[0:00] e [0:56] 7:36 in the morning I'm apologizing for being the last one here I forgot that we [1:01] had to do a more SECU this route to get to City Hall so uh call to order not [1:08] quite yet the meeting of the din Housing and Redevelopment Authority uh I think [1:13] as director bener I probably indicated to folks in the chambers and online that [1:18] uh uh we're doing these meetings in a hybrid fashion There's an opportunity to participate whether you're here in Chambers or uh watching the meeting if [1:26] you're watching the meeting uh through one form or another you can call in during Community comment and that number [1:32] is on the screen all that information you need to be able to get to the HRA to [1:37] discuss a matter of concern to you is there and having provided that information I'll call the meeting to order and ask Sharon Allison who's with [1:45] us this morning our city clerk to call the role commissioner agon here commissioner Jackson here commissioner [1:52] Pierce here commissioner rer here cheer hlin here uh next is the Pledge of Allegiance [2:01] Al to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it [2:07] stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for [2:16] all thank you for that participation and uh we've got a form of meeting agenda is [2:22] anyone on staff for H that wishes to modify the meeting agenda in any former fashion all right is there a motion to [2:28] approve the meeting agenda so move second commissioner Jackson moves commissioner U seconds the approval of [2:34] the meeting agenda uh any further discussion all those in favor of approving the me meeting agenda say I I [2:40] I opposed carried uh now we are at Community comment um and let's get that [2:46] number back on the screen and while we're waiting for some of our fellow residents to potentially call in we'll [2:52] see if anyone in the audience wishes to address the uh H in a matter of concern [2:57] to them hearing nothing and seeing no one coming [3:02] forward I'll turn to director benro see if she has anybody online I do not yet have anyone on the line but because [3:09] there is a short delay in the broadcast I'd recommend we wait one minute or so before we move on with the agenda my [3:15] clock shows it at 7:37 now so I'll come back to you at 7:38 or when I have a [3:20] call or whichever is first thank you [4:24] it's been a minute and I still don't have any callers so I think it's safe for you to move forward with the agenda all right very good thank thank you um [4:32] our practice is to have our executive director respond to community comments that were made at the uh meeting prior [4:38] meeting of the um HRA and that meeting was on May 16th uh executive director [4:44] Neil anything to comment on uh your honor no no Mr chair we did not have any Community comment at the May 16th [4:49] meeting very good uh next is the consent agenda there's only one item on there and that's the draft minutes of the [4:56] regular meeting of May 16th 2024 any changes additions to those [5:01] minutes there a motion to adopt the minutes of the regular meeting of May 20 May 16 2024 so moved second Jackson [5:08] moves commissioner AG second the adoption of the minutes of the regular meeting of the uh HRA on May 16 2024 any [5:16] further discussion all those in favor of adoption of those regular meeting minutes for the HRA on May 16 2024 say I [5:22] I I opposed carried those minutes are adopted uh and now we're at the heart of [5:28] the agenda this morning and we have some interesting things to discuss and Stephanie hackinson our [5:34] portable housing manager is going to lead that discussion and the first matter there is um possible support of [5:41] resolution [5:47] 2024-25 parkline Avenue South and 5 510 Summit Avenue and we welcome manager [5:57] hackinson I think we have a guest with us as well from common [6:03] Bond yes thank you very much um so as [6:09] you said today's request is adoption of resolution [6:17] 2024-25 15,000 um I would be coming back next [6:25] spring with um the loan documents for approval of those but as it stands now [6:31] it' be 0% interest this could change depending they're seeking tax credits as [6:36] well and sometimes tax um the way those form that uh small interest may be more [6:43] beneficial um and it be co-terminus with a loan from Minnesota housing and that [6:49] would be between 30 and 40 years um and then this would uh I'm also seeking [6:54] authorization to work with a City attorney to draft the loan document [7:00] once all the other financing comes into play and these photos are from common [7:06] Bond just for the population now local context um I before [7:13] getting into the heart of this matter the setting in which this is taking place based on American Community survey [7:22] 64.7% of you senior renters are housing cost burdened and 90 [7:31] % um have greater than 150% of the poverty level but that is considered [7:39] 22590 6% of Edina seniors have incomes of less than [7:45] $5,060 so there um and there's two Section 8 [7:52] project project based Section 8 apartments Ina that serves this population with 129 [8:03] units so common bond is a nonprofit corporation that was established in 1991 [8:11] they serve over 7,000 rental apartments and town homes across 60 cities and they [8:16] acquired these two properties South Haven and Summit Point in 2005 it is their mission to provide [8:24] stable and safe housing for low-income residents in their communities [8:30] so South Haven is at 4,300 Park laon Avenue it's a 100 unit apartment the [8:35] average income of all the residents is $177,000 the average tency is a little [8:40] over 7 years the average age is almost 70 years old and they have a 20-year ha [8:47] contract now a ha contract is a Project based Section 8 by Hud and there the um [8:53] residents only pay 30% of their income and then the half contract covers the rest so these residents are not housing [9:00] cost burdened then that it's designed so they're not to be because they only pay I mean it's established that 30% of [9:07] their income goes towards rent the the difference it's made up by Hud Summit Point um which is Stones [9:15] throw away from here is 29 apartment units average income is again about [9:22] $177,000 um again seven years of uh the [9:28] average tency average age is over 70 years old and they too so these are the [9:34] only two half contract buildings in the city that serves this [9:43] population so what happens half um these are 20-year contracts with common Bond [9:49] they would want to renew them you know at the end of the 20 years they'd want to renew them HUD comes and does [9:55] physical um surveys of the buildings before renewing them to determine whether or not there is Rehabilitation [10:02] that is needed when they bought the buildings in 2005 they were able to do moderate some [10:09] small rehab but because they um the incomes and the rents are so low there [10:14] isn't the bandwidth to address major Rehabilitation so 20 years later the [10:21] buildings are in need of some mechanical systems they need Windows they're a little tired um I went around with a [10:29] Community police officer and they're really tidy and neat and clean and all [10:34] that but they're just Boulder um so they are seeking $850,000 [10:41] from the city which is about 2.2% of the overall budget now the budget is High um [10:48] when you think about it but it's still a lot less than to replace these buildings [10:54] and um $10 million of this is the refinancing of the First Market morgage the first mortgage was for 30 years it [11:03] was a 20-year um mortgage actually with a 30-year amatz so 20 years is up they [11:09] have 10 years left on their original mortgage so the refinancing and including the rehabilitation in so that [11:16] is one of the reasons why the budget is high I recommend that we use some of our [11:23] remaining Southdale 2 um Tiff pooled funds and that would leave just shy of [11:30] $2 million left in that source of [11:37] funding and I think this project aligns really well with the values [11:42] viewfinder um we are really trying to show this community that is um [11:50] disenfranchised that they are part of the community the residents um like I said the community police officer and I [11:57] went and visited them um and spoke spoke with the um property management and [12:03] since that time we've had about 12 applications from one of these buildings alone that signed up for our free [12:09] internet service health and all policies one of the um so uh health indicators is having [12:17] a safe and affordable place to live and this is securing providing extra [12:23] security to these residents that their home housing will stay in place race and [12:28] Equity it is investing in some of most disenfranchised residents in the city [12:34] it's helping them feel included by putting some of our financial resources towards their health and well-being and [12:40] sustainability is um that they are going to be increasing their Energy Efficiency [12:46] of the building and truthfully it is much more sustainable to rehab a [12:51] building than to build new so it's um pretty simple request in my mind um and [12:58] again I'd come back they are applying to Minnesota housing for bonding and 4% tax [13:06] credits here in um and they'll be applying to hanpin County once all the sources are in I'll be coming back with [13:12] some loan documents so that's what I'm seeking thank you uh questions for manager [13:21] ainson walk through the kind of the key terms and conditions of the loan again [13:26] so that we understand that yes um we're seeking $850,000 it would be a deferred [13:33] loan which means there' be no monthly payment until the end of the term which [13:39] would be 30 or 40 Years it' be co-terminus with Minnesota housing so depending on what they would want with [13:45] their loan term and used to be 30 years they're moving towards 40 years and at that point the loan would be um the [13:53] financing of the whole buildings would be refinanced we would be paid off so it [13:59] is it deferred we will not be getting any loan payments for the next 30 Years um and right now it's set at 0% [14:07] interest that will be somewhat um aligned with again the loan terms of [14:13] henpen County and Minnesota housing and through negotiations with the tax credit [14:18] investor on the tax credit investor needs to experience losses and so they [14:24] they tweak interest rates on the Deferred loans to try to figure out what the losses are so right now I say um 0% [14:30] it could be about 1 or 2% and I'll come back in about January [14:35] our interest rate would match what Minnesota housing does correct but for purposes of this conversation you want [14:41] to make sure that it was possible or conceivable that we might not get any interest on this money that we would [14:47] lend I um I thought it' be better to come back and say the interest rate is [14:52] 2% um when I initially said zero then tell you at zero when I initially said [14:57] two it's it's a deferred loan not a forgiven not a forgivable loan spark [15:03] money