 Okay, sorry for the delay Let me call to order the October 22nd meeting of the and it says regular meeting of the housing authority of city of Santa Rosa First item or second item listed is the roll call Chair Harris here vice chair Lemke here commissioner Burke commissioner Downey Commissioner Johnson Morgan here Commissioner Wilson here and as a reminder to the commissioners to please turn on your microphones when speaking please Thank you Any statements of abstention Our hearing done let's proceed to Number four public comment, and this is the second time for items not listed on the agenda Number four I have a card here from Jennifer Australia Hi Hi, so my name is Jennifer Estrella. I'm with Habitat for Humanity of Sonoma County I'm here today because we were one of the several applicants Seeking funding for an affordable housing project as part of this recent NOFA While our project Somerset place was not selected for funding at this time We hope that there's serious consideration in the next funding round We are trying to be creative in providing affordable housing to the community And as part of our project we intended on adding junior dwelling units to the primary units that City Ventures is Building at Somerset Place with the city trying to encourage Accessory dwelling units or junior dwelling units to all the residents in the community to get them to increase housing Available affordable housing. We hope that this is a consideration is as you guys look at available funding in your next round that if Habitat's building affordable units that are dwelling units that Essentially that it's a it's a good commercial for the community to see that their support So hopefully As I understand it, there's about 400,000 that hasn't been committed yet and our application was for 500,000 We'd be happy to receive a small portion that funding to help us build these junior dwelling units. Thank you Thank you the next card for this General comment is Dwayne DeWitt. Oh, my name is Dwayne DeWitt. I'm from Roseland I wanted to thank the housing authority and for you folks volunteering your time on these activities and say that I was at Friday's opening of the Benton Street Veterans Village and As I came here today, I went by Paseo Vista out on Dutton Avenue wrote my bike by there Those are going to be over 130 units and that project was set up to be affordable Those are for sale units for around 350,000 dollars per unit. I Also rode by Village Station on Boyd Street. Those are housing units that are for sale Not considered affordable, but will be around 400,000 and perhaps more for the larger units Down on Sebastopol Road. The Villas is being built with over 198 parcels going in so all of these are unsubsidized Well, excuse me. I should rephrase that Paseo Vista is subsidized Village Station in the Villas aren't subsidized and they'll be going for around $400,000 At the Benton Street property. Mr. Craig Melzner stated that it was $3.8 million the newspaper reported three point six three point eight million about five hundred and forty thousand dollars a unit So I have a problem with that because I believe Affordable housing should be produced for less than market rate housing And it is possible to do it and the subsidies shouldn't be given to such highly expensive situations I'd also ask you To continue item 9.1 till November because when I read the NOFA had said the decision Would be in November and I've been working with a group called the Sonoma County Housing Advocacy Group to talk about putting together a Statement letter to put in on this item. It's really important because there's this woman who just spoke She thought the decision is already done Before the public hearings even been held and that's not the way these things are supposed to work and at the public hearing I would be thinking that we could advocate for things that did more accessory dwelling units and did more creative and innovative Approaches rather than just returning to the same old government organized non-government Organization Burbank Housing and saying hey, we're gonna help you to me the Lantana project is a pig in a poke It's a boondoggle that's been going on for way too long and isn't gonna provide any more real Affordable housing for renters and homeless and people right now. It's a convoluted Rational that I've read I haven't been able to talk with any of the commissioners about it But I read the rationale and I don't believe it So I'm hoping that you folks will talk deeply in-depth about this later in the meeting and then also Hold that in November November for 9.1. Thank you for your time Seeing no more cards. I don't believe I'm gonna look to my Deck here one more time no more four is any one else from the public wishing to speak in this open comment period Okay, seeing none. Let's move on to item number five As stated it doesn't matter from the housing authority regarding future agenda items and at the last meeting in September I had proposed that We develop a future agenda item to discuss and make decisions about the timeline of the release of Agenda and supporting materials and That is what we are to consider now is putting that on a future agenda and Although I have not spoken with my fellow commissioners My thought is to appoint Commissioner Downey and Commissioner Johnson Morgan to develop a proposal for Consideration at our November meeting If that is possible if we need a longer timeline, we will deal with that, but if You would agree to work on Developing that agenda item then I would appreciate that and certainly anyone Can submit ideas on this topic? Okay, so that takes us to Item number six. Excuse me, Mr. Chair The process then requires us to both requires you to vote. Yes That's right. Here's a 5.1 Mr. Dwayne I thought we were gonna discuss that hello. My name is Dwayne do it I'm from Roseland and I'm very supportive of more information to the public as early as possible in any process of Public policy decision-making. I think that this would be a good thing And I think it's especially important to keep in mind that the city paid Lots of money to put together an open government task force and have it delve into the idea of Information being shared as early as possible with the public to make sure that we had a well-informed electorate helping with these types of situations So I'm hopeful that this will go forward in a positive manner looking at it as if it's a supportive and Complementary measure to the hard work that you volunteers are doing. I say this because the other day when they finally put up the Information packet for this meeting. I realized, you know, this is really big and there's a lot of stuff in there And if you don't get it in plenty of time It's difficult to make a well-informed decision on how to best Marshall the assets of the taxpayers to serve the community at large So I understand that you might have your own views on how bureaucracy might operate But I really would like to see the housing authority be one of the most open accountable and transparent agencies ever It's if I am correct. I remember looking back at a report that I have in my bag from It's from 1970s it points out that Santa Rosa's redevelopment agency was started in 1958 60 full years ago. And so I don't think it's inappropriate to say hey this long-term body Could do a better thing of informing the public in a nice way. I appreciate your time all the best to you Thank you, mr. Dwayne. So I have a question certainly I'm a little confused on this item I was under the impression that the city council is Under pressure resulting from some of the open government task force Recommendations to try to shorten their time frame, but I thought no decision had been reached about that So I'm wondering if we're Early in trying to align ourselves with the city council policy This the city council has established a subcommittee that has started to meet the first meeting Was last earlier this month The next meeting will be on November 1st. They are anticipating probably at least six meetings to go over the recommendations of the Open government task force The notion of setting an earlier time for posting preliminary agendas Is one of the topics that will be discussed by that subcommittee and again for you today is simply to Excuse me to vote on whether to put it on your agenda You know whether next month or another month forward, right? I mean my feeling is we're jumping the gum a little I mean if if we have an intent to Align ourselves with city council policy and city council hasn't developed their policy For us to come up with an independent recommendation at this point Doesn't make too much sense to me. Well, I think we need to take into consideration the fact that the city had an attempt at open government and And This is a second try. So if we're gonna I think we have a much smaller scope of just timing in of our Preparation of preliminary and final agendas and the packets to go with it And that's much smaller scope than the whole topic that I think the city council is taking on and If we wait for that process We don't know how long it'll take because it was a few years ago that they made their first attempt at that and it didn't Result in anything so But I think I'm understanding the process here is I mean we certainly could take the time to have members of the commission give their thoughts on this topic of Timing of release of the agenda and supporting items In particularly since Uh, two of the members have agreed to work on this In preparation for our next meeting assuming that we have Voted any affirmative to have this as a topic on the november agenda Any comments or input? I mean this is a At minimum a three-step process wants to get it to this point now another step to get Something I mean we're just voting now whether to put this on the agenda for next time and I'm suggesting we delay that yes, I'm a little A little confused There's a process that the city council has adopted For having items that aren't on the agenda discussed And a process of a vote being taken by that board And I think we've kind of followed that to determine if there's something that we want to discuss on a future agenda So we so we have that piece Um if I'm not