IURA Neighborhood Investment Committee

108 E. Green St. Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 274-6565 AGENDA IURA Neighborhood Investment Committee (NIC) 8:30 am, Friday, September 13, 2019 Third Floor Conference Room City Hall, 108 E. Green St., Ithaca, NY 14850 I. Call to Order II. Changes/Additions to Agenda III. Public Comment IV. Review of Minutes – August 2019 V. New Business A. Action Item - Discuss and Recommend - Enterprise New York State Anti-Displacement Learning Network 2019 Request for Applications B. 9:00 a.m. – Update and Discussion- 2018 Project #16 – Targeted Urban Bus Stop Upgrade(s) - Meadow Street Stop - Megan Pulver, TCAT C. Program Update – 2018 Project #8 – Temporary Ramp Program VI. Other Business A. IURA Grant Summary B. Staff Report VII. Motion to Adjourn If you have a disability and require accommodation in order to fully participate, please contact the CITY OF ITHACA CLERK’S OFFICE at 274-6570 at least 72 business hours prior to the meeting. 108 E. Green St. Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 274-6565 DRAFT MINUTES ITHACA URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY (IURA) NEIGHBORHOOD INVESTMENT COMMITTEE (NIC) 8:30 A.M., Friday, August 9, 2019 Council Chambers, City Hall, Ithaca, NY In attendance: Karl Graham, Chair; Fernando de Aragón, Vice Chair; Tracy Farrell, Teresa Halpert; Paulette Manos. Excused: None. Staff: Anisa Mendizabal Guest(s): Jude Keith Rose, Child Development Center; Emme Edmunds, Neighbor to Neighbor. I. Call to Order Chair Graham called the meeting to order at 8:33 a.m. <Farrell arrived at 8:34 a.m.> II. Changes/Additions to Agenda Chair Graham moved discussion items forward on the agenda to better accommodate the meeting’s presentations. III. Public Comment None. IV. Review of Minutes – July 2019 De Aragón motioned to approve; Farrell seconded. Carried 5-0. V. New Business A. Action Item – Discuss and Recommend -2018 Project #8 –Temporary Ramp Program. Mendizabal stated that FLIC’s most recent Quarterly Report showed slow progress in installing ramps within the City per the FLIC 2018 Contract. She reached out to FLIC’s Executive Director, Jan Lynch, for a preliminary discussion and set a meeting for further strategizing. Staff turnover in the ramp installation role may have had an impact on outreach. Halpert suggested FLIC partner with a contractor who installs/renovates homes to provide first-floor bathrooms, as the residents of such homes may be in need of accessibility improvements. De Aragon wanted to know if FLIC currently partners with INHS. De Aragon also asked if there is a formal housing-type affinity group that could meet monthly for line staff, and if so, whether FLIC could plug in there as a source of information and referrals. Mendizabal responded that the Human Services Coalition hosts regular meetings of the Homeless and Housing Task Force and other Forums, which may be of interest to FLIC. De Aragon acknowledged that may be useful but also wondered about a more general group that discusses a wide(r) range of housing issues (maintenance, repair, accessibility, and myriad issues beyond affordability). Mendizabal knew of a few other groups that touch on housing but not in the expansive way that De Aragon articulated. The Committee recommended increased outreach, keeping a waiting list, and pausing installation of ramps in the County while in the process of identifying the requisite number of City beneficiaries, and partnering with other agencies until the end of the contract period. However, the Committee is not comfortable with a long-term/indefinite pause on ramping in the County, especially since there is a demonstrated need there. Action Item: The Committee instructed Mendizabal to research HUD Guidelines on this matter. Does the Participating Jurisdiction (PJ), which is the City of Ithaca, have any flexibility in this area? It was acknowledged that housing costs within the City tend to push individuals with fixed- or low-to-moderate incomes into the more affordable areas of the County. Response/Finding: Unlike HOME funding, the PJ does not have discretion to allow use of CDBG funds to areas outside of the City. However, only the initial ramp installations must be within City boundaries; the ramps are re-usable and may be placed elsewhere after an initial installation. B. Action Item – Discuss and Recommend -2018 Project #18 – Domestic Violence Shelter Renovation - Prioritize Roof (no resolution) Mendizabal explained that this funded was originally intended as “gap funding” to enable the Advocacy Center to complete the costs of a renovation planned to be completed with Dormitory Authority of the State of NY (DASNY) funding. However, DASNY has been very slow to release funds. Mendizabal reached out to Executive Director Heather Campbell, who is in regular communication with DASNY, but who stated there is still no expected date for release of funds. Campbell stated that roof replacement is now the top priority among the package of repairs and renovations the Advocacy Center anticipates being able to complete, and inquired whether they could utilize the IURA funding immediately for that project. Campbell stated that the Advocacy Center could provide proof of capital sufficient to complete the remainder of the roof project should the cost be in excess of what IURA has awarded. Staff has reviewed this question, and, given that roof replacement was one of many projects named in the original contract, has determined that, should the Committee recommend it, this use of funds would be acceptable. The Committee voiced unanimous support for this use of funds. C. Presentation with Q & A: Childcare Code Compliant Ground Floor Units Chair Graham welcomed Jude Rose from the Child Development Council. Ms. Rose discussed the Child Development Council’s (CDC) goal to expand capacity for provision of childcare in the area. Large childcare centers such as that existing at Cornell are difficult to bring online due to issues of scale, however, CDC has identified opportunities to expand childcare resources via in-home group childcare. There is a bit more economy of scale for these “medium-sized” daycare types. To that end, it would be helpful to have more childcare-ready units in the City. Outside of NYC, State