CITY OF DANBURY
 Danbury Housing Partnership
 155 Deer Hill Avenue
 Danbury , Connecticut 06810

Minutes of the October 4, 2007 Meeting

Attendance: Nolan, Schierloh, Zaborowski, Shepperd, Elpern, Payton, Yamin, Barrows, McLachlan, Sangut

Absent: Coelho, Lima, Pitts, Scalzo, Sistrunk, Valeri

The meeting of the Danbury Housing Partnership was held in City Hall, conference room #3c, on October 4, 2007. Chairman M. Nolan called the meeting to order at 3:08pm. Minutes of September 6, 2007 were reviewed by all participants of the Partnership. A motion to accept the minutes was made by P. Schierloh, seconded by W. Shepperd, passed unanimously.

Following the agenda, there were no public comments made at this time. Chairman reported that he received a call from a real estate marketing firm that was doing a feasibility study for senior housing in Western Connecticut, northern Fairfield County, and lower Litchfield County. The firm would not further identify which specific client other than the feasibility study based on what type of senior housing is needed in our effective market area of Danbury, and specifically the site of the old Police Department. Mr. Nolan talked about certain demographics and the existing housing that we have in the area, which confirmed on what the company had in their report. Mr. Nolan spoke to the representative regarding income levels and what the Partnership has discussed at past meetings. This company does various marketing surveys and feasibility studies for hospitals, prisons, family housing, market housing, etc...

The representative gave the Partnership a proposal that would address the supply and demand and desires of affordability, trends, limitations and opportunities for the next 5-7-10 years. Since our target population is seniors, veterans, and the homeless population defined in our Ten Year Plan, the City can demonstrate definitive housing, but is looking at the site of the old police station located in the center business district. The representative summarized his talk that the future estimates are for planning purposes and that they can’t predict the actual amount of supply that may be attracted. The analysis will include detail comparisons and profiles of what market participants are offering, including interviews, what services are lacking, etc. The Chairman can supply copies of what was discussed at today’s meeting to all Partnership members.

The objectives of the market assessment is to provide the Partnership with a basis in which we can make a decision to be made to the quality and type of senior housing units to be developed on the site. Other items would be included in the assessment, including the qualifications of the market company. The fee for the entire package is $7500, plus another $1500 out of pocket expense. The total amount for something of this nature can run easily up to $10,000.00 price range. The Chairman has contacted the Mayor regarding the market survey and how to handle this request. Mark also mentioned that he has two non-profit development corporations that he is involved with. Since this is geared towards economic and community development, there are some reserve funds in which the survey can be done, in the most economic way and make a contribution to the City. Mr. Nolan will need to contact the appropriate parties in the non-profit with details to support their contribution.

The Chairman welcomed a new addition to the Housing Partnership. Ms. Milena Sangut, Director of Community Service with Greater Danbury Mental Health Authority who was recently appointed by the Mayor. Mr. Nolan stated that Ms. Sangut needs to be officially sworn in by Corporation Counsel. Ms. Barrows inquired as to the length of time the survey would take, in which Mr. Nolan stated that the company indicated a 6 week period. Mr. Nolan gave an intent of demand for senior housing, the number that we currently have, etc. Mr. Nolan indicated we need to define the scope a bit more, and if the Non-Profit Development Corporation of Danbury would assist financially, then we can come up with appropriate guidelines for the company to follow. The Partnership should have a committee to develop a list of questions. Mr. Elpern suggested that the Partnership draft questions that we are interested in, review the questions to make sure they are properly worded and that the wording is not leading, that the company draw the sample for the survey, they send out the questionnaires, that they receive them back, and they do all the analysis, etc.

The Partnership needs to determine the need for the community based on our existing populations and there are certain things going on around the community. We need to focus more and be site specific, based on the survey results. The Partnership would like to have the Mayor and Common Council approval to provide senior housing at a site specific area, especially if the survey results indicate the need.

Mark made mention of the Non-Profit Development Corporation involvement and even DECD having monies available from the State to help develop housing. Mr. McLachlan stated that the Mayor and Co-chairs of the Housing Partnership could jointly co-sign a letter requesting that the Non-Profit assist in having the survey completed. The feasibility/market study will focus on the senior housing component and what the demands for housing are in the City.

