Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Hey. Hey. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hello. I would like to call to order the Tuesday, June 23rd, 2026 HA board meeting. First item is the approval of the agenda. Are there any edits or changes? >> I have one >> to the agenda. >> Well, well, and I haven't. No, not the agenda itself. >> No, they consent. Okay. So, um hearing none. May I have a motion to approve the agenda? >> So moved. >> Moved by Commissioner Hooim. >> Second. >> And second by Commissioner Robertson. All in favor? >> I >> opposed. Okay, motion passes 4 to zero. Uh the next item is consent business and our consent item is the June 9th, 2026 meeting minutes. Would anyone like to pull this item for discussion? >> I would like to motion to pull the item of discussion. >> Okay. Second. >> Second. >> Second. Motion by Commissioner Wooten and second by Commissioner Hooim. So, who brings up what? >> So, I'm asking um as I read the minutes, there were a couple of things as I remember the discussion that weren't as detailed. And so I'm looking for a little bit more detail in relationship to uh the decision and the process we made to uh table the um the um the down payment assistance agreement. So there's one a few more things in here. >> Commissioner Hooim. >> Thank you Madam Chair. Um, also could is there a way for just it to be noted that I submitted an email um for on the record because I did kind of state that in my email that I wanted that on the record and so I just if that could just be clarified the email doesn't have to go in it but just a note that I did submit it on that item. I'd appreciate that. >> Thank you. And so, Commissioner Wooden, what would >> So, what I want what I wanted to make sure was highlighted is that the reason for the um tableabling to this particular um session was because our original which was approved in 2023 um was changed and the new policy brought forth um was changing the um focus or the particular um objective for that particular uhou which was to to invest uh in marginally representative um uh black foundational families because of the disparity in um home ownership. And so based on supposedly federal compliance, we were being instructed to to make that change. agent. So I I need that to be included so that it you know it's noted that it is again it it's in contrast to what we initially was a spirit of what we're looking at. >> Okay. So those changes are noted and will be in the amended minutes. Um so we don't vote to approve, do we? Then >> uh maybe we could have our attorney jump in. I think there needs to be a formal motion to table with amendments to bring back. Um, could we have Rachel jump in? >> Yeah. Hello everyone. Sorry I can't be there in person today. Can you hear me? >> Yep. >> Okay. Um, you could either table and have minutes brought back or uh I made a couple notes. Um, Commissioner Hooim wanted the record to reflect that she had submitted an email um, reflecting her concerns and Commissioner Wooten wanted the record to reflect that the uh, concern was that the original memorandum of understanding included um, a an agreement for the program and I've lost the wording and I didn't write it down the exact wording um, for um, I'm sorry. I maybe someone else there knows the wording of the um individuals that were targeted for benefit for that program. >> Can I clarify for the focus was to be that foundational black families which were underrepresentative in uh in a margin. >> Thank you, Commissioner. That's the word I couldn't come up with was foundational. >> Yeah, foundational black families. >> So, >> yep. that that foundational escape my brain. Um, so either you could we could just reflect the record with kind of those simple amendments um and and have that corrected. You can adopt it as amended or we could come back with an amended u minutes and have you approve those. It either way I think will work. I >> I think I'd rather have you come back with minutes approved because I want to make sure that the reason why it was changed is because of that that that change but also because we're being directed federally to change So, I'm not sure how you want to word that so we don't get in trouble, but I mean that's the reason why we that's the reason why we did it. >> So, basically, I would be looking for a motion to table the approval >> of the minutes of the June 9th meeting. >> Right. So, I move to table the minutes for the June 9th meeting in hopes of it being returned with the additional um corrections. >> Okay. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> And second by Commissioner Robertson. All in favor? I >> I. >> Motion passes 40. >> Um, no organizational business, it looks like. So, next is new business. Uh, 5.1, the Adora Apartments development proposal. May we have the staff report? [snorts] >> Good evening, commissioners. My name is Kevin Kase and I am the assistant port authority administrator here to present on the Adora affordable housing development project. We're also joined by Mr. Johnny Opara who is sitting behind me and we'll have the opportunity to provide some comments about the development as well. Uh if you wouldn't mind pulling up the presentation here. Uh for some context while that is being pulled up. This is a lowincome housing tax credit project that is proposed on city-owned property. It is three properties and it looks like we're still waiting on that presentation. Um, it is three properties that the city owns at the corner of 13th and American and city code requires that we either market properties through an RFP process or through a approval by at least five votes of the city council. And uh, the developer reached out to city staff with this proposal for the redevelopment project. And as part of that proposal, we asked city council at their June 15th meeting if they would be open to evaluating the project for development and potential financing from the city and the HRA outside of that formal RFP process. Um and uh while while the presentation is uh getting uh fixed or brought up here, um these three sites, so they're about uh 3/4 of an acre and the developer is doing community engagement sessions with the neighborhood that these properties are in. So that first session happened on June 18th, so this this week. Uh there was some feedback provided during those sessions and that focused on around concerns related to livability concerns that were mostly existing issues. So things related to traffic and um and people that are parking commercial vehicles on that street. The developer is doing an additional community engagement session related to the project on the 25th, so next month or sorry, next week, and um has committed to continuing to work with staff to address those concerns. Um let's see, [laughter] there we go. Um so, uh as I had shared, so it did go to city council on the 15th. Um, and at that point, port staff presented the development project to city council, including the request for TIFF financial assistance, and the possibility of an HR loan, which we'll discuss here in a little bit more detail. The goal of the meeting tonight is to provide you context about this development project, why it's being brought before you today, and then answer any questions you may have and then determine if you are supportive of providing a financial commitment to this project. At this point, the developer would be applying for the tax credits and it's a very competitive application process. So, it requires us as a city to commit to providing financial assistance through that process if the funds are awarded. So, that's really what we're asking you to do today. And as I shared, Mr. Opara is the developer and the company that he operates is called Jo Companies. So, they are an affordable housing developer that has done a number of projects. The most recent one that they're currently undertaking right now is in Richfield. So that's Penn Station. Very similar type of project. Um and then their development team is with K Wilson who also happens to be across the street. So the neighbor to the development site that we're discussing as well as Doran and then Hverson and Blazer Group and these are all Bloomington based companies. And as I shared the developer has conducted one and will conduct another community engagement session. And then you can see a depiction of the Dora here on the screen as well. Oh, I skipped one. So, sorry about that. So, I talked a little bit about the property itself. It was acquired by the city in 1994. So, these were right-of-way acquisitions that were acquired from the Metropolitan Airport Commission. They originally acquired it due to um noise issues related to the runway at that point. Um, it is recommended by staff that we repay the fund that was used to acquire the property and that's for $285,570. Additionally, we would be asking for a write down of that sales price and based on the most recent appraisal we have, that is 695,000. However, the developer did conduct a broker's price opinion to get a more updated valuation and that came in at 936,000 as of today. So the proposed development itself is for 52 units. This is split between 30, 50 and 60% AMI units. It is a tax credit project as I previously mentioned and staff is supportive of this project for a number of reasons including that it brings deeply affordable units that we need in our community. The developer was also finalist for another recent project within our community. So 700 American the Rosland uh he was a finalist for that project. This project is along American Boulevard which is a transit corridor with the Dline bus rapid transit. It's also close to employment. So you've got um employers along American Boulevard. You also have the Walmart and you've got them all really close to there as well. Um having the 9% tax credits allows for these more affordable units. Without that subsidy, it becomes especially more challenging to provide units at that lower AMI because of the amount of financial assistance that's required. And then I mentioned about the architect, general, contractor, and property manager being in Bloomington. As I shared previously, city code requires an RFP process with a sealed bid or city council can approve sale via vote of five approval votes. At this point, we have presented this project and that was on the 15th. City council gave an affirmative vote of 7 to zero to proceed