►
From YouTube: Housing Opportunity Fund Meeting - 10/19/20
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Hi
good
afternoon,
everybody
welcome
to
a
special
housing
opportunity
fund
advisory
board
meeting
scheduled
for
monday
afternoon.
I
usually
don't
get
to
say
happy
afternoon,
usually
good
morning,
so
welcome
everybody.
Before
we
get
started,
I'm
gonna
pass
it
over
to
a
sign
language
interpreter
named
megan
who's
gonna
give
us
a
couple
of
general
instructions.
A
B
Hi,
yes,
my
name
is
megan.
I
just
want
to
explain
for
anyone
who
wants
to
make
sure
they
can
keep
seeing
me
as
I'm
interpreting
you
you're
gonna
want
to
click
on
your
square,
there's
the
three
dots,
you're,
gonna
click
and
then
it'll
pull
a
menu
down
and
then
you're
gonna
click
pin
p-I-n,
and
that
means
you'll
always
see
me.
It
doesn't
matter
if
they
share
their
screen
or
who's
talking.
You
can
always
see
me
so
just
click
p-I-n.
B
B
A
Okay,
thank
you
megan.
A
So
it's
customary
that
we
begin
each
meeting
with
public
comment.
We
had
three
registered
public
commenters
today,
so
when
I
call
you.
D
B
A
Okay,
if
not
we'll
get
started
with
public
comment,
we
have
three
public
commenters.
When
I
call
your
name,
you
have
three
minutes
to
give
public
comment.
Let's
start
with
christine.
A
E
Good
morning
or
good
afternoon,
I'm
used
to
morning
hof
meetings,
myself
hi.
My
name
is
christine
kirby,
I'm
the
director
of
development
and
advancement
at
neighborhood
legal
services.
First,
I
want
to
thank
the
hof
advisory
committee
for
the
opportunity
to
present
about
the
critical
need
of
legal
services
at
the
october
advisory
committee
meeting
held
earlier
this
month.
I
am
just
back
from
vacation.
I
am
working
on
getting
you
the
information
that
I
promised.
I
had
to
attend
a
a
covered
wedding
in
florida.
E
So,
basically,
just
to
recap,
the
mission
of
neighborhood
legal
services
is
to
meet
the
civil
legal
needs
of
the
poor
and
vulnerable
individuals
in
our
community
through
effective
legal
representation
and
education.
E
E
E
We
are
asking
the
hof
advisory
committee
to
do
a
set
aside
for
legal
services
in
your
allocation
plan
to
treat
that
as
a
grant
funded
program,
not
a
fee
for
service.
While
we
received
a
contract
with
the
ura,
we've
served
very
little
people
and
basically
that's
people
choosing
between
money
or
rental
assistance.
We
believe
rental
assistance
and
legal
assistance
goes
hand
in
hand,
especially
as
the
cdc
moratoriums
come
to
a
close
utility.
Shutoffs
moratoriums
have
closed,
so
we
will
be
seeing
more
people
in
this
coming
year
in
need
of
critical
legal
services.
E
Courts
are
asking
people
to
defend
the
moratorium,
they're
continuing
things
so
come
january.
We
are
going
to
have
a
deluge.
E
Typically,
an
attorney
can
handle
anywhere
from
125
to
150
eviction,
cases
on
average
and
the
cost
per
attorney
and
support
staff
is
about
100
to
125
000
per
person.
We
would
be
looking
to
serve
as
many
clients
as
we
can,
by
expanding
our
advocacy
staff
to
address
eviction
prevention.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
christine
next
is
swain
uber.
F
Hi
everyone,
my
name
is
twain
uber,
I'm
an
attorney
with
the
community
justice
project.
I
just
mostly
want
to
echo
what
christine
shared
we
know.
You
know.
We
know
that,
there's
an
eviction
crisis
happening
in
allegheny
county.
We
know
that
one
of
the
best
ways,
in
addition
to
rental
assistance,
direct
rental
assistance
to
the
tenants
one
of
the
best
ways
to
prevent
those
sort
of
evictions,
is
through
legal
representation.
F
You
know
this
is
something
that
you
know
was
written.
What
was
written
into
the
housing
opportunity,
funds,
legislation
and
the
policies?
This
was
an
original
idea
of
what
some
of
this
funding
could
be
used
for.
There
have
been
some
quirks
related
to
specific.
F
You
know
contracting
that
that
prevented
this
from
you
know
seeing
be
working
as
well
or
as
efficiently
as
as
we
had
hoped.
You
know,
as
christine
outlines,
there's
kind
of
two
changes
that
we'd
ask
for
the
board
to
make
one
would
be
kind
of
set
aside
a
specific
amount
in
a
grant-like
form
rather
than
a
fee-for-service
type
of
model,
which
you
know
we.
We
know
that
the
ura
is
used
to
dealing
in
that
sort
of
model,
but
this
this
sort
of
grant
allocation
would
make
more
sense.
F
So
then
they
would
be
able
to
hire
upfront
and
serve
as
many
people
as
they
can
with
a
specific
hire.
F
The
second
thing
would
be
to
not
kind
of
prevent
tenants
in
need
from
both
receiving
legal
assistance
and
receiving
rental
assistance,
because
we
know
that
oftentimes
you
need
both
to
be
able
to
stay
in
your
home
and
it
sets
people
up.
For
you
know
a
successful
and
stable
life
moving
forwards
being
able
to
kind
of
work
with
both
of
those
programs.
F
I
know
from
watching
the
last
housing
opportunity
fun
board,
meeting
advisory
board
meeting
based
on
the
you
know,
jessica
and
everyone
else's
projections.
F
I
think
there
would
be
of
the
you
know:
non-admin
9
million
allocation
based
on
their
projections
of
you
know,
supply
demand
what
they
expect
each
program
existing
program
to
to
the
need
for
next
year.
I
believe
there
should
be
you
know
some
some
funding
available
and
I
think
you
know
allocating
a
specific
number
around,
maybe
like
half
a
million
five
hundred
thousand
two
legal
services
to
continue
on
the
programs
that
they
have
been
able
to
implement
with
cares.
F
Funding
would
really
just
set
pittsburgh
up
to
avoid
the
massive
eviction
wave
that
we
know
is
going
to
be
coming
come
january.
So
I
really
do
think
like
now.
Is
the
time
to
put
money
into
this
again.
I
think
you
know
what
would
make
sense
would
be
having
a
separate
program.
You
know.
Maybe
it
makes
sense
to
have
it
in
the
demonstration
fund
for
this
year
a
pilot
program,
something
along
those
lines.
F
I
think
you
know
there's
different
ways
to
do
it,
but
I
really
do
think
like
with
with
that
sort
of
on
currently
unallocated
or
unaccounted
for
portion,
giving
a
significant
chunk
of
that
to
poor
legal
representation.
I
think
would
be
you
know,
money
well
spent.
We
know
that,
according
to
a
study
they
did
outside
of
in
in
philly,
I
think
it's
every
dollar
that
they
put
into
legal
defense
for
eviction
prevention.
F
The
you
know
the
greater
effects
were,
you
know
both
on
reducing
the
need
for
homeless,
nist
services
and
other
things
along
those
lines.
It
was
a
13
to
one
return
on
the
investment.
So
I
think
you
know
it's
a
pretty
significant.
F
You
know
way
to
deal
with
the
issue
up
front,
so
I
think
I'd
ask
for
you
all
to
consider
that
you
know
I'm
going
to
be
working
with
christine
to
make
sure
that
we
get
all
of
the
information
that
everyone
needs
and
answer
any
questions.
As
you
know,
we
move
forward
and
yeah.
I
thank
you
all
for
your
time.
A
Thank
you,
swain
and
our
last
speaker
is
megan.
Confer.
A
G
Hi
everybody,
my
name
is
megan
conference.
I
am
the
interim
executive
director
of
the
fair
housing
partnership
and
I
think
I
am
the
third
megan
on
this
call.
But
let
me
know
if
there's
more
as
we
seem
to
be
multiplying
my
comment
today
is
I
one?
I
eagerly
look
forward
to
see
the
proposed
2021
allocation
plan
and
I
have
three
main
points
of
feedback
for
consideration.
G
So
that
way,
when
we
sit
here
again
next
year,
we
have
data
driven
decision
making
for
the
2022
allocation
plan
regarding
program
output
and
program
output,
not
only
as
it
relates
to
low-income
housing,
but
as
it
relates
to
the
need
for
addressing
discriminatory
behaviors
in
the
housing
market
as
well.
Two
is
simply
to
support
christine
and
swain.
G
If
the
unit
became
unaffordable
due
to
pandemic
related
income
loss,
these
inflated
charges
are
even
worsened
by
landlords
who
are
refusing
to
accept
the
money
on
the
table
from
the
rent,
relief
programs
and
they're
gambling
on
collecting
hundreds
or
thousands
more
in
2021,
because
historically
in
pittsburgh,
tenants
are
unable
to
successfully
navigate
the
landlord-tenant
legal
system
and,
as
a
result,
tennis
are
at
risk
of
legally
owning.
