 Hello, Commissioner Downey. Can you please unmute your microphone and turn your camera on please so we can test it? Yes, it should be good. All right, yep, it is working. Thank you. Have you on the line? Is it possible to make an appointment for some iPad support? I am going to defer that to Kaylee or Steve. I will have them get back to you on that. Thank you. You're welcome. Good afternoon, all. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. We have all commissioners present. You can go ahead and start the meeting. Thank you very much. I'd like to call the meeting to order and first some housekeeping. I want to remind the commissioners to keep their audio on mute unless they're speaking. Commissioners other than the chair can mute themselves. Staff will remain muted until needing 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 viewed during the meeting. If you're calling in from a telephone and choose to speak during the public comments portion of today's agenda, the privacy concerns the host will be remaining your viewable, renaming your viewable phone number to resident in the last four digits of your phone number. And as a reminder, the city of Santa Rosa's community creating a safe and inclusive environment free from disruption. We will not tolerate any hateful speech or actions which are well-staffed 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. Or can you please explain how the public comments will be heard at today's 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 and Zoom meeting 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 public comment or for 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 have 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 agenda meeting. Additionally, there is one public comment period on today's agenda to speak on non-agenda items, matters, item five. 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 ask the clerk for a roll call please. All right. I'll take the roll call. Commissioner, Commissioner Burke. Here. Commissioner Downey. Here. Commissioner Olson. Here. Vice chair test. Here. And chair Owen. Here. Let the record show or let the record reflect that all commissioners are present. Thank you. We'll move on to item number three and ask if any commissioners statements of abstention on today's agenda items. Hearing none, we'll move on to study session item number four and Megan, please go ahead. Good afternoon. Our first, our study session for today is the fiscal year 2021-2022 budget process and public input. Kate Goldwein, administrative services officer presenting. Thank you. Can you start the presentation, Stephen Caley? Thank you. And next slide. Megan, would you like to discuss this one? Sure. So the fiscal year 2021-2022 budget consideration is a review of the city council priority public hearing which was held last week. The housing authority has their own budget which they review and approve in advance of the city council's budget each year. So what we are trying to do is have similar steps in the city council budget sequence. One thing that we're gonna touch on is the community development block grant disaster recovery funding, which will be the $38.5 million that you reviewed at your last meeting in January. And that's showing up again in your budget. It showed up this year with no action and then we will carry that over. So you will be seeing that until it is expended. Next slide, please. Thanks, Megan. So as she said, I'm Kate Goldwein, administrative services officer for the Housing and Communities Services Department and good afternoon. We expanded this study session this year to include the preliminary funding assumptions that we'll use to build a fiscal year 21-22 budget. And please note, as noted on this slide, these assumptions may change if we receive new information. This slide details the new local funding available to the housing trust. Most funding is in line with the current year. We have received more loan payments than budgeted in the current year. So we will use that excess revenue in 21-22. And by far the largest source of funds to the housing authority is federal funding from HUD to be used for specific programs and activities. 100% of the Housing Choice Voucher Program funding comes from HUD and between 45 and 50% of housing trust funding comes from HUD. We have not yet received any information from HUD about our funding allocations, but that's normal for this time of year. We generally receive that information anytime from about now through May, hopefully not later than June. We are using current year allocations as placeholders and we will make adjustments to the final budget once HUD releases that information. And we haven't received any indication that that funding will increase or decrease significantly. Next slide, please. Thank you. So with that said, we anticipate generally flat, of generally flat expenditure budgeted in detail, including city determined costs such as salaries and benefits. Next slide, please. And this slide notes the authority's budget process timeline, which runs concurrently with the cities. As Megan said, the city held its budget priorities public hearing on February 9th. And today is the authority study session where you will hear public input. The city council will review the general fund budget in early April. And we will be back in front of you at your April 26th meeting with a detailed presentation of the 21-22 budget. We'll go back to council in early May to present the entire Housing and Community Services department budget with all the other city departments. And then finally, we'll return to the authority in June on the 21st for adoption of the final budget and the city council will adopt the entire city budget the following day. Next slide, please. Okay, this concludes the presentation and Megan and I are available for any questions you may have. Any questions from the commissioners? Commissioner Owen, I have a question. On the 1.4 million from transfer tax, how much of that is homeless and how much of that is for housing? Do we haven't yet made that decision? We will, and that's not my decision to make, that will go to Megan and to the assistant city manager to determine, but in general, we need to cover specific costs within homeless services. Real property transfer tax pays for a portion of the Sam Jones Hall homeless shelter. It pays for a portion of administrative salaries and benefits and overhead for the homeless program. So we need to make sure that all of those costs are covered. And then if there are any additional homeless related costs that the city council would like to use real property transfer transfer tax funding for and then we can determine how much is left over for the housing authority. We use a portion of that money for housing trust admin costs. And then what's left over of that we're able to use for develop, like your long product, housing authority loan product. And so the portion that goes to homeless would be in the department's budget, but it wouldn't be in the housing authority budget, correct? Correct. But if that's an area of interest, we can certainly identify that at your April meetings that you are aware of the amount of funds that is going towards homeless. It's just you don't have purview over that, but for your information, we can certainly highlight that. Very definitely. I look forward to having that information. Thank you. Any other questions from the commissioners? Yes, I had a question. With regard to the funding sources, I didn't see in there the PG&E disaster funds which were recently discussed by the city council at public meetings. Does that mean the housing authority would not be able to participate in some of that money that's coming to the county and the city? So in response to the recent conversations that the council has had and those transpired last week during their goal setting session, which was on Thursday and Friday, they directed staff to put $10 million into the Renewal Enterprise District, which has been a fairly long-discussed process with the county. So that would go directly to the Renewal Enterprise District and would not come to the housing authority. Thank you. I have a question. Thank you, Megan. Although not overtly mentioned, how is a prudent reserve banked into this budget for just in case? And is there a ceiling as far as how much prudent reserve the city of Santa Rosa Housing Authority can have just in case things come up? Thank you. Yes. Several years ago, I hope in 2015, the housing authority determined a reserve amount for the housing trust of 15% of administrative expenditures. And so that amount, because your administrative expenditures fluctuate a little bit year over year, once I determine that amount, then I can set aside that the reserve amount that does not get expended that year. In the housing to its voucher program, the federal government does not allow us to have a reserve. And so HUD holds, they're called HUD held reserves, holds the reserves, if any, for the housing trust voucher program. So is there a length of time that money could roll in, assuming that something jumps off unexpectedly between money coming from housing and money coming to the city of Santa Rosa? Is there a timeline as far as how long it would take money to come in if we really needed it for something? We would have to work with the city's finance department and city council to determine it would probably depend on the amount and the need. So it's very individual. Yes. Thank you. Megan? Yes. So the county in the city has made the decision for real that that large amount of money just coming from PG&E is not gonna go through the housing authority, is that correct? So the decision has not been finalized but during the council goal setting session, which is equivalent to a study session. So they're just providing direction. They're not providing any approvals. They did direct the use of $10 million to the renewal enterprise district. So I imagine that will be coming back to the council for action during a regularly scheduled meeting in the near future. But the answer is yes, their direction is to put that money into the renewal enterprise district and not into the housing authority. Who will oversee that, Megan? The renewal enterprise district has an executive director, Michelle Whitman, and there are two representatives from the city council which are currently Victoria Fleming and Jack Tibbets. And then there are two representatives from the county board of supervisors. