HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Mail Packet - 5/25/2021 - City Council Finance Committee Agenda - May 24, 2021
Finance Administration
215 N. Mason
2nd Floor
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6788
970.221.6782 - fax
fcgov.com
AGENDA
Council Finance & Audit Committee
May 24, 2021
10:00 am - noon
Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/8140111859
Travis Storin conferred with the City Manager and the City Attorney and have determined
that the Committee should conduct this meeting remotely because meeting in person would
not be prudent for some or all persons due to the current public health emergency.
Approval of Minutes from the April 19, 2021 Council Finance Committee meeting.
1. Discuss and Designate New Chairperson for the Council Finance Committee
2. Assumptions for the 2022 Budget 40 mins. L. Pollack
T. Roche
J. Poznanovic
3. Immigration Legal Fund 30 mins. K. Stannert
C. Champine
L. Escalante
4. Utilities Income-Qualified Assistance Program (IQAP)
20 mins. J. Gaskill
B. Tholl
5. Housing Catalyst CCIP Support 20 mins. M. Overton
S. Beck-Ferkiss
Council Finance Committee
Agenda Planning Calendar 2021
RVSD 05/19/21 ck
May 24th 2021
Assumptions for the 2022 Budget 40 min L. Pollack
Immigration Legal Fund 30 min K. Stannert
C. Champine
Utilities Income-Qualified Assistance Program (IQAP) 20 min J. Gaskill
B. Tholl
Housing Catalyst CCIP Support 20 min J. Brewen
M. Overton
Jun. 21st 2021
2020 Fund Balance, Revenue, and Expenditure Review 30 min B. Dunn
TCEF Supplemental Appropriation 30 min D. Woodward
Timberline Recycling Center Operations 30 min V. Shaw
C. Mitchell
Community Impact Off-cycle Investment 30 min TBD
July 19th 2021
2020 Audit Results 25 min B. Dunn
Future capital projects and financing options 30 min B. Dunn
Carnegie Center Renovation 30 min J. McDonald
K. Mannon
Laporte Multimodal / Siphon Ped/Bike Overpass 30 min B. Buckman
Aug. 16th 2021
Front Range Financial Comparison B. Dunn
2022 Development Review and Capital Expansion Fee Updates J. Poznanovic
GERP Review 30 min B. Dunn
Sept. 20th 2021
Front Range Financial Comparison B. Dunn
2021 Annual Adjustment Ordinance L. Pollack
Future Council Finance Committee Topics:
• Financial Policy Updates – October 2021
• Golf Debt Issuance
• Revenue Diversification
• Utility Long-term Financial Plan and Capital Improvement Plan – November 2021
Finance Administration
215 N. Mason
2nd Floor
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6788
970.221.6782 - fax
fcgov.com
Finance Committee Meeting Minutes
April 19, 2021
10 am - noon
Zoom Meeting
Council Attendees: Mayor Wade Troxell, Ken Summers, Ross Cunniff, Susan Gutowsky, Emily Gorgol
Staff: Darin Atteberry, Kelly DiMartino, Kyle Stannert, Travis Storin, Carrie Daggett,
John Duval, Tyler Marr, Lance Smith, Caryn Champine, JC Ward, Noelle Currell,
Ryan Mounce, Tim Dailey, Meaghan Overton, Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Victoria Shaw,
Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Leo Escalante, Blaine Dunn, Dave Lenz, Jo Cech, Zack Mozer,
Jordan Granath, Carolyn Koontz
Others: Joe Rowan
Joshua Stallings
Patricia Miller - Thistle
____________________________________________________________________________________
Meeting called to order at 10:04 am
Mayor Troxell; I would like to note for the record that I have conferred with the City Manager and the City
Attorney and have determined that the Committee should conduct this meeting remotely because meeting in
person would not be prudent for some or all persons due to a current public health agency recommendation.
Approval of Minutes from the March 15, 2021 Council Finance Committee Meeting. Ross Cunniff moved for
approval of the minutes as presented. Ken Summers seconded the motion. Minutes were approved unanimously
via roll call by Ken Summers, Ross Cunniff and Mayor Troxell.
Travis Storin expressed appreciation to the Council Finance Committee members and acknowledged their service (a
combined 18 years of Council Finance Committee experience) and on behalf of staff thanked the committee for their
engagement. This committee has embodied our high performing board mantra He also recognized many of the
significant accomplishments which include; sponsorship of our Broadband Business Plan and debt issuance, the
establishment of City Give, updates to Development Review Fees and Capital Expansion Fees, the CRISP regional
project within the law enforcement agencies of the area, on-bill financing and the EPIC loan program, updates to
the sales tax code for internet sales, Police Regional Training Facility and the Gardens expansion just to name a few.
Mayor Troxell added his thanks Ross and Ken for their service as well.
Ross Cunniff added his thanks to current and past Council Finance Committee members and said that it has been a
privilege and an honor to serve the community in this capacity. Our interaction with staff has led to a sharper
organization with our combined thoughts.
2
A. Affordable Housing Fee Credits
Victoria Shaw, FP&A Manager, Community Services
Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Lead Specialist, Social Sustainability
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to seek feedback on requests from two development projects to provide fee credits
from the City for qualifying affordable housing units. These units will serve households making no more than
30% area median income (AMI). At the discretion of City Council, fee credits of $14,000 per qualifying unit of
new construction may be provided under the City Code to incentivize the development of units which serve
families that earn up to 30% of Area Median Income (AMI) if the proposed credit will not jeopardize the financial
interests of the City.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Is Council Finance Committee supportive of issuing fee credits to two affordable housing developments with
qualifying units?
2. Does Council Finance Committee have direction on which City fund to provide these fee credits from?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The City has received requests for fee credits from two affordable housing developments:
1. Housing Catalyst (HC) is developing the Oak 140 project at 140 Oak Street in Fort Collins. This project will
deliver 79 affordable apartment homes and 7 of them qualify for fee credits. Their request is for a total
credit of $98,000. See HC’s request attachment 1.
2. Volunteers of America (VOA) is developing Cadence, a 55-unit age-restricted affordable housing
development at 2555 Joseph Allen Drive. This project will have 55 apartment homes and 18 of them qualify
for fee credits. Their request is for a total of $252,000. See VOA’s request attachment 2.
Fee credits replaced the City’s prior fee waiver program and is currently the City’s only mechanism to specifically
incentivize units which serve households that earn 30% or less of AMI. These units are the hardest to develop
since they have the largest cost gap because resulting rents are extremely low. For instance, a household of two
must earn no more than $22,590 annually to qualify. Most mechanisms to incentivize affordable housing are
available for units that serve up to 80% of AMI. The table below illustrates the 2020 AMI thresholds for the Fort
Collins – Loveland MSA. (2021 AMI thresholds have not yet been published).
Household Size 100% AMI 80% of AMI 60% of AMI 50% of AMI 30% of AMI
1 $65,900 $52,700 $39,540 $32,950 $19,800
2 $75,300 $60,200 $45,180 $37,650 $22,600
3 $84,700 $67,750 $50,820 $42,350 $25,450
4 $94,100 $75,250 $56,460 $47,050 $28,250
5 $101,700 $81,300 $61,020 $50,850 $30,550
6 $109,200 $87,300 $65,520 $54,600 $32,800
7 $116,700 $93,350 $70,020 $58,350 $35,050
8 $124,300 $99,350 $74,580 $62,150 $37,300
3
Fee waivers were previously calculated based on the sum of eligible fees, prorated by the percent of the
development’s total units which are restricted to serve ≤30% AMI. Fees historically considered eligible for waiver
include:
• Development Review Fees
• Building Permit Fee
• Capital Expansion Fees (including those for Fire, Police, Streets, and Parks)
Other fees collected by the City that are not considered eligible for waivers include fees which are collected on
behalf of other agencies (such as Larimer County or Poudre School District) and fees for utilities.
In 2020, City Council changed this subsidy from a pro-rated waiver to a flat credit of subsidy. The amount was
set to $14,000 per unit for new development units and $5,500 per unit for redevelopment units where the
project gets the benefit of prior fees paid on the property. This simplified the process and provided predictability
to developers. City Council retained discretion to authorize each request. Authorization is dependent on a
determination that issuing the credits will not jeopardize the financial health of the City. City Council may also
direct staff on which fund, such as General Fund or Affordable Housing Capital Fund, to use when issuing
waivers.
The request from HC is for Oak 140 to be located at the site of the former Elks Lodge at Oak and Remington
Streets in downtown Fort Collins. All 79 new apartments will be restricted affordable. It will have a mix of studio,
one and two-bedroom apartments with the vast majority one bedroom. They will be priced to target households
earning between 30% and 80% AMI. 7 units qualify for fee credits because they will be restricted to serve
households with ≤30% AMI. This project, in partnership with the Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority,
aims to fill a demand for downtown employees that find downtown housing costs a challenge to living near
where they work.
The request from VOA is for Cadence, a 55-unit age- and income restricted housing community in one building
at 2555 Joseph Allen Drive near the corner of Drake Street and Timberline Road. All 55 new apartments will be
affordable. They will be priced to target adults 55+ earning between 20% and 80% AMI. 18 units qualify for fee
credits because they target households at or below 30% AMI. Including 20% AMI targets is unusual and will
serve extremely low-income households. The location of this community is near a bike path, a bus route and a
supermarket which are well suited to the special population (seniors) targeted by this project.
These two requests are the first requests to be considered under the new fee credit process. Both requests are
for qualifying new units of construction. Therefore, the flat fee to be applied to these requests is $14,000 per
unit. The total of the two requests is $350,000. In the past, fee waiver reimbursements have been funded from
General Fund Reserves or the Affordable Housing capital Fund (AHCF), which is part of the Community Capital
Improvement Project funding. Often the cost was split between these two sources, as shown in the below table:
Project Total Waivers % Backfilled Total Backfill General Fund Transportation Fund AHCF
Redtail Ponds 274,762$ 85%233,781$ 274,199$ -$ -$
Village on Redwood 100,708$ 0%-$ -$ -$ -$
Oakridge Crossing 90,923$ 100%90,923$ -$ -$ 90,923$
Village on Horsetooth 352,319$ 83%292,345$ 179,845$ -$ 112,500$
Mason Place 326,081$ 90%294,054$ 190,554$ 3,500$ 100,000$
Total 1,144,793$ 80%911,103$ 644,598$ 3,500$ 303,423$
Backfill SourcesBackfill of Waivers
4
The AHCF currently has $810,359 available, and 28% of AHCF dollars through 2020 have been used to fund fee
waivers.
*U.S. Census Quarterly Retail E-Commerce Sales 4th Quarter 2020
**Top 10 US companies based on % of e-commerce sales, eMarketer, July 2018
Discussion / Next Steps:
Ken Summers: we have $810K in the Affordable Housing Fund – gives us 43% of our goal units
Sounds like a good deal – 1/3 of the fund for 43% of the goal sounds like a good deal
Ross Cunniff; I support doing this - appreciate the renaming from waiver to rebate
I think a split between General Fund and Affordable Housing Fund – 50/50 might be the most rational split –
view it as a matching type of fund – I do not have a hard and fast – a split makes sense
Mayor Troxell; are there any other funding sources?
Victoria Shaw; largely these two funds; General Fund and the Affordable Housing Capital Fund
Mayor Troxel; the question is more the split than from what source
I am fully supportive – fee credits with qualifying units are a good outcome - let us start with 50/50 split unless a
case can be made for something else – this is my current thinking
Ken Summers; would this be coming out of General Fund reserves?
Travis Storin; this would come from the unassigned reserve bucket - I think historically this committee has been
comfortable using 25% from the Affordable Housing Capital Fund toward this purpose and 75% General Fund
unassigned reserves.
Mayor Troxell; I am ok however it is presented and codified then. More basis for where you are coming from
right now.
Ross Cunniff; balanced 25% from Affordable Housing Capital Fund – that makes sense as a rational basis -
Other uses for Affordable Housing Capital Fund – this is an important use but not the only use.
Ross Cunniff; ballot language lists a variety of other uses
Sue Beck-Ferkiss; the ballot language allows for this fund to be used for 1 or more affordable housing
developments or rehab -it has to be for affordable housing - the development or rehabilitation of affordable
housing
Ken Summers; is there a certain balance that we are required to maintain in the Affordable Housing Capital
Fund?
Travis Storin; it has a fixed amount around how much would be allocated to this one relative to the other 16
funds - across 10 years this fund has a $4M projected revenue stream- so far we are exceeding that amount as a
component of the CCIP ¼ cent tax - no minimum fund balance
5
Ross Cunniff; I would like to keep the purchase of land as an option from this fund which is one of the reasons
for trying to keep funds in there.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT
1. Is Council Finance Committee supportive of issuing fee credits to two affordable housing developments with
qualifying units?
2. Does Council Finance Committee have direction on which City fund to provide these fee credits from?
Result:
Committee would be supportive of $200K allocated from the Affordable Housing Capital Fund and $150K from
the General Fund Reserves / unassigned. An interest in additional codification needed and noted.
B. Immigration Legal Defense Fund
JC Ward, Senior City Planner, CDNS
Leo Escalante, Community Engagement Specialist, CPIO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (a brief paragraph or two that succinctly summarizes important points that are covered
in more detail in the body of the AIS.)
The purpose of this item is to respond to a request from some members of Council for an off-cycle general fund
appropriation to create a Municipal Immigration Legal Fund pilot program. If approved, this appropriation would
create a pilot grant program to provide local access to immigration legal services for Fort Collins residents
seeking citizenship or lawful presence. Grant funds will be awarded to legal service providers based on a
competitive process and will be dedicated to program administration, education, and outreach; providing
defense for people at risk of deportation; children seeking Special Immigrant Juvenile Status; and for community
members seeking pathways to citizenship and lawful presence also known as Affirmative Cases.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What feedback does the Council Finance Committee have regarding the research and unmet needs
assessment for immigration legal services in Fort Collins?
2. What feedback does the Council Finance Committee have regarding the funding level or services that could
be provided to Fort Collins residents as part of a municipal immigration legal fund?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION (details of item – History, current policy, previous Council actions, alternatives or
options, costs or benefits, considerations leading to staff conclusions, data and statistics, next steps, etc.)
During the March 23 City Council Virtual Work Session, City staff from Neighborhood Services and the
Communications and Public Involvement Department presented their findings from the research conducted on
immigration legal defense funds implemented in 42 different jurisdictions across the country. The information
covered included demographic data and unmet needs assessment in Fort Collins, program design from other
jurisdictions, potential funding, and service level options to assist undocumented residents in Fort Collins with
pathways to lawful citizenship and lawful presence, and strategic alignment with City Council priorities to improve
safety, community trust, equity, and livability.
Key Findings on Greatest Needs in Fort Collins
City Staff worked with several service providers in Northern Colorado with expertise in immigration services to
assess current service levels and unmet need for immigration legal services. Based upon this research, the
6
following is a summary of our key findings to inform Council’s decision on the City’s role in immigration services
to Fort Collins residents.
• Limited Availability of Services: Currently there is only one immigration attorney practicing in Fort Collins.
Attorneys in other practice areas may take on immigration clients but are not focused on complex systems of
administrative or immigration law, making the representation challenging and outcomes less consistent. In
addition to the limited availability of direct legal representation for immigration cases in Fort Collins, legal
advice and documentation assistance for cases related to extension of visas, DACA renewal, citizenship, or
legal permanent resident (“LPR”) applications are largely unavailable and can cost hundreds of dollars for
consultation with an attorney.
• Affordability: According to data provided by community partners from target population surveys and
feedback from engagement activities, the lack of affordable legal services and representation are considered
the biggest barriers to successful integration for immigrants in Fort Collins. While we do not have access to
Fort Collins-specific information, data from regional partners working with immigrant communities confirms
that 2,963 Northern Larimer County residents are eligible for immigration relief and need low-cost or pro
bono legal services to pursue lawful paths to citizenship and presence. We also learned that many need
these services for multiple family members in the same household. Out of pocket expenses for deportation
defense range from $6,000 to $20,000 in filing fees and $10,000 to $50,000 for attorney costs depending on
the specifics and complexity of the case. DACA, Visa, or LPR applications and renewals have varying filing
fees and though the total varies widely, average approximately $4,000 in attorney costs.
• High Demand for Services:
o In Fort Collins, 2,200 residents are eligible for naturalization and the remaining 2,300 non-citizen
immigrants are estimated to be undocumented and currently at risk for detention and deportation.
0F
1
According to local immigrant advocacy organizations conducting outreach and operating immigration
hotlines, the estimated unmet need for Fort Collins Detention/Deportation cases is 75-100 per year, SIJS
cases is 100 per year, and affirmative cases (DACA, LPR, Naturalization) is 400 per year.
o As of December 2020, there were 418 Larimer County residents with pending immigration deportation
proceedings initiated by Department of Homeland Security, 83 of whom lacked legal representation.7
The Larimer County case numbers and unrepresented immigrants in detention as of December 2020 are
almost double the 2019 case numbers.
o In the Poudre School District, there are 54 students who arrived in the U.S. as unaccompanied minors
seeking asylum because they are unable to return to their countries of origin due to threat of death or
imminent harm. These students could remain in the United States through Special Immigrant Juvenile
Status (“SIJS”). Due to the age of the children and current placement in foster care or with relatives
other than their primary caregivers, these children only have access to immigration legal services
through community programs. The Interfaith Solidarity and Accompaniment Coalition fundraises and
connects children with legal service providers for SIJS cases, but their work is limited by the amount
raised and availability of pro bono attorneys willing to take Fort Collins cases who are also skilled in
complex SIJS cases.
1 https://dornsife.usc.edu/csii/eligible-to-naturalize-map/
7
Market Rates & Pilot Program Budget
To inform Council’s consideration of the fund amount, City Staff obtained attorney costs by case type in the Fort
Collins market from nonprofit immigration service providers, Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network
(“RMIAN”) and Interfaith Solidarity and Accompaniment Coalition (“ISAAC”) and are based on actual attorney and
legal staff costs. The amounts listed cover limited filing fees associated with the pro bono representation.
Case Type Pro Bono Legal
Costs/Case in Fort
Collins market
Detention/Deportation $6,000/case
Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) $4,000/case
“Affirmative Cases”- Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (DACA), Lawful Permanent
Resident (LPR), or Naturalization
$1,000/case
Pilot Program Budget
Startup costs for the program would include funding program administration and pro bono attorney’s costs to
represent a minimum of 10 deportation cases to recruit and retain an attorney and support staff to provide local
representation.
The pilot program is proposed for 12 months from June 2021 to June 2022 to allow time to evaluate the long term
need and City role for this program. The program startup costs below are based on this timeframe. This timing
also allows for an informed discussion, if desired, as part of the 2023/2024 Strategic Plan and Budgeting for
Outcomes process.
Note: This timing would create a funding gap of approximately six months in 2022. If desired, Council could
consider an 18 month pilot program to address the funding gap.
Program Start Up Minimum
Item Amount Description
Program Administration $60,000 Program outreach to target populations, educational
materials, translation and interpretation services,
coordination of legal advice clinics and training sessions,
capacity-building activities for local and regional service
providers, administrative duties related to legal
representation and grant reporting
10 Deportation Cases $60,000 Direct legal representation, intake assessment, and legal
advice for Fort Collins residents facing detention and
deportation, including residents on bond from detention
awaiting immigration hearings
8
Additional Service Options
Item Amount Description
Additional Deportation
Cases
$6,000/case Direct legal representation, intake assessment, and
legal advice for Fort Collins residents facing detention
and deportation, including residents on bond from
detention awaiting immigration hearings
SIJS Cases $4,000/case Direct legal representation, intake assessment, and
legal advice for Fort Collins residents who arrived as
unaccompanied minors, are seeking asylum, and are
unable to return to their country of origin due to the
threat of death or imminent harm
“Affirmative” Cases (DACA,
LPR, or Naturalization)
$1,000/case Direct legal representation, intake assessment, and
legal advice for Fort Collins residents who may qualify
for DACA, LPR, or Naturalization pathways to citizenship
or lawful presence
Next Steps: First Reading of the appropriation Ordinance for a municipal immigration legal fund is scheduled for
City Council consideration on April 20, 2021. If this appropriation is approved by City Council, Staff anticipates
releasing a request for proposal from legal service providers to perform work under a competitive selection
process in the second quarter of 2021 and anticipate work to begin in the third quarter of 2021.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
What feedback do the Council Finance Committee members have regarding the pilot program timeline (12 or 18
months), funding level, or services that could be provided to Fort Collins residents as part of a municipal
immigration legal fund?
Discussion / Next Steps:
Cost to start program and a per case cost
Better quantify the local need
Mayor Troxell; what is the residency requirement? There needs to be some qualifying elements to this program.
Caryn Champine; we would have a residency requirement and welcome your guidance on what makes the most
sense (Denver uses 12 months).
Mayor Troxell; I hear 16 years (residency in years not months) Also hear that there is a concern about coming
forward. How do you submit an application without being known? I know one of your criteria was feeling safe,
but I see some discontinuity that tends to be at odds. I think a pilot is important.
Ken Summers; I do not remember this being an issue before the new year. It seems like it came to the horizon in
February followed by a Work Session in March and now proposing an ordinance in April. For something that is
totally new it is hard to quantify the need and we are thinking of doing an off-cycle budget request. So, this is of
such critical nature impacting all residents of Fort Collins that it cannot wait for 4-5 months to be factored into
the normal budget process.
Caryn Champine; this first came up during budget hearings in October - we heard from many community
members speaking and asking for this.
9
Ken Summers; even if it came up in October we are talking less than 6 months from initial discussion to we are
doing this. Allocation wise we are talking about a minimum of $125K to a non-profit partner; 1 attorney.
Are we giving funds to organizations in Denver? Where do the attorneys come from? Does this fall under an
Economic Development concept – provide more work for immigration attorneys. I see there are no
community partners who provide pro bono services. Can you review what is available specifically in Fort Collins
in terms of providers, nonprofits, and attorneys?
Caryn Champine; we have several potential grant recipients that are functioning in this area including Rocky
Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network (“RMIAN”), Interfaith Solidarity and Accompaniment Coalition
(“ISAAC”), and CSU. We would need for them to leverage their resources and the grant program to bring in
what would be needed. The coordinator position is a recommendation. It is true that there is
one immigration attorney in Fort Collins however there are several along the front range – way to leverage some
additional funding to reach a broader network into Fort Collins specifically.
Ken Summers; I know you have talked with several of the advocacy groups and who recognize the need and
want to see this happen. Did you talk with the immigration attorney here in Fort Collins to get an insight to how
these cases progress?
Caryn Champine; we did learn a lot from that attorney (Kim Medina) We also learned a lot from the service
providers who have been tracking these cases – that helped us gauge the unmet need and number of cases
and also provided information for the pilot program – how long does it take for a case to go through?
Ken Summers; timeline – the backlog - we know for a fact that there is a backlog in immigration courts, and it is
years not months - What was your understanding from the providers?
