HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/05/2026 - Meeting Minutes N11N( ! I
FROM fl 11
COMMIINH Y 1)I VI I OI'N11 N I ,t ('nl'I I Al IMI'It()VI MI,N I I'Itt),II.( 15
I�c�;\itl) N11 I: I INc� tc 'I)c 'll')
M�nulav, .lanuary 5'�' 7t1.'.h
S:00pin
1. Board Members Board Members Not Present
Brad Christensen
Joseph Murphy (Jui,)hy)
Dallin Jones
Cooper Fankhouser
(Online)
Scan Weeks
Jenny Bonk (Online)
Staff Present
Dennis Rutledge
Jack Markman
Alexandra Hall
Tonv Milner
Tyler Durfee
Also Present
2. Terms
FOF — Funding Our Future
3. Welcome and Introductions
Mr. Rutledge begins the board meeting at 5:02 P.M.
4. Approval of Minutes
Mr. Jones motions to approve the minutes. Mr. Fankhouser seconds. The minutes pass.
5. Vote for Vice Chair
Ms. Bonk nominates Mr. Jones for Vice Chair and makes a motion for it. Mr. Fankhouser seconds.
The motion passes.
6. Application Review: Funding Our Future
Mr. Markman begins the application review process for Funding Our Future.
i. The INN Between—Medical Supportive Housing for the Homeless
Mr. Markman introduces the INN Between's program
Q. Mr. ('hristcnsen asks what the (It lfc►cnce was hctwccn their previous years'
application and this %car.
A. Mr. Markman ansx\crs that the appli(•ntions were approxi►natcly the same.
Q. Mr. AVecks asks il'tlhc prouran► i,, c\rlusivcly fir those with medical conditions.
A. 1v1r. �1arknuui answers lhal the pnn►ar� service fir the program is hospice or cnd
ot'liti rare 161-homeless inclivicluals, though they may house individuals with
chromic renditions that aren't tcrn►inal the\. locus on those with terminal diagnoses.
ii. The Road Home CTR11) — House 20
Mr. Markman introduces 'I'M I's House 20 program. He mentions that House 20 was
historically an FOF category which TRH used to apply for almost exclusively. It is
more competitive this year due to category changes.
Q. Mr. Murphy asks if it's reasonable to have 20 beneficiaries for this program.
A. Mr. Markman answers that they generally have a rotating pool of 20 individuals
they are working with. Mr. Christensen adds that the program would likely look for
other funding sources for rent assistance while this funding stream would likely
cover case management for the 20 beneficiaries.
Q. Mr. Weeks asks about the intensity of the case management.
A. Mr. Markman answers that he believes it is wrap-around, intensive case
management, but he will reach out to the organization for clarification.
Q. Mr. Murphy asks what Mr. Weeks considers a full workload for case manager.
A. Mr. Weeks answers that for health providers,20 people is considered a single
full-time case manager which is why he was wondering why TRH is funding two for
the program. Mr. Christensen adds that the case management for this program is
likely more outreach oriented than is standard for case managers.
iii. The Road Home(TRH)—Landlord Assurance
Mr. Markman introduces TRH's Landlord Assurance program.
Q. Mr. Jones asks about clients served.
A. Mr. Markman answers that the number of clients served for the program will
likely be close to the TRH's projection of 50.
Q. Mr. Weeks asks for clarification on what barrier elimination and landlord
incentive means in their application.
A. Mr. Markman answers that some examples may include senrices such as damage
repair resulting in impending eviction, higher downpayment for entry associated
with at risk home seekers, etc. Landlord incentives may include fees associated with
business licenses and other fee removals.
iv. ]'he Road Home (TRH)—Shared Housint;
Mr. Markman introduces �I�IZI 1's program. Ile adds that this was
also a I:OF program that has become 11101C conlpetilive in recent years.
Q. Mr. .]ones asks ifthc landing covers the rOOIlllllatc a11(1 what the vetting process
may look like.
A. Mr. Markman answers the funding would COX CI' both individuals. Ile also
desclibes the vetting process tier the program and clarifies that the IIUD definitions
ofhonlelessness are strict enough that shared housing doesn't qualify individuals as
homeless, so the enrollment of this program focuses on those currently homeless.
Q. 'Mr. Murphy asks what the city's rationale for getting rid of the shared housing
catei"01N.
A. Mr. Markman answers that some categories were getting very few applicants and
other categories provided similar but different programs, so to pool funding towards
the in-catest need, the categories were lumped together to benefit more applicants,
though it made the funding more competitive. Overall, 8 categories were
consolidated into 2 categories where most provided tenant-based housing assistance.
Q. Mr. Christense asks if the program is time-limited or if clients can have access to
assistance for as long as they meet the qualifications.
