 every house and different people moving in and out every week that a lot of neighborhoods making against that. But if there's a way to encourage homeowners to rent out a room to college students or somebody that's 25 and working in town that would open up hundreds and hundreds of rooms for rent. And inflation and rent are all driven by supply of the band. So if you can increase the supply of rooms, you're decreasing the demand and rents will either hold flat or come down. But last I heard there were a lot of restrictions or people talking about restrictions about houses letting renting out their rooms. And I think that could be instead of building hundreds of more homes and having the government have more and more control over everything. If we can encourage more open rooms from houses, I think you've accomplished the same thing without having to buy up more land and build low-income housing or affordable housing, whatever you want to call it, and still resolve the problem. That was, I thought about housing. Can you tell us your name as well? Okay, I'm staying at Tolan, a local resident of the area. I came here to, you know, mention something to the Senate Council, but it's a housing issue. This is about the lamp lighters. It got shut down because of, quote, a meth situation. I'm pretty sure most hotels in this community, if they did a careful examination, could find traces of meth. The thing I was going to mention is that when I was working at one point on kind of a work-to-day, a paid-to-day, there was a woman, if she had a relatively young son, she was freaking out when she didn't get over ten hours of work that day. Because she didn't have that many hours. We wouldn't be able to stay in the hotel room. I think it was either the lamp lighter or the one nearing. So these, one of the things that the houses should really be concerned about is make sure we have more of these low-cost hotel rooms in the community for people like this woman in her Senate. And I know this is something that is really hard because we got people that are screaming about it. And what I was planning to say, and I said last time at the City Council, is that these sort of things have to be put on a ballot because any council or public person that supports this sort of stuff, like in Fort Collins, when they had got rid of some of their regulations, and all the City Council people were kicked out of office. And then fair housing stuff was removed. So that's my two things. Not just places where people can, oh, we can move in and start a family here. But when something doesn't work out in your relationship, and you have a young son or something like that, and you have hardly any money, that is a critical need. Thank you. Thank you, Stephen. How is that? Seeing no one else, I'm going to close public invited to be heard. I didn't miss the gender revisions and submissions of the audience. Any revisions to the gender? No, I don't do new business resolution. Resolution 202328, management agreement for the property located at 12, 3 for each 6, well done, mode 1. This item here has a long history behind it. The City Council in 2019 did provide direction to staff to go ahead and use existing housing that is on land that was purchased for either open space or by water resources, particularly around Union Reservoir, but not, excuse me, and use that for affordable rentals, rather than that. And so that was in 2019, and the staff at the time started working on an MOU between what was then Public Works Natural Resources and Community Services to go through the property, determine what was most appropriate for each one, and put together an MOU. COVID put the brakes on some of that for a while, but in the beginning of 2022, they did finalize that MOU between the two divisions, which now are, in effect, HCI and Parks and Natural Resources all together. So the first property on that list was the newbie house, which has been rented by Habitat for Humanity. They're AmeriCorps volunteers for the last several years, and that has been going smoothly. They did some work on the house in exchange for lower rent rates, and then the second house is what we call the Adrian House. That's the one we're looking at here. It was over 100 years old. It was a two bedroom house. It was in need of lots and lots of repairs, and we spent affordable housing fund dollars to rehab that, since the HCI division does have a rehab program, and that work is now complete. All we're waiting for is final utility hookups, and then that house will be rent-ready. We renovated it to go from a two bedroom house to a four bedroom house. It has a two-car garage. It has a yard, and it really is looking wonderful, and we are going to be setting up tours as soon as we get the utilities turned on for everyone to see if they would like to. But now that the LHA and the city are in partnership, and the HCI is very good at rehabs, and the LHA, their core mission, is property management and affordable rentals. So what you have here is a management agreement between the city and the LHA to manage that property, and then lease it out to a low-income family, of which the lease is one of the exhibits on there, and what that would look like. And the idea is we have people approved for four bedroom vouchers on our list and have been looking and can't find anything, so we would like to prioritize our voucher holders and get them in there as soon as we can. So this is an interesting one because this is kind of a pilot program, right? It's similar to other things where open space or the water group have been using P&P property management to lease the homes before, so we kind of used that and modified it to be specific to what an LHA management agreement would need to include, and so they're still in review on that. They generally agreed to all the terms, but we couldn't get the open space, I'm sorry, Parks and Natural Resources attorney to get it totally signed off ahead of this. So what we'd like to do is send this forward to you tonight. We are confident that the issues to resolve it are minor, and then we would have to bring it back to City Council anyways because it's the lease of city property. That would have to go for two readings, and so if we end up having to make any modifications as we finalize that last legal look then we would bring it forward at a council meeting and just adjourn and make that correction. But we don't anticipate anything substantive, we wanted to make sure we still brought it today in case you wanted to have any discussion on it in more depth. So can I make a motion to move 2023-20? I move. Second. Is there any discussion? It's a pretty long list of rules. I'm just curious, who's going to enforce these rules? So that is the house rules that are in place at every LHA property today. So the property manager for this property, LHA property management, staff would enforce those rules. So your team. Yes. Yes, so HCI team, investment building, rehab, housing authority management, so this will be the housing authority side of the piece that is already doing this. Okay. This has been moved by Commissioner Waters, seconded by Commissioner McCoy. All those moved by Commissioner McCoy, seconded by Commissioner McCoy. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All those opposed? That passes to me. As soon as we have final pre and post photos, I will bring those back to you as well so you can see what the house looks like. Resolution 2023-29 is an approval of candidate by Council's receivable write-offs. So I'm covering this in Kidra Daniels' absence. This is, you just had one of these come through last meeting, so it's kind of following the same order of business here. This current write-off is for $100,984.60, and these are just being sent to collections. Do you have any questions? Yes, one is Smith. Can I have a motion for Resolution 2023-29? I mean adoption is Commissioner Martin, seconded by Commissioner McCoy. I do have a question. What is the main reason for the write-off? I know one of them was Smith. And confirming for you, just to make sure I'm doing my write-off. I think they're both Smith as well, actually. Because the one away was, that's when we found the hike after he had been vacated. Yep, these are both from the prior Methodist, but they're cleaned up at this point. All right, so, let's go, I'll have some things to say. I, I, and I'll as opposed that have to be in this. Now we're at C, Resolution 2023-30, approval of the Execution of Construction Contract for the Village on Main Rebuild Creation Project with Patriot Construction Project. I'll be taking this item. The day has come where we are signing construction contracts for the Village on Main Rehabilitation that will start in January. This, these, it's two exhibits. And if you aren't very familiar with these types