Committee Report CR-3

The Housing Committee held a public hearing on April 14, 2015, beginning at 5:35 p.m. in the Cambridge Public Library, 449 Broadway, Community Meeting Room.

The purpose of the hearing was to discuss the reappointment of Gerard Clark as a Commissioner of the Cambridge Housing Authority for a term of five years and to receive from the Cambridge Housing Authority an update on the RAD progress and to receive responses to questions from the tenant Town Meeting of October 2014.

Present at the hearing were Councillor E. Denise Simmons, Chair of the Committee, Councillor Marc McGovern, Councillor Craig Kelley, Councillor Nadeem Mazen, Richard C. Rossi, City Manager, Greg Russ, Executive Director, Mike Johnston, Deputy Executive Director, James Comer, Director of Operations, Terry Dumas, Director of Planning and Development, Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA), Donna Claudio, Asset Manager, Cassie Arnaud, Project Planner, Community Development Department (CDD) Neal Alpert, Aide to Councillor Simmons and Paula M. Crane, Deputy City Clerk.

Also present were Gerard Clark, CHA Chairperson, Cheryl-Ann Pizza Zeoli, Co-Chair, Alliance of Cambridge Tenants (ACT) and Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust, Jean Hannon, Co-Chair, ACT, Elaine DeRosa, Executive Director, Cambridge Economic Opportunity Committee (CEOC), John Hawkinson, Sue Reinert, Cambridge Day, Sue Stafford, Kathy Watkins, Hasson Rashid, Glenna Wyman, James Williamson and Michelle Malvesti.

Councillor Simmons convened the hearing and read an opening statement (Attachment A). She gave an overview of the agenda for the meeting. (Attachment B). She then introduced Greg Russ to give remarks on behalf of the Cambridge Housing Authority.

Mr. Russ provided written responses to questions and comments from the attendees of the Tenant Town Meeting on October 21, 2014 (Attachment C) as well as answers to questions related to the CHA's conversion of public housing under Rental Assistant Demonstration (RAD) (Attachment D). He thanked the Housing Committee for the opportunity to talk about where they are with RAD. He stated that Washington Elms, Newtowne Court, Putnam Gardens, Woodrow Wilson Court, LBJ Apartments, JFK Apartments, Lincoln Way and Jackson Gardens are all converted to the Rental Assistance Demonstration. He noted that the Manning Apartments is likely to convert in the fall. He stated that once the Manning Apartments convert, all of these properties will be under RAD subsidy. He stated that in addition to moving the subsidy platform, the RAD conversion will start on a huge capital improvement program. He stated that every site will be rehabilitated or modernized, depending on the age and types of units. He noted that overall, the RAD will be bringing several hundred million dollars in capital investment into Cambridge to restore and maintain units for the next forty years. He stated that as it relates to a tax credit approach, a real estate transaction must occur in order for the IRS to grant tax credits. He explained that when the real estate transaction occurs, only then will the investor get to claim a deduction off their income tax in proportion to the capital contribution that they make. He explained that this figure is right off the bottom line of their taxes. Mr. Russ pointed out that refinancing and repositioning of the properties is the first step. He stated that advertising for contracts has begun and construction will begin and eventually as contracts take hold and vendors mobilize, all sites will be under construction. He stated that relocation efforts have begun and that the CHA attempts to make relocation as easy as possible in terms of logistics.

Mr. Russ stated when looking at all funding sources for Phase 1 (1150 units), they are approaching $375 million dollars in investment. Of that amount, the tax credit is about $111 million dollars. He stated that in addition, once the properties are completed, several benefits will be accrued to the properties that do not exist in public housing program. He stated that the operating subsidy that they give for public housing continues to be underfunded. The housing program that has received consistent support from Congress is the voucher program. Under this approach, CHA has to establish a relationship with investors but there are many controls on what the investors can and cannot do. He stated that the CHA has taken a lot of time to ensure that the long term affordability of the housing is protected. He noted that they have crafted exit strategies and structured deals so the non-profit affiliates will have the opportunity to have the property returned at the end of the tax credit period. He stated that because they have moved off the public housing platform there is another element of RAD that is important. He stated that RAD requires a significant contribution to replacement reserves. In the new scheme, each property will have substantial replacement reserves to be used to put back into the property when capital investment is needed. He stated that with RAD they will have ability to refinance property at the end of the initial tax credit period and raise money again without having to go back to HUD or Congress. He stated that in positioning these properties to serve the community for the long-term, they understand the compromises of the tax credit program but the platform that the CHA will be left with is, in some ways, stronger than the platform that is in place currently. He said that Phase 2 will begin planning in the next few months and noted that Phase 2 is smaller (979 units).

