CRHA Regular Meeting   9/24/2018

No.

To see it next to me, it cost $12.

Oh, well, charge it.

Charge it.

Charge it.

It's cash only?

I didn't.

He already paid.

Yeah.

Exactly.

All right, shall we?

Let's do.

Well, welcome.

Welcome.

Today is September 24th and we're calling to order the regular meeting of the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority.

Vice Chair Ricker?

Here.

Commissioner Oliver?

Here.

Thank you.

And now we'll have a brief moment of silence.

Thank you.

I am thrilled to start this meeting tonight.

There are several items on our agenda which represent some significant pieces of work on the part of this board with our partners, PHAR and other residents and our staff.

And so I'm thrilled to get to those, but of course we will start this evening with an opportunity for public comments.

followed by comment from PHAR.

Hello, Rachel McFarland with Legal Aid Justice Center.

I just wanted to

Follow up on my notice and comment letter that I sent regarding the section 8 admin plan and just emphasize two of the points that I had made in that letter.

First, regarding the proposed changes for the visitor policy, to go from 15 consecutive days and 60 days in a year to a total of 14 days in a year is a massive change and is actually substantially different from the public housing lease.

which allows 14 days in a month and 45 days in a year.

I think that it should be on the part of the landlord to enforce that and to set that strict of restriction.

I also think it's going to be a massive administrative burden on CRHA to both police that and to

speak with residents about when it might be a reason to go beyond that.

So I would recommend leaving it what it is to help residents and not go to such a drastic change.

And secondly, regarding the preferences system, there are some pretty serious fair housing issues.

with what has been proposed.

I understand the purpose of the working resident preference.

However, that's not considering single parents who may not have the resources to work because they can't afford childcare.

Individuals who are taking care of another family member that serve as their caretaker and therefore can't work.

Individuals with criminal backgrounds, and of course criminal background itself isn't a protected class, but it is often a proxy for race, which is clearly a protected class.

There are individuals who maybe for various mental reasons can't hold down a job that maybe don't qualify specifically for the disability preference but can't keep a job.

And then outside of the fair housing context, right now the employment rate is pretty good, the unemployment rate is pretty good, but who's to say in a couple years it won't be terrible and people are gonna be hurt based on that.

I think that trying to come up with some other workarounds, particularly in regards to fair housing, coming up with some other preferences that would account for that would

make it a more fair system and not hurt people who for no fault of their own are not able to work.

Thank you.

Hello.

Hello.

I'm an ABA at this, so be patient with me.

I just want to introduce myself.

My name is Wanda Johnson.

I've recently joined the staff at PHAR.

in the capacity as an internship coordinator.

I'm very excited, currently conducting outreach for that.

I've visited about 80% of all the housing sites in the first round and I'm looking forward to doing more engaging.

This is the flyer that I'll be passing out.

provide one for someone and then take the opportunity to invite you all to PhAR's 20th anniversary celebration taking place this coming Saturday, 6 p.m. at Carver.

I need to leave contact information so anyone hearing this, if you are interested in the PhAR internship program, 434-984-3255 is our phone number.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening.

You got Miss Good with me this evening as well.

Hi.

I'm Brandon Collins.

I work for PHAR, Public Housing Association of Residents.

We're the duly recognized resident advisory council and resident advisory board for residents of public housing in Charlottesville.

984-3255.

And you can find us online at www.pharseville.org.

And you can call us anytime.

And I appreciate Miss Johnson, Wanda Johnson,

mentioning our anniversary, 20 years of PHAR at an extremely important time.

I think back to April 2016 when a new director was coming on board and PHAR released a positive vision for resident directed redevelopment and we all felt like this was a new beginning and I feel like we're starting to realize the fruits of that new beginning.

I think we've got some even bigger new beginnings going on right now.

As you consider the resolution tonight, as you've brought on a redevelopment coordinator, as we have begun to engage with Enterprise Community Partners about community engagement and strengthening PHAR and strengthening the housing authority and moving us all forward, things are really looking up for the future of this community

and particularly Lowell families in this community.

I've got some written comments.

I'm not going to speak too long.

You all know I like to talk.

I do want to just say, you know, the comments from Legal Aid were discussed with PHAR and represent PHAR's position on the admin plan.

So I hope you'll consider that.

I'm also only going to talk about redevelopment right now.

I do hope that you might refer to last month's comments that requested a number of updates.

and some attention to maintenance issues.

And what I don't have in the written comments are a couple things that I do want to say.

The resolution you're considering tonight about development partners is extremely important and includes a number of things and they're going to be extremely helpful in this redevelopment process.

But I do want you all to understand it is not solely on their backs to create a relocation plan.

or to carry out community engagement.

Those things are pretty much CRHA and PHAR working together as best we can.

Now I gotta say, judging by the materials and the conversations we've had with Riverbend and CASL and VCDC about this process, I am extremely confident that they're going to be extremely responsive to the relocation planning and the community engagement that we put together and we're all gonna work together on this.

couple of things as well I really am struck by now we sort of have this layer of flexibility to be able to be responsive to community engagement and resident direction for this process.

Resident direction is a really hard thing for y'all to swallow.

This has been something we have battled out with y'all years ago.

and took this giant step a number of years ago together and I think you all have done an amazing job of accepting and embracing the idea that residents should be directing this and moving the future forward and we really appreciate that and I think that's revolutionary and I think that's something really important for this board to consider and to continue embracing and I know you will.

I also am struck

by the pro forma showing a willingness for these development partners to do whatever it takes to get things financed and in order to meet the goals that y'all have laid out and that PHAR have laid out in the positive vision, their pro forma show reaching people solely at 30% area median income.

Now I know that may be something that has to be considered in terms of the kind of money we can bring in.

but just that alone shows me that they're paying attention to what's going on and what we need in this community and I think that's a big deal.

I think that's a huge deal because nobody else is coming to y'all with a pro forma saying they're gonna serve extremely low-income families in this community so that's a big deal and something worth keeping really close and cherishing as you move forward.

Lastly, and I'm gonna say this in the written comments, a while back I,

I kind of implored you all to just make sure you know why you're in this and to take this on as a moral obligation, as a radical step forward to doing something different to make an amends to this community and that all of you cannot go anywhere.

You are in it.

We expect you to be in it.

If you leave this board, you're still in it.

You need to provide that stability for this community.

So here's my written comments with all that said.

PHAR is deeply pleased to support the selection of Riverbend Development, Castle Development, and Virginia Community Development Corporation to help take the giant step towards a future that significantly improves the lives of families living in public housing in Charlottesville PHAR has participated on the Redevelopment Committee, has engaged residents intently for many years, and has taken step after step to understand resident concerns, conduct research, form partnerships, and set the stage to help realize the positive vision for resident-directed redevelopment

We are confident that the decision made tonight is the best way forward and we are deeply excited to begin work.

The positive vision, among other things, sets out the need to develop at South First Street and Levy Avenue as a first step.

We identified that in the positive vision.

We're committed to seeing this through based on resident input and guidance.

We are confident that the steps taken today are in line with the consensus built by the residents of Crescent Halls.

We welcome the new partners from Riverbend, CASL, and VCDC and we are excited to begin work with Enterprise Community Partners this October to further engage residents.

