 for women. You've got weird women issues. Commissioner Rawhouser, can you mute yourself please? Steve, can you please promote Morgan Biggerstaff who is serving as our counsel today? I will do so, yeah. It's all right, Chair Tess. It is 1.30. I believe all the commissioners that are going to be here are now here. And just a note again. I don't see myself on screen and neither does Tom LaPanna, although I can see Tom LaPanna on screen, but he can't see himself. I don't know what that all means. Oh, I've got you all on on screen currently here. So I think we should probably move forward. Good afternoon. I'd like to call the January 23, 2023 Housing Authority regular meeting to order. Due to the provisions of the governor's executive orders in 25-20 and in 29-20, which suspends certain requirements of the Brown Act, the Housing Authority commissioners will be conducting today's meeting in a virtual setting using Zoom webinar. Commissioners and staff are participating from remote locations and or practicing appropriate social distancing. Members of the public may view and listen to the meeting as noted in the city's website and as noted on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to speak during item six, public comment, or during our public hearing items will be able to do so by raising their hand and will be given the ability to address the commission. In compliance with California government code 54956.8, the Housing Authority will conduct a closed session at the beginning of this meeting. Prior to the Housing Authority recessing to the closed session, members of the public will be permitted to speak up to three minutes on the item to be addressed. I'd like to ask the clerk for roll call. Okay, one second. Okay, we'll go ahead and do a roll call for attendance. We will start with Commissioner Rawhouser. Here. Commissioner LePenna. Here. Commissioner Downey. Commissioner Downey has not joined us. Sorry, Commissioner Burke. Here. Commissioner McCorder has not joined us. Vice Chair Owen. Here. And Chair Test. Here. We'll let the record show that all commissioners are present with the exception of Commissioner Downey and Commissioner McCorder. Thank you. I'd like to call item number 3.1, closed session items. Following the announcement of closed session items and prior to recess into closed session, the public may speak up to three minutes on items to be addressed in closed session. City Clerk, are there any public comments on closed session item 3.1? There are no hands raised. Okay, thank you. We'll now close the public comment period and recess to closed session. What that means is all commissioners and pertinent staff will leave this public Zoom link and enter closed session Zoom link. That Zoom link ends in 3-4-1-0. There we go. And can we verify another roll call to make sure that everybody is back in to the regular session now? We can. Give me one moment. Thank you. Okay. Just one more moment. Okay. Since we left the and started the closed session, we had a commissioner joined with us during the closed session is now back in the regular session. So let the record show that Wayne Downey has joined the session and currently only Scott McCorder, Commissioner McCorder, is absent. Okay. Thank you. I see a hand up for Downey. Commissioner Downey, you had a question? I just wanted to apologize. I've been having technical issues trying to get in and out of meetings and going back and forth between the two meetings. I think I'm in this meeting. I think I can be heard. I just wanted to verify that I could do that and I could also raise my hand. You can definitely raise your hand and I see you on screen. Thank you. You're welcome. So if it's all right with everyone, I'd like to, this is Assistant City Attorney Bigger Stap, just here to report out of closed session. The commissioners received information and gave direction to staff on item 3.1 at which point Commissioner Downey did join during the closed session and is now present as we just noted. So we can now proceed with the open session items. Okay. Thank you. I'd like to remind the commissioners to keep their audio on mute until Leslie are speaking. Commissioners other than the chair can mute themselves. Staff will remain muted until meeting to speak. As members of the public join the meeting, you will be participating as an attendee. Your microphone and camera will be muted. Only today's panelists will be 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, for privacy concerns, the host will be renaming your viewable phone number to resident as the last word digits of your phone number. City of Santa Rosa is committed to creating a safe and inclusive environment free from disruption. We will not tolerate any hateful speech or actions and are well-staffed to monitor that everyone is participating respectfully or they will be removed. If necessary, we will also immediately end the meeting. Clerk, can you please explain the public comments, 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 to public comment. The host and zone will be lowering all hands until public comment is open for the agenda item. Once the chair has called for public comment, the chair will announce for the public to raise their hand if they wish to speak on the specific agenda item. If you are calling in to listen to the meeting audibly, you can dial star nine to raise your hand. The host will then call on the public who have raised their hands. Public comment will be limited to three minutes any time or 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 e-mail public comments. If you provide a live public comment on an agenda item but also submitted an e-mail, your e-mail public comment will not be read during the meeting. Additionally, there is one public comment period on today's agenda to speak on non-agenda matters. Item eight, 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. Item number five is report, if any, on the closed session items from general counsel. I believe I already reported out on the item. Perhaps we might have taken one item early, but I think we're okay. Okay, great. Thank you. Item number six is statements of abstention. Do we have any commissioners who have to make an extension on agenda? Yes, Chair Tess. Yes. I'll be abstaining today from item 14.2 on the agenda. It's come to my attention that Petaluma Equomedical Properties, PEP, may have an interest in the purchase of the subject property. And as noted several times in the past, I have a non-financial conflict of interest in that I serve on both the vigil light and housing authority boards, both of which I've received funding requests from PEP in the past. So those are the reasons I'll be abstaining from item 14.2. Thank you. Oh, thank you. All right. Our next item is item number seven, study session for budget process and public input. Kate Goldstein. Hi, Kate. Hello, Chair Tess and commissioners. This is the fiscal year 2324 budget process and public input study session. And Megan Bassenger, director, will start us off with an overview of budget concerns. Next slide, please. All right. Good afternoon. Our fiscal year 2324 budget and program considerations are comprised of the following. So the city council continues to focus on housing and homeless, and this remains two of the goals and the top priorities of most of our efforts within the city. Our work on the community development for off-brant disaster recovery projects continue. And as you may recall, this is $38.5 million that was awarded to the city and is administered by the housing authority. It has been committed to five projects, one of which is complete, three are under construction, and one is in the process of finalizing their financing. So this is remarkable progress in two years to advance over 300 units within the city of Santa Rosa. We continue to heavily focus on housing vouchers. There are over 2,000 extremely low and very low income individuals that benefit from these vouchers. Over 400 which are veterans affairs supportive housing vouchers that are administered in conjunction with the US Department of Veterans Affairs and 131 emergency health vouchers. And these were our most recent Toronto vouchers. And these are targeted to homeless individuals that are referred to the housing authority from the Sonoma County and continue to prepare. So had set up some very specific parameters on how these can be administered and who can receive them. We also continue to inspect the voucher units following the COVID-19 waiver of inspections. So housing choice voucher staff has been very busy getting caught up on all of the annual inspections. And then of course for every move in when a new tenant, when a tenant moves into a new unit, an inspection occurs for those units. Home ARP, which is a transit funding that came to the city as part of the American Recovery Act, will be coming to view in February. This is approximately 2.6 million that is being developed with a very specific set of parameters to again benefit homeless individuals. And there is an action plan that is a standalone plan that a staff will present to you again in February. And then finally compliance monitoring. This has been an increasing program and you may recall in the current fiscal year, which is 22-23, we added an additional housing and community services technician to help address the compliance monitoring of our departments. Within the last year, we have added 78 new units. And then in 2023, we are anticipating over 300 new units coming online. And so with those units, staff reviews the tenant income certification for each and every restricted units move in to make sure those individuals meet the income qualifications of that unit. And depending on the program funding that has gone into them, there's often move-in inspections that are associated with those. And then on an annual basis, this will add to the portfolio of properties and units that we conduct regular monitoring on. So each year, the tenants need to recertify that they are in fact income eligible to live in those units. So before I turn this back over to Kate, are there any questions on the budget and program considerations? Excuse me. Commissioner Downey, did you have a question? My question was for change to disaster relief funding and any other specialized funding that's associated with the time that we just went through. How long will that funding be available before it's either sunsetted or not going to happen anymore? So for the CDPGDR, that $38.5 million, once that money is committed and expended on projects, it is in the project for as long as that loan remains in place. So they have 55 year terms, generally what occurs with affordable housing units is that those funds will stay in place through the life of that loan. I hope that we don't find ourselves in a disaster situation again where we have another Toronto funding like this. With the Home ARP, it is one-time funds. So once the city or housing authority commit and expend those funds, that funding source will also cease. And then with the emergency housing vouchers