Thousands
of
unsubstantiated
money
to
landlord
and
such
debt
has
the
power
to
destroy
lives
at
an
unprecedented
rate
and
from
a
fair
housing
lens.
G
The
lives
that
are
at
risk
or
the
tenant's
vulnerability
are
disproportionately
black
brown
single
mothers,
families
with
minor
age,
children
and
households
with
disabilities.
So
the
cares
act
created
a
functioning
pilot
program
for
landlord-tenant
legal
assistance,
and
it
requires
local
funds
to
continue.
G
G
I
J
A
C
C
K
A
Diamante
walker
here
adrian
wannahal,
here
kelly
where's
hebron,
here
megan
winters
here,
let
the
record
be
known
that
we
do
have
a
quorum.
Thank
you
next
review
and
accept
the
minutes
of
our
october
1st
meeting.
A
I'm
sorry,
I
the
minister
emailed
out
a
little
late.
I
emailed
him
out
yesterday.
Does
anybody
have
any
questions
or
concerns
about
the
minute.
C
Move
to
approve
the
meetings,
the
meeting
minutes-
this
is
mark
masterson.
L
A
A
Okay,
so
basically
it's
a
really
short
agenda
today.
The
purpose
of
this
special
meeting
held
on
a
monday
afternoon
is
to
talk
about
the
allocation
plan.
We
we
talked
about
it
last
month
at
the
public
october
first
meeting.
We
did
public
outreach
meetings
in
september.
There
was
a
survey
in
september
and
the
advisory
board,
of
course
got
together
this
week
and
looked
through
all
the
data
and
then
started
drafting
individual
plans
which
we
have
aggregated
together
and
we'll
discuss
today.
A
So
just
as
a
recap
for
the
general
public
watching
on
youtube
live,
how
can
the
10
million
be
used?
It
can
be
used
in
various
ways,
according
with
legislation
that
was
drafted
in
2018,
that
enabled
the
housing
opportunity
fund
and
the
the
prime,
the
prime
ways
that
can
be
used
are
helping
people
make
home
repairs.
A
There
is
a
program
currently
sourced
called
the
homeowner
assistance
program.
It
can
be
used
to
help
short-term
financial
help
for
renters.
You
heard
about
that
in
public
comment.
Already,
that's
the
housing
stabilization
program,
helping
people
buy
their
first
home
down
payment
program,
affordable
housing
for
rent
building,
more
affordable
housing
or
preserving
existing
affordable
housing,
but
both
of
those
being
development,
driven
programs-
and
we
have
we're
currently
sourcing
a
program
out
of
hlf
called
the
vernal
gap
program,
responding
to
large-scale
emergencies
or
potentially
any
other
pilot
types
of
programs
needed.
A
That's
called
demonstration
dollars
and
building
more
affordable
housing
for
sale.
Those
are
the
programs
that
we
have
been
operating
out
of
what
is
in
the
legislation.
The
legislation
does
go
into
some
things
and
more
specificity.
A
That
could
also
be
funded
out
of
the
program,
such
as
encouraging
accessibility
for
seniors
and
people
with
disabilities,
helping
with
social
services
legal
help.
You
heard
about
that
in
public
comment,
helping
renters
share
ownership
of
a
building
utility
bills
which
is
paid
for
as
part
of
our
health
stabilization
program,
avoiding
foreclosure,
homeownership
classes,
making
housing
permanent.
These
are
all
eligible
uses
according
to
the
legislation
next
slide.
A
So
just
as
a
quick
recap,
we
started
this
process.
In
september,
the
public
survey
was
opened
on
september
14th.
The
survey
just
as
a
refresher
asked
questions
about
what
people
saw
at
the
housing
needs
for
their
neighborhood
and
for
the
city
in
general.
A
That
survey
was
open
for
a
few
weeks.
Pittsburgh
united
and
the
hilltop
alliance
were
hired
with
hof
funding
to
to
do
over
the
phone
surveys
and
to
do
outreach
to
get
more
people
to
take
the
survey.
A
The
survey
officially
closed
on
october
5th
staff
then
took
the
survey
results
and
put
it
in
a
memo
which
is
circulated
to
the
advisory
board
and
the
advisory
board
had
an
internal
session
attended
by
about
60
or
70
percent
of
the
advisory
board
members
to
start
drafting
it.
That
was
on
october
13th.
A
We
gave
all
advisory
board
members,
including
the
ones
not
at
that
meeting
a
couple
of
days
to
ask
additional
questions
and
to
submit
their
the
way
they
would
break
up
the
10
million
dollars
and
then
what
we
did
was
on
friday.
The
staff
assembled
it
all
came
up
with
an
average
and
we're
going
to
discuss
that
average
and
some
other
recommendations
based
on
that,
and
that's
today,
we're
going
to
do
that
today,
october
19th
and
then
the
goal
is
to
to
end
the
hour
or
however
long.
A
This
meeting
is
today,
with
the
advisory
board
doing
a
preliminary
vote
on
a
plan
which
will
then
go
on
the
ura's
website
for
two
weeks,
with
the
final
vote
being
november
5th
at
the
advisory
board
and
the
following
week.
I
think
it's
november
12th
at
the
ura
board
of
directors
and
the
ura
board
of
directors
serves
as
the
governing
board
and
then
once
that
happens,
it
will
be
introduced
at
council.
So
we're
looking
at
a
final
council
vote
sometime
in
the
month
of
december
next
slide.
A
So
just
as
a
recap
of
the
outreach,
we
use
several
marketing
methods,
including
social
media,
email
distributions
online
commercials.
I
don't
know
how
maybe
starting
online
commercial
view
or
a
produce
that
the
city
ran
press
releases
and
virtual
community
presentations.
A
A
And
the
results,
so
we
got
over
500
552
survey
results
196
were
collected
over
the
phone
356
were
collected
online
out
of
the
total
responses,
however,
100
were
eliminated
due
to
the
responses
being
incomplete,
so
a
total
432
responses
were
used
for
this
report.
A
I
A
N
But
this
is
just
to
give
you
an
idea
of
who
responded
and
just
that
everyone
knows
we
weren't
aiming
for
a
goal,
400
responses
and
so
for
a
sample
size
appropriate
for
the
city
of
pittsburgh,
we're
aiming
for
400
and
we
reached
432,
which
is
great
and
of
course
we
were
we're,
aiming
for
more
it's
more
than
we've
received
in
the
past,
and
so
we
did
like
this
joint
outreach
method
of
partnering
with
community
organizations
to
get
the
word
out,
especially
due
to
covid.
N
We
were
limited
on
our
outreach
methods
and
we
wanted
to
make
sure
there
wasn't
a
technological
divide.
So
our
community
partners
really
focused
on
providing
survey
responses
over
the
phone
so
contacting
people
and
recording
their
responses.
N
So
there
were
different
methods
to
out
for
outreach
for
the
survey,
so
you'll
see
the
percentage
breakdowns
by
race,
income
and
neighborhood,
and
so
for
we
had
about
33
percent,
who
were
black
or
african
american
who
responded
to
the
survey
and
about
55
percent,
were
white
about
five
percent
were
latino
or
hispanic,
and
then
about
three
percent
were
asian,
and
then
we
also
had
an
option
for
other
or
two
or
more,
and
that
was
about
four
percent
as
well.
The
top
income
level
was
under
25
000.
N
The
second
top
income
level
was
between
fifty
thousand
and
seventy
five
thousand,
and
then
the
third
was
between
thirty
five
thousand
and
fifty
thousand
as
well.
We
had
we
had
pretty
great
representation
throughout
the
city.
I
think
we
hit
a
good
majority
of
the
neighborhoods,
but
the
top
neighborhoods,
where
our
respondents
came
from,
were
garfield
bloomfield,
the
hill
district
north
side
and
then
homewood.
N
We
had
slightly
more
renters
than
homeowners,
but
it
was
pretty
much
split.
50
50
in
terms
of
the
housing
needs
out
of
the
current
programs
that
we
currently
offer
rental
gap,
the
housing
stabilization
program
and
then
the
down
payment
and
closing
cost
assistance
program
or
the
program
that
helps
first-time
home
buyers,
purchase
a
home
in
the
city
were
the
most
popular
ones
and
then
out
of
the
possible
programs
that
hof
could
fund
making,
affordable
housing
permanent
was
the
most
popular
option
and
then
accessibility,
modifications
followed
by
foreclosure
prevention
as
well.
A
Well,
real,
quick
before
before
you
change
slides.
I
just
want
to
emphasize
something
that
tina
said
so
of
the
the
top
five
current
hof
programs.
Rental
gap
was
the
one
listed
as
number
one,
because
the
question
was
framed.
As
you
know,
what
what
is
the
sort
of
the
most
important
you
know?
Housing
goal
right
now
and
to
bring
on
more
additional
affordable
units
is
a
was,
was
what
was
hitting
number
one.
