UVM/Burlington Community Outreach Partnership Center
Semi-Annual Progress Report
Period: July 2002 – December 2002
Part I: Synthesis of the Administration of the COPC Grant for Report Period
July 2002 – December 2002
________________________________________________________________________
The UVM/Burlington COPC has progressed well over the last six months. All three
major projects – Community Leadership, UVM Impacts, and Fair Share Housing – have
completed almost all of their planned tasks (plus considerable additional
accomplishments not in the original plan) and are focusing on completing their project
evaluations. The COPC Overall is also working on an overall evaluation and continuing a
wide range of activities designed to sustain UVM’s commitment to community outreach
and partnerships.
The UVM/Burlington COPC continues to work with the UVM Committee on Community
Engagement to increase and sustain support at the university for community outreach
through partnerships. We have met on three occasions with the new UVM President, Daniel
Fogel, and are working with him and other top administrative officials on the feasibility,
design and funding of a “center for community partnerships for service and learning.” Such
a center would integrate more completely university-wide efforts to promote and support
service-learning and the outreach and partnership work of the COPC. Funding for this
center would come from the forthcoming UVM capital campaign and proposals being
prepared for a Challenge Grant application to the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA), a Learn & Service America application to the Corporation for
National Service (CNS), and a New Directions Grant (HUD).
UVM/Burlington COPC Projects continue to progress well too, finishing up planned
project activities while carrying on new activities within the existing partnership
framework.
The Community Leadership Project, even as it completes its planned tasks under the
COPC grant, continues its efforts to strengthen community participation skills, increase
and diversify citizen participation in community decision-making, increase capacity and
effective linkages among existing community organizations, and provide support for
increased service-learning activities involving the Old North End (ONE).
During the summer and fall of 2002, the community leadership team


Began a series of Multi-Cultural Forums to obtain a better understanding of the needs of two
ethnic minorities: (a) Bosnian refugees, and (b) Vietnamese refugees. Similar work is
ongoing, focusing on African American residents, and taking more of a “study circle” form.
Helped carry out the Neighborhood Improvement Night this fall and is now helping plan the
spring Night of Neighborhood Successes.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
1





Made additional progress in the reorganization of staff and staff functions for the Community
Justice Network of programs, and developed a draft “Map” of quality services.
Assisted with the Burlington Neighborhood Project’s expansion in size and scope and
development of its new governance system.
Continued data analysis and reporting on the interviews carried out in the Youth Voices
Project, an effort designed to bring younger people more fully into the neighborhood affairs.
Collaborated with the Visiting Nurse Association to conduct a study of parents’ views of how
characteristics of their neighborhood have affected their parenting decisions. This study
focused specifically on the COPC target area. In-depth interviews were conducted with
sixteen mothers and fathers; the data have been analyzed and the results are being distributed.
Conducted the intensive Facilitative Leadership (FL) Training of the Trainers by identifying
three trainees, training them, and preparing them to become certified trainers capable of
training other community members.
The UVM Economic Impacts Project has implemented a variety of measures that expand
and improve employment opportunities at UVM for local residents, and increases
opportunities for local businesses to sell their goods and services to the university. During
the last six months, the Project, through its service-learning class, “UVM and the
Local/Regional Economy,” studied the process, impacts and sustainability of four of these
activities:

Development of a 3-6 month mentoring/placement program at UVM for individuals
facing different barriers to employment who are sponsored by local workforce
development programs.

Increased UVM recruitment activities in Burlington’s Old North End through the
Vermont Department of Employment and Training’s Career Resource Center.