with the next step which at this point this next step is coming before the HRA to ask for the requested financial assistance to help support the affordable rents for this project as well as repayment of that rightaway fund. So, the request from the HR today is for up to $300,000 to do just that. Additionally, there is a proposal for tax increment financing, and that would be through a housing tiff district that would provide over the course of that 26 years about $900,000 in increment paid over uh 26-year period with that PGO note. And then, um the timeline where we're at right now is in this meeting, we're at the 23rd. And then if HRA votes for approval of up to 300,000, we would then go back to city council and ask for them to approve really two things. And that would be an intent to purchase the property that obligates the property to the developer while they apply for the tax credits as well as a resolution indicating support for the tax increment financing for this project. And then if the developer applies on that July 9th deadline and is awarded, that would probably happen this winter. And then we would come back to city council and the HRA uh for additional approvals. Um and that would include things like establishing a tiff plan through a public hearing. That would include a land sale public hearing. And then the developer would also have to go through the proc or procedures of submitting their development plans for approval for their permits. Uh and then um if all that happens, then construction would be anticipated to take place in the fall of 2027 with a completion in 2028. And the reason we're coming to you right now is because of the application deadline and the opportunity before us to have this project with affordable housing units. And this deadline occurs really on an annual basis. So if we miss it this year, then it means waiting another year and then possibly being subject to market changes. So that's the reason that we're really here before you today. And so what we're asking um staff today or not staff um the HRA is if you are supportive of TIFF for the project and then really if you're supportive of the $300,000 of funding to help support the affordable rents and then repayment of that rightway fund for the property. And with that I think I have reached the point of the motion. So before we get to that, I would be happy to answer any questions you have and then I'm happy to also invite the developer up to make some comments as well. >> Commissioner Wooten, >> uh so what would determine whether LAA funds are used versus other means? >> Uh Chair Mueller, um Commissioner Wooten, Commissioner. So that's a great question. Because of the timeline that we're looking at and having a couple projects that are moving forward at various timelines, we wanted to ensure that there is flexibility of using this LAA resource or other potential resources that may come to us at the point where we have to commit the assistance. So it would be determined at that point where the project receives a tax credit award if that happens >> and then evaluating if it makes sense to use LAA or if it makes sense to use an inloo fee that was paid by another development and that's currently sits in our trust fund that we could utilize in its place. >> So can I just ask follow question? >> Yes. So from my own understanding, LAAHA is basically used to kind of guarantee that there's no impediment to the process. >> Uh Commissioner Wooten, that is a correct characterization. So the LAA is a commitment to help the project in providing the funds that would be required to write down that sales price and it also provides competitiveness to the application. So without local financial support, the project just would not score competitively in the tax credit application. >> Thank you, >> Commissioner Hulim. >> Thank you, Chair. Um I think this is a great project to start off with. I really like the one thing that really stuck out to me is the 10 at 30%. Um the 10 onebedrooms at 30%. That's a market that we can't hit often. And so thank you for being creative with that. My only concern is, and Administrator Aves knows that this is probably coming, but I really need, and I'm going to ask for this again, is I'd really like to see a current spend of LAA, a already projected spend, and what we've committed already, just because I know that this is LA is something that they're stating is guaranteed, but I don't want to say anything is guaranteed anymore. Um, I'd love to say that we'll have this money for years to, you know, in a couple years, but I just want to make sure we have the funds to commit to that if that's understandable. I just haven't we're we're saying LA a lot and I just I can't wrap around. I'm an accountant, so my brain is where are we? Where are we with this? If that looks good, I'm I'm 100% on board with this. I just want to make sure we have the funds to commit before we commit something. >> Yes, Commissioner Huhim. Uh, so we do have a couple slides. We we thought that might be a question. Um, they were hidden, so I don't know if I can pull them up myself, but perhaps um, Brienne, you're able to do that. >> Uh, it would be at the end of the presentation. There's two slides that are currently hidden. >> If I can make a comment before we put >> I'm I'm enthralled with the fact that there are Bloomington companies involved with this project. I I I'm I am over the moon excited and my hat goes off to Mr. Dori for having the foresight to be able to partner with our companies that are in Bloomington. So, thank you very much for that. >> Yeah, one's literally across the street [laughter] and it's the architects, you know, they want to design a nice building because they're going to have to look at it all the time if it happens, right? Um, uh, H administrator Abe, do you want me to speak to this or would you like to? >> Okay. Uh, so staff has, um, a I'm just going to call it a sheet that we use to sort of track the different projects and potential uses of the funds. Um, so as you may recall in I believe December of last year, the council and the HRA and I think also the Port Authority met and had some consideration about how these funds would be utilized and really that was a split of affordable home ownership, affordable housing at for multif family and then there was a recent update for some rental assistance and so we are tracking the different projects based upon those different buckets and aligning it with what those approvals are. And so this slide right here is the projects where the existing funds are currently allocated within those buckets. Uh and so um you can see on this slide that there's a proposal for the Adora Apartments for the 300,000 that we discussed today as well as um some of the other projects of the Heights for example. And then um perhaps if you want to go to the next slide, I'll just detail that as well. And then this is looking at the split of those funds amongst the different projects. And uh the reason we're trying to leave some amount of flexibility there is understanding that all of these projects are moving at different time frames and there may be a benefit of using the ENLU fee versus LAA. So there are some spending timelines that are required with Laha as well that we want to be mindful of and so uh staff is tracking that within our various documents to ensure that we're spending it in line with how it was dictated via those approvals as well as the requirements of the program itself. So I'm hoping that answers your question, but happy to take any other follow-ups. >> Administrator A. >> Yeah, chair and commissioners. I I just want to add that the reason why these are listed as upcoming projects and they don't have dollar amounts is because we anticipate, you know, some of these may come in the future and oftentimes the dollar amounts change until we bring a formal proposal to the H. So, want to acknowledge that there are projects coming up, but we don't have a dollar amount necessarily uh dedicated to that project yet. So, that's why they're they're listed, but no dollar amount. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. I have a question. >> Okay. [laughter] Um, so if you don't get the um grant or the award for the I forget what it was the l whatever that was um are then we don't have to pay the money. If we would vote to commit the money tonight then if you do not get that and cannot go forward with the project then we are not obligated to that money. Is that correct? >> Uh chair Mueller. So that's a great question. So the documents that we have drafted for approval by city council have some obligations that are tied to them and part of that is that that award would need to happen. So the tax credit award would need to happen and then we would have to determine that the project is viable with that award in order to proceed. So the resolution of support as well as the letter of intent for the property contemplate that to ensure that it is contingent on the award of the lowincome housing tax credits. >> Okay, Commissioner Wooten, >> I I like that. Um but I'm I'm eternal optimist in the event we don't get those dollars, is there any way to make this project happen? because it is a good project for that area uh and the spirit of what we're trying to accomplish. So, I'm not willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. [laughter] >> Uh Chair Mueller, Commissioner Wooten, it would be challenging and I maybe we'll let the developer speak to that here in just a couple minutes, but it would be challenging without the tax credit award. So, that provides a sign significant amount of the financing required for the project. Uh there is a possibility that Minnesota housing when making that award evaluates different resources. So we did incorporate that into the um the resolution and the letter of intent, but it it would have to align with the intent of what that application was for those funds. So trying to preserve some of that flexibility, but realizing that it does take a significant investment with that award in order for the project to be feasible. Okay, >> Commissioner Hooim. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, well, one other question that I when I was looking at this originally and there was kind of a diagram of the location. Um, green space is always a concern, especially in that area. It's a very high density area. Um, I noticed like the outline for the building and then there's I know there's some green space behind there. And I do I did see there was a playground and a dog run. Um, but I'm not understanding who owns that little bit of space that's not highlighted cuz that has some nice trees. It has some So, is that avail is is that part of this property or is that I just need clarification on that? And if it's not, is there a way it can be so to keep that extra green space for people? >> Uh, Commissioner Huim. So, the property to the south and here um >> might make sense to just pull it up. I think it was the second slide. Um, yes. So, this image is is flipped. So, the property just north of the one in question that we're discussing tonight that is uh owned by another entity. I know the developer has been in conversations with that entity and I there might be an opportunity there, but I think it would be likely to be expensive. Uh the developer does have a playground incorporated into the development plans and then Smith Park is not too far away. Um so it it would be really negotiation between those two private parties in order to secure that additional space and I I would expect it would be expensive and so the with the project feasibility it may create some challenges but I think the developer can speak to that. >> Thank you. Could we look at the slide with the rendering of the green space for the development? The next one down is it >> or two couple down. >> Okay. >> So, patio, playground, dog run. >> And this would be included with the development, the green space that's marked on here. Okay. And if it's helpful for context, this is a pretty constrained site and so that does create some challenges. It is a little bit more of an urban character just given its location. And um and with that being the case, fitting the number of units on the site and providing those affordable units does necessitate having this level of density in order to achieve that. Um, and uh, I think I'll pause there and then if the developer has any other comments that he would like to share, he can certainly do that. >> I have a couple questions in regards to the development itself. So, I probably want to have them. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. [clears throat] >> If I'm looking at that site and my memory serves me, that's right over the airline or flight path for airplanes coming in and out. And so so my question is what are you going to do to to to address that >> for sound abatement >> for sound abatement? >> Do you want me to address it real quick? >> Uh Commissioner Wooten. So this building is under the flight path for what's known as the crosswind runway. It's very infrequently used and the reason for that is it's really only used for very large aircraft. Sorry, I'm an aviation geek, so I know a little bit more details here. Um, so the primary runways do not actually have flight paths over this. It's pretty minimal. I think in the 90s that used to be more common when you had larger 747s taking off and using it. Uh, at this point, it likely would not have as much of an impact just given the runway operations, but on occasion, there would be some noise impacts. >> I'm thinking about noise and also vibration of the building. >> Oh. Sure. And and I don't know if I have a great response to that tonight. Maybe the developer can speak to that, but it's my understanding most of the flight paths are still a ways away. And I do know that there are substantial amounts of housing development, for example, in Richfield that is substantially closer. Um, and we would be happy to research if they have additional noise abatement related to those developments. But I do know that this is not um impacted like those properties would be. I'm also looking at, you know, opportunity to be able to bring in additional funds for the construction so that, you know, we're we're >> we're improving the quality. So, you know, additional funds for that would be nice if there's a opportunity to do that. So, >> yes, certainly we can definitely evaluate if there are any MAC programs and if it falls within that area. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Kevin. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. So, um, as Kevin stated, my name is Johnny Opara, president, CEO of Geo Companies, and we do appreciate your support. Hi, Council Member Abe >> administrator. >> Administrator. So, uh, I think we saw saw each other last at the city of Brooklyn Park. So, um, we are excited about Adora Apartments, uh, the Adora and, um, you know, the city of Bloomington, as I mentioned to the council members, uh, last week. Um, I used to work in Bloomington almost 25 years ago at the Mall of America when I was in college. So, I would bus from Augsburg University uh, in Riverside to uh, the Mall of American work. And um so uh for many years I've always had aspirations uh since we started our company uh in 2018 to do something special in the city of Bloomington. And as you mentioned uh Commissioner uh Wooten um our team uh from our property management company uh HPG uh Doran Companies During Construction and K Wilson are Bloomington based companies. We're actually based in St. Paul. Um we are we we we we specialize in delivering high quality affordable housing, right? Um and the reason why I say high quality is because we want to make sure that uh folks that have ranging incomes that are not positioned uh to live in uh Margaret or not in a position to purchase their first home still can live somewhere with dignity. And I've always said this and I continue to say this. Um if I can't live there, then I don't want to be a part of it. It's it's really simple. It's pretty black and white. So, you know, when I look at a project like uh the Adora, I see a lot of potential, a lot of opportunity. A blighted site where we're going to invest $30 million uh into this community uh to deliver 52 homes, one, two, three, and four bedrooms. um deliver a uh indoor tot park or even on site the green space to make sure that uh this is a site that when you drive by you you stop in amazement and say w what is this you know I want I want to know more about that and there's a consistency between all of our projects from the hollows to uh Wayne Commons and Brooklyn Center to Penn Station currently in Richmondville being under that's under construction the consistency is not only the quality but also um the level of detail uh we really pride ourselves in making that could we envision ourselves living uh at the development, right? In terms of making sure that the square footages are modest. Um that um the four bedrooms are equipped with uh two bathrooms, washers and dryers in every units, balconies, uh underground parking, EV uh charging stations, um uh solar panels, making sure that we're sustainable. This isn't a box with windows. I'm not in the business to, you know, walk away. you know, we're long-term owners and operators, so we uh are committed to making sure that uh we can u not only be stewards in the community, but also serve that community by listening. And as Kevin eloquently said, um we already had our uh first community engagement meeting last week on Thursday, and we're having our second this Thursday, right? And I think it's important that uh folks that live in the community express both, you know, why they would support this development, but also why they would not support this development. As you know, uh, being a developer is one of the easiest jobs in the world. [laughter] But, um, at the end of the day, you we get a lot of, um, information in those meetings. For example, uh, when we had our community engagement meeting with the city of Richfield, um, the nearest park is 2 to three miles away, right? So, what did we do? We, um, did some due diligence and we invested um, into an indoor line. That's two stories, right? Uh to make sure that we we listened, we heard them, and that we wanted to make sure those families that are staying in a three and fourbedroom units. Those kids, especially during the winter months, uh have a place where they can kind of burn off the energy. I had three kids, nine, seven, and one, and >> they still drive me crazy. So, [laughter] in a good way. So, my point is that we wanted to make sure that we listened first and reacted second. So, we're hoping to do that with the Odora. you know, it's um truly in terms of a site an infill development right on transit uh not too far from Walmart, access to the highway, the Mall of America's right there, the airport. I mean, you think about all the folks that could potentially live there from police officers, the teachers, the CNAs, the folks that are working at, you know, hourly jobs. you know, we're thinking about all these different things in terms of AMIs and making sure that we can uh deliver something that, you know, one they can be proud of, but most importantly, the community can be be be a part proud of. So, at the end of the day, I just, you know, want to appreciate you and answer any detailed questions surrounding the process with Minnesota housing uh in terms of, you know, how that process works. So, >> any specific questions or >> anything? >> Okay. I just have one out of curiosity >> when it it was stated that you approached the city. >> Yes. >> For this. So, how did that come about that you saw, hey, look at this land? >> So, you know, I uh so my background has been in um the people [clears throat] business for almost 25 years, right? So, as a developer nationally, you know, you have aspirations in terms of how you grow your company, right? So back in 2018, you know, we would, you know, look at cities that we could see and envision, you know, developing in. Um, and one of those cities was the city of Bloomington. So, uh, there was an opportunity that presented itself at 700 American Boulevard commissioner. And, um, to Kevin's point, we did come up, you know, second in that RFP round. And, um, so, you know, we truly are an infield development company. We try to find areas where uh the proximity to retail, the proximity to you know employment to jobs, the proximity to highways, grocery just the live work and play model right and uh those are the those are the characteristics that we look at when we are choosing and selecting uh sites. So the city of Bloomington as I mentioned earlier has always been a place where I envisioned you know uh investing in um but also spending time in and