that is correct chair it's a deferred questions from other [15:08] Commissioners commissioner briser um I there's a lot to like about this in [15:16] terms of sustainability not tearing down a building um I when I look at the price [15:22] tag I have to admit I get a little bit of sticker shock and I'm just wondering if you could speak to the aesthetic [15:28] changes that are being considered and also when I looked at the value of these [15:35] two buildings it was 10 million for one and 3 million for another and we're [15:41] looking at significant investment is this going to have an impact on property taxes and would HUD pick up the change [15:51] or how would that work um chair Commissioners I have k [15:59] from common Bond she may be able to speak in more detail with regards to the [16:04] aesthetic changes with regards to property values it is Comm it's one of [16:10] the reasons we often come here with gap financing for affordable housing um seeking Gap is that the cost to do the [16:17] work far exceeds the values of the building including the rents that can be [16:23] received um from living in that building to pay off the costs there there in [16:30] construction um since there's two different sites and it's window replacement and I said HVAC system some [16:38] piping um it's expensive work and also [16:43] when you have multiple funders you have multiple attorneys and so there the soft [16:50] costs on here you see the professional fees is 1.5 million um that is another [16:57] inefficiency with the creation of affordable housing is that there are all these loan documents you have all these [17:03] funding sources that there's not just one fun and it jacks up the price of it [17:10] um we've been it's been simplified believe it or not in the last 20 years [17:15] um with the same type of budgeting modeling that they've been using uh but as far as more of the [17:22] detail Aesthetics why I have do you mind coming up and talking about that please [17:29] may I invite Katie Anthony to come up and talk about that yes [17:36] please miss Anthony yeah good morning my name is Katie Anthony I'm a principal [17:41] project manager with common Bond communities which means I work in the team at common Bond that's not out day [17:47] to-day working with residents but works on our new construction buildings that we're building and renovation of our [17:53] existing buildings that we own um and so I'm working on this project um I think [17:58] to respond to your question about Aesthetics which I interpret to be what are we doing in the renovation is that [18:04] an accurate interpretation well I I noticed you're Contracting with lhb Architects and [18:11] um so I just want to know more about that we we've had another project come [18:16] before us um I'm thinking e East um where they had a whole series The [18:22] Condominiums and we could see very clearly what each line item was and [18:27] there wasn't an AR chitectural redesign component to it so I'm I'm curious about [18:32] that okay um well a couple of thoughts come to mind and then obviously ask me a [18:38] followup if I don't fully respond to your question we're working with lhb Architects to do a physical assessment [18:45] of the property so as engineers and Architects we've walked both buildings looked at mechanical systems looked at [18:51] what are the issues that um our on-site staff are experiencing and can talk [18:56] about in terms of system issues but also with their expertise what they see so that's directing us to um make repairs [19:04] to Windows make repairs to the Plumbing Systems which some of them are original [19:09] to the buildings and are now ending the um approaching the end of their useful life um boilers water heaters water [19:16] softeners so all those things I wouldn't necessarily characterize as Aesthetics they definitely drive up construction [19:22] costs um within the apartment units we have some original kitchen cabinets [19:29] flooring um not necessarily carpet carpet gets turned over when residents leaves but we're anticipating a full [19:35] refresh of Apartments um to upgrade materials um that are being used in [19:41] apartments and to provide residents you know upgraded living environments also community room spaces that may need some [19:47] redesign to better meet the needs of how residents use them now elevator upgrades [19:53] um fire alarm upgrades both of the buildings are sprinkled but upgrades um to the fire alarm system and the [19:59] elevator systems as well as uh security cameras and access control so that's [20:06] sort of a smattering of the things that we are doing um in terms of ability to see line by [20:13] line when we submit to Minnesota housing in July that uh application package as [20:20] anyone may or may not know is very robust and includes a lot of detail and I'd be happy to provide that to [20:25] Stephanie if folks want to see that'll include a detailed budget that provided by the contractor and a detailed scope [20:31] of work from lhb that says here's the things we saw these buildings need here's the things that common bond has [20:37] identified as livability and operational upgrades they'd like to make and here's the costs associated that coming with [20:43] the from the contractor does that respond to your question yes thank you [20:49] okay yes commissioner yes thank you Mr chair so sort of to follow on with that [20:56] um when thinking member or commissioner rer talked about the tax impact but with [21:03] these upgrades what will happen to the energy bills for the people who live