 This is the March 16th meeting of the Longwood Housing Authority Advisory Board. Let's roll to item number two on our agenda, which is the approval of minutes from our February 16, 2021 meeting. Those are in the packet. Does anyone have any comments? Minor revisions? I'm going to turn it over to, actually, we're going to do something unusual today and start with someone that's not named Jean. Let's go to Arlene and see what your thoughts are. Well, on the discussion about the resident engagement, it says in there, I expressed an interest in conducting the meeting. I have no desire to conduct the meeting. And if I said that word, I really misspoke. Attending the meeting is what I'd like to do. You guys are perfectly capable of conducting that meeting and the residents know you. So that's it. Good catch. Jean, did you have any comments? I know I'd like to approve as amended. Second. I move to approve as amended. She moves in Arlene's second. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, thumbs up. We are approved. Item number three is public to invite, invited to be heard. Olivia, did we receive any contact from anyone? So with no one reaching out to Olivia to request to be heard at this public meeting, we will roll on to item number four, new and old business. And the first item is an update on the inclusionary housing program. I'm not sure who's going to leave that discussion. That's Kathy. Kathy. All right. So I sent you a copy of our draft inclusionary housing snapshot, which this year also focuses on affordable housing information because all housing is now inclusionary housing. There's very few of developments that are excluded anymore now that we're to almost going on our third year in to this. So this just kind of gives you an overview of where we stand in meeting our 12% affordable housing goal at the city. So on the on the top first page that has the houses on it, you can see that we're about 45% of our way to the goal. In 2018, we had about 2300 affordable housing units, which accounted for 6.2% of our total housing stock, and we're trying to get to 12. We only added six units in 2019 because Fall River didn't get its certificates of occupancy until 2020. And the same thing with the Micah housing project. So those six units were all habitat units, I believe. So that took us up to 2342. And it dropped us down to 6.06 because of the increase we had in the number of dwelling units that came on in the city in 2019. So then 2020, we added 90 units, which did include Fall River, the Micah home project. And then the in between acquired a market rate rental housing project, and is going to convert it to affordable. So those units are included in there. And then we had, I think was 14 for sale homes brought on either through habitat or the blue vista development for 20. And that brought us to 6.07% of our total housing stock as affordable. So then going forward 2021 we're projecting we'll have about 73 units come on board 2022 about 175 units 2023 about 240 units. And these are our projections that 21 and 2022 numbers are probably closer to accurate. Once you get out to 2023, it gets a little more nebulous. And this is the pipeline timeframe is what we agreed to as part of the the Boulder County Regional Housing Partnership program. So we're trying to align some of the statistics and data that we're providing with the countywide data. So there's a good comparison between Longmont and the county. And then as you can see on the far right 5400 units is our goal. And that's projecting what build out will be in 2035 and how many units we think will have in total. And then what 12% of that is so 5400 right now is our goal. And we have not been adjusting that because that would be kind of crazy making. So we took a pick that figure when we started the the regional partnership and we're sticking with that. And we probably do some adjustments maybe a little bit later down the road, but we're not going to adjust it every year with new projections and everything that just be crazy. So of the 24 that 2432 units that are affordable and those are deed restricted as affordable 94% are rental homes and 6% are for sale homes or purchased homes. In 2020, we invested or leveraged in federal funds about $746,000 $233,000 in our local affordable housing funds and then about 15 million in leveraged funds. So that is primarily the Fall River project and the acquisition of the in between home. As you can see on the 2019 figure and I'm looking at the chart on the far the bottom left, there was a larger leveraged investment because that is we did include Fall River and the Micahome project over in 2019, even though the units weren't completed and counted until 2020. And then looking at the inclusionary housing program on the bottom right, the fee and Lou pipeline, we received $14,600 in fee and Lou that was paid into the local affordable housing fund in 2020. We're projecting about 800,000 to be received in 2021. And then the projections go out to the next two years as well. And those again are also a little nebulous fee and Lou is not paid until certificates of occupancy are requested. So it's a little hard to predict exactly when some of those are going to come in. We did receive a $50,000 payment though. Last week, I think it was or it's coming up. So we're getting on our way to the 800,000. And then if you look on the back page, that kind of gives you some analysis of what's happening in the broader market in Longmont. So the top left shows median sales prices in Longmont over the years. And we looked back for a decade. This is a little bit past the recession, as we're starting to come out of it. And you can see the top line is single family detached homes, median sales prices, and then single family attached median home sale prices. The chart on the right shows new homes versus existing home sales. So this is from the assessor's data, and they have a little bit of a lag. So this is only through October 31. So that's why 2020 looks so low. That will bump up. I don't know that it'll get all the way up to 2019's figure, but it definitely will bump up. Because I remember from last year, it looked really low for 2019. And then it bumped up, obviously to this point that it's almost equal to 2018. But it's just a comparison to show you that of all the home sales in Longmont, how small of a percentage the new brand new home sales are, the new construction and new home sales. So that just kind of gives you an idea that with that small of number coming on each year, that's all that we can hope to achieve through 12% with the Occlusionary Housing Program. So that program, while is good and is a great step for making it, it's not going to be the be all and end all of providing affordable housing. So just trying to put things a little bit in perspective on that. The middle chart kind of shows the income needed to purchase a rent in Longmont. So using the median sales prices for detached and attached product from that top chart, figuring out how much a family would need to pay or the income they would need to have in order to afford to purchase one of those median priced homes without excuse me, without cost burdening themselves. So not paying more than 30% of their income for their housing. So you can see that to afford a single family detached home, median priced, you'd have to be pretty close to $115,000 for a family to purchase in there. And then for a attached home, a townhome product or condo product, it's about a little over $85,000 that's needed to purchase. So and then to afford the median or average rent, it's almost $75,000 is needed to afford a median or the average rent in Longmont. And that's the average. So it's not a one bedroom, it's not a two bedroom, it's the average of everything together. So that probably skews a little bit high. So it's, it's not for just a single person having to make $75,000, that's a family income. And then the two dash lines show you where the HUD 80% median income is and the 50% median income figure is. So usually 50% is the the figure that we use to afford rentals and they have to be hit and be affordable at 50% area median income in order to, to be considered an affordable rental and 80% to be considered a force affordable for sale. So you can see how much lower those are than than where our median home prices are in the incomes needed for the median home prices. There's also a line and I can't tell because I printed out in in black and white, there's a right in the middle of the city's median household income. So that's from the census data. It is a lag behind a year behind. But that kind of just gives you an idea that cities median income household income is going up, but not at the rate needed to afford the housing prices in long term. And then finally, the bottom chart is just showing the actual permits issued in each of the years and the affordable housing units provided in those years, again, kind of getting back up to the top right one where new home sales are such a small percentage of the overall built environment. This is kind of showing the same thing. So the number of permits issued versus the affordable housing units that were provided and then the lighter colored charts are projecting that forward. So there any questions or anything different that you would like to see on something like this? Colleen? I just have two questions. If a current facility does not have affordable housing, can they apply or be included in that in the future? That's because I bumped my computer. What is considered the average rent in long run? Average rent is, let me see if I can find it here. Well, you can reach, you know, get back to me eventually. It just seems to me the rents that I see in my way of thinking are extremely high. But yeah, I think the average, I want to say it was around 1500. Okay, sure. And what was your first question? First question was if a current facility does not have low income housing, can they apply for that or get into that in the future? If they chose to deed restrict their units, you know, they could contact us and we could work with them on that. Probably they would want some type of subsidy in order to do that. And that's something that we have talked about. And at this point, nobody has come forward and to have the data to, oh, here we are, or the funding to be able to do that in any kind of substantive way, I would say we're not to that point. But once we start getting some payments in