seeing if we can do something special. Um, so we have an opportunity right now and I think you know to Kevin's point um July 9th is the application the submission date for Minnesota housing and you know the funds they talked about the LAA funds everything to uh tiff uh Minnesota housing there's there's things that they look at in terms of uh going through the application process and saying hey does this project merit uh an opportunity for us to invest in right so everything from feasibility uh to uh the the added value it brings to the community but also scoring. So the metrics uh that they're looking at uh specifically to this uh H meeting today is the financial readiness. So that financial readiness would mean okay so the city of Bloomington yes they like this project but do they really like this? Do they are they willing to invest in this project? Right. So when they see uh everything from the land sale, the tiff, uh the laa funds that supports and increases our competitiveness in terms of the application in in in in regards to other applications, right? So that process all is part of the formula in order for us to move forward. And to Commissioner Wooden's point um earlier, let's just say for example, uh we don't get the tax credit award, right? Well, then there's an opportunity for us to apply the following year. So this is an annual process. Um you know Penn Station was a unique situation where we actually got the award the same year which is extremely rare. Uh Wangster Commons we got the award uh after one year of applying to the second year right. Um, so you know, these are, you know, you go in hoping that you can deliver something that's, you know, unique, special, and something that's going to really deliver, you know, what you want, which is a high quality, you know, development in the community. But, um, you just never know sometimes. But, I just want to let you know that if for any reason doesn't happen this year, uh, there is a possibility it could happen the following year. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, I think we're ready to Yeah. get the motion back up and take a vote. All right. So, I'm looking for a motion to approve a resolution of support for financial assistance and authorizing staff to negotiate associated agreements. >> I move to approve. >> Moved by Commissioner Wooten. >> Second. >> Second by Commissioner Hooim. All in favor? I >> I motion passes 4 to zero. >> Thank you. >> Next item of business is 5.2 down payment assistance agreement with Habitat for Humanity. May we have the staff report. Yes. Good evening, chair and commissioners. Sarah here, administrator. Um I'll be presenting on this item. Um, some background. This was the item that we uh we just discussed in relation to the minutes and adding some more specific information about the conversation that happened two weeks ago. This is relating to a project that's been in the works since uh 2023 or under discussion since December 2023. And so the discussion last or last meeting as noted was around um the the focus of the agreement and um some of the federal compliance issues. And so we're bringing this back. It was tabled at that meeting. And so the discussion tonight is to consider if the board would like to approve. So for the presentation I kept it fairly short. I didn't go too much into explaining the differences. I know happy to have that discussion or you know um resolve some of those questions again. Um but for this presentation I just talked about some of the similarities as the board was interested in some of the parallels between the originalou and the current iteration of the proposed contract. So just waiting for the slides to come up here. Okay, sounds like we're having some tech issues. So, uh I will do my best to do an overview from memory and then I can fill in any gaps when we get the slides back up. So um in terms of the parallels between the uh the requirements of the originalou memorandum of understanding and the current proposed contract a lot of the terms um did stay the same. So uh the roles of both parties were spelled out in thatou. So for example the h some of the responsibilities of the h are around program promotion um providing referrals to that program. Oh, good. Uh, and additional outreach. And then the responsibilities of Habitat were to essentially to manage the program, to process applications, um, to do their own outreach, to provide annual reporting to the HA. Great. Yes. Here's the background. Here we go. Um, and provide some additional home buyer education as part of this program. And then it the the dollar amount noted in theou was the same as what's in the current contract which is that five-year term maximum amount of 250,000 per year. The contract does formalize uh a lot of this language and it includes the ability for the HR to terminate the agreement at any time. It also includes requirements for annual reporting to come before the board um with Habitat. And then some of the things that the contract spells out a little bit more clearly than theou did are especially around payment structure. So this formally identifies a funding source for the program which is local affordable housing aid or LAAHA dollars. Um it spells out the funding flow. So, it would allow us to issue that first annual payment to Habitat upon execution and then release future installments, not more than annually, but once Habitat submits evidence of qualifying expenditures. Um, and then it includes some clarity around an admin fee, which was not identified in theou. So, this spells out what they're eligible for in terms of admin and and sets a cap. And then, uh, the reporting requirements. So this includes that annual reporting structure and has some specifics in terms of needing to provide an executed purchase agreement and then um some information about the households that are being served through these programs income the assistance and the purchase price of the property. And that's uh that's it for the presentation. Just next steps if approved staff and Habitat would execute the contract. Um we um and then we would move forward to issue that payment and then continue forward with the annual reporting structure. >> And here's the motion. Happy to answer any questions. >> Questions? >> Uh I have a question about the reporting. >> Yes. >> Is it just annually or can we adjust that to be bianually? >> Yes, chair and commissioners. We could we could add more frequent reporting requirements. I >> I would like to move to that. Okay, other questions. Okay, ready to go ahead with the motion? >> I am right. So, I need a motion to authorize a down payment assistance and services agreement between Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity Lending and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the city of Bloomington and related allocation of funds. >> Uh, so moved. >> Moved by Commissioner Robertson, >> second >> and second by Commissioner Wooten. All in favor? >> I motion passes four to zero. Could I ask just a quick clarifying question on the reporting? Would you want Habitat to come present by annually to the board or is a just a written report appropriate? >> Yeah. Well, if I could have that, I would really like it. >> Okay. >> Love that. >> Yeah. >> Do I need a motion for that, too? >> No, I'll I'll note it in the contract requirements. Yes. Okay. >> Thank you very much. >> Great. All right. Are you up here for the next item? 5.3 which is 2720 West 108th Street. May Oh, there's Mike. May we have the staff report. Thank you, chairs and commissioners. Um, yeah, I would have gladly let Sarah present. Uh, I'm here to present 2720 West 108 Street. Sometimes we call it the Mint House. And there's a little sign in the house that said the mint house. So, we didn't name it that way, but you'll see why in the photos in a minute. Um, so to bring you up to speed, uh, some of you might remember this in the very end of 2023, it was December, I think 29th, very end of, uh, we purchased the house at 2720 West 108th Street. Um we had uh some close sessions to talk about some of the known issues at the house. Um ultimately we settled on a purchase price of 232,500. Um and the intention at the time was to include this in our rental homes for future home buyers program. Uh we knew going into it that there were some issues identified with uh the support beam in the basement and we had a structural engineer uh do a report on that and they estimated those repairs at about $10,000. Um we also knew um that the electrical panel is 60 amps which is on the lower side that we'd likely want to update that um just given today's modern demands on electricity. Um, so knowing that, we kind of negotiated the price down a little bit. Um, but like I said, we had these known issues that were called out in our time of sale report. Um, and so in 2024, we started to move forward with addressing those issues and soliciting some bids on what that cost would be. the initial bid on the beam with uh the design that we had the structural engineer kind of come up with the solution ended up being closer to $25,000. Um and at that time the uh one of the biders pointed out there's some issues that you might want to look into with the foundation that we're seeing that was previously missed. So at that time we then started to solicit bids on repairing the foundation and we actually had quite a range of bids that came in and we're not experts on this. So eventually we called in our our city building official to also give kind of a neutral third party review of it and she she pointed out that yes there are some significant issues with the foundation that need to be repaired and likely the higher bids are more accurate than the lower bids that we were were seeing. Um, one of the things that we had talked about um, off and on and during the negotiation um, prior to purchasing the property was adding a third bedroom. Uh, on the one hand, it serves some of our households that have our smaller two family households. You know, thinking of our uh, all things housing report, we do have a lot of those kind of dual households or single households and our current portfolio tends to be three or four bedrooms, so larger units. Um, so this house would uh meet those needs. And the other hand, we do typically see a lot of families that are more likely to be income qualified. Um, so having a third bedroom would be add that flexibility. So