Mr. Russ noted that Jefferson Park State is being funded through a different mechanism as they could not save the buildings in Jefferson Park State. The construction fence is up and demolition of that portion of the site will begin next week. He stated that they plan to close on Jefferson Park later in the year. He stated that Bank of America is the investor there. He pointed out that they will rebuild on the same site with a different configuration and brand new units.

Mr. Russ noted that Millers River is one public housing property that they could not make work under RAD and that HUD has approved the disposition approach instead. The disposition process under the rules set in place by Congress trigger 300 new Tenant Protection Vouchers. He said that the CHA will project-base these vouchers into Millers River. Once this happens, the CHA will be in a position to secure an investor and begin rehabilitation for Millers River. This will probably cost about $60 million.

As all this begins to move forward, they are able to tell the committee that CHA is securing the affordable housing stock for low income families for a long time to come. He stated that although there are development pressures, the CHA is able to maintain these units as permanent affordable housing which is the mission of the housing authority.

Mr. Russ noted that this is the fifth largest RAD deal in the country and the structure does not look the same in each community. He stated that the CHA wanted to keep as many of the existing housing policies in place as possible and wanted to put capital investment into the buildings. Through management agreements, the CHA will become the manager of the properties and retain existing staff. He stated that the existing workforce will be used, and the day to day experience for tenants should feel largely unchanged.

Councillor Kelley asked about Jefferson Park and what is being undertaken. Mr. Russ responded that Jefferson Park State is the four buildings on Rindge Avenue. He stated that the remaining buildings as one enters Jackson Circle is the Federal side. Councillor Kelley stated that Jefferson Park as a whole comes out to be an estimated 90 million dollars and asked if the RAD Phase 2 is set for an undefined time in the future. Mr. Russ responded that planning will be underway this year and that the earliest construction is the year after next for Federal Jefferson Park.

Regarding the trees at Putnam Gardens, Councillor Kelley asked that if the trees are going to be impacted by construction it would be beneficial to spell this out to residents. Terry Dumas stated that four trees were removed, one each for each of the new trash buildings. Ms. Dumas added that there have been discussions of a community garden in the back of Putnam Gardens which would take an additional three trees. She noted that these discussions have been included in the conversation since 2012.

Councillor McGovern stated that there is confusion as to why the decision of switching to RAD has been made. Mr. Russ stated that this is the only vehicle currently offered by HUD that would allow the CHA to raise this kind of capital. HUD has offered this as a demonstration program, and the CHA decided to take advantage of it. If you are doing large capital work, it is the only program available. He stated that the CHA went to HUD and asked to do a disposition of all units which would have triggered tenant protection vouchers. He stated that the Federal government responded in the negative to disposition. Mr. Russ explained that around the same time, the ground rules related to RAD were changed which allowed them to "rent bundle," which is when properties with better cash flow support properties that are less strong.

Councillor McGovern stated that when people hear that things such as "We're moving away from public housing to private partnerships," people's anxieties go through the roof. He noted that it is a lot for people to take in, and people are scared. He said that he is a big fan of informational sheets that boil down these complicated concepts into very easily understood sentences explaining what is actually going on. Mr. Russ explained that materials have been used to inform residents and the community about the RAD process. He stated that the easiest way to think about this is: the investors don't want to manage property or own property, they want the credit. The CHA does want to manage property, and to continue to have its own entity, and be able to protect property from any compromise due to the tax credit requirements. Ms. Dumas added that the tax credit piece is not new, it has been around since the mid-1980s. She noted that it is not a new model for CHA or for Cambridge. Councillor McGovern pointed out that most people are not aware of this. He noted the importance of reassuring people and suggested direct, simple messages and statements to quell the fear, with assurances of what will not be changing for the tenants under the RAD process. Mr. Russ affirmed that there are standing CHA RAD informational meetings scheduled at different locations throughout the city each month. He stated that it is hard to convey the idea that the investor is only temporary, and that tenants may be skeptical. Mr. Russ agreed that producing a fact or statement sheet for CHA residents may be helpful.

