 Should we get started do some intros for Sean. And then we've got reviewing the minutes report back from the other committees and then really wanting to dive in on the hit. And then I also just shared two other things that I got that we could discuss during other business so how does that. How does that agenda sound. I'd like to add to other business a brief report on the history page for the month. Oh great. Great. Or we can do that as report backs from. I'm excited about it. Well, we can start with introductions. Yeah, Sean. Hi, I'm Shayna Casper. I use your pronouns. I'm on Kent street. And I don't feel like I've had any time for doing any. Learned self-learning right now. It's like very silly, but obviously I'm always learning, but always a little, little fried at the moment. But I'll pass it to Michael. Hi, I'm Michael Sherman. We have communicated by. By mail. I'm a member of this committee and also of the Montpelier. Community fund board. And I've been a resident of the city's. Since 1985. Yeah. Morning. I'm feeling con. I'm also a board member. I work for Norwich. University. And like, Shayna. I didn't do too much. Because it was a grading week. All the midterms and everything. So maybe next time I can share with something about the, like new learning opportunities. Jeremy. Morning. My name is Jeremy Baudry. Resident. Montpelier. On Elm street. And a member of. The community fund board. I work for Norwich. University. And like shine. I didn't do too much because it was a grading week. All the midterms and everything. So maybe next time I can share with something about the, like new learning opportunities. I can share with something about the community fund. And a member of the committee. All right. And Cameron. I'll just keep calling on people here. Hi, I'm Cameron. The staff support for this committee and the assistant city manager. And Lauren. Good morning, everyone. Lauren Hurl. I am the city council. I am the city council. I am the city council. I am the city council. I am the city council. I am the city council. One self learning thing. I've been reading the book, white rage. I don't know if anyone's read, but really. Just like. Fascinating and awful history of kind of like US history with. Like. Through. Like reconstruction and I'm like halfway through the book now, but it's just like. Like how people. Worked to uphold. You know, Jim Crow segregation, the white supremacy structure. So recommend that book. It's halfway through it. And Sean, do you want to introduce yourself? Sure. Good morning, everyone. My name is Sean Gilpin. I am the director of the housing division at the department of housing and community development, which is part of the agency of commerce and community development. And I'm happy to talk about, about VHIP. It's an exciting program. We're hoping to have up and running imminently. So yeah. And then I know you folks have some other stuff on your agenda. If it's all right and not too disrespectful, I might bow out after we cover the VHIP stuff to. Frankly, tackle some of the application materials that we're putting together for the. Hurdly before our press release comes out. I'm happy to meet you all. Thank you. Thanks. Let's just review and approve the minutes real quick. If folks have those pulled up, let me know if I can share my screen. If anyone had, thank you so much to Cameron for taking notes. Also, do we have a note taker for this meeting? Shoot. That's never. Yeah. Ready and I'll take notes today too. Thank you so much. But does anyone have any edits? I'll move to approve the minutes circulated. Michael made a motion. A second. Jeremy seconds all in favor. Hi. Hi. Any opposed? All right. And so then. For report backs. Michael, do you want to share a little bit about the website? And then does anyone else have other city committee report backs as well or other related report backs? Okay. I can just tell you that. We have two authors. I'm not sure. The first did the prehistory or the indigenous history of the area. And Paul Carnahan, the librarian at the Vermont historical society. Did the rest. I've gone through them. We've, they're both in second revisions. We're working out a few things. I'm not sure if, if the city folks want to vet them before we, before you put them up. Okay. Paul and I have had an exchange and we're not quite sure what to do next. And then after that, after we've gotten the text put together, Paul and I will look for photographs and other images and maybe Jess will be involved in that as well. We did say we did have a budget for this. Paul is receiving a stipend for his work. Jess said that that's part of his job. He wouldn't take a stipend. So that was very kind of him. And we have, we have $100 set aside for the use of foot images. If the historical society chooses to impose its usual fee. So I think we're getting close to the end and. So amazing, Michael. I'm so excited to read it and, and to have that as a resource. Like it just feels so like such a. Clear step and like. Thing to check up off and like there's not often in this work, you're like, awesome, we did the thing. And this feels like we're, we're getting close to doing that check. Right. Anything else. That's my excitement. I don't know. I think it's good too. It's a big improvement over what we have. So. And then yeah, anything else from, yeah, the school board meeting, the, um, it feels like a million years ago and yet it was just two weeks ago of, um, from, you know, from, from our last meeting of, of, um, you know, police review, budget school board. Yeah. All of, all the different things that we're all engaged in. So, um, I don't know if we have a public update on police review. Um, and Michael, please, Cameron, um, add in. But our last, um, meeting, the, my failure police department came in and gave, um, a series of updates on actions that they were taking that were. Kind of putting into action the, uh, a set of the police review committee recommendations. And, you know, there was like. A suite of them that the police department and police review committee recommendations. And then there's still a handful of items that were recommended that the police department is either like just not