law makes it difficult to license childcare facilities outside on second floors; there must be a stairway directly from the unit to the ground. Such stairways are more likely to exist in houses or duplexes, but often are missing in buildings that have ground floor retail, such as Vecino’s proposed Green Street development. If developers planned for and built in childcare-ready ground floor units, that would be a big win. There are difficulties with doing so. Rose cited an example of a site on the City/Town border, once a commercial building with residential within it. This project encompassed multiple jurisdictions, zoning ordinances, and other conflicts. IN NYS home- based childcare is not considered a business for zoning purposes. Someone must live on-site, but it need not be the childcare operator. Committee members were interested in costs for operators. Rose said that an example of egress window with a staircase that she showed in her presentation cost approximately $1,700. The commercial structure she cited needs $20-30K worth of upgrades to be childcare- ready. The Committee inquired whether CDC has talked about addressing the Tompkins County Landlord Association to see if they are interested in one-on-one (technical assistance) meetings to improve understanding/awareness of the issues around childcare provision. For example, landlords cannot legally prevent someone from operating in-home childcare, but they can discourage it; landlords cannot evict a resident who has in-home childcare, but they have been known to not renew a lease. Halpert pointed out that new NYS tenant protection legislation may now prevent that. Rose stated that in the past, CDC has helped in conversation with hesitant landlords. Two local architects that are aware of and committed to addressing childcare needs are Claudia Brenner and Noah Demarest. Dr. Mildred Warner, Cornell Professor of City and Regional Planning, worked with CDC in 2002 to develop a model that calculates the economic impact of childcare in Tompkins County—the direct, indirect, and induced effects of taking in revenue and making purchases related to childcare. Warner also worked on a universal application for childcare that was meant to be a “one-stop application” to identify all the ways people pay for childcare, much like the federal financial aid application (FAFSA) does. CDC has worked the childcare “benefits cliff” into its calculations and outreach. When people who receive DSS-subsidized childcare earn more in wages, their benefits are decreased, resulting in higher childcare costs that eat up the increased earnings they’ve achieved. Minimum wage increases are impacting benefits-eligibility, and some people have historically denied wage increases or promotions because they would be worse off. For the most part, people who receive childcare subsidies have an income that is below 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL). If their income goes above 200% of FPL, they no longer receive childcare benefits/subsidy. It doesn’t stagger off, it just disappears, Rose explained. Childcare providers receive a set payment rate from DSS for childcare, no matter how much the provider earns and no matter how many children they care for that are paid for via DSS payments. This rate, called the Regional Market Rate (RMR) is adjusted every few years. [Note: Ms. Rose forwarded current RMR; they are attached in this agenda packet]. The RMR is set at the 75th percentile of the cost of care in the region. Neither the cost providers charge nor the RMR tend to accurately reflect the true cost of care, which is why quality and wages often suffer, according to Rose. Families are paying on average $800-$1,000 per child per month. Infant care can be up to $2,200. CDC works with providers to set and enforce policies and payments. For example, providers often don’t add in costs of operating—such as the cost of their mortgage—they simple charge the DSS rate. Another common issue is that more staff is needed for younger children, and without planning, this is often not sustainable. Rose said she is interested in seeing the old Common Grounds building utilized for childcare. It’s sizeable and on four acres in an Opportunity Zone. CDC is positioned to work with the Southern Tier Regional Economic Development Council (REDC), can work with USDA mortgages, and is talking with developers at Carpenter Park about the possibility of a drop-in or other type of childcare center. The Committee wondered if CDC has reached out to area developers and/or affordable housing sites. Yes, and Lynn Truame at Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services has provided information and been very helpful. The Chair asked if Ms. Rose has met with Vecino. Yes, she has met with Molly Chiang. Mendizabal that since Vecino’s planned Arthaus development has proposed set-asides for formerly homeless youth, it would be interesting to have at least one code-compliant unit for parenting youth. Again, the Green Street Development came up and, if there is no conference center, it would be interesting to consider ground floor childcare. D. Presentation with Q & A: Program Update from Neighbor to Neighbor Chair Graham welcomed Emme Edmunds, newly appointed Co-Director of Neighbor to Neighbor (N2N). Ms. Edmunds spoke about the history of the program, formerly known as Love Knows No Bounds. N2N’s current contract states that the group will provide home rehabilitations for homeowners at or below 60% of AMI. This figure was based on LKNB’s past work and their 2018 application. As Ms. Edmunds explained, some factors limit N2N’s ability to identify suitable candidates for its projects: homeownership is expensive in Ithaca, so difficult for people at 60% AMI and below to own; N2N’s rehabilitation range is $10,000 per project and the rehabilitation needs identified must be completed for that amount (they cannot leave a portion undone, per HUD requirement). The latter is one of the reasons N2N has chosen to focus on roof replacement. Therefore, N2N is requesting that its 2018 contract be modified to include candidates with up to 80% AMI. Edmunds also acknowledged that there had been a lull in outreach due to leadership and other changes. She is jumpstarting those efforts now. She stated she has done qualitative research in the past, which has made her comfortable with talking to people, and also is “very friendly”, so recently walked around neighborhoods and knocked on doors asking residents if they “know [homeowners] who would need a roof.” She tells people about N2N’s mission to help people stay in their homes. This has helped in getting referrals from neighbors to other neighbors in need. N2N is also talking with other agencies, like INHS and GIAC, and has plans to talk to Southside Community Center, St. James AME Zion and other area churches for referrals. N2N’s focus has shifted from their own volunteers doing repairs to a 6-member volunteer board that subcontracts for roof replacement. She noted that in addition to furniture redistribution, the group would also like to take on building ramps and replacing front steps. <De Aragon departed at 9:40 a.m.