Councillor McGovern stated that free wifi is a topic that comes up at the Income Insecurity meetings and focus groups. He asked Mr. Russ if free wifi for CHA tenants is in the plans. Mr. Russ stated that there will be free wifi in the common areas of the properties. He stated that getting into the units and making wifi free is not something that the CHA is prepared to do on its own, due to the costs. He noted that this topic has been discussed in conversations with city staff.

Councillor McGovern asked what the Uniform Relocation Act entails. Ms. Dumas stated that CHA hires movers, pays for moving companies, assists in packing and covers any out of pocket expenses for tenants that are being relocated as part of the RAD building rehabilitations. Councillor McGovern asked if this includes when residents move back to their units. Ms. Dumas responded in the affirmative. Ms. Dumas explained that the first thing that is done is coming up with a relocation plan that is approved by the residents and the CHA Board. This is a very detailed plan that is tailored to the work at each specific development. Councillor McGovern recommended that this information be more widely shared with tenants.

Councillor Mazen asked about the wifi cost and cost per unit. Mr. Russ responded that wifi access to the buildings is through Comcast or Verizon. Councillor Mazen stated the need for wifi for each unit and noted that the cost is small. He stated that this is something that the CHA should do. Mr. Russ stated that Comcast or Verizon charge for this service. Councillor Mazen stated that there are commercial distributors of fiber who you can engage with the CHA at a low cost. Mr. Russ stated that he would be glad to hold conversations with these providers, and Councillor Mazen said he would provide contacts at these companies to Mr. Russ. Mr. Russ stated that they have talked about using city fiber which was practical and noted that he would be interested in finding out how to include wifi access in the units. Councillor Mazen stated that this boils down to ensuring educational equity and online access. Councillor McGovern added that in all the focus groups, wifi is the first thing that gets mentioned.

Councillor Simmons mentioned the list of questions that were generated at the last Housing Committee meeting with the CHA, and she asked the CHA to review some of the questions and their answers. Mike Johnston stated that at the last meeting that was held, the CHA heard that the committee and the City Council felt that the issue of closing the waiting list had a significant impact on people. In response to this concern, he stated that the CHA first looked at the number of people that were placed in units in the last three years, which was 190 placements on average. This number was then broken up into different categories such as elderly, families, etc. They then decided to make 250 vouchers available to households on the public housing waiting list of which 100 would go to the elderly and 150 would go to families. They have looked at the individual waiting lists and made sure that the new master waiting list is true and accurate. They have taken 19 site-based lists and compiled one main waiting list and sorted by preference and chronological order and put into one pot. When looking at the family list, for example, they are looking at leasing 29 one bedroom units. To do this, they will contact at least 50 people and ask if they are interested. These people will be screened. He noted that some people will not pass the screening. He stated that the people would be briefed and would then be issued a mobile voucher and be given four months to find a place to live. He stated that if a person takes a voucher and they do not find a home within that four month window, they will not be taken off the public housing list. He said this is kind of like getting two bites at the apple. He noted that with the mobile voucher program, they look at income, immigration status, and criminal record, but that it is up to the landlord to screen. He said that, due to the very high rental prices in Cambridge, it can be difficult for people with mobile vouchers to find an apartment in Cambridge.

Councillor Simmons stated that it will be interesting conversation to have, as these mobile vouchers are issues, wherein the City's inclusionary program can look for ways to work in conjunction with the voucher program. She said this is an important conversation to have.

Mr. Johnston stated that they are going through the Master Waiting List and noted that there are times when someone is third on the list for a specific site and when combined will then be farther down on the list. He stated that staff is undergoing testing to ensure that the numbers are correct. He said this is important to do before calling people in for vouchers.

Mr. Johnston stated that CHA will send a mailing out to approximately 10,000 applicants on the public housing waiting list to inform them that the list is closed and that it will take longer to get an apartment because of RAD relocation. The mailing will go out next week in bulk mailing, first class mail, which is a better guarantee of receipt. He noted that within two weeks, a second letter will go out regarding the availability of 250 vouchers. Councillor Simmons stated that she would be interested to hear feedback in response to the mailing.

