►
From YouTube: Housing Opportunity Fund Meeting - 12/3/20
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
Good
morning,
everybody
welcome
to
the
december
meeting
at
a
housing
opportunity
fund
advisory
board.
We
will
get
started
today
in
our
traditional
fashion,
where
we
have
public
comment.
We
post
registration
for
public
comment
a
couple
of
days
prior
to
the
meeting
on
the
ura
website,
and
we
asked
the
public
commenters
keep
their
comments
to
three
minutes.
We
have
one
public
commenter
today,
megan
confer
hammond,
welcome,
megan.
B
Thank
you
jessica,
good
morning,
everybody,
and
so
let
me
just
get
right
into
it.
My
name
is
megan
conference.
I
am
the
interim
executive
director
at
the
fair
housing
partnership
and,
in
short,
you've
heard
me
speak
for
the
entirety
of
this
past
year,
and
so
this
morning
I
am
asking
for
the
action
for
2021
that
takes
us
into
the
beginning
of
equitable
change.
For
for
pittsburgh,
I
am
asking
that
the
hos
advisory
board
establishes
a
committee
to
quantify
and
timeline
a
fair
housing
lens
to
the
hos
funding
disbursements
over
the
2021
calendar
year.
B
Additionally,
given
that
the
pandemic
is
daily,
worsening,
pre-existing
inequities
throughout
the
city,
the
county
and
the
country
that,
if
needed,
that
an
existing
committee
can
take
on
the
task
to
begin
it
for
the
month
of
december
into
january,
until
such
an
equity
committee
is
able
to
be
established,
421
to
ensure
that
we're
simply
doing
the
work,
to
give
a
concrete
example,
just
to
return
back
to
the
concept
of
the
down
payment
and
closing
cost
assistance
program
to
be
concise.
B
If
we
understand
that
the
racial
homeownership
disparity
in
the
pittsburgh
msa
is
38,
and
then
we
look
at
the
hos
2019
annual
report
and
we
recognize
that
the
dpccap
served
32
black
households
and
31
white
households.
We
have
a
roughly
one-to-one
rate
now
it's
admirable,
and
I
appreciate
that
the
program
is
not
worsening
the
racial
homeownership
disparity,
but
we
do
have
to
identify
that
it
is
maintaining
it.
B
Therefore,
a
fair
housing
lens
based
on
this
program
based
on
race,
for
example,
has
a
goal
to
fill
to
address
the
racial
homeownership
gap
over
time,
so
that
the
dpccap
can
serve
black
households
with
a
goal
of
a
seven
to
five
ratio
of
black
to
white
applicants
and
what
the
ratio
does
is.
It
serves
forty
percent,
more
black
households
than
white
households
to
start
the
process
of
addressing
the
racial
inequity
gap
that
we
have
in
home.
Ownership.
Now
remember
that
this
goal
isn't
a
mandate.
B
It's
not
a
requirement,
we're
not
turning
down
white
applicants,
but
we're
taking
outreach,
which
has
become
deprioritized
to
a
sign-off
sheet
and
the
concept
of
affirmative
marketing
to
invite
those
of
us
who
have
been
marginalized
into
these
systems
of
housing
for
so
long
in
order
to
begin
to
address
it
with
intention
the
same
intention
that
created
the
racial
homeownership
gap
to
begin
with,
and
so
to
touch
on
to
understand
what
we
all
get
here
is
that
what
is
the
foremost
argument
used
against
such
diversity,
efforts
that
there
were
no
qualified
applicants,
no
qualified
applicants
who
were
black,
disabled
muslim,
female
or
so
on,
and
so
we
all,
I
know,
understand
here
that
when
a
marginalized
group
has
been
continually
oppressed
from
a
space
saying
that
the
door
is
open
is
not
enough,
and
so
affirmative
marketing
is
not
a
form.
B
It's
about
the
flesh
and
blood
of
the
pittsburgh
residents,
who
have
been
intergenerationally
disallowed
for
housing
and
outreach,
isn't
a
buzzword
but
a
crucial
tool
to
create
an
inclusive
society.
Today's
inequity
is
not
our
fault,
but
it
is
our
responsibility,
and
so
just
to
explain
just
for
a
quick.
Second,
is
that
pittsburgh
is
my
home,
but
it's
hostile
to
who
I
am
because
of
my
identity.
I've
nearly
gotten
into
physical
roles
at
bars
and
restaurants,
because
I've
had
the
audacity
to
ask
that
the
closed
captions
be
turned
on
on
the
televisions,
shows
and
concerts.
B
Don't
offer
sign
language
interpreters,
but
a
headset
that
I
fundamentally
can't
use
the
devices
at
the
movie
theaters
for
closed
captions
work,
maybe
one
out
of
three
times,
and
I
don't
want
another
free
movie
ticket
for
a
movie.
I
have
a
one
in
three
chance
of
enjoying
pittsburgh
is
my
home.
I
was
married
at
pnc
park.
I
have
the
pictures
to
prove
it,
but
pittsburgh
is
hostile
to
my
identity
because
of
our
lack
of
bi-diversity.
B
B
Yes,
judge
me
but
judge
me
because
I
root
for
washington's
football
team,
not
because
I
need
the
closed
captions
on
in
order
to
watch
the
football
game
and
there's
a
lot
to
judge
me
for
that
and
again,
fhp
is
ready
to
provide
every
assistance
possible
to
this
goal,
but
we
need
to
be
asked
in
order
to
develop
the
resources
to
do
it.
So
thank
you
very
much.
A
Thank
you,
megan
and,
and
I
do
apologize
for
not
having
interpretation
services
today,
we
are
working
on
getting
them
very
consistent
every
month
from
here
on
out,
okay,
so
moving
on
next,
if
we
can
do
row,
call.
C
D
C
E
E
A
Diamante
walker
here
adrian
wannahal,
here
kelly,
where
sebrun
here
megan
winters
here:
okay,
let
it
be
known
that
there
is
a
quorum
first,
the
review
and
acceptance
of
minutes
from
the
november
5th
meeting
the
minutes
were
distributed
earlier
this
week.
Does
anybody
have
any
questions
or
comments
on
the
minutes?
F
A
Okay,
derek
made
the
first
motion.
Knowledge
made,
the
second
let
it
be
known
for
attendance.
That
knowledge
is
here
now
as
well.
Is
there
jessica.