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Just a follow-up question on that if I may. You see, I thought I read in the paper that it was unanimous that they would direct the money to that $10 million to red. Was it not unanimous, Megan? I believe it was unanimous. I participated in the goal setting study session and I believe that every council member, all seven of them were present and did support the allocation of those funds to the red. Thank you. And if I may just jump in when we say unanimous, as Megan was saying, I guess you could say their direction was unanimous but they have not taken action. And again, as Megan mentioned, that item will have to come back to council for a formal approval. Megan, to follow up on those questions, when would it go back to council for formal approval? As far as I know, that date has not been identified yet. There were a series of items that the council all supported and to echo Jeff's comments. So each council member identified their support for the items. So those will need to come back at a subsequent meeting and that has not been identified yet but I can certainly provide the housing authority with that information when that date is identified. Yeah, I'd appreciate that if that could be done. Also, was there any discussion during that meeting as to the housing authority raising its hand and sending notification to city council that we thought that those funds should go through the existing housing authority and our procedures and policies? No. Okay, thank you. Are there any other questions on this item? If none, I'd like to open it up for public comment on item 4.1. Are there any public comments? A countdown timer will appear for the convenience of the speaker and meeting participants. The first speaker will be acknowledged and invited to speak. Please make sure to unmute yourself when you are invited to do so. Your microphone will be muted at the end of that count. Chair Ohlin, I see no questions at this time and we receive no email public comment. Okay, thank you. I'd like to bring back to commissioners to move on to item 5, which is the public comments and non-agenda items. We're now taking public comments and item 5, non-agenda items. 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. We wish to make a comment via Zoom. Please raise your hand. You're dialing in via telephone. Please dial star nine to raise your hand. A countdown timer will appear for the convenience of the speaker and viewers. The first speaker will be acknowledged and invited to speak. Please make sure to unmute yourself when you were invited to do so. Your microphone will be muted at the end of that countdown or at the conclusion of your comment. Chair Ohlin, I see no hands raised and we've received no email public comment. Okay, thank you. We'll move on to item number six, which is approval of the draft minutes. We do not need to take a vote on this, but I wanna make sure that there's a unanimous consent of approval for these minutes. Chairman Ohlin, the minutes look fine. I just wanted to point out clarification and it probably goes to Jeff Burke. I made some comments under this item at the last meeting, basically explaining that I wasn't going to abstain, but that I had looked into that matter with your help and explained the reasons for that. I assume that the recording of the meeting suffices to kind of document that fact and it's not necessary in the minutes. If that's correct, then I'm fine with the minutes. I think that is correct and the minutes are fine as it is drafted. Thank you. So hearing no other comments, we showed it to let the record show that we approve the unanimous consent of the draft minutes from the last meeting. Do we go ahead and move on to item seven? Let's see if there's any commissioner reports. Chairman Ohlin, I do have a question. I guess it's a suggestion for the housing authority if I may. Yes, please. It occurred to me that we are, as a housing authority, a separate legal entity and the executive director is also the director of housing and community services for the city. And right now, Omega is filling that position on an interim basis. I would like to ask if the housing authority would have an interest in placing an item on a future agenda, probably next month, whenever our next meeting is, that might send a letter or some kind of communication to the city council requesting that somehow there's at least one representative of the housing authority included in the process for selecting the new person who would be our executive director as well as the department director. Can I ask the council how that process would work? It's an interesting question and you can certainly put it on an agenda and ask and then the council can decide what to do with it. I honestly don't know where they are in the process. Perhaps this passenger may know, but I don't know if interviews have already been scheduled or where that's at. I assume that's what you're talking about, but yeah, you could put it on an agenda and send a letter or perhaps if you don't want to wait, I think you could, well, I suppose you could give direction today to the chair. Megan, maybe you could, do you know where they're at in the process? If I could interject, the process has not commenced yet so there is no recruitment that is currently open and as of today, I've not heard of a recruitment schedule. So there's, I think there's definitely adequate time to provide input to the city manager and to the human resources department. Then I would suggest that the better practice would be to actually put it on as an agenda item. And so the agenda, just to clarify and Commissioner Burke, if you could chime in, it sounds like what we're looking to put on the agenda is approval to discuss with city HR and I'm not sure what other entity or individual department to state that we would like to be part of the hiring process or evaluations. Is that correct, Commissioner Burke? Yes, it is. And it's some representation from the housing authority in that process as is appropriate. I think the decision falls to the city manager in a situation like that, but also our executive director has a kind of unique responsibility directly to the housing authority. So hopefully we'd have some ability to participate in that process. And Jeff, I don't know if it takes a, Jeff Burke, I don't know if it takes, I know we've discussed this before but I forget exactly the process. When we want to put an item on the agenda, does it take a vote or just a consensus of the housing authority board to do that? You know, I'd have to take a look at the bylaws, but if you want to just give a thumbs up of whether you're all in agreement to put that on the agenda. Does any, you want to just give a thumbs up, Commissioners, if you want to see that on the next agenda. Well, I don't understand. I think you're good either way. Yeah. Jeff, I don't understand why we can't just approve of writing a letter today. I don't understand why we have to put it on the agenda. Yeah, I mean, it's perhaps a little bit of a gray area. And the reason to have it on the agenda is so that the whole reason that you have the Brown Act right is so people are aware of what's on the agenda and can comment on it. I wouldn't expect this to generate much controversy. And I suppose, frankly, there's nothing stopping the chair from reaching out to the city's human resources departments or the city manager to say, hey, I'd like to play a role here. But it sounds like since you had adequate time, I wasn't faced with having to tell you, yeah, you could probably go ahead anyway. So I hope that's a sufficient answer. All right. The wheels turn so slowly. Great question for Jeff Burr. Do you know there's any consideration to recruit in-house or will this specifically be in at-large search? I don't know the answer to that question. I would interject and say in