City of Columbia, Missouri  
Meeting Minutes - Final  
Housing and Community Development Commission  
Room 1A/B, City Hall,  
701 E Broadway  
Wednesday, March 13, 2024  
Regular Meeting  
7:00 PM  
I. CALL TO ORDER  
MR. ROSE: We'll go ahead and call our meeting to order.  
II. INTRODUCTIONS  
7 -  
Present:  
Michael Fletcher, Mitchell Ritter, Thomas Rose, Rebecca Shaw, Erica Pefferman,  
Jay McIntosh and Michael Nguyen  
2 - Ross Kasmann and Rikki Ascani  
Absent:  
Present at the meeting were commission members Rose, Ritter, McIntosh, Fletcher,  
Nguyen, Shaw, and Pefferman. City staff Jennifer Deaver, Molly Fair, Jacob Amelunke,  
and Rebecca Thompson were also in attendance. Commissioners Kasmann and Ascani  
were absent.  
MR. ROSE: And we'll start off with introductions to my right. We'll start to my left,  
that way we start with the Commission.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Erica Pefferman, Ward 4.  
MS. SHAW: Rebecca Shaw, Member at Large.  
MR. NGUYEN: My name is Michael; I'm from Human Service Commissions.  
MS. SHAW: He is our new representative.  
MR. FLETCHER: Mike -- Mike Fletcher, Member at Large.  
MR. MCINTOSH: Jay Mcintosh, Sixth Ward.  
MR. ROSE: Tom Rose, Fifth Ward.  
MR. RITTER: Mitch Ritter, Ward Two.  
MR. AMELUNKE: Jake Amelunke, City Staff  
MS. FAIR: Molly Fair, City Staff  
MS. THOMPSON: Becky Thompson, and I am the new director for the new  
department of Housing and Neighborhood Services.  
MR. ROSE: Okay.  
MS. DEAVER: Jennifer Deaver, City Staff.  
MR. ROSE: All right. Very good. I'm going to ask -- oh. Michael Nguyen, okay.  
Nice to meet you.  
MR. NGUYEN: Nice to meet you.  
MR. ROSE: I love speaking my names down here.  
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA  
MR. ROSE: First off, we'll -- I'll entertain a motion for approval of the agenda.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: So moved. Erica Pefferman.  
MR. RITTER: Second. Ritter.  
MR. ROSE: All those in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed.  
(Unanimous voice vote for approval.)  
MR. ROSE: Okay. Thank you.  
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES  
Approval of February 21, 2024 Meeting Minutes  
Attachments: 2.21.24 HCDC Minutes  
HCDC Meeeting Recording 2.21.24  
MR. ROSE: Next, we'll have the approval of the minutes from our February 21st  
meeting. I would entertain a motion again for approval.  
MR. MCINTOSH: So moved. Jay McIntosh.  
MS. SHAW: Seconded. Rebecca Shaw.  
MR. ROSE: Any discussion? All in favor, signify by saying aye for approval. Any  
opposed, same sign.  
(Unanimous voice vote for approval.)  
MR. ROSE: Okay. Thank you.  
V. NEW BUSINESS  
FY 2025 Request for Proposal  
Attachments: Request for Proposal - FY 2025 and Reallocated Funds  
MR. ROSE: So our first item of new business is the request for proposals for the  
2025 fiscal year, CDBG and HOME funds.  
MS. DEAVER: Yes. We are ready to put out our -- once we have approval, to put  
out our request for proposal for the FY '25 Community Block -- Block -- Community  
Development Block Grant, CBDG funds, and the HOME funds. We also do have  
reallocated funds as we discussed. So the City anticipates at this point the budget still  
has not been released from HUD, so we go with our anticipation that we'll get $1 million in  
CDBG funds, and $600,000 in HOME funds for FY 2025. We are also at this point going  
to reallocate up to $840,000 in carryover CDBG funds, and $45,000 in carryover HOME  
funds. All of the funds will be -- or still -- we're still working off our 2020 to '24  
Consolidated Plan. We had an informational meeting at the end of February, on February  
28th. It is not required that you attend that meeting to be able to receive funds, but we  
did have, oh, I would say ten participants show; is that about rightish? Oh, you weren't  
there.  
MR. AMELUNKE: Yeah.  
MS. DEAVER: Molly wasn't there. So we had a good turnout. It was the -- it was  
the people that we normally have for those types of meetings. So we have also made it  
clear that we're more than happy to meet with everybody. We do plan on meeting with  
each group as they start to do that and send in their proposals. Then just to find CBDG  
and HOME funds, we'll run this in the paper. It'll go in -- it will be in Tuesday's running if I  
turn it in tomorrow, so -- any questions on anything with the proposal? Yes?  