A
So
so
I
just
wanted
to
to
identify
that
that,
of
course,
happy
stabilization
program
also
came
in
number
two,
and
that
is
very
important
right
now,
but
but
that
people
were
you
know
stating
that
it's
not
just
needing
help
paying
rent,
but
it's
needing
help
really
finding
a
place
and
finding
an
available
unit.
N
Right
and
jamie
will
actually
provide
more
detail
on
that,
because
you'll
see
and
the
breakdown
across
different
different
groups
of
people
so
like
renters,
homeowners,
etc,
you'll
be
able
to
see
their
preference
as
well
and
the
slides
that
jamie
will
go
over.
N
So
we
will
go
into
that
as
well
and
then,
if
you
can
flip
to
the
next
slide,
so
this
is
just
the
representation
on
the
survey
as
well.
I
won't
go
through
this
because
we'll
go
through
it,
some
more
on
the
next
slides,
so
if
you
can
flip
to
the
next
slide,
so
this
is
a
representation
of
the
city
of
pittsburgh
versus
our
survey
responses.
So
the
blue
is
the
city
of
pittsburgh
and
then
the
yellow
is
comparing
it
to
our
survey
responses.
N
So
you'll
see
we
have
slightly
higher
than
average
renter
responses
for
our
survey
and
then
slightly
lower
representation
in
homeowners
compared
to
the
city
for
our
our
survey
as
well.
In
terms
of
the
age
demographics,
it
was
pretty
equal
for
those
between
in
the
30s
and
we
had
higher
than
average
representation
on
the
survey
for
those
between
35
and
55
percent
and
then
lower
than
average
representation,
55
and
older
and
the
next
slide.
N
So
we
had
a
slightly
lower
than
average
white
representation
for
this
survey,
but
then
a
slightly
higher
than
average
black
or
african
american
respondents
for
this
survey
as
well,
and
then
slightly
higher
for
latino
or
hispanics
and
then
below
average
for
asian
and
then
pretty
much
the
same
for
other
and
then
the
same
thing
for
income
demographics
as
well
so
you'll
see
we
had
slightly
lower
than
average
for
those
between
less
than,
I
think
that's
30
30
000.
N
We
did
have
higher
than
average
representation
for
the
pittsburgh
median
income.
So
you'll
see
we
had
about
18.24
percent,
who
identified
as
the
pittsburgh
median
income
who
took
the
survey,
which
is
great
and
then
just
varies
across
the
next
income
levels.
N
And
then,
if
you
can
flip
to
the
next
slide,
jamie
will
actually
be
explaining
this
one.
L
Hi
everyone
so
on
this
slide
on
the
next
slide,
we're
going
to
get
into
the
the
results
from
the
sort
of
like
meat
of
the
survey
which
had
to
do
with
ranking.
The
first
question
was
ranking
the
programs
that
already
exist.
The
second
section
was
about
ranking
other
eligible
uses
that
are
outlined
in
the
legislation.
L
So
what
you're
going
to
be
looking
at
is
a
darker
color
means,
and
the
number
one
means
the
top
ranking.
The
lighter
color
means,
which
is
goes
up
to
number
six
means
the
thing
that
they
ranked
the
lowest.
L
What
you'll
see
on
the
left
hand,
side
is
among
what
group
of
people
was
that
ranking
indicated
so
the
the
segments
that
we
get
asked
to
break
down
the
most
are
on
the
left
side
and
those
are
housing
tenure,
so,
whether
it's
a
homeowner
or
renter,
we
have
race
and
ethnicity
the
the
questions
that
we
get
asked
the
most
are
minority
identities
overall
and
then
more
specifically,
black
and
african
american
identities.
We
also
get
asked
sometimes
about
what
this
senior
population
is
thinking.
A.
L
Is
whether
the
respondent
is
actually
working
in
our
industry
and
then
the
last
one
is
whether
they
have
experienced
the
housing
crisis
and
we
define
that
in
a
couple
different
ways.
If
you
did
take
this
survey,
you
can
see
it
could
be
that
they've
had
eviction
or
foreclosure.
Maybe
they
have
fallen
behind
on
rent.
L
What
I
want
to
draw
your
attention
to
on
this
this
first
table
is
the
average
at
the
top
shows
the
ranking
that
bettina
had
just
gone
through
with
the
rental
development
being
the
highest
choice
and
actually
those
large-scale
emergencies
being
ranked
the
lowest
and
the.
But
the
the
other
interesting
thing
is
that
it's
sort
of
across
the
board
homeowners
were
the
only
ones
that
didn't
rank
the
rental
development.
L
That's
the
highest,
however,
second
and
third
place
are
interesting
when
you
look
at
which
populations
were
answering,
because
on
this,
for
the
second
rank
housing
stabilization
program,
it
was
renters
and
those
that
have
experienced
the
housing
crisis
ranked.
Second,
although
you
know
ranking
third
is
not
a
small
thing
and
then,
on
the
the
other
hand,
it
was
kind
of
I'm
sorry
on
down
payment
and
closing
costs.
We
see
homeowners
finding
that
interesting.
L
We
see
minority
black
and
african
american
identities
ranking
that
as
their
second
place,
and
then
we
see
seniors
and
people
who
have
experienced
the
housing
crisis
also
interested
in
home
ownership.
L
The
thing
that's
very
interesting
about
this
one
is
that
permanent
affordability
is
the
top
priority
among
all
of
those
segments.
And
what's
what
you
don't
see
here,
but
what's
in
the
data,
is
like
the
strength
of
that
preference,
the
prior
slide,
which
is
the
programs
that
already
exist
there.
L
There
wasn't
as
much
uniformity
as
there
is
on
this
slide,
the
the
housing
per
permanent
affordability
for
things
like
community
land,
trust
like
that
was
by
and
large,
the
highest
ranking,
for
you
know
some
of
the
enabled
uses
or
eligible
uses
and
then
that
second
accessibility,
modification
for
seniors
and
people
with
disabilities.
That
was
also
by
far
the
second
rank.
L
So
everything
else
was
more
in
the
middle
than
those
two
things
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide
all
right,
and
we
had
a
couple
of
places
to
have
some
open-ended
responses,
and
those
were
really
really
interesting.
They,
of
course,
they
kind
of
aligned
with
the
ranking.
In
terms
of
you
know
the
the
biggest
thing
that
we
hear
about
was
you
know
this
need
for
more
additional,
affordable
housing
units.
They
also
talked
about
legal
protections,
for
this
is
a
new
term
for
me.
L
So
I'm
sorry,
it
is
black
indigenous
people
of
color
and
minority
renters
from
landlords
that
either
are
neglectful
or
from
landlords
who
are
not
totally
aware
of
what
the
law
prescribes
for
them.
Displacement
from
gentrification
also
for
those
target
populations
covet
related
support
came
up.
Of
course.
We
asked
explicitly,
but
colgan
related
support
came
up
on
across
the
board
on
all
of
those
open-ended
responses.
L
A
Yes,
thanks
jamie
and
bettina,
yes,
so
so
that
same
data
that
we
just
showed
was
shown
to
the
advisory
board
members
last
week
in
our
working
group
session,
and
then
we
handed
advisory
board
members,
basically
a
excel
spreadsheet,
where
they
could
then
pencil
in
based
on
that
on
that
information
and
also
information
that
we
showed
at
october,
first
meeting
about
supply
and
demand
for
your
programs.
A
For
those
of
you
who
watched
the
october
first
advisory
board
meeting
the
staff,
the
ura
who
operate
the
programs,
we
showed
what
we
viewed
as
the
supply
that
we
currently
have
in
hand
of
funding
and
then
the
demand
based
on
the
development
and
and
also
the
waiting
list
we
have
for
our
programs.
A
So
we
talked
about
that
on
october
1st.
We
also
talked
about
it
in
the
working
group
meeting
last
week,
so
the
advisory
board.
They
they
heard
that
information.
They
saw
the
survey
data,
we
gave
them
an
excel
spreadsheet
and
they
completed
filling
it
out,
based
on
their
informed
decision
on
all
that
information
and
and
also
what
they
are
hearing
in
the
communities
that
they
live
in
and
basically
what
you
see
in
front
of
you
here
is
an
average.
We
have,
I
think,
72
percent
of
the
advisory
board
members.
A
I
think
it
was
12
or
13
responses
out
of
17,
so
we
averaged
those
together.
You
can
see
that
in
front
of
you
just
just
as
a
reminder.
This
is
a
little
bit
tricky
when
creating
the
plan,
because
we
have
to
have
fifty
percent
of
the
funds
allocated
at
thirty
percent
ami
twenty
five
percent
of
the
funds
allocated
fifty
percent
ami
twenty
five
percent
of
the
funds
allocated
eighty
percent
ami.
Additionally,
administration
is
a
million
dollars
for
the
ura
to
administer
these
programs.
O
A
Other
ratios
as
well
so
so
we
took
the
average
of
all
12
or
13
advisory
board
members
who
submitted
their
proposals.
