Anchorage Assembly: HHAND Commission Monthly Meeting September 2026

The 2027 Housing Development Action Plan. I don't have a formal PowerPoint here, but I am going to give a little introduction to talk about how our planning process works and why we're doing it during the 2027 Action Plan now when we don't have a draft or anything else for anyone to review. And the basic reason for that is that this is a required element of our citizen participation plan that we have a public hearing before we draft the action plan each year so that we can get input from the public before we do anything. Um, in the past, we generally have not had the first hearing quite this early. It's not even 2027 yet, um, but we are trying to get onto a cycle where we have, um, our money in hand earlier in the year, basically, than we have been In past years, we have generally actually not even gotten that year's grant in place until the next calendar year, which is fine.

You know, that's not a problem, but it does mean that we are kind of behind the ball every year, and it runs into these issues with timeliness of spending funds and things like that. So we are catching up on that, and we're trying to get ahead of it. So this year we are actually doing the first hearing for 2027 right as soon as we submitted 2026, which we just submitted. So that's the basic idea.

This hearing, more even than many others, is really geared toward getting input from people on what types of projects and programs you would like to see. You saw the example up there of what we submitted for 2026 after we went through this whole process in 2026. Now we're coming up on 2027. Yes. Can I just, for the record, we have Michelle Baker has joined us and we have—.

All right. So maybe after this presentation, we can go back and do it. So that's basically the idea behind the public hearing. There will be another public hearing after we draft a proposed action plan. There'll be a 30-day public comment period, public hearing to get reaction to an actual proposed allocation of funds.

So there will be another chance to come back and give input on what we propose to do. But this is the initial— let us know what you want.

We, we manage 3 grants through this action planning process. That's Community Development Block Grant, which is our largest program. Usually we get a little less than $2 million per year that can be used for a variety of community facilities, community services, public services, public facilities. Um, new this year due to the passage of the 21st Century Road to Housing Act in July, We will be able to do new housing construction with CDBG funds. That has not been an allowed activity under CDBG for the past 50 years of the program that it's been in place.

That was changed by that law that was recently passed. Can now do up to 20% of the grant amount for construction of new housing. Very exciting. Housing is a big priority. Not being able to do it with CDBG or largest grant that has been Um, so we are particularly interested in looking at what types of new housing construction might be done.

Now, it's not a huge amount of money, um, because it's only 20% of our approximately $2 million. So that's about $400,000. Um, but still, that's more than we've had in the past for this grant, um, for new housing. Um, other things that can be done that are housing related is acquisition properties for housing. Utility and groundwork construction and renovation rehab of existing housing, which is something we are also looking into doing, setting up a new program to do redevelopment, as we're calling it, but as part of that is rehab of existing housing.

Our second program, Home Investment Partnerships, is primarily focused on housing. In fact, really entirely focused on housing. However, it is a smaller grant. We usually only get about $600,000 or $700,000 a year. From home.

So, um, that does kind of constrain what we can do with that one. You can do rental housing, you can do homeowner-occupied housing. We do a lot of work with Habitat for Humanity, and in the past, some have done that program. You can also do rental assistance through that program. Um, Emergency Solutions Grant is our smallest grant, usually about $160,000 a year.

Um, in recent years, we have used that entirely to fund homelessness prevention. Rental assistance program through the Aging Disability Resource Center here at the Health Department. And, you know, that's, that is one thing you can do. ESG is generally focused on homelessness. And so there's a variety of things you can do with it, but it is a pretty small grant.

And so what we've typically done with that in, in recent years is focus that on prevention, which tends to be the biggest bang for the buck. In the homelessness world. So those are our grants. We don't yet know our exact grant amounts. We're so early in the process here, HUD has not yet announced what we're getting for 2027.

They usually don't announce that until the spring, sometime between March and May. So we won't be able to actually set specific amounts and submit the action plan until we have those specific amounts, but we can do these early stages in the process kind of estimating approximately how much we intend to or expect to get based on different years. It is a formula. It's nationwide. It's out of our control how much we get.

They just run the numbers and give us a number. But it's typically about the same from year to year. So that's 437 Action Fund kind of in a nutshell, and we'll open it up to any public comment.

Thank you, Jed. I'll open it up to commissioners first.

Um, and I, I would just— one thing that I just noticed on the list, so, and maybe this is something that I missed, um, but in the list of organizations consulted, two of the largest homeless services providers in the community are included on this. So one being Catholic Social Services and Full Disclosure work with Catholic Social Services. So comment with this hat on, and maybe I missed an email or something, but the other is Covenant House, another very large, um, uh, homeless services provider that does a lot of this. And they just, they just noticed that those, uh, those two are conspicuously absent. So, okay, yeah, great, great feedback.

And, you know, the, that list of organizations consulted does often get kind of carried over from year to year, and if you're not always updated with who we are in fact talking to. I mean, we certainly have talked to CSS a lot in the past year, and so definitely we're interested in consultation with any interested organization. One of the things that we say, you know, when they ask, like, is there anyone you deliberately did not consult with? There's no one that was deliberately excluded. So definitely, definitely interested in talking further about this.

