Regional AI case study

1. 2018 NACCED Webinar Series Regional AI case study Panel members Matthew Ramirez, City of Austin Christy Moffett, Travis County Emily Barron, City of Pflugerville Heidi Aggeler, Consultant

2. Introduction to panelists and places Matthew Ramirez, City of Austin, Matthew.Ramirez@austintexas.gov Christy Moffett, Travis County, Christy.Moffett@traviscountytx.gov Emily Barron, City of Pflugerville, EmilyB@pflugervilletx.gov Heidi Aggeler, BBC Research & Consulting, aggeler@bbcresearch.com

3. Members of Central texas regional ai Collaboration among: City of Austin, Pflugerville, Round Rock, Travis County, Williamson County, Housing Authority of the City of Austin, Georgetown Housing Authority, Round Rock Housing Authority, Taylor Housing Authority, Housing Authority of Travis County For more information: centraltexasfairhousing.org TEN participants! Three cities! Two counties! Five housing authorities! Participation governed by an Interlocal Government Agreement

4. Today’s agenda Why equity matters History of the AFFH obligation AI v. AFH approach The Central Texas Regional AI plan Q&A

5. Why equity matters

6. Why equity matters For much of our nation’s history, all but a narrow group of residents were denied economic mobility. This was done through denial of homeownership, discrimination in employment, lack of access to quality education, substandard housing conditions. All of these affect economic mobility. Economic mobility is generally defined as the ability of an individual or family to improve their economic status—usually measured as income. For some, it means economic stability. Economic mobility looks different for different types of people: Persons experiencing homelessness Persons with disabilities Persons with mental health service needs Children Undocumented immigrants and refugees

7. Why equity matters Denying residents economic opportunity is expensive for the public sector. Direct and indirect costs are found in: Limited human capital Criminal behavior Reliance on public services

8. Evolution of fair housing planning

9. Affh overview The obligation to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing, or AFFH, was enacted with the Fair Housing Act (FHA of 1968) and executive orders. The AFFH obligation extends to all federal agencies that administer housing and urban development programs. The AFFH obligation is just one part of the Fair Housing Act. Communities that do not receive housing and community development funds are still held to the non-discrimination provisions of the FHA. The FHA and AFFH are different obligations: FHA focuses on what cannot be done (e.g., “otherwise make unavailable or deny” housing) AFFH requires that recipients of federal funds take “meaningful actions” to address segregation and related barriers for those protected by the Act

10. Affh overview HUD’s AFFH Final Rule, adopted on July 16, 2015, applies to recipients of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME, Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), HOPWA, HTF—as well as PHAs. Purpose of rule: “Provide HUD program participants with an approach to more effectively and efficiently incorporate into their planning processes the duty to affirmatively further the purposes and policies of the Fair Housing Act.” Rule was needed because of lawsuits (Westchester County) and General Accounting Office (GAO) audit.

11. Affh overview AFFH Final Rule led to a new approach to fair housing planning called the Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH). The AFH: • Replaced the AI as the HUD mandated review of fair housing • Contained a broader assessment of access to opportunity and housing choice • Was supplemented with HUD-provided data through an online AFFH Tool (“AFFH-T”, available at https://egis.hud.gov/affht/)

12. Affh overview The AFH submittal was extended by HUD on January 5, 2018to give communities more time to adjust to the new framework. The AFH reverted to the AI, governed by Fair Housing Guide issued in the mid 1990s Guidebook: https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/FHPG.PDF AFH suspension FAQ: https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/FAQs-Extension-of-Deadline-for-Submission-of-Assessment-of-Fair-Housing-for-Consolidated-Plan-Participants.pdf The extension: Does not change AFFH Final Rule. Does not change statutory requirement to affirmatively further fair housing under the Fair Housing Act.

13. Afh V. Ai Primary differences in approaches The AI does not have a firm submittal date; communities are encouraged to have the document completed before their next five-year Consolidated Plan AI follows Fair Housing Guide. AFH had a required template and HUD-provided maps and tables to analyze AI guidance calls for a more direct analysis of public sector policies and regulations associated with land use and zoning, property taxes, building codes, and internal departmental coordination. AFH suggested these in the context of “contributing factors” The AFH required consideration of a list of “contributing factors” or impediments to fair housing choice and economic opportunity The AI guidance suggests, but does not directly emphasize, community engagement. The AFH prescribed meaningful community engagement, especially with typically under-represented residents

14. Advice from hud Incorporate best parts of the AI and AFH Use meaningful community participation. Ask “who is missing from the process?” and seek them out As available, incorporate data and GIS mapping In setting goals: • Use metrics and milestones • Track goals through IDIS • Examine how other communities and regions approach impediments or contributing factors

15. OurApproach

16. Central texas regional ai Collaboration among: City of Austin, Pflugerville, Round Rock, Travis County, Williamson County, Housing Authority of the City of Austin, Georgetown Housing Authority, Round Rock Housing Authority, Taylor Housing Authority, Housing Authority of Travis County For more information: centraltexasfairhousing.org

17. Community meetings: engaging & creative Westside https://vimeo.com/257041888 Eastside https://vimeo.com/259219978

18. Community engagement plan Proposed Plan A resident survey on housing needs and barriers to housing choice. Online and in paper copy in 6 languages (Arabic, Chinese, English, Korean, Spanish, Vietnamese) Focus groups with stakeholders Focus groups with residents Community meetings As needed, “pop up” engagement to reach community members where they are (e.g., outside a grocery store, through houses of worship, at community events) Public hearings during public comment period (45 day)

19. Panelists on the regional ai

20. From the panelists Why did you choose to participate in the Regional AI? Discuss the process of coming together and developing the interlocal agreement. What was easy? What headaches did you experience? What are your hopes for the study? Fears? Q&A

21. Q&AThank you!