Human Rights Commission Meeting Minutes Housing Committee March 31, 2021 Virtual/Electronic Meeting 6:00 pm Link to rebroadcast: https://boxcast.tv/channel/vabajtzezuyv3iclkx1a 1. WELCOME a. CALL TO ORDER i. Committee Chair, Shantell Bingham, called the meeting to order at 6:05 pm b. ROLL CALL i. Shantell Bingham ii. Tobiah Mundt iii. Mary Bauer iv. Wolfgang Keppley c. MISSION (recited by all): Act as a strong advocate to justice and equal opportunity by providing citywide leadership and guidance in the area of civil rights. 2. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT i. None. b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i. None. 3. MINUTES a. Review of minutes from March 17, 2021 Housing Committee Meeting i. Motion to approve as written 1. Mary ii. Second 1. Tobiah iii. Discussion 1. None. iv. Vote 1. In favor: 3 2. Can live with: 0 3. Opposed: 0 4. Abstained: 0 4. BUSINESS MATTERS a. Michael Monaco Community Services Coordinator for Piedmont Housing Alliance (PHA) presented information regarding PHA’s eviction prevention program i. See attached PowerPoint presentation ii. Commissioner questions 1. Are residents directed to resources for court costs for evictions? a. Prior to COVID PHA would waive late fees and court fees b. PHA absorbs those costs 2. What are the legal fees for evictions and about how many people are affected? a. $57 for court filings – PHA would cover i. This applied to 12 to 15 people in eviction prevention in 2020 b. Not all tenants in eviction prevention had an open court case but most had late fees – PHA would waive these 3. How many units does PHA manage within the City of Charlottesville? a. About 340 4. Did any of the tenants who were evicted have an attorney? a. Unknown 5. Of the 45 families in eviction prevention did any have attorneys? a. Some people had representation through Legal Aid b. The exact number is unknown but could be determined 6. What are the costs associated with getting evicted and what do they pay for? a. Legal fees cover filing with the court b. PHA does not provide financial supports to residents for legal representation iii. Committee Chair offers the public the opportunity to ask Michael questions 1. None. b. Commissioner updates regarding outreach to potential partners i. Shantell 1. Plans to contact CLIHC a. Emily Dreyfus and Elaine Poon are aware of the work ii. Tobiah 1. Invited Michael Monaco 2. Contacted Emma Goehler at DSA a. Committed to pushing Council to provide legal support to tenants facing evictions b. Asked for suggestions as to how DSA can support the HRC’s efforts iii. Mary 1. Attended Council budget meeting on 3/17/21 a. There was $117K set aside in the budget b. Councilor Snook noted that there had only been a handful of eviction trials, so he thought the amount should be smaller 2. Reached out to Jake Gold about the actual number of eviction cases a. Number of eviction cases, not just those that make it trial, was 700 average per year prior to the pandemic 3. Reached out to John Pollock about calculating costs a. Works at the National Right to Counsel b. Has helped other cities develop right to counsel programs c. Several decisions can lead to budgeting decisions i. Is the an income cut-off? 1. 200% of poverty level or below a. Average 80% of tenants in other cities with right to counsel programs met this criteria ii. What is the predicted default rate? 1. 50% is typical for other cities a. In Charlottesville that would mean about 350 (out of 700) cases would still be successfully matched with lawyers b. Assuming 20% of people would be over the income threshold, that would be about 300 cases 4. Asked Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC) how many lawyers they thought it would take to handle 300 cases a. LAJC suggested that 1 lawyer could handle about 100 cases b. This means 3 full-time lawyers c. $120K = salary + benefits + overhead d. Total cost = $360K i. This did not include outreach or other coordination 5. Did not contact Central Virginia Legal Aid Society (CVLAS) a. Assumes that the numbers would be similar 6. Other cities include subsidy terminations in their plans a. Including administrative proceedings that terminate vouchers b. Could include those types of cases, as well c. Would need to ask for that data from CRHA i. How many subsidy terminations happen outside the court system? 7. Takeaways a. $117K is not enough for the initial year b. $360K may be a good starting point c. Cases may go up or down depending on outreach and situation d. LAJC may be willing to accept the funding and do the work iv. Todd 1. Emailed Kaki Dimock a. Asked about the support system 2. Emailed Dr. Kathryn Howell a. Awaiting a response 3. Emailed Dr. Barbara Brown-Wilson a. RVA eviction lab could potentially help with data b. suggested collaboration between Equity Center, Eviction Lab, DSA i. For data and policy examples c. Potential actions i. Write a letter citing the evidence for a higher amount 1. Seek support from other organizations 2. Mary will draft the letter by Friday 3. Total amount should be more than $360K to account for outreach and coordination ii. Speak at the April 5 Council budget meeting 1. Shantell will request that other speak in support a. DSA b. CLIHC c. PHA d. CRHA e. PHAR f. TJACH g. RVA Eviction Lab h. Equity Center i. City Human Services iii. Mention in letter that RVA Eviction Lab, DSA, and Equity Center might support data collection to show the impact of the work 1. Todd to ask RVA Eviction Lab for case results with and without lawyers iv. Continue to speak with Human Services about potential assistance with outreach and connecting people to the program 5. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC a. PUBLIC COMMENT i. None. b. COMMISSION RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC i. None. 6. NEXT STEPS a. Mary will draft the letter to City Council by Friday b. Shantell will send a summary email to all listed in 4.c.ii. i. Send on Thursday ahead of letter c. Todd will ask RVA Eviction Lab for case results with and without lawyers 7. ADJOURN a. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 pm. Piedmont Housing Alliance Eviction Prevention Program  First incarnation of program: January 2019 – March 2020  Intended to prevent evictions at Piedmont Housing Alliance- Background managed communities  Primary focus on rent-related eviction  67% of all households qualify as Extremely Low-Income (<30% AMI) Demographics  91% of all households are under 50% AMI  In 2019, 67% of move-ins were formerly homeless January 2019  In total, 45 households were enrolled in EPP to  20 households “graduated” March  4 households were evicted 2020  Continuing court cases as far as possible (up to 9 months total) Tools to  Eliminating outstanding late/atty. fees prevent  Financial assistance from community partners (AIM, eviction Network2Work)  In-house housing counseling team  EPP repurposed to rent relief/assistance Post-COVID  Sought or provided assistance to over 300 households (out of 600)  Outside assistance from statewide Rent Relief Program & C’ville City RELIEF fund  Using next three months to prepare for end of moratorium Now  Enroll/re-enroll households at risk in EPP  Focus on payment plans & financial assistance for households at risk  Reliant entirely on outside funding Gaps  No capacity for housing counseling for each EPP client  In-house MSW or similar services professional needed