I will say also what you're looking at is the home allocation plan. That's what that document is— oh no, okay, never mind. This is—. I thought you were looking at what was in the packet, which was the page 1 and then number 3. Oh yeah, so, but we will check the— to make sure that that is included.

Thank you for pointing that out. Yeah, we will check, um, it—. That—. Yeah, so that's— that, that's the one that we're going to do next hearing on, but But still, good reminder to make sure to always check as many boxes as we can. Okay, we'll go ahead and open up for public comment.

I think just to put a little structure around this, we'll do 3 minutes.

Who is here for public comment on this plan specifically? I saw a raised hand there, raised hand there. Anyone online?

And public comment generally is not a dialogue or a debate back and forth. It is, you want to give your statement, and then if Jen has follow-up questions or Commissioner has follow-up questions, that's usually when we'll get back into, you know, a little bit more of a conversational kind of posture, but it's provide your statement, write your comment. Who wants to go first? There you go. Great.

Um, yeah, are you ready? Great. Yeah, whatever, go ahead and start and I'll start the timer. All right, uh, my name is Jamar Hill. I run a youth sports program that has its home in Mountain View.

We're located across the street from Mountain View Lions Park. We're like the big blue box. Um, we have an indoor sports facility, which is designated community center. And in that process, we've had to find public funding, we've had to demo properties, we've had to become a good steward to the property of Mountain View. And I have 3 suggestions.

I'd like to see funds go to demo of properties. I'd like to see programmatic funds Demo Pride community facilities. I think that those could all be really valuable, especially in a time when activities are being cut and just families are looking for extracurricular things for their kids to do. Also, with the condition of uplifting Mountain View and revitalizing the area, the Demo Park and all that is very important.

Can I ask a couple of clarifying questions? Um, when you say demo properties, is there a specific type of property that you would like to—. Like, properties? So our current facility is next to, like, a very notorious meth house, and then it was able to be demoed by the city, and it really, as a result, made the park safer. And what I find is that these places tend to get foreclosed by out-of-state banks, and it's just such a nightmare to come out of it in a neighborhood like Belmont, you get held hostage by it.

And so to just be able to come to the city for support and things like that could really, really change different various neighborhoods. So specifically for blighted or derelict properties that are a nuisance to the neighborhood? Um, I, I mean, that's beneficial, but I wouldn't necessarily say that. I mean, we just had a community council meeting last week for the old Circle K gas station, which is problematic. There was a couple homicides there and assaults, and it was voted unanimously like that needs to be community asset for the park, you know.

And so being able to have funds that you could, you know, that's a similar situation with a, with a large publicly traded corporation, reclaim properties and, and make them for public use, I think, is And the other 2 categories you said programming and the 3rd one? Programmatic support, community facilities. Just expand on those 2, just be a little bit more specific. Yeah, I think that, I think that there's the New York Times did an article just recently about just the pay-to-play culture. Like, if you want to have kids in activities or whatever, becomes highly expensive.

So, When there's facilities that, you know, especially like to say one like mine that's walkable in Mountain View and it's funded in such a way where it's just like, here's a third space, go to it, I think it's very valuable to maybe a quadrant of the city. So I think that, and then on top of that, it positions kids for things like, to give an example, our website collects all this data. So we'll see like health insurance information, who has it, who's on the down and out. So you can create partnerships like that, but being able to staff and be positioned for things like that is very impactful. And that, that's what I thought for public funding.

I don't look at what we do as anything better than anything anybody else is doing, really, all over the city, especially with our climate. We just need safe, warm spaces for people to go. To create community. So I think that if that is a, a line item in the budget, uh, you really get a lot of community activation. This is what I think is important.

Thank you. I appreciate that. I think, um, we focus a lot of this body's attention on the, the two H's, the housing and homelessness, but I appreciate you really speak to the, the N and the D, the neighborhood development. So, Jen, do you have any questions? No, that's great feedback.

Those are all eligible activities that we could do. We can do demolition, we can do public services, we can do public facilities. And, you know, there's some caps on amounts for some of those, but all things that we can include in the action. Thanks for having me. Other commissioners, any follow-up questions?

Okay, moving on.

Um, thank you.

Um, so I would like to say I really appreciate what you just brought up. First, identify yourself. Dawn Morse. Thank you. Yeah, um, I live in Mountain View and have for the last 4 and a half years.

I've been in the country between 2 and last bit, almost my whole life. But, um, I have a little different perspective on the derelict, blighted buildings. Glad you brought that up. I'd like to spawn clean.

When I moved there, I just started cleaning and moved out, and many places are beautiful in Nanwuju now, and I can tell the community has joined in that. But when there are— I hope for the city to get 2 terrible buildings removed. And now they're like fields of flowers, which is very peaceful and lovely. And we need more fields of flowers in Mountain View and not boarded up buildings that are filled with asbestos and other unsafe things that are not safe for anyone to stay in. So thank you so much for bringing that up.