you're saying that the city council has adopted that piece already All right. Well, it's my understanding this at least their practice. I don't know if they've adopted it or not I don't know what This process of placing things on the agenda Where at the council if a council member Would like to place something on the agenda They make a motion and get a second at the first meeting it then comes back for a vote Which requires four affirmative votes to place it on a future agenda at the council that is In council policy that process. So that's the process that we're following here as well at the council level In terms of when it comes when the item comes back to the council is usually left open Sometimes there is a defined time, but sometimes it's left open So you are in taking this vote today you are aligned With the council policy That two-step process to get something on the agenda So that would be the action that we would be taking Today today. Yes today the action would simply be Yes or no, we want to place this on a future agenda The chair has suggested that it be on the agenda next month's agenda So you would be either affirming that or Denying that or continuing it. So some of the some of the issues we're talking about Making sure we're in sync with the city council could be more It could be more detailed discussion about that at our next meeting right the If this motion passes what will be on your agenda Either next month if you direct it that way or some later future agenda if you direct it that way What we'll come back to you is a proposal to Have staff post your agenda and supporting materials Sooner than is currently required under state law, which is what staff currently follows the The city council has a preliminary agenda that is posted at least nine days Prior to their prior to each meeting that's based on a settlement That took place back in the 80s with the Sierra club And then they meet the 72 hour notice for all of the supporting materials get posted 72 hours What is before the task force? Um, I mean, I'm sorry. What is before the subcommittee for open government that has recently been constituted by the by the mayor? one of the proposals is to Increase that the timing of the preliminary agenda to be I think it's 14 days in advance I may not be exactly correct on that number of days So that's the proposal that you would consider Next week Some version of an earlier preliminary agenda or earlier full You know final agenda In advance of either the 72 hour that's required currently by state law Again, we're not going to give that all by way of explanation of what's in front of you It's not in front of you today to discuss It's simply whether you want to put that on the agenda And then the question of the timing So that we would be more consistent with what the city council is doing Is really another question that we might discuss in the future at our next meeting or Whenever it's appropriate given the city council's action on that Correct, it seems to me to make sense to be in sync with the city council's process since we do that with Pretty much everything else, but I do I do understand the issue of The fact that we meet monthly and the city council typically meets weekly and so there would have to be some Variation of that theme for maybe the housing authority to consider but anyway, so this whole discussion so so based upon a discussion I guess I would like a suggestion from staff about whether or not next meeting would be too premature given the city council's Involvement and studying this matter now. Maybe it'd be better to put it out two meetings or so well the excuse me the Expectations of staff is there wouldn't be a staff report nor an analysis We would be listening to the legislative body trying to understand What you're asking and what your expectations are So it would be a discussion on your part. I mean for example the Preliminary agenda that goes out currently nine days in advance There really isn't any supporting materials attached to that. It's basically the item in a Executive summary. There isn't an analysis. There's no background That comes out 72 hours in advance of their meetings. So that was that's an example of some Seeking clarity on our part so If we did that at the next we started that discussion at the next meeting that would be Comfortable from staff standpoint to be able to do that. Yes Given the fact that we're gonna discuss this matter in more detail at the next meeting Makes more sense to me and I would support that Okay, any other comments? Mr. Olson Well, I just like to get this thing down to black and white and get on with it I think we need to have You know a subcommittee or Some kind of a prior meeting to dash this thing through and get on with it We're now this is the second meeting. We've been screwing around this thing And it looks to me like we ought to be waiting on city council But if you want to go forward, let's have a subcommittee and we'll do it I mean it just seems to me. This is just inertia. I'm just really through with this I don't see the I don't see The validity and all the effort that's being put into it That's my position on the whole thing Yes, you're coming to herd I I think this is a small enough bite of the whole big picture that It would Be obvious to make one step and know that we can always augment or Modify from there. I mean This is not An irreversible Or an unamendable action that would be taken So Further comment, is there a second then of The motion to have a subcommittee, I guess I would say is what I'm proposing and Open to any suggestions from other members and come back with a report at the next meeting Whether or not that's a report that we would want to take action on I think is still to be seen So either a second So are we what are we voting on? The chairman the chairman has the ability to appoint committees, right? I don't think that needs to be acted upon So the question really is whether or not we want to have this on our next agenda to discuss or detail And that's a full vote, correct? That's a full vote and actually you already have the You had the second At your last meeting so you can proceed with oh we can proceed Why did it have to come back here? That's the that's the process. So But if you if you made the motion, there's no harm in having a second Asking for a second at this point and then you can move forward with the vote Okay Well, we might as well proceed with the roll Chair Harris. Hi vice chair limkey. No Commissioner Burke Commissioner Downey Commissioner Johnson Morgan Commissioner Olsen No Let the record reflect that The motion passes with two nos and one vacancy Okay So that takes us now to reports Chairman and commissioner I guess I will turn to my fellow commissioners first Are you going to comment on the well, but I'm giving you a chance to comment on well, yeah, so There was an opening of a beautiful facility Which was mentioned by mr. Duet a little bit earlier. It's the Benton veterans village It was last friday at noon and Small and impressive development well received from all accounts by the neighborhood, which was no small feat and So in addition to the mayor speaking at that event we had the district third district supervisor Shirley zane who spoke As well as the president of the Santa Rosa firefighters local who has been very much involved with the project And then craig melster who was a project developer or per project manager consulted to the project and of course that was it was emceed by the chair of of The organization that sponsored at the community housing Sonoma County. That was paula cook. I'm very well done very nice units. I Wish it wasn't so expensive and I think we need to continue to Seek ways to reduce the cost of housing and always possible and but But it's but it turned out to be a very very nicely designed well developed project and It works well in that neighborhood and so I think it's going to be successful We heard from some of Some of the people just by walking around and talking to them who are going to be living there So I wish them well and it was Just a nice event Any other comments commissioners I do want to comment on Measure in I know there's been some positive publicity going on it. I have no idea What the polls are looking like but it certainly is a major item that would affect how much housing gets built in the near term and If I may You may you are free to voice opinions on any ballot measure as an individual outside of the city premises So just a caution right that's All I will say about that And in our last meeting we did Approve the project based voucher NOFA and I became aware by searching on the city website that that NOFA was issued on october the second I did not receive a copy did any Other commissioners receive a copy of the NOFA announcement that was on the city website It's a straightforward announcement, but I think it Would be a useful communication For us to all be aware that there Is a notice out there with a proposal due on november the fifth. So that's Coming up fairly soon and I think we have a need for improved communication on matters like this and I would like to make available for the record a Explanation, you know in 2016 congress passed hotma Act which is a housing opportunities to modernization act of 2016 that made major changes to the project based voucher rules And make it possible for us to issue many more Project based vouchers than we have in the past So I have here a couple of pages that are from the website of the National Moe income housing coalition in washington dc. It is a digest primarily based on HUD's notice of 2017 dash 21 is a number of the notice But it's much easier to read a couple of pages from a newsletter than it is and so i'm Making this copy available to be Put in on the website and made available To all this commission And as chair, I would like to take the time also to discuss the topic of the Brown act which we had a study session on at the last meeting City attorney and I have had dialogue on this topic and I acquired a copy of the league of california cities publication open and public is their Guide to the Ralph m brown act which this is the fifth edition open in public five and I have some areas