HRA Backs Co-Living Ordinance, Reviews Rental Program Changes

General Interest
Meeting Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2025
Story generated: Oct 8, 2025
Focus: HRA board approval of co-living ordinance support and discussion of rental homes program policy changes

The Housing and Redevelopment Authority approved a letter of support for a proposed co-living ordinance during its April 8 meeting, while also reviewing significant changes to the city's rental homes program for future homebuyers.

The board voted 6-0 to support the co-living ordinance, which aims to provide diverse housing options including affordable units at 30% of area median income levels. City Planner Emily Horseback presented the final ordinance, which expands the definition of family to allow six or fewer unrelated adults or any number of related adults with minor children. The ordinance requires co-living developments to have five or more units, with shared kitchens and a minimum 70-square-foot unit size.

"This is providing housing choices that could have flexible leases with a 30-day minimum, good for students, seniors, mobile professionals," Horseback said. The ordinance will proceed to a public hearing at City Council by the end of April.

Staff also presented proposed changes to the Rental Homes for Future Home Buyers program, including moving from a waitlist to a lottery-based application system. Assistant HRA Administrator Salvador explained the current waitlist, closed since 2023, had a low success rate with many applicants no longer responding or qualifying when contacted.

Other proposed changes include removing ongoing income limits for participants, allowing them to increase earnings without losing program eligibility, and adding financial hardship provisions that would let participants access their escrow savings to cover rent during extended difficulties. The program currently serves 21 households and has facilitated one home purchase this year, with two others in progress.

This story was created by artificial intelligence (a large language model) based on the proceedings captured in the video below.

Go deeper on this topic

Research related meeting documents and build a brief — without rewriting the story.

Rate this story

Meeting Analysis

The April 8, 2025 Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting focused on two main items: approval of a co-living ordinance and proposed changes to the Rental Homes for Future Home Buyers program. The board approved a letter of support for the co-living ordinance, which aims to provide diverse housing options including affordable units at 30% AMI levels. Staff presented significant proposed changes to the rental homes program, including moving from a waitlist to a lottery-based application system, removing ongoing income limits, and adding financial hardship provisions.

Source Document
Focus: Original document text

[1:17] . >> I WOULD LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE TUESDAY APRIL 8TH

[1:24] HRA BOARD MEETING. FIRST ITEM IS THE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AND THE SECOND

[1:33] MOTION MADE BY WOOTEN AND SECONDED BY DUBLINER.

[1:41] ANY DISCUSSION ALL IN FAVOR I OPPOSED. NO I'M ACTUALLY NOT VOTING ON

[1:49] THIS ONE BECAUSE I WAS NOT HERE. SO IT PASSES 5 TO 0 NEXT IS

[1:56] THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING. ARE THERE ANY EDITS OR CHANGES

[2:04] ? OKAY. OKAY SO WE MADE A MOTION TO

[2:10] APPROVE SECOND AND SECOND BY WHO CAME ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR?

[2:18] I ALL RIGHT. PASSES 520. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM ORGANIZATIONAL

[2:25] BUSINESS

[2:32] . GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS EMILY HORSEBACK. I'M A PLANNER.

[2:39] I HAVE BEEN HERE ONCE BEFORE IN DECEMBER AND I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT CO-LIVING ORDINANCE

[2:47] WHICH AGAIN NICK JOHNSON AND I WERE HERE IN DECEMBER TO KIND

[2:52] OF GET YOUR THOUGHTS AND IDEAS ON A DRAFT ORDINANCE AND NOW WE HAVE A FINAL ORDINANCE.

[2:59] SO JUST AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT TIMELINE. THIS HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR

[3:06] ALMOST A YEAR NOW SO WE WENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION A FEW TIMES AND NICK I THINK CAME TO

[3:14] THE HRA BOARD LAST SUMMER AND THEN NICK AND I CAME IN DECEMBER AND YOUR JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

[3:21] WE'VE BEEN TO COUNCIL FOR STUDY SESSIONS AND THEN WHERE WE'RE HEADED IS A FINAL PUBLIC HEARING AT COUNCIL AT THE END

[3:26] OF APRIL. LOOK, I KNOW YOU COULD I NEVER

[3:39] KNOW IF IT'S JUST LIKE LAGGING AND I'M GOING TO SKIP LIKE FOR SCIENCE OR IF IT'S A

[3:49] OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THIS IS THE WHY WHY CO-LIVING.

[3:56] SO FIRST THE CONNECTION TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF GOALS IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT WHICH

[4:01] RELATE TO CO-LIVING AND THAT'S TO PROVIDE A RANGE OF HOUSING CHOICES.

[4:07] SO THIS IS PROVIDING HOUSING CHOICES THAT COULD HAVE FLEXIBLE LEASES WITH A 30 DAY

[4:14] MINIMUM GOOD FOR STUDENTS SENIORS MOBILE PROFESSIONALS AND ALSO CO-LIVING COULD

[4:21] SUPPORT PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND WE REALLY THINK THAT THIS COULD MEET 30% AMI

[4:28] LEVELS WHICH IS DEEPLY AFFORDABLE AND WHICH IS THE SECTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING

[4:36] THAT BLOOMINGTON HAS STRUGGLED WITH A LITTLE BIT. SO OVERALL IT'S JUST ADDING TO THE SPECTRUM OF HOUSING POSSIBILITIES WHICH IS A

[4:42] POSITIVE THING

[4:49] . I'M JUST GOING TO BRIEFLY GO OVER THE ALL OF WHAT'S IN THE

[4:54] ORDINANCE AND IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT A SECTION WE CAN GO THROUGH

[5:02] THAT. BUT MOSTLY I'M JUST GOING TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT WHAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE. MAYBE THANK YOU.

[5:12] SO DEFINITIONS WISE WE ARE CHANGING THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY AND I THINK LAST TIME WE HADN'T DECIDED ON A

[5:20] DEFINITION NOW WE DECIDED TO TRY TO BE VERY INCLUSIVE WHERE

[5:28] WE ARE ALLOWING SIX OR FEWER ADULTS OR ANY NUMBER OF ADULTS WHO ARE ALL RELATED TO EACH OTHER ALONG WITH ANY MINOR

[5:33] CHILDREN IN THEIR CARE. THIS ALLOWS FOR NOT ONLY MORE

[5:39] ROOMMATE SITUATIONS WHERE IT CAN BE SIX ADULTS WHO AREN'T RELATED BUT ALSO MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR

[5:46] MULTIGENERATIONAL FAMILIES. ONE CHANGE THAT WE MADE TO THE CO-LIVING DEVELOPMENT DEFINITION IS THAT THE

[5:53] DEFINITION IS NOW CALLING OUT THAT IN ORDER TO BE A CO-LIVING DEVELOPMENT IT NEEDS TO HAVE FIVE OR MORE CO-LIVING UNITS.

[5:58] THIS IS TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND THEN ADDITIONALLY THE

[6:03] DEFINITION OF CO-LIVING UNIT CHANGE TO SPECIFY THAT THE KITCHEN WILL BE SHARED AND COOKING FACILITIES SUCH AS

[6:09] LIKE A STOVE WILL NOT BE INCLUDED AND EACH LIKE UNIT OR BEDROOM AS FAR AS YOUTH

[6:19] STANDARDS GO NOT MUCH HAS CHANGED THERE OTHER THAN WE DID DECIDE TO PUT THE

[6:27] REQUIREMENT THAT EACH UNIT WILL BE AT LEAST 70FT AS A MINIMUM AND ADDITIONALLY WE

[6:34] MADE THE REQUIREMENT THAT A KITCHEN MUST BE ON THE SAME FLOOR AS A UNIT FOR ACCESSIBILITY PURPOSES.

[6:41] AS FAR AS LIKE USE TABLES AND WHERE THINGS ARE PERMITTED OR NOT CO-LIVING DEVELOPMENTS ARE

[6:49] ALLOWED WITH THE SAME PERMISSIONS IN THE SAME DISTRICTS THAT MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS ARE ALLOWED

[6:55] IN RENTAL CODE AMENDMENTS ARE JUST MATCHING THE ZONING CODE. SO KIND OF ADDING SOME DEFINITIONS IN THERE AND THEN OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE

[7:04] AMENDMENTS ARE JUST ALLOWING FOR SOME POTENTIAL FLEXIBILITY WHERE CO-LIVING MAY MEET THE

[7:13] REQUIREMENTS AND THEN DELETIONS ARE JUST DELETING SOME OLD DEFINITIONS AND KIND

[7:20] OF MOVING THE CO-LIVING UNIT INTO A NEW SECTION. WE'LL.

[7:27] SO HOW IS THIS ORDINANCE REMOVING BARRIERS TO HOUSING? I HAVE TOUCHED ON SOME OF THESE THINGS BUT AGAIN CHANGING THE FAMILY DEFINITION

[7:35] AND ALLOWS FOR MORE FLEXIBLE LIVING SITUATIONS FOR FAMILIES OR FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT RELATED CREATING A CO-LIVING

[7:42] USE WITH STANDARD THAT ARE RESPONSIVE TO UNIQUE CARE

[7:48] CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSING TYPES ARE RECOGNIZING THAT CO-LIVING IS DIFFERENT THAN OTHER HOUSING TYPES.