G
Yes,
there's:
actually
there
will
be
an
interpreter
joining
us
she's
just
hopping
on
shortly
so
city
staff,
please
let
in
maria
she
will
be
the
interpreter
for
today.
A
Okay,
first
homeowner
assistance
program.
So
I'm
going
to
be
passing
this
over
to
to
jeremy
to
discuss
the
recommendation
for
approval
of
a
contract
with
the
pittsburgh
project
for
up
to
250
000
for
to
serve
as
a
program
administrator
for
the
hap
program.
A
Jeremy,
okay,
I
don't
know
what
happened
to
jeremy,
but
I
can
go
ahead
and
talk
a
little
bit
about
this.
So
the
hap
program
is,
you
know
our
homeowner
assistance
program,
and
this
is
a
program
where
up
to
thirty
thousand
dollars
worth
of
repairs
done
to
to
homeowners
houses.
A
We
started
the
program
with
six
non-profit
program:
administrators
rebuilding
together,
pittsburgh,
habitat
for
humanity,
oakland
planning
and
development,
corporation
action,
housing,
nazareth,
housing,
service,
hilltop
alliance-
and
I
can't
remember,
if
I
just
said
five
or
six,
but
we
we
have
six,
and
then
we
brought
on
four
for-profit
contractors
as
well
to
be
able
to
help
with
the
huge
demand
that
we
have
at
this
time.
We
are
asking
approval
to
bring
on
one
more
non-profit
contractor
called
the
pittsburgh
project.
A
They
are
based
in
the
north
side
and
we
are
asking
that
that
they
they
start
to
work
with
the
homeowners,
especially
the
homeowners
that
have
already
applied
to
the
program
that
live
in
the
north
side.
And
so
the
action
today
is
to
enter
into
a
250
000
contract
with
them.
That
will
be
enough
to
do
around
nine
houses,
or
so
maybe
a
little
less
six
to
nine
houses
and
the
contract
length
would
be
12
months.
A
There
is
overhead
factored
in
at
20
percent
and
I
don't
know
if
anyone
is
here
from
the
pittsburgh
project.
Does
anyone
hear
from
the
pittsburgh
project
that
would
like
to
speak.
H
Jessica,
I
think
charles
chapman
is
on
the
phone.
Let
me
try
and
get
him
to
unmute.
H
I
I'm
actually
thinking
he
might
have
gotten
off
the
line.
Sorry
jessica,
I
don't
believe
he's
in
here.
I
was
mistaken.
A
That's
okay.
Does
anybody
have
any
questions
or
comments
regarding.
J
So
has
the
ura
done
work
with
the
pittsburgh
project
in
the
past.
A
For
for
years,
I
think
they
they
have
been
part
of
some
sort
of
larger
groups.
There
was
a
group
called
ship
for
a
while
that
had
several
of
the
homeowner
rehab
groups
together
and
the
ura
did
some
work
with
the
overall
group,
but
we
have
not
entered
into
any
contracts
with
the
pittsburgh
project
before.
D
So
jessica,
I
do
have
a
question:
did
you
say
that
this
money
would
go
towards
six
to
nine,
how
homes
is
that
what
you
said
or
did
I
misunderstand
that.
A
Yes,
yes,
so
each
each
house
is
approximately
thirty
thousand
dollars.
So
so
that's
where
that
number
comes
from.
A
E
A
If
we
need
them
to
work
in
a
certain
neighborhood
for
a
certain
reason
with
that
said,
though
we
do
try
to
if,
if
a
program
administrator
has
a
neighborhood,
they
concentrate
in,
like
the
hilltop
alliance
concentrates
in
the
hilltop,
and
you
know
so
far,
there's
there's
been
enough
homes
in
the
hilltop
to
keep
them
busy
in
the
hilltop.
So
the
same
sort
of
thing
here
the
pittsburgh
project
has
acts.
A
You
know
to
to
try
to
stay
in
the
north
side
to
this
impossible
and
as
long
as
we
have
enough
houses
in
the
north
side,
which
it
appears
like
you
know,
they'll
be
able
to
do
that.
E
Yeah
joanna
their
preference
will
be
district
one
and
we
have
about
30
households
on
the
waitlist
in
that
district
alone.
G
L
Yes,
I've
been
trying
to
get
them
to
apply
for
a
while
now
a
couple
years
and
they
have
new
leadership.
So
I'm
glad
to
see
that
they're
able
to
apply
now-
and
I
know-
we've
had
some
homeowners
that
we've
been
waiting
a
couple
years
to
have
the
repairs
done.
So
I'm
hoping
this
will
help
with
that.
I
I'll
make
a
motion
to
recommend
the
approval
of
a
contract
with
the
pittsburgh
project
for
up
to
250
000
for
administration
of
the
half
program.
A
L
Go
ahead,
what
have
you
asked
about
the
capacity?
What
yeah
who's
going
to
be
managing
this.
E
Yes,
the
pittsburgh
project
will
be
administering
it
and
they
have
brought
on
a
partner
contractor
to
do
the
work
because
they
do
not
have
any
construction
on
staff
anymore,
but
in
terms
of
capacity.
We're
gonna
just
start
with
one
or
two
at
a
time
and
see
how
that
goes
and
go
from
there.
A
Okay,
so
I
believe
we
had
a
motion
and
a
second
and
apps
and
two
people
abstaining
all
those
in
favor.
A
Okay,
next
on
the
agenda
is
a
discussion
regarding
bylaws
and
the
chair
position.
A
As
you
know,
the
ura,
when
we
started
administering
this
program
in
the
summer
of
2018,
we
hired
eight
rna
advisors
to
to
help
us
kind
of
get
the
the
program
started,
and
they
did.
Those
of
you
that
were
on
the
committee
at
the
time
know
that
they
did
a
wonderful
job
with
some
working
groups
and
really
helping
us
get
focused
and
helping
us
identify
the
first
five
programs
that
we
have
been
operating
now
for
some
time.
A
So
the
ura
for
the
request
of
the
advisory
board
a
few
months
ago,
the
advisory
board
started
talking
about
you
know
wanting
to
function.
You
know
more
as
an
advisory
board
that
that
wasn't
so
much
you
know
led
by
ura
staff,
but
but
led
by
each
other
on
the
advisory
board.
So
we
went
back
to
hrna
and
asked
them
to
help
us
draft
by
laws
and
also
think
through.
