August 14, 2025 — City Council Study Session

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[5:15] Welcome to tonight's study session of the Boulder City Council. I am Council Member Marquis and thank you for joining us. We have only one item on tonight's agenda, which will be the homelessness strategy update scheduled for the entire meeting. Before we go into our work items, I would like to outline how the meeting will be conducted. We will review the staff's presentations and then we have then we will have time for questions. At the end of the presentation, we will conduct our council discussion with staff. If you have questions, please wait for staff to complete the presentation. We will now turn for our city manager, Nuria Rivera Vandermite, to introduce our first item and only item.

[6:02] >> Thank you so much, Council Member Marquez. I am so excited to come before you today to kick off this important work. Uh, and though I I'll try to keep it as brief as possible because there is so much to cover today. I will say our collective efforts have already achieved significant progress helping over 2100 vulnerable people secure housing since 2017. Tonight we're going to be focused on our updated Boulder homelessness strategy which builds on a strong foundation over the past 5 years. The process to update this strategy took place over the period of six months and we certainly did not do this alone. We engaged with a diverse set of stakeholders from providers, frontline staff, individuals with lived experience, and business and community leaders who provided invaluable insight in both single adult and family homelessness. And I have to say we are so grateful for their contributions throughout this process. And while this

[7:00] strategy focuses on the city of Boulder, we recognize that implementation is a truly collaborative effort and our continued regional partnerships are essential to its success. The plan calls for standardized PRA practices, better data sharing, and an optimization of service delivery to ensure our investments are as impactful as possible. To that end, a significant part of the strategy's development was the system modeling and analysis that provided us with the insights needed to make these strategic investments. We're grateful to have Mandy Chapman Simple of Clutch consultant with us today who was instrumental in this process. Clutch specializes in transforming homelessness systems across the US working with cities like Denver, Dallas, Los Angeles, and Cleveland. And I'll say I had the privilege of working with Mandy when I was in Austin. Clutch has achieved significant reductions in homelessness in these communities through system transformation, strategic redesign, and implementation.

[8:00] Mandy and her team's guidance and expertise has provided a strong foundation for this strategic refresh, and they are here to present their finding and recommendations. But I also want to recognize Kurt Fernho and and the housing and human services team at the city. their efforts and their leadership have been uh incredibly important over the past few years both in achieving significant outcomes and diving into this new strategy. They have been and they continue to be invaluable. And so first I'd like to pass it to Kurt before we hear from Mandy. Kurt. >> Thank you Maria. Yes. So Kurt Bernhover Housing Human Services. And um we we as our as a staff team, we've really um appreciated and valued working with uh the clutch uh consulting team and the expertise that they've brought from other on larger cities and bringing some of those solutions um and ideas to the city of Boulder.

[9:02] So tonight um and and Mandy will be doing the the bulk of the presentation this evening. But from the housing human services um side we have uh Megan Newton uh Vicky Edner um Elizabeth Perau and Wendy Schwarz um who will help me um answer some of your questions uh this evening. And so really look forward to this um uh more in-depth conversation um that we have um occasionally on this topic in an area that the community cares a great deal about. And with that, I will hand it over to to Mandy Chapman. Thank you. you. It It's wonderful to be here and I'm just pulling up the slides um and getting them uh into presentation mode

[10:01] here uh so we can jump right in. Great. Well, thank you for uh having me back and for the incredible opportunity to work with um your team at the city and with all of the partners um throughout the Boulder community and um including um the county of Boulder and and others um who who so graciously kind of leaned into this particular process. Um, I'm excited today to be sharing with you the results of the last six months of activity and I'm really going to focus today in this presentation and and we hope in this session on um thoroughly understanding the strategies that are being um presented, the particular road map um that's being provided. And while it can be incredibly tempting um to want

[11:01] to dig deep into some of the system modeling and the budgeting that's included in the report, we're really um aiming for this particular session to ensure that there is um adequate alignment on the strategy so that that staff can proceed from this point forward with this document um serving as an operational um roadmap for their implementation of the strategies and also for their formula formulization of budget requests and also alignment um of of resources across other partners. In no way is the strategy update today intended to imply that the city of Boulder um can or should cover the entire cost of the homeless response strategy. The strategy update recognizes the incredible role that other partners play, particularly the uh Boulder County um and and other critical um service

[12:02] providers. Um so you know with with that and and the focus today is really intended to organize around that strategy so that staff are well positioned to help support the alignment not just of the city's resources but of their partners' resources as well um around this this um kind of larger kind of strategic uh update for your community. Um, I think it's important to recognize that this strategy really built on the 2017 strategy document that was presented um or that was created by the city of Boulder. The key distinction here I think at the time when the bold when that 2017 strategy document was brought together, there were a different set of conditions. It was the first time the community was really coalescing um in a in a a a really organized and coordinated way. And it represented a

[13:02] wide swath of strategies that helped this community move in a very kind of specific and strategic way, learning lessons, um bu building upon its its learnings over the last seven years. And so we really wanted to honor that work, not necessarily stray from it, but bring a larger systemsbased approach to that thinking. So instead of looking at individual programming and asking is this is this program kind of getting the results that we're looking for, what we needed to do is take a more holistic view and understand the interconnectedness between these programs, understand um how resources are aligned or are not aligned and the impact of that and really try to extract from this over this this holistic view what are the most high impact solutions. there can be really excellent programming taking place, but it may not be um achieving the highest impact. And so that is, you know, how we wanted to

[14:02] help this community build from its 2017 um strategies, honing in on those strategies that are going to have the greatest impact and the combination of strategies that were going to be required in order to produce now some very particular results. The 2017 strategy cast a very big vision and and we've maintained that vision. But this um the this strategy document in front of you now really represents a narrowing and a and a focus which uh provides more uh clear kind of uh opportunities to reach particular milestones over the next five-year period. And the system modeling contained within the document um serves as a roadmap and a framework for how on an annual basis you can set priorities. You can set annual action plans um based on the resources that are available both within the city but also in partnership. And this is how you start to move incrementally

[15:01] um toward the milestones that are outlined in this particular document. I Nuria mentioned the incredible participation that took place from the community in order to make this this uh document possible. I just want to reiterate that uh the providers in particular attended multiple work sessions as did our county partners. Uh and and these work sessions were really instrumental in helping us um explore this holistic view, looking at the system model, tweaking that model, um discussing deeply the programmatic adjustments that may be required in order to implement the model. discussing the constraints and the real feasibility considerations for each of these strategies. We also were able to meet with a larger variety of community stakeholders. Um some within the city itself uh and others within the business community, other area administrators within the behavioral health system. Um these were all really critical uh

[16:02] conversations that that helped to shape the overall document that has been presented. The format for the document itself um was really intentional to recognize that we can't have just one single set of strategies for both individuals experiencing literal homelessness and families experiencing housing instability. that a in fact the conditions surrounding those two populations um and the resources that have invested and the systems that have evolved actually look quite different. So we were able to create two distinct response plans within this single document following the same format. Each having a preamble describing the current conditions, each having a roadmap that that establishes a goalpost, the milestones that this community should aim for over the next five years, the core strategies that will be required.

[17:00] Each has a system model that provides um guidance for strategic investments and program priorities. Each describes how to measure success and each provides an an implementation overview. But as we get in to the meat of each of these response plans, you'll see that they're actually quite distinct in what they're aiming for. And that really is because of the investments that have been made to date and the different uh populations that each of these are intended to to support um to intervene and and to stabilize. uh when I was here in February I you know we shared that that this activity would include system modeling to reveal high impact strategies and I just want to give a a little bit of a primer while we won't go in to the complete uh detailed results of the system modeling all of it is contained within the document I do want to um help everyone appreciate how the system modeling was an important dimension in understanding

[18:01] and analyzing whether e any one particular strategy Y that has has existed in the 2017 document, whether that strategy um was ultimately going to contribute to where we wanted to go next or whether that strategy had done done its job and now we needed to pivot or make adjustments. And so the way we were able to to do that is using data we were able to analyze what's the annual inflow that will exist for each population. And then with an understanding that for everyone who falls into homelessness, we want a system that can ensure that those individuals exit homelessness in a timely manner. And so that's how we started to contemplate the combination of activities that would, you know, immediately provide relief for those experiencing the crisis, but then also equally provide a timely remedy. And so

[19:00] what's the balance of those um investments? What exists in the community and where are the gaps? And each of those things helped us kind of further understand as um a larger community within those those provider work sessions in particular um how everyone uh everyone's role kind of fits within the context of this particular plan, but also where um the priorities that we've had in the past have enabled us to get this far. but how an a perhaps slight adjustment in those priorities going forward is going to help us get to that next larger um strategic impact that everyone is looking for. And that won't be at at the expense right of the overall system. It's about building on the system that's already been um created within the system modeling process. we did um uh approach it in the same way but obviously there are differences in

[20:00] the particular source datas that are available to us between individuals and families and there's a variety of reasons for that and so what it ultimately means and I just wanted to provide you with some visibility that on uh within the the response plan for individuals we were able to go e go relatively deep in that analysis because that data is so contained and standardized within the homeless management information system. And so it allowed us to to dig deep. And the city also had um a lot of contracts in place that helped us more accurately explore um cost calculations and then ultimately calculate the the cost gaps that may exist. On the family side, um we we were challenged a little bit in pulling the data together at at the beginning because it wasn't contained in a single system. This is not news. This was reported in the the HSBC evaluation. So it but we were able to successfully with the partnership of the actual family

[21:00] service providers and the county as well as city staff pull that data together. And so each um response plan has now um a system model in place that's fully accessible to your city team so that this can continue to be part of your annual uh planning activities and your annual budget exercises where you update this tool. Um and it also means that staff are well positioned to push that family um analysis even deeper into the cost calculation category. But that you will see some differences in the depth of that system modeling within the document. So the last thing before we jump into the individual response plans that I think is really important to um highlight are the current conditions. And um the current conditions are are really important and it sometimes can feel quite daunting to try to take seven years of activity and shifts, economic

[22:00] shifts and and social shifts and try to distill them down to, you know, kind of what does all of it mean for how we move forward with our next set of strategies. And so, um, we feel really confident that these current conditions really help explain, um, and validate why the strategies were selected, um, a, and are backed up by the system modeling activities themselves. Um, those those current conditions look different for individuals than they do for families. So, we'll go through each of them distinctly, but I think you'll hopefully see um a representation of all of the kind of different conditions and things that you all um have recognized and shared throughout this process. I think first and foremost, what we wanted to recognize is that the city strategies are working to stop homelessness from growing. that your inflow and your point in time counts remain relatively flat, but um you're really stuck, right? For

[23:01] as many individuals as you're getting out of homelessness, there is that same kind of volume of individuals flowing in. And so part of the objective of this particular strategy document is to figure out how to tip the scales so that we can flow more people out of homelessness than are flowing in so that we can start to see actual reductions in your point in time count. even if we're not necessarily seeing reductions in the inflow itself. The second current condition recognized that the targeted strategies to rehhouse individuals experiencing chronic no homelessness are making an impact. That this was a major part of the 2017 um strategy document. It's been a a really central part of the city's focus and implementation and it absolutely is having an impact but will need to continue to be robustly resourced to you kind of go all the way and the model really represents that. The thing about these targeted strategies for individuals experiencing chronic homelessness is that they require

[24:00] sustainable funding. Um, and so while you've kind of made that front-end investment, um, we need to apply these same kind the same discipline to the next set of strategies. We need to be targeted and we need to make sure that they're robustly resourced, um, o over that five-year period so we can see the same kind of impact. uh the Homeless Solutions for Boulder County or HSBC. Um we want to recognize that this really has worked um to date to help align investments in programming, but as was revealed in that HSBC evaluation and through our own experiences in this process, that future success really hinges on deeper strategic alignment and in particular data sharing. and and this was was absolutely recognized in all of our provider sessions and among all of our partners. And I think that the process help hopefully helped um reiterate the importance of that single data system so

[25:00] that these system models can become more robust. Um and this overall framework can become a more practical way to create clarity about how everyone is investing in this both the city, the county and other partners. um and and where those investment gaps still remain. The the fourth condition really is in regard to uh the parallel activities that that were taking place between 2017 and today. And so what we understood is that while this system homeless response system was really driving on these targeted strategies to rehouse individuals experiencing chro chronic homelessness to to bring more crisis um and and safety uh to the community through the the expansion of the night shelter and and the day services center. Um there was also parallel activity taking place to engage individuals who were sleeping rough or sleeping outside and to begin to manage public space in a