MR. FLETCHER: Remind me again. The reallocated funds must be spent by when?  
Is it different -- is there different chunks that have different timeframes, or are they all --  
MS. DEAVER: The goal of spending the reallocated funds is that they would be  
spent by the end of this calendar year. It's tight because we still have -- we'll have to  
amend the Annual Action Plan that we're changing or removing funds from and moving  
around funds. We do have to get HUD approval for that before we can move on it, but we  
will be set to go the day that we come out and are ready to move.  
MR. FLETCHER: Have we talked to anybody that we gave money to for future  
projects if they can use those funds in a quicker manner?  
MS. DEAVER: They still have to go through the same process. We can't go  
between years and just give money between the years. But, yes, that is one of the  
things that we have talked with -- with all of the players.  
MR. FLETCHER: I mean, we would be in the same boat because we still have to  
reallocate --  
MS. DEAVER: Correct.  
MR. FLETCHER: -- the funds down the road. So it's kind of kicking the can down  
the road, but at least they would get the money spent so we don't lose any funds.  
MS. DEAVER: Correct. And that is our goal.  
MR. FLETCHER: Yeah.  
MS. DEAVER: We're trying to get the funds spent as soon as possible.  
MR. FLETCHER: Yeah.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Question. Erica Pefferman. You have the RFP due May 8. Do  
you have any idea of how quickly -- and maybe you said this and I missed it -- but when  
the decision will be made so that we can turn that around really fast.  
MS. DEAVER: As soon -- as soon as we go back through HCDC, and you all  
approve whatever the funds are, we will go with the reallocated funds, we're able to go to  
the -- we will be prepared to go to the next City Council meeting and have City Council  
approve those changes.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: So the June meeting?  
MS. DEAVER: It -- hopefully. I mean, it just depends how quickly the dates --  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Like, if you just had to ballpark it, what would you say?  
MS. DEAVER: It'll be June, and then, hopefully, we'll have everything set and ready  
to turn in. Once it's approved by City Council, we'll have the -- everything will be ready to  
send that next day to HUD and get their approvals, and then we'll be set to move on as  
quickly as we can.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: How long do you expect HUD to take?  
MS. DEAVER: It can take -- the last time, they took about three months.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: No kidding?  
MR. ROSE: Wow.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: So seriously, we're looking at potentially being fall before we can  
get these funds out, but they still have to spend them before the end of December?  
MS. DEAVER: That is the hope.  
MR. FLETCHER: Is HUD supportive in a case like this where there's a compressed  
timeframe? I mean, when you have communications with them, are they able to be more  
nimble or do they, you know, the snail is pointed in the right direction no matter what?  
MS. DEAVER: So as we discussed where that we are, we did get a letter of  
timeliness this year, so that's what we're trying to avoid for next -- for this year.  
MR. FLETCHER: Right.  
MS. DEAVER: Again, there were more funds that didn't go through for this year, so  
that we're still -- so we're -- we have another chunk of money that we're trying to get rid of.  
What our plan is is we're already in a plan that we had sent back to them back in the fall  
when this all kind of came up. Our -- our idea is is that once we know where all of our  
funds are and what's being spent, that then we will have a call with them to go through  
and re-say, you know, they don't -- I would not think that HUD wants the money back  
either. On a training that we were on last -- last week or the week before, they said there  
was a -- discussing that HUD is considering they would push to potentially get rid of  
timeliness and move to a different system where they track everybody quarterly. If that  
happens, that would be a beautiful thing. They said 40 -- well, between -- I've heard  
different ones -- 40 and to 48 percent of all areas that have received funds are -- have not  
been meeting timeliness.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: I have additional questions.  
MS. DEAVER: Uh-huh.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Again, Erica Pefferman. Two questions. One, could you  
explain what the letter of timeliness means?  
MS. DEAVER: Uh-huh.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: And then, two, is there anything that we could have done in  
hindsight to have gotten this RFP out five or six months before we have?  