Mr. McLachlan made a motion that the vice-chair of the Partnership and Mayor Boughton submit a letter to NPDCD, Inc. requesting that they agree to pay up to ten thousand dollars to conduct a market feasibility study regarding the use of 120 Main Street for senior housing and to determine the type of senior housing needed in Danbury. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shepperd. Mr. Nolan clarified that the cost factor would be up to $10,000.00. Mr. Elpern also would like to include sufficient survey information that would also give us generalized information regarding community wide needs and not just on the one site specific analysis. Mr. Nolan stated that the Housing Partnership would like to see what 5-7-10 years out would indicate also. The motion carried unanimously.

No more new appointments made by the Mayor to the Partnership as of this time.

Committee reports were made:

  1. S. Zaborowski and P. Schierloh reported on the Housing and Community Development Committee’s meeting that took place at 2:00pm. today. Information was given regarding proposed development housing: a.) 8 transitional housing offered by MCCA; b.) 28 units on Scuppo Road offered by Connecticut Outreach West Pilot Program of 2001 to produce 11 supportive housing, 2 which are for the chronic homeless. The total of 36 units is being proposed at this time. Milena indicated that the developer for Scuppo Road did not have a site specific, but the funding was awarded and approved a while back. Mr. McLachlan would like this lead agency to contact the Mayor’s office to discuss the Scuppo Road project in more detail.

Mr. Elpern provided information and documentation to the committee regarding Senate Bill 1500 which details incentives to municipalities that voluntarily create Incentive Housing Zones at sizes and locations of their choosing. The incentives include state payments of (1) $2,000 per unit allowed in the zone, and (2) $2,000 per multifamily unit or $5,000 per single-family unit for each building permit issued in the zone. The legislation gives complete control over the location, amount and design of new housing. Mr. Elpern will provide copies for the Housing Partnership members at the next scheduled meeting. Mr. Elpern stated that the City has zoning districts that provide density bonuses for affordable housing and that Danbury may already qualify for monies as indicated in the Senate Bill. Mr. Nolan also stated that if Danbury has a market feasibility study commission and it was supportive for seniors, it may be eligible to be under this grant as long as 20% are offered at 80% of the median income. Some of the units would be available for those seniors making $40,000-$60,000. Mr. Elpern reported on the results of the Community Attitudes random 2500 surveys which are available in the Planning and Zoning Office.

  1. Wanda Payton reported on the Social and Supportive Services Committee which met on Wednesday, October 3rd. Two guest were invited to this meeting: Reverend P.J.Leopold, the Executive Director of Arc(Association of Religious Communities), which is also the fiduciary for Dream Homes, and Karl Myers who is the Program Director for Dream Homes. The committee discussed the coordination between Dream Homes and the Partnership. Both guests discussed what they would like to collaborate with the Partnership, one being that the Partnership be the resource to provide a grant writer. There has been one Dream Homes success into homeownership. At this point in time, Dream Homes is targeting the disabled population for homeownership opportunities in Danbury. Mr. Nolan indicated to the Partnership that we have a copy of the report that was sent to the Mayor and Common Council dated September 25th which points to the efforts that Dream Homes is trying to accomplish.

Mr. Schierloh indicated that the point of entry is a key component of the Ten-Year Plan and that they are assigned responsibility for carrying out certain recommendations. Among their duties is the implementation and review of the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) which is a HUD initiative designed to accumulate data regarding service users, to address duplication of services and to identify gaps in services. Mr. Myers and Rev. Leopold indicated that they were currently providing monthly reports on Dream Homes activities to the Common Council. It was their position that they were to provide their reports to the Council only until such time as the Partnership could begin its oversight function. The Committee agreed to raise this issue with the full Partnership at the October meeting. The Partnership ordinance states that the Social and Supportive Services Committee shall be responsible for supporting and monitoring the Point of Entry system. Discussion ensued, with Mr. McLachlan stating that Dream Homes should still submit a report to the Council since that is the funding source, but that a copy of the report would be electronically fowarded to the Partnership so that the Committee could carry out its monitoring and support function.

Members proceeded to discussion of coordination between Dream Homes and the Partnership. It was agreed that due to the fact that the Committee was charged with monitoring the Point of Entry it would create a potential conflict of interest should the Dream Homes director or fiduciary be appointed members of the Partnership. Members determined that the best arrangement would be for representatives of Dream Homes to attend the monthly meetings of the Social and Supportive Services Committee to review their report. This will also allow the committee to work closely with Dream Homes to analyze the HMIS data and coordinate implementation of required follow up and activities.