I'm just pointing that out there as we get into the next slide which talks a little bit more about the the cost that we are identifying for this property. So like we had pointed out the beam uh the estimate we have uh is about 25,000. The foundation like I said we had quite a range. So 45 would be maybe on the low end. 70 is probably more accurate if what we're hearing from our building official. Um and then there's just other necessary updates that we'll need to do to make it ready for the program. Typically we put some money in when we're flipping a house even between users. So we have some of that work as well. also about $20,000 on the low end, $40,000 if we do some more significant updates. Uh and then uh if we do want to add a bedroom, that 50,000 uh comes in there. So, you can see we kind of quite a range that we could have for this potential project. And we've really come up with two options that we've taken our time and gone through the bids of what we can do with this property. Option one would be to demolish the property knowing that there are some significant issues that need to be addressed. Uh we could use community development block grant funding for that. We have acquisition demolition as one of our activities in the action plan this year. So that would fund it. Um and that's estimated about 20 to $30,000. Uh and we've done this with other properties in the past and as you've seen with the Bloomington Affordable Home Ownership Program, we find opportunities uh to partner with developers or 9030 park. Another example of where we had this property, demolished it, and we were able to do uh put four units on there. And this property is not quite as large, but we would likely still be able to um potentially get an ADU on it as well. Uh the other option would be to continue with the rehab and get it uh ready for our uh rental homes for future home owner program. Uh we place the beam, do uh extra work, potentially add that third bedroom. Um and you know that renovation, I think the last slide said 90,000. So 90,000 to 200,000. You know, it could be quite a big range determined on if we move forward with that option. uh funding on that is uh challenging. We could use some of our community development uh CV dollars. Uh as you recall, we're are renovating or rehabbing our current units with those CV dollars. Um but that is uh limited and we have to act quickly to do that, which is why we're bringing it tonight. Um and that would only cover a portion of the rehab. Additionally, we do get rental income then being in the program, but that rental income hardly covers just operations. So, as we're looking at this large capital improvement, that's where the HA h levy is really stepping in and filling that. Uh, so we'd be committing HA levy to really do that renovation knowing that we'll likely never get repaid. So there are some pros and cons for each. Um the benefits of doing demolition is uh we won't be doing this ongoing subsidy. Um we have a s funding source readily available for the demolition. um that would be a good site for that uh future programming either through a developer um either future phase of the BA program or another uh example with Walt and uh Habitat partnership uh or we have some flexibility. Um we could just sell it at market rate and kind of recoup some of the expenses. The challenges is we did communicate to the neighborhood that we would be preserving this house and it would remain there. S. Um, so this would be a change that we would need to inform the neighborhood is happening and why it's happening. Um, and given that this is a little bit lower in our priority, we have, you know, we just went through a couple big projects. Um, it it could sit there for a little bit before we demolish it or we demolish it, it might sit vacant for a while as we work, you know, over time. We were just talking with that, you know, you missed this round of funding, you have to wait another year. So it could be uh a couple of years before we actually start working in earnest and get it redeveloped. Uh rehabilitation on the other hand as you saw could be a significant cost. Um and that's the costs we known as we saw we went into it thinking we had a good idea of what those costs were but then it it uh grew exponentially and so there's still a lot of unknowns on what we find as we start to do the renovation. Um but um and it requires that ongoing subsidy. Uh we're also finding that difficulty on whether we need that third bedroom or not. We're not entirely sure what that market need is. Um and so that that's a little bit of a unknown. Um but at the same time we would be providing a unit in our program that is you know successful and gets people into home ownership opportunities which was the the original intent and and so it it would be adding that benefit. So we've outlined some options for you to consider. Um the first option uh is demolition and this is where staff has settled on recommending. This would be uh what we would recommend just given the high cost of the rehab and the unknown uh what other issues might be there. Um [snorts] if we move forward with this, we would then really need to do that neighborhood engagement and start informing and explaining why and what will be happening. Um we would then move forward and get bids for demolition. Um and then work on that redevelopment opportunity. So, I I don't want to lose sight to on that that there is still potential that this becomes an affordable owner opportunity. So, while maybe not in our rental homes for future homeowner program, there's still opportunity for us to potentially look at modular home or some of the other things that we've been kind of exploring with the BA program that just don't quite fit right now, but maybe in the future. Um, and we can come back to these slides. We have a motion on each of them if you so choose which one. Um but option two again invest in the repairs. Um we would get updated bids and start working on that. We would create a more firm project timeline on for those repairs and getting uh uh someone into that unit. Uh and then at some point actually market the unit and get fill it for the program. And then there is a third option that we want to make you aware of. We could always punt um table it for a future date, get more information um knowing that uh some of these bids are a little bit dated. We could go and get more bids and get more firm details for you if you need that information. Um and could define the project a little bit more, get more detailed on the third verse, second bedroom cost benefit analysis. Um you know, one of the consideration is with the third bedroom, you get more rent. So there is a cost benefit to it that um we've done it in the past but um we can certainly update that and we can bring this back to another meeting. >> All right, time for questions. Commissioner Wooten, >> um option three looks good to me and I'll tell you why. primarily the benefit of a third bedroom uh in this marketplace right now based on what I'm hearing and I've experienced and and trying to place people in in in housing who have been homeless. The need is there. Um it it off it offers itself not only for uh single um parent household families but also extended families, you know, where you have, you know, interg generational chances for people to stay together. Um, and as far as the con construction cost, it's a competitive market right now with with that. I'd like to probably see us go back out and rebid to see if we might be able to get a better cost of that and eventually have it be owned by someone who's renting initially. Um, so I'm I'm not always so quick to punt and kick it away to someone else to do the work um based on our monies. So, or lack thereof. That's just my opinion. >> Thank you, >> Chair Commissioners. I might just add a little bit more context on the demand. So, we have currently 21 homes in the rental homes for future home buyers program. So, this would expand that portfolio by one more. And then we we have currently, I believe it's two properties that are vacant, and we have had some trouble filling units of the three-bedroom size recently. Um, and because it's an income qualified program, we're seeing either people with not enough income or too much income. And so, we're we're not sure of the demand for the three-bedroom unit. So, it is a it is a challenging question in in adding a two-bedroom size to the portfolio versus adding the third bedroom. We would have to look more into what the demand could be, but we're not sure that there is a strong demand for a unit of of that size currently. >> Commissioner Robertson. [clears throat] >> Thank you, Chair. Um, so I was on the opposite end end of the spectrum and coming in I was thinking more option one, right? Um, to demolish the structure. Um, hoping that eventually it could be sold back to to a developer who's looking to keep it in the affordable housing realm. Um, that said, I'm open to the idea of punting it, right? Um, just to be very clear. Um, but my I have to say the biggest concern for me are those construction costs. And we know, or I shouldn't say we know, but often in building projects, it ends up costing three times as much as you're quoted initially, right? So, I'm not super confident that getting more bids or u more uh up to date. I am so sorry, my brain is Swiss cheese today. Um or current bids, excuse me. Um I'm not super confident that that would result in like a lot of cost savings, right? Um and if anything, frankly, I'm wondering if we would just see higher numbers, honestly. Um, but I'm wondering what the rest of my colleagues think. >> Commissioner Hooim. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, I will say this. I was the I was the voice that got 9030 Park from being sold to a developer and worked with Habitat and Walt on. And I'm really proud of that project. I I very much take that one to heart. I'm gonna I will boast about that till the day I probably die. Um, but and I have that feeling with this like I don't want to sell it to a developer. I'm sorry, but I'm very much against that. I would like to keep this where what we did with 9030. I mean, that that sat vacant for a while. We did demo it, which I would like to see that done sooner rather than later. I do think it has a risk for vandal vandal. >> Thank you. And we're still going to have to obviously maintain the property if it stays either way, right? Um, and we're going to have to do yard costs and all that. So, that I mean that we have to own that. Um, but I would love to see another opportunity if possible with as successful as that was or maybe even like MACV. Um, there another opportunity we could do with Minnesota Veterans. We did do that previously. So, I mean, I think there's options out there. I just I really would from the bottom of my heart not like to see us sell it to a developer and really keep this as an H project and and do what we've done and what we can do really well I feel like and that's partner. So that's where I sit. Yep. >> I'm good with demolishing. I do think it's going to end up costing a lot more um just with costs. I don't think they're going to I wish that I could say that they were going to get cheaper. I just and once you get into foundation, being a construction worker's daughter, you just never know what you're going to get into once you start working with that foundation. So, that does terrify me a little bit. Um, so that is my two cents on it is I just would really like to see us keep it and if it takes a little bit, it's okay. I think it'll be the the the holding will be worth the reward at the end, I think. Commissioner Robertson, >> if I may, thank you so much and thank you so much um for everyone's comments. Those are really helpful for me. Um and I think uh like what you're saying is maybe let's take a minute. What both of my colleagues are saying is let's take a minute and get some more information even if it's not necessarily about getting updated bids and things like that. Um but just figuring out if maybe not to add an option four uh but make it worse for everyone. Um but maybe there is some way that we could hit a sweet spot and we can demo it. but we don't have to sell it and maybe it just sits around and doesn't burn our money away. But, you know, I I think that there's room there's room for us to find a a happy medium is what I'm hearing. Um, and so with that, um, I would be open after hearing this discussion, I would be open for option three, um, to table the item to a future date and learn more before we vote on it today. Yeah, J commissioners, I I'll just say um I think that that the option of demolishing and then waiting to determine what to do to the property to resell or to redevelop would that would be option one. So that would move us towards the demolition and then we could leave the property vacant for some time before we could hold the property as the HR and then consider it as a future redevelopment project. So that could still be action one to move us forward. Yeah, >> thank you so much. Um, I very very much appreciate that. May I ask then of my colleagues, does that move the needle for you towards option one at all? >> Hold the property. >> It does. If we were to hold the property. Yes. So, it would be demoed, but we would hold it. We wouldn't sell it. >> Commissioner Huligim, >> can you show option one again? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Because I think it did state that that I I do remember it being that there wasn't necessarily a determining factor on if we were >> um it says work on a long-term redevelopment opportunity, which I think that would be >> commissioners. Yeah. And that We threw out sell in there as just you know that is part of the options of option one if you want to get more convoluted that but I I think we totally agree like that is the mission of the HA to continue that affordable and that and so I very clear that we could continue that partnership and there are and that is why there is not a definitive of what the next step is because it could be MAC fee it could be Walt it could be working with the modular as a demonstration project. So there there's lots of options and different funding sources we can pursue too to also help make that come to fruition. >> Well, as chair, I'm going to throw in my two cents. Um I want this property to remain with the city with the H and it remain an affordable lot, however property, however it is done. So that I think meets our mission statement and and everything. Um I would I would go with the demolition. I I think having a well-kept empty lot is probably better than a house deteriorating. And how much money, you know, being in the real estate business, I know how much money the upkeep and and also once you find issues. Oh my goodness, you can find issues. Um, so I would support the rest of the commissioners here in in going with option one. >> All right. So, is this the official motion on the bottom? Okay. So, we need a motion directing staff to demolish 2720 West 108th Street. And can we add something on there that it remains an affordable property that it will rem not be sold or can we not do that? >> Chair and commissioners, I don't think that needs to be reflected in the motion. I think the direction to staff is clear that we would maintain the property. >> All right. So then the motion is just to direct staff to demolish um this mentioned property. >> So move >> second. >> Okay. Moved by Commissioner Wooten and second by Commissioner Hooim. All in favor? >> I. Motion passes four to zero. Uh next we're on discussion items which uh 6.1 is the update on development of St. Mark's property and developer solicitation and training program. May we have the staff report? Yes, chair commissioners. I took a brief break to sit down and now now I'm back. [laughter] Um, so the purpose of this item is to provide an update on the St. Mark's property which is at Xerxes on Xerxes. Um, good. There we go. So, this is part of our Bloomington affordable home ownership program, which as you recall is a large initiative to develop 27 homes for um owner occupied homes that are affordable at 80% of the area median income. And so, this uh property acquisition is a large chunk to get towards those 27 homes. And so um we acquired this property just earlier that should actually be 2026 um just closed on that earlier this year. And uh the the item tonight is really it's a discussion item. It is an update on progress and then um some conversation around the vision for this site and the one of the goals of this program is also to partner with emerging developers. And so we've been working on creating some training materials um to support emerging developers through that process. And so to just have a discussion on where we currently stand and um any feedback or direction that HR would like to provide in terms of vision for this property. Okay. Um so this is a aerial view. So, uh, basically the site vision that we had initially proposed had a number of single family and duplex properties or twin homes equaling 17 owner occupied opportunities on this site. However, since that time, um, the city has passed a missing middle housing ordinance that allows for some some new housing types to be built in the city. And so some of those include triplexes, detached town homes. Um there are various other housing types that are now opportunities that were not opportunities at the time of those discussions. Also in the time between the initial um site acquisition and now we've worked on some single family development projects and the gaps on those projects are significant and increasing. And so the opportunity to revision this site is around um both, you know, using this missing middle housing ordinance to potentially develop some new housing types on this site and also an opportunity to reduce some of the development gap for these affordable home ownership opportunities. And so here is a revised drawing. I I realize it's a little bit hard to see. There is a larger version um in your packets or on your iPads. And so those green lots are three family dwellings or essentially triplexes. The yellow lots are detached town homes. And I'll just highlight this is a it's a vision. It's a concept really. It's it's for discussion purposes. Um so this kind of shows what are using some of these housing types. What how could we increase the density on the site? So this has six three-unit town homes and six detached town homes for up to 24 units possible in this vision. Um, I'll note too that our the grant that we received for our affordable home ownership program, we have been developing other properties. And so, um, we only have funding left for about 16 sites. So, if we wanted to increase the density, we would likely be developing this in phases. Um, so the first phase would be using the the Minnesota Housing Impact Fund dollars that we have now, and then we would work on developing a next phase at a later date. Um, and then some elements of this site plan. Um it includes public right of way. So you can see also a lot of conversations about the cell tower that's on the site. And so you can see um how we're keeping the cell tower where it is and adding a road. Um, also one of the questions is around would we require would we have an HOA and uh our recommendation is not to create an HOA but to manage for some of the especially for the three family um dwellings to have agreements between the parties in the dwellings instead of an HOA that covers the full site and that is because of some of the challenges we've seen with just managing HOAs that this would be a simpler agreement structure. Um the other note here is that we would need to do additional engagement. So we had a neighborhood meeting in uh earlier in 2025 where we showed that site plan with the 17 units. So this would be an increase taking advantage of the ordinance changes. So we would uh want to go back and revise present a revised concept to the community. Um there at that community meeting there were mixed reactions. Um so this would be a change and and we would need to have a discussion with um community members and I I think it's fair to anticipate that a mix of opinions including some opposition to increasing density in this way. So okay and so um part of this discussion is also just letting you know what the next steps are and asking if any questions, comments, concerns um regarding development on the site. Uh the first step is to publish an RFP, a request for proposals for basically for the engineering design for the site with the public road. And we would anticipate doing that very soon here in the next couple of weeks and then bring a selection to the August H meeting just to do the design. It's basically the pre-development phase. And then um we are continuing to