[7:54] WE HAVE IN KIND OF BEEN FLEXIBLE WITH THAT AGAIN ADDING INCENTIVES FOR CO-LIVING WHERE AFFORDABILITY

[8:00] REQUIREMENTS ARE MET. AND THEN LASTLY AGAIN ALLOWING

[8:06] DIVERSITY AND VARIETY OF HOUSING POSSIBILITIES FOR RESIDENTS. >> SO WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR TONIGHT IS APPROVAL OF THE

[8:15] LETTER OF SUPPORT THAT SHOULD BE IN FRONT OF YOU AND ALSO WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.

[8:20] SO THIS IS A LETTER TO GIVE TO COUNCIL FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING

[8:25] SHOWING THAT THE HRA BOARD IS IN SUPPORT OF THE CO-LIVING ORDINANCE.

[8:32] AND YEAH LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS

[8:50] ? SARA COHEN THANK YOU CHAIR SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS.

[8:57] SO YOU MENTIONED THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE THE KITCHEN ON THE SAME FLOOR AS THE LIVING UNITS.

[9:04] SO THEN BASICALLY WE WOULD BE SAYING THAT THIS COULDN'T BE LIKE A MULTI STOREY UNLESS THERE WAS A KITCHEN ON BOTH

[9:12] FLOORS. CHAIR COMMISSIONER CARTER THAT IS CORRECT. SO I MEAN IT COULD BE HOWEVER MANY STORIES BUT THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A KITCHEN ON EACH

[9:19] FLOOR. OKAY. OKAY. I THINK THAT WOULD BE ONE THING I WOULD WANT US TO JUST KIND OF MONITOR LIKE DOES THAT

[9:24] PROHIBIT LIKE PREVENT UNITS FROM BEING DEVELOPED BECAUSE

[9:31] IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE TO PUT ANOTHER KITCHEN IN WHEN I MEAN I'M JUST IMAGINING LIKE, YOU KNOW A HOUSE THAT COULD BE TURNED INTO A I GUESS IT NEEDS

[9:39] TO BE FIVE OR MORE RIGHT BUT A PLACE FOR FIVE INDIVIDUALS AND IF THERE WAS A KITCHEN ON THE

[9:45] BOTTOM AND THEN TWO LIVING AND THEN THREE ON TOP, YOU KNOW, LIKE WOULD IT PREVENT SOMETHING LIKE THAT FROM HAPPENING? SO THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN.

[9:52] AND THEN FOR THE PARKING WE HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION IS A HALF A SPACE PER ONE CO-LIVING

[9:57] UNIT AND THEN IT'S MENTIONED THAT IT IS MORE RESTRICTIVE IN THE NOTES IS THAT CHAIR

[10:08] COMMISSIONER CARTER DO YOU MORE RESTRICTIVE COMPARED TO I GUESS LIKE OTHER CITIES WE WERE COMPARED TO LIKE HALF A

[10:17] SPACE PER QUALITY? YEAH. THE MORE RESTRICTIVE SIDE OF THE RANGE OF COMMUNITIES RESEARCH YES. YEAH. SO WE TRIED TO TAKE THE

[10:23] RESEARCH THAT WE GOT AND THEN KIND OF PUT IT IN A BLOOMINGTON CONTEXT AND ALSO

[10:30] WHEN WE WENT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT THAT NUMBER THE .050.5 I THINK

[10:41] TOO RESTRICTIVE OR NOT BEING HIGH ENOUGH. OH YES.

[10:49] OKAY. THAT'S KIND OF A COMPROMISE, RIGHT? A LITTLE BIT. AND ALSO A LITTLE BIT OF KIND OF A WAIT AND SEE LIKE KIND

[10:57] OF SEEING HOW IT ACTUALLY PLAYS OUT. OKAY. OH GOSH. SORRY.

[11:05] THAT'S FROM A DO NOT STORE RUN POTENTIAL SPAM IS CALLING ME AGAIN SO YEAH I GUESS MY

[11:11] PERSPECTIVE WOULD BE I MEAN I KNOW PARKING IS THE COST OF PARKING IS VERY EXPENSIVE AND SO YOU KNOW IF WE CAN

[11:19] REDUCE LIKE MAKE IT NOT AS RESTRICTIVE I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THAT. BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND YOU'RE GETTING FEEDBACK FROM A LOT

[11:26] OF PLACES RIGHT NOW SO I GUESS FOR NOW I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE FOR A WAIT WITH A WAIT AND SEE

[11:31] APPROACH BUT I ANTICIPATE WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO REVISIT IT IN THE FUTURE AND REDUCE

[11:37] THAT RESTRICTION. SO THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. WERE YOU DONE OKAY.

[11:45] MY QUESTION HAS TO MY QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH THE LIVING ENVIRONMENT. THE MAX IS SIX PER FACILITY,

[11:52] RIGHT? SIX PER HOUSEHOLD CHAIR COMMISSIONER AND THAT'S FOR

[11:58] LIKE SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS. SO YEAH, CHANGING THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY WOULD

[12:06] ALLOW FOR YOUR CORRECT A MAXIMUM OF SIX UNRELATED PEOPLE. SO MY MY QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH LIVABILITY AND SPACE SO

[12:14] IF THE COOKING OR OR EATING AREA IS GOING TO BE ON THE SAME FLOOR AS IS, HOW IS THE

[12:22] LIVING AREAS? HOW MANY BEDROOMS, HOW MANY BATHROOMS WITH THAT MANY PEOPLE?

[12:29] MAX A CHAIR COMMISSIONER WOOTEN SO THE REQUIREMENT FOR A KITCHEN ON EVERY LEVEL IS FOR A CO-LIVING DEVELOPMENT SO

[12:37] WE WOULDN'T HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT FOR A SINGLE OR TWO FAMILY HOUSE IF THERE'S LIKE SIX PEOPLE LIVING THERE

[12:44] WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT LIKE A ROOMMATE SITUATION. IS THAT KIND OF ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?

[12:51] NOT QUITE. OKAY AND MAYBE I DIDN'T ASK IT CORRECTLY SO LET ME CLARIFY THIS WAY HOW MANY BEDROOMS WOULD YOU ANTICIPATE BEING IN A SINGLE FAMILY SITUATION

[12:59] WHERE THERE'S SIX PEOPLE IS A MAX GOTCHA CHAIR COMMISSIONER

[13:05] WU AND I THINK THAT HAS TO DO MORE WITH LIKE OUR BUILDING CODE STANDARDS AND PERHAPS ALSO OUR RENTAL HOUSING

[13:13] STANDARDS. SO I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT ANSWER TO THAT BUT I MEAN THERE ARE STANDARDS IN PLACE

[13:20] THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY IN THE ZONING CODE BUT THAT HAVE TO DO WITH OCCUPANCY AND YEAH SO

[13:28] FOR CLARIFICATION MY UNDERSTANDING IS USUALLY AS TO TWO PERSONS PER ROOM IF IT'S NOT AS OUR SCENARIO WE ARE A

[13:36] COUPLE BUT EVEN WITH THAT THREE BEDROOMS MINIMUM HOW MANY BATHROOMS 12I MEAN THE

[13:43] THING I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE ENVIRONMENT NOT BE SO RESTRICTIVE THAT YOU HAVE ONE

[13:50] AREA WHERE THERE'S A SPACE FOR COOKING. YOU HAVE SIX PEOPLE TOTAL AND THERE'S NO UP OR DOWN LEVELS

[13:58] FOR A LIVING. SO IT CREATES A IT CREATES A LITTLE BIT MORE DENSITY IN THAT ENVIRONMENT THAN THAN

[14:06] WOULD BE NORMALLY COMFORTABLE FOR A FAMILY. MHM. SO THAT'S JUST MY PERSPECTIVE

[14:13] . YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER WOOTEN THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT. THAT'S A FAIR POINT. I WILL SAY THAT WE DID WORK

[14:21] WITH OUR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION THROUGH THIS SO THEY WERE KIND OF COMFORTABLE WITH

[14:26] THIS NUMBER AND THEY'RE THE ONES THAT DO RENTAL INSPECTIONS NOT SAYING IT'S PERFECT BUT I KNOW THAT I FEEL

[14:33] BETTER FOR HEARING FROM THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY OUT IN THE FIELD AND KNOWING THAT

[14:40] SOMETIMES THEY DO SEE SITUATIONS LIKE THIS AND THEY WOULD, YOU KNOW, WANT US TO KIND OF ALLOW THAT.

[14:50] I'LL RESERVE THE THIRD COMMENT. I'M I HAVE IF I'VE READ

[14:56] CORRECTLY WHEN IT'S A DEVELOPMENT WILL EACH BEDROOM HAVE ITS OWN BATHROOM IN THE

[15:01] COMMON SPACE WILL BE THE KITCHEN AND LIVING AREA OR IS THAT JUST DEPEND ON CHAIR

[15:08] THINK YEAH IT DEPENDS SO IT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE ITS OWN BATHROOM BUT THE COMMON SPACE WILL BE LIKE THE KITCHEN AND

[15:15] IF THERE'S ANY TYPE OF LOUNGE SPACE SURE. OKAY.