acting on yet because there's more work to be done or figuring out and some things that they didn't support. So those are still kind of in progress, but, um, a lot of like training and, um, resources, sources around that body cameras and other things. There's, um, just a lot of work going on a better transparency around data. Um, and, um, and, um, um, Um, anyway, it was very encouraging to see a lot of work underway of moving forward. A lot of the recommendations. Um, and of course, like more work to be done to follow through on. All of them and, um, take out some of the ones that were, I think more controversial and see what happens with those with counsel. Just say the. The review committee is no longer an active committee. Um, but, um, um, I think the folks who showed up are doing this as a kind of volunteer. Um, well, it was all volunteer, but, um, Kind of watch dog and reference, you know, so if the, if we'll have it, we'll have other meetings in the future. Um, just to sit, you know, to keep up with the, what the police. And the city are doing. And I'm not sure what will happen is with. Whether the city will appoint another committee, but I don't think it's decided yet. I think I don't know what city council has been thinking. Yeah, I don't think we, we haven't even really talked about that yet. I think it's like, let's. Focus on implementing the first set of recommendations and then figure out what the next phase looks like. It's my sense. Great. Um, all right. Can we hand it over to Sean to give an overview on the hip and, um, and yeah, what's going, what's going on with you guys. Or great. Thanks so much again. And, um, yeah. So I'll jump right in. So, uh, VHIP is, um, it's actually a, so it currently stands for Vermont housing improvement program. Um, there's been some, uh, changes over, over the eye. Um, it's been, it's been a note. It's been called investment. It's been called, um, incentive, but we're going with improvement. So Vermont housing improvement program. And it's actually a, um, a type of program that our department has pitched for a number of years. And unfortunately, um, due to just other political ramifications that hadn't gotten much traction or at least, um, the bills that it usually got associated with over the past couple of years didn't end up making it through the legislature. Um, however, we were lucky enough last year. Um, to be able to use some of the cares act funding, the coronavirus relief funds, um, to run a program, um, that was actually called the rehousing recovery program. So if you see RHRP and wonder why, um, that acronyms being used, um, we used cares act funding, um, to run a substantially similar program to what we're hoping to launch again. And the idea is to, um, working through the five home ownership centers throughout the state. So it covers, they cover every region of the state for you guys. It would be down street housing and community action or excuse me, community development. Um, just usually referred to as down street. You guys are probably familiar with them. Um, so. Working with the five home ownership centers throughout the state, um, to identify private property owners who have, um, potential rental units that are offline or, or have other habitability issues, you know, code, you know, rental housing health code issues. Um, and providing relatively, um, small grants and I say relatively small in sort of the context of, uh, affordable housing development. So grants of up to $30,000 per unit. Um, with the VHIP, it's a 10% or excuse me, a 20% match is required. And the goal is to bring these units back online, um, and rented at affordable rates for at least five years. And, um, we were able to successfully bring online about 240, excuse me, 249 units of housing this way in the, um, the CARES funded program. We, uh, originally had asked for, uh, general funds, um, to continue the program and the governor's budget requests last year requested $5 million dollars each year for three years, um, to run the program. The legislature ended up actually giving us $5 million of American Rescue Plan Act funds, uh, which admittedly, you know, it's understandable that they wanted to use, you know, some of the federal, um, funds that are coming into the state. Unfortunately for us, that complicates things a little bit because of the, the required, um, uses of those funds. So, um, the way that we're running the program or at least start proposing to run the program, um, in the coming year is, uh, so again, it would be grants of up to $30,000 per unit. The units need to be vacant because of code non-compliance. Um, there still needs to be that five year affordability covenant and that, um, will restricts, um, the rental rates to what's, uh, sort of wonkily called the HUD fair market rent, which in colloquial terms, that's just the, the maximum amount of rent that, um, uh, section eight or housing choices voucher, um, can pay. So the idea is to keep the units affordable for at least five years and also the, um, the sort of big caveat with the ARPA is that, um, the units actually must be rented to somebody who is exiting homelessness. And so the property owner is going to be required to, um, and that's also a five year covenant. So the property owner is going to be required to work with what's called the coordinated entry lead organization. And so if folks aren't familiar, we have a, a network of homeless service providers that, um, department of housing and urban development HUD refers to as the continuum of care. Um, and Vermont actually over the last couple of years has implemented, um, basically a, a data management system. So that when people, um, you know, are sort of, sort of touch the system, so to speak. So enter a shelter or, um, receive assistance from, uh, from a homeless shelter provider. Um, their information is collected, um, in a secure, uh, system. And that's called coordinated entry. And the idea there is that, you know, if, if I were, um, to need services from, let's say, uh, a shelter in, in Barry or, or Montpelier, and then, um, you know, a couple of weeks later moved up to the Burlington area. Uh, I wouldn't have to redo an application and, and all the rest of