Increased UVM partnership engagement (“mock” interviews, tours of UVM work
sites) with different workforce development organizations.
 Provision of improved and expanded information about (1) UVM
purchasing opportunities to local businesses and (2) local vendors to those within
UVM doing the purchasing.
The results of these studies will be incorporated in the Impacts Project evaluation and
recommendations for change passed on to UVM and community workforce and business
development partners.
The Fair Share Housing Project works with community groups and residents to open up
Burlington’s suburbs to more affordable housing. This is intended to relieve the pressure on
affordable housing in the Old North End and to provide opportunities for ONE residents
to move closer to the location of stronger job growth outside of Burlington.
This project has now completed two of its most outreach-intensive parts: (a) meetings
with the largest Chittenden County selectboards and planning commissions or zoning
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
2
boards, and (2) conducting its fall 2002 conference, “Making Housing Affordable:
Regional Solutions for Chittenden County”.
During the last six months, project team members completed educational meetings about
the need for and barriers to affordable housing in the suburbs with the select boards and
planning commissions all of the largest and fastest growing Chittenden County suburbs.
The meetings provided a presentation and discussion forum for project reports on spatial
mismatch and regional housing coordination.
In October, the Project held its conference, “Making Housing Affordable: Regional
Solutions for Chittenden County.” The 75 conference participants included
representatives from select boards, planning commissions, and/or town planning staff
from Burlington, South Burlington, Shelburne, Williston, Jericho, Winooski, Charlotte,
and Essex, as well as representatives from numerous nonprofit and government housing
agencies, towns elsewhere in Vermont that are experiencing tight housing markets,
members of the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, representatives of
local business groups, some legislators, some builders, and various others.
Carl Guardino, the President and CEO of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, gave
the plenary talk on business leadership in the area of housing affordability. This was
followed by four workshops: Zoning Tools for Affordable Housing, What Employers Can
Do, Building Support for Affordable Housing Locally, and Regionalization. Eighteen
cosponsors from the local housing and business community contributed to publicity
and/or donated money.
The conference was very successful at bringing together a wide variety of participants
and co-sponsors around an issue of growing importance in Vermont as well as around the
country: the interdependence of economic development and affordable housing.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
3
UVM/Burlington Community Outreach Partnership Center
Semi-Annual Progress Report
Period: July 2002 – December 2002
Part II: Narrative on Progress of Project Management Work Plan by Functional
Categories One through Four
________________________________________________________________________
Project Category One: UVM/Burlington COPC Overall
(1) Restatement of Major Tasks and Milestones
Project Category One is charged with establishing, operating, and sustaining a
Community Outreach Partnership Center (COPC) at the University of Vermont. This is
to be an integrative and administrative center designed to bring together partners from the
private sector, the community, the government and the University. The “COPC Office”
will serve as an information and linkage point for community members and provide
coordination for the project as a whole.
The purpose of the COPC is “to create effective, reciprocal, sustainable partnerships
within UVM itself and between UVM, the City of Burlington, and residents and
organizations of the Old North End (and in surrounding low-income areas).” The overall
goal, in nurturing such partnerships, is to further the Old North End’s (ONE) physical,
economic, social and political development, while advancing the University’s mission of
service, education and research.
The major tasks in this project are to
a)
b)
c)
d)
Plan and establish the COPC,
Promote and support COPC projects,
Promote and support community outreach and partnership activities at UVM, and
Build sustainable and effective partnerships with the city and the community.
(2) Statement of Progress Toward Tasks and Milestones During Report Period
 Plan & Establish the UVM/Burlington Community Outreach Partnership Center
The UVM/Burlington COPC is fully established and has been operating effectively since
October 1999.
Our new Coordinator of UVM/Community Partnerships, Courtney Lamontagne, joined
the office in early July 2002 and is fully oriented, trained, and working productively. Her
major areas of focus have been:
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
4
1. Serve as the coordinator/liaison for the COPC and the COPC Steering Committee
through September, 2003, to ensure the successful completion of the COPC
contract with HUD and to prepare for the New Directions grant application to
HUD.
2. Conduct the organizational activities and fund raising necessary to support the
expansion and continuation of effective university-community partnerships: both
the Coordinator and Co-Directors Richard Schramm and Lynne Bond have been
very much involved with the Committee on Community Engagement throughout
this reporting period. Throughout the Fall, 2002 semester, Committee members
met with UVM’s new President, Daniel Fogel, on three occasions and have been
asked to re-submit the “institutionalization” proposal originally submitted during
the Spring, 2002 semester, this time with a more direct focus on service-learning.
In addition to service-learning, the updated proposal will suggest an expanded
awareness and focus on building and sustaining community partnerships across
the University and will request staff and faculty appointments to support such
work.
3. Carry out internal and external publicity, communications and advocacy regarding
community outreach and partnerships to support the goals of the COPC: the
Coordinator has been very successful in increasing the sheer volume of press
attention afforded the COPC, both on campus (via the Vermont Cynic, the UVM
Student Newspaper, and the view, the UVM Faculty/Staff online weekly
newsletter) and off (in both the Burlington Free Press, a Gannett organization, and
Seven Days, a free local weekly). In addition, an increase in communication and
meetings with various constituencies both on and off campus has created good
will and understanding for the COPC. Finally, during the Spring, 2003 semester,
the COPC has taken on a graduate student intern to update and improve the COPC
website.
4. Serve as an information resource and facilitator in establishing new partnerships:
the Coordinator has been very much involved in the creation of two new
partnership projects to be presented to HUD as a part of the UVM/Burlington
COPC’s New Directions Grant application.
 Oversee & support UVM/Burlington COPC projects on community leadership, fair
share housing, and UVM economic impacts
The UVM/Burlington COPC office continues to provide logistical and other support to
the three project teams, including planning, marketing, and administrative support for
meetings and one conference, and to the Steering Committee, which met once during the
reporting period.
The UVM/Burlington COPC also continues to provide financial
management support to the Project Teams as they complete their work per the original
HUD proposal, and as they develop ways to sustain their project partnerships.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
5
 Promote and support the development of a community-outreach curriculum at
UVM
The UVM/Burlington COPC continues to work closely with other parts of the University,
both through the Committee on Community Engagement and on its own, to promote and
support increased University outreach and partnership activities.
The COPC course The University and the Local/Regional Economy (CDAE/ECON 295)
was offered again during the fall 2002 semester, supported by both departmental and
Continuing Education funding. Six students continued the work of classes in the three
prior years. More detail on this course can be found in the Narrative section on Project
Category Three: UVM Economic Impacts.
COPC Co-Director Lynne Bond and Coordinator Courtney Lamontagne continued to be
very much involved in the University’s expansion and support of service-learning classes.
In addition to teaching her own service-learning courses in Psychology, Lynne Bond has
served as a valuable resource to other faculty members working with service-learning
pedagogy, through her involvement in a year long Brown-Bag lunch series on servicelearning and one-on-one assistance. COPC Coordinator Courtney Lamontagne
coordinated the recruitment and selection of the fourth class of the Faculty Fellows for
Service-Learning course, a Spring class through which selected faculty members learn
how to inject service-learning pedagogy into new or existing courses. And finally, CoDirectors Richard Schramm and Lynne Bond, as well as Coordinator Courtney
Lamontagne, continued to be well connected to the Committee on Community
Engagement as it refined its proposal to University President Daniel Fogel to create a
virtual service-learning center on campus. We hope to solicit continued support for
faculty development in service-learning, and stipends and mini-grants for both faculty
and students involved in applied research using service-learning, in addition to such ideas
as course designation and faculty recognition.
 Build Sustainable and Effective Community Development Partnerships with City
and Community
COPC’s impact on the greater Burlington community continues to grow, as evidenced by
the list of over 100 new individuals and organizations from which we are soliciting costshare and involvement information (to be included in our final grant report). Having
started with a list of merely eleven partnering organizations, it has become clear that the
COPC has touched more corners of Burlington than we thought possible. The
relationship that has grown the most is that between the University and the City of
Burlington Community and Economic Development Office (CEDO), as evidenced by
eager participation in the forthcoming New Directions application to HUD. The
relationships formed as a result of the COPC are so strong that participation in future
collaborations is a given.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
6
The major effort to “institutionalize” UVM’s commitment to community outreach and
partnerships continues to progress quite well. As mentioned, the Committee on
Community Engagement (on which Co-Director Richard Schramm and COPC
Coordinator Courtney Lamontagne sit, and which Co-Director Lynne Bond chairs) met
with UVM’s new president, Daniel Fogel, on three occasions throughout the fall 2002
semester. As of December 2002, the Committee has been asked to resubmit the Spring,
2002 proposal, originally submitted to the UVM Capital Campaign, and to outline areas
for immediate funding in FY’04. We anticipate that the foundations of a center for
community outreach and partnerships, with a specific emphasis on service-learning, will
become a reality in the next academic year. Aided by potential grant funds currently
under application, we hope to have a “center” in place at UVM in the very near future.
Finally, as the UVM/Burlington COPC approaches the end of its one-year no-cost
extension, we are actively pursuing other forms of support for our community
engagement work both on campus and off: in addition to an application for HUD New
Directions funding and a proposal to the UVM President for permanent UVM funding,
the COPC is working on a Challenge Grant application to the United States Department
of Agriculture (USDA) and a Learn & Service America application to the Corporation for
National Service (CNS), all of which will support both the expansion and the integration
of our community outreach and engagement activities created by the current COPC.
(3) Utilization of Funds
In describing the utilization of funds, the percentage of funds spent to date is relative to
the amount of time that has passed. This is approximated in this report to be 39 of 48
months, or 81.25%.
Sponsor Funds: 89.10 %
The Sponsor Funds component of this project is on target.
UVM Cost-Share: 97.29 %
The UVM Cost-Share component of this project is on target.
Local Matching: 105.24%
This project is on target in virtually all categories and in fact has already exceeded the
Local Match.
(4) Analysis of Progress Toward Project Management Work Plan
This project category is progressing very well in meeting the overall goals of the
UVM/Burlington COPC. In this, our one-year, no-cost extension year, we have started to
focus on, in addition to the three projects, implementing a COPC institutionalization and
fundraising strategy both in conjunction with the University Committee on Community
Engagement and on our own. We have a number of funding sources identified (see
above), and applications in the pipeline, and feel that the solid foundation of COPC work
in the past 3.5 years will make our work fundable.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
7
(5) Expectation of Changes in Progress Toward Project Management Work Plan
We anticipate that the Project One work-plan will be fully completed by September 30,
2003.
Project Category Two: Community Leadership
(1) Restatement of Major Tasks and Milestones
One Major Task has been to establish and regularly consult with an Advisory Committee
for the Community Leadership Project.
In addition, the Community Leadership Project was to pursue the following lines of
work, focused on strengthening capacity for community leadership: (a) build the
capacity and increase the effectiveness of civic citizen organizations through refining
their organizational structures, systems, and/or general practices; (b) strengthen
leadership capacity in community/civic organizations; (c) draw non-engaged residents
into community involvement; (d) facilitate coordination and communication among civic
citizen groups and government; and (e) develop and implement fieldwork courses as an
infrastructure for university-community collaboration.
Within each of these tasks, the project team planned, over the four-year funding period,
to evaluate current practices and resources, revise and implement new services to meet
needs that are identified through the evaluation, and subsequently to evaluate and
disseminate the newly revised and implemented services.
(2) Statement of Progress Towards Tasks and Milestones During Report Period
During its first year of funding, the Community Leadership Project Team reorganized the
manner in which it pursued certain of the Major Tasks in order to increase efficiency and
effectiveness. The team re-conceptualized its Major Tasks in terms of the following five
categories: (a) establish and regularly consult with a project advisory committee, (b)
strengthen residents’ community participation skills, (c) increase and diversify citizen
participation in community decision-making, (d) increase the capacity of and effective
linkages among existing community organizations, and (e) strengthen University servicelearning activities within the city’s Old North End (ONE). Progress towards each of
these major tasks and milestones is summarized below:

