DOCSLIB.ORG

WSHFC | My View | Washington State Native American Housing Authorities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING • July 2014 My View A unique, “inside” perspective on housing and community development from the executive director of the Washington State Housing Finance Commission Inside this Issue Snapshot of needs and challenges on tribal lands ........................2 Diana Phair: We develop a community ....3 Federal funding for Native American housing..............................5 John Williamson: It takes these kinds of Despite projects to break that cycle of poverty ....6 Wendy Lawrence: formidable challenges, Don’t be afraid to dream................8 Place of Hidden Waters ...............11 Washington State’s Brook Kristovich: The tax credit program Native American Housing has raised the bar for housing standards on the reservation....................12 Authorities rise to the top The LIHTC program on tribal land: A national perspective ................14 Map of Washington’s 29 tribes .........16 What does creating and preserving affordable housing on Native American lands look like in our state? With which major issues do tribal leaders and housing authorities struggle? How do they go about solving them? What resources are available to them? This issue of My View is dedicated to housing on Native American lands in Washington state because I want to share a fuller picture of how the work of affordable housing is accomplished in Indian country. In addition to four creative and hard-working housing authority directors on Washington state Indian reservations, I spoke with tax-credit consultants David Bland of Travois and James Horvick of Raymond James for a broader national perspective. Also, I’ve highlighted some of the outstanding housing created in Indian country using the Housing Tax Credit. Since 2000, the Commission has approved more than $97 million in credits to build 628 homes on 10 different reservations in the state. Above: Qui Nai Elt Homes I on the Quinault Reservation KIM HERMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Photo Credit: Larry Gill WSHFC NEWSLETTER p.1 NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING • JULY 2014 My View Snapshot: Needs and challenges on tribal lands Regarding the challenges so many Native Americans face in securing decent housing and other essential needs on reservation land, two recent reports (the GAO’s Native American Housing: Additional Actions Needed to Better Support Tribal Efforts and the Housing Assistance Council’s Housing on Native American Lands) give a good overview of the national picture, including these key facts: American Indians and Alaska Natives are almost twice as likely to live in poverty as the rest of the U.S. population—27 percent vs. 14.3 percent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013). More than 25 percent of all households living on tribal lands have incomes that are less than $20,000 a year (as opposed to that are 18.4 percent of all U.S. households). Overcrowding in homes (more than one occupant per room) is common on Native American lands, where 8.8 percent meet this criterion, compared to the national average of 3 percent. Much of what is commonly considered homelessness goes unreported on tribal lands. Many tribal members are doubling and tripling up—living with family members. Tribal housing challenges include: A significant shortage of healthy rental housing on tribal lands—and an ongoing shortfall in federal funding adequate to maintaining this housing stock; The remoteness of many reservations, which translates into higher costs for creating and maintaining housing and infrastructure—and challenges in securing capable contractors; Almost-flat appropriations for NAHASDA [see sidebar], which restricts available funds; Difficulty of combining Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG) funding with other funding sources, due to the requirements of many federal programs; Legal restrictions on private mortgages on tribally owned and trust lands; Costly and burdensome federal red tape, including environmental reviews, that are typically required by, and often uncoordinated among, federal agencies. In the face of these challenges, tribal housing authorities in Washington are using creativity and persistence to make the most of the resources they do have— with, as you will see, extraordinary results. Top: The Colville Homes II project created 20 single-family homes on the Colville Reservation. Photo Credit: Crystal Banks-Mann Left: The Makah’s Sail River Heights development will increase housing stock on the reservation by 25 percent. WSHFC NEWSLETTER p.2 NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING • JULY 2014 My View Diana Phair: We develop a community One of the tasks of a housing authority (HA) Diana says that the LIHTC program has is to think strategically, to get the most out worked for the tribe, “but if we were to do it of the resources you have available—and again we wouldn’t go so low as 40% or lower then scour for more. As LHA director, Diana of area median income (AMI) to qualify” Phair and her staff are highly strategic—and those living in the homes. Like most LIHTC relentless. Diana continues to seek ways to programs, ours here in Washington uses a create more housing for her people, while scoring process to award housing tax credits also providing tools that will help those living to applicants based on the public benefits in the housing to be more successful. that will be achieved for the community. The Lummi Nation’s tribal land sits along The points allow applicants to choose which the coast north and west of Bellingham in public benefits they want to provide to the Northwest corner of the state. More residents and to meet community objectives. than 5,000 tribal members live on about The purpose is to provide a fair process for 13,000 acres. Diana manages about 300 units all potential applicants. Many Lummi families of rental housing and runs an internal tribal make their living in the fishing industry company that builds about three to five and these Lummi homes were specifically homes a year for homeownership. Through targeted to low-income fishing families. DIANA PHAIR her HA, she’s created a number of social But fishing is cyclical, with some good years Executive Director of Lummi Nation programs to support residents and help and some bad. Many families, Diana Housing Authority (LHA) since 1992 preserve the integrity of Lummi Tribal explains, would cycle above and below the Housing’s community. Her tribe was the required income level, which made it difficult first to take advantage of the Low-Income to remain within the terms of the program. Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program; they Like all federally recognized tribes, the built 24 homes through the program Lummi are eligible each year for the Indian in 2000. Currently, they are in the process Housing Block Grant (IHBG) program adminis- of transitioning these homes out of this tered by HUD [see sidebar]. Each tribe’s grant 15-year program. is based on a formula that takes into account PHOTOS PAGES 3 & 4: Lummi Nation Housing Authority was able to secure $4.2 million in stimulus funding to build the first 72 units of Kwina Village to house low- income families. Now 52 more apart- ments are under construction. Photo Credits: Brandon Sawaya WSHFC NEWSLETTER p.3 NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING • JULY 2014 My View of communication with tribal leadership. A common frustration for Indian HAs is that tribal council membership changes over time; it can be difficult to maintain great relation- ships and keep council members educated about their tribe’s housing needs. Historically, says Diana, “we’d get new council members, and we’d get run through the wringer. So we redid the ordinance. I said, ‘Why don’t we have a council position? That way they can’t say they don’t know what we’re doing.’” Now LHA has a commissioner, Henry Kagey, who also sits on the Lummi Indian Business Council. “We keep him informed, and when housing comes up at the council, the size of the tribe and many other factors; primarily of one- and two-bedroom apartments; he’s right there at the table. That gives us the Lummi’s allocation is about $3.4 million phase two is 52 more apartments currently some stability.” annually. That may not sound like an under construction. All are targeted to low- Integrated drug testing and treatment into inconsiderable amount of funding, but there income families. the community. Substance abuse bedevils are wide-ranging demands on that money, “We found that many times when we put many Native American communities; about from maintaining and rehabbing existing families in large units, we were setting them 10 years ago, Diana and her staff decided housing stock, to administering the HA and up to fail. So instead, we start these families to draw a line. “We do intensive backgrounds its myriad programs, including providing out young and teach them the tools, the costs and we do drug testing. Anyone 16 and tenant-based rental assistance. Most HAs are of moving to a larger unit. Then they can get older has to undergo a drug test.” Early on, extremely hard-pressed to make their grants on the waiting list to transfer to a bigger unit. if anyone in the family unit failed the drug test, cover anything but the most clamoring needs. That was one of our success stories of those the family would come off the waiting list. 72 apartments.” Orchestrating efforts to support “Now,” she says, “we’re able to keep that Aggressively sought and secured funding the Lummi community family on the waiting list so long as those from myriad sources to build and maintain who fail the test do an assessment and then Here’s a pared-down version of what LHA housing stock—and support residents. show us that they got that and are following has accomplished in recent years: About 10 years ago, Diana hired a profes- their assessment program.” The tribe offers sional planner to help perform environmental on-reservation drug treatment and counsel- Secured competitive federal stimulus reviews and write grants.
Recommended publications
  • Watershed Plan