You
can
see
the
average
there
in
blue
and
then
in
green.
We
basically
rounded
just
because
it's
so
much
easier
when
doing
audits
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
to
have
even
numbers.
A
So
we
we
rounded
to
roughly
the
closest
twenty
five
thousand
dollars,
either
up
or
down
to
come
up
with
a
staff
recommended
total,
with
a
couple
of
exceptions,
so
you'll
see
some
other
eligible
uses
there,
which
you
know
in
some
cases
only
one
or
two
people
filled
in
there.
There
was,
I
think,
a
steady
stream
of
folks
who
put
funding
into
the
legal
help
line
items,
but
the
other
ones.
A
You
see
there,
one
or
two
people
per
per
line
item
with
foreclosure
prevention,
housing
with
social
services
on
location
and
accessibility,
modifications,
the
staff
recommendation-
and
this
is
open
for
discussion
here
with
the
advisory
board.
The
staff
recommendation
would
be
not
to
create
separate
programs
for
those
three
line
items
in
part
because
it's
administratively
high
and
burdensome
to
do
that,
and
also
in
part,
because
those
activities
are
really
already
happening
under
either
some
of
these
programs
right
now
or
another
ura
program.
A
Accessibility
modifications
can
be
done
through
that
the
hap
program
on
the
spreadsheet
can
also
be
done
through
a
ura
another
program.
We
have
called
happy
foreclosure
prevention.
We
do
some
tangled
title
works,
who
have
already
and
helping
with
social
services
on
location.
We
do
have
preferences
for
social
services
in
our
rental
gap
program
already.
So,
for
those
reasons,
our
recommendation
would
be
to
not
to
not
have
those
in
the
line
items.
Additionally,
you
can
see
the
other
difference
here.
A
Is
we
round
it
up
a
little
bit
on
the
demonstration
dollars
and
down
on
legal
assistance?
Just
because
legal
help
is
a?
It
is
a
new
program.
It
is
a
demonstration
program
and
the
way
it's
being
you
know
I
think
described
or
proposed-
is
for
for
us
to
do
an
rfp
to
get
legal
firms
that
would
have
like
one
or
two
staff
people
for
one,
for
you
know
one
to
three
firms
and
that
we
feel
like
that.
A
Two
hundred
thousand
dollar
allocation
is
enough
to
do
that,
but
if
it
seems
like
the
program
is
growing
or
needs
more
help
due
to
the
eviction
moratorium,
that
we
would
have
the
demonstration
dollars.
But
if
it
seems
like
we
can't
expend
it
based
on
you
know
it
being
a
new
program
and
maybe
the
parameters
or
whatever.
Then
then
we're
not
at
risk
of
like
having
those
funds
sitting
there.
A
So
that
are
is
the
ura's
recommendations
in
front
of
you,
but
this
is
where
now
I
I
be
quiet
and
I
pass
it
over
to
the
advisory
board
to
discuss
what
your
thoughts
are
on
the
blue
column
and
the
green
column,
and
what
you
would
like
to
do
in
terms
of
recommending
a
plan.
A
P
This
is
kelly,
I'm
also
absorbing,
and
would
like
to
thank
you
for
matthing
for
us
ura
and
making
these
numbers.
You
know
not
end
in
81s,
and
things
like
that.
P
To
digest
my
only
question,
I
guess
in
terms
of
the
other
eligible
uses
that
fit
under
other
categories
is
the
foreclosure
prevention.
I
do
have
some
concern
about
whether
or
not
that
fits
neatly
under
the
other
categories.
I
know
we're
doing
some
foreclosure
prevention
with
our
covert
response
work
where,
if
you're
a
homeowner
you
can
qualify
for
that.
I
don't
know
if
that
number
moves
up
somewhere
or
if
there's
any
legal
services
related
to
foreclosure,
that's
other
than
tangled
title,
because
sometimes
they're
not
always
one
in
the
same.
A
Q
Yes,
so
with
a
little
bit
of
hlf
funds,
but
primarily
non-hof
funds,
we
expanded
hsp
in
april
to
also
do
mortgage
assistance
with
the
cares
funding
that
we
have.
We
have
extended
that
to
go
up
to
six
months
or
six
thousand
dollars,
which
is
twice
as
much
as
we
offer
with
our
rental
program.
Q
However,
since
april
we
have
received
very
very,
very,
very
few
referrals,
and
that
is
indicative
of
county-wide
and
statewide.
We,
we
are
just
not
seeing
lab
referrals
at
all.
We
have
about
a
million
dollars
for
mortgage
assistance,
but
the
referrals
that
we
are
getting
we're
able
to
assist
them
and
prevent
them
from
even
reaching
the
point
of
foreclosure.
Q
P
C
That
would
be
I'm
sorry,
I'm
sorry
just
to
to.
Is
there
a
reason
that
you,
that
is
it
because
the
courts
haven't
been
functioning
on
all
cylinders
if
somebody
were
to
have
to
go
through
foreclosure
they're,
just
not
getting
there
yet,
but
is
that
a
dam?
That's
about
to
break
that
we're
going
to
see
a
lot
of
folks
that
are
going
to
need?
This
help
is
yeah,
courts
are
back
and
functioning
and
people
are
going
to
get
kicked
out
of
their
houses.
Q
Yeah
so
so
it's
kind
of
a
longer
timeline
but
similar
to
what
we're
seeing
with
the
eviction
right.
So
the
cdc
moratorium
will
expire
at
the
end
of
this
year.
We
expect
to
surge
in
the
first
quarter.
We
are
still
seeing
a
lot
of
forbearances
running
into
the
first
quarter
of
2021,
so
many
many
many
people
have
been
able
to
work
out
forbearances
with
their
lenders
or
servicers,
and
so
that's
what
we're
hearing
a
lot
of
the
gses
have
followed
the
federal
agencies
in
terms
of
what
forbearances
they're
offering.
Q
So
that's
what
we're
hearing
but,
but
to
your
point
mark.
We
do
expect
that
to
end
when
the
forbearances
expire
in
the
first
quarter
and
expect
to
see
a
surge
of
mortgage
holders
requesting
assistance.
Q
We
have
a
deadline
to
try
to
expand
the
money
by
the
end
of
january
2021,
but
I
believe
we
are
able
to
ask
for
possibly
an
extension
for
that.
But
we
have
a
small
amount
from
the
demonstration
program
that
we
still
have
available
that
doesn't
expire.
P
Have
we
been
doing
any
marketing
around
the
mortgage
program?
I
know
I've
seen
it
as
part
of
our
covid.
Yes,
okay,
I'm
like
I
had
just
because
I
haven't
seen
it
doesn't
mean
it
doesn't
exist.
I
just.
P
Q
We
need
to
do
more
and
we
have
plans
in
place
in
november.
Our
team
is
working
on
a
series
of
events
that
we
will
hold
with
community
members,
as
well
as
our
lender
partners,
to
make
sure
that
they
are
aware
of
mortgage
assistance
and
how
to
connect
their
borrowers
to
our
service.
So
we're
continuing
to
work
on
that.
Q
I
A
Sure
I
mean
evan
has.
I
should
have
probably
said
that
evan
I'll,
let
you
describe
what
you
have,
but
he
has
a
series
of
spreadsheets
that
he
can
make
some
changes
too.
I.
I
Have
it
open
as
well
so
yeah?
What
are
people's
reactions
to
this?
Is
this
look
like
what
people
expected
to
see?
Is
there
any
glaring
differences
between
what
you
put
and.
O
My
question,
I
do
have
a
question
so
I
know
it
looks
like
the
staff
suggestions
are
rounded
up
a
lot.
There's
I'm
trying
to
understand
why
there's
so
much
unused
and
remaining
on
the
board
member
allocation
like.
O
Why
do
we
have
so
much
that,
like
I
know
when
I
filled
mines
out,
I
allocated
all
the
money,
but
I
just
went
back
to
the
forum
and
it
showed
that
it
didn't
allocate
all
the
money.
So
I
don't
know
if
something
happened,
did
someone
change
the
forms
or
was
there
a
glitch,
because
even
here
it
says
like,
for
example,
under
30
percent,
it
says
the
total
used
is
four
million
eight
hundred
and
seventy
nine
thousand
twenty
remaining
hundred
twenty
thousand
right.
N
So
yeah
there
were
some
last
minute
changes
to
the
form
over
the
weekend.
I
think
so
I
do
have
the
most
the
ones
from
friday
at
the
due
date
that
I
can
show
they're
very,
very
similar,
but
if
you
would
like
more
accurate
one
that
I
do,
that
does
have
your
full
allocation
on
it,
knowledge
and
everyone
else's.
I
can
share
my
screen
instead,
so
evan,
if
you
could
just
let
me
share
why.
L
Don't
I
explain
to
to
knowledge's
point
because
I
think
you're
going
to
have
the
same
issue
on
the
updated
version?
Knowledge
the
reason
that
you're,
seeing
under
one
of
the
income
levels
that
there's
still
money
left
it's
just
because
there's
an
average
of
all
of
the
advisory
board
members
in
that
average?