MS. DEAVER: Okay. So on timeliness, what that means is that you have to -- you  
have to spend -- you can no more than 1.5 percent of your funds that you've been allotted  
in a time period. So when we've had before --  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Oh, I see. So it's rolling over --  
MS. DEAVER: Yes. Yes.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: -- and it's going into --  
MS. DEAVER: Correct. So that's what timeliness is. As regard to whether we  
could have done it earlier, so we were still in the fall waiting to hear back from HUD on the  
ones that we had submitted from May. So that was one reason why we didn't go ahead  
and start reallocating more money because we hadn't gotten approval on our -- the  
money, the four hundred -- we did last spring, and that's being spent right now --  
reallocate $441,000, so we got rid of a big chunk of money then. But we weren't in a  
position where we were going to do that. The other part of -- we considered doing two  
RFPs this fall, or this spring, but the problem that you run into there is it's very confusing  
to people on what they're going for, what they're doing. You have to do the training --  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Thank you for clarifying. I just -- you know, I think my first  
meeting was in October, and we've been saying the same thing since October.  
MS. DEAVER: Uh-huh.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: And now the RFP is due at the end of May. It just feels -- I  
know you guys were shorthanded, but I --  
MS. DEAVER: It really had nothing to do with being shorthanded.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Okay.  
MS. DEAVER: It had to do with the fact that we hadn't been approved by HUD  
already for what we were trying to get rid of initially.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Okay.  
MS. DEAVER: And readjusting. Every time that you go back into a plan, so if one  
of these was -- and, at this point, we reallocated all of the FY '21 money, but it's going  
into '22, so if we -- and we've already adjusted it once, it was already waiting to get it  
approved. It's just -- and then it's helping the groups that are trying to do it get through  
that process, as well.  
MR. MCINTOSH: Who do you deal with at HUD? Do you deal with the same  
person, the same group? How do you do that?  
MS. DEAVER: We have a HUD representative.  
MR. MCINTOSH: Okay.  
MS. DEAVER: Each area has a HUD representative.  
MR. MCINTOSH: So this goes back to his question. I didn't quite understand your  
answer. Is there anything you can do to them to explain that a three-month timeframe  
puts us in an impossible situation?  
MS. DEAVER: We've already done that.  
MR. MCINTOSH: Okay.  
MS. DEAVER: In the sense that they know that we -- or what our plan was as we're  
going up through spring is we've come into more money coming back.  
MR. MCINTOSH: Okay. Right.  
MS. DEAVER: We're going to probably have to readjust that with them, and that's  
where we'll get to as we go through the spring here.  
MR. MCINTOSH: Okay. Okay.  
MS. SHAW: And do they have -- Rebecca Shaw. Sorry. Do they have anything like  
a -- I mean, for a grant, you would have, like, a no-cost extension. Do they offer anything  
like that through HUD where -- I mean, you're not asking for any more funds, you're just  
asking for more time. Is there an application process or --  
MS. DEAVER: Not -- not really. It's more of working with them to make sure that  
they understand your plan of how you're going to get rid of the money. Once we know  
how we're getting rid of our 2025 funds, that will help us determine how we're going  
forward. So once we're through this whole spring process of getting the funds -- of getting  
the funds for '25 out, knowing what our reallocated amount is, then we can go back to  
them and share what we are. We have reviewed it, and if things do move along as they're  
hopefully anticipating, we can't make people spend the money quicker than they're  
spending it, if that does happen, we will -- we will meet timeliness this year, but it's -- it's  
-- we've got -- all the pieces have to fall into place. We're going to have to -- we are on our  
toes and we're still working on the -- we have -- the CAPER is set and ready to go to  
Council on Monday, so that once the CAPER is done, that's a big step out to get that  
sent into HUD. We are -- I -- we are in the process of working on the Annual Action Plan  
for 2024, and then we still have the Consolidated Plan action, so there's a lot of -- a lot of  
pieces in motion with our office right now.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Again, Erica Pefferman. Your point that you've made in previous  
meetings, though, about maybe changing how we allocate funds based on, like, what  
we're allocating for might -- it seems like it's going to help us in the future, though. Right?  
MS. DEAVER: Correct.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: It seems unlikely that we'll end up in this scenario again --  
MS. DEAVER: Correct. That would be my thoughts.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: -- with this much money?  
MS. DEAVER: That would be my thoughts. With our 2024 funds, and I reviewed  
them as -- with Rebecca got a whole fun training on HUD stuff and where we are. The  
2024 funds look very solid as to what they are, that they will be spent by the groups that  
said they would spend them. We'll be doing the same kind of stricter previewing of them  
before we get into it this year, as well.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Thank you.  
MR. ROSE: Mr. Ritter?  
MR. RITTER: Mitch, Ward 2. We also had faith in the presentations when we gave  
them that funding originally -  
MS. DEAVER: Correct.  
MR. RITTER: -- that they were going to complete their projects, which they didn't.  
MS. DEAVER: Uh-huh.  