that I mentioned, to the best of our knowledge, this is an ongoing funding source. So it's 131 individuals that have been issued vouchers. As long as they meet the program requirements, they will continue to receive that monthly housing assistance. Yeah, my hope is that we won't experience any more disasters. But with that said, I want to make sure that the existing disaster related funding that we had, what's going to carry us through to get these projects completed. And that sounds like what you're saying. Correct. Thank you. I see no other questions at this time. Okay. Yes. Hello, chair, test and housing authority commissioners. So I am cake will find administrative services officer for housing and community services. And this slide details everything we know to this point about funding coming to the authority for fiscal year 2324. So we'll start with local funding and we'll start with real property transfer tax. So the city is choosing again to fund homeless services with the city's tranche of American Rescue Plan Act funding, meaning that all RPTT is coming to the authority for the second consecutive year. And the city's finance department let me know that total RPTT for the coming fiscal year is 4.25 million. It is up to 50%. We are receiving 50% of that total at 2.125 million. We again plan to see impact fees of around 1.4 million. These are the fees that are paid by developers for the impacts that their new construction has in the surrounding area and in lieu of including affordable housing in their developments. And just as with the last two budgets, we are keeping a close eye on this. As it is expected, the development will slow down, although we haven't seen it yet. Loan repayments I think is where we're going to see the biggest change. They are anticipated to be down significantly in 2324 for a few reasons. Mainly, the 2223 budget included around 3 million of Lantana project pay downs, and that's only going to occur once. And then you also may recall that the authority appropriated $300,000 of loan repayments in November for use in the current year budget, which reduces the amount available for 2324. As Megan mentioned, we are looking at another $150,000 or a little more for compliance monitoring fees in 2324. Since we don't know exactly when all of those new units are coming online, we don't have them in this current budget. But I suspect in the 2425 budget, that'll be a much larger increase due to all those new units coming online that Megan discussed. And the $150,000 is up significantly from prior years what was more like $120,125. And then in state funding, I apologize, you forgot to put this on the slide, but we will receive nearly $1.2 million in the permanent local housing allocation, the PLHA grant funds. That's the third year of the five-year grant cycle. And then in federal funding, we have not yet heard about CDBG home or Habla, which is normal for this time of year. Depending on HUD, we may know as soon as February or as late as July. So we'll build the budget using the current year's amounts until we know the final amounts to plug in. In housing choice vouchers, Congress increased HUD funding for the program, 10% $2.9 billion to ensure housing authorities can continue to pay the rising rental subsidies and have enough funding for staff. So HUD calculates the amount needed to pay all of the Hab housing assistance payments and admin fees for every housing authority in the country, and then it prorates it based on the amount of funding that's available from Congress. So per HUD in early January, they plan on 99% proration for Hab assistance payments. And then housing authorities have the ability to use unused housing assistance payments from prior years to make it 100%. So we will have 100% of our housing assistance payment budget available. For admin fees, the proration is estimated at 91%. That's an increase of 3% over this current year and up 8% from fiscal year 21-22. And we anticipate that this will be adequate funding for the program. And then finally, emergency housing vouchers continue to be funded at 100% and we have not received any information that that will be different. Next slide, please. Okay. Here's the fiscal year 23-24 expenditure assumptions. So in expenditures, we know that all city staff have a contracted salary increase effective July 1st. I want to say it's 2.5%, but I can double check. And we also anticipate that benefits, especially health, are likely to increase up to 10% as has been in the past few years. We anticipate that rental assistance will continue to rise. Our per unit cost has risen each year from July through the following June. It just continues to tick up. And then I want to note that we're not adding any positions in fiscal year 23-24. The commissioners, you may recall that we added several positions in the current year, 22-23 budget, a permanent program specialist and a limited term technician in the rental assistance program, and then a permanent technician in the trust. So we have just reached the point where all positions are filled. We're operating at full staffing. And so now we need to watch that and we'll make adjustments in upcoming years based on capacity and available funding. But we think that we're set for now. Next slide, please. All right. So this slide notes the authorities fiscal year 23-24 budget process timeline. It runs concurrently with the cities. We will hear public input on the budget today. The city and city council held its public hearing for budget input on January 10th. That video is online if you would like to view it. And in summary, Santa Rosa residents spoke in favor of an eviction moratorium, improvements to the Roseland area, increased and safer bike lanes, civic engagement, and expanded homeless shelter and housing. So now, next week, we'll receive updated revenue and expense estimates from the city's finance department and we'll start actually formulating and entering the budget. Then in March, Megan and I will review the entire HCS budget with the city manager and deputy city managers. And then we'll be back in front of the authority on April 24th with a detailed presentation of the 23-24 budget. We'll then go to city council in early May and present the budget along with all the other city departments. We'll return to the authority on June 19th for your adoption prior to the city council adopting the entire city budget on the following day, June 20th. Next slide, please. So that concludes the presentation and I am available to answer any questions. Commissioner Downey. Hi Kate, have you heard anything from Governor Newsom's office about any potential budget deficit coming up or that just congestion? I have not heard of that. We will meet with the city's finance department next week prior to starting budget entry and I suspect that if they have heard anything credible, they'll share it with us. Thank you. Commissioner Burke. Yes, thanks Kate for the presentation and Megan. Could you review again the real estate transfer tax income, the total amount and then how it's broken down? When that was first adopted by the city council many years ago, the city council had determined that it would all go for housing and then before it was actually adopted, there was a carve out for booking fees which kind of hit the city unexpectedly so it was housing or in a much smaller percentage for increase in booking fees. What's the current division of what's the total funds and what's the general division of those funds? Sure, so in October of 2018 the city council updated that policy so it is currently that a portion of real property transfer tax will go to general funding for homeless and affordable housing production and that's about the most guidance we get on how to expend the funds. The interesting part I think of this is that each year the percentage of real property transfer transfer tax increases to housing and homeless services. So when this policy was adopted in 2018-19, housing and homeless received 25%. Now there were and it increases 5% each year so now that we're at fiscal year 23-24 we're receiving 50% of that amount and the total amount changes based on the city finance departments estimates and so while our percentage will keep going up, it will be a percentage of that overall total as determined by the city's finance department. Thanks for that. I better understand that now. So kind of to recap whenever it was first adopted which was probably in the I don't know 80s or 90s I can't remember when it was it was pretty much 100% and then except for the carve out for the booking fees and then over time it's been modified and the most recent modification was in 2018 where we're getting 50 plus percent depending upon the increase in those transfer tax fees. Thank you. This is just kind of a process question I guess. Since the housing authority is a separate legal entity, does it still require two green lights in other words one from the housing authority and the other from the city council to have the budget adopted? To the best of my knowledge yes and we have struggled with that question in the past and it comes up every once in a while and so I will say to the best of my knowledge yes but that is not a legal opinion and I doubt that our council will know that off the cuff. That's a pretty nuanced thing. I understand and I don't think that it's ever been an issue and so it's just kind of more to put things in perspective that since the housing authority is a separate legal I think I mean as I understand it the housing authority is a separate legal entity so it's the housing authority's budget but there the counting laws in the state require I think that the city council adopt the entire budget including the housing authority's budget and that's about as that's that's my my general understanding of how it works so so thank you for that. If I can interject like we can certainly do some more detailed research and when we return to you in March we can have that information and the other thing that I would say in association with that is the resources that come from the federal government the CDBG the home and the Hapwa actually come to the city and then are allocated by the city council to the housing authority so there are some some nuances and steps in how those are appropriated to you know that's a that's a very good point and and so maybe the the Hap funds are solely the responsibility of the housing authority and then the balance of the funds it's more of a decision initiated by the city council. Morgan did you have a question or what to make on that? Oh no I was just going to advise that we could take a note and I think director Basinger did that which is we could take a note and get back to you with a specific answer. Okay thank you. Thank you. I see no other hands raised so we will now start taking public comments on item 7.1 if you wish to make a comment via zoom please raise your hand if you are dialing in via telephone please dial star 9 to raise your hand you will have three minutes. We have no hands up in zoom but we have a gentleman