in that that I would like to share with the rest of the commissioners So i'm unclear is this not Putting another item on the agenda for discussion Yes, I would suggest that if the chair would like to have further brown act discussions That that be placed on the agenda and I'd be happy to have that To ask the director to put that on the agenda for next month But in this setting I will not be able to respond to any of the comments And is not an appropriate appropriate for discussion at this meeting right although I want to point out one thing in particular in That training material which is you know, excuse me. We just had a ruling from the city attorney Not to have a discussion. So it's not a discussion. I just want to a unilateral discussion perhaps by you It's not a discussion It is the public has a right to review agendas and other written materials distributed by any person to a majority And and it goes on to elaborate on how that can be done if it is with less than 72 hours before a meeting And I Want to make sure that that particular item gets noted that there is I will I will certainly Be Provide you with a response at a later date Well, I would appreciate that because you know what largely precipitated this was the fact that We had two meetings in june and july meetings that did not have a quorum and And so that has resulted in me writing a memo in august To which I have not received a response yet and and so I will just leave it at that for the moment Let us proceed then on the agenda to the next item Which is Committee reports other than the know for committee. I don't Not aware of any And that takes us to item number eight executive director reports monthly activities Thank you chairman the report is in your packet. I'd be happy to respond any questions. I have a question I just wanted to make sure that the cal home disaster Assistance will be used only For homes that were damaged or destroyed by the fire I couldn't tell from your report if that was true or not Chep of staff I the the answer is yes, but I'm What I was thinking of is it might help secondary displacement families as well or my Disaster only yes, okay, great. Well, but that raises the question of actually The description of the area Does it does not cover any of the burn area if the north border is a liner in the west Boundary was stated was coffee, but what I see in census is the railroad tracks And gernvill to the south There are not destroyed homes in that area. So I did we get the wrong number for the census tract or We need to be farther north and west To to actually Have any homes that were Destroyed by fire, you know, they There were mobile homes right up to piner there where Where range hits Piner but they're on the north side of the street. They're they're on the other side of the boundary of the north boundary We have not received the standard agreement yet from hcd So once we have the standard agreement be happy to come back and provide more information for the full commission On the program and its implementation. Is it possible that the the census tract is the wrong number Because if you can get that census map very easily By googling it and and it does not cover anything The only thing I could see that was relevant to us in there was the del nido apartments are within that census tract, but There are no destroyed homes. I Again, I'd be happy to return at the next meeting with further information. Okay Okay, any other so the first item Dave was the announcement of the completion of crossings at astin And the fact that there are six project based vouchers there If that process proceeded already have they chosen Are the people who are going to be moving in there already advised or do we know How that process is proceeding and in what role You know the waiting list i'm unclear as to where the waiting list is with regard to that and and the overall waiting list It's maintained here in the housing authority Well i'm referencing that there's a grand opening november 29 starting at 12 30, but Can I go into detail and we're out with the process of the project based vouchers there and the wait lists and things You know, okay, and I would advise that it simply be a brief statement There'll be no discussion back and forth since it's not a a formal separate agenda item, but Yeah Yes, um, so the crossings on astin has Six project based voucher units benton veteran veterans village has six project based voucher units Benton veterans village leased up today and The qualification process is still moving forward for crossings on astin. We have sent Eligible family names to the developer and they're determining Their own eligibility for the tenancy and those names were from our waiting list Does that include any of the people who have been on our list for our limited? preference the 24 vouchers for Currently homeless No, these were from our regular waiting list The top of the waiting list. So so far, uh, none of those currently homeless have had Uh an offer of a project based voucher. I mean This is in material that I believe should be uh reported to us on a regular basis is just where you know, okay What is the standard status of the 24 vouchers and and that I don't believe was part of the director's report. So we'll we'll have to put that on the next agenda and And we hear your request to have that information Right and I mean to be perfectly honest my Request would be that we you know see that not necessarily at a meeting but on a A regular basis to know the status of uh, you know, because I I know you have uh a requirement to be able to show HUD that you're using the vouchers and if we have Difficulties in in getting people paired up and I was asked by one of the city council If if I knew what the status was with regard that they had understood that all 24 had been issued But a minority had been able to find places So let me take for the look here Okay, so yeah crossing the vast units actually mentioned twice on the activity report Okay, so that takes us now Uh-huh. Oh, that's right a card on this item number 8.1 Thank you, sir Hello, my name is Dwayne DeWitt. I'm from Roseland And it's good to see the effort to try to get as much information as possible So that the public can understand What the agency is doing as I've understood it in the past The agency is a separate entity from the city and is not the city's government So please correct me if I'm wrong on that because when you point out that in this thing today it points out community housing Sonoma County Benton Veterans Village Back on the 19th Friday was assisted by both the housing authority and the city So money came from two pots apparently and it may be different Something that public could understand better if these things were Uh, given more detail And I understand that staff perhaps is not accustomed to sharing as much information as they might But I believe it's okay to share information About activities that are funded with taxpayers money It shouldn't be like we're just you know, like oh, we'll take care of it And you just come back and find out from us later So the report that uh, mr. O'goyne has put together is interesting to me because I was told by some people who operate various They're called community housing development organizations and non-government organizations that They don't give any priority to veterans Unless there's veterans money in the mix That somehow the money has to be called out to help veterans and then They might work with veterans on things So I live in a section 8 voucher subsidized unit not hud vash but I would say that It'd be nice If we could find out when openings are available in other parts of the city to perhaps get into a better housing situation I don't necessarily like the spot where I'm at But you don't really know how to get on the lists for the other spots Um when I went to one of the local agencies, which gets a lot of money from you guys They told me oh, well you have to apply to each and every spot that you might want to go to And back when they were preparing for the opening of a site on burbank avenue in the neighborhood where I grew up I was told yeah get on that list and you couldn't get on the list The the phone number was always busy And it turned out that I was never able to find out what happened until after it was all done So that's why I want to come here and advocate for more sharing of information Making things easier to communicate and helping the Taxpayers and the recipients of these subsidies the housing Project based vouchers for the future is something. It's really important to know How the community might be able to help in the Efficiency of those activities for the lowest cost units for the most people. Thank you Thank you, mr. Duit So that takes us on to the next agenda item Report items 9.1 is a report of the 2018 notice of funding availability funding recommendations acquisition of parkwood apartments at 68 99 monoceto and Pre-development construction and mortgage assistance loans for lantana place 29 79 and I Might as well go right straight to the Crunch point on this is that I believe this NOFA process has been Defective from The beginning in july when it was on the agenda for the regular housing authority meeting on july the 23rd As item 4.1 on the agenda that staff will issue a notice of funding availability that reflects the direction provided While the meeting was never held so the NOFA was issued Without the input that it was been indicated on the july meeting agenda and Okay, I have said I believe that this is a Defective process that was started Without the input that had been indicated would be given and it when it did then state That applications which are determined to best meet or exceed the criteria are Anticipated to be recommended for approval at the housing authority at its november meeting. This is october. So there's Two prior communications that indicate that we're not following a procedure as Would normally be expected and so I will turn to the city attorney for Our advice a clarification question chairman. Are you referring to the staff report from the july meeting? No, the july meeting was agenda item 4.1 Study session on the fiscal notice of funding availability Uh, it was not