Research Shows ACCOA Community Hub Project Doomed From the Start?

We have come into possession of a good amount of the communiques and documentation as pertains to the ACCOA “Community Hub” project. It is our intent here to provide the public with an investigative, transparent, and decidedly editorial approach to the issues at hand.

We will admit… It would be much easier to simply follow the lead of local legacy media: Step 1. Perform softball interview of interested parties fishing for talking points. Step 2. Be certain not to ask the hard questions.

However, we believe that due diligence, examining facts, and asking questions is the best route to finding the truth. After examining the facts (all we are able to provide, will be provided here), and reading our take you, dear reader, can decide for yourself.

What is the ACCOA?

Here is the stated purpose of the Alcona County Commission on Aging per their own documentation:

ACCOA is a 501(c)(3) organization with the following purpose as defined by their By-Laws (bold emphasis added by the author):

ACCOA is a nonsectarian, nonprofit, 501(c)(3)* organization, whose purpose is:
1. To provide programs and services for senior citizens;
2. To provide a forum to define the needs and desires of senior citizens;
3. To work cooperatively with other agencies to communicate and promote the interests of senior citizens to legislative bodies and news media on political, economic, and social issues;
4. To assist senior citizens in channeling their questions and concerns to the agency or authority most appropriate to provide an adequate response; and
5. To promote and secure federal, state, local, and private funding to support the operation of senior citizen programs and services.
*501(c)(3) is the IRS tax code designation assigned to ACCOA to include its tax-free status as a nonprofit agency.

This pretty succinctly establishes that this organization is all about the seniors. Notably absent is the inclusion of any other age bracket or demographic within the community.

Next, Article III of the by-laws define membership. In the interest of brevity, the “General Membership” is the definition we will share here (full document below… bold emphasis added this time per the document formatting):

1. General Membership is available to all Alcona County residents who are 60 or more years of age, and to their spouses (“general members”).

Neither the community center is solely dedicated to seniors nor is the subsidized housing. And we believe these are both highly relevant to this story in that the community hub itself is decidedly not “senior specific”.

That being said: Before even going into the other many issues at hand here, we’d like to pose this question as food for thought:

Could the consummation of this community focused project potentially put this senior oriented organization at risk of losing their tax-exempt status?

Knowing the IRS and what they have to say about Unrelated Business Income, we certainly see this as a distinct possibility. It would be our hope that the board fully considers this, and weighs the ultimate risk of collapsing an organization which has done so much good for the Senior Citizens in our county.

What is the sentiment among Alcona residents who oppose this development?

It is difficult to ignore the overt gaslighting efforts of the media and those who are pushing (rather firmly) to shoehorn this development into our community. To gain a better understanding on the sentiment “boots on the ground”, we have talked to as many people in our county as possible on this topic. We have yet to find anyone who is extremely enthusiastic about the prospects being laid forth in the project. The sentiment we have encountered is either vehemently opposed or patently lukewarm. So far, we have only noted any sort of enthusiasm for this project coming from a couple board members, some ACCOA employees, the architects, and friends/relatives of the aforementioned.

Who is the majority here?

We believe that the following points combine to provide the biggest driving factors within those who are reticent to see this development move forward. The most common themes we have noted among all those who oppose this project within the community are thus:

1. Alcona Seniors simply want a dedicated Senior Center.
2. This project is outside of the purview of the Commission.
3. Alcona Seniors are not interested in a mixed use community center (several exist in the County already), and additionally public demand for the target housing demographic is low to zero (per studies paid for by ACCOA).
4. This project fails to deliver on the single solitary element lacking and most needed within Alcona County – A dedicated Senior Citizen Center.

Every single person we have talked with in person feels that the needs of Alcona’s senior citizens are being marginalized. Consider how this is all at the behest of the State government’s sole agenda here: pushing more subsidized housing in Alcona County. Despite realigning of project priorities to schedule the community center to the front of the line – the project (per ACCOA Board Vice President Will St. John’s own words at the last meeting) – cannot happen without the housing.

If you’re curious to know, until last month, the contracts with the contractors dictated that the housing would be developed first. This is an interesting notion considering the fact that this project is already over budget.

Given what we know, those dots line up to an interesting conundrum.

My question here: Why would a board approve receipt of a grant that delivers on nothing that the actual people are asking for? The narrative of a family housing shortage – in a community bereft of good paying jobs possessing “mass appeal” – is being delivered by none other than the agencies, NGO’s, and their “studies”.  All of which all sure seem to be pushing against the will of the people.

The narratives here are being facilitated (at least publicly) by two primary datasets. One University of Michigan managed survey which doesn’t even mention housing.  You can see what we found on that survey here.   The other, is a NEMSCA Community Needs Assessment which includes a grand total of 39 Alcona Citizens (below).

(source)

More on these later. For now, know that these are portrayed as the primary impetus for this project’s talking points. I would imagine if they had datasets which were actually convincing, they would be using those instead.

Who is behind this vehement push for housing?

So the fact is simply this: The progenitor of the grant money, the MEDC (Michigan Economic Development Corporation), is awarding the grant money solely because it will facilitate the development of Government subsidized housing. Full stop.

The latest buzzword they’re using to define the Government housing is “Missing Middle”. It is important to know that LIHTC (Low Income Housing Tax Credit) and also Workforce Housing have been discussed within internal and external ACCOA communications and notably, within signed documents. The 2022 board denies the current usage of monies coming from either of those programs.

Those documents are an important part of this discussion, as they are a necessary step in understanding that this path was taken knowingly by ACCOA. Therefore, we are including them below.

If you need to discover how we arrived to this point, it is necessary to examine the path(s) taken.