of architecture contracts, they're not often used for city vertical builds, but it is the standard in the life type world. And so you'll see what looks like a bunch of tech changes that looks like a draft, but that's actually the final contract. It's just modifications to the template language. What's unique about this one this time is this isn't the final construction cost. That comes in the, the guaranteed maximum price contract later, which comes just about before closing. What this one is, is agreeing all to the general terms and authorizing a certain value of pre-purchase. So specifically, we have a 72-week lead time on electrical panels, and we want to make sure that we order that in time to be during our construction period. We also would like to do a demonstration unit ahead of time so that the residents can see what it would look like. So one of these construction contracts, the A133, does allow for that rework ahead of guaranteeing the maximum price. So it's just work out to a certain part of the value that's being organized. You know, I have a motion resolution 2023-3. I move 20, 23, 30. Second. Commissioner McCoy, move 2023-3, sent to you by Commissioner McDonnell-Fairing. Is there any more discussion on seeing what's about all those in favor? Aye. Aye. All those in favor? Aye. All those in favor? Aye. All those in favor? Aye. All those in favor? Aye. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. We're now at Village on Main and is sent at over-crossing pre-development planning budget fluctuations. So for this one, back in fall of 2022, between the LHJ and the LHGC, it was agreed to loan $350,000 of development funds from the LHGC to LHJ to fund pre-development costs on the Village on Main. And we have been paying invoices since and really making headway. And because we would like to do such things as order electrical panels and be able to do a demonstration unit and just continue finalizing design and getting permitted, we don't want to be scrambling at the end of the year with the holidays and planned closing in December. What this request is for Village on Main is to leave the $350,000 loan from the LHGC as is, but then put aside $650,000 of the LHJ general fund aside to cover some of those pre-development costs knowing that closing is certainly scheduled for early December and we will close the year with that early back of the bank. So that's the first one. We will need a motion and a vote and so I'm not sure if you'd like to do them together or separately? I think we should do them separately, eventually. So can I have a motion for the Village on Main? How much of a modification for Village on Main is it? I think we should have a motion for the Village on Main. And the motion for the Village on Main is second to this. Is there any discussion? Yes. We should have a motion. Yeah. Molly, there's a big chunk out of the general fund. Is this anticipated or is this going to have other impacts to LHJ's expenditure? It will not impact LHJ's expenditure. It wasn't necessarily anticipated, but you've done budget projections and it will not impact our ability to do everything else that we anticipate and as long as it's back in the bank at the end of the year, it will be. So remember, we're selling the building adjacent to this project to center people with disabilities, and so that's bringing half a million dollars in in addition to what we're having fund balance and because it's closing in December and we're within the same fiscal year, we're okay with that. Thank you. We will. I mean, if it appears that it looks like it will jeopardize closing, then we're going to pump breaks because that will make a difference in how we close down to your finances. But we're actually running ahead of schedule. We would close earlier if we didn't have a pre-payment penalty in November that we're trying to look away. So let's vote on the bill with John Mayne. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? I'm going to pass it to you. And then we're going to do the single vote process. Yep. So our development partner, Penrose, is putting out two million dollars of pre-development funds of their own funds to be able to get us all the way through to tax credit closing on this one. So again, we put in our application for tax credits if we're successful, we'll know it about November, and then the goal would be to close on that financing next July. And so they are going to be front of $2 million of pre-development costs, which is quite significant and is one of the benefits of bringing in these experienced development partners. So on our side, though, we do have some costs to get us to next July. And those are now that the property is no longer an LHGC property, it's an LHA property. LHA has to assume payments of the commercial HOA fees. And then also we do have some legal fees as we put that development agreement together and that not all of those can wait all the way till next July. So the request for this one is $150,000 from the LHA general fund. This one would not be paid back this year, but Kidner has projected out that budget and it would also not impact operations. I think when you look at timing too, when you look at how we were moving it to the August one then, all of them are really, really fast to submit application. Between now and November, we're going to slow down a lot and do a little bit here and there to not spend your funds. If we're not awarded the tax granted application in November, then we're going to wait and spend again in August. So this is going to be a point where it really will be you be awarded the tax granted as the trigger of the expenditure of funds. So can I have a motion to move this in? I would approve all of the budget modification and other process. I'll second. If I can share what it is, and if I can share it, I'll go through it in this session. Molly, just out of curiosity, you sound like we're moving a lot of money. What is going to be that sort of in our general fund with all of this? What, will our fund balance me at the end of the year? Yeah. I think Kidner is running projections because she's prepping the beginnings of the 2024 budget right now. And so I think that I can get that answer for you, but she's got a lot of things reports running right now to project that out. Yeah. I mean, so when you look at the numbers related to Village, that's essentially a wash at the end of the year because it closes in at the end of the year. We spend it. So we're only talking about a couple of months. And so it really is the hundred thousand. Yeah, 150. 150. So I think it's the last year. Financial, all right, this one too. So I see that we have that. So we have the third quarter. So we're looking at current assets, 3 million of unrestricted cash, a million of restricted. And what we have growing in there is the additional half a million. So if you look at it just from the Center for People with Disabilities, if we have expanded to 15, we have that 350 additional revenue. I mean, it's going to happen, but probably the easiest way to look at it, if you have to wash it and tell it out. So you would still see a revenue in general. Well, so I really can't rate this. Yeah, there are our quarterly financials are attached here. And so I'm seeing that generally each property is showing net income overall with a couple of minor small lower changes there. We can definitely get a more comprehensive summary to you as soon as kindergarten returns. So let's vote in all those in favor, all those of seeing none. We're now at LHBC asset transfer update. So when the city was first coming on with LHA and partnership, we did engage or the LHBC, I should say, engaged an attorney to look at the LHBC organization, how that fits in with LHA, and what the ideal structure should be and various related things. The LHBC board has shown over time, there are currently three members. And at the time in 2020 and 2021, there wasn't a lot going on in the development side. And they were looking for purpose, I'd say. And it felt like that they should dissolve if there wasn't much of a purpose for them. And that's what they desired to do. The opinion issued by a tax credit attorney that we work with a lot said that it would be financially a good decision to absorb the LHBC assets into the LHA with one caveat that they might run into a related parking debt issue, which I'll get to in a moment. So we took that direction and started working with the attorneys trying to research, which for each property, what would it take to transfer the asset to LHA? And just really get a plan going, which we've reported to you before. So since then, we've actually completed one of the transfers because the land, the Hoverland got moved over to LHA for the ascent project. And then Village Place will be taken care of with the recent