> <Ms. Rose and Ms. Edmunds departed at 9: 50 a.m.> The Committee further discussed the two presentations. Graham spoke of the need for childcare. Farrell noted that while childcare is expensive, the providers aren’t well-paid. Halpert wondered if in-home daycare could occur in senior housing developments; there could be grandparents and older individuals who would be excellent care providers. She also noted that for presentation to landlords, groups like CDC should consider knowing and encouraging landlords to understand the codes involved. E. Action Item – Contract Amendment-2018 Project #1 – N2N Homeowner Rehab – Resolution. Manos pointed out need for a change in the N2N resolution—reference to LKNB needs to be replaced with N2N. {Note: Mendizabal has made the change in the text below.] Manos motioned to approve, Farrell seconded. Carried 4-0. 2018 Ac>on Plan Project #1 ― Neighbor to Neighbor Homeowner Rehabilita>on: Modify Contract to Extend Qualifying Incomes to 80% AMI WHEREAS, the City-adopted 2018 HUD Entitlement Program Action Plan allocated $40,000 in CDBG funds to Project #1 – Neighbor to Neighbor (N2N) Homeowner Rehabilitation Program sponsored by the agency formerly known as Love Knows No Bounds (LKNB) to accomplish four home rehabilitation jobs on behalf of four homeowners in the City of Ithaca whose incomes are at or below 60% of Area Median Income, and WHEREAS, 24 CFR §570.208 (a) describes CDBG National Objectives requiring people of low-and moderate-incomes be the primary beneficiaries of the CDBG program, and WHEREAS, HUD defines moderate income as up to and including 80% of AMI, and WHEREAS, on August 1, 2019, N2N requested a contract modification to extend the income qualification of N2N beneficiaries from 60% or below of Area Median Income (AMI) to 80% or below of AMI, and WHEREAS, N2N requests such an extension in order to fully serve four income-qualified beneficiaries, and WHEREAS, in compliance with 24 CFR §570.208 (a), N2N shall appropriately ensure that funded activities to not benefit moderate-income persons to the exclusion of low income persons, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) is designated by the City of Ithaca as the Lead Agency to develop, administer and implement the HUD Entitlement grant  program, including funds received through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, and WHEREAS, this matter has been reviewed by the Neighborhood Investment Committee of the IURA who recommends the following; now therefore, be it RESOLVED, the IURA approves the contract modification of the 2018 HUD Entitlement Program Action Plan Project #1 Neighbor to Neighbor Homeowner Rehabilitation to include beneficiaries whose incomes are up to and including 80% of AMI, and be it further RESOLVED, that the IURA Chairperson is authorized, subject to review by IURA legal counsel, any documents necessary to implement this resolution. VI. Other Business A. IURA Grant Summary Neighbor to Neighbor (N2N0and the Advocacy Center have been slow to spend down their funds. Staff met with N2N’s new co-director to orient her to key provisions of their contract and IURA procedures. N2N has identified two potential homes for rehab and will reach out to their roofing subcontractor, though it is unclear at this time whether they will be able to complete projects while the weather holds. Staff will reach out to the Advocacy Center now that the Committee has discussed and recommended use of IURA funds for the roofing portion of their rehab. B. Staff Report Mendizabal reviewed Action Items from previous meeting. VII. Motion to Adjourn Adjourned by consensus at 10:01 a.m.  New York State Anti-displacement Learning Network Request for Applications 2019 NEW YORK STATE ANTI-DISPLACEMENT LEARNING NETWORK  REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS (“RFA”) Pre-Application Conference: September 12, 2019 at 3:00 p.m. EST Submission Deadline for RFA: October 31, 2019 at 5:00 p.m. EST Expected Date for Notice of Program Participation: December, 2019 Grant Period of Performance: January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2021 How to Apply: Applicants must submit full proposals through SlideRoom, the online system being used for this funding opportunity. Applicant must print and fill out the matrix templates and upload it to SlideRoom as an attachment. To start your application, use https://bit.ly/2ZdZ5Tr IMPORTANT: SlideRoom automatically saves your work as you go. That means that even if you lose your internet connection or have computer problems, your work will be saved. You can log in and out as many times as you need to complete your proposal. However, once you submit your proposal you cannot go back to make any edits. Submission Deadline: 5:00 p.m. EST on October 31, 2019. Proposals received outside of SlideRoom or after the deadline will not be accepted. Pre-Application Conference: There will be one Pre-Application Conference meeting to address questions regarding this RFA on September 12 at 3:00 p.m. EST. The call-in number is: 1-866-469-3239, code 66184256. Register for the Pre-Application Conference by emailing jyang@enterprisecommunity.org. Written questions to be answered on this Pre-Application call may be submitted via email to jyang@enterprisecommunity.org at least two business days prior to the call. Questions: All interested applicants will be afforded the opportunity to e-mail