Ryan is ready for baseball practice. Seriously, the hat, the glove, the batting glove, he is ready. He is quite good at hitting and catching for a two year old. Having had two other two year olds back in the day, I feel like I am in a position to judge. He is "ready to go". The tantrum that will ensue as a result of his inability to go to practice will be similar to the other tantrums he has thrown lately. The after nap/evening two year Ryan is challenging right now. We have moved to my mother's house while we sell the house, so no doubt he is discombobulated.
Also, a couple of weeks ago, Chris went to Banner Elk, North Carolina for several days to ride his bicycle with some friends. He had a great time. We had a very nice time as well since didnt do any real work on the house while he was gone. When he came back we had a fabulous family weekend as a result of my cousin getting married. It was incredibly relaxing and soul nourishing. We quickly followed up that relaxation with a crazy four days of cleaning, moving and transitioning out of the house we have lived in for eight years. And now it is the last week of baseball and school, so things are not too settled.
Someone asked me what is on my plate now. I really thought after we moved that things would settle down. But that is not the case. School Board is kicking up with some policy discussions in the next two weeks, David's TENTH birthday, family visiting, reunions, bike rides, swim team and SUMMER. Dear me, I will continue to only sporadically blog because of the inability to spend more than ten minutes in front of the computer. If I start to blog more, perhaps it will because I am feeling more settled. So wait for it...
Showing posts with label housing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label housing. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 04, 2013
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
More task force vetting
The CDBG task force is in the middle of reviewing RFPs and narrowing the field of proposals [pdf-quick guide to cdbg money/requirements] to a reasonable number. The task force has less than $400,000 to allocate. We have $1.7 million in requests. The hard work the members put in is dramatic but we have a commitment to balancing the interests of the taxpayer and the nonprofits serving truly needy people.
Some of the CAHIP money- the Charlottesville Housing Fund was recently allocated by our committee. A lot of that money went to Region 10 (Home First), AHIP (rehab), PHA (to maintain housing for disabled people) and Habitat for Humanity- along with some other smaller allocations. As Chair of the task force I believe Housing Fund applications should continue to flow through the CDBG task force (even if it is misnamed) for vetting. I prefer if staff/City Council arent the only people making the decisions. The members really check each other for conflicts and what is best for those served and the taxpayers. Besides Council always has the final say, why not allow an application process to continue?
City Council has the last word on this work- they will vote at their first March meeting. The final recommendations of the Task Force will be in the paperwork preceeding the meeting (we havent completed the recommendations yet).
Some of the CAHIP money- the Charlottesville Housing Fund was recently allocated by our committee. A lot of that money went to Region 10 (Home First), AHIP (rehab), PHA (to maintain housing for disabled people) and Habitat for Humanity- along with some other smaller allocations. As Chair of the task force I believe Housing Fund applications should continue to flow through the CDBG task force (even if it is misnamed) for vetting. I prefer if staff/City Council arent the only people making the decisions. The members really check each other for conflicts and what is best for those served and the taxpayers. Besides Council always has the final say, why not allow an application process to continue?
City Council has the last word on this work- they will vote at their first March meeting. The final recommendations of the Task Force will be in the paperwork preceeding the meeting (we havent completed the recommendations yet).
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Housing First
The housing money has been allocated for 2007. One decision the task force made was to partially fund Region Ten's proposal for the Housing First program. This program provides housing and intensive social work for dual diagnosed homeless folks. This article by Marc Fisher recently outlined the District's program. The project is innovative, cost saving and literally gets people into homes. This project is much cheaper than continually arresting or temporary detention in a mental health facility.
I hope the community will continue to support this program in the coming years either through housing money or other community investment. Region Ten is a under-funded but hard working organization that works with people virtually no other organization does- innovation and support is essential.
I hope the community will continue to support this program in the coming years either through housing money or other community investment. Region Ten is a under-funded but hard working organization that works with people virtually no other organization does- innovation and support is essential.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Last Council Meeting for Hamilton and Lynch
I am impressed with last night's council meeting, many things were accomplished.
1. CAHIP money allocated per the recommendations of the CDBG Task Force + the addition of a CAHIP staffer to watch over the outcomes and results for this money. 5-0 margin.