Caryn Champine; detention cases usually take from 300-500 days and naturalization cases usually take from 7-
13 months
Ken Summers; it looks like our potential qualifications for recipients is wide – The State of Colorado has
legislation to help indigent immigrants. Ours seems to be for anyone who needs services, and it seems like it is a
not a legal defense fund but a legal resource fund.
Caryn Champine; immigration legal fund –consistency is important, and that terminology aligns with my
understanding
Ken Summers; this is problematic – this person is here, and it is a matter of life and death if they were deported
– if someone is facing deportation and it does not seem to be justified by virtue of the family situation or
whatever the case may be - defending certain individuals – is far more justifiable than free legal advice and is
available as needed. There are a lot of issues here that need to be looked at let alone the fact that the level of
funding that is being proposed is the highest in the nation of any city, county – even the State of Colorado is not
proposing the level of funding we are talking about here in Fort Collins. If we want our residents to know that
we are going through a thoughtful process that is worthy of taxpayer funds, I do not view this as anywhere close
to being ready for prime time. We need a lot more information and understanding of what the policies are
going to mean and do for various individuals. I would prefer that it is viewed more as a Legal Defense Fund and
not just a Legal Resource Fund. You would get your best bang for the buck instead of providing half the money
for communications and administrative costs, trying to encourage folks to use the fund.
10
You need a lawyer when you need a lawyer. Certainly, DACA, students, refugees, asylum seekers with a
justifiable and legitimate asylum case – there should be some kind of prioritization. We need a lot more study,
more parameters and understanding of the issues. I see Fort Collins giving money to Denver advocacy
organizations and attorney which will not help the local economy. Not sure why CSU would be serving as a non -
profit advocacy for undocumented residents. That seems a bit strange
Ross Cunniff; the details lead me to think that we need more time – The proposed $60K for the administration
side – that was not obvious to me when we discussed this in the work session. That does not have the direct
benefit and I probably would not have supported that. I agree that a prioritization of the types of cases we
wanted to support – DACA – SIJS cases – people who may qualify under asylum laws – that makes sense to me –
we will need more time to figure this out – I have hesitancy about mid cycle appropriation as we do not have the
full vetting and community feedback we need and would get during the normal budget cycle. I think the idea
and program have merit. I could be supportive of a lower amount - Minneapolis has 10x more immigrant
population as we have, it you divide by 10 that suggests we should be in the $25-30K range for assistance. I
think right number be developed via more community engagement
If this were strictly a DACA program we could serve a lot of students. A future council could take it a totally
different direction. I do not think we are ready to make this decision now. I would support taking more time on
this as I do not think this is ready for full Council now.
Mayor Troxell; I agree, this is not ready for prime time. What is the outcome we are trying to accomplish?
I like the conversation that we are having in terms of there should be asylum seekers and not just a legal fund
We should provide legal support to all those who need it in our community.
Why PDT?
Darin Atteberry; there is a lot going on - a lot of demands on Council’s policy agenda. It is a
matter of available resources. Caryn stepped up when we needed help.
Caryn Champine; the logical connection to Neighborhood Services is that they are familiar with leveraging grant
programs and non-profit partnerships in the community to provide and extend services. They took the lead on
the eviction legal fund program so there is a bit of a natural fit.
Darin Atteberry; if Council at some point does approve this program and if this is a pilot, I do not know if it is
ideally in PDT or Sustainability. To Ken’s point, I do remember feedback from the Budget hearings – Council
gave direction and was frustrated that it did not come sooner. In two different occasions Council was clear
about their direction.
Ross Cunniff; I understood that as well.
Mayor Troxell; PDT – basic service of our community - should be used in that direction
Have supported former students to become naturalized citizens. Some of this could be encouraging sponsorship
in our community toward naturalization. I have participated in 5-6 of the naturalization ceremonies in Fort
Collins. It is a glorious ceremony. I still have so many questions over how this is being proposed.
Who are we trying to serve? Shadows – full citizens of this county – part of it – failure of the federal
government – maybe we should be spending more of our time speaking with our federal legislators – it is a
failure, and this is being demonstrated within our community. I think it should be postponed – it needs to go
through a budget prioritization process and engage our community.
11
Darin Atteberry; The committee is recommending that this be postponed. In this case, I will communicate to
Council that the Leadership Planning Team (LPT) based on this discussion, I will send a note out to Council saying
that I am pulling it off the agenda and that we will work with the new LPT on their preference with scheduling.
Two options to work with the new LPT and Council.
1) Do more engagement and get the new Council up to speed and bring it forward offline or
2) fold it into the normal BFO process.
Is there an objection to pulling it off tomorrow night’s agenda? Any concerns?
Ross Cunniff; I think it makes sense. There will be some disappointed community members but there will be
disappointed community members no matter what happens. I think in that case, we need to step back and look
at what makes the best sense from the integrity of the city processes. The transition in power that we are going
to be experiencing, we want the new Council to get their hands on where this goes.
Mayor Troxell; No concerns, I am supportive.
Susan Gutowsky; no additional thoughts. I will go with the members of the Council Finance Committee and their
infinite wisdom.
Darin Atteberry; Hearing no objections, I will send a communication out to Council notifying them that I am
pulling it off the agenda and that we will work with the new LPT on their preference with scheduling.
Caryn Champine and Kyle Stannert will communicate with the other stakeholders.
C. Hickory Village Mobile Home Park Resident Owned Community (ROC) Funding
Kyle Stannert, Deputy City Manager
Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Social Policy and Housing Program Manager, Social Sustainability
JC Ward, Sr. City Planner, CDNS
Ryan Mounce, City Planner, CDNS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide an update on the potential for Hickory Village Mobile Home Park (MHP) to
become a resident owned community (ROC) and to seek feedback from the Council Finance
Committee members on the desired level of City engagement in that process.
On March 3, 2021, the owner of Hickory Village MHP agreed to sell the park to a corporate operator. According
to state law the potential sale triggered a 90-day window for residents to make an offer to purchase the park
and become a ROC. Neighborhood meetings with the Hickory Village community have revealed that there is
strong support to pursue this. Staff from CMO, Community Development and Neighborhood Services, and Social
Sustainability Departments met with representatives from Thistle, a non-profit affordable housing organization,
which provides technical assistance and helps arrange financing for ROC’s in Colorado. With the high purchase
price ($23 million) and short timeline, Thistle staff have expressed a desire for local support for the formation of
a ROC.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Does financial support of resident owned communities of mobile home parks align with the City’s strategic goals
for affordable housing?
12
Should the City engage in discussions to be a financial partner in support of a potential purchase of Hickory
Village in the event residents move forward with an offer to purchase the mobile home park?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Hickory Village Sale Status & Timeline
Hickory Village is one of nine MHP’s in Fort Collins and contains approximately 200 manufactured housing units,
a majority of which are owned by their residents. In early March, residents and the City received notification
from the owner of the intent to sell the property to a buyer for a purchase price of $23 million.
Recently passed state legislation requires a 90-day advance notice of the sale of an MHP and provides the
opportunity for residents to submit their own offer to purchase the property, potentially leading to a resident
owned community. The City’s Housing Strategic Plan also contains a transformational strategy to allow tenant
right of first refusal/offer for cooperative ownership of multifamily or manufactured housing community.
The decision to pursue resident ownership requires the support of a large majority of Hickory Village residents
as well as the ability to organize a cooperative, arrange financing, and submit an offer to the current owner.
Timing is an especially critical aspect to any potential resident ownership decision, as residents and partners
have as few as 90 days from the original notice of the intent to sell (March 3, 2021) to complete these tasks.
Thistle, a ROC technical assistance provider, is meeting with Hickory Village residents and local partners to
provide information about resident ownership and to ascertain what level of interest residents at Hickory Village
may have in the idea of a resident ownership proposal. Key dates in the timeline thus far include:
• March 3: Notice of sale mailed/posted for residents; trigger date for state required 90-day notice and
opportunity to purchase period.
• March 9: The City receives mailed notice of intent to sell Hickory Village.
• March 15: Staff met with Mi Voz Leaders’ Council to discuss fears and outline potential paths forward.
Resident leaders had a strong interest in becoming a ROC.
• March 18: Staff met with Thistle to discuss the feasibility and process of Hickory Village becoming a ROC.
• March 25: Thistle hosted a neighborhood meeting with 45 Hickory Village residents to provide information
and resources on becoming a ROC.
• April 3: Thistle hosted a follow-up neighborhood meeting with 125 Hickory Village residents to provide
information and resources on becoming a ROC. The residents have formed an interim leadership board and
are continuing pursuit of ownership.
• June 1: The end of the state-required 90-day notification period and the earliest a sale of the property to
another buyer could be completed.
Considerations for the City
• Potential short-term City roles for Hickory Village MHP Sale
• Take no action: City staff would not actively participate in this process other than to direct inquiries
regarding this process to agencies involved.
• Be a convener: The City’s Neighborhood Services and CPIO departments can provide engagement support;
connecting residents, community partners such as Housing Catalyst, The Family Center-La Familia and
Thistle, and park owners (if/when appropriate).
• Be a convener and financial partner: The City can provide engagement as described above, as well as
financial support.
o Financial support would be used to avoid steep increases in rent due to the purchase.
13
o Significant investment would be necessary to keep park lot rents affordable. Without subsidy, rent
increases would likely be several hundred dollars a month.
Potential long-term City roles
City staff could create a program to assist in future conversions to ROC’s. This may include supporting residents
in the formation of residents’ associations and the creation of a plan for becoming resident-owned should the
opportunity arise. City staff can also continue their engagement with property owners, ensuring they fully
understand state laws regarding MHP sales and are aware of all selling options. Other financial support
considerations could be explored to include creation of a grant, loan, or other funding program to prepare for
future MHP sales.
Discussion / Next Steps:
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Does financial support of resident owned communities of mobile home parks align with the City’s strategic goals
for affordable housing?
Should the City engage in discussions to be a financial partner in support of a potential purchase of Hickory
Village in the event residents move forward with an offer to purchase the mobile home park?
Mayor Troxell; I am fully supportive of helping and encouraging resident owned communities. Housing Catalyst
affordable housing - adding this to an expectation portfolio of Housing Catalyst.
Kyle Stannert; Housing Catalyst’s role in this would be to come in and purchase as opposed to supporting
someone else’s purchase – there is already a party moving forward with an offer in – the ROC is a potential party
–there is a legal restriction that would keep Housing Catalyst from coming in and joining.
Mayor Troxell; if we roll it back one year and say we recognize that manufactured housing and mobile home
parks are a form of affordable housing that we want to support as a community - asking Housing Catalyst to add
this to their portfolio
Sue Beck-Ferkiss; we have reached out to Housing Catalyst specific on this project and they said it would not be
appropriate for them to interfere with a sale that the residents were trying to accomplish - we did not talk with
them about their general feelings about managing manufactured housing communities. I am happy to circle
back with them. In the past, for example in Boulder, the housing authority held it as an interim play, the city
purchased it and had the housing authority manage the project while it was becoming something else – so more
in a transition role than a permanent role.
Mayor Troxell; I think Housing Catalyst should also have a goal of housing ownership in their portfolio and I think
this plays to that - one thing that concerns me is needed improvements – a lot of these properties need
improvements; safety issues / tree trimming / water distribution systems / not having sub metering
/connectivity / broadband issues / energy. How do we accomplish those outcomes in the zone district going
forward? Is it always the owner of the property and not the tenants – like we have seen with our EPIC program
– cracking the nut between the landlord and the rent payer - if it is not owned by the residents themselves -
how do you get property improvements? I am assuming they have appropriate wastewater systems as well as
water supply - Zooming out and thinking of this more broadly – I am a supporter of ownership and moving in
that direction – how can we support that through mechanisms we have set up to provide for affordable housing
- Housing Catalyst. How do we ensure property improvements over time whether they be resident owned or
landlord owned? Health, safety efficiency – city stated policies
14
Kyle Stannert; there are a number of things in the works – committed to Council around some are zoning related
– local enforcement - what makes the communities more livable for residents – that is in the pipeline - staff will
continue to work on that. The Hickory Village situation is a great opportunity to inform what does it look like
when a sale comes up
Mayor Troxell; I do not want it to be lost - I am thinking about an overall approach to resident owned
communities for affordable housing - all these things play a role into that - how do you get to that?
As Ken mentioned – why don’t we just purchase the property? How do we ensure that we meet livability
standards – keep it affordable - we have pieces, but it needs to be executed in a way that achieves a 10–20-year
outcome -not just bits and pieces
Ken Summers; this is a challenging situation - if the city were to be involved financially - Ross had mentioned in
our Work Session – a down payment then an allocation of a grant for energy efficiency.
If the city were to make a commitment – I am in favor of the idea of saying if the residents are able to
successfully purchase the property, then the city ‘s contribution would be initially toward some energy
efficiency, property health and safety issues. It would be a contribution to our environmental goals and help
provide some targeted funding to address those improvements that need to be made. How a potential lender
might look at this - for example, I am a member of a 20-year-old established HOA and thinking about talking to a
lender - the response would be ‘not interested’. To think of lending to a yet to be organized group of mobile
homeowners $23M to purchase the property. I do not know how they go about that – no assets other than the
land. I am in a quandary on how this gets worked out - Did Boulder step in and provide a bridge loan? Then the
city is on the hook for ability to pay and meet the costs. I am not sure the residents are fully on board yet – that
they fully understand and comprehend what is at stake for them. I ask the question during the work session -
they will pay higher rent for 5 years and then maybe the rental will be lower than the market rate at the end of 5
years. How long is it going to take to make up for the 5 years at higher than market rate?
Kyle Stannert; you are touching on a lot of the points that make these very complicated transactions –
The HOA analogy can personalize this for a lot of us and also shows that this is a very different process - the
lenders that are involved in this are a targeted very specific group and having partners that can help the
residents - we are fortunate to have these independent 3rd party non-profits who are navigating these waters
because they are complicated but this has been accomplished hundreds of times across the country - so it can
be done but it requires a very special set of circumstances. In terms of educating the homeowners - there is
understanding but there is also wanting to know exactly what is that commitment - with us not being the
purchaser and we are not financing the big picture - what is the breakeven point going to be for residents -
because we are not a party at that level of detail but this is the type of thing that in the community meetings
Thistle is bringing this type of information forward to the residents – goal of lot rent stabilization -if resident
owned this is where the HOA analogy helps in terms of what do we need to do to make the books work in the
future years versus if an outside entity comes in and purchases we can only speculate about increases as we are
not in the conversations but you can assume and the staff has looked at other examples that a private party
purchase will most likely lead to lot increases - this is where Thistle is working with residents to put that in a
framework and to see what makes the most sense to move forward
Ken Summers; there is a special niche of people who work with that obviously has happened
I find it interesting on a side note basis – to understand and know the situations where it worked well and not so
well, and the lessons learned - this is where Thistle is contributing
15
Ross Cunniff; I think it does make sense for the future Council to pass this contingent resolution that we talked
about – I think down payment assistance is within the scope of what Council could do to participate here - I do
not know what the right level is but future Council can work that out – my recommendation would be to support
an amount that could be sustainable -
To answer the second question – if the city is going to engage in this - we should engage in program and policy
so that we are not having to make it up on the fly in the future - What are the portfolio of options that are
available? Which ones should be engaged by which trigger mechanisms? make a lot of sense
I would not make the down payment assistance contingent on coming up with an energy improvement plan or a
water supply improvement plan - I view those as add-ons – the energy improvement plan is beneficial to
manufactured / mobile homeowners regardless of whether they own the land or not and very beneficial to our
city climate goals. Tend to be less energy efficient – more expensive – As is often said; it is very expensive to be
poor - If the city can help with that and educate. Contemplate this May promissory note – not really an
appropriation - by law and by practice and develop a program with ROCs and the other improvements to the
property both the home itself as well as the land it sits on.
Kyle Stannert; part of Thistle’s involvement one of their practices is to bring in financing to get to 110% -
tying into some city programs – good alignment
Note - to bring forward a commitment in the form of a resolution - I hear you and agree -not just a will to do so
but how we would do it - being able to follow up with the allocation through the process if conditionally
everything lined up.
Emily Gorgol; if this is being pushed to the next Council - Kyle, in your conversations with Andy is that an
appropriate timeline knowing how long a Council process can take?
Kyle Stannert: that is one of the things that Thistle reinforced - discussing in the guise a resolution or an
expression of commitment - that being in place would be sufficient for what they are looking for as they do not
need the actual allocation or cash in hand to move it forward. Regardless of the 90-day window Council could
come forward with the intent to allocate a certain number of funds and then if approved we could go through
the allocation process.
Emily Gorgol; thank you for that - Is there an end date for the resolution they need it passed by?
Kyle Stannert; we have not gotten to that level of specifics yet - because it is a resolution it gives us more
flexibility -
Ross Cunniff; the 18th of May is in that time range - by being a resolution we do not need to make room for 2nd
reading within 10 days effective date is the other advantage which will give the next Council a chance to fully get
their hands on it and guide the direction that they want it to go.
Susan Gutowsky; looking at this situation with Hickory as a test case - when we did the zoning we anticipated
that something like this would happen and it has – looking at this as an opportunity to establish a process as we
have 6-9 mobile home parks that might be in the same position - making it part of the budget process makes
sense as it will come up again in the future and if we have a process in place it will be good for Council and for
city as a whole to know how to proceed.
16
OTHER BUSINESS:
Darin Atteberry; this has been a great Council subcommittee. Ross, Wade and Ken – I appreciate the
partnership. We have gone through a lot - the transition from Mike Beckstead to Travis when he was in an
interim role - Travis, you made that transition easy for him and for me. The opportunity to bring information
pre-Council to Finance Committee. It is a big advantage for us to vet information through the Finance
Committee before it goes to Council. I think it is great for the staff and for the Council as well.
The additional set of eyeballs on our city finance / responsibilities. I am very appreciative of that partnership –
some of the policy level thinking before something is on the Council Six Month Planning Calendar. As I look at
the total body of work since we created the Finance committee and turned it more into a policy level group for
us. This committee requires push-ups, and the city is better off because of the diligence you (Wade, Ross, and
Ken) have all put into this committee. Emily, thank you for being the alternate and Susan thank you for joining us
as well. Thank you on behalf of the entire staff team - you have always asked your questions in a very
professional way and I am grateful for that. I will be emphasizing to the new council and new mayor – this is
very important - robust structured.
Ross Cunniff; reflecting on my 8 years with the Financial Committee - started off with discussions of
The Foothills Mall revitalization and went into a variety of things including Revenue Diversification, BOB2, KFCG
Renewal, complete revamp of the Financial Policies, Budget and navigating and improving the BFO process and
navigating the COVID pandemic, the short- and long-term impacts and implications to city services and current
discussions involving how we can plug into housing affordability. This committee has a unique place in that it is
at an intersection of policy and implementation because the dollars are where the rubber meets the road. It has
been a pleasure serving with all of you. I will miss our dialog.
Darin Atteberry; to name a few others; the robust work around Capital Impact Fees and Employee Benefits and
we are now on a track where that information is provided in a regular, systemic way.
Mayor Troxell; I appreciate it – I want to thank Travis and great group and great discussion – thank you to Emily
and to Susan for joining us today.
Ken Summers; express my appreciation – wanted to give a special shout out to Travis - in his previous role he
also did an excellent job in terms of overseeing the audit process and is a great pick in terms of the transition to
the CFO role and he will continue to provide great guidance to future committees.
Meeting adjourned at 11:45 am
COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Travis Storin, Jennifer Poznanovic, Lawrence Pollack, Teresa Roche
Date: May 24, 2021
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
2021 BFO Assumptions for funding availability, salary adjustments, changes to benefits costs,
and insurance premiums.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2021 the City will again use Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) to prepare the City Manager’s
Recommended Budget for 2022, the second of two back-to-back one-year budgets. Key
assumptions are established early in the process and reviewed with the Council Finance
Committee.
1. Funding Sources: The sales and use tax forecast is an important revenue stream necessary to
support ongoing costs. General Fund sales and use tax is allocated across all seven Outcomes,
while the voter approved dedicated tax forecasts are allocated to specific Outcomes where
applicable Offers can utilize that as a funding source, per ballot language requirements.
Available reserves can also be used to fund offers, typically for one-time types of expenses.
2. Expense Pressures are numerous, including inflation, restoring 2021 reductions, balancing
what we have vs. net new enhancements and insurance premiums.
3. Salary and Benefits: The 2022 Budget includes a 3% average salary pool increase, which is
reflected in proposed salaries in 2022 offers. Employee benefit cost changes have also been
entered into the City’s budgeting tool and are used to calculate total employee compensation for
2022.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1) What questions does CFC have about these 2021 BFO assumptions?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
All background information is contained in the attachments and will be discussed in detail during
the meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – Presentation
Assumptions for
the 2022 Budget
05-24-21
Council Finance Committee
Assumptions for the 2022 Budget
•Funding Sources: Major Taxes,
Utility Rates and Reserves
•Expense Pressures
•Salary and Benefits
2
Agenda
3Sales Tax History
Fort Collins Sales Tax has recovered and surpassed pre-pandemic levels
4Sales Tax: Fort Collins vs. National Trend
Fort Collins surpassing pre-pandemic levels in recent months
Current 2022 Sales Tax Budget
•Historically Fort Collins Sales Tax follows the same
trend as US GDP, Colorado Personal Income, US CPI
and Denver-Aurora-Lakewood CPI
•All projecting recovery from 2020
pandemic levels
•Economic recovery, stimulus spending and
marketplace/economic nexus sales contribute to Fort
Collins continued growth in recent months
5
2022
8% Growth
6Use Tax History
Use Tax is volatile and difficult to forecast. Driven largely by development and business investment.
Current 2022 Sales Tax Budget
•Use tax on building permits on par with pervious years
•Not seeing decline in the development
review process
•Some decline in multi-family but not single family
7
2022
$18M
8Property Tax History
After being flat since 2008, Property Taxes have grown significantly over the past couple years.