vacation. So that'll be done by the end of the year. So then the ones left are Spring Creek, Fall River, Harstone Lodge, and Christman One, which we don't yet have ownership of, but we're on that partnership structure for LHBCS. So when doing the research, first of all, Harstone and Lodge are kind of their own animal. We have to do that, exit that HUD 202 program. So we started working with HUD to kick that process off and see what it was going to take. It is essentially a development project because you will be refinancing loans, most likely putting a rehab in with it because you have that cash infusion to be able to do that with a loan. And also tying it very closely with the HUD budget approval for those properties. It has to be, basically you have to make it to a certain point within 90 days of your budget approval. It's a very structured process. So we knew that in 2023, we weren't going to make that because that was the budget we're doing here this month. And so we're shooting on as that is a 2024 project unless we end up wanting to do a rehab that's more sizable. We need to plan that out. It may be 2025. But that is kind of what that those set of properties would need to get transferred out of the 202 and then really into the LHA side of things. Spring Creek Fall River and Cristen 1. Well, let me, I'll break them up. Spring Creek, it is possible to go ahead and swap out the LHDC entity with LHA and move that over. What that really takes is a fair amount of attorney's fees and you really have to get consent from all the tax credit investors and lenders and there's a waterfall and it takes, it's a process, but it's doable. And we are going to go ahead and pursue doing that, but just not in a huge rush at the moment. Bottom line is because Fall River is the real interesting one that is making LHDC want to stay on. First of all, the related party debt issue is coming forward on Fall River. And that means in order to transfer LHDC off of the partnership stretcher, we would have to bring in another 501c3 or a different independent community partner so that could be Boulder County Housing Authority. It could be Thistle. They would own 21% of the LHDC's current interest in the partnership and we would have to do that or else we would be running the foul of the whole deal. So we resetted that to LHDC last month. They agreed that that is not desirable. We would rather keep it in our own system and because now that we do have development coming and they do have a way to use their expertise and fulfill that purpose, they want to stay on. And so specifically for Fall River, because we won't be able to really touch that until resindication and since it just finished construction in 2020 that won't be until at least 2035. So that is kind of prompting LHDC to stay on with us. They are interested in development still and then there's another purpose that I'm going to get to in a moment that we're considering for that as well. But first the last property, Crispin II. This one is currently LHDC's entity is set up as a corporation which is taxable. Do not sure why that was done that way but it's not ideal and so we're going to move ahead with that one as well transferring it over to get LHA on and change it to an LLC entity. So moving forward with Crispin I, Spring Creek, Fall River is staying in. Car student lodge would move eventually with that 202. So basically when you self-perform in the way that we get Fall River under the tax law requires you to have this ancillary corporation which is LHDC and so that's the way that was public which basically says unless you bring another group in and it performs the same function you have to wait until the resindication way out of time and either you can go to Boulder County or go to Thistle or you have to create the same kind of structure again. So it just kind of made sense that if you have a structure you need to leave it that's just that's what occurs when you self-build self-finance. But it's different. This is why Crispin we didn't understand because Crispin is very similar to the approach that we took on Crispin II, the approach that we're taking on Zinnia and the approach that we're taking on Holbrook which in that scenario don't need to sit it up the way they sit it up which actually has tax implications which makes it cleaner to remove that and shift that in but Fall River is sort of that hanging piece. There's not much we can do with it based on the way that it was planned. So that created a bit of a different issue for us and that was part of the work that we were doing. LHBC in their portfolio 21% ownership of Fall River is part of there as an asset if LHB has been dissolved they're obligated to award or assign those assets to another and they can't assign those to LHA. It has to be a it cannot be related party and so it's not a cash it's a it's a physical asset or ownership so you might be able to find somebody else or is there some reason it's only this little longer. So it can be another housing authority as long as it's not on the LHA. It has to be a housing authority. Housing authority or a 501c40 because of how it's because of the tax credit tax law. So rather than I would want to I would be I would be opposed to assign 24% ownership of Fall River to the county or to this or that was our perspective or less so I see continued continues on and then maybe another role for them to play. Right yeah so is there any other questions about this piece and I'll move on to this that I really want to know. This is kind of a thing that is LHBC involved in our new project as said over Kristen What about money? That they provided funding but it's all through LHA and LHA is on the entity on the ownership section. Okay great. Well and that's that's the difference in our building projects is we're not so performing so fun and so we have the other partner which really takes away the related party issue that occurred in Fall River because we're at the LHAs actually we just can LLCs that we've talked about to work that's where they're sitting and and that's I think you're right I think decided my brain was on the last question but I think the reason it needs to be something like this all is that you want it to be an organization that has similar mission so they don't just take their ownership So the traditional role of a housing development corporation is they come in and they do the development and then they're on the entity the ownership structure and then when you re-syndicate and you're not pulling as much you're just refinancing loans essentially you're not necessarily always having to pull in a large amount of funding to do it from scratch then traditionally if you're self-performing in LHBC plays that upfront role at re-syndication they transferred it into LHA which is exactly what happened in Aspen Meadows before we started this model it would bring in partners and we still self-performed we're self-performing Yeah So on the next piece something we've been interested in the staff for a long time is considering we need an we need some way to accept donations right now we accept donations of supplies and materials or that type of thing physical goods but we do not the LHA does not have a mechanism to accept financial contributions in the form of a donation other housing authorities do so Boulder Housing Partners has a BHP foundation that is targeted towards providing resident services and they do a lot of family work and children accessing children to resources and that type of thing BCHA also has a foundation and so we've had a need for a long time and we can see that continuing and growing if LHA had a way to accept donations for resident services or for development one or the other or both we could have two separate funds but the LHDC because they're already set up as a 501c3 nonprofit we could use the LHDC as that foundation arm to benefit the residents of LHA and so we were talking to them about um what that might look like they are interested we've spoken to our advisory board one of our new advisory board members is a community banker and does a lot of like tech work and he is offering up some resources just to to get started and figure out what that could look like and so that's something that we'd like to run through LHDC and they seem interested in. I know the question but I do have a good perspective I don't announce the right time or during council or a commission comments it's from Home Ahead which is a nonprofit but I think how is the year I cross-pass with these folks their mission their mission is to collect furniture they collect furniture and donate it to folks who have moved into housing who now have a home but don't have furniture and a little bit of a disagreement about this I was just curious how many of our budget residents would find themselves in a