pursue grants. We are pursuing a lot of grants for these affordable home ownership programs. Um and the this schedule to move into the public infrastructure public bid. This is where our public works team would also weigh in and kind of navigate that process of getting a public bid for the road install in installation. Um and then moving into construction in 2027. We would uh ant well I'll move to the next slide actually. Um so in also at the same time we would be working on a developer selection process. So, as this is developing, we're, you know, doing the pre-esign, we're installing the road. We would be selecting uh developers to work on these home ownership opportunities with the goal of potentially coordinating on construction timing um and getting things ready to to complete construction in 27 2027 and 2028. uh we have been working with Neo who's a well-known consultant um in the space of emerging developer curriculums and so they have uh put together basically a uh like a overview of what some of these sessions could entail and identified some critical topic areas and presented some training materials and so um would like to bring to the HA to our July meeting a discussion of increasing that contract um and moving forward to have them execute the training opportunities as well And then uh again August would be a big selection date for the HR selecting developers. Um and then we would do the training for the emerging developers later this year with the goal again of continuing to submit additional funding applications, finalizing purchase agreements late this year, early next year, and then really moving into that pre-development and development phase. Some notes about the developer recruitment. So um there's a couple of like what do they have to meet in terms of minimums. Uh so those are listed here. Um a completed application which NAO has been working with us to develop an application. Um, and then we also did note in the application a equity contribution. And the reason for that is because a developer will still need to secure some private financing in a bank loan as well as public financing and likely have to invest some upfront dollars into the project. And so it it can be a real challenge for emerging developers to secure some of those upfront resources. And so in order to select a partner that we think is equipped and ready to move forward, there is a reality that that there will likely be a financial commitment required. And so we have decided to spell that out in the application. Um and then this last piece is no more than what what is an emerging developer. And so this is the def the proposed definition I would say. Um the caveat is that it's strongly proposed because it aligns with some fun requirements. So, it's no more than 25 units of development experience. Um, and then 15,000 square, you can't own more than 15,000 square foot of commercial space. And then developing scoring criteria. So, this is fairly standard scoring criteria for an application or an RFP, developer qualifications, project concept and readiness, and financial readiness. Okay. Okay. And then a little bit more information about the training program that we've put or that NO really has been working on developing. Here are some of the really critical topic areas and we're still working out like what are the number of sessions? Um what's most appropriate for timing and are they in person or are they hybrid? We would anticipate a mix of of the above. But here are some key areas. You know, just reviewing the program overview pro like what is your project? Um and what is the affordability requirement? And then these last four bullets are really critical. development costs. So, helping to develop a perform which is kind of spells out all the sources and uses of the project, complying with funer requirements. We do have significant grant funding for this project already and will continue to apply. And so, this is a really critical piece is how can we make sure that the project is compliant with all of these? Well, we're probably having like three to five at least different funding sources. And so, complying with all of that can get complicated. So, kind of walking through what that looks like. Um, and then underwriting, you know, what are banks looking for in terms of underwriting criteria, how do you secure that financing, and some more information around insurance requirements and what insurance would look like. So, that's kind of an overview of some of the critical areas um for for a training. Okay, which brings me to I guess it's not really requested action, it's more like requested discussion. So there are also some more specific uh discussion items. But these are kind of the four areas where we would uh love board feedback and direction. Um one are you supportive of this you know exploring this path of modifying the vision increasing the density and using the missing middle housing ordinance. Uh two any um feedback on the proposed topics or direction of the developer training program. Three any comments or concerns around the selection criteria that we outlined. And then four is just kind of general. Are you any feedback on the next steps and the the timing the proposed timing of this item? So, uh that is that is it. Happy to answer questions and talk through comments. >> Questions? Commissioner Hooim. >> Thank you, Chair. Okay, this is going to I'm going to be very vulnerable here. Um, can you explain what the difference is with a detached townhouse versus I mean, I understand they're detached. I get that, but what what what makes it a detached townhouse versus just a single family home? >> Yeah. Um, in terms of what exactly does that look like in terms of construction? That is a great question. Um, my understanding is that really the key difference is just the attachment. So, um, is it a standalone structure or is it a triplex with an adjoining wall? And so I don't know if you have Mike is our planning guru and might have a little more information on what that looks like. >> Yeah, I'll just add it. It also has a lot to do with like setbacks. You're really close to the property line like five feet on both sides. So while a town home you are literally connected, a detached town home means you're very close to the property line but and but sequential. So, it's like a town home, but you do still have that physical separation. So, you're getting close to the density of a town home, but not quite. You don't have that common wall ownership, which sometimes, you know, when you have that, that adds HOAs and other complications. So, that's why they're showing up to be a little more popular in the market these days. >> Thank you. >> Um, I have a couple questions. Um, with the triplexes, um, I'm curious how they would be structured. You know, I get duplex, side by side, up, down, triplex. I'm kind of wondering what this would look like. Um, is are the lots going to allow for enough parking? I mean, I assume each structure will have a garage like, you know, all new construction does, but what about, you know, additional parking when you have I mean, because we are increasing the density. Um, and and I say this as a board member, but I also say this as someone who lives just a couple blocks from this. I'm curious what it will look like. That's the first question. [snorts] Yeah, chair commissioner, I do think some of this will be so one of the next steps is that engineering design and so some of these will be determined as we're looking at like the design and and can the site support this density, what does it look like, where are the driveways, um where is the parking, and so it would need to go through a more full planning process. So I do think some of those questions are yet to be answered. Um, right now it's the question is more like do you want to go down this road of exploring that option and is that a housing type that you'd be open to on the site? >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> And then I do have a bit of a concern with the triplexes and you know when you have shared the shared walls but you don't have an HO and I don't want it the city to get into an HOA. I I don't think that's the direction we need to go. But when you have the upkeep and it comes time to it needs a new roof, what if two out of three parties can't afford it or you know there's just and having sold some twin homes that don't have an HOA? It's just it's a concern for those owners and are those houses going to be as wellkept as you know the single family one is the detached one who's not relying on someone else for money. So, I I get that goes into the study, but I just want to bring that up as a concern. Um, and then that we're putting more density in here. Is there going to be enough green space for the people? I mean, if you have a triplex, what's that backyard going to look like? Everyone wants their kid to go out and play in the backyard. So, what's that going to look like is another consideration. >> Yeah. chair and commissioners, you know, with the with some of the zoning changes, the maximum density, this has been um re reguided for low density, but even with a low density project, it does allow up to 12 units per acre. So, this site, according to our planning regulations, could support as many as 48 new units. Now, we're not proposing that. We're not proposing that, but in terms of the questions around is there enough green space, is the site going to support this? according to our zoning requirements, there's there there's opportunity to have even greatly increased density beyond what we're currently showing here as the vision. Yeah. >> Okay. Commissioner, no. I I just saying okay to her. You can go ahead. Commissioner Houi. >> Thank you, Chair. Um I just wanted to second your concern on the triplex. That wasn't even something that really came to my thought, but I do think that is a very valid concern and and could be a pain point. So, um I think that's something to definitely research. I I like the idea of increased density. >> I really like the detached town houses now that I understand what you're saying. I I do apologize. Um but I do like that. I'm just I do have a little bit of a concern with the triplexes. I And it is just because if you don't have an HOA, how how does that look? maybe staff has some um ideas on that um to support it without doing an HOA obviously because we are definitely not in the business