Establish and regularly consult with a project advisory committee
The team recruited and has been consulting with a 15 member Community Leadership
Advisory Committee of: 1 city official (the Assistant to the Mayor), 2 university students
(one coordinates student community service volunteers and the other is a student
government officer), 1 university staff member (an immigrant for whom English is a
second language), 2 leaders in nonprofit community service organizations, and 9
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
8
community residents who have been active in neighborhood and community
organizations (several of whom were selected for the Advisory Committee by their
neighborhood organization).
During its first year, the Advisory Committee developed and adopted a series of “Guiding
Principles” and a set of “Working Goals” for the project, a work-plan for each Major
Task, and new short-term projects that complement the Major Tasks being pursued. It
has regularly reviewed the community-based data that the UVM/Burlington COPC
Community Leadership Project collected and discussed and proposed civic engagement
policy changes that grow from the project initiatives. The Advisory Committee has used
this review process to guide “next steps” in project design and implementation. During
this final, no-cost extension year, we have communicated with the Advisory Committee
by email as needed rather than convene the entire group. We have pursued this tactic for
the sake of efficiency and because the Advisory had “signed off” on the activities of this
final year. During the remainder of the project, the team will complete the community
leadership programs that have already been agreed upon by the Advisory Committee,
which are listed in previous reports.

Strengthen residents’ community participation skills
The project team identified a series of sub-tasks required within this Major Task in
collaboration with the Advisory Committee. The sub-tasks are to: (1) identify existing
local training/support opportunities, (2) craft standardized descriptions of existing
training opportunities, (3) disseminate summaries to community residents, organizations,
non-profits, etc., (4) identify residents’ perceived leadership training needs, (5) identify
gaps between existing training opportunities and leadership training needs, (6) identify
national training models for potential replication and integration, (7) develop and
implement new training opportunities to fill gaps between needs and opportunities, (8)
evaluate and disseminate new training opportunities.
To date, the team has completed sub-tasks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6; progress on sub-tasks 7,
and 8 is ongoing. To elaborate by sub-task:
1, 2 & 3: Project team members have spoken with residents, community leaders, and
community organizations across the region to identify and collect information regarding
more than 45 local settings that offer training relevant to community leadership capacity.
The team created a booklet of standardized descriptions of each of these training
opportunities (including training content, schedule, cost, audience, etc.) and disseminated
approximately 700 of these “Citizen’s Training Resource Guides” throughout
neighborhoods (door-to-door in some cases, at local gathering places - markets, cafes,
laundries), as well as to community agencies and nonprofits throughout the region. The
booklet is also available on the web home pages of our community partner (CEDO) and
the UVM/Burlington COPC.
4: Team members completed a Training Needs Assessment that included questions
regarding the needed skills, competencies, and strategies for training that would promote
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
9
effective community leadership and participation. Interviewees were also asked about
the sorts of training that had been most effective in promoting their own community
participation and leadership. The team members interviewed 35 Burlington residents
who were specifically identified as active in community organizations. They also
incorporated training-related questions in interviews of 42 residents affiliated with groups
under-represented in community decision-making (people of color; elderly; poor; recent
immigrants; single caregivers of young children; those with disabilities; those with little
formal education), as well as in door-to-door neighborhood canvassing. Most questions
were posed in an open-ended fashion and ultimately coded by identifying common
themes in respondents’ answers. Data collection, analysis, and interpretation have been
completed, and results have been disseminated in a variety of community settings (e.g.,
Neighborhood Planning Assembly subcommittee and committee meetings, Public Safety
Project, etc.). There is a log of public presentations of the data.
5: Using the information gathered in items 1-4 above, team members worked with the
Advisory Committee and various community organizations to identify gaps between
perceived available training and perceived training needs in varied settings.
6: The project team worked with a variety of local and regional consultants to gather
information about national “best practices” in community leadership training. The
consultants presented various models of “best practices” that team members then
analyzed in terms of their potential applicability for this community.
7: Much of the team’s recent and current efforts focus upon implementing community
leadership programs for residents with varying levels of existing experience and
expertise. In mid- January 2002, the team piloted one training model (Facilitative
Leadership, or FL) with community residents by incorporating those residents into a new
training offered by the City of Burlington to city employees. This model is specifically
designed for a subgroup of individuals who have relatively sophisticated experience and
skills in community leadership. Based upon that pilot, the team worked with the
Interaction Institute for Social Change, proprietors of “Facilitative Leadership Training,”
the City of Burlington (Employment & Training) and the Snelling Center (a local
nonprofit government leadership center) to create and implement a joint program that is
training trainers of community leadership using FL. Representatives from each of the
collaborating groups were selected to be trained together as trainers. Each of those
trainees has committed to working together to provide residents (and others) with
intensive community leadership training opportunities through 2005. Training began in
September 2002. An advantage of collaborating with city government and a nonprofit
community leadership center in offering this training is that it will likely generate
strength and sustainability through its multiple sponsors and collaborative stakeholder
activity.
As reported in our July 2002 report to HUD, in March 2002 the team piloted a less
intensive training program for residents who have more limited community leadership
experience and expertise. University faculty worked with CEDO staff to provide two
evening trainings to 20 residents. Based upon the success of the pilot training and
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
10
constructive feedback from participants, the program is being significantly revised and
will be offered again in the winter of 2003.
In other efforts to offer varied types of training experiences, the Community Leadership
team contributed to the second year of Neighborhood Improvement Night, (an activity
that the team worked to initiate last year). This event (elaborated upon in a subsequent
section) involves separate “town meetings” in each neighborhood that all residents are
invited to attend along with City officials and City Commissioners. The meetings are
used to solicit residents’ input on community needs as well as to guide the allocation of
City funds.
The team is also involved in planning the third Burlington’s Night of Neighborhood
Successes for this upcoming spring, an event that the team helped to initiate in 2001.
This project involves a broad array of community partners who organize and co-host this
free and highly publicized, public evening event at City Hall. In each of the first two
years the event drew 200 - 275 community members (of all ages) who shared dinner,
stories of neighborhood successes, and resources, and received awards. The evening is
designed to identify and celebrate the accomplishments of Burlington’s neighborhoods,
to provide a forum for community members to talk about their successful grassroots
initiatives to improve quality of life in their neighborhoods, and to disseminate
information that fellow community members could use as models for community
improvement efforts of their own.
8: Evaluation and dissemination is being incorporated into the newly designed training
programs, and will be conducted on the previous sub-tasks. Throughout the summer and
fall 2002, the team has been designing and is now beginning to conduct an intensive
evaluation process. Two University undergraduate students have joined the team to work
on this evaluation as a part of their Honor’s thesis and independent study projects.

