities service area. Of these, 3 are in the GMA (Aspen, Poudre Valley, and Timber Ridge). Park Name Electric Water Wastewater Stormwater Aspen - 400 S. Overland Trail x x x Harmony Village – 2500 E. Harmony Rd. x x x x Hickory Village – 400 Hickory St. x x x x Montclair - 1405 N. College x x x x North College - 1601 N. College x x x x Northstar - 1616 Laporte Ave x x Parklane – 411 S. Court St. x Pleasant Grove - 517 E. Trilby x x Poudre Valley – 2025 N. College Ave. x Skyline - 2211 W. Mulberry Ave. x x x x Stonecrest - 1303 N. College x x x x Timber Ridge - 3717 S. Taft Hill Rd. x x Mobile Home Park residents identified additional issues related to water utilities, some stemming from those cited by MHP managers and owners and others related to lack of infrastructure upgrades and the master metering of mobile home parks. In mobile home parks in Fort Collins, the City provides a “master meter” and services the infrastructure up to and including that meter. This is the meter that the City relies on to charge for providing water to the entire mobile home park. All infrastructure beyond the master meter, throughout the park, and up to the connections from the pad into individual homes is owned and maintained by the MHP property owner. ATTACHMENT 2 2.2 Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Mobile Home Park Water Services Background Information (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) 2 Attachment 2 – Mobile Home Park Water Services Background Information 2.2 Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Mobile Home Park Water Services Background Information (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) July 13, 2021 Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program JC Ward, Senior City Planner Emily Olivo, Neighborhood Liaison ATTACHMENT 3 2.3 Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) 2 Direction Sought What feedback do Councilmembers have about mobile home park enforcement options and timeline? 2.3 Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) Overview 1.Strategic Alignment 2.MHP Residents’Rights Team 3.Background 4.Current Conditions 5.Summary of Options 6.Additional Support or Resources Needed 7.Estimated Timeline 3 2.3 Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) 4 Strategic Alignment City Strategic Plan •Neighborhood Livability & Social Health:1.5, 1.8, 1.11 •Economic Health:3.5 •High Performing Government:7.2, 7.3 H Housing Strategic Plan:Strategies 2, 20, 23, 24 2.3 Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) Mobile Home Parks Residents' Rights Team 5 •JC Ward, MHP Residents’Rights Team Lead, CDNS •Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Social Policy & Housing Program Manager, Social Sustainability •Leo Escalante, Public Engagement Specialist, CPIO •Jamie Gaskill, Program Specialist Supervisor, Utilities Community Engagement •Ryan Mounce, City Planner & MHP Zoning Lead, CDNS •Emily Olivo, Neighborhood Liaison, CDNS •Wendy Serour, Public Engagement Specialist, Utilities Strategic Accounts •Julie Wenzel, Mini-Grant Coordinator, CDNS •Marcy Yo der, Neighborhood Services Manager, CDNS 2.3 Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) Background –Projects & Programs Completed In Progress/ Underway Long Term / Resources Req. MHP Webpage Neighborhood Liaisons (highest need parks)Enforcement of Municipal Code (Section 18) & State Legislation (Limited, Need-Based) MHP Mini-Grants LHIP & Emergency Grants Housing Unit Single Metering (water) Maintenance Responsibilities Code Changes Partner/Contractor Projects CARE; LCCC Negotiated investments Limitation of Required Upgrades MHP Handbook* Liaisons (all parks) Section 18 Residents’Rights Updates Utility/Water Services Billing Transparency ROC support (shifted from notice of sale/opp to purchase work) Local Complaint System Education & Outreach to Support Enforcement MHP Licensing* *Project on hold temporarily to align timing and consistency with other ongoing efforts 2.3 Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) Background -Ongoing Engagement •Support for Residents’Associations •Relationship building with managers and residents •Kick-offs and clean-ups at senior MHPs this Fall (grant-funded) •Utilities, building inspection, and nuisance enforcement (complaint-based) 7 2.3 Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) 8 Current Conditions Ongoing Issues: •Wa ter Services –Wa ter billing/rebilling transparency,infrastructure maintenance •Park Rules –Legality, inconsistent application, lack of transparency, frequency of changes •Maintenance Responsibilities –Tr ees and snow removal •Retaliation •Safety –Lighting, speed limit enforcement, loitering, lot grading •General Nuisance Violations –inoperable vehicles,weeds, rubbish, outdoor storage •Manager/Owner Accountability –manager turnover and education, communication with City 2.3 Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) 9 Current Conditions & Ongoing Need •State Mobile Home Park Oversight Program is not enforced to level needed •Some residents (renters) are excluded from the state’s Dispute Resolution Program •Section 18 of City Municipal Code on mobile home parks has limited enforcement mechanisms; problems persist •Current enforcement programs and components do not address full scope of issues •Ag ing w ater and sew er infrastructure owned by mobile home park •MHP residents have limited access to data to confirm accurate water services rebilling, customer service from Fort Collins Utilities, & income-qualified programs 2.3 Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) 10 Program Goal Enforcement Program Goal: Support residents, owners, and managers into achieving voluntary code compliance through education/engagement and comprehensive enforcement, increasing livability and safety across mobile home parks in Fort Collins. 2.3 Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) Summary of Options 1.Local Park Registration:Park owners meet wi th city staff to provide park details and acknowledge MHP policy changes. 2.Manager Certification: Annual certification/renewal by completing education requirement, acknowledging MHP handbook, and meeting with MHP Residents’Rights Team. 3.Comprehensive Annual Inspection:Addresses issues that proactive enforcement does not prioritize and that require expertise from City Subject Matter Experts. 11 2.3 Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) Summary of Options (continued) 4.Proactive Enforcement:Aligns with Code Inspection in other neighborhoods across the city 5.Education, Engagement, and Support: Community clean-up days, mock inspections, and mini-grant support leading up to official enforcement in 2023, supporting MHP’s in achieving voluntary compliance. 6.Code Changes to Ad dress Water Services Rebilling: MHP leak notices to residents, prohibiting flat rate water billing or inclusion in lot rent, requiring submetering of units or use of an approved allocation formula, authorizing disclosure of MHP water bills (or portions) to certain parties 12 2.3 Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) Summary of Options Short-Te rm (1-6 months)Mid-Te rm (6-12 months)Long-Te rm/Resources Req. (1 year+) Complaint-based Response Mock Enforcement Inspections Local Park Registration Support Formation of Residents’Associations MHP Mini-grants Manager Certification Program Clean-Up and Repair Days (Senior Parks) Clean-Up and Repair Days (All Parks)Proactive Enforcement MHP Handbook Conduct Needs Assessment Annual Park Inspections Wa ter Services Solutions Possible Municipal Code Updates 2.3 Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) Estimated Timeline 2.3 Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) Support & Resources Needed •Staffing •Code and other inspectors for proactive enforcement and complaint response •Neighborhood Services staffing for outreach and management of park registration and manager certification programs •Mini-grant funding for repairs, clean-ups, maintenance •Application of penalty structures and additional Municipal Code Changes 15 2.3 Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) 16 Direction Sought What feedback do Councilmembers have about mobile home park enforcement options and timeline? 2.3 Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10443 : Mobile Home Park Enforcement Program) DATE: STAFF: July 13, 2021 Ginny Sawyer, Policy and Project Manager Colman Keane, Broadband Director WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Fort Collins Connexion Update. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide to Council and the public an overview and update of the Connexion municipal fiber build-out. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What questions does Council have for the Connexion team? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Connexion staff will provide an overview approximately every 3-4 months throughout the build to bring general updates to Council and the public. The Connexion team, along with partners Atlantic Engineering Group (AEG) and OnTrac, continue to build and install fiber to the home service throughout the city. This voter -approved initiative began in 2018 and the main build of the system is on target for completion in 2022. To date over 550 miles of fiber and more than 22,000 underground vaults have been installed. Connexion is gearing up for a large ramp up of service availability in the coming months. 