questions regarding this RFA. Applicants must e-mail these questions to Jenny Yang at jyang@enterprisecommunity.org. Applicants may not contact anyone other than jyang@enterprisecommunity.org with questions about this RFA. APPLICATION GUIDELINES I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE Resident displacement is a significant contributor to destabilizing communities. Displacement occurs in both strong and weak housing markets and can be caused by a variety of triggers, ranging from gentrification to limited supply of quality rental housing to tax foreclosures, and can be exacerbated by local code enforcement and housing policies. Displacement disproportionately harms low-income communities, under-resourced, marginalized, and communities of color, but its impacts reverberate across communities, causing lasting impacts on poverty and economic mobility and overall community well-being. Additionally, when low-income people of color are displaced from communities, research indicate that patterns of re-segregation emerge, perpetuating racial and economic inequity. Through this Request for Applications (RFA), Enterprise Community Partners, Inc. (Enterprise), in partnership with the New York State Attorney General, is seeking to support efforts of local municipalities and counties (Applicants) in New York State that wish to reduce or prevent the displacement of low- 2 income communities through peer learning and funding of targeted strategies. For the purpose of this RFA, Enterprise welcomes applications from municipalities that have identified displacement triggers that push low income people, people of color, and other vulnerable populations out of their homes or neighborhoods. Examples of displacement triggers include but are not limited to: evictions, gentrification, rezoning, increasing housing prices, tenant harassment, concentration of vacant or abandoned properties, inequitable code enforcement, home health hazards, poor housing quality, climate/natural disaster issues, large-scale new construction or redevelopment of low-income neighborhoods, etc. Enterprise will provide technical assistance and peer-to-peer learning on anti-displacement strategies for up to ten (10) Applicants. Each participant will join a peer learning exchange by phone or in person on a bi-weekly basis for a period of three months. Each participant will receive one-on-one technical support, and participate in additional peer learning if appropriate, to apply for grant funding of up to $1 million to implement a strategy that will have significant positive impact. Successful applications will demonstrate an understanding of local causes or actions that push residents out of their homes or neighborhoods, a willingness to learn about and share potential anti- displacement strategies, and a history of collaborating with local organizations and residents directly impacted by displacement, particularly in low-income communities, communities of color, and renters. Applications should demonstrate a commitment to preserving and stabilizing communities that face high rates of evictions, property abandonment, foreclosure or loss of existing affordable housing or community assets that push residents out of their home or neighborhood. This program will encourage Applicants to work collaboratively with local stakeholders in affected neighborhoods to identify and implement a high-impact anti-displacement strategy targeting the most vulnerable population(s)—particularly in low-income communities, communities of color, and renters— with the ultimate goal that successful outcomes will allow residents to remain in their home or neighborhood and foster community stabilization. The term of the program is expected to be January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2021. II. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION The program, up to 24 months is comprised of three phases: • Phase 1, Learning Exchange (three months): During this phase, Project Teams (comprised of local/elected officials and community partners directly impacted by displacement in targeted neighborhood(s)) will learn about various strategies to address displacement through webinars and/or peer-to-peer discussions. There are dozens of potential strategies to address displacement; the Learning Exchange phase will cover only a subset of strategies, which will likely include rent stabilization, tenant protection programs such as right to legal counsel and tenant and landlord education programs, funding and financing for repairs, foreclosure prevention and ensuring long-term affordability of the housing stock. The strategies covered in this phase will be determined based on input provided by the Project Teams in the applications (see below for application questions). Each Project Team member is expected to commit an average of up to five hours/month for engaging in the Learning Exchange, as well as attending a 1.5 day in-person convening during this period, date and location TBD. • Phase 2, Strategy Selection (three months) & Funding Request (two months): Project team will 3  identify one top strategy to implement. While many teams may decide to choose a strategy that was covered in detail during the Learning Exchange phase, teams are not restricted to that set of strategies. During this phase, invited Project Teams are eligible to request funding to implement their chosen strategy in targeted neighborhood(s). In order to be approved for a funding request, Project Teams must demonstrate understanding of local displacement challenges, identify one impactful and achievable strategy to implement in targeted neighborhood(s), demonstrate support for the chosen strategy from community partners from impacted communities, create a plan for engagement of impacted communities throughout the engagement process, and demonstrate commitment to meeting the milestones and deliverables to achieve desired outcome/impact. Project Teams may use the awarded funds directly for capital-based strategies or for programmatic strategies. • Phase 3, Implementation (16 months): During this phase, Project Teams that have been awarded implementation funding will implement their chosen strategy. Project Teams will track short- and long-term deliverables/success to achieving the desired