**Resident Involvement/Self Sufficiency Notes**

**Public Housing Administrative Reform Initiative**

**July 12, 2007, Washington, DC.**

[Ron Ashford]{.underline}, Director of Community and Supportive Services
in the Office of Public Housing Investments at HUD, was the facilitator.
He greeted the participants, noting that some administrative changes
related to resident involvement/self sufficiency issues might be
desirable given the shift to asset management. He asked the participants
to offer ideas for issues that might be worthy of more discussion.

[Consistency]{.underline} and [Transparency]{.underline} seemed to be
central themes.

[Issues raised during the morning brainstorming session:]{.underline}

-   Preservation of 24 CFR Part 964, which establishes various
    requirements for PHAs pertaining to resident participation,
    particularly in light of the March 1, 2007 HUD notice, published in
    the Federal Register allowing PHAs to apply for waivers from various
    regulations.

-   Flat rent policies and how they are calculated.

    -   Negotiations with PHA

    -   Resident involvement in development of policy

-   Capital Funds -- Maintenance

    -   Upkeep

    -   Replacement

-   The need to define and explain what Asset Management is so that
    Public Housing residents "can make sound comments" about it.

    -   Discussed need to train board, residents and PHA

    -   Capacity building -- residents should have equal input

    -   Consistency and transparency in rent-setting and calculation
        policies.

    -   Need to maintain supportive services

-   Protection of resident rights through Part 964, particularly as it
    applies to grievance procedures and the role of a Resident Advisory
    Board. The distinction between a Resident Advisory Board and a
    Resident Council was discussed.

    -   Need consistent policy regarding the RAB, as some PHAs treat it
        like a resident council (appointed, not elected), and other
        allow elections

-   The FSS Program.

-   Right of return after demolition, both the policies and the process
    employed by PHAs.

    -   This would pertain to HOPE VI, non-HOPE VI/mixed-income, tax
        credit, demolition

    -   Need policy and consistent guidance

    -   Voucher may not be the best option, as it is costly and could
        lead to residents becoming homeless

    -   Resident council should participate in the process of returning

    -   Use of replacement funds for those who are displaced as a result
        of demolition.

-   Neighborhood gentrification resulting from asset management.

    -   Site redevelopment

    -   Training on asset management so residents to lose homes because
        of gentrification increasing the value of neighborhoods

-   Are buildings being forced into distress in order to qualify for
    revitalization funds?

-   PHA policies on whether to apply for grants.

-   HUD Enforcement of Regulations

    -   Monitoring

    -   Maintaining "transparent process"

-   Where is the Resident "Voice" in Asset Management

    -   Concerned about the amount of resident input in asset management

    -   HUD regulations are interpreted by PHA - there needs to be
        stronger clarification from HUD

    -   Concerned about displacement of residents

    -   "plantation mentality"

    -   Operating Budget

        -   Line item for resident services should be required, not be
            an option

        -   Grant applications/management ability for resident council
            to apply for grants

> [Discussion of Part 964:]{.underline}
>
> Following a lunch break, a lengthy discussion ensued about how best to
> approach the questions related to Part 964. Several members voiced
> concern that discussing the potential waivers specifically mentioned
> as examples in the March 1 notice -- the role of jurisdiction-wide
> resident councils, PHA roles in resident participation activities,
> requirements concerning resident council membership, election
> procedures, uniform bylaws -- would give credence to a policy that
> should be resisted.
>
> The group, however, discussed the issues, with several members
> indicating concern about the role of residents' associations within
> mixed-income communities (and the representation or lack thereof
> accorded to Public Housing residents there); the role of PHA's in
> resident activities, elections, and uniform bylaws.
>
> [Discussion of 3/1/07 Notice regarding]{.underline}:

-   Role of jurisdiction-wide resident council

    -   Current wording impacts efficiency of city-wide resident
        council; need a "core for the resident council

    -   Clearly defied role under asset management need since asset
        management is "development by development and resident councils
        perceive asset management as funding less centralized funding,
        so why should it be waived?

    -   Recommendation = keep jurisdiction-wide resident councils

-   PHA role in resident participation activities

    -   Notice appears to abolish resident council power under asset
        management

    -   \$25 for resident participation is not always provided

    -   Perhaps there could be an MOU between the housing authority and
        the resident council

    -   Under/over 250 -- concerns vary

    -   Don't diminish the power provided in QWHRA

    -   Look at the impact of asset management on "removal" of 964
        rights and ways to increase resident participation

    -   Recommendation = waiver "walks away from consumer"

-   Resident Council membership/election/uniform bylaws

    -   Keep recognition

    -   Resident council membership "expansion"

    -   Election of 3^rd^ party -- keep overall third party

    -   Define uniform bylaws -- who decides what they are? PHA?
        Resident council?

    -   Recommendation = clarification of "terms of art" definitions

> [Items for Next Meeting]{.underline}:

-   Review Regulations

    -   E.g., Harvard Study; notices for public housing programs
        regarding the transition to asset management

    -   Review documents on website

    -   Determine if other documents need to be posted on website

-   Review Industry Comments

-   Utilize chat room between meetings

-   Request a statement from HUD regarding the value of resident
    participation to the housing authority

-   Explore FHA Section 245 Regulations, which are similar to 964

> [Co-Chairs of Resident/Self-Sufficiency Group]{.underline}
>
> The group voted to make **Joy Johnson** and **Willie Mae
> Bennett-Bradley** co-chairs. The group will meet by regular
> teleconference for 1.5 hrs each Wednesday at 10:30 EST and will plan
> to hold two meetings (7/24 and 9/12) in Washington prior to the final
> meeting in September.
>
> [Ground Rules]{.underline}:

-   Start on time

-   No sidebar conversations

-   Email agenda two weeks before the meetings

-   Commitment to read materials and be informed for each meeting

-   One speaker at a time

-   Minutes/notes will be emailed within a week -- rotating notetaker

-   "final products" posted in chat room

-   Conference calls Wednesdays at 10:30 EST