Increase and diversify citizen participation in community decision-making
The Community Leadership Team has worked with its Advisory Committee to identify
the series of sub-tasks needed to complete this Major Task. These sub-tasks are to: (1)
identify groups of individuals who are seen by themselves or by others as underrepresented in community decision-making and community action; (2) identify diverse
modes of community involvement that residents feel are or could be important to them
(especially among those perceived to be under-represented); (3) identify barriers and
incentives to both traditionally and non-traditionally defined forms of community
participation; (4) work with community residents and organizations and city government
and nonprofit organizations to modify relevant structures and practices in ways that
diminish barriers and build on incentives for increasing participation; (5) evaluate and
disseminate the newly instituted practices.
To date, the team completed sub-tasks 1, 2, and 3. Considerable work has been
completed on sub-task 4, although this work remains ongoing. To elaborate by sub-task:
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
11
1, 2 & 3: During the spring and summer of 2000, team members conducted intensive
individual interviews with 42 Burlington residents who are affiliated with groups that are
seen as under-represented in community decision-making (i.e., individuals who are: 65
years or older, from underrepresented ethnic/racial groups, recent immigrants, selfidentified with physical and mental disabilities, very low income, with little formal
education, not employed, with young children, single parents or grandparents raising
children, lesbian/gay/bisexual, homeless/temporary shelter). Interviewees were asked
about ways in which they were currently involved and wished to be involved in
community participation and decision-making, incentives and obstacles to such
participation, and experiences with such involvement. Coding and analyses were
completed in spring, 2001. Team members created a two-page, highly accessible, written
summary of the findings that now has been disseminated to over 250 households
throughout the targeted COPC neighborhoods, and to over 100 community organizations
and NGOs in the area; team members are continuing to disseminate it in a variety of
venues.
3: During the summer and fall of 2002, the team began a series of Multi-Cultural Forums
to obtain a better understanding of the needs of two ethnic minorities: (a) Bosnian
refugees, and (b) Vietnamese refugees. Similar work is ongoing focusing upon African
American residents, taking more of a “study circles” form. The purpose of these
discussions has been to gather information that will help to inform the city’s
neighborhood programs regarding ways to achieve more inclusive and constructive
practices. Beginning with the Bosnian focus groups: 5-7 individuals participated in a
series of focus groups that examined, respectively: (a) their culture’s traditional means
and practices for supporting safety, neighborhood, and personal connections; (b) their
appraisal of the cultural fit and appropriateness of existing city practices; and (c) specific
modifications for improving the city’s support in creating and sustaining cultural
networks that are important to them. A parallel process will be used with the members of
the Vietnamese community this spring. The Study Circles Project on Racism will be
launched this March and will involve up to 200 community members in a communitywide dialogue.
4: Community Leadership Team members are continuing to discuss the interview
findings with diverse community groups in order to work collaboratively to translate the
findings into changes of policy and practice among community organizations and city
governance. A team log records each of these presentations.
5: Evaluation and dissemination of newly instituted practices will be completed during
the next six months.
 Increase the capacity of and effective linkages among existing community
organizations
The sub-tasks are to: (1) identify primary civic organizations to be the focus of the
capacity building and linkages efforts, (2) develop baseline indicators by which to
evaluate capacity of civic organizations, (3) develop working relationships and assess
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
12
capacity needs of targeted organizations, (4) recommend a system for improving linkages
and enhancing communication among the groups and agencies, (5) facilitate a community
process in reviewing, modifying, and adopting or rejecting recommended changes, and
(6) develop an implementation plan and secure needed funding and resources to support
implementation.
As previously reported, the capacity building work has continued to focus on the
following organizations: Neighborhood Planning Assemblies (NPAs), the Public Safety
Project (PSP) - now renamed the Burlington Neighborhood Project, - Neighborhood
Associations (NAs), the Community Justice Center (CJC), and the Community Support
Program (CSP).
Sub-tasks 1-2 have been completed. There are several distinct initiatives under way
involving sub-tasks 3-6, as reported previously. Due to the nature and interconnectedness
of these sub-tasks (and the organizations), they are being executed in a circular as
opposed to a linear process. As various recommendations are implemented, each of subtasks 3-6 needs to be revisited in light of the new changes. The activities of the various
initiatives over the past 6 months include:
The Community Justice Network –These programs have been programmatically and
physically co-located as a result of previous COPC work. With this rather large
undertaking completed, the focus has shifted to: 1) the branding of this network of
quality of life/civic engagement programs, 2) the reorganization of staff and
functions, 3) the finer details of streamlining programs, and 4) the mapping of quality
of life services between the City’s “Community Justice Network” and the University.
In the past 6months the reorganization of staff and their functions has been designed
and is almost fully implemented. This has been a difficult process in that it has
required staff of various programs to make changes in their job responsibilities. A
community based process to “brand” these programs is just being designed and will
involve gathering feedback from the various community and advisory boards
involved with the projects as well as with staff and community leaders. We plan to
complete this process in the next 6 months. In terms of streamlining programs,
program staff are meeting monthly to address these issues in a systematic manner.
Finally, a draft “Map” of quality of life services has been completed and will serve as
a guide to the City and University on addressing quality of life issues.
A presentation was made to the Burlington City Council to update the Mayor,
citizens, and City Councilors about the significant changes that have taken place, and
the notable successes of the Community Justice Network.
Burlington Neighborhood Project (previously Public Safety Project) –The
organizational plan COPC developed to increase the effectiveness of the BNP has
been almost fully implemented as of this current reporting period.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
13
The project has grown significantly in size and scope, has undergone a name change,
and is implementing changes in governance structure. The task still to be completed
over the next reporting period is to incorporate the BNP into a HUD recognized
Community Based Development Organization (CBDO).
The Neighborhood Civic Engagement Plan – This is a broad-reaching effort
involving the NPA’s, PSP, CDBG and various Departments of the City. A draft plan
was developed to strengthen the capacity and linkages of these groups with an eye
toward strengthening civic engagement in Burlington. Many of the elements of the
plan have been completed or have made significant progress. Some of the
recommended changes have begun to be institutionalized.
The most significant accomplishment for this past reporting period was the successful
execution of Burlington’s second annual Neighborhood Improvement Night (NIN)
program. These NINs were developed and implemented in partnership with resident
committees, UVM, and City Department staff. NINs were intended to be highly
publicized “Town Meetings” in each Ward of the City were citizens could play an
active role in affecting change in their Ward. This year, the Neighborhood Planning
Assemblies worked with the City Planning and Zoning Department to launch a
community involvement process for re-writing the City’s Zoning Ordinance. These
events were once again an overwhelming success. Over 250 residents turned out to
play a role in the re-writing of the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
Ideas for Strengthening Neighborhood Governance Structures – The Civic
Engagement Plan addresses two major categories: 1) Enhancing Operations &
Linkages at the Neighborhood Level, and 2) Enhancing Operations & Linkages at the
Municipal Level. There are numerous specific suggestions under each of these broad
categories.
A number of the “ideas” from this plan have been successfully implemented. Some
have been rejected or have not had the political or community will to implement. One
major, and still outstanding, recommendation of this report calls for the creation of a
Foundation for Civic Engagement. The Foundation would serve as an important
fundraising umbrella for neighborhood groups identified in the COPC. As mentioned
in the last report, this idea has been received with a good deal of enthusiasm from
neighborhood leaders and City officials, but there was a small and vocal contingency
of people (primarily City Councilors) who were critical of the proposal. During the
past reporting period, little was done to further the Foundation proposal. Instead we
focused on educating stakeholders about the many other positive changes that were
implemented from the plan. The previously mentioned presentation to City Council
was a part of that strategy. Community members have continued to raise the proposed
“Foundation” as an important tool for civic engagement activities. The “Foundation”
will once again be an important focus area of the COPC in its remaining time. The
expected outcome however still remains unclear.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
14