there is are the energy bills paid by [21:08] the whole building or by the individual tenants and will that go down when we get more Energy Efficiency yeah um [21:15] residents at these properties are responsible solely for their own electric um so I want to acknowledge [21:24] that I don't have a strong sense of should any of the electric change um [21:30] I think it's I mean it's like lighting they're they're individual electric so I would not think that I'm not certain [21:36] that our upgrades will improve their electric bills but I don't have a reason to believe that they would um I think [21:42] it's usage based okay so forgive me that I don't have more to I can provide more and followup no no that's that's that [21:48] that answers my question the second one is though are you seeking tax credits um from the invest for from the Rel [21:56] inflation reduction act um which are available for even for nonprofits um and I didn't see that on [22:03] the line items of things and I know that there's Federal money available for insulation and and keeping these [22:08] buildings as energy efficient as possible yeah we didn't have that on our initial um list of sources because [22:14] organization we're still getting our mind around some of those newer sources um so I think the simple answer is yes [22:21] we will be looking at it we didn't know enough about where to slot it in in part because we didn't have our sort of final [22:27] scope of work which some of those tax credits to your point are driven at least my understanding to date is driven [22:33] by the improvements you're making so to more to come and to be looked at um and [22:39] probably to be looked at even before we submit to Minnesota housing in the next month terrific well I strongly encourage [22:44] you to to do that because we want to see the Energy Efficiency and this is exactly the type of project that those [22:49] tax credits are aimed at reaching so I I hope that that's part of the final [22:55] package we see thank you thank you commissioner um couple questions from me [23:03] um manager ainson well first of all uh I noticed in your memo manager hackinson [23:08] that you're not only talking about seniors but you're also talking about folks living there that had disabilities [23:15] correct and is that is that true or is it just senior occupied or seniors maybe seniors with disabilities too uh chair [23:23] Commissioners um the buildings initially were age restricted HUD had changed the [23:29] rules with regards to Section 8 H um Project based Section 8 housing for [23:35] seniors that people with disabilities were eligible to move into those buildings um each building does have [23:43] some folks with disabilities that are not seniors the numbers are low I believe in Summit Point it may be one [23:51] resident and at South Haven it's um less than a dozen fewer than a dozen [24:00] um what are you what are we proposing for uh security for repayment of the [24:06] loan our security for the financing there will be a mortgage and a note [24:12] prepared and placed against the property and this may be a question for [24:18] Miss Anthony but when I look at sources and uses and I see that there's a on the usage side of it there's a developer fee [24:24] of $3.8 million who who is the developer [24:29] uh chair Commissioners the common bond is the developer they will be deferring a portion of the fee uh and they also [24:37] have a sellers note in the property for over um $5 [24:42] million um operating these properties is Staff [24:48] intensive uh the when we went to both of the buildings there's more than one [24:53] staff person that is on site and I don't know with the cost of operating these [24:59] buildings has increased that they um common Bond PPL and Aon did go to the [25:06] legislature to ask for some help with operating these organizations so the [25:12] developer fee is the maximum allowed um by Minnesota housing but it helps with [25:18] the organization and maintaining their work and continuing to do this type of work all right you want to affirm that [25:24] for us Mr Robert Anthony excuse me that's c um yes [25:30] I will comment on both of the uses and sources that Stephanie mentioned so one [25:36] yes the developer fee is revenue that comes to Common bond for the work we do as a real estate developer the for the [25:43] the industry and particularly the public agencies Minnesota housing hanpen County [25:49] others um yourselves set Norms of sort of how we calculate that so there's some sort of norms dictated by Minnesota [25:56] housing about how a developer fee is size based on the scale of the project [26:01] so the 3.8 million is based on formulas set by Minnesota housing and pretty consistent with industry Norms across [26:08] the state and across the country um as you may imagine these properties they [26:14] have restricted rental income based on being affordable rents and expenses that [26:19] are normal to operate in any housing and and sometimes arguably higher given the compliance needs we have to have the [26:25] service provision that we provide in our buildings so we don't earn really revenues on cash flow there's not cash [26:31] flow coming out of these buildings to support our operations so developer fees are sort of um the the life for us to [26:38] keep our organizational work going so that's where the developer fee goes and the purposes it is for before I comment [26:46] on the seller note do are there any follow-up questions on that clarification just a comment I think [26:52] that um over the years that common