So, in addition to that, I am curious how, how you choose the groups that are included for, hey, what's your feedback for this? Yeah, great question. We generally start with community councils, organizations that we've worked with before or partnered with, and then, you know, people that come to meetings like this, people that reach out to us. We did get a lot of people reach out to us. We are trying to ramp up our active engagement with the community.

In fact, Frankie's role is now as an outreach coordinator, and he's kind of going to meetings and presenting and just making us a regular face in the community, which we really have not been for several years. And so we're trying to ramp that back up, get input. You know, we do start with the list of people we know. And so, you know, that's organizations we've worked with or community councils or contacts that we hear about through other municipal agencies. But, you know, we'll talk to him.

We're open to ideas from the board. We're really interested in getting more input from a wider range of organizations and people, just even individuals. And so feel free to reach out to us. We can give you contact information, pass the word along. For this action plan, like I said, we're starting much earlier than we usually do.

So there's a lot of time to talk to people and get ideas and and developed concepts. I'm hearing a lot of support here for slum and blight clearance, which is a major national priority for CDBG funding. And so that is something we can definitely do. It is not something we have done in recent years. And so this is an example of the importance of doing this outreach early on, in that now we are hearing and have the opportunity to really set aside some money in the action plan to do some slum and blight clearance and make that a priority to an extent that it hasn't been in recent years.

And so that's the kind of thing we just want to know what you guys want. Sounds like that's something that there's definitely a need for, and that's definitely something we can do. And so, as we're developing action plan, we'll bring that up.

Excuse me. I had a— when do your— I have a question that we as a commission talked about assigning or asking commissioners to go to different community councils. And if I go to one, am I allowed to say I'm here as part of a commission, or is there rules about that? I just wasn't sure. Yeah, I mean, yeah, if you discuss it as a commission, you can decide to like have Commissioners go as representatives of the Commission to speak about the work that you're doing, that's absolutely in line if that's something you guys decide.

Yeah, I think the trouble would be public meetings notice that if multiple commissioners show up to the same meeting, it technically needs to be a publicly noticed meeting. But if it's just you going to Fairview Community Council or something, To talk about. Well, I just think, you know, a lot of people, of course, don't know all about what's going on because there's so much going on in people's lives. And I thought, well, I go to a couple of community councils. I didn't know if I was allowed to say, oh, look at this document and give me input later, because I just didn't know what the rules as a commissioner.

Yeah, I think it definitely is allowed. I think because of the kind of the Open Meetings Act issue, it would be best if it's something that the Commission deliberates on and decides on so that we don't end up with multiple commissioners at the same meetings without that being publicly noticed. It is something the Commission has discussed, but I think in the past few years, but I don't recall that it's actually ever gotten to the point of, like, designating specifics. But yeah, it's definitely something you guys could do. And, you know, we in our planning and stuff, we historically have relied really heavily on the Planning Commission as kind of a sounding board for these things.

And so if you can expand your reach, we're definitely very interested.

And— what? I didn't invite you to put it on these yet, but for next month, if you happen to talk about it. Thank you, Francie. Uh, too, that's also a really great place to recruit for commissioners. We have at least one open seat, um, and I believe we're going to have another seat, uh, opening sometimes.

Yeah, Daniel's not going to—. Yeah, um, I think today— yeah, today is Daniel's last, um, meeting, I believe, right, Daniel? I think he said it was the October one when we talked. Oh, right, okay. So, yeah, October would be the— yeah, because it's before the celebration.

Julie says if you show up in person, we'll bring you cupcakes. But yes, so after October, we will have two open spots. Great opportunity to do that. We would just have to make sure if, say, both of us show up to the same meeting, that only one of us is representing the Commission. On official business.

We'll just make sure that we're minding our p's and q's on that, but let's have a discussion about it this month. And that being said, like, you're all community members outside of being a commissioner that you have knowledge of this. If you go to, let's say, your own community council and you just want to flag that this is a thing, you can just say as a person with knowledge of this, not in your capacity as a commissioner, you can just say This is open right now if you guys are interested. This is the person you can talk to if you have questions. And these are all like public documents, public processes.

So anyone that's aware of them can bring them up. Just because they don't bring us in, we can talk to you here if you want to. Can I add context to something beyond my 3 minutes? So I think that like, Blighted Properties, and I'd like to talk about, like, brownfield remediation, because something that's unique to Mountain View specifically is that they've had that Circle K gas station in the, like, adjacent to the park, which is highly unusual for a neighborhood park. But with it gone, like, I'm sure there's a lot of environmental cleanup and different things.

That's a pretty key property for the mountains. The first one when you enter the neighborhood, we've discussed this thing through the council. So, I don't know if that fits into the line of property, whatever, or if it needs to be a separate con line suggestion. But I know that that is something that the community really values, that would like to see turned into a community space. Yeah, it is kind of related, but a little bit separate.

So, the municipality, totally separate from our programs, has brownfield assessment grant that the planning department manages where they'll that can go and do an assessment of a potentially contaminated property and kind of determine what level of cleanup it needs. And then there is a process for applying for funding through EPA, which is these Brownfield programs that could potentially cover some of the remediation costs. So we can definitely connect you with the people at the Planning Department that manage that. Not in CBDG's wheelhouse? No, it's not.