outcome/impact. Resources Available for Phases 1 through 3: Phases 1 & 2: Support provided during phases 1-2 includes a stipend of up to $25,000 per Project Team to support community stakeholders’ time participating in this process. Additionally, each Project Team will receive up to 20 hours of one-on-one technical assistance from Enterprise’s designated consultant team to select a strategy that will have significant positive impact, develop a high-impact but achievable plan to implement chosen strategy, and craft their funding proposal. Phase 3: If Project Team’s application is selected for implementation funding, it will receive support to implement its chosen strategy. As part of the budget, Applicants are required to provide a detailed budget on the use of the grant, including resources for community partners directly impacted by displacement in targeted neighborhood(s) to participate in the implementation phase of the program. III. ELIGIBILITY AND STRATEGIC GOALS Project Teams must meet the following eligibility requirements: • Project Team: Meaningful collaboration between elected officials, local municipal or county staff, and stakeholders from communities most impacted by displacement is required. Applicant should demonstrate how the Project Team members were selected. Project Team should reflect the racial diversity of your community and consist of four to six members – half of the team members should consist of elected officials or local leadership and the other half should be made of local community partners. The community partners selected for the team should represent the communities that are most impacted by and vulnerable to displacement. Preference will be given to jurisdictions where at least one of the local representatives is an elected official or a direct report to the Mayor or County Executive. The Mayor or County Executive may be designated as an honorary team member and is not counted toward the four-to-six-member limit. Additionally, Project Team should have demonstrated capacity and expertise to carry out the objectives. At the time of the application, Applicant should have a general sense of target geographic area(s). Applicant should designate a day-to-day champion and project manager from the Project Team who will be responsible for coordinating with the rest of the team during the learning network. Applications that demonstrate political readiness to work with local community partners to take active measures to identify and implement one impactful 4  and achievable anti-displacement strategy will be prioritized. This can be demonstrated through local officials having made positive public statements; past, current, or pending anti- displacement initiatives; stated commitment to addressing displacement in existing municipal plans or documents; letters or other evidence of support from local leadership and the community, etc. • Target Populations: Target populations must be primarily under-resourced or marginalized communities (80% AMI or lower) or populations vulnerable to displacement pressures. This can be demonstrated through using a racial and economic equity lens to identify the most vulnerable population(s) or neighborhood(s) currently experiencing displacement or most at risk of displacement. Priority will be given to applications demonstrating a focus on preventing displacement of the most vulnerable populations in the community, particularly low-income households and/or people of color. Because most analysis indicates that renters bear the greatest displacement impact, we expect that a substantial proportion of program participants will focus on displacement related to renters; however, we also welcome compelling applications that effectively demonstrate a high degree of displacement vulnerability among certain homeowner populations. Applicants should demonstrate the ability to meet the following strategic goals: • Demonstrate local commitment for carrying out anti-displacement work, including meaningful local community engagement, and provide opportunities for local stakeholders to be engaged throughout all three phases of the program. • Impacted communities play an active role in developing and implementing anti-displacement strategies. • Address racial and economic inequities in the community, particularly communities of color and disinvested communities. IV. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Applicants should provide responses to the following questions online in SlideRoom. Applications must be submitted by the local municipality or county. 1. Applicant Information Name of City/County: Name of primary staff person: Title: City/County Department: Email: Phone Number: 2. Project Team Information Name, title, organization and contact of each Project Team member. 5  3. Displacement Triggers & Challenges (no more than 750 words) a) Describe local displacement triggers – what displacement challenges are you seeing? What populations and neighborhoods are most affected by displacement? What quantitative and qualitative evidence do you have that support those are the displacement challenges? What further analysis and research is needed to fully understand the scale of displacement challenges? Please see Appendix A for guidance on options for quantitative analysis. (no more than 500 words) b) In addition to your narrative response, please fill in the challenge matrix to illustrate local drivers of eviction in your community. Significant Moderate Small Not a Don’t Specific Displacement Challenge problem problem problem problem know Home in poor condition; code enforcement      condemns; tenant has to move out Home in poor condition; tenant speaks up;      landlord evicts tenant Home in poor condition; landlord needs to raise rents to fund repairs; tenant can't afford higher      rents and moves Home in poor condition; tenants must temporarily vacate for repairs to be done;      tenants can afford rent afterwards but does not have the legal opportunity to move back in Tenant moves out; the only apartments they      can afford are in poor condition Tenant has life change (e.g. loses job) and can't      afford rent; either moves out or is evicted Landlord evicts tenant; raises rent      Landlord raises rent; tenant can't afford rent      and moves out