Councillor Simmons asked if there will be a meeting regarding the process that will be undertaken by CHA. Mr. Johnston stated that the initial screening meeting is done one-to-one. He stated that in this meeting the applicants will be walked through the process. He stated that once an applicant is found eligible and receives a voucher, there will be a group briefing to walk them through finding unit, etc. He stated that they do discuss inclusionary zoning units but the problem is when someone has waited on the list for voucher and has a time limit to use this voucher, it doesn't help them to get on another list. He added that finding a unit is very hard.

Councillor McGovern asked for clarification of the way in which the voucher program will work. Mr. Johnston responded that an applicant will try to use the voucher to obtain a unit and if they are unable to find a unit, they will stay on the waiting list. If a person takes a voucher and is unsuccessful in finding a suitable unit, they will not be taken off the list. If you do find a unit, you would then come off the list. Councillor Simmons stated that this is an issue because if an applicant uses the voucher in another city or town and later want to return to Cambridge they will not have preference as a Cambridge resident. She stated that she would like to have further discussion on this issue. Councillor McGovern agreed that a conversation on this topic needs to take place.

Mr. Johnston stated that the CHA Housing Choice Voucher program is a vehicle by which someone can go out on the private market and pay up to 40% of their income towards rent. He noted that in project-based units (1,000 PBA units are in Cambridge), because the Affordable Housing Trust has put a significant amount of money into development, the city has stepped up and those rents are lower and no one pays more than 30%.

For the voucher program, there is a mobile side and a project-based side. The CHA works off one list for both. If a project-based unit comes up, they grab the top 3 bedroom applicants on the Section 8 list and they start screening. What was happening was that people wanted to wait for a mobile voucher. Some people were not eligible. With project-based units, the owners get to screen applicants. He noted that the CHA is looking to give people the opportunity to not only apply for a mobile voucher but also to several project-based waiting lists. This is not currently the policy in place and it must be decided by the Board. The CHA will be bringing this policy change to the commissioners for approval with the recommendation that people are taken off the list if they pass up a unit at a specific property/owner but stay on the other lists for other properties/owners. This will give advantage to the applicant and advantage to owners to fill units faster. This adds transparency on how the wait list is managed. Mr. Russ stated that you are multiplying choices. There would be a master list for vouchers and each property/owner would have its own list or lists. Councillor Simmons asked if there is a limit as to how many lists a person could sign up for. Mr. Johnston responded that a person could apply for all lists.

Councillor McGovern asked for an example of why a person's number on the list may change. Mr. Russ stated that when giving people choices, things can get complicated. He stated that people get bumped. He noted that if there is a status change, you can lose preference and drop. An example of a status change would be if an applicant worked in Cambridge at the time of application, but then no longer works in Cambridge. He added that veterans get local preference, regardless if they live in Cambridge or have local ties, so a veteran that applies today could be moved ahead of a non-veteran (who lives outside the city) who applied last year.

Councillor Mazen asked if time on the list interplays with preference. Mr. Russ stated that the length of time on the list does not factor into treatment. The primary driver is how many units at a particular property are turning over in a given time. He added that the length of time for non-preference applicants will be a very long time.

Mr. Johnston stated that when you first apply to be on the wait list, you are on for a long time. There is then a spurt because people wait so long that they move away, they found housing, they are no longer employed in Cambridge, etc. Mr. Johnston stated that the applicant has a 6 month window to confirm that they want to remain on the wait list after receipt of the letter, but that applicants can sometimes be reinstated after that time if a request is made.

Councillor Mazen stated that cell phone penetration has been considerable. He asked if the CHA chases mail with a text message. Mr. Johnston stated that e-mail has been discussed but not text messaging. Councillor Mazen suggested that this would be a strategic move to look at the possibility of using text messages to reach out to applicants.

Councillor Simmons asked if the CHA counsels and guides applicants on which lists they sign up for. Mr. Johnston responded in the negative, and said that the CHA cannot be placed in the position of making people's choices for them. Councillor Simmons pushed back and stated that people need to make informed decisions. Mr. Russ stated that each time a person applies for a public housing site, they are given an estimated wait time. Councillor Simmons stated that this may still not be enough information for a person to make an informed decision, as one person could be told that there are 100 people ahead of them on waiting list A, and only 20 people ahead of them on list B, and therefore assume that they'll be waiting for significantly less time on list B - but that what they don't know is that list A is turning over much quicker, and it would be a much shorter wait for them to apply for list A. She strongly urged the CHA to make that kind of information available to applicants.

