[00:00:03]
WELCOME TO THE PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, UH, ON THIS DAY, FEBRUARY 8TH, UM, 2002.
AND WE HAVE A LOT TO GET TO TODAY.
SO, UH, I WOULD ASK THAT WE START WITH APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, UH, FROM THE JANUARY 11TH, 2021 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEET COMMITTEE MEETING.
I WAS SO ANXIOUS TO GET RIGHT TO IT.
YOU CAN CALL ROLL COUNCIL MEMBER TREVINO HERE.
COUNCIL MEMBER ANDREW SULLIVAN.
MADAM CHAIR, YOU HAVE A FORUM.
[1. 21-1611 