general, the city recruits outside of the organization for department head positions. So I anticipate it'll be an external recruitment. Okay, thank you. So we will put something on the agenda for next meeting. The, any other commissioner have any reports? Hearing none, we'll move on to item nine, which the executive director reports. And Megan, you can go ahead. Good afternoon. Chair Owen, I'm sorry. We missed item eight committee reports. Oh, I'm my apology. So item eight, do we have any committee reports? Hearing none, we'll go ahead and move on to item nine and Megan. Good afternoon. I'm Megan Bassinger, the interim director of housing and community services. First, I'd like to introduce the new voice you will hear in the background. That is Mark Hughes, who is a new senior administrative assistant with the department of housing and community services, specifically supporting our section 18. So welcome Mark. And then I'd like to provide a brief update on the application process for the housing authority commissioner vacancies. As you're aware at the January, 2021 meeting, there was an announcement regarding the vacancies. We have two vacant tenant commissioner positions as well as two existing commissioners who are up for reappointment. We received a fairly robust response to those vacancies. The applications have been received by the city clerk and are being reviewed. Each applicant must reside within the Santa Rosa city limits and be registered to vote. So the city clerk is vetting those applications. The next step will be for interviews to be conducted. So applicants will be contacted by the city clerk's office and those interviews will be scheduled with city council. These are at large appointments by the city council. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have about the existing vacancies. Any questions from other commissioners? Megan, what do you see is the timing on this? I'm hoping we can have the interview scheduled in the next couple of weeks and we'd be able to seat a new commissioner, hopefully by the April meeting, new commissioners. I think March might be a little bit too optimistic. And the review is done by city council, is that correct? Correct, the city council members review, interview and appoint the commissioners. Megan, do you know if any positions that have expired are going to be reappointed without a formal application or everyone will have to go through a formal application who wishes to continue serving the city center of the housing authority? I believe that every position would need to be re-interviewed and reappointed to provide an equitable process for all interested parties. Thank you. Megan, do you have anything else that you wanted to add? That concludes this portion of the update. We'll move on to item 9.2, housing authority fiscal year 2020 to 2021 Q2 financial report. I'm sorry, chair Owen, we do need to take public comment on the previous item. My apologies. We'll move for a public comment. Megan, if you wish to make a comment via zoom, please raise your hand. You're dialing in via telephone, please dial star nine to raise your hand and you will have three minutes. A countdown timer will appear for the convenience of the speaker and viewers. The first speaker will be acknowledged and invited to speak. Please make sure to unmute yourself when you are invited to do so. Your microphone will be muted at the end of that countdown or at the conclusion of your comment. At this time, chair Owen, I do not see any hands raised and we've received no email public comment. Thank you. Again, so now we'll move on to item 9.2, which is the housing authority fiscal year 2020, 2021 Q2 financial report. This item is a written communication similar to what was presented to you. We had Q1, which was a little bit behind schedule presented to you at the last meeting. Kate Goldfein, administrative services officer is available to answer any questions, but there is no formal presentation of this item. Do any of the commissioners have any questions? I guess my only question was, would there be anything that staff would want to bring to our attention that deserves discussion? Yes, hi, Kate Goldfein here, administrative services officer. I think the biggest change that's worth noting is the inclusion of the community development block grant disaster recovery funding of 38.5-ish million, which nearly doubled the authority's budget that hasn't been included in any of the prior financial reports. We received the funding from this California, State of California. And as you know, at your last meeting, you were planning for specific projects and trust staff were working with developers in the State of California to move forward on those projects. So as funding is committed, you'll see that and it expended as well. And if I could tie on to Kate's comments, as you recall, you took action, the housing authority took action at their January 25th meeting to award these funds to five projects. Staff is in the process of providing those applications to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for their review and final approval. And we can look for the expenditure of these funds within the next year or so as those projects advance. And we'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. And I can't wait to hear your thoughts. Thank you for the information you just asked. Yes, hi. First of all, thank you for all the details that go behind each one of these numbers, very well done. I just had a question regarding the administrative overhead section of the budget. And since there's a lot of money still remaining there. Is that due to COVID, is it due to overhead that we haven't been able to hire that kind of thing? Well, it's mainly due to vacancies. So the housing trust had several vacancies that occurred for up to several months. Megan may need to assure that, but several months worth of vacancies in staffing and none of our overhead or information technology or building use has decreased, but it's within the department staffing that the lessen expenditures program. Correct, yeah. So as you may recall, we had two program specialists that retired in July. So that created a fair amount of salary savings. One was replaced in November. And then we also had another retirement in October. That position was just replaced. And then of course the executive director has retired. So there's a salary savings there as well. And I think there's also, well, it might be slight, but decreased in office supplies and training expenses because staff has been working remotely. So there's not the same demand on those line items. Thank you. Any other questions from commissioners? I have a few questions. First of all, is to follow up on Vice Chair Tess comment, the administrative and overhead of almost $6 million, how much is that allocation and how much is that actual department expense? 100% is kind of split basis. Well, I don't have that number immediately available. I can tell you a few things. So all city staff salaries and benefits are determined by our, we are all part of unions that reside within the city of Santa Rosa. And all of those are determined by our contracts with the city. So all of the salaries for every single staff member. And I believe between the divisions there, that's about 18 people. And again, I need to look at that in more detail, but generally. And then we are also the overhead that we are charged by the city for such things as all the financial support that we receive, the city attorney's office support, the information technology support. We also don't have any control over those costs. Those are allocated to us. So while I don't have an immediate percentage for you, the vast majority of costs are not determined by the housing authority. We have a very small budget that we are able to determine for ourselves. The rest is determined for us. And that was my point, Kate. If in the future we could take that number and show a split of how much is allocated and allocation to the department versus true department expenses for overhead and such. That information that would be somewhat difficult to show here, I certainly can. And that is shown every year at, like it'll be shown during your April budget study session as it is every year. So I can talk with Megan about how we would even want to show that on these going forward. You hit on a key term, which is controllable and non-controlable expenses. So to look at as the housing authority, we can look at controllable expenses and non-control being what's allocated for IT and city attorney's office and such. And so to have a better understanding of what's controllable and what's allocated would be beneficial in the discussion to be able to know what the overhead is and what is overhead going up, is what's going on. Megan brought up a good point that pen and pencils are down because people are working from home, simple things like that. We're seeing that a lot of, I'm seeing that in a lot of different businesses. So that would be a good information to provide. One of the items that we would want to look at on here is the transfers in line item of $286,000. That is what was allocated from last year from the real