Councillor Simmons asked for an update on emergency applications. Mr. Russ stated that there have been 58 emergency applications since the list was closed on January 1, 2015. He noted that fourteen people met the criteria and had the appropriate preference. He stated that 5 have been approved, 3 denied and 6 are in the process.

Councillor McGovern asked what constitutes an emergency and who makes the definition. Mr. Johnston responded that the CHA decides what constitutes an emergency. Examples of an emergency are fire, other natural disasters, victim of no-fault eviction, loss of housing due to domestic violence, and lost income due to domestic violence. Mr. Johnston commented that in order to apply for emergency housing you need to have a local preference. Local preference is living or working in Cambridge or veteran status.

Councillor Simmons asked about the CHA responses to the Tenant Town Hall meeting that was held at the Cambridge Senior Center the previous October. Mr. Russ replied that the CHA's answers to the questions that were forwarded to the CHA from Councillor Simmons are included in the packet they have brought with them this evening. Mr. Russ said they went through each of the questions and answered what they could, and noted which questions they felt they could not answer. Councillor Simmons suggested that Mr. Russ review the questions on the first page of this FAQ packet, and he did so. (See CHA packet). He discussed the differences between a project based voucher and a mobile voucher. He said there is a question of what is the appropriate balance between project based vouchers and mobile vouchers issues. He talked about the challenges in defining all the complicated terminology. He said that the CHA would be willing to put together a glossary of terms, and Councillor Simmons agreed this would be helpful.

Councillor McGovern asked how much of the information provided at the meeting is available on-line. Mr. Russ responded that they will look at posting all information on-line to provide better access. Councillor McGovern advised that this would be helpful. Mr. Russ stated that the material can be posted or a drop-box for the City Councilors can be established with links.

Councillor Kelley stated that CHA does not have a lot to do to change the situation due to finances being out of their control. He stated that the only thing the CHA can do is to try to ease the anxiety around the messaging.

Councillor Simmons turned the conversation to Tenant Councils, which she said are a vehicle by which information can be distributed, but she noted that all buildings do not have a Tenant Council. Mr. Russ stated that the CHA has a tenant liaison to work with any building or group that wants to form a Tenant Council. He stated that it is difficult for CHA as the "Landlord" to be the one in the initiation mode when forming a Tenant Council. He stated that they have relied on ACT and CEOC in dealing with tenant issues and concerns. Councillor Simmons stated that Tenant Councils are beneficial to community involvement. Mr. Russ stated that if a Tenant Council is formed, the CHA will support it in any way possible. He stated that the CHA would provide advice, assistance, and help with an election.

Councillor McGovern asked if there is mechanism in place where tenants and CHA are working together. He asked if there is a way to change the culture of the dialogue so it is not adversarial. Mr. Russ stated that dialogue often happens when they go into a site to conduct capital work. He stated that at different points in the process, they are listening to the residents and exchanging ideas. He stated that when there is a Tenant Council that has a particularly strong group of people, they have contributed ideas and have also commented on policy documents. He stated that the CHA relies on local advocacy partners and will continue to do that. James Comer stated that he prefers working with a strong Tenant Council. He stated that this allows the CHA to be far better informed as to the concerns of residents. He stated that Tenant Councils are a conduit for information. He stated that he has good working relationships with the Tenant Councils and added that it is easier to manage a property when people are active and want to be part of leading the community.

Councillor McGovern stated that in a previous meeting there was discussion about having an ombudsman position. He asked the status of that position. Mr. Comer stated that the CHA is in the process of hiring a firm that trains employees in customer service skills. Councillor McGovern stated that residents have the fear of retribution. Councillor Simmons stated that it would benefit each building to have a Tenant Council in place and suggested that this should be on the list of top priorities for the CHA.

Councillor Simmons then moved to the topic of the appointment of Gerard Clark as a Commissioner of the Cambridge Housing Authority for a term of five years. She asserted that this conversation is about the appointment process, not the person. She stated that this appointment is important and noted that Mr. Clark has been with the board for 40 years. She stated that Mr. Clark has served the City well and reiterated that the conversation is about the appointment process.