A. Mr. Markman will ask what the timeline for clients served in this program is.
V. The Road Home (TRH)—Supportive Housiny,Case Management
Mr. Markman introduces TRH's Supportive Housing Case Management program.
Q. Mr. Murphy asks about Magnolia House.
A. Mr. Markman believes it is TRH's property but will ask for clarification. Mr.
Christensen adds that his understanding is that Magnolia House is owned by TRH
and operates as permanent supportive housing for those with chronic illnesses.
vi. Utah Community Action (UCA)—Landlord Tenant Mediation
Mr. Markman introduces UCA's Landlord Tenant Mediation program.
Q. Mr. Christensen asks if the funding would supplement short-term rental
assistance for rentals beneficiaries already have or if it's similar to Rapid Re-housing
programs.
A. Mr. Markman answers that the rental assistance will be paired with tenant-
landlord mediation for clients at risk of eviction, whereas, rapid re-housing,
beneficiaries generally have been homeless before applying or have no disputes with
their landlord.
vii. Utah HousinL Coalition (UHC)—Renter,Tenant, and Landlord Education
Mr. Markman introduces UHC's Renter, Tenant, and Landlord Education program.
lie adds that their estimate ofbeneficiaries likely includes how tar the educational
impact extends.
Q. Mr. M1111vlly Asks if the 1'11(' is separated From the city/state-
A. Mr. Rutledge ansvrcrs that he bclicvcS they arc .I separate entity and arc a non-
profit. Mr. A1ilner adds that Ihev address honlclessncss Ihroligli nit the state but arc
not Connected to the go\(1111111el11.
Q. Mr. 11u11)h\ asks if there is a nlininttnn amount oI'Iunding that can he awarded to
FO1 applicants.
A. Mr. Markman ansvrers that the lower hound cap tier FOF has been historically
',0.Ooo.
v iii. Volunteers of America (VOA)— House 20
Mr. Markman introduces the VOA's House 20 program.
Q. Mr. Christensen asks. regarding both House 20 programs, what criteria is
considered for vetting beneficiaries.
A. Mr. Markman agrees to get that information to the board.
N. \Vasatch Communitv Gardens (WCG)—Green Team Case Manay-ement
Mr. Markman introduces the WCG's Green Team Case Management program. He
specifies that this program will fund housing related needs for participants of their
Job Training program.
Q. Mr. Murphy asks for clarification on whether the funding is going to be used for
housing case management or rental assistance.
A. Mr. Markman answers that he believes the funding will be used for both,but he
will reach out for clarification. Mr. Christensen adds that he saw money allocated for
housing assistance in their application and that the program pays wages to their
participants.
Q. Mr. Christensen asks how many FOF applications are the same as HUD
applications.
A. Mr. Rutledge answers that just from this meeting,two applications were carry-
over applications. Mr. Christensen asks the board to consider whether they would
want to fund these programs with FOF funding if they had decided not to fund those
same applications through HUD programs. Mr. Markman adds that some applicants
will overlap with HUD even if their programs don't. Mr. Rutledge offers to send the
board a list ofthe applicants that have sent the same application for both HUD
applications and FOF.
X. Women of the World (WoW)—Assistance for Refueee, Immigrant and
Asylum-Seeking Women
Mr. Markman introduces WoW's program.
Q. Mr. Christensen asks how program income works tier FOF programs.
A. Mr. Markman answers that the city's policy is that program income funds are
recaptured by the city. (Ienci iiII-,, the returned funds are clearly generated by the
program.
vi• 1ANVA Utah -- Residential Self-Sufficiency Pilot Survivor Driven Flousin2, and_
FaRH lncentivized Rent Assistance
Mr. Markman introduces the YWCA's program.
There are no questions.
7. Other Business
Mr. Christensen asks whether FOF has historically covers programs that HUD does not. Mr.
Markman answers that is part of how FOF has been marketed to applicants, but there has always
been a mix of applicants that apply with programs that could be fulfilled with HUD funding.
Mr. Jones asks when the board scores are due. Mr. Markman answers the 1 111 would be ideal. Mr.
Rutledge adds that the goal for the next meeting is to do the FOF final funding and review the
HUD funding in the same night. Mr. Markman reminds the board that their scores are necessary to
,et both done on the salve night. Mr. Rutledge also reminds the board to look at their funding
decisions ahead of time in preparation for the meeting. He also describes what meeting with the
council might look for the board members.
The board requests staff to send the contingencies from the previous year. Staff agree.
8. Adjourn
Meeting is adjourned at 6:19 P.M.
X
CDO and Chair
This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the
CDCIP Board meeting held January 5111, 2026.