[15:22] YES PLEASE. SO I'M GOING TO GO ON RECORD SAYING THAT IF THERE'S SIX

[15:28] PEOPLE IN A HOUSEHOLD IF IF OP OPPORTUNITY PRESENTS THEMSELVES TWO BATHROOMS AT LEAST AND THE LIVABILITY SPACE

[15:41] AND THE SPACE WHERE WE'RE FOOD PREPARED IS THERE'S ENOUGH ROOM WITH A SEPARATION SO

[15:52] THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? FEEDBACK, COMMENTS.

[16:01] OKAY. HEARING NONE. MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE CO-LIVING ORDINANCE SO MOVED

[16:12] MOVED BY DOUBLING HER SECOND

[16:18] AND SECOND BY WHO CAME ALL IN FAVOR? I I OPPOSED MOTION PASSES 620

[16:35] . DID YOU VOTE? OH, THIS EVENING I'M SORRY YOUR VOTING I THINK YOU THINK

[16:41] YOU JUST ALL RIGHT SO THERE'S NO NEW BUSINESS SO THE NEXT IS

[16:49] DISCUSSION ITEM IS DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE RENTAL HOMES FOR FUTURE HOME

[16:56] BUYERS PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND ADMISSION POLICIES. MAY WE HAVE THE STAFF REPORT?

[17:04] GOOD EVENING, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS IN A SALVADOR ASSISTANT TEACHER ADMINISTRATOR WE ARE RETURNING TONIGHT WITH A CONVERSATION

[17:11] THAT INITIATED EARLIER THIS YEAR REGARDING THE RENTAL HOMES FOR FUTURE HOMEBUYERS PROGRAM. WE'VE COMPLETED A REVIEW

[17:19] OF THE MANAGEMENT AND ADMISSION POLICIES FOR THE PROGRAM AND ARE HERE THIS EVENING TO DISCUSS OUR PROPOSED CHANGES AND ALSO SEEK

[17:25] FEEDBACK FROM YOU AS WE WORK TO FINALIZE THESE UPDATES.

[17:31] I DO WANT TO QUICKLY REVISIT THE GOALS OF THE PROGRAM SO THE RENTAL HOMES PROGRAM

[17:38] SUPPORTS A PATHWAY TO HOMEOWNERSHIP. IT DOES THIS THROUGH AFFORDABLE RENT AND PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROGRAM

[17:45] ALSO GET ACCESS TO COACHING AND EDUCATION AND A CORE COMPONENT OF THE PROGRAM IS

[17:53] THIS SAVINGS TOWARDS A DOWN PAYMENT THAT IS FACILITATED THROUGH AN ESCROW ACCOUNT FOR EACH HOUSEHOLD.

[17:58] WE CURRENTLY HAVE 21 ACTIVE RENTAL HOMES AND BASED ON THE

[18:05] BOARD'S DECISION EARLIER THIS YEAR THE CURRENT INCOME LIMIT FOR ELIGIBILITY IS BETWEEN 60 AND 80% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME

[18:12] AND RENTS ARE SET AT AFFORDABLE RATE AT 50% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME HOUSEHOLD RENT

[18:20] AND ESCROW CONTRIBUTIONS ARE RECALCULATED ANNUALLY AT RECERTIFICATION AND LEASE RENEWAL.

[18:28] ALSO I JUST WANT TO PROVIDE SOME FUN UPDATES ALREADY IN 2025 WE'VE HAD ONE HOME PURCHASE FROM THE PROGRAM AND

[18:35] TWO OTHER HOUSEHOLDS ARE ACTIVELY EITHER BEEN PRE-APPROVED FOR A MORTGAGE AND LOOKING FOR A HOME ARE

[18:40] REALLY CLOSE TO CLOSING ON A HOME SO WE WANTED TO SHARE THAT UPDATE EVEN THOUGH WE'RE ONLY IN APRIL AND WE ALSO

[18:47] TAKEN FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD ARE GOING TO BE OFFERING ADDITIONAL ONE ON ONE

[18:54] COUNSELING FOR ALL CURRENT PARTICIPANTS OF THE PROGRAM THROUGH OUR PARTNERSHIPS WITH CAPPY AND PEOPLE. ANOTHER THING I DID WANT TO

[19:02] JUST FOLLOW UP ON TO AND OUR PREVIOUS CONVERSATION WE DID RECEIVE FEEDBACK ABOUT WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AS PART

[19:10] OF PROGRAM PARTICIPATION AND WE HAVE INITIATED DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PORT BECAUSE THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN THE PROCESS

[19:16] OF DEVELOPING A BROADER WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR THE FOR THE CITY WIDE AND

[19:22] SO WE WANTED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT WORK THAT'S ALREADY BEGUN AND POTENTIALLY CONNECT OUR PARTNERS OR OUR PARTICIPANTS WITH THAT WORK.

[19:30] THAT'S ALL AND IT'S VERY EARLY STAGES SO WE DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT THAT WOULD IMPACT OUR PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS AT LEAST FOR THE NEXT YEAR OR SO.

[19:37] BUT IT IS UNDER DISCUSSION IN TERMS OF THE ADMISSION AND

[19:45] MANAGEMENT POLICIES THEMSELVES. THERE'S FIVE AREAS WHERE STAFF IS PROPOSING CHANGES AND I'LL

[19:52] WALK THROUGH EACH OF THEM NOW ALL FIVE OF THE CHANGES ARE ATTEMPTS TO BALANCE THE FACT THAT THIS IS ENTIRELY A LOCAL

[19:58] PROGRAM WHICH MEANS WE HAVE A LOT MORE FLEXIBILITY THAN WE DO FOR OTHER PROGRAMS THAT ARE ADMINISTERED BY THE HRA BUT

[20:06] ALSO A LOT MAKING SURE THAT THIS PROGRAM IS MEETING THE HIGH LEVEL GOALS THAT ARE SET FOR IT. HISTORICALLY WE'VE RELIED ON

[20:13] HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS TO KIND OF SET A FOUNDATION AND INFORM THIS PROGRAM. BUT WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE

[20:21] THAT FLEXIBILITY AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THAT LOCAL FLEXIBILITY FOR THIS LOCAL PROGRAM WHEREVER POSSIBLE.

[20:31] THE FIRST ONE I'LL GO INTO IS THE APPLICATION PROCESS. SO WE ARE CURRENTLY PROPOSING TO MOVE TO A MORE TRADITIONAL

[20:36] LISA MODEL RATHER THAN RELYING ON A WAITING LIST PRIMARILY

[20:41] BECAUSE THE SUCCESS RATE WITH OUR WAITING LIST IS INCREDIBLY LOW FOR A FEW REASONS BUT MORE RECENTLY WE'VE BEEN SEEING

[20:49] THAT WE ARE JUST NOT GETTING RESPONSES WHEN WE REACH OUT TO

[20:54] PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE WAITING LIST THEY'RE ALSO THEIR INCOMES ARE TOO LOW TO BE TO QUALIFY FOR THE PROGRAM OR

[21:01] THEY'RE NOT CURRENTLY IN A POSITION WHERE THEY CAN MOVE FROM THEIR EXISTING LIKE THEIR CURRENT HOUSING SITUATION WHICH MEANS WE'RE CONTACTING A

[21:08] LOT MORE HOUSEHOLDS TO FILL A SINGLE UNIT WHICH JUST ADDS TIME FOR THE LEASE UP PROCESS MOVING TO A MORE TRADITIONAL

[21:16] LISA MODEL MEANS THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH HOUSEHOLDS WHO ARE IN A LIKE IN A PLACE WHERE THEY'RE READY TO MOVE.