in chamber that can't access zoom that is going to be making a public comment at our podium here you may not be able to hear that comment do the way that the system is set up currently but I will record that comment in the minutes. Should we wait a bit and he's made his comment then? Yeah I will I will let you know when he begins. Okay thank you. All right can you hear me? Thank you sir my name is Duane DeWitt I'm from Roseland and my comments about the budget are that many people in my community don't know that you're having this meeting right now and yet a number of people in Roseland benefit from the housing authorities control of the housing voucher program. There's a concern that homeless veterans are not being able to get access to what are called the HUD VASH vouchers which are used by homeless veterans to find places to live. What's been happening is the city has been interacting with the governmental agencies to do what are called project-based vouchers and they have this idea that the veteran who's homeless can wait a couple of years for a project to be built and then get into that housing. That's not helping these homeless veterans right here right now as they need this place to live. These recent rains were quite hurtful to a number of people living outside even those that might have had a shelter of a RV or a car still were negatively impacted by all of that bad weather. So I'm hoping that the housing authority will look into finding a way to help the homeless and get those vouchers into the hands of the homeless veterans at this time when they need it. Then regarding the budget process it's really important that you not steer and focus so much of this affordable housing into the Roseland and Southwest area as you call it because we've already been inundated with all types of housing. We're overwhelming the infrastructure and this isn't a help to the people who are already living in Roseland. You should be focusing on public housing in the downtown Santa Rosa city area. Now that one large building is going up you could build another and you could have many more large multi-story affordable rental units in the downtown area. The housing authority was started close to 60 years ago with the idea that we needed more affordable rental residential housing and we have never been able to catch up and take care of that to do the things that are needed for those people of low income who need to be able to rent a place to live truly near the center of our city. Thank you for your time. To attest Mr. Whit has completed his public comment. Okay thank you and that those comments will be forwarded to us either through email or at the next meeting is that possible? That is correct. I've made note of his comments and I will make note of his comments in the minutes so you all will see them. Great thank you. Okay at this point we will move on to item 7.2 review of the 2022 housing authority planning day themes and outcomes. Megan. All right one second when we get the presentation up. Florida can you please pull up the presentation? Okay so this is a review of the 2022 housing authority planning day. Next slide please. So as an overview the mission of the housing authority is to ensure adequate decent safe and sanitary housing for qualified people within Santa Rosa consistent with state federal state and local laws. Next slide please. At the retreat or planning day that we had at the end of 2022 we reviewed the housing authority roles and responsibilities which include the following key objectives set funding priorities for affordable housing production and preservation set policy for rental assistance to approximately 2,000 families that are assisted by funds allocated to us by HUD and oversee the monitoring of affordable housing units. Next slide please. During our planning day there were several ideas that were presented and the next few slides are going to be an overview of what those ideas were and the comments that came out of them and the goal today is to refresh the housing authority on what was shared at that meeting and to identify any particular items that you would like staff to provide some more time or information on in the community. So for the first idea which is where we should emphasize housing in addition to in order to improve our housing inventory the themes that came out of that were to identify the needs in the community and align those funding sources versus using the funding sources to drive our funding decisions. So see what where the needs are instead of just reacting to what the funds allow improve neighborhoods to help them thrive and be proactive and preserve housing. Study the conditions in Santa Rosa and analyze the need for additional housing and again this is to make it more of a data-driven approach diversify the types of housing so that we can maximize the financing that's available. So what are the new types of technology affordability or other options that may be out there? Another suggestion was to learn more about assisting people between 80 and 120 percent of AMI. The majority of the housing authority funds are targeted to households at or below 60 percent of AMI. So this is reaching more towards what we call the missing middle or that income group that is often not assisted by affordable housing resources. And then finally within this theme work on more acquisition rehabs in order to add more units to our housing stock that we monitor. So if it is good with the chair I'd like to open up this slide for some discussion and see if there's any particular theme or themes on this topic that you would like to provide direction on. Okay commissioner Downey you have your hands raised. Myself commissioner LaPenna and commissioner Roehauser had the opportunity to attend a public housing authority conference yesterday in Navva and I'm wondering if we would have the opportunity to share some of our experiences and insights that would be germane to this planning session and planning the future. So council bigger staff correct me if I'm wrong but for that particular presentation or to share that it would need to come through either commissioner reports or we would need to set up a discrete agenda item to have that discussion. But if you're able to weave any of those themes into what is being presented here then I think we could incorporate that in today's conversation. Yeah are you saying we're trying to keep it within the scope of what this presentation is about? Yes yes I understand yeah we need to make sure we properly agendize um matters that may be related but not uh not explicitly within the scope. So I would I would advise we take a note and then try to circle back on that. Thank you. Commissioner Burke. Thank you chair test. Megan you had mentioned I think your words were to not react just to the funding uh constraints um when when trying to use the money to address Santa Rosa's major issues and and I think the discussion included not to react to just the proposals coming to us from developers who are responding to those in other words do something about focusing our um nofas on areas and the types of housing that we want so that the developers non-profits and for-profits would be kind of focused on those more than they have in the past. I don't know if I missed it or not but if you can respond to that I'd appreciate it. Yes certainly so I think to kind of elaborate on that if we're looking at a on the slide here a way to frame that would be with our cdbg resources that's the community development block grant oftentimes what we do is put that into our new affordable housing production pool of resources and we see those funds being used for acquisition those funds are also eligible for rehab of units so if if it is a goal or desire of the housing authority to focus on rehab of existing units then look at positioning the cdbg for that that use in the upcoming year. That would certainly be a part of it I mean and I know this you know right now when the funds are available I think generally it's pretty open to all parts of the city that's probably not that's probably not a not a totally correct analysis or comment about how we go about designing our NOFAS but I but I think that generally speaking I think that my thought would be to go to a more precise goal to set out for developers before the NOFAS are issued so that it got into more detail on locations and type of housing and and and then including as you mentioned whether or not that be for new housing or if it's for for housing that can be improved in existing neighborhoods so that'd be my my thought would be we would we would really look carefully and again the data driven objective that's also highlighted would help us would help inform the housing authority and the staff as to where the needs are and then and then target the NOFAS to address those needs and then make it a little less broad. Megan do you have any comments on that or clarifications? I've made a note of that and it's certainly something we can incorporate into our upcoming NOFA design keeping in mind the majority of the funding sources that are often used to advance projects come from the state or from TCAC it's SIDLAC and so we want to make sure that we are able to assist projects that can achieve full financing. Understood. We have any further questions from commissioners on the study session items? Commissioner Downey? I want to make sure to stay in my lane as far as planning for the future as far as housing for for moderate and severe low income families but I'm also aware that families in general are having a hard time in our location affording housing so I'm wondering if there's a way that something quite curiously could benefit people in general who are experiencing difficulty affording housing or would that just steer us completely out of our purview of sticking to this plan for the future? I'm not sure I understand your question Commissioner Downey. So as staying in our lane our directors are specifically to address moderate and low income housing. With that said I'm aware that there's a lot there's a broader spectrum of people that are experiencing trouble affording housing in our general location so what I'm wondering is that within our planning for the future and developing low income housing is there a component of that that could vicariously be of assistance to people who aren't on low income housing per se but could certainly benefit from something that could give them a break in the costs of housing in Stem County? I don't know that makes more sense. That is I don't know and that is something we can look into. One of the limitations we have is our funding sources often do identify the income groups that we're able to assist for example with CDBG the majority of the beneficiaries need to be low income and we are required to report out for household on their income levels same with some of the resources that we receive through the state through grant applications but we could certainly explore ways to broaden the income groups that receive our assistance and then certainly I