And it's mostly just because, like, it's not that it couldn't be, but it's mostly that there are already separate programs that like, focus on that. And so that, that way our money can go further if we kind of hand those things off to them, um, particularly for something like brownfield remediation, which can be very expensive. Um, if there's someone that, like, is dedicated to that, that's usually a better bet. Um, but it's something to discuss because, like, when, when there is a demolition of an older property, often there will be hazardous materials there, even if it's not, like, officially a brownfield site. And that's something that has to be factored into both costs and contracting and all that.

So there's definitely like multiple points of—. Suggested though, because like I said, I think it's really unusual to have a gas station right next to a neighborhood. Yeah, I mean, that would be a perfect—. Especially a neighborhood that directly qualifies for CME. Yeah, I think that that particular site would be a really great candidate for that Brownfield assessment grant.

And I think that's something we should You know, so I just, you know, since we don't manage that program, I don't know how it works. But I think for this program, that's what we're discussing, right? Public comments for this program. Yeah, so public comments here for this program, but I think there is some overlap here with the Brownfield work, basically, and then we can facilitate some. So, no, it can't be suggested?

It can be suggested. I mean, we could definitely include that. Okay. I think the Generally, but something we have to look into is whether we can actually directly have them fill up with stuff. We probably can.

We can talk further, but definitely can suggest it for sure. Okay, thank you. And if I could just chime in, I don't think everyone is here, but the former gas station owner still bears responsibility even if it's off them. Property to make sure that they still have any— that, like, they still kind of own the underground tanks, and if there's any issues with that, they still bear some responsibility. Yes, it— my understanding of it is that the owner of the property generally bears a responsibility of cleaning up, particularly if the owner of the property is also the entity that, that caused the contamination, which in this case, presumably, It's because it's a gas station owned by Circle K, but Circle K is responsible for the contamination being there in the first place.

Under those circumstances, like EPA Brownfields program is not going to give a grant to Circle K to clean up the contamination that they caused. They're still legally responsible for it. But Circle K Corporation is giant, like, corporation. They probably don't care that much about their responsibilities to this site. So I think the way this would generally work is negotiating with them for a transfer of ownership to a different entity, which might be the city, might be someone else who could then get funding to clean it up.

And that, you know, that would allow Circle K to wash their hands of it and would get it cleaned up in a way that isn't rewarding them as the polluter and letting them avoid any responsibility for it. So, but this is all, you know, this is all a little bit out of my wheelhouse as well. So, I think it's something we could continue talking about, but we want to get some of the experts in. Thank you. Any other comment on this plan before we move on?

You're about to say something.

I'm getting—. You are here, you are allowed. So I've been working since 2008. I have been, I have lived in house, in a house. I have been homeless, so I have good experience.

I don't think that Circle K is going back to that Mountain View property that worked for them.

Thank you.

Uh, okay, before we move on to the other plan, we're going to jump back to the agenda, um, and I would get a little silly, but it's procedural thing we're going to do. We're already most of the way through the agenda, but at this point I would, uh, entertain a motion to approve the agenda that we're already mostly through.

And I need a second from a commissioner online. I second. Thank you, Michelle. Any discussion? Any opposition to approving the agenda?

Going once, going twice. Agenda is approved. Moving on to the approval of minutes. I would entertain a motion to approve the minutes. Tom.

The—. What is it— August meeting. I make a motion to approve the minutes of the August meeting. Can I get a second?

Second. Thank you, Jessica. Take a second to read through them.

Excellent job, Frankie, as well.

Frankie, did Jed just soft launch your promotion? Did you get a promotion? Yes, since May, actually. I've been—. Congratulations.

Thank you. Congratulations. Yes, we're very excited to have Frankie. Yeah, well earned, I'm sure. Thank you.

Um, any changes, comments on the minutes? Any opposition to approving the minutes as written? Going once, going twice, sold. Minutes are approved. Um, we don't need to go back to disclosures, do we?

There are no action items. There are no action items, right? Yeah. So jumping back on down to item F2A2, public hearing on Home ARB substantial amendment number 3. Jed, you're back up.

I'm back.

I'll make sure I'm getting that. Okay, great. So this is the public hearing for substantial amendment 3 to the HOME-ARP allocation plan. And this, I'm going to give some background on this. This is a special allocation of funding that was done as part of the American Rescue Plan Act back in 2021, part of the COVID response.

Congress funded a big chunk of money that was called HOME-ARP. That is a supplemental grant to the regular HOME Investment Partnerships Program, which we get every year. This was also an entitlement program to the municipality. We have about $2.7 million total. One of the requirements of that funding was that we come up with an allocation plan for what types of projects we wanted to fund with it.

Within the eligible categories, this was a program particularly focused on housing and homelessness. And so it was, there were some housing-related types of projects, rental development. There were some homelessness services-related types of projects you could do. There were a few open categories.