Landlord evicts tenant; changes unit to short-      term rental Landlord sells property to new owner who      raises rents (possibly after evicting tenants) Tenant moves out; there are insufficient      apartments available at rents they can afford Property falls into disrepair; homeowner can't      afford to fix it, has to sell Homeowner has life change (e.g. loses job) and      can't afford mortgage and/or property taxes Property values rise; property taxes rise;      homeowner can't afford property taxes Homeowners, particularly elderly or otherwise      vulnerable, targeted for deed fraud 6 Property values rise, homeowners sell below      market to flippers Other:      4. Anti-displacement strategies (no more than 1,800 words) For reference in answering the below questions, please see the strategy matrix for sample proposed strategies to addressing specific displacement challenges. a) Which anti-displacement strategies has your municipality or county already enacted, if any? What efforts are currently underway? What new policies or programs are you considering pursuing? Do you consider any of those “low-hanging fruit?” Please check all that apply (matrix of tenant anti-displacement strategies with columns for already enacted, current under development, considering, want to learn more and not relevant/interested). Please describe any research or groundwork already accomplished towards the strategies you checked. If the jurisdiction has not put in place any anti-displacement initiatives or policies, please explain some of the reasons/challenges why this has not happened. (no more than 500 words) b) Please fill in the strategy matrix. Policies Under Considering/ Not Strategy already development want to learn relevant/ enacted more interested Rent stabilization     Just cause eviction protections     Right to legal counsel     Fair chance housing for people with     criminal records Tenant opportunity to purchase (TOPA)     Support for hoarders to prevent tenant     eviction Permanent affordable housing Programs and funding for repairs     Equitable code enforcement     Anti-displacement strategies in housing     and other related city plans Rent payment guarantees     Foreclosure prevention programs     Homeowner tax incentive programs     Other:     c) Has the city/municipality adopted a housing plan that includes anti-displacement strategies? Have any community groups or coalitions developed housing plans that include anti-displacement strategies? Please attach plans and briefly describe the anti-displacement strategies. (no more than 300 words) 7  d) Describe potential challenges (structural, political and/or financial) to undertake a community-informed anti-displacement strategy? (no more than 200 words) e) What are the short (1-2 years) - and long-term (3-5 years) goals and anticipated impact/outcomes (both qualitative and quantitative) you hope to achieve? What could success look like? How do these goals correspond to the affordable housing and community development needs and priorities of the local county or municipality? (no more than 300 words) f) What successful or innovative local policies would you like to share with your peers in other cities? (no more than 200 words) g) What policies and/or strategies would your team be most interested in learning about during phase 1? Strategies could include but not limited to: data analyses; addressing structural, political, and/or financial barriers; narrative or communications strategies; community education and outreach strategies; or other strategies. (no more than 300 words) Please provide at least three letters or support, including a letter from the mayor or resolution of support from the city council and letters from community organizations working in and with leadership from low- income communities of color in your city and in neighborhoods that are most at risk for displacement, including the community partner organizations in this application. Additionally, the Applicant is encouraged to provide links or attachments of current anti-displacement efforts that align or complement proposed activities. 5. Target Geography or Population (no more than 500 words) a) Describe the anticipated neighborhood(s) or community(ies) to focus on strategy development and explain why that geography or population was chosen, through a racial and economy equity lens. Describe the racial demographics and income range– what is the Applicant’s plan to ensure that their needs are reflective of the displacement strategy? (no more than 500 words) Applicant may attach maps/charts of target neighborhood(s) or community(ies) illustrating the above information. 6. Project Team & Qualifications (no more than 1,800 words, not including resumes) a) Describe the Project Team, elected and local officials (including local agencies and associated staff) and local stakeholders of targeted neighborhood(s) and their relevant experience to executing the proposed activities. (no more than 500 words) b) Describe each team member’s role and responsibility in achieving the desired outcomes, specifically, what expertise or influence does each team member have that they can utilize to achieve the desired outcomes? (no more than 500 words) c) The expectation during this program is that communities most directly impacted by displacement will play a lead role in determining displacement triggers/challenges, and in developing and implementing strategies to address displacement. How will decision-making processes be designed in order to center impacted communities? (no more than 300 words) 8  d) Briefly describe the broader landscape of housing and organizations that are engaged in anti-displacement work in your community. How will these groups engage with the proposed Project Team? Describe the existing relationships among the local government and community stakeholders and experience with past engagement and collaboration efforts (both successes and lessons learned). (no more than 500 words) Attach resumes and bios of each Project Team member. V. EVALUATION CRITERIA Enterprise will determine the number of Applicants selected to participate in the program, based upon the following evaluation criteria. Evaluation Criteria Eligible Points Outcomes/Impact – Applicant is able to articulate local