think the more units that the housing authority produces there are more opportunities for households within Santa Rosa to have affordable housing occur. Megan do you have um I don't see any other hands raised are you uh with your presentation here are you comfortable that going into the future on any uh NOFA's in particular that are put out these are the kinds of goals that we would be looking at well I think I have a few more slides to go through and then I think that would be a great wrap-up conversation for the housing authority is how you would like to implement some of these so as I go through the next couple slides maybe if the commissioners can think about what elements they'd like to see incorporated into the fiscal year 23 24 NOFA to help advance some of these ideas and address issues in the community thank you all right can we go to the next slide please so another theme that we talked about was the distribution of assisted housing throughout the community and I think this ties back to one of Commissioner Burke's comments um and also ties into Commissioner Downey's comments so assistance for people needing to get back on their feet um and some of this could just be having presentations to the housing authority on the existing programs we have and how those are able to assist people the distribution of affordable housing around the community so there isn't an over concentration was a theme that occurred during our planning day being strategic and identifying the purchase of land and then soliciting proposals to build rather than responding to the proposals and so the way our NOFAs are often structured is we identify the amount of resources we have available and developers present their plans to us and then finally in this particular topic understand the existing properties that are out there and identify opportunities for future development are there any comments or questions on on this slide I see no hands raised next slide please excuse me uh Megan uh Commissioner Downey you had another question going back to the last five for a second and I'm sorry for being so slow I'm wondering if there's a way that since low income housing is so so by night if there's a way to build in an offering for people to get off of subsidized housing and get into market rate housing so that some of the pressure to build subsidized housing is relieved and enabling people to truly get back on their feet by having true autonomy was around housing situations I hope that makes sense yeah thank you Mr. Downey that does make sense and maybe a future study session for the housing authority can be on the housing choice voucher programs family self-sufficiency program often called FSS and this is a specific program that is intended to help households that are on the housing choice voucher program become self-sufficient and then exit the program and whether that's through market rate housing acquiring a housing unit that they that they own so I'm going to write that down as a future study session to provide more information to the housing authority and let you let everybody understand what that program entails and how how it is effective in doing just what you asked last chair oh and you had a hand raised yes thank you um to follow up on commissioner Downey's question if we look at our funding sources the vast majority coming from fed which has restrictions on what they can be used for and making you discussed how it has to go to 60 percent of of affordability do we have local sources the real property transfer tax low income fees I mean development fees rather than building houses in lieu fees is what I'm trying to say that could help people progress out of the 60 percent in lower bucket in into the 80 percent to 120 percent bucket in terms of either rental assistance or funding toward that so that that that that market segment for development purposes is there a way we can look at what's unrestricted in terms of what could go toward a missing middle yes there is a way we can look at and at the top of my head I don't know the income restrictions for each of our funding sources but that's certainly something we can present and discuss at a future date to help the housing authority frame where they want to target the resources and so that may be a great discussion to have next month in February so that we can keep that in mind as we're looking at developing that fiscal year 23 24 now back thank you commissioner Burke thank you commissioner chair test um that would be great to be able to do that and at that time good staff provide information on the regional goals and the income targets that we're obligated to meet to see what discretion we might have in terms of increasing the income groups that we want to assist that is an excellent point commissioner Burke and yes we certainly will leave the regional housing needs allocation often known as green out into that presentation so that the housing authority can understand the goals that are assigned to the city of Santa Rosa and the number of units we're going to each income category that we are asked to provide to the community thank you all right if there are no further questions next slide okay so back at the planning day we discussed the types of units that are needed and whether that's units for families seniors homeless veterans people with disabilities and there was an interest expressed on focusing on mixed affordability within projects we talked about how new market rate housing downtown will certainly test the area of downtown development right now we have a few affordable projects that are in the downtown for under construction um looking to developers to be more creative on how to mix different populations within their developments encouraging diversity within the housing projects and housing types and using data to identify what what is needed within Santa Rosa any questions on this slide for comments i've seen no comments okay next slide please so we've touched on this um throughout the course of the last few slides and this is our annual solicitation process often known as the NOVA so the comments that were received were analyzing where the focus should be to preserve housing versus new construction so looking out onto the horizon and where we want to be and this certainly ties into commissioner Burke's comment he just made on the rena number so also understanding what the goals that have been assigned to Santa Rosa are for new housing production identifying subsidies and grants to help narrow the income disparity and so commissioner Danny believe this ties into your comment on how to to help people and move them through the continuum of housing whether you know they start out in assisted housing and then they're able to exit to market rate housing or ownership and then finally to re-engage our lending institutions um to help assist with financing affordable housing and this is often done through the Community Reinvestment Act any questions or comments on this this slide reagan i i see no questions on this all right next slide please so this also touches back to commissioner Burke's comment in the previous slide the regional housing needs allocation um so we'll certainly bring this forward in February when we conduct a study session on this but the city does have an assigned allocation of units um that the state of california would like to see constructed in santa rosa the problem is we don't construct units so we approve them or we can help provide financial assistance to them and so between 2023 and 2031 the goal is 4685 units um within that it's broken down by income category so a little over 1200 to households that are at or below 50 of am i which is very low uh 700 units at low income so that ranges probably 50 to 80 percent and then moderate we have 771 that's 80 to 100 percent of am i and then above moderate and that's almost 2000 and that's not an income group that we we target those are often just naturally occurring construction within the community and the other factor to keep in mind is the city council approve the homelessness solution strategic plan and that identifies providing more permanent supportive housing within santa rosa to help move individuals through um the continuum of housing from homelessness into housing where they're provided the services in order to achieve stability and remain housed so that will be a factor we will wrap into the February study session as well um to help shape the housing authority's understanding of where resources are needed and the specific numeric goals that we're trying to achieve are there any questions on this slide commissioner downey i'm sure i remember how long ago it was i think it was commissioner owen myself and the coal that were working on a scoring uh rubric for applicants i'm curious how that scoring rubric stands and if you've been able to generate any kind of takeaways from the uh metrics that we put together for that uh particular document so i imagine that scoring system was last worked on in spring of 22 in advance of the fiscal year 22 23 nova and the intention um in creating that scoring criteria was to have quantitative factors that go into an application uh previously it was a qualitative process we wanted to make it less subjective and i think that we've done a fairly good job in doing that um in our last funding round with every kind of tweak of the NOPA or the goals we need to adjust the scores accordingly so that we're able to meet the housing authority's objective so i'm anticipating if there is a change in direction on how the housing authority would like to allocate the resources we would need to evaluate the point system to make sure that we're able to achieve that goal so it sounds like you have an option to adjust the scoring for your needs not in the not in the scoring moment but it would need to be adjusted the criteria would need to be adjusted in advance of releasing the NOPA because we want to make sure that every applicant is aware of how their application is going to score so they go into the process understanding the competitiveness of their particular application thank you i think no other hands raised maykin all right and so i believe this moves us to the final slide which are next steps and direction on this um so if you don't mind uh chair test i'll summarize what i heard from the housing authority and then if commissioners or yourself can interject and let me know if i'm missing anything or any additional items that you would like incorporate it that'd be fantastic um what i've heard is there's definitely an interest in having an overview of funding source requirements and i'd like to bring a study session forward in february to lay out those requirements per funding source to the housing authorities versus we use to fund our affordable housing projects um i think having that study session will help set up the commissioners to provide direction for the 23 24 resources and how they want to be targeted so once we're looking at the funding sources and the renegals layered with our homelessness strategic plan