property transfer tax. And this year we're looking at a budget of 1.4 million, which is not, if I understand correctly, is not going to be apples to apples because that's what the entire department would receive, not what would go into the housing authority. My understanding is that on that real property transfer tax, it was the projection was decreased because there was concern of how many properties would transfer because of the pandemic and lockdowns and such. And the housing market actually in Sonoma County, Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California as well, has done much better than people thought it was going to be. So I understand why that number was projected to be lower because there was so much uncertainty at that time, but as the number has been shown to not actually go down, does the housing authority or does the city ever true up those funds to say this is what the estimate was versus this is what the actual numbers coming in? Has that done? And either Megan or Kate can answer this question. Yes, that annually. And so that the commissioners know when the city's finance department gave us our real property transfer tax estimate back in February of a year ago, as we were building the budget for the current year, they did not have us decrease the share that went to homeless and housing, even when they decreased the total amount later in that year due to COVID concerns. So they gave us our estimate and that's the amount that per city, the city council policy, that's the amount that transferred to homeless services and housing. So they will do a true up, but of that amount, we received the 35% off their original estimate. Okay, even though their estimate went down later in the year. Right, we weren't able to make, we weren't able to still have a budget, frankly, with the estimate being so lowered and the city wants to keep these programs going. So when there is a true up, is that done on a calendar year basis or a fiscal year basis? Fiscal year. Does the information in terms of real property transfer tax track on a fiscal or calendar basis? For our purposes, we track it on a fiscal year. So it's what was received in that fiscal year, that July through June period. So the city budgets, this is the amount we're gonna get in that period. And then trues up based on that, what's received in that period. So for last year, $286,000 was a percentage of 35% of the real property transfer tax. Right. And this year is going to be 40% of the real property transfer tax. The housing and homeless, yes. Between the two, we'll get 40% of what the estimate is. The city's preliminary estimate is that that is $3.5 million, 40% of that is 1.4 million. And that 3.5 million estimate is based upon what true up? Is that still an estimate or we don't know? That's not a true up. That is the new amount of funding that the city believes they will receive in total for fiscal year, fiscal year 21, 22. So the accounting, I can certainly talk to the city's finance and accounting department to ask about that true up when we can follow up with all year and date. As they say, would the commissioners be interested in us working with the finance department to obtain the 2019-20 real property transfer tax true up? So it would look at the prior fiscal year with the estimates that were put into the budget and then purses the expenditures. Yes, please. I think that was important in terms of the transparency that's involved for the public and the people to pay those taxes, all those sales transactions that took place and wanting to know where that money actually went in the for transparency purposes. It's important that we have that data. We will work on obtaining that and providing it to the commission. One of the things that we show on here is we have, I know this is a presentation thing, but my finance background is that you always show sources first and then show expenditures, but this is done in the opposite order, that's okay, it's just how I'm used to reading it. But one of the things that normally would match up is that you would show funding sources that match expenditure uses. But we have a discrepancy of $84 million approved versus $87 million in the budget as expenditure. So how is that roughly $3 million difference bridged? How's that financed? Yeah, good question. We remember from prior budget presentations that when we do not expend the full amount of our budget in the housing trust or revenue comes in higher than expected, such as what's happening with loan repayments this year, that money goes into reserves in each of those funds. And we don't keep that in reserve because our reserve policy is only 15%. We re-budget that during the next year. So we've already received the revenue, but we haven't gotten your approval to expend it on a certain items such as loan products. So we use that funding that we've received in excess of the current year and not re-budget it, budget it during the next fiscal year. Does that explain the difference between the 84 and 87 for this current fiscal year? Yes, and it should. It will always explain that difference. And I'll review that. I talked about that during, I believe our budget study session was in May last year, but I'll talk in detail about that at our April budget study session. Go ahead, Megan. I was gonna say, if I may interject too, the an important item to note about projects, is those funds carry over between fiscal years. So they may not necessarily be budgeted in the current fiscal year. A project could be something that funds were directed to in a previous fiscal year, but it carries forward until it's expended. And we do have several examples of programs where we've put funds into them, and they're slower to expend money such as the Housing Accessibility Modification Grant Program. We've put money in there in prior fiscal years. It hasn't been expended in that one fiscal year. So it carries over. So it'll show up in subsequent budgets until it is expended. So let's follow that through. I'll take a project as an example of Dutton Flats Project received over $3 million for one period. And those monies are being dispersed over more than one fiscal year with those of the expenditures shown on a cash basis. So when that money goes out, that's what's shown in the category for expended. Yes. Okay. One of the things that we're looking at here in terms of the transfers in the real property transfer tax, that $286,000 or whatever that number turns out to be for this coming fiscal year, what are those funds normally used for? We have to use a portion of those funds to pay for salaries and benefits and overhead for the housing trust. And then whatever is left over is used for loan from it. So if I'm looking at, let's take out admin costs and just look at the number roughly $300,000. And as we have seen projects come in in the last meeting when everybody, even though I was recused is I was listening in, the projects that came in for the CDBGR money came in anywhere from 400 to almost $600,000 a unit in terms of overall cost. And in that example, those funds for the CDBGR were local that those entities would then go out and get tax credits or other grants or other funding sources. So it was the local piece of their overall capital stack and funding. But I look at this line item and state, and in state, we still have an issue of a seven year waitlist for vouchers for housing choice vouchers. And a dollar amount, which graciously, we are very happy to receive this dollar amount of roughly $300,000. And hopefully it's going to be more for next fiscal year. Just by the economics, that doesn't even get you one full unit in terms of production. But what those monies can be used for is for vouchers in terms of it wouldn't be a housing choice voucher understands a different program. I'd like to have something put on the agenda for the next meeting that we can discuss how funding sources that come in such as these real property transfer tax can be used for vouchers. I'm sorry, I'll use the housing choice voucher that I don't know the name of the other program because those would have far more of an impact in putting people into units immediately versus being a small piece to a larger capital stack to build a project that's not going to come online for two to three years because that's the normal timeline it takes to for development and finish construction and Lisa. Megan, you have your hand raised, did you want to? I was safe I can interject and we'd be happy to come back at the March meeting and provide a presentation. I think specifically what you're referring to is the use of the HUD home funds as tenant based rental assistance. So on an annual basis, we receive between seven and $800,000 in home funds and they need to be the last money into a project which does limit them because it is a relatively small amount once you take out admin and so those could be deployed as tenant based rental assistance which is parallel to the housing choice voucher program and it is similar to how the city, we reprogram some funds at the onset of COVID to help address some of the rental payment issues that residents were experiencing. So we are happy to come back in March and provide