Didn't
oh
wait
once
you
average
them
all
together.
It
doesn't
always
add
up
to
what
you
know
the
individuals
were.
M
L
L
So
it's
not
gonna
be
rounds.
When
we
look
at
the
average
one
and
that's
one
of
the
reasons
why
you
can
adjust
it.
C
I
I
think
that
there's
a
fundamental
issue
that
this
is
not
accurate,
because
when
I'm
looking,
when
I
pull
up
my
tab,
I
can
tell
you
I
didn't
leave
any
money
left
over.
I
doubt
knowledge
did
so.
If
you
look
at
my
pull
my
tab
up,
if
you
want
to
share
it
and
there's
300,
you
know
there's
money
left
over,
I
had
it.
I
mean
I
understand
how
the
income
needs
to
break
and
I
had
it
there.
M
A
All
right
so
so
latina.
I
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
the
situation
so
so
we
can
describe
it
to
them.
So,
on
friday
it
looked
like
things
were
averaging
and
things
were
pretty
accurate
and
you
went
in
it
this
morning
and
it
looked
like
a
couple.
People
had
gone
in
to
change
their
allocations,
so
you
wanted
to
show
the
the
most
up-to-date
and
put
those
new
numbers
in,
and
this
is
where
it
happens.
So
it
seems
like.
A
Maybe
we
need
to
stick
with
friday's
numbers
because
whatever
happened
over
the
weekend,
if
somebody
maybe
accidentally
went
into
the
wrong
spreadsheets
or
something
like
that,
it
sounds
like
something
kind
of
strange
happened.
So
so
we
should
stick
with
friday's
numbers.
Is
there
any
way
we
can
move
like
bring
up.
N
F
N
So
this
was
the
the
figures
at
friday
at
4:
30
p.m
that
we
pulled.
We
did
try
to
update
it
before
this
meeting
because
we
did
notice
some
of
the
figures
changed
over
the
weekend,
but
it
looks
like
this
is
the
most
accurate.
The
most
accurate
figures.
A
Right
this
is
the
one
we
looked
at
on
friday,
because
the
other
thing
I
wanted
to
point
out
is
on
the
slide
that
tina
had
had
previously
shown.
If,
if
anyone
was
wondering,
the
fsdp
did
not
look
rounded
it
looked
off
by
about
150
000
and
I
think
that's
what
happened
with
using.
You
know
the
updated
numbers
today,
but
with
the
numbers
on
friday,
you
can
see
that
the
the
rounding
the
staff
did
was
within
25
000
for
all
the
line
items
yeah.
A
M
A
A
We
want
to
make
sure
we
can
extend
the
money
quickly
and
not
to
have
any
leftover
and
also
from
what
we
have
seen
is
what
what
people
are
asking
us
to
do
is
to
create
a
program
where
we
rfp
to
law
firms
who
respond
with
you
know
one
or
two
staff
people
per
one
or
two
firms,
and
we
believe
that
that
was
enough
funding
for
that
to
happen.
A
If
it
turns
out
that
more
is
needed,
we
also
have
demonstrations,
you
know-
or
we
could
just
do
one
demonstration
program
and
put
legal
help
in
that.
If
people
are
more
comfortable
with
that,
instead
of
identifying
money
we
just
didn't
want
to
like
overshoot.
If
we
undershoot,
we
can
take
it
from
demonstrations
that
that
was
the
logic
of
the
staff.
I
So
yeah,
it
seems
like
if
we're
going
to
make
the
program
work
better
and
be
more
flexible.
We
need
to
allocate
more
money
to
it,
but
if
we're
gonna
keep
it
like,
we
did
in
the
past,
we
won't,
you
know,
be
able
to
spend
that
much
money.
So
program
needs
to
change
regardless,
and
I
think
the
more
we
can
identify
that
priority
in
here,
the
better
so.
A
And,
and
also
I
should
know,
we
also
have
130
000
that
was
identified
for
legal,
that
is
under
contract
right
now.
That
has
not
been
spent.
So
so
we
have
sort
of
like
that
extra
funding
available
as
well.
I
A
Q
D
Jessica,
can
you
clarify
this
part,
so,
on
the
sorry,
I
don't
have
the
best
glasses
on
for
this
and
I'm
getting
old
the
existing
programs,
the
homeowner
repairs,
where
the
average
of
the
board
members
you
know
is
just
over
a
100
million
for
the
30
percent
and
560
000
for
the
50
percent
and
the
staff
suggestions
sort
of
switched
those.
What
what's
the
rationale
behind
that?
What
did
you
learn
or
why
do
you?
A
Yeah,
that's
a
good
question
if
any
of
the
staff
have
a
better
memory
of
this,
please
chime
in.
But
if
I
remember
correctly,
we
were
going
through
all
the
line
items
to
make
sure
you
know
that
the
breakouts
were
like
we
were
able
to
extend
them
for
those
programs
because,
like,
for
example,
down
payment,
closing
cost
assistance.
You
know
if
you
get
much
underneath
80
ami,
it's
really
hard
for
people
for
home
ownership.
A
A
D
A
We
did
it
for
all
the
other
line
items
jamil.
This
was
the
line
item
that
kind
of
fixed
it.
If,
if
you
understand
what
I
mean
so
so,
some
of
the
other
ones
are
very
prescriptive
like
that
that
it
only
works
levels
same
with
for
sale,
development,
hap
works
at
all
income
levels.
So
once
once
we
went
through
the
other
four
lines
in
order
to
get
it
to
work
out
to
50
25
and
25,
we
use
tap
as
the
modifying
version.
A
I
can
tell
you
that
hap
we
have
a
long
waiting
list
at
all
three
of
those
income
levels
and
jeremy.
I
don't
know
if
you
can
go
into
more
detail
about
our
waiting
list,
but
but
that
was
really
the
logic.
Does
that
make
sense?
Jamel.
R
Okay,
jamil,
I
think,
that's
a
great
observation
and
I
think
a
main
thing
that
we
should
talk
about
as
a
board,
because
it's
interesting
how
similar
our
totals
are
to
the
ura
staff
recommendations,
which
is
great
because
we're
all
on
the
same
page.
But
a
shift
is
the
30
percent
versus
50
percent
in
the
rental
gap.
B
R
A
half
so
we
want
to
shift
more
of
that
rental
funding
to
the
30
percent
households
and
shift
the
down
payment
closing
50,
or
do
we
want
to
kind
of
leave
it
more?
How
we
have
it
in
our
recommendation
that
to
me
looks
like
the
major
difference
between
what
we
came
up
with
what
the
staff
is
recommending
recommending.
So
I
don't
know
what
you
guys
think
I
would
be
curious
to
hear
from
the
ura
if
they
have
dem,
I
mean
having
three
million
out
of
the
four
million
just
for
30
of
ami
and
below.
R
Q
So
I
can
speak
for
the
homeowner
assistance
program
just
from
looking
at
our
list
of
about
280
people
about
100
of
those
are
on
a
wait
list
that
have
not
been
funded,
that
this
breakdown
pretty
much
mirrors
kind
of
what
we
need.
So
there
are
more
homeowners
in
the
50
ami
bracket
than
there
are
in
the
30,
and
so
this
just
comes
close
to
mirroring
what
the
demand
is
for
projects
that
are
unfunded.
At
this
point,.
N
And
just
a
reminder
as
well
for
new
advisory
board
members,
it
is
50
ami
or
below
so
that
could
still
assist
households
at
30
percent
ami
and
same
with
80
ami
or
below
funds
allocated
at
80
ami
could
go
to
assist
households
at
50
and
30
as
well.
A
Yeah,
so
so,
so
that's
a
good
question.
When
we
fund
long-term
housing
tax
credit
deals,
they
usually
have
a
certain
amount
of
30
units
because
it's
a
phfa
requirement
when
we're
funding
deals.
You
know
that
are
more
cvc
type
deals
or
deals
that
are
not
tax
credit
bills.
They
they
do
sometimes
have
trouble
hitting
that
30
ami.
So
so,
could
it
be
extended
primarily
on
tax
credit
deals?
Yes,
would
it
be
good
to
have
the
flexibility
for
deals
that
are
not
tax
credit?
A
Yes,
but
the
homeowner
program
is
sort
of
the
same
way.
What
I
I
think,
we're
kind
of
saying
is:
could
we
extend
them
on
more
30
day
in
my
household?
Probably
yes,
but
it's
nice
to
have
that
flexibility
in
case
we
have
people
in
our
pipeline
yeah.
So
I
I
think
it's
kind
of
we
need
to
find
that
medium
balance
between
the
two,
but
am
I
hearing
from
the
advisory
board
because
I,
I
think,
jamil.
D
Right
I
mean
I
I'm
I'm
advocating
for
that.
You
know,
but
with
the
idea
of
trying
to
understand
how
it
got
to
the
other
ways.