Bond's been in we've had such a good [26:57] relationship with you and uh understand the stresses that you're under I think [27:02] is that um as you try to provide housing for people that is high quality really [27:08] decent quality housing uh and you getting rents in return that don't cover [27:14] the cost of operating and and also the cost of maintaining that property uh it [27:20] is extraordinarily difficult for organizations like yours to to to function I think and it gets more and [27:25] more difficult all the time and visiting with Cecil bador from over over the last couple of years on on this very issue in [27:32] fact I approached her with an idea on on buying some additional properties she said well you know we're just in such a [27:39] difficult position here because with the rents that we we generate we can't really even maintain the properties that [27:46] we own in the proper manner that we want to maintain them so I see here you've come up with a creative way of [27:52] refinancing an existing mortgage at about $10 million and then trying to improve the property that you on in [27:59] Nina uh so that these seniors that are uh living at lower income levels have [28:06] high quality housing and I think that's really critically important so uh getting that explanation on how you [28:12] would deploy the developer fee to basically operate continue to help out [28:18] with operating these properties that you own I think was helpful for me personally great thank you and I did [28:23] just want to comment on the seller note because it may not seem intuitive um what we do in these projects um we [28:30] currently own these buildings and technically we own them under a legal entity called CBC 202 limited [28:37] partnership and then we transfer it technically legally to a new ownership as a mechanism to create this [28:44] refinancing and so we have a value of the two buildings as they are and we [28:49] sell it to ourselves this different legal entity and the value of that is [28:54] about $10 million the sort of refinance number and what we're going to do with that $10 million is pay off the existing [29:01] debt that exists and the remaining is uh seller equity and we're putting it back [29:07] into the transaction which is the common Bond seller note so instead of taking cash out to fund operations um it [29:14] remains in the project as a source of funding Mr be uh thank you uh Mr chair I [29:20] don't really have um additional questions but just a the comment um I do [29:27] think that this is is and a good use of Tiff funds um I Echo member Jackson's [29:35] comments um and I would say the same thing whether this was affordable housing or a commercial um [29:45] project these aren't free funds right getting dollars out of TI I mean it's [29:51] not free-for-all and so it still is is good for us to have a practice to make sure [29:57] that we are are leveraging and using as many other sources as we can um and I [30:03] know that you are are doing that um and I would just encourage perhaps not only [30:08] the the energy related um fund but are there other funds that we could go after [30:15] um to reduce the amount that we're taking out of um that we're leveraging Tiff so thank [30:23] you comments or questions okay commissioner commissioner rer just one [30:30] uh I know the Met Council only counts new buildings that are created when [30:37] they're looking at the metrics for what we've done for affordable housing and I don't know if there's any way to capture [30:43] Investments like this to say you know when we submit the numbers oh by the way we're investing in ensuring that these [30:52] houses can remain and you know it just it's frustrating because I think this is valuable [30:58] to that count and it should count cheer Commissioners um every year [31:05] I have to do a Aloha um report that talks about City investment no [31:13] ahola not the Hawaii um report that talks about the city investment in [31:19] affordable housing and this is captured in that report right but I I want the Met [31:24] Council to hear that we think they need to count more [31:32] Aloha to you [31:38] too all right thank you for that standby uh colleagues um the request from our [31:46] housing uh affordable housing development manager Stephanie hackinson is that we adopt resolution 20243 which [31:52] would allow for this uh this loan to the U common Bond organization is there a [31:58] motion to that effect so moved second commissioner Jackson moves commissioner Pierce seconds the adoption of [32:04] resolution [32:10] 2024-the loan for a next round of approval uh any further discussion all [32:16] those in favor of adoption resolution 20243 say I I I opposed 202 403 is [32:24] adopted thank you for being here with us this morning [32:30] may I say thank you I just want to thank I just want to say thank you on behalf of common Bond and the residents that [32:35] we've been meeting with we've had a couple resident meetings to get input on the renovations um and thank you to [32:40] Stephanie for her work and for your leadership and thoughtful questions um I'm going to follow up on a couple of of [32:46] items and I'll send that via Stephanie right and and and just a quick question for you with with Minnesota Housing [32:52] Finance and with lhtc is everything going along as you expected it to go yeah it's moving along well the [32:58] Minnesota housing application is due July 11th it's a pretty robust application and um so we're working [33:04] through all those pieces and but it's moving along well and we feel good about