Strengthen UVM service-learning activities with the Old North End (ONE)
The Community Leadership team has identified a series of sub-tasks involved in pursuing
this Major Task. The sub-tasks are to: (1) create and offer new credit-bearing courses at
the University regarding community leadership that integrate community service and
learning in the context of the targeted COPC area (the ONE); (2) gather and disseminate
models of “best practices” in service-learning to faculty across the University and to
community members across the region; (3) increase student awareness of the opportunity
to integrate community service and credit-bearing learning experiences; (4) build an
infrastructure at the University to provide ongoing faculty training and support for
service-learning courses.
There has been significant progress on all four of the sub-tasks. To elaborate by sub-task:
1: The team has created and three times offered two new, credit-bearing, service learning
courses to date: a graduate-level Community Psychology course (offered spring 2000
and fall 2002) and an undergraduate-level Community Psychology course (offered fall
2000 and 2001). In both courses, every student was involved in a service project that
entailed working with community partners (organizations and residents) to gather
information from community members regarding an issue that the community partners
had identified as a high priority. Specifically, in the first three courses the students
conducted neighborhood canvassing regarding issues that affect quality of life in
neighborhoods, and they conducted an evaluation of a grass-roots community project
designed to enhance neighborhood quality of life. Class members of the fall 2002
graduate-level community psychology course conducted in-depth interviews with parents
regarding the needs of families and the relationship between neighborhood quality of life,
community services, and parenting practices. All four courses were extremely well
received by class members (receiving student evaluations of “excellent” by all students
across nearly every dimension rated). The courses also produced information that has
been of tremendous value to the city government and to community organizations. In
each instance, this information addressed questions identified as “Major Tasks” of the
COPC Community Leadership Project (Project Category Two).
2, 3 & 4: The team has continued to collaborate with other individuals and units across
the University to gather and disseminate “best practices” models of service-learning.
More recently, team leaders have met with the University’s new President on three
occasions during fall 2002 and reached agreement on a new initiative that will develop a
University Service and Learning Partnership Center.
The team has given presentations in five formal settings at UVM regarding the team’s
service-learning activities; the project has also presented this work in community settings.
Project team members are part of a Service-Learning Fellows group that studied servicelearning models throughout the spring 2000 semester; have served as faculty facilitators
of subsequent service-learning courses for university faculty (Spring 2001, 2002, and
2003 semesters); and are presenting colloquia on service-learning in a new brown-bag
series during the 2002-2003 academic year. The research conducted by this project team
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
15
was presented at a national conference on service-learning research at the University of
California, Berkeley in October 2001, and has been submitted for publication.
The Committee has co-authored five different funding proposals (two internal and three
external to the University) for resources to develop and support additional servicelearning opportunities involving the University and community. All of the grants have
been funded. As a result of one of the internal proposals, the former University President
established a University of Vermont Committee on Community Engagement (and
budget) that is co-chaired by the UVM/Burlington COPC Co-Director (Bond). The
COPC is further represented on this committee by the other COPC Co-Director
(Schramm), the new Coordinator of UVM/Community Partnerships (Lamontagne) and a
third UVM/Burlington COPC member (Gail Shampnois, Government Relations).
The Community Leadership Project generated considerable media attention for its
service- learning work. There have been articles about its service learning courses in one
national newspaper (Christian Science Monitor, December 2000), one local newspaper,
and two UVM publications.