We are confident that these partners understand PHAR and CRHA's visions and will be responsive.

We are enthusiastic about the potential for fully funding these and future projects.

As we stated many years ago,

All of us attending this meeting tonight must commit to seeing this process through.

We have willing community partners and PHAR has the expectation that all will make sure they stick around to realize a brighter future.

We have a lot to make up for.

Current conditions must be improved as we move this effort forward.

There will be many detractors.

We must stand together and show positive, meaningful movement towards redevelopment and towards improving conditions in the here and now.

We must have something to show residents at other sites who will not see the fruits of redevelopment realized as quickly as others will.

We have a lot to make up for.

Some of it not your doing, but some of it is.

Charlottesville's legacy of colonization, enslavement, land theft, urban renewal, mass incarceration, and dehumanization must be turned back.

CRHA and PHAR have a role to play in making amends for the past.

Redevelopment offers a chance to make those amends.

We believe that if the Residence Bill of Rights for Redevelopment can hold strong and the living vision laid out by residents is embraced by all, the Charlottesville community will see a brighter day and all will thrive.

Let's do it.

Good evening.

My name is Annette Wilcox.

I currently live at 1400 Monticello Road at Apartment 102 in Charlottesville, Virginia.

I read the Charlottesville Weekly Magazine.

Last week I noticed that there's gonna be 925 apartment building, which will

to be built someday next, one of these weeks next week.

I hope there'll be some new changes going on on Levy Avenue, close to public housing.

Have a good evening.

I suggest that we really do, my name is Rosia Parker, I really do suggest that we really do have this discussion.

I've seen it on Agenda for Safety because as the chief keeps continuously lying on the TV, allowing the community to actually believe that

We don't have a safety plan.

It's not the point of us having a safety plan.

The point is if we're looking to police officers who are there to protect and serve us, to get a response and understanding what is it that we need for safety, which is we expect to be protected, like very protected.

Why should we have to have a continuously a safety plan?

you know we've been dealing with this for years and to hear on the radio yesterday affordable housing community where she feels that she's going to come in and save everybody we've been doing this work in our community for years fighting the police for years now it's time for them to be held accountable and for her to sit at that meeting and say what she was going to do in front of 20 or more people

and it wasn't done?

And you're continuously on the TV saying that you did this, did that, and you had a safety meeting.

Why weren't you committed to, like you said you was, to come back two weeks after?

If you had came back two weeks after, we would have definitely been prepared for what took place, which was a safety issue that we already had from the beginning.

Then I'm just appalled, you know, and I don't want to keep saying,

that I'm the one or as activists pushing back.

It's not the point that I'm an activist, it's the point that I'm a resident and I'm a community leader first and foremost.

However, the community see me as an activist.

I've been fighting for my people for 13 years or more before August 11th and 12th came last year.

So for her to think that I'm an activist, no, I'm a resident and I want her to know this.

and I want her to be able to provide safety for us instead of saying we don't know a safety plan.

Let her do her job.

Thank you.

Are there other comments at this time?

We have an opportunity for questions and comments from commissioners.

I believe many of the things that were brought to us we will discuss as part of our agenda this evening.

So with that, shall we proceed?

All in favor?

Aye.

Great, thank you.

Next on our agenda is adoption of the HCV administrative plan.

You all will remember that we engaged the assistance of Harrisonburg Housing Authority to help us go through and identify areas in which our old plan was not concurrent with HUD regulations and policies and also to advise us in other ways that our

their plan might not be serving us well as they worked to give us some guidance in making that department more efficient.

It was distributed for public comment.

We approved the initial plan to go out for public comment more than 45 days ago.

If anybody wants a paper copy, I have one here.

It's also been emailed to you.

It's available at our offices at any time.

As you heard from Miss Rachel, we did get some comments from PHAR and Legal Aid Justice Center.

Could somebody help me understand the visitor policy?

Why?

It does seem like a very substantial change in

I think that is a reflection of policy that the Harrisonburg Redevelopment and Housing Authority has incorporated in their plan, and they find is consistent with other HUD, well, other housing authorities.

I don't think there's anything regulatory that drives that.

I know I'm going to put her on the spot, but I'd ask if Rachel

Could you come join us again to walk us through some of these items?

I apologize.

I should have.

So I mean I think the concern with the visitor policies is just such a drastic change and it's you know people are going to lose their vouchers over keeping with what may be in keeping with their lease and what would be permissible in public housing and basically any private housing and to go from you know a pretty standard policy to a pretty draconian one out of nowhere just seems

I did not discuss that with PHAR, so I don't know.

Do we have a sense what visitor, do typical leases in the market contain visitor policies?

And do we have a sense of what sort of a general visitor policy is?

Since so many of our people rent from

I think the public housing one is more in line with what I've seen, but... With what you've seen in the general... Yeah, but I haven't paid close attention to that.

I mean, they have their own remedy for that.

They can give a 2130 and if it's not addressed, then sue for unlawful detainer.

And I apologize.

I'm looking for the section in this document that we're in.

I guess my question is, you know, is there sort of a strict rule followed by a, but if you need more, ask, right?

I would agree.

I'm inclined to agree.

We've seen residents have issues that are similar and I can't disclose any information, but I mean we've seen residents have very serious issues in which either elderly parents who currently live in our housing sites have been

They would need care or need someone to look after them for more than 14 days or we've seen families be in situations in which they need someone to come and live with them for an extended period of time.

I'm not opposed to keeping it to be what it is with public housing, 15 consecutive days and 60 days per year.

I'm not opposed to that.

I'm just asking questions to try and suss out where the change is coming from because I want to make sure we understand the implications and you're right.

I mean, if they're landlords who have raised issues.

I also think in all cases, the lease with the landlord probably supersedes our rules.

I mean I think it would come down to if, I don't know for the housing authority specifically if they could go after, I would think they could if you're violating the admin plan that you would be able to go after somebody who has some violation of the lease and I think that's a problem if the landlord, if they haven't violated their lease

then to say but you violated our plan I mean that seems hugely problematic to me and if the landlord chooses not to issue a 2130 and go after someone for going over that then it seems

I'm sure it's the kind of thing that somebody is abused, so we need to address it.

But there's got to be an incredible number of serious issues that really we as a community want to help, let alone

who opens their back bedroom or something.

The other thing I see as a problem is you know I could see if we build this into our regulations landlords would build their leases around it then all of a sudden the landlord's got it in his lease and we have somebody that comes to the executive director looking for a waiver and maybe the landlord doesn't want to waive it you know so now we're in the middle

wants to be let the landlord be the first remedy.

OK. Maybe we don't even have that in our plan.

Possibly.

I'm just saying.

That's a bigger jump at the other end.

Well, then we don't.

They only have the lease that comes from the landlord where they're having to.

Page 49.

Again, the only concern that I have would be

setting the stage for what becomes basically unlawful tenancy.

And do you feel like a 60-day max gets close to unlawful tenancy?

Well yeah I mean I think that's acceptable given that that's what we have adopted in public housing and immediately above this area it's sort of abandonment is also

defined as 60 consecutive days out of the unit.