it's very competitive we can do test [33:10] scores but we feel very good about it's all scoring based we feel good about our score and the dollars you've put in um [33:16] in addition it helps our score and it also helps Minnesota housing know that there's other funders that are ready to [33:22] move this project forward so thank you we we've had some real world experience with their once a year Mission dat yes [33:28] I'm sure you have thank you thank [33:36] you all right uh next couple of matters that we had before us this morning our economic development manager bill [33:42] nindorf has for us and um one involves some work going outside the front door [33:47] going on outside the front [33:53] door I guess both of them do frankly [34:09] should have our director of engineering here this morning to compliment compliment him on those roundabouts [34:14] they're getting a lot of use yes uh thank you good morning we'll [34:21] start this morning with resolution 20245 uh which is a a request to to [34:27] modify the Eden Wilson Tiff district and the associated Tiff plan that goes with [34:33] that and now that I look at the screen I realize I pulled up the wrong WR one [35:02] all right there we go so resolution 202 24-5 uh in summary the the request this [35:09] morning is to modify the boundaries of the Eden Wilson Tiff District you just mentioned the roundabouts and all the [35:15] construction work happening around here all those projects are are located in this particular Tiff district and funded [35:22] by this Tiff District the the request this morning is to help clean up uh a detail and here that um uh that needs to [35:29] be cleaned up so uh when we first established this particular Tiff District we included the old Perkins [35:35] site we included the Tupa Park parcel um just across from City Hall as well as [35:41] the roadways that lead to uh the Perkins site uh that was a request as we went [35:46] through that project uh the need for um for public roadway improvements became [35:51] obvious um The Limited sidewalks uh lack of bike routes limited roadway capabilities some some safety concerns [35:59] uh urged us to include all those roadways we also included the park um [36:05] because as we did our research uh over the decades there's been several studies about potentially relocating those [36:11] historic buildings and uh I recall there was three different studies over three [36:17] different decades and they all came to the came to the same conclusion this would be good we don't know where we're [36:23] going to put them and we have no idea how we're going to fund them and we're not sure if it's worth the effort [36:28] um so when we created the Tiff District the thinking was well if there ever is a place to relocate them by using tax [36:35] increment we could maybe solve that funding problem um there's a lot of ifs in that [36:41] statement if we decide to do it if there's a place if there's a will if there's a reason um but we included it [36:49] just to give the the city uh additional flexibility as we were certifying the [36:54] district through the county we came to learn that the manner in which city hall [36:59] and the park were originally uh registered as on a land survey was [37:04] problematic it wasn't an alignment with the County's expectations um for how you [37:09] um Define a tiff boundary so if you recall as a city council a month and a [37:14] half ago you approved a resolution to vacate minihaha Road a road that has not [37:19] existed for Generations um but that was one of the details in this ongoing [37:25] conversation with the county to clean up the the legal records um we're at a [37:30] point where there's still more cleanup to do and it's going to take months um uh and uh it doesn't help anything it's [37:37] just paperwork that has to happen quite frankly um so that we're we're at a [37:43] point where we really need to get this tip District certified so our recommendation is to simply just [37:48] simplify the whole certification process and just remove that Park parcel from [37:54] the Tiff boundaries uh so these two maps on the screen on the left it shows those [37:59] original Tiff boundaries in yellow um and then the [38:05] um and then the image on the right shows the new boundaries which would in still [38:11] which would still include the old Perkin site the surrounding roadways um but just for the simplification of the [38:17] certification with the county we would eliminate the Tupa Park Parcels um we're [38:23] at a we're at a point where uh it's our recommendation that that's the best way to proceed [38:28] um I've been working extensively with Jay lingren at dorsy and Whitney uh Nick anut at Ellers Associates uh Nick in [38:35] particular over the last year or so has been instrumental and guiding and trying [38:40] to work through this certification process um this is the most complicated one I've seen here in Adina um uh and [38:49] we've all reached the conclusion that you know it's time to just eliminate that Park parcel from this and focus on [38:55] what we really intended to do get the old Perkin site redeveloped which is now finished and get these roadway [39:01] improvements um which about half of them are finished and half of them are under construction so that that's a bit of the [39:08] messy background uh and that's our uh that's our resolution is to um modify [39:14] the Tiff plan to Simply modify those boundaries um we're not making the [39:21] district any larger we're actually making it smaller we're not changing the duration or any of the financing