situation in the actual house. So should we want to do this at the end or do this? I think it makes sense now because this could probably you know I have to stress it out quickly but I think how that could interplay with foundation and how they could work together there's an interest in doing this. Yeah I have a good sense. I had one conversation I said why don't you send me your information so I can share it with either us as a council or us as commissioners based on what LHJ is interested in. They collect their biggest challenge is that it is not getting furniture it's worth it right they don't have a place to store it right but they'll collect it they'll store it and they'll help get it delivered and set up with people on the news so it just seems to me it's something we ought to at least consider. I will say that we kind of started this ad hoc on our own because we've had some residents pass away and their families just give up possession of units the LHA don't want to deal with anything and we definitely have people coming in at the suites without dishes without just the basics bedding and so because the suites has so much storage space we've been pulling it over and creating our own little donation center it's all internal it's not accepting anything external at this point but there is a clear need and we can if it's okay I'm happy to do an email and connect you I guess or you and Joan whatever the whatever the right combination would be just to learn more about where they are and whether or not it's not for us. Okay because what I'm thinking about in space means if LHTC had the foundation and somebody donated space to the foundation then the foundation could that's kind of tax reduction or for them a deduction for them that then space could be part of them so they could use it to store the stuff and then they set up the holes and have the operational burden that would worse and there's a way this could be a word thumbs up better to do this. Yeah it sounds like you're right. I mean it's like there's no lots of noise. Yeah so um what do you, is it just informational for you? It is um we have not delved in other than we need to figure out it's it because the entity's already created it might just be an accounting function that we need to add but then also you know on the left side and we should we need to plan around it and then if LHTC is the entity then the official approvals will go through there but if it's for benefit of LHA we'll kind of see how that ends up planning together. We'll have to have an interview with each other and kind of figure out how it works but we didn't want to spend a lot of time on this and outrun the mission's headlights if you were like now it's not much. I think we should go forward with it. Is there, did you send us um a document of who is on the LHTC lawyer or who, who the entity is there you know? We can send it, it's a person board. Great person. We do have the contact list. Is that a way to ask for that? Yeah, I'm curious. Zero back, yes. Yes. So I get, do you want LHA to continue with this? Yeah, I would, I would thank you. It's time for me to go through stuff. We're going to ship the fiscal accounting party. Yeah, I think we should stick with LHTC where we hit or have to. Plus you have to look at the role you're describing. Yeah, you have your direction, you have your direction. So now we need to talk about the city vehicle purchase. So this is kind of just an informational item on some of the, just an example of the ways that the city and LHA partnership are really benefiting both, both organizations. So the, I've got my notes here. So the LHA could use some trucks. We've been paying for private snow removal service that is, we've talked about it in this meeting before, breaking the bank. It's just very expensive every single time. And our staff is going out and redoing what they do anyway to make sure it's meeting the needs of the residents who are expecting what the needs really are for safety reasons. So we've been talking with fleet services to see if we could purchase a city vehicle that was going off the, would be going to auction otherwise. And so we worked out a plan with them and with purchasing to purchase a truck and a sander so that we could do our own snow removal. And that is happening as we speak. It's always within budget. So there's no budget modification or special request necessary. But the total cost of that is about a thousand dollars. I'm sorry. The first truck is $8,000 or $5,000. Maintenance is $2,000 fuel is $7,000. And then includes the sander and some of the gates. And then we'll have an annual replacement cost of around, I think that changed Friday, $10,000. That's all within budget. And that lets us replace that truck in five years for a new truck. So the total cost is this year is $30,867. And then the ongoing component of that in future years is $22,000. On that we're up to $22,000. When does the other plan come in? Fuel, maintenance, and then we get a replacement cost. Do we advertise? Working with fleet services to help them manage that for us over time. There's a second truck that we're looking at doing. We're realizing that's probably going to be next year. We did find a way to finance it or fund it in this scenario. But our fleet order trucks got canceled. A number so we can't get the truck that we weren't going to get until the new truck's coming in. So it's probably going to be a delay in some time next year. But we'll go ahead and bring the second truck in. Included to that is also a, I call it, the utility, you know, the old vehicles at UC that's also included. That we use on sidewalks. We're not going to go to purchase a trailer so that we can do all the sidewalks. And I think we found out that those things can go all the way across town. And so they're not necessarily the trailer. So we may have two people doing other things. But what this is going to be at the end of the day, even with one truck we're going to be able to, is that that's going to reduce the operating cost of each one of these properties. So what that allows us to do is then probably more aggressively flatten that mitigation cut. So we're starting to, it's also been announced by capital organizations, but also maybe kid tenant services or something. So, I mean, it's going to be a net savings. And then I will be sort of finisgrating the costs that we're throwing at the general fund. That says $30,000 of expense, which we're going to offset, I would say, in terms of current expenses. So it's the last snow season we paid over $200,000? I assume. Oh, man. So, you know, that's, is it going to reduce all that? Or is it still going to contract someone that out? No. So it saves all that? Yeah. Do you have to hire somebody or? No, because our maintenance staff have been, so here's the other problem that we would have, the snow removal companies come out and our maintenance staff would have to do it anyway, because either they weren't getting there clean enough or they didn't know what we needed. And so we're going to use the maintenance staff and only work on this. But basically we're going to account for their time based on our building. So if we use Dave and Dave's attached to Spring Creek, then instead of having that offset on building, we'll bring Randy and Randy will go to Spring Creek so that we can account for already encumbered maintenance dollars that they're doing this. And so there may be some minor overtime expenses, but that means that we're going to have to have personnel. Now that being said, as we start moving into adding facilities, we are going to have maintenance personnel in these facilities and they'll just become part of that group that goes this way. So, you know, I would say if I looked at it in a really conservative, taking in unanticipated things that could happen, you know, probably no less than a hundred thousand arm savings. If you really wanted to push it, I think you could be somewhere in the neighborhood in aggregate of a hundred and sixty thousand. And that would vary by property, because we have to portion it by space. So the properties of larger parking areas and more sidewalks won't save more than properties of smaller areas. Is the truck that you're getting the first one, excuse me, is it a plow in center? Yeah, it's one that we already, it's one that does that work currently. Okay. And it's in good shape. We're seeing it actually making room for it too. It's before we title transfer. So they send it back until we get all the final transfer. And so it's been performing that across the city now and we know that the condition will last for the five years. And fleet will still be doing the maintenance on the move. That's going to be part of the IGA. Thank you. I just wanted to say I remember when I first started that I'm pure as a