So it seems to, I mean the 60-day threshold appears to apply when establishing residency.

Okay.

Yeah, I'm comfortable with it.

Yeah.

And so the second question that Miss McFarland brought us was questions about the preference policy and a preference that we established amongst many for a point that could be awarded for working families since there seemed to be so many points available to folks who were in other categories.

And lots of people will get multiple preferences on that list.

I love working because that's one of the ones you can go out and change.

You can't always, but you have a chance of generating a preference there.

And you're not going to become disabled.

You're not going to become a veteran.

That's something you can go change.

And for every client we have,

for every resident we have who's working, I suppose it essentially almost allows somebody else who's not working there because of the fee structure and everything, is that correct?

Wait, wait, wait.

There's a lot of factors that go into employment for one and there are a lot of factors that go into why someone wouldn't be able to work.

I think that there are a lot of people who for various reasons cannot work who would be denied those points and would then be farther down on the list and for virtue of family status or criminal background are not going to actually get a chance the wait list is already exorbitantly lawland to put them way down at the bottom because they can't work for reasons that they can't help just seems to be penalizing them and I think it's a little patronizing to

to try to push towards working as this carrot to say, get a job and we'll give you extra points.

I also think there's a fundamental question of, do you wanna help the neediest people or more people?

to get the housing.

I mean, let's be clear.

I don't disagree with you, but this is a preference system which is looking at all sorts of those factors and trying to alleviate and address the neediest folks in our community.

So you have the most points if you are homeless, if you're a displaced family, if you are already

I'm sorry, I can't read them all here.

I mean, if you're a victim of physical abuse, there are all sorts of things that we have totally created here and a big change from what we've been doing, a preference system that absolutely prioritizes the neediest in our community.

And so you can't just look at the preferences, you also have to look at the points that are awarded to them.

and it is our responsibility in addition to there are many many many many families as you know and they live in our housing as well or would like to live in our housing who are working but still can't afford to live here.

So we don't want to disadvantage the tons of families who wouldn't fit into any of the other criteria because we are focusing on the neediest in our community.

But there is so much need for people who do work but do not make enough to live here.

And so a mere 10 points versus 20, 15, 20, 30 points you get in other categories.

I just want to be clear that I don't see that as a full fair housing issue.

I understand the points you're making.

I'm totally sympathetic.

I'm absolutely open to discussion options.

I think you may definitely see a disparate impact on such as single working parents, which would be a fair housing issue.

So, I think there's also, you know, the current system we have now is just a lottery system.

I mean, there's zero focus on need at all in that system, and that's certainly something that we could choose to keep because

It is a lot less of an administrative burden.

And it doesn't ask families to disclose all of these things.

So, I mean, that is also an option.

I have a question.

It's hard to share without everyone having copies of this, but I'm looking through.

There is another section.

There's working, employed applicants who are employed at least 20 hours per week or are receiving income based on their inability to work.

And then there's another category that's live or work in the jurisdiction of Charlottesville or Albemarle County.

Is that redundant, do you think?

because the lived work is to focus on really making sure that we're housing from here.

I mean that could be something that's left to the discretion.

I mean we could create space within that preference for demonstrated difficulty in

Yeah.

I think that's sort of what I'm trying to get at is trying to encompass someone who isn't on disability, who doesn't have that as the alternative to working but still can't work for legitimate reasons.

And I just want to make sure that we're protecting a class of people that don't fit into all of these other boxes

but whom we want to keep in Charlottesville because they are the working poor and we want them to be able to be housed too and not fall entirely off of our eligibility list because they don't fit into so many boxes.

That's part of our mission.

Yeah, I'm sorry that feels a little loose.

Smarter behavior.

Well, I tend to agree with Wes why we just can't go with the way that she's wording it.

Right.

Yeah, she said to include something.

Yeah, not remove it.

Right.

I don't have proposed language.

I had suggested maybe we try to all sit down and meet at some point and work through it.

So here's a suggestion.

Well, we're not tabling this.

I mean, we could amend this forever, right?

Yeah, we could amend it forever, but a significant amendment would require another 45-day comment period.

I don't want to table this whole process because everything has to roll out because as soon as we adopt these preferences and all of the other policy changes there is a lot of work that falls in how, because we have changing how we run the program so all that notification has to go out and we're all of a sudden going to have an actual ordered wait list which is going to be quite a challenge

So I think we can remove it entirely.

We can add some language to it, making the words inability to work not be limited to

I've got a question.

If we add, I'm just trying to think of the language, 20 hours per week or are receiving income based on their inability to work or, I mean, how do you document your inability?

I'm trying to think of how to put the next line I was thinking or you could just say or document their inability to work.

And bring it in.

I don't know how you document it except to say I've tried this, this, this, this, this, and here are my reasons, but there's a little bit of subjectivity to whoever that comes into.

Based on their inability to work in extenuating circumstances or in life circumstances such as primary caretaker for other family members, past felony record making, hiring if possible.

So what would the harm be potentially in taking it out altogether and basically turning to the next

Next box, which is live work within the jurisdiction that gives preference for living and or working in Charlottesville.

I mean, you still catch some of the work.

So that already has 20, like a good 20 points there.

And the working is 10, the lowest is 5, and then it goes up to 20.

So the range is 0 to 20.

So the one in question is 10.

And most of them are 15 or 20.

Yeah, I mean, we could certainly just remove it.

And that is problematic.

And we've got a working preference here in this clause.

But if they didn't work, it would actually help them rise in our system.

That's my concern.

I mean I know lots of people who aren't elderly and disabled.

My concern is that there are people who are 30% of income and below in Charlottesville whose only preference, whose only box they would get to check in this preference system would be working.

And so therefore they've fallen out of our

They don't fall out, but the way the system gets prioritized.

Now that said, we have made a decision as a board that we are absolutely focusing on the neediest, being the homeless, being elderly disabled.

I guess I want us all to be aware of the priority choice that we're making.

Yes, unintended consequences.

No resources.

I think I'm comfortable with it.

No, comfortable as it reads.

I'm not comfortable.

Because, so just for me, like the 60 days per year, if something happens and you need someone's assistance for more than, I mean, you need someone needs to come live with you, just, I mean, using Betsy as an example, if someone gets hurt and then you need someone to live with you for,

30 days here and 45 days the next time, you wouldn't be able to.

So, no, I think we're good on that piece.

So we're curious how you, I think we're all in agreement that we'll change the visitor policy to 15 consecutive days, 60 days total in a year.

I think we're agreed on that.

So now the question is the preference system and whether or not we keep the working or take the working out entirely as a preference.

The working piece I was following.

My apologies.

I'm sorry.

Mr. Duffield, do you have issue with having discretion to be able to decide what inability to work means?

So, I mean, what I would, I mean, where I'm going to default is, I guess, to have some, a medical provider or some provider give us a- Provide with something to say that- That says, yeah, unable to work.

Okay.

If that's the case, yeah, fine.

As long as it's not

But we would have that document.

They wouldn't just come in and tell you.

A caseworker.

So then that person is already getting points for working with a community service organization?

Or no?

I mean, then they'd have a caseworker.

But it doesn't have to be.

It could be a job advocate.

It could be.