[26:01] very different way, helping to push these individuals into those care environments that the city was investing in. And that really has put Boulder on a path to end unsheltered homelessness through deeper integration of these practices. I want to appreciate that anytime we say things like end unsheltered homelessness, it feels very lofty. But the system model actually really supports that it's possible. And I want to recognize that you've already started to see this in practice become a reality. Right? The Boulder Creek corridor looks very different than it did just a few years ago. And it's because of these very intentional um parallel activities that that ultimately need to be deep deeply integrated in order to see even kind of more substantial results across the entire city. Boulder has mobilized incredible investments toward deeply affordable, supportive housing. There's no doubt about that. You're maximizing your development pipeline over the next 5

[27:00] years. But, you know, we would be remiss not to acknowledge that there are still gaps in the housing supply uh for everyone at at all affordability levels. But also there are some unique conditions within Boulder where individuals traveling to the community with limited resources want to experience everything that Boulder has to offer and there may be limited opportunities for those individuals. And so the strategy really needed to contemplate is it the responsibility of the homeless response system to absorb those individuals or are there other ways in which this strategy could um contemplate how to support more balance between individuals within this community experiencing homelessness and others who may be just traveling to the community to experience Boulder for a short period of time. And finally, um, and I think what is probably capturing the attention of many at this current juncture is a a relatively small percentage of in of

[28:02] individuals who are experiencing unsheltered and sheltered homelessness who have very severe behavioral health issues and substance use conditions who really do need access to higher levels of institutional care. And those uh levels of institutional care are just not readily available locally at scale. And so I'm not necessarily talking about involuntary commitment, but um there are ways to bring individuals into crisis care today, but there are no beds to help keep them in that care, even under a voluntary structure where we can more successfully provide for continuity of care and ultimately appropriate discharge into the right type of long-term environment. In many cases, that's not a long-term institutional environment. it's it's into permanent supportive housing or into other appropriate care environments, but we are not uh Boulder lacks the ability to kind of support that transition successfully and

[29:01] and individuals end up cycling um between that crisis care and the streets themselves and it's really creating a real strain on the community. When it comes to the to families, the conditions look quite different because for the most part, Boulder has a very small number of families experiencing literal homelessness. And I just want to applaud the community um for that result. and and that result comes from a very intentional choice over these years to really focus on prevention, to focus on the avoidance of displacement um and really try to support families to remain stably housed within the Boulder community. And so that system is really reflected here in the current conditions that many families served by the city's stabilization programs are from Boulder. And what that tells us is that the economic shocks um that are affecting so many people across the country, they're really having impact on local families who desire to stay in the community. And

[30:01] so that was an important um indicator for how to shape uh the the core strategies that you see in this particular document. Again, Boulder has invested heavily in its affordable housing stock since 2017, but there's still limited available availability of attainable family housing that increases in cost of living or creating continued instability for thousands of families in Boulder. And we needed to think more comprehensively um about how we might tackle that and then distill it down to a set of activities that felt reasonable over the next five-year period. And finally, what we recognized is that a formalized family response system in Boulder would be positioned to focus on preventing literal homelessness among families with practices and policies that are distinct from those serving literally homeless single individuals. In essence, we needed two very distinct plans um and

[31:01] not a single strategy document that tried to to to um combine those strategies. So you'll see both both of these plans rely on the continued expansion of affordable housing. Um but each kind of recognize a distinct set of uh implementation priorities that uh will impact these populations distinctly. So with that I am excited to jump right in to the two uh to to the meat of this which are the two particular response plans. So we're going to start with uh single adult individuals and what we've developed here is a roadmap to end unsheltered homelessness. So you know there's a big vision um from the 2017 document which is about you know kind of housing stabilization for everyone and what we've said is we really want to focus on ensuring no one's sleeping outside as a as a you know kind of critical goalpost in getting us there. And so over the next five years, what

[32:01] are the two key milestones that we should focus on that we should strategically advance in order to reach that that larger goalpost. So the first is the elimination and prevention of long episodes of homelessness. And we define those long episodes as over 365 days. over a year. And and it is critically important to eliminate those long episodes of homelessness because those individuals are taking up a shelter bed for a very long period of time. And when you have continued constant inflow, if we're not turning those beds, right, in a meaningful way, then that's how kind of we overflow and we see folks sleeping unsheltered. So working to eliminate anyone who has a long episode of homelessness, prioritizing them um for placement right in an toward an appropriate exit pathway and then working in a very deliberate way to prevent long episodes of homelessness in the future become a

[33:00] critical part of those implementation activities. The second milestone is uh designed to reach an end to rough sleeping. So, this is building on the work that's been done to date and the very thoughtful the the very targeted um and careful way in which we expand the capacity of this system to intervene early and prevent long episodes of homelessness um and then systematically push more and more individuals off of our streets, out of rough sleeping and into our care environments that were intentionally definely resourcing that can produce the remedy for each of these individuals. So, let me dive into the core strategies that are contained within the document that support reaching these milestones. I think they'll they'll come as as no great surprise. We need to continue to expand supportive

[34:01] rehousing and stabilization programs that quickly return individuals to safe and stable housing solutions. For the most part to date, those investments have largely been in the permanent supportive housing category. And that's a really smart way to build your system. And this core strategy recognizes that it's now time to expand the the types of programming that you are investing in so that you can quickly return a larger number of individuals to safe and stable housing solutions and prevent those long episodes of homelessness. And so as we get into the next slide, I I'll provide some more detailed examples of how we do that. The second core strategy is about really creating local access to institutional behavioral health facilities with transitional and long-term care options for the most complex cases. As I articulated in the current conditions, we lack those bets in this community.

[35:03] And so this was an opportunity to recognize that. But I want to draw a distinction here. This is not something that the city can solve for. this is this is outside the purview of the city itself. So this is where partnership with Boulder County and with the state are going to become really critical uh to to create these beds. So as as we get into some of those details, we can talk about those implementation uh priorities. The third is to maximize and expand affordable housing development. This is something that that is clearly already being done with your incredible five-year pipeline, but the the caveat here is to consider including alternative and short-term options for traveling and transient individuals. So, right now, those options just include the emergency shelter. And perhaps that's not actually the best way for these individuals to

[36:03] visit, right, and participate in the Boulder community. perhaps there there are other alternative and short-term options that could be made available. Uh so the strategy creates space for the community to contemplate that um a and to consider those a as part of the overall effort. This becomes uh a really important kind of condition to consider as we look at the fourth core strategy which is setting clear boundaries to prevent rough sleeping and ensure health and safety for everyone in the city of Boulder. So, as individuals or as the city and its partners are resourcing care environments to provide both relief and remedy for individuals experiencing homelessness, we want to shift our efforts from servicing people away from those care environments to migrating those individuals into those care environments so that they can they can receive the remedy that they desire. Boulder has um experimented with setting

[37:02] these clear boundaries in a compassionate and careful way. And as we continue to make those investments, this strategy really calls for the necessity to to draw those boundaries and to get clearer for everyone, including the individuals experiencing homelessness. what are the pathways out of homelessness or what are the pathways to to experience the Boulder community that ensure health and safety for everyone and making sure that all of our our activities um to to provide care and support to these individuals really align with with those core strategies. So, I don't want to go into to all of the depth here of this slide, but I thought it was important to help kind of articulate that within the strategy document, we really do build from these milestones a a set of core strategies and then begin to define how you implement based on a set of priorities

[38:01] that achieve the milestones themselves. So ultimately the big goal that we're trying to to to accomplish is to end unsheltered homelessness. The way we end unsheltered homelessness is we amplify the number of individuals that can move through our shelter beds. So instead of our shelter bed serving one individual a year, we want it to serve that one bed to serve 12 individuals a year. And we do that by attaching the exit pathways to that bed at at that particular scale. And so we we start to free up the ability to move those beds in the way that we desire by first prioritizing current long-staying individuals for exit interventions, really tracking those individuals by name and targeting the expansion of interventions for those individuals. The second is that we simultaneously need to expand and enhance enhance exit interventions to prevent long lengths of

[39:00] of stays in homelessness. And this is really about integrating a much more robust suite of rapid resolution interventions. This is diversion, reunification, relocation, and rapid exit. And um this community has has experience with many of of those activities, but perhaps not to the scale and not to the depth that is being described. And and certainly has um throughout the country been a recent recognition um as a really viable way to move a oftentimes a large percentage of individuals that would otherwise sit in shelter for far longer than they need to. kind of building up their capacities in in order to move out on their own. So, this is a way to kind of help with a very light touch continue to move folks through that bed. And so, there are lots of of examples of the these the these suite of services. There are organizations out there that train and support communities to implement and

[40:02] communities are seeing really incredible results um in helping to move a large number of people through their shelter beds in a really short period of time. So the way in which we then equally as we're you know building up the capacity of the shelter begin to drive individuals sleeping outside toward these care environments is through two implementation priorities. The first is the enhancement of crisis care and stabilization pathways for complex cases. So obviously this is how you know partnering with the state and county to secure access to those institutional beds I was describing that provide for the transitional care that individuals need. But I think there's also some practical things that the city can do um in helping to consolidate and coordinate the high utilizer programs both that the city participates in and the county um to create a single complex care team

[41:01] where we're, you know, you're working a dedicated list of the small number of individuals who need that higher level of care and are going to require right specialized pathways in order to ensure that they get the continuity of care that they need. When communities um across the country are have taken this approach, they see incredible results in moving folks off the streets who have who have been cycling between jail, between uh hospitals, um the streets and the emergency shelter for often in some cases years. and and the these are the strategies that are successful um to date in helping move those individuals um from that cycle and into long-term stable solutions. The complement to that then comes in making sure that we establish clear boundaries to ensure health and safety. So this might look like trying to to

[42:00] centralize more of our unsheltered services and supply distribution into the day services center where the rapid resolution and some of those other interventions would be available. So if the rapid resolution is available within the day services center and we are continuing to provide uh supply distribution and and and other basic needs activities far from that facility, it becomes quite disconnected in our ability to deliver on the care that individuals need. In addition to that, expansion of space management and camping prohibition practices can be done then in a really targeted way in support of moving individuals toward those care environments. And there's good examples across the country and I think good examples in your own community of how this can be done in a compassionate and thoughtful manner, but also ensures that you're drawing a clear boundary um and and and a very reasonable boundary

[43:01] within a community. uh as long as things are being resourced within the shelter environment that makes it possible to deliver the remedy to individuals. So contained within the strategy document um I apologize is uh the system modeling as I've described and one of the the the products of the system modeling exercise is the ability to articulate for the entire annual inflow and in this case we calculated 1,250 individuals what are the ex the categories of exit pathways and h and what do we lack in each of those exit pathways? um and and how much that might cost to fill those gaps. And I think what you can see here is that this allows us to really contemplate what is an optimized response system. And in our optimized response system, we would be positioned to rapidly resolve and immediately

[44:00] return or rapidly exit individuals to safe housing. The we would that would be 60% of that inflow would go through that programming. So not, you know, it's not that they could be completely diverted from shelter, but some, you know, 60% could be supported through a rapid resolution strategy. About 20% will uh use shelter to then exit into an affordable housing unit that you've developed through your pipeline. And then another 20% are likely to need some form of rental subsidy and stabilization services either in a time limited way which is the bulk of those individuals and in some cases in a much longer term way in order to en ensure stabilization. And what that ultimately creates for us here is about an average time from entry to exit in an optimized system of 46 days. We want zero individuals experiencing long-term homelessness. And we want to see fewer than 9% of the individuals returning to homelessness

[45:00] that have flown that that have flowed into our system and and flowed out of our system. Um and so this is the optimized state that we're aiming toward and the the framework and the road map that we've provided for you. Finally, within the UN uh the single adult system, we were recognizing here that there are a combination of of programming and components that should be invested in in order to achieve these results. Um it it's detailed within the document and I I think it this slide nicely corresponds to the activities that we just described in the previous slide. I want to note here that under the health and safety response, a substantial amount of resource today is going into targeted unsheltered engagement. And over time, as we we um manage public space more effectively and we reduce the number of individuals sleeping outside, more of those resources can ultimately be shifted into supporting the acceleration of exits. And that's the balancing of the system

[46:00] that the system model really contemplates. So, last but certainly not least, is the family response system. What you'll see is that within the context of the the family response system, the community set a relatively ambitious goal of of a goalpost of thinking about how do we um stabilize all low and moderate income families in the community of Boulder. And so this felt like a pretty lofty goal, but when we started to really look at the data, what we found is that there was a a pretty logical uh milestone available to us, which is scaling a family response system to stabilize all families with children children living in Boulder at or below 50% of the area median income. What we discovered is that the Boulder uh the city of Boulder um programming is serving about half of those families today. So, this felt like a reasonable stretch goal within a five-year period to to to work toward.