a Recommendation, but it was very clearly stated that staff will issue notice NOFA that reflects the direction provided In this meeting and there was no meeting in which to provide Direction and the The staff piece that came along with that Item 4.1 um Had questions as to whether it should be a A hard award date or whether it should be rolling And there was a prioritization given For let me see if I can find that staff report from that meeting said that The Lowest priority was for acquisition of Existing to convert to that was number four on the list of the priorities was the acquisition of new Or acquisition of existing housing to be added to the inventory of Deeders shifted housing that was of the fourth priority and I think it uh That prioritization would probably have been affirmed by The housing authority board had we had a meeting on the 23rd of july There was no quorum at that meeting. We are not able to hold that meeting and we have gone forward with the NOFA As is permitted the staff did go forward with the NOFA as is permitted under law Um to the extent that you have questions or concerns about That general process You are of course free to to discuss those um, and I will mention that To extent we get into the merits of the award of the NOFA. I would Um recommend and urge the chair to recuse himself from that piece of the discussion Due to communications with applicants outside of the NOFA process, but to the extent that you have concerns about the general Decision to move forward with the NOFA you're free to discuss those Right, I have concerns about moving forward with the NOFA and in the absence of a review of criteria and an assertion of the priority by the housing authority members As they were presented the discussion would have made A clearer picture for those who served on a subcommittee as to what priorities were felt to be and I think for us to Actually Have a NOFA process that takes into consideration the priorities That we need to have that discussion that was not held on the 20th sort of july And that is not on today's agenda. So that would require us to continue This so that we can have that discussion at a future meeting I would be Perfectly amenable to a special meeting if that's what the Wish of the body is but proceeding with The agendized items of these recommendations I believe is is flawed from the fact that it did not get input From The entire housing authority At all because the meeting of july the 23rd was not held The agenda item is here before you to Take the recommendation staffs. I mean, I'm sorry the subcommittees recommendations on On issuance of funding That is before you if you want to go back in time if you want to go back and If the commission is a whole instead wants to go back and open Up the terms of the NOFA that you'd need to make a motion and take a vote on on that Otherwise this item is before you and is available for the count for the commission to discuss Well, as you know, I uh, you've just told me that I should recuse myself I mean on the grounds that I thought it was One courteous to Burbank housing to let them know that I had real concerns about acquiring existing property when our Well-known issue is lack of inventory And again, I would I would recommend that you recuse yourself from any substantive discussion on This particular award Given your communications outside of the NOFA process And I would ask that if you decide not to recuse yourself That you not discuss any of the communications that you had outside of this process So that it does not taint the Further taint the process or taint the other commission members. Well, I think you're applying the standard here that it was not applied to the NOFA that the city council conducted last year their three million dollar NOFA I have Looked into that. I've found no inconsistency. This is the same advice that I would give to the council members as well But i'm not going to engage in this setting in that discussion. We can have those discussions outside Of this sitting those the the three million dollar NOFA that was before the council is not on our agenda Nor is a discussion of The standards for conducting a NOFA So I i'm not going to engage in any further discussion of of the legal side of this in this setting But again, i'm happy to talk with you further outside Of outside of this meeting. I think it needs to be An agenda item that we should have a policy that clearly identifies these things of the expectations of uh How members of this commission communicate? And what under what circumstances? Those communications are considered inappropriate. I that is not at all clear We do not have a manual here to open up and look at the policy and and that is I think not a good way to You know bring the public volunteers into A decision-making process without having clear communication so I I would recommend that we take action to continue For a later time this NOFA in fact, I think it would be appropriate to Have a meeting discuss the topic of the NOFA and its priorities and have it reissued Hi I would like to make a motion to continue with Discussion of this item that's on the agenda I'll second that but I would like to hear from Legal counsel from staff about is there any discomfort with proceeding given the issues of I think there are three issues one is the timing for acting on the NOFA The fact that we had to Skip a date when we had this the NOFA on the agenda and then the third thing about the Priorities that were in the NOFA. Is there any reason that staff can think of where we shouldn't proceed with acting on this today? well and to clarify commissioner Burke the the The priorities were listed in the staff report for the july 23rd meeting not in the NOFA Um That we reference in the NOFA that a decision will be made by november Not that it will be made in november by november. I said november meeting. It did not say by it said specifically it says to be So recommended for approval by the housing authority at its november meeting and not say by Are you reading from the NOFA? I'm reading from the NOFA The next to the last bullet on the back recommended for approval to the housing authority at its november meeting Oh right there You're correct. The process here has been I think accelerated beyond reason And in further attempts have been made to reduce the amount of dialogue that goes on around this NOFA and That to me is enough reason to Uh Distart over and have some clarity on what the expectations are And have the opportunity for this body to look at those staff recommendations And uh comment on them, excuse me. Mr. Chairman on the floor I was just trying to get responses to yeah I just want to clarify all the applicants were notified of this meeting today with this on the agenda I'm sorry. Could you repeat that? The applicants to the NOFA were notified of today's meeting that this would be a topic for your consideration I have just one question from staff Normally the staff meets with the subcommittee to discuss the these data And I understand that in this particular case For a variety of reasons that meeting didn't take place My question is did staff make a any attempt to To get together with the people on the subcommittee to have a meeting Yes, the NOFA subcommittee met twice to come up with the recommendations. That's before you today And uh, let me know that I was told to recuse myself so that the opinions that And the observations that I have it is observations factual observations That raise questions about really whether we want the priorities as they are being expressed by our by these NOFA recommendations And and I was unable and have been restrained today from making those comments to you all either and I You know, I'm here as a volunteer As a commissioner being selected by the city council, but I do not believe I gave up my rights as a citizen and voter in the city of santa rosa to be able to express My thoughts on this and I think there's a motion there's a motion on the table If my understanding is correct that there's no reason the staff sees is not to go forward with the sign of my second I do not see any reason any legal reason to not proceed So that means that we are proceeding Well, we have to vote on that Okay, there's a second And we need to vote on whether we are proceeding then To the rest of item nine I'm sorry just for clarification for the record vice chair lemke was your motion to continue the item or to hear the item I'm sorry to what continue over here to hear To hear the item to discuss it. Okay. I will call roll call now. That's my understanding Chair harris No Vice chair lemke I Commissioner Burke Commissioner Downey Commissioner johnson morrigan Commissioner olsen Let the record reflect that the motion carries with a majority of the votes with one vacancy and two nos Okay, so that takes us to the staff presentation I have a question. Are we going to uh I know we're going to hear the ones that were that were picked out By staff, but are we going to also hear those people put an application in who are not Picked out I'm sorry. I can repeat the question. Well, there were more than two people applied for the money Yes, and we're going to hear from the two that was chosen by staff to give the money to What are we going to hear from staff those who put in a you know Claim and didn't get it. Yeah, we're going to go summarize all of the projects for you briefly and then in the report as well Thank you And just to clarify chairman olsen. This is a recommendation from the housing authority's subcommittee not just staff Oh, thank you. Thank you very much Who is the subcommittee? And actually i'd like to uh make a point on that Uh after reading the recommendation, I don't feel that it is my full recommendation Um, we were a subcommittee of two or three people I don't feel that this was my full recommendation I thought that we were going to be moving forward with more than these two recommended Uh projects So I think in the future I would like to have Some kind of advanced information as to what the recommendation, especially if it's going to include a subcommittee that i'm on I'd like to have a Advanced copy of that before it is published to make sure that I'm going to agree with