2. YMCA ground lease approved by a 3-2 margin.
3. EMS/fire recommendations of the Oversight Committee were adopted and moved forward by a 4-1 margin.
Other things happened too. Controverial and non-unanimous votes- really a great exercise in democracy last night and proves the point "reasonable people may differ".
I really appreciate Kevin and Kendra's voices on Council. While I wildly disagree with either one of them at any given moment, they were cool, calm and had honest debate (mostly with each other). I look forward to the new voices on the City Council in January, but I will miss these two.
1. CAHIP money allocated per the recommendations of the CDBG Task Force + the addition of a CAHIP staffer to watch over the outcomes and results for this money. 5-0 margin.
2. YMCA ground lease approved by a 3-2 margin.
3. EMS/fire recommendations of the Oversight Committee were adopted and moved forward by a 4-1 margin.
Other things happened too. Controverial and non-unanimous votes- really a great exercise in democracy last night and proves the point "reasonable people may differ".
I really appreciate Kevin and Kendra's voices on Council. While I wildly disagree with either one of them at any given moment, they were cool, calm and had honest debate (mostly with each other). I look forward to the new voices on the City Council in January, but I will miss these two.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Format
I changed the way my blog looks and now I dont cringe everytime I look at it. Success.
Tonight the Task Force will be reviewing RFPs in public. We have never really had people come to our meetings, although they are open to the public. I have never felt pressure from any applicant before this money came under our watchful eye. In the CDBG process (federal money targeted to particular neighborhoods and activities), we are the experts on the applications, but it does have to go through the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Admittedly these expenditures are typically rubber-stamped. The primary reason for the rubber-stamping is the priorities are set early by Council, then we follow the priorities and the federal regulations on the CDBG funds.
This money is different- this is City affordable housing money, with definite priorities. However, the funding is limited and its not clear the money will be available to these same organizations on an ongoing basis (the City has a commitment to at least three years, maybe five years). The task force (I dont speak for them all) acutely see this as 'our' taxpayer money to be spent exceptionally carefully to most effectively combat the affordable housing problems in our City.
I always say the CDBG task force is the best board in the City. The board is diverse on many different levels, thoughtful, engaged, respectful, and unapologetic in its critiques of these RFPs. I understand Council may override all the decisions we make in this RFP process. I look forward to this layer of transparency on the process for the community to see not only our hard work, but the wonderful organizations in our City trying to make a difference.
Tonight the Task Force will be reviewing RFPs in public. We have never really had people come to our meetings, although they are open to the public. I have never felt pressure from any applicant before this money came under our watchful eye. In the CDBG process (federal money targeted to particular neighborhoods and activities), we are the experts on the applications, but it does have to go through the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Admittedly these expenditures are typically rubber-stamped. The primary reason for the rubber-stamping is the priorities are set early by Council, then we follow the priorities and the federal regulations on the CDBG funds.
This money is different- this is City affordable housing money, with definite priorities. However, the funding is limited and its not clear the money will be available to these same organizations on an ongoing basis (the City has a commitment to at least three years, maybe five years). The task force (I dont speak for them all) acutely see this as 'our' taxpayer money to be spent exceptionally carefully to most effectively combat the affordable housing problems in our City.
I always say the CDBG task force is the best board in the City. The board is diverse on many different levels, thoughtful, engaged, respectful, and unapologetic in its critiques of these RFPs. I understand Council may override all the decisions we make in this RFP process. I look forward to this layer of transparency on the process for the community to see not only our hard work, but the wonderful organizations in our City trying to make a difference.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Priority question
The CDBG Task Force is honored to review RFPs for the affordable housing money appropriated this year. I am very proud of the work we have done so far. This community has a lot of people doing great work in the housing arena. We look very carefully at the RFPs because of the limited amount of money and the great need.
The other day, I read an article in the Progress regarding priorities for the next budget cycle. This paragraph stood out
"Early next year the council is likely to vote on setting a lower real estate tax rate for energy-efficient homes and buildings. And a majority of councilors have come out in favor of handing out compact fluorescent light bulbs to residents, subsidizing energy audits for low-income families and increasing Charlottesville’s tree canopy." My emphasis.