[47:00] The three strategies are pretty straightforward here. It's, you know, we need to formalize a Boulder family response system. There's been some incredible work done between the city and the county and the the family service providers to create this collection of programming. But the more that the city can take charge in helping to formalize and standardize those solutions, the easier it is to scale those solutions and to align resources across partners. What's going to be critical in making that possible is a shared data system. And I just want to appreciate um within these the provider work sessions the the city and the county and those family service partners were thinking so far ahead at the possibility for for utilizing predictive analytics and really recognize that if if we could I use other indicators other data indicators to identify families who are at risk of homelessness before or housing instability before they are even raising their hand. we can actually, you know, avoid displacement and really

[48:01] support more economic resilience within the community and that it starts with a shared data system. And so this became a really critical part of the conversation. And finally, it it goes without saying we need to expand accessible housing options for families. And you know that really looks like not just the continued expansion of the development uh capacity for affordable housing but it looks like the integration of particular supports within those environments as well like case management, critical time intervention, economic empowerment tools and residential services. So the the idea is that when each of these core strategies, you know, um look at over the next 5 years these particular implementation priorities, that's how you're going to begin building that system that supports housing stability and economic resilience. And it really is about avoiding displacement of families from the Boulder community. contained within the document is a a bit

[49:01] more of a detailed map here because there are multiple pathways that we're describing. What I want to note is we calculated about 1,700 households annually who um are at or below the uh 50% of the area median income and those are those are households with children and please note that about 76% of those um are modeled here to to go through prevention programs. So this is about keeping them housed in uh you know where they are and and only about 24% of those individuals may fall out and require emergency housing and other rehousing solutions. What's great about that is prevention programming is is a much lower cost investment and you know reduces trauma for families and children. Just there's so many benefits um to the prevention program. So, this is just a really exciting um model uh for a community because, you know, most communities just aren't as well positioned here as you are in Boulder. So finally, um I I just want to

[50:00] appreciate within the the strategy document itself, you'll see a series of charts both in the individuals uh and within the family side that that allow you to recognize within those categories that I was just described and all the way down to some of the programmatic um investments. you can see where the existing inventory is supporting and then where there's inventory gaps relative to meeting um those those bigger goalposts that that we've we've described. And so the intent here is that this document becomes um an operational tool for your staff. And how you as council interact with this document is through the budget process and the ability to evaluate how your investments have advanced you against this overall framework and toward your goals and what are the key next investments that are going to help move you incrementally right toward where you need to be or the adjustments that you may need to make uh given you know a shift in conditions. So, we're really

[51:00] excited that that we've been able to leave staff with those tools and um I'm excited that staff, I think, have already begun to implement these activities and have a lot to share with all of you um about uh you know, how this do this this strategy framework is already being implemented. And so, I think with that I pass it to Megan. Good evening, council. I'm Megan Newton, homelessness policy advisor with Housing and Human Services. Um, our updated strategy is launching, as you know, in a context of a challenging financial environment. So, we're looking closely at what we can do now that is both impactful and feasible within the current resources we have. So for the single adult homelessness system, we've identified some immediate steps, some already underway and others that we can move forward on quickly that offer small

[52:00] but important wins in coordination, effectiveness, and system performance. Um on the slide you'll see some of the early progress um is that we've clarified governance roles within homeless solutions for Boulder County HSBC and now each participating jurisdiction now designates its own representatives and we are also adding two nonprofit organizations um that have actually already joined the board. Um we've been working with the emergency shelter system to identify ways to further strengthen operations. Um, this includes efforts to make the most available beds available and enhance the shelter's role as a key system resource. So, some of the stuff that Matthew was saying, being able to turn the beds over quickly and pushing folks to those resources um from the central core. Um, we've also started reviewing options for the centralized data collection as you all also heard when we did the HSBC system evaluation that was recommended. Um right now programs operate in multiple system

[53:00] which limits our ability to do this kind of work and evaluate systemwide performance. Um so we're exploring ways to transition into a single shared data system. Um, and some of the opportunities we'll be looking at for the next couple months is we want to, as Mandy suggested, we want to revisit prioritization practices, um, to ensure that individuals with the longest term stays in the system are higher on the list and prioritized for whatever the appropriate housing placement might be. Um, and we'd also like to explore standardized diversion and navigation staffing. So, dedicated staffing to work through some of that stuff that she she suggested with finding the right housing resource. Um, and the in the rapid exits and both this would happen in both the emergency emergency shelter and in outreach settings with the the folks that are doing that work out in the in the field. Um, we want to work with the frontline staff at both the shelter and an outreach um to align messaging so that individuals receive realistic

[54:01] consistent information about housing options. I was in a meeting today where we were already discussing with outreach workers um some of the the language that they're currently using and how that's transitioning. Um and then finally we will we want to look at the data integration. So once we get operating in one system, it'll enable us to do more of this analysis, kind of repeat what Mandy's already been doing on a on a somewhat regular basis so we can see the the strides we've been making um with the changes in the system. Now going to turn it over to Elizabeth Crowe to talk about some of the the work that'll be happening in the family system. >> Thanks Megan and good evening council. Um, Elizabeth Crowe, Deputy Director, Housing Human Services. Um, just a quick followup on um, what Mandy shared earlier about our uh, family homelessness um, system, Little S, as it exists now. Um, as Mandy said, we're

[55:00] very fortunate in Boulder and within our region to have so many uh services within the city and then through our partner agencies that we've already been um making some great progress and maintaining good progress and meeting the needs of families who who haven't experienced homelessness and to move those families who are experiencing literal homelessness um onward into a better situation as soon as possible. Um just some of those uh programs within the city include our family resource schools and older adult services programs that have the ability to help uh families um including multigenerational families who need that assistance um financially in order to stay in their home. and also our eviction prevention rental assistance uh program or EPRIS uh which is both um executed and implemented by our city staff as well as through a partnership with um emergency family assistance um association or EA. And then of course in

[56:01] addition to Epha, we also um appreciate our partnership with the Safe House um SPAN, our domestic violence shelter um for the assistance that they provide um to uh survivors of domestic and intimate family violence and and their children. So as Mandy shared um uh a lot of these um organizations and institutions are in place. we communicate and coordinate very well with each other. And um what we lack is still a more formalized system that has the ability to really map the programs and funding streams so that we can more precisely see what those outputs are. Um where we have resources, we have really good outcomes and um as you all know um resources are are yet um scarce in terms of reaching those goals. Um but really being able to map the systems out and and track some of the funding streams toward those outcomes and impacts. Um similar to what Megan shared, um uh

[57:01] data systems is another area where we can expand and have a lot um of potential um again um in terms of staffing kind of dollar resource capacity. um we'll see what we can advance kind of in this climate uh with our fantastic partners at Boulder County and our nonprofit agencies. And then lastly, um I think um well it's it's it's known right that um people who are experiencing low income um oftentimes can use um and make very good use of uh financial coaching, financial literacy, financial planning tools. I will say there are many people in our low-income community that have those tools and resources either because they um you know have have had them and had that knowledge and awareness and practice for quite some time um and it doesn't that knowledge doesn't necessarily help you if you don't have

[58:01] the resources to plan with. And so we definitely have um families in our community that really need um the that financial coaching. And there also is a network um including our city staff and nonprofit partners um at EA um Boulder County Personal Finance Program, the PI program, fantastic nonprofit organization called My Wealthbeing. we already connect with each other and just kind of coordinate um kind of who's doing what in terms of financial coaching. And there's interest already among all of us to really um formalize and solidify um some of those relationships so that we can do even better at coordinating and providing those services to families um so they more have the information, knowledge, and resources they need to stay housed. So, those are some of the next steps for family homelessness and I believe um at this point we are turning it back over

[59:01] to Council Member Marquis. >> All right. Uh thank you so much for all the work that was put into this presentation both from uh Clutch and Mandy and also the different um city staff people who participated. We really appreciate it. And now I think um we're going to start asking some clarifying questions and after that we can have uh comments um just about the the direction but as was noted we're not making uh any taking action or making budget decisions. We're going to be doing that through the budgeting process. So if that works for everyone. So with that being said um are there any clarifying questions from council? Okay. Uh Nicole and then Mark. >> Yeah, thanks so much for the presentation and all the work. Um my question is is um just a little bit

[60:01] systems oriented. So when we think about kind of who who's responsible for different pieces of this, right? Certainly there we have a lot of community partners. Um how does that how does that work for the family? Um kind of the ideal family setup, the ideal single adult setup in terms of the proportion of the the work, the funding that is sort of cityled um or city derived versus uh nonprofit partners and others in community and is the balance the same when we're thinking about family and um uh single adult. Yeah. So I would say what's typical in communities across the country is there there always has to be a lead and so it's that doesn't necessarily mean that that lead is providing those services but but it's an it's an organizing entity that helps kind of coalesce um

[61:01] all of those activities because the truth is it takes a village. So there isn't per se an exact formula, but but I would say what is pretty typical is that government um oftenimes lines up to um help define priorities to to help invest in those resources based on on their own individual priorities and ideally in a in alignment with a common strategy document. Um and that that lead entity really helps drive that that coordination through the implementation activities that are oftentimes performed by the provider partners themselves. So the you know the typical contract from you know a funer to the provider um you know kind of is the main mechanism here but the there oftentimes is a centralized entity that's doing more to actively manage and drive the coallescence of these activities. Um, I think HSBC in your community has has um

[62:03] intended to try to drive that alignment and I still I I very much think that as functionally that is still possible. Um, staff seem to have good working relationships there. I think the provider community themselves would like that to become a more amplified structure where they can participate more actively in driving on those implementation and experimenting in real time. So not just interacting with their government partners through contract um you know but in in a more kind of constructive way. What that also means like you know I kind of like talked about how we go from the middle down then there's like going from the middle up. So, you know, there's individual authorities here. The city has their own authorities and their own priorities. The county has their authorities and priorities. What we tend to hope is that that coordinating entity is working with all of those partners to help inform and

[63:00] educate and drive alignment and while we're respecting those priorities. Um, so there isn't an exact formula unfortunately in all of this. But I think what's critical to making any of that happen is you have to have a framework that clearly articulates the what which is what we wanted to to provide for you. Like very concretely it's these categories of activities that need to be invested in and there needs to be standardization so that if the county is investing and the city is investing we can you know we all understand what we're going to get equally from those investments. Thank you. Um, and may I just do one follow-up question, Tina? Um, and my follow-up question there is, um, you know, you've worked with a lot of different cities. Um, you've certainly gotten to know ours a little bit more and our relationships with the county. Um, do you have a sense of whether that ordination that you just talked about, um, is it better for family homelessness

[64:02] than it is for single adult? Are they just two kind of different beasts that just I'm curious on your observations on that. >> Yeah, I mean I think I think this is where there's um just a difference in the number of activities and the number of partners. So, um, there are far fewer service providers on the family side and there was some intentional work done countywide to establish like access points. And so, that that's kind of the beginning of kind of a natural way to drive um, you know, that synergy that I was describing. And I think this your the city um, has really leaned into saying we know where our access point is. We understand how the ca, you know, how the county is going to be investing and we're now going to align our resources and amplify and and what the strategy really calls for in this particular case is to lean into that role even more to really formalize and and standardize that system through the

[65:02] bolder access point. Right? So, I just think I think there's some ease there because of some of those structural supports that looks different on the single adult or individual side and there's a much kind of wider array of kind of programming that goes into all of this because because of your unsheltered homelessness. So, there's a ton of basic needs work in addition to the activities of rehousing individuals. And when providers perform both of those, it can it can get very complicated because um sometimes it's difficult to for even those providers themselves to figure out what to prioritize, you know, and especially when government, right, is sometimes not as clear or other funders are not as clear. So I just there's there's just and that's not unique to Boulder. I I just want to appreciate that that that is true. But it's not

[66:01] that there are not good opportunities and there there is equally a framework to drive standardization and coordination and and that has existed. I don't I don't want to undermine anything that already takes place. There is a there is a lot to work with. This strategy document says let's build on that but let's build on that in really targeted ways. Right. >> Thank you. >> Is that it Nicole? >> Okay. Great. Uh, next we have Mark, then Ryan and Matt. >> Well, thank you for that presentation. It was most interesting. I have a couple of questions. Um, the first is is based on I think it was page 10. You have the chart of of um 1,250 individuals, 60% to be diverted and 20% uh to uh be housed in affordable housing. Um my first question is um is there a lot of track record that we can achieve a 60%

[67:02] diversion? >> Well, so when we when we calculated for that that diversion percentage, it was calculated based on um looking at the performance of the system. And so because diversion has been a relatively small kind of a sliver of a program in your community um and not necessarily a program that every single individual kind of like it's not your first triage tool, right? So the data gets captured differently. And so what we were able to do in in looking at the performance data at a system level is recognize that there's a lot of individuals that come into your shelter who ultimately stay in your shelter for a period of time and then exit and don't return. And that what we were able to do then is look at the total number of individuals who have been diverted but who also clearly could have been exited faster had we had the

[68:00] ability to intervene. And that's how we came to that 60% figure. So it's not, you're right, it's not that the community has been successful to date. That program hasn't been completely scaled. But there is evidence in looking at the the way the system functions historically that that gives us confidence that a large percentage of the individuals in fact could we could rapidly exit those individuals and reduce the number of days that they're in the shelter ultimately. >> Have other cities hit a 60% mark? Yeah. In fact, um, in many communities when you when you start to organize like this and I just want to appreciate that when you like actually organize and put diversion or rapid resolution as your front-end triage tool. Yeah, absolutely. Sometimes all the way to 70 or more percent can go through that pathway.