Here is the form submitted to Michigan c/o Legislative Sponsor Senator Jim Stamas.  Notably absent is any mention of Senior Center or even Senior Citizens…

Here is where the State of Michigan appropriated the monies in their “Omnibus” for FY 2022-23 Labor and Economic Opportunity Budget.  You will find our “Lincoln Housing Project” – Sec 1094m found on page 5 line 19 below:

So, what is this “Missing Middle”?

“Missing Middle” is a MHSDA (Michigan State Housing Development Authority) program which has been brought into existence as a “housing production program designed to address the general lack of attainable housing and housing challenges underscored by the COVID-19 pandemic”.

Since Missing Middle is a target right now, we have made some effort to ascertain via publicly available information, where the ACCOA is in the process of obtaining money to finish the housing. This is important since it was revealed at the last ACCOA meeting that the projected complete development cost is well beyond the currently guaranteed funds. It was revealed that current plans for the Community Center are at 10.5 million and an additional 2.9 million slated for outdoor recreation facilities, as the first 2 stages of development. That is already exceeding the 12.5 million “cash on hand” (even though it isn’t all technically, on hand yet).

So, before even breaking ground we are already behind budget and the rest of the project is depending on uncertain current & future grant applications and… ?

We have been able to determine the specific amounts that the State of Michigan has set aside for Missing Middle projects throughout the state.

• Round 1 opened on 9/19/22 and closes on 12/30/22 with $15,000,000 total funding available.
• Round 2 opens between 2/23-5/23 and will close on 9/30/24 with a net total of $33,000,000 available to the state.

New Building Project Planning Committee Meeting Minutes dated 11/17/22 show that Ethos is apparently going to try and acquire a part of the $33,000,000 available to be disbursed throughout Michigan in round 2. Given the amounts being applied for (and granted) in the first round of the MHSDA program, and after Ethos (and other firms) take their cut, it seems highly unlikely that this grant program is going to be able to provide enough by itself.

There also seems to be a request out to the Federal Government for another 8-12 million (per documentation below). Aside from the documentation we have on this request, there is no information we can provide one way or the other as to the status of this specific grant request. Notably, the documentation does include the possibility of grant money being disbursed via the LIHTC (a claim currently being vehemently denied).  This document does, at least, specifically mention Seniors.  However the general target scope remains “Community Hub”

There is also a citation of the Detroit Free Press which suggests that over 40% of our population is below the poverty line. The real figure per the US Census data is 12.6%.

We have been unable to ascertain any other avenues being explored aside from the above.  It is also very important to note that we do not have the date of the above document.  We know, simply, that it exists and was sponsored by our current US Senators.

Here’s what the most current Missing Middle applicant & disbursement chart looks like as of the date of publication:

(source)

Things are not adding up. Here’s even more information to muddy the waters…

One of the most narrative destroying pieces of information that we have received is a study which was conducted by Shaw Research & Consulting dated November 23, 2021. Shaw conducts “Real Estate Analysis & Market Feasibility Services” (per their own branding). They are an LLC operating out of Bad Axe Michigan. The entire document is below… However, the first paragraph of the study letter is most notably and irrefutably concerning (if the development does come to fruition).

Based on the analysis of local demographic trends, as well as a brief examination of the local rental housing stock, sufficient market demand cannot be demonstrated for additional affordable rental units targeting family households at this time.

This is undoubtedly why the ACCOA has scaled back their plans for the apartment phase by about half. But, it does not take an economic genius to extrapolate that “sufficient market demand cannot be demonstrated” means that even this scaled down project will not add value to the community. Especially in the long term… Especially if we are to examine similar developments in nearly any municipality in the United States.

Curiously, the results of this particular study have never been (to our knowledge), made public… Why? Surely the board would want to deliver to the public, complete transparency for a multi-million dollar Community Hub project. Wouldn’t they?

They sure have no problem mentioning the NEMSCA Assessment which surveyed only 39 Alcona residents (less than 0.4% of our current population). They’re okay with also sharing, the U of M Survey. A survey which they admit didn’t solely target seniors, doesn’t even mention housing, and sure seems to have been repeatable when taken online. Though, that specific data has not fully been published yet either.

Here’s what we think…

Government “aid” always finds a way to sound wonderful. Somehow, it never ends up as billed, sadly. The world has countless examples which show Government using well meaning people to facilitate their “nice sounding” but incontrovertibly terrible and damaging policy.

We don’t need to keep doing this.

The basic principle of economic fact is that the reason our population here is not growing is quite simple… There aren’t enough jobs within 30 minutes which have a broad appeal. It is the very nature of our county, and a big reason why many of us have chosen to live (and vacation) here.

In the opinion of this publication, we would prefer the agencies which exist here to concentrate on their stated purpose and listen to the will of the people they serve. It is, after all, their area of expertise. Moreover, it is also our opinion that the State doesn’t need to dangle enticing looking carrots in front of well meaning people in order to facilitate their unquestionably failed policy.

If ever you wanted to take a look at the effectiveness of the clown show in Lansing… Look no further than the sheer negligence they have afforded to our system of roads.

So where does all this leave us?

Well, it looks to me like we are currently sitting and wondering why this dedicated senior center, as asked for by the Senior Citizens of Alcona County, is still not happening. And obfuscations of important research, such as the Shaw Survey, leaves us with more questions than answers, and less trust than we walked into this discussion with.

Whatever happens with this “Community Hub”, this much is clear: We will still need to build a new dedicated Senior Citizen’s Center.

Want to help? Reach out. We’d be happy to help you get involved.

We are the news now.

Jeffrey Dobbs