You
know
I'm
not
necessarily
saying
hey
switch
it
because
it's
different
than
what
we
said,
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
how
we
got
there,
but
you
know
the
I'm
just
thinking
about
the
hap
program
and
the
number
of
seniors
who
have
roofs
on
their
houses
now
and
making
sure
that
we
continue
to
fund
that.
I
Seems
like,
though,
instead
of
skewing
towards
renters
that
are
more
vulnerable,
but
to
balance
it
to
make
sure
we
cover
those
homeowners
and
sometimes
having
those
set
asides
helps
us
prioritize
those
homeowners
right
because
we
might
end
up
helping
the
50
percent,
because
that's
where
the
pot
of
money
is
so.
Yes,
there's
flexibility,
but
it's
nice
to
set
that
priority
out
front.
A
Q
I
mean
typically
yes,
with
the
current
funding.
We
have.
We
have
that
50
to
80
percent
set
aside
specifically
for
that
bracket,
but
if
we
had
some
of
that
money
not
tied
to
a
project,
we
technically
could
serve
someone
at
30
percent.
A
M
A
B
O
Let
me
ask
this
question:
I
know
jeremy,
you
spoke
about
the
fact
that
you
it
was
switched
around
to
reflect
the
waiting
list,
so
how
much
of
those
funds
is
not
is
outside
of
the
waiting
list?
So,
for
example,
when
just
to
answer
that
question,
you
said
typically,
you
have
a
set
aside
if
and
it's
for
projects.
So
if
there's,
if
it's
not
allocated
for
projects,
then
yes,
so
then
how
much
of
that
money
is
not
allocated
for
projects
that
could
theoretically
be
go
down
to
the
30
level?
If
there
was
a
need.
Q
Oh,
I
mean
at
this
point
nothing.
We
have
every
single
dollar
committed
and
tied
to
a
project,
and
then
we
have
about
70
to
80
people
who
are
on
the
waitlist
that
have
no
funding
a
tie.
Therefore
they
don't
have
no
pre-approval.
So
at
this
point
there
is
no
unallocated
funding
for
this
program.
Q
It's
between
30
and
50,
which
is
still
in
line
with.
So
if,
if
you
look
at
the
kind
of
ami
breakdown
chart
that
we
showed
at
the
october
1st
advisory
board
meeting,
we
showed
the
235
projects
that
we
have
in
the
program
and
the
the
funding
breakdown
associated
with
that.
So
I
just
looked
at
it
and
we
have
like
107
projects
in
this
50
ami
bracket
within
that
program,
which
is
about
45,
and
the
funding
on
the
staff
allocations
is
about
44
of
that
funding.
I
Q
R
I
just
worry:
it
doesn't
align
with
the
rental.
I
mean.
If
we
do
this,
that
three
million
dollars,
I
think,
will
be
going
to
fund
why
tech
prod
like
the
20
units
and
lie
tech
projects
and
maybe
sro
units,
but
all
these
creative
projects
that
are
sort
of
in
the
middle
we're
going
to
get
they
just
usually
don't
have
30
units
in
them.
So
I
don't
know.
P
But
isn't
a
lot
of
our
rgp
money
already
spoken
for
because
we
got
so
many
ly
tech
grants
this
year,
like
there
really
isn't.
I
mean
most
of
that
is
in
fact
spoken
for
with
those
li-tech
deals,
and
that's
not
I
mean
I
don't
want
to
say
it's
not
real
money,
but
it's
not
it's
not
real
money.
It's
not
really
there.
P
So
I
think
in
terms
of
what's
actually
still
able
to
be
used,
probably
closer
reflects
what
the
the
reality
that
you're
talking
about
that
most
other
people,
most
other
developers,
aren't
aren't
dealing
with
that
percentage.
Group.
A
Well,
actually,
the
the
live
tech
units
that
you
mentioned
kelly.
Actually
it's
the
2020
rgp
money
that
that
needs
to
go
to
fund
that
so
this
2021
money
I
mean
there'll,
be
another
year
worth
of
tax
credit
deals.
You
know
that
very
well
could
need
the
money,
but
but
there
might
be
other
projects
as
well.
P
S
About
it
in
the
context
when
we
think
about
the
most
vulnerable
population
so
for
on
the
rental
side,
it
seems
to
be
the
hardest
folks
to
house
are
to
30
and
below.
So
if,
if
we're
standing
in
line
with
the
need
in
in
the
marketplace,
then
our
priorities
should
stay
focused
on
the
lower
tier
for
the
rental.
Similarly,
on
the
home
ownership
side
a
lot
of
times
folks
at
50,
am
I
even
80,
don't
qualify
for
the
lower.
S
You
know
for
certain
programs,
because
you
have
to
be
at
that
tier,
so
it
seems
like
the
way
it
is
now
is
more
consistent
with
with
the
need
in
the
marketplace,
but
also
on
the
hap
program.
It
still
leaves
flexibility
to
be
able
to
serve.
You
know
those
under
that
income
level,
so
I
will
probably
advocate
more
to
keep
it
this
way,
as
opposed
to
making
that
you
know.
R
Where
do
we
put
the
most
restricted
funding,
and
maybe
it
does
make
sense
to
put
it
in
the
rental
in
the
rental
program?
It's
just
going
to
mean
that
we're
not
we're
not
going
to
be
funding,
we're
going
to
be
funding
many
li-tech
projects
and
then
housing
for
people
at
risk
of
homelessness,
which
is
needed.
Everything's
needed!
That's!
What's
so
hard
about
this.
We
have
too
much
demand
for
every
single
category.
L
I
think
that
this
is
again
sort
of
a
reflection
of
the
lack
of
planning
and
again
I
am
I'm
not
criticizing
anyone,
but
when
we
come
down
to
this
close
for
these
conversations
and
decisions,
it's
really
tough.
So
I'm
just
going
to
put
on
the
table
again.
Maybe
we
can
do
a
halfway
through
the
year.
Let's
take
a
look
at
not
only
the
programs,
but
any
data
that
we
can
gather
related
to
demand
because
we're
we're
all
in
that
position.
Everything
is
needed.
You
know
in
the
surveys.
L
Folks
are
responding,
that
these
are
programs
that
they
need
that
they
want.
This
isn't
an
endless
fund.
I
think
the
targeting
of
these
dollars
to
leverage
other
dollars
is
also
really
critical,
and
you
know
being
able
to
dialogue
a
little
bit
more
about
what
leverages.
What
and
what
other
funds
might
be
might
be
better
served
to
address.
Some
of
these
issues
in
a
more
robust
way
would
be
incredibly
helpful.
S
I
think
also
from
a
marketing
perspective.
I
know
I
haven't
seen
much
from
it,
but
there's
the
landlord
small
mitigation
fund
is
just
another
resource
to
help
with
some
of
those
creative
ways
to
you
know,
create
more
affordable
housing
and
preserve
more
affordable
housing.
So,
just
thinking
about
those
other
programs
that
do
exist
and
how
we
market
those
more,
you
know
to
the
public.
A
Yeah,
the
small
landlord
program
we
rolled
that
out
in
march
or
april
right
after
coven,
and
we
have
not
had
a
lot
of
demand
for
that
program.
But
but
we
are
open
to
you
know,
reworking
the
guidelines.
You
know
in
2021
to
help
address
the
needs,
but
but
to
your
point
derek
I
mean
we
do
have
that
funding
sitting
there.
A
It's
not
hof
funding,
but
it
is
funding
for
the
small
landlord
program
where,
where
landlords
cdcs
anybody
with
you
know,
smaller
number
of
rental
units
can
apply
for
a
low
interest.
Loan.
S
Well,
I
do
have
a
few
more
comments,
so
I
I
think
you
know
I
had
some
time
to
really
digest.
You
know
the
averages
staff
recommendations
even
looking
at
you
know
some
things
that
we
sent
over
on
friday
and
I
actually
think
these
levels
make
sense.
There
is
they're
pretty
consistent
with
our
averages,
except
the
one
that
jamil
kind
of
pointed
out,
and
I
think
we
just
talked
about
that,
but
a
few
other
things
that
the
public
raised
as
far
as
permanent
afford
affordability.
S
So
I
feel
we
can
incorporate
that
into
the
policy
language.
What
have
you
to
extend
the
affordable
affordability
periods,
maybe
to
something
like
35
years-
also
think
that
we
can.
We
can
and
should
incorporate
fair,
fair
housing
measures
into
all
funding
programs.
You
know
once
we
agree
on
allocation
to
ensure
that
this
practice
is
intentional,
focused
and
really
institutionalized,
and
then
the
legal
discussion
that
came
up.
I
think
this
level
makes
sense
one
kind
of
the
jessica's
point
being
the
you
know.
S
First
time
is
rolled
out,
but
we
also
still
have
130
000
from
previous
allocation
and
then
they're
still
the
dollars
from
demo
from
the
demonstration
dollars.
Should
they
be
necessary
so
yeah
just
kind
of
general
comments
that
that
I
think
we
can.
You
know
utilize
this
model,
but
still
speak
to
the
other
public
concerns
with
with
or
our
policy
for,
rfps,
etc.