lieu, that might be something that we could take a look at. So the current average rent in Longmont is 1504. Thank you. Yeah. So I mean, this really explains why we need affordable housing, that income needed to purchase. It's just astronomical that it basically doubled all of the income that's needed, mainly for a single family home. So getting to Arlene's point, that was kind of my question, too. Can we put a chart in here too, possibly that shows the rise in rent as well over kind of that same 10-year time period? Is now that yellow line does, income needed to afford average rent? It doesn't tie to the specific. Well, that's income needed, but I think it's more like if we go to the previous page where you had like the medium sales in Longmont, I mean, that's probably more readily available, I would imagine. But I don't know if you would have something similar to that for the average rent. Yeah, I do have that charted, so I could add that to that table or put another one somewhere. Right. Good idea. So I have a big picture question. I look at this and I realize it's clear that in the inclusionary housing program is not the one vaccine solution to the problem. I say that because my arm is sore. I got my shot yesterday, my first one. But what does this tell us about the role of the Longmont Housing Authority? What should we take from this and how, if at all, should we be thinking about adjusting our actions, our goals as a housing authority to help fill this gap? And maybe that's for a more in-depth discussion. I think, I don't know, Kathy or Karen, if you want to go first, I have some ideas, but I was going to yield to our experts in this one first. So I think when you see this, so when you really look at new versus existing home cells, I mean, what this is showing is the lack of land that we have available to develop for new housing projects. So that's sort of setting the bar there. I think for the housing authority, and this is really part of the work that we're doing in understanding LHTC, it is this question of accelerating development of affordable housing projects in the future for land that we own and land that we get through this process. And so I really think that for you all and for all of us on the housing authority side is, is for us really to look at how we can potentially be more aggressive in the development of affordable housing on the properties that we own that are vacant and how we can acquire new properties via different mechanisms. So the thing I'll get put on the table on this and is when we really worked the when we created the deal for Costco and worked with Reggie Golden on that partnership, we were able to buy nine acres of land for affordable housing that had nothing to do with the traditional housing development in that world. And so I think for us, it's using the staff on the city side using opportunities like that to try to get more land for affordable housing, but then really working within the housing authority, housing to LHTC format, whatever that looks like over time to ensure that we're we're not just sitting on land, but we're converting that into units as quickly as we possibly can. And that'll be a lot of what we're going to be bringing to you all as part of the update. And we may give this update first, but you know, it's what we're doing at Sunset Heights, which is the additional project with the element at the Suites property. It's we're engaged with conversations with Chris about the development of additional affordable housing on North Main where they didn't finish. It's also looking at the property that we have to the west of the Lodge and Harstown and developing that out for affordable units. And then also the nine acres that I just talked about that we had with the Costco deal. And it really is about not sitting on that property and getting it turned into units does a couple of things for us. A first and foremost, provides affordable units to our community. Second, it brings in operational revenue for our organization. And then if we can structure the partnerships, then we get a piece of the development revenue. So it also strengthens us financially. And I think equally important, what we're talking about is they need to be housing for families and broad age groups, because we have a lot of facilities for older adults that we do as the housing authority, but we have very few that really is into that wide age group. And so that's what we're talking about, as we need to move forward. So I think for you all, it's really, we all need to then be start focusing on the development piece. And I think as I said, I don't know if it's this group or before, I'm surprised that we're having that conversation so quickly in this transition. But I think we all realize we need to do it to get at this issue. Kathy, did I misstate anything or? No, I think Arlene asked the question in that housing authority just by itself owns about 11 acres. And if we could put at least 50 unit per acre density on that, that would double your portfolio in the next however many years that we could get that going, which also addresses, as Arlene brought up, the goal to try and reduce the dependence on HUD within the budget. So there's a number of different areas that continued development will help address for the agency to make it more solvent and more sustainable for the future. So as well as helping the community. You know, and I think the only thing that I would add is even though the longer term goal would be to reduce our dependency on HUD, I think the other area that we want to continue to look at and pursue would be the acquisition of additional vouchers through HUD so that in addition to building and managing properties that we are also building our portfolio of vouchers through HUD so that we're also able to extend opportunities through our housing choice voucher program. And then I think, you know, Kathy has talked about as well as Harold is, and again, in looking at the inclusionary housing program, even though it takes a whole range of options for increasing our affordable housing in Longmont, being having the LHA being available as a partner with those developers who are needing to and looking for opportunities to meet their inclusionary housing requirements for LHA to be at the table as one of, you know, of several affordable housing developers in our community for partnerships is also something that would be a fabulous thing. And I think on top of that, it's this is where it starts attaching to our planning world is also looking at some of these new approaches that are being taken in different areas and how that fits within our overall development guidelines and what we can do. And I say this because as I've talked to one individual and it was specifically about the nine acres adjacent to the Costco location, there's an interesting model that they're looking at that is can be potentially a for rent or for sell product, but is really dense, but has the feel of a single family detached home. And so it's a really interesting concept. And we're going to try to Kathy and Karen haven't seen it, but we're going to try to start talking about that concept. So I think it's also really working in with Joanie and her group and maximizing the land that we have and being able to really utilize the density but look at different models that may historically like this model has been a for rent product. But when I was looking at the layout, it really could also fit well, it is a for sale product for affordable housing. And so I think it's also understanding, you know, the creative models that are being developed across the state and nation where, where folks are looking at it in a slightly different way. But, you know, that's just the work we have to continue. Obviously, we're not where ideally we'd want to be, but we're further ahead in terms of our potential ability to develop and partner with other groups. It was this is helpful. And as we go through this and as we're now in what our third meeting as an advisory board, I'm stepping back trying to figure out just what's our role as the advisory board, how do we add value to this process rather than just being a group of people that going to hear a address rehearsal of the same information that'll be shared with the actual housing authority board. And I've one thing that comes to mind for me is that as we are, this board is much less involved in the day to day operations of the authority and the financial pieces of the authority than we used to be. Maybe that opens up an opportunity for us to be living on a little bit bigger picture level and trying to identify and establish some longer term goals and nudge staff and counsel along a little bit in those areas. So just searching for some traction for our group. Arlene? I don't want to have to ask a whole lot of questions, but I have a couple. One, is there any way that the city would allow a building to be like say 12 stories? Or are you stuck at four? So 12 stories is not in the code. And so obviously that would have to be a broad code discussion. I know that as part of some of the planning efforts that councils looked at when we look at our, you know, obviously you wouldn't want a 12 story building adjacent to a neighborhood. But one of the things that council did talk about as we were looking sort of, I'll just call it the steam area, which is in that more urbanized area adjacent to downtown. And when you look at the topography of the sense that it's flowing down, council did talk about going higher in that location. But that would have to be a conversation initiated not only with the council, but the planning commission. And we'd have to really relook at zoning and what we would allow. But today that we don't have the ability to do that. But I know people have, the councils talked about it. Others have talked about it in areas where it makes sense that's not adjacent to other residential areas. But they haven't moved on that. I think that's sort of the evolution of that area south of downtown in that more, what used to be industrial area. I think if, what's the max height we can go to Kathy six? I think so. I think six is max height. Okay. And I was going to bring this up a little later, but since you guys have already brought it up to the dependence on HUD. And the goal that says you're going from 45% to 25%. That seems to me to be a pretty aggressive goal. And I'm sure that someone on the board can kind of clue me in as to