displacement challenges 50 through quantitative and/or qualitative evidence. Applicant demonstrates understanding of anti-displacement strategies the local jurisdiction has already enacted, underway or consider pursuing. Applicant demonstrates understanding of the biggest barriers in advancing an anti-displacement strategy. Applicant demonstrates commitment to learning more about local displacement challenges. Applicant demonstrates short-and long-term goals and anticipated impact/outcomes Applicant hopes to achieve. Applicant demonstrates what success would look like. Project Team & Readiness to Act 30 Project Team – Applicant demonstrates collaboration between local/elected officials, local agencies and local stakeholders of targeted neighborhood(s). Project Team has the qualification and experience as well as deep representation to achieved desired outcomes/impact. Project Team demonstrate commitment to meeting short term goals that will result in long term impact. Readiness to act – Applicant demonstrates that they are ready to move forward on an inclusive anti-displacement agenda. Indicators of readiness include political and leadership support for participation, past success in community engagement efforts, staff capacity for planning and implementation, and the scope and strength of existing affordable housing infrastructure. Target Geography – Proposed activities presents significant impact to vulnerable and 20 low-income households (80% AMI or lower) and the geographic area served. Proposed activities are focused on communities and populations most in need, particularly communities of color and under resourced, marginalized communities. Maximum points 100 Enterprise may request additional information from Applicants with respect to their applications. Enterprise reserves the right to interview any Applicant and key management of the Applicant entity. 9  In addition to individual application criteria, Enterprise reserves the right to select applications based on overall cohort characteristics, which may include: geography; range of policies and strategies; market type; and possibly other characteristics to create a well-balanced and effective cohort. VI. TERMS OF THE GRANT If awarded funding, Applicants will be required to enter into a grant agreement with Enterprise governing the grant. If requested by the Applicant, Enterprise may enter into agreements with one of the Project Team members directly. The term of the engagement of all three phases of the program will be for a period of up to 24 months. Work is expected to begin January 1, 2020. On a case by case basis, Enterprise may consider modifying the start and completion timeline. Enterprise reserves the right to reject and/or modify any funding request made through Phase 2 of the process. If awarded funding through Phase 2, Applicants shall agree to comply with all Federal, State and Local laws, rules and regulations applicable to the grant. Enterprise reserves the right to award Applicants less than their full funding requests, during Phase 2. In the event that Enterprise chooses to award less than the amount that an Applicant originally requested, the Applicant will have the opportunity to revise the scope and budget of their application to appropriately reflect the actual funding allocation. If awarded funding, Grantees must assume full responsibility for execution and implementation of the grant for the duration of their agreement with Enterprise, including situations in which the grantee has partnered with another organization for a portion of the work described in the application. Representations, Warranties and Covenants Applicant currently possesses or will obtain all expertise and personnel necessary to undertake and execute the Scope of Work in the implementation phase in a manner that is satisfactory to Enterprise. VII. AWARDS, PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE The use of the funds will be monitored by Enterprise and its designees. All grantees will be required to document project expenditures using generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Grantees will submit progress reports relative to the provision of the grant on a quarterly basis to Enterprise or its designees and will comply with periodic programmatic and financial audits as requested by Enterprise or its designees. All grantees will also be required to document project results, participate in monthly check in calls with Enterprise, and cooperate with reasonable requests of Enterprise or its designees. Reporting policies and procedures will be set forth in the grant requirements, if awarded funding during Phase 2. All reporting of financial and project data will be submitted by the grantees to Enterprise or its designees. Should the grantee fail to comply substantially with the grant requirements, funding may be suspended or terminated, or the grantee may be subjected to other appropriate sanctions. VIII. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS Enterprise reserves the right to: • Reject any applications received that do not comply with the requirements outlined in this RFA; 10  • Communicate with an Applicant for the purpose of assuring a full understanding of responsiveness to the RFA solicitation; • Amend, modify or withdraw this RFA after notifying the Applicant; • Adjust or correct arithmetical errors in applications; • Utilize any and all ideas submitted in the application received unless such ideas are covered by legal copyright, patent, or property rights, and Enterprise is notified in the received submission; and • Adopt or utilize all or any part of an Applicant's application. APPENDIX A Options for quantitative analysis NOTE: Should you choose to conduct quantitative analysis, data should be disaggregated by race/ethnicity, unless these data are not available. Data point Source/process to measure Number of evictions City court records American Community Survey (Table Number of tenants who move per year B07001) American Community Survey (i.e. Table Speed of change in rents over time B25031) HUD CHAS data; National Equity Atlas Number/percent of tenants who are housing cost-burdened housing burden indicator HUD CHAS data (includes one/more of Housing quality/condition the housing issues) Number of housing