    Watershed Plan

    CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND This watershed plan for the Hoko-Lyre Watershed provides a comprehensive review and evaluation of vital water resources in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 19 and lays the groundwork for future management and stewardship of these resources. Located on the Olympic Peninsula (see Figure 1-1), WRIA 19 is a beautiful and remote area with few human inhabitants, though it carries a legacy of large- scale logging throughout the region. Based on the review of water resources, this plan outlines steps for ensuring the optimum ongoing use of the watershed’s surface waters and groundwater in a way that balances water needs for human use and environmental protection. An overview of the important characteristics of WRIA 19 is provided below. Appendix A provides more detailed descriptions of WRIA 19 features that are important for consideration in a watershed plan. Figure 1-1. WRIA 19 and Subbasins 1.1 WHY WAS THIS PLAN DEVELOPED? In 1998, the Washington State Legislature created the Watershed Management Act (Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 90.82) to support local communities in addressing water resource management issues. The act established a voluntary watershed management planning process for the major river basins in the state. The goal of the planning process is to support economic growth while promoting water availability and quality. The Act encourages local governments and interested groups and citizens to assess basin water resources and develop strategies for managing them. The Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) defined boundaries that divide the state into WRIAs, which correspond to the watersheds of major rivers, and established funding for groups in each WRIA that choose to undertake the planning process (funding is broken down by phases of the planning 1-1 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan… effort, as described in Appendix B).
  • NOPLE Work Plan 2016