how that came about. But is there a way to say, maybe define that a little bit more and say by 2025, we hope to go to, you know, 40% by 30 2030 and so on down the road. I don't have a problem with not being dependent upon HUD. I'm just wondering how this is all going to work out. Anyone have any answer? I don't have any answer. I mean, obviously, we can, we can put some kind of figure on it or do some kind of step down if that's what and or maybe there's a discussion is that even where we need or want to go? Is it, is it realistic? I, Arlene had asked the question and, you know, I remember prior board talking about this and setting a goal around it. And to me, looking at where we're at now, which the HUD funding, the housing choice voucher funding is about 48% of our 2021 budget, how, you know, this is really a stretch goal without knowing how far out and everything, even knowing how far out, that's a big difference, a big reduction. So I think that is open for discussion and potentially a change if that's something that you all would like to recommend to council. They've never seen this. They are definitely not the ones that put this forward. You know, that is really from, from prior, prior board. So well, and I think when you look at the HUD funding, you know, I want to talk about a couple of things to Arlene's point one and capture what Karen said, we want more housing choice vouchers, which brings in more HUD funding. Part of the reduction, though, is when you create more developments and you bring more properties in the portfolio, you hope to bring more non-HUD revenue in. So what this is really to me about is increasing other revenue streams to reduce the percentage of overall impact that HUD's playing in, even though we're saying we want more HCV money. And so for me, that goal says something a little bit different. It really says we need to focus on the development and bring more properties into our portfolio to bring additional revenue sources in versus reducing the HUD revenue. So that may stay the same or increase, but we want to bring more revenue sources in in different categories to ultimately offset that percentage and drive it down. I don't know if that answered your question. Yeah. In the development of affordable housing, given what we've looked at in terms of family income needed, and especially in developing affordable housing for families, wouldn't the process to keep the rents at, I'm going to call it a reasonable rate for affordable for the income, keeping the rent lower so that families could afford housing, affordable housing. And I know it sounds competitive, but affordable housing is becoming not affordable for a lot of people right now. Okay. So as we build, wouldn't the rent required keep it affordable to the point that we're not as dependent that we, as you mentioned, Harold, we keep the percentage of vouchers in any particular development lower because the rent is so high that everybody would need a voucher to move in. Do you understand what I'm saying? And part of this is going to be in the development cost. And it's a matter of, is there something we can do to keep that cost down so that the rents aren't so high? Is that something we can look at? It's really in the amount of subsidies that you bring into a development. So the more subsidy, which makes it work a more complicated project, because there's so many multiple funding sources, but that is about the only way that you can keep rents pretty low without having to add a voucher in, you know, into every unit to keep it low. So really taking a look and increasing the amount of subsidy that's put in, which again also ties back in and what I think kind of our vision has been with the relationship with the housing authority in the city and assuming that we will continue to get good fee and lieu into the affordable housing fund, that will increase the amount of subsidy that we can probably put into a project that's going to keep very low income units. That's exactly what happened under the last inclusionary housing program. We got payments in lieu. We turned around and put it back out with FISL or with the housing authority and could invest more deeply and keep rents lower and got more units for lower incomes than we would have if the developers would have provided the units on site. So the fee and lieu is a real bonus in this situation. Okay, so that's one of the avenues where we can subsidize really the payment to the developers is basically what we're doing, right? I think it's it's taking relying less on the equity and subsidy. Yeah, okay, okay. Yeah, when you look at the economics in this world and you look at the one the one time development cost and the ongoing operational cost, I think what we've learned is we can't skimp on the ongoing operational cost because that creates other problems that we're dealing with now in the facility. So you've got to be really regimented and setting that. So then you take the development cost and and so there's some things that you can't move. So, you know, fortunately for us, we're able to get land in different ways. So the land cost isn't playing as much into the calculation. But when you look at construction costs and and the increase in construction costs, and you look at the construction index, I mean, that's doing this and you can't adjust that either. Like right now, all construction costs are going in because of lack of product or they're going up. And so things like metal concrete, those things are just really expensive today. So you can't adjust that. So then you look at the capital stack. And what Kathy's saying is what we're doing is trying to augment the incentives in the capital stack so that you're reducing the reliance on the rent payments or the equity in the facility to make that up. And so that's for us then to look at it. So the example I would give you as we're talking about the Crispin project, it really is about augmenting the capital stack so that we can maintain that affordability. And that's kind of the conversation we're in there in now from a financial perspective. That's amazing how much the three of us have learned about development. And I mean, really, I mean, this is this is a developer model where you're you're bringing this in. And I think the value of this relationship is at least on our at least in my mind in terms of what we need and where we're going with the affordable housing fund and inclusionary housing, we're seeing it earlier. And I think it's allowing us to plan better in terms of what could potentially happen within that fund. At least that's my perception. I don't know if that's Kathy's or not. And am I right that from the perspective of the housing authority and our role in facilitating that process, we've got a couple tools that we can use. One is we have money, we have revenue, we have we have some money we can spend. We can use our money to pursue projects. Another option is we can partner with private developers and give them access to funding sources that they might not have access to on their own. And there are probably some others I'm not thinking of. But you know, a lot of the other subsidies are more city council level or outside organization level. And I'm trying to figure out what is what does the authority do? And we've got a few things we can do. I'm also looking at the clock and the agenda and wondering if this is a good time to transition to another big picture question, which is our five year plan. Anyone have any follow up final comments on inclusionary housing report before we do that, Tom? Yeah, I just had a quick question. So the first part there, it says units, we're talking about, you know, our goals, 5400 units, we are not including housing choice vouchers in there, right? Because these are just set aside units, correct? Right, deed restricted, yeah. So that's kind of like in addition to this, we do have the housing choice vouchers to bring down to the market rate. Okay. All right, let's roll on to item 4b, which is a review of the five year plan and a recommendation to the LHA board. All right. So this is a plan that's required by head. It's pretty streamlined for small agencies. So as you can see, it's a five or six page document. Because of COVID in 2020, there was a waiver to submit in 2020. So it's actually due in early 2021, but it will cover 2020 through 2024. It aligns with the city's consolidated plan and the goals and objectives within this plan also align with the city's consolidated plan. It is not much different than the prior five year goal or five year plan, which also aligned with the city's consolidated plan. So, you know, basically creating affordable housing opportunities, protecting and enhancing our properties and programs, developing an organizational structure to more efficiently manage operations and develop enhanced and strengthen external relationships for ongoing partnerships. Item b3 within the plan just was a progress report on those goals and what we did in 2014 to 2019 to help address some of those the goals that we had. And then the rest of it is somewhat boilerplate. Again, because of COVID there was a waiver in public participation. So we weren't required to do anything this year, which is kind of bizarre given HUD usually is all about that. But we did post this on the website. It's been up since March 11. It'll we won't take it down until right before it goes to council on the 30th. And so anybody wants to comment on that it's available at LHA office. And so we did do what we felt we could do to try and put it out there for the public comment. Even though we didn't have to so any questions or concerns about this, and particularly around the 45 to 25% goal if that's something that we want to adjust or make a recommendation to adjust. I'm happy to talk about that. I just had a question on the b2 number one the last objective there. It says that we'll have work with local property owners to increase the number of rental units available to program participants by gaining 10 new private market property owners. Does that mean we'll have, you know, this is a five-year project. So a five-year goal. So we'd have two a year. Is that doable? Is that or is that looking at not just the long housing authority? This is looking at big picture for the city. Well, I think this was primarily looking at how do we increase the number of property owners that will accept vouchers within the city. It's really what I think we we were