So adding a line or document their inability to work.

On their inability to work.

Circumstances could include, you know, caretaker duties, past felon burden, burdens of past felons.

I mean there's already points for disabilities so we'll just put in some language that cites some of those examples so that it's clear that that's open.

Okay.

Okay?

Okay.

Okay.

Agreed.

Are there other issues, questions, things that you'd like to comment on about this policy?

Great.

Then I think we need a motion.

And the motion carries.

Thank you all.

Thank you all, Rachel and Legal Aid and PHAR and residents for helping us shape this.

Yay.

And thanks to Harrisonburg.

We'll send them something.

So thank you, Harrisonburg.

But it was a massive undertaking.

So with that said, Miss Duffield.

There are a lot of changes in this document based on how we've been carrying things out.

Well, now that we've adopted this, it goes to HUD for review and their approval.

I believe that's a 75-day approval process.

I have no reason to believe that they'll recommend any type of change other than what we've had here.

That certainly gives us ample time to notify current HCV recipients of any differences, any changes within the administrative policies as well as modify our forms and template documents such that new residents, new participants have accurate information.

That said, I think the biggest thing that we did just now is adopt a preferences system, which actually creates an ordered wait list.

And I'm assuming that everybody on our wait list has to be notified.

may need to send us additional information so that they're, I'm just making assumptions here, I don't know.

Yes.

Excellent.

We look forward to learning more as policy goes into place.

For our next agenda item, we have a redevelopment update and recommendations from the Redevelopment Committee concerning the RFP for a development partner.

Sure.

So we put out an RFQ six months ago at this point.

Got a number of responses to that.

kind of pre-qualified everybody who had applied and then we went through an RFP process and with some follow-up interviews, one team, a local team really rose to the top there.

I think the generosity and compassion for the program really kind of stood out and made this election pretty straightforward and easy from the committee's perspective and I think the larger redevelopment committee met last Tuesday

it was an agreement with that concept.

Yeah.

Outstanding job and major, major kudos to the Redevelopment Committee.

Everyone who's participated.

This is like, just really briefly, I know I like do this every time we talk about it, but I'm just really, really, really proud.

And I read something while I was having a conversation with Delegate Discano, we were on a panel and he said that they had started talking about redevelopment when he was on council.

which was in 1991.

I was born in 1986.

They've been talking about this for 26 years now but this body has been able to actually do something and I think that's not to be taken lightly.

This body, our staff, our community members, our community partners, I really wish like the media was here to

Excuse me, sorry Emily.

More members of the media, excuse me.

But you know all the media that often likes to talk about why we aren't doing this or that.

And I also want to give some kudos to Miss Parker and Miss Turner.

Even during the city council meetings when people come up and they say why isn't this happening that happened and they come to the meetings and they say no this is happening.

Let me correct you on X, Y, and Z, and that's really appreciated.

Mr. Collins does the same.

So it truly shows that we all can work together and that we're moving this together.

And I'm just super, super excited and very, very, very, very, very proud of everyone.

Well, I would add to your kudos, Brenda Kelley.

Miss Kelley, yeah, of course.

Quite a few of us, you know,

I ain't gonna lie I didn't even think we'd be able to do this when I first came on the board.

And I'll add to that as well because I think that we have a lot of experts even on this board.

So I have to give our thanks to the board members too because it takes a lot and we just have just great experts sitting all around.

This is really difficult.

Yeah.

We never got this far.

I was on the board in 1999.

Really?

I didn't know that.

Yeah.

This is my second time around.

And y'all working on it then.

But we got it this time.

Well, and I'll say, I don't think you can discount, again, the tremendous work that PHAR has put in, development of the positive vision, certainly the work that Brandon's done.

She's not here, but Kim Rolla, I think, was tremendously influential in helping us get things moved forward.

And just the culture of the larger system itself,

is shifting and it's one that says, you know what, we can.

We've got a lot of strengths if we leverage them together.

The smoking policy was a very small microcosm of that.

This is a bigger piece and I mean as much as redevelopment is exciting seeing new buildings come up, seeing that those relationships

Okay.

My back feels well padded.

I'm going to pierce this too.

I appreciate taking a moment to celebrate.

It has been a lot of work and there are a lot of experts involved and the biggest one of those being the residents.

I'm sorry, one question.

When did the Redevelopment Committee, because of course I have a Facebook post, but when did the Redevelopment Committee start?

It hasn't been that.

18 months ago.

Maybe two years.

So with that, our journey really has just begun.

But it's begun.

Well, we got through the major piece.

I mean, we have all said this repeatedly, but the reason we have gotten here is because everyone has continued to make a commitment to show up even when it's hard, even when things were tense, even when there was a lot of other stuff going on.

And just a point of order.

I think it's going to happen.

So as I said, this journey is just beginning.

What you have before you tonight are the recommendations.

made by the Redevelopment Committee to this board that we consider authorizing our Executive Director to proceed with negotiations with those who were selected in the RFP process, which is Riverbend Development and VCDC.

Those MOU negotiations are still sort of a high level

high level take at the first step in moving towards down this partnership path.

They will define everyone's roles.

They will define some timelines, some deliverables, and then there'll be even more documents that we enter into to get even more serious about things.

So this is just the first step of getting serious.

But it's a big one.

We definitely have to put on our big people boots when we go here.

So what you have again are the recommendations from the Redevelopment Committee.

You can read through them.

Please let me know if there's anything missing from this or questions that you might have.

Well, without any further ado, I'd like to read the resolution.

Okay.

CRHA resolution number 1389, a resolution to proceed with MOU negotiations with Riverbend Development, VCDC for phase one of Charlottesville public housing redevelopment project and to shut everyone up who said we can't do it.

Oh, sorry.

That's not in here.

I thought that was in here.

All right.

It stops the project.

I just need to stand up.

Okay, it's been an hour.

Okay.

Okay.

Good.

Alright, you don't have to stand up.

Here we go.

Next on our agenda is discussion

about a safety update and where we are and things we've heard from the community since our last meeting.

As you will recall, the last time the board got together, we had been experiencing some major issues, particularly in the West Haven community.

We called for a safety meeting that was held at West Haven.

It was very well attended.

The police chief did come.

if you want to give us an update.

Some of the key takeaways from the meeting, one was a commitment, part of the police to have a second meeting that would involve CRHA and PHAR.

Had some difficulty in getting that meeting arranged, and some back and forth email.

Hopefully that's something that can happen sooner rather than later.

I'm not sure why there's difficulty in making that happen.

I want to know if there is a way that we can have these safety meetings.

that would include all of the sites where we can maybe meet in city space or something, but we need to be able to include all of the sites.

We talk about one site and then issues happen on another.

It's gotta stop on all the sites.

And I will say just on those lines, we did hear a number of times some discussion about CRHA communities need to have safety plans in place.

I get that up to a point.

I've lived in apartment communities where I haven't had the police come to me and say, no, in order for me to protect you, you need to have a safety plan.

I'm not sure what that's necessarily about.

Or maybe there's something that I'm missing.

But it certainly doesn't hurt us to have a safety plan in place.

in as much as that plan includes proper lighting and I don't know, private security, other security measures.

That's amazing.