  1. The Financial Resources and Fundraising Committee report was presented by M. McLachlan. This committee met on Wednesday, October 3rd. There was positive discussion on Project Homeless Connect and the possible problems with funding of this event. Mr. McLachlan spoke with the coordinators of this event and asked where would the $6-$8,000 that the committee needs to run this event come from. What was suggested from this fundraising committee is to let Project Homeless Connect, gather all in-kind support and services, prizes, raffles, gifts, etc., so that a budget line item for this is presented in someone’s budget next year. The Mayor had indicated that signage and tee shirts may need to be passed this year due to budget constraints. The Homeless Connect event will be held on December 5th. The committee can assist in the marketing of this event, which may need to be a one-on-one approach. The difficulty lies in trying to get to the people who need to be serviced.

Milena offered information regarding the event in which fliers will be placed in all the homeless shelters, notices in the library, all social service agencies, soup kitchens, etc... To attract attention for the target market, gift baskets will be given that will benefit this population. At this point in time, gift cards are being evaluated as to how to institute them into this event.

This committee is also focused on the housing finance inventory. Questions raised by the Financial Resources and Fundraising committee is what types of programs are available, both public and private, what are the dynamics of private, non-profit developers and how can they leverage their resources with strategic partnerships. The inventory would be an inventory of rolodex cards to reach out when we are thinking of going into a different direction and who are the right people to call, i.e. veterans and veterans support/transitional housing.

Mr. Schierloh provided information on VA representative Mr. John Sullivan. Discussion was brought up regarding the Housing Authority and vouchers set aside for veterans. Mr. McLachlan would like to invite Mr. Sullivan to the next committee meeting, and will notify all Partnership members of the date and time of the subcommittee’s meeting for their attendance. After further discussion, Mr. McLachlan made a motion that John Sullivan of the Veterans Administration be invited to the next Partnership meeting to discuss housing and service programs. Seconded by D. Elpern, passed unanimously.

4. Public Relations, Marketing and Education Committee report was presented by W. Shepperd. A review of the 10 year plan, specifically the first and second years were discussed further, with suggestions made by Mr. Schierloh, to ensure that this committee and their assignments fill the goals as indicated in the Homeless Plan. Discussion was presented on the web page, which will include inventory of housing, and financial programs that will be included. No logo has been provided. The government access channel will be utilized and will discuss it further with Ted and perhaps have mention of Project Homeless Connect event before the December 5th date. The Committee had lengthy discussions to enlist the assistance of local business to provide/donate gifts, etc., that can be used for the Homeless Connect event.

Next on the agenda, Milena Sangut provided further information on Project Homeless Connect which is scheduled for December 5th at the Elk’s Lodge on Main Street from 10:00am to 3:00pm. Fliers/letters have been sent out for a need of volunteers, donations, and in the process of looking into the amount of food needed. An organization for box lunch preparation may be needed; morning coffee/donuts donation requests are being made. The Lions Club had been contacted to donate vision services for the day. Certain organizations have been secured/confirmed participation such as Health Services, a local bank to open bank accounts, Department of Social Services to take applications for benefits, Education/ Western Connecticut State University/Community College, Employment Agency, a representative from the Emergency Shelter, Dream Homes and the Housing Authority may take applications, and contact with State and Connecticut Legal Services to provide legal advise, CL&P to discuss accounts, Wellness on Wheels, etc. will all provide their services to connect with the City of Danbury’s target population.

The City of Bridgeport has offered this event for the past two years. For the first year event, approximately 60 people show up. Last year approximately 600 people attended. The City of Danbury’s Homeless Connect is purposely being held the week of National Project Homeless Connect. Since this year has been a short time for preparation, next year’s event will be more organized with a longer period of time to plan.

Flier was presented to the Partnership on notification of the December 5th event. Discussion entailed changing/adding such as “potential homelessness”, mortgage information, legal assistance, etc... It would be nice to have the Governor attend this event before she goes to Hartford. Milena went into detail as to what will actually happen on this day. Discussion on a letter sent to the Governor, at least needed within 60 days with the Mayor’s and Chairs of the Partnership signature to attend this event.

Discussion provided on scattered sites and RFP geared to support services for part of the Pilots Program, and part of the DSS rap certificates, on a specific population, being the homeless and chronic homeless. Need to provide support services to qualify for this program, for example an agency such as MHA.

Supportive and Affordable housing proposals were discussed earlier in this meeting.

Spoke on membership referrals to the Mayor.

Update on Dream Homes discussion already presented.

A motion to adjourn was made by P. Schierloh, seconded by C. Barrows, passed unanimously.