thinking about in setting this goal. So okay. So it's not just two new properties. Okay. So it's property owners. Okay. I follow you now. Okay. That could probably make that a little bit more clear. Yeah. Two developments a year would be quite quite aggressive. That's what I was wondering. Was that what we were trying to say here or okay? I'll see if I can't make that more clear. Any other comments? Along the same line that Tom was talking about, because I had that highlighted as well, have you approached anybody about this? And if you have, what kind of pushback are you getting from private owners? So I would say we have not done that too much to date since the city has become involved. I think that has been an ongoing goal is to try and keep and enhance the property owners that are taking vouchers willing to take vouchers. I don't know, Karen, if you have a different take on it. I mean, that is something that that the city has worked with worked on as well to get some incentives out there around security deposits or other assistance, particularly as it pertains to folks who are coming out of homelessness, where people might be a little bit more concerned about about renting even with a voucher. Yeah. Yes. And so what I would add to that is that, so certainly we've been having these discussions with, among city staff, and we have a landlord tenant mediation program. And so we have an active engagement with local landlords around positive tenancy is what we call that. So we are working at it from that angle and continuing to, first of all, encourage landlords who are accepting or property owners that do accept vouchers to stay the course and to continue to be involved in that program. So part of this is maintaining our existing property owners that are involved in the program. And we also have there's a countywide effort. We on an accounting wide level receive some grant funding to hire. Her name is Beverly Miller. We call her, she's a landlord acquisition specialist. But as Kathy mentioned, is that we we do have so Beverly is working on a countywide effort to reach out and engage local property owners in in accepting and participating in the housing choice voucher program that the target population is for folks who are at risk of or are coming out of homelessness is really our target population for Beverly's efforts. But but but certainly she's building relationships with landlords across the entire county and and working to get them involved in the voucher program at all levels, not just for targeting people experiencing homelessness. So so we're really encouraged by that. And because it makes a huge difference in having someone out there that is really focusing on that, and we are all benefiting from that countywide. Yeah. I Karen, I appreciate what you said. And I really am excited that there is somebody dedicated to this. One of the things that that I ran into a lot with residents that moved in is that their landlord would no longer accept vouchers. They had been accepting vouchers. But one of the consistent complaints was it's too much work on the landlord. And I was wondering, has there been some effort to minimize the impact on the landlord of what's required for voucher for voucher participants? Has that been addressed? Has somebody looking at what can we reduce the burden on the landlord for accepting a voucher? So what I would say, yes. There's the there's a quick answer. So so again, we have, as part of this work that we are doing with with our landlord acquisition specialists, we we do occasionally here in Longmont and we refresh that survey countywide where we do survey property owners in about participation in the Housing Choice Voucher program. And we have received some updated feedback from them. So certainly what you talked about is how to make it easier to navigate through what is required to participate in the Housing Choice Voucher program is one thing that we are working on. And we are taking the input that we receive from property owners to try to help make that more streamlined, easier to participate. You know, the other thing that we hear quite a bit from our property owners is how to have successful tenancy. So if there is if landlords do experience a challenge, a behavioral challenge, say with with a tenant in their in their property, they they do want and benefit from assistance to help resolve those issues and help make sure that there is an ongoing successful tenancy. So so we're working with that data to continue to help that be successful on both sides of the equation. And just a reminder is that that there is new state law that that for Colorado, it's the larger property owners that, you know, that they cannot consider source of income in in renting to to tenant. So so that would that would make it not in line with the law if you if you denied someone's application because they have because of the source of the income to pay for their rent. So that's a new law in in in Colorado. Okay. So I'm putting trying to put this in context of the five year plan. And is it fair for me to say that under b21 that last objective, working with local property owners to increase the number of units, these discussion, we were just having kind of fit under that, that it's not just that we want 10 new units, we probably don't want to lose any, we want to make everything easier for the landlord to stay part of the program. So I want to be comfortable with the language as it's written, or do we or we want to recommend any change to this? Realizing that our job is to make a recommendation to the housing authority about whether they adopt this as written or with modifications. I think thus far, my take on it is that as written kind of covers the issues that we've discussed. One item we haven't discussed a whole lot is the plan to move from 45% dependency on HUD down to 25. Are we comfortable with that concept, or do we want to suggest some change to this before this goes to the board, Jean? Yeah, I agree with Arlene. I think 25 is way too aggressive. I would rather see something on the order of 35. Let's go down 10% and get there. I see some nods. Is everyone comfortable? So I guess I don't want to cut the discussion short, but what I'm hearing from this is that we're generally supportive of exactly the way that's written, but we would recommend that the board consider a modification of item B33B to change it to a 35% target rather than a 25% target. And we don't have a formal resolution in the packet to consider, but I would entertain a motion that we approve this as written with the change to B33B to 35%. Nice, I'll move. Again. Jean moves and Tom seconds. Any further discussion, Karen? So I just have a question as I'm reading this. So that particular reference to setting that goal is it looks like that's in the in the 2025 or the 2014-2019 plan. Is that goal in our list of proposed goals for the 2020-2024? You know that's a good point because it's not in that. I don't see that in there. No, it's what it's saying is that this was set during the 2015 to 2019 time period was the goal. We can move it to a more to B2 as a formal goal if we want to do that. Right, because it's not in, it's not proposed as a formal goal in the 2020-2024 plan. Is that correct? I just needed clarification. I didn't see it. So that is good. Thanks for keeping us on track and sorry for sending us down that path. So I guess the question would be maybe for for Kathy and Karen. So that that goal from the last five year period was not specifically included this year in this for the next five. Is there a reason from your perspective that we ought to consider leaving it out? Or is it helpful to set a numeric target like that? Well, I think if that is the overall one of the goals, we should keep it in and or amend it, which we could address it as amending the goal and just state it differently within B2, an actual goal. But if that is of importance to us in the 2020 to 2024 time period, then we should have it as a goal in either, I would say probably two, two or four, probably two. So we can leave the one in 3B, B3, 3B as it is, but then under B2 have it amend the goal to move from 45 to 35 instead of 25 to be more realistic about it. So if we were going to do that, I think what we would do procedurally is Tom would perhaps amend his motion, which was basically restating what I said. So I'll amend my recommendation, which would be that we might consider changing Tom's motion to I think it was Gene's motion, actually. Gene's motion to add a new line to B2, 2. Cameron? Yes. Let's vote down the motion that I made first. Okay. Let's all not agree to that motion so that we get that off the table. Okay. That's fine. I was just going to have you just amend it and that's how I'm agreed, but go ahead. Yeah, I think it would be clearer if we made it as one of the objectives. Kathy, would that be under B2, 3, listed as an objective under there? Kathy? Yes. I think, yes, it could be under 3. That probably 3 or 2 probably would work. Well, look, it's under infrastructure in the past tense. So I think it would go under infrastructure in the plan. So make it an objective. Yep. Okay. Okay. So my suggestion, Gene, is that we just amend your motion. Okay. Instead say what you're adding to B2, 3 instead of the other one. Yes. And make it the objective is to reduce our dependence. Why don't we say it as reduce our dependence on HUD by 10% and leave it at that. So whatever it is now, it'll go down 10%. I mean, you could also say with the exception of the Housing Choice Voucher Program. Yes. So you want to amend it? Is that a clear amendment? Reduce it by 10% with the exception of the Housing Choice Voucher Program. Is the amended motion, Tom? Are you comfortable with that? Yes. Okay. So now we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? All in favor? It's approved. Thanks for letting me be formalistic today. Warmth me up for the rest of my day. Let's roll on to item 4C, which is the review of our bad debt policy and the recommendation for the LHA board. And I believe that policy is in our packet. So with the changes made, are we okay with recommending the five-year plan go to Council or go to the LHA board? Sorry. Yes. Yes. Okay. Kathy, do you need that as a formal motion? I think that was included in Jean's original motion, which was to approve this as written with that one. Got it. Thank you. So bad debt. Is that Kathy? That Harold? And yeah, it's Kathy. Lisa and me. So