I think the reason for a coordinated safety plan, and I don't know, this is not my bailiwick at all, but I can imagine if the police are sending armed officers to our site that they know has armed security guys,

Right.

I mean, when the chief asked that question at the meeting, do you have a safety plan?

And I said, well, I don't know that we have a safety plan per se, but here are the things that we do have that we consider part of our safety strategy.

and so we've got, you know, a barment policy and the police are supposed to be our close partners on a barment policy and one of the things that we need is joint training because there's so many new officers and clearly a new chief who doesn't understand the barment policy.

We have a parking policy.

We have lighting contracts.

We have security at Crescent Halls.

And so I understand wanting to say, okay, let's sit back and with the guidance of law enforcement officials in town and others, put all of those pieces spelled out in one place as a safety plan.

I think there's something really valuable to that.

It's nice to, we do have the security at Crescent Halls or what have you, but having, I just found out a couple of days ago, the security at Crescent Halls basically, we need some kind of way of getting in contact

with the security at Crescent Halls because they don't have any kind of way other than what if you can't get out of your house to get to the security?

You know what I'm saying?

They have no kind of walkie talkie whatever, you know what I'm saying, to get in contact with them.

So we need to maybe make some kind of better arrangements of how to, you know what I'm saying, as far as Crescent Hall safety policy.

We need to make some kind of standard with them

A number should be placed somewhere where all residents are able to contact security if need be.

So that's useless.

To a certain extent, Carolyn, you're speaking as to why each site would have a safety plan.

Because if you had a safety plan for each site, all of those things would be laid out in terms of policies, procedures.

Since there is a lot of turnover with our police department,

who knows maybe we don't want to use Millennium next year or whenever you would need some kind of set guideline in a pamphlet form PDF form or whatever some kind of document that you can send to individuals or let them know this is the specific plan for this site.

This is the plan that we should have been and had though.

We've had millennium now.

for almost a year.

The residents don't have a way of contacting them other than to come out of their homes.

But isn't that also the role of the property manager and the actual police?

I just want to be clear sort of what our negotiations with them are.

I've always thought it was a number, but I just found out, what, a couple of days ago that there is no number.

But that is why we would need... Again, even though we have some policies and some agreements, no one knows everything that's supposed to take place on each site because A, we have a new chief, there's a lot of turnover.

I'm not trying to make excuses.

speaking about the facts, like people, a lot of these officers and even, I mean, I think some staff members or community members, they don't know the barment policy.

It's hearsay, like we know this, we know that, but if there was a comprehensive plan that was for all of our sites and then an individual plan for each site, I think that would, I mean, there's no excuses after that's made because this is what you're supposed to go by.

It covers us.

It gives them the expectations, them being the police, the expectation as well as the residents.

I think we absolutely need to move forward with having specific safety plans for each site that involve all of the strategies we've been employing all along plus things we might be missing.

I'm really hoping that the new chief and her staff will be very heavily involved in helping us design those so that they feel comfortable with their role in that.

The other thing that has come up from residents and others and particularly in the events that most recently transpired at West Haven was the role of cameras.

This was a perfect case for a time when cameras might really have stopped a shooting before it happened.

and so I shared with you all a draft camera policy.

I would love as part of these conversations for us to draft a policy and also begin the process of at least piloting some safety cameras somewhere other than Crescent Hall so that we get a sense of how they might work and how we might craft an even stronger policy along those lines.

I want to be clear that the policy that I think we should be considering is one that is about criminal activity and not one that has anything to do with day-to-day lease enforcement operations unless of course they're of a criminal nature.

You have in the document you sent over, CRHA is committed to enhancing the quality of life of residents in our public housing communities.

A critical component of a comprehensive security plan using technology is surveillance equipment, which would lead to why we would need the plan.

The next bullet point, the purpose of camera surveillance of public areas is to deter crime and to assist CRHA staff and the police in protecting the safety and property of the community, which speaks to your point in regards to this is not to monitor

I keep thinking spy, but that's not the right word.

I don't know.

Video surveillance for security purposes will be conducted in a professional, ethical, and legal manner.

Personnel involved in video surveillance will be appropriately trained and supervised in the responsible use of technology.

and then your last point, information obtained through video surveillance will only be released when authorized by the CRHA Executive Director.

So I think that speaks to some of the fears that some residents may have in regards to if cameras are put up they're going to be just invading people's privacy or looking at something that they shouldn't.

So, I don't know how you all feel, but I'm seeing an agenda shape from our conversations right now, starting with Miss Oliver saying, okay, this isn't just one site, it's all our sites.

We need to make sure we're having safety meetings at all our sites so we get everybody's input.

I'm hearing Wes and the police chief saying, okay, you might have all of these strategies and policies in place, but you need a safety plan.

We'd love to help you spell that out.

That definitely has to be informed by our residents because they're the experts on where they live and what safety is going to mean there.

and that there are some other components that we don't have in place now that we might need to have in place like cameras and a camera policy, like policies around the role of security and the role of other officers.

I have a question.

They do, but they too are not as effective.

I have my clue.

I think, you know, we need to find out information on that because I've been in units where they have a pool chain.

And once that pool chain is full, it goes directly to the fire department or the police department or whatever.

Nah, that's not the case there.

I mean, that sounds like it could be a fix for Creston Hall.

I agree with that.

I would be willing to serve on a safety committee, an ad hoc safety committee, but I would only request that that committee, we have a timeline, so I mean, come back with recommendations for the board within two months.

But then in the meantime, while the safety committee is being formed and having meetings,

They're still real situations that are occurring on our sites.

Thank you.

You're right.

I didn't make that.

Well, no, but you're right.

I mean, I don't want this to be perceived as us saying, let's crank down on bureaucracy.

I mean, it's an intermediate step.

I would love to hear from the board and maybe we have some committee members even far here.

I mean, is an initial step.

for all of the sites looking at hiring or outsourcing private security.

As we heard in that safety meeting, I think it was Miss Parker or Miss Johnson who said something like, we need the security.

members there when the staff leaves at five.

So if that's having two private security members on site from five to four a.m. or seven a.m. or something like that, I know that incurs a cost.

but the city would be willing to help with that cost.

I'm just literally throwing out ideas.

Well, I don't envision this being like a gigantic committee.

Okay, so maybe two board members, two members of PHAR?

Would y'all, I mean, is that a suggestion?

Two board members, two members of PHAR?

I'd like to make a suggestion that it be three board members and two members of PHAR, just in case one board member can't be there, you'll still have two in attendance.

Right.

Three board members is a public meeting, which just requires notice.

Not a bad thing, just in terms of timelines for things.

I know he's not here, but I think we could probably ask Sergeant Haney to be part of this as well, so that there's representation from the police department from the get-go.

I have concerns about three when it becomes a public meeting because then the media can come and I don't know like if we're talking to residents are they gonna want to talk or some people like don't want to talk in front of cameras like this has been a hot topic so we have a meeting and then the news is like oh we want to know what y'all are talking about and then that makes some people knock up not saying that'll happen but

It was just a suggestion.

How would you feel about two board members and three members of PHAR?

So we're volunteering PHAR to do all kinds of things over there.