[69:00] >> Okay. Now, this is all based on >> that real quick. >> What's that? Can I said can I call a queue on that line of questions real quick? >> Absolutely not. Please. >> I'm moderating Mark. Yes, you can Lauren. >> Thank you. Um, so you mentioned that this is just that the sort of diversion, reunification, relocation as a strategy is just a sliver, but and I know our council hasn't focused on that extensively, but I've definitely heard past Councils um talk about that quite a bit. And is so isn't that something my impression was that that was part of sort of the initial stages of what is happening at all all roads and with our outreach teams. Um what kind of things would you want us to focus on to change that program or to improve it? >> Yeah, I appreciate the question. So, so it's one about kind of expanding that spectrum to include rapid exit. So that

[70:02] you know often times it's very difficult to um divert someone, right? It's it's a like when when I break that 60% down, the percentage that are going to be diverted is relatively small compared to the percentage that are going to be rapidly exited. So I just I just want to put that into context. Um so so the model calls for the expansion of rapid resolution to include rapid exit. Um and then it it calls for a standardization of of the that program model overall dedicated um diversion specialists who perform the the function of rapid resolutions. We'll call them rapid resolution specialists and a flexible fund that gets attached in order to deliver on all those interventions. So um you know it's you're right it's not that a large percentage of individuals are going to be diverted or or even like quote reunified you know like immediately the rapid exit becomes kind of the

[71:01] amplification of the tool itself. But then there are also some standardized ways in which you integrate that in the front end. You change the script um of the experience at the front end of the shelter um or the day services. it um experience and you really use coordinated entry as a last resort tool in in all of that. So there is a some kind of programmatic and process flow adjustments that that help support that. And so I I don't want to discount um the experience in this community and all roads and and I absolutely and and like other communities who've had similar experiences when they've made these types of adjustments, they've been able to really see a much more dramatic um shift in moving individuals through that shelter much more rapidly. >> Thank you and thank you for letting me jump in. >> Oh, no problem. Um my my next question is also based on that chart. Um it shows

[72:02] 20% um affordable rehousing exits for affordable housing units. Um are you anticipating a major growth in private sector construction of affordable housing because that's a pretty much what Boulder Housing Partners does in a year. So, are you assuming that the homeless will have a priority on those units that BHP um can builds? Um or how is that going to work? Uh with let's say 250 units um to house people uh and the the basic mission of BHP has always been to house um economically deprived people. How are those going to relate? >> Yeah. So I would say everyone experiencing homelessness fits into the category of economically deprived. And so we calibrated that 20% based on the

[73:01] pipeline projections that city staff have. And so it is not implied that we're kind of, you know, forcing a prioritization of all affordable housing. This is over the course of a 5-year period, keeping in mind that this framework is intended to be kind of incrementally grown, right, to the to the over overall result. And the expectation is that individuals um apply to these units the same way that any other in economically disadvantaged individual applies to those units. And if we want to accelerate individuals out of shelter and into those units, then we could ask for that prioritization. And in some cases, the city does in the negotiation um in the development negotiation asks for a set aside a small percentage of those units to be made available. But because we don't necessarily do that at at scale, what we built into the model is that these individuals will actually be in shelter for an average of 120 days

[74:02] while waiting to qualify for one of those those existing units. And so it we didn't this isn't a stretch goal. This was a calibrated percentage based on the the the existing pipeline and how much turnover capacity would ultimately be available on an annual basis 5 years from now. Um, and so I would say it aims to be relatively conservative, frankly, um, and not try to, um, out compete, right, you know, others. But >> my my my question remains, this looks like it would absorb the entire production of affordable housing. But let me go um to the last question that I have um which is we're we're obviously turning away people at the shelter. We're constrained for resources. Was any consideration given to creating a

[75:02] homelessness priority for people who have a more robust connection with the city of Boulder as opposed to people who just came off the bus? And and if not, why? So absolutely there was a consideration and I think that you that that we can that it shows up in the strategy document in a couple of different ways. So first it recognizes that there's a series of individuals who come to this community who are lowincome and don't really intend to remain in this community and that and that they are taxing this this community and we think that you could explore alternative options for those individuals and equally set some clear boundaries that that starts to make some of those changes. So, so that's one way in which we absolutely contemplated and it's recognized in the strategy. The second way is through this expansion of the

[76:00] diversion, reunification, relocation and rapid exit and the modification of the script uh on the front end of all of this. So rather than trying to say Boulder resident versus non-Boulder resident, what this really says is it's more than just one indicator, right? we triaged and if one and and if we're triaging and what one of the things that we recognize that that this individual is not from this community and is not intending to remain in this community, it doesn't make sense to put them on a list for housing in this community. Right? So it but we do need to provide an appropriate pathway out of homelessness or right you know through a reunification or relocation opportunity. So, um, that it it it shows up in the document in a more functional way because historically drawing that arbitrary line really puts municipalities in a very difficult position. Frankly, if the shelter is

[77:00] just a like decides not to service those individuals and those individuals end up sleeping outside as a result, this the city really has to make some hard choices about how to manage in that moment. And what we wanted to do was with this document instead is to say yes, let's set some clear boundaries because that's reasonable and important, but equally let's make sure that we're providing appropriate pathways for individuals. But that pathway doesn't have to be a rehousing service in the Boulder community. It can be right appropriately. You know, we've got to like housing isn't going to happen here. So, let's find an appropriate option. And sleeping outside, isn't it? >> I have many more questions, but that's enough time for me. I see four people lined up. I'm going to yield any time I have left and uh let others question. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Mark. Uh, next we have Ryan, then Matt and Aaron.

[78:00] >> I have two questions. Uh, they're kind of high level. Kurt, I think I'll address you to start with. Um, can you provide just a simple way to understand the role of the city versus the role of the county in addressing homelessness? >> Sure. Thank you. And I also may lean on both um Megan and Elizabeth as well to uh provide a little bit more detail. So the the one thing I'll start off with is and it's covered partly in the strategy as well um around uh behavioral health and it was mentioned earlier by Mandy um behavioral health public health um fall in the realm um of the county. Um, I would say that we work equally with with uh Boulder County um and coordinate very collectively with the

[79:01] city of Longmont and um we we through HSBC we look to align um certain programs with the funding that we have that each of us has available. Um so uh as an example, Boulder County um uh supports uh coordinated entry um components um of the services um and we provide um um a variety of approaches around housing uh of course the day service center um specific services within that um the the staff that help um transition individuals in the housing. Um, and the city also supports um programs that help keep people housed and those are that that's peer navigation um and

[80:00] staff involved in the building home program. But I'm going to ask uh Megan for a little more um detail on that if she has it. Um, and then then there's also the family side and I think Elizabeth can do a great job of breaking out how that um is dispersed between the the county and the city. >> Yeah, Kurt, I think you did a really good job there. I think the the one primary bucket is the behavioral health. Everything else we kind of trade and blend between us, the county, the state, and some federal resources, the housing stuff. Um, and so in the single adult world, it is behavioral health that tends to be a distinct need and something that we we aren't really able to address at the municipal level. And I'll touch really briefly on the family side of things. Um, so structured differently. Um, there are there is a

[81:02] network as I mentioned earlier of county staff. um specifically within the housing stabilization program um that work with um countywide and with both school districts um Boulder Valley School District, St. Breen Valley School District um a plethora of nonprofit agencies to try to coordinate um the prevention um side as well as bridge housing um case management just other services that families need in order to maintain housing or get housed. Um and and also again with the domestic violence shelters in our region. Um one place where we do connect and coordinate is through the family resource networks um family homelessness subcommittee. Um that is a network that is for the most part kind of staffed by um Boulder County staff and um with rotating leadership for uh the family resource

[82:00] network as well as the family homelessness subcommittee. And so, um, there are there are also, um, I I think differences there and again, like that network for family homelessness is is less formal when it comes to having one specific strategy, data sharing, etc. Um, but the county is a very um, heavy player and strong kind of player and leader in that space. And when it comes to city of Boulder, we we most um directly connect with between the city for some of I mentioned earlier some of the programs that we have uniquely the EPIS program for eviction prevention um uh the support that we provide directly to um EPA and SPAN you know for some of their services and um and also through um our family resource school and and older adult services. So some of those um kind of connections, partnerships are robust um kind of on their own um

[83:01] without you know county engagement and in the larger regional sense um we partner very closely with the county um in in those other ways including again helping to staff the the family resource network. >> Thank you very much. Um, I just have one more question. Um, and it's thinking about the new update, the new strategy update. What, if anything, are new notable concepts or departures from the way that we've done things before, new change models, new inspirations? Just like what's what's new in here, if anything? um compared to how we have approached uh the issue before. >> So, so I'll start again and u and then Megan Elizabeth may also have other areas to add. Um so I think one um one

[84:05] which is new um but has been evolving since the beginning of this year is around sort of the alignment of of messaging and sort of setting expectations uh for individuals who are new to the community experiencing homelessness. Um and u that's something that um as Megan said earlier we're we're building upon and um also the messaging as um they enter um services I mean obviously the the conversation around diversion um family was brought up earlier that's part of the the playbook currently um We've we've diverted 777 individuals since

[85:00] 2017 through that. So it's it's roughly um 100 people a year. So I think part of that is also increasing the resources. So, currently in this year, we only have $45,000 set aside um through city resources to support um uh the shelter and I'm sorry, all roads and um focus re-entry in um um direct costs related to that. if that was further resource um that that that could have a sign significant impact. Um uh I I think there's um something that we've been um talking about for the last um year within HSBC is expanding um permanent support of housing. and uh this this document reinforced that and

[86:03] um I think expanding uh PSH to other communities within Boulder County. Currently all the PSH um belting lives in uh Boulder and the city of Longmont. So, City of Boulder is actually provides a regional um support for individuals experiencing homelessness and I think I think we need to work on having a more regional approach around housing as well. Um so, Megan, do you wanna is there other areas that you're thinking that I'm missing? And Elizabeth around family aspect as well? I think I would just add kind of what Mandy called out a little bit earlier is that we have been doing the diversion and the reunification but a rapid exit which is similar but g gives a little bit more resourceheavy um some more like normally when we're doing reunifications and diversions it's like

[87:01] a one-time um cost of something might that be gas cards or it could be you know going getting back with your your grandmother or whatever. But with the rapid exit, there is some flexibility to that financial assistance that might be we're going to pay your rent for three months or something like that. Um, we have not historically done that. So, I do think that would be an added an added exit that we haven't utilized before. Um, but to Kurt's point, we just need to resource that appropriately. I think on the family side, it's it's really as again Mandy Sheridan's in the report is is really about scaling up in many ways the things that we're already doing. the I think the substantive difference in the way that the family homelessness, you know, strategy, the recommendations are is just naming the impact of of of

[88:01] of a boldly proactive approach. And um I think where that's different is um I think the city and our again all of our partners are working really hard just to meet the demand that is just right here and present. Um the lines continue to grow, if you will, of people who um who need rental assistance, who need that um those those that prevention assistance. And the amount of resources that people need in order to become kind of whole, much less kind of achieve that bridge to financial stability is just more and more every year. And so to me, by uh by kind of naming the number like this is what we're after, we're acknowledging that people of low income, many families of low income, whether they're, you know, kind of monthtomonth um able to make their rent or not, um are potentially at risk of of losing their

[89:02] home. And so the the difference is really that that scale of approach and really setting um a pretty bold goal um and strategy for how we could really long term uh address the need for families. >> Thank you. Thank you for that. >> Is that it, Ryan? >> Yeah. >> All right. Uh Matt, >> thanks. Uh uh just again I'll pile on on the on the u wonderful presentation. Um I'd say this is kind of a long time coming um to kind of get this clarity for this next chapter in in how we evolve on this. So I appreciate that. I've got a couple questions. Um, one, uh, maybe piggy back piggybacking on some of this discussion of all roads in the county given the county has no, uh, cohesive regional strategy to address homelessness and that we've seen, you know, the city

[90:00] and the county at odds about what to fund and all roads being somewhere caught in the middle of that in in in an unfortunate manner. And in this strategy, All Roads is taking an enhanced crit critical role in um what we're trying to achieve here. Is there a is there a recommendation or strategy built into this to how we maintain the stability uh financially and programmatically of the shelter? Because it seems like more now than ever or in the future, the All Roads is going to be such a nexus for all this and and you know, and we already saw the county cut a bunch of money from All Roads and that sort of thing. we had to compensate. Their capacity came down as a result. And so if they're at the mercy of a county who doesn't have a plan and certainly hasn't adopted or or or or agree with this plan, h how do we inoculate the shelter and all roads? How do we keep them stable so that our strategy has the pathway to success? >> Yeah, maybe I can start and and then Kurt and his team can can build on this.