sorry, I was having problems with my device behind me. So I think one of the things, Lisa, do you and Kathy want to jump in and talk about what we were seeing on the bad debt? And who is that? So I can start on the bad debt policy itself. So this is the existing policy that we, LHA has had and operated under, I think it was approved in 2017. With the exception of, we added item number C, no, this is, no, number three and number four are the two changes. And so this is combined to a certain extent with the proposed Resolution 2021-03. So, and Lisa can go into more detail, but basically we had a tenant that was, their rent was raised and they were given the appropriate notification, but they continued to pay the lesser rent. And even though it was accruing within the Yardee system, that they were not paying the correct rent, LHA staff with all the turnover and everything, or I don't know what reason, failed to correct that or notice it and call this out. And so by the time it came to our attention when the tenant moved out in January of this year, they had a thousand dollar debt in Yardee, which we didn't feel that we really could collect since we had never done anything to bring this back to the tenant's attention, et cetera. So the other impinging factor was that we only have a certain amount of time to return security deposits and we were running up against that time. So we had to make a decision on this one and couldn't wait to go to the board. So the executive director took the step to allow staff to write off the debt so that we could get it out of the Yardee system so that we could then process their security deposit. So we've got two things happening here. So we did this kind of outside of the policy to a certain extent with the executive director's approval so that we could make sure that we met the security deposit timing and didn't get a finding from HUD around that. And then are amending the bad debt policy to allow the executive director because this is probably going to happen until we get the full complement of issues fully go through every single tenant record and make sure it's totally accurate. We're probably going to run up against this again. So that's why we added number three and number four, allowing the executive director to write off up to $5,000 per tenant in bad debt if needed. And then after the fact, going to the LHA board for that approval, of course, we're going to try and do that before the fact wherever possible. But we're just concerned we're going to run into a couple of these issues again. So there's two items. But the other changing, we made another change. So on section B where it used to say if within 30 days, after sending notice, we actually extended that to 90 days. Looking at the accounting standpoint, 30 days is virtually possible for the accountants and the financial groups to manage this. And so we thought 90 days was actually a more realistic timeframe to place in this agreement. And, you know, this is just something that, and I'll let Lisa talk to the specific cases. It looks like this is something that's sort of just been happening over time and for some time. And so we really want to stay up, we want to stay on top of this and really have these conversations on the front end versus letting this accrue. But we still have to resolve the issues that have been occurring over the last few years. Correct. And so also with extending it to the 90 days, this is going to give us a chance in-house to try to collect from the previous residents as well, and then send to collection and try to recruit some of the money. Because what I have seen that's been going on, nothing, no attempts have been made to collect any charges, any passowed rents, any damage charges. So bringing this and extending that will give us a chance as well as LHA to collect that bad debt. And then we are in the process of reviewing every tenant ledger going back anywhere from to move in two, three, four years to correct. So I know, luckily with the snow day yesterday, a lot of the managers were able to dive in and get through quite a few, but it's going to take months to get through and audit and adjust and notify the tenants and try to collect from the tenants. Any comments or questions about the proposed policy? Tom? I had one. So in what number is it? Number four, it says approval for write-off on a periodic basis. Could we have that say either quarterly or say semi-annually, just so that it's kind of there's a timing that could be expected for that if it was to occur or if there was no write-offs, it could just be stated that there was no write-offs during that time. Yeah, that makes sense. Quarterly is fine. And then another question on that. So the managers are going through the tenant files now or the tenant accounts now. What is their access to that? Are they able to post to the individual letters or does that have to go then back to accounting to have them correct, say if there was an incorrect application? Yes, they are going through correct, kind of making their own ledger in an Excel format, coordinating with Kendra in accounting to correct, and then they'll go back to the residence. So remember some of our audit comments that we had where you didn't have the appropriate legs of the stool. Segregation duties. Yeah, the segregation on the accounting piece, and that's why we're not allowing, I mean we pulled most of that from the managers because it's the only way you can comply with your audit requirements in this, in that segregation of duties. Lisa, and Cameron? Of course. Yeah. Given the circumstances you were describing of people paying the wrong amount of rent, and given that this board and Cameron prior, when we were on the other board, Yardee was used as an excuse that we didn't know what was going on. But when a manager receives a check, right then and there, they know whether or not that's the correct rent. So it seems to me that what you're doing now is cleaning that up so that managers today, when you get that check, doesn't match what's required, right? Correct. Correct. They all have to keep their sheets in front of them and what was posted for billing, and then they can mark off who's they've collected from. But some of our issues do fall back on contracts with other agencies. It could be Boulder Housing, it could be MHP, and where we were not set the correct contract or there was a change in the contract and it was never updated in the file and never updated in Yardee. So a lot of the suites and a few other properties they found, those contracts don't line up with what was the charges. So I think yesterday she was able to get through six ledgers and eight hours going back to 2016, 2017, 2018 and matching up every contract and requesting missing contracts. Right. So it is a bit of a process to get through each ledger. Yes. Yes. Okay. But at least it's happening now at, you know, on the front lines right away. Correct. Because it wasn't obviously. Okay. So we know by the fifth, the sixth of the month who has not paid rent. If there's any debt or if it was the wrong amount, they've already been notified as soon as they're bringing that check in. Awesome. Okay. Well, to be clear about the next item why I authorized it for this individual is we didn't fulfill our obligation and requirement to let them know that they weren't paying the correct rent. It's not their fault. That was our fault. And so just like we do in the city when that occurs, we cover it. Now I want to do, I also want to call attention to there's two kinds of issues we deal with. One, the rent side, the other's damages. And even in that, so typically on the damage side, we are telling folks, here are your damages. That's a different conversation. But it all falls into the overall conversation in terms of how we do it. So I just wanted you to know that there's two different pieces in this as well. Arlene. Harold, I agree with you that it was, you know, the LHA's fault that this was not picked up. However, if the client or the resident actually signed the lease that said this is the new rent, it seems to me that they should have been held responsible for part of that too. And if they weren't, again, it goes back to that. You know, it is the board or the LHA's fault for not doing that. But the resident actually needs to pick up some responsibility here too. I think I could be wrong. Yeah, I think when we talked about it, the hard piece is really knowing and understanding whether or not the resident actually understood the contract they were signing because that's the other piece of this too. And I think that's part of the work that we're doing also with our senior services folks and really realizing how we communicate with our residents. I think what I've learned in this process and I've learned it in what we do as a city, different individuals have different challenges understanding contracts and what they're signing and how they're doing it. And I think that's another piece that Lisa's been working on is really how are we communicating with individuals and how are making sure they understand what they're signing to because that's a big piece. And I think for us, that's, we don't know what that really looked like because what's interesting about the case that I overrode, the individual is very diligent about always sending in the amount that they needed to. And so that tends to lead me to, it wasn't like they sent the new amount in and then reverted to the old amount, they never changed. And so that tends to lead me to look at it as a potentially different situation, which is why we do that. Because I agree, if they knew and they understood it, and if we would have seen them pay the new amount and then default to the O amount, that's a slightly different conversation. But this just never changed. And unfortunately, none of us were here to understand why. So communication is the thing then. Okay. Thank you. And as I read this, what happened is we, the Executive Director gets a report of bad debts that are deemed uncollectable. And then the Executive Director has to assess that and make a determination. They're not automatically written off. Those debts might linger for years. And Harold or whoever the future Executive Director might decide, even though the initial report says they're uncollectable, no, we're not going to write those off. Let's leave them on the books. Great. And so what this really does is just give us a procedure for how that