Current 2022 Property Tax Budget
•Recommendation is based on preliminary 2021
valuations
•PFA receives 67% of the city’s portion of property
tax via an IGA
9
2022
6%
10Municipal Utilities Rate & Debt Forecasts
10 Year Rate Forecast (presented to the Council Finance Committee on 1/27/2020)
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Electric 3.2%3.5%1.8%5.0%5.0%3.0%3.0%1 - 3%1 - 3%1 - 3%1 - 3%1 - 3%1 - 3%1 - 3%1 - 3%
Water 0.0%5.0%5.0%0.0%0.0%2.0%0.0%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 2%1 - 3%1 - 3%1 - 3%2 - 4%2 - 4%
Wastewater 3.0%3.0%3.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 3%0 - 3%0 - 3%0 - 3%
Stormwater 0.0%5.0%0.0%2.0%2.0%0.0%0.0%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 2%0 - 2%
2022 anticipated rate increase was brought forward to 2021 for anticipated watershed protection measures due to the Cameron Peak Fire
Updated rate forecast will be presented to the Council Finance Committee before the 2023-24 Budget cycle
11Municipal Utilities Rate & Debt Forecasts
10 Year Anticipated Bond Revenues (presented to the Council Finance Committee on 1/27/2020)
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Electric $10-15M $15-20M
Water $55-65M $30-35M
Wastewater $10-15M $15-20M
Stormwater $35-40M $35-40M $20-25M
12The Challenge of Using Reserves during COVID
•Reserves were used
intentionally to fund
ongoing operations
in 2021
CONCEPTUAL -NOT TO SCALE
2020 2021
~ 3.0%
Inflation
Budgeted
Reductions
~ 5.0%
Revenue
Growth
Total Ongoing
Operational Expenses
Total Ongoing
Operational Expenses
Funded by
Reserves
Funded by
Ongoing
Revenue
2022
Total Ongoing
Operational Expenses
Funded by
Reserves
Funded by
Ongoing
Revenue
•Continuity of
operations
•Minimize impacts to
service delivery to
the community
•Not further
negatively impact
staff
Reserves
•General Fund estimate reserves available for the 2022
Budget only $4.3M
•ARPA –TBD
•Recovery Plan in draft stages
•Will be an available funding source for 2022 BFO
•“Watch List” Funds with no available reserves
•Parking Fund
•Self-Insurance Fund
•Recreation (possibly, depending on 2021
participation/utilization rates)
13
Expense Pressures
Expense Pressures
•Significant inflationary pressures –average of 3% for
the 2022 Budget is well below some industry averages
•2022 Average Salary Pool increases proposed at 3.0%
•$16.0 of reserves in governmental funds was used to
pay for 2021 ongoing operations
•Includes Hiring freeze -$3.1M savings is
delayed ongoing expense
•Net new revenue (or additional reductions)
required to bridge this gap
•May require two budget cycles
•Strong interest for enhancements to ‘Restore’ 2021
budget reductions
•Insurance Premiums
15
16Expense Pressures –Insurance Premium Increases
•The 2018 hailstorm led to $5.8 million in damages to City property, negatively affecting
insurance premiums
•Property Liability premiums have increased from $785K in 2019 Actuals to a
forecasted$2.0M in 2022
•Senate Bill 20-217 changed the rules of liability around policing
•Separate liability policy to cover law enforcement in addition to existing coverage
•$328k annually for $10M in coverage
•If passed, Senate Bill 21-197 is anticipated to go into effect August 2021 and changes how
injured employees select treating physicians
•It is anticipated this change may impact 20%of Workers Compensation claims with
about $15k higher costs for each of those claims
Salary & Benefits
182018 -2021 Salary Budget Comparison
2018 2019 2020 2021
National1 3.1%3.2%2.9%2.9%
Colorado2 –All 3.0%3.1%3.1%2.0%
Colorado2 –Government N/A 3.1%3.2%1.1%
Colorado Peer Cities 3.5%3.0%2.9%0.5%3
City of Fort Collins 2.5%3.0%3.0%0.0%
1 Source: WorldatWork Salary Budget Surveys
2 Source: Employers Council Planning Surveys
3 Two out of 12 entities awarded pay increases
19Salaries
•No salary increases in 2021 to non-CBU employees
•Concern about competitive position relative to market
•Cumulative effect of reduced resources has been challenging
•Hiring freeze
•Recognition and career development nearly eliminated in 2021
•Recommendation to restore salary increases
•A BFO offer has been submitted to analyze the local cost of living
•Pressure to attract and retain talent will only increase over time
20Plan Design In Market, Premium Contributions Above Market
Fort Collins Plan Design Premium
Single (13%)
Premium
Spouse
(29%)
Premium
Children
(29%)
Premium
Family
(29%)
Cost/
Claim Share
Consumer
Choice
Public +In Market -9%Not Reported -11%In Market +
Private
West
ER 1,000 –4,999
National 500+
+-3%
-11%
-9%
Not Reported Not Reported
-5%
-8%
-8%++
Public comparison was done using local municipal survey
Private comparison was done using 2021 Mercer Survey
Managing Plan with Minimum Increases to Premium and City
Medical –Increase Employer Cost
•2021: No Change
•2022: Advised 7.5%
Dental –Increase Employer Cost
•2021: -1.0%
•2022: No Change
Increase to City Budget:
•2021: 0.8% Increase
•2022: 3.0% Increase
21
•All changes reflect the Fixed Per
Employee Per Month (PEPM) Budget
•Employee Premium Increases
determined in Q3
222020: Trend Year and Healthy Fund Balance
•2019 Total Plan Costs: $24.6M; Per Employee Per Month: $1,149
•2020 Total Plan Costs: $26.3M; Per Employee Per Month: $1,207
•5.1% Increase due to:
•Large Claimants Increased
•5.6% Increase in Net Medical/Rx Claims
•Membership Increase (Adding New Members to the Population)
•Overall, 2020 Represents a Trend Year
•Benefits’ Fund Balance above Policy Minimum
•Target: 30% of Actual Claims = ~$7 million
•Estimated 2020 Ending Balance: ~$15.2 million
What questions does the Council Finance
Committee have about these 2021 assumptions?
CFC Discussion
THANK YOU!
COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Caryn Champine, Director, PDT
Leo Escalante, Community Engagement Specialist, CPIO
Date: May 24, 2021
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Municipal Immigration Legal Fund
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (a brief paragraph or two that succinctly summarizes important
points that are covered in more detail in the body of the AIS.)
The purpose of this item is to appropriate $250,000 in General Fund Reserves to create a Municipal
Immigration Legal Fund pilot program. If approved, this appropriation would create a pilot grant program
to provide local access to immigration legal services for Fort Collins residents seeking citizenship or lawful
presence. Grant funds would be awarded to legal service providers based on a competitive process and
would be dedicated to providing defense and legal support for people at risk of deportation; children
seeking Special Immigrant Juvenile Status; community members seeking pathways to citizenship and
lawful presence (also known as Affirmative Cases); and program administration, education, and outreach.
The Council Finance Committee reviewed this appropriation request at its April 19, 2021 and May 24,
2021 meetings.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
(Work session questions should be designed to gather direction from Council without requiring
Councilmembers to make a decision.)
1. If the City can obtain additional funding through grants or fundraising for immigration legal
services, would the Council Finance Committee recommend:
A. Use of those funds to add to the $250,000 City General Fund Reserve appropriation to
increase the total program funding?
or
B. Supplanting City General Fund Reserves with external dollars to reach a program funding total
from all sources of $250,000?
2. What feedback does the Council Finance Committee have regarding the funding level or services
that could be provided to Fort Collins residents as part of a municipal immigration legal fund?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION (details of item – History, current policy, previous Council
actions, alternatives or options, costs or benefits, considerations leading to staff conclusions, data
and statistics, next steps, etc.)
During the May 11th City Council Virtual Work Session, City Staff from Planning, Development, and
Transportation; Neighborhood Services; and the Communications and Public Involvement Department
presented demographic data and unmet needs assessment for pro bono immigration legal services in Fort
Collins, best practices program design and structure from other publicly funded immigration legal funds,
potential funding ranges and examples of the caseload and case types accommodated in each range; and
options that would assist undocumented residents in Fort Collins with pathways to lawful citizenship and
lawful presence, and strategic alignment with City Council priorities to improve safety, community trust,
equity, and livability. This agenda item responds to feedback provided by a consensus of Councilmembers
at the Work Session to advance an appropriation for $250,000 to create an 18-month legal fund pilot
program.
Key Findings on Greatest Needs in Fort Collins
City Staff worked with several service providers in Northern Colorado with expertise in immigration
services to assess current service levels and unmet need for pro bono or low bono immigration legal
services. Based upon this research, the following is a summary of our key findings to inform Council’s
decision on the City’s role in immigration services to Fort Collins residents.
• Limited Availability of Services: Currently there is only one immigration attorney practicing in
Fort Collins. Attorneys in other practice areas may take on immigration clients but are not focused
on complex systems of administrative or immigration law, making the representation challenging
and outcomes less consistent. In addition to the limited availability of direct legal representation for
immigration cases in Fort Collins, legal advice and documentation assistance for cases related to
extension of visas, DACA renewal, citizenship, or legal permanent resident (“LPR”) applications
are largely unavailable and can cost hundreds of dollars for consultation with an attorney.
• Affordability: According to data provided by community partners from target population surveys
and feedback from engagement activities, the lack of affordable legal services and representation
are considered the biggest barriers to successful integration for immigrants in Fort Collins. While
we do not have access to Fort Collins-specific information, data from regional partners working
with immigrant communities confirms that 2,963 Northern Larimer County residents are eligible
for immigration relief and need low-cost or pro bono legal services to pursue lawful paths to
citizenship and presence. We also learned that many need these services for multiple family
members in the same household. Out of pocket expenses for deportation defense range from
$6,000 to $20,000 in filing fees and $10,000 to $50,000 for attorney costs depending on the
specifics and complexity of the case. DACA, Visa, or LPR applications and renewals have varying
filing fees and though the total varies widely, average approximately $4,000 in attorney costs.
• High Demand for Services:
o In Fort Collins, 2,200 residents are eligible for naturalization and the remaining 2,300
non-citizen immigrants are estimated to be undocumented and currently at risk for
detention and deportation. 0F1 According to local immigrant advocacy organizations
conducting outreach and operating immigration hotlines, the estimated unmet need for
Fort Collins Detention/Deportation cases is 75-100 per year, SIJS cases is 100 per year,
and affirmative cases (DACA, LPR, Naturalization) is 400 per year.
o As of December 2020, there were 418 Larimer County residents with pending
immigration deportation proceedings initiated by Department of Homeland Security, 83 of
whom lacked legal representation.7 The Larimer County case numbers and
unrepresented immigrants in detention as of December 2020 are almost double the 2019
case numbers.
o In the Poudre School District, there are 54 students who arrived in the U.S. as
unaccompanied minors seeking asylum because they are unable to return to their
countries of origin due to threat of death or imminent harm. These students could remain
in the United States through Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (“SIJS”). Due to the age
of the children and current placement in foster care or with relatives other than their
primary caregivers, these children only have access to immigration legal services through
community programs. The Interfaith Solidarity and Accompaniment Coalition fundraises
and connects children with legal service providers for SIJS cases, but their work is limited
by the amount raised and availability of pro bono attorneys willing to take Fort Collins
cases who are also skilled in complex SIJS cases.
1 https://dornsife.usc.edu/csii/eligible-to-naturalize-map/
Market Rates & Pilot Program Budget
To inform Council’s consideration of the fund amount, City Staff obtained attorney costs by case type in the
Fort Collins market from nonprofit immigration service providers, Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy
Network (“RMIAN”) and Interfaith Solidarity and Accompaniment Coalition (“ISAAC”) and are based on
actual attorney and legal staff costs. The amounts listed cover limited filing fees associated with the pro
bono representation.
Case Type Pro Bono Legal
Costs/Case in Fort
Collins market
Unmet Need in Fort
Collins*
Detention/Deportation $6,000/case 75-100 cases/year
Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) $4,000/case 100 cases/year
“Affirmative Cases”- Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (DACA), Lawful Permanent
Resident (LPR), or Naturalization
$1,000/case 400 cases/year
*Unmet need in Fort Collins is estimated for 2021 and may be higher due to reluctance of
immigrant community members to identify themselves and their need for services for use by a
governmental entity in this analysis.
Pilot Program Budget
In addition to consideration of market rates and unmet local need for immigration legal services in
determining an effective pilot program budget, there are also baseline start-up costs due to the current
lack of local access, program administration needs, and minimum caseload needed for recruitment of
qualified attorneys to participate.
The pilot program is proposed for 18 months from June 2021 to December 2022 to allow time to evaluate
the long term need and City role in this program. The program start-up costs below are based on this
timeframe.
Program start-up costs
• Program administration
Includes a program coordinator position or equivalent employed by a partner organization.
Responsibility for program deliverables related to outreach to target populations, educational
materials, translation and interpretation services, legal advice clinics and training sessions,
capacity-building activities for local and regional service providers, administrative duties
related to legal representation, and grant reporting.
Costs for pilot program administration would not exceed $90,000 and could be decreased
based on program needs and delivery models of grant recipients.
• Minimum Caseload
Because Fort Collins does not have an existing pool of immigration attorneys, the municipal
immigration legal fund service providers would need to recruit and retain a qualified attorney
(or group of attorneys contracted to provide local access to legal services) and support staff.
Deportation cases have been identified as the most urgent need, cause the most disruption
to families and the local community compared to other case types, and have the largest
economic impact.
The minimum caseload identified for the Fort Collins area to recruit and retain legal staff for
the duration of the pilot is 15 deportation cases (or the equivalent financial commitment).
18-month Pilot Grant Program Funding Example*
Example Program
Administration
Detention -
Deportation
Cases
*minimum
15
$6,000/case
Special
Immigrant
Juvenile
Status
Cases
(SIJS)
$4,000/case
Affirmative
Cases
(DACA, LPR,
or
Naturalization)
$1,000/case
Funding
Range
C-18 Up to $90,000 15-20 0-5 0-20 $180,000-
250,000
*Case numbers in the example are not intended to reflect the actual number in each case type that
would have representation under the pilot as the actual number will be impacted by factors outside
of the control of service providers, such as who applies for participation and at what rate.
Program Focus
The City of Fort Collins has authority to offer this pilot as an equity program, one that is available to any
Fort Collins resident in need of the services without regard to income, case type, age at entry into the
United States, or other qualifiers. Having heard from Councilmembers an interest in assisting with cases
involving children, DACA recipients, and victims of violent crime, the requests for proposals can
encourage legal service providers to propose service delivery that is inclusive of a broad range of case
types. The grant review panel can also prioritize marketing efforts for the request for proposals to
organizations that provide or seek to provide those services. The appropriation request of “up to
$250,000” reflects the anticipated funding level needed to maximize the potential representation for the
greatest variety of case types, including those related to minors and violent crime victims within the C-18
example funding range.
Partnerships & Additional Funding Sources
Through extensive collaboration with stakeholders, Staff has identified a number of potential community
partners and grantor organizations that might be in positions to assist with providing services or additional
funding for a City-sponsored immigration legal fund. If this appropriation is approved, Staff will actively
pursue these opportunities to leverage these partner resources.
City Manager, Darin Atteberry, communicated with Larimer County Manager, Linda Hoffmann, in April
and May 2021 regarding the potential for collaboration and partnership to provide immigration legal
services to both City and County residents. Further discussion will be at the City Leadership and County
Leadership levels.
Existing Publicly Funded Immigration Legal Services
Program design, metrics, and funding options were determined through comparative analysis of existing
publicly funded immigration legal services and incorporation of best practices developed by these cities,
counties, and states. In previous Council agenda item materials, comparison of a limited subset of these
publicly funded immigration legal services programs was included consisting of those with an approximately
equivalent percentage of immigrant population in the cities/counties to that of Fort Collins. “Attachment 4”
contains available information for 46 existing publicly funded immigration legal services/funds, two of which
were newly established in May 2021.
Next Steps: If this appropriation is approved by City Council, Staff anticipates releasing a request for
proposal from legal service providers to perform work under a competitive selection process in the second
quarter of 2021 and anticipate work to begin in the third quarter of 2021.
ATTACHMENTS (numbered Attachment 1, 2, 3,…)
1. Municipal Immigration Legal Fund AIS from City Council Work Session on May 11, 2021
2. Municipal Immigration Legal Fund City Council Work Session Summary
3. Council Finance Committee Notes on agenda item from April 19, 2021
4. Publicly Funded Immigration Legal Services Comparison
5. PowerPoint Slides
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
Staff:
Caryn Champine, Director, Planning, Development, & Transportation
JC Ward, Sr. City Planner, Neighborhood Services
Leo Escalante, Public Engagement Specialist, CPIO
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Municipal Immigration Legal Fund
Executive Summary
City Council requested this work session item in order for staff to provide an overview of research and
options to address the need for immigration legal services in Fort Collins, existing municipal immigration
legal fund implementation and funding models, and alignment of potential solutions with our community-
specific needs.
A municipal immigration legal fund would provide local access to immigration legal services for Fort
Collins residents seeking a legal pathway to citizenship or lawful presence. As a new effort, the potential
program would be considered a pilot effort of 12 – 18 months. Grant funds would be awarded to legal
service providers based on a competitive process and will be dedicated to program administration,
education, and outreach; providing defense for people at risk of deportation; children seeking Special
Immigrant Juvenile Status; and for community members seeking pathways to citizenship and lawful
presence also known as Affirmative Cases.
General Direction Sought
1. What feedback does City Council have regarding the research and unmet needs assessment for
immigration legal services in Fort Collins?
2. What next step would Council like Staff to pursue regarding an 18-month or 12-month pilot
municipal immigration legal fund program for Fort Collins residents?
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends funding an 18-month pilot municipal immigration legal fund grant program.
Background
Procedural History
Community members and nonprofit partners recommended funding of immigration legal services as an
equity-centered program to City Council in Fall 2020. Staff began working with those partners in October
2020 to gather data on the potential impact and outcomes for Fort Collins residents. The findings were
initially brought before City Council at the March 23, 2021 work session. Due to the timing of transition of
City Council, the complexity of the background information, and public interest in the item, it comes before
the City Council for a work session on May 11, 2021. Potential funding of a pilot grant program has also
been discussed in 2021 at the Human Relations Commission, Community Impact Ad Hoc Committee, and
Council Finance Committee.
Background Information
As City Council has acknowledged, fear and uncertainty due to immigration status and lack of due
process can impact overall community safety, equity, and livability. While immigration policy and
enforcement are controlled by the federal government, Fort Collins City Council noted in the 2020
Legislative Policy Agenda that “issues pertaining to civil rights at the United States’ borders and
immigration law more broadly have wide impacts that can directly impact the day-to-day life of Fort Collins
residents.”0F1 The City Council’s Resolution 2019-100 details concerns that fear resulting from federal
immigration law and enforcement policies could discourage Fort Collins residents from engaging with
safety personnel, Police Services, and other City departments to access services and resources.1F2
1 https://www.fcgov.com/citymanager/files/19-21914-2020-legislative-policy-agenda-web.pdf?1578507829, page 9
2https://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=72&docid=3390688&dt=AGENDA+ITEM&doc_download_date=OC
T-01-2019&ITEM_NUMBER=11
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
Fort Collins has an immigrant community of more than 11,000 people or 6.8% of the total population.2F3
Approximately 4,500 Fort Collins residents are currently not United States citizens. 3F4 2,200 residents are
eligible for naturalization and the remaining 2,300 non-citizen immigrants are estimated to be
undocumented and at risk for detention and deportation. 4F5 15% of children in Fort Collins live with at least
one immigrant parent and 75% of these children are themselves US citizens.5F6
In December 2020, there were 418 Larimer County residents with pending immigration deportation
proceedings, 83 of whom lacked legal representation.6F7 Many people in deportation proceedings have
valid legal claims to remain in the United States but cannot effectively assert those claims or gather
necessary evidence without legal representation. Any non-citizen including lawful permanent residents,
refugees, and people who entered legally on visas can be placed in deportation proceedings.7F8 Immigrants
are 10.5 times more likely to be able to lawfully remain in the U.S. when they have legal representation.8F9
42 municipalities in the U.S. now have some form of immigration legal assistance to assure due process
and equity so that inability to afford an attorney is not a determining factor in the ability to lawfully remain
in the United States.9F10
Fort Collins lacks available pro bono or low-cost legal advice and assistance for cases related to
extension of visas, DACA renewal, citizenship, or legal permanent resident applications. There is one
immigration attorney practicing in Fort Collins and although community partners are providing assistance
for immigrants, no organizations currently provide pro bono or low-cost immigration legal defense and
advice for Fort Collins residents. 2,963 Northern Larimer County residents are eligible for immigration
relief and need low-cost or pro bono legal services to pursue lawful paths to citizenship. Best practices
from other municipal immigration legal fund delivery models include legal services that meet the most
urgent needs, reach the greatest number of impacted community members, and build trust in the
immigrant community through ongoing self-advocacy and program support.
Strategic Alignment
− Strategic Outcome - Neighborhood Livability & Social Health 1.4 Advance equity for all, leading
with race, so that a person’s identity or identities is not a predictor of outcomes.
− Strategic Outcome - Economic Health 3.2 Understand trends in the local labor market and work
with key partners to grow diverse employment opportunities.
− Strategic Outcome - Safe Communities 5.1 Improve overall community safety while continuing
to increase the level of public trust and willingness to use emergency services.
− Strategic Outcome - High Performing Government 7.3 Improve effectiveness of community
engagement with enhanced inclusion of all identities, languages and needs.
− 2020 Legislative Policy Agenda – Immigration and National Border Conditions 1. Supports the
humane treatment of persons who are detained by Immigration Officials and the rapid resolution
of legal proceedings to determine their status; 2. Supports a pathway to legal immigration into the
United States that is sustainable in the long term.
− City Council Resolution 2019-100 re: The Immigration Crisis at the Southern Border of the
United States and its Impact on the Fort Collins Community
3 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fortcollinscitycolorado
4 http://research.newamericaneconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/nae-co-report.pdf
5 https://dornsife.usc.edu/csii/eligible-to-naturalize-map/
6 U.S. Census Bureau (2017), Age and nativity of own children under 18 years in families and subfamilies by nativity
of parents. 2016 ACS 1-year estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
7 https://trac.syr.edu/phptools/immigration/nta/
8 https://www.usa.gov/deportation
9 Vera Institute of Justice Policy Brief (February 2021). Retrieved from https://www.vera.org/publications/a-
federal-defender-service-for-immigrants.
10 https://www.vera.org/initiatives/safe-initiative
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
− Social Sustainability Strategic Plan (2016) – Equity and Inclusion Theme B1.2.b Research
existing partner and community programs to help inform refugee and immigrant populations of
their legal rights and responsibilities; seek opportunities to create programs where none currently
exist.
Immigration policy, enforcement, and adjudication are under federal jurisdiction, but as noted in the 2020
Legislative Policy Agenda, “issues pertaining to civil rights at the United States’ borders and immigration
law more broadly have wide impacts that can directly impact the day-to-day life of Fort Collins
residents.”10F11 The City Council’s Resolution 2019-100 and Community Trust Initiative outline additional
concerns that fear resulting from federal immigration law and enforcement policies could discourage Fort
Collins residents from engaging with safety personnel, Police Services, and other City departments to
access services and resources.11F12 12F13 Lack of engagement could discourage people from obtaining
emergency assistance or reporting crimes, and ultimately interfere with obtaining an accurate count of
people living in Fort Collins, putting at risk the City’s accurate representation in Congress and in the
Colorado General Assembly, as well as federal funding. These local impacts on safety, equity, and
livability led 42 municipal government entities across the United States to create immigration legal funds
and programs.
Challenges for Immigrant Communities
During the research phase of this process, Staff learned that Fort Collins lacks pro bono or low-cost legal
advice and assistance for cases related to extension of visas, DACA renewal, citizenship, or legal
permanent resident applications. There is one immigration attorney practicing in Fort Collins and although
community partners are providing assistance for immigrants, no organizations currently provide pro bono
or low-cost immigration legal defense and advice for Fort Collins residents.
• Deportation is considered a civil rather than criminal penalty, therefore immigrants facing removal
are not protected by the Sixth Amendment “right to counsel” in place for criminal defendants.