A
I
99.
yeah
the
for
sale
is
the
one
with
the
99
year
requirement
correct
right
and
that's
been
underutilized.
So
that's
something
that
needs
to
be
increased
as
well.
Utilization.
M
I
I
Yeah
and
then
we'd
have
to
flip
move
the
same
number
into
the
home
repair
category
or
the
demonstration
category,
but
we
don't
want
to
lose
it
from
the
home
repair
section.
So.
I
Well,
even
if
I
I'm
just
trying
to
think
of
what
would
balance
it
out
more,
be
like.
S
S
P
I
would
say-
maybe
two-
I
don't
know,
I'm
a
little-
I'm
just
personally
a
little
worried
of
moving
too
much
out
of
our
homeowner
assistance
program,
because
I
do
really
think
that
a
lot
that
is,
you
know
if
you're
at
48
of
area,
median
income
and
you're
a
homeowner,
you
do
not
have
money
for
repairs.
So
this
is
I'm
a
little
bit
nervous
about
moving
any
substantive
number
of
funds
from
from
this
category.
Not
that
I
you
know
just
flagging
my
my
own
personal
concern
about
you
know
maybe
200,
but
I
would
be.
I
A
A
J
And,
though,
for
the
covet
money,
you
have
to
prove
a
covert
related
or
an
income
loss
that
was
correct,
created
by
or
at
least
around
the
same
time
as
a
covert
pandemic
kit.
Whereas
that's
not
a
requirement
for
these
funds,
so
they're
a
little
bit
more
flexible
from.
M
A
A
H
Yeah,
I
can
do
whatever
I'm
just
waiting,
I'm
if
that's
what
you
want
me
to
do
I'll.
Do
it
right
now,
but
wasn't
sure
if
there
was
a
good
consensus
so.
H
And
then
put
a
hundred
from
here
into
the
30
percent.
G
S
S
I'm
just
wondering:
should
we
be
shifting
a
little
bit
more
over
there
or
do
these
levels
kind
of
speak
to
the
the
need?
That's
in
that
marketplace.
Q
So
for
down
payment
assistance
is
picked
up
significantly
since
covid,
so
we
used
to
be
closing
eight
to
ten
loans
a
month
last
month
we
closed
17
and
we
are
on
track
to
keep
that
pace.
So
as
long
as
the
housing
market
is
a
strong
buyer's
market,
we
expect
that
to
continue
or
pick
up
even
a
little
bit
more.
I.
C
C
H
I
think
it's
kind
of
well
documented
from
charts
we've
seen
in
past
months
that
there
is
still
money
in
that
program
from
the
past
couple
of
allocations,
but
I
think
the
reason
it's
funded
at
this
level,
and
our
suggestion
is
that
you
know
it's
probably
a
matter
of
when
not
if
the
utilization
will
ramp
up
and
those
units
that
are
being
assisted
through
the
for
sale
development
program
are
likely
going
to
need
the
full
amount
available
per
unit,
which
is
right
now
set
at
70
000.
H
And
you
know
if
one
tactic
to
up
utilization
is
at
some
point
down
the
line
to
make
that
a
higher
amount
available
per
unit.
Then
we're
probably
gonna
start
to
see
this
money
go
away
pretty
quickly.
So
that's
why
we're
we
have
it
at
the
level
that
it
is
right
now.
C
That
program
guarantees
the
longest
affordability
period
because
we're
not
it.
I
guess
there
could
be
a
non-li-tech
deal
on
the
rental
side
that
would
have
similar
length
of
time
and
a
for
covenants
on
the
deed,
or
are
we
just
locking
it
in
on
the
rental
side?
I
I
just
don't
remember
we've
closed
a
couple
of
projects.
I
think.
H
Sale
development
program
is
99
years
if
it's
in
the
form
of
a
loan,
it's
only
10
years,
but
we've
only
seen
that
and
I
think
like
one
out
of
the
probably
like
15
or
so
projects
that
we've
had
through
for
sale,
development
and
then
for
rental.
It
is
now
a
minimum
of
40
years,
but
we
are
seeing
a
handful
of
deals.
H
At
least
I
think
we've
had
about
18
projects,
and
I
want
to
say
maybe
four
or
five
have
been
willing
to
do:
99
years
on
their
term
of
affordability,
but
it's
it's
kind
of
based
on
the
what
the
project's
able
to
do
and
kind
of
their
mission
and
also
if
it
helps
their
application
and
their
ability
to
convince
the
advisory
board
to
fund
the
project.
Then
I
think
they're
motivated
to
do
it
that
way.
H
Q
Mark
70
about
75
of
down
payment,
closing
costs,
loans
are
to
people
underneath.
Eighty
percent.
C
C
Okay,
I
guess
just
to
follow
up
on
that
real
quickly
for
folks
that
aren't
aware
or
might
be
newer
to
it.
That
is
the
one
program
area
that
income
limit
rises
above
80
percent.
That
was
that
was
an
amendment
at
city
council.
I
think
it
goes
up
to
125
percent
of
area
median
income
150.
So
what?
What
number
is
that
perfect
for
two-person
family
right
now?
What's
the
150
percent.
C
Okay,
so
you
know
again,
this
is
up
to
folks
and
to
decide
where
we
allocate
what
we
spend
on,
but
you
know
who
who
we,
who
do
we
try
to
help,
but
we
know
that
there's
demand
for
all
of
these
things.
It's
just
is,
as
the
resources
get
scarcer
or
more
utilized
like
what
are
we
doing
with
it
than
trying
to
target.
I
Good
question
good:
I
point
a
question
about
the
legal
help.
So
our
what
are
we
landing
on?
You
said
you
might
put
an
rfp
out
to
some
different
lawyers,
I'm
still
not
clear,
I'm
where
we're
landing
with
legal
help
or
if
we're
crafting
a
program
which
will
take
some
time
but
be
a
lot
more
flexible.
A
I
mean
the
the
ura.
We
tend
to
procure
everything,
so
you
know
we
have
an
application
for
the
rgp.
We
have
an
application
for
dp.
You
know
we're
going
to
have
to
do
an
application
for
law
firms
to
respond,
and
we
can
do
that
after
we
get
program
guidelines
crafted
so
so
that's
sort
of
our
plans
in
the
future.
But
you
know
it's
really
up
to
this
advisory
board
if
they
recommend
any
changes
to
that
recommended
amount.
A
You
know
once
again,
we'll
have
to
get
a
committee
in
place
to
re-look
at
this,
but
what
what
we're
hearing
is
that
the
program,
the
way
it
is
currently
is
not
at
least
for
the
the
one
firm
that
we
have
under
contract
is
not
functioning
the
way
they
would
like.
So
we
are
agreeing
to
explore.
A
S
With
this
legal
help,
is
it
intended
to
be
for
renters
and
homeowners,
or
is
it
mainly
like
eviction,
prevention.
A
S
I
raise
that
because
clearly,
renters
are
going
to
need
that
service,
but
there's
definitely
homeowners
that
that
need
it
as
well.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
they
don't
get
left
out.
Q
And
something
to
consider
derek
if
you
were
to
consider
including
homeowners
as
part
of
the
legal
assistance,
the
advisory
board
may
want
to
consider
moving
that
into
demonstration,
because
that
would
allow
them
to
serve
homeowners
in
between
that,
like
50
and
80
percent.
Whereas
the
current
allocation
would
be
limited
to
50.
S
Yeah
to
that
point
you
know
if
we
left
it
at
left
those
dollars
in
demonstration,
though,
we
have
that
flexibility
to
to
to
do
that
as
opposed
to
I
guess
it
could
go
either
way.
I
I
think
we
definitely
need
to
specify
help
for
your
homeowners
to
get
clean
titles,
because
that's
a
big
barrier
to
getting
the
home
repairs
and
that
needs
to
be
a
separate
program.
Slash
yeah,
separate
guideline
rfp
process.
Q
We
do
have
a
tangle
title
program
with
neighborhood
legal,
that's
funded
at
around
130
000
and
we
have
processed
a
few
referrals
through
that
program.
So
there's
still
a
little
bit
of
funding
for
specifically
tangle
title.
P
Title
is
very
specific
actually
in
terms
of
what
it
can
be
used
for,
it's
very
specific.
So
when
we
think
about
this
is
to
my
earlier
point,
I
guess
about
moving
money
from
foreclosure
prevention
and
to
where
it's
going.
Is
that
tangled
title
does
not?
It
is
it's.
P
It
sounded
a
lot
cooler
than
it
than
it
was
in
reality
like
as
after
going
through
like
the
continuing
legal
education
credits
where
they're
like-
and
this
is
a
really
great
thing
and
they're
like,
but
it's
also
like
you
just
carved
out
this
really
specific
thing.
You
know
from
from
from
a
legalistic
perspective
that
there's
definitely
need
for
other
things
for
low-income
homeowners
other
than
tangled
titles.
So
I
am
a
fan
of
of
flexible
demo
dollars.