Councillor Kelley also stated that this conversation is about the appointment process and not the individual. He stated that it has to do with skill set. He stated that he would like to see the CHA connect better with its residents. He questioned if this skill set exists on the Board. He questioned how the Board can better manage to push the education of its residents to the forefront of the CHA. He stated the need for deep thought about what the Board should be doing as it relates to education. Mr. Russ responded that he has provided the committee with the Cambridge Housing Authority's Moving To Work Annual Plan of 2016. (Attachment E). CHA serves approximately 450 youth, 2,100 families and 1,800 elderly adults with its programs and services. Ninety three to ninety four percent of the 200 youth in CHA's Workforce Program go on to secondary education. He stated that each one of the programs is brought to the Board which helps move the policy framework forward. He noted that the CHA is constrained by finding a good partner and then being able to afford the policy/program. He stated that there is a lot of policy discussion and the Board is the body that drives the discussion. He stated that when the Board brings a question or policy concern to the CHA staff, the staff is obligated to respond. The Moving To Work Plan comes before the Board every year, after a public hearing process. He noted that this is the primary document that the Board endorses from a policy position. Councillor Kelley stated that his point is that whatever we are doing is not working as well as one might like. He asked if the disconnect can be fixed. He questioned if the current makeup of the Board is the best for guidance and review.

Mr. Russ then talked about the Maker Space on Portland Street as an example of one of CHA's many initiatives for kids and youth. He noted that the children are taught about being entrepreneurs and coming up with product ideas within the context of new technology. The idea is to introduce the participants to this technology and develop skills around this technology. He stated that this is funded by the CHA in collaboration with the Biogen Foundation and the Possible Project. He stated that this program is the "toe in the water." He noted that the CHA is in discussions regarding longer term expansion plans with the hope of duplicating this program at other locations. Mr. Russ stated that the CHA would be interested in figuring out how to get the people on the other side of Portland Street to open up some pathways, i.e tryout jobs, internships, etc. Mr. Russ said that the CHA would be open to figuring out a strategy to draw those companies closer. Councillor Kelley stated that without an education, we are not going to give people who live in housing the ability to move off into the private market. He does not think that making partnerships with Microsoft is the sweeping change that is needed.

Councillor McGovern stated that this is an important conversation. He stated that he does not believe that this is the right time to have this discussion about the CHA. He stated that there needs to be a better way to have these conversations. He stated that he believes that this conversation is not about Mr. Clark but that Mr. Clark's appointment was the mechanism that the City Council is using for this conversation. Councillor Simmons pointed out that this topic was before the committee because it was referred to the committee by the City Council for discussion.

As it relates to the Maker Space, Councillor Mazen asserted that he is very proud of the work that is being done. He asked Mr. Clark for the unanticipated negative consequences of RAD and what the City is setting itself up for. Mr. Clark answered that you can never force a Congress of 15 years from now to commit to any funding. He stated that they play a political game in Washington. They have consultants and lobbyists in Washington. Mr. Clark stated that both parties continue to back the HUD budget and that the voucher programs seem to be in favor in Washington. He noted that the danger is the commitment of Congress to continue funding into the future. Mr. Russ added that there is always the risk of the defunding of public housing (operations is currently funded at 83 cents on the dollar). He stated that RAD gives the CHA a better umbrella because it is the voucher umbrella. He added that there is a small risk if the CHA does not pay their mortgage. He noted that the bank has recourse. Mr. Clark stated that the CHA has Bank of America and Wells Fargo on their side to help persuade Congress to continue adequate funding levels.

Mr. Clark noted that this was his first opportunity to meet with a couple of the City Councillors present, and he offered to meet with any City Councillors privately if they so wish.

Mr. Rossi stated that when thinking about this appointment, he thinks back to when the CHA was not in good shape and the State was threatening to hold back funds. He stated that Mr. Clark was looking for the opportunity to volunteer in areas of helping underrepresented and lower income individuals and families, particularly in areas of housing. He was asked to apply to become a Board member. He stated that Mr. Clark was part of a critical reform in housing. He stated that the CHA Board has done wonders in its relationship with the City of Cambridge to work collaboratively. Mr. Rossi added that this has been Mr. Clark's passion for 40 years. Mr. Rossi added that it is the entire City that bears the responsibility of education and it is a collaborative effort. Mr. Rossi urged the committee to forward Mr. Clark's appointment to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation.

Councillor Simmons stated that moving forward it is important to note that the City Council has oversight when appointments are made. She noted the need to look at the Boards in totality and to ask how the candidate will impact the policy measures that will enrich the work of the Boards. She asserted that the City Council has to be more engaged in the conversation and remarked that the issue of diversity is important when making appointments.