• A common misperception is that deportation proceedings are only for undocumented immigrants.
In fact, any non-citizen including lawful permanent residents, refugees, and people who entered
legally on visas can be placed in deportation proceedings.8
• Increases in economic hardship, food insecurity, and housing instability are associated with
deportation of a family member.13F14 In Colorado, families lose 30% of their income when an
individual is detained or deported.14F15 Colorado immigrants in detention lose $3.9 million in
earnings per year.15F16
• There is currently one immigration attorney practicing in Fort Collins.
• Although community partners are providing a wide spectrum of assistance for immigrants,
organizations and attorneys taking on pro bono immigration cases currently provide limited pro
bono or low-cost immigration legal defense and advice for Fort Collins residents. This assistance
does not meet the need for local, immigration legal services.
• No statewide pro bono or subsidized immigration legal defense is provided in Colorado.
Currently, the State of Colorado does not provide legal services or support for immigration cases
and proposed legislation to create an immigration legal fund will still be insufficient to meet the
needs of Colorado immigrants. The Colorado Legislature is considering HB21-1194 to create a
statewide immigration legal defense fund of $100,000. However, the fund would be limited to
providing legal representation for detention-deportation cases and the funding amount is limited
by Taxpayer Bill of Rights (“TABOR”) Amendment. If approved, the anticipated state funding level
11 https://www.fcgov.com/citymanager/files/19-21914-2020-legislative-policy-agenda-web.pdf?1578507829, page
9
12https://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=72&docid=3390688&dt=AGENDA+ITEM&doc_download_date=O
CT-01-2019&ITEM_NUMBER=11
13 https://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=17&docid=3391549
14 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.04.007
15 https://www.coloradofiscal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/2.12.21-Final-Report-2.pdf, page 13
16 https://www.coloradofiscal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/2.12.21-Final-Report-2.pdf, page 14
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
is unlikely to meet 100% of the overall need for all Colorado residents. Advocates for the Fort
Collins immigrant community say the solution is not exclusively federal or state or local but
requires the additive combination of funding and policy change at all levels.
For additional information on the immigration process, associated costs, and timelines, see background
information attachments.
Current Conditions in Colorado
In 2019 the Department of Homeland Security adjudicated 8,500 immigration deportation cases in
Colorado.16F17 65% of immigrant detainees in those cases did not have legal representation.17F18 In Colorado
in 2020, 2,154 children faced immigration court deportation proceedings and 61% of these children did
not have access to legal representation. Unfortunately, those without representation are much more likely
to be detained while awaiting their hearings and to eventually be deported. Being represented by an
attorney helps immigrants return to their families, jobs, and communities more quickly and keeps them
there while their case is awaiting the deportation hearing. Immigrants are 10.5 times more likely to be
able to remain in the U.S. when they have legal representation.9 Immigrants are 3.5 times more likely to
be released on bond while awaiting trial if they have access to legal counsel.18F19 There is an estimated
300% return on investment in universal representation in immigration cases in Colorado.19F20
Current Unmet Need for Immigration Services in Fort Collins
In the Fort Collins 2020 Legislative Policy Agenda, City Council indicated support for the humane
treatment of immigration detainees, rapid resolution of legal proceedings to determine their status, and
pathways to legal immigration into the United States.1
Demographics – General
In addition to the absence of critical representation for detained immigrants awaiting hearings, legal
advice and assistance are lacking in Fort Collins for cases related to extension of visas, DACA renewal,
citizenship, or legal permanent resident applications. This unmet need creates significant challenges to
our unauthorized and partially documented immigrant community members, including financial and
emotional instability; lack of access to health care, stable housing, higher education, and meaningful
work; and a cycle of poverty.
• Fort Collins has an immigrant community of more than 11,000 people or 6.8% of the total
population.20F21
• Approximately 4,500 Fort Collins residents are currently not United States citizens. 21F22 2,200
residents are eligible for naturalization and the remaining 2,300 non-citizen immigrants are
estimated to be undocumented and currently at risk for detention and deportation. 22F23 23F24
• 2,963 Northern Larimer County residents are eligible for immigration relief and need low-cost or
pro bono legal services to pursue lawful paths to citizenship and presence.
• As of December 2020, there were 418 Larimer County residents with pending immigration
deportation proceedings initiated by Department of Homeland Security, 83 of whom lacked legal
17 Colorado Fiscal Institute. A Matter of Justice: Cost Savings from Universal Legal Representation for All Colorado
Immigration Proceedings. (February 2021). Retrieved from https://www.coloradofiscal.org/wp-
content/uploads/2021/02/2.12.21-Final-Report-2.pdf
18 TRAC Immigration Reports, Syracuse University, “State and County Details on Deportation Proceedings in
Immigration Court,” available at: https:// trac.syr.edu/phptools/immigration/nta
19 Ryo, Emily, “Detained: A Study of Immigration Bond Hearings,” Law & Society Review 50, no. 1, 2016, 117-153.
20 https://www.coloradofiscal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/2.12.21-Final-Report-2.pdf, page 12
21 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fortcollinscitycolorado
22 http://research.newamericaneconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/nae-co-report.pdf
23 https://dornsife.usc.edu/csii/eligible-to-naturalize-map/
24 Pew Research Center. (2019). Estimates of U.S. unauthorized Immigrant population, by metro area, 2016 and
2007. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/interactives/unauthorized- immigrants-by-metro-
area-table/
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
representation.7 The Larimer County case numbers and unrepresented immigrants in detention
as of December 2020 are almost double the 2019 case numbers.
• Due to the reliance on reporting agency data collection, ownership, and publication generally
aggregated at the county, regional, or metropolitan statistical area levels, information may not be
available at the city level or in real time. While we do not have access to Fort Collins-specific
information, data from regional partners working with immigrant communities confirms that 2,963
Northern Larimer County residents are eligible for immigration relief and need low-cost or pro
bono legal services to pursue lawful paths to citizenship and presence. Many households need
these services for multiple family members. Out of pocket expenses for deportation defense
range from $6,000 to $20,000 in filing fees and $10,000 to $50,000 for attorney costs depending
on the complexity of the case. DACA, Visa, or LPR applications and renewals have varying filing
fees and though the total varies, average approximately $4,000 in attorney costs.
• An August 2020 poll of immigrant residents in Fort Collins had 162 respondents of which 70%
reported their unmet need for immigration attorney services.24F25 49% of respondents cited the high
cost of immigration legal services as the primary barrier to access, 36% could not find information
on local legal services, and 39% did not think their current status had a pathway to citizenship.
Demographics – Children
Because of valid concerns about disclosure of immigration status to federal government agencies, state
and local relief or assistance programs are increasingly filling the gap in those services to assure that all
children and families can meet basic needs.
• 15% of children in Fort Collins live with at least one immigrant parent and 75% of these children
are themselves US citizens.6
• “Mixed status” families, where one or more family member is undocumented, can face uncertainty
due to inconsistent federal policy. Children who are U.S. citizens did not receive the first round of
COVID-19 economic stimulus benefits if even one parent was undocumented.25F26 The second
round of those benefits could be accessed by the children if one parent is lawfully present, but not
if both parents are undocumented.
• Locally, undocumented parents (even those with citizen children) indicate a reluctance to allow
their citizen children to enroll in or access programs like Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
(SNAP) Program, Medicaid, or Section 8 housing vouchers out of fear that the parent’s future
application for citizenship would be negatively impacted.
• In the Poudre School District, there are 54 students who arrived in the U.S. as unaccompanied
minors seeking asylum because they are unable to return to their countries of origin due to threat
of death or imminent harm. These students could remain in the United States through Special
Immigrant Juvenile Status (“SIJS”) and later adjust their status to lawful permanent resident as
long as they apply before the child’s 21st birthday. Processes for both SIJS and Adjustment of
Status are complex, require payment of multiple fees or applications for fee waivers at varying
points in the process, and have strict deadlines.
• Abused, neglected, and abandoned children in any other court system in the United States are
entitled to legal representation as well as a Guardian ad Litem to assess the best interests of the
child.26F27 Children in immigration proceedings have no right to legal counsel, Guardian ad Litem
evaluation, or adult supervision during detention or hearings.27F28
Local Economic Impact
25 Alianza NORCO August 2020 Immigrant Community Survey
26 https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2021/1/8/22213330/immigrants-stimulus-mixed-status-covid-
coronavirus-chicago
27 https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/represent.pdf
28 ACLU. Immigrant Children Do Not Have the Right to an Attorney Unless They Can Pay, Rules Appeals Court.
(February 6, 2018). Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrants-rights/deportation-and-due-
process/immigrant-children-do-not-have-right-attorney
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
• In Colorado, the estimated cost to an employer to replace an employee is 16% of that employee’s
wages.28F29 The current median annual income for U.S. immigrants is approximately $30,000.29F30
This equates to a $4,800 cost to an employer to replace a detained or deported employee. With
418 Larimer County residents currently in detention and facing deportation, there is a $1.9 million
possible loss in 2021 for Larimer County employers to maintain their workforce levels.30F31
• Individuals with an income in the $30,000 annual income range tend to spend most of their
income on the purchase of basic needs in their community and pay 9% of their income to state
and local taxes.31F32 For each detained and/or deported resident, there is an annual loss of $2,700
in local and state taxes. With 418 Larimer County residents in deportation proceedings that
equates to an annual $1.1 million potential loss in local and state taxes from Larimer County
alone.
• Because undocumented immigrants do not qualify for some benefits including unemployment
insurance or SNAP benefits, wages must take the place of those other payments or income that
support basic needs.32F33 33F34 Every $1.00 spent by undocumented immigrant families in a community
generates $1.60 in local economic activity.34F35 This means the lost local economic activity from one
detained and/or deported resident is $4,320 per year.
Fort Collins Pilot Program Delivery Model
Estimates for funding levels to provide effective pro bono or low-cost immigration legal services to
residents of Fort Collins were determined by demographic analysis and current unmet need; data,
regional service costs, and subject matter expertise from local and regional community partners on inputs
necessary to build and support local capacity for these services; and comparative service levels,
outcomes, and costs from cities with existing municipal immigration legal funds.
Best practices demonstrated by effective municipal immigration legal funds and modeled by the Vera
Institute of Justice’s ‘Safety & Fairness for Everyone’ Initiative offer wrap-around, holistic services to meet
the most urgent needs, reach the greatest number of impacted community members, and build trust in
the immigrant community through ongoing self-advocacy and program support. A Fort Collins pilot
municipal immigration legal fund grant program would provide the following elements:
• Direct legal representation for the lifecycle of immigration cases
• An emphasis on legal services for deportation and detention cases
• Support for legal pathways to citizenship
• Scholarships or subsidized application and renewal fees for affirmative cases like DACA, SIJS,
Visa Renewals, Adjustment of Status for LPR, U Visas, and Family Reunification
• Legal Advice & Consultations through legal clinics
• Know Your Rights Trainings in detention centers and embedded in local immigrant communities
• Education and outreach that includes leadership and empowerment training to improve self-
advocacy
• Focus on outcomes-based program metrics (program accomplishments like improvements in
community safety) rather than output-based metrics (participant numbers or number of cases
resolved)
• Program coordinator housed in a local nongovernmental organization
29 Boushey, Heather & Glynn, Sarah Jane. “There are Significant Business Costs to Replacing Employees,”
Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, November 2012, p. 2
30 https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2019/03/07/latinos-incomes-higher-than-before-great-recession-but-u-
s-born-latinos-yet-to-recover/
31 https://trac.syr.edu/phptools/immigration/nta/
32 https://www.coloradofiscal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/2.12.21-Final-Report-2.pdf, page 15
33 Fiscal Policy Institute, “Only Wealthy Immigrants Need Apply.” October 2018.
34 http://fiscalpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/US-Impact-of-Public-Charge.pdf
35 https://www.coloradofiscal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/2.12.21-Final-Report-2.pdf, page 15
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
Potential future success of these elements in our community is further indicated by the outcomes of the
successful City of Fort Collins Eviction Legal Fund 2020 pilot, which used a similar model and employed
direct legal representation, education and outreach, self-advocacy empowerment, and community partner
leadership to reach residents and landlords in need of assistance with eviction prevention as a response
to unmet community need due to COVID-19.
Fort Collins Market Rates
To inform Council’s consideration of the funding amount, City Staff obtained attorney costs by case type
in the Fort Collins market from nonprofit immigration service providers, Rocky Mountain Immigrant
Advocacy Network (“RMIAN”) and Interfaith Solidarity and Accompaniment Coalition (“ISAAC”) and are
based on actual attorney and legal staff costs. The amounts listed cover limited filing fees associated with
the pro bono representation.
Case Type Pro Bono Legal
Costs/Case in Fort
Collins market
Unmet Need in Fort
Collins*
Detention/Deportation $6,000/case 75-100 cases/year
Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) $4,000/case 100 cases/year
“Affirmative Cases”- Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (DACA), Lawful Permanent
Resident (LPR), or Naturalization
$1,000/case 400 cases/year
*Unmet need in Fort Collins is estimated for 2021 and may be higher due to reluctance of
immigrant community members to identify themselves and their need for services for use by a
governmental entity in this analysis.
Fort Collins Pilot Program Budget
In addition to consideration of market rates and unmet local need for immigration legal services in
determining an effective pilot program budget, there are also baseline start-up costs due to the current
lack of local access, program administration needs, and minimum caseload needed for recruitment of
qualified attorneys to participate.
Examples for the types and number of cases that could have legal representation within various funding
ranges under a municipal immigration legal fund in Fort Collins are given for both an 18-month pilot
program and a 12-month pilot program for Council consideration. The 18-month option is recommended
by City Staff due to the length of time for immigration cases to reach resolution (one to two years for
detention/deportation cases and seven to thirteen months for naturalization processes). This timing also
allows for an informed discussion of pilot outcomes as part of the 2023/2024 Strategic Plan and
Budgeting for Outcomes process. If a 12-month pilot is funded in June 2021, City Staff will submit a 2022
Budgeting for Outcomes Offer for gap funding of the six-month unfunded remainder of 2022.
Program Administration costs fund a full-time program coordinator position employed by a partner
organization rather than the City of Fort Collins to increase community trust and avoid putting the City in
the position of providing direct legal services. The program coordinator would provide or assist with
coordination of outreach to target populations, educational materials, translation and interpretation
services, legal advice clinics and training session logistics, capacity-building activities for local and
regional service providers, administrative duties related to legal representation and grant reporting.
Optimally, the coordinator role would be staffed by someone with paralegal experience.
Start-up costs for the program also include pro bono attorney’s costs to represent a minimum of 15
deportation cases as the minimum caseload for an 18-month pilot and 10 deportation cases for a 12-
month pilot. Because Fort Collins does not have an existing pool of immigration attorneys, the municipal
immigration legal fund service providers would need to recruit and retain a qualified attorney (or group of
attorneys contracted to provide local access to legal services) and support staff. The minimum caseload
of deportation cases, which have been identified as the most urgent need and cause the most disruption
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
to families and the local community compared to other case types, is included in each funding example
below.
18-month Pilot Grant Program Funding Examples
Example Program
Administration
Detention -
Deportation
Cases
*minimum 15
$6,000/case
Special
Immigrant
Juvenile
Status
Cases (SIJS)
$4,000/case
Affirmative
Cases
(DACA, LPR,
or
Naturalization)
$1,000/case
Funding
Range
A-18 $90,000 25-30 20-40 100-150 $400,000-
550,000
B-18 $90,000 20-25 5-20 20-100 $250,000-
400,000
C-18 $90,000 15-20 0-5 0-20 $180,000-
250,000
12-month Pilot Grant Program Funding Examples
Example Program
Administration
Detention -
Deportation
Cases
*minimum 10
$6,000/case
Special
Immigrant
Juvenile
Status Cases
(SIJS)
$4,000/case
Affirmative
Cases
(DACA, LPR,
or
Naturalization)
$1,000/case
Funding
Range
A-12 $60,000 15-20 15-25 40-100 $250,000-
380,000
B-12 $60,000 12-15 5-15 25-40 $150,000-
250,000
C-12 $60,000 10-12 0-5 0-25 $120,000-
150,000
Program Metrics
Establishing program metrics that measure outputs, outcomes, and effectiveness are an important part of
concurrent evaluation and iterative improvement. The program will also offer an opportunity to have a
deeper understanding of the greatest challenges and unmet needs for Fort Collins residents (given limited
available datapoints). City Staff recommends considering the following potential program metrics to
assess program accomplishments and output-based metrics such as participant numbers or number of
cases resolved:
• # of people receiving free legal advice or training
• # of people receiving direct representation (adults/children & case type)
• # of people able to lawfully remain in the U.S. due to representation
• # of people released on bond during the program compared past years
• # of referrals to the program by other participants
• % of participants who feel they are safer due to the program
• % of participants who are more knowledgeable about their pathways to citizenship or lawful
presence after the program
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
• % of participants reporting greater likelihood of accessing City or community resources due to the
program
It is important to note that some metrics may be difficult or impossible to ascertain during a 12-month pilot
program because of the length of time immigration cases take to navigate the system with average
resolution times for detention/deportation cases of one to two years and naturalization processes of
seven to thirteen months.
Potential Partners
Through extensive collaboration with stakeholders, Staff has identified a number of potential community
partners and grantor organizations that might be in positions to assist with providing services or
expanding a City-sponsored immigration legal fund.
Organization Potential Role Opportunities
Vera Institute of Justice Grantor Up to $100,000 matching grant funds for
municipal immigration legal funds for
detention/deportation cases
U.S. Citizenship &
Immigration Services
“Citizenship & Assimilation
Grants”
Grantor Average award of $250,000 to nonprofit
organizations for LPR citizenship preparation
services including education
Rocky Mountain Immigrant
Advocacy Network (RMIAN)
Grant Recipient Currently providing immigration legal services
to other Colorado communities with existing
relationships with attorneys
Catholic Charities Grant Recipient Currently providing immigration legal services
to other Colorado communities with existing
relationships with attorneys
Alianza NORCO Grant Recipient Currently providing education, outreach, and
support services to immigrants in Fort Collins
Interfaith Solidarity and
Accompaniment Coalition
(ISAAC)
Grant Recipient Currently providing support for SIJS cases
with existing relationships with attorneys
Fuerza Latina Grant Recipient Currently providing education, outreach, and
support services to immigrants in Fort Collins
Colorado State University Grant Recipient Currently providing immigration legal services
to all full-time students. Additional funding
might allow expansion to services for
undocumented staff and part-time students.
University of Colorado Law
School
Grant Recipient Currently providing student law office clinic
representation for some immigration cases
University of Denver – Sturm
College of Law
Grant Recipient Currently providing student law office clinic
representation for some immigration cases
Colorado Access to Justice
Commission
Technical
Assistance
Assistance connecting volunteer attorneys
with clients
City Manager, Darin Atteberry, contacted Larimer County Manager, Linda Hoffmann, in April 2021
regarding the potential for collaboration and partnership to provide immigration legal services to both City
and County residents. Partnerships with Larimer County will need to be aligned with policies regarding
the use of City funds to benefit the residents of Fort Collins.
Pilot Start Up Timeline
Timeline indicates an estimate of length of each step following a funding appropriation.
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
The pilot program funding options were requested by City Councilmembers for discussion as an off-cycle
budget appropriation rather than waiting to submit a budget offer through the BFO process to have
continuity in the work under Council priorities for equity through the Home 2 Health program and
outreach, Community Trust Initiative relationship-building strategies, and increased public feedback on
racial justice. The urgency reflects the importance of keeping promises the City organization makes to
historically marginalized communities and collaborating to incorporate community input into municipal
action. COVID-19 has also had a disparate impact on undocumented immigrants and families with “mixed
status” in our community. Although our undocumented community members are experiencing the same
health and financial concerns, they cannot access the same medical treatment, pandemic relief or
economic stimulus payments, or eviction prevention programs from the City or other community partners
because of federal restrictions on access by undocumented immigrants.
Public Engagement
“Reimagine Public Engagement'' was established as a City Council priority in 2019 to increase the level of
engagement among historically marginalized communities in the decision-making process, recognizing
that input from the broad community is important and seeking to incorporate voices from diverse
backgrounds. As part of these efforts, staff has worked closely with community partners and community
members to understand the barriers to participation this vulnerable segment of the population faces. To
address these barriers, public engagement plans have placed an emphasis on providing additional
avenues for participation to community members directly impacted and those who face the greatest
number of inequities that lower their ability to participate. The recent City-sponsored Equity Indicators
report demonstrates that in Fort Collins, Communities of Color face the greatest number of inequities, with
Hispanics/LatinX residents facing the most. In addition, feedback received for other City-led public
engagement projects such as Strategic Plan 2020, Climate Action Plan 2021, and Housing Strategic Plan
2021, show low levels of trust among the Hispanic/LatinX communities towards government entities,
further inhibiting their ability to participate. As such, public engagement efforts for equity-based programs,
such as the proposed Municipal Immigration Legal Fund, have prioritized participation and involvement
from the Hispanic/LatinX communities whose exclusion from engagement in organizational processes in
the past led to inequities and disparate impact.
Public Comment Summary and Themes
Information on municipal immigration legal funds and City Council’s discussion surrounding this item was
featured in:
• Local print (Coloradoan, 3/4/21 and 4/14/21)
• News radio (600 KCOL)
• Social media from City and community partners
• Community partner outreach with impacted community members through public events,
educational materials, and hotline information
Application, Review, & Selection
(City Staff)
One Month
Contracting
(City Staff & Grant Recipients)
Two Weeks
Begin Administrative Services
(Grant Recipients)
Two Weeks
Begin Legal Services
(Grant Recipients with Existing
Legal Providers)
Two Months
Begin All Legal Services
(Grant Recipients)
Four Months
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
• Two immigration-focused documentary premiere discussions for both “2020 Hispanic Community
Voices: The Impact of COVID-19” on 1/31/21 and “Fort Collins LDF Documentary” on 3/7/21
City Council received public comments related to establishment of a municipal immigration legal fund in
Fort Collins at virtual City Council meetings beginning in September 2020. Comments to City Leaders
from the general public were also submitted via email and voicemail in advance of the March 23, 2021
work session and as follow up to that discussion. The email comments are compiled by date received in
Attachment B. The majority of comments from all formats supported City Council funding immigration
legal services at this time.
The predominant themes that emerged from public comments in support of a municipal immigration legal
fund were desire for the City to demonstrate commitment to social justice and equity, and concerns about
the lack of due process afforded to immigrants facing deportation proceedings. Commenters cited the
high cost of legal services as barriers to pursuing lawful pathways to citizenship and many noted the
effectiveness of both other municipal immigration legal funds operating in Denver or other parts of the
U.S. and having legal representation in immigration court.
Comments in opposition to municipal funding of immigration legal services largely reflected an underlying
desire to limit immigration into the community. Shared concerns of commenters included: competition for
jobs, belief that beneficiaries of these legal services have no lawful right to remain in the U.S. or have
broken the law, and uncertainty about the role of the City in providing these funds with a preference for
federal or nonprofit leadership in this space instead.