what the recommendation was My if I'm going to part of thank you for those comments when when frank kasmos finishes the presentation He was planning to turn it over to the subcommittee so you would be able to Share your thoughts or what might be missing or or additional information. Whatever you'd like to say could I um So Are we saying that it's like a two to one vote on the subcommittee? No, because I was asked to recuse myself. It was really one vote So steve did you support the recommendation? Well, we have three people on the committee Chairman harris um myself and uh johnson morgan christian johnson morgan you're right The um There was a discussion about a need to Have the chair recuse himself and so that took place in I don't know the first or second meeting and so the committee proceeded as two members and I came away from that with the understanding that The two of us that were on the committee Were recommending that we go forward with a recommendation that is before the full housing authority today and Commissioner johnson morgan just indicated Her thoughts on that point. It may also be I guess important to say that I don't think that we actually at the um the subcommittee said As a cohesive group, this would be our recommendation. I think we all kind of voiced our opinions And then that was the end of it. So what i'm seeing as at the recommendation is not what I would have recommended to the whole group And so I would chime in at this point today I think that confirms that this is it has been an unacceptable process and that we should not be proceeding with it Chairman harris members of the housing authority The housing trust issued a notice of funding availability or a nofa on july 26 applications were due on august 31st of 2018 The nofa announced the availability of approximately four point one million dollars of local and federal funds The federal funds include community development block grant funds Which have an annual timeliness expenditure requirement So that no more than 1.5 times the annual grant is on hand at the end of april of each year The selection criteria set forth in the nofa include readiness timeliness financial feasibility qualifications capacity and experience of the development team As well as housing authority policies and preferences and as well as also as cdbg and home regulations In response to the nofa we received 11 applications requesting almost 22 million dollars The chair appointed a nofa ad hoc committee Including the chair and commissioners berk and johnson morgan Who reviewed the applications and as pointed out the chair Uh Was not participating in the second meeting Uh, where the recommendations were mean Together staff and the the ad hoc committee made the funding recommendations that are for you today The applications reflect a range of project types including new multifamily rental housing for families Homeless veterans and seniors displaced by the the seniors who were displaced by the 2017 wild wildfires New home ownership housing And rehabilitation I would like to add the public comment about the auxiliary dwelling units was also The auxiliary dwelling units are not being uh recognized as part of the new home ownership. Well, that's not obvious The 11 the 11 applications are summarized here and i'll kind of group them for you and go through them The rehabilitation projects include del nido and quail run Del nido is actually a hybrid whereas most of the 260 units will be rehabilitated With the exception of 18 which would be demolished and 24 new units would be constructed for net gain of six units Both del nido and quail run requested four million dollars Boyd street also requested four million dollars and that is a new 47 unit multifamily development for families Other new family projects include dutton flats Proposing 60 units and requesting five hundred thousand dollars rich point Proposing 56 units and requesting two million and 46 thousand dollars rosalind village proposing 75 affordable units and requesting one million dollars And then uh herne veterans village would be um a veterans Is a proposed actually expansion of an existing facility for 32 additional units For veterans mostly homeless veterans and they're requesting 285 thousand dollars The site currently houses 12 veterans Journey's end is a two-phase senior housing development for the journeys and fire victims For this first phase there is a request for one million dollars for 111 units Phase two would include 51 units The summer set place is in ownership development Uh a proposal approved by the planning commission and the planning department In accordance with the housing allocation plan provides that the market rate developer city ventures Will provide 10 ready to build lots to habitat for humanity For construction of 10 ownership homes at 80 percent AMI So that is kind of the baseline on that one There's a requirement already on the table for the 10 units at 80 percent habitat's application Was a request for 500 thousand dollars To add a junior accessory dwelling unit to each of those 10 and those junior accessory dwelling units Would be available to a households at 120 percent of AMI And a junior accessory dwelling unit Is no more than 500 square feet in size and it is contained entirely within the existing single family structure It utilizes an existing bedroom and contains an efficiency kitchen It may or may not have does not require to have it. It may have a bathroom A lantana place is requesting 1.3 million dollars for 48 home ownership units And parkwood is a request for 2.4 million dollars for acquisition of 56 market rate units And conversion to affordable housing The NOFA ad hoc committee review the applications with staff on september 20th and 27th Two projects rose to the top relative to the selection criteria These are parkwood apartments and lantana place homes with a total funder in quest of 3.7 million dollars The ad hoc committee and staff can meet uh and reconvene later will to further review the remaining nine applications in light of potential future full or partial funding for one or more projects Parkwood apartments is located at 6 8 9 9 monoceto boulevard is adjacent to rink and valley community park and the rink and valley library And very close to maria creole high school and the monoceto shopping center Lantana place is located at 2 9 7 9 dotten meadow It's near lc allen high school in near southwest community park parkwood is acquisition of 56 market rate Two better units in conversion of those two affordable housing It is recommended for funding because Burbank housing is poised for a quick close in december of 2018 The federal cdbg and home funds along with some local funds Would be expended at that time Which uh is prior to the april 30th cdbg expenditure deadline Conversion of the project to affordable would protect the rents for the existing tenants In addition a regulatory agreement would be recorded against the property at the close of asco And it would restrict the incomes and rents for 55 years protecting existing and future tenants The acquisition is fully funded with the bridge loan and the housing authority loan And the site is also it's in the northeast quadrant A little background on lantana place Well first it's a 40 it's proposed 48 units three bedroom of all of them three bedroom units But the project has been in the housing authorities development pipeline since 2007 First it was a multi family housing development But due to financial and market challenges starting in 2008 the funding gap grew Making the project infeasible in 2017 housing authority approved changing the project to 48 home home home ownership Homes as well as providing additional funding at that time HUD has approved the use of the original cdbg funds that were put in the project in 2007 For the multifamily they've approved it for the conversion to the home ownership project Lantana place Lantana place is recommended for funding because it moves the project from the 11 year pipeline toward production with a start date projected in june of 2019 In addition burbank housing will market the homes to their existing tenants in their other properties Which would free up rental units for other households It may also provide home ownership opportunities for section 8 voucher holders who are family Self-sufficiency Program graduates The family self-sufficiency program participants augment their education and find employment build assets and achieve Financial stability ultimately for the purpose of home ownership Funding for this project and its product in this construction would clear a long funded cdbg project And the project is in a priority development area, which is the rosland sabbatical road specific plan area It is recommended by the housing NOFA ad hoc committee and the housing authority and the housing and community services department that the housing authority by two resolutions Approve a conditional commitment of funds to burbank housing development corporation the amount of 2 million 400 thousand dollars for acquisition Of the 56 unit parkway departments and conversion from market rate to affordable housing And Two to approve a third further advance in the amount of 1 million 300 thousand dollars to burbank housing development corporation For pre-development and construction costs for lantana place 48 single family ownership homes and conversion of the loan To home buyer mortgage assistance loans We'd be happy to answer any questions you may have and I would refer back to the The committee if you had any further comments or thoughts that We might have missed in the presentation or should be amplified or other Frank um Clarify for me just once more the two that the staff is recommending with the Approval of the subcommittee What made them stand out? Because I didn't seem that much different. So what made those two stand out? One of them was timeliness When they would be When they would use the funds and have and start construction or in the case of parkwood It's an acquisition. So it's completed. So the cdbg money For parkwood In effect is utilized as soon as the project closes, which is anticipated at the end of the year So the use of the cdbg funds and the other funds as