model. I remember when I looked at the budget and I was like, wait a minute, why is the maintenance doing this? Because where I came from, that's what, so this is beautiful to me, because I couldn't understand how we contracted that much out, whereas most positive authorities, they use a maintenance to do that, that work. And so, of course, I'd like to see how many different, you know, the executive director's report. So I want to have Molly start off with a development update, because that's going to transition into a piece of my report that you are going to hear as the housing authority commissioners, but you're really going to hear it as the council, but I think in terms of the housing authority world, it's probably more important that you hear it to understand what that really means to us developing more projects. Can we start on that? Yep. So we really are just moving along on the Hover project, Village on Main project. Everything is just rolling from Hover. We are slowing down, waiting for tax credit, but we still are working on design, just not Cold War. Everything's just moving on Village on Main. We are ahead of schedule, so we're just getting, making sure we have all of our ducks in a row and anticipate everything. What I really wanted to show you tonight is some updates on the Recovery Cafe, because we now have the potential rendering of the Village, I'm sorry, Recovery Cafe located at the suite. So here's where we are in this project. The feasibility study has been completed. It is feasible in terms of it can be permitted, the utilities we can work out. It will be quite a project to get all of the suites, investors and lenders to consent to everything, but we just went through that on Zinnia. We kind of know how that would go, probably navigate along like a snake, but we'll get there. None of them so far have said that they think that this is a bad idea. It's just how do you make sure that our existing deal doesn't get impacted. So the Recovery Cafe board is considering this tomorrow night, whether they want to keep moving forward. So we'll report back on how that goes. The cost estimate, they have a pretty detailed cost estimate on what this would cost at this point, and it's about a $5 to $6 million. So they are going to be discussing capital campaigns and their financing options and they're already going to be applying for worthy cause and there are a lot of things in the works, but so we're moving from the project is feasible to now what does this look like financially. And so we are funding their design to date with our CDBG COVID money, and we do have ARPA funds tag for this as well. And so once we get word that they are moving forward, they are gathering resources, then we can go ahead and contract that ARPA funding out if everything looks like it is a go. I just wanted to share these because this just came out from their architect. So what I really like about this one is that here's the suites, which we know the suites looks it's not the most attractive building in the world, but when you put this in front of it, it does look like it's kind of an intentional look, I think, but it's very welcoming. This is the right here is the cul-de-sac, and so it would have a storefront look at that cul-de-sac and be more inviting. Here's kind of what they are showing in the middle area. So I just wanted to give an update that we have reached a milestone. The project is feasible. Now they need to come up with their plan for the financing of this, and so that's what we'll be reporting back to you all on. All right. I think part of the conversation with the investors is the most significant issue that we face in the suites is cul-de-sac building. We also know that many of the reasons that folks struggle with recovery are because of their own health issues. And having this kind of facility at this location, I think when you look at the long-term viability of their asset, the protection of their asset is that the more we can have this available at the facility, we think the more successful not only of this facility, but as any of them being kids, we just know what issues we're dealing with. And so we talked about this with you all before, but this is not being pretty important to both of these projects in terms of having this successful project. I totally agree. Just having on-site help would be nice in the future if we could have mental health care as well so that they can work together. So that's part of what we're thinking. So we have the support services position. I know that all the team are working on that. We have that person with, you know, we're also, I think we're thinking that position in the back of it, between everything to deal with dramatic situations versus traditional social service work because it's a different world. And, you know, one of the things that there was a question previously about, you know, what we're doing on that house, I think part of it is the relationship with the Sairings Act that we're now having to meet for the conversations around mental health partners is we've actually made some progress in terms of how do we share information, how do we come together to support the individuals because we were so hard to analyze. It was hard for any of us to do anything. So this is just an evolution, I think, that we have forward to do. What I was going to talk to you about is as we start evaluating the projects and the goal that you all have for us in terms of six housing units and five years of things, one of those. And so obviously, you're seeing 200 construction, hopefully, over a third. And we have another one here that we could have to use some time before. And then when we talk about the city project, which is, you know, the affordable attainable home ownership opportunities, that's five. One of the biggest challenges that we're facing right now on the housing authority side in the city side, these are inherently connected. When we merged, we really looked at how do we take advantage of a common scale and actually reduce more units. What we found is that it works. What we've also found is we've probably reached our limits in terms of our capacity and what we can and can't do. And these positions also can generate revenue for projects. And so Katie, who you've seen in the conversations, at some point in the mix and the group, in different phases, there's different work, different people involved. It's the same people in every project. And so at one point, we had Christmas starting construction, we were moving on to Zinnia, and we started over handling of the village-based recidivation. And we asked Katie, you know, can you get a grant for the affordable attainable home ownership? And so this is where it starts. And I'm going to try to keep this as separate as I can, but I can't because of the work that we're doing. Well, Katie, you know, in that work, in meeting with Doa, our DOH, and we got $1.8 million for that, we can't keep this up. So as we began looking at how we approach it from an housing authority standpoint, knowing that in order to really make the housing authority more viable, we need more projects, affordable side, and attainable side, we obviously need more projects. And so the only way that we think we can blend this is on the city side of it, we have our administrative expenses cap at 10%. We're looking at, in order to produce more housing, like Zinnia, so the projects also have ownership opportunities. We need to move that cap to 20% to add a position and bring it there on full time. The reality of how the world has changed is when we originally created this fund, there were no revenue sources out there. Now, there are so many revenue sources out there for housing that we're almost at the point of both the housing authority side and the city side, where we're not able to go for things just because we don't have the standard capacity to do it. And so the blendedness that it may show itself in the housing authority budget, some in the city, is you really need to drive that administrative cap up, but we're pretty confident that we'd love if you just think of this your triple the value of one grand. And the thing that's also in plain house problem very in the sense of how that can apply to both rental and for sale projects and then over is really going to be a test case that I think can cross cut into the middle income housing authority based on how they're looking at price points. And when you take average income in front of 123, I think what we're going to be able to do is going to be much different in a year than it is now. We just don't have the staff. So no, on both sides of the house, this is going to be part of the budget. To me, it's so important when you will see when the problem with the first presentation, I think your world's accounts have been early on