Key:
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Federal Issue
Should be BFO Offer
City as Equity Leaders
Nonprofit Funding, Not City
Community Need
Effectiveness of Other Immigration Legal Funds
Local Economic Contributions of Immigrants
Benefits those Breaking the Law
Prefer Other Uses of City Funds
Affordablility of Legal Services
No Right to Remain in U.S.
Competition for Jobs
Equity
Due Process
Frequency of Comment Theme
Theme Appeared in Comments Supporting Municipal Immigration Legal
Theme Appeared in Comments Opposing Municipal Immigration Legal Fund
May 11, 2021 Municipal Immigration Legal Fund Work Session AIS
The City Staff Team for this research project would like to sincerely thank the community partners for their
contributions, patience, and openness in supplying valuable data, connections, and anecdotal information
on the unmet needs of the Fort Collins immigrant community. Because of the understandable reluctance
of undocumented immigrants to self-identify and open themselves and their families to risk of deportation,
the City Staff worked with local and statewide advocacy groups with existing relationships with Fort
Collins immigrants to conduct a local needs assessment, research existing and projected conditions in
Larimer County for the immigrant community, analyze other municipal immigration fund program and
budget models, and conduct public engagement.
We appreciate the community partners who worked directly and indirectly with the Staff Team: Alianza
NORCO, Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition (CIRC), Interfaith Solidarity And Accompaniment Coalition
(ISAAC), Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network (RMIAN), Fuerza Latina, Catholic Charities,
BIPOC Alliance, Foothills Unitarian Church Community Dreamer Fund, Mujeres de Colores, CSU
Dreamers United, La Cocina, Vera Institute of Justice, University of Colorado Law School and Dr. Violeta
Chapin, The Denver Foundation, Denver Councilmember Jamie Torres, and BakerRipley (Immigration
Fund Manager in Harris County, Texas).
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.221.6376
970.224.6134 - fax
Planning, Development & Transportation
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 14, 2021
TO: Mayor Arndt and City Councilmembers
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Kyle Stannert, Deputy City Manager
Caryn Champine, Director of Planning, Development & Transportation
FROM: JC Ward, Senior City Planner, CDNS
Leo Escalante, Community Engagement Specialist, CPIO
RE: May 11, 2021 Work Session Summary – Municipal Immigration Legal Fund
At the May 11th City Council Virtual Work Session, Caryn Champine, JC Ward, and Leo Escalante provided
an overview of research and options to address the need for immigration legal services in Fort Collins,
existing municipal immigration legal fund implementation and funding models, and alignment of[SB1]
potential solutions with our community-specific needs.
All councilmembers were present for the discussion via video conferencing. Funding immigration legal
services for Fort Collins residents would advance Council priorities to improve safety, community trust,
equity, and livability.
A municipal immigration legal fund would provide local access to immigration legal services for Fort Collins
residents seeking a legal pathway to citizenship or lawful presence. As a new effort, the potentialThe
proposed pilot program would be considered a pilot endeavor of 12-18 months. It would to fund grants,
that would be awarded through a competitive application and review process,. Grant funds would be
awarded to legal service providers would be dedicated tofor program administration, education, and
outreach; providing defense for people at risk of deportation; children seeking Special Immigrant Juvenile
Status; and for community members seeking pathways to citizenship and lawful presence.
All councilmembers were present for the discussion via video conferencing. Funding immigration legal
services for Fort Collins residents would advance Council priorities to improve safety, community trust,
equity, and livability.
General discussion and direction from the work session included:
Challenges for Fort Collins Immigrant Community Members
• Shared background information on:
- The designation of immigration cases as civil cases without the right to legal counsel and the
impact of legal representation in deportation cases.
March 23, 2021 Council Work Session Summary Page 2
Municipal Immigration Legal Fund
- Negative impact on public safety due to heightened fear of all law enforcement due to
immigration status.
- Lack of access to medical care because of decreased access to private health insurance and
lack of access to publicly funded healthcare programs.
- Estimated unmet community need for pro bono immigration legal services in Fort Collins per
year is: 75-100 detention/deportation cases, Special Immigrant Juvenile Status cases is 100,
and affirmative cases is 400.
• Discussion of availability of legal resources in Fort Collins with publicly funded services currently
covering other types of civil cases and indigent criminal defense. (There is one private
immigration attorney practicing in Fort Collins. No organizations currently provide pro bono or
low-cost immigration legal defense and advice for Fort Collins residents).
Other Publicly Funded Immigration Legal Funds
• The pilot program for Fort Collins is designed as an equity program rather than an income-
qualified program in contrast to the proposed Colorado statewide program based on legal
authority and best practices from existing municipal immigration legal funds.
• Some discussion centered on the data provided in the materials for other publicly funded
immigration legal funds. The background materials did not provide data for all 42 municipal
immigration legal funds across the U.S. but highlighted municipal immigration legal funds those
with similar intended outcomes related to unmet community need and percentage of immigrant
population in relation to the total population. Staff will provide follow-up with additional
datamunicipal examples. in the Council packet ahead of the June 1st meeting.
• Denver Foundation (Denver Immigration Legal Services Fund) Steering Committee member
provided information on the funding from City and County of Denver for approximately 3.5
years and discussed the recent increase of municipal funding to $500,000 in this budget year
due to the success of the program; types of cases resolved, positive community reception of
their program, and funding model.
Pilot Program Design
• Council consensus was in support of an 18-month pilot program in the C-18 example funding
range ($180,000-$250,000).
• Council and Staff support for an 18-month pilot over a 12-month pilot option stems from the
ability to collect data for the lifecycle of immigration cases that average more than 12 months. to
resolve to guide future program and budget discussions.
• Program participants would be Fort Collins residents with a lawful pathway to citizenship or lawful
presence and those in the process of determining whether those pathways apply to their
circumstances. through legal advice, educational trainings, and direct legal representation.
• Discussion of program coordinator functions as administrator of the program as well as
coordinator for education, outreach, marketing, limited fundraising, and client intake. Housing
the position in a nonprofit rather than having a City Staff coordinator is more cost effective and
adds a level of protection for community members with concerns about disclosure of their
information.
• Information shared by Police Services Assistant Chief of Police John Feyen on the department’s
work with immigrant communities (through Community Policing and the Community Trust
Initiative) and the Fort Collins Police Services’ role in enforcing local, not federal laws, and focus
on safety for all community members.
March 23, 2021 Council Work Session Summary Page 2
Municipal Immigration Legal Fund
• Exploration of partnerships with Larimer County, nonprofit community partners, and grantor
organizations to fund or expand a City-sponsored immigration legal fund was supported.
• Discussion of logisticals details to understand what services would be offered, who would be
eligible for the services, and how that directly supports the local unmet need and City Strategic
Outcomes.
Next Steps & Follow-up
• Staff will bring an off-cycle appropriation request for City Council discussion consideration and
First Reading on June 1, 2021 for a pilot program through the end of 20221[SB2] following a
discussion at Council Finance Committee on May 24, 2021.
• As part of the off-cycle appropriation request supporting materials, Staff will respond to follow
up questions related to data from existing municipal immigration legal funds and the potential for
collaboration with Larimer County and related to universal representation. .
• For the June 1st Council meeting, Staff will provide information on the universal representation-
based service levels for deportation cases and affirmative cases that accompany the budget
request so Council priorities may be built into the overall program delivery structure and
education programs.
Finance Administration
215 N. Mason
2nd Floor
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6788
970.221.6782 - fax
fcgov.com
Finance Committee Meeting Minutes
April 19, 2021
10 am - noon
Zoom Meeting
Council Attendees: Mayor Wade Troxell, Ken Summers, Ross Cunniff, Susan Gutowsky, Emily Gorgol
Staff: Darin Atteberry, Kelly DiMartino, Kyle Stannert, Travis Storin, Carrie Daggett,
John Duval, Tyler Marr, Lance Smith, Caryn Champine, JC Ward, Noelle Currell,
Ryan Mounce, Tim Dailey, Meaghan Overton, Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Victoria Shaw,
Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Leo Escalante, Blaine Dunn, Dave Lenz, Jo Cech, Zack Mozer,
Jordan Granath, Carolyn Koontz
Others: Joe Rowan
Joshua Stallings
Patricia Miller - Thistle
____________________________________________________________________________________
Meeting called to order at 10:04 am
Mayor Troxell; I would like to note for the record that I have conferred with the City Manager and the City
Attorney and have determined that the Committee should conduct this meeting remotely because meeting in
person would not be prudent for some or all persons due to a current public health agency recommendation.
Approval of Minutes from the March 15, 2021 Council Finance Committee Meeting. Ross Cunniff moved for
approval of the minutes as presented. Ken Summers seconded the motion. Minutes were approved unanimously
via roll call by Ken Summers, Ross Cunniff and Mayor Troxell.
Travis Storin expressed appreciation to the Council Finance Committee members and acknowledged their service (a
combined 18 years of Council Finance Committee experience) and on behalf of staff thanked the committee for their
engagement. This committee has embodied our high performing board mantra He also recognized many of the
significant accomplishments which include; sponsorship of our Broadband Business Plan and debt issuance, the
establishment of City Give, updates to Development Review Fees and Capital Expansion Fees, the CRISP regional
project within the law enforcement agencies of the area, on-bill financing and the EPIC loan program, updates to
the sales tax code for internet sales, Police Regional Training Facility and the Gardens expansion just to name a few.
Mayor Troxell added his thanks Ross and Ken for their service as well.
Ross Cunniff added his thanks to current and past Council Finance Committee members and said that it has been a
privilege and an honor to serve the community in this capacity. Our interaction with staff has led to a sharper
organization with our combined thoughts.
2
A. Immigration Legal Defense Fund
JC Ward, Senior City Planner, CDNS
Leo Escalante, Community Engagement Specialist, CPIO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to respond to a request from some members of Council for an off-cycle general fund
appropriation to create a Municipal Immigration Legal Fund pilot program. If approved, this appropriation would
create a pilot grant program to provide local access to immigration legal services for Fort Collins residents
seeking citizenship or lawful presence. Grant funds will be awarded to legal service providers based on a
competitive process and will be dedicated to program administration, education, and outreach; providing
defense for people at risk of deportation; children seeking Special Immigrant Juvenile Status; and for community
members seeking pathways to citizenship and lawful presence also known as Affirmative Cases.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What feedback does the Council Finance Committee have regarding the research and unmet needs
assessment for immigration legal services in Fort Collins?
2. What feedback does the Council Finance Committee have regarding the funding level or services that could
be provided to Fort Collins residents as part of a municipal immigration legal fund?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION (details of item – History, current policy, previous Council actions, alternatives or
options, costs or benefits, considerations leading to staff conclusions, data and statistics, next steps, etc.)
During the March 23 City Council Virtual Work Session, City staff from Neighborhood Services and the
Communications and Public Involvement Department presented their findings from the research conducted on
immigration legal defense funds implemented in 42 different jurisdictions across the country. The information
covered included demographic data and unmet needs assessment in Fort Collins, program design from other
jurisdictions, potential funding, and service level options to assist undocumented residents in Fort Collins with
pathways to lawful citizenship and lawful presence, and strategic alignment with City Council priorities to improve
safety, community trust, equity and livability.
Key Findings on Greatest Needs in Fort Collins
City Staff worked with several service providers in Northern Colorado with expertise in immigration services to
assess current service levels and unmet need for immigration legal services. Based upon this research, the
following is a summary of our key findings to inform Council’s decision on the City’s role in immigration services
to Fort Collins residents.
• Limited Availability of Services: Currently there is only one immigration attorney practicing in Fort Collins.
Attorneys in other practice areas may take on immigration clients but are not focused on complex systems of
administrative or immigration law, making the representation challenging and outcomes less consistent. In
addition to the limited availability of direct legal representation for immigration cases in Fort Collins, legal
advice and documentation assistance for cases related to extension of visas, DACA renewal, citizenship, or
legal permanent resident (“LPR”) applications are largely unavailable and can cost hundreds of dollars for
consultation with an attorney.
• Affordability: According to data provided by community partners from target population surveys and
feedback from engagement activities, the lack of affordable legal services and representation are considered
the biggest barriers to successful integration for immigrants in Fort Collins. While we do not have access to
3
Fort Collins-specific information, data from regional partners working with immigrant communities confirms
that 2,963 Northern Larimer County residents are eligible for immigration relief and need low-cost or pro
bono legal services to pursue lawful paths to citizenship and presence. We also learned that many need
these services for multiple family members in the same household. Out of pocket expenses for deportation
defense range from $6,000 to $20,000 in filing fees and $10,000 to $50,000 for attorney costs depending on
the specifics and complexity of the case. DACA, Visa, or LPR applications and renewals have varying filing
fees and though the total varies widely, average approximately $4,000 in attorney costs.
• High Demand for Services:
o In Fort Collins, 2,200 residents are eligible for naturalization and the remaining 2,300 non-citizen
immigrants are estimated to be undocumented and currently at risk for detention and deportation.
0F
1
According to local immigrant advocacy organizations conducting outreach and operating immigration
hotlines, the estimated unmet need for Fort Collins Detention/Deportation cases is 75-100 per year, SIJS
cases is 100 per year, and affirmative cases (DACA, LPR, Naturalization) is 400 per year.
o As of December 2020, there were 418 Larimer County residents with pending immigration deportation
proceedings initiated by Department of Homeland Security, 83 of whom lacked legal representation.7
The Larimer County case numbers and unrepresented immigrants in detention as of December 2020 are
almost double the 2019 case numbers.
o In the Poudre School District, there are 54 students who arrived in the U.S. as unaccompanied minors
seeking asylum because they are unable to return to their countries of origin due to threat of death or
imminent harm. These students could remain in the United States through Special Immigrant Juvenile
Status (“SIJS”). Due to the age of the children and current placement in foster care or with relatives
other than their primary caregivers, these children only have access to immigration legal services
through community programs. The Interfaith Solidarity and Accompaniment Coalition fundraises and
connects children with legal service providers for SIJS cases, but their work is limited by the amount
raised and availability of pro bono attorneys willing to take Fort Collins cases who are also skilled in
complex SIJS cases.
Market Rates & Pilot Program Budget
To inform Council’s consideration of the fund amount, City Staff obtained attorney costs by case type in the Fort
Collins market from nonprofit immigration service providers, Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network
(“RMIAN”) and Interfaith Solidarity and Accompaniment Coalition (“ISAAC”) and are based on actual attorney and
legal staff costs. The amounts listed cover limited filing fees associated with the pro bono representation.
Case Type Pro Bono Legal
Costs/Case in Fort
Collins market
Detention/Deportation $6,000/case
Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) $4,000/case
“Affirmative Cases”- Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (DACA), Lawful Permanent
Resident (LPR), or Naturalization
$1,000/case
1 https://dornsife.usc.edu/csii/eligible-to-naturalize-map/
4
Pilot Program Budget
Startup costs for the program would include funding program administration and pro bono attorney’s costs to
represent a minimum of 10 deportation cases to recruit and retain an attorney and support staff to provide local
representation.
The pilot program is proposed for 12 months from June 2021 to June 2022 to allow time to evaluate the long term
need and City role for this program. The program startup costs below are based on this timeframe. This timing
also allows for an informed discussion, if desired, as part of the 2023/2024 Strategic Plan and Budgeting for
Outcomes process.
Note: This timing would create a funding gap of approximately six months in 2022. If desired, Council could
consider an 18 month pilot program to address the funding gap.
Program Start Up Minimum
Item Amount Description
Program Administration $60,000 Program outreach to target populations, educational
materials, translation and interpretation services,
coordination of legal advice clinics and training sessions,
capacity-building activities for local and regional service
providers, administrative duties related to legal
representation and grant reporting
10 Deportation Cases $60,000 Direct legal representation, intake assessment, and legal
advice for Fort Collins residents facing detention and
deportation, including residents on bond from detention
awaiting immigration hearings
Additional Service Options
Item Amount Description
Additional Deportation
Cases
$6,000/case Direct legal representation, intake assessment, and
legal advice for Fort Collins residents facing detention
and deportation, including residents on bond from
detention awaiting immigration hearings
SIJS Cases $4,000/case Direct legal representation, intake assessment, and
legal advice for Fort Collins residents who arrived as
unaccompanied minors, are seeking asylum, and are
unable to return to their country of origin due to the
threat of death or imminent harm
“Affirmative” Cases (DACA,
LPR, or Naturalization)
$1,000/case Direct legal representation, intake assessment, and
legal advice for Fort Collins residents who may qualify
for DACA, LPR, or Naturalization pathways to citizenship
or lawful presence
Next Steps: First Reading of the appropriation Ordinance for a municipal immigration legal fund is scheduled for
City Council consideration on April 20, 2021. If this appropriation is approved by City Council, Staff anticipates
releasing a request for proposal from legal service providers to perform work under a competitive selection
process in the second quarter of 2021 and anticipate work to begin in the third quarter of 2021.
5
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
What feedback do the Council Finance Committee members have regarding the pilot program timeline (12 or 18
months), funding level, or services that could be provided to Fort Collins residents as part of a municipal
immigration legal fund?
Discussion / Next Steps:
Cost to start program and a per case cost - better quantify the local need
Mayor Troxell; what is the residency requirement? There needs to be some qualifying elements to this program.
Caryn Champine; we would have a residency requirement and welcome your guidance on what makes the most
sense (Denver uses 12 months).
Mayor Troxell; I hear 16 years (residency in years not months) Also hear that there is a concern about coming
forward. How do you submit an application without being known? I know one of your criteria was feeling safe,
but I see some discontinuity that tends to be at odds. I think a pilot is important.
Ken Summers; I don’t remember this being an issue before the new year. It seems like it came to the horizon in
February followed by a Work Session in March and now proposing an ordinance in April. For something that is
totally new it is hard to quantify the need and we are thinking of doing an off-cycle budget request. So, this is of
such critical nature impacting all residents of Fort Collins that it can’t wait for 4-5 months to be factored into the
normal budget process.
Caryn Champine; this first came up during budget hearings in October - we heard from many community
members speaking and asking for this.
Ken Summers; even if it came up in October we are talking less than 6 months from initial discussion to we are
doing this. Allocation wise we are talking about a minimum of $125K to a non-profit partner; 1 attorney.
Are we giving funds to organizations in Denver? Where do the attorneys come from? Does this fall under an
Economic Development concept – provide more work for immigration attorneys. I see there are no
community partners who provide pro bono services. Can you review what is available specifically in Fort Collins
in terms of providers, nonprofits and attorneys?
Caryn Champine; we have several potential grant recipients that are functioning in this area including Rocky
Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network (“RMIAN”), Interfaith Solidarity and Accompaniment Coalition
(“ISAAC”), and CSU. We would need for them to leverage their resources and the grant program to bring in
what would be needed. The coordinator position is a recommendation. It is true that there is
one immigration attorney in Fort Collins however there are several along the front range – way to leverage some
additional funding to reach a broader network into Fort Collins specifically.
Ken Summers; I know you have talked with several of the advocacy groups and who recognize the need and
want to see this happen. Did you talk with the immigration attorney here in Fort Collins to get an insight to how
these cases progress?
Caryn Champine; we did learn a lot from that attorney (Kim Medina) We also learned a lot from the service
providers who have been tracking these cases – that helped us gauge the unmet need and number of cases
and also provided information for the pilot program – how long does it take for a case to go through?
6
Ken Summers; timeline – the backlog - we know for a fact that there is a backlog in immigration courts, and it is
years not months - What was your understanding from the providers?
Caryn Champine; detention cases usually take from 300-500 days and naturalization cases usually take from 7-
13 months
Ken Summers; it looks like our potential qualifications for recipients is wide – The State of Colorado has
legislation to help indigent immigrants. Ours seems to be for anyone who needs services, and it seems like it is a
not a legal defense fund but a legal resource fund.
Caryn Champine; immigration legal fund –consistency is important, and that terminology aligns with my
understanding
Ken Summers; this is problematic – this person is here, and it is a matter of life and death if they were deported
– if someone is actually facing deportation and it doesn’t seem to be justified by virtue of the family situation or
whatever the case may be - defending certain individuals – is far more justifiable than free legal advice and is
available as needed. There are a lot of issues here that need to be looked at let alone the fact that the level of
funding that is being proposed is the highest in the nation of any city, county – even the State of Colorado isn’t
proposing the level of funding we are talking about here in Fort Collins. If we want our residents to know that
we are going through a thoughtful process that is worthy of taxpayer funds, I don’t view this as anywhere close
to being ready for prime time. We need a lot more information and understanding of what the policies are
going to mean and do for various individuals. I would prefer that it is viewed more as a Legal Defense Fund and
not just a Legal Resource Fund. You would get your best bang for the buck instead of providing half the money
for communications and administrative costs, trying to encourage folks to use the fund.
You need a lawyer when you need a lawyer. Certainly, DACA, students, refugees, asylum seekers with a
justifiable and legitimate asylum case – there should be some kind of prioritization. We need a lot more study,
more parameters and understanding of the issues. I see Fort Collins giving money to Denver advocacy
organizations and attorney which won’t help the local economy. Not sure why CSU would be serving as a non -
profit advocacy for undocumented residents. That seems a bit strange
Ross Cunniff; the details actually lead me to think that we need more time – The proposed $60K for the
administration side – that wasn’t obvious to me when we discussed this in the work session. That doesn’t have
the direct benefit and I probably would not have supported that. I agree that a prioritization of the types of
cases we wanted to support – DACA – SIJS cases – people who may qualify under asylum laws – that makes
sense to me – we will need more time to figure this out – I have hesitancy about mid cycle appropriation as we
don’t have the full vetting and community feedback we need and would get during the normal budget cycle. I
think the idea and program have merit. I could be supportive of a lower amount - Minneapolis has 10x more
immigrant population as we have, it you divide by 10 that suggests we should be in the $25-30K range for
assistance. I think right number be developed via more community engagement
If this was strictly a DACA program we could serve a lot of students. A future council could take it a totally
different direction. I don’t think we are ready to make this decision now. I would support taking more time on
this as I don’t think this is ready for full Council now.
Mayor Troxell; I agree, this is not ready for prime time. What is the outcome we are trying to accomplish?
I like the conversation that we are having in terms of there should be asylum seekers and not just a legal fund
We should provide legal support to all those who need it in our community.
Why PDT?
7
Darin Atteberry; there is a lot going on - a lot of demands on Council’s policy agenda. It is a
matter of available resources. Caryn stepped up when we needed help.
Caryn Champine; the logical connection to Neighborhood Services is that they are familiar with leveraging grant
programs and non-profit partnerships in the community to provide and extend services. They took the lead on
the eviction legal fund program so there is a bit of a natural fit.
Darin Atteberry; if Council at some point does approve this program and if this is a pilot, I don’t know if it is
ideally in PDT or Sustainability. To Ken’s point, I do remember feedback from the Budget hearings – Council
gave direction and was frustrated that it didn’t come sooner. In two different occasions Council was clear about
their direction.
Ross Cunniff; I understood that as well.