You
know
what
really
is
the
role
of
the
advisory
board
and
and
the
role
of
the
chair
position.
A
So
today
we
have
christiana
from
the
hra
associates
who
has
agreed
to
join
us
this
morning.
They
have
been
working
very
diligently
on
this,
and
just
this
week
you
know
produced
a
really
strong
working
memo
regarding
their
findings,
so
I
distributed
that
that
draft
memo
to
the
advisory
board
last
night.
A
I
don't
know
how
many
people
have
gotten
a
chance
to
look
at
it,
but
I
I
did
ask
for
cristiano
to
to
come
to
give
us
a
very
brief
overview
of
what
the
process
was
for
for
drafting
that
memo
and
then
to
hit
the
highlights.
The
memo
is,
is,
I
think,
structured
really
well
in
the
fact,
with
the
roman
numerals,
it
has
about
five
different
core
sections
to
it,
but
for
her
to
to
hit
the
highlights
and-
and
then
today,
basically
then
just
for
advisory
board
to
discuss
it.
A
You
know
to
find
out
if
this
is
what
what
you
were
hoping
for
and-
and
you
know
any
part
of
the
content
that
needs
discussed
today,
so
that
we
can
move
forward
getting
bylaws
in
place
early
next
year.
So
so
this
is
where
we're
at
today
christiana
I'd
like
to
pass.
It
over
to
you.
M
Hi
everyone
can
you
hear
me:
okay,
jessica,
yes,
great
well,
good
morning,
thanks
for
giving
me
the
chance
to
to
speak
to
you
all.
My
name
is
christiana,
I'm
a
senior
analyst
at
hrna
for
those
of
you
who
don't
know,
we
are
a
consulting
firm
that
specializes
in
sort
of
housing,
economic
development
and
real
estate,
and
we've
done
quite
a
bit
of
work
in
pittsburgh.
M
So
some
of
you
may
know
us-
and
I've
spoken
to
some
of
you
directly,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
give
you
a
brief
overview
of
how
we
approached
this.
You
know
sort
of
our
high-level
findings
and
maybe
maybe
give
you
a
chance
to
ask
me
any
questions.
If
you
have
any
about
our
process
or
what
we
found,
you
know,
as
jessica
said,
you
know
we.
We
helped
sort
of
research,
sort
of
policy
priorities
for
the
housing
opportunity
fund
a
couple
of
years
ago
and
sort
of
after
two
years
of
operations.
M
You
know
jessica,
let
us
know-
and
we
heard
this
in
conversations
with
you
all-
that
just
having
more
clear
structure
and
governing
bylaws
would
be
really
helpful
and
what
we
did
was
we
first
reviewed.
You
know
we
did
sort
of
a
scan
of
similar
housing,
trust
fund
or
housing
opportunity,
fund
advisory
boards
across
the
country
and
reviewed
their
bylaws
looking
for
best
practices,
then
we
spoke
with
about
five
past
and
current
board
members
one-on-one
to
understand
kind
of
first.
M
You
know
what
the
successes
of
the
board
have
been
and
what
has
been
going
well
and
what's
been
running
well
and
then
also
kind
of
what
the
challenges
had
been
and
any
sort
of
process
related
issues
that
have
kept
the
board
from
being
able
to
accomplish
what
they
want
to
accomplish
and
also
sort
of
function
smoothly
on
a
regular
basis.
M
That
kind
of
helped
us
to
understand
what
kind
of
questions
we
should
be
asking
in
a
survey
which
we
circulated
a
few
weeks
ago
a
couple
weeks
ago.
Maybe
to
all
of
you
to
get
your
feedback
on
what
what
the
biggest
issues
were
going
to
be
in
the
bylaws,
and
that
was
incredibly
helpful.
And
I
will
just
say
that
there
was.
M
There
was
a
fair
amount
of
consensus
on
a
lot
of
the
questions
in
the
survey
which,
which
was
really
helpful
for
us
and
and
said
to
us
that
there's,
you
know
pretty
clear
sense
amongst
the
board
about
sort
of
what
needs
to
happen
and
to
help
the
board
sort
of
function
more
smoothly
and
accomplish
what
it
is
that
you
want
to
accomplish.
M
We
got
eight
responses
on
the
survey
and
we
incorporated
those
into
our
draft
bylaws,
which
you
all
have
and
I'll
stop
there
quickly
to
take
any
questions
about
sort
of
our
process.
Before
I
move
on.
H
M
Great,
so
what
we
heard
in
general
is
that
you
know
the
board
is
only
about
two
years
old.
M
So
given
that
and
just
given
the
fact
that
the
enabling
legislation
did
not
provide
a
lot
of
structure,
clarification
about
how
the
how
the
board
should
operate,
given
that
that
things
have
been
going
well,
that
people
feel
like
they've
been
able
to
you
know,
be
impactful
in
their
work
and
that
in
general,
people
are
engaged
and
and
very
passionate
about
making
sure
that
you
know
the
the
allocation
plan
and
the
funding
is
distributed
in
a
way
that
meets.
You
know
the
public
interest.
M
What
we
heard
was
that
I
would
say
some
of
the
high-level
issues
that
we
heard
are
that
in
general
it's
really
been
difficult
to
get
through
everything
that
people
want
to
do
partially,
because
a
lot
goes
into
reviewing
loan
applications
and
and
it's
hard
to
be
fully
prepared
with
that
material
in
advance
and
be
able
to
get
through
that
quickly
and
that
there
hasn't
been
as
much
time
to
get
into
broader
sort
of
policy
priorities
and
issues
that
a
lot
of
board
members
would
like
to
be
thinking
about,
or
thinking
more
about,
the
impact
of
the
funding
allocation.
M
So
far,
and
so
there
were
a
couple.
We
set
this
up
the
draft
bylaws
into
five
sections
voting
and
participation,
broad
responsibilities
of
the
board,
and
I
will
just
say
that
that
is
the
one
area
that
actually
is
at
least
partially
covered
in
the
enabling
legislation.
So
we
just
added
to
that
public
engagement,
and
that
is
something
that
came
up
as
an
area
where
there
just
wasn't.