ORDERED: That the Housing Committee forward a favorable recommendation to the full City Council on the appointment of Gerard Clark as a Commissioner of the Cambridge Housing Authority for a term of five years effective January 26, 2015.

ORDERED: That the City Manager work with Mayor Maher and Councillor Simmons to schedule a meeting with the City Council and the Cambridge Housing Authority Board.

Cheryl-Ann Pizza-Zeoli thanked all for attendees for participating in this conversation. She stated that because of the conversion to RAD, the ceiling rents were increased. She stated that as Co-Chair of ACT, it made her think about what we can do to help those families to move through the housing system. She stated that a recent planning session was the focus of new units. She stated that the Trust has a part to play in looking at minimum rent as well as a way for inclusionary zoning to create 3 bedroom units. She stated that 90 families would be affected by the rent increase. She noted that the CHA did send a letter to those affected but only about eight households showed up. She stated that are a lot of questions about inclusionary units.

Jean Hannon stated the importance of communication and dissemination of information. She stated that Tenant Councils are being kept in place and CHA is continuing to fund them through the RAD program. She stated that while the Tenant Councils need support getting started, the CHA is not the entity who can instigate the forming of a Tenant Council. She stated that it is the duty and responsibility for the tenants to organize the Tenant Councils and then ask for support from the system. She stated that voucher tenants are scattered and that is would be welcome if support and funding could be provided for a voucher tenant council as well.

Elaine DeRosa stated that we are victims of our success. We have various City programs, we have the work that the CHA is doing. She stated that this is a great opportunity for those now at the ceiling rent to look at other affordable housing options in the city. She noted that sometimes you do have to chase people, because life happens, you get a letter from an agency like the CHA and you forget to follow up on it, similar to all the people who rush in at the last minute to submit their taxes and then they don't have all their forms. She stated that the ability to take on this project would be an exciting thing that you would think someone would want to focus on. It is exciting because it potentially moves people from living in CHA units to possibly taking advantage of the City's affordable home ownership programs, if the program had enough protections against people failing out of the program. This is where the City's housing policy and the CHA can possibly come together.

Sue Stafford, Mothers Out Front, stated that her organization has have worked with city officials to move Cambridge off of dependence on fossil fuels. She is interested in the opportunity for all this renovation the CHA is engaged in to be mindful of being environmentally conscious and to investigate installing clean energy. These buildings will not be looked at for another 50 years, and this represents a great chance to have these buildings contribute to a healthier environment.

John Hawkinson stated that Mr. Clark's name is Gerard, and that it had been listed incorrectly. Mr. Rossi stated that the record will be corrected. He also stated that as it relates to wifi, there is a huge gap in cost versus what tenants get charged.

Hasson Rashid stated that he is concerned about the RAD program. As it relates to the Moving To Work program, he asked whether or not the RAD program has the same flexibility. With regards to Mr. Clark's reappointment, he stated that Mr. Clark voted no on the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between ACT and CHA, so the bid was rejected. He stated that Mr. Clark never gave an explanation of his vote. He stated that there are people who are still waiting for an answer.

Glenna Wyman stated that she lives in Truman Apartments. She stated that as it relates to the MOU, it is her understanding that there was a negotiation process but it never got signed by the parties. She stated that in some ways that hampers tenant empowerment in Cambridge. She stated that an ombudsman position would be helpful if one was unable to get a problem addressed. She stated that she attended a meeting of the Board of the CHA. She stated that her observation is that there is no place for tenant involvement at the board meetings and it would be beneficial to tenants if they could address to the board directly, similar to the public comment allowed at City Council meetings.

Michelle Malvesti stated the importance of an active Tenant Council. She stated that she went through the CHA chain of command with a problem and it would have been nice to have had a Tenants Council to go to. She stated that she lives in Lincoln Way and previously lived at Corcoran Park. She stated that she was on the Medical Leave Act and she had negative experiences with the manager. She stated that she was forced to move or become homeless. She stated that she has had issues with eviction notices and privacy. She stated that her disability has worsened due to stress. Councillor Simmons offered to speak to Ms. Malvesti at the conclusion of the meeting.

Councillor Simmons informed the attendees that the next two meetings of the Housing Committee have already been scheduled. She stated her commitment to advancing conversations on housing pathways. She acknowledged the tenants who testified at the hearing. She stated that the conversation of an ombudsman needs to be advanced.