Mayor Troxell; PDT – basic service of our community - should be used in that direction
Have supported former students to become naturalized citizens. Some of this could be encouraging sponsorship
in our community toward naturalization. I have participated in 5-6 of the naturalization ceremonies in Fort
Collins. It is a glorious ceremony. I still have so many questions over how this is being proposed.
Who are we trying to serve? Shadows – full citizens of this county – part of it – failure of the federal
government – maybe we should be spending more of our time speaking with our federal legislators – it is a
failure, and this is being demonstrated within our community. I think it should be postponed – it needs to go
through a budget prioritization process and engage our community.
Darin Atteberry; The committee is recommending that this be postponed. In this case, I will communicate to
Council that the Leadership Planning Team (LPT) based on this discussion, I will send a note out to Council saying
that I am pulling it off of the agenda and that we will work with the new LPT on their preference with
scheduling. Two options to work with the new LPT and Council.
1) Do more engagement and get the new Council up to speed and bring it forward offline or
2) fold it into the normal BFO process.
Is there an objection to pulling it off of tomorrow night’s agenda? Any concerns?
Ross Cunniff; I think it makes sense. There will be some disappointed community members but there will be
disappointed community members no matter what happens. I think in that case, we need to step back and look
at what makes the best sense from the integrity of the city processes. The transition in power that we are going
to be experiencing, we want the new Council to get their hands on where this goes.
Mayor Troxell; No concerns, I am supportive.
Susan Gutowsky; no additional thoughts. I will go with the members of the Council Finance Committee and their
infinite wisdom.
Darin Atteberry; Hearing no objections, I will send a communication out to Council notifying them that I am
pulling it off of the agenda and that we will work with the new LPT on their preference with scheduling.
Caryn Champine and Kyle Stannert will communicate with the other stakeholders.
1Caryn Champine, Leo Escalante
Municipal Immigration Legal Fund
Appropriation
Agenda Overview
2
1.Strategic Alignment
2.Key Local Findings
3.Pilot Program Overview
4.Potential Partners
5.Timeline
CFC Direction Sought
3
1.If the City can obtain additional funding through grants or fundraising for
immigration legal services, would the Council Finance Committee recommend:
A. Use of those funds to add to the $250,000 City General Fund Reserve
appropriation to increase the total program funding?
or
B. Supplanting City General Fund Reserves with external dollars to reach a
program funding total from all sources of $250,000?
2.What feedback does the Council Finance Committee have regarding the funding
level or services that could be provided to Fort Collins residents as part of a
municipal immigration legal fund?
Strategic Alignment
4
Strategic Outcomes 2020 Legislative
Policy Agenda
City Council
Resolution 2019-100
Social Sustainability
Strategic Plan (2016)
Neighborhood Livability &
Social Health 1.4
Economic Health 3.2
Safe Communities 5.1
High Performing
Government 7.3
Immigration and National
Border Conditions
The Immigration Crisis at
the Southern Border of the
United States and its Impact
on the Fort Collins
Community
Equity and Inclusion Theme
B1.2.b
Key Local Findings
5
•High Demand for Immigration Legal Services
o Approximately 4,500 Fort Collins residents need immigration legal services
o Estimated unmet annual need for Fort Collins Detention/Deportation cases is 75-100 per
year, SIJS cases is 100 per year, and affirmative cases is 400 per year
o 83 Larimer County residents are in detention, facing deportation, and unrepresented
o 54 Poudre School District students are eligible for SIJS and need pro bono representation in
the process
•Limited Availability of Local Immigration Legal Services
o One immigration attorney in Fort Collins
o No community partners providing pro bono legal advice clinics
Program Structure
6
•Establish a grant program to provide funds to
community-based organizations and/or legal
service providers
•Grant recipients would offer residents wrap-
around, holistic immigration legal services to meet
most urgent needs, and build trust in the
immigrant community through ongoing self-
advocacy
•The City would initiate a request for
proposal process and select service providers
through competitive review
Pilot Program Overview:
Costs
7
18-Month Pilot Funding Range C-18 was recommended
by Council consensus at 5/11/21 Work Session*
Example Program
Administration
Detention -
Deportation
Cases
*minimum
15
$6,000/case
Special
Immigrant
Juvenile
Status
Cases
(SIJS)
$4,000/case
Affirmative
Cases
(DACA, LPR,
or
Naturalization)
$1,000/case
Funding
Range
C-18 Up to $90,000 15-20 0-5 0-20 $180,000-
250,000
*Case numbers in the example are not intended to reflect the actual number in each case type that
would have representation under the pilot as the actual number will be impacted by factors outside
of the control of service providers,such as who applies for participation and at what rate.
Program Focus
8
Equity Program
•Available to any Fort Collins resident without regard to income, case type, age at
entry into the United States, or other qualifiers.
•To reflect Council interest in cases involving children, DACA recipients, and victims
of violent crime, RFP can encourage legal service providers to propose service
delivery that is inclusive of a broad range of case types.
•RFP marketing efforts can prioritize organizations that provide or seek to provide
services for SIJS and affirmative cases.
•In the C-18 funding range, $250,000 reflects the anticipated funding level needed to
maximize the potential representation for the greatest variety of case types,
including those related to minors and violent crime victims.
Program Metrics
9
•Nº of people receiving free legal advice or training
•Nºof people receiving direct representation
(adults/children & case type)
•Nºof cases resolved due to representation
•Nºof people released on bond during the program
•Nºof referrals to the program by other
participants
•Pct. of participants who feel they are safer due
to the program
•Pct.of participants who are more knowledgeable
about their pathways to citizenship or lawful
presence after the program
•Pct.of participants reporting greater likelihood of
accessing City or community resources due to the
program
Metrics
Adoption Consideration
1
0
1.What feedback do the Council Finance Committee members have
regarding the pilot program timeline (12 or 18 months), funding level, or
services that could be provided to Fort Collins residents as part of a
municipal immigration legal fund?
COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Jamie Gaskill, Utilities Community Engagement
Brian Tholl, Utilities Energy Services
Date: 24 May 2021
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Income-Qualified Assistance Program (IQAP) Update and Proposed Changes
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Income-Qualified Assistance Program (IQAP) that provides income-qualified customers
reduced rates on select Utilities services was introduced in October 2018 as a pilot program. The
IQAP rate that provides a 23% discount on electric, water, and wastewater services is due to
expire July 31, 2021. Staff are planning to provide City Council an update on the program in
June 2021 and will be seeking City Council’s direction regarding continuing the rate through
2024 and making administrative changes to the program’s enrollment process.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
• Staff are seeking City Council’s direction regarding extending the IQAP rate pilot an
additional three years (through December 2024) and aligning the rate with the Utilities
annual rate ordinance. Does the Council Finance Committee support bringing the three-
year extension of the IQAP rate pilot and the rate alignment to the full Council for
consideration in June 2021 ahead of the IQAP rate expiration (July 31, 2021)?
• Does the Council Finance Committee support shifting the IQAP from an application-
based/opt-in program to an auto-enroll/opt-out program?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The Income-Qualified Assistance Program (IQAP) was approved by City Council and launched
in October 2018 in conjunction with the Time-of-Day (TOD) electric rates. The program was
designed to reduce utility burdens for qualifying low-income participants that opt-in to the
program by giving them a 23% discount on specific rate components of electric, water and
wastewater services. The current pilot and associated discount are set to expire July 31, 2021,
pursuant to City Code §26-724.
Current Program Design
Utility burden is defined as the percentage of a household’s income that is spent on utility
services such as gas, electric, water, wastewater and stormwater. Low-income households have
been found to have disproportionately high utility burdens when compared to non-low-income
households0F
1. The IQAP rate pilot was designed as a multi-pronged approach to helping low-
1 ACEEE (2020). Energy Burden Report. https://www.aceee.org/energy-burden,
US Water Alliance (2016). Invisible Crisis – Water Affordability in the US.
http://uswateralliance.org/sites/uswateralliance.org/files/Invisible%20Crisis%20-
%20Water%20Affordability%20in%20the%20US.pdf
income households (at or below 165% Federal Poverty Level) achieve utility burdens that are
more similar to those of households with 100% Area Median Income (AMI). The IQAP 23% rate
discount was designed to be combined with Low-Income Energy Assistance Program (LEAP)
benefits and in-home conservation efforts to reduce participants’ utility burdens to more average
levels (approximately 3.1% of income).
Utilities also partners with LEAP for income-eligibility verification for IQAP. LEAP eligibility
is based on household size and an income threshold of 60% of State Median Income (SMI).
Utilities customers that are enrolled in the current or past LEAP season are eligible to complete
an application to “opt-in” to participate in IQAP. Utilities sends bulk invites via mail or email to
LEAP-enrolled customers annually to encourage them to apply for participation in IQAP.
Customers can also fill out an application at any time during the year to be enrolled in the
program provided their LEAP enrollment can be verified. Applications can be completed online
or via a paper form. Once an application is received by Utilities staff, the customer’s LEAP
enrollment is verified, and their rates are changed for the applicable services.
In addition to receiving the reduced rate on services, IQAP participants are encouraged to
participate in no-cost conservation programs such as Larimer County Conservation Corps
(LCCC) and/or Colorado Affordable Residential Energy Program (CARE) to make their
dwelling more efficient and to help reduce utility costs further. They also receive the monthly
Utilities Insights newsletter (fcgov.com/utilities/utilities-insights) that provides low- or no-cost
tips and tricks for reducing utility use and costs.
Initial IQAP Pilot Results
The IQAP was launched in October 2018 and results discussed here are based on the first two
full calendar years of the program (2019 and 2020). The following were used to analyze program
impact:
• Program enrollment
• Reduced rate benefit to customers/utilities revenue impact
• Actual customer utility use (year one)
• Customer surveys
o Pre- and post-program surveys annually
o In-depth customer engagement survey (year one)
When IQAP was approved in 2018, participation was projected at 2,000 customers annually
based on census data and expected LEAP enrollment. For the first two years of the program the
actual average annual enrollment was 717 customers, or 36% of what was projected.
Additionally, the projected benefit to customers was $441,000 and actual average annual benefit
to customers was $141,944, or 32% of what was projected. The actual annual utility bill savings
per customer was approximately $200. Table 1 summarizes program enrollment and the annual
benefit to customers.
Table 1: IQAP planned and actual participation and annual customer benefit
Participation Annual Customer Benefit
Planned* 2,000 $441,000
Actual** 717 $141,944
*Council approved in 2018
**Average annual participation and benefit for 2019-2020
Encouraging energy and water conservation through dwelling modifications and behavior change
education has also been a focus of the IQAP pilot. Customers are invited to participate in
programs such as LCCC and CARE. Table 2 summarizes IQAP customer participation in each
program in 2019 and 2020. Note: due to the impacts of COVID-19, in March 2020 LCCC and
CARE were put on hold because contractors were not able to do in-home assessment. As an
alternative, customers were invited to request conservation kits to be sent to their homes. Kits
contained do-it-yourself products that customers could install in their homes to reduce energy
and water use. Approximately 85 IQAP customers received kits since September 2020.
Table 2: IQAP customer participation in LCCC and CARE
2019 2020
LCCC 90 27
CARE 7 1
In addition, IQAP participants were sent the monthly Utilities Insights newsletter via email or
mail. The newsletter contained seasonal tips, tricks and programs for saving energy and water
and ways to make homes healthier. Insights newsletters were offered in English and Spanish. See
Attachment 2 for a sample issue. Approximately 50% of participants received the newsletter via
email. Open rates on the email version of Insights were significantly higher than the industry
average and are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3: Open rates and click rates for emailed version of Utility Insights newsletter
compared to industry averages
Open Rate Click Through Rate
Utilities Insights E-Newsletter 48% 9.5%
Government Agency or Services
Industry Average*
29.98% 11.22%
*Industry average according to Constant Contact data
(https://knowledgebase.constantcontact.com/articles/KnowledgeBase/5409-average-industry-
rates?lang=en_US)
In an effort to examine impacts of conservation efforts associated with IQAP participation, staff
engaged Apex Analytics, a Colorado based evaluation and analytics firm, to conduct an initial
billing analysis for year one of the program (October 2018-September 2019). The analysis
utilized a difference-in-differences approach, comparing 538 IQAP participants to a synthetic
control group (non-participant LEAP customers). The billing analysis found there to be no
statistical change in water use and a 5% increase in energy use. See attached memo from Apex
Analytics for detailed findings.
Apex Analytics also designed a customer survey that was utilized to understand how IQAP
benefited participants and impacted customer engagement and awareness of conservation
programs. Survey invitations were sent to 527 IQAP participants and 175 customers completed
the survey.
Highlights from the findings from the IQAP Participant Survey include:
• 76% of survey respondents have participated in or are aware of conservation programs.
• 76% of survey respondents report increased comfort in their home.
• 86% of survey respondents report being more secure in their ability to pay their utility
bill.
For additional survey findings, please see the attached Apex Analytics memo.
The first two full calendar years of IQAP implementation provided valuable information about
program design and execution. Utilizing the “opt-in” application-based enrollment resulted in
participation rates that were significantly less than what was projected. Enrollment moderately
increased across the two years.
The COVID-19 pandemic began at the beginning of 2020 which coincided with the second full
calendar year of the IQAP implementation. COVID-19 did not appear to significantly impact
program enrollment in 2020, however, it did impact the conservation component of IQAP. For
example, customers were not able to participate in LCCC or CARE after March 2020 because
both programs were suspended due to COVID-19. The suspension significantly impacted
participation rates which was apparent in the sharp decline in participation from 2019 to 2020.
The effects of COVID-19 on this and other components of the program have made overall
assessment of program effectiveness and sustainability difficult to determine. The pandemic’s
continuing effects on customer behavior is one of the factors driving staff’s recommendations to
extend the program pilot which will be discussed next.
Issues for Consideration
The IQAP rate pilot is due to expire July 31, 2021, as stated in City Code. Staff recommends
extending the rate pilot an additional three years and aligning the rate with the annual Utilities’
rate ordinance that is considered by City Council each fall. With the extension staff will:
1. Continue targeted engagement with low-income community members. Staff will utilize
findings from participant surveys to tailor methods of engagement to make them more
effective.
2. Build on existing enrollment and seek to enroll 1,500 customers.
3. Continue to promote participation in conservation programs and educate program
participants about efficiency practices.
4. Analyze program impact for customers and the utility and report findings to Council.
In addition, staff recommend that consideration be given to changing the program from an
application-based/opt-in program to an auto-enroll/opt-out program. An auto-enroll program
would eliminate the need for customers to fill out an additional application beyond the required
LEAP application. In addition to removing participation barriers for customers, auto enroll
would decrease the amount of staff time required to administer the enrollment process and would
allow staff to spend more time engaging directly with customers. Figure 1 illustrates how this
would affect program processes and the customer experience.
Figure 1: IQAP Application-based Enrollment Processes Versus Auto-Enroll
Changes to the enrollment process will also integrate with citywide efforts to streamline income-
qualified programs across the organization. For example, LEAP-enrolled customers that move
into the Utilities service area outside of the auto enroll months (December – May) will be able to
apply for IQAP via the online or mobile portals that are currently in development in partnership
with Code for America (see attached Memo regarding the Code for America partnership).
Changing the IQAP enrollment format is projected to nearly double the number of participants in
the program. In addition, the impact to annual operating revenues would increase from $141,944
(0.1% of total utility revenues) to $272,342 (0.2% of total utility revenues). Table 4 illustrates
the projected impact on overall participation and annual customer benefit and Table 5 illustrates
the projected revenue impacts for each utility.
Table 4: Projected impact of making IQAP an auto-enroll program
Participation Annual Customer Benefit
Planned* 2,000 $441,000
Actual** 717 $141,944
Projected with Auto
Enroll***
1372 $272,342
*Council approved in 2018
**Average annual participation and benefit for 2019-2020
***Based on estimated 98% auto enrollment of all LEAP-enrolled customers
Table 5: Projected revenue impacts by utility of making IQAP an auto-enroll program
Utility Planned* Actual** Projected***
Electric $348,000 $105,782 $215,423
Water $39,000 $17,041 $23,149
Wastewater $54,000 $19,121 $33,770
TOTAL $441,000 $141,944 $272,342
*Council approved in 2018
**Average annual revenue impact for 2019-2020
***Based on estimated 98% auto enrollment of all LEAP-enrolled customers
Should Council approve the change to an auto-enroll program, staff proposes starting the auto-
enroll format with the 2021-2022 IQAP season that begins October 1, 2021.
Board/Commission/Committee Recommendations
At the May 6, 2021 Affordable Housing Board meeting, board members voted unanimously (6,0)
to support the three-year extension of the IQAP rate pilot. Board members also voted
unanimously to support making the program an auto-enroll/opt-out program.
At the May 13, 2021 Energy Board meeting, board members voted unanimously (8,0) to support
the three-year extension of the IQAP rate pilot. Board members also voted unanimously to
support making the program an auto-enroll/opt-out program.
Staff will also be presenting the IQAP update and proposed changes at the May 20, 2021 Water
Commission meeting and will include commission member feedback and considerations before
going to Council on June 15, 2021.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Memo from Apex Analytics (PDF)
Attachment 2: Sample Utilities Insights Newsletter (PDF)
Attachment 3: Memo Re: Digital Access & Equity Outreach Update (PDF)
APEX ANALYTICS Page | 1
To: Brian Tholl, City of Fort Collins Utilities
From: Noah Lieb, Joe Van Clock, Jon Koliner, Apex Analytics
Subject: F indings for the Income Qualified Assistance Program
Date: April 7 , 202 1
This memo details the research and findings from a statistical billing analysis and participant
survey for the City of Fort Collins Income Qualified Assistance program (IQAP).
Background
When Fort Collins Utilities launched its time of day (TOD) rates in October 2018, it also
introduced an Income Qualified Assistance Program (IQAP) to ensure its rate structure
remained equitable. The IQAP provides a 23 percent reduction on electric and water bills for
Utilities customers who qualify for Colorado’s Low-income Energy Assistance Program
(LEAP) through Energy Outreach Colorado. Utilities has enrolled over 700 customers in the
IQAP from the roughly 1,600 customers who qualify and participate in LEAP.
As part of the eligibility for receiving the IQAP rates, Utilities has an educational and
engagement requirement for customers to participate in conservation activities.0F
1 The
potential for increased engagement with qualified customers, who have traditionally been
underrepresented in efficiency programs, and the resulting opportunity to reduce energy
use and achieve non-energy benefits was an important motivator for Utilities to offer the
rate discount.
Utilities sought to understand the electric and water usage impacts from the IQAP rates,
recognizing that, while the engagement/education components could result in energy and
water savings, lower rates could provide a price signal leading to increased use. Utilities
engaged Apex to develop a statistical billing analysis in order to estimate the electric energy
and water consumption impacts from their IQAP efforts, and to conduct a qualitative
analysis to further understand changes in behavior and energy use based on a customer
survey. The objectives of this research were to:
〉 Determine the electric and water impacts attributable to IQAP participation
〉 Assess IQAP energy use intensity relative to non-IQAP participants, and whether lower
rates helped IQAP customers achieve a more comfortable or energy equitable home
〉 Determine the IQAP rate impact on revenue and assess whether IQAP participants
shifted consumption to off-peak hours
〉 Understand how participants are benefitting from the program and why IQAP
participants energy use changed
〉 Determine if changes to program engagement offset changes to energy use
1 IQAP participants receive “Utilities Insights”, a monthly newsletter with tips to save energy and water to lower
utility bills and are occasionally contacted directly regarding efficiency programs. There is no requirement for IQAP
participants to attend workshops or participate in other conservation programs.
APEX ANALYTICS Page | 2
Methodology
Apex conducted a statistical billing analysis to assess electric energy and water consumption
changes as a result of IQAP participation. To explain differences in monthly consumption,
we modeled monthly energy/water consumption as a function of participation status
(participant versus non-participant comparison households), time period (whether the
period was pre- or post-IQAP rate introduction) and weather (for the electric analysis
monthly heating and cooling degree days, for the water analysis, average daily
temperature). Apex developed two energy and water impacts estimates: one for the actual
year and one weather normalized to account for longer-range climate conditions.
Utilities provided data on households participating in IQAP. The analysis included 538 homes
that received IQAP rates between October and December 2018 and remained as active
status in the IQAP dataset.1F
2 Apex matched these households to LEAP-qualified homes that
did not participate in IQAP using a ranked comparison of households based on the pre-
installation period consumption (usage between October 2017 and September 2018) to
create a comparison group.2F
3 Statistical testing showed that the comparison group’s pre-
participation energy consumption closely matched that of the participant group.3F
4
To gain further insight into the changes in energy consumption observed in the billing
analysis, Apex developed a survey guide focused on understanding how participants benefit
from the IQAP rate and any actions they may have taken to change their energy use. Active
IQAP participants with an email address on record in the billing system received an email
solicitation while customers without an email address on record received a letter invitation
to complete the IQAP survey online. Participants received a $20 credit on their bill as an
incentive to complete the survey. Of the 217 mailed invitations and 310 emailed invitations
distributed, 175 IQAP participants completed the survey, resulting in a survey response rate
of 33%.
Key Findings
This section addresses findings related to each of the primary research questions.
〉 Changes to consumption: Did IQAP participants adjust their electric energy and water
usage relative to non-IQAP participants after receiving the new rates?
The statistical billing analysis results showed that the average household that received IQAP
rates between October and December 2018 experienced an increase in annual electric
usage of 363 kWh, relative to pre-usage and controlling for exogenous effects (represented
by the matched non-participant comparison group households) (Figure 1).
2 There were an additional 167 participants that were inactive, having received the rate for a short duration of time
and were removed from the program due to closing of accounts among other reasons.
3 Specifically, Apex identified the most equivalent non-participant comparison household match based on
Euclidean distance (i.e., the lowest absolute difference in monthly usage compared to the participants).
4 Apex modeled a period to quantify the “drift” of each comparison group relative to the participant homes electric
usage. Using 2017 as a baseline matching period, we then examined the 2018 electric usage before IQAP
participation to quantify the “drift” of the average comparison group versus participant group usage. The LEAP
comparison group showed the lowest “drift”, with electric usage remaining almost perfectly aligned with the
participant homes between January and September 2018.
APEX ANALYTICS Page | 3
Figure 1. Participant and Matched Comparison Monthly Electric Usage
Source: Utilities billing system data
As Table 1 shows, the change to the mean annual household energy consumption factoring
in a typical weather year was 380 kWh.4F
5 The average household that received IQAP rates
between October and December 2018 did not show any notable change in annual water
usage attributable to the new (lower) rates.
Table 1. Mean Annual IQAP Billing Analysis Results
Model
Change in
Mean
Study
Period
Household
Usage
Weather
Normal
Household
Usage
Change
Mean
Annual
Load
Change
as % of
Annual
Load
Explanatory
Power (R2)
90 %
Confidence
Interval
Statistically
Significant
Electric +363 kWh +380
kWh
7,408
kWh
+5.1% 0.76 +/- 155
kWh
Yes
Water -945
gallons
-356
gallons
84,952
gallons
-0.4 % 0.51 +/- 3,271
gallons
No
〉 Participant benefits: How are participants benefitting from IQAP and why did their
energy use change?