M
You
know
best
practice
for
these
types
of
boards
is
really
to
have
working
groups
and
committees
to
be
able
to
get
into
certain
topics
in
much
more
detail
that
whether
it
just
isn't
time
for
these
types
of
in-depth
discussions
during
regular
board
meetings-
and
there
was
a
lot
of
support
amongst
survey
respondents
and
also
in
our
interviews
for
creating
working
groups
and
then
finally,
sorry
there's
actually
two
more.
The
fifth
is
the
establishment
of
officer
positions
and
we
lay
out
what
the
roles
of
a
chair
and
vice
chair
should
be.
M
And
then
finally,
we
added
an
amendment
to
the
original
conflict
of
interest
policy
which
which
we
helped
write
two
years
ago,
which
you
know.
We've
heard
that
it's
been
a
challenge
that
you
know
many,
that
people
who
have
a
lot
of
experience
in
affordable
housing
financing
often
have
to
recuse
themselves
from
conversations
about
loan
applications.
And
so
we
amended
the
conflict
of
interest
policy
as
well.
M
I
would
say
to
touch
on
the
major
points
of
what
we
actually
recommend.
M
M
You
know
attendance
is
important,
having
the
materials
in
a
timely
way
and
clear,
clear
sort
of
elimination
of
responsibilities
of
the
chair,
the
ura
staff
and
the
chair
of
any
working
group,
so
that
people
can
be
well
prepared
for
meetings
and
the
participation
of
board
members
in
public
meetings
and
helping
to
you
know,
disseminate
the
survey
and
engage
with
the
public
so
that
the
board
can
have
meaningful
feedback
throughout
the
year.
M
We
also,
you
know,
provided
a
structure
for
working
groups
so
that
you
know
board
members
can
opt
in
to
work
in
groups
as
they
want
and
sort
of
establish
within
the
working
group,
their
own
structure
around
a
chair
and
whether
or
not
they
want
each
of
their
working
group
sessions
to
be
public.
M
I
would
say
just
I
will
touch
on
the
conflict
of
interest
policy
quickly.
The
amendment
that
we
made
is
that
you
know
board
members
who
have
a
clearly
stated.
Conflict
of
interest
should
be
able
to
participate
in
conversations
about
loan
application
reviews
up
to
the
point
when
the
vote
is
actually
held.
M
I'll
stop
there
jessica
is
there
any?
Are
there
any
other
major
points
that
you
think
we
should
bring
up
now.
A
No,
I
I
think
that
sounded
really
good.
I
mean,
I
guess
I
I
would
only
sort
of
want
to
emphasize
and
we
can
maybe
have
this
discussion
a
little
bit
later,
but
emphasize
the
part.
You
know
regarding
the
committee
structure,
because.
A
Has
came
up
a
couple
times
in
the
last
24
hours,
so
yeah.
If
you
can
maybe
go
into
that
a
little
bit,
christiana
wow,
you
know,
members,
you
know,
need
to
be
proactive
and
and
beta
wants
to
create
those
those
yeah.
M
Absolutely
so
the
working
groups,
so
they're
not
required,
but
they
are
a
helpful
tool
for
being
able
to
cover
some
topics
that
we've
heard
from
board
members
they've
not
been
able
to
go
into
in
the
type
of
detail
they
want.
So,
for
example,
a
working
group
could
be,
you
know
to
help
contribute
ideas
to
the
public
survey
or
the
working
group
could
be.
M
So
it
is
up
to
board
members
anyone
on
the
board
and
as
in
the
way
that
it's
drafted
now-
and
you
know
all
of
this,
of
course-
can
be
revised.
But
in
this
version
it's
up
for
the
board
up
to
the
board
members
to
suggest
a
working
group
and
the
board
could
vote.
You
know
take
a
majority
vote
to
establish
a
working
group.
They
would
also
need
to
vote
by
a
majority
to
have
a
chair
of
the
board
who's.
M
Really
responsible,
for
you
know,
setting
up
the
meetings
of
the
working
group
setting
the
agenda
for
the
working
group
and
it's
really
the
responsibility
of
the
working
group
to
report
back
to
the
board
during
these
regular
meetings
and
the
chair
would
be
responsible
for
that
uri
staff.
Can,
you
know,
attend
those
meetings
as
needed
and
help
when
they're
able
to,
but
it
wouldn't
be
the
expectation
that
they
would
be
running
those
meetings
they
could
assist
sort
of
as
needed.
M
It's
really
on
the
board
to
take
the
opportunity
to
to
you
know,
set
these
up
for
the
topics
that
they
really
care
about
and
run
them
in
a
way
that
lets
them
accomplish.
You
know,
sort
of
what
you
want
to
accomplish.
M
You
know
non-board
members,
so
outside
professionals
who
might
have
you
know
a
lot
of
experience-
and
you
know,
information
to
offer
to
the
to
a
working
group
can
join,
but
they
can
join
the
meetings.
They
can
actually
join
the
working
groups
formally,
but
they
could
be
present
at
meetings
to
sort
of
help.
Provide
information
on
this
specific
topic.
A
Yes,
thank
you
christiana
and
there's
one
other
thing.
I
I
wanted
to
point
out
quickly
before
we
open
it
up
for
discussion.
I
think
it's
in
sections
either
section
two
or
three
that
talks
about
in
addition
to
the
legis
section.
Two,
in
addition
to
the
legislative
responsibilities
you
know,
hrna
is
proposing
that
the
board
continue
to
review
the
loan
applications.
M
A
Yeah,
but
I
I
just
one
quick
clarification,
the
way
it
reads
now,
it
says
the
board
is
responsible
for
reviewing
and
approving
loan
applications
in
accordance
with
the
legislation.
The
ura
board
is
the
governing
board
for
final
approval,
so
so
we'll
just
have
to
add
for
reviewing
and
recommending
approval.
A
Yes,
okay,
so
at
this
point
I'll
open
it
up
for
for
comments
from
the
divisor,
but
I
I
guess
just
one
more
quick
comment
before
I
do.
That
is
so
so
this
is
the
draft
that
the
ura
has
you.
B
A
We
we
we
hired
hrna,
you
know
we're
paying
for
this
draft,
so
you
know
at
this
point
we
can
open
up
for
discussion
for
comments.
We
want
this
to
be
something
that
the
board
is
comfortable
with,
but
if
there
there
are
to
be
changes
to
this,
you
know
I
would
ask
you-
can
see
the
date
here
on
the
slide.