So on the short answer is, PHAR takes this extremely seriously.

We had a conversation at the resident services meeting recently.

And I think I expressed PHAR's frustration that we seem to come into this issue every year about this time.

PHAR made a major push on some of this stuff a few years back.

Implementation kind of got lost between the changing of directors and the changing of police chiefs

all this stuff.

I think a couple things to understand.

It's been PHAR's position for a very long time concerning cameras that you need to have community meetings and get the blessing of the community and perhaps involve those folks in the creation of policy regarding those cameras.

We don't want to block what we think might work for safety.

We do have the healthy understanding that cameras do not necessarily keep people safe.

that they are basically an enforcement tool and come after the fact.

Secondly, Resident Services Committee has established a subcommittee holding safety meetings with a large number of residents that are scheduled for this Wednesday, one of which is at noon, I believe, and the other is at 6.30.

And a number of residents will be at those meetings, and in fact,

Some folks on that committee have offered to train residents to help facilitate those conversations.

I think that is an important vehicle for maybe moving some things forward.

I think what Commissioner Bellamy mentioned about there are some things in the here and now that need to happen, maybe that's a body to discuss and prioritize what can happen right now and kind of get the blessing of folks.

people want to participate in making their communities safer.

Lastly, PHAR is extremely disappointed that Mr. Duffield has reached out to the police chief on multiple occasions to set up a meeting to discuss some serious issues about safety in our public housing communities and the chief has failed so far.

to set up those meetings and discuss a number of the proposals that have come forward that were offered by her, some offered by us and to have a conversation about what can be done and that's just extremely frustrating.

I think the relationship between the police and this housing authority

It needs to get in line somehow and I don't put any blame on you all for that.

I think the police are phoning this one in and it's a real disappointment because residents of public housing should have equal access to law enforcement if they so desire it.

So one thing that was discussed at resident services and maybe discussed more with the resident safety committee, it's not just a resident safety committee, but at that subcommittee, there was a time when there was a police captain involved with the resident services committee that was present at all those meetings, would sometimes attend these meetings.

had an opinion, was a constant presence, had some ability to engage, and I think that was helpful.

And when Chief Thomas came on, that just disappeared.

I don't know why or for what reason, but from my perspective, that was starting to help some things.

And so having some kind of representative present, not just

for law enforcement on site but being present in policy discussions and all these other things I think could be very helpful and it used to be before a long while back they would come to every monthly board meeting and give a report and it would just be like you know there were you know a couple traffic stops or whatever you know there was some incidents and they would just go down the list but y'all at least know what was going on and you would see them monthly and if there were concerns you could deal with them

You don't have that.

Your annual plan says you do.

You don't have any coordination with the barment list.

I don't know that that's necessarily for lack of trying on your end.

Well, I want to say, you know, I was unable, thank you, I was unable to be at the resident services meeting, so I didn't know these two safety meetings were happening.

But given the subcommittee that has been formed through resident services, I think maybe we don't need a separate board committee.

We just need to join efforts and make sure that board members are engaged in that process.

Wednesday, Wednesday.

So are there, are any of us on that subcommittee?

So would it be possible for us to have a board rep added to that committee one?

And then secondly, could we give that committee a timeline of 60 days or 90 days?

I mean, at least by the entity, like let's give them a timeline in regards to when we, we could task them with creating a safety plan.

Well, perhaps.

So you think that's separate?

I think that's separate.

So what's their specific task?

And so for those who are listening, I've been getting texts, some people are listening.

Ms. Wanda Johnson stated that their task, that subcommittee or ad committee, their task is collecting input in terms of what a safe neighborhood looks like.

I mean I will say that the base level recommendations from that report last time we absolutely implemented.

There have been lighting upgrades and ongoing lighting contracts on all of our sites.

There have been changes in policy and procedure on the part of our staff.

I don't want people to think that nothing happened the last time around.

Then there were other pieces that couldn't or didn't happen because they fall in other people's responsibilities like police department.

What was previous with that engagement from the police department there for sure.

Alright, so one thing I'm going to commit to taking the commissioner hat off and putting the counselor hat on.

I need the dates.

We will have a law enforcement representative at each one of those meetings.

I see some grimaces in the back.

Is there concern about having law enforcement at that point?

Because you want to get input.

No, no, no.

Yeah, I love to hear because I thought that's what I just heard you say you wanted.

Housing Authority was trying to meet directly with the chief to discuss some things that really needed to be discussed.

I'm a little hesitant about law enforcement at that resident meeting.

There were some conversations at the resident services meeting about just being able for folks to feel comfortable, and I'm not sure.

I don't feel comfortable saying that that's like a yea or a nay.

So it might be worth connecting with Charlene and seeing what her takeaway from that meeting might be.

I think there's definitely a desire to have housing authority, folks who can get things accomplished.

Correct me if you're wrong.

I could have heard it wrong, but I thought you said that it was a better atmosphere when we had a former police captain who attended the meetings and they were there.

So then I said, I'll make sure we have police there.

So previously we had Captain Lewis at resident services meetings.

Right.

It's kind of a different body that's being set up.

It is primarily residents.

I'm sure some would appreciate having a police liaison person there, but I think there are probably some others who would appreciate just as much sort of some freedom to be able to sort through some issues, and I can't make that call.

Absolutely.

Yeah, we will have law enforcement at both the resident services meetings and the board meetings moving forward.

I'm not available this Wednesday.

I have two questions before y'all move to a different subject.

My first question is, so you all said that it was going to be some staff that was going to be trained in order to review the footage or the tapes and stuff like that.

So going forward I would like to make sure we cover that and all draft policies and plans that we put in place that don't get put on the back burner or forgotten.

The second question I have maybe Mr. Bellamy can answer is why haven't the Chief been, I know you can't answer that but maybe that's a question that you can ask, seeing as though we don't have a relationship with her

and we're going to try and have a relationship with the police department where she works.

She hasn't reached out to us to get a, to have or form a relationship with us to know what our, to know what our problems are, to really understand us.

So I think maybe we should have at least one meet and greet meeting.

with her to be able to talk to her, invite her to I guess one of these meetings so that she can hear some of the problems that we're having.

So I think her response, I can't speak for the chief one, which I've learned just not to do.

Thank you very much, Mr. Bellamy.

I also think that after the incident at West Haven, when you get two officers shot, you should have had a meeting the next day.

There's no reason why a meeting shouldn't happen the next day whether she was there or not.

Somebody should have been there and nobody's been there yet.

I would only ask that we keep in mind that she's trying to do a lot to revamp that police department and I can't speak to

where she is at all times.

I just texted her about 20 minutes ago.

I'm sure she'll text me back.

Could you just- And I'll pass it on.

Yep, invite.

I am hearing that certainly a starting place is making sure there's board representation on the subcommittee that is having safety meetings.

Perhaps we can actually task both that subcommittee and the resident services committee in general with bringing us more specific recommendations, I would say in 30 days at our next meeting.

As that is proceeding, we laid out other pieces that we need to work on, which is primarily beginning to write out a safety plan.