happens and some Executive Director discretion up to the $5,000 level to handle those without going to the board for approval. Which is why I drew the attention to the meth or to damages, a lot of it, or maybe our meth rooms is those we may never let off because we want to hold accountable for the damages in the facility. So yeah, we have to look into each one of these. Good point, Cameron. I have a really minor kind of word choice question about item number one. This is upon the vacate of a tenant and determination of the program. I think it maybe would sound better if it said upon the vacation of a unit by a tenant and or termination of the program serving that unit. We don't really vacate a tenant. Vacating rather than vacation. That could get confusing. Yeah. Upon upon the tenant vacating unit or yeah. Yeah. I noticed that last night and I left it because I was like, maybe this is a specific word that's used. I don't know. Yeah. Yeah, that's cool. And I can make that change. Yeah, we took that just so you all know, we took the old policy and just made the changes where we need it. So we yeah, we'll make that change. Any other comments or questions or a recommendation to the board? That we make the changes identified. The first one would be to number one. And the other one would be to report quarterly to the board, which would be a number four that we make those changes and then approve that policy. I grew up watching Battlestar Galactica and the Cylons would sound just like Tom's microphone just did. Sorry, that was a nerdy teenage comment. But Gene, did you have a second? I'll second. Yeah. Okay. Motion in a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? It is approved. Thank you. We are just burning through this agenda. Item 4C, we just approved 4D recommendation of unlawed resident debt right off. So this was an item that we brought into the other conversation on the individual that we had that was had a rent set. They were on time monthly with the original rent payment, but they weren't paying the new amount. They then moved out. They were requesting their deposit. No damage in the unit. And this was the issue of we weren't sure how the rent increase was communicated. They were never late with the rent. And so this is the one, is this the one we're talking about or is this the other one? I just thought about it. Yes. So this is the one where we're recommending we write off the debt for this individual not retroactively affirming my decision on that. We've discussed this one quite a bit. Do we want to go straight to a motion? Yeah. Let's move to support the recommendation. Second. Gene moves Arlene seconds. All in favor? Excellent. Moving on to, I think we are now finished with the new and old business. Okay. Let's move on to item 5, the city report with an update on operations. So I'm going to start off a little bit on the topic at hand, which is snow removal and dealing with the system that just came in. And I wanted to go over this because you all may receive calls on this. We've definitely been receiving calls. So as we were moving into the system, we're utilizing our golf staff and our recreation staff to clear the housing authority properties based on the amount of snow that was coming down and what we had to do. We took the perspective of we need to first and foremost ensure emergency access to the facilities. And so what you saw at the facilities and yesterday I drove through I think all but one just because I didn't make it to that side of the town, but when we finished this meeting, I'm going to go out and do it again is you it looked pretty clear. It actually was very clear in terms of emergency access and moving through the parking lots drove through Aspen Meadows, Aspen Meadows neighborhood. There was a clear path to asphalt same for Spring Creek and Fall River. What we didn't get to is the parking spots in between the cars just based on the nature of the work and what we were trying to manage. I know they're looking at that now. So what we were hearing was individuals requesting us to remove the snow from their cars. We obviously do not remove snow from people's cars. They were requesting us to get access to their car, which that's something that I've asked Jeff Friesner who's working with the snow team to look at with Lisa because there are some issues just in terms of their getting access to cars. When I drove through Spring Creek, some people had basically pulled the snow out from their car. I just dumped it in the middle of the pathway that we had cleared. So we were coming back to clear that. So generally what I can tell you is very good emergency access was cleared down to pavement throughout the system. We started on the sidewalks, had to kind of give up in the middle of the storm because it was clogging everything. They went back and it looked pretty good like they were able to move through that. And then as we got into yesterday, our parks team I think had may have assisted with them until we went in and started doing single passes through the entire community. We're going to continue working to understand how we can get into between cars. This morning we sent a group with a loader to clear access to the front of our office building because it was blocked with the wind row from the work that we do on Main Street. We then I asked Jeff last night to send that same front in loader to Aspen Meadow because we had people moving in this morning and where cars were parked actually it was fine. But where you didn't have cars parked we had like we still had let's say approximately 12 inches of snow that hadn't melted. And so I asked them to go in with the front end loader to clear those spots for the individuals that are moving back into the facility because we didn't have any spaces available there. And then we're going to continue to evaluating how we manage between cars. To be honest with you the challenge on that is we also can't damage the cars either. And so it may not be possible for us to do it until the cars get out. But I wanted you to know people probably aren't going to be happy with us because you know very clearly saying no we will not clean snow off of cars. We will only go in between cars if it's reasonable and we can ensure that we won't damage them. But if there's a potential for us damaging them we're just not going to go in because we can't accept that liability. But otherwise I was pretty happy from with throughout the storm that we had what I felt was like really good emergency access through the parking lots if we needed it. And Lisa I don't know if you have anything to add or if there's any questions you've all heard from residents. No I just the local team of maintenance guys that were able to go out and help on Sunday and Monday was amazing. I had a manager out there at the suite shoveling non-stop partner husband all weekend just to make sure that those residents had past and emergency access to the building as well. Yeah and uh yeah I mean everybody was just phenomenal. And then part of the challenges so you know I mean and we dealt with this as a city we had folks that didn't live here that we said don't even try to come here because even those that we were giving on the city side we gave them large trucks to get into town and we still had a couple of them get stuck and so we're like just stay there. So like on the on our side Lydell and Randy I think were the two that were in town and they were just ping-ponging all over the place handling routine maintenance issues like elevator issues to leaks and so on and so forth. So to all of the housing authority staff that were really engaged in this and helping this phenomenal job and just staying on top of it and partnering with their city teammates now and getting into it. So Lisa and her her group did did an amazing job. It should be much better today as we continue but so that's my update on the snow because I know you're probably going to hear from it our council's probably going to hear from it. I'll actually update them tonight on that as well. Yeah yeah about the snow and I'm totally totally agree with you about not cleaning off cars. I think there was a and something through Boulder County that had cultivated I believe had individuals who would come out and help on a on a one to one basis. So there are volunteers that would come out and help residents clean off because that is huge. The snow turned ice so it's it's hard for some residents. So there is an option that we reduces our liability but the other question and Lisa I'm sure you're aware of this. We've got not only the move ins today but we've also got parking lot starting and so cars need to be moved and we I haven't looked Harold and maybe people have shown up by now that you know at 7 30 this morning there was still a lot of snow in the parking lot but they're going to be moving the pods out so cars have to move in a read you know we'll have fewer spaces so I'm just hoping that snow gets removed so that there's room for all the cars to park in a crunched crunched area for a while because we've got the pods going out we've got residents coming back it's going to be a little a little hectic so I'm asking for priority okay and I think I think Kathy has an update on the parking lot rehab Kathy. So I send all this information to our project manager yesterday and she is working with palace on it we're going to talk about it this afternoon likely the pod removal will be postponed a bit and then we'll see whether or not we need to move back the the parking lot actual work or not but we're going to talk about that this afternoon so we're awesome we're on it that was that was my first thought too I'm like wait a minute that's great great yeah part of just so you all know this is been thankful to Molly and on this side but you know when you look at you know what we talked about yesterday in the meeting on this parking lot is when when you redo parking lots and you're looking at your sub base and your asphalt temperature weather systems all of those things come into play we have the potential of snow tonight I think there's another storm that potentially will come in next weekend you know we're hoping the weather forecast this is good for us right now maybe saying trace but we also have to watch the weather because you want to make sure that you're you're constructing that project in a weather window so you don't put something in that ends up falling apart because it really is