it. They already have the info in there. So the idea is to kind of streamline sort of one, one point of entry to the whole system. So that's just a little background on why we're choosing to use the coordinated entry lead organizations, because they're well equipped to sort of make referrals to landlords. Um, so that's, um, that's sort of in a nutshell. So I'll stop there. I know that was a lot and, um, take some questions and then I'll happy to elaborate. I have a question, um, to start. So with, with this latest round of funding that is focused on folks coming out of homelessness, or it sounds like the, I think coordinating care organization is what you use. That's kind of makes the connection between the individual that needs housing and various kind of private landlords who might be interested in the pro and this funding. For rental units, getting rental units online. Um, is that really the only kind of conduit. For folks to, to get housing. Is that the process? Um, that's, that is how we envision it working this time around. Um, and, and that particular, um, That particular nexus between the ARPA funding and the homelessness, that might, um, That might evolve over time. If we do end up getting either additional funding or different funding sources for the program. But yeah, the idea is that the, um, coordinated entry lead agencies are kind of the best, um, suited to quickly make the referral and, and make ongoing referrals because we are going to require, um, for that five year period that at turnover, the, the property owner needs to go back to the coordinated entry agency to, to bring in, you know, new. So it's not a, it's not a one, you know, for one and done. Um, but yeah, they are, they're kind of the more sophisticated, um, groups. Uh, And one of the, just for a little context too, in the, in the previous program, the 2020 program that we ran, um, we kind of did a hybrid where the affordability covenant was there. The same, um, for five years, but the, um, The property owner only had to, um, Consider three referrals from the continuum of care organizations, um, which is a bit of a broader definition of organizations than the, than coordinated entry. Uh, and it ended up, being quite, quite chaotic and oftentimes the landlords, the property owners didn't really know who they were supposed to be talking to or they were getting calls from a lot of different organizations. So we're trying to streamline and make it a little more concise about exactly who they should be, um, going to just to make it a little, a little simpler and, and more successful in trying to, to serve people who are most in need. Um, Did that answer the question? Sure. Michael. Um, in the, in the first memo that we're, that I saw, which I guess is the 2020. There was a, there were two parts. There was the rental housing investment. It was two minutes. Proposals two million. Then there was a home ownership. A purchase and rehabilitation of a million dollars set aside. And 25% of that was a minority ownership. What's happened. You didn't mention either of those in your report. Are they still part of the program? So they are kind of separate. Um, you know, we, we pitched them to the legislature as, as two sort of. Two sides to the same coin. Uh, I'll readily admit that until, uh, until about six, six months ago, um, our department consisted of me and one other individual who dealt with, uh, mobile home parks. Um, so we have only just been able to expand our staff a little bit. And we're also overseeing the, um, the rental assistance program and mortgage assistance. So admittedly, we, we pitched them to the legislature as two sort of two sides to the same coin. Um, and then we also, um, we also have a home ownership program and mortgage assistance. So admittedly we have not gotten this home ownership rehab program up and running, although we have the appropriation for it. And we'll, once we get VHIP going again, um, we'll probably pivot to, to opening that back up. But the idea there, um, is, is, is similar, but on the home ownership side, basically to provide, um, essentially construction loans for first time Vermont home buyers that needs immediate work. And right now it's really difficult to get financing for that. You know, we've been hearing anecdotally, especially from realtors that, you know, people might get qualified for a mortgage, but then as soon as the, uh, inspection comes through, the bank is no longer interested in, in, um, Financing a particular home because of the repairs that are needed. So our idea there is to, um, is to start and operate a program that would be ongoing, um, to kind of do a similar, similar thing with, with addressing habitability and rental units through VHIP, but, um, have it be for, uh, first time home buyers, uh, who, who might, um, be interested in, in purchasing and fixing up homes. Um, I will say we actually have been doing some research and have found, um, there's, there's actually a HUD program that might be a really great match with this. And we've been in discussions with the Vermont housing finance agency as well, which has a down payment assistance program. So we've been tinkering a little bit with how the, how this home ownership side will work. Um, but we're still a ways away before we can, um, for ready to launch, launch that. And is the minority ownership set aside still part of the plan? It's still part of the plan, although, um, the, I, I hesitate and this might seem like parsing words. I hesitate to call it a set aside because there's some fair housing implications, um, for, um, so I think, I think it would be more accurate to call it a goal. And we, um, and we're going to achieve that goal by sort of specifically reaching out, um, as best we can to BIPOC and other minority communities in order to, in order to make sure that they have, you know, enough access to these particular funds, um, in order to, in order to reach that. Um, but I would, I would be hesitant to call it a true set aside. Well, I was just quoting from the, from the memo. Yeah. No, I, I appreciate that. And, uh, I, I regret the, uh, the wording of, of how we put that together, but, um, just want to be, want to be clear. And did the