    NOPLE Work Plan 2016

    22001166 WWoorrkk PPllaann North Olympic Peninsula Lead Entity for Salmon Clallam County Courthouse 223 E. Fourth Street, # 5 Port Angeles, WA 98362 360/417-2326 1 NOPLE Work Plan 2016 Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Membership ................................................................................................................................................. 5 List of Ranked 2016 Work Plan Narratives .................................................................................................. 7 2016 Narrative Ranking Workbook ........................................................................................................... 18 Capital Scoring Criteria ............................................................................................................................ 30 Non-Capital Scoring Criteria .................................................................................................................... 33 2016 Review of Narrative Ranking ............................................................................................................ 36 Project Narratives....................................................................................................................................... 38 2 NOPLE Work Plan 2016 North Olympic Peninsula Lead Entity for Salmon Cl allam County Courthouse February, 2016 223 E. Fourth Street, # 5 Port Angeles,
  • Sub-Region: Western Strait (See Map with Habitat Complexes and Drift)

    Sub-Region: Western Strait (See Map with Habitat Complexes and Drift)

    Appendix B – 1: Western Strait Sub-Region Table of Contents Sub-Region Summary ……………………………………………………………. 2 Geographic Location …………………………………………………….. 2 Geology and Shoreline Sediment Drift …………………………………. 2 Information Sources …………………………………………………….. 3 Description of Sub-regional Habitat Complexes ………………………. 4 Habitat Changes and Impairment of Ecological Processes …………… 7 Relative Condition of Habitat Complexes ……………………………… 7 Management Recommendations …………………………………………8 Habitat Complex Narratives …………………………………………………….10 Neah Bay ………………………………………………………………….10 Sail River ………………………………………………………………….18 Snow Creek ……………………………………………………………… 20 Bullman Creek ……………………………………………………………22 Rasmussen, Jansen, and Olsen creeks …………………………………. 24 Sekiu River ………………………………………………………………. 24 Hoko River ………………………………………………………………. 28 Clallam River ……………………………………………………………. 36 References…………………………………………………………………………45 1 Western Strait Sub-Region Sub-Region Summary Geographic Location The Western Strait sub-region extends from Koitlah Point that marks the west end of Neah Bay (west of the breakwater) to an area of “no appreciable drift” along rocky headlands located between Clallam Bay and the Pysht River (Figure 1). Shorelines in the Western and Central Strait sub-regions alternate between relatively protected pockets (largest ones being Neah Bay, Clallam Bay, Pysht, and Crescent Bay) that tend to accumulate sediment material sometimes derived from fluvial sources, and the more exposed and often very steep rocky shorelines. Geology and Shoreline Sediment Drift Geologically,
  • Makah Formation--A Deep*Marginal*Basin Sedimentary $Equence of Late Eocene and Oligocene Age in the Northwestern Olympic Peninsula, Washington

    Makah Formation--A Deep*Marginal*Basin Sedimentary $Equence of Late Eocene and Oligocene Age in the Northwestern Olympic Peninsula, Washington

    Makah Formation--A Deep*Marginal*Basin Sedimentary $equence of Late Eocene and Oligocene Age in the Northwestern Olympic Peninsula, Washington GEO :LdXHCAL SURVEY P R OF E S SI O N A L P A P E R I 1 i6 2 - B Makah Formation--A Deep-Marginal-Basin Sequence of Late Eocene and Oligocene Age in the Northwestern Olympic Peninsula, Washington By P.O. SNAVELY, JR., A.R. NIEM, N.S. MAGLEOD, J.E. PEARL, and W.W. RAU SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRATIGRAPHY GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1162-B A study of stratigraphy, petrology, paleontology, and paleogeology of a marine sedimentary sequence of the Olympic Peninsula UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1980 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR CECIL D. ANDRUS, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY H. William Menard, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract. ........................... 1 Physical characteristics Continued Introduction................................1 Falls Creek unit.....................15 Acknowledgments.............................2 Unnamed sandstone unit............... 15 Geologic setting and contact relations......3 Petrography................................ 15 Physical characteristics....................7 Reservoir potential of turbidite Baada Point Member.......................9 sandstone members........................ 16 Dtokoah Point Member.................... 12 Age and regional correlations.............. 17 Carpenters Creek Tuff Member............ 12 Depositional
  • UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary

    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary

    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER RESOURCES OF CLALLAM COUNTY, WASHINGTON: PHASE 1 REPORT By B. W. Drost U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 83-4227 Prepared in cooperation with the CLALLAM COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS and STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Tacoma, Washington 1986 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Cover photograph by Clallam County Planning Department For additional information Copies of this report write to: can be purchased from: District Chief Open-File Services Section U.S. Geological Survey Western Distribution Branch 1201 Pacific Avenue - Suite 600 U.S. Geological Survey Tacoma, Washington 98402 Box 25425, Federal Center Lake wood, Colorado 80225 (Telephone: (303) 234-5888) ii CONTENTS Page Abstract 1 Introduction 3 Purpose and scope 3 Description of the area 4 Acknowledgments 4 Ground water 6 Surface water 8 Water quality 13 Water use 17 Water-resource problem areas and recommendations for future studies 19 References cited 21 ILLUSTRATIONS (Plates 1-5 in pocket) PLATES 1-5. Maps showing primary study areas: 1. Miller Peninsula and adjacent areas. 2. Sequim-Dungeness Peninsula. 3. Port Angeles and adjacent areas. 4. Soleduck-Calawah River basins from LaPush to Sappho and adjacent areas. 5. Clallam Bay-Sekiu and adjacent areas. Page FIGURE 1. Map showing Clallam County and primary study areas 5 iii TABLES Page TABLE 1. Summary of selected ground-water data in the primary s tudy areas 7 2. Summary of selected surface-water data 9 3. Summary of selected ground-water-quality data 15 4.
  • Appendix a Regional Summaries

    Appendix a Regional Summaries

    Appendix A Regional Summaries Appendix A Table of Contents Introduction A-1 North Puget Sound Regional Summary A-5 South Puget Sound Regional Summary A-31 West Puget Sound Regional Summary A-57 Islands Regional Summary A-83 Olympic Coast Regional Summary A-95 Southwest Washington Regional Summary A-119 Lower Columbia River Regional Summary A-145 Middle Columbia River Regional Summary A-171 Upper Columbia – Downstream of Grand Coulee Regional Summary A-197 Upper Columbia – Upstream of Grand Coulee Regional Summary A-223 Snake River Regional Summary A-249 Columbia Basin Regional Summary A-269 Draft EIS A-iii Table of Contents Appendix A INTRODUCTION The geographic area of the proposed action and alternatives stretches across the entire State of Washington and includes all non-Federal and non-Tribal forestlands of the State (see Figure 3-1 in Chapter 3). These are the covered lands or the lands subject to State Forest Practices Rules. The State has been divided into 12 analysis regions (see Figure 3-1 in Chapter 3), which are used in Chapters 3 and 4 of this EIS to help describe the affected environment and environmental effects of the proposed action and alternatives. The regions were defined based on three factors: the distribution of threatened and endangered salmonids, Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) boundaries, and physiographic regions. The 12 analysis regions consist of 7 western Washington regions and 5 in eastern Washington as follows: Western Washington Analysis Regions • North Puget Sound • South Puget Sound • West Puget Sound • Islands • Olympic Coast • Southwest • Lower Columbia Eastern Washington Analysis Regions • Middle Columbia • Upper Columbia – Downstream of Grand Coulee Dam • Upper Columbia – Upstream of Grand Coulee Dam • Snake River • Columbia Basin Detailed summary descriptions were written for each of the 12 regions, providing baseline information for each area.
  • Introduction

    Introduction

    INTRODUCTION The pristine sparkling water of the Lyre River; the gently curving Clallam Bay; the open coastal waters all the way west to the tip of the continent at Tatoosh Island at Neah Bay, these scenic landscapes are part of the Lyre-Hoko watershed for which this document was developed. The watershed provides a livelihood and home for approximately 4,500 people. Water is becoming a critical issue in much of Washington State and is seasonally limited in watersheds here. A local group has been meeting since 2000 to understand and make recommendations regarding elements that they chose to address: water quality, water quantity, instream flows, habitat, and water storage. Many, many hours and a substantial amount of dollars have gone into this effort. The following sections set the stage for why this work is being done. Included in this report are the group’s final recommendations. What is the purpose of this plan summary? This summary is intended to provide an extremely brief overview of the Lyre-Hoko Watershed Plan for citizens and officials. The full plan is divided into the following key components: Background Watershed Process Plan Elements Plan Recommendations Appendices Why was this plan prepared? This plan was prepared as a result of legislation, passed by the Washington State Legislature in 1998, that authored a planning process. This process provided an opportunity to develop recommendations for local solutions to water conflicts. Who paid for, wrote, approved, and adopted this plan? Grant funds from the Washington Department of Ecology funded the planning process. Clallam County has supported this process since funds expired in 2005.
  • WRIA 19 (Hoko-Lyre) Watershed Plan Draft