in this process for the housing authority, I believe. But it's really about So the 10% ministry cost cap? All of the funds that we have coming in that aren't directed. So we put a million dollars into for housing, but that 10% 364,000 at 10% is the cap. And then the general by transfer to 206,000. I think 20% probably will be because I give you Christian. That would be 729,000. So it's it's done 400,000 already. The assumption is it is you're not going to be able to make up your capacity. You've added capacity for life, life, or not, either when there's Katie or someone else. Right. And it's Katie and so on. And the capacity to generate new work to secure new revenues and build the right so that the over time, the more you generate, I guess that does grow. Well, we build on the revenue sources that are coming in on the housing authority side. So as we get more administrative expenses by managing facilities, you know, talk about that with the live housing authority, that starts boosting that revenue stream so that they can start contributing into this at a different level. So it's, it's, you know, it's that flag that we're trying to get that started so that we are ramping up our, our ability so we're more comparable to what you see in four columns that we're involved in. Somewhere in it, is there a way to get you relate? I mean, Katie plus someone else, it's one thing. What about, what about buying back some of your time? Well, sorry. So part of it, I'll be honest with you. So part of these two positions is actually buying back some of her time. Because right now, you know, as we look at this, I look at it from the standpoint of I'm trying to fill needs from the bottom up, because we're routinely finding issues. And that is part of the equation because the more we build in administrative expenses, it may not be that we can get an executive director, but we can get maybe an assistant director that's paralleling with Molly. But on the other side, this is going to relieve Molly of some work she's having to do to assist Katie. And what I didn't say about Katie is Katie's term limit, because we use the ARPA funds to do it. So we know that the other issue is when the ARPA funds run out. And so the hard part within the broader budgeting process is I can't budget it onto a position unless I create my own credit. The reality is, the number I gave you is 729. I don't need for the next two years, because the ARPA dollars are going to continue to flow in. And so that bunch is balanced the overall system. And so actually, it's a lower amount that's going to be coming in. But I have to set that by the number two. I get it. That, in terms of the value, that kind of capacity is going to create and revenues and kind of fly where you want to keep going. There's another part of this. If you ever decided to leave, whoever sits under this council, in its commissions, and the hell of a job, I know some of you can start a little in the energy city. So the sum of the capacity that has to be built that seems to be great is quite a succession plan. I agree. And part of that is, that's why I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I don't want you to go anywhere. I just say it now. I hate to be, I hate to be looking at somebody to replace you to, you know, ever. But, you know, that's the same worry I have over here, right? And so I think part of it is, is if I can agree, Mollie, that Mollie can have some, you know, there's some more succession plan I can bring in place. And I'll just say for mental health, that would be my assumption going along. But for you and for Mollie, and for everybody else, this is probably a mystery. It's been a full court press I get for since game one. And that's not probably sustained in the long term. So as you're talking about building capacity, there's got to be a world view. Yeah. And that's again, kind of where the blame comes in, because on the other side of the budget, if we work limited, we're trying to figure out how to get some support for health balance and both sides. And we're just limited this year. I think for all of our mental health, and right now, but I'll just tell you, the group that I'm the most concerned with is really our property managers. Nobody has a clue to what they deal with on a daily basis. And that's where we're focused. Because there's day, I mean, literally, we took a day where we had a meeting set up and I just came in and said, let's go bowl. You need a relief. You need to hit a pressure relief. That works tough. And I would say, but for Sarah, and this, it's even working out of force. And again, combination or something in the budget on the other side that's going to let us get more of Sarah have Sarah help coordinate across the board on many issues we're dealing with. But it's connected to like two rooms. Because I can inject $50,000 into the system and actually get Sarah more free to have to do this stuff and create another name service officer which will inherently work for the same things. So you're now starting to see that interplay between those systems so that we can maximize it. Yeah, thank you. I hope that we had a 10% cap and 20% cap. And I guess what I'm asking is what's the reason for the term cap and what causes the constraints? That's actually the issue that we're circling back from all of these things is, well, we were here on the attainable housing fund and we weren't here on the board so we're not sure why. What most places do is just do a direct cost allocation and they don't necessarily have a cap. I mean, that's another option is to say we're not going to cap it, we're just going to do a direct cost allocation that will be evaluated on any basis. You'll probably find financially the best way to go because you're always making a decision based on the ROI. So it's not, it's not something like a state. It's self-imposed. It's self-imposed. That was where I was going. It might have been modeled off. CBG has a statutory 20% cap on admin. And so when the affordable housing fund was created in 2000 or so, that might have been a model to use at that time, but that was a totally different world. And by the way, our CBG funds used to fund about a position and a half and now they don't cut a full one. Just the CBG funds are going down and are everything else going up? But yeah, we truly are. And it's kind of maddening at times. I mean, it took us a while to work through all this and how you allocated when we figure out what we do. But we can say, equivalently, it's leading to the generation of more new. I think we've created more affordable housing units that are in the pipeline and we probably have at least a single point in time in the history of our community. So we know it works. It's just, that's my report. Thank you. Thank you for sharing that. I think she's after, she's after financial property, which I'm covering, which means specifically for financials, this is our quarterly financial look. And if we have any specific questions, I can forward it through or ask Kindra for further information if we needed. So we've got the age receivables report and then monthly financials and the voucher issuance account. So if anybody has any questions on us. Kindra's moving for a daughter in college. So if there aren't any questions on the first two items on the voucher issuance account, I do want to give some information on this one. So Kindra started showing our two-year tool in the packet for these quarterly updates. That really does show us what our voucher capacity can look like over an estimated two-year period. In this case, we've talked about this sum where Boulder County Housing Authority and Boulder Housing Partners both increased their payment standard up to 110% of their market rent. And the question was will we follow suit and do the same? And what we reported to you a couple months ago was that we're not showing that our voucher holders are having a tough time leasing up. And if we go up from 105, which is where we currently are to 110, that reduces the number of vouchers that we can actually put out because we have a certain dollar value. And so you could either pay more for less people or less for more people. So what you're showing on what you can see on this two-year tool is that we're actually showing that we're going to kind of hold steady with where we are. It's actually it's slightly a reduction. That's our projection with this current HUD funding value and keeping pace at 105% of fair market rent. And that's really not what we want to do. We would like to increase our number of vouchers, which means we need more funding from HUD. We are about to give HUD a call and find out how come some of our other regional housing authorities have received additional voucher funding this year. We have not yet received it. When we have shown now in