 Your test on showing it is 130 and all of our commissioners are present. Thank you today is November 22nd, 2021. I would like to announce the meeting of the Santa Rosa housing authority. Pursuant to government code section. Pursuant to government section 54953S, and the recommendation of the health officer of the County of Sonoma. Housing authority members will be participating in this meeting, either via Zoom webinar or in-person socially distanced in the city council chamber at 100 Santa Rosa Avenue. Members of the public can participate in the meeting by Zoom, by visiting srcity.org.zoon.us and following the following code. That is J8-9279-115333 or by phone idiling 877-853-5257, and entering webinar ID 892-7911-5333. I'd like to call the meeting to order. As a matter of housekeeping, I'd like to remind commissioners to keep their audio on mute unless they are speaking. Commissioners other than the chair can mute themselves. Staff will remain muted until meeting to speak. As members of the public join the meeting, you will be participating as an attendee. Your microphone and camera will be muted. Only today's panelists will be reviewed during the meeting. If you're calling in from a telephone and choose to speak during the public comments portion of today's agenda for privacy concerns, the host will be renaming your viewable phone number to resident and the last four digits of your phone number will show. City of Santa Rosa is committed to creating a safe and inclusive environment free from disruption. We will not tolerate any hateful speech or actions and are well-staffed to monitor that everyone is participating respectfully or they will be removed. If necessary, we will also immediately end the meeting. Zoom host, can you please explain the public comments? Will be how they will be heard at this meeting. At each agenda item, the item is presented. The chair will ask for housing authority member comments and then open it up for public comment. The host in Zoom will be lowering all hands until public comment is open for the agenda item. Once the chair has called for public comment, the chair will announce for the public to raise their hand if they wish to speak on the specific agenda item. If you are calling in to listen to the meeting audibly, you can dial star nine to raise your hand. The host will then call on the public who raised their hands. Public comment will be limited to three minutes and a timer will appear on the screen for the commission and public to see. Once all live public comments have been heard, the meeting host will read email public comments. If you provide a live public comment on an agenda item, but also submitted an email, your email public comment will not be read during the meeting. Additionally, there is one public comment period on today's agenda to speak on non-agenda matters, Item 5. This is the time when any person may address the housing authority on matters not listed on this agenda, but which are within the subject matter, jurisdiction of the housing authority. Thank you. I'd like to call roll call now, please. Okay. We'll go ahead with roll call. We will start with Commissioner Burke. Here. And Commissioner Downey. Here. Commissioner McWhorter. Here. Commissioner Rawhouser. Here. Commissioner LaPenna. Here. Vice Chair Owen. Here. And Chair Test. Here. Let the record reflect that all commissioners are present. We'll move on to Item 3, Statements of Abstention. We have any comments from commissioners on this. Seeing none, we will move to Item Number 4, the study session. Before we begin with our study session, I would just like to note that today we have two new Zoom hosts, Jill Hernandez and Lacey Chapin. So they will be assisting us throughout the meeting. Item 4.1 is a study session, Affordable Housing Compliance Overview. And Jennifer Mendoza, our relatively new Housing and Community Services Technician, will be giving the presentation. So, go ahead. Host, if you could put the presentation up, please. Great, thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Test and commissioners. As Megan said, my name is Jennifer Mendoza and I am the Housing and Community Services Technician. We appreciate the opportunity for the Housing and Community Services Department, HCS, to inform the Housing Authority and members of the public about HCS's responsibility for maintaining compliance on affordable housing. The purpose of this study session is to provide an overview of the compliance portfolio. First slide, please. Next slide, please. Thank you. To share the background, the mission of the Housing Authority is to ensure adequate, decent, safe and sanitary housing for qualified households within Santa Rosa, consistent with federal, state and local loss. The city and Housing Authority have supported the development of over 4,500 affordable rental and ownership units, including single family and multifamily residences, housing for seniors and persons with special needs. Next slide, please. The Santa Rosa Housing Trust is the division for Housing and Community Services that is responsible for affordable housing, which is production, the preservation, administration and compliance and the public services program. The Trust's asset management and compliance portfolio exceeds the 130 million and includes over 500 contracts and loans. More than 4,500 units are actively monitored and for regulatory compliance. Next slide, please. These are some colorful pictures to show some of these affordable housing