We did our initial allocation a couple years back. Since then, we've been rolling out the funding, doing a series of competitive grant solicitations. The one I mentioned earlier today was the latest of those. This substantial amendment is actually to reclassify some of the funding that has already been allocated through those requests for proposals to better reflect the category that it actually falls into. So basically what that was is tenant-based rental assistance is one of the eligible categories.

We had allocated some funding to tenant-based rental assistance through one of those competitively selected grantees. After further discussion with HUD, we determined that the type of rental assistance that, that program was intending to do actually fell more under a different category, supportive services, which also includes certain types of rental assistance. Basically, within supportive services, the type of rental assistance you can do is very narrowly constrained. With tenant-based rental assistance as a separate category, you have more flexibility. You can do more different types of programs.

However, there are a lot more requirements for what you have to do. In terms of inspections and compliance and things like that. Whereas if you stick to the types that's, that's under the supportive services, you don't have to go through as much of that. And that is really more the type of rental assistance that we were intending to do. So what we're doing with this reallocation is basically moving that money over to this category.

It doesn't actually change the type of activity that we are intending to do with it. It's still rental assistance. It still has the same, like, eligibility requirements as the other rental assistance that we had previously funded through the supportive services. It just adds it to that category. And so $260,420 from TenBase Rental Assistance to supportive services within that program.

This does mean that we ended up allocating all of our funding aside from the administrative portion of that to supportive services, which is really not that surprising, I don't think, because I, I think it's pretty clear that there's a real need for supportive services. And unfortunately, this was only one-time funding, so we're not going to get it again. But for the time that we have it, supportive services is really the top need, um, for a lot of these issues. So anyway, that is what we're doing with Substantial Amendment 3 here, and I'll open up for public comment.

I, I think I'm just confused a little bit. Um, so is this money that's already been spent because it was in 2000 And now you're—. Yeah, no, great, great question. No, it has not been spent. Oh, it has been allocated to this category, Tenant-Based Rental Assistance.

And we're just out— we're just changing the category allocation to supportive services, um, and then the grantee will be able to spend it on the type of project. Yes, so the grantee is funding incorporated. They were grantee selected through a previous OMARC request for grant proposals, and this funding is within that. And then when you say spent, does that— are you referring to the money has changed hands from the municipality to the grantee, or the grantee has spent the money out on rents and an activity. So, because you spending it is a little different than the—.

Yes, and that's a great, that's a great point and a great clarification. So our grants are all on 100% reimbursement basis. So no money has been— like, for this particular chunk of money, no money has been spent by anybody because the way the process works is that the grantee will do their intake process for clients, we spend the money on the rental assistance, come to us for reimbursement, We'll reimburse them for it, and then we will go to HUD for reimbursement, and that's when we actually are counted as drawing down our funds. But nothing has— no money has changed hands yet. It's just been kind of earmarked for this purpose.

Okay, then for members of the public who would like to comment. One, two.

So I have a question for you. So I was listening to you regarding the reallocation of that. That's going to Hennings, is that correct? Yeah. And I'm piggybacking off of what Ms. Green said.

So really, in reality, you don't know— it sounds like to me that the money was already spent by Hennings in the Supportive Service Department And what you guys did was change the reallocation of it. So now they're gonna—. They've already done it. So now they're gonna bill the guys who actually get the money from HUD in a different category. Is that what I'm hearing?

Yeah, they have not spent it. And they have not spent it, and the reason they have not spent it is because the requirements around the tenant-based rental assistance categorization were not a fit with their program. And so once this is reallocated, they would be able to spend it, and then— but it has not been spent yet. Can I ask one other question? How do you know that the money has not been spent?

What are your checks and balances on? Do you have checks and balances? We do have checks and balances on that, and You know, the main one is if they were to spend it under the tenant-based rental assistance. So this one, the difference, if they were spending on tenant-based rental assistance, they would have to come to us first and say, we want to fund rental assistance for these people in these locations. And we would have to, like, do environmental review and we would have to check that it was eligible for that purpose before they get it.

So they have not done. So we know that they, we know that they did not spend it on eligible tenant-based rental assistance purposes. So we can be assured that, like, if they went out and paid rents, they can't come back and say to us, I need the reimbursement because we'd be like, well, you didn't do this. So that's why we know that they have not. Yeah, and then my, my last question on that is, so the $260,000 was already allocated to them in a different category?

Is that what I'm hearing? Yes. And you guys just reallocated it into a different category?

Yeah, that's exactly what we're doing.

Different but similar. Different but similar. It's like the— it's still rental assistance, but it's not like any base rental assistance as a term of our HUD leases. Thank you.

So I have a couple of questions for you. The first one is, you mentioned that there was funding, that the CRP funding went out a couple of years ago. And I would like to clarify if this was RF GP 2024 GP005. If that's the— you said it went out in proposals, right? An RFP.

And I think this may be the proposal that you're talking about. It went out in January, December, January.

2023, 2024, It was extended for a week or so. Uh, possibly, but I'd have to take a look to see. I just don't remember the number of it. Of course, I totally get that. Um, the reason I'm asking is because this particular grant was sent out as a request for proposals to the community.