I really strongly believe we need to do that in partnership with the police department and the city and other partners in keeping our community safe, so I would suggest that when that meeting happens with the police and PHAR and

the Housing Authority that that be the first line of action is coming up with a plan and that also in 30 days at our next meeting we get a report back from that small meeting about the plan the steps that we're going to take to get a safety plan in place and I would like to say the camera policy is something that's kind of a joint piece that is part of discussions that happen in our safety meetings at the community

I'm just still like, I know we have to go, I'm sorry, Chairwoman Jones.

I still don't feel like we're coming away from anything that tangible today and I can't in good conscience go back to West Haven and talk to the young lady who lives right across the walkway from where the shooting transpired who

Beck, like basically was crying, and I even saw on the news talking about the same thing.

Why don't we have cameras?

What's up with the lighting?

Why don't we have security over here?

My babies were in here when this happened.

And then when I go back, which I'll probably be over there tomorrow, and then she say, well, Wes, what happened at your meeting?

And then I, like, we can't, we're gonna say we had an ad hoc, we're gonna have a resident service meeting.

That doesn't address her issues that she has today.

So are we gonna,

Are we going to add millennial security to the sites?

What are the things that we're going to give them today?

Mr. Duffield, do you want to discuss?

What discussions have you had with Millennium?

Millennium is more than willing to deploy in the neighborhood.

Very clearly coming out of the safety meeting with the chief, I heard two things.

I heard we shouldn't put Millennium

We shouldn't put the security contractor in the neighborhood unless we got a plan for how that's going to interface with the neighborhood.

I also heard, but the housing authority is ultimately responsible for our safety.

So why can't we put two private security members there from

five p.m. or six p.m. to when the staff gets there the next morning at least for 30 days while we try to figure out this policy.

I mean like it's a short term kind of fix but it's doing something.

like the people who live over there they don't want to hear that because we don't have the policy set up we couldn't hire nobody like they want something today I'm absolutely I'm sorry I'm not trying to like yell at you I'm in agreement with you honestly I'm in agreement with you now we're gonna run that'll run our budget we do have

We do have surplus from prior years.

We can likely tap for 30 days.

Yeah.

Well, and again, I really do want to keep a timeline on it that says this is all a pilot.

It's all for review.

I do think that we have

We have had strong community, we've had strong relationships with community partners for our safety in the past that worked better than what we've had since I've been on this board.

Things have, when the barment conversations started and then I really feel like we lost some partners and we need to find ways to bring them back to the table and so

I don't wanna just say council pays for security and then everybody's off the hook.

I really want, because it is, it's the whole community.

So what about 30 days?

As you alluded to.

And also, I mean, specifically, I would love to hear from Miss Carolyn and Audrey, I mean, I would love to hear, is that okay with y'all?

I mean, specifically, y'all live on sites.

Do y'all think that's okay?

I mean, just for 30 days, two officers on each site.

My concern is that with what has happened in West Haven, I have concerns for the security who's coming on the site.

There has to be some kind of

Some kind of negotiation with the police department and Millennium.

I'm sure they're concerned about bringing down folks on the property too.

When you have other folks who are walking around with weapons that's bigger than the ones that they're carrying.

I really have a concern with that.

However, Millennium is ready.

They're ready to come.

So they're ready.

It's not them at all because they're ready to come.

I think there still needs to be some kind of conversation with them and the police department as to what they're going to do and how it's going to happen and why I have a chance to speak.

For me, by the end of this week, I'd like to know what's going on with those poor change at Crescent Hall, what they're connected to.

What they're connected to because something needs to happen there that doesn't make sense for them to have them and they're not in use, so for me that's an easy

Okay, so I think we have a plan of action.

Lighting is about to happen right now.

We have asked Grant to work with Millennium on staffing our sites in precarious hours.

On the last caveat, start date for Millennial, are we looking at them starting by this weekend?

I mean, requesting to them, hey, we would like for you all to start on Friday night, or Friday, if possible.

Okay.

Can I ask something?

I do think if they're going to be on site, can we get

I would think we would probably need a 48 hour advance notice of the flyer.

So if you talk to Millennium tomorrow and we say, hey, we would like for you all to start Friday, you all work through whether or not that's a possibility by Wednesday morning or on Wednesday morning, we would have flyers up on the sites that they're going to be at.

to let folks know, hey, Friday this is what's going to happen.

It does, in sort.

So, is this going to be at all properties, as you said, or just Crescent Halls or just West Haven?

So I think that's what Mr. Duffield would need to talk to see if they can staff.

Like my personal preference with that it would be obviously West Haven, First Street, Sixth Street.

Like those would be the three that I would think that.

So I guess my conversation then would be Crescent Halls is a different animal from West Haven.

So what are they going to be providing would be next when you have that conversation with them?

I think it would be monitoring the sites, so doing continuous walk-throughs throughout the evenings, making sure obviously there's time for them to do rotations and whatnot, they have consistent communication with the residents as well as law enforcement.

But then again, the reason why this is a pilot as Chairwoman Jones was saying,

for 30 days, they can bring us back information at our next meeting and say, hey, this is what we saw worked.

This is what didn't work.

This is what y'all need to be doing.

And that can all be coinciding with the ad hoc safety committee.

But again, this is something immediate where people will know that we're doing something.

And we got a month also to hear from residents about whether they like this, they don't like this.

This makes me feel safer.

And the audience has been pretty good about that in the past.

They have monitored our properties and they have told us what we're dealing with.

Great.

Thank you.

You asked Commissioner Bellamy.

My question was answered.

So I, in the interest of moving things along, not to keep you all too late, I feel like through this discussion we got a pretty good understanding of what happened at resident services.

So perhaps we could allow the rest to just, you can read the report that's in your file.

So we're going to move that from the agenda.

The Executive Director's Report and then following that annual board retreat planning, I will just cover that briefly to say we're gonna plan an annual retreat, which typically happens in January.

I'll be contacting you all for dates.

Yes?

Yes.

Excellent.

Done.

I will.

I will try and be fairly brief.

Let's see.

in the period of August 25th to September 21, spent a significant amount of effort and continue to preparing Crescent Halls for REAC.

We are embarking on the site and community safety planning elements.

We've held several five-year and annual plan meetings with our community and obviously we've been

very active in the developer selection process.

Some things that we've got, our surveyor work is currently underway at South First Street.

We should have a plat that we can put forward for subdivision very shortly.

We're working with Virginia Housing Development Authority, Harrisonburg,

and Redevelopment and Housing Authority.

TJAC on a Pay for Success project proposal really looks at some social programs that can be incorporated in low income communities.

Our next outreach is to PHAR to bring PHAR into the fold here.

Let's see.

We've spent a fair amount of time working with the maintenance personnel committees as well as the maintenance team and the asset managers.

We have an offer extended at this point for our Director of Housing Services staff position.

You should know about that any time now.

We met with the Enterprise Community Partners last Friday.

and in game planning, the next round of engagements there and have been present at participating in form-based code meetings as they're occurring within the community.

As we look at the financial health of the organization and in the interest of time, the roll-up sheet that you have in front of you

on Page 3 of 53.

Month to date, we ran a net gain of $86,639.

Year to date, we are almost $21,000 ahead of budget.

The ensuing sheets show how that breaks down by communities as well as the detailed financial reports themselves.

