I am hopeful that we will continue to see the investment in the city of St. Paul, especially surrounding some of our affordable housing uh projects and redevelopment projects here. very important to see the state investments.

So, I'll take a motion from uh Commissioner Naker to approve.

The home is currently within the purchasing process with an income qualifying uh owner occupier who was actually using DPA funds uh to help with the the purchase of the home. So the request is to release the restrictive covenant on a 556 goten so that the sale may commence.

So the reason in this instance is because it will be uh owner occupied rather than a rental unit and the 4D uh uh tax statute is only qualifying for rental units.

We were notified of the sale of the property after closing had been scheduled. And so that closing date had been was then pushed back in order to have an HA meeting to have this action before it.

So, I just want to make sure I understand. Um, so properties can choose to not comply with the program and then they then they lose the benefit. And then you said we usually don't allow them to unenroll because the new property owner could just choose not to comply. In this case, we're removing the declaration because it's we need to in order for it to sell. Can you just say a little bit more about why?

So, I I think this is a really interesting conversation, but as I'm thinking about it, it doesn't seem to carry the same risks. Worst comes to worst. You know, we're not they don't continue to get the benefit and then we can assume they'll let us know if they want to receive it again.

So, there may be a couple items that come before you with introductions that have to act on the 22nd for the ETH meeting. Um, and if there's anything that will come up there, you may see that within those two dates for July, we may do a couple introductions and actions if needed.