Loading...
Human Rights HUD FundsMEMORANDUM September 11, 2001 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: Human Rights Commission Recommendation for Utilization of HUD Contract Funds This year the City of Dubuque Human Rights Department has received a new contract from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The contract is different from past years in that there is a new portion called a Partnership Initiative (PI). Under the PI the Human Rights Commission is given the option of applying for funds up to the following amounts in four different categories: 1) $11,000 for testing; 2) $5,000 for novel and complex cases; 3) $5,000 for outreach and education; and 4) $20,000 for enforcement projects. The process is non-competitive. If the City chooses to apply for the funds and provides a reasonable proposal regarding how the funds will be spent, we likely would receive the funds. We have the option of apply for all, some or none of the funds under the PI. Additionally, the PI is designed to allow the City to contract with other agencies and other public and private entities to carry out the initiatives that are being pursued. Human Rights Director Kelly Larson and the Human Rights Commission are recommending that the City apply for the HUD Partnership Initiative funds. I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council approval. Michael C. Van Milligen MCVM/jh Attachment cc: Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Kelly Larson, Human Rights Director CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA MEMORANDUM September 11, 2001 TO: Michael Van Milligen, City Manager FROM: Kelly Larson, Human Rights Director RE: Commission Recommendation for Utilization of HUD Contract Funds Purpose The purpose of this memorandum is to forward to the City Coundl a recommendation from the Human Rights Commission regarding funding under a new HUD contract. The Commission is recommending that the City of Dubuque indicate its intent to apply for HUD funds under a new Partnership Initiative to carry out the projects described below. Backqround On September 4, the Human Rights Department received a new contract from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The contract is different than in the past, and required some policy guidance from the Commission, There is a new portion of the contract this year called a Partnership Initiative (PI). Under the PI, the Human Rights Commission is given the option of applying for funds up to the following amounts in four different categories: 1) $11,000 for testing; 2) $5,000 for novel and complex cases; 3) $5,000 for outreach and education; 4) $20,000 for enfomement projects. The process is non-competitive. If the City chooses to apply for the funds and provides a reasonable proposal regarding how the funds will be spent, we likely will receive the funds. We have the option of applying for alt, some or none of the funds under the PI. Additionally, the PI is designed to allow us to contract with other agendes and other public and pdvate entities to carry out the initiatives we choose to pursue. I partidpated in a conference call on September 6 regarding the two largest categories, testing and enforcement projects. The call involved several directors from agencies who are members of the Regional Executive Coundl on Civil Rights (RECCR). The RECCR is interested in pursuing both categories as a partnership effort amongst member agencies. The Dubuque Human Rights Department is a member agency. Following the conference call, I took the proposals that were discussed to the Human Rights Commission for their consideration on September 10. The Commission has recommended that the following proposals be pursued: 1 ) Testing. The testing proposal would be carried out by contracting with the John Marshall Fair Housing Legal Support Center (John Marshall), a nationally recognized expert in fair housing and also in testing initiatives. John Marshall would ask that the local agencies solicit testers, but John Marshall would train the testers and would serve as a consultant in carrying out the tests. When tests were completed, John Marshall would review the tests for validity. Tests would be conducted in a vadety of areas, such as racial steering, family status issues, and accessibility issues. This proposal would insure well-trained testers and an independent professional review of the tests to insure the validity of test results. The test results from this project would then be used as an educational tool for the community and for the individual housing providers where violations were discovered. 2) Enforcement Projects. The Commission recommended pursuing two enforcement projects. First, the Commission would review condominium association by-laws for compliance with family status laws. In some cities, there are by-laws in place from before family-status was added to the fair housing law, and those by-laws illegally prohibit families with children from purchasing a condo. The compliance audit would be conducted by sending letters to condo associations and asking them to forward copies of their by-laws for review. If the associations did not comply with the request, we would obtain the by-laws from the county recorder and review them. We would then meet with associations to educate them about the law. If they refused to change their by-laws, we may initiate complaints. Second, the Commission would audit multi-family housing built since 1991 for accessibility compliance. This effort would involve contacting all owners of buildings built since the effective date of the accessibility standards and asking them to complete a survey identifying whether their buildings comply with the applicable standards. If they complete the survey, we would work with them on any potential compliance problems identified. Because failing to build in an accessible manner is a continuing violation, the safest course for owners and builders is actually to allow the filing of a commission initiated complaint and then enter into a settlement agreement. By entedng into a settlement agreement that is signed off on by HUD, they protect themselves from further suit related to the non-accessibility of the building. Such settlement agreements would typically involve retrofitting a percentage of apartments, rather than retrofitting the entire building for compliance. For those owners who refuse to complete the survey, we would contact with an engineering or architectural firm to go to the buildings and check for accessibility in common areas. If there are accessibility issues identified, we would pursue enforcement with a commission initiated complaint. 3) Novel and Complex Cases. We have one case on file that may qualify as novel and complex. The Commission has recommended applying for these funds. 4) Outreach and Education. The Commission recommended applying for the education and outreach funds to be used for either video/radio spots or for a fair housing educational conference. We are facing significant time restraints. HUD originally asked that I inform them by September 10 whether we intended to apply for PI funds and how much we intend to apply for in each category. I have asked them to grant an extension to allow the City Council to consider the Commission's recommendation on September 17. If the Coundl approves proceeding with PI funds, I then am required to present a detailed proposal to HUD by October 10. I would prepare this proposal, review it with the Commission, and submit it to Council for approval on October 4. Action Requested In summary, the Commission has recommended that we inform HUD that we intend to apply for $1 1,000 for testing, $20,000 for enforcement projects, $5,000 for outreach and education, and $5,000 for novel and complex cases. The action requested is that the Commission's recommendation be placed on the Council agenda for October 17.