our two-year tools for the last two years that we are managing this appropriately and we should have the authority to go higher. So we're going to be having that conversation. But that's why on here you'll see that our two-year projection is at 410 vouchers whereas currently we're in that 427 range. So my question is, have you asked HUD to increase the vouchers previously? Or is this the first time you've ever asked? This is the first, it's not about the ask necessarily, but this is the first time the funding has been out there and we have met the thresholds that we should be called. Remember, we didn't meet the performance requirements. So this is where we finally have a record to show we're meeting the performance requirements. And not only do you have the words resulting in the reductions essentially in vouchers. And so we're going to start managing this. This is going to be managed in terms of what we're seeing from Manning come out in terms of this year. So this is the first time I think we've been in a position. Here it is. And then I think, Chairman, you were the one that connected us to the increases on this. And so Sandy sitting at that point, which means that is an opportunity to start talking about this. But yeah, this is the first time we were on the road last year, assuming we were where we needed to be. We're good. I'm glad you're pushing. So if you're going to ask me a question later here, if you're successful in whatever that challenge looks like, or any way it looks like, what does the dollar figure in the number of vouchers? How would you determine what success? So we know, so let's take Fuller County partners, for example. We know that they have about double the size of our vouchers in their program, and they've received eight new vouchers that we heard for this this year. So understanding that we should be on par with them on performance, then if we received four new vouchers, that's a step. I mean, we were hoping for more than that. But I do think that that would be at least keeping pace with our partners. So does that 410 become a success is 414? Officially, but it depends on the dollar value, because you can see what it's really, how much are we anticipating to increase over time as well, in terms of future funding increases. So it would be 414 plus? Plus, hopefully more than that, if you're not going to get too far up with the value of that. Well, and we haven't lost sight of the whole reporting issue of either. We just need to get to some of this to begin to, because that's another plague that we're trying to wrap our mind around, in terms of what that means. Yeah, it's all tied together, certainly we'll see which I can move on to occupancy. So, okay, so we're at 96%, which is a high for this year, in those properties that we are actively filling, because we do have a hole on Briarwood and Village Place for getting Matthew to fix and then also holding by Village Place for the recidivation project. For your property updates, this is Lisa's update here. I'm not going to go over everyone, and specifically, but I did want to highlight one thing. You can always feel free to ask a question if you see anything on there, but I did want to share a good news story, and it's another, and I have permission to show this. It's another good story about how the city and LHA and how it all works together for the better. So this is the son of a city staff member, and he is getting his Eagle Scout, and so the portion pits that's for the Creek and Fall River were put in in that 2018 or 2020 period, but nobody is useful, and residents would rather have had great garden beds, which we wanted to give them for a good year plus, and so he volunteered to do the garden beds as part of his Eagle Scout project, and so he's finished work and they're planting right now pumpkin seeds and things, because they have a full harvest. So I thought that was a great example of just, I mean it could have happened without the city as well, but it's just those connections. That kid built those? Yes. By himself? I think he had some help, but yes, but he led the charge. I know Eagle Scouts are things. Is this just him? Yeah, I know his dad, so they both went on the side of the canyon. And they're also talking about doing, what, some bedding works to do, right? Do you think the game is going to be heard about the next time? We have a lot of, we have lots of ideas for things that are in the realm of the foundation that we are here for doing, and what we came to hear in there, but certainly have people banging on the door, trying to do more with us. So in the other, only other main update that I wanted to provide is that today was the last day for Corinne Lawson, our community manager at the Sweets and the Espans, and it was just a big loss because she was so wonderful. She's very sensitive to what she did not want to, and so we do have some staff openings. We are listing, her position is listed, and we are looking for someone with more of a crisis management skills and de-escalation techniques and that type of thing. And then we have another assistant manager, assistant community manager posted and had a good interview so far. So we're hoping to be back up and just have a tiny lip on the radar of the vacancies. I think that's probably the biggest change. The moment we first started getting qualified applicants was tough. I think we're now seeing qualified applicants. And from an organizational perspective, that's what people want because the reputation wasn't great, which meant people weren't applying. It means getting qualified. That means more reputation. And so that's another side that I look forward in terms of how we're doing. Any other questions? So I just wanted to give you a quick recap on the last six months, I guess, working more with LHJ. So attending all the coffee and conversations, I think we've really been able to accomplish a lot of the really small day-to-day issues that residents are having to the large issues that end up having public safety or police come out to properties. So anywhere from dealing with some lighting and landscaping issues to parking lot problems to even neighborhood problems without our outliers that do affect our property. So we've been able to tackle them and really solve each one of them. And I actually got a compliment today from gentlemen at Spring Creek about the noise mitigation that we were very creative about. And he's very pleased with our work. So he's one that attended, I think, the last month of November 4th. So a lot of success versus just kind of sitting on problems or taking just too much time. Michelle Bowman's finally, we finally got her pinned down to come in August, September to talk to our senior properties on evacuations and we did get more signage up for folks who feel more comfortable about that. So that will be coming up. We recently had some debacle about the Gazebo in front of Village Place with LVDA. Had a meeting about that. I'm getting quotes to the discussion as leading containment that, due to the ongoing, I mean, years and years of problems with that Gazebo. So it will be taken down in the next few weeks. And then it just not being maintained. The question was like who's maintaining it? LVDA thought LAJ was doing it and the contract was from 1989. So we're basically soothing that over. We're going to take the Gazebo down and make it make additional problems. Which won't add a ton, but it will add a few spots. And that was actually complaining from the residents about the activities that were back in Gazebo actually became more of an attractive instance in terms of the activities in our car. For many years. And then, last but not least, the meth detectors. So we're still, we're still doing, you know, we're still following them. The data is reading consistent. So we know that they're working as far as right now they're at a low between like a four and a 16. Which means that we have no no meth. Which is a good thing. Where they are. I think what we're finding is that the sustainability of it being a battery operated device is going to be a problem. And so we have a meeting this week with our representative from New Zealand regarding, you know, the possibilities of ever going part-wire. So yeah, we're still, we're still at it. So trying to be cautious before we move forward and figure out that maybe they just, and we're all they say favorably. So I think we're going to try to put them into some clean units soon. Okay. Better to do your group. Like. They can. However, we're having to replace them about every week. And then I should have said that. Correct. And then it's the amount of time we would have the sensors, you know, basically scan the air. But even then we're fine. They're telling us it lasts up to six months, but we're not seeing that with the numbers that