well But the use of the cdbg funds means that we meet our timeliness factor for this year. So that's A benefit of that in addition There are the existing tenants Most of the existing tenants In the project are 80 percent earning 80 percent or or less of am i And the rents reflect in fact the rents have been kept low lower than market So by acquiring this project Burbank housing is protecting those tenants There there would be a risk if an owner Who is a market rate owner acquired it? So they they're protected for the existing tenants as well as future tenants Lantana, I'm sorry. Is this the corner of mill rinkin and uh, monosit? Or It's near It it's near there, but it's not at the corner. It's between Middle rinkin and calisthoga. It's near the park and the library Okay Okay, is there anything To be said for using And generally speaking i'm in favor Buying used units and redoing them because it's cheaper than build a new one It's substantially cheaper than building new ones Um, I heard an argument today that when you buy those, uh, actually what you do is you don't increase the Uh amount of units available. You just shift the amounts of units that are available from one source to another Uh, is that a legitimate criticism? Well that that it you know Clearly there's no new units being being instructed But as you mentioned the cost per unit for this is We talked about other units being constructed over five hundred thousand dollars, which is not Uh abnormal these days and these Units would be acquired for under 300,000 285,000 more or less for each unit So there's an advantage as well one of the benefits Are they are these units ready? In other words, did they have any money set aside to rehab these units? There's no money in the this first step is acquisition and The second step is syndication And it's the plan the plan for permanent financing is to syndicate find an equity investor And issue a tax-exempt bond that would bring in Is projected to bring in sufficient funding to have about 60 thousand dollars per unit of rehabilitation In the near future Thank you That just brought up a question for me. So when you're saying that they're wanting to issue a tax bond Is that already in the works now or is that something that we're looking for in the future on another? Ballot management measure. That's not it's not a ballot measure, but it would be something that they would be working on You know after after acquisition They would start getting in in motion their their investors and lenders and and apply for tax credits to the tax credit allocation committee and The four percent units that the four percent tax credit allocation is generally It's not competitive So it's generally awarded and then the city of san rosa is an issuer of Of one of many but the city of san rosa has an issuer of tax-exempt bonds So they would put this package together and bring it back before Um, well the city council if they're the issuer. I see we discussed that before. I just didn't realize it was the four percent Discussion that we had before Yeah, I think it's been discussed probably Pretty much already in an outline by by frank But the timeless timeliness of the projects was um, I think foremost in my mind I think was discussed considerably by the committee members about the importance of I mean developments that could move forward quickly When it comes to park wood, um, it was a matter of a long-term commitment to affordability that was Was not is not there currently but would be there if the units were purchased Um So you're you're protecting affordable housing for 55 years. I think is the term That certainly was a part of the of my consideration In the location of the development it is on the east side And that's not an easy thing to achieve these days given land prices and and the availability of land for development opportunities Even though this isn't a development opportunity a bit of provides affordable housing in an area that Has some affordable housing but more is needed And so I think that's a positive for for park wood and in terms of Lantana It was my belief I guess the third thing on park wood was that it also facilitated The utilization of federal funds in a rapid manner, which is important because You know, we're always being judged on how far how quickly we can Not only allocate the funds but have the funds put to actual use. I mean that's very important and it's very difficult to achieve because The housing authority is the first stop when a developer of affordable housing Uh has a thought about producing housing They need a commitment from the local housing authority before they can go forward with acquisition of land or proposals to purchase often Before they can apply for other funding sources And so these projects take a long time and to a large degree because we're the first in line And so it makes it difficult once we make those commitments To have the funds Be put to use as quickly as all of us would like to see them put to use so so I and so That comes to play with my thoughts about Lantana. It's a development that's um Was to be rental housing Personally that would have been my preference but uh because of circumstances out of everybody's control That wasn't possible the the development was having Was meeting challenges came back to us Uh had was uh interested in seeing faster progress on that on that commitment of funds that we had made to the development and um It's very important to me that that project moved forward because to undo that development to undo that deal Would be very expensive. It would be a big loss to affordable housing funds. I believe to the to the city's resources that are available for affordable housing so Parkwood Because it could go forward quickly his location timeliness uh Lantana because of the um because the long-term commitment to that And to lose that would be I think it would be very expensive and kind of catastrophic in terms of us Achieving our objectives Through commitments that we made a long time ago. So You know, that's what I mean. There was there were very fine Proposals submitted Which we could have funded all of them There's weren't always as many proposals are there as there have been in word this time and I think that's a real positive sign and I guess I'll leave it with that except there was a question that was posed Initially by habitat for humanity about any residual funds that might be available for That project and I would leave that to staff to respond to Uh after my comments. So thank you Okay, I do have three uh public comment cards. Okay I would like to hear if you are as comments. I would just say you know Typically I give a lot of weight to a subcommittee because they have reviewed in detail and discussed in detail Something that the rest of us haven't so Um steve's comments and your comments are important to me I as well thought that um Parkwood was a good choice because of how fast it can move Some of the concerns that we discussed were that it's not actually adding inventory to our area However, we did discuss in our meetings that perhaps we could add in some caveats into the The contract with burbank that they're already going to pull from their Their housing list, but we also thought that maybe we could add in a caveat that they have to Make some of those open available Units that are open currently to our our voucher holders waiting list And there might be other things that we can do to Kind of draw some of our Some of the ones some of the people that are on our waiting list into that development It is kind of concerning that, you know, if we don't preserve it for affordability that We're going to potentially have 56 because it does seem that most of the units are rented below Market rate that if we don't preserve it or if we don't Convert it so that we can't preserve it that we're going to have 56 more households that are looking for low-income housing In terms of lantana I didn't know the history about it. I'm just coming into it now as the way it is and it seems like a pretty good plan in my mind I think also it's important to mention that HUD is strongly encouraging us to move forward because they have approved the plan the way it is now And they would like to see this move forward That's my impression was that HUD has commented that they would like this project to move forward the way it is If you'll remember back to last spring spring of 2017 We were the subject of an audit by the HUD office of the inspector general In regards to lantana and at that point in time Burbank was beginning to reshape the project from rental to ownership in order to make it proceed So we shared all that information with HUD and they have agreed to the ownership concept that is before you So yeah, I did like I said when I mentioned when we started this I personally thought that We should be moving forward with three options There are options that we could fund with the rest of the money My concerns are I don't I'd said this about the larger applications For the four million. I don't like putting all of my eggs in one basket So that was kind of my concerns about those ones but also Funding just these two product projects puts all of our eggs with one developer. So the third um project that I was hoping to develop wouldn't Have not been with Burbank housing so that we have multiple Multiple projects going that with different developers and I thought that would be a better plan So I know that that money is still available and I know that it said that we could Revisit that later, but I don't see the point in why we can't move forward with Making recommendation For the rest of the money right now But I do I am support supportive of the two that we are recommending Thank you Kate blessing calamara from eden housing public comment Sorry got my clogs on today Can you hear me My name is Kate blessing calamara and I work for eden housing a non-profit housing developer based in hayward, california And I'm here to speak about Two applications for funding the quill run apartments And del Nido apartments on the southern and northern sides of the city respectively So in 2014 eden housing acquired quill run, which is a 200 unit affordable rental housing development From a