And there was quite a response to that. And in the proposal, or in the RFP, it's very clear that the community was looking for supportive services, and they were also looking for rental assistance. And I met recently with VIA, um, because one of my clients submitted a proposal to this was given an extraordinarily low rating on one of the— and I said, how did this happen? She said, well, we looked at, we looked at all the proposals that came in and we decided that what we need is rental assistance. We didn't really know that.

So We didn't include the social services, supportive services. The only one that got it, I think, was Choosing Our Roots, which is a very wonderful group to get it. But essentially, they looked at it and they kind of recalibrated and said, okay, this is what we need. So I'm asking you if that was this number one, I find it unsustainable that the meeting pivoted after they had done the RFP and said, oh, we decided we're not going to fund that, even though we asked for it. So much time went into those proposals.

Rug out under feet. Okay. Um, that's my first thing. Okay. So I would like a response on that from you.

Um, after the meeting, if you will, get you my contact information. My second thing is Henning, which I read about in the newspaper several years ago, and I'm going to read what the assembly said about Henning, right? And what was in the ADN about Henning.

A message from one Henning employee who said, we should make a post on Facebook to encourage all our friends and family to vote for Mayor Bronson. Post pictures of him working with our people. Let's do transport for the clients to go vote, encourage people to register to vote when we do ID on Monday, and other things, other things that were really not good. Sean Hayes, who was leading the organization, if it ever gets subpoenaed, these text threads, we're all going to have to leave town. That's from the leadership, right?

And I know it's transitioned over to the other person on the text thread. I believe she's now leading any So the Assembly went ahead and gave them their grant, and then they followed up in June— that was in May— they followed up in June with another million dollars for Henning. And then in October of 2022, they followed up with another $3.7 million, and they did that begrudgingly because they only had 2 days before the um, before the, the place was supposed to be set up, and Henning was the only one who could do it because somebody didn't help other things to happen. So, um, Nancy, to get to your comment on—. Get to my comment, yes, this is all part of my comment, and it's extremely relevant, and I, I beg your indulgence, all of you.

Every commissioner here and every member of the public here. So I ask you, when I, when I read through this online and I saw what very much appears to be a sole source allocation of $260,000 to Henning— I do a lot of pro bono work in the community The people that are experiencing homelessness and Hemming does not get good vibes, not from anyone that I have ever spoken with. And I have zero idea why they are suddenly getting $260,000 just because it was allocated to them, however, whenever it was, 2 years ago, for something that Mm-hmm. Are they really doing that? Has anyone asked the people that they're serving?

Because there are other groups in this community that actually serve people and actually care, and they're not getting millions of dollars to do it. In fact, they were given $0. They could have been given something, but they were given nothing.

It was a poor decision by the union. I'm glad this meeting is being recorded.

So my question is, is this a sole source? Is the muni just planning to give this to Henning, or is it open for perhaps the other groups that submitted applications for— to provide supportive services that were very compelling? Were dismissed unjustly 2 and a half years ago.

Thank you for your comment.

Um, sorry, Madam, can I just ask a question really quickly? What was that RFP number that you read off? Because I have the file up right now, it's gonna just confirm. RFP 2024 GP005. Yep, that's the one.

That's the one. And I would just say, this, this body here and, and Jed, um, we are not the procurement office. We are a vehicle for public comment. All the commissioners here are citizen volunteers. Jed and his team put together plans, but they don't necessarily distribute the funds and make the decisions for where those— where those funds go.

You guys get the priorities, um, that answer to that. So we can—. Yes, we can, um, I can, I can answer the question. So, um, yes, that is the RFP that the money was awarded under. This funding, as with the allocation, that it is changing the category of awarded to Hennig as an amendment to their contract that was awarded through that particular competition.

So it's not a sole source. It wasn't an increase of funding as more funding became available. The process of doing that RFP was we had initially put out the RFP just for the home office supportive services funding. In the course of the process, while the RFP was out, um, we learned that the municipality had access to an additional source of funding through the U.S. Department of the Treasury for emergency rental assistance that had to be spent on a very short time. And, um, made the decision through that procurement process to add that funding to the Home Arc Support Services RFP because rental assistance was already an eligible activity under that, and this was an additional source that was limited, right, assistance.

Um, what that meant was that the rental assistance proportion of The funding that was awarded ended up being a much larger proportion than had originally been envisioned in the Home Arc Supporting Services RFP. And that was the basis of the allocation funding by the RFP review committee.

That was the process through which this money was allocated.

Determinations about compliance with code requirements and other requirements were made by the purchasing department at that time, say, in the summer, and they determined that that was compliant with our requirements.

It was an unusual set of circumstances with the timing and the different funding sources.

And it is not the way that our procurement processes usually work. It is allowed to do that sort of adjustment to the funding available as if additional funding becomes available unexpectedly, but that doesn't happen very often. And so generally that is not the way that, um, grants are awarded. It was the way that was awarded.

So those grants— so when that extra funding came up, it doesn't go out to the rest of the people that apply with the RFP to allocate? It, it was considered in the—. You know what I'm saying? Yeah, yeah, it was considered in the allocation and the reallocation. When that extra funding came up.