A
I
would
ask
that
any
proposed
amendments
to
this
be
sent
to
us
by
december
17th
and
we'll
go
over
them
as
amendments
at
the
january
meeting
and
people
can
kind
of
vote
for
those
changes
or
not,
because
this
is
our
starting
document
and
if
there
there
should
be.
If
there
needs
to
be
changes,
we
need
to
make
sure
that
the
advisory
board
by
majority
vote
is
comfortable
with
those
changes.
D
So
I
have
a
I
have
a
question
or
a
comment
after
reading
the
bylaws,
what
I
did
not
see
in
there
and-
and
I
don't
know
if
it's
that
important,
but
the
actual
makeup
of
the
board
and
kind
of
like
who
we
represent
so
those
various
areas
that
we
represent,
because
in
section
2
2,
it
talks
about
us
seeking
feedback
from
the
groups
that
we
represent
and
so
just
kind
of
putting
that
out
there
who
we
are
representing
on
the
board.
I
think
that
should
be
part
of
the
bylaws.
A
Yeah,
that's
that's
a
good
comment,
so
that
is
currently
in
the
enabling
legislation
for
for
the
fund.
All
17
seats-
and
you
know
who
they
represent
is
is
in
that
I
I
do
think
we
could
probably
include
that
portion
of
the
legislation
you
know
as
a
amendment.
You
know
just
as
an
attachment
or
an
exhibit
to
to
the
bylaw
document.
If
the
advisory
board,
you
know
feels
that
that
would
be
useful.
D
Yeah,
I
understood
that
they
were
in
that,
and
I
just
was
wondering
if,
if
it
should
be
in
our
bylaws
as
well,
so
that
people
want
to
know
that
they
don't
have
to
read
our
bylaws
and
then
go
back
to
legislation
to
find
out
who
we
might
represent.
So
I'm
just
kind
of
putting
it
in
there
for
for
that
purpose,.
M
Great,
that's
helpful
thanks
jim,
I
should
have
said
at
the
beginning
that
we,
we
didn't
add
sort
of
the
text
from
the
enabling
legislation
here,
except
to
clarify
what
the
responsibilities
are
in
the
enabling
legislation.
M
O
Jerome,
did
I
also
here
or
maybe
I'm
just
took
something
and
ran
with
it,
but
some
accountability
metrics.
It
sounded
like
you
were
also
perhaps
referencing
about
making
sure
that
we're
actually
representing
those
communities
as
well
or
speaking
to
our
community
they're,
not
just
saying
hey,
I'm
the
east
and
representative
and
do
whatever
you
want
without
any,
without
checking
becky.
O
No,
I
mean-
I,
I
think,
that's
a
great
idea-
I'm
not
sure
how
we
can
personalize
that
maybe
we
could
work
in
group
to
operationalize
how
to
do
that.
But
I
I
definitely
like
the
idea
of
not
having
self-appointed
or
or
mayoral
appointed
kings
that
do
whatever
without
checking
in
so
I'd,
be
interested
in
talking
to
you
how
to
maybe
get
that
in.
N
So
there
is
sonia,
I
have
a.
I
have
a
comment
and
a
question
thinking
on
megan's
the
public
comment
early.
I
wonder
if
we
should
include
in
here
perhaps
in
section
559,
a
verification
that
an
interpreter
has
been
secured
and
for
each
meeting
and
the
question
or
clarification
is
in
five.
Eight.
It
talks
about
the
officer
position
being
two
years.
M
N
Not
I
guess
I'm
asking
for
clarification
on
the
language
and
whether
the
term
has
to
be
two
years
so
we
at
most
we
well,
I
guess,
we're
the
worst,
the
beginning
board
each
time.
I
think
it's
three
years
and
so
do
you
then
have
to
be
elected
as
a
chair
of
vice
chair
in
in
to
start
in
year.
Two,
or
could
you
start
in
year
three
and
serve
one
year,
because
you
don't
necessarily
know
if
you
are
going
to
be
re-elected,
because
I
feel
like
the
way
it's
currently
stated.
I
I
would
suggest
that
that
just
be
one
year
for
that
very
reason
that
you
know
you've
got
new
folks
that
come
on
every
year,
they're
one-third
of
us-
or
you
know
I
can't
remember
three
or
four
year,
but
so
you've
got
potential
for
a
third
or
a
quarter
of
the
board
to
be
new
each
year.
Everybody
should
have
a
chance
to
vote
for
the
board
chair
on
the
board.
So
why
not
just
have
it
every
year?
It's
you
know
folks
get
reelected.
That's
what
that
time,
every
non-profit
that
I've
been
on.
I
That
has
staggered
terms
like
that
that,
where
there's
new
ones
each
year,
you
just
have
the
officers
voted
each
year,
and
you
know.
I
think
that
that
is
like
the
first
thing.
That
happens
each
you
know
january,
but
that
that
would
be
my
suggestion
to
keep
it
clean.
And
then
you
don't
have
that
where
hey
somebody
gets
elected,
they're
supposed
to
serve
two
years
and
their
term
expires
and
they're,
not
reappointed,
and
you
get
into
losing
track
of
what
you're
supposed
to
be
doing
and
when
you're
supposed
to
be
doing
it.
I
I
would
say
make
it
the
maximum
could
be
whatever
that
you
know.
The
term
is,
if
we're
three
year
terms,
make
that
the
max
that
somebody
could
run.
I
So
you
know
if
you're
elected
and
you,
sir
you
you
know
that
you
could
go
up
to
three
years
as
a
board
chair
or
vice
chair.
D
But
the
way
that
is
stated
in
the
in
the
current
document
is
that
you
have
to
be
on
the
board
for
at
least
a
year
before
you
can
run
for
a
position
which
then
means
that
you
know.
If
someone
has
been
on
the
board
a
year
and
then
is
elected
to
a
position.
They
only
have
one
year
left
and
so
to
make
it
a
three-year
term
that
that
person
may
not
be
back
on
on
the
board
again
or
even
a
two-year
term
in
in
that
case,.
J
That
would
be,
you
know,
a
chair
who
would
lead
a
subcommittee
that
outline
these
key
critical
issues
that
we
talk
about,
but
we
never
dive
deeply
into
and
I'm
seeing
megan
you
know
are
we
looking
to
you
know
really
in
this
language,
put
forward
that
whoever
is
taking
on
these
roles
is
really
making
the
commitment
to
ensure
that
affordable
housing
conversations
are
at
the
table.