[91:00] So what I witnessed in this process is that county staff actively participated in the development of this strategy. And so while that doesn't, you know, necessarily authorize the county to be to be in alignment, I want to appreciate it's it's a really um kind of important foundation. So there's opportunity here. HSBC as an existing structure allows at a staffing level that continued alignment while still respecting kind of the autonomy here. So what the framework of this document, you know, ultimately represents is the ability for city staff to go to the table and say at an operational level, here's where we're going to drive investment. Where are you going to drive investment? And, you know, at least at least creating some clarity about those particular elements. And none of that will be a surprise to county staff because they helped inform this process. I think what it that does then is positions, you know, um kind of,

[92:00] you know, each respective um entity that, you know, you as city council members and and the county and the county commissioners to really contemplate um the opportunities to to drive alignment. But e even if there isn't kind of an a formal adoption and all of that, it doesn't mean functionally that that there there couldn't be alignment and that the city can carry back from those HSBC environments the opportunity to to inform right on how functionally this is taking place. the strategy update because it's intended to be a strategy update and provide the roadmap doesn't provide for an exact um annual action plan to to respond to to the the all roads conundrum right that that that you represent here. I think though um what the strategy document clearly articulates is you must sustain that capacity or you fall out of balance.

[93:01] um toward reaching those milestones. And so that really then creates a natural priority at the the oper staff level to really work to try to negotiate for h for for how to how to do that. I think you you happen to be in a year where there are extreme constraints and a lot of unpredictability in in resources that the the county is really bearing. Um the county like every other county is bearing a lot of that weight and and so it it creates some kind of muddiness in this moment. But the document is intended to to try to um allow everyone to anchor to that to to weather this particular storm. Um and and I think it relies on staff to set those annual priorities through a budgeting process, you know, relative to what we think the county is going to be investing. That may change year to year where you all um

[94:01] put your resources if if you're successful in gaining that level of visibility. So that that was what I witnessed in this process and and what part of what helped shape the document in front of you is to try to create that opportunity. I Kurt and team Mandy, if you don't mind, uh just quickly, uh Mark Wolf, assistant city manager. I just wanted to also recognize that we are joined tonight uh by Mike Block, CEO of All Roads. Um wanted to just triple down on some of the appreciation for him and his staff participating in the process, the board's engagement at All Roads as well. So just a critical partner uh to to make this strategy uh happen and you know recognize the the funding challenges that we're all facing but um certainly can't do it without him and just wanted to make sure council was aware that that Mike was joining us tonight. >> Yeah. So so Matt, I'll try to add a little more um uh local color to that

[95:02] question as well. Um, so, uh, f first of all, I'll start off by saying I'm I'm a fan of HSBC. Um, and I can say that because I'm on the executive board. Um but I also lived um in this in this uh in this world and in this challenge before HSBC um trying to uh you know do this work and I think HSBC has really really brings together Boulder Boulder County at a staff level in a very uh effective way. Um it doesn't mean that it's easy or we um uh always get along or agree because it's it's really tough work. Um but I think there's been really good coordination around the resources that we do have. Um, and there's other organizations that are impacted by challenges that you mentioned like together as well in the

[96:00] in the uh the closing of the the recent closing of their uh youth shelter which has an impact on our uh community. um where where the staff doesn't have the same um necessarily influence is through the budgeting process or the resources available and HSBC works with the with the uh the resources that have been made available through our councils of Longmont and Boulder and through the county commissioners of the county. Um and um so I I do think that your question um lives both at the um at that level as well as at the staff level and um I I also think we're entering a very difficult time and but both organizations also go for apply for outside funding from state and federal sources at a very less level and we've been successful as a community. Um, but

[97:01] we also we also know and see that that that is changing. And so I think the coordination that you um you're asking for um is probably going to be more critical now than it than it has been. >> I appreciate that, Kurt, and I appreciate the response and uh Michael, it's great to have you with us. Uh my my next question um has kind of circle back to some prioritization which is um obviously to do this at scale you know sort of forecasted to have a quite a price tag and so I'm wondering how do we prioritize as hopefully sooner rather than later uh Nuria our financial situation improves uh more rapidly but as those resources come available and there's a choice point to invest in this work to scale it and accelerate the work how do we priorityize poritize what aspects of this get, you know, the first 500,000 or if we've got 3 million, like h how do we how do we properly invest that money as it comes in line

[98:00] comes on over the next couple years hopefully and and properly and most effectively insert those resources into this strategy to maximize impact. >> I'll say I'll start. Oh, Mandy, you want to go ahead? >> No, go ahead. Uh well I was going to say I think this road map is really what gives us the the path in which to start but what I was going to say is um without getting too ahead of of our budget presentation you will see that we will be starting that actually um and you will see some of that alignment as we move forward. Um while we are in uh I have yet to find the word that will replace fiscally constrained for this year. U I'm got till budget to figure that out. um we know that this is the way in which we want to move forward and we will make some hard decisions as we as we go and the team and I just can't speak highly

[99:01] enough of our HH HHS team who has looked at this road map and who has said this is how we are going to shift because we will not get there if we do not make those hard decisions that say this is the alignment that we are going to make. So this allows us the prioritization um uh roadmap in which to move forward. Now again we do not do this alone and to do this effectively we will need to continue to talk to our partners in order to maximize those dollars uh as as we continue to move forward. But it is with this tool that I believe that we will be using um our dollars the most effectively as we go. it is how we will think about um not just how we use our own dollars but how do we apply for grants? How do we think about what investments to make? Uh this provides us that pathway. Mandy, what have I gotten wrong? Or Kurt, what did I get wrong as we think about that? I I I think that's beautiful. The the one thing that I would just add is that

[100:02] there are um investments that you've already made that need to be both sustained and prioritized like your permanent supportive housing pipeline. And so I think it's it's not lost on anyone that there are lots of different opportunities for partnership in the expansion of that pipeline which then could open up your ability to expand your priorities deeper into this particular framework. So um I I think very obviously priority one is to sustain and ma and ensure right the that all of what you've invested in right has impact. I think the second is there are oftentimes a there's a natural opportunity to want to to tackle that 60% or get as deep into that 60% as you can and really start to drive more diversion, you know,

[101:03] reunification, relocation, and rapid exit. And it's a relatively low cost per person. So, um, you know, um, Mike Block said it at an event earlier this week. I mean, Kurt Kurt has has said it. You guys have proven you can have impact, but you've had very a very small amount of dollars. So, it won't take very, you know, if you can incrementally grow those pots, you can probably see some pretty pretty big results. So, I think those are the types of uh that's like the decision calculus that likely I you know, we've been talking in background with your team about you know, kind of thinking through and and how to support those priorities. I appreciate that. That That's a great answer. Helps out a lot. I appreciate it. That's it for me. >> All right. Uh Erin. >> All right. Thanks everybody uh for the fantastic presentations and the extraordinary work that's gotten us to this point. I really really appreciate it. Um my one uh question, we just

[102:03] talked a little bit about dollars, but just there's so many good ideas in this uh plan as we have an incremental amount of time or incremental dollars available. How do we determine which of these things we would tackle in what order? Like what what's the process going to be for that? And I know we've been at this for a while, so if there's a kind of a quickish answer to that, I I would love to hear it. So, I I'll jump in here, Mandy. I think it's it's it's similar to her her previous response. Um, I think the uh the lowest cost intervention is going to be increasing resources further around uh diversion and reunification and the the efforts around that. the um uh sort of the the two areas of strategy that she spoke about. The other one was those who have been um in our system for

[103:01] way too long. They have been unhoused for way too long. um that's that's going to be solved uh in part by um continuing to implement our housing pipeline and we need to have both the the units and the vows to accomplish that. I think that that the headwind we have um for that particular uh strategy is the significant reduction in vouchers that we're seeing um throughout our community and other communities and across the state. Um and um we're we're going to have to monitor to see if that moves in a more positive direction or two or next two or three years, but we need to start creating the housing now um or when those um vouchers become available. >> Thanks, Kurt. That that builds well on

[104:01] the previous answer. That helps me to understand that. Appreciate it. >> Okay. Uh Lauren Thank you. Um, I also appreciated the presentation very much and all the thought and data that that went into this. I had a couple of specific questions. Um, first, when you say we should set boundaries to rapidly reduce the number of unsheltered individuals, what specific actions do you mean? You also recommend expanding the SAMs model to better manage public spaces. And I'm curious how much expansion you're suggesting and given our limit limited funds, how we balance these priorities. >> Yeah, I that's a great question. I I don't think we're necessarily um advocating to expand the SAMPS program, but but um I think what what we're

[105:01] saying is as you start to make headway in reducing the number of individuals sleeping outside, their geographic presence, right, the space that they manage can grow. So, so um I I think that's a good point of clarification here. Um and the and and speaking from experience um there are ways to kind of continue to maintain those publica spaces with kind of less effort which allows you to take that targeted capacity and kind of move it out um in different ways. the complement to that around the setting those boundaries. I don't think setting those boundaries themselves is how we kind of rapidly reduce, right? It's all the boundaries are setting those boundaries is part of a a complimementaryary or it is a complimentary strategy to helping to kind of move individuals closer to where we're investing in the solutions for those individuals. And I think what's contained in the document as an example

[106:01] is, you know, right now there um are lots of supply distribution activities and feeding um activities that occur and those occur really far from the day services center and the night shelter. And here the city has made important investments in those environments to try to produce more care and support for these individuals, but but we're keeping individuals relatively disconnected. So that that's one way to you know to start to start to do that. I think another way that's articulated in the document about setting clear boundaries is shifting the script and getting a bit more honest as and I think Megan mentioned this getting just a bit more honest about what is possible and what isn't possible. So this idea that every person experiencing homelessness in front of us today is somehow going to be able to live and be fully integrated in housing in in Boulder, it it's it's just not fully achievable at this juncture. And telling someone it is or pretending that it is

[107:02] actually can be harmful to that individual. Like the idea that they're just waiting outside until that happens. So, you know, really working to try to, you know, set a a clearer boundary about what's possible and what isn't so that we can work in concert with those individuals to figure out the right solution for them as quickly as possible. So, those are some examples that I that we tried to really articulate in the strategy um as as ways to move this forward. >> I appreciate that. Thank you. That's helpful. Um, you also mentioned one recommendation is to consider opportunities for private sector development of short-term affordable accommodations such as micro units, boarding houses, and host. Are there other short-term options we should explore? I've heard from community a lot of interest in ideas like um tiny home villages or sanctioned camping.

[108:01] Yeah, I really I'm glad you're asking this question because I think it's important to really draw a distinction here. What this what that um statement in the strategy document really is pointing to is there needs to be more affordable options for individuals, which is really different. Like these tiny home villages and sanctioned encampments are not about affordable options. Those are containment strategies for individuals who are experiencing unsheltered homelessness. That we that is not what that right is intended to elicit. Instead, what it's intended to say is if somebody wants to come and climb and experience Boulder and they they have limited means. Sometimes what happens today is that they sleep outside in your community. And what if we, you know, what if we could have some some al affordable alternatives, but that's really different, right? Yeah. >> That makes sense.