legislature have to approve that change from a goal, from set aside to a goal, or is that. I believe in the, um, well, we're actually in an interesting situation where both VHIP and this home ownership program were described in. Um, the, um, the, um, S 79, which had a, uh, larger rental housing safety and registry components. Um, in the quirks that are our legislature, the policy bill ended up getting vetoed by the governor because of concerns about the rental registry, um, which is in my humble opinion, rather unfortunate. Um, however, the appropriation did actually make it into the budget. Um, and the last thing that VHIP up and running is we're in kind of a, an interesting legal situation where the policy describing the program, um, wasn't passed into statute, but the appropriation was allowed. So we had to figure out whether or not we were legally even allowed to run the program. And after a lot of consultation with, um, with various lawyers, um, it was determined that we do our department has the statutory authority to create programs to address housing. Um, and, um, um, I don't know if you have the appropriation, we were able to move forward, but it delayed things. So that's a long way of saying, um, the legislature, uh, did not actually, and, and for what it's worth in S 79, I believe, um, the change was made to call it, um, to call it a goal rather than a set aside for those reasons. And I'm hopeful, um, my understanding, and I don't want to speculate too much. Um, but my understanding is there's been some conversations with the chairpersons of the two housing committees in the, you know, in the house and the Senate and the governor's office. And I think they've come to a reasonable, um, uh, reasonable, uh, agreement compromise is the word that's escaping me a reasonable compromise, um, on what will have to be a new S 79. They'll do a strike all because the dates that were included in that, um, have passed. And so they can't, they can't simply do a veto. So it would be impractical to simply do, try to do a veto override. So there's going to be some changes. And I'm pretty confident that early in the session, we'll see, um, we'll see the actual statutory language pass. And that'll also help us kind of move forward with the homeowner, um, aspects. Uh, so yeah, that's all that's, that's as much a reading of tea leaves and looking into the crystal ball as I'll go for the next legislative session. I've been around just long enough to know that never expects the expected. And it's, and it's probably, uh, anomaly that the, the money is there, but the policy isn't usually in my, you know, watching Congress still pass a bill and say, Oh yeah, we'll do this and that, and then they don't fund it. Yep. That is, that is, uh, my experience as well. Um, so this, this is quite, uh, quite a, uh, cart before the horse situation here. Congratulations. Yeah. Thanks. You said the funds. That's good. Yeah. I will say, um, if, if there's anything beneficial out of this pandemic, it's been an incredible amount of resources going into housing and homeless service. Um, it's been, it's been amazing to go from a lack of resources to suddenly, uh, more than we, we can implement. Um, so we've got a rapidly increasing unhoused population here and no place to put folks. So what is the realistic timeline of some of these opening up for folks, even if they're in the continuum of care? Is there going to also side note, is there going to be preference for people who are already in our community or will people be like trucking into communities that have these programs? Um, the first off the timeline, I expect that will be, um, so let me back up. So the homeownership centers on down street included have already begun sort of informal waiting lists of interested property owners. So they've got people in the queue who are interested, understand the parameters and are ready to begin construction as soon as they get the green light. I'm hopeful that, um, the program will sort of officially be launched and we'll start, um, Start projects prior to Christmas. Um, we're, we're being pretty aggressive about trying to get this, this going. So this month I think, um, is reasonable that that properties will start, um, start work. We have a requirements, um, in the agreement letters between the homeownership centers and the property owners that, um, the properties need to be completed and, uh, and occupied within 18 months of signing the agreement letter. We worked a lot faster than that last year, um, just because of the nature of the cares act funding. So I think, um, we'll probably start to see, um, units opening up in the spring or possibly even before it sort of depends a bit on, um, It depends a bit on, you know, the, the amount of work that needs to be done to a particular unit, you know, some, some might, might be relatively small fixes that can happen quickly. Some might be, you know, more, much more serious renovations or even, you know, converting, um, um, uh, buildings that, you know, have a poor layout or too many bedrooms for the market to, you know, multiple apartments is another option for these funds. Um, so it's, I, it won't be a silver bullet to, to, you know, completely eradicate homelessness in the particular area, but we're hopeful that it will, it will be a good dovetail into other, um, other efforts going on. And the, um, the vision is to, as far as sort of the locale of individuals, um, the coordinated entry lead organizations do each have particular regions that they work with. So the idea is to try to keep people as close to where, um, as close to the community that they're a part of as possible. So, um, we're certainly not encouraging, you know, significant movements of, of populations from, from one region to another. Who's our coordinated entry organization in this area? You know, that is a great question. And I wish I looked it up before meeting with you guys. Um, they're admittedly a bit, um, it's a bit outside of my, uh, it's my wheelhouse. Um, you know, we, we kind of, um, we typically deal more with the bricks and sticks, if you will. And it's, it's agency of human services that, that, um, overseas the COCs. I do have a list