Additional initiatives
The Community Leadership Project has pursued additional projects related to its mission
as the need and opportunity has arisen (in particular, as suggested by the Advisory
Committee, community members, and city governance).
King Street Neighborhood Needs Assessment. During the fall 2001, COPC CL team
members worked with students from a Community Psychology course and the
Burlington Public Safety Committee to complete a needs assessment of the King
Street Neighborhood area through door-to-door interviews of 83 residents. This
project focused on quality of life and support from the city and community
organizations. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected, analyzed and
interpreted. During spring 2002, team members created a highly accessible 4-page
summary of the results that was disseminated to residents, community organizations,
and city government. During spring 2002, the team also conducted three open forums
to discuss results, their interpretation, and subsequent action steps.
Youth Voices (formerly called Adolescent Voices). Adolescents comprise one of the
groups that are under-represented in community decision-making. The Project
adapted the interview used in the study of “under-represented groups” to guide both
individual and group interviews with 14-20 year olds, especially focusing on youth
who feel marginalized and/or come from families that are under-represented in
community decision-making. The interview examines youths’ interests and
experiences in involvement with their communities and community decision-making,
and their perceptions of incentives and obstacles to such involvement. The project
team has interviewed approximately 45 youth. During the past six months, the team
has completed its analyses of the responses, has written one conference paper based
upon a preliminary summary of results, and will conclude writing up the results this
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
16
spring 2003. One master’s thesis and one independent graduate student project are a
part of this study.
Women Grassroots Community Leaders. During the winter and spring 2002, team
members worked with two students to conduct in-depth interviews of 17 women
community leaders in Burlington to investigate the incentives and obstacles to their
involvement, their vision of their own and others’ leadership skills, and the interplay
between their community leadership and other aspects of their lives (e.g., family,
work, etc.). Analyses have now been completed and reported in two conference
papers. These findings are in the process of being disseminated to community
members, as will additional reports. Both a UVM undergraduate Honor’s thesis and a
Dissertation have been based on this work
Neighborhood Quality of Life. The students and faculty in the Graduate Community
Psychology service-learning course (spring 2000) worked with a community
organization and the city to develop and conduct a study of neighborhood quality of
life and of the impact of Neighborhood Associations and Block Associations (BA).
Approximately 180 households were canvassed door-to-door on nine streets in the
ONE. A minimum of 45% of households on each street was interviewed. A total of
four of the streets have Block Associations and five do not; four of the streets (half
with a BA and half without) are a part of the Neighborhood Action Project. This
allowed the team to compare statistically the effects of various types of community
organization. Results have been presented and discussed in a variety of venues
including the UVM/Burlington COPC-CL Advisory Committee, the UVM/Burlington
COPC Steering Committee, four additional community groups, and the Burlington
City Council (May, 2001) in order to consider implications for policy and social
action. A highly accessible, 4-page summary of the results was also disseminated to
over 400 community households by door-to-door delivery as an insert to a community
newsletter and as a handout to all attendees at Burlington’s Night of Neighborhood
Successes (described above). The team maintains a log of each of these
presentations.
Neighborhood Action Project (NAP) Evaluation. The NAP was designed to help
residents work together to identify and address concerns they have about quality of
life and well being in their neighborhood. This residential area abuts the University
and therefore experiences particularly severe student-resident conflicts and tensions.
NAP participants and varied stakeholders wanted systematic data concerning the
goals, processes, and outcomes of the NAP. The hope is to use these data to support
and strengthen the NAP as well as to consider its replication and dissemination to
other areas in Burlington and beyond. From October 2000 through June 2001, COPC
CL team members and students and faculty of a community psychology class worked
with NAP stakeholders to develop and complete an in-depth study with interviews of
35 NAP stakeholders. Data analyses and interpretation have been completed, and an
extensive report of findings has been disseminated to all interviewees, NAP
participants, and community leaders. NAP stakeholders have been discussing
interpretations and implications of the data.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
17
Americorps*VISTA Profiles Project. Americorps*VISTA volunteers have been a
central part of the community development and leadership effort in Burlington and
the ONE. CEDO staff and other community development specialists as well as
educators have been interested in understanding the perceptions and influences of
A*VISTA volunteering as they relate to the personal development and community
involvement of A*VISTA alumni. Alumni of the Burlington program from the past
five years were recruited to complete both a written survey and subsequently a
personal interview that examines the alumni’s perceptions of their A*VISTA
experience, past and present community involvement, personal development and
related goals and values. Forty-five alumni were contacted; 34 completed and
returned the survey, 17 completed a personal in-depth interview, and 2 provided
other/additional information. Data analyses and interpretation were completed during
the summer of 2001; a report of the findings was disseminated to relevant community
organizations in the Burlington area as well as to all interviewees.
(3) Utilization of Funds
In describing the utilization of funds, the percentage of funds spent to date is relative to
the amount of time that has passed. This is approximated in this report to be 39 of 48
months, or 81.25%.
Sponsor Funds: 76.72 %
The Sponsor Funds category of this project has improved over the last reporting period,
but is still slightly underspent. We anticipate meeting the spending expectations of this
category by the end of the contract, as the Community Leadership Project wraps up its
work. As mentioned in the last report, the Community Leadership Project has committed
$10,000.00 of its training funds towards a three-year Community Leadership Training
Partnership, including the Multi-Cultural Training, described above. This commitment
has not been spent down yet, but will be by the end of the next reporting period, bringing
the Project up to target.
UVM Cost-Share: 88.57 %
The UVM Cost-Share is on target.
Local Matching: 91.54%
The Local Matching category of this Project has improved dramatically over the last
reporting period, due in part to improved reporting by our partner agencies, and is now on
target.
(4) Analysis of Progress Toward Project Two Management Work Plan
Progress toward specific tasks is explained in (2) above. Project Category Two:
Community Leadership is progressing as planned. The slight reorganization of the
project’s Major Tasks did not substantively change its orientation while it allowed the
project to be more efficient and effective in addressing its goals.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
18
As detailed in the January 2002, semi-annual report to HUD, progress in developing and
implementing new community leadership training had to follow a revised course and time
schedule. That revised course and timeline has been adhered to and appears to provide a
workable plan for the remainder of the project.
(5) Expectation of Changes in Progress Toward Project Management Work Plan
During the final six months of the no-cost extension, the Community Leadership project
will continue to focus on: (a) implementing and evaluating community leadership
training for residents, (b) further development of the Civic Engagement Initiative and (c)
outcome evaluation in general.
Project Category Three: UVM Economic Impacts
(1) Restatement of Major Tasks and Milestones
This project involves the following major tasks, as restated in previous HUD semi-annual
progress reports, and expanded to include third year tasks and milestones.

Create, develop, and support a Workforce and Business Development partnership that
will oversee the project, analyze findings about the local economy and UVM impacts,
help determine appropriate responses to this analysis, and support initiation and
implementation of agreed upon high priority activities. A major first year milestone
was having a fully functioning advisory committee in place. This milestone applies to
years two and three as well.

Determine the (a) needs and skills of the Old North End (ONE) workforce, (b)
variety, strengths, and needs of local business, and (c) City and regional goals,
strategies, and programs for local workforce and business development. The
milestone was to complete this study in year one.

Work with Burlington’s Community and Economic Development Office (CEDO) in
preparation of Jobs & People IV, the Year 2000 update of economic conditions,
trends, and strategies. The milestone was to complete the relevant study and submit
to CEDO in year one.

Study the impacts of UVM’s employment, purchasing, and technology transfer
activities on the residents and businesses of Chittenden County, Burlington, and the
ONE. A first year milestone was the completion of the employment and purchasing
impacts study. A second year milestone was the completion of technology transfer
(commercial development from research findings) study. Since year three was to
focus entirely on outreach, no additional impacts research was anticipated.

Based on an analysis of these findings, the university-city-community partnership
will identify, agree upon, and initiate mutual activities designed to increase local
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
19
business and employment opportunities that ultimately serve residents of the ONE.
The first year milestone was advisory committee agreement on at least one action.
The second year milestone was to implement one partnership workforce and business
development strategy. The third year milestone was to implement additional activities
recommended by the Advisory committee.

Evaluate the partnership process, products, and outcomes on a continuing basis. The
first year milestone was development of the evaluation plan. The second year
milestone was to begin implementation of this plan, principally in terms of data
collection. The third year milestone was completion of this evaluation.

Conduct a conference in Year Three around the findings, models, process issues,
policy options, and outcomes that emerge from the agreements reached and activities
conducted by the university-city-community partnership. There were no milestones
for year one and two. The third year milestone was to implement the conference.