sites. Next slide, please. Today I will be covering the summary of the compliance portfolio, which includes the number of rental units, the number of ownership, some of the types of the compliances, which are rental, ownership by age and the mobile home rent control and the general reporting requirements, which include the initial move-in, the review of documents required to verify eligibility, quarterly reports, annually reports and annual financial reporting. Next slide, please. Here's a picture of the online interactive map of the affordable housing in Santa Rosa that displays the multifamily, the senior citizen and special needs properties, as well as the mobile home parks. These properties have been funded by or are under agreement within the Santa Rosa Housing Authority. Next slide, please. Moving on to the tracking summary, there's 81 rental properties, which are multifamily. 20 of those are special needs complexes and 10 of those are 10 senior complexes. We also have 266 ownership, which are single family plus the 48 newly added Lantana homes. There's also 16 mobile home parks, which we administer space rent and compliance with the ordinance. Next slide, please. For all those properties, we do have general reporting requirements. So for rentals, we have a regulatory agreement, quarterly reporting, move-in, verifications, annual monitoring and inspections, annual reporting, insurance monitoring. And for ownership, we also do an initial eligibility process. We verify all household income, as well as the annual owner occupancy affidavits and insurance monitoring. Next slide, please. General reporting requirements continue. We also have the annual income limits. These are the city of Santa Rosa's standard income guidelines based on the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, also known as HUD income limits. Some of these projects may be subject to alternate income limits. We have tenant files to review. We have the annual utility allowances, which we receive from a company that uses the HUD's utility schedule model. We have the fact sheets, which are sent twice per year, once with the income limits and the other time with the utility allowances updates. And lastly, the annual financial reporting. Next slide, please. Long-term affordability controls are recorded against property developed with federal or local funds, whether it's ownership or rental. And the HCS staff conducts compliance reviews for rental units as required by the program regulation or as deemed prudent. Each recipient of funds is also subject to federal audit requirements. The HCS staff follows up on any deficiencies or findings until they are corrected. Next slide, please. For quarterly reporting, we require information on the number of household members, household income levels. If they receive housing choice voucher assistance, the bedroom size of the unit, the maximum rent verification, home units are subject to on-site monitoring as required in the home regulations. Next slide, please. And on the annual reporting, just a few slides back, please. Thank you. And on the annual reporting is similar information, the number of household members, household income levels, if they receive the housing choice voucher assistance, bedroom size of the unit, maximum rent verification. And again, if these are home units, they're subject to on-site monitoring as required in the home regulations. Next slide, please. So once an agreement begins, monitoring fees are collected from the rental properties. These monitoring fees are collected to offset staff costs for compliance and the fee increases are tied to the CPI. Next slide, please. Okay, so I hope this presentation expanded and enhanced your perspective and ability to meet the additional monitoring requirements of units that are currently under development. We do take pride in all the city of Santa Rosa in Housing Authority does to assist with affordable housing while working to increase the amount of assistance and to make sure all of the involved agencies honor their agreements. And that is compliance. And one more slide, please. You can reference all this information back to our HCS website in the 2020 to 2024 consolidated action plan. Thank you very much. Thank you, Jennifer. Do we have any questions from any commissioners? Commissioner Downey, you're muted. Thank you. So if I'm to understand this correctly, we're at about 4,500 property that's available for low income housing. And with that said, did Rebecca come up with a final number as far as the amount of people who applied for section eight housing because I believe the lottery is closed now. And I'm just trying to get an idea of the ratio of what we have and what we need. So commissioner Downey, I am happy to touch on the waiting list update when we get to the director's report. And then just a reminder that housing choice vouchers can be used in any unit throughout the city. So it doesn't have to be tied to an affordable restricted units. But we'll touch on your question when we get to the director's report. Okay. Do we have any other questions of staff? Commissioner Burke. Thank you, chair test. And thank you, Jennifer, for the presentation. Start off with, I just think this is one of the most important and kind of unnoticed functions of the housing authority and the housing and community services department, mainly because I think how we use the funds to support development of housing preservation of housing assistance in various forms is really