Conversations
of
equity,
racial
disparity
across
the
community,
inclusive
housing
on
a
variety
of
levels,
because
I
think
when
we
talk
about
inclusive
housing,
we
can
talk
about
zoning.
J
I
think
that
the
structure
is
key,
but
sometimes
in
our
structural
conversations
we
miss
those
values
and
I'm
curious
as
to
you
know
whether
or
not
this
is
a
really
great
time
to
start
wrapping
that
language
that
intent.
That
structure
you
know
in
a
looser
term,
into
this
more
formalized
structure
that
we're
talking
about
for
the.
J
I
Guess
I'm
not
speechless,
I'm
just
I
don't
know
how
you
know.
What
are
you
suggesting
specifically?
I
mean
I
understand
the
point
that
we
don't
delve
very
deeply
in
it
because
we
doesn't
seem
like
we
have
a
chance
or
we're
not
structured
to
do
it
that
way.
But
what
are
you
specifically
proposing
to
change
to
this,
like
as
an
example.
J
O
O
Should
we
all
be
committing
to
that
to
what,
to
you
know
acting
with
fidelity
in
regards
to
those
areas?
Absolutely
okay,
I
mean
I
would
be
interested
in
seeing
that
perhaps
incorporated
as
part
of
our
bylaws.
F
It
seems
like
the
the
work
as
far
as
implementing
that
is
probably
connected
to
a
committee
kind
of
you
know
what
megan
talked
about
earlier
with
the
fair
housing
comments.
P
Yeah,
I
I
think
this
is
a
question
of
whether
or
not
the
board
should
the
the
chairman,
shortshare
woman,
chairperson,
should
shepherd
a
set
of
a
mission,
vision
and
values
for
the
hof
and
to
really
understand
why
this
advisory
board
exists
and
the
lens
through
which
we
evaluate
public
policy
when
it
comes
to.
P
You
know,
investing
public
dollars
in
advancing,
affordable
housing,
and
so
I
think
that
the
the
chair
has
a
responsibility
to
help
establish
those
values,
but
it
is
incumbent
upon
each
of
us
to
uphold
those
values
in
our
independent
capacity,
as
well
as
a
part
of
being
a
part
of
any
committee.
I
think
that
we
did
have
a
very
brief
discussion
around
fair
housing
and
what
that
means
to
this
committee.
P
I
think
that
is
the
point
of
our
work
and
we
do
not
see
it
strategically
sort
of
nested
in
a
lot
of
the
decisions
that
we
make
right
now,
so
I
think
going
into
2021.
Not
only
do
we
need
a
committee
around
that,
I
think
we
need
to
establish
it
as
a
value.
If
that
is
what
we
are,
all
you
know
saying
that
we,
you
know,
we
support
and
we
champion.
L
A
Is
there
somebody
that
would
like
to
volunteer
to
send
me
that
language,
because
I
mean
I
could
try,
but
I
prefer
it
come
from
from
a
member
of
the
board
to
craft
a
value
language,
and
then
we
can
add
it,
and
I
mean
I
think
one
go
one
potential
goal
and
it's
really
up
to
you.
I
mean
this
is
a
document
for
for
the
use
of
of
this
board.
A
But
if
you
would
like
to
get
this
approved
in
january,
you
know
we
need
a
votable
document
in
january,
so
I
don't
know
how
to
do
that.
We
could
either
take
this
document
as
it
currently
exists.
You
can
propose
proposed
amendments
in
january
or
if
you
want
to
send
me
your
red
lines
now
I
could
try
to
put
it
together.
Have
you
all
look
at
it
via
email?
A
A
A
J
P
A
Okay,
we'll
do
that
this
afternoon.
The
only
thing
is:
if
10
people
are
editing
it
I
mean
I
just
don't
you
know
not.
Everybody
agrees
with
everybody
said
it's
in
some
edits
might
be
contradictory,
so
so
we
can
try.
We
can.
We
can
see
what
we
get.
You
know
by
the
date
I
put
on
the
slide
and
I
can
send
it
out,
but
then,
if
people
have
concerns
with
the
you
know,
if
there's
like
double
comments
or
con,
contrary
comments,
we'll
have
to
get
those
addressed,
sounds
like
deliberative.
F
I
have
a
question
about
the
conflict
of
interest
amendment,
so
I'm
reading
it.
It's
saying
you
know.
If
you
have
a
conflict
of
interest,
you
may
participate
in
discussions
as
long
as
you
clearly
state
that
before
the
discussion
and
then
also
as
it
relates
to
the
vote,
I
think
6.2
is
this
saying
that
you
can
also
vote
as
long
as
you
don't
have
a
financial
interest
in
that
project.
Or
can
you
provide
some
clarity
around
that.
M
Yeah,
so
what
we
heard
from
the
survey
responses
is
that
people
with
conflicts
of
interest
in
general
should
be
able
to
vote
on
the
annual
annual
allocation.
They
should
just
not
be
able
to
vote
on
funding
that
they're
eligible
for
specifically,
so
that
would
be
those
would
be
the
only
votes
that
they
would
have
to
abstain.
I
And
what
what
happens
where
there's
conflicts
that
are,
you
know
it
might
not
be
a
project
that
you're
doing
but
you're
working
with
an
agency,
that's
selling
land
to
a
project
or
providing
financing,
or
maybe
you've
provided
financing
that
is
going
to
be
taken
out.
You
know,
you've
done
the
interim
financing
and
you're
going
to
be
taken
out
so
bank
or,
like
our
organization,
runs
into
that
quite
a
bit.
Is
that
a
I
I've
always
assumed
that
that's
a
conflict
because
we're
getting
a
loan
repaid,
that's
a
financial
benefit
to
us.
M
That's
a
good
point.
That's.
M
To
have
add
language
about
about
financing
as
well.
I
And
if
you've
got
administration
or
ura
officials,
where
they've
got
land
or
other
things
that
are
there
of
value
that'll
be
there,
you
know
is
that
a
conflict
even
though
it
might
not
be.
You
know
the
mayor's
department,
that's
selling
the
property.
Is
that
you
know
how
far
do
you
stretch
that
conflict
of
interest-
I
guess
is
you
know,
to
put
some
clarity
around
that
so.
