Council Special Meeting

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING CITY OF MONTEREY Wednesday, February 28, 2024 4:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBER, 580 PACIFIC ST. MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Councilmembers Present: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson Absent: None City Staff City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Community Present: Development Director, City Clerk, Housing Manager, HCD Coordinator CALL TO ORDER Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. City Clerk Klein called the roll with the Council present as highlighted above. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember Smith led the Pledge. STUDY SESSION 1. Review Monterey Rental Assistance Program Guidelines (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Reviewed guidelines and provided input Housing Manager Wyatt gave the staff presentation outlining the results of the recent rental assistance survey and the draft program guidelines prepared by City staff. She answered Councilmembers' questions with additional input from Community Development Director Cole. Public comment was received from: Adam Pinterits, of Monterey County Association of Realtors, who spoke in favor of serving as many well-qualified people as possible with the program and asked that inspections be excluded; Kathryn Avila, who spoke in support of the program and particularly for providing legal and mediation services and housing deposit support and asked Council to consider expanding the salary range for participants; Kathy Anderson, who spoke against the program, stating that the allocated funds would be used up quickly and that other organizations help with rent; Karen O'Neal, who said that the program would need more funds and that inspections should be done by City staff; Esther Malkin, who asked for a clear definition of double-dipping and urged prioritizing families with children and seniors on a fixed income; Jean Rasch, who echoed the need to prioritize families with children and said the program could remain the most sustainable if it only covered temporary emergencies; and Lori Mazzuca, who said it might be difficult to figure out where the need was greatest. Concern was expressed by numerous commenters about the sustainability of providing ongoing assistance with rent increases. During public comment, Councilmember Smith left the Chamber from 5:10 to 5:11 p.m. On question from Council in response to public comments, Housing Manager Wyatt said that housing vouchers covered whole rent but not other living expenses; City Manager Uslar said City Council Minutes February 28, 2024 that the percentage of survey responses was 1-2% which he stated was not insignificant for a survey; and Housing Manager Wyatt said that Council could determine whether the guidelines would require relocation within the City or allow relocation to housing outside the City. The Council discussed the matter. Positive remarks were made about the proposed program presented by City staff. It was stated that moving forward with the program would be a step in the right direction. Regarding the proposed education and training, it was agreed that it would be invaluable to recipients. One stance taken was that receiving financial counseling should be a requirement for receiving assistance; in disagreement, it was stated that the need for counseling would depend on the applicant and should not be a requirement. Regarding prioritization of funds, it was discussed whether to create a standard or policy around how funds should be distributed. Support was expressed for prioritizing family units with children, victims of domestic violence, expecting mothers, people with disabilities or critical medical situations, and seniors on a fixed income. It was stated that having a clear policy around applicant prioritization would protect the City and assist the most needy. City Manager Uslar urged following staff's proposed first-come-first-served policy, stating that it provided a clear criteria that would serve applicants efficiently. Regarding funding allotments and methods, it was stated that utilities and health and safety issues should come first followed by rental assistance in urgent scenarios. It was suggested that any additional assistance funds should be allowed to cover utilities. One viewpoint was expressed that payments should be required to be made directly to the source (landlord or utility). Another viewpoint was countered that there was a concern about the potential of landlords having less interest in keeping tenants if they knew the tenants were in financial distress. Regarding covering rent increases with program funds, disapproval was expressed, citing a concern about potentially incentivizing landlords to raise rent, and the need to ensure sustainability of the program and its funds. On the other hand, it was stated that brief assistance with managing a rent increase might help an applicant if it gave them the time needed to come up with a financial plan. Regarding funding limits per applicant, proposals included: $3,000 per applicant (in order to reach more people with the program); $5,000 per applicant plus $3,000 for additional assistance; and an assistance timeframe of 3 months which could total $7,500 per applicant. Regarding including inspections in the program, comments were made disapproving of the concept, stating that there were other available mechanisms and resources. In disagreement with this perspective, it was stated that inspections by staff could be valuable in the instance that the inspection would resolve the circumstance causing an applicant to need assistance. Regarding income range, it was stated that the proposed income levels did not equal real world scenarios in many cases and that there should be flexibility with eligibility. It was proposed to move forward with the program and look again at appropriate income levels for year two. Regarding whether applicants should be required to stay within the City of Monterey, it was stated that relocation should be allowed anywhere in Monterey County, citing housing stability as the most important factor. 2 City Council Minutes February 28, 2024 Additional suggestions were made by the Council. It was proposed to include homeowners in the program, citing that the goal was to help people stay in their homes. It was posed that City staff could potentially take on the offering of legal services in-house. Discussion arose around the idea of increasing the City's contract with the Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity (ECHO) Housing counseling agency instead of adding additional staff. On question from Council, Housing Manager Wyatt said that ECHO Housing provided legal services and were responsive and helpful with housing challenges. It was stated that City staff should consider and accommodate literacy and education levels from the beginning of the application process, provide in-person support if needed, and consider how to work with people who don't use banks or have required documentation. It was stressed that it would be important to have structure and a well-defined process but that flexibility and case-by-case assessments would also be needed. City Manager Uslar summed up the Council's discussion, stating that it could be broken down into two categories: the proposed rental assistance program, which he said would be up and running shortly and would give the City experience and information that could be used and tweaked going forward; and additional social programming that he said went further than what staff had currently envisioned, which he said was valuable input and that such programming would require more research and discussion and likely more of a regional effort. ADJOURNMENT The Council adjourned at 5:55 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Clementine Bonner Klein Tyller Williamson City Clerk Mayor 3