important because I don't think that if we, I think that if we don't do a good job, it has an impact on people's faith and trust in government making sure that their public dollars, their tax dollars are going to good uses and then continue to be put to good uses. So that's kind of my general comment about how important I think this is. And then a tough question, maybe, but can you explain the process used to monitor projects similar to the Vineyard Creek Apartments, which I believe was tax credit development? I don't recall if it had county funds in it, but it's located just outside the city limits of Santa Rosa. I guess the question is that there were some apparent problems in the monitoring in the case of that development, Vineyard Creek Apartments. And to what degree is there confidence that we would have caught those using the process that the city employs? So Jennifer, I'm happy to weigh in on this for you. If I'm remembering the context of the Vineyard Creek Apartments, which I believe is off of the airport boulevard and was subject to a Community Development Commission agreement, there had to, there were some issues with falsification of tenant income. We could be subject to the same issue, but our potential tenants are required to submit their tenant income information on a form and sign it under penalty of perjury. So we are relying on them to submit it in good faith. And we do review the documents. So their tenant income certification form needs to be accompanied by information that substantiates their income, or if they don't have any zero income after David. So thank you, that helps. Currently there's no kind of testing for factual information just on some kind of a sample basis. We don't do that. We currently do not do a sampling of documents in it other than the initial review of what is provided to us. But we certainly do ask for follow-up information if there are areas that we feel need some more documentation or cost questions. Thank you, that helps. I guess I just wanted to note also that in the 4,500 units that are noted by Jennifer in her presentation, just kind of an observation, doesn't include all of the assisted housing in the city of Santa Rosa. And I'm thinking of Salvation Army Towers. I don't think we have any role in that, but it is providing housing to low income seniors. And it's a contract directly between Salvation Army and HUD. And the same is true for the development like the North Coast Family Apartments. So there are additional developments, fairly substantial developments throughout the city that are receiving assistance just to kind of comment on the larger picture. Let me just see here. So I guess my final question is to what degree do we find non-compliance issues? I mean, is a frequent modest, never? If I may jump in on that is, so a property can become non-compliance based on that one unit, that one unit that doesn't turn in paperwork on time or so it's a constant in compliance out of compliance, in compliance out of compliance with all these units. And again, it's a matter of that one unit that is not submitting their paperwork by the deadline or is delaying on collecting any bank statements for that tenant to move in. There's a lot of factors that go into the eligibility, which I briefly mentioned on, that make that property in compliance. I don't know if that answered your question. No, it does. Thank you. Kind of leaves me thinking just a general discussion about, well, let me ask you this question. Is there any oversight by, say, the federal or state government and the process that we use involving funds that come from those two sources, for instance? In addition to that, yeah, I'm happy to answer this. So all of the projects that we assist that provide CDBG or home funds and those VR2 primary sources of federal funding can be subject to audits by HUD staff and they have in past, I believe in 2019. A HUD auditor came to review the Crossroads Project, which is a property that the housing authority assisted in conjunction with the county of Sonoma. So they certainly do come, they review all the documents, they go through all of our financial files and verify that we are in fact compliance with their requirements and if not, provide us with corrections that need to be made. And then projects that receive tax credits or are assisted through other state programs such as the multi-family housing program at HCD would then be subject to compliance from those organizations as well. So a project can be subject to compliance by city staff, by state staff, and then also could be reviewed by the federal government. That's okay, so that happens as well. I guess my final thought would be if there are, maybe request is if there are improvements or additional things that could be done to make the process even stronger, I would suggest the staff bring those forward because I think it's that important. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Chair Allen. Thank you. So I just wanted to confirm that the view of all projects and units are just done on an annual basis. And then my second question is what happens to a tenant that is receiving a voucher that is now has a better job and has improved their income position? What happens to their ability to stay in that unit? Rebecca Lane can answer the voucher question as that's her program area. Good afternoon, commissioners. Thank you for the question. My name's Rebecca Lane. I'm the manager of the Housing Choice Voucher Program. So I believe your question is related to if someone income changes with a voucher program, the voucher program, the family is eligible to continue to receive assistance so long as 30% of, they're paying 30% of their monthly adjusted income and they will continue to receive assistance on the voucher program so long as we need as the housing authority to help contribute to the rent. When someone is earning enough income that 30% of their monthly adjusted income covers the entire contract rent on the unit, then they are considered over-income for the program at which point they have 180 days until the contract on the unit expires. So if they have income changes within that 180 days, then they may report those to the housing authority and we would reinstate their assistance if mathematically that's what was required. And so that's on the voucher side. What happens to the project side in terms of a tenant that's in a unit that's not receiving vouchers is just a housing requirement that's on the deed, on the housing restriction that's on the deed of the property because they receive assistance through either tax exam bonds or tax credits or through the housing authority. Do they, is that unit no longer counted as the required as being in compliance with affordable housing in terms of its qualifies as a unit to be determined affordable? It really depends on the regulatory agreement of the property. It really depends because for example, if it's a property that allows units that can be, that are not specifically, how should I say it? If it's, I'm blanking on the name, but on the regulatory agreement, if the property has units that could be floating, there's the term, sorry, floating, then the family can be, can remain, we definitely let the property know that they are, that that family is over income. And to remedy that non-compliance aspect, the property would work to either find another unit that would be available under that, the rental income to bring up, up to speed the property to be in compliance. Sorry, that was all over the place, but so if the property has other units where a new family can come in, that would be under guidelines, then that would remedy the non-compliance. But we definitely mark all the documentation and we keep correspondence, log of correspondence with the property owners and management to let them know a way to proactively remedy the non-compliance. And if I may interject, I think kind of synthesize what Jen is trying to explain. If you have a unit that is available for 30% households and their income increases and they're still either 50 or 60%, the next available unit would be rented to the original income level. So the next available unit would go to another household, that's at 30%. But in general, I believe our regulatory agreements allow up to six months for households to remain on site and who have exceeded the income requirements of the property. Thank you. Do we have any other questions of staff? I just had a minor question. So Rebecca and Jennifer, it sounds like you two are involved in your various areas of expertise in the monitoring and overview. Are there other staff or is there a department that brings all that together periodically? So Jennifer performs the compliance for everything that is assisted through that housing trust. So that's projects that receive financial contributions or have density bonus agreements or housing allocation plan contracts. And those are generally developers who are providing units through their planning process. And then Rebecca can touch on how the Section 18 handles their compliance. Sure. Thank you, Megan. And thank you Commissioner Tess for the question. So we have ongoing compliance every month. There are tests on our files. They're reviewed by peers to make sure that the files are a small number of files are reviewed on a monthly basis by peers. And we also have an annual compliance process which is an in-house compliance review process called CMAP, which is the Section 8 Management Assessment Protocol. And then we also are subject, just based on the amount of funding that we receive we're required to have an annual outside audit. So that's another piece of the compliance for the voucher program. Thank you, Rebecca. Seeing no other questions of staff, I'm gonna open this to public comment on item 4.1. We are now taking public comments on item 4.1. If you wish to make a comment via Zoom, please raise your hand. If you're dialing in via telephone, please dial star nine till we raise your hand. You will have three minutes. Chair Tess, I see no hands raised at this time. Thank you. We're moving on now to item number five, public comments that are not on the agenda today. Comment on non-agenda items states, we are now taking public comments on item five, non-agenda matters. This is the time when any person may address the housing authority on matters not listed on the agenda, but which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the housing authority. If you wish to make a comment via Zoom, please raise your hand. If you're dialing in via telephone, please dial star nine to raise your hand. Chair Tess, I see no hands raised at this time. Thank you. We'll move on to approval of minutes. We have the minutes of October 25th, 2021. Are there any changes? Commissioners, any changes? Okay, seeing none, we'll move on to item number seven, staff briefings. All right, 7.1 is a staff briefing, housing authority fiscal year 2021, 2022, quarter one financial report, and Kate Goldfein, our