On the task force we have reviewed two different grant applications submitted for the purpose of providing energy audits for low income families. As a board, we love the idea, but we are constantly battling with limited resources - if given an energy audit, these low income homeowners would not necessarily receive the funding to actually implement the strategy outlined by the audit. To be fair a recent RPF suggested a $500 maximum to implement some of the strategies(although the homeowner would be reimbursed, so on the front end would need to outlay the money).
I wonder how many people think energy audits for low-income homeowners would end up being overall a savings for the homeowners (especially if there is no implementation strategy)/taxpayers (who presumably would have to pay less for heating programs and the like). How many middle-class homeowners would like an energy audit? How many would pay for it? I suspect a lot.
At this point, my thought is money could be going to rehab and weatherization, actual repairs on homes that are substandard with attention paid to energy efficiency while repairing.
I suspect a lot of middle-class homeowners would like the opportunity to pay for an energy audit and strategies for implementing efficiency in their homes. If the group is successful with that model, the low-income homeowners audits could be subsidized by the middle class audits- just a thought.
Am I off base? Or should the priority be energy audits to low income homeowners?
The other day, I read an article in the Progress regarding priorities for the next budget cycle. This paragraph stood out
"Early next year the council is likely to vote on setting a lower real estate tax rate for energy-efficient homes and buildings. And a majority of councilors have come out in favor of handing out compact fluorescent light bulbs to residents, subsidizing energy audits for low-income families and increasing Charlottesville’s tree canopy." My emphasis.
On the task force we have reviewed two different grant applications submitted for the purpose of providing energy audits for low income families. As a board, we love the idea, but we are constantly battling with limited resources - if given an energy audit, these low income homeowners would not necessarily receive the funding to actually implement the strategy outlined by the audit. To be fair a recent RPF suggested a $500 maximum to implement some of the strategies(although the homeowner would be reimbursed, so on the front end would need to outlay the money).
I wonder how many people think energy audits for low-income homeowners would end up being overall a savings for the homeowners (especially if there is no implementation strategy)/taxpayers (who presumably would have to pay less for heating programs and the like). How many middle-class homeowners would like an energy audit? How many would pay for it? I suspect a lot.
At this point, my thought is money could be going to rehab and weatherization, actual repairs on homes that are substandard with attention paid to energy efficiency while repairing.
I suspect a lot of middle-class homeowners would like the opportunity to pay for an energy audit and strategies for implementing efficiency in their homes. If the group is successful with that model, the low-income homeowners audits could be subsidized by the middle class audits- just a thought.
Am I off base? Or should the priority be energy audits to low income homeowners?
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Slush fund reference
This post at www.cvillenews.com provided the descriptive 'slush fund' reference in my previous post. I support the current allocation because of the rigorous vetting it went through with staff and the HAC. I understand the HAC (housing advisory committee) reviewed these proposals- two grants went to PHA (Piedmont Housing Alliance) and one went to Habitat (more money went to Habitat). All three proposals support affordable housing efforts in the City.
HAC and CAHIP initiatives have provided sunshine for well-intentioned programs that in the past, were shrouded in secrecy, this no doubt leaves a bitter aftertaste. E.g. It probably feels a little late to be finding out about this money for groups like AHIP and other housing non-profits who have struggled mightly trying to serve its constituents. It is unfortunate process was not valued in the past, I believe the City is headed generally in the right direction with respect to process and citizen input. I believe it is our responsibility to make sure input and process are a normal part of operations in the City. So in the past this may have been slush fund money, today this is not the case.
HAC and CAHIP initiatives have provided sunshine for well-intentioned programs that in the past, were shrouded in secrecy, this no doubt leaves a bitter aftertaste. E.g. It probably feels a little late to be finding out about this money for groups like AHIP and other housing non-profits who have struggled mightly trying to serve its constituents. It is unfortunate process was not valued in the past, I believe the City is headed generally in the right direction with respect to process and citizen input. I believe it is our responsibility to make sure input and process are a normal part of operations in the City. So in the past this may have been slush fund money, today this is not the case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)