[21:23] THEY'RE ACTIVELY ENGAGED WITH THE PROGRAMMATIC COMPONENTS OF THE PROGRAM AND INTERESTED IN THE HOME OWNERSHIP AND

[21:28] HOMEBUYING PROCESS AND THE THE

[21:35] WE'RE INCORPORATING A MORE EQUITABLE PROCESS BY USING A

[21:43] LOTTERY TO RANDOMLY SELECT FROM ELIGIBLE APPLICATIONS SO THAT WOULD BE A CHANGE WITH THE NEW PROCESS AND WE'RE

[21:48] HOPING THIS STREAMLINE ENDS THE LEASE UP SIGNIFICANTLY SIGNIFICANTLY FOR STAFF WHILE

[21:55] ALSO ALLOWING US TO BE MORE FLEXIBLE IN HOW WE'RE MARKETING ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS FOR EACH OF OUR

[22:00] PROPERTIES WHEREVER WE CAN. >> ALSO WE ARE PROPOSING TO

[22:08] ALIGN OUR DEFINITION OF FAMILY THAT'S USED FOR THIS PROGRAM TO THE CITY'S DEFINITION OF FAMILY THAT'S CURRENTLY AS

[22:15] YOU JUST HEARD BEING UPDATED THROUGH THE CO-LIVING ORDINANCE. PREVIOUSLY WE WERE USING THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER

[22:22] DEFINITION OF FAMILY WHICH CONSIDERS A LOT OF DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT JUST ARE NOT

[22:28] RELEVANT TO THE HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE SERVED THROUGH THIS PROGRAM AND KIND OF HAD A LOT OF ADDITIONAL DETAIL THAT WASN'T NECESSARILY RELEVANT

[22:35] FOR THE RENTAL HOMES PROGRAM. SO WE SAW THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALIGN THIS PROGRAM WITH THE CITIES WHERE

[22:42] THE CITY IS HEADED WITH THEIR DEFINITION OF FAMILY. >> THE NEXT ONE IS ONGOING

[22:49] INCOME LIMIT. SO CURRENTLY THE PROGRAM HAS A REQUIREMENT THAT IF THE HOUSEHOLDS INCOME GOES ABOVE

[22:57] OUR INCOME LIMITS THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MOVE. AS STEPH WAS REVIEWING THIS WE THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS

[23:05] IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH SOME OF THE UNDERLYING GOALS OF THE PROGRAM WHICH IS FINANCIAL SELF-SUFFICIENCY AND HOMEOWNERSHIP READINESS.

[23:12] WE RECOGNIZE THAT AN INCREASED INCOME IS REALLY HELPFUL FOR BUYING A HOME BUT IT'S ONLY ONE OF A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT

[23:17] FACTORS THAT GO INTO THAT CONSIDERATION. SO WHILE THEIR INCOME GO UP THEY MAY STILL NEED TIME TO DO

[23:24] WORK ON THEIR CREDIT OR COMPLETE THOSE EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS. AND SO WE'RE PROPOSING AT THIS

[23:30] TIME TO JUST REMOVE THAT LANGUAGE ENTIRELY. WE ALSO SEE IT AS A BENEFIT IF

[23:35] THEIR INCOME GOES UP THAT JUST MEANS THEY'RE ABLE TO SAVE MORE FOR THEIR DOWN PAYMENT ULTIMATELY. SO THAT'S THE THE THINKING BEHIND THAT ONE.

[23:43] AND THEN WE ALSO ARE TAKING SOME LANGUAGE FROM HOUSING

[23:50] FIRST OUT TO YOU AGAIN BUT JUST TO KIND OF DEFINE SOME TEMPORARY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A TEMPORARY AND PERMANENTLY ABSENT FAMILY

[23:56] MEMBER AND THIS IS MORE JUST TO PROVIDE CLARITY FOR STAFF

[24:02] IS AS TO WHAT INCOME WE WOULD COUNT IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS AND WHAT INCOME WE WOULD NOT COUNT DEPENDING ON THE CIRCUMSTANCE.

[24:09] AND THEN THE LAST PROPOSED CHANGES AROUND FINANCIAL HARDSHIP AND WE KIND OF SEE THE GOAL OF THIS AS A HOUSING

[24:17] STABILITY MECHANISM WITHIN THE PROGRAM. SO IT CREATES AN AVENUE FOR A HOUSEHOLD TO REMAIN IN THE

[24:24] UNIT AND PAY THEIR RENT AS THEY NAVIGATE A CHALLENGING FINANCIAL SITUATION FOR THEIR FAMILY. THE ULTIMATELY WOULD BE THAT

[24:32] WHEN THE HOUSEHOLD ULTIMATELY LEAVES THE PROGRAM THEY'RE NOT STARTING OFF IN THE NEGATIVE WITH A SIGNIFICANT BALANCE

[24:38] OF UNPAID RENT WHEN THEY LEAVE OUR PROGRAM AND TO QUALIFY FOR THIS EXEMPTION THE HOUSEHOLD

[24:44] WOULD HAVE TO BE THE HARDSHIP WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED LONG TERM WHICH MEANS IT'S

[24:51] LASTING OVER 90 DAYS AND OTHERWISE THE HOUSEHOLD WOULD NEED TO BE ON TRACK FOR MEETING PROGRAM GOALS AND

[24:58] THEY'VE DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY'VE EXHAUSTED ALL OTHER FORMS OF EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE IF THEY MEET THOSE THREE

[25:05] CRITERIA THEY WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO ACCESS ANY ESCROW SAVINGS THAT THEY HAVE ACCUMULATED TO THAT DATE TO

[25:12] COVER ANY BACK RENT POTENTIALLY OR FUTURE RENT FUTURE MONTH'S RENT SO THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO STAY ON TRACK

[25:17] WITH THEIR RENT PAYMENTS. WE ALSO INCORPORATED SOME

[25:24] OTHER KIND OF CLARIFYING LANGUAGE MOSTLY DOCUMENTING OUR EXAMINATION APPOINTMENT PROCESS BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT

[25:32] PREVIOUSLY INCLUDED IN THE MANUAL AND THEN ADDING A DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ACTIVITY WHICH IS

[25:40] HELPS AGAIN PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE CLARITY AND THEN WE ALIGNED OUR RENT COLLECTION POLICIES WITH CURRENT STATE LAW WE'RE NOW

[25:48] GOING TO TRANSITION INTO THE DISCUSSION PORTION. THERE'S A FEW QUESTIONS ON THE

[25:55] SCREEN AND THOSE ARE JUST MORE MEANT TO GUIDE THE DISCUSSION BUT REALLY WE'RE SEEKING FEEDBACK ON THOSE PROPOSED CHANGES OR IF THERE'S OTHER

[26:03] ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION THAT YOU'D LIKE US TO INCORPORATE. COMMISSIONER WOOTEN I HOPE

[26:11] HE'S THE FIRST COMMISSIONER WE SAY OH THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. YEAH I JUST HAD A FEW COMMENTS SO FIRSTLY I AM IN SUPPORT

[26:18] OF AND I COMMEND THE IDEA OF CHANGING KIND OF THE INCOME LIMIT ASPECT OF THIS BECAUSE

[26:25] YOU KNOW YOU DEFINITELY WANT TO INCENTIVIZE GOOD GOOD DECISIONS, RIGHT? AND PEOPLE HAVING THE ABILITY TO MAKE THOSE GOOD DECISIONS

[26:31] AND HAVING A SURPLUS, I COMMEND THAT. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA BUT I AM JUST A LITTLE BIT

[26:37] CONCERNED ABOUT THE LOTTERY ASPECT. I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU GUYS WOULD KIND OF WANT TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT WOULD JUST HELP SAVE LIKE TIME ADMINISTRATIVE

[26:44] TIME BUT IT IS A LITTLE BIT CONCERNING BECAUSE YOU KNOW IF SOMEONE KIND OF WENT IN EARLY ON AND WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE

[26:52] PROCESS AND DID THE STEPS, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO KIND OF GET IN FIRST. I UNDERSTAND IT'S DIFFICULT

[27:00] BUT IF THERE'S ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE TO THAT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THAT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CAN I

[27:07] ACTUALLY HELPS OH YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONERS I JUST IF I COULD JUST QUICKLY CLARIFY

[27:12] SO PREVIOUSLY WE HAD HAD A WAITLIST WHERE SOMEBODY WOULD FORMALLY APPLY AND THEN BE ON

[27:18] A VERY LONG TERM WAITLIST. PART OF THE REASON WE HAVE HAD SUCCESS IS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT WAITLIST OPEN SINCE 2018 AND SO THIS PROPOSED

[27:26] CHANGE WOULD BE IT'S IT WOULD BE A LIMITED OPENING OF APPLICATIONS.

[27:32] SO LIKE TEN DAYS, TWO WEEKS, A SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME BUT INSTEAD OF HAVING THE VERY FIRST PERSON WHO COMES IN THE

[27:38] DOOR IT WOULD BE LIKE WITHIN THAT LIMITED APPLICATION PERIOD SO YOU'D STILL BE ALLOWING FOLKS WHO ARE YOU

[27:45] KNOW, MORE READY BASED ON WE WOULD HAVE LIKE AN INTEREST LIST AS OPPOSED TO A WAITLIST. SO YOU STILL HAVE FOLKS WHO ARE MORE READY AND WHO ARE

[27:50] INVESTED AND RESPONDING QUICKLY TO AN OPEN APPLICATION WOULD BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO

[27:56] THAT OPENING BUT THEN WITHIN THAT IT WOULD JUST WOULDN'T BE THE VERY FIRST PERSON TO BE READY. SO IT DOES ALLOW A LITTLE BIT

[28:04] OF SPACE FOR FOLKS TO BASICALLY COLLECT THEIR DOCUMENTS IN AND SUBMIT A FORMAL APPLICATION AND THAT'S WHEN THE LOTTERY WOULD BE

[28:09] APPLIED. SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT KIND OF A MIX BETWEEN THE TWO DIFFERENT

[28:14] OPTIONS WE HAVE. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING THIS IS BECAUSE IT'S KIND OF IN BETWEEN. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPS TO ADDRESS SOME OF YOUR YEAH,

[28:20] THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO ALSO ADD TO IS BECAUSE WE WOULD BE DOING THIS

[28:25] FOR EACH VACANCY THERE'S POTENTIAL FOR THAT SAME HOUSEHOLD TO APPLY MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE SAME YEAR

[28:31] DEPENDING ON HOW MANY VACANCIES WE HAVE. SO JUST BECAUSE THEY APPLIED

[28:36] IN ONE LOTTERY DOESN'T EXCLUDE THEM FROM APPLYING FOR OTHER OPPORTUNITIES IN THAT SAME POTENTIAL TIME PERIOD. SO THAT YES SO I'M ACTUALLY

[28:45] GOING TO TAG ON COMMISSIONER HE SAID HIS CONCERN THERE ARE

[28:52] PEOPLE WHO SIT ON LOTTERY LISTS FOR A WHILE AND FOR WHATEVER REASON RULES GET CHANGED AND THEY GET PURGED

[28:59] OFF AND GET FRUSTRATED AND SO THEY MAY NOT APPLY BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN ON FOR SO LONG.