you can see we'll be able to see if a portion should be identified for rehab or if there's geographic areas so i think that'll help shape the future direction of our novice i also from comments that were received think that would be great to advance study session at a later date on the family self-sufficiency program as administered by our rental assistance or housing choice voucher team to provide the housing authority with an overview of how staff and HUD have a program to help households exit the rental assistance program and have um self-sufficiency and looking at how and i this also ties into the funding sources how we can use our funding sources in a different way than we have previously um so looking to pivot from the formula we've kind of known and implemented year over year to something that will advance the housing authority schools. Questions or comments? Commissioner Burke. Thank you chair test um from your earlier comments earlier in the agenda you mentioned the budget hearings that the city council heard the initial input from the community one of the items may have been on the top of the list was people calling for restriction against evictions i i i don't know where that is or what the expectations are of you as staff or the housing authority but i i guess my my general concern is that with increases in rents being really substantial and um incomes of the lower income folks that we're trying to assist not necessarily meeting those increases um it just seems like that's going to be that whole issue of keeping people who are on the margins uh housed so that they don't become homeless and exacerbate the homeless problem that we're already facing i think that's going to be a big issue and it's not a long-term kind of thing so much as it is uh i i hope this doesn't happen but you know is it going to be a crisis you know throughout the state and including santa rosa that all kinds of resources and extra efforts going to have to be marshaled i i don't know if there's a discussion about that megan yet or not but it seems like it's something that just needs to be i don't know we everybody needs to be aware of it and and and be thinking about ways that we can help to avert that and i can certainly go back to the the council's public hearing and listen to those comments again in order to help frame them for the housing authority great thank you commissioner downey i don't know if this is something that uh morgan can weigh in on but within the context of eviction um obviously there's going to be some individuals that are going to have some challenges that could potentially put them in a place of being evicted i'm curious is there is there an alternative to evicting somebody and putting them out on the streets and if there is an alternative what does that look like from a legal perspective thanks for your question commissioner downey i think that is a very broad question that i think would warrant some research and um and future discussion to really get at the heart of versus kind of trying to answer that one on the fly so if you don't mind a punt until until a future meeting i think we could talk about that with a little bit more detail thank you i appreciate that i see no further hands raised so megan um thank you for your summary of our discussion um is there anything further on this item no that concludes this particular item and we have some additional um presentations that will be coming to the housing authority starting next meeting so thank you yeah thank you very much okay um so we are now taking public comments on item seven point two if you wish to make a comment via zoom please raise your hand if you're dialing in via telephone please dial star nine to raise your hand you will have three minutes hey chair test um we do have some public comments on this and i think we have perhaps solved the problem with uh with the commissioners being able to hear the comments so just one okay great all right hello my name is duane do with a member of the Sonoma county housing advocacy group uh i wanted to wish you a good new year and thank you all for volunteering to be on this housing authority listening to this report was very interesting and it's important that three topics at least by my view can be looked at deeper especially with the data-driven approach specifically improved neighborhoods preserve units and the distribution of the affordable units by getting more of them into the actual downtown area especially for the extremely low income people in the past we had residential hotels in downtown santa rosa and we need more of those more housing could actually be put in while you save units in my area the neighborhoods are not being improved by what's occurring right now and actually structurally sound inhabited units are being destroyed by the city for various projects that they like to do one of the dilemmas is when the public wants to participate and give voice about where more housing could be located it's frequently ignored the southeast greenway project is a specific example more housing there could be quite helpful for eyes on that uh prize if you will if you had more housing units there you would be able to house people near nature and you would protect the nature from those who might defile it it's something that's really important then the downtown specific plan has a portion of roseland it's at sabastopol road and runs up to dotton avenue the area of roberts avenue is a very good site to where housing could go in the dilemma so far has been that no one from the housing authority has been coming out to our area to talk with the people in roseland about how we could get more affordable housing into these former industrial areas instead of way out on the edges of town in the greenfields area the infrastructure is not keeping up with the extra residents for moving in and the dilemma that we face is our quality of life is worsening yeah we need to have the city use the downtown specific plan to revitalize that roseland uh industrial area right there at sabastopol road running from dotton avenue on up to olive street get those multi-story as tall as those grains silos are 10 12 story buildings out there and then look at it like downtown could also have more of these buildings especially because of what's been happening now with the nice building that's going up with you few trail that is an example of a downtown city-centered type of growth that could be replicated in numerous sites the cannery project going forward is an example in which we'll get positive activity once that building is completed there are other sites in this downtown core area that the city owns parking lots where this type of housing could go in sooner than going to the far edges of the city and doing greenfields destruction it's very important that the housing authority be at the forefront of the city's goals for resiliency sustainability urban density is how we'll get better housing mixed use can happen downtown but not like what happened at uh 615 heelsburg avenue where they forced in mixed use at the bottom and no one's rented those units so instead you've got empty spaces in a fully booked residential building near downtown thank you again for your time and thank you all for serving where are there any additional public comments yes this is uh david harris uh the same david harris that served eight years on the housing authority and i wanted to comment on uh the slide about the rena numbers and then the second item on there was the homeless numbers and uh it looked like i mean the the lowest income strategy or stratum there was a 1200 or something and then the homeless was like 1400 are those related numbers i mean or is that homeless need completely unrelated i mean how a bag uh mpc whoever arrives at the rena numbers i don't know but i mean if units came on uh you know whether homeless are actually moving into them uh it is another question and i would strongly urge that at least every twice a year that you look back at these numbers and see what progress has been made it look like the rena numbers were goals for 2023 to 31 i believe and uh so were those numbers already taking into account the 300 units that you say are in process and and should be livable within the next few months is that going to reduce those numbers uh in the rena numbers or were those numbers already taken into consideration before those rena numbers were arrived at and so that whole question of of actually keeping an eye on progress toward those goals of the strata of the rena numbers and the homeless that needs attention you need to go back to those on a regular basis and see what is happening and i'm really confused about whether those 300 units that are coming online will immediately have a result in fulfilling some of those rena requirements or not so i look forward to seeing more analysis of of the progress toward the goals that are set out and thank you very much thank you no more hands are raised thank you uh just a comment and that is that some of those units that are under construction are close to being completed uh some of those units do include uh specific units for homeless okay um now we move forward unless there's any other public comments on this particular item move forward on item number eight public comments on non-agenda items we are now taking public comments on item eight non-agenda matters 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 if you wish to make a comment via zoom please raise your hand and if you were dialing in via telephone please dial star nine to raise your hand may you hear me it's not my name is dwayne d with i'm from rosalinds where we've been having issues of affordable housing my entire life i'm hoping that one of the things our housing authority could do i believe some probably to mandate when it was originally formed was to get more the residential rental housing this is really important the city has been zoning and taking a lot of its pigs for decades in the downtown area numerous housing to rezone or commercial for people to just live then for a while one of the levels that you're facing is that we're not replacing that with this subversion sprawl burdens for all pros and c's been actually underwriting land tenant housing way out on the southern border of san lagoza example one of the things that is really important is when the housing authority does the financing projects they make sure they get as much affordable residential rental property as possible that last example of a big switch that would happen almost 30 years ago the belview branch was going forward and that caused the entire rosalind county island back in the day when the southern west barrier plan was being played the developer built the tux more and came forward and said 64 units close to one of the rentals he put in his development and that's having the one of the rules that goes forward but then after the approvals were given he did evade the switch said oh no can't make this pencil we're going to have to have this be regular housing and then he came the