MR. RITTER: So that needs to be noted. Is there any way to move the final  
recommendation of the reallocated funds to the end of the meeting on May 15th, which  
would get that recommendation, get that piece of the recommendation in front of Council  
on May 20th instead of waiting until the May 22nd meeting, which would put the Council  
meeting another week out from that -- no two weeks out. They're every two weeks.  
MS. DEAVER: I can review that with staff in the morning.  
MR. RITTER: So I think if we put the reallocation recommendation, since that's going  
to be some very targeted projects, put that at the end of the May 15th agenda, we get a  
decision on that distribution, get a vote, get it in the record, get it to Council on Monday,  
the 20th, and then that way you're -- you kick-start that piece of it --  
MS. DEAVER: Earlier.  
MR. RITTER: -- potentially, three weeks, four weeks earlier than bogging it down with  
the rest of the recommendations.  
MS. DEAVER: I can definitely review that with staff tomorrow. I'll have to see -- we  
have not noticed this yet out in the paper, so I may be able to make adjustments and  
then it just depends on where we -- I would have to talk with Rebecca about what we've  
sent to Council already, but we can look and see if we can adjust that in the morning.  
MR. ROSE: Yeah. Tom Rose. And there most likely won't be a lot of discussion  
that has to be had on those reallocated funds.  
MS. DEAVER: Correct.  
MR. ROSE: It would be limited --  
MR. RITTER: Yeah. They're going to be shuffled right through.  
MR. ROSE: Yeah.  
MS. DEAVER: Correct. Any other questions?  
MR. ROSE: Anybody else? We don't have to have an approval?  
MS. DEAVER: I think it's just you all noting --  
MR. ROSE: Okay.  
MS. DEAVER: -- that you approved it.  
MR. ROSE: Okay.  
MS. DEAVER: Correct.  
MR. ROSE: I believe that was our only item for this evening.  
MR. RITTER: I think we should take a vote.  
MR. ROSE: I think we probably ought to take a vote. Yeah. We will take a roll  
call vote for approval of the request for proposal for the 2025 funds and the  
reallocated funds. Oh, wait, let's get a -- let's get a -- first a motion to approve.  
MR. RITTER: I'll make a motion to approve the RFP -- FY '25 --  
MS. PEFFERMAN: I second. Erica Pefferman.  
MR. ROSE: Motion made by Mr. Ritter, Erica Pefferman, second. Okay. Any  
discussion? Okay. All in favor?  
MR. RITTER: Aye.  
MR. ROSE: Aye.  
MR. MCINTOSH: Aye, Jay McIntosh.  
MR. FLETCHER: Aye.  
MR. ROSE: Mr. Fletcher, aye.  
MR. NGUYEN: Aye.  
MR. ROSE: Mr. Nguyen, aye.  
MS. SHAW: Aye. Rebecca.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: Erica Pefferman, aye.  
MR. ROSE: Any opposed? No. Okay. That passes. Thank you.  
7 - Fletcher, Ritter, Rose, Shaw, Pefferman, McIntosh and Nguyen  
2 - Kasmann and Ascani  
Yes:  
Absent:  
VI. GENERAL COMMENTS BY PUBLIC, MEMBERS AND STAFF  
MR. ROSE: Next if we have any general comments, first from the public? We have one  
public person. Okay. Do we have any comments from our members from the  
Commission?  
MR. MCINTOSH: How far out do our meeting dates schedule? I just saw them  
through maybe May or June of this year.  
MS. DEAVER: So once we're through the -- when everything is approved in June by  
the -- by HCDC, we -- there is generally a short break during the summer because your  
job is really finished for the year of what you've done. When will we start getting that  
back out to everybody?  
MS. FAIR: I think this last year it was September was our next meeting back --  
MS. DEAVER: Yeah.  
MS. FAIR: -- so we'll probably -- we would probably set the calendar at probably that  
meeting.  
MR. ROSE: Baring any crisis or --  
MS. DEAVER: Correct.  
MR. ROSE: Any other questions or comments, or from the staff? Nice to meet you.  
MS. THOMPSON: Nice to meet you, as well. I'm happy to be here.  
MR. NGUYEN: Actually -- Michael.  
MR. ROSE: Yes.  
MR. NGUYEN: Do you guys mind, can I -- can we just go through, like, reallocation  
of that 2024 funding because, like, I wasn’t there.  
MS. SHAW: A history of, kind of what happened.  
MR. NGUYEN: Yeah.  
MR. ROSE: Do you want to go ahead and give him a breakdown?  