for-profit company for the purpose of preserving the affordability of these units in santa rosa And going into that acquisition. We knew that we had to put a lot of work into the property It was going on 20 years and needed some work. So that time is now And this project will preserve much needed high quality affordable housing for about 600 people Including families and seniors in santa rosa We want to begin the rehab in a year in november 2019 But are concerned that the funding we have right now Will not go far enough in this rehab While we were not recommended for funding We think it's important to rehab this property so that we can keep providing high quality affordable housing to santa rosa residents in the long term as an aside Quill run is in a priority development area and we're looking into the possibility of adding new units To vacant areas of the site in a second phase But we can't get to that point until we have this rehab under our under our belt and underway So in a similar story in 2012 eden acquired gelnito apartments are also a rental community of 206 studio and one bedroom apartments in north santa rosa with the intent to rehab The aging property this one was built in 1970 Although units are restricted at 60 percent of the area median median income The majority of the tenants earn well below this level The first phase of the project will include substantial rehab of most of the existing units and replacement of 18 units with 24 new units This initial phase will open up space for construction of 50 additional units in a later phase and our team will work closely with the city of santa rosa's Planning department to add as many new units as possible So in these ways the project aims to preserve both the long-term viability of existing units out at del nido While also adding density to this underutilized site We thank you for supporting affordable housing. We hope that you reconsider allocating funds for these projects Or allocating other sources of sources of funds at the housing authority to to these projects. Thank you very much Chair Harris, can you turn on your microphone, please for the record? Sorry, sorry The next card I have for public comment is mr. DeWitt Hello, my name is DeWayne DeWitt and I wanted to Thank the people from Eden housing for the work they're doing. I know both of those Housing projects and it's very important that we do keep them I also wanted to thank all of the others that applied And I wanted to state that Though I do not support giving the funding to burbank. I support burbank My first internship in housing was with arnold sternberg at burbank housing in 1996 So I've been a member of numerous groups always supporting affordable housing My concerns for this process is that I also felt it could be extended through till november That it could have been done in a more transparent manner I essentially also wanted to point out that For almost decades It seems that the city and the county have been steering and focusing The low-income folks over into my area of roseland and you could Essentially say at times people call it uh for burbank the big three-story Uh Burbank housing development they put out there off of what they renamed South Debton to be Debton meadow And all this housing that's going out there and we were already the most Disadvantaged underserved overburden community in the entire county And yet people want to still plow more stuff in there. There's over 500 housing units in production right now With no improvement in the infrastructure So it's just too bad. That's what we're going to get. It comes our way But there's a positive out there and it's called Debton flats I don't know this guy that's putting it together, but I read the proposal and it's like close To the railroad station on west third And that could be something good for all of this highfalutin talk I've heard for decades about transit oriented development and we're going to be resilient and sustainable and do all these good things It's near a bus line. Yeah, we could do that fund that one And then I always look at journey's end because that's where I really got my teeth If you will on trying to save affordable housing when we fought back in the mid 90s To keep it from being replaced by a home depot store and those 44 people Who have their mobile homes sitting there vacant, but still They're not burned They should be a part of this equation and they should have been helped by burbank Waiting years and years to get something done while the poorest in our community are there struggling really seems so Just callous on the part of the bureaucracy So then we have a Somerset place habitat for humanity. I support their approach They're trying to do something new and different and get more units in at a better bang for the buck So I would hope that you would fund people like Debton flats Uh her and veterans village summerset with the habitat for humanity things like that instead of giving big blocks of money To the 800 pound gorilla. Thank you so much I'm thanking mr. Dewitt. I have a card here from alley gaylord of midpen housing Good afternoon Oh, no, it's fine. Thanks. Um, i'm alley gaylord the director of development for midpen housing santa rosa office up here at 350 college app Midpen applied for one million dollars of funding for this nofa for roslyn village In january of 2016 midpen was selected by at the sonoma county community development commission At the developer of the roslyn village project an approximately seven acre site located off of spassipole road and owned by the cdc roslyn village is a mixed mixed use master plan that contains 100 market rate Residential units 75 affordable residential units a food related mercado a civic building And a one acre plaza as well as public infrastructure improvements Midpen will develop own and operate and provide services for the 75 affordable rental apartments, which will house over 300 low income persons Since selection midpen has engaged with the community to solicit feedback on the project Including the one acre plaza worked with the cdc to engage environmental remediation and to apply for remediation Funding we've submitted entitlement applications and have nearly competed completed a disposition and development agreement with the cdc The entitlement process was underway for a year when it was delayed last november by a combination of factors roslyn was annexed into the city and the entitlement applications were required to be resubmitted from the county to be processed through the city In addition the processing delays Were also experienced because of the wildfires that we experienced last october To this point we resubmitted applications to the city and we are now expecting to receive our entitlements in december We will complete architecture and engineering for the 75 affordable apartments the design for the affordable apartments needs to proceed so that we can apply for local and state funding To get this project off the ground We are currently working with the city of santa rosa city bus to identify a transit project in order to apply for state funding for the Affordable housing and sustainable communities grant this spring which requires local leveraging roslyn received a commitment recommendation of two million dollars from the cfh Funds from the cdc last week and a local commitment from santa rosa for funding would increase its competitiveness Though we plan to break ground in 2020 in order to be more competitive for funding We can use that funding commitment from the santa rosa today As we and we ask for reconsideration of our request or a request for funding of the left over Unallocated four hundred thousand dollars. Thank you okay, thank you anyone else from the public wishing to comment on uh this matter of the recommendation of the uh NOFA funds I see an orange card You know, there's no red light up there yet. No, there is no Thank you. Uh, my name is thomas ells and My background is development and The costs we just have this terrible problem of not enough housing Not enough houses Um, I would I would recommend to you a very interesting book uh written by Richard walker called What is it called? A city gone it's it's a he's a Social geographer and he analyzed the entire bay area And what he found was that we're building as many houses as we have ever built And that's hard to believe that we have this price increase and Tremendous homelessness and and really Serious difficulties with housing But he claims that this is this is true and the but the reason for the challenge is the great inequality In the incomes of people that it's causing people to build just the bigger More expensive houses rise Increasing the cost and prices of all houses and making it unaffordable So putting a lot of pressure on affordability of all houses. So Um the key is really building more houses and I don't know that you can really change where your situation is with this at this moment But I would request that you consider very inexpensive houses And and you can have a I believe as dwayne said you're a separate entity and you can have you can weigh in on this debate Both financially and morally On the sizes of the units because Many and I don't mean the sizes of verbanks units or anything some of their their modest sizes But but together The costs end up being exorbitant and there are as many ways to actually achieve Production of housing that is much less expensive, but I don't know how to do it Through this as you mentioned so the commissioner mentioned about the Timing and the difficulty of being up front with the first person the first Contractual arrangement that comes from the housing authority And then you go back and back and forth the HUD get approval of the development and then you go through the entitlement process By the time you do that you've got a really big chunk of overhead a huge chunk of overhead being an Being a civil engineer. I know where that overhead comes from and I know where it goes And and it's very very challenging And I would just recommend that that you try to speed the process to produce those Less expensive units And smaller units. Thank you Okay, any further comments Good afternoon commissioners larry flooring with burbank