though, um, that, uh, I can look up and send sends to follow up, um, on the, uh, invitation email with that, that information. Would it be capstone? Um, I'm not, it, it very well could be that seems the most likely. Um, but sometimes it's, um, sometimes there's, there's other organizations that actually do the, the data input. Um, but capstone is definitely part of the continuum of care. And they'll, they'll be involved, I imagine in the referrals. Um, do you know if, do they have a landlord liaison program at capstone? Well, I think they used to, um, I was on the board for several years. Um, and I'm pretty sure there was that there was such a program. Yeah. I don't know. I don't know if that's still the case. They got sort of out of the, the land loading stuff. Um, they unloaded their own properties and I don't know. Um, what, what their relationship is with other landlords. Uh, the other kind of technical question I had is. And maybe we don't need to know this in our committee, but where's the kind of flow of information in terms of. Um, um, I know that this is a, um, um, I'm not sure if it's on Peeler city understanding. This is the breadth of this program and how many units we might be expect to come online in the next 18 months is that this downstream on that information? Are they interfacing with other city groups? Um, I guess just in general too, like what does $3 million mean for the state to. Yeah. million allocation and it's going to be distributed, like I said, between the five homeownership centers. I don't have the budgets that they provided right in front of me, but it's not going to be a million apiece. There's kind of differing interests. It's actually, interestingly enough, the lowest amount of property owner interest is in Chittenden County, and I think the highest is up in the Northeast Kingdom. I don't recall the numbers that Down Street is considering. We anticipate that with that five million, we'll probably translate into about 140 to 145 units throughout the state, so it's not an enormous amount, but it's definitely, you know, it's not insignificant. There has been a lot of legislator and gubernatorial interest in this program. I don't, again, don't want to speculate too much, but I think it's safe to say that there's going to be an ask from the governor's office in the Budget Adjustment Acts to increase the amount of funding for this program in particular, and one of the reasons why we're kind of launched, we're getting wait lists, and there'll be hopefully next week a press release on this directing people to contact their homeownership centers if there's interest, is to kind of develop some support for the program and really be able to articulate why this should be funded at a higher rate than the five million. For what it's worth right now, especially with increased material and labor costs, we're seeing a traditional sort of multifamily subsidized housing development costing about $300,000 per unit, so the idea of bringing units online for $30,000 per unit, one-tenth of that public investment is naturally getting a lot of attention with appropriators, so my fingers are crossed that we'll see this program grow in the amount of money that's available for it, and hopefully the interest will stay there, so all that's sort of, again, a long answer, sorry I keep being so verbose in these, but there will likely be more interaction between, more information sharing between the homeownership centers and localities this time around than in what seemed like a one-off with the CARES funding. It's also important, well, good to note that our department for the first time ever has actually been able to hire a communications director, so we now actually have somebody who can specifically get some of this information out, you know, in the before times it was just me writing press releases and updating our website along with actually administering all the programs, so I'm hopeful that we'll be able to be a conduit for more information for interested municipalities, but also- Do you have to opt in or anything, or is it, I mean this is just happening, I don't have to like, it's just to get the word out, right? Yeah, there's no opt in or opt out, it's working with, you know, private property owners to improve properties. I would, you know, I would hope that there wouldn't be any municipalities that want to opt out of improving the housing stock in their area, but I'm sure there's some healthy concern about exactly what that would mean. One of the reasons I think why this program has gotten quite a bit of traction and talk is that it's not concentrating poverty, it is, you know, trying to spread people out so that you don't, you know, it's perhaps a little bit more palatable to have an apartment here or there as opposed to, say, you know, purchasing a hotel and running it as a transitional housing that kind of can get people a little concerned about the effects of that. But no, there's not a particular, I mean, not a particular opt out, I'm sure the homeownership centers would be eager to partner with, or I'm sure Downstreet would be eager to partner with you guys to, you know, to broadcast the availability of the program and we would certainly encourage that. That was going to be my next question, what can a committee like this do to be of some help to you, if anything? You know, off the top of my head, I don't know that I have a particular plan for a group like this other than, yeah, I am happy to, you know, keep you folks on my list of groups to contact when things change or more things become available to, you know, reach out to whatever your own networks or, you know, distributions, lists serves, the things like that. I think we'll learn more sort of as things evolve and roll out and we see what the actual interest is. But yeah, I'll be happy to stay in touch as things evolve. Has there been any thinking about, like, I mean, I guess Michael's question kind of got at it, but like, are there any barriers that you see from local city like ordinances or anything that make this more difficult, any like challenges that a city could get ahead of like ours or their opportunities on the flip side of like, you know, like