MS. DEAVER: So basically, what happens is is each year we vote with -- for  
instance, right now, we're looking at 2025 funds which will be spent next spring. We'll --  
they'll be started to be spent next spring. If funds -- and so each year when we do this, if  
funds, for whatever reason, an agency doesn't spend the funds that they were allotted, we  
have to reallocate those funds. We -- in other words, if we had $1 million and we spent  
$500,000, we still need to use that $500,000. So that's what we're in the process of  
doing is trying to reallocate the funds from previous years when funds were not fully spent  
out. Another thing that happens that is when you get large amounts of what's called  
program income, so money that, for whatever reason, is returned, for instance, last June -  
- May-June, Phoenix programs that we had given money to sold to a different entity, and  
we were returned back $250,000, which is then added onto the top of everything. And so  
you have to spend it first. So those are the funds that we're trying to reallocate. So when  
we were already having agencies that hadn't spent all of their funds, we then got another  
$250,000 to spend, so those are things that we have to strategize on how to get rid of.  
MR. NGUYEN: Is there specifically deadlines for these fundings? Is it, like, you  
know, kind of like you guys mentioned. Right? It's got to be spent by the end of the  
year, so, like, it's, like, 2023, you know, or 2024, and by the end of this year, we've got to  
spend it. Right?  
MS. DEAVER: So that reallocated funds, the goal is that they'll be spent by the end  
of this calendar year.  
MR. NGUYEN: Okay.  
MR. ROSE: But our normal -- Tom Rose here. But on our normal cycle, like, 2025  
funds, we're going to approve, and they don't -- they need to spend them by --  
MR. RITTER: 2026.  
MS. DEAVER: '26.  
MR. ROSE: By the end of fiscal year '26.  
MS. DEAVER: '26. December of '26.  
MR. ROSE: December of '26. So that will give you an idea of what --  
MS. SHAW: Usually we're a year ahead.  
MS. DEAVER: Correct. You are a year ahead.  
MR. ROSE: Yeah.  
MR. MCINTOSH: It's been my life experience, it's not hard to get people to spend  
money, so what are some of the unique challenges we face to happen?  
MS. DEAVER: The main challenges that we have run into with the funds not being  
spent, we've run into groups that didn't have site control over their site, so they didn't --  
weren't -- they thought they were going to purchase a property. They weren't able to  
purchase it.  
MR. MCINTOSH: Yeah.  
MS. DEAVER: They were given, you know, $100,000. That's back. We had an  
agency that several agencies pulled out of their funding because they did not feel that  
they were going to be able to probably -- and I don't -- this was before me, so I can't really  
speak to them, but there were -- I had heard reasonings such as they didn't know that  
they would be able to get rid of the funds using timeliness quick enough. They didn't  
know that they would have all of the paperwork that they were going to have to do and  
how it all worked --  
MR. MCINTOSH: Okay.  
MS. DEAVER: -- when they got into it. So it's -- there's a lot of reasons why money  
was returned. Challenges that we've had, you know, we've had the same challenges as  
everybody else. I think that we've spoken several times about I think that Covid coming --  
for the not-for-profits coming out of Covid, it's just taken them a little bit longer to get  
moving again. They're not just ready to -- they've had staffing changes, they've had  
turnover. I also think that we've had -- we've had issues with that there aren't enough  
contractors available to go out and, you know, having -- sometimes when we're trying to  
find people to do the work, there's not people to do the work. So lots of different kinds of  
reasons that I think we're seeing across the country and in the construction industry as a  
whole that, you know, it's just coming back from all of it. So the other thing that happens  
is is also during that time there was Covid, there was CD3 money, which was CDBG-CB  
money, that was allotted out for various things. It's almost like when -- it's great to get  
the money, but when it's almost like -- like everyone gets saturated with money, and they  
can't get rid of that money, and then they're still trying to get rid of your money, and it just  
keeps piling on.  
MR. MCINTOSH: Okay.  
MS. DEAVER: So it's -- it always is a good thing to get more money, but it  
makes it challenging to get rid of all the money. There's just so many places it can be  
spent. Does staff have anything -- Jake, Molly, have anything to add on that?  
MR. ROSE: All right. Very good.  
VII. NEXT MEETING DATE  
MR. ROSE: I will -- well, first off, our next meeting then is April 10th.  
VIII. ADJOURNMENT  
MR. ROSE: And I will entertain then a motion to adjourn.  
MS. PEFFERMAN: So moved. Erica Pefferman.  
MR. ROSE: Second?  
MS. SHAW: Seconded. Rebecca Shaw.  
MR. ROSE: Very good. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed?  
(Unanimous voice vote for approval.)  
MR. ROSE: Okay. Thank you all.  
(Off the record.)  
(The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m.)