asphalt especially is very sensitive to in the type of asphalt you use in the weather that you're in in terms of the curing piece is really important so those are all things they're gonna they're gonna talk about plus so you know we are using we did go ahead and pull the trigger for some of the city contracts and we used LNM via the city so the resolution that the council adopted when they became the board and appointed me the executive director I think also let me use city resources and so I went ahead to make the decision to use contractors that we have on the city side to help with this as we move through this and right now we don't have the ability to use it we're using a lot of contractors right now to start pulling snow off the streets because we don't have room for it as we move through it and we get a better handle on this that may be something that we look at at these facilities because we have some pretty big snow piles that you know in their current condition maybe there for a while and we then may evaluate is actually coming in and trucking and removing that snow off of these facilities and I want to have that conversation with Karen, Kathy and Lisa probably tomorrow but right now our contractors we need to put so last night they were there all night on downtown on main street because we really ran out of capacity they're driving today we're probably going to move to north main necks based on what we were seeing and then our own crews are going to be on ninth and seven what they call zogging with the big machine that dumps it into trucks and start getting it out so we can actually have capacity so once we get through that we may evaluate may coming in and trying to remove snow we are doing it on selective basis based on emergency issues and things like that so that's the next stage in this um as as Scott Roche said snow vid 2021 so he's so clever he is um just a reminder I think uh to the advisory board I I don't know if you recall but um when we had our first snow event of the season back the end of October the LHA's snow removal contractor served us notice that they were no longer be fulfilling our our contract as snow removal for the 2021 snow season so we and when we went to solicit additional bids for for this season they they did come in like about twice the amount of what we had available so just to clarify that because Harold mentioned our our golf um staff and our our recreation basically our athletic may athletic maintenance field staff we um blessed their hearts they uh they stepped up and they um they agreed to provide that um snow removal so that um so that we wouldn't have to break the bank in order to to get a contractor in for snow removal for the LHA for the for the remainder of this winter season um and so and so thanks to Harold with backfilling with our our current parks contractors for some of you know because this this is more than a four inch snow so um so anyhow so we we have been making it work um at a very low cost for the housing authority for this winter season and we are in the process right now for um you know for the um going out to bid for a landscape landscape contractor landscape maintenance contractor and snow removal contractor for the subsequent years to see if we can get some economies of scale by by releasing those bids for both of those services for the for the coming spring summer season and the winter season um next year into 2022 so so anyhow so yeah there's a lot of folks trying to figure out how to make this work um you know and thank gosh that we don't have these uh big snow storms this is why the fourth worst one I think in in Colorado history um but anyhow but thanks to all of the um the crews to golf and recreation and to the other uh city staff parks streets herald for for having a stay on top of this as well as we were able to do um Lisa you have any other operational updates you're on mute you're on mute sorry we are just a couple quick updates we are moving forward on the install the pendant system at heartstone and lodge and removing the pool court system um the bid was signed last week and yesterday spent a lot of time working with Andrea and the company to get the install scheduled for the next over the next two weeks so by the end of March we will be alleviating the fire department some using this new pendant system you actually reminded me we also then also authorized the new security system at village place um we had a few more things coming back and forth on that um we were allowed to use the replacement fund um to do this and so the cost of that um all in if it took the amount of time we thought to install is $27,000 no ongoing expense this year and then uh from here on out I think as long as we're under contract with them that is the city's contractor on security and fire monitoring um all in cost is um roughly $1,800 a year I think was the number that we came up with our purchasing agent um so um we did all of that last week I think they're gonna try to get out here as fast as they can to install all the security at that facility um obviously weather's playing into it we also they were there Friday Thursday or Friday um Friday morning doing a walk through finalizing the security that they were going to put at Aspen Meadows apartment and then also Aspen Meadows neighborhood um and and so you all know the security consists of video cameras um mag locks on the doors um security for the offices um a monitored security system for the offices um and and they're also working with um Sarah Arnie um and in our in our police department in terms of really looking at placement of these cameras and so Lisa's done a great job we're having more issues around village play so we're going first there then when they do the exterior work at Aspen Meadows they will tie this in with that so it won't we obviously have to get the exterior work finished to the point where they can do their work so they may do some wiring before intermixed in with the contract and Molly's really managing that and then we're going to move to the neighborhood that's all going to be integrated into an overall system for that area based on things that we've seen um so we'll have a much better look at this it will be cloud based which means that we all will have access wherever we are but it also means that we're going to give access to our dispatchers and our police department if they get calls they'll actually be able to look into it um before they even get to the facility so that's moving forward we're in the process of we will then integrate all systems so we're going to have the same key fob system at every facility the same camera system at every facility versus having sort of the miss mix match that we've had so we can manage it better so that's our operational update um it's all years now Lisa and then I was just gonna say moving forward we are working to hire our third manager since I came on board in December so we're placing an ad for that for and this will be for spring creek and fall river and then a lot of this past month has been focused on building the resident relationships I've been officeing at a spring creek two to three times a week getting to know those residents and we're hoping to start some more resident meetings as soon as we go into code blue which by the way for everyone we just moved back into orange with our case rates so it may be a little bit longer before we go to blue just got that update just now sorry hot off the press yep any other comments or questions on the city report I think the only thing that uh that because we have a waitlist update uh vacancies there and and um and and a couple things so Olivia has been doing a stellar job and and helping get our wait lists in order and and and basically getting everything entered into yardie and really helping yardie help us to uh to manage the wait list so um so we did clean up the housing choice voucher wait list we um we did that over the last uh couple of months sent out um because I don't think we had updated the wait list and since 2018 if um I believe so Olivia certainly hop on if I make anything if I if I miss anything so we we did send out notification to um to everyone that we still had on our hcv wait list we um that was roughly around 900 households I believe we um gave them a date certain to send information back we received back information from about 120 or so households that are still uh around are still interested in being on the housing choice voucher wait list for the housing authority and so uh so basically Olivia updated their records uh inserted all of that information into into yardie and so now we do have an updated um hcv wait list in um that's that's in yardie that we can do a random poll um whenever we do have vacancies in um in our housing choice voucher program so that will help us to keep updated on that and have active households who are interested and and then we are looking at you know how to do um you know to to maybe have a basically update that wait list um annually or maybe two times a year but really being on being on on top of that Olivia is there anything else that you would add to that work and maybe do you want to talk about the the other property wait lists that you have you're also managing um I think you covered it on the hcv side uh the key for the property wait lists I think is just getting enough people um in the queue to move into our vacancies so you know when we have more than one person give notice in the same month all of a sudden we have two or three vacancies um so I think just getting more organized going forward to have those people ready to go um right now what we're kind of doing is just leaving it open for application so if an individual comes in and is interested in being qualified they kind of have the opportunity to just stay on that wait list that's kind of that that's kind of the gist unless Lisa has anything to add no and I was just going to say we did have Grounds River Spring Creek and Village Place they their wait list was open um March 5th through March 8th which gave got us a good new pool and which um a lot of our vacants do have applicants from that wait list now pending and then we're opening Aspen Meadows Senior and Aspen Meadows Neighborhood on the 26 so that we can get those vacancies filled great and do we have the we have the vacancy aged receivable reports is that Kendra or the the vacancy where it shows all the properties so I think that's Lisa so you