P
I
mean,
if
you
put
it
in
the
80,
if
we
keep
it
in
80
category,
we
really
can
use
it
for,
for
we
really
can
use
it
for
anything
but
yeah.
I
think,
but
I
agree
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
have
some
homeowner
legal
protections
as
well.
P
I'm
not
always
clear.
Sometimes
I
pop
up
here
with
just
a
statement
here
and
a
statement
there
but
like
this
is
what
I
was
trying
to
trying
to
make.
This
connection
is
that
you
know
I
was
concerned
when
we
moved
the
foreclosure
prevention
that
it
gets.
You
know
where
it
needs
to
go.
L
I
Q
So
we
don't
turn
anyone
away
and
hack
because
of
tango
title.
We
put
them
on
the
list
and
wait
and
refer
them
to
tango
title
to
get
that
cleared,
and
then
we
can
work
with
them,
but
christine
kirby.
When
we
started
talking
about
this
about
a
year
ago,
she
had
shared
a
really
good
resource,
might
be
outdated.
By
now
that
I
think
pnc
was
involved
in
which
essentially
mapped
kind
of
high
risk
properties
in
the
county
that
would
be
targeted
for
tango,
title
outreach
and
things
like
that
christine.
L
To
it
just
seems
like
it
would
be
nice
when
we
start
to
have
these
conversations
if
we
had
a
density
or
impact
sense,
so
that
we
could
be
right
sizing.
I
love
the
idea
of
flexibility,
because
that
gives
us
more
options,
but
also
thinking
you
know
is
this
5
000
people
or
is
it
50
people,
because
our
strategy
and
approach
would
be
intensely
different
depending
on
what
we're
really
looking
at.
E
This
is
christine,
I'm
listening
in
and
we
did
have
a
map
and
it's
robust,
it
might
need
some
data
sets
updated,
but
it
took
all
in
in
allegheny
county
and
it
highlighted
the
city
of
pittsburgh.
E
Pnc
community
development
helped
what
helped
fund
it
and
we
used
the
the
data
center
oscar
at
pitt,
and
we
mapped
all
properties
in
the
in
in
the
in
the
region,
in
allegheny
county
that
hadn't
not
had
a
deed
transfer
in
40
years,
against
the
social
security
death
index
and
and
and
some
there's
another
layer
that
was,
they
were
delinquent
on
taxes
and
we
kind
of
identified
certain
areas.
E
You
know,
penn
hills
come
to
mind
the
hill,
which
is
outside
of
the
city,
but
the
hilltop
region
of
the
city
of
pittsburgh
comes
to
mind.
There
are
several
areas
that
comes
to
mind,
so
we've
targeted
our
outreach
tangle
title
is
a
is
a
process
and
it's
not
in
it.
It
takes
some
time
depending
on
the
number
of
errors
and
a
lot
of
things,
and
we
we
would
be
happy
to
kind
of
go
over
that
with
for
the
advisory
committee,
but
one
takeaway
is
when
we
applied
for
the
housing.
E
The
tangled
tangled
funding
under
the
hat
foreclosure
prevention
was
part
of
that
and
then,
when
the
contract
came
to
the
ura,
the
ura
had
decided
to
focus
singularly
on
tangled
title
and
not
include
the
foreclosure
prevention
either
for
mortgage
foreclosure
or
tax
sales.
I
understand
tax
sales
because
of
some
of
the
things
of
people
being
current
on
their
taxes,
but
we
were
prepared
going
in
to
provide
foreclosure
prevention,
legal
services
and
that
was
removed.
A
Yeah
historically,
phfa
has
a
hema
program,
which
you
know
most
folks
in
the
city
can
apply
to
for
for
foreclosure.
You
know
in
terms
of
if,
if
the
advisory
board,
you
know
allocate
the
plan
that
has
legal
help
in
it,
you
know,
once
again,
we
will
work
with
the
advisory
board
to
create
program
guidelines
that
the
advisory
board
believes
will
will
help
with
the
crisis
at
hand
that
the
ura
believes
is,
you
know,
will
be
will
be
able
to
administer,
and
we
will
move
forward
from
there.
I
Okay,
so
I
think,
as
long
as
those
demonstration
dollars
we
talk
about
that,
I
think
we
should
prioritize
legal
assistance
with
that,
once
we
adjust
the
program
to
be
more
effective,
that
makes
sense.
P
I
A
Yeah,
so
I
I
I
thought
about
that,
and
I
don't
know
if
that's
possible
or
not
reason
being
we
are
tied
to
allocation
plans
that
go
to
city
council
and
that
particular
contract
was
funded
out
of
hsp.
A
So
I
I
just
don't
know
the
answer
to
that,
except
to
say
we
would
have
to
really
look
into
that
and
and
and
kind
of
figure
that
out,
because
I
you
know,
we
don't.
Generally
speaking,
you
know
if
to
move
it
out
of
a
program
in
a
particular
year
that
would
take
council
reauthorization.
I
A
And
I
think
it
was
it
wasn't
it
wasn't
that
audit,
I'm
not
sure
about
the
annual
report,
but
I
can't
tell
you
because
we
just
did
an
administrative
billing.
We
are,
you
know,
definitely
on
track
to
expend
a
million
in
the
course
of
a
calendar
year
for
for
staff,
time
and
also
consultants
annual
report-
you
know,
audits,
so
on
and
so
forth.
C
A
A
Recent
yeah,
I
mean
we're
not
quite
on
calendar
clock,
but
we're
getting
caught
up
with
that
and
and
do
and
and
also
you
know,
please
remember
that.
The
first
year
we
had
the
the
upfront
costs
of
hra
advisors
setting
it
up.
So
I
can
give
you
a
more
specific
answer,
but
I'm
pretty
confident
to
say
that
a
million
dollars
is
needed
in
the
course
of
a
12-month
period
and
and
that
I
think
you
know,
because
of
those
upfront
costs
we
kind
of
got
that
caught
up.
But
we
can.
A
We
can
do
a
little
bit
more
of
a
report
out
in
a
future
month
on
that,
but
and-
and
also
please
look
at
the
the
annual
audit
as
well.
S
I'm
comfortable
with
the
with
the
levels
that
we're
right
now.
P
O
L
M
A
Don't
believe
that
required
your
abstention
from
the
vote
today,
unless,
if
someone
remembers
differently,
please
shout
out.
A
M
O
O
For
the
homeowner
assistance
program,
or
had
2
million
340
thousand
dollars
for
the
for
sale,
development
program,
700,
735
000
for
demonstration
dollars
we'll
do
for
400
000
and
for
legal
help.
We'll
do
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
and
that's
also
for
administration,
which
is
consistent.
A
million
dollars.
M
A
Okay
motion
carries
thank
you,
so
so
what
that
motion
was
with
the
preliminary
approval,
and
then
we
will
put
this
on
our
website
for
any
public
feedback
over
the
next
two
weeks,
and
then
we
will
bring
it
back
to
the
advisory
board.
The
first
thursday
of
november.
A
I
A
Yeah
yeah,
I
mean,
I
think,
that's
another
working
group,
so
you
know
part
of
the
hrna
contract
that
they're
doing
for
us
right
now,
which
is
creating
bylaws
helping
with
the
the
scope
for
the
chair
is
to
come
up
with
some
recommendations
for
committees
and-
and
I
think
you
know
if
the
committee
wants
to
relook
at
our
guidelines-
you
know
we
can.
We
can
do
that,
but
I
you
know
just
in
terms
of
realistic
with
timing
and
all
of
our
programs.
You
know
right
now.
A
A
Okay,
so
anything
else,
you
can
see
here
final
announcement,
the
next
advisory
board
is
november
5th,
and
I
think
the
next
slide
just
puts
a
reminder
that
for
folks
that
are
watching
this,
that
need
rental
assistance
or
mortgage
assistance
right
now,
due
to
the
covet
crisis
or
really
any
life
crisis
that
they're
experiencing
right
now,
please
call
the
united
way's
helpline
at
two
one
one.
C
Jessica
before
we
do
that,
I
have
two
requests.
One
you'd
said
at
one
of
the
previous
board
meetings
that
you'd
be
sending
out
the
terms
of
the
board
members
and
the
representation
for
the
legislation.
If
you
could
send
that
out
or
or
put
if
you
want
to
put
it
and
also
I'd,
suggest
getting
the
website
updated
with
that
info,
because
it's
kind
of
outdated,
I
I
think,
maybe
I
pulled
up
a
a
cash
page
and
then
the
second.
K
L
A
A
Okay,
all
right,
let
me
double
check,
but
there
are.
There
are
several
who
have
talked
to
them
at
this
point.
Is
that
correct?
Yes,
yes,
yeah
okay,
at
least
it
got
one.
Yes,
okay,
a
couple
yeses,
so
so
that
is
well
underway.
Let
me
double
check.
I'm
sorry
that
you
don't
have
it.
You
should
have
it
definitely
by
the
end
of
the
week.
I
would
think
anything
else.