I
I
A
Q
Yeah,
I
want
to
be
absolutely
clear:
I'm
not
an
attorney,
and
I
think
there
are
some
attorneys
on
this
advisory
board.
So
I
would
defer
to
them-
or
you
are
a
legal
counsel.
But
my
best
understanding
from
prior
conversations
with
attorneys
is
that
you
know
you
guys
are
an
advisory
board
and
not
subject
to
the
the
sunshine
law
or
open
records
act,
you're,
making
sort
of
recommendations
to
a
governing
board;
you're,
not
an
official
sort
of
arm
of
government.
Q
So
but
once
again,
not
an
attorney,
and
I
can't
make
that
clear
enough.
A
I
also
want
to
chime
in
and
say
that
that
christiana
agreed
to
do
this
at
the
very
last
minute
and
she
does
have
a
meeting
at
10
o'clock.
So
if
that
are
there
any
final
questions
specific
to
hrna.
L
Add
some
changes
I
can
put
them
on
the
google
doc,
but
just
I
think
there
should
be
a
written
report
from
the
working
group
provided
and
I
think,
there's
going
to
be
cases,
and
maybe
the
chair
of
the
working
group
can
ask
ura
staff.
I
just
think
that
that
piece
is
probably
gonna
be
critical,
because
the
working
group's
not
gonna
be
able
to
do
stuff.
They're
gonna
need
information.
L
I
guess
my
concern
is
that
they're
gonna
be
kind
of
left
out
there,
not
getting
support
or
not
really
making
the
impact,
because
the
ura
staff
have
kind
of
recused
themselves
of
any
obligation
to
the
working
group.
So
I
guess
a
little
concerned
about
that.
A
You
know
the
working
groups
really
need
to
be.
You
know
owned
by
you
guys,
as
you
are
the
advisory
board.
These
are
topics
you're
interested
into
as
staff.
We
will
get
information,
you
know
we
will
definitely
be
the
conduits
of
information
and
if
we
are
needed
at
meaning
to
provide
information,
you
know
we
can
do
that.
But
but
we
are
not.
You
know
we're
we're
operating
programs
we're
making
loans.
We
we
really,
you
know,
are
not
able
to
to
staff
working
groups.
You
know
from
that
standpoint.
L
L
F
I
also
noticed
that
the
there
was
a
recommendation
to
hire
new
staff,
the
ura,
to
help
you
know
the
officers
prepare
for
board
meetings,
so
maybe
that
new
staff
can
also
be
that
conduit
for
for
information,
etc.
A
If
we,
you
know,
can
do
that
administratively
or
not,
you
know
once
again,
this
is
a
document
for
you
guys
to
help.
You
figure
out
how
you
want
to
organize
yourself.
I
I
think
the
details
of
how
the
ura
fits
in
with
that
we
we
will
need
to
figure
those
out.
M
I
That
5.4.1
officers
should
not
represent
themselves
as
representatives
of
the
ura.
What
does
that
mean.
M
So
I
will
actually
let
the
ura
staff
speak
to
that
because,
because
they
they
had
asked
for
it.
It's
it's.
What
it's
meant
to
be
is
to
clarify
that
so,
for
example,
like
we're
suggesting
that
the
chair,
not
the
ura
staff,
and
it's
meant
to
provide
more
clarity
around
the
fact
that
the
board
is
independent
of
the
ura
staff
and
not
representing
themselves
as
part
of
the
ura.
M
But
if
the
staff
has
additional
comments
on
that,
I
would
would
absolutely
let
them
speak
to
it.
I
I
unfortunately
have
to
run
to
another
meeting,
but
I
will
look
at
all
of
your
comments
closely,
that
you
provide
in
the
google
doc
and
you
know,
feel
free
to
reach
out
and
and
provide
additional
comments,
and
you
know,
hopefully
we
can
get
this
finalized
into
something
that
everyone
is
excited
about.
So
thank
you.
A
Yeah,
I
I
did
ask
for
for
them
that
I
think
you
know
when
you're
looking
at
criteria-
and
you
know
metrics
and
things
like
that.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
it's
clear
folks.
This
is
advisory
board.
You
know
criterion
metrics
the
ura.
We
are
a
big.
We
are
a
lending
agency,
we're
a
government
entity.
J
A
We
may
have
our
own
and
we
also
may
have
you
know
we
have
our
own
approval
system.
So
there
is
a
bit
of
a
strange
overlap
here,
and
so
the
statement
was
really
just.
You
know.
These
are
the.
If
evaluation
criteria
comes
out,
it
needs
to
be
clear
that
it
is.
You
know
that
of
the
advisory
board
and
not
necessarily
that
of
the
ura.
C
Let
me
bounce
back
to
derek's
comment
about
the
staff.
I
don't
know
if
this
is
where
he
was
going,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
that
makes
so.
The
assumption
would
be
that,
with
this
new
structure,
some
of
those
things
that
you
spend
your
time
on
just
your
steps-
some
of
that
will
be
shifted
and
that
would
free
up
some
of
your
time,
but
any
new
staff
that
the
ura
hires
it
still
has
to
come
out
of
that
million
dollars
that
the
ura
you
know
gets
from
this
budget.
C
A
Anything
else
I
mean
we
will
put
it
on
one
drive
this
afternoon,
get
everybody
to
onedrive
link.
We
need
to
have
comments
by
two
weeks
from
today.
That
date
was
on
the
slide
with
two
weeks
from
today.
A
A
Okay,
all
right!
Well,
there's
no
further!
I
saw
a
couple
thumbs
up.
So
if
there's
no
further
comments
on
this
we'll
move
on
in
the
agenda
fatina,
if
you
can
put
the
slideshow
back
up.
L
I
guess
I
did
have
another
comment
about
two
things:
one
is
fund.
Applicants
will
not
be
required
to
present
at
the
board
meeting
or
the
board
during
public
meetings,
and
I
it
has
been
nice
to
have
people.
So
I'm
wondering
if
that,
if
that's
changing
that
changed,
how
we
do
things,
I'm
assuming
maybe
this
saved
time
and
I'll
start
with
that.
A
Yeah
I
wish
cristiano
was
still
here
was
still
here.
I'm
pretty
sure
she
told
us
that
that
came
out
of
the
the
survey
results
and
possibly
the
interviews
that
I
think
people
were
concerned
about
time
and
sort
of
thought.
You
know
that
to
save
time
they
they
did
not
need
that
component
of
it.