Develop and conduct an annual CDAE/Economics field study class (“The University
and the Local/Regional Economy”) as a vehicle for studying economic relationships
between the University, the county, the City, and the ONE, along with ways in which
these relationships might be improved. The first year milestone was the creation and
implementation of this course for the first time. Second and third year milestones
were to conduct this course two more times.
(2) Statement of Progress Toward Tasks and Milestones During Report Period

Create UVM/Community Workforce and Business Development Partnership
Besides the existing Project Advisory Committee, we created (fall 2001) two separate
university/city/community Employment and Purchasing Groups to guide and oversee
project outreach activities (see earlier reports). The Advisory Committee and the
Employment and Purchasing Groups met together in October, 2002 to review on-going
outreach activities, discuss plans and progress of student teams evaluating the benefits
and sustainability of major outreach activities (see below), and explore new areas for
partnership activities.

Assess local workforce and business development needs and current government
and nonprofit policies and strategies.
Completed (see earlier reports).

Contribute to Jobs and People IV Study.
Completed (see earlier reports). Ultimately the City decided not to complete this study.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
20

Study impacts of UVM Employment and Purchasing Expenditure Policies and
Practices on employment and advancement opportunities for ONE residents.
Two reports on UVM employment and purchasing impacts have been completed and
have provided the basis for outreach activities over the past year. A third summary report,
with products of student and partnership activities, has been assembled.
As discussed in an earlier report, this project has focused on employment and purchasing
impacts since they have proved so fruitful in guiding our business and workforce
development partnership activities.
Work is continuing on the research and development of two policies: a UVM “Targeted
Buy Vermont” and a UVM “Livable Wage.”

Develop ways that UVM and its community partners can work together to
increase employment & advancement opportunities for ONE residents.
This project has made very considerable progress in expanding and improving
employment opportunities at UVM for local residents and increasing opportunities for
local businesses to sell their goods and services to the university, as reported in the last
two HUD reports.
The wide variety of employment and purchasing partnership activities carried out through
this project were shared with other presenters and participants at the Project’s April
conference and reviewed at the October meeting of the Advisory Committee and the
Employment and Purchasing Groups.

Evaluate the partnership process, products, and outcomes on a continuing basis.
Research for the Impacts Project evaluation is continuing. Development of survey and
interview documents and data collection is ongoing.

Conduct a conference in Year Three around the findings, models, process issues,
policy options, and outcomes that emerge from the agreements reached and
activities conducted by the university-city-community partnership.
This conference was conducted in April 2002 (see last report). A full conference report is
available on the UVM/Burlington COPC Website (www.uvm.edu/~copc).

Develop and conduct an annual CDAE/Economics field study class (“The
University and the Local/Regional Economy”) as a vehicle for studying economic
relationships between the University, the county, the City, and the ONE, along
with ways in which these relationships might be improved.
This course has now been conducted four times (the original plan was only for three
semesters), providing valuable information for this project and serving as a very effective
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
21
instrument for implementing recommendations developed by the university-community
partnerships overseeing the project (see earlier reports). While the first three semesters
focused on research and implementing recommended activities, the fourth course in this
series evaluated major on-going activities and identified and implemented ways to sustain
these activities. The four activities studied were:

Development of a 3-6 month mentoring/placement program at UVM for individuals
facing different barriers to employment who are sponsored by local workforce
development programs.

Increased UVM recruitment activities in Burlington’s Old North End through the
Vermont Department of Employment and Training’s Career Resource Center.

Increased UVM partnership engagement (“mock” interviews, tours of UVM work
sites) with different workforce development organizations.

Provision of improved and expanded information about (1) UVM purchasing
opportunities to local businesses and (2) local vendors to those within UVM doing the
purchasing.
Evaluation information from these studies will become part of the Project and COPC
overall evaluation; recommendations for activity improvements and ways to increase
sustainability will be passed on to UVM and community partners.
(3) Utilization of Funds
In describing the utilization of funds, the percentage of funds spent to date is relative to
the amount of time that has passed. This is approximated in this report to be 39 of 48
months, or 81.25%.
Sponsor Funds: 87.88 %
The Sponsor Funds category of this Project is on target.
UVM Cost-Share: 59.13 %
The UVM Cost-Share category of this Project remains underspent. As mentioned in past
reports, some UVM participants are no longer working on the Project. This has had a
significantly negative impact on our ability to meet UVM Cost-Share expectations. We
anticipate making up this shortfall during the one-year, no-cost extension, as Richard
Schramm has taken on the majority of the work left by those participants no longer
involved, and has been working solely on a cost-share basis in the current year. Those
costs are not yet reflected in the current figures.
Local Matching: 59%
The Local Match category for this Project has consistently fallen short since Year One.
We anticipate that this will improve prior to the end of the contract with the inclusion of
contributions from the April 2002 conference, Vermont Economic Engines in Action:
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
22
How College, Hospital, Corporate and Government Expenditures Can Strengthen Local
Businesses, Communities and the Environment. The Impacts Project has, through its
Employment and Purchasing Groups, developed many new partnerships with community
organizations not included in the original proposal. We will be asking these partners to
document their contributions during the coming months.
(4) Analysis of Progress Toward Project Three Management Work Plan
With the exception of conducting a study of the commercial impacts of UVM Research
Findings (discussed in earlier reports), the project has met its schedule and targets for all
of its tasks. It has gone beyond its original plan by conducting the UVM Impacts class for
a fourth time, moving forward with efforts to change several UVM purchasing and
employee policies, and explorations of new partnership areas in workforce and business
development.
(5) Expectation of Changes in Progress Toward Project Management Work Plan
Completing the development of the UVM Targeted Buy Vermont policy (not included in
the original work plan), taking steps to sustain the many project outreach activities put in
place so far, and completing the evaluation of this project are the principal remaining
work of the Economic Impacts Project. We are confident that this work will be completed
on schedule over the coming report period.
Project Category Four: Fair Share/Fair Treatment Housing
(1) Restatement of Major Tasks and Milestones
The purpose of Project Category Four is to work with community groups and residents to
open up Burlington’s suburbs for more housing for low-income people. The Fair
Share/Fair Treatment Housing Project has completed its planned work for Year Three:



Facilitate connections between ONE residents and individuals and groups
throughout the region to advocate for reduced barriers to affordable housing
(throughout the project)
Conduct workshops and a conference on housing affordability in Chittenden
County.
Analyze local ordinances and regulations in the region to identify specific barriers
to affordable housing.
Much of this work was completed previously, and reported on in earlier reports. This
report concerns the work occurring in the most recent reporting period.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
23
(2) Statement of Progress Toward Tasks and Milestones During Report Period
This section is organized according to specific items in the Work Plan for Year Three.

Throughout the grant period: create a university/community/city
partnership that will plan, oversee, and implement the Fair Share/Fair
Treatment Housing Project.
The project’s advisory committee, which includes Old North End residents, and
representatives of the city, the university, and housing groups in the area, met a lot to
plan the fall conference, “Making Housing Affordable: Regional Solutions for
Chittenden County”. The committee met on August 13, September 5, September 26,
October 8, and October 16. The committee also contributed a lot of work toward the
conference (see below).