tax payers at the house and that's free now he has the city of san rosa that underwrite financing for vervegg housing built in and provide that instead of him which is what's supposed to happen originally vervegg housing they come in and they build what they call some home housing the housing is built by people who are then not kept in the covenant and they're able to own the homes and then down the road some of the houses built today and the court will house it stopped this type of thing can happen in other places unless the housing authority is very stringent and has very strong oversight to make sure that all affordable residential rental units that are to be underwritten with the tax payers money from housing authority sources state sources county sources any sources stay or affordable residential is this how you just switch it over like lantana doesn't make it easier for people trying to find affordable rental housing and because it was so far out of the town that he makes like some sources of people live out there those people aren't writing to us they give the tides of what they call the transitorium development I don't want to get some of us out there it's all those people use our ours our ours for a minute this is happening every good it was built out there such as for long to have a new boy street etc thank you for your time it's nice thank you mr wet we have any other further comments public comments we do have one more public comment okay right yes good afternoon again this is david harris and I wanted to comment on a number of the trustees have raised the question of knowing the restrictions on the different funds and I want to encourage you to do that on a regular basis is to keep tally and have it more visible is to what has restrictions for 50 percent AMI and below you know etc all of those AMI breakdowns because in looking at the agenda today in the the item related to to stonehouse it talks about a repayment of a loan relatively small at 200 it looks like it's a total principal repayment 227 000 plus interest there are no figure given for the interest but what buckets is that loan repayment going to go into all of this you know it's dynamic but but having it come up on a regular basis I think would leave you better prepared to focus the the NOFAS and know what the scope of the NOFAS can be so again I would encourage a regular report that would give you the current tally of funds available for those specific goals arena goals for example that would be helpful to not only to you as commissioners but also to the general public to know what is coming along and possibilities I appreciate your time thank you very much thank you any other public comments no other hands are raised thank you thank you for the thank you for the public comments and we're now moving into item number nine approval of minutes are there any changes but commissioners being none the minutes are approved as prepared item number 10 chairperson commissioner reports there are no reports at this time item number 11 committee reports are there any on this agenda I don't see any but anybody have any comments on this we'll move forward then we're now on item number 12 executive director reports communication items make them yes thank you chair test so attached to your agenda materials is the monthly update to the housing pipeline this month you will note that orchard commons has moved into the completed area of the pipeline and this is a total of 46 units 45 which are affordable on void street the housing authority has a 200,000 dollar loan and so those tenants the 45 income restricted tenants have gone through their income certification process and the project is in the process of leasing up on the other item I'd just like to note is that staff continues to work with the developers of bourbon avenue and this is the last remaining cdbg dr project in order to secure their final financing to bring that project into construction so I'm happy to answer any questions you may have commissioner Burke thank you uh Megan the just curious to know I'm looking at the report for the oh shoot where is it the development on sabastopol road and I'm trying to find it here in the chart and I can't find it but uh it I just yeah I just haven't uh pardon me acne apartments uh it's it's the mid-pan project I think it is rosin village yeah yeah it rolls on village what's I mean I haven't heard too much about that is it is it progressing and I see you know the report there and what it says is the status but I haven't heard too much about it recently so this project also is in the process of obtaining it's needed financing to be in construction they are on the state accelerator fund list as is bourbon housing so they are navigating through the process of adjusting their construction budget and obtaining their final financing so it is making progress that's encouraging thank you welcome vice chair oh and yes I was looking at um the integrated you know which project was it just a moment stony oaks 142 units are only 15 of those affordable so I don't want a handful of projects that we just have a density bonus on so the housing authority does not have financing in the project they receive nine percent tax credits the housing authority has a density bonus agreement reported against the property so we only will be monitoring those 15 units the remainder of the project will be monitored by the California tax credit allocation committee I would think that 142 units to get nine percent tax credits would have to be a hundred percent affordable to score high enough the project is a hundred percent affordable but our only restriction is the density bonus because we don't have a loan or a rate that's going against it so how does that 15 versus 142 work with the arena numbers which ones get counted so the state has changed the way arena reporting works it's done based on the calendar year and it's for the building permits issued within that calendar year we report on the number of units that we have deep restriction bond and then there's also reporting for units that are not restricted but affordable so we would note that the remainder of those units are affordable but that we do not have a deep restriction against them so do the what goes against our arena numbers do we get to count the 142 or just the 15 I would need to do some further research to give you an answer on that hopefully it's the the larger number all right I'll find out okay thank you and there is there's a few on the list that came across like that the Kiwanis for the integrated community development it's 151 and 154 and the numbers for the affordable it's just the deed restrictions because we did a density bonus but if we could find out if we can count all those units toward affordable that would be very beneficial correct and this we added units that just have a density bonus agreement or a housing allocation plan agreement several months back at the request of the housing authority so that would be the Kiwanis Springs apartments the there's a Santa Rosa Avenue developments and then stony oaks would also fall into that category as well as aviara okay thank you Megan the only comment I have is that the Canary at railroad square is actually had started site work which I didn't see that on here but I I drive by it fairly frequently and was excited to see uh had the equipment out there yes they started construction and I off the top of my head don't know if it was at the very end of December or the beginning of January um and hopefully we see their grand grand groundbreaking ceremony be rescheduled it was canceled due to the rains we experienced in the beginning of the month yeah exciting hey I see no other questions from commissioners um we are now taking public comments on item number 12 if you wish to make a comment via zoom please raise your hand and if you're dialing in via cell telephone please dial star 9 to raise your hand you will have three minutes there are no hands raised at this time thank you so item number three is um excuse me item number 13 is consent items and there are no consent items on this particular agenda item number 14 is report items report for partial release of deeds of trust and regulatory agreements between parcels for western avenue and her veterans village Angela good afternoon uh good afternoon Angela Morgan here a program specialist in the housing authority and I'm sorry a program specialist in the housing community services department waiting for a presentation thank you uh I'll be presenting this item regarding the partial release of deeds of trust and regulatory agreements between the parcels for the western avenue and her veterans village next slide please community housing Sonoma county is the owner of the of the her veterans village and the western project located at 21 49 west herne avenue which is made up of two parcels 134 011 012 and 134 011 013 west herne avenue is an existing 15 unit permanent supportive housing project for formerly homeless uh veterans and the herne veterans village is a proposed 32 unit permanent supportive project uh housing project next slide please the two projects occupy adjacent lots with a portion of the future herne veterans village project situated on both parcels chsc is currently working to complete a lot line adjustment to allow each project to occupy its to occupy its own parcel and has requested that the uh that the deeds of trust and regulatory agreements recorded against both of the parcels be partially released and only encumber each respective parcel as you'll see demonstrated on the following slides next slide please thank you the project is located in southwest santa rosa and is visually and and and this visual shows the current situation of the two parcels highlighted in blue the strip of land and access road to the left is vacant and currently identified as parcel number 134 011 013 the larger lot to the right is the exist is the existing west herne avenue project and currently identified as parcel number 134 011 012 next slide please this image demonstrates how the two parcels will appear upon completion of the lot line adjustment by reducing the larger parcel ending in 012 and increasing the smaller parcel ending in 013 next slide please this slide in the next and the next will list the funding approved by the housing authority by project in october of 2007 a loan was approved in the amount of 245 407 and in february of 2021 another loan was approved in the amount of 77 498 along with a regulatory agreement for this uh specifically for the west herne avenue project the total housing authority investment to date for this project is 322 905 next slide please in february of 2019 a loan was approved in the amount of 285 000 and most recently in december of 2021 a loan was approved in the amount of 410 000 including regulatory agreements specifically for the herne veterans village project the total housing authority investment to date on this particular project is 695 000 next slide please upon completion of the lot line adjustment the west herne avenue