we're finding. So that is our next conversation. So what kind of, what kind of batteries are they? Just a lithium battery. Like a AA, AA, AA, AA like the kind they recommend for your smoke detector. Correct. But this is an active. So it's doing two things. It's pulling it in and then it's communicating via a cell signal. And so they're not blasting as far as they're supposed to in the reads or in after it. As the battery dies. So when the battery dies, it totally goes offline. So we can see that. Okay. Do they stay consistent? Well, so far. When they're operable, we are seeing consistent and they're being read every, well, we've asked for the time to be changed a little bit, but the timing is like about every hour to every maybe two hours. We have three. We also learned a lot about which batteries to use. We now know that the chase is fireproof. You might just say, oh. We can answer the matter. New Zealand, New Zealand, that we're not ever using again. And so again, that's why we want things already learned through this, right? So we now know that issue. And so some questions and results doesn't work yet. It works. The battery's dead. And so we're going to answer that and try to talk to them about how we approach this. But we're at the point where it's worth the test in some ways. And so we're now starting to evolve. I'm just a little surprised with technology in the days of the world. That in so many houses that have hard wire that fire protection systems that they didn't have that ever used to stay out of it. It seems like every time we do have a conversation, there's something new. They're evolving quickly, but we can't get it in time for, you know, they can't keep sending us the newest, best model, right? So I believe the next model we get will be updated for more than that. I think Sarah's their orange. Especially for the US market. I mean, there's real things to sort out with price. International boundaries. I think if you go to a place in Europe, they have given me what I've seen. Similar to your name? No idea, but they're, I mean, they basically are using these devices. They're currently using these devices in New Zealand with this battery system. And so we have reached out to, they gave us the name of an organization that does use them. And we have some, we've been communicating back and forth. And that's the last email I sent to her was, hey, what are you doing? Because we are just figuring this battery thing out. So I've asked her what they're doing, and I'd be able to hear back. But we're trying to communicate with the folks that do use them. They do have the, a different outlet, adapt, you need an adapter that's, they use a type one plug. That's why I was wondering if they, like, you know, it's also the system. Well, we're, we run a little bit of an issue with SIM cards. And so that was one of the first things they had to correct is working on what the SIM card is. So we have a SIM card in SIM card to install them because they're already installed. And so that's the R and D. I mean, there is this learning. That's all I have. So that's your answer. Yeah. So that's how we're talking the same thing as well. Correct. So we're finished with your comment. I have a question. If this gets into PIPA, shall we know? The voice mail of a gentleman who said that he was section 8. You knew that voice mail? We were going to look to see if he was an LHJ. What was his name? I forget his name. Somebody that is. The most attractive to PIPA. Yeah. But it's something that we can't talk about. Okay. I just want to say that, you know, as we were talking about Harold, about men's health and the staff and everything. And then also your time. The last time we spoke, due to the fires and everything in Hawaii. Yes. One of Harold's desire is to go out and to Hawaii and assist in learning to teach at the same time. But not having that opportunity to be able to go out to do that. It's important for our city manager to go out to something like that and see what he can learn. But I don't know if he has the capabilities of being able to do that. And I don't know what the rest of the commissioners think or slash counselor think about that. And I don't think he would have ever brought it up. But that was something that he was passionate about doing. Any city managers have ever done it before. I know city managers have gone to other cities, jurisdictions, states to learn on all types of different issues. But with what we may be experiencing here, I think it would be... I'm sure Ashley Stiltson would have loved to go someplace before a different town. What's happening and how do you manage this from a management standpoint? I know you have three backups of the city. What about LHG? Yeah, I think part of it is figuring out balance for other things too. But yeah, backups. I can work remotely too. An interesting piece was I actually had... You all wanted me to schedule my vacation, so I scheduled my vacation. It seems like there's a certain amount of waiting to see what the results are. But it seems like a lot of people are so fired at this. So it could be the communities that might be in the U.S. too. California's Hawaii. Yeah, it's pretty much Hawaii. I would think that herald being herald would be even rebuilding. But yeah, I think being under oppressiveness is something. And watching how they suffer problems. It would be a great opportunity for them to be smart too. Do you think I'm ready? Well, we're trying to figure it out right now because obviously I'm on a vacation set, so we're watching it closely. Part of it is unfortunately I have my share of natural disasters over my career. We as a go-to city council... Especially before November. Whispered around the table yet. The county commissioners have decided that they will accept the... that they will terminate the conservation easement on one of the states. And I think that they reserve the right... We have to annex it before the easement is actually terminated. So they've got this little hook going on. Were there any conditions for them? Other than the annexation. The commitment that Jack Bestoff has made to keep the affordable... To keep the fore sale. Little tier, at least at the first sale. And they're angling for more. They're wanting Longmont to do something about some shorter deed restrictions to keep the military for at least a little while. But I don't think that is a condition. So speaking of that, what we're finding in the state funding and everything we're talking about is they are looking at deed restrictions. And I think that's going to be about ten-year requirements. What we're looking for. And so we're toying with some concepts of the only kind of component in that. If you sell it before ten years, then the next person coming in has to meet the requirement. And they may have ten years. But if you live in it during that, then you can sell it before you're happy. But we actually ran into that last week. It's on the IHoy grant in terms of the ten-year piece. So if you go in and you get any of the state dollars, which I would expect you're going to have to, you'll definitely be an affordable person. So there's going to be an affordable state. So these are habitats, so they're probably already plugged into that. Yeah, because that's different. Because habitat subsidizes the cost of the house. And so that's a different framework. So is that a condition of $123 million? We haven't seen, they haven't made it as far as to create any of those actual grant agreements yet. But the same group doing it, it's coming on at the same shop. And that's so far showing us a ten-year. So we actually get, Root is providing us tomorrow, our mini report on what are deed restrictions for attainable housing to look across the state right now. So we can get some numbers to see what are the conditions like out there in the market. The 123 group also cracked the 213. No, it was a different group. Root's probably, so there are some problems with the molding up in that. But the problem is they didn't create any rules. So the rules are not going to be created out of, for a whole ownership out of the parking house and the rental. Out of the middle of the economic. Oh edit. Oh edit. In chat room. And opposite economic development and international trade. They have the, this figure, they have the rental fees with Java. But we're just seeing it coming. I mean, we're going to attach deed restrictions. There has to be educational deed restrictions. And people have to figure out what they saved. Because they always say they're not getting the equity. But you also saved over ten years how much money you gave. Yeah, you built equity gains and did that too. Exactly. If you, if you figure out how to save that. So you don't go to the future. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved. I moved.