administrative services officer, will be providing you with an overview. Yes, good afternoon, Chair Tess and Housing Authority commissioners. As Megan said, I am Kate Goldfein, administrative services officer for the Housing and Community Services Department. And this memo details the first quarter of fiscal year 21-22, revenue and expense for the authority. I'll hit the highlights and then be available for any questions. So first, looking at expenditures, the authority is trending well in all categories. I did wanna call out the loan activity, current budget and committed funds, which are higher than usual for a few reasons. So one, most notably, the city council committed $10 million of PG&E settlement funds to the Renewal Enterprise District, and that's the city, county, joint, regional housing organization known as the RED. And these funds currently reside in the authority's loan activity budget, and you'll see the corresponding transfer in of $10 million on the revenue side. And then additionally, several large loan commitments rolled over from fiscal year 2021 to 21-22, including Bennett Valley Apartments at 5.8 million and Mahoney-A-Glen Apartments at 2.9 million. And then also of note, in projects, current budget is high due to one-time pandemic-related funding. That includes CARES Act, CDBG, CB, CARES Act, Housing Choice Voucher Program, admin funding, and the ARP, Emergency Housing Voucher Services fee funding. And the home ARP funding that you will consider later in the agenda, later in the agenda will be added to this projects category when you approve it. So moving on to funding sources, again, I'm just gonna focus on the highlights. Looking at housing impact fees, we projected to receive 1.5 million in fiscal year 21-22 and had received 20% of that in the first quarter, so that is trending a little low. I looked at it again this morning, and as of today, we'd received 31%, 469,000. So it's a little better, but still on the low side, so I'm continuing to monitor it. And then finally, just the state grants category is higher than usual due to the addition of the PLHA grant that you guys approved in August, the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Grant from the state. So that concludes the briefing. I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. Any questions of staff? Commissioner Burke. Thank you, Kate, for the presentation. You've partially answered the question about the $10 million, so there's another item on the American Rescue Plan, and that came to us, coming to us for approval to go into our budget. Did the $10 million follow a similar process? I can't remember that. Megan may be able to jump in that $10 million was from the Tubbsfire PG&E settlement, and the city council designated that to the red, and currently it is in the housing authorities budget while we await agreements with the red. Megan, am I just describing that correctly? So the council approved a resolution which appropriated it to your budget, so that was a council action, and that money actually moved out last week, or maybe the week before. Within the last two weeks, that money has already moved out into the red's funds. So as far as, I guess maybe that answers my question. So I was gonna say to what degree is housing authority responsible for these funds, and what is our role? And then I was gonna ask questions about overhead costs and the rest, but maybe it's not an issue if the money came in has gone out. Right, so the city is using the housing authorities, it's essentially the housing authority's financial system. So we have a loan system, and we're the only loan system within the city of this caliber to monitor the funds. So it was moved in so we could enter it into our system and track it, and then we wired it out into the red's bank account. So we are simply providing oversight of the funds. The oversight comes from- Oversight via that it's in our system and tracking the term. From the administrative side, probably not the housing authority I would guess, huh? Correct. Okay. The DSF. Commissioner Downey. Hi, can you hear me? I can. The press Democrat reported, I think it was in the last two weeks that Santa Rosa was going to benefit a huge portion of these federal funding from I think one source was this infrastructure that was approved, and then there was another source that was making itself through the Senate, I believe. And I want to say 450 billion or something just ginormous like that. Did you catch wind of that or am I completely off? Completely off. No, no, you're not. That I believe that it may have been passed or is in progress and any funding like that will likely go to the city first and then be allocated to the housing authority if there are any funds that it's appropriate for the housing authority to manage. So any kind of infrastructure funding that came to the city would likely go to the city's transportation and public works and utilities departments? Okay, and then the second pile of money, what made the article very interesting is that they tried to dial it down specifically the Santa Rosa and how all this federal resources was going to help our local counties. So I was curious and had to ask. Oh, I understand. Thank you. Vice Chair Owen. Thank you for the CDBG DR funds, the 38 million that's been approved earlier this year. What is the timing for those funds to be utilized? Is there a deadline as to when they need to be spent or allocated to projects? There is and I don't want to say the wrong thing. So I'm hoping that Megan or Nicole can answer that. Say Nicole, if you're able to answer that and Nicole has been living and breathing CDBG DR for the last few months, there she is. Hi, good afternoon, commissioners. For the CDBG DR funding, the timeline for expenditure is not until 2024 with grant closeout in 2025. So that is the requirements of the program. However, our projects are on track to far exceed that with expenditures expected in the next year for the programs. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Do we have any other questions? Okay, thank you. Kate, thank you for your presentation. I'll now open this up to public comments on item number 7.1. We are now taking public comments on item 7.1. If you wish to make a comment via Zoom, please raise your hand. If you were dialing via telephone, please dial star 9 to raise your hand. You will have three minutes. Chair Tess, I see no hands raised at this time. Okay, thank you. In that event, we'll move to item number 8, Chairman Koch-Commissioner reports. Any commissioner reports? Anyone? Seeing none, we'll move to item number 9, committee reports. There are no committee reports. Oh, excuse me. Commissioner Downey, did you have a question? Yes, this one went back to the commissioner reports. Several years ago, there was a cheat created outlining some of the acronyms used, like CDBGGR, which I know as Tidlack Home. Tidlack Home, I'm wondering if there's still a cheat sheet floating around that could be updated without creating too much more work for staff. That could be emailed by Steve Brown. Commissioner Downey, we can certainly look through our files and see if we have the acronym list and update it and distribute it. Thank you. Thank you. We're gonna move on now to item number 10, executive director reports, communication items. All right, thank you very much. I don't have any communication items this month, but I do have some updates I'd like to share with you on various programs that we are currently administering. So as commissioner Downey inquired at the beginning of the meeting, as you may recall, the housing choice voucher waiting list closed after being open for two months and we received 7,316 applications. Staff is now going through the process of reviewing and creating a lottery for those applicants. The emergency housing vouchers, which are the 131 additional vouchers that the city of Santa Rosa was awarded as part of the American Rescue Act, which came out of the COVID-19 legislation. We have 88 program referrals, 20 vouchers that have been issued and seven leased units. So this program is moving along quite well. We are required to work with the continuum of care to identify homeless individuals that meet the program requirements and assist them in utilization of their voucher. In regards to the CBBG DR program, there are several updates to provide you. The Linda Tuna senior apartments, which held their groundbreaking ceremony on Friday, I think it was October 28th, is expected to begin construction shortly. The site formerly known as Journey's End, which is now known as 3575 Mendocino Avenue and this is a senior project, will be closing escrow and is on track to begin construction before the end of the calendar year. Karrotas Homes phase one, which is the portion of the Old Family Support Center site here in downtown Santa Rosa, has received their notice to proceed from HCD and that is a requirement of the CBBG DR program. We have to work with HCD and provide them all the program documents. They are on schedule to close the financing in December and initiate construction. The Canary at Railroad Square, which is another CBBG DR funded program and this is also in downtown Santa Rosa, has a conditional commitment HCD, which means we are just finishing up the environmental review and waiting for finalization. And they are proceeding with additional funding commitments from the state level and are hopeful that they'll start construction in the first half of 2022. And that's 129 units. And then finally the fifth and final DR funded project is Burbank Avenue. They too have a conditional commitment from HCD and are working on the final financing and are anticipating a 2022 start as well. And then the last project I'd like to note is Dutton Flats and this is a development that received 3.1 million from the Housing Authority back in 2018, I believe has completed construction on the 42 units on the corner of West Third in Dutton and those units are currently leasing up. So Jennifer is working with those tenants on reviewing their income and making sure that the project starts the compliance path. Be happy to answer any questions. Seeing no questions. Thank you, Megan. We'll move on to item number 11, consent items. Megan, you're muted. Thank you. Item 11.1 is a resolution, acceptance of the $2,737,433 of home investment partnerships, American Rescue Plan, grant award, and budget appropriation. This is a consent item. So there isn't a presentation that accompanies it. Okay. I do see someone has a question. Commissioner Burke. Yes, thank you. I certainly support it and think it should be approved. I was just kind of curious to know, would there be additional funds beyond 2021, the 2021 allocation? And then the second part of that, what kind of, is there any anticipation by staff as to what categories might be used for the funding? I know it's early on. Megan, your first one. Julie Garan, Program Specialist has prepared this item and is on camera, so