I
think
that's
where
it
came
from,
but
I
I
otherwise
I
I
don't
know
I
could.
I
could
ask
her
and
make
sure.
L
And
then
the
second
thing,
the
board
is
not
responsible
for
reviewing
or
proving
funding
allocations
from
any
other
source
of
public
funds.
Understanding
that
you
know
we
are
set
up
to
advise
on
the
hof
funds.
It
is
a
little
difficult
to
make
those
decisions
in
a
vacuum,
especially
like
when
we're
helping
you
know
we,
some
of
our
ideas,
have
turned
into
other
sources
of
funds.
L
You
know
there's
funding
for
the
programs
that
we
oversee
that
comes
from
other
places,
so
I
understand
like
the
desire
for
that
clarity,
but
wondering
if
there's
still,
some
sharing
of
information
as
it
can
help
us
make
decisions.
J
A
Hlf,
that's
why
the
statement's
in
there
we
you
know
the
ura
is
a
very
open
public,
transparent
agency.
We
share
information
from
all
of
our
programs.
L
Yeah
like
when
we
did
the
allocation
plan,
you
know
you
guys
showed
us.
We
have
this
much
allocated
from
this
other
source
for
this
program,
so
yeah,
I'm
just
thinking
like
when
we
talk
about
you
know
the
fair
housing
criteria
like
if
we're
just
you
know,
tracking,
oh
great
hof
is
like
being
proactive,
but
like
we
have
three
other
funding
sources,
we're
not
tracking
the
same
things
on
or
we're
not
going
to
report
to
hof
on
yeah.
I
just
think.
L
While
we
may
not
be
responsible,
it
may
be
useful
to
have
some
integration
when
the
when
the,
when
the
programs
are
programs
that
we
set
up
like
you
know
that
we
can
review
the
outcomes
of
the
programs.
Even
if
there's
multiple
funding
sources.
A
Mean
I
think
this
is
an
example
of
please
I'll,
just
re-emphasize
what
kelly
said
earlier.
Please
put
all
your
your
sort
of
edits
and
comments
in
the
comment.
Part
of
the
document.
You
know
I'm
a
little
worried
that
we're
gonna
have
conflicting
comments.
A
I'm
a
little
worried
that
you
know
some
things
are
going
to
some
comments,
might
might
not
drive
the
legislation
so
once
we
get
all
comments,
we'll
look
to
see
what
they
are
and
we'll
probably
assimilate
the
list
of
all
the
comments
and
then
work
with
hr
aid
to
try
to
get
a
revised
document.
A
I
I
actually
have
to
get
off.
I
have
to
be
down
on
the
at
a
ribbon
cutting
for
a
hotel
project
at
10
30.,
but
I
wanted
to
make
a
comment
about
the
public
comments
that
were
made
before
about
fair
housing
and
how
we
look
at
our
programs
and
our
outcomes,
and
I'm
hoping
that
we
can
pledge
that
in
2021
that
that's
going
to
be
a
significant
component
of
how
we're
looking
at
the
the
funding
that
we've
got.
I
I
P
A
A
A
Okay,
so
can
we
move
on
or
is
there
any
any
other
final
comments
on
this.
A
Okay,
so
the
rest
of
the
meeting
is
really
you
know
some
of
the
same
slides
you've
seen
in
the
past,
showing
just
that
the
map
is
getting
busier
and
busier
housing
stabilization
program
in
yellow
homeowner
assistance
program
in
blue.
Some
of
those
thoughts
are
being
covered
by
the
yellow,
but
you
can
see
that
those
two
programs
are
all
over
the
city,
as
is
the
down
payment
and
closing
cost
assistance
and
demo
dollars.
The
shelter
did
officially
close.
A
K
A
That's
right:
the
givener
building,
congratulations
to
jerome
and
everyone
that
was
working
on
that
project
that
did
close
next
slide.
So
here's
just
what's
been
allocated
for
the
last
three
years.
This
this
does
not
include
the
2021
allocation
and
just
real
quick,
a
quick
update
on
that.
That
was,
I
think
it
was
introduced
this
week
and
will
be
discussed
next
week
at
city
council
for
a
final
vote.
The
following
week,
david.
Is
that
correct.
Q
The
annual
allocation
plan
is
yes
up
for
committee
discussion
next
week
and
then
should
be
up
for
a
final
vote
the
week
after
that
which
puts
us
in
line
with
sort
of
the
enabling
legislation
having
annual
allocation
plans
synced
up
with
calendar
years.
So
I
think
that's
actually
something
to
celebrate.
The
board
should
be
really
excited
about.
A
Yes,
after
starting
in
the
middle
of
the
year
in
2018,
we
are
finally
caught
up
and
on
the
regular
path
to
having
the
fall
allocation
plan,
you
know
worked
on
and
improved,
so
so
you
can
see
the
allocations
here
to
point
out.
We
are
now
adding
some
cdbg
to
our
homeowner
assistance
program.
That's
what
the
1.6
million
of
additional
resources
are
for
the
homeowner
assistance
program,
just
just
to
be
able
to
help
us
get
through.
A
You
know
the
the
list
that
we
have
in
a
faster
manner
and
now
that
we're
bringing
on
new
program
administrators
such
as
the
pittsburgh
project,
you
know,
hopefully
we
can
move
faster
and
then
the
housing
stabilization
program.
Of
course
you
know
a
really
exciting
thing
that
happened
on
tuesday
was
the
final.
The
final
vote
for
another
for
more
money
to
come
to
us
through
the
cdbg
cares
act
so
so
that
is
why
that
number
has
now
increased
as
well.
A
So
you
can
see
that
there
next
slide
and
then
you
know
here's
just
our
unit
counts,
which
is
you
know,
really
impressive.
A
You
know
the
demonstration
we've
talked
about
this
before
is
high
because
of
the
shelter
count,
but
even
if
you
take
you
take
the
1600
out
of
that,
you
know,
there's
still
a
thousand
units
that
we
have
helped
to
date
or
a
thousand
households
for
the
30
ami
590
for
the
50
ami
and
236
at
the
80
or
115.
A
Ami
slide,
and
that's
really
all
we
have
today.
We
anticipate
that
our
next
meeting
will
be
on
january.
7Th
at
9.
00
am.
Is
there
anything
else
that
anybody
would
like
to
talk
about.