Yeah.

How was it considered? What does that mean? Understand the additional funding through the, through the RSVP allocation process was added into the overall pot of funding that the committee was awarding based on their scoring of the applications, which meant that the amounts awarded were not necessarily the same as the amounts applied.

I guess, right? That's— maybe I misunderstood what you were asking. There was— $5.5 million, I believe, that was eventually allocated for this. Choosing Our Roots got $206,000 of that. I'm actually going to pause here, bring us back to what the purpose of this possibly be.

Bring us back to the purpose of this hearing here, and it's not to relitigate what has happened in the past. This is not relitigate. This is coming up in the debate here. Excuse me, I'm going to be entering into debate here. Okay, good.

If you have comment about substantial amendment number 3, that is what we're facing, and would be willing to hear that and put that on the record. We're not going to go back and do a forensic analysis. Further discussion with this, I will, I will say I consider this a journey and comment on the resolution. Thank you. I really appreciate it.

It feels like you're genuine. That's why. Thank you. I'm looking for a, a forward-facing— I want the groups in Anchorage that are grassroots organizations that are making a difference in our communities with actual people and not just with Big funders, I'm looking for them to get the money.

Yeah, not, not the groups that have been getting millions and millions and millions of dollars. And we have the same system right now. It's not okay.

The people are speaking, and I'm one of them.

Who, who are those groups? Trusted Connections is one.

I just like to use—. Gathering Space is one. When you said those groups, are you— just for clarity, are you speaking on the groups that are not getting the funding or groups that are getting the funding? I speak, I speak, I speak for one of my clients, another one of my clients, and someone who is not my client but who is who I see makes a difference for people. And it's natural connections.

They're doing good work. We're, we're going to move the conversation along. We have, um, one more, um, talk about, um, modular housing redevelopment. Yeah, we don't really have much to say about that. If I could just please add, for participant here this morning, Um, since we have this on the record, um, it is recorded.

Um, as the Human Services Division Manager and the Program Manager for Community Safety and Development, would love to have a meeting with you. We can sit down, we do believe in transparency, and we can walk you through as long as you need and answer any questions that you have. Would that work for you? That would be a help, but I don't just want my questions answered. I want this changed.

I don't want Henning to get $260,000 because it's easy, because they're already in the system getting lots of money. It's not okay. So I will tell you that I am very happy to meet with you. I sure really appreciate that, but I'm not going to be happy with a meeting and getting my questions generally answered. I'm not here to dispute your statements by any means, and I applaud you for standing your ground and for fighting for what you believe is correct.

I think just there's, there's power in knowledge, and if we can at least answer the questions, then you're free to do whatever avenues that you decide. Thank you. Sorry, shaking chair. Thank you. Yeah, so the, the other thing that we just wanted to provide a quick update on, this isn't a public hearing.

It's just, um, the Montour Housing Redevelopment Program. Um, we are moving forward with setting up this new redevelopment program that will have several different components, one of which is going to be a, uh, demolition of nuisance properties component. Um, so that it may not be the only avenue that we take to do demolitions. I mean, I think that there is a possibility we actually allocate some separate funding to to that. There's different, like, regulatory requirements for how we designate funding in terms of income qualifications and stuff like that.

So it might make sense to have a different piece of that. But one piece of the redevelopment program is going to be if a property is determined to be not worth fixing, just demolishing it, basically. If a property applies to the program and is determined to be a relatively small fix to make it habitable, um, we can do that. And then if the determination through that process is that there's a need for assistance in redeveloping a particular parcel through modular housing or through utility improvements or through whatever it takes to reactivate that parcel, this is often going to be parcels where a previously, um, lighting structure has already been demolished and we want to get it rebuilt with something, um, we, we would be able to do that as well. So the idea behind this, um, program is that there would be an application portal that potential property owners could apply to, and then we would assess the type of project that would be, um, most suited to the situation, and then use whichever bucket of funding we have allocated to the program to do that, to, um, do whatever needs to be done.

So that's the basic idea. We'll be rolling this out over the next few months, and so we'll have more details.

When, when you say about the same, you mean traditional?

Not, not through this program, you're actually focusing on permanent housing that's manufactured, modular. That's very—. Yeah, like, and, and so the idea is that— and exactly what that would look like, or like who the manufacturers would be, we're not sure. But it is not—. It is not— we are also, you know, separately doing a lot of like policy discussions about mobile homes and, and the best options for some of the, like, development parks.

So that's another piece, but this housing development program is particularly focused on permanent housing that may be modular in construction. Thank you. Okay, moving on. And just, we're, we're butted up against time here, and I think we probably have some public comment as well. Um, 2027 municipal budget priorities.

Yeah, this is just kind of a flag for you guys that the administration is in the process of developing its proposed 2027 budget. This is that season, and so there are going to be public meetings to gather input on what budget priorities should be. And this is for— not for our grant funds, this is for municipal general funds. Um, that budget is typically approved by the assembly in November, and And so this is the time of year that the administration is gathering ideas for that. So, you know, just keep an eye out.