matching some of our own ARPA funds too for the city got to like expand or like put the program into greater effect more quickly and, you know, get more housing units online or like any anything like that that from a city government level you're seeing would be a help or a particular hindrance to making this as effective as possible. Sure. No, that's a great question. You know, I'll definitely reach out to the homeownership centers and ask about barriers last time. To be honest, often off the top of my head, you know, I don't think that the 2020 program really had too many municipal barriers, partly because we're dealing with existing largely dealing with existing structures. So the level of permitting is has been relatively minimal, although, you know, that's always we did allow for new unit creation, but not in I don't think we did any any actual new buildings, you know, it would be like converting a carriage house or something like that or, you know, creating a basement apartment or what have you. So I don't know that there's a huge municipal barrier, I think the biggest barriers to be honest are going to be labor availability and material availability. I know that that was that was definitely a difficulty in 2020, although fingers crossed, it's not quite as you know, the supply chains aren't quite as stretched as they were last year, but we definitely aren't back to, you know, pre pandemic situation, especially when it comes to costs. I'm sorry, there was a second part to your question that is polluting me. Oh, just just like, are there opportunities that like cities could have to, you know, partner in some way or make their own investments or something that could expand it? Yeah, our dollars as well. Yeah, I'll be candid. I don't think we've really considered a whole lot of sort of municipal partnering on on the appropriation side, but I'm certainly happy to have that conversation. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible, especially if there's, you know, increased interest if there's if there's more interest with a particular homeownership center in terms of number of interested property owners, then then funds available. I don't see why municipality couldn't commit to applying ARPA funds. I'll actually speak with our general council and see if it makes more sense for, yeah, I mean, I think we could definitely share our grant agreements with municipalities and see if you guys wanted to do sort of follow a similar model and just enhance the amount that's available. One, I do want to be cautious about reporting requirements with the ARPA dollars are pretty stringent, so I definitely want to consult and make sure that, first of all, that everything's being kept track of so that, you know, a future audit, which is almost inevitable with these funds, doesn't come back with serious findings and also just that from an administrative burden, if we're already doing reporting, you know, there's not really a good sense of why, you know, we'd have a municipality reporting on the same projects as well. So I would just want to make sure that we're coordinating that, but I think it's an interesting thought, especially if you're hoping to put ARPA funds towards housing development. Go ahead. Oh, no, no, I was just going to say, you know, we're we're still like figuring out what we're going to do and lots of needs. I just, you know, housing is a top priority of our strategic plan and of our council. And, you know, as Cameron said, we're seeing, you know, obviously, as you know, well, like so many people in our community with needs. So if there was an ability to take some portion and even like sub granted to you all to use it and then you do the reporting or something like, it would just be interesting to know if that was even an option. Yeah, yeah, but I think that would probably be perhaps the most efficient. If and I'll, like I said, I'll speak with our general council and kind of pose the question and let him mull it over. Yeah. Thanks. Sorry, Michael, I'm sorry, sorry, sorry. That's going to say, is there a role here for something of an organization like Habitat for Humanity to be involved in some of these projects? I mean, I know that they usually, a normal way of operating is that the potential owner has to put up some capital and some sweat equity. But it would be one way to lower the building costs if you have a volunteer core, but I don't know if that's, you know, would that fit within the federal and your guidelines for how this gets done? Or do you have any restrictions on who's the card? Who is the contractor or things like that? Yeah, so we don't, we don't have restrictions on who the contractor is. Fortunately, because one benefit of ARPA is that a lot of the, a lot of the other requirements, including environmental review and things like that are actually waived because it's considered, you know, a disaster relief program, essentially, which is generally helpful just for expediency, although we're still, you know, doing sort of cursory reviews just to make sure funds are being spent appropriately and not putting people at risk. That said, I don't know that there, I don't believe there's been any conversation with Habitat. My initial reaction is, again, because this is ARPA, the focus on households exiting homelessness is in large part due to not only the need, but the fact that they're considered, that population is considered categorically eligible. So basically, if somebody is the, you know, the U.S. Treasury has essentially put in their guidance that if somebody is experiencing homelessness, then they're automatically eligible for COVID relief funding, largely to keep people out of congregate shelters, where obviously the virus can spread more easily. So I know that Habitat is typically, at least my understanding is they've typically focused on home ownership for, and so I don't know if the, if sort of the ends, the end user, the end resident would necessarily align with this round, but I'd definitely be interested in, you know, if we, as I think I mentioned before, we're really hoping to turn VHIP into a permanent ongoing program. And I think the program parameters will change and, you know, just