[29:06] THAT COUPLED WITH THE FACT OF HOW WE'RE GOING ABOUT DOING THIS MARKETING A WE'RE GOING TO THIS MARKETING THAT'S A

[29:13] CONCERN I HAVE FOR THE APPLICATION PROCESS. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BUT THOSE ARE TWO FOR THE APPLICATION PROCESS THAT THAT KIND OF CONCERN ME.

[29:20] THANK YOU CHAIR COMMISSIONER WOODEN I THINK THAT WAS KIND OF OUR THOUGHT PROCESS FOR MOVING AWAY FROM THE WAITING

[29:29] LIST PROCESS IS THAT IT WAS A NUMBER OF YEARS THAT THEY WOULD THEY HAVE BEEN WAITING ON THE LIST BY THE TIME THEY

[29:34] WERE SELECTED. THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED AND THEY'RE EITHER NO LONGER INTERESTED OR WE CAN'T

[29:41] GET A HOLD OF THEM. AND SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND MOVING TOWARDS LIKE AN APPLICATION

[29:47] FOR EACH HOUSE WHEN IT BECOMES VACANT SO THAT IT'S A MORE ACTIVE LIST.

[29:54] AND THEN YEAH, I HAD ANOTHER THOUGHT BUT I LOST IT SO GO AHEAD AND ASK YOUR QUESTIONS AND I CAN SO ALONG THAT LINE

[30:02] ALL I SEE THIS IS IS AN UPGRADED VERSION OF THE WAITING LIST. WE BASICALLY ARE PUTTING THE

[30:09] WORD OUT WHEN THERE'S A SPACE AVAILABLE PEOPLE BUY A LOTTERY. THEY DON'T GET ON IT. SO THEN AT THAT POINT IN TIME

[30:17] THEY'RE KIND OF LIKE YOU OUT OF OUT OF THE GAME UNTIL THEY GO TO ANOTHER OPENING. SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ALL

[30:23] THAT DIFFERENT THAN THE ORIGINALLY WAITING LIST ONLY THAT IT'S A SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME.

[30:29] SO I GUESS I CAN'T SIT HERE AND AVOID THAT ANY MORE DIRECT THAN I HAVE AND AS MY OPINION MAY NOT BE ANYBODY ELSE'S BUT

[30:36] THAT'S MINE AND I'VE WORKED IN THIS FIELD AND I'VE SEEN HOW WE LIST DISILLUSIONED FOLKS FROM BEING ACTIVELY ABLE

[30:44] TO GET INVOLVED WITH THINGS SO SO YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION BUT THAT'S THAT'S WHAT MY OPINION WOULD BE ON THAT COMMISSION.

[30:54] I ALSO WANTED TO ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION ABOUT MARKETING. THAT WAS THE OTHER COMPONENT OF YOUR COMMENT. >> SO WITH EACH WITH EACH

[31:02] OPENING WE WOULD IMPLORE AN AFFORDABLE AFFIRMATIVE MARKETING PLAN IS WHAT IT'S

[31:10] CALLED AND GENERALLY HOW THAT WORKS IS WE DO AN ANALYSIS OF WHO WE ARE CURRENTLY SERVING WHO HAS APPLIED IN THE PAST AND WHO ARE LIKE COMPARE

[31:17] THAT TO THE POPULATION OF THE CITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE CITY ARE REPRESENTED WITH THE

[31:25] APPLICATIONS THAT WE'RE RECEIVING AND THEN DO TARGETED MARKETING AS NECESSARY TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S REFLECTED IN IN SUBSEQUENT OPENINGS

[31:32] WHETHER IT'S MARKETING BE CULTURALLY SENSITIVE. YES, BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S ONE OF OUR PRIORITIES IS TO MAKE

[31:37] SURE THAT FOLKS WHO ARE NOT REPRESENTATIVE IN HOMEOWNERSHIP HAVE A CHANCE

[31:43] TO TRULY BE INVOLVED AND THAT'S ANOTHER CONCERN OF THIS ,YOU KNOW, NEW UPGRADED TYPE OF MARKETING BUT PROBABLY A

[31:51] LITTLE BIT MORE EMOTIONAL THAN THAT TO MOST PEOPLE WOULD BE. YOU MENTIONED A POINT ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WAS WASTED AND

[31:59] CONSIDERED TO BE RELEVANT AND I COULD ME OVER THE SLIDE YOU PUT OUT THERE BUT YOU REMEMBER THAT POINT I BELIEVE IT WAS THE THE INCOME LIMITS, THE

[32:06] ONGOING INCOME LIMITS AND I DIDN'T MAKE IT I DIDN'T MAKE ANY GOOD NOTE OF THAT.

[32:14] OKAY. SO UNDER FINANCIAL HARDSHIP WHAT SUPPORTS FINANCIALLY ARE YOU LOOKING AT PROVIDING FOR FAMILIES THAT ARE IN THAT

[32:21] HARDSHIP PERIOD SO THE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP PROVISION WOULD ALLOW THEM TO ACCESS THEIR ESCROW ACCOUNT SO ANY SAVINGS IN THEIR ESCROW

[32:29] ACCOUNT TO COVER RENTAL COSTS TO STAY IN THE UNIT GOOD THAT'S GOOD.

[32:36] >> I RELINQUISH OKAY I HAVE ACTUALLY A QUESTION ALONG THAT LINE HOW LONG CAN THEY ACCESS

[32:44] THEIR ESCROW FOR HARDSHIP? I MEAN AT WHAT POINT DOES IT BECOME THEIR MONEY'S GONE? IS IT A CASE BY CASE BASIS IS

[32:52] A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONTHS? YEAH. THANK YOU CHAIR FOR THAT QUESTION. SO THE WAY IT'S OUTLINED CURRENTLY IN THE HARDSHIP

[32:59] PROVISION DRAFT IS THAT UNTIL THEY HAVE THEY CAN HAVE ACCESS TO THAT ESCROW ACCOUNT UNTIL EITHER IT'S EXHAUSTED OR THE

[33:07] HARDSHIP IS OVER. SO AND THAT OBVIOUSLY WILL VARY FROM SITUATION TO SITUATION AND BECAUSE ESCROW

[33:14] ACCOUNTS ARE GOING TO RANGE IN THE AMOUNT THAT'S LEFT, IT WOULD BE I THINK THAT WOULD BE

[33:22] MORE OF A CONTROL OF WHEN WHEN THEY WOULD THE HARDSHIP WOULD BE OVER. >> OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. I THINK WHO CAME WAS NEXT.

[33:32] THANK YOU CHAIR WITH THE ABSENT FAMILY MEMBERS AND THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO HOUSEHOLD INCOME, CAN YOU EXPAND A

[33:38] LITTLE BIT MORE ON THAT? I JUST WANT TO KIND OF GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM WITH THAT BECAUSE I CAN SEE SOME

[33:44] CONFUSION AND SOME I HAVE SOME CONCERNS WITH THAT MAKING SURE WE'RE DOING YEAH. >> THANK YOU CHAIR

[33:49] COMMISSIONER WHO HIM KIND OF WHAT THIS IS STRUCTURED MORE IS IT'S BREAKING DOWN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A

[33:56] TEMPORARILY ABSENT FAMILY MEMBER AND A PERMANENTLY ABSENT FAMILY MEMBER. SO A COUPLE EXAMPLES THAT COME UP I THINK WITH THIS PROGRAM

[34:04] WOULD BE LIKE A STUDENT. SO A COLLEGE STUDENT WHO ISN'T IN THE UNIT FOR MOST OF THE YEAR BUT DOES STILL CONSIDER

[34:11] THIS THEIR PRIMARY RESIDENCE OR WOULD BE IN THE UNIT FOR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF MONTHS OF THE YEAR?