The most common benefit participants reported as a result of receiving the IQAP discount
was the need to worry less about paying their utility bills. The ability to keep their homes at
a more comfortable temperature and do things in the home that allow them to stay
healthier, like using an air filter, were also commonly-cited benefits.
5 The model provided strong explanatory power, with an R-squared of 0.76. The household estimate is statistically
significant at the 90% confidence level, though precision was moderate, at +/- 41% (155/380). The lower degree of
precision is a result of the variability in household usage (all household types were included in the analysis,
including electric heat and gas heated homes, single-family, multifamily and manufactured homes).
Post period
APEX ANALYTICS Page | 4
Figure 2: Benefits of IQAP Participation (n=175)
While all IQAP participants reported the discount allowed them to worry less about paying
their utility bills, participants whose energy consumption increased were significantly more
likely than those whose usage decreased or stayed the same to report keeping their homes
at a more comfortable temperature due to the discount (Figure 3). According to one
participant, “I am not worried about a big bill, and we don’t have to freeze in the winter. We
still do not have our heaters on during five to nine [PM], but it is better to have the ability
to exercise the option.”
Figure 3: IQAP Participant Agreement that “Because of the Discount, I Keep My Home at a More
Comfortable Temperature” by Change in Energy Consumption
〉 Program Engagement: Determine if changes in program engagement offset changes
to energy use.
15%
43%
46%
45%
54%
23%
27%
29%
31%
32%
27%
15%
15%
14%
5%
18%
10%
6%
4%
3%
15%
5%
3%
6%
6%
0%100%
Increased discretionary spending
Do not need to choose between utilities and other
necessities
Maintain healthier home
Increased comfort
More secure in ability to pay utility bill
Completely agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree Completely disagree
26%
32%
55%
45%
39%
36%
33%
31%
0%100%
Decrease Use (n=23)
No Change (n=22)
Increase Use (n=33)
Total (n=175)
Completely agree Somewhat agree
APEX ANALYTICS Page | 5
Survey findings suggest IQAP participants, particularly those whose energy use increased
after receiving the discount, are energy conscious and engaged with energy efficiency
programs. Nearly two-thirds (65%) of IQAP participant survey responses reported that
people in their households put “a lot” of effort into saving energy and water, and a majority
(60%) reported increasing the amount of effort they put into saving energy and water since
receiving the discount (Figure 4). Households whose energy consumption increased since
receiving the discount were nonetheless the most likely to report putting “a lot” of effort
into saving energy and water and increasing their level of effort since receiving the
discount.
Figure 4: IQAP Survey Respondent Reported Effort Devoted to Saving Energy and Water
More than three-fourths of surveyed IQAP participants (76%) were aware of energy
efficiency programs, and a majority (51%) had participated in programs. LCCC was the
most common program in which participants reported participating, with half of all IQAP
recipients that were aware of programs (50%) reporting participating in LCCC.
Figure 5: IQAP Participant Awareness of and Participation in Efficiency Programs
The energy saving tips that Utilities provided to IQAP participants resulted in a marginal
increase in energy saving actions participating households took. Approximately one-third
(37%) of IQAP participants reported beginning to take one or more action they recalled
65%
68%
73%
65%
0%100%
Decrease Use (n=23)
No Change (n=22)
Increase Use (n=33)
Total (n=175)
People in household put "a lot" of effort
into saving energy and water
26%
18%
36%
29%
30%
27%
36%
31%
0%100%
Decrease Use (n=23)
No Change (n=22)
Increase Use (n=33)
Total (n=175)
Change in amount of effort put into
saving energy and water since receiving
discount
A lot more effort A little bit more effort
52%
77%
61%
51%
30%
14%
15%
25%
17%
9%
24%
23%
0%100%
Decrease Use (n=23)
No Change (n=22)
Increase Use (n=33)
Total (n=175)
Have participated in programs Aware of programs, have not participated Not aware of programs
APEX ANALYTICS Page | 6
Utilities recommending after receiving the discount. A majority of households reported they
already undertook most of the recommended actions prior to receiving the discounts (Figure
6). The greatest increase in uptake of the recommended actions came from households
replacing incandescent bulbs with LEDs and households unplugging electronics or using
power strips to reduce phantom loads.
Figure 6: IQAP Participant Uptake of Recommended Energy Savings Actions (n=175)
〉 Energy intensity: Assess IQAP energy use intensity relative to non-IQAP participants,
and whether lower rates helped IQAP customers achieve a more comfortable or
energy equitable home
Apex drew on data from Experian and the city assessor to normalize energy usage data on a
monthly kWh per household square foot basis to calculate energy use intensity (EUI). We
examined the pre-and-post-IQAP EUI across various households and primary heating fuel
types. IQAP participants had a statistically significant lower EUI than the comparison group
across single family detached homes and multifamily apartments, the two most common
housing types (Figure 4). This indicates that IQAP households used less energy than
similarly sized homes in the comparison group and thus may have been curtailing their
usage.
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Use Monitor My Use tool
Use refrigerator thermometer
Air dry clothes & dishes
Unplug electronics/use power strip
Check for leaks in water fixtures
Change summer thermostat settings
Close windows and curtains or blinds
Replace incandescent bulbs with LEDs
Continued activity, began prior to discount
Began activity after receiving discount, do not recall program recommendation
Began activity after receiving discount, recall program recommendation
APEX ANALYTICS Page | 7
Figure 7. IQAP and LEAP Household Energy Intensity (kWh per Sq. Ft.)
〉 Revenue and Peak Usage: Determine the IQAP rate impact on revenue and assess
whether IQAP participants shifted consumption to off-peak hours.
Apex conducted the same analysis used to assess changes in electric energy consumption
associated with IQAP participation to assess changes in premise-level billing period revenue.
Figure 5 shows the pre-and-post IQAP period monthly revenue for IQAP participants,
matched LEAP non-participants, and a modeled full 23% reduction in revenue (consistent
with a 23% reduction in IQAP rates assuming no change to monthly consumption). The
average IQAP participant revenue showed a decline over the post-IQAP rate period between
the comparison non-IQAP LEAP group and the full 23% reduction. This is consistent with the
finding above that IQAP participants showed an increase in consumption and tells us that
revenue did not fall in lockstep with the rate reduction.
Figure 8. Monthly Revenue
Post Period
APEX ANALYTICS Page | 8
Apex further investigated on-peak period use between IQAP participating and non-
participating groups. We found that overall peak period use (as a percent of total monthly
use) is statistically higher for IQAP participants, as seen in Figure 6 below. IQAP participant
peak use is consistently higher than non-participants (both LEAP non-participants and all
other residential non-participating customers). We can conclude that IQAP participants,
during the post-IQAP rate period, showed consistent or higher on-peak usage relative to
non-participating LEAP customers, and therefore did not shift their consumption to off-peak
hours relative to non-participants.
Figure 9. Monthly On Peak Percent of Electric Energy Use
Conclusions
On average, IQAP households increased their energy consumption after receiving the
discounted rate. The Apex team’s analysis suggests that this increase in energy
consumption reflects households that are no longer as concerned about paying their energy
bills choosing to keep their homes at a more comfortable temperature.
Increased program engagement with IQAP participants did not offset increases in energy
consumption due to the discount, likely because there is limited remaining energy savings
potential from behavioral and low-cost measures in IQAP participants’ homes. IQAP
participants, and particularly those whose energy consumption increased, are energy
conscious, making and increasing efforts to save energy. They are also aware of, and have
participated in, efficiency program offerings and undertook most of the energy saving
behaviors Utilities recommended. Thus, there may be little opportunity for significant,
additional energy savings in IQAP participants’ homes short of equipment replacement and
building upgrades, which face significant cost and split incentive barriers in a low-income
population with a high proportion of renters.5F
6
6 Split incentive barriers occur when the entity responsible for bearing the upfront cost of an efficiency
improvement (e.g., a landlord) is separate from the entity that benefits from the resulting energy cost savings (e.g.,
an individually metered tenant).
Summer period
APEX ANALYTICS Page | 9
The Apex team’s analysis of household energy use intensity (EUI) is consistent with these
findings. IQAP participants in the two most common housing types (single family detached
homes and multifamily apartments) used less energy on a per-square-foot basis than
similar income-qualified households. While single family detached and multifamily IQAP
participants’ EUI increased after receiving the discount, it remained below that of the
comparison households.
DID YOU KNOW?
LEDs use 75% less energy and will last up to ten
times longer than incandescent lights. This could
save you hundreds of dollars during the holiday
season. Plus, you’ll save with Time-of-Day (TOD)
electric pricing if you make the switch to LEDs. Check
out how TOD affects the cost of using decorations
for one hour, from fcgov.com/TOD-cheat-sheet:
UTILITIES INSIGHTS
Small Changes, Big Differences
November 2020 | Issue 11
Utilities
Monthly newsletter for Fort Collins Utilities customers with tips to save energy and water to lower utility bills.
fcgov.com/UAP | utilitiesaffordability@fcgov.com | 970-212-2900
Auxiliary aids and services are available for persons with disabilities. V/TDD 711
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Need Help Paying Your Bill?
If you are past due on your Utilities bill due to the
COVID-19 public health crisis, you may be eligible
for financial assistance of up to $600 through the
CARES Act. Learn more at fcgov.com/CARES.
• Apply early. Funds are limited and
applications will be processed on a first-come,
first-served basis.
• Approved funds will be applied directly to
customer accounts as bill credits within 30 days
of applying.
• Utilities will resume shut-offs for non-payment
beginning Nov. 13. Visit fcgov.com/covid-updates
to learn more and explore payment options.
Customers can receive utility bill assistance through
the Payment Assistance Fund once per season
(Oct. 1 – Sept. 30). For assistance, call:
• Catholic Charities (970-484-5010)
• La Familia/The Family Center (970-221-1615)
• Discover Goodwill (888-775-5327, ext. 7)
Don’t Forget to Renew!
• Apply for LEAP. Renew your application online at
fcgov.com/LEAP or by phone at 866-432-8435.
• Medical Assistance Program renewals start
Dec. 1. Go to fcgov.com/medical-assistance or call
970-212-2900 for more information.
You Can Open This Gift Early ...
Just a handful of free conservation kits are still
available. Kits include LED light bulbs, sink aerators
and more. These are easy to install and will help you
save on your utility bill. Request your kit at
fcgov.com/free-kit or call 970-416-2032.
MAKE A LIGHT SWITCH
• Consider switching to LED holiday lights
this season.
• Unplug all lights and decorations when not in use.
• Look for electricity-free decorations like tinsel,
garland or wreaths.
• Recycle broken string lights at the Timberline
Recycling Center (1903 S. Timberline Road,
970-221-6600).
‘Tis the season for festive decorating. Save money on your utility bill this winter with these tips.
On-peak hours (5-9 p.m. Oct.-Apr. / weekdays only)
Off-peak hours (all other hours of the day, plus
weekends and major holidays)
noviembre 2020 | 11.a Edición
Utilities
“UTILITIES
Pequeños Cambios, Gran DiferenciaINSIGHTS”
Boletín mensual para clientes de Fort Collins Utilities con sugerencias para ahorrar energía eléctrica y agua para reducir sus facturas.
fcgov.com/UAP | utilitiesaffordability@fcgov.com | 970-212-2900
Hay ayuda y servicios auxiliares disponibles para personas con discapacidad. V/TDD 711
¿SABÍA USTED?
Que los focos LED usan un 75% menos de energía y tienen
una duración de hasta diez veces más que los focos
incandescentes. Esto podría ahorrarle cientos de dólares
durante la temporada de luces de invierno. Además,
ahorrará con los precios de electricidad Time-of-Day
(TOD) si cambia a focos LED. Vea como TOD afecta el
costo del uso de decoraciones durante una hora (visite
fcgov.com/TOD-cheat-sheet):
RECURSOS ADICIONALES
¿Necesita ayuda para pagar su factura?
Si su factura de Utilities está vencida debido a la crisis
de salud pública de COVID-19, quizá sea elegible para
asistencia económica de hasta $600 a través de la
Ley CARES. Más información en fcgov.com/CARES.
• Complete su solicitud temprano. Los fondos son
limitados y las solicitudes serán procesadas según el
orden en que fueron recibidas.
• Los fondos aprobados serán aplicados directamente
a la cuenta del cliente como crédito dentro de 30 días
a partir de la fecha de entrega de la solicitud.
• Utilities reanudará la desconexión de servicios por
falta de pago a partir del 13 de noviembre. Para más
información visite fcgov.com/covid-updates.
Los clientes pueden recibir asistencia para el pago
de su factura de servicios públicos a través del fondo
de asistencia Payment Assistance Fund una vez por
temporada (octubre 1 al 30 de septiembre). Para
asistencia llame a La Familia/The Family Center
(970-221-1615), Catholic Charities (970-484-5010) o
Discover Goodwill (888-775-5327, ext. 7).
¡No olvide renovar!
• Complete su solicitud para LEAP. Renueve su
solicitud en línea en fcgov.com/LEAP o por teléfono
en 866-432-8435.
• La renovación para el Programa de Asistencia
Médica inicia el 1 de diciembre. Para más información
visite fcgov.com/medical-assistance o llame al tel.
970-212-2900.
Puede abrir este regalo ahora...
Aún hay kits de eficiencia gratuitos disponibles. Los kits
incluyen focos LED, aireadores de grifos y más. Son fáciles
de instalar y le ayudarán a ahorrar dinero en su factura de
servicios públicos. Pida su kit en fcgov.com/free-kit
o llame al 970-416-2032.
CAMBIE DE ALUMBRADO
• Considere cambiar sus luces navideñas a luces LED
esta temporada.
• Desconecte todas las luces y decoraciones cuando no
estén en uso.
• Busque decoraciones no eléctricas como oropel y
guirlandas.
• Recicle las guirnaldas de luces inservibles en el Centro
de Reciclado Timberline (1903 S. Timberline Road,
970-221-6600).
Estamos en temporada de decoración para las fiestas. Ahorre dinero en su cuenta de luz este invierno con estas sugerencias.
Horas Pico (5 a 9 p.m. octubre a abril entresemana)
Horas Valle (todas las otras horas del día, fines de
semana y días festivos)
Para una decoración
inflable Para una guirnalda de
focos grandes
215 N Mason Street
2nd Floor
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6795
970.221.6782 - fax
fcgov.com
M E M O R A N D U M
Date: 4/29/2021
To: Mayor and City Councilmembers
Through: Travis Storin, Chief Financial Officer
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
From: Nina Bodenhamer, Director, City Give
Re: Digital Access & Equity Outreach Update
_________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND
The City of Fort Collins hosts a range of income qualified (IQ) programs: from reduced-cost
Recreation passes to an annual grocery sales tax rebate, from reduced Utilities (IQAP) to
discounted pet licensing. Combined, these programs enroll approximately 2,600 households
annually.
The City’s newest income-qualified program, Digital Access & Equity, is funded by a 6%
Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) of Connexion’s revenue paid to the General Fund per City
Council priority. Simply, PILOT revenue grows as Connexion’s subscription rate grows.
While a robust PILOT fund is needed in order to build a comprehensive Digital Access & Equity
program, program development is well underway: including user engagement, burgeoning
community partnerships, the construction of a mobile/online income verification application and
initial resident enrollment in reduced-cost internet access of $19.95 per month per 1 gig.
Enrollment in reduced-fee internet access is currently offered to residents who have previously
participated in City IQ programs and reside within Connexion’s service area.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 10B9FDB6-3910-4E6D-9E1F-F371F5EC1FD9
CURRENT OUTREACH
Each week, the addresses of City IQ participants are cross-referenced with Connexion’s “lit”
service area. These households are notified, via a mailer (attached), of details for how to enroll
in Connexion’s discounted internet rate.
- Utilities Customer Service Representatives (CSRs) have received talking points and
training for how to best support, respond and enroll Digital Access & Equity customers.
With respect to data privacy and Red Flag laws, residents enrolled in Utilities Income Qualified
Assistance Program (IQAP) and Medical Assistance Program (MAP) are notified by the Utilities
team via the same process: weekly cross-reference with Connexion’s “lit” service.
Additionally, students from CSU Access Center are onsite at two (2) affordable housing
properties operated by Neighbor to Neighbor. The purpose of their outreach is to gather resident
feedback as to the barriers to subscription, household utilization, and digital needs.
To date, approximately 200 IQ households have been identified as being Connexion “lit” and
received notice of prequalification, with a current Digital Access & Equity enrollment of 30
residents.
NEXT STEPS
As Connexion expands “lit” services to Multi-Dwelling Units (MDUs), the rate of IQ subscribers
should dramatically increase.
- Per Census data, 80% of low-income residents rent. The majority, we can infer, rent
apartments versus single family homes--a by-product of Fort Collins’ housing inventory
and cost of housing.
The City’s partnership with Code for America is mid-stream toward the development of a mobile
and online application for Digital Access & Equity with an anticipated launch of August 2021.
This platform will serve as a framework for a single point of entry to all of the City’s IQ programs.
The 2021 City budget includes a City Council approved budget offer to fund an IQ Navigator.
Posted, the position will identify economies of centralized IQ program delivery, determine real
costs for current services, and develop internal efficiencies via streamlined administration,
uniformed performance measures, and orchestrated outreach.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 10B9FDB6-3910-4E6D-9E1F-F371F5EC1FD9
Utilities Income-Qualified Assistance ProgramUpdate and Proposed ChangesJamie Gaskill, Utilities - Community EngagementBrian Tholl, Utilities - Energy Services1
Agenda1. Overview of Utilities Affordability Portfolio2. Income-Qualified Assistance Program Background and Impact3. Issues for Consideration4. Discussion2
3Utilities Affordability PortfolioPayment AssistanceEfficient HomeEfficient PracticesLower Utility CostsHow We Help Income-Qualified Customers Reduce Utility Costs
Payment Assistance Fund(One-Time Assistance)4Colorado Affordable Residential Energy (Deep Retrofits)Income-Qualified AssistanceProgram (Discounted Rate)Medical Assistance Program (Discounted Rate)LCCC Water and Energy Program(Basic Retrofits)Utilities Affordability Programs (UAP)
5Utilities Affordability Program Impact01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000Actual in 2020 Estimated Potential ReachNumber of Participants6,000*moreUtilities customers could benefit from UAP6,000*moreUtilities customers could benefit from UAP8,000*2,000**Estimated using a city-wide poverty rate of ~12%, based on Census Bureau data combined with controlling for the student population in Fort Collins (City Rebates Eval Report, 2019).
IQAP Background• Strategic Alignment: • NLSH 1.3: Improve accessibility of City and community programs to low- and moderate-income residents and increase participation in services to eligible income-qualified residents.• Program launched in October 2018 in conjunction with Time-of-Day electric pricing• LEAP-enrolled customers eligible to apply for reduced-rate on select utilities services6Income-Qualified AssistanceProgram (Discounted Rate)
IQAP Background• Engagement• Monthly Utilities Insights newsletter• Direct customer engagement at events and through targeted outreach• Outreach to agencies• Evaluation• Pre- and post-program surveys• Billing analysis (year one)• In-depth customer survey (year one)• IQAP rate set to expire July 31, 20217
8IQAP Planned vs. Actual Impact*Council Approved in 2018**Average annual participation and benefit for 2019-2020ParticipationAnnual Customer BenefitPlanned* 2,000 $441,000Actual** 717 $141,944
Billing Analysis Findings• Average annual utility bill savings: $200• Energy use: 380 kWh/year (5%) increase• Water use: no statistical changeCustomer Survey Findings• 33% response rate• 76% have participated in or are aware of programs• 86% report being more secure in ability to pay billIQAP Billing Analysis & Customer Survey9Program Evaluation: Year 1 of Program
Issues for Consideration1. Extend IQAP rate pilot another 3 years (for a total of 6 years) and align with Utilities’ annual rate ordinance.2. Make IQAP an auto-enroll/opt-out program instead of an application-based/opt-in program.10
11Extended IQAP Rate Pilot• Continue targeted engagement and enrollment with low-income population• Tailor methods based on findings from prior billing analysis and participant surveys• Enrollment target of 1,500 customers• Execute ongoing analysis of program impact• Consideration given for COVID impact• Evaluate behavioral efficiency and conservation alignment• Evaluate and quantify other benefits• Review findings with CouncilNext Steps for IQAP Pilot Extension
12IQAP Auto-Enroll/Opt-OutCustomer is approved for LEAPLEAP List Sent to UtilitiesLEAP List Sent to UtilitiesCustomers Bulk Enrolled onto IQAP Rate*Customers Invited to Apply for IQAP Via Paper or Online ApplicationStaff Process Returned Applications and Enroll Customers onto IQAP RateCustomer Notified of Enrollment and Additional Engagement BeginsAuto-EnrollApplication-based EnrollmentCustomer Notified of Enrollment and Additional Engagement Begins*Enrollment via application option would still exist for LEAP-enrolled customers who move into service area outside of timeframe that auto-enrollment would take place.
• Customer-focused program design (reducing barriers)• Reduced administrative time during enrollment• Increased opportunity to engage customer segment • Increased sample size positively impacts program evaluation accuracy• Integration with city-wide income-qualified efforts • Proposed start: 2021 IQAP Season13Considerations for Auto Enrolling ParticipantsIQAP Auto-Enroll/Opt-Out
14IQAP Actual vs. Projected Impact*Council approved in 2018**Average annual participation and benefit for 2019-2020***Based on estimated 98% auto enrollment of all LEAP-enrolled customersParticipationAnnual Customer BenefitPlanned* 2,000 $441,000Actual** 717 $141,944Projected with Auto Enroll***1372 $272,342
Group OutcomeAffordable Housing BoardPilot extension (Yes = 6, No = 0)Auto enroll (Yes = 6, No = 0) Energy BoardPilot extension (Yes = 8, No = 0)Auto enroll (Yes = 8, No = 0) Water Commission TBD – May 20Council Finance CommitteeTBD – May 2415Boards, Commissions and Committee Feedback
16Questions for Consideration1. Should Utilities extend the IQAP rate pilot (set to expire July 2021) another 3 years (for a total of 6 years) and align with Utilities’ annual rate ordinance?2. Should Utilities make IQAP an auto-enroll/opt-out program instead of an application-based program?
For Questions or Comments, Please Contact:Jamie Gaskill, Utilities Community Engagementjgaskill@fcgov.com | 970-416-4338THANK YOU!17
COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Meaghan Overton, Sue Beck-Ferkiss
Date: May 24, 2021
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Request for Subsidy from Affordable Housing Capital Fund (AHCF)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Housing Catalyst’s (HC) Oak 140 project is a partnership between HC and the Downtown
Development Authority (DDA) to finance and construct a 4-story, mixed-use building at the
intersection of Oak and Remington Streets. The project will create 79 affordable rental homes in
the Downtown area serving residents who make between 30-80% of Area Median Income
(AMI). The financing for the project includes contributions from DDA and HC, State and
Federal tax credits, Private Activity Bond (PAB) allocations from the City and County, and HC
bonds. Housing Catalyst is requesting $610,000 in City funding from the Affordable Housing
Capital Fund (AHCF) to help close a financing gap created by escalating commodities pricing,
especially lumber. This request is aligned with guidance in the Housing Strategic Plan and with
the City’s criteria for funding affordable housing projects.