[109:00] >> Other strategies. Yeah. >> Um, what would you what do you I guess then the this didn't really weigh in on strategies like tiny homes and sanctioned campgrounds, did it? How does something like this play in or why wasn't it included? >> Yeah. So um you know the HSBC evaluation I think you know provi and and and our job was to build on on that so not to repeat it and it provided a pretty clear recommendation um and felt consistent with I think some other conclusions that that city council had drawn previously as well. So I don't know that there was necessarily a reason to revisit it. In addition, what I will tell you is the system modeling really suggests that we want to minimize the amount of investment in our our crisis and health and safety in order to maximize our investments in remedies. And so we have to balance those obviously, but if if we

[110:02] invest too heavily in crisis and and health and safety response, then we're actually kind of entrenching individuals in crisis because there's no way to get them out in a timely way. And so tiny home villages and sanctioned encampments really represent an expansion of those types of environments, not necessarily of the remedies themselves. and they're really expensive, oftentimes more expensive per person than a a full year's worth of rehousing and stabilization supports. And so the, you know, the economics just don't work and the strategies just don't work to accomplish the goals. And so when the community through these work sessions really began to set the stretch goal of saying we really think we want to, you know, we want to point to a goalpost of ending unsheltered homelessness. th those solutions just ceased to be a a reasonable way to accomplish that given the balance of what was needed.

[111:02] >> Thank you. >> Can I Lauren on that one just for sure? >> Sure. >> So >> Tina says yes. >> Tina says yes. So I just have a quick question about the um tiny home villages for instance in Texas. Are you saying that those models are all in the help people, they don't live there forever and ever? They're just they for a short period of time and it is um why do you why I'm just curious why you don't think that that's valid housing or maybe I'm thinking about the wrong type of tiny home village. Can you just >> do you know what I mean? >> Yeah, sure. Great great question. So the the one primary community first village is the the big kind of primary village in Texas. So first just know that community first village um you know is is camping sites, it's our it's you know RVs, it's um tiny homes but tiny homes

[112:03] without bathrooms, tiny homes, right, without kitchen facilities. So it's and so um traditionally those don't meet habitability standards for like long-term remedies. So I I don't you know with it it's it's this is a tricky kind of conversation in terms of splitting hairs but at the end of the day um that those are approaches to expanding kind of um sheltering um within within your community and people do live there for a long period of time. But those were all that that's all historically been privately funded because it didn't meet those habitability standards. Now the there has been some expansion and and there is expansion planned that looks more like you know traditional development and they will qualify for for some of that

[113:01] expansion. Um so the way I look at some of that is like a a modern version of a mobile home park. And so it's a perfectly viable affordable housing solution to consider as part of your affordable housing pipeline. But when it's set up as a uh we can just go, you know, create a village and everyone can go there and everything's going to be fine with the expectation that we want people to move out of that village, right, in a timely manner, then that puts it into the category of interim housing. So, I'm not telling you it doesn't get >> Yeah, you you totally made it clear and now I get it. I think I forgot and you reminded me um of the different type the iterations of that, but you're right and thank you for clarifying. >> Sure. >> I had one final question which was just um I assume we well I do see Brad on the

[114:01] call but I didn't prep him for this ahead of time. I was wondering about if we could get an update from planning about the barriers to the kinds of um private sector development for short-term affordable accommodations that were highlighted like micro units, boarding houses, and host. >> Uh good evening. Brad Mueller, planning and development services director. What happens when you're uh when you're on the line, Brad? >> That's right. >> Interested listener. >> This could be information later. I Yeah. >> No, that's fine. I I appreciate the question and and it really it speaks, I think, to the larger theme of it being a holistic uh challenge that runs the whole spectrum from uh unhoused to fully housed. So, appreciate the context and question. um you know, boarding houses and tiny homes, quote unquote, and small

[115:00] subdivisions are fundamentally allowed by the code right now. Um you know, there could be some nuance that could be looked at in terms of setbacks and things like that. Um but a lot of times it gets hard to assemble that type of property or to overcome individual taps or things like that. I think council's um leaning into zoning allowances for uh ADUs and for uh duplexes and quadplexes on places that uh formerly were really restricted to single unit lots uh moves along that way. But certainly if somebody came along with a project that's kind of being being envisioned, we would we would be eager to work with them and and in many cases there might be a way to get there. >> Did that answer your question? I'm sorry I kind of caught it on the back end. >> I appreciate you jumping in and I think I might uh follow up outside of this as

[116:00] well, but that was great. >> Thanks. >> Thank you. That was it for my questions. >> Great. Okay, next we have Taiisha. Awesome. Awesome. Thank you very much. Um, so I just have a couple of questions. Um, the first on the engagement um, to inform this strategy. I just wanted I wanted to I couldn't find the slide. Um, but I was just curious and the mention of Malco block and just the work that All Roads has done with the the surrounding community and neighbor there neighborhood there over the years um has has really been in the direction that we want to move in. So, I was just kind of curious if um HOAs or neighbor or neighborhoods that are in the in the um vicinity of where services are currently being held or considering being held were engaged in this process. So what I can answer is no. They they

[117:01] were not ex explicitly engaged to participate in the work sessions. Individuals with lift experience were the providers um you know area administrators and the and the likes. So I I would I suspect >> that's fine. I just I just needed to answer on that. I'll have comments later. I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss it. um because that's really a critical population and stakeholder group and I wanted to make sure that uh that that was that was um that I was clear on that and whether or not this feedback and all of the strategy had their um their their information as well and I can share more why um during the comment phase. Um the other question I had was on the um on why an equity analysis is not being considered until the programmatic level given that an equity analysis needs to be both at the systemic and programmatic level. So since there wasn't one done at the systemic level um although I appreciate racial equity tools etc being

[118:01] used at the programmatic level as an equity specialist with over 30 years of experience I know that it's the most important actual impact that you can make is at the systemic level and not at the programmatic. So um can you just share a little bit more about why that um decision was made and I don't need to know what's going to be made uh done in in in lie of that because the ship is already silled um on on that but um but if there are opportunities for to do an analysis on the actual strategy and the framework itself and not just program by program. >> Yeah. So um you know our our contract didn't include an evaluation right of existing programming through those lenses. What you'll see in the strategy update document is it it absolutely points to the necessity when measuring success and through the utilization of dashboards that uh the you know that

[119:00] equity needs to be tracked and and actively understood so that appropriate systematic and programmatic adjustments and an understanding of that relative to the the annual priorities can be supported. >> Okay. And is there an equity definition or um you know kind of a what you're using what what is equitable practice? I haven't seen anything and I'm curious what you're using um to guide and inform your canon. No, I I don't think that there's a a formal definition beyond what's been what's been embraced by the National Alliance to End Homelessness, which um looks at how individuals are served by the system, right? So, it looks at >> uh not just, you know, the racial demographics of individuals as they of the effort, >> but absolutely how they flow through and and how they return. And that's what >> what is expected um

[120:00] >> to be continued to be tracked through a dashboard. >> So I guess um and that leads to my next question. So I was looking at the 2017 goals and I was struck by goal two that talked about expanding access to services um and strategic the strategy one underneath that is investing in evidence-based practices that have um long-term impacts. And so I'm just again wondering why we have to still wait until milestone one strategy one for 2025 for the long the landscape analysis at the programmatic programmatic level. So can you help me to understand um how this level of strategy has been able to be conducted without having that program by program information with change over time outcomes and outputs. >> Yeah. So so what we were able to do is look at at the system level data in aggregate. So it so it wasn't right we

[121:03] didn't have to look at it at a in a programmatic way. I'm sorry. I just want I I asked if you if there was a program by program and you're saying there was an aggregate so you didn't have to look at the program by program. So, thank you. I feel like I got my answer for that. Um, and then just lastly, the funding gaps. I was just curious what criteria you were using for the funding gap analysis work and projections because there is a a gap of 13 million between 2018 and 2030 that remains the same but the needs and demands go up. So I just kind of it it kind of made a little flag for me as I I know the different cuts and and fiscally restraint and e you know environmental economic u problems and challenges that we're having. So I'm just curious what data points you were using for your modeling to make that projection. >> Yeah. So the way the model works is that it defines what is your existing capacity and then it calculates kind of

[122:01] based on the the the percentages that we um represented for the pathways. It then calculates what's the gap. Um, and then we worked with staff to identify the cost per slot and that's how it then projects the relative um investment today versus the gap in investment needed. And then it has the model over time just um uses a really simple kind of um inflation uh annual inflation, right? Figure that. And so and and and so the last thing to say is what the the model you're looking at in the >> in the report represents is over a fiveyear period in the first three years we're going to work to resolve all individuals who are longstaying who have been homeless for more than a year. So they they flowed in earlier and they

[123:01] have yet to flow out. And we're going to figure out how to start um avoiding that in the process. So, it's going to cost it's you're going to see differences, right? You're going to see a growth in those first three years and then to sustain that system and avoid having long stairs in the future, then then it stabilizes and that's the consistent cost figure. >> Thank you. I appreciate I I appreciate these responses. Thank you. That's all I have. >> All right. Uh Tara, >> I have no questions. This was such a great report. I asked my one question, forgot to take my hand down. >> Okay. Uh then I'll call on myself uh really quickly. Um one question I had was with the goals, the very high level goals about reducing the time of homelessness and also about reducing rough sleeping. Um, just from a I guess from a city perspective, are those goals that we feel the council needs to adopt

[124:01] or are those goals that really are being led from the city? >> I might take that one. Uh, Tina Mark Wolf, assistant city manager. I I think we are looking at the strategy as an operational document. Uh, so don't anticipate kind of needing any formal adoption. Um, I I would say that your uh feedback tonight uh gauging general support for those goals certainly helps us um uh take that kind of general policy direction forward. And as Nuria mentioned, you'll see some of that reflected um in the the 2025 2026 budget proposal. Uh so I think generally under understanding where council's at would be great, but no, not anticipating a formal action. >> Okay. And then similarly with our partners in the county and the city of Longmont, would it be would we want to see if they would also be interested in supporting those as our the goals that

[125:01] we're looking to achieve? >> Yeah, that it's a good question and happy um for others to chime in on this as well. Um we have been working with them through the process and certainly they are aware of the strategy. Uh I I think we are anticipating bringing the strategy and some of our implementation thoughts back to HSBC as well since um we have heard that uh the county and Longmont certainly would continue to support that model and allowing that to be uh staff driven. Um certainly um anxious to to um hear how the funding decisions will play out um in both of those um entities uh over the next few months as well and and certainly HSBC will be in a position to react to that and hopefully the strategy can be a guide. >> Okay. And then I had some specific questions about the report. Um the first is that we all were sent um conveniently

[126:00] today the point in time count and they did mention that 76% of the people that are um homeless in Boulder have a disabling condition and we also mentioned that a small percentage have a severe behavior mental and mental health um issue that needs to be addressed in the in this report. What are the other conditions and how can they be addressed? Because the the way it's phrased in the PIT count is that they're conditions that would keep a person from pursuing employment or living stably in housing or might need some kind of intervention. So what is what is that delta and how is that being addressed? >> Um I will let Megan answer that. I think she'll provide some good insight and particularly with the um with her work with um the individuals with um those

[127:02] you know multiple challenges that they have. >> Sure. I think we could I could speak to what we're doing currently. I don't know if Mandy wants to speak to what the strategy would suggest um we might do differently. Currently, those folks are are the ones who typically stay in the system longer um and are the ones who get prioritized for the permanent supportive housing that we do have. We have a very small amount of rapid rehousing and kind of uh that has decreased in the last year or so, but that would be our secondary option where we would be trying to match those folks um with some of our more intensive. And I do think it it it primarily lives around the behavioral health and the substance use. Some of the physical disabilities were able to get people with some income, SSI, some ability to work and able to get them into to market rate or maybe just a regular HCV voucher.