project will be situated exclusively on parcel number 134 011 012 and the herne veterans village project will be situated exclusively on parcel ending 013 next slide please it is recommended by the housing and community services department that the housing authority by resolution approve partial releases of deeds of trust and regulatory agreements to community housing sonoma county for west herne avenue apn from apn 134 011 013 and for herne veterans village from apn number 134 011 012 to separate the loans associated with each project and as a result of the lot line adjustment next slide please this concludes this presentation and i'm happy to answer any questions angela i had a question um will these changes uh be completed after the lot line adjustments um or will they be in concert with the lot line adjustment um so one of the conditions in order for the um for the city to approve the lot line adjustment and the um and to record the lot line adjustment is approval from the housing authority as a lender so that is um it's a condition needed for the recordation of the lot line adjustment well the recording of those uh documents would be prior to the lot line adjustment or in concert with it oh my apologies uh no i meant the disapproval this request for approval um but the actual recordation or um partial release partial releases will be after the lot line adjustment has been completed right thank you vice vice chair olem thank you uh angela can you go and um i don't know if you can go back and putting your presentation up is that possible we're we're retrieving the presentation one moment thank you i'm looking at the fourth and fifth slides mainly the fifth slides probably the best which shows the lot line after the lot line adjustment the next one please so if if i understood angela if you get um if i understand correctly there are two separate loans the two separate entities all of the loans are issued to the same entity which is community housing sonoma county uh just um the um there's two loans there's two loans issued to to the her and to the existing her and house property uh um her and house project which is the 15 units for for homeless veterans and then there is separately two loans to the to the future her and veterans village project that has not been constructed yet okay so all we're doing is putting the deeds of trust and resolutions to their specific use on the specific project this visit parcels that is correct okay thank you i i needed the picture to help thank you commissioner downing my angela with those lot line adjustments will those change the value of the land since they'll be changed accordingly uh recently in there was a recent appraisal done uh in september of 2022 and it did take into account both parcels um and there is uh with the with both parcels uh there is sufficient value uh for the existing um loans for for our loans um but it is not broke out separately thank you okay any other questions of staff okay i see none we're now taking public comments on item 14.1 if you wish to make a comment via zoom please raise your hand if you're dialing in via telephone please dial star nine to raise your hand you will have three minutes we have a public comment thank you uh commissioner test uh this is craig nubster can you hear me i sure can hi craig hi uh just wanted to let the commissioners know that my senior project manager barbara counter and i are uh on the call it if you have any questions about the proposed lot line adjustment we'd be happy to answer them that's it okay thank you it looks like i could unmute this is david here's i mean the question is how soon is that project going to get underway and get finished there are no other hands raised okay angela do you have some comments to uh make regarding these public comments that were made based on the last project description that we received for the project uh for the future her and veterans village um specifically it it looks like they are currently active or actively seeking uh funding resources to cover some of their operating expenses as well as their their future construction um and they are looking at um commencement of construction in 2024 thank you and um is there any other comments that um you would like to hear from craig melzner or barbara saying none oh excuse me um commissioner downey you have your hand up i was wanting to ask craig if those um funds are committed or um it's still being actively sought we still have craig online we have craig uh thank you commissioner downey um uh just a quick comment that the lot line adjustment is a critical activity and our ability to move forward with the financing applications for her and vets village so we certainly appreciate the commissioner's support in that regard we are looking forward to the next xcd super nofo which includes the vip funding which is kind of the key state resource that we're looking to to find out uh her vets village too last thing i saw the nofo was expected out uh in april without the patients doing june thank you any other questions i see none um would any housing authority commissioners like to make a motion on this item will approve the resolution any motion steve i think you may be muted i see you look looks like you're talking you're still muted yes there you go church yes i'd like to move uh resolution of the housing authority of the city of san ariza approving a request from community housing sonoma county for a partial release of deeds deeds of trust and regulatory agreements between parcels for west herne avenue and herne veterans village and wave the reading of the text i second that motion did we have a roll call vote moment and we'll do the roll call okay we will now take a roll call vote on this um on this resolution uh we will start with um pardon me uh we'll start with uh commissioner bark all right and then uh chair test fine commissioner rawhouser hi commissioner um commisionable opinion hi and commissioner downy and vice chair oh hi right that motion passes with six eyes uh with commissioner and the quarter being absent thank you our next item 14.2 is a report to request to release the regulatory agreement on three five five five sonoma highway upon sale and repayment of loan and this is the point where uh commissioner uh rick you're going to be abstaining i believe i'll be abstaining and recusing myself so thank you very much and since this is the last item i will see you at the next meeting thank you naked right so the presentation is pulled up we'll get started but can you pull up the presentation please it's one moment to retrieve that presentation so are you able to find it we're still trying to retrieve it one moment i have it up on my screen and can share it myself if that would be easiest for you oh there we go okay clerk would you like me to share my screen yeah please do okay can everyone see the presentation yes okay so good afternoon before you is a request to release the regulatory agreement for stone house also known as the fina house located at 35 55 sonoma highway upon sale and repainted of the lower i beg a passenger director all right so stone house is located at 35 55 sonoma highway this is located just um beyond brush creek road in rincon valley as you can see in this photo it is a historic structure along highway 12 to give you some background and you can see here in the aerial map it is adjacent to the highway um there is a parcel located just to the kind of that's that southwest so i'm pointing to my cursor and then the surrounding uses our residential in 2010 the housing authority approved a request from california human development commission in the amount of $200,000 to assist with the acquisition of the property at that time the property was closed and previously been used as an in in 2011 the housing authority provided an additional $27,151 to assist with rehabilitation of the um the site california human development commission um intended to use the property as a 40 bed residential drug and alcohol treatment facility through the housing authorities loans 28 of the 40 beds were restricted for low income individuals and associated with the deeds of trust there was a 30-year there is a 30-year regulatory agreement that was initiated in 2012 following completion of the rehabilitation and the occupancy of the facility the property occupied operated as a treatment facility between august 2012 and july of 2022 as many of you may have read in the press democrat the facility seized operations because they were not able to fund the the operational costs associated with the program the individuals i graduated out in july and the property owner california human development commission listed the property for sale currently stonehouse has received the site has received a confidential offer associated with that offer they are requesting that the property we released from the regulatory agreement that's reported against it and again that regulatory agreement restricts it to 28 beds in the treatment facility the buyer that um is in questions due diligence period ends on the 25th which is on wednesday of this month and they are currently scheduled to close escrow in february of february 24th so to provide you with an overview of the marketing of the property it has been listed for sale for approximately seven months there is outreach on loot net which is a commercial real estate sites um they have reached out to organizations throughout sonoma county to determine if there's interest in the property upon sale if there is an approval to release the regulatory agreement and the associated deeds of trust the funds will be repaid to the housing authority and then would be reinvested into our novice so tying back to our previous conversations where we take the funds that we have been repaid to us through various means they would go into additional projects with work through work with the city attorney's office um determination of the potential regulatory agreement we don't see this as precedent setting in that this is a treatment facility it is not a permanent housing unit this is not the standard residential rental projects that you support through your financial resources and through our regulatory agreements um this is a transitory population so the individuals are accepted into the program they were living there for the duration of their treatment and then they would graduate out and return to living in whatever units or cities that they had originated from or desired to move to if the housing authority is to approve the release of the regulatory agreement the conditions that are being identified is that California Human Development Commission must continue to make their amortized payments on the loan and this is one of the few loans that the housing authority has where there are monthly amortized payments and then also there's a limited duration for an approval if the housing authority approves this today it would be valid for six months and there'd be one time option to extend that for an additional three months upon an extension of the escrow so