    WRIA 19 (Hoko-Lyre) Watershed Plan Draft

    WRIA 19 (Hoko-Lyre) Watershed Plan Draft Lead Entity : Clallam County Funded by Washington Department of Ecology Grant no. G050013 (Intentionally Left Blank) WRIA 19 (LYRE - HOKO) WATERSHED PLAN Public Review DRAFT October 2008 Prepared by the Lyre-Hoko Watershed (WRIA 19) Planning Unit Cover photo: Hoko River (Intentionally Left Blank) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WRIA 19 Planning Non-governmental Unit Members Herb Balch, Citizen Margaret Owens, Citizen Harry Bell, Green Crow Josey Paul, Citizen John Burdick, Citizen Janeen Porter, Citizen Karolyn Burdick, Citizen Patrick Raymond, Olympic Resource Management Coleman Byrnes, Citizen Ken Sadilek, Citizen Bill Drath, Clallam Bay/Sekiu Chamber of Commerce Louise Sadilek, Citizen Don Hamerquist, Citizen Frank Silvernail, Crown Pacific (formerly) Ian MacIver, Rayonier Jane Vanderhoof, Citizen Sasha Medlen, Citizen Peter Vanderhoof, Citizen Joe Murray, Merrill & Ring Connie Beauvais, Crescent Water Association, Inc. Carol Johnson/Don Hansen, North Olympic Timber Action Committee Cindy Kelly, Dry Creek Water Association, Inc. WRIA 19 Planning Unit Initiating Governments Members Jim Medlen, Lyle Almond, Jeff Shellberg, Gwen Bridge, Andy Ritchie – Makah Tribe Tom Martin, Mike Kitz – Clallam Public Utility District Cathy Lear, Pat Crain, Debi Barnes, Jeff Bohman, Andy Brastad – Clallam County Doug Morrill, Ted Schmidt – Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe A special thank you is extended to the government policy makers who supported this planning process and who are ultimately responsible for implementing these recommendations: Clallam County Commissioners: Clallam PUD Commissioners: Mike Chapman – District 2 Hugh “Ted” Simpson, District 3 Mike Doherty – District 3 Will Purser, District 1 Steve Tharinger – District 1 Hugh Haffner, District 2 Lower Elwha Klallam Tribal Council: Makah Tribal Council: Frances G.
  • Olympic Peninsula Quilcene, Quinault and Makah National Fish Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Final Report, Appendix A

    Olympic Peninsula Quilcene, Quinault and Makah National Fish Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Final Report, Appendix A

    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Pacific Region Olympic Peninsula Hatchery Review Team Olympic Peninsula Big Quilcene, Quinault, Hoh, Sooes, and Waatch River Watersheds Quilcene, Quinault and Makah National Fish Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Final Report, Appendix A: Briefing Document; Summary of Background Information May 2009 Please cite as: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009. Quilcene, Quinault, and Makah National Fish Hatcheries: Assessments and Recommendations – Appendix A: Briefing Document; Summary of Background Information. Final Report, May 2009. Hatchery Review Team, Pacific Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. <http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ fisheries/Hatcheryreview/ team.html>. USFWS Olympic Peninsula Hatchery Review Team Olympic Peninsula NFHs Assessments and Recommendations Report –May 2009 Figure 1.Fish Hatcheries on Olympic Peninsula (National Fish Hatcheries are in caps and underlined) 1 1 Modified figure from Streamnet <http://www.streamnet.org/>. Appendix A i USFWS Olympic Peninsula Hatchery Review Team Olympic Peninsula NFHs Assessments and Recommendations Report – May 2009 Table of Contents I. OLYMPIC PENINSULA 1 II. QUILCENE NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY 53 IIA. QUILCENE NFH COHO ....................................................................................... 75 IIB. QUILCENE NFH, HOOD CANAL STEELHEAD.................................................... 101 III. QUINAULT NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY 103 IIIA. QUINAULT NFH STEELHEAD (COOK CREEK PROGRAM) ................................