she can answer questions for you. Hello, everyone. As Megan said, Julie Garan, Program Specialist. And to answer your question, these funds, essentially, we have to follow what is called an allocation plan. So we have to consult with the COC and service providers and the community and we'll be holding a public meeting on December 1st as the first step to do this in order to review and collect feedback as to what these funds may be spent on. They do have regulations and there are certain categories that they need to meet or that the funds are allowed to be spent on, including Tebra Public Services, Affordable Housing and the last one, sorry, I'm pulling it up right now, is my apologies. As I pull that up, I'll just answer your other question and the other question was related to if there will be additional funding. It's not anticipated that there will be another round of funding because this comes from the American Rescue Plan. And so this is set what looks like to be one-time funding. However, there hasn't been any notice that there would be another sort of funding stream of this type. So I'm pulling it up right now and I apologize. I didn't have it up before. Yeah, so Julie, as you're doing that, the Continuum of Care has a responsibility to recommend how these funds might be best used. No, it's a HUD regulation that we consult with the Continuum of Care and provide them the opportunity to give us feedback. The County of Sonoma has also received an allocation and so we will also be consulting with them in order to make sure that we are collaborating and to see as far as like if they would have any other suggestions. So I have it here. There's two sort of sets of regulations for these funds. One is that they have to be spent or they have to serve certain qualifying populations and the qualifying populations are homeless at risk of homelessness and I'm sorry, excuse me. I was included in your presentation information. Anyway, Julie, so as far as I'm concerned, you've answered my questions. I am certainly support adopting this under consent. Thank you. Okay, would you like me to continue with the populations and then, sorry, let me just read it quickly. Homeless at risk of homelessness, fleeing or attempting to flee domestic violence and veterans and families that include a family member that meet one of the preceding criteria and the eligible activities are tenant-based rental assistance, development of supportive housing, provision of supportive services and acquisition and development of non-congregate shelter units. Got it, thank you very much. Thank you. Vice Chair Owen. I was reading in the presentation that one of the has to benefit tenant-based rental assistance who will the Housing Authority be working with? Are we working with third parties to qualify tenants and disperse those funds? And how are those, if so, how are those third parties vetted? So if I can interject, that is one of the options that is available as I think many housing authority commissioners are aware we do provide tenant-based rental assistance through our regular home allocation. So this is already a program that we provide. So it wasn't one of the top areas that we as staff were looking to steer the money. Okay, thank you. Commissioner Downey. Someone related, I'm curious about the old general hospital property and if that's still on the table, if it's been sold, is it slated for housing development? It's a big one. And I'm curious. Commissioner Downey, I don't know if that relates to the item that we're currently discussing. Jeff Burke, would you like to weigh in? Well, it doesn't, but at least what I recall from reading in the paper, I think that it was owned by the county, it sold privately and any development would have to go to the city of Santa Rosa through the planning department. But we are, as Megan mentioned, that's not really connected with this agenda item, but I thought I'd throw that little piece in there. Thank you. Any other questions of staff? Seeing none, we'll move on to public comments. We're now taking public comments on item 11.1, consent calendar. If you wish to make a comment via Zoom, please raise your hand. If you were dialing in via telephone, please dial star nine to raise your hand. Chair Tess, I see no hands raised at this time. Thank you. This seems to conclude. So Chair Tess, we need to have a motion on the consent item. It looks like there is a lapse in our annotated agenda. So yeah, thank you for mentioning that. Chair Tess, I'll move on the resolution to housing authority of the city of Santa Rosa accepting a grant award for the home investment partnerships, American Rescue Plan, approving the budget appropriation and authorizing the city manager execute the necessary program documents and waive the reading of the text. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you. We will now move on to item, oh, sorry. Megan, can't hear you. Mute is killing me today. Zoom host, we need a roll call vote, please. Or chair or secretary, please. OK, we'll go ahead with a roll call vote for 11.1. We'll start with Commissioner Rawhouser. Hi. Commissioner McWhorter. Hi. Commissioner LaPenna. Hi. Commissioner Downey. Hi. Commissioner Burke. Hi. Thank you. Vice Chair Owen. Hi. And chair test. Hi. That motion passes with seven eyes. Thank you. Item number 12, report items. There are no report items on this agenda today. So number 13 is adjournment. I'd like to wish everybody a happy Thanksgiving. Have a safe time. Thank you so much.