the action today would not release it um from the property it would have to be done in conjunction with the escrow and within the next six to nine months based on the circumstances and just to provide you a little additional context um in addition to the stone house included in the sale is the property that I called out on the aerial map and let me just scoot back over there so you can see this this site right here they are owned by two separate entities so the housing authority's loan is only on the highlighted blue parcel so that is the parcel that we have secured the deed of trust and regulatory agreement too this property right here is included in the sale but is owned by a different entity associated with California Human Development Commission so they have or corporation they have purview over the site but it is not restricted by the housing authority's financial assistance in advance of any potential questions on the program or what you may have read in the past democrat california human development corporation also owned a site in rink and valley which was known as hope village they have sold that and the purchaser of that property will be leasing it back to the organization to allow the program to continue that has not occurred yet but the the individuals who seek treatment will still have an opportunity at a different site in rink and valley and again california human development commission has also sold that site and as was noted in the um non-agenda public comments there was a question about the source of loans for this property they are operating reserves of the housing authority and mortgage revenue bond proceeds so they are not the funds that come with the restrictions like cdbg or home so at the time of the original loan the creativity was used to find a funding source that would allow for a transitional residential treatment for individuals so going back to the recommendation before the housing authority today it was recommended by the community housing and community services department that the housing authority by resolution authorized the termination and release of the 30-year regulatory agreement for stonehouse on the repayment and getting principal and interest on the housing authority loans subject to the conditions that are outlined which is to close escrow within six months and allow for a one um three-month extension if there is a delay in that as from that concludes my presentation and i'd be happy to answer any questions thank you for sharing vice chair oh and thank you uh megan the three-month option is predicated on what i'm trying to find that in a resolution what has to happen for that option being able to go through there we need to be an extension of the escrow so there would have to be circumstances that would extend the close of escrow is that stipulate i'm trying to find that in the resolution let me pull up the resolution really quick as well so if you are looking at okay so the resolution says this the executive director is there another document that's between housing authority and chd in regard to the what has to happen for that option to go into play so the way it is currently worded and certainly um if it's the interest commissioners we can modify the language in the resolution it is written as the approval to terminate and release the regulatory agreement recorded against the property is valid for six months from the date of this resolution and there is a protocol that would be changed a three-month extension may be approved by the executive director if there is an extension of the closing of the sale okay that's good and so we will revise that to january 23rd 2023 thank you or well no so six months from now would be july 23rd 2023 we might just need a minor modification to clarify yeah thank you measure downy it was in the interest of trying not to be complicated what are the ramifications of keeping this regulatory agreement in place and finding someone else to operate a drug and alcohol freedom facility uh at that location so i will do my best to answer the question and then i believe that there were representatives from california human development uh corporation on the meeting but one of the primary factors for this facility closed closing was that they no longer had operational funding so they were not able to sustain their operations to keep the facility open and serving its intended purpose and there's no one else that could considerably provide those services at that location it from my perspective it's been a fairly public process in terms of the the information that's been shared on the closure of this facility and i'm not aware of any other organizations that provide treatment at the facility stepping forward i do see that assistant city attorney bigger stock has his hand raised when i jump in more yeah i'm sorry i just wanted to caution um council member downy because you've not only abstained but recused yourself that typically means you're not going to participate on the items which would mean to refrain from asking clarifying questions generally speaking that was commissioner burke who had left the meeting i'm sorry what but uh sorry i thought commissioner downy just participated correct i thought he was recusing i i apologize am i the wrong uh member i apologize on that so i want to make sure we were uh proceeding appropriately no words mr burke left the meeting apologies all okay thank you any other comments from commissioners i see none we are now taking public comments on item number 14.2 if you wish to make a comment via zoom please raise your hand if you're dialing in via telephone please dial star nine to raise your hand you will have three minutes we have a public comment from a citizen within the chambers help you yes this is david harris uh in the chambers and um you're correct that this has played out fairly publicly uh i was on the authority when we made those loans and uh saw the remodeling that was done to make it usable it had previously been in someone's attempt to run a b and b it's a nice building but it's right there on highway 12 and that wasn't very viable and i kind of hate to see a property that could potentially have many more units of affordable housing there if it's not going to be a treatment unit and uh this is the one card that the housing authority uh has is uh i hope there's been some discussion going on though about the potential that the buyer would uh uh do some affordable housing in their development uh it's it's really is not an affordable housing card that we hold but uh this could be a long time playing out as a future use we don't know what it is um and it sounds like california human development um is uh needing the financial relief of selling it uh but it sure would be nice if we knew that it was going to have some affordable housing in its next uh wife but i'll leave my comments at that i mean this is the kind of thing that's kind of an opportunity that seems to be slipping away thank you are there any other public comments at this time yes we have tina wallace hey tina good afternoon can you hear me yes sorry there was an exhaustive search for any type of nonprofit use on this site available to answer questions should the commission have them is our nick avid and william savairi the brokers who worked with incredible diligence to market this property um we did specifically look at the possibility of affordable housing however it's not allowed in this zoning district and it would require an amendment to the existing um policy statement in the pd zoning and cqa compliance so we looked for affordable housing developers we were not successful in finding that type of fire and because of the extensive entitlement process that would have to occur for affordable housing to happen here it's unlikely at this site additionally most affordable housing is constructed with tax credits and this site is not likely to receive as high enough score to get tax credit funding and again we do have nick avid and william savairi and the audience if you have more questions on these topics and thomas stuber the executive director of the human development corporation thank you i don't see any um hands raised by commissioners um are there any other comments from staff or public at this time thank you additional comments and chair cast there are questions we have um attendees uh in the chambers uh yes this is david harris in the chambers and uh i guess my question would be to california human development uh you've done some very excellent affordable housing projects in other locations uh do you have plans for affordable housing or i mean do these funds uh are they already spent what you will gain from this sale or do you have the uh purview to consider other locations for affordable housing that's the end of my comment thank you clerk are there additional members of the public wishing to make comments yes we have thomas stuber thank you go ahead thomas thank you uh chair cast and vice chair oan and commissioners uh yeah thomas stuber i'm the chief executive officer of california human development corporation and in regards to the proceeds of the sale one of the things we do we're a 501 c3 nonprofit and we work with migrant and seasonal farm workers we were founded in santa rosa um and sonoma county over 50 years ago and our again our team population is migrant seasonal farm workers so we have a an affordable housing complex um in santa rosa and with the proceeds from this sale that will basically help us uh consider expanding that same site uh for an additional to 37 units of affordable housing for migrant seasonal farm workers thank you thank you any other comments i see none no other hands are raised thank you vice chair oan uh you had made a amendment to the proposed resolution in front of us would you like to read the resolution and and your change that you're suggesting um well the amendment i think it was clarified by the director megan so there isn't actually an amendment on this okay but i will uh if appropriate i will move to approve the resolution of the housing authority of the city of santa rosa approving determination and release of the regulatory agreement on the sale of full repayment the housing authorities loan for stone house athena house bill to get it 3555 santa noma highway apn 18012033 and waive the reading of the test thank you we have a second a second thank you and can we do a real call vote please we'll now do a vote on this uh resolution we will start with um vice chair oan yes and then commissioner alpena hi uh commissioner brawhouser hi uh commissioner downy no and commissioner test or chair test excuse me hi okay that motion passes with four eyes with commissioner um uh downy voting no commissioner berke abstaining and commissioner recorder absent thank you that completes this item and the meeting will be adjourned i wanted to thank morgan for your help on on this particular meeting uh no problem and apologies again to commissioner downy for uh for admonishing when unnecessary okay morgan have a good day yeah thank you everyone bye bye