What I'm passing out to you now is a list of work orders over the past month.

You can see the nature of work orders that we've received and the status of them to date.

You'll notice that a number of these have inspection

beside it.

These were work orders that were generated for unit inspection prior to our REAC work.

It appears that generally work orders are getting closed out.

You can see some that don't have clothes beside them.

You can certainly go back and take a look and see why that's the case.

I think the overall volume during the reporting period was somewhere in the neighborhood of 378 work orders generated during the month.

Again, a significant portion are tied to inspections and then the subsequent improvements, repairs needed after the inspections.

As to turns and vacancies, at this point we have a total of about 38 vacancies by October 1st.

We have a total of 38 vacancies.

We have 8 units that are now in the lease up process.

We anticipate having

Two more of our substantial rehab units come back online in the next couple of weeks.

So yeah, that work is beginning to bear fruit and hopefully we get those back online and the overall vacancy numbers reduced.

I have a question.

It's the question that I always have.

It's the question that I've had several meetings.

It's the question that I've asked for several meetings.

We still do not have, Mr. Duffield, the vacancy list and turnovers, on and off units list, and the evictions list.

I believe several times I've asked for that to be put in here and several times you've told me you were going to do it.

It's still not in here.

Also, I ask that there be a line added for the vehicles that are purchased that is not in here.

I talked with the accountant about that.

That falls to a balance sheet item.

at the year end audit.

I can again talk with them and see if there's some way to force that into the operating budget.

That's what the accountant tells me.

On page, I don't think it has a page, I think it's, yeah, 18 of 53.

Under administrative, it says criminal background checks.

And if it is for staff, we have zero.

We have done criminal background, you can see period to date, we have spent money this year on criminal background checks.

If it happened within the month because that part of the budget as you see at the top says month to date actual month to date budget and variance if you come over to the next set of columns it has period to date actual period to date budget that's for the year in total so and if you follow those period to date down you see that actually we have spent funding

So we've done 192 criminal background checks.

Yeah, we've spent $192.

That's right.

Okay.

So this doesn't give us a headcount.

So where would, if we were to ask for driving records, where would that go?

Would that be in something or would that be a line item that we had, we would have to, the cost, what would that cost line would be?

Oh, okay.

Administrative personnel.

Okay.

Okay.

Great.

Any questions from this side?

Thank you, Mr. Duffield.

You're welcome.

I'm always amazed when I read those how much is going on.

Just one very brief thing.

Mr. Duffield and I have had conversations, and we talked about this in a previous meeting, about the digital skills training courses that we'll be starting up in our public housing sites.

So we've had conversations.

We'll be passing that on to

Mr. Duffield, you're number two.

Ms. Robin, and we'll be getting information out to the residents in regard to the digital skills classes that we'll be offering hopefully this fall and definitely in the early stages of next year.

So there's going to be a fundraiser for week old two to get laptops so that we can have them for not only the residents for digital skills classes, but also

Anyone who is an ex-offender or a member of a re-entry community will be teaching digital skills.

So that fundraiser is Saturday, November 3rd at the DoubleTree.

It's a sneaker ball where you dress up in your black tie or fine wear and you wear sneakers with it.

So our proceeds will be going to these programs.

Hope to see you there and also looking forward to be contacting PHAR and our other residents about getting them to sign up for the digital skills classes.

I have a question about the work order list.

I just need a quick, it says under reasonable accommodation on page 211 at the bottom, 5130 closed.

It says fresh pharmacy.

I think I can answer.

So some of these things Community Center, Open Community Center, Fresh Pharmacy is a city-wide program that brings fresh fruits and vegetables to West Haven and I believe Crescent Halls a couple of times a month and so they just have scheduled hours when they show up and so I'm guessing it's on our work order list because staff had to come and unlock the

I know it's at West Haven and I think the new nurse at West Haven is working to make sure that it goes to Crescent Halls as well and it's a big community partnership that brings fresh pharmacy.

Okay quick meeting announcements you see them on your agenda but I just want to invite everyone to join us for our Redevelopment Committee meeting tomorrow

at noon at the South First Street Community Center, followed again.

We are meeting weekly at this point, so we meet weekly on Tuesdays at noon, primarily at South First Street Community Center.

On Wednesday, there are two subcommittee meetings of the resident services talking about safety.

at noon and again 6.30 at West Haven.

And I'm excited and really hope residents will come out to those and give some input.

And any board members who can attend, please do and share what you learn with us.

I hope to attend at least one.

I'm hoping some of my fellow board members at the table are going to at least one.

Miss Oliver.

Oh, they have one at 6.30 and one at 12.

Well, I'm going to go at 12.

Oh, well, I mean, oh yeah, okay, I'll see.

Somebody has to be there at 6.30.

Miss Slaughter, if you're available, that would be awesome.

You can come to both.

I know I can't do 6.30.

I'll do 6.30.

Thank you.

I'll be there at noon.

We have our resident services meeting will be Thursday, October 11th, and it's at the 6th Street Community Center.

and we will meet back here again on October 22nd for our regular board meeting here in City Council Chambers.

Not on this, but we are working towards dates for a maintenance committee meeting, we are working towards dates for a personnel committee meeting, and we are working, I believe we're gonna need to call a board work session for the five year plan.

You know what?

You all are here right now.

As soon as I close this meeting, let's find a date.

And we'll put it on the calendar tonight before you leave.

Yeah, OK. OK?

I just can never get the three of us in the same place to schedule.

So we will do it before we leave tonight.

OK.

The personnel committee members are myself and Miss Talbert and Miss Oliver.

So that date will be coming out shortly.

Okay, I'll try to be brief.

My son took my pen, so I didn't take good notes.

One thing overlooked on the safety issue, there was a request to have Housing Authority contact the towing company and see if they can ramp up their efforts.

That was a big focus, so hopefully

Moving forward.

Next thing, I know you already made the decision, but I just wanted to go back over disparate impact and what that means and why that's important.

I think you guys made an okay decision, but the idea being that because mass incarceration is racist,

that when that affects somebody's ability to get a job, find housing, get healthcare, anything like that, because mass incarceration is racist, then it has the impact of racism in these other things that may have a policy associated.

So that's why somebody who may be unemployed, maybe because they are an ex-offender and can't find employment, maybe they're a family member who has somebody incarcerated, and of course the other factors that you all discussed.

So I think that it's really important to consider and maybe at a later date we could start thinking about what housing authority might be able to do to help with re-entry.

a little more than you already do and I just think that's kind of important.

Last thing was I'll remember and I'll let you guys know good job everybody.

It's all going to be alright.

No hard feelings.

Thanks for your partnership.

Okay, hold that.

No, well come up and make a comment then.

Come, make a comment.

I just couldn't totally understand you, but whoa.

I'm serious.

I'm dead serious as a resident.

Do we have a vacant unit available that if a city councilor wanted to spend a night in one of our units they could bring an air bed and we can make it happen?

Sure.

I don't know.

We have to check into the legality of that actually.

Before we get to the party, before we adjourn tonight, we have a closed session.

And there is a motion for that closed session in your binders.

Is there a second?

All in favor?

Aye.

Oh, we don't want no bacon unit, Mr. Grant.