[34:19] WHAT WHAT THIS POLICY OUTLINES ESSENTIALLY IS THAT THEY WOULD STILL BE CONSIDERED A FAMILY MEMBER FOR THAT FIRST YEAR WHEN THEY'RE GONE. BUT THEN AFTER THAT IF THEY'RE

[34:26] STILL OUT OF THE UNIT FOR MOST OF THE YEAR AFTER THAT FIRST YEAR THEY WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED A FAMILY MEMBER AND THEN WE WOULDN'T COUNT THEIR

[34:32] INCOME. SO BUT IF THEY'RE IF FOR THAT FIRST YEAR WHILE THEY'RE GONE

[34:37] THEY WOULD WE WOULD COUNT THEIR INCOME FOR EXAMPLE. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE SITUATIONS THAT WE'VE ENCOUNTERED WITH THE PROGRAM.

[34:45] OKAY. AND IS IT OKAY IF I PIGGYBACK OFF OF THAT? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO LIKE MY MY CONCERN I

[34:52] UNDERSTAND THAT AND I TOTALLY GET THAT. BUT ARE WE ALSO THEN CONSIDERING WHEN THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS

[34:58] HAPPENING THAT THIS PERSON COULD BE A TEMPORARY ABSOLUTE

[35:03] OR LIKE A TEMPORARY MEMBER IN THE FACT OF IF THAT'S KIND OF MAYBE WHAT PUSHES THEM OVER FOR THE QUALIFICATION BECAUSE

[35:10] IT COULD END UP BECOMING A HARDSHIP IF THAT INCOME WAS BASED TO QUALIFY THEM AND THEN THAT INCOME'S NO LONGER

[35:16] AVAILABLE LET'S SAY. SO KIND OF MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE COVERING OUR BASIS

[35:22] OF GETTING THAT AT DURING THE APPLICATION PROCESS AS WHO COULD BE A TEMPORARY MEMBER AND OR AN ABSENT MEMBER.

[35:30] YEAH. THANK YOU CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER WHO? HIM I WOULD SAY YEAH IT'S IT'S KIND OF HARD TO ANTICIPATE THAT ALWAYS RIGHT BECAUSE

[35:35] CIRCUMSTANCES CAN CHANGE OVER A FIVE YEAR PERIOD PRETTY DRASTICALLY.

[35:41] BUT ONE THING WE DO TRY TO DO THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS REALLY UNDERSTAND

[35:46] WHO'S BRINGING INCOME IN THE HOUSEHOLD LIKE WHAT THAT INCOME LOOKS LIKE AND HOW THAT CAN IMPACT ONGOING ELIGIBILITY IN THE PROGRAM AS BEST AS WE

[35:53] CAN AT INITIAL APPLICATION. SO THANK YOU. COMMISSION DOUBLING HER YEAH.

[36:01] CAN YOU MOVE TO THE SECOND TO LAST SLIDE. YES THIS 1I1 THERE DEFINITIONS

[36:07] FOR CRIMINAL CRIMINAL ACTIVITY SEEMS PRETTY VAGUE AND WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS AND

[36:15] DEFINITIONS THAT WERE ADDED? >> YEAH THANK YOU CHAIR COMMISSIONER DELLINGER SO THE DEFINITION THAT WE APPLIED TO

[36:23] THIS PROGRAM IS THE SAME ONE WE USED FOR THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM AND SO IT'S IT'S PRETTY HIGH LEVEL I MEAN TO BE HONEST WITH YOU AND IT'S

[36:28] SOLELY CONSIDERING A VIOLENT CRIME OR DRUG.

[36:35] WHAT'S THE CRIME? YEAH. DRUG OFFENSES SO THAT'S THAT'S GENERALLY IT'S YEAH IT'S A

[36:42] VERY HIGH LEVEL IT DOESN'T GO INTO A LOT OF DETAIL IF THAT MAKES SENSE AS A VARIANCE.

[36:50] HOW LONG IS YOUR PERIOD INVOLVED? SORRY NO IT'S LIKE THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS OF OTHERS SO

[36:57] THANK YOU. SO THAT IS CAPTURED MORE IN OUR SCREENING CRITERIA AND LESS IN THIS ACTUAL DOCUMENT.

[37:02] SO OUR SCREENING CRITERIA FOR THE PROGRAM GOES INTO A LOT MORE DETAIL ABOUT LIKE HOW LONG AN OFFENSE CAN BE LIKE ON

[37:09] SOMEONE'S RECORD BEFORE WE ARE AND WHETHER WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT. AS FOR ELIGIBILITY OF THE

[37:16] PROGRAM, THAT'S NOT IT DOESN'T WE DON'T GO INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL IN THIS DOCUMENT IF THAT MAKES SENSE. THANK YOU.

[37:24] DO YOU HAVE A FOLLOW UP TO COMMISSIONER DOUBLING YOUR OKAY. SO SO ARE THE ARE THE LAWS

[37:31] THAT ARE USED FOR THAT SET BY THE FED THEN OR IF LIKE IF

[37:38] SOMETHING CHANGED IN HUD, WOULD THAT CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND OUR IN THE

[37:43] DEFINITION ITSELF DOESN'T ACTUALLY CITE ANY ANY HUD

[37:50] REGULATIONS. IT'S JUST IT'S JUST WE'VE ESSENTIALLY TAKEN THE LANGUAGE FROM THE HUD DEFINITION AND

[37:58] APPLIED IT TO THIS PROGRAM SO THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY LIKE TYING IN THE FUTURE. LIKE IF THAT DEFINITION WERE

[38:03] TO CHANGE WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE REQUIRED TO CHANGE IT HERE. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARTER

[38:09] THANK YOU CHAIR SO THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO PAGE 64 IN OUR PACKET I THINK IN IT'S UNDER

[38:16] THE PROGRAM INFORMATION CORRECT? THAT'S THE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT SO IT JUST SAYS NOT ENGAGE IN DRUG RELATED

[38:21] CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OR VIOLENT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY INCLUDING CRIMINAL ACTIVITY BY ANY FAMILY MEMBER INCLUDING POSSESSION OR USE OF ILLEGAL

[38:29] DRUGS BY RESIDENTS OR VISITORS. AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER UNDERNEATH IS THE EDIT SAYS VIOLENT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS THAT WOULD YEAH AND WE'RE

[38:36] TALKING ABOUT YEAH THAT'S CORRECT OKAY SO IT IS PRETTY HIGH LEVEL AND IT'S MORE ABOUT THE PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS. MM HMM.

[38:43] YES. THANK YOU CHAIR COMMISSIONER CARTER THIS IS MORE YES. THE DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AS IT'S INCLUDED

[38:48] IN THIS IS MORE REFERRING TO ONGOING RESIDENCY AND LESS ABOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR THE PROGRAM THAT IS THE CORRECT

[38:54] SECTION AND REALLY ALL WE'RE ADDING IS DEFINING VIOLENT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND THE WAY IT'S DEFINED IS THE TWO THINGS

[39:02] I MENTIONED THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTION COMMENTS.

[39:10] COMMISSIONER WOOTEN ONE LAST THING FOR ME THE CULTURAL PIECE WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION

[39:17] LAST YEAR AND WE TALKED ABOUT TARGET YOU KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT FOCUSING ON ENSURING WE INCREASE THE HOMEOWNERSHIP FOR

[39:25] CERTAIN GROUPS HAVE NOT BEEN A PART OF THE PROCESS BEFORE AND

[39:32] I'VE NOT SEEN THAT LANGUAGE IN HERE. I GUESS I WOULD JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS STILL

[39:37] PART OF OUR MISSION AND AND I ACTUALLY WOULD ASK IF THERE'S

[39:43] SOME WAY TO BE ABLE TO ARTICULATE THAT ON PAPER SO THAT WE CAN SEE IT.

[39:51] THANK YOU, CHAIR. COMMISSIONER WOOTEN I WILL SAY THAT THE THE SECTION OF THE

[39:58] DOCUMENT THAT TALKS ABOUT THE APPLICATION PROCESS PROVIDES SOME DETAIL ABOUT THE

[40:06] AFFIRMATIVE BARGAININ PROCESS THAT I JUST MENTIONED. SO WE DO HAVE THAT LANGUAGE IN THE PLAN BUT I AM HEARING THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY

[40:13] BUILD THAT OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE AND THAT'S WE CAN TAKE THAT NOTE FOR FEEDBACK. APPRECIATE IT.

[40:21] I THINK COMMISSIONER CARTER I THINK YOU CAN WE GO TO THE SLIDE ABOUT THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

[40:28] OKAY. SO CURRENTLY I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND CURRENTLY WE HAVE A WAITLIST AND NOBODY'S

[40:35] BEEN ADDED TO IT SINCE 2018 BECAUSE OF HOW LONG IT'S BEEN ACTUALLY.

[40:42] THANK YOU CHAIR THAT WE ACTUALLY CLOSED THIS WAITING LIST IN 2023 SO PRIOR TO THAT IT WAS OPEN ALL THE TIME.

[40:50] THE WAY THAT IT WAS MARKETED WAS THE SAME WAY THAT WE MARKETED OUR HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER WAITING LIST.