[128:02] >> I think the the other thing that I would add is it's difficult to draw that kind of conclusion from the point in time count. So the point in time count is a survey that asks if individuals have a disabling condition. That definition of disabling condition under HUD is relatively broad, but it would be a kind of a false correlation to believe that every individual with with a disabling condition is in need of a really intense intervention. and actually systems who have are are closer to reaching kind of the scale right to to eliminating unsheltered homelessness altogether. What they've come to understand through the evolution is that many of those individuals in fact don't need right a a deeply intensive and long-term intervention um particularly if we can intervene earlier in their homelessness. So I ju I just caution, you know, you to to to look too deeply

[129:00] into the to the point in time report. It's it's honestly not really intended to provide us with those kinds of insights. It's a it's for trend analysis um and particularly um for trend analysis relative to the overall kind of number at a point in time um and is a better tool to then compare against inflow to have a relative understanding um to to the impact of of our investments and our strategies. >> Okay. I'll also just mention that um excuse me um sorry um our other data sources like um uh coordinated entry and um our one home system have better data on those disabilities and some of it can uh can come in the form of even the the length

[130:01] of time that they they've been unhoused. Um that's a disabling. So I wouldn't um I agree with Mandy that uh that's not necessarily the the purpose of the point in time count, but those interviews are helpful for us um as we look at them. But through the um other databases, we're actually spending more time um with individuals um to get more accurate data um on those types of um trends. And um on our dashboard, you'll be able to um see more more information around that. >> Okay. And then um thanks, that's great. And my last question is on the strategy around um getting access to more beds in the county and the state. Do we feel that um there are things that we haven't pursued yet? I we're I think that there's just so many people working hard

[131:00] to get people connected to resources that um that that there is still an opportunity there. And we we actually even considered it in the intergovernmental affairs committee to ask the state to give priority to communities that have um significant sheltering facilities to have some kind of priority over for some of these beds. Um but are there things that we feel like we can pursue? Um, I don't know if Nuria has any input on that, but I I know that Carl Castillo uh worked very hard on that and um I I know that there's many communities that are that are leaning into that concern. Um >> I Well, I would say and I appreciate that. I I I think that there could be I think we're in a difficult environment right now um with the current administration, but I do think that there are opportunities to explore. I'm

[132:02] really hopeful with our uh new intergovernment affairs officer coming on board to see what that could look like. Um but both the state uh has opportunities and I haven't given up on federal possibilities that are continuing to come down. I know that we um we as a city are in a better position than perhaps other communities in that regard and that we don't heavily rely on um federal funding. But I do think that there are different ways in which we can think about braiding or funding and um layering so that we can try to maximize that. I know that there are additional conversations we're having currently even with things like what is the use of the opio opioid proceeds and what does that look like as we're thinking about some of the conversations we have here

[133:01] right in fact I'm going to have that conversation tomorrow uh with the opioid council that we can um think about leveraging as we continue this conversation so long- winded way of saying I think there are opportunities and we're going to have to take those as they come Again, this is this is an opportunity to think with our partners about what are ways we can maximize those as opposed to perhaps previous um ways in which everybody was kind of doing their own thing and a little bit of peanut buttering some of those um opportunities around. >> Okay. Well, that those are all the questions I have. Um are there any other clarifying questions before we move on to comments? Okay. Uh Matt, >> just a just a quick one. Um I know that this discussion has really again come back to sort of centralizing some services and stuff with with the day service center which which makes sense

[134:00] but it is there a balancing act with uh individuals coming to the shelter as compared to when some of our teams who are out in community interacting with individuals and and tri and sort of mobile triaging if you will for lack of better words. And is there a balance of both so that we can make sure that the most people are entering the system and and rapidly being assessed needs and therefore funneled where they need to go or is the physical presence of needing to be at the day service center critical unto itself? And so I'm just sort of curious based on how folks are are spread around the community and how maybe that balances. >> I'll I'll provide a little bit of input there. Um so Focus Re-entry does a lot of that work currently and they will continue to be um a good partner in that. Um uh there's um other partners um like Peak Forward that also um provide

[135:00] that kind of support. Um I I would say however that the the day service center the the intent and how it's um how it's rolled out it's there's a collection of 18 different organizations that provide service and community service center. Um so while there there will continue to be efforts to um support people um out on the street or along the creek really their um their showing up at the day service center is really going to give them um the the broad and more comprehensive assistance that they need. Okay, thanks K. >> Okay, and maybe our last question will be with Nicole. >> Hopefully good segue into the comments. Um, I was just wondering, staff, if you could remind us uh what types of comments would be most helpful.

[136:04] >> I I think it is uh general uh feedback on the strategies themselves. Um, you know, certainly if there's um, you know, any type of kind of major gap that you all are seeing, it' be good to to capture that. Um, I think our goal is to, uh, finalize the document based on your comments. So, I think anything that that are really directly aimed at at the strategies would be most helpful. >> Okay. And and again I think you had asked us not to focus as much on the budgeting part which has some unique challenges uh but that we'll do that through the budgeting process. So uh is that Kurt I see your hand is >> yeah if I could just make one more followup uh comment Tina to your question. Um, so there there's been a lot of conversation about um the county

[137:00] around behavioral health and I I also just wanted to add in that much of that behavioral health service is actually um supported through through Medicaid and um uh actually a significant amount is both primary healthcare and behavioral health and um as we know there's there's um there's risk around in the future. So, we've already seen in the last year that there's been a reduction um in the individuals that are covered through um through Medicaid. Um so that's um uh that's something that we're watching and we'll have to to look at as a community to understand how we um support clinic um in providing much of the services as well as other providers that um use that as a financial resource to support those individuals. >> Okay. Um, thank you for adding that um,

[138:02] lens to think about this um, document. So, why don't we move on to feedback and we still have 45 minutes. So, I think you know this is an important topic. So, um, hopefully we can hear from everyone. So, who would like to kick us off? All right, Mark. Um, I know there's going to be a lot of um, uh, approval and love reflected for this plan, and I know we've been asked not to to focus on, uh, budgetary considerations, but I simply do not understand how you can have an action plan without understanding where you're going to fund it. Um, $13 million a year is a lot of money. Um the assumption that the um housing department uh will grow by 10% a year for the next 5 years I think is contrary to what almost every

[139:00] department in the city will experience. So that's a concern to me. I don't to me regarding this as an operational plan in the absence of dollar one um is very troubling on the substance of the plan. I think there are just a lot of good things there and I could um provide a little love for those specific um proposals. Um diversion I think is is is a great uh program. I think the the program for um homeless families is terrific. Uh protection of LGBTQ plus uh individuals and uh young people is is fabulous. But I simply cannot look at this and say well um uh in fact I was told quote that this document provides a roadmap for a fully optimized system and it is independent of current budgets andor economic conditions. I don't

[140:00] accept that and I I don't think you can accept that. Um that's not good governance to me. I like the plan. I don't like it being divorced from uh funding and if we're going to divert funds from other departments and other reasons to um close that gap, I would like to know about that um before I I finally sign on to it. Um so I approve of the uh components and specifics of the plan but I am very troubled that we're living in um to some extent to la land because we don't have dime one. All right. That's that's my view of it. Thank you. >> All right. Uh Tara, I wonder why there are not a lot of other hands up but okay. What I love about this plan is probably the it's the opposite of what Mark doesn't like, I guess, and that is that it is more of a

[141:04] like a blueprint for organizing how we're going to go forth. When it comes to, for instance, any of our transportation um ideas, let's just say, we don't have funding for it at the time. And then whether it's through grants or the many great ways that um staff gets money um to pay for things to at least what this why this makes me very happy is because it is just like without an overall plan and a road forward and this is somewhat detailed although not in the budget area then we're just constantly reacting to what is currently happening. happening or what can we do specifically versus here is our big plan and that is to get people off the streets and into some

[142:00] sort of shelter or housing or and the many different details that it went so that um that are available that were also in that plan. So, I would say that is what I do like about it. And um let me just hold on one second. Let me just find that little sheet of paper that tells me something that I can really impress everybody with. No, I'm kidding. I don't have anything impressive. Um I like the key milestones. I, you know, I'm not usually a person I like to live for the day. Honestly, I'm not like a future thinking person. So, what I like about it, it really pushes me to like say this is what we want to accomplish in the future. Um, I like the core strategies very much. Um, and then the details, well, we've all been working, some of us older, on council for years and years and years, right? Trying to accomplish some of these things. And to me, it just gives us it gives us the way forward.

[143:01] So, that's why I like it. >> Okay. Next we have Taiisha and then Lauren. >> Awesome. Thank you very much. Um so when I first came on council and I had the opportunity to meet with the HHS team and um got to see the incredible theory of change and outputs and outcomes and everything. I got like super excited and I asked for like the programmatic level of detail on just like outcomes of how are they doing and and I was told wait we'll get that information or you know it's you know it's really complicated there's a lot of partners each people have different pieces of the puzzle and so we're going to compile this together and um and I'm still and and um I'm just disappointed that it's still not here and I just have a hard time again as a strategic planner somebody who's been doing that for 20 the idea that these kinds of strategies could be developed without having programmatic data on outcomes and

[144:01] budgets. And I'm not asking you for pro budget projections. I'm asking you for how much money did we spend on these programs over the last seven years or even three or just at least three. Um, and so again, just coming from my expertise in evaluation, in program evaluation in complex organizations, I continue to be concerned about the ways that our research and evaluation is being conducted. Um, and so specifically not having an equity analysis, please stop saying that we do equity if we are not including an equity analysis at the systemic level when it's possible. you even have equitable elements within the document within the other components of the analysis. And so I just continue to be um eager to get to to walk our talk on equity. Um and equity is not just having people with lived experience in the room. Equity is access um meaningful

[145:00] representation. Equity uh is in quality and outcomes and and outputs. Um and you know again just the the the the accountability mechanisms I'm just not seeing it and the data points that we would need to make these kinds of decisions on will we move forward with the strategy or not is very difficult without having that information. Um the milestone. So again in my world a milestone is something that is something is in service to reaching a goal and it sounds like in this iteration a milestone is what we want to achieve in five years. So my question becomes what are the look fors between years you know one and five in order like what kind of data would you be collecting like I'm just you know and if this is an operational plan versus um you know aligning to the you know I thought that there was a real effort to align the operational plan at the staff level with the council goals with the BBSD plan etc. So again just that need

[146:00] to weave and crosswalk across plans. I did notice the two blurbs in the beginning. Um but again, I just I feel like there's an opportunity for some deeper weaving here. Um and then um the partnerships component um really having a better idea outline and understanding of what um I appreciated um Ryan's question around the the delineation between the city and the county, but as you indicated in your report, the organizations that are supporting family homelessness are very different than the support organizations that are supporting single homelessness. I also going back to the equity question have a lot of questions around family homelessness as I've only heard us talk about it as a monolith and I know that there's a lot of of variety um you know family homelessness looks very different and the different scenarios can elicit different responses so are these um you know is it documented or undocumented are their children you know how old are the children are they in school are they out of school right and so again um just having a little bit more information in

[147:01] in order to guide this strategy as opposed to, you know, the the the efforts that were completed which are helpful. Um, and the programs that are proposed are, you know, interesting, but um, I I was hopeful that this was an opportunity for us to take a look at where we've been and and the outcomes of those efforts over the last seven years to then inform the strategy and the budget and those kinds of things moving forward. So I say all that to say I look forward to the programmatic data uh for outcomes as well as cost and a proper systems level equity analysis moving forward before I can advocate on anything related to this work. And the idea again, and I couldn't more wholeheartedly agree with my fellow council member Mark when he says the idea that y'all can create a strategy without one dime of where this stuff is going to come from is is some of the challenges that I think or some of the processes that we need to that we need to revisit. Um

[148:01] because we can't just build it and then try and figure out how we're going to make it work. We really need to meet the moment. Um, and then lastly, and I voiced this in my 101 one-on-one conversation, which is I feel like this plan needs to align with the moment at the federal level as well. Um, knowing that the county um is going to continue to to to experience deficits and and cuts um that are going to, you know, decrease their capacity, which then again has us hitting, you know, at a much higher level than we really have the capacity um to to meet that need. So um I continue I appreciate the effort um and um I await qualitative and quantitative data to make the decisions that we need to make at the next stage. Thank you. >> All right. Uh next we have Lauren and then Matt. >> Thank you. So I hear the concerns my colleagues um but I also think that this is a bit of a

[149:03] unique issue. It is by far the issue that I hear the most about from our community. Um, and I appreciate that this framing really encourages us to refuse to accept homelessness as an unsolvable tragedy. It really pushes for finding and moving towards a solution. Um over the past two years we have seen reductions in unsheltered homelessness while the nation at large has seen increases and that didn't happen by chance. It happened because we chose to stay the course with housing focused solutions and also work handinhand with our regional partners. I think, you know, I'd like to highlight the eviction prevention and rental assistance program that's kept 96% of the families it serves in their homes. I think that's the example of a program

[150:02] that can really have profound impact um and is relatively inexpensive for us to provide. But we can't rest on what we've already achieved. I think as I mentioned, homelessness remains by far the greatest concern we hear from the community. So, we have to work really hard to close those gaps that remain to expand rapid rehousing so people spend less time in crisis, to advocate at the state and regional level for access to institutional and behavioral health care so that we're not leaving people untreated in our community, and to create more safe, short-term options for people who need them. Um, I also think that it's really important that we invest in and make make sure that we're continuing to invest in more invisible forms of homelessness like family homelessness. Um, as this moves forward, the main things I would really like to see are details,

[151:00] being really explicit about what kind of those changes are and look like, and I I know it's hard, but where possible, guidance around tradeoffs. As many people have mentioned, our budget is tight, but we have to work towards a day in Boulder where homelessness is rare, brief, and nonreoccurring. And I think that we will find benefits in terms of improvements of quality of life for everyone in our community in a way that we don't that we can't through other types of spending. Like this is such a critical thing for us. Um, and this study shows us, you know, it's not perfect, but that we can get there. Um, we've seen progress. We have built many of the tools we need. And Nuri, I appreciated your comments earlier, but I hope we can find a way to dig deep and continue to make significant progress. Thanks.

