Polk County reviews ERA2 housing proposals and shelter repair needs; no funding vote

Polk County officials received detailed briefings on how to spend remaining federal Emergency Rental Assistance program (ERA2) funds and interest earnings, and on capital and operating needs at Central Iowa Shelter & Services (CISS). Staff warned the board that federal rules require ERA2 funds be obligated by Sept. 30 and that investments must target households at 50% area median income (AMI) and below.

Sarah (Polk County staff leading ERA2 work) said the county received $62 million from the U.S. Treasury as a pandemic response; 75% of that amount was used for emergency rental assistance and exhausted in May, and the remaining roughly $15.5 million is earmarked for developing or preserving affordable housing. She said the county also has about $2.7 million to $3 million in interest earnings. “All funds have to be obligated by September thirtieth of this year,” Sarah said.

Sarah reviewed projects the board approved in concept in December and projects still under review: a single-family infill program that would build copy‑paste 2–3 bedroom homes on seven county-owned vacant lots (estimated house cost presented as roughly $250,000 in discussion), a proposed $3 million contribution toward purchase and rehab of the downtown Holiday Inn into about 60 supportive studios, a proposed purchase of an eight‑unit building at 2419 Cottage Grove (listing price cited as $675,000), and earlier use of $500,000 in interest earnings for demolition assistance in Urbandale. Sarah said the December approvals total about $10.7 million and would add roughly 244 affordable units if fully executed; she said that would leave approximately $4.9 million in ERA2 funds plus the interest earnings to allocate.

Melissa, representing Central Iowa Shelter & Services, described operational strain at the shelter: the facility serves more than 250 people each night, served 2,448 individuals in fiscal 2024, and now faces equipment failures and capacity limits. She gave line-item operating figures the shelter uses to manage services: $6 per meal; roughly $28 per day for shelter-only costs; and about $66 per day for all-inclusive shelter services that add case management, meals, job-training programs and healthcare access. Melissa outlined capital needs recommended by Baker Group (an engineering/maintenance firm) including HVAC replacement, lighting and plumbing improvements, and cited service impacts from equipment failures — for example, insufficient hot water capacity and aging InstaHot units.

During Melissa’s presentation a supervisor asked whether $822,000 in ERA2 interest or an earmarked $850,000 could be used for the shelter’s upgrades or rental assistance; Sarah said she had earmarked $850,000 of interest earnings as a potential allocation but emphasized that was her staff-level earmark and a board decision would be required.

Board members raised recurring concerns: whether Polk County should temporarily own and then transfer units to nonprofits, the geographic concentration of proposed investments (many infill lots are inside Des Moines city limits), the county’s appetite for interim property ownership and property‑management responsibilities, and how to ensure projects comply with Treasury rules (for example, ensuring county funds pay specifically for units that meet the 50% AMI requirement). Public Works Director Brett Van De Loon explained the infill lots were identified from county tax‑sale and county‑owned vacant parcels and that most buildable vacant lots are in Des Moines rather than in outlying jurisdictions.

Sarah said RSM, an external auditor, will provide written guidance on Treasury compliance; the county attorney’s office will also review funding agreements. Staff told the board a resolution extending the RSM contract will appear on the Feb. 11 agenda and that funding agreements for projects approved in concept are being prepared for future board consideration. No funding allocations were approved at the meeting.

Next steps: board members asked for more detailed budgets, legally reviewed funding agreements, clarity on operation/ownership contingencies, and assurances that ERA2-funded units would meet the required AMI thresholds. Sarah proposed drafting funding agreements for approved projects and anticipated presenting finalized agreements in March–April so funds can be obligated before the deadline.