Collect and review existing data resources on the location of low-wage jobs
and the location of publicly subsidized and other affordable housing
Most of this work was completed during earlier reporting periods. We are still waiting for
the release of the 2000 Census data entitled “Journey to Work” to update our 1990
Census tabulations on location of jobs and location of residence by earnings level. (Some
data has been released from the 2000 census for transportation planners, but it does not
include destination [suburban vs. central city] and earnings [as opposed to household
income] by town).

Review existing materials on inclusionary practices to promote fair share
housing in other U.S. cities and towns; analyze local ordinances and
regulations in the region to identify specific barriers to low-income housing.
Our previous work in this area was included in the report Affordable Housing in
Chittenden County: The Necessity of Regional Housing Coordination. We have been
updating this report from the new town plans as these become available.

Disseminate results of all the research findings and policy recommendations
through a regional conference and workshops.
We have completed the most outreach-intensive part of our project this period. It consists
of two parts: (a) meetings with the largest Chittenden County selectboards and planning
commissions or zoning boards, and (2) our fall 2002 conference, “Making Housing
Affordable: Regional Solutions for Chittenden County”.
(a) meetings with selectboards and planning commissions/zoning boards
Since our last progress report, we have met with the selectboard or planning
commission of Williston, Shelburne, Richmond, and Winooski. Including our
engagements with the selectboards and planning commissions of other towns reported
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
24
on previously, we have spoken with the boards of all of the largest and fastest
growing Chittenden County suburbs about the need for and barriers to affordable
housing in the suburbs. (The only exception was Colchester, where we spoke with the
town manager, town planner, and town assessor.) Prior to each meeting, we
distributed to each member of the board a copy of our reports on spatial mismatch
and regional housing coordination.
(b) October 23 conference, “Making Housing Affordable: Regional Solutions for
Chittenden County”
The conference took place on a Wednesday evening, with about 75 people in
attendance. Conference participants included representatives from selectboards,
planning commissions, and/or town planning staff from Burlington, South Burlington,
Shelburne, Williston, Jericho, Winooski, Charlotte, and Essex. Participants also
included representatives from numerous nonprofit and government housing agencies,
representatives from towns elsewhere in Vermont which are experiencing tight
housing markets, members of the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission,
representatives of local business groups, some legislators, some builders, and various
others.
Carl Guardino, President and CEO of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, gave
the plenary talk on business leadership in the area of housing affordability (SVMG is
a consortium of businesses which has been very active in responding to the housing
crisis in their area). In addition, Guardino had a series of meetings with other groups
who are key to solving the local housing problem. He met with the editorial page
editor of the Burlington Free Press (which resulted in an excellent editorial on the
urgent need for affordable housing), and several members of the Chittenden County
delegation to the state legislature (including the chair and co-chair of the Joint
Housing Committee). He met with business leaders at a breakfast cosponsored by the
UVM/Burlington COPC and the Vermont Forum on Sprawl. He met with the mayor
of Burlington, members of the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission
and other planning organizations/personnel. In all cases, he spoke eloquently about
the importance of housing affordability for local economic growth, and about what
businesses can do in partnership with other local groups to promote housing
affordability.
We ran four workshops, with the following people as presenters or moderators:

Zoning Tools for Affordable Housing: Presenters were Beth
Humstone (Vermont Forum on Sprawl); Mike Miller (Lamoille
County Regional Planning Commission). Additionally, Susan
Sussman (private consultant on human rights and discrimination)
discussed the disparate impact of zoning regulations on protected
classes, such as people of color, families with children, or people on
public assistance. Mike McNamara (State Director, HUD) served as
moderator. There were 31 participants.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
25



What Employers Can Do: Jim Saudade (Green Mountain
Development), and Dennis Corrigan (Fannie Mae) were presenters.
Brian Pine (Burlington Community and Economic Development
Office) was the moderator. There were 23 participants.
Building Support for Affordable Housing Locally: Presenters were Jim
Condos (South Burlington City Council president, Vermont
Legislature Joint Housing Committee); Andy Broderick (Housing
Vermont); Sandy Kilbourn, (community activist, Swanton). Gus
Seelig (Vermont Housing and Conservation Board) was the moderator.
There were 11 participants.
Regionalization: Justin Dextradeur (UVM/Burlington Community
Outreach Partnership Center) and Sarah Carpenter (Vermont
Housing and Finance Agency) co-chaired a discussion on regional
housing coordination. There were 27 participants.
Eighteen cosponsors from the local housing and business communities contributed to
publicity (by lending mailing lists or including our materials in the organization’s
mailings) or donated money. Co-sponsorships generated $3500 for the conference
budget. The cosponsors were: Greater Burlington Industrial Council, Cynosure, Inc.,
the Vermont Forum on Sprawl, the UVM Economics Department, the Chittenden
County Regional Planning Commission, Fannie Mae, the Vermont Housing
Awareness Campaign, Vermont Housing Finance Agency, Vermont Community
Development Association, Lake Champlain Regional Chamber of Commerce,
Addison County Planning Commission, Lamoille County Planning Commission,
Northwest Vermont Planning Commission, Central Vermont Planning Commission,
Two Rivers-Ottauquechee Planning Commission, Vermont League of Cities and
Towns, Vermont Department of Housing and Community Affairs, and the Snelling
Center for Government.
Many government and nonprofit agencies also made much of their literature available
for the information tables and/or the conference participant packet. We had materials
from: the Vermont Housing Awareness Campaign, the Burlington Community Land
Trust, the Mayor’s Affordable Housing Task Force (Burlington), the Vermont Forum
on Sprawl, the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board, the Vermont Association
of Planning and Development Agencies, the Chittenden County Regional Planning
Commission, and the Burlington Community and Economic Development Office.
(3) Utilization of Funds
In describing the utilization of funds, the percentage of funds spent to date is relative to
the amount of time that has passed. This is approximated in this report to be 39 of 48
months, or 81.25%.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
26
Sponsor Funds: 61.94 %
As reported previously, the Housing Project was redefined in Year One and is still not up
to plan in terms of spending Sponsor Funds. Costs attributed to the October 2002
conference, not included in this report, should help in improving the figures in this
category.
UVM Cost-Share: 94.70 %
UVM Cost-Share component for this Project is on target.
Local Matching: 25.48 %
The Local Match category of this Project has improved slightly since the last reporting
period, but remains underspent. While the shift in focus of this Project (noted in Year
One) has significantly reduced the local matching component, we anticipate that this will
improve with the inclusion of Sponsor and other Local Cost-Share funds attributed to the
October 2002 conference. These figures are not included in this current report. As
reported earlier, funds allocated to discrimination testing have not yet been spent. They
are, however, currently being used in developing new UVM-Community partnership
activities.
(4) Progress in relation to original plan
If the 2000 census Journey to Work data becomes available soon, we will update our
original Spatial Mismatch report. Otherwise, the Fair Share/Fair Treatment Housing
Project has completed its work.
(5) Effect of deviations from original plan
See (4) above.
HUD COPC-VT-99-125 University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont
27