[152:00] >> Okay. Uh, Matt. >> Thanks, Tina. Um, appreciate some of the comments that came before. Um, I just want to maybe respond to one before sort of give my other feedback. You know, we make we make plans and we set courses for projects all the time without securing all the funding. Um, the core arterial network program is is a perfect example. Um we've been building better streets, better intersections, better bike lanes, uh all the while still working year after year to secure the funding to finish that buildout. So I I just because we don't have the funding now is one not an indictment on the quality of the strategy and two it shouldn't be at shouldn't prevent us from moving down the path because we can do a lot with the new strategy with the resources we have. So I'm hopeful that we can continue to do that and I think staff's chartered a good course. I will say that you know this >> sorry can I have a point of clarification please >> sure >> thank you um I just want I don't know

[153:00] which colleague you were mentioning but I wasn't suggesting that we needed to have the money secured I was suggesting that there was no financial data to inform the strategy so I just wanted to clarify that if that comment was for me or my comments >> it was it was not but thank you for the clarification um so you know what's what's essential here is recognizing the successes that built where where we're at, right? We have done a tremendous job doing the housing and exiting people from homelessness and it's just time that the strategy has to evolve to also work with how people are coming into our community and I think the time is right for us to do that. And so I think that there's just really tremendous opportunity in front of us for how we think about that. And I thought Lauren uh made a really great point in terms of in the future we should be looking at things where people are coming in in one very infrequently and their time is spent very short and they have a rapid uh uh exit uh back into stability if not a place to thrive. So I think that there's just tremendous opportunity in front of us for that. Um I I like where this strategy is headed

[154:00] in the sense that it's actually looking at some of the constrained resources but realizing that we have to invest further. I love that it also points to where our role is and where it is not. And I think this has been so much of our pressure, our stress and conflict with the county, which is really trying to understand where whose lines are what. And I do recognize that at a staff level, staff is working great together. It is at the policy level that this is a major breakdown. And again, our two entities are quite different. We have a we have a city manager run uh organization at the city of Boulder and the county has a political arm that runs their the county and that is fundamentally different. Um and because of that there is tension and that tension needs to be resolved. And so I just like that it points to that and I think that that's a great place to sort of try to build partnership with the county and hopefully get them to see that this is a strategy that could be scaled up and perhaps utilized in whole or in large portion with what may become a regional strategy. Um I still waiting

[155:00] to find that regional strategy, but hopefully with some pressure and some showing good results here in the city that we can show the county that they can take these things, scale it up and not have the risk of doing things in the unknown um and have those outcomes that they can then uh scale and take responsibility for as our regional agency uh going forward. So anyway, I really appreciate where this is taking us and and hopeful that uh staff can do a great job in executing it and when more money comes online uh scale it up. But but really appreciate uh where we're headed and Mandy, thank you for spending so much time in our community um to help us out. Appreciate that. >> Okay, Ryan, >> Megan, Elizabeth, Kurt, and team, thank you. Um there's a long list of unsung heroes in the city who get a lot more opinions than they do. Thanks. And um you all are high on that list, and I'd like to just say thank you for your service to this crucial work. Um and also Mandy that yeah this is a solid body of work and also council member Folkarts thank you for your work in and

[156:00] around this and our um county county uh efforts. Uh so I I generally do have a lot of confidence in the the team's expertise and work here and I just have a I think three kind of practical suggestions. Um, so the first is picking up on Mark's concerns and Terara's commentary, I do agree that it's good to have a visionary plan that's starts with not being hemmed in by financial constraints. Um, and and I do hope that when we get to the point of having to do budgeting that we will get recommendations from staff and not find council in a position of somehow having to sort of figure this out um that you know so maybe I'm trying to draw a bridge between those two comments that um we we do need the advice on how to and how to do the budgeting. So I'll look forward to that. Um, second one, um, I asked what was new

[157:02] and Kurt, you and the team provided a list. I think if I also follow this correctly, there was also a new something new that's a plan to consolidate outreach services that would reduce um, what we currently have in Central Park. Um, I guess I would just say whether I have that exactly correct or not. Um, in any case, I would just encourage that as we as we go forward with changes that we be very um uh thoughtful about where we are making changes and that we set up a good way to track the outcomes coming from that and then have a way to come back and compare uh and check, you know, with with what's what what's working um against the baseline. Uh, and then third, um, I heard on on my one of my earlier questions about the county versus city

[158:02] work, I heard I heard a kind of very heavy emphasis in partnership. Um, and it makes sense that that is, you know, the the I guess the kind of theme. Um, but I do think as we go forward and think about future reporting and dialogue about what we're accomplishing, I would I I do think it would be helpful to have um a little more breakout of where the organizations have their unique roles and responsibilities so that we're able to understand what the the organizations are bringing to the partnership. um and just able to I guess appraise that a little bit more. So I know that's all there and um and um just look forward yeah to the next time we talk about it to be able to dig into that a little more. Thank you. >> Okay, Nicole.

[159:01] >> Thank you. Um and just I so appreciate all the work that everybody has put into this. Um a couple of things that uh just comments I'm taking away. Um, one is that we've got different strategies for individuals and families. Um, I love that when I first started on council. Um, we as a council didn't really even talk about family homelessness much. Um, and now we've got a whole separate strategy for it. And to me that reflects a a pretty major advancement. And I I just want to to note that it I think um you know clearly there's more work to be done in terms of um just getting information across all the different people who are um engaging in family homelessness. But the fact that we're talking about it and have a plan um is to me um quite remarkable. So thank you for that. Um I love that we we now have a clear picture of where we want to go um that's updated for 2025 um and beyond. Um, I like my colleagues, I'm

[160:00] wondering about the funding and all of that as well. And I know we'll we'll continue to have those conversations. Uh, but I think a lot of the really wonderful things about the city, um, have come just from having a really good plan to start with, like the Boulder Valley Comp plan, um, CAN, uh, our flood and storm water master plan, which is still one of my favorites, all of that. So, um, just really excited that that we have this update in place now, too. Um and then the other thing that I think is going to be interesting as we move forward into um future conversations is thinking about the different potential paths and timelines that we could take because this was certainly a very ambitious one um that you know if we could get the funding to implement everything we could be looking at um getting basically to um functional zero within a few years. um and just thinking about what are the different steps along the way that will get us to those different um places. What's the um focus

[161:00] on prevention versus um responding uh to acute homelessness or or chronic homelessness? Um especially with um folks more and more folks likely falling into economic procarity um as we continue to lose jobs and things like that. um how are we going to think about that balance between um prevention and uh response to a situation that's already unfolding? Um so I look forward to having those um future conversations, but I'm really thrilled with this plan that we have in front of us and look forward to um helping to implement that as at least the first stages as we head into budgeting this fall. Thank you again for good work. >> All right, Erin. >> Great. Well, I will add my thanks to my colleagues for the uh amazing and extraordinary work. As I said earlier, Mandy, thanks so much for coming to our community and putting all of these great recommendations in front of us and to our internal team, Kurt and everybody. Just appreciate you so much. Um, and I

[162:00] think we're absolutely on the right track with this plan. There have been a great uh set of comments by some of my colleagues. I'm tempted to just say ditto what Lauren said because Lauren, I thought you were your comments were perfect. Um, I'll just add a couple more things. Also appreciated Matt's recognition that uh we don't always have the funding for the uh plans as we adopt them and the CAN um is a great example uh for one that we adopted a few years ago and then have been implementing as we have funding um available and resources. So I think we're it's ambitious and appropriately so. I I appreciate um Matt, you asked a question earlier about um just in terms of prioritization around funding and what resources are available to what people. And so I appreciate the the recognition that we can't provide every service to every person much as we wish that we could. And so I appreciate that the plan recognizes that we have to do some form of prioritization um in order to get to that functional zero level which um you know with this plan it does give us a

[163:01] vision of that. So, um I look forward to us continuing to get the numbers of people uh sleeping rough down and getting more people uh into the the stable housing that they need. So, thanks again to everybody and looking forward to the next test. >> Thank you. And I'll um call on myself last. I agree with a lot of the comments that have been said. I am particularly appreciative of the two goals for individual adults and the goal for family housing and the way that those have been simplified. And one of the things I would look forward to is to continue to um have just reporting on those goals specifically um because I just will want to see the progress we make depending on of course the money that comes in. Um it's I think one of the the disappointments with the budget is that this is such an important um goal or value of our community is to

[164:01] help people who are experiencing homelessness and it's frustrating to have a plan that looks feasible and know that we don't have the money to make it happen. So that's it's it is very frustrating and I hope that and I um look forward to staff understanding where we can make the biggest impact in the shortest time to meet the goals that are uh put forth in this plan. So, um, the other piece is I would like to see in this plan or in in any work we're doing on this topic, how we can continue to clarify the roles of the city and the county and um make more progress there, including on how we align with our nonprofits and with our budgets. Uh, I think we can continue to do that and I we have some great partners. And then I also just want to hope that our nonprofits are heavily engaged uh particularly our roads which seems to be the center of a lot of this work and um

[165:00] they're doing so much work already. So as we think about the new work and how they can be supported to become to take on even more of the city's responsibility as we try to u make these changes. So um that's all I have. Uh staff, is there anything else you wanted to add before we close out for the evening? And was this helpful? Is this what you need? >> Um yeah, I'll just um share my appreciation for all of the input um from all the various different perspectives. They they all um are helpful in understanding um how we will measure this and report it to you. um how we will prioritize funding um in the future with you. Um and I'm also um actually looking forward to um working with our other um partners in in the

[166:00] county and in Longmont and seeing in ways which we can align with this strategy. Um and and I think the last thing I'll say is um and you've touched on it a little bit, the the real the real heroes in this work are the organizations that are working with these individuals every day. um it's not necessarily us as staff of the city of Boulder and just really want to show my or indicate my appreciation. um they're um compassionate, caring people who are actually incredibly skilled at what they do. And I think the combination of that with resources that we've had um has really led to the success that we've seen and we're looking forward to growing um that with this plan and with this road road mapap um as research becoming >> and I um if I reflect on where we've come from se 2017

[167:02] um I think there was a lot of concern um in the community at that point. I feel like we're um there's been a lot more alignment um since then and I think this strategy will help you move that further. So, thank you. >> Thanks, Mark. I saw you come off mute. Did you want to add anything? >> Kurt covered it well. I think appreciation for uh council tonight um and your engagement throughout um also to to our staff uh and Mandy for for spending many many hours with our service providers and our staff and really providing um such excellent expertise and guidance throughout the process. So um just wanted to also extend our thanks to to her and just um appreciative that we're um feeling in good shape and in having a road map for the future. So, uh, thanks, uh, council for all your, uh, comments and, um, uh, work on the on the leadup to producing

[168:00] this document. >> I just wanted to add, and I appreciate Kurt, you lifting up everyone who's doing this really, really hard hard work on the ground, but Mark, you touched on something, and council, I I say this earnestly, hard conversations because it's hard work and you're a real important part of this, right? your advocacy as we're thinking about how do we continue to work with our partners at the elected level, at the state level, at the federal level. We need your help as we push this forward. Certainly, there's a lot happening on the ground. Certainly, there's a lot of uh work that we are doing operationally and with our partners, but your voice and your support in this, your advocacy role will be critical as we continue to do this role. And so, uh, we thank you so much for leaning in because the work of regional partnership requires your voice to move this forward as we're thinking about leveraging partnerships, leveraging money, leveraging funding, leveraging that layering. And so, I just

[169:02] want to highlight that this takes all of our efforts to move it forward. And thank you all for leaning into that. >> All right. Well, I think that's it. We're about 15 minutes shy of our end time of 900 PM, but I hope that we can say goodbye and take back those 15 minutes. So, that we'll conclude this meeting at uh 8:44. Have a good evening. >> Great job.