[40:55] SO IT WHAT WE WERE ENCOUNTERING IS THAT WE WERE GETTING APPLICANTS THAT WERE

[41:01] JUST INTERESTED IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND NOT NECESSARILY THE HOMEOWNERSHIP COMPONENT OF THE PROGRAM. I THINK THAT'S ALSO WHY WHAT

[41:06] WE'RE SEEING NOW WITH THE HOUSEHOLDS THAT WE'RE SELECTING IS THAT THERE TEND TO BE LOWER INCOME THAN WHAT

[41:13] THIS PROGRAM IS TARGETING. SO ALL OF THAT KIND OF LED US

[41:18] TO CLOSE THIS WAITING LIST TO GIVE US TIME TO REASSESS THE PROGRAM IF THAT MAKES SENSE. OKAY. GOT IT.

[41:26] OKAY. I GUESS NOW I MEAN LISTENING TO THE COMMENTS FROM FELLOW

[41:31] COMMISSIONERS, I'M MY INITIAL INSTINCT WAS THAT IT MADE SENSE TO DO IT KIND OF MORE

[41:37] OF A ON A LOTTERY BASIS AND SOMETIMES IT'S ACTUALLY MORE EQUITABLE BECAUSE WE SEE THIS

[41:44] WITH THE CHILD THE THE CAMP PROGRAMS IS LIKE THE PERSON WHO CAN BE ONLINE AT 10 A.M. AND GET THE FIRST SPOT OFTEN I

[41:51] MEAN LIKE IT JUST IF IF YOU ARE IN A POSITION WHERE YOU CAN'T DO THAT THEN YOU'RE AT

[41:58] THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST OR YOU GET ON THE WAITLIST RIGHT AND AND IT'S NOT FAIR AND SO THAT'S WHY I LIKE THE LATTER APPROACH BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE

[42:06] IT KIND OF IT'S A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD LIKE IF YOU COULDN'T BE THE FIRST ONE TO GET ON THE LIST BECAUSE YOU

[42:13] KNOW MAYBE YOU HAVE A JOB WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO A COMPUTER AND YOU DON'T GET TO TAKE TIME TO SIT ON AND WAIT AND COMPUTER LITERATE.

[42:21] YES. YEP. EXACTLY. UM SO SO I GUESS THAT'S WHY I WAS THINKING THAT I LIKED THE LOTTERY APPROACH BUT I DO

[42:28] TOTALLY AGREE WITH MARKETING AND MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE MARKETING AND OUTREACH IN MULTIPLE LANGUAGES AND THAT

[42:36] WE'RE WORKING WITH COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND THAT WE'RE YOU KNOW, SHARING WITH THOSE WHO MIGHT BE ON THE

[42:43] VOUCHER PROGRAM IF THEY ARE ELIGIBLE JUST YOU KNOW, REALLY MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE

[42:50] THOROUGH IN OUR OUR MARKETING APPROACH. SO IT'S REALLY AND THAT WE SHOULD BE ASSESSING THAT TOO

[42:55] IF WE'RE NOT GETTING A DIVERSE POOL OF APPLICANTS THEN WE SHOULD BE RE REMAP VISIONING

[43:01] WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE SO I THINK OTHERWISE I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION THAT I'M A HUGE FAN

[43:10] OF REMOVING THE INCOME LIMIT PIECE. UM YEAH I THINK WE ALL AGREE ON THAT ONE.

[43:17] SO UM AND THEN ONE LAST QUESTION I HAD WAS FOR THE ESCROW ACCOUNT IF PEOPLE ARE DOING A LITTLE BIT BETTER

[43:24] FINANCIALLY CAN THEY ADD MORE MONEY TO THAT? YES. THANK YOU CHAIR COMMISSIONERS YES. SO TECHNICALLY IT'S THEY'RE

[43:31] LIKE THEY CAN SAVE THEY CAN PUT MORE IN THAN WHAT THE CALCULATION IS. I THINK GENERALLY THE THE

[43:39] THING WE TRY TO BALANCE TOO IS THEY ONLY GET 2% INTEREST ON THE ESCROW ACCOUNT.

[43:44] SO IF THEY'RE ABLE TO PUT THAT MUCH IN IT MAY ACTUALLY BE MORE LUCRATIVE TO PUT IT IN. I YIELD SAVINGS ACCOUNT AND

[43:51] THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THOSE ARE CONVERSATIONS WE HAVE WITH HOUSEHOLDS WHEN THAT IS A CIRCUMSTANCE. YEAH. GREAT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHO

[43:58] CAME IN YOU ONE LAST QUESTION THAT I KIND OF GOT BROUGHT UP WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS

[44:05] THERE GOING TO BE KIND OF LIKE A TIME LIMIT FOR AN APPLICATION WINDOW AND WHAT KIND OF TIME FRAME ARE WE?

[44:10] ARE YOU KIND OF PICTURING AT THIS POINT? >> YEAH. THANK YOU CHAIR COMMISSIONER

[44:15] WHO HIM GENERALLY OUR PRACTICE WOULD BE ABOUT A TEN BUSINESS

[44:22] DAY WINDOW SO TWO WEEKS FOR APPLICATION PERIOD. I'M GOING TO PIGGYBACK OFF OF THAT AND SUGGEST MAYBE A

[44:28] LITTLE BIT LONGER. THE ONLY REASON IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU BROUGHT UP. IT MAY TAKE SOME PEOPLE A

[44:34] LITTLE BIT LONGER TO GET THE PROPER DOCUMENTATION AS WELL. I THINK WE'RE YOU KNOW I'M I'M

[44:40] ASSUMING WE'RE ASKING FOR, YOU KNOW, PROPER DOCUMENTATIONS, FAIR DOCUMENTATIONS AND IT COULD BE A LOT OF DOCUMENTATIONS FOR SOME

[44:45] PEOPLE AND I ALSO THINK THAT GIVES THEM TIME TO REACH OUT TO STAFF IF THEY HAVE ANY

[44:51] CONCERNS AND MORE TIME TO DO THAT. SO I WOULD LEAN MORE TOWARDS A 15 TO 20 DAY YOU KNOW, IN MY

[44:58] PERSONAL OPINION I KIND OF LOOK AT IT AS YEAH, I LIKE THREE THREE WEEKS AT LEAST YOU KNOW AND INCLUDE THAT AS

[45:06] BUSINESS DAYS BECAUSE YEAH BECAUSE YOU DO I CAN SEE PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS

[45:14] AND THEY MIGHT JUST MIGHT TAKE LONGER I JUST THAT THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION THANK YOU THAT I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER

[45:21] WHO CAME ON THAT ON THE TIMELINE EXPANDING IT COMMISSIONER DOUBLING HER I JUST HAD A THOUGHT ABOUT THE LOTTERY.

[45:29] IF SOMEBODY IS LIKE READY TO GO AND MORE READY THAN OTHER PEOPLE IS IT POSSIBLE TO LIKE WAIT THEIR APPLICATION SO

[45:34] THEY'RE MORE LIKELY TO BE CHOOSED BUT NOT 100%? IS THAT A I DON'T KNOW.

[45:41] YOU STILL PICK AND CHOOSE. THAT'S IT'S NOT FAIR. YEAH I THINK IT WOULD BE HARD BECAUSE YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE LIKE QUANTITATIVE WAYS

[45:47] OF MEASURING AND THAT'S WHERE IT GETS REALLY CHALLENGING I

[45:54] THINK COMMISSIONER WOOTEN AND THEN CARTER I DON'T WANT TO BE A DEAD HORSE BUT I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE MARKETING

[46:01] PIECE AND THE COMMUNICATION BECAUSE IT'S THIS IS THIS THIS

[46:06] IS IT FEELS TO ME A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN RELATIONSHIP TO HOW

[46:12] WE'RE GOING TO APPROACH THIS LAST YEAR. SO AND I'VE LOOKED AT IN MY NOTES I'M SURE I'LL FIND IT

[46:17] ONCE I GO HOME TONIGHT BUT YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S THE PIECE THAT CONCERNS ME MOST. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARTER

[46:24] SORRY, JUST CLARIFYING. SO WHEN PEOPLE APPLY THEY JUST KIND OF GENERALLY PUT THEIR NAME IN AND THEN IF THEY'RE CHOSEN THEN THEY WOULD GO

[46:31] THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THEIR APPLICATION PAPERWORK. AND THEN I GUESS MY FOLLOW UP

[46:36] QUESTION TO THAT WOULD BE THAT IF THEY DO ALL OF THE APPLICATION MATERIALS AND IT DOESN'T WORK BUT THEY COULD

[46:43] COME BACK AT A LATER TIME IF THEY'RE CHOSEN AGAIN AND TO COME BACK AT A LATER DATE, CAN THEY DO THEY HAVE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN OR CAN THEY KIND OF START WHERE THEY LEFT OFF?