generally evolve as we change funding sources and sort of see the longer term effects. So I definitely think there might be an opportunity to have a conversation with Habitat to be completely honest right now. It's a lot of coordination, even just with between our shop and the five homeownership centers and the coordinated entry lead organizations. So I'd like to get the program sort of up and running and moving before we start bringing in more, more organizational stakeholders, just for the expediency of getting, getting money out into the streets. I had a clarifying question, you know, I've been talking a lot with some of the folks who've experienced homelessness here and a lot of them are very frustrated and have given up on the coordinated entry continuum of care process. So would those folks be able to work directly with Down Street or do they need to be in the queue through the continuum of care? Yeah, that's a that's a good question. I think right now the way the way we are structuring it is requiring a pass through with with coordinated entry. I think we can probably if that if that turns into or becomes, you know, a bottleneck or a reason why folks aren't getting getting into housing, their housing needs. I think I think we'll definitely consider opening it back up to to the larger continuum of care. The one struggle as well for you know, folks who are not not working with coordinated entry is is whether or not they have the subsidies that would be likely necessary to get them back into kind of a permanent housing situation. So we definitely want to make sure that we're not setting folks up for you know, for a failed tenancy that could you know, further make it difficult for them to to find rental, you know, other rental housing in the future because of checkered history. So it's the questions well taken. And I think I'll be sort of diplomatic and say that it's a it's a it's a difficult balancing act to try to make sure that we're we're setting people up for success. Yeah, does anyone have any other questions? Great. Well, again, thanks. Thanks so much for for giving me all this time to chat about this this program and for your interest in it. I'll definitely stay in touch as things as things evolve. So you're aware of sort of where we're at. And yeah, we'll be updating our website and working with the all the HOC's to kind of make sure that there's opportunities for folks to learn more about the program. And yeah, if if there's any follow up questions or you know, things you think of later, certainly don't hesitate to reach out and and I'll do my best to to answer questions. Thank you. Thank you. Great. Take care. Have a great rest of your day. Thank you. You too. Because do we have any like follow up from that or like other? Yeah, next steps. Well, I actually had a quick follow up question for you, Cameron. Curious about what you've been hearing from homeless individuals about frustrations you working with, you know, they can coordinate entry organization. Well, I think a lot of the frustration that I've been hearing is is that people can't get there's there's no places to go. And so why would they wait through all of this paperwork and being checked in on and like, why would they go through all this process is to be told at the end, there's nowhere for you to go. You're on a list, right? So it's also very hard for people to get connected because most people are told to connect through these things through 211, right? And so they're either being put on really long holds or they can't get a call back because they don't have phones. And so it's just it's a very complex system to connect with. And it's not easy. And so you kind of have to know what you're supposed to be doing, right? So I'm interested to see how this I'd like to talk to Down Street more about how they and, you know, the state intend to get the word out that this these apartments are becoming available because if they are neat, if you need to be on the list now to be considered, then how are we getting people on that list? How are we making it easier for them to connect? You know, there's a whole host of things. We're trying to get good Sam and another way into the transit center now to have more phones and connect people to the continuum of care that way. It's just it's a hard it's it's just it's a bureaucracy. It's a very intense state bureaucracy system that people have a really hard time managing when they have no one to support them to walk through that, right? So I would say that this is just another layer of difficulty, honestly, to to getting into the housing. But I mean, if it becomes available, maybe by that time, they'll have a better sense of how many people would be eligible and how many apartments are available after that, right? It should be great to know. Yeah, cool. Thanks. Appreciate that. Yeah, and then I just want to recognize to that, I think, three unhoused folks in Montpelier have passed away in the past months. And so past couple of weeks, right? No, I don't. There was a really weird email chain that came out in the last week, discussing folks who had passed away and put a number between three and six. We don't like I asked my police to look at any deaths that happened and they didn't find any in our in Montpelier. So those are very unsubstantiated. I don't really like it when people do those things over emails. But I have I don't know what people are talking about. So maybe maybe we just don't know about them. But I am going to go ahead and say probably not. Okay. And then I don't I'm actually I'm going to pause there because I was a whole other thing to open up. But maybe can we just circle back real quick to the budget? So I know those were due yesterday, I believe. So the budget ask for stipends for city committees. And then just there's any update on creative discourse? No, any update? What are you looking for for the stipend for city committees? I mean, y'all were still sort of like looking at options and how you want to package that. You know, our next council meeting is the eighth. And then I don't know what the next one is the 15th. I think the that it was like to draft a like kind of a final proposal with of the 42,000 