to do that. Um so yeah, I definitely appreciate that comment and really would like to second that and get more information on that. But I do like the idea of um the increased density if the area can afford um handle it and in regards to parking and how that looks, which obviously there's more to come. So, I do support though looking more into um a little increased density with that new missing middle piece. I think that's great and I know we've been on discussions on that. So, it' be really cool to um to advance that in this project. >> I just want to add another comment. I was at the meeting at St. Marks which neighborhoods were neighbors were there and some were fabulous some I understand their questions. Um I know one thing was the amount of traffic. Um and to clarify how much traffic goes down Xerxes right now and how much this may add just in general with the original plan and with the increased um density because I know neighbors did not quite understand and honestly I in that meeting either didn't understand the volume of traffic already on that road. So this increase is like is it a lot? Is it not much? you know, so I'm saying that as a commissioner and as a neighborhood resident. So other questions or comments? So So uh no hearing none. So do we need a motion to move forward or just a discussion item? >> No, just a discussion item. So, I've taken notes on your comments and concerns and things to bring back when we kind of work a little bit more than engineering on site design and answering some of these questions for the for next steps. >> Okay. Oh, Commissioner Hooim, >> just really quick. Um, what's kind of a timeline? I I think you had one on here of when you guys thought you might be able to come back. I just want to get that in my Yes. Uh, we have a couple of steps in the developer selection process. I am anticipating um um an item in July to basically contract to to run developer training sessions. Um and then in terms of development or and de developer selection actually we are looking at that August meeting to select an engineer and uh potentially to select developers you know developer selection might be a little bit later August September but we're we would be aiming to complete the training later this year. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> All right, I think we are done with this item. >> Thank you. >> So, you can sit down for this one. The next item 6.2 is HR administrator updates. All right, let me pull them up on my computer here. Okay. Um, I have quite a few, so I'll just run through them. Feel free to stop me if you have questions. Um, first on the packet in the update section, you'll notice we did get an a letter from HUD basically reminding us of our obligation to report fraudulent activities under federal funding. So I just included that as a example of some of the communications that we've been getting on this topic and that letter specifically asks us to share out the letter. So it's included there for your review. Um some project updates on things coming up. Um the Wixon project which is the apartment that we looked at in must have been May. Um they had indicated that they were going to apply for some additional funding sources and then would come back at a later date to the HR. So, they did receive uh $900,000 from the county and they had applied for 1.5 million. So, it's a little bit less than what they applied for, but they did receive funding. Still waiting on a decision for some additional funding sources. Um so, [snorts] that that is something that we're looking at potentially bringing back in July. It depends a little bit on timing of those funer announcements. Um excuse me. Uh and then continuing down this track of project updates. Um last year we did a uh promotion in partnership with our sustainability team to offer free home energy squad visits for the summer. So we have launched that partnership again and so we're actively marketing that program. Um and so that was very successful last year. We had over 180 visits and about half of those were um in below 80% of the area median income families. So, um excited to see that moving forward again this summer. Uh property updates. So, I updated last the last couple meetings around um this um energy program called Liar or LER lowincome rental efficiency. I forget what it stands for, but it's essentially a program where for incomequalified renter households, um they'll do free um inspections of the house for energy efficiency upgrades and then issue a report of recommendations. So, we are starting to receive those recommendations. Some things that were included were um some high efficiency water heater replacements and things like that. So, they do cover a portion of the cost towards those improvements. And so we've moved forward with making some of those changes because also because we can use the CDBGCV dollars as the HR half of that contribution. So we are moving forward with some of those upgrades already. Um we also had our emergency maintenance provider who has been doing very well um had a temporary halt on services as of last Thursday. So, uh, shortterm we have staff acting as an emergency contact for our residents, but there is a potential for some longerterm impacts. So, we are evaluating what that looks like and trying to monitor the situation and just be aware of what's going on in that space. Um, also emergency rental assistance. So, this was approved by the city council in January and by the HR in February. I know it's been a while since we've updated on this one. So, I just wanted to give you a quick update that the H approved moving forward with five contracts. One of the groups did decline because of the um state the reporting requirements. However, we are actively working with four partners. It's been a little bit slower than we expected to get those funds out the door. So, we're going to be working with our partners to determine what the barriers are and you know what we can do to respond. Um, also regarding the heights, I know there have been some questions around progress at the heights. Uh, we spoke with the contract, the construction manager and the property manager and they were hoping for a September completion date. So, that's something um we'll continue to update the board on as we get more updates. Um, well, that's that's a lot. I have a couple more. Maybe I'll pause there. Yes, >> thank you. Um, in regards to rental assistance, um, I know one of the major issues that I've heard about is the fact of the reporting is the fact that, >> um, whether citizenship or not, um, there is a marginalized community that really does not want any their names documented anywhere. Um, I don't know how we get around that, but I'm I'm putting a challenge out there to see is there anything that is there anything that can be done um to help with that. I I I understand we have to report I it's a catch you know it's such a tough situation but I know that that's one of the biggest impacts is um there's a big fear in reporting whether no matter immigration status >> there's just a huge fear of going into a database. >> Yeah. >> So yeah chair and commissioner that's what we suspect is the barrier. Um, I will say we'll be engaging with our partners a little bit more on are there solutions and it is a tough spot as you've said because we do have reporting requirements. So that is something that we've just noticed that it's been slower to get the dollars out the door and so we're kind of looking at well what what are some opportunities that we have to to help that flow. Yeah. Okay. Well, I'm I'm almost done. >> [laughter] >> Um, I did uh review uh folks availability and I'm looking at August 19th for a tenative board retreat. So, I'm planning to send out a calendar hold. Still working on timing, full day versus half day. I'll plan to set out a full day hold, but hopefully in the next week or two, we'll have a little bit more clarity um in terms of timing. Um, but if you could maybe just note that and and tenatively hold your calendars, we'd be looking at that date. And then just a couple legislative updates. So, these are new, newly developing, but just things we're keeping an eye on. Um, so the 21st Century Road to Housing Act is federal legislation, and the goal on that is to address the growing housing crisis, and it's a these days rare bipartisan bill that's received a lot of support. is currently working through um Congress and a couple of the things that may affect us. We're still looking into, you know, what's the specific language, but some streamlining of HCV inspection requirements and potentially environmental review changes. Some of the other elements of this are investor restrictions to limit large institutional investors from purchasing single family homes. um also easing regulations on small and community banks and um addressing some mandates on in terms of the development of manufactured homes. So quite a few changes that we would expect to see. Still kind of working through what exactly they are and how does that impact H programs, but it is exciting to see a bipartisan bill like that go through acknowledging the housing crisis and trying to put steps in place to address it. Um and then the other update is um the office of management and budget, the federal office uh has proposed some revisions to governmentwide rules for federal financial assistance. So they are pretty significant. There's like a 400page document online that spells out all of what they are. Um so we are monitoring that as well. Could affect how federal agencies design, review, award, suspend, and oversee grants. So, kind of just working through a lot of potential legislative impacts. Um, my suspicion is we won't see dramatic immediate impacts, but we have to know, you know, the details of how they impact our programs and especially our federal reporting. So, just kind of some legis some legislative action that we're keeping an eye on that I wanted to let the board know is coming up. So, that is it. That is all my updates. I'm happy to answer any questions. >> No questions. I think everyone's brain is full. >> Yeah. [laughter] All right. So, we have reached the end of our agenda. So, may I have a motion to adjourn the Tuesday, June 23rd, 2026 HA meeting? >> Some moved. Second. >> Moved by Commissioner Hooim and second by Commissioner Robertson. All in favor? I. Motion passes 40. Thank you everyone. >> [music]