[46:50] DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH. THANKS FOR THAT QUESTION. SO WE WOULD DO WHAT WE KIND OF CALL AN INITIAL

[46:56] APPLICATIONS OF YOUR BASIC INFORMATION JUST TO DO AN INITIAL SCREENING FOR ELIGIBILITY BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LOTTERY IS

[47:03] INCLUDES ONLY HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE PROGRAM. SO THERE WOULD BE SOME SORT OF INITIAL APPLICATION FOR THE

[47:11] LOTTERY COMPONENT ONCE THEY'RE SELECTED FROM THE LOTTERY THEN WE WOULD DO THAT MUCH MORE IN DEPTH APPLICATION AND GET VERIFICATION DOCUMENTS FOR ALL

[47:18] INCOME AND ASSETS AND THAT KIND OF A THING. SO IF GENERALLY IF LIKE

[47:26] ANOTHER APPLICATION IS WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD SO OUR OUR RULE OF THUMB IS 90 DAYS THAT WE CONSIDER THAT INCOME

[47:33] STILL ACCURATE AND RELEVANT FOR 90 DAYS. SO IT WOULD KIND OF DEPEND ON WHEN THE APPLICATION THE NEXT APPLICATIONS CYCLE IS WHETHER

[47:41] OR NOT WE COULD USE THAT SAME INFORMATION THEY ALREADY SUBMITTED. COMMISSIONER WOULDN'T THAT YOU

[47:48] OPEN THAT DOOR IF WE'RE GOING TO KIND OF DISPENSE WITH THE INCOME LEVEL OR AT LEAST

[47:56] BROADEN INCOME LEVEL THEN WHY WOULD ANYBODY WHO WAS ABLE TO APPLY NOT BE ELIGIBLE PER SAY

[48:03] SO? SORRY. JUST TO CLARIFY YOUR QUESTION SO NOT HAVING A CEILING AT ALL

[48:08] FOR THE PROGRAM IN TERMS OF INCOME WELL IS IS A TOP CEILING MAYBE BUT NOT A LAW

[48:15] THAT THE GREAT BIG ISSUE THAT I HEARD YOU SAY WAS THAT PEOPLE WEREN'T QUALIFIED FROM A STANDPOINT OF HAVING ENOUGH INCOME. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO YOU KNOW,

[48:22] BASICALLY KIND OF TAKE AWAY THAT THAT THAT FLOOR, WHY WOULD NO ONE BE OTHER UPPER

[48:29] LEVEL? WHY WOULDN'T THEY BE ELIGIBLE IN SOME WAY, SHAPE OR FORM? I THINK THE CHALLENGE IS WE HAVE TO SET THE RENT AND A

[48:34] CERTAIN AMOUNT AND SO WE WANT

[48:39] TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEREVER WE'RE SETTING THE RENT IS TIED TO THE INCOMES OF THE HOUSEHOLDS WE'RE SERVING IN THE PROGRAM BECAUSE A

[48:45] HOUSEHOLD WITH A LOWER INCOME IT WOULD THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE SOME OF THAT. THE GOALS OF THE PROGRAM

[48:51] INCLUDING PAYING INTO AN ESCROW ACCOUNT. SO BECAUSE THEY WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE REQUIRED TO PAY

[48:58] BASE RENT AND POTENTIALLY BE COST BURDENED SIGNIFICANTLY WITH THAT BASE RENT IF THEIR INCOME IS IS REALLY LOW IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

[49:06] WELL CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS TO JUST TO JUST TO CLARIFY SO THE INITIAL SCREENING WOULD STILL HAVE THAT RANGE OF THE

[49:13] 60 TO 80% AMI AND THEN THE CHANGE PROPOSED HERE IS THAT THERE BASICALLY WOULDN'T BE AN ANNUAL RECERTIFICATION THAT THEY'RE STILL WITHIN THAT

[49:20] RANGE SO THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO INCREASE THEIR INCOME AT A LATER LATER DATE. BUT THE INITIAL SCREENING WOULD STILL INCLUDE MAKING

[49:25] SURE THAT THEY'RE WITHIN THAT THAT RANGE. YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT IF

[49:32] THE LOWER RATE YOU JUST SET IT UP A LITTLE BIT RATE SO IT'S A WAY TO KEEP THEM I GUESS I

[49:39] HAVE A COMMENT ON THAT IS I MEAN YOU KNOW YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN INCOME TO QUALIFY

[49:46] FOR A MORTGAGE AND SUCH SO WE DON'T WANT SOMEONE PAYING INTO THIS PROGRAM FOR FIVE YEARS WHO'S NOT GOING TO QUALIFY FOR

[49:54] A MORTGAGE. I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BUT I'M JUST THAT'S MY PRACTICAL

[50:01] REALTOR BACKGROUND SAYING THAT ADMINISTRATOR YEAH. >> I MIGHT ALSO JUST NOTE

[50:08] THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF FLEXIBILITY ALSO FOR AN INCOME DECREASES BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE RENT IS SET AT

[50:15] THAT 50% AMI LEVEL BUT WE'RE ACCEPTING FOLKS AT THE 60 TO 80% SO SOME SMALL DECREASE

[50:21] WOULD STILL TECHNICALLY FALL WITHIN THOSE AFFORDABILITY LEVELS. SO THERE IS A LITTLE BIT

[50:27] OF LEEWAY FOR INCOME DECREASES AS WELL.

[50:32] SO THERE ARE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OH WELL WE THINK YOU

[50:44] OH YEAH YEAH SORRY ONE LAST QUESTION CHAIR COMMISSIONERS JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THE DISCUSSION ON THE LOTTERY SO IT SEEMS LIKE FOLKS ARE

[50:50] GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE STRUCTURE THAT WE'VE LAID OUT WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE KEEP THAT PERIOD OPEN FOR

[50:57] THREE WEEKS. I KNOW THAT THE THE LANGUAGE IN THE MANUAL DOESN'T SPECIFY A PERIOD SO WE WILL TAKE NOTE THAT WHEN WE ADMINISTER WE'LL KEEP IT OPEN FOR THREE WEEKS

[51:05] AND THEN WE CAN KIND OF SEE HOW THE THE PROPOSED CHANGE STILL GIVES US FLEXIBILITY IF THAT'S NOT ENOUGH TIME OR IF

[51:12] US TOO MUCH TIME WE CAN STILL BE FLEXIBLE WITHOUT NEEDING A MANUAL CHANGE.

[51:18] THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

[51:25] SO THE NEXT ITEM IS ADMINISTRÉ UPDATES.

[51:30] >> OKAY CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS MY ONLY UPDATE IS THAT WE HAVE A MEETING NEXT WEEK INSTEAD OF IN TWO WEEKS

[51:37] AND THAT IS THE JOINT MEETING WITH THE PORT SO WE'LL BE DOING MOSTLY INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AT THAT MEETING.

[51:45] IT'S THE ALL THINGS HOUSING REPORT AS WELL AS SOME OTHER MARKET INFORMATION AND THEN THERE WILL BE ONE VOTING ITEM ON IF YOU REMEMBER WHEN THE

[51:53] WHOLE WAS FIRST IMPLEMENTED IT WAS FOLLOWING IN A STUDY AND SO THE THE PASSAGE OF THAT

[51:59] ORDINANCE REQUIRED THAT IN FIVE YEARS WE DO ANOTHER UPDATED STUDY. SO WE'LL BE DISCUSSING A

[52:06] SELECTING CONSULTANT FOR THAT PROCESS. AND SO THOSE ARE THE TWO MAIN ITEMS AND THEN FOLLOWING THE JOINT MEETING THERE WILL BE A

[52:11] SHORT HRA MEETING TO GET THROUGH A COUPLE OF ITEMS. IT'LL BE MOSTLY ITEMS ON

[52:17] CONSENT AND SO IT SHOULD BE A FAIRLY FAIRLY SHORT MEETING FOR THE HRA MEETING DIRECTLY FOLLOWING BUT MAKE SURE NOT TO

[52:22] LEAVE WHEN WE RECESSED WITH WITH THE PORT. THANK YOU.

[52:29] I JUST DON'T HAVE THE MEETING ON THE 22ND CORRECT. NO MEETING ON THE 22ND. IS THAT 6:00 STILL? YEP.

[52:34] YEAH. JUST A QUICK NOTE THAT MAKING

[52:41] SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS CHECKING THEIR EMAILS AS THE VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION IS COMING UP SO JUST KIND OF A NOTE TO YOU NEED TO RSVP FOR

[52:49] IT SO IT'S I THINK THE 29TH OR SOMETHING. SO JUST KIND OF A REMINDER. THANK YOU.

[52:56] ALL RIGHT. WELL THAT IS THE END OF OUR AGENDA WE HAVE MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THIS

[53:04] TUESDAY, APRIL 8TH MEETING OF THE HRA BOARD? SOME MOVED MOVED BY WHO CAME

[53:10] SECOND AND SECOND BY SAY ALL IN FAVOR. I ALL RIGHT OPPOSED PASSES

[53:18] 620. >> MEETING IS ADJOURNED

This story was created by artificial intelligence (a large language model) based on the proceedings captured in the video below.

Want to know when new stories arrive?

Enter your email to receive updates.

We will not use your email for any other purpose. You can unsubscribe at any time.