but not having there be the like not not figuring out all of the nuts and bolts of the implementation of it but putting it into the budget so that it could start in, you know, we could figure out the nuts and bolts of the implementation by July. But wanting to like bring that to the to the city council as kind of the the line item proposal. And so I think that all that is in the budget for 42,000, right? And so I'm just yeah, what's what are other? Do we have any other next steps there? All right. Yeah, if you want that to be on council's agenda to look at a proposal would need to be in the hands of staff, like you're written. Here's what we'd like you to consider. Friday this week or the 17th. We hear me. Oh, God. So I mean, is this going to be like often the way the budget has been presented in recent years is like, there's like core services and then there's like things that either committees like this are asking for and like council kind of like debates which of those we could like are going to include in the budget? Like is this just going to be part of a list? So essentially, like this committee just sending an email like a one pager around of like, this is why this is part of the ass. Like, does it have to be it doesn't have to be like a standalone agenda item on the no, no, no, it just has to go to it just has to go to Kelly, our finance director, it just needs to go to Kelly for inclusion. That's it. I just mentioned the council dates because we're discussing the budget at council and so Kelly needs it at least in time to include in her materials. So basically be writing up the proposal into like a one page memo, sending it on Friday and then being on the city council on next Wednesday to discuss it. Is that right? Well, it would. So it Lauren is right. We're trying to pitch all of the things sort of at once. And so we're starting to talk about the budget next agenda and then the budget conversation will basically extend through January. So just the sooner is better. Jeremy as the resident budget guru. Is that something that you could do or would it be helpful to have someone else such as myself to just kind of write up the general proposal? Well, curious to know if there is any kind of template for this. We can. Okay. So I can't do that this week. For sure. Other than maybe responding to something could get into it next week. If no one else wants to take the lead on that. I think that would be great. Yeah, I'm like, looking at my just looked at my calendar and I was like, well, it's not gonna happen before Friday. So if we're gonna hold off, then I think that would be great for me if you could. Yeah, that's not good for folks. But sounds up enough. Okay, I'll do my best to build some kind of a one page proposal. And then share out for you all to comment on individually over the course of next week. Cool. Thank you so much. And for those comments, we can send those will email those comments directly back to you, Jeremy and not to the whole great. Cool. And then for creative discourse of first signing the part phase two piece, I just didn't know if there was any update from the camera there. Sorry, I was trying to loop both of those things in together. No, that would need to go on a council agenda, but I haven't, I haven't touched that. So I will, I will look at that and I will have a report for you by next time on what, what steps are taking and what we need to do. Cool. Thanks so much. And then the other business, I just wanted to share these two things that I had gotten with a request to share. So one is that Human Rights Commission, HRC, I think this was called scorecard of Montpelier that they got two weeks ago. And I just thought it was interesting to be interesting as a committee just to like look at what they're tracking around non-discrimination laws, like the municipality as an employer, municipal services, law enforcement and leadership on LGBTQ equity. Obviously, this is like coming from a very perspective around, you know, like LGBTQ work. And I think there's some, you know, this was important for for all of the work. And so just wanted to share that thing. I thought it was interesting as well. And then I got the this email from Peter Kalman with a request to share it with C. Jack. We don't have time to discuss it today, but the proposal of pallet shelters for folks experiencing homelessness in Montpelier, I guess I'll kind of go on record of that. I think that this is, you know, would have to kind of be at the very minimum, like a bandaid of kind of this like broader problem that we're talking about. And I'd like to kind of more focus our committee's efforts on like structural change. And and and but I'm open for, you know, having more conversation if folks are interested. I'll say that I had seen this proposal before Peter contacted me and I have a long email response suggesting that there were a lot of unanswered questions here about infrastructure and permits and and and until and lesson until they could get those straightened out. I didn't think I thought it was premature to come to our committee with any kind of endorsement. We could encourage them to move forward, but I'm happy to share the my response to Peter with you. If you want to see that, I'll send it to you. To you, Shayna, and you can just share it out. So all right, so between the next meeting, Jeremy's going to write up the memo to be able to share with the city council. Cameron's going to check in with creative discourse. Michael's going to share this the response I suppose on any other kind of immediate next steps. So we're still thinking December 15th. Yeah. Next meeting. Does that work for folks? Yeah, 15th at eight o'clock. And normally I suggest to folks that they take a holiday breather end of December through the first few weeks of January where we all decide so we can talk about that at your next meeting. So I have an agenda for next meeting of the memo for council read the stipends, creative discourse contract updates, a history update for the website if we have one, if that's ready. And then we'll be talking about holiday scheduling. Does that sound right? Should I send the history text to you, Cameron? Yes, please. Okay.