2021 MARCH-JULY UPDATES The Build This is the largest municipal broadband underground project in the nation. As discussed in previous work sessions, the design-build approach to the project has allowed construction to move quickly and adds an element of schedule uncertainty. Staff continues to message that residents can antici pate service availability within 6-9 months of initial construction in their area. The Design portion of the Design-Build process is nearing completion. Having design complete will help to inform any adjustments potentially needed to the capital budget and costs through build completion. More than half of the city is currently under construction including Downtown. A bi-weekly newsletter update is being provided to downtown businesses through a Downtown Development Association (DDA) distribution list. D owntown construction is anticipated to last 6-weeks. Private irrigation damage and repair continues. Locating private irrigation that has been installed in the public right-of-way is the responsibility of the owner of the system. These systems and their owners, while required to be registered with the 811 system, rarely are and locating is not being done. Although AEG and the City are not legally responsible for damages, efforts are being made to mitigate impacts and provide exceptional customer service. Any irrigation damage caused by Connexion to private residences are repaired at no cost to the homeowner. 3 Packet Pg. 145 July 13, 2021 Page 2 Transparency and Customer Experience Connexion’s Design-Build process creates numerous customer touch points from construction to service and staff has mapped these opportunities to better understand resident needs, to determine appropriate and effective communication tools, and to identify metrics to ensure customer expectations are met. This work is in the early stages but survey data to date is positive. Connexion launched an address look-up tool and static status map in June. These tools are intended to provide greater transparency into the build and service availability as well as provide more information to residents on the timeframe in which they may be able to sign up for Connexion service. The site had over 750 unique hits in the first two weeks of availability. General In August, Network Engineering and Network Operation staff are anticipating moving to a permanent location at 700 Wood Street. This move will allow staff to co-locate resulting in needed efficiencies, a more professional trouble-shooting setting, a shared lab for testing and learning which will provide a higher level service for customers. Connexion will continue to update Council and the public through monthly reports (available online at fcconnexion.com /reports <https://www.fcconnexion.com/reports>) and quarterly Council work sessions. ATTACHMENTS 1. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 146 City Council Work Session July 13, 2021 ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) Purpose 2 1.Construction: Schedule and Progress 2.Customer Service Mapping 3.General Updates 3.1 Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) Build/Construction •Downtown Progress •Irrigation Lines •City Collaboration 3 3.1 Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) New Splicing Truck & Trailer 4 3.1 Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) Fiber Areas Completed 5 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Y 2019Jan-20Feb-20Mar-20Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22May-22Jun-22Jul-22Aug-22Sep-22Oct-22Nov-22Dec-22#of AreasActual Forecasted 3.1 Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) To tal Fiber Pulled 6 0 Ft 1,000,000 Ft 2,000,000 Ft 3,000,000 Ft 4,000,000 Ft 5,000,000 Ft 6,000,000 Ft Y 2019Jan-20Feb-20Mar-20Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22May-22Jun-22Jul-22Aug-22Sep-22Oct-22Nov-22Dec-22Fiiber Pulled in FeetActual Forecasted 3.1 Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) Overall Schedule 3.1 Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) Fiber Areas Q3 2020 vs Q2 2021 8 Q3-20 Q2-21 In Design 147 41%63 18% Under Construction 150 42%143 40% Construction Completed 60 17%151 42% To tal Fiber Areas 357 357 3.1 Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) General Updates •Regional partnerships •County assessment •Federal opportunities •Majority of staff will soon be co-located •Network Security and Reliability •Customer Experience 9 3.1 Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) 10 3.1 Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) Ta ste of Fort Collins 2021 11 Connexion is a proud sponsor of the 2021 Taste of Fort Collins! Saturday, July 24th & Sunday,July 25th at Washington Park in Old Town 3.1 Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update) QUESTIONS? 3.1 Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (10446 : Fort Collins Connexion Update)