units affordable at various % AMIs. HUD CHAS data County Clerk’s Office (historic data and # Mortgage foreclosure rates of lis pendens filed the last two years) Local foreclosing government unit (local Tax foreclosure rates or County) (historic data) Where homeless people are coming from HUD Point In Time Survey Other relevant data (e.g. potential residents impacted by a large-scale infrastructure project; number of children moving within a school district in a school year) 11  IURA Grants Summary July 2019 ON TOTAL # SCHEDULE HUD ENTITLEMENT ACTIVITIES SPONSOR BUDGET EXPENDED UNEXPENDED % SPENT 2016 CDBG Activities 1913 ok Unallocated 2016 CDBG 18, 20, 25 N/A 1,390.00 0.00 1,390.00 N/A Total 1,390.00 0.00 1,390.00 0% 2017 CDBG Activities 2561 complete 1.0 Chartwell House Tompkins Community Action 22,000.00 22,000.00 0.00 100% 2562 complete 2.0 2017 Homeowner Rehab INHS 75,000.00 75,000.00 0.00 100% 2563 complete 6.0 Mini Repair INHS 26,000.00 26,000.00 0.00 100% 2564 complete 7.0 Hospitality Employment Training Program GIAC 100,000.00 100,000.00 0.00 100% 2565 canceled 8.0 Ithaca ReUse Center Expansion Finger Lakes ReUse, Inc. 0.00 0.00 0.00 100% 2566 complete 10.0 Work Preserve Job Training: Job Placements Historic Ithaca 67,500.00 67,500.00 0.00 100% 2567 complete 11.0 Food Entrepreneurship CCE of Tompkins County 36,190.01 36,190.01 0.00 100% 2568 ok 12.0 Urban Bus Stop Signage & Amenities TCAT 25,000.00 20,823.24 4,176.76 83% 2569 complete 13.0 DICC Heating & Roofing Replacement6, 7, 19 DICC 49,000.00 49,000.00 0.00 100% 2570 complete 14.0 Immigrant Services Catholic Charities 30,000.00 30,000.00 0.00 100% 2571 complete 15.0 Work Preserve Job Readiness Historic Ithaca 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 100% 2572 complete 16.0 2-1-1 Info and Referral Human Services Coalition 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 100% 2573 complete 17.0 A Place To Stay: Supportive Services Catholic Charities 15,925.00 15,925.00 0.00 100% 2574 complete 18.0 Housing For School Success: Year #2 ICSD 13,280.00 13,280.00 0.00 100% 2575 complete 19.0 CDBG Admin IURA 128,882.00 128,882.00 0.00 100% ok 22.0 Economic Development Loan Fund IURA 56,886.24 0.00 56,886.24 0% complete 9.0 Harriet Gianellis Child Care Center Tompkins Community Action 84,200.00 84,200.00 0.00 100% ok Unallocated 2017 CDBG16, 19, 25 N/A 396.99 0.00 396.99 N/A Total 770,260.24 708,800.25 61,459.99 92% 2017 HOME Activities 2767 canceled 3.0 402 South Cayuga Street17 Habitat for Humanity 0.00 0.00 0.00 100% 2768 complete 4.0 Housing Scholarship Program11 The Learning Web 65,592.00 65,592.00 0.00 100% 2769 complete 5.0 Security Deposit Assistance Catholic Charities 62,700.70 62,700.70 0.00 100% 2770 complete 21.0 828 Hector Street (CHDO) 23 INHS 41,378.00 41,378.00 0.00 100% 2771 complete 20.0 HOME Admin IURA 27,565.10 27,565.10 0.00 100% 2807 ok Unallocated 2017 HOME12, 17, 23, 24 N/A 4,314.08 0.00 4,314.08 N/A complete Home Admin (PI)22 N/A 2,448.76 2,448.76 0.00 100% ok Recaptured Funds (HP)15 N/A 5,000.00 0.00 5,000.00 N/A ok Unanticipated Program Income (PI)8 N/A 21,545.00 0.00 21,545.00 N/A Total 230,543.64 199,684.56 30,859.08 87% 2018 CDBG Activities 6002 NO 1.0 Neighbor to Neighbor Home Rehab Love Knows No Bounds 40,000.00 0.00 40,000.00 0% 6003 complete 2.0 Chartwell House Tompkins Community Action 75,000.00 75,000.00 0.00 100% 6004 ok 8.0 Ramp Loan Program FLIC 25,000.00 19,270.44 5,729.56 77% 6005 ok 9.0 Mini Repair INHS 32,500.00 19,729.40 12,770.60 61% 6006 ok 11.0 Hospitality Employment Training Program GIAC 110,000.00 64,873.59 45,126.41 59% 6007 ok 13.0 Volunteer Worker & Job Skill Training Finger Lakes ReUse, Inc. 71,800.00 29,401.65 42,398.35 41% 6008 ok 14.0 Work Preserve Job Training Historic Ithaca 67,500.00 22,305.24 45,194.76 33% 6009 ok 16.0 Targeted Urban Bus Stop Upgrades TCAT 13,500.00 0.00 13,500.00 0% 6010 ok 19.0 Immigrant Services Catholic Charities 30,000.00 22,500.00 7,500.00 75% 6011 ok 20.0 Work Preserve Job Readiness Historic Ithaca 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00 0% 6012 complete 21.0 2-1-1 Info and Referral Human Services Coalition 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 100% 6013 ok 22.0 Housing For School Success Year #3 Ithaca City School District (ICSD) 27,005.00 0.00 27,005.00 0% 6014 ok 23.0 CDBG Admin IURA 137,214.00 85,453.16 51,760.84 62% 6015 ok 25.0 Economic Development Loan Fund IURA 151,052.00 0.00 151,052.00 0% 6016 complete 17.0 Final Phase: Heating & Roofing 25 DICC 29,300.00 29,300.00 0.00 100% 6017 NO 18.0 Domestic Violence Center Renovation 25 Advocacy Center 9,960.72 0.00 9,960.72 0% ok Unallocated 2018 CDBG N/A 25,000.00 0.00 25,000.00 N/A Total 884,831.72 387,833.48 496,998.24 44% 2018 HOME Activities 8002 ok 3.0 402 South Cayuga Street INHS 150,000.00 0.00 150,000.00 0% 8003 ok 4.0 Housing Scholarship Program2 The Learning Web 65,592.00 14,513.62 51,078.38 22% 8004 ok 5.0 Security Deposit Assistance 24,2 Catholic Charities 48,250.00 41,377.50 6,872.50 86% 8004a ok 6.0 Security Deposit Inspections 24 TCA 2,500.00 0.00 2,500.00 0% 8005 ok 7.0 INHS Scattered Site 2 (CHDO) 24 IURA 100,000.00 0.00 100,000.00 0% 8006 ok 10.0 Additional Reserve (CHDO) 24, 26 TBD 95,730.84 0.00 95,730.84 0% 8007 ok Home Admin IURA 36,880.30 27,250.65 9,629.65 74% ok 2018 HOME Unallocated2 N/A 12,729.74 0.00 12,729.74 N/A Total 511,682.88 83,141.77 428,541.11 16% CDBG Spend Down Ratio (must be less than 1.5 by June 1st of each year (60 days prior to program year): CDBG Spend Down Ratio = total unexpended CDBG funds/most recent annual CDBG Page 1 of 2  IURA Grants Summary July 2019 ON TOTAL # SCHEDULE HUD ENTITLEMENT ACTIVITIES SPONSOR BUDGET EXPENDED UNEXPENDED % SPENT YES Current Method: Total Unexpended CDBG funds: Line of Credit + CDBG Revolving Loan Fund: 0.946 Maximum Unexpended CDBG Funds to Satisfy 1.5 CDBG Spend Down Ratio 1,029,107 Amount Required to be Expended by 6/1 to Meet CDBG Spend Down Ratio of 1.5: -380,265 Total Unexpended HUD Entitlement Funds CDBG Activities 375,363.64 CDBG Program Income Activities 184,484.59 CDBG Revolving Loan Fund Balance 457,962.86 HOME Activities 459,400.19 HOME Program Income Activities 0.00 HOME Program Income Unassigned 0.00 Total Unexpended HUD Entitlement (Including PI) Funds 1,292,726.69 Page 2 of 2