want to the vacancy report um I'm not going to go into too many details but we do have a lot of pending applicants at the moment due to opening these wait lists to fill those vacancies we're hoping to see the movements here within the next two weeks as the units get turned we've had a little bit of turnover at the sweets we went from my vacancies down to seven to our only LHA they both have pending applicants but one of those is being housed by the fled victim so as soon as she is able to go back into her unit we will move the pending applicant in so we are kind of pre-leased there on that one Aspen Meadows Senior the ones being used as an office the other ones are all hoping to get filled when we open the wait list on the 26 and then the also the age receivable report is in the packet and if board members has have any questions about that uh Kendra's on and would be able to answer those questions I'm hearing no questions so a couple of updates operationally on this um our ability to use Yardee um and Kendra popped on but thanks to Kendra and Lisa in terms of taking advantage of the training sessions um our our ability to use Yardee is increasing dramatically it seems like every week and what we're able to do and what we can look at and how they're really cleaning up the system with H2 which is the consultant we brought in so I think the we're going to be able to have more robust reports on this as well as we're going into the future so we're really excited about that a couple of other things I wanted to update we're still trying to understand the CARES Act um so we have a more clear understanding on the city side but in the CARES Act it looks like there's going to be some potential for more vouchers specifically to house homeless and people and to keep people housed and so we're going to try to understand what that means in terms of expanding the voucher piece that Karen talked about um it also looks like there may be some funding that can go directly Kathy and I don't know what you've if you've heard anything new on this one but when you look through it there may be some funding for housing authorities directly um and we're trying to understand what that means and so when we talk about all of the funding associated with CARES Act and we and we look at this it is also tying directly to the development stuff work that we're looking at and how we can fund it to leverage more dollars for additional um development opportunities and then just understanding what we can do we don't know right now we will report to both the advisory board and the board as soon as we have a better understanding of this but it is a bit of a challenge I'm trying to figure out this legislation Kathy do you have any updates I do not um other than there was a line in the summary that said that housing authorities would get additional vouchers with funding for and through 2030 um for particularly for emergency situations and folks exiting homelessness or that are homeless to get them into housing so I think it's going to primarily focus on that um but we don't know anymore about um if there's any kind of cutoffs as far as size of agency or if it's just you know going to be put um forward as part of the regular formula however they calculate the formula allocation um for housing choice vouchers um so yeah and then uh finally Lisa mentioned this on the on the the unit that was impacted by the sprinkler system bursting in the last cold storm I know you all may have uh the the individual may have reached out to you um when we look at this in terms of the time that it's taking to get that individual back in the unit compared to what we've encountered at the the was at the lodge when we had a similar issue um this is actually moving pretty quick at the challenge that we had as we had to clear it we then had to bid out the reconstruction and that was signed off on I think last Friday or Friday but approximately a week ago and when I was there I was there Friday and they were their contractor was actually working on the unit um when when I was there so they're moving forward with this we just had to go through the appropriate processes that we needed to um to get that to work down on that facility so they're moving forward in case you get if they reach out to you you all know that um we're in the process and we just had to go through our bidding procedures on that um finally what I wanted to say to you all in terms of of looking you've heard about the work that they've done in the snow the work that they're doing on you already in these issues and and this is really for me to give a shout out to um my uh to to the entire team both city staff and housing authority staff and and the folks that are still here and the folks that have joined us um this is an exciting moment for me because what we have is a group of folks that are fearless but caring um and are committed to moving forward very quickly and so you can see um what I like is the pace of the work is really starting to move and what we're able to do and um big thank you to the entire group that's on here and the group that's not on here um because I think we're we're poised um to do some amazing things and a really big shout out to Lisa um just what you all to know I've learned a ton from Lisa and when when you bring people on at least as a manager you want to learn from them as much as they can learn from you and I think I've learned more from Lisa than she's learned from us or from me and so I wanted to give her a big thank you because she's she's really been an integral part of of helping us and so I just wanted you to know that because a lot of times we don't talk to you all about these pieces um but without each and every one of these folks and where we're going I don't think we're talking to you about the things that we did today it probably is much further down the road so Karen, Kathy, Kendra, Lisa, um Olivia, everybody that's on here and everyone that's not thank you um you you have made this um as concerning as it's been at times and Cameron I mean we were just in the we were all in this conversation it's now exciting and um I think the future of of of the housing my housing authority housing group um and and for our community is really bright and I think this is what we all wanted so thank you all and I would add to that that Harold's a pretty darn good housing authority director so maybe that wasn't in his career path but he has embraced that role um in in ways that that are also very very exciting so I also want to give a shout out to uh to our housing authority director Mr. Dominguez thanks Karen absolutely it's it's it is it is pretty cool to start looking at uh you know what we're going to do to change things for the better rather than just putting out fire so there's still some fires but uh uh you know there's you can start to see the the sun coming up over the horizon and it's and it's exciting um any other business under the city report I don't think so any other business that anyone would like to raise Harleen there was a article in the paper a while back that talked about um Senator Tracy Burnett introducing a bill to encourage private and non-profit agencies owning and leasing out um low-income units to reduce those residential units energy use how is that going to impact the units here and I don't know if that bill hasn't been introduced or not but what kind of impact will that have on the units here um I don't I'll have to get with Sandy to understand the bill itself typically when we see this there is a time period typically they're not retroactive and that they don't make you go back but and if they do you they give you time to retrofit that within your structure so don't know the answer to it but we will look into it one of the things where we eventually will sort of evolve is working with some of our sustainability folks and our power folks to do some audits and figure out what we can do in our facilities because there's also other funding sources to do some of that work that we will look at but um that's down the road now obviously when we retrofit all of the units like we just did at Aspen Meadows that has to go through the building code and the building code's pretty aggressive in terms of some of the sustainability components that you have to build into it but um that's a quick update we'll we'll get back to you on that piece to understand what that really means for us thank you one one brief item of other business I'm gonna add uh you know we've we've applauded the efforts of of Harold and Kathy and Karen and Lisa and Olivia and Kendra and others who have really gotten us through some challenging times and and do some exciting times another thing that I've typically run into on non-profit boards is what after you finish serving on a non-profit board there's a little bit of fanfare when you end your term um but one thing that's been pretty consistent over the past three years is that uh we've had a number of board members who've put in some serious time and and commitment that they didn't sign up for when they joined uh that as they transitioned off the board we were so busy fighting fires we didn't even pause to say goodbye um they just didn't show up for the next meeting and it's it may be a little too little too late but but I've been talking uh with Karen and Olivia and some others about something we might do to commemorate them and just just as a point of information uh we've we've uh purchased some some books that have just been published called Longmont the first 150 years it was written by Eric Mason who's a the curator of history down at the museum uh and there's also a little book plate to put in that and the plan is I was going to come come by Olivia I'll probably collect those write a little something to a list of the the board members that have been pretty instrumental during the last three years or so and we'll figure out how to get those to those folks just to let them know that we noticed and that that they were pretty valuable to uh the process of keeping us afloat during some tough times so just wanted you all to know that was happening and if you had any other suggestions or reservations about that let me know but I'll I'll roll that plan out with Olivia this week if that's okay all right seeing that there's no other business I think we can officially adjourn and I since we're fairly informal we'll adjourn without a motion so thank you all and we'll see you next month