the housing authority with an overview of what that program would look like and if you are inclined to include it as a program for the fiscal year 21-22 budget which would then subsequently reduce your production budget but it would provide a more immediate way to address residents rental housing issues. And I would like to see that put on the agenda and one of the data points I'd like to see on that is we talk about a seven year wait list and Kate this is in your arena in regard to, well how many people does that represent and what is the average voucher that's put out in terms of dollar amounts? So if we were to look at a transferring monies from smaller sources toward voucher type programs how many people would that actually help using how much, how many people we have in the voucher system now was the average voucher so you can quantify a dollar amount into people? We can certainly do that. Okay, Kate's on mute but your head's going vertically up and down so that's good. Yes, we can do that and I'll work with the housing choice voucher program to make sure we're working on that together. Chairman Owens? Yes, Phil. Well, the one other thing that always comes up is that the money that we are charged for expenses by the city for computer help and all of that sort of thing that amount is just given just told with the rule be charged this and they've never been able to actually have anybody give us a detailed breakdown of how to determine what will be in charge. It's pretty opaque, I've never been able to get my hand on who says how much is what and that's what they charge us and as I understand that's not negotiable. That is something that we are just charged by the city and I've always wondered why we don't get an itemized list of how they determine that or I'm not familiar I don't remember ever seeing one. Megan, you wanna address that? I'll actually defer to Kate who works directly on developing the budget and the IT rates that are provided. Yes, so the city has an overhead consultant who determines both the information technology rates, computers, hardware software, all the support we get and then on a separate track determines overhead rates for the city, so like city attorney support, finance support, the housing authority share of costs. So you may not be remembering a few times we've had the city's overhead consultant come in and do a presentation for the housing authority to discuss how that's done and we can, I can ask if you would like them to do that again I can ask them to come back to a future meeting. Bill, would you wanna have that done? I would up the up to the rest of the board. I don't remember having anyone explain to me and I've been on this board a long time. So I'm particularly interested not so much in the, in the charge for the computer services but other charges that are put forward and how they determine what those charges are. And I'm hearing if I speak for a commissioner Olsen that we would like to have that consultant come to a future meeting. And again, it dovetails into the prior conversation of when we're looking at the budget that we have for admin and overhead, having that split between controllable costs and allocated costs. And so you know, it is a very, very small amount in the few thousands of dollars that the housing authority has control of there. So I wanna make sure you understand that HUD gives us an administrative allowance that can only be used for section eight housing choice vouchers. The housing trust, we're given the amounts for salaries and benefits and as commissioner Olsen said, allocated costs. And we have a very small amount of services and supplies budgeted. And that's what the housing authority would have. That's where you would have some leeway. And so kind of if you're looking at the quarter to financial report you can see that loan activity was seven point almost $8 million. That is where the housing authority has much more leeway during your notice of funding availability process. That is the money that you can decide how you want to expend it. The administration and overhead amount, I think is gonna be in truly in the thousands of dollars. So I can show it and so everybody understands it but it's not gonna be a source that's gonna be able to make a lot of difference. Well, my point is as we're going over this budget and let's say what we're looking at here at the $87 million. Well, for next year, CDBGR will be coming out. So it's gonna drop by $38 million assuming everything else is gonna stay even. But we're looking at a lie on them of almost $6 million and to have an understanding of how much of that is controllable and how much is allocated is important because we wanna make sure that we're not talking about things that we have no control over. So having an understanding and again using the term of transparency to know that look almost $6 million of this X number is what we control in true full-time equivalent FTEs, employees and here's the salaries and here's the position so you can have headcount and dollar amount for salaries and benefits. Here's the overhaul just off this expense and everything else is allocated. And so we can look at that and break that's almost $6 million down and state this is what is controllable and what's not controllable. Are there any other questions from commissioners? Okay, hearing no other questions we'll move to a public comment. Down timer will appear for the convenience of the speaker and viewers. The first speaker will be acknowledged and invited to speak. Please make sure to unmute yourself when you were invited to do so. Your microphone will be muted at the end of that compound or at the conclusion of your comment. Chair Owen at this time I do not see any hands raised and we have not received any email public comments. Thank you very much. We'll move on to item 10 which is consent items. Just acknowledge that there are no consent items on the agenda which moves us along to item 11 which are report items. And I'll give the floor to Megan to discuss item 11.1. All right, good afternoon. Item 11.1 is a report item extension of the lease between the housing authority of the city of Santa Rosa and Southwest community health centers for 983 Sonoma Avenue. Clerk, could you put the presentation up please? Thank you. Next slide please. All right, so this first slide is an aerial view of the Brookwood Health Center. As you may know, this is the site of the former Brookwood Homeless Shelter which is located on the corner of Brookwood and Sonoma Avenue. To the left across Brookwood Avenue is the public safety building and then to the right is a residential complex and then to the north that you cannot see very well as a parking lot and other businesses associated with the Memorial Hospital complex. Next slide please. So a quick history on this site. In January 2002, the housing authority acquired the site. In April 2002, the Brookwood Homeless Shelter which was operated by Catholic Charities opens. Fast forward to 2009 and the city began to experience the financial implications of the Great Recession and had to make some budget cuts. So the shelter was closed and the 40 beds that were at the site were relocated to what was then relatively new. Think we've been open about two or three years the Samuel Jones Hall Homeless Shelter. So we were able to reduce the number of facilities while maintaining a constant number of homeless shelter beds. In August 2009, under housing authority direction a request for proposals was issued to identify a new use for this particular site. Next slide please. In September, 2010, the housing authority adopted resolution 1496 which approved a lease to Southwest Community Health Centers. And in April, 2011 Southwest Community Health Center commenced the lease and began to occupy the building. The lease was a 10 year period which expires at March 31st, 2021. Next slide please. The housing authority held a closed session in January to review the end of the lease and discuss potential extension options. The housing authority directed staff to proceed with a two year lease extension which would take the current expiration to March 31st, 2023 and allow the tenant Southwest Community Health Centers the option for two one year extensions. The health center anticipates relocating to the caritas facility which has just begun construction. So there may be some additional delays which is why the one year extensions are advantageous to them. The lease structure that was identified in the initial lease which has a monthly payment that is currently at $806.33 will remain in place. This increases 3% annually and the health center pays us quarterly. Next slide please. So with this, it is recommended by the Department of Housing and Community Services that the housing authority by resolution approve an extension to the lease between the housing authority and Santa Rosa Health Centers which is acting as doing business under Southwest Community Health Centers authorize the executive director to sign the lease subject to the approval by the housing authorities general counsel. So this would be two years with the option for two one year extensions. That concludes the presentation