housing. I'm apologized that I didn't fill out a card I was going to let the hearing proceed But I think there are a couple of things that I wanted did want to bring to the attention of the committee first of all I want to thank It's the staff for your thoroughness in the in the presentation as well as in the process of the subcommittee For your elaborate for your deliberations on this as well as the full authority The I wanted to just speak to commissioner johnson morgan's point actually I don't think it was brought up previously But there are 12 vacant units currently at parkwood which were being held vacant by the previous owners Or by the current owners, excuse me With the intent of driving up the value it would be our intent and we'd be happy to work to put project section 8 Applicants in there. So in essence you'd be getting 12 new units as a result of this and just to confirm with the other Point that was made that we would be applying for 4% tax credits to do the rehab Once the project is acquired. So that's that's our intent going forward With lantana, I just wanted to share that when I started at burbank about I don't know a year and a half two years ago. I was told about Lantana, you may know the It was a previously fully entitled for a 96 unit affordable rental project and frankly I'd love to do a 96 unit affordable rental health project We all know we desperately need that but the funds dried up success It was almost like you could track the drying up at affordable housing by looking at the progress on lantana every source Disappeared during the course of that project your staff. I think was being a little polite in suggesting that Community development blot that hud was had put the city on notice about this We felt particularly at you know, that it was our responsibility to do something And that's why we repositioned this as an effort as a for sale project And that's why we want this to move forward I have been with jurisdictions that have been the subject of inspector general reports on cdbg funds There are long-term lasting consequences if the projects don't move forward I don't know that that was fully articulated We see ourselves as being hopefully being part of the solution here with these funds We'll be able to move this project forward and we'll be able to provide 48 units of affordable housing Our goal is to be able to provide to break ground by the by june of july of next year And in addition be able to preserve san rosa status in with hud so we appreciate everything the staff's done and all of you done and Look forward to continuing to work together. Thank you Thank you, mr. Florence I would like to make a comment about the history that some of the history with berbank that a couple years ago Berbank came before us with a request for I think it was nine hundred thousand dollars from reserve of the housing authority because of contracts that had been entered into back in the 1990s underwritten by southern california Edison's subsidiary that participated in tax-traded bonds And I was on the subcommittee that Was able to you know take this question on and on the face of it It just did not seem right to me that we should be digging into our reserves When it would appear that the actions of southern california Edison were really grieve us in that case and we did succeed in getting a negotiation going and finding out that Obviously, santa rosa was in berbank were not the only ones who had been taken down the path by southern california Edison to the point where upper management Southern california Edison was divesting itself of that subsidiary and sold it to an organization in boston So this is an example of where we were able to sit down and come up with a better solution and I think we have been Prevented from doing that in this case. I mean there is a mention of the The project based vouchers as something that would be needed in the future at Parkwood and I would wonder if that would be a better Way to accomplish but berbank wants there as opposed to taking 60 percent of our cash Hard cash that could be better deployed in creating new inventory and you're being you know You're able to get out there on a limb basically with what you've done in bridge financing, etc and if you're already If your limb will hold it, uh, I think we could make better use of 60 percent of our cash for creating new inventory organizations that don't have that Capacity to balance that you do Uh, that's sure. I just want to say that I don't agree with that We can now buy these units and preserve them Uh at a price per square foot, which is 25 less than if we go to build new units So this is actually a better use of our money than it would be to use our money to buy New units until the prevailing wage and some other things are changed It is extremely difficult to build competitively priced affordable housing as somebody asked today There are units all over town for 400,000 and it costs us 500,000 to build the ones on bened Ben and avenue So there are real problems of building new units at affordable rates So I think that anytime we can buy existing units at 25 less in market And that's something we should go ahead and do Thank you. Well, let me just clarify that with the project lease vouchers. They could potentially do the same thing It is not a question of whether it's funded or not. It's just a mechanism by which it's funded If you're ready, uh chairman Harris, I'd like to propose a resolution I guess we do them one at a time. Is that the best way? so I would propose that we Housing authority consider adoption of a resolution of the housing authority of the city of santa rosa Proving a conditional commitment of funds in the amount of 2,400,000 to burbank housing development corporation for acquisition of market rate units and conversion to affordable housing located at 68 99 minus edel boulevard I'm not going to I'm going to waive the rest of the of the text because it gets into apn apn numbers and I don't think that's necessary. So that would be my Motion for approval on this one project second Any further comment Questions I do want to comment that you know one of the other aspects of this is that we're taking a property off of the tax rolls And we're impacting way beyond City government we're impacting the school districts by taking a property that's currently paying about $200,000 a year in property taxes and pulling it off of the tax roll and You know we there are consequences to Converting this property that go beyond what has been analyzed in this process and I have been Prevented from making these comments to the committee and I do believe that this is a flawed process that is jumping to this conclusion Efforts have been made to keep my opinions off the table and my analysis off the table and this is a A case where I really believe that we are not serving the best interests of our citizens By making a number one priority And alliance share of our funds Going to a project. It has detrimental effects on our other fellow government entities Are you calling the vote chair hairs? Well, I'm looking to see if anybody else is going to comment and Seeing no further comments. I see no other choice, but to say call the question Commissioner Burke vice chair Lemke Commissioner Downey Commissioner Johnson Morgan Commissioner Olson And chair Harris no Let the record reflect that the motion the resolutions pass with the majority of the vote with one no vote and one vacancy Okay, so now this takes us to a further staff presentation or you're done with Anything related to the second resolution I'm ready to make a motion I move resolution of the housing authority of the city of san aroza Approving a third further advance in the amount of 1.3 million dollars To burbank housing development corporation for pre-development and construction for lantana place homes 2979 metal loan number 9932-2 801-17 And conversion of the loan funds to silent second mortgage assistance loans And waive the reading of the text Is there a second? I'll second Any further discussion or any comment from the public Well, I'm getting tired of seeing lantana here. I'll tell you that It's been uh, I've been on this board for a very very long time and it's been on practically as long as I have I guess we're just in it's you know, it's it's not a good thing I think but marines. So it's so deep. It's been so long the commitment is so You know the commitment is so big and chairman berkson To get out of it is probably It's just something that's not feasible. So With that in mind, uh, I am going to vote for it But I want it known that lantana is in my opinion a disaster Thank you well Mr. Olson, uh, you know, we have not been able to do the analysis of whether this is good money after bad and and uh, I think it's questionable to not do adequate analysis But I see no choice here, but to Call the question Vice chair lemke Hi commissioner berke commissioner downey Commissioner johnson morrigan commissioner olson no And chair harris no Let the record reflect that the resolution passes with the majority vote with one vacancy and two nos Well, that takes us to the end of the agenda and I have three items here that I would like to see Entered into the record and posted on the city's website for the housing authority Yeah, as part of the public record Uh, since I have been, uh, prevented from making these arguments, uh In the subcommittee and subsequently have been restricted in what I've been able to say here Uh, I would like to make sure that these get into the public record And I'm going to distribute the copies of this memo to the fellow members and to the staff and Knowing of no other business Uh, we do have a november meeting scheduled for the normal fourth monday. I believe you're that correct What did you want with this what you want to fill? It's only one Oh, okay We'll check and get back to you What was the date in november? november 26th Okay, so that's after Thanksgiving No, I'm sorry. It's the monday after Thanksgiving Commissioner, I'm sorry. I didn't get the monday after Thanksgiving. So it's on basically a long right It's on after a long holiday weekend. Is there any comment on that schedule? I don't know hearing none. I will adjourn this meeting