Though City Plan, the City Strategic Plan, and the Housing Strategic Plan all encourage
production of affordable housing, the realities of financing and constructing deed-restricted
affordable housing are very challenging. Project feasibility can be significantly impacted by
changes to the costs of materials and labor. To break ground as scheduled in summer 2021 and to
avoid even greater cost escalations, the Oak 140 project requires additional subsidy. Currently
the only direct City subsidy allocated to this is $98,000 in fee credits for 7 units that will serve
residents making 30% AMI or below.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Is Council Finance Committee supportive of the request for $610,000 of direct subsidy from the
Affordable Housing Capital Fund for the Housing Catalyst (HC) Oak 140 project?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The City has established community-wide affordable housing goals to have 10% of the city’s
housing stock deed-restricted and affordable by 2040. This goal has been reaffirmed through the
adoption of the Housing Strategic Plan, which sets a clear vision that Fort Collins will be a
community where everyone has stable, healthy housing they can afford. To reach our 10% goal,
the city needs to develop at least 282 affordable homes each year. If the Oak 140 project is built,
it will represent 28% of the city’s annual affordable housing production goal.
There are several funding sources available to support the development of affordable housing
(CDBG, HOME, AH Fund, AHCF). The City allocates between $2 million - $3 million to
affordable housing in a typical calendar year. It is important to note that although the City has
been notified by HUD of an additional HOME allocation of $2.6 million in recovery funding
through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), guidance related to the application process and
eligible uses won’t be available until the fall. With the addition of these funds, staff estimates
that approximately $5 million will be available through City and Federal sources for the 2022
Competitive Process. $500,000 will be added to the AHCF in 2022 as well.
Social Sustainability completed the 2021 Spring Competitive Process in April and the funding
recommendation from the Human Services and Housing Funding Board is scheduled for
consideration by City Council on June 1, 2021. Four housing proposals were received, which are
being recommended for a total of $2,700,000 in funding. There is an unallocated balance of
$486,394 in Affordable Housing funds which will be reappropriated for use for affordable
housing projects in 2022. To initiate a Fall Competitive Process, the unallocated balance must
exceed $500,000; otherwise, the unallocated funding is carried into the Spring Competitive
Process. There is an unallocated balance of less than $500,000 in Affordable Housing funds and
no federal funds. Because this threshold has not been met, next year’s Spring Competitive
Process is when these and the new allocation of federal funds will be available to housing
projects.
Project Background and Funding Request: Oak 140
Housing Catalyst (HC) approached the City to discuss the possible use of the AHCF to help
close a financing gap in Oak 140 created by escalating commodities pricing, especially lumber.
HC is requesting $610,000 from the AHCF to successfully close on the project and lock in
pricing for construction. Though the total gap is projected to be larger than the amount requested,
HC will reduce costs on the project through value engineering and use a range of other strategies
to close the remainder of the financing gap.
The Oak 140 project will create 79 affordable rental homes in a desirable Downtown location.
The breakdown of unit types and the income levels served is outlined below:
30% AMI 7 units
40% AMI 6 units
50% AMI 29 units
70% AMI 29 units
80% AMI 8 units
Average AMI 57.85%
To date, the City has committed $98,000 to the project through fee credits for 7 qualifying units
that will serve residents making 30% AMI or below. No additional subsidy has been committed
to this project. Oak 140 is being financed through contributions from DDA and HC, State and
Federal tax credits, Private Activity Bond (PAB) allocations from the City and County, and HC
bonds. HC hoped to avoid using Competitive Process funding; however, the cost of materials has
skyrocketed since the project began the development review process in May 2020. The financing
sources and amounts for the Oak 140 project are as follows:
Source Amount
Federal LIHTC Equity $11.6 million
State LIHTC Equity $1.7 million
First Mortgage (bonds) $7 million
Second Mortgage (bonds) $1 million
Fort Collins DDA Equity $5,175,370*
City AHCF (current request) $610,000
Deferred Developer Fee $576,298**
TOTAL $27,689,041
*DDA Equity amount does not account for the land contribution; estimated value is $2.3 million
** Does not reflect HC $1.3 million for 143 Remington acquisition
A detailed memorandum outlining Housing Catalyst’s request for funding is included as
Attachment 1.
Affordable Housing Capital Fund Considerations
The 2015 voter-approved Community Capital Improvement Program includes the AHCF, which
will accrue a total of $4M over ten years through 2025. The ballot language states it will fund
capital costs of development or rehabilitation of one or more public or private housing projects
designated specifically for low-income individuals or families. Previous Council direction has
supported use of this fund for fee credits and direct subsidy for qualifying projects. This request
would be a direct subsidy.
The current balance of the AHCF is roughly $610,000, which is available for the capital needs of
one or more affordable housing projects. The AHCF will be replenished with $500,000 in
January 2022. If this request from Housing Catalyst is approved by the full Council, the balance
of the AHCF will be approximately $300 until January 2022. Staff does not expect any
additional requests for fee credits in 2021.
This request is well-aligned with previous Council direction and with the recently adopted
Housing Strategic Plan. Providing final funding to projects that are “shovel ready” but facing a
funding gap is a use of AHCF resources that has strong policy support. The AHCF was also used
in this way to finalize funding for Mason Place in 2019. In addition, the current request is
substantially lower than the City’s typical subsidy of affordable housing projects. Between 2015
and 2020, the median average subsidy the City contributed per affordable housing unit was
$38,970. The current request for $610,000 and the $98,000 in fee credits represents a per-unit
subsidy of just under $9,000 per unit. For a relatively low per-unit subsidy, the City can support
the construction of 79 affordable homes in an area of the community with high access to jobs,
transit, and other amenities.
Staff is aware of other affordable housing projects in the development pipeline; however, it does
not appear that there are any other affordable housing funding needs that cannot wait for the
2022 Spring Competitive Process.
Previous Council Actions
Council has taken three previous actions related to the Oak 140 project. Two actions (July 2020
and November 2020) were related to determining fair market value for leases between the
Downtown Development Authority (DDA) and Housing Catalyst.
At the May 18, 2021 hearing, Council considered a request for $350,000 in fee credits for
qualifying units in two affordable housing projects – Oak 140 (Housing Catalyst) and Cadence
(Volunteers of America). Of that amount, $98,000 was for Oak 140’s 7 qualifying units. This
request was unanimously approved on First Reading.
NEXT STEPS
If Council Finance Committee is supportive of this request, staff will prepare an ordinance for
consideration by the full Council in June and will seek a recommendation from the Affordable
Housing Board at their meeting on June 3, 2021.
To fulfill this request, the City Council would need to authorize the City Manager to enter into a
funding agreement between the City and Housing Catalyst that would provide $610,000 to
Housing Catalyst from the Affordable Housing Capital Fund. This funding agreement would:
• Provide funds as a “due-on-sale” loan to ensure the project remains as affordable
housing. This loan would only need to be repaid if/when the development was sold
• Require a minimum 20-year agreement of restrictive covenants
ATTACHMENTS
1. Request for funding from Housing Catalyst
May 19, 2021
City Council Finance Committee
Request for Gap Funding Due to Construction Material Escalation
As you know, Housing Catalyst and the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) have
been working on Oak 140, a much-needed mixed-use affordable housing development,
and it is close to the finish line. The two agencies had been committed to completing this
project without the need for deep city subsidy such as CDBG, HOME or the Affordable
Housing Fund.
Housing Catalyst, the developer, has been able to overcome many unforeseen hurdles in
bringing this project to fruition. Unfortunately, despite all our best efforts to maximize
resources and utilize creative financing solutions, the extreme rise in lumber and other
construction material prices has created a funding shortfall. We now come to you for help.
To minimize the risk of rapidly escalating construction costs, Housing Catalyst is
respectfully requesting funding to be able to close the partnership and all financing at the
end of June in order to lock in construction pricing and minimize further risk to the
development.
Housing Catalyst is requesting $610,000 from the 2021 City Affordable Housing Capital
Fund to help complete the financing for Oak 140, a mixed-use development that will bring
79 affordable apartments and two ground-floor commercial spaces to the site of the
former Elks Lodge at Oak and Remington Streets in downtown Fort Collins. With the
commitment of these funds from the City of Fort Collins, Oak 140 will be able to move
forward to close financing on the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) project and start
construction in July 2021.
Project Overview and Funding Sources
100% of the 79 studio, one-bedroom, and two-bedroom apartments will be affordable for
those earning between 30% and 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI), with an average
resident income of 60% of the AMI. Below is the detailed AMI breakdown and unit mix:
30% AMI Units - 7
40% AMI Units - 6
50% AMI Units - 29
70% AMI Units - 29
80% AMI Units – 8
79 Units
The Total Development Cost for the housing portion of Oak 140 is $27.689 million.
Source Amount
Fort Collins DDA Equity $5,175,370*
Federal LIHTC Equity $11.6 million
State LIHTC Equity $1.7 million
First Mortgage (bonds) $7 million
Second Mortgage (bonds) $1 million
Deferred Developer Fee $576,298**
City AHCF $610,000
TOTAL $27,689,041
*DDA Equity amount does not account for the land contribution, which estimated value is
$2.3 million
** Does not reflect the Housing Catalyst $1.3 million for 143 Remington acquisition
City of Fort Collins Contribution to Oak 140
This $610,000 AHCF request would bring the total subsidy from the City to $708,000
(including fee credits), which is less than $9,000/unit. The Affordable Housing Strategic
Plan indicates that the typical City subsidy in affordable housing is $40,000 per unit.
This less than average investment is being leveraged with numerous other funding sources.
The City AHCF dollars would constitute 2% of the total funding sources. In return for this
investment, the City of Fort Collins will see the rare opportunity of affordable housing
being implemented in a prime downtown location with local trusted partners.
The City of Fort Collins also contributed $9.2 million of 2019 and 2020 Private Activity Bond
cap. Bond cap is not considered a subsidy to the project, but it is an important and
necessary commitment. In total, the project is utilizing $14.2 million in bond cap. The
remainder of the PAB was committed from Larimer County and Colorado Housing and
Finance Authority (CHFA).
In Alignment with City Goals and Policies
The project is also in alignment with the strategies in the newly adopted City Affordable
Housing Strategic Plan and the City Council’s priority to improve access to a broad range of
quality housing that is safe, accessible, and affordable. With 79 affordable units, this
project will make a significant impact in helping the City achieve its goal of having 10% of
the City’s housing stock be affordable by 2040.
Oak 140 is also a strategy to implement the identified goal of increasing the supply of
affordable rental units in Fort Collins. The project will serve a healthy mix of income levels,
including 13 units at the very hard to reach 30% and 40% AMI levels.
Oak 140 creates living options for downtown employees that currently find it financially
challenging to live and work in Fort Collins because of rising housing costs. The DDA’s
contribution of the land at the former Elks building site provides a rare opportunity to
make building affordable housing in a highly desirable downtown location financially
feasible. Housing Catalyst and the DDA are proud to have developed an architectural
design that respects the rich history and essence of Downtown Fort Collins, while also
reflecting the evolving needs and character of the community. Since identifying the
significant need and desire for affordable housing for people working in and around
downtown, the DDA and Housing Catalyst have worked to create a development that
honors the vision to address this unique community demand. Oak 140 is ideally located for
public transit use and easy access to job centers across the City. The site is within a
quarter-mile of multiple bus stops with daily service to most areas of Fort Collins and
adjacent cities, along a bike route and adjacent to a bike sharing program, and provides
next-door access to hospitality and retail jobs.
Why Now?
Oak 140 is the culmination of many years of vision, commitment and partnership that has
resulted in something that we hope Fort Collins can be extremely proud of.
In this case, the project is ready to move forward upon the commitment of these funds.
The project is unable to wait for the Federal Competitive Funding Process next spring. We
are facing an unprecedented commodities pricing escalation crisis, and the safest way to
stabilize the costs is to close financing and issue contracts as quickly as possible. In the
current climate, additional time would compound the issue, adding costs and creating the
need for even more resources. It is for this reason, that we are requesting the specific type
of funds to be used at this time.
We recognize that during the typical competitive process, there is strong consideration
given to whether the project is sure to move forward and if it can do so in a timely manner.
In this case, these funds would be used as last-in funds to get an important project across
the finish line that is ready to proceed within 60 days.
Housing Catalyst and the DDA were both committed to bringing the project forward
without the use of limited competitive resources, including the City of Fort Collins
Competitive Funds. This shared commitment to allow for the greatest reach of our local
resources was unique to Oak 140. Housing Catalyst has not yet developed a new
construction LIHTC project without significant local subsidy. It was believed that the
benefit from the land contribution and significant DDA equity would negate the need for
local subsidy. However, the recent combination of market disruption and commodity
escalation pressurized the deal to a tipping point. Housing Catalyst has been working
aggressively to maximize resources and utilize creative financing solutions. All these tools
combined are still not enough, and we come to you to request access the Affordable
Housing Capital Funds for Oak 140.
Federal LIHTC Market Disruption - 4% Lock and Income Averaging Guidance
The following issues have caused direct impact to the financial feasibility of the project
over the last ten months.
Following Oak 140’s successful award of Federal 4% and State Low Income Housing Tax
Credits (LIHTC) in November 2020, a market disruption occurred based on two primary
issues. At the time of application submittal, the project was modeling $0.91 Federal LIHTC
pricing, which was in line with the market at the time.
First, a provision to lock the 4% Federal LIHTC rate was included in the Covid Relief Bill
passed in late December 2020. The 4% rate was previously floating and based on a
published monthly rate (July 2020 = 3.07%, lowest in history). The 4% lock, while providing
more credits, resulted in lower pricing because the investors yields drop at the same price
per credit. In the case of Oak 140, this caused a drop in equity pricing down to $0.87.
Although the lock was intended to benefit projects by generating more equity, the
reduction in pricing and the CHFA requirement for Oak 140 to also return $358,853 in
annual State Credit, only pressurized the project further.
Following the 4% Lock, the IRS published new guidance for projects utilizing Income
Averaging. This tool was a perfect fit for the Oak 140 project that was looking to provide
affordable housing targeted at the downtown workforce that includes a broad range of
income levels, up to 80% AMI. This guidance put onerous risk on the occupancy
compliance which could put the tax credits for the entire project at risk (if a single unit was
out of income compliance, the tax credits for all of the units would be at risk, instead of
just being limited to a single unit). This issue essentially caused the majority of tax credit
investors to pull out of the market until new guidance would be issued. Only one investor
included a proposal that would allow the project to move forward with Income Averaging.
This resulted in another drop in equity pricing down to $0.855.
Overall, the drop from $0.91 in July 2020 to $0.855 in Feb 2021 caused an $745,000
amount of reduction in federal credit equity pricing, in addition to the return of $358,853
in State Credits back to CHFA per their requirements.
Housing Catalyst has been diligently working to utilize every possible tool to overcome
these impacts, but the pending commodity price escalation proved to be a new challenge.
Commodity Price Escalation
Among the biggest impacts to the project have been the dramatic increase in construction
commodity pricing over the last 10 months. Since Housing Catalyst first priced the project
in July 2020, the total construction cost has increased 10% from $17.7 million to $19.6
million ($1.95 million increase). The cost of lumber alone has increased 42% for the project
from $1.5 million to $2.6 million.
Across the industry, lumber composites (the composite price of all types of dimensional
lumber and sheet lumber) is up 463% since the beginning of 2020. Steel is also up
significantly.
Prior to this commodity escalation crisis, the typical construction cost escalation rate was
5% annually, which we have historically been able to plan for and absorb. Projects are
generally seeing a 2% monthly increase currently.
In the case of Oak 140, a 60-day delay could cost nearly $700,000 in construction
escalation.
The addition of a substantial construction cost increase after overcoming the gap due to
equity pricing proved to be difficult to overcome. Housing Catalyst was able to reduce the
construction budget down through value engineering and is also securing a second
mortgage utilizing bond proceeds. After utilizing all of these tools and resources, a gap
remains that is needs to be filled to get the project to the finish line.
Combination of Financing Solutions
#1 - Credit Enhanced Revenue Bonds + Second Mortgage with Bond Proceeds
The project is structured to utilize a credit enhancement project that will leverage Housing
Catalyst’s AA- issuer credit rating to issue credit enhanced revenue bonds via the capital
markets with KeyBanc Capital Markets. In this structure, Housing Catalyst will issue the
bonds and lend the bond proceeds to the LIHTC partnership. By issuing revenue bonds on
the public markets through a negotiated sale, Housing Catalyst can achieve the best
financing available for the project. The financing results in $900,000 of benefit to the
development (approximately $770,000 of additional loan proceeds due to the lower
interest rate and approximately $100,000 of reduced interest expense and financing cost
savings). This financing approach was necessary to allow the project to stay on track for the
needed closing timeframe and overcome the various funding gaps.
The general revenue pledge is a commitment that in the very unlikely situation that the
project revenues could not support the bond debt service, operating reserves were
depleted, and there were no funds or fix available to correct the project revenues, then
Housing Catalyst would use unrestricted general revenues to make the bond debt service
payments. This sophisticated tool has been utilized by very few developers in the state of
Colorado. The strategy provides the opportunity to benefit from the AA-rating that
Housing Catalyst has worked hard to achieve and maintain.
Housing Catalyst is also pursuing a second mortgage utilizing bond proceeds to help fill the
gap.
#2 - $1.3 Million Acquisition by Housing Catalyst
In addition to the general revenue pledge, Housing Catalyst stepped in to acquire the
property at 143 Remington to ensure the project could move forward successfully. This
was months into the design and outreach process. The opportunity to acquire 143
Remington had not previously been available; however, through ongoing communication
and design efforts, it became clear to the seller that the inclusion of the property would
make for an enhanced building design and overall better project for the community.
Housing Catalyst agreed and committed to contribute $1.3 million of its own equity to
complete the acquisition. Staying true to the initial commitment, no additional funding
sources were sought to cover this cost. It is a direct contribution from Housing Catalyst.
#3 – Value Engineering
Housing Catalyst has worked with the team to reduce the construction costs as much as
possible while maintaining the aesthetics and quality of building design that were
approved through the involved entitlement process.
#4– Gap Funding City Affordable Housing Cap Funds - $610,000
Thank you for your consideration and please let us know if you need any additional
information.
Sincerely,
Julie J. Brewen CEO
May 24, 2021
Meaghan Overton, Housing Manager
Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Social Policy and Housing Program Manager
Council Finance Committee
Request for Subsidy
from Affordable Housing Capital Fund
Direction Sought
Is Council Finance Committee supportive of the request for $610,000 of
direct subsidy from the Affordable Housing Capital Fund for the Housing
Catalyst Oak 140 project?
2
•LIV 2: Promote infill and
redevelopment
•LIV 5: Create more opportunities
for housing choices
•LIV 6: Improve access to housing
…regardless of their race,
ethnicity, income, age, ability, or
background
Strategic Alignment
3
•10%affordability by 2040
•Rental needs concentrated below
60% AMI
•Continue to prioritize direct funding
to lowest income levels
•Increase inventory of affordable
rental units
•NLSH 1.1 Improve and
increase…housing… affordable to
a broad range of income levels.
•ECON 3.4 Foster infill and
redevelopment opportunities
consistent with City Plan policies.
Funding Request
4
What: $610,000 in direct subsidy
from the AHCF for the Oak 140
affordable housing project
Why: Financing gap created by
escalating commodities prices,
especially for lumber.
The Project: 79 affordable rental
homes serving residents making
between 30-80% AMI
Partners: Housing Catalyst,
Downtown Development Authority
Oak 140 Timeline
Oak 140 Funding
6
Source Amount
Federal LIHTC Equity $11.6 million
State LIHTC Equity $1.7 million
First Mortgage (bonds)$7 million
Second Mortgage (bonds)$1 million
Fort Collins DDA Equity $5,175,370*
City AHCF $610,000
Deferred Developer Fee $576,298**
TOTAL $27,689,041
Federal LIHTC
42%
State LIHTC
Equity
6%
First Mortgage
(bonds)
25%
Second Mortgage
(bonds)
4%
DDA
19%
City AHCF
2%Deferred Developer
Fee
2%
*DDA Equity amount does not account for the land
contribution, which estimated value is $2.3 million
** Does not reflect the Housing Catalyst $1.3 million for 143
Remington acquisition
Considerations
7
Benefits Trade-offs
Direction Sought
Is Council Finance Committee supportive of the request for $610,000 of
direct subsidy from the Affordable Housing Capital Fund for the Housing
Catalyst Oak 140 project?
8
9
Affordable Housing Capital Fund
10
•Established 2015, $4 million over 10 years through 2025
•Uses:
•Fee credits for qualifying units (less than 30% AMI) in AH projects
•Direct subsidy for development or rehabilitation of one or more AH
projects
•Previous projects supported include:
•Cadence (55 units, age-restricted), Oak 140 (79 units), Mason
Place (60 units permanent supportive housing), Oakridge Crossing
(110 units, age-restricted), Village on Horsetooth (96 units)
•AHCF will be replenished with $500,000 in January 2022
2022 Housing Funding (Est.)
11
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
TOTAL $5,075,000
•Competitive Process
•AHCF will also be replenished with $500,000 in January 2022
OAK 140
Council Finance Committee May 24, 2021
We are the largest affordable housing developer and property
management company in Fort Collins.
Mission:
To build public and private
investment partnerships that foster
economic, cultural, and social
growth in the Downtown area.
Mission:
To create vibrant,
sustainable communities
throughout Fort Collins.
THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The 140 E Oak St Development meets our community needs and priorities.
The City of Fort Collins believes one of the
keys to a healthy community is the ability
to house its residents in good quality,
affordable housing.
A top priority in the City’s Housing
Strategic Plan is to increase housing
supply and affordability.
City Council has prioritized improving access
to a broad range of quality housing that is
safe, accessible and affordable.
A top priority is to increase the supply and
affordability of housing.
ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL IN 2021
Reaffirmed a goal for the City to facilitate the
development of affordable housing: 10% of the
City’s housing stock be affordable by 2040.
Current affordable inventory is ~5%; goal
requires 282+ units to be produced annually
until 2040.
7
30% AMI Units
6
40% AMI Units
28
50% AMI Units
The overall income average will be 60% of the area median income (AMI).
29
70% AMI Units
8
80% AMI Units
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DOWNTOWN
Creates affordable living in a highly
desirable downtown location
Unique affordable community targeting
people who work in and around downtown
Mixed -use project partnership between
Housing Catalyst and the Downtown
Development Authority
Aligns with adopted policy and priorities for
the City of Fort Collins
Mixed-use concept activates street level and
promotes pedestrian activity
PROJECT BENEFITS
Sign up for updates and info: tinyurl.com/oakfc
Historic Context
HISTORY AND OUTREACH
October 2016 Charrette
Identified significant need
and desire for affordable
housing for people working in
and around downtown
Broad participation from
community members, public
sector, business owners
Called for an active ground
floor, partnerships, and a
design complementary to
historic character and
reflective of our time