and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Any questions? Thank you Mr. Olson. That site is being considered according to the paper for one of the places to have homeless parking. Isn't that true? That is correct. Staff was tasked with identifying locations throughout the city's seven council districts for potential safe parking. The site has been used before as a safe parking facility because there are certain advantages to it. There's a gated area in the rear of the parking lot. It's also ADA accessible. So if there are individuals that need accessible bathroom facilities, it is a good location. I'd also note that council has not taken any action or provided firm direction on proceeding with the safe parking sites or locations. So that was put out there as a potential location. Thank you. Any other questions from commissioners? So I have a question. So if I'm tracking this correctly, this lease extension would gain Southwest community health centrally ability to have a caritas completed in which they would move there. And then the existing property would be converted back to all purposes of housing homeless, people who are experiencing homeless. Do I have that sequence correct? Not entirely. So the health center's goal and intention is to move to caritas when that is complete because it's going to be an inclusive center to serve the homeless and low income populations. The housing authority will need to have subsequent conversations, possibly in closed session to discuss future uses and the disposition of the site. So that will be a discussion that will schedule within the next year to see what the housing authorities inclination is for a future use and tenant at this site. Thank you. Any other questions from the commissioners? I do have a question, Megan. So it's a two year lease. It was basically the terms of the last lease rolled over for two years. The two one year options. Is that the same situation? They're going to roll over the lease rates and the same structure, the lease, the only change will be the term. Correct. And then a question about the property improvements. As I recall, reading that lease, that would be the responsibility of the tenant of the Southwest community group. Commissioner Burke, could you clarify your question? The property improvements as it relates to the CASP inspection that's noted in the amendment or in terms of improvements associated with returning the facility to the housing authority? Not returning it to the housing authority, but the who's, so why don't you explain, just summarize who's responsible, who pays for the cost of any kind of property issue that would arise during the reigning terms of the lease? Certainly. So the existing lease, which was included in the housing authority packet as an attachment, section six is the maintenance repairs and alteration of the facility. And that places the obligation on the tenant to repair and maintain the premises while renting it. There are certain capital repairs that are the responsibility of the landlord, which is the housing authority. We do have a budget that we establish and a lot of these funds carry over year after year to assist with any issues that may arise. If there is a leak to the roof, the tenant reaches out to us to address those matters. Thank you. As a follow-up question to Commissioner Burke, so there's a reserve with the housing authority for the property for capital improvements on the building? We have an operating budget each year and I wanna say it's around $30,000, but please don't hold me to that because that's off the top of my head, but that does address the insurance that the housing authority carries on the structure and helps us address any issues that may arise. And so that would be an example, again, going back to a previous item where we have funds that carry over year over year to address items that may arise. Okay, any other questions then, commissioners? Yeah, I'm sorry. Oh, excuse me, excuse me. Commissioner Elson? Megan, how does that work? Do we take property checks? No. No, the housing authority and the city of Santa Rosa do not pay property taxes. Thank you. But we do have to ensure the structure. Yes. So then if the plan to use it as a RV parking area to take care of some of the homeless needs, the details of that will have to be worked out between the city and the housing authority. And the tenants, if that is in fact the direction that council provides to the homeless services team. And this was done previously. And so that was why it was identified as a potential, again, potential location and it's a relatively small site. So it would only be able to serve a few vehicles, but it was identified as a potential location. But there were costs associated with that, I'm sure some type of a monitoring of the use and the rest. And so who bore the cost of that last time around? I would need to get back to you on that to provide you accurate details, but there is an ongoing 24 seven presence in this facility because there are respite beds for homeless individuals that are released from the hospital. So there are people who are on site 24 seven. Most likely, I would guess it would probably come out of the department's homeless digit. I mean, that's most likely. So I'm certainly happy to return with that information. As a follow-up question, the lease covers the improvements as well as the land, is that correct? Or is it just the improvements? I believe the lease refers to the improvements and land as the premises, so both. So if the city were to use that parking lot for parking, they would have to get the approval of the tenant. That is correct. And that's that tenant did provide that approval in the past. In the past they have, yes. And we briefly checked in with them before identifying it, but we would need to, if the site was selected, we would need to have subsequent conversations with them on the continued use of that sites. Any other questions from commissioners? Just a suggestion that when, if there is such a request, I think it should come to the housing authority as well as the tenant. Certainly, I'd be happy to make sure that occurs. Jeff, to follow up on that, because the city would be using it for housing, for parking, and it's actually owned by the housing authority, is that a separate legal entity they would have to seek our approval? Yeah, this is the first I heard of this issue today, and I've got that down in my notes to look into it, but that would be my understanding, but I haven't looked into that. But I think that's correct. Okay, thank you. Not hearing any other questions, I'd open it up for public comment. We are now taking public comments on item 11.1, extension of the lease between the housing authority of the city of Santa Rosa and Southwest Community Health Center for 983 Sonoma Health. If you wish to make a comment via Zoom, please raise your hand. If you are dialing in via telephone, please dial star nine to raise your hand. You will have three minutes to make your comment. A countdown timer will appear for the convenience of the speakers and viewers. The first speaker will be acknowledged and invited to speak. Please make sure to unmute yourself when you are invited to do so. Your microphone will be muted at the end of the countdown or at the conclusion of your call. Chair Owen, at this time, I do not see any hands raised and we have not received any email public comment. Thank you very much. Looking for a motion to approve the resolution for the lease. I'll be happy to do that if you wish. I'll make a motion to approve resolution of the housing authority of the city of Santa Rosa authorizing a two-year extension of the lease between the housing authority of the city of Santa Rosa and Southwest Community Health Centers, doing business as Santa Rosa Community Health Centers for 983 Sonoma Avenue and waive the reading of the text. We have a second. I second that motion. Thank you. Question, Jeff Burke, this is a resolution to approve a two-year lease extension. Should the resolution, I'm sorry, I didn't read the resolution in detail. Should the resolution also include the two one-year options? I believe that it does. Okay. Thank you. If I can interject, I believe that language is found in the body of the resolution towards the end of the first page. Thank you. Be it for the resolve. I ask the court to go for a vote, please. Okay, we'll go ahead and take a roll call vote. Commissioner Burke. Aye. Commissioner Downey. Commissioner Olson. Aye. Vice chair test. Aye. And chair Owen. Aye. Let the record show that the motion passes unanimously. Thank you. We'll move on to animal 11.2. 11.2 is report recommendation and commissionable commitment of rehab funds for her and house located at 2149 Herne Avenue. Angela Morgan, program specialist presenting. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you, Megan. So today I'll be presenting on the her and house commitment of rehabilitation funds. Next slide, please. The subject property is in Southwest Santa Rosa, located at 2149 Herne Avenue and identified on the map in red. Next slide, please. Community housing Sonoma County is a local nonprofit and owner of the her house. It is a 15 bed transitional housing facility for homeless veterans seeking drug and alcohol treatment, which has been placed in service since 2013. Next slide, please. A water leak was discovered in the main restroom causing all tenants at her and house to be relocated. Community housing Sonoma County obtained an estimate for the needed repairs. The rehabilitation to be completed within six weeks and excuse me, within six weeks from the commencement of the repair work and the tenants should be relocated back to her and house within 30 days of the completion of construction. Next slide, please. Our housing authority approvals include a loan in the amount of $247,407 for acquisition of the her and house in 2007 and another $285,000 conditional commitment of funds in 2019 for pre-development expenses for the creation of an additional 24 units on the site. Next slide, please. Staff proposes the approval of rehabilitation funding for emergency repairs. The itemized budget proposes to use the city funds as follows, $56,045 in rehabilitation costs, $11,678 as a hard cost contingency for the project and $9,775 in soft costs, totaling $77,498 that the total ask today. The loan would be secured as a lien against the property and the affordability restrictions would be extended for an additional 13 years to 2081. Next slide, please. The project consists of permanent supportive housing beds and specifically and more specifically transitional housing for homeless veterans seeking drug and alcohol treatment. All beds are restricted to individuals with up to, with incomes up to 30% of area median income. This commitment of funds would support the preservation and rehabilitation of our existing investment as well as extending the affordability by 13 years. Next slide, please. It is recommended by the Housing and Community Services Department that the housing authority by resolution to approve a commitment of rehabilitation funds necessary for emergency bathroom repairs in the amount of $77,498 to community housing Sonoma County for her and house, a 15 bed transitional housing facility for homeless veterans seeking drug and alcohol treatment. Next slide, please. This concludes the presentation and I'm happy to respond to any questions. I have a question. Questions from commissioners. Yes. Mr. Downey. Yeah, Angela, I wanted to ask you, beyond the $77,498 to repair the bathroom, what condition is the rest of the property in that could present additional funding needs from the city center or the housing authority in the future? From the application and proposal that we received from community housing Sonoma County, they did not identify any other repairs. This appears to be an unforeseen repair or expense, unforeseen meaning it was this repair item was discovered and then brought forward to us. But normally I have, I personally have visited this property before in recent years and it is always appears to be in good order and good repair. But I'm not aware of any other necessary upcoming repairs. Thank you. If I can interject as well, the initial funds that we used to assist this property were home repairs. We used to assist this property were home funds, which gives us an obligation to inspect the property on a regular basis. So every several years a staff member from housing and community services does conduct inspections of the property. Commissioner Olson, do you have a question? Yeah. What happened to the money we put forward to develop a plan to extend that property? Did that go forward or where's that at? If you're referring to the $285,000 of pre-development funds for the additional 24 units, it is my understanding and maybe Megan can jump in here that the project is in process of obtaining their approvals and until they've been able to, until they can receive their approvals for the creation of those additional units, those units will be unable to be created or constructed until then. That's correct. They're currently in the planning process and obtaining a lot line adjustment because the goal is to create separate legal parcels that will have this facility that's before you today on one property and then have the new units on a separate property. And as you may recall, they are in the process of looking for future funding to construct phase two. And it was one of the many applications that we received for the CBBGDR funding. So that is proceeding in the process. But they have used our $207,000. They're actively expending it on expenses associated with engineering and design. Okay, thank you. Mr. Tass, do you have a question? Excuse me, that was actually my question as well. So thank you for the information. Commissioner Burke, did you have any question? I do, Commissioner Owens. Thank you. Just remind me the process. So is this, was it over the counter applications submitted rather than a, often we have rehab requests coming through the Redmond Dofer process. In this case, it apparently was over the counter. Is that correct? Yes, that is correct. It was an over the counter application due to the, due to the necessary repairs and the urgency to have those repairs and have the tenants relocated back to the property as soon as the repairs can be completed. Yes, this was an application that was accepted over the counter. Okay, well, that's certainly understandable. I mean, when people have to be displaced, that's an emergency situation. Will this lead to possibly a number of other applicants coming forward when they have rehabilitation, kind of emergency related repairs that are necessary and are we kind of equipped to handle that? I'll jump in and take that one for you, Angela. It certainly could lead to others approaching us to obtain emergency funding. No, we're not equipped to handle it financially. We generally put all of our funds out in NOPA. We happen to have a small amount of funds, as you can see available. And the difference is that oftentimes when we see rehab loans come in through our NOPA process, it's for larger items that can be done over the course of time, whether it's repairs to a roof siding dry rot, whereas this was a more immediate concern that required all tenants to be relocated and the building be vacant while we're trying to actively monitor the affordability of that facility. Thank you, Megan. I think that that kind of leads me to suggest that perhaps the resolution ought to include some language that separates this as an emergency situation from possibly other requests coming in, just to distinguish it as extremely unique and not so inappropriate. The, is the kind of on another point, I think you mentioned something earlier which may answer this question, but the county CDC, are they not handling a rehabilitation program on behalf of the city? So the county CDC was conducting rehabilitation associated with the Cal Home Mobile Home Repair Loans. And that was a grant that the housing authority obtained in like 2015 or 16. Those funds have all been committed. We did use the CDC for what rather small scale individual rehab loans. Also of note, the CDC has had a significant number of staff changes like Angela here. So they are currently not operating at the same level that they were a year or so ago. But this type of loan would be handled by housing and community services staff, usually. Thank you. And so the accessibility rehabilitation fund that you mentioned earlier in one of the presentations, that's still one that's administered. Who is that administered by Megan? So the Housing Accessibility Modification Program, otherwise known as HAM, is a relatively small pool of funding that is administered by Disability Legal Services Center, DSLC. So Disability Services Legal Center. And that is specifically for renters who need accessibility modifications to their rental units. So if you are a low-income renter and you need grab bars or ramps or other types of modifications, that program you would access through DSLC and then they would seek reimbursement from us. And those are for properties within the city limits. Thanks for clarifying that in the relationship between that particular program and what the county used to do and kind of where we are on that. I guess the final point I'd like to make, I understand the urgency of this. So normally would have said, can you bring some more details back on the cost? It's substantial, 77,000 and maybe the information that was submitted. But given the fact that it's so urgent, I would defer on that at this point in time. Those are my comments and questions, thank you. Any other questions or comments from commissioners? I do have a question. I just have a comment for Jeff. Yes, Mr. Downey? So, Jeff, it seems like we have made, or Steve, I'm sorry, it seems like in the past we have made exceptions for applicants without necessarily following into the role of setting a precedent that we would take applications on a case-by-case basis per conversation we had a couple of years ago. Is that your recollection as well? For Steve Burke? Well, I'm trying to think. I know we've refused requests based upon the fact that we'd set a precedent. I can't remember exactly waving it, but this could have very well happened. So, if I could address the concern about setting a precedent. I