They have recommendations for both the city and county budget cycles. Here is what they found to be priorities.
This was a long, rambling conversation, where they pieced this all together, not greatly bloggable as usual, but here’s the highlights. (if our really want the recording let me know, its bad, but you can still hear things)
Heidi Wegleitner explains that they should make recommendations now, since if they wait until October its too late.
TENANT RESOURCE CENTER FUNDING
Ronnie Barbett asks for an update on the Tenant Resource Center, when he went to the meeting, he understands Joe Parisi can make changes and when do they know that. This is the $95,000 going to the CAC, to they have the program, is it sealed or what?
Casey Becker says the budget reflects and RFP decision, the reallocation of funds is not a budget decision. (I really want to know where this comes from, as the county board has the final say. But that is neither here nor there.) So she is not aware of a mechanism to change an RFP decision. (C’mon, every RFP at the city and county has language in that that essentially says the city and county can do whatever they damn well please.) But, what Wegleitner is alluding to is that there can be a recommendation for additions to the budget. Now would be the time to discuss those and make recommendations. The County Executive’s budget is introduced October 1st and then the county board takes over the process and can modify the document through their committee process.
Barbett asks if they can make a recommendation to fund the Tenant Resource Center, to send that message to them. Cuz this is important, how do I do that? To make sure that they are covered instead of left with nothing. How can we support an organization that is important. Ulyesses tells him to make a motion to that effect. Weglietner says that they can do that or they can do a whole slate of recommendations.
Wegleitner says that they should restore the 1/3 cut of the budget to the Tenant Resource Center, but not take funding from another organization because we should be expanding services. Everyone seems to agree. She says it might be difficult to unwind the RFP process, but that doesn’t mean that we couldn’t restore funding. We would be adding more money instead of pushing it around. (lots of talking back and forth about logistics)
Brad Hinkfuss says that what you are saying is that a RFP was issued, the award was to CAC to provide those services and we’re making a motion to give that money to CAC even tho those services are being provided by TRC, even tho those same services are supposed to be provided by CAC.
Barbett says that they will provide the services in the RFP, but at the hearing, they might consider the will of the people, and he is trying to support that. We voiced our opinions about who would be better to run it. We want to the money to go to the agency that is more prepared to provide the services. Even tho it is going to CAC, it can be changed.
Linda Ketcham says that it is not clear through the RFP process, if this is apples to apples about the services that will be provided. Some of what will be provided will remain, but there are gaps. Some of the services by the Tenant Resource Center were not really included in the RFP. Things like mediation and services for the outlying communities won’t be provided. We need additional funding to make sure that all of the services continue.
Brad Hinkfuss says he agrees and it seems that TRC is a better fit given their long history of service there, what he has a problem with is giving the same amount of money to CAC to provide a lesser amount of services while providing the same money to the TRC, that’s $95,000 times two. Ketcham says it would expand services, Hinkfuss says its not coordinated in that fashion. He says there were responses to an RFP and there is accountability to what people say they are going to do when they are awarded money.
Wegleitner says at the budget hearing it was 2.5 hours and the hearing was for all of Human Services and at least half of the speakers spoke in support of funding for the Tenant Resource Center. It has been presented by Director Green and Casey that this is a RFP decision. She is not as concerned with taking money from CAC as making sure that TRC is still accessible in the way it is to low income tenants throughout Dane County and I see a huge problem if they lose 1/3 of their budget. Because she doesn’t have adequate information to evaluate the RFP process, she feels uncomfortable saying “you guys screwed up” but it might be more important to say there was an unintended consequence to this RFP process that results in a decrease in services for tenants in Dane County and we don’t want that decrease in services. Find the money, find it in the $5M that Human Services would otherwise return to the general fund at the end of 2014. That is her point, process wise, yes the RFP decisions are reflected in the budget but its hard to comment on that when you weren’t a part of the process and that information isn’t available until after the budget process.
(a little more discussion on TRC below as well)
OTHER COUNTY FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS
This is where it gets really hard to follow. I consolidated the conversations under county and city but it wasn’t necessarily in this order and I took out all the procedural discussion.
Wegleitner reports that the Salvation Army was also at the hearing to seek funding to make sure no single women or families are turned away. TRC and this were the two things that stuck out. Developmental Disabilities group also was happy. Becker reminds her that Bethel asked for an increase. Becker has the details of the request which were $10,000 part-time custodian, $12,000 cook position, $15,000 admin support. Wegleitner says that they have to start paying for the use of the facility in addition to the $80,000 they now get. The committee searches for details and has small cross talk. They think Salvation Army requested April – October funding for staff, meals, etc. $168,405. They also had a request for single women $50,000, which they believed was additional.
Deedra Atkinson asks if the $95,000 would go for something specific TRC does (mediation or eviction prevention?)? Does that then compete with the other things. The committee says it just adds on. They agree that they should recommend a slate.
Weglietner reminds them of the Housing is a Human Right resolution and how this slate of things is in line with that.
Wegelietner also wants an expansion to the Affordable Housing Development fund, they put in $2M this year, and they got $5M in requests. Long Term Support recommended that it be increased to $5M. She also thinks they need a housing development director staff person at the county. They need an in house person with experience like the city has, they have relied on the city staff. They are trying to develop outside the city in the areas that are interested, but they don’t have staff capacity. It got cut at the last second last year. They need to consolidate housing services. That was about $91,000. This is like Matt Wachter at the city.
Wegleitner reminds them that the city requested to increase the funding for the day center. $30,000. She thinks they should match that from the city. Becker says they have $100,000 from the city, $100,000 from the county and $100,000 from United Way. Atkinson says that the original budget was less than $300,000 so they don’t need the money. Wegleitner says that budget was troubling, it is too low.
Motion is to fund:
– $30,000 for homeless day center
– $37,000 for staffing of Bethel
– funding to Salvation Army to make sure families and single women are not turned away
– restore cut to Tenant Resource to ensure adequate services to tenants throughout the county, particularly outside the city of Madison (they debate if its tenant/landlord law, eviction – prevention, finding housing, security deposit loans, Wegleitner wants to keep it open, but they go with the massaged language)
– increase capital budget to $5M for the affordable housing development fund
– create and fund a position of a housing development director to oversee and coordinate housing initiatives
That motion passes unanimously.
CITY RECOMMENDATIONS
I spoke (registered late) to let them know what the supplemental requests at the city were related to housing and homelessness.
#1 – $30K for day resource center
#2 – $185,000 Housing First Street Team
#5 – Briarpatch $50,000
#6 – DAIS shelter expansion $100,000
#? – $80,000 Homeless Housing Coordinator Position
#? – $120,000 Cost of Living Increase for agencies
Wegleitner suggests the first two. Atkinson also supports the Briarpatch request. They don’t understand the DAIS request to increase their reserves – it says it would increase the amount of days in shelter but its unclear how. Atkinson asks about the Housing Coordinator position.
Wegleitner moves to recommend all but the DAIS. That also passes unanimously.