We don't have anything specific scheduled yet, but there will be meetings coming up at which input on budget priorities is really desired. So keep an eye out. Thea will be giving an update on the budget at the next indication. Great. Okay.

With that, we are for general public comments. Would like to give general public comments.

Uh, sure, why not.

Um, okay, no, uh, start over, start over. This is going to be probably one of the shortest ones I've ever done. Uh, Jamie Lopez, East Anchorage. Basically missed, uh, bus number 1, missed bus number 2, missed bus number 3. Paid for.

And, uh, so here we are. Um, yeah, haven't had a chance to look at any of this stuff. Uh, gap analysis, your program analysis and results, that looks about right. Um, I guess my concern is, considering the fact I'm having to talk about things, uh, is that there are a tremendous amount of people outside all over town and they're not getting help right now, and And if I say it here, then it may result in more police showing up to those locations to drive along. But one of the bigger concerns is, as I've been on before, when you displace people endlessly, you cannot hand people free things and free stuff, which turns them to crime.

They have to steal more of their strip of things. And then what it should be sort of the responsibility of leaving is a set of externality. It's transferred to private property. Owners who have far less resources to deal with these problems than a large government entity. And so, uh, yeah, basically right now, uh, a lot of people are facing punitive measures.

It's not improving. Uh, the night shelter, I think, would be a good thing, which will help people, but then they'll just be right out the door the next day and, uh, facing the elements again. So, uh, I don't know what could be done. By a commission that only has advisory authority. The people above have to listen.

But thank you again for your time. Sorry I showed up late, and I don't want to talk about things that I've not had the opportunity to read or the presentation I haven't seen. So thank you.

You set the clock, and just make sure you identify yourself. My name is Deborah Allen. And I was born and raised in Anchorage, Alaska. I just came back here after 24 years and I do not recognize my own home. I think it's commendable that we're looking at getting people off the streets, but that's not gonna fix the problem.

Okay? We're not looking at the next generation of people that are barely able to keep their homes. I'm hearing about grants for this, about grants for that. I'll speak personal, I work for Circle K, I make $15.50 an hour. I cannot pay my rent all at one time.

I just got my mom, who had two strokes. So now any extra time I could go out and work, I can't do anymore. So what I'm not hearing is about this middle population. Me, where I'm lucky, I have a landlord that lets me pay rent by the week. My last check was $458.

$400 Of that went to rent. We're not talking about bus passes and cell phones I can call. We're not talking about keeping food in my house. We're not talking about having the right to get my mom some of her medication. So my question is, what are we doing about the whole picture?

It's great taking people off the streets, but until you make them accountable for their actions, and this is as a recovered addict of 21 years, they're gonna stay in that same cycle and the same money's gonna keep on being used over and over for people that don't wanna change because they don't have to change. Because we are not doing anything to make them. Okay, you have people that are trying and barely hanging on. Acres used to be a village. Now it's all separated.

I'm hearing people say they care. I see you caring. I see the caring. I see the caring. Okay, but now everybody needs to come together and care as one group, not just a committee.

But what are we going to do to change this problem?

The problem for Mountain View Circle K is down on Burroughs, where they smoke dope in front of my store, where they come in my store and steal. Because we can't make money, the corporation cuts hours. Okay, they're not losing, I am. The people that are working with somebody has to work an overnight shift by themselves. There's been 2 shootings and a robbery in the last month and a half.

Because there's a problem with the drugs and the homelessness.

So I would like to see us as a whole do something. I work there and I hate it. I work with homeless people since 2008, but I don't have degrees, I don't have this, I have life experience.

And so all these things, people just need to come together. That's what I want to see. I said, you do tiny homes? That's great. You have requirements for being there.

Do they attend meetings? Do they do this? Are they showing accountability?

Washington bought a $230 million unit complex and threw a whole bunch of homeless people in it. It was empty within 6 months because people just got high, came for it.

Okay, um, Julie or anyone online? Julie, I just want to speak to what you talked about, and you know, holding people accountable and being and then getting that balance and then helping people. Like, we work with Truk Yeshua Housing and helping people once they get in an apartment home. I'm realizing how much more work we have to keep on doing, that keep on reaching out with those people and making that neighborhood community feel like taking them out to coffee still, making sure they got their rent paid, and then looking for assistance, like if they slipped up with their rent, where can a small group, like in our backyard, go to get some partners to help them with their rent? Because people slip up, because we're people, we're humans.

But still working with them, like you said, those people do have some jobs or some disability, but they can't make every end meet. And so keeping an eye, wrapping our arms around them, but also scaffolding Yeah, so I really appreciate what you're—. Yeah, yeah.

Any other commissioners?

Uh, I don't think we have any reports. Our next meeting will be on October 7th, same time, same channel. Um, and with that, I'd entertain a motion to adjourn. Um, can I add an idea for the agenda? Agenda?

We did, we can talk about—. Oh, I'll talk about it. Okay. Um, but, uh, I motion to adjourn. I get a second?

Second from—. Second. Thank you, Michelle. Any opposition? Okay, thank you everyone.

We are adjourned.