note that in the resolution, it does talk about a couple of things. One, it talks about the fact that because of these necessary repairs that the residents had to vacate the project, and it talks about the fact that funds are available. So, I don't know if that alleviates the concern, but that is in a couple of the whereas provisions in the resolution. And even if it wasn't, frankly, this commission, the housing authority, would have discretion on a case-by-case basis. Perhaps maybe there's a political concern, but I don't know that I'd be concerned from a legal standpoint, but I do think that there is some language in here that would serve to differentiate it from future cases coming forward. Megan, I don't know if you have anything to add to that. No, I think that was a good summary. And it means because of the situation where tenants had to vacate the facility and the target population, where these are homeless veterans, that I certainly took the application outside of our funding cycle because I wouldn't want them to have to wait an additional three to four months to have their application reviewed by the housing authority and then delay the use of the facility that much longer. Jeff, or to follow up on that, and I see reading the resolution, how you extrapolated those points. And in recognition of Commissioner Burke's comments, should we add another whereas that comments that this was seen as an emergency situation? So it's very explicit. So you could, I thought about that. And so in the fourth whereas provision, I think you can simply add the word emergency between necessitating and repairs. And I think that will, just the word in the insertion of the one word emergency. So if somebody wants to make an amended motion with that slight amendment, we can modify the resolution accordingly. Thank you. Any other comments? I just heard, this is the first time I've been on the housing authority for a couple of years now. This is the first time I've seen one of these come through. So pushing just on process. When we look at the cost that come in for something like this, how do we evaluate whether or not those costs are seen to be true costs or inflated costs or below market, how are those costs evaluated? I guess that would go to Megan or either one of you can answer. Thank you. I'll let Angela, Angela can start. Okay. So when this application came in, it was a full application that included their project scope as well as an itemized budget and a copy of the estimate that was received by the contract, by the selected contractors. So they had gone through a process. Community housing Sonoma County had gone through a process of obtaining several estimates. And this was the best, the best estimate that they had received and wanted to proceed with. And they shared it with us. When you say best estimate, is that based upon lowest cost or is it based upon reliability and reputation of the contractor as well as a good cost? How was that defined? It was referred to me as cost, best cost. So lowest cost. Yes. If we could have that included if we see something like this. So we have an understanding that that process took place because that was left out. Understand the process of how the numbers were come or derived. Another question probably pointed toward Megan. If the, because there is a line and for contingency on here, which is good anytime we're doing some sort of rehab. And that's good that that number's in there. If the funds are not dispersed in that full amounts, how was that tracked and how is it tracked in terms of dispersing, how is that process work? So what our process is for dispersing loan funds is it's reimbursement. So we will establish the loan for the amount that's approved by the housing authority and the borrowers need to provide us with copies of invoices from their contractor or consultants who are doing the work for whatever the project may entail. So we reimburse based on the invoices provided. So if they do not expend all of the contingency and we want to see change orders associated with that work to justify expending the contingency, then those funds would remain. We would reduce the final loan amounts. And then those funds, this would be a good example of where you would see more money in the next fiscal year's budget. So that would roll over and become additional funds available for a loan product. Through dispersing this, and you described what happens in a normal funding process, regardless, and this being just one of those entities, one of those situations. Are lean releases requested when going in for disbursements, additional lean releases? Not generally, we do receive copies of all the leans that are put on the properties from the various subcontractors. But when we do finalize the loan, we will look to see that those leans have in fact been released. I'm not talking about the leans have been placed. I'm talking about winners that invoice submitted that they would provide a conditional lean release that basically states that we're asking for $10,000. And if we've been paid the $10,000 as a subcontractor, our lean release would, our lean rights for that 10 grand once paid or reduced, does the city go through that level? We do not go through that level. Okay. Any other questions? Hearing none, we'll go ahead and open for public comment. We are now taking public comments on item 11.2, commitment of rehabilitation funds for kernels located at 2149 Kern Avenue. If you wish to make a comment via Zoom, please raise your hand. If you are dialing in via telephone, please dial star nine to raise your hand. You will have three minutes to make your comment. A countdown timer will appear for the convenience of the speaker and viewers. The first speaker will be acknowledged and invited to speak. Please make sure to unmute yourself when you are invited to do so. Your microphone will be muted at the end of that countdown or at the conclusion of your comment. Our first speaker will be George Penn. George, I have enabled your speaking permissions. Thank you. Can you confirm you can see the countdown? Yes, I can confirm that. Your time to be in is now. Thank you. I just wanted to make a quick comment. I have a passing interest in housing here and how our city conducts business and things going forward. And I was just really surprised at the cost of the renovation is so high. I mean, $77,000 is a substantial amount of money. My mortgage is 2,700. So that would cover my mortgage for two years. And given the housing authority's goals of putting people into houses, I'm not saying it's not a good use of money that it definitely is and needs to be repaired, but it just brought up the point to me and it made me wonder if there is a process of vetting how much is being charged for these repairs. I strongly believe in saving as much money as possible because the more money that's saved here can go to house more people and more people in need. And again, I think it should be done but I think the price seems extraordinarily high. I think we've also watched some house-huntered or some of those renovation shows and $80,000 goes a long way in terms of repairing and updating properties and things of that nature. So I would just ask maybe if there's a way to vet that process and to understand why the price is as high as it is. And yeah, that is my comment. Thank you for listening. Chair Owen, I do not see any more raised hands and we've not received any email public comments at this time. Thank you and thank you for your comment. And again, it is something that we looked at in terms of that's what was my questions in terms of how that number was derived and then looking at the estimates that we're providing and that process was followed through with more than just one estimate in Angela and Megan confirmed that process. So I do appreciate your comment very much. I look to the commissioners to if there's a motion on the resolution. Vice Chair Tast. I'll make a motion to approve the resolution of the housing authority of the city of Santa Rosa approving a commitment of rehabilitation funds necessary for emergency repairs of Herne House located at 2149 Herne Avenue. No numbers 9933-3315-21 and 9933-3325-21 with an added amendment paragraph four reading whereas a leak beneath the shower floor was identified in the main bathroom at Herne House causing damage and necessitating emergency adding the word emergency repairs to the shower floor subfloor and walls resulting in all residents vacating the project and moving off site. Thank you. Do we have a second? Oh, sir. Thank you. Commissioner Downey and Commissioner Olsen that Mr. Downey chimed in first. If we could go ahead and request a vote on the resolution. Okay, we'll go ahead and do a roll call vote. Start with Commissioner Burke. Aye. Commissioner Downey. Commissioner Olsen. Vice Chair Tast. Aye. And Chair Owen. Aye. Okay. Let the record show that the item passed or the resolution passed with unanimous vote. Thank you. And that moves us to our last item which is a adjournment of the meeting. I wanna thank everybody and staff for time and effort in putting all this together and thank you very much. Thank you. This concludes our meeting. Thank you.