but [39:27] we're um just simplifying that that certification uh with that I'll turn it back to you Mr chair and of course [39:33] myself I'm available for available for questions as well as Mr an Hut and Mr lingren thank you both of them for being [39:40] here this morning um so let's I'll turn to my colleagues now to see if anybody has any [39:45] questions about this yes commissioner Jackson yes thank you Mr chair so I'm just going to summarize this and you can [39:52] correct me if I'm wrong that this will not impede any work that we're going to do on fixing the interchange between [39:59] 50th and 100 in fact it will facilitate it by making the paperwork and the deeds [40:04] and everything with a county um right that's correct okay thank you [40:10] commissioner rer um when I look at the stipulations [40:16] for creating a Redevelopment district one of them is that substandard buildings are reasonably distributed [40:22] throughout the geographic area and when I look at the documentation for for this I'm looking at page 10 from the stantech [40:30] report which shows the old Perkins site kahill school and the Grange and figure [40:39] three distribution of substandard structures the substandard buildings are reasonably distributed throughout the [40:45] geographic area of the potential Tiff District if we remove those two [40:51] buildings are we at risk of invalidating the Tiff District [40:59] an Hut or Mr linger one of the two thank you Commissioners Nick anhut [41:04] with Ellers and Associates and I'll just uh my attempt to answer the question um due to how small overall this site is [41:12] and the Fairly central location of the Perkins building that would still be within the original [41:18] qualifications um and all the surrounding area that all directly feeds into that in terms of the roadways we do [41:25] not think that that would invest validate any of the original findings and um in creating a Redevelopment [41:33] District um the finding that needs to be made is that greater than 50% of the buildings that are included within the [41:39] Tiff District need to qualify a substandard so when we remove this parcel we will still have one of one [41:45] building that was originally substandard so that's [41:51] 100% lingren any other thoughts uh Mr chair commissioner good [41:57] morning I really don't agree with that entirely I have certainly seen in my experience many districts that have a [42:03] single building that are of similar size and I think that meets the distribution requirements I'm comfortable with what [42:10] Mr anud said Thank You creates comfort for us too for both [42:16] of you being here and offering up your opinions other questions for either our experts or our manager [42:25] our director okay um the requested action is to uh approve resolution [42:31] 20245 which would modify the tax and government financing district for the Eden Wilson Redevelopment tax in [42:37] government financing District located in the Southeast D Redevelopment project area to uh modify the boundaries thereof [42:44] got a question on question I do have another question though um so if we remove these [42:51] buildings from the Tiff district and we decide that we do want to relocate them [42:57] where will the funds be coming for that it will no longer be possible to [43:04] use Tiff funding rate if we if in the future we decide to [43:10] do that we'd have to figure out where the financing is going to come from it's highly unlikely that Tiff would be an [43:15] option at that point okay so it would have to be generated in a different [43:20] manner through the levy or something like that correct yeah we uh uh Mr chair [43:26] and and commissioner uh as we've uh discussed over over decades we'd be in [43:32] the same pickle that we might come to the realization we want to move those and then we'd have to find a different [43:37] funding source um there's a lot of different options out there um but we're [43:43] not even at the point where we want to choose to do that let alone how to finance it um but by removing these [43:49] Parcels from this Tiff District today I believe that would disallow the use of Tiff on those Parcels um I mean [43:57] hypothetically in the future maybe we can reconsider a new Tiff District just to include those Parcels that's a whole [44:03] another conversation that could that could be had um but by removing this [44:09] parcel today the Eden Wilson Tiff funds would not be available to to move those buildings okay thank [44:17] you so when the decision was made to put those buildings into the Tiff District [44:22] was it possible probable that we could potentially use Tiff generated funds to [44:28] move those buildings or were we uncertain about that and just put them in there as a as a you know for future [44:35] determination does that make sense it it does so when we when we included them [44:41] um initially we did not include that the park parcel in the Tiff District the [44:47] real Focus was the old Perkin site but as we did our due diligence meeting with the park and wreck commission the [44:52] Historical Society the historical preservation um uh uh uh and cultural [44:58] commission they reminded us we had these old studies and as long as we're doing the Perkins what if we could maybe do [45:03] something for the park but all the conversations were what if um and so by in by originally trying to include it in [45:11] the Tiff uh we felt we could use Tiff increment from the Eden Wilson's District to relocate those but with one [45:19] very important caveat um or two I guess first there's the political Community will to move [45:24] them but then the second caveat would have been that in order to use Tiff we [45:30] would have to redevelop the property which means private Redevelopment so [45:35] that means that we would relocate the historic buildings and then we'd have to sell the land for private [45:43] development that's another big conversation that we've never had so um [45:48] this was a a long shot but at the time that we created the Tiff District I felt based on the input I got from the [45:54] various boards and commissions that it might be wor worth trying to include that flexibility um but at at this point [46:02] um the the likelihood of needing that option and using that option is very [46:08] minimal thank you for that so uh we've got a motion uh that's been requested as [46:13] I mentioned earlier uh to approve resolution 20245 which would modify the boundaries [46:19] of the tax increment financing plan for the Eden Wilson Redevelopment tax incurment financing District located [46:25] within the southeast D Diner Redevelopment project area is there a motion to that effect so moved second [46:32] commissioner Jackson moves commissioner agu seconds the adoption of resolution 202 24-5 any further discussion all those in [46:39] favor of adoption of motion 20 resolution 20245 which modifies the tax increment [46:45] financing District plan for the Eden Wilson Redevelopment tax increment financing District uh say I I I [46:53] opposed carried abstention I'm abstain I I feel like I do not understand this [46:59] well enough okay we've got four eyes and one abstention uh motion passes motions [47:06] approved and then uh Manor rorf go ahead with a final matter of the morning yes [47:12] the last item this morning is resolution [47:19] 2024-the the use of tax increment funds generated from this Eden Wilson District [47:25] to pay for the roadway Improvement that are currently underway this resolution is a followup from a recent city council [47:31] meeting where the council authorized the issuance of bond of bonding debt um for [47:37] a variety of purposes throughout the city about $5.4 million of that of that [47:43] uh debt obligation that will be incurred in the next month will be focused on paying for these public improvements so [47:49] the resolution this morning is simply the uh uh the agreement of the HRA that [47:55] when tax increment funds are available from the Eden Wilson district will repay [48:00] the debt um that will be incurring um as a city council when the Deb is actually incurred in I think Late July early [48:08] August there's a another page where the city council will agree to accept those funds so it's a little bit of pingpong [48:14] as far as uh the process um but this is the resolution that signifies the H's [48:20] consent very good thank you questions for director nondorf on that matter all [48:26] right um we get a motion to approve resolution 20244 recommended by staff which would [48:33] authorize the execution of the tax increment financing pledge agreement for the Eden Wilson tax increment financing [48:39] District any further discussion uh all those in favor of passage of resolution do we have a [48:45] motion to that effect so moveed so move or second commissioner Pierce moves commissioner Jackson second the adoption [48:51] of the resolution 20244 authorizing execution of the tax and government financing pledge [48:57] agreement uh for the Eden Wilson tax en government financing District uh any [49:02] further discussion all those in favor of adoption of resolution 20244 say I I I [49:10] opposed abstention did I hear oh I I was an i oh [49:17] you were an i okay thank you uh the chorus I get confused by the individual [49:22] members of the chorus all right uh the motion's approved resolution [49:27] 20244 is adopted we're going to be able to repay ourselves that's good all right um I think that concludes [49:35] our work for the morning any HRA commissioner comments any good to the order commissioner Jackson yes thank you [49:41] Mr chair so I got a very interesting email from a resident who had moved here from another metropolitan area out of [49:48] state and she asked why are we getting only 10% of affordable units when we [49:55] build a market rate apartment building under our housing policy and I thought it might be a good time for us to review [50:02] our and so I looked at minneapolis's um uh inclusionary housing policy just for reference and it's slightly different [50:09] and I thought it might be a good time for us to go back and look at our inclusionary housing policy compared to [50:15] our neighbors sort of see how they they've evolved over time and how we've evolved over time and if there any fresh [50:21] and new ideas that we might get from our neighbors so I'd like to just put that request in with staff thanks for that uh [50:28] unrelated to HRA we've got a ribbon cutting this morning at 10:00 of the new [50:34] police substation at Southdale will'll be 930 okay we'll be we'll be over there [50:41] shortly yeah and I hope to see those of you that can get there over there and maybe we'll [50:48] stop in kowalskis afterwards and get a cup of coffee all right uh anyone else [50:53] have anything for the good of the order all right uh is there a motion to adjourn so moved second commissioner [51:00] Jackson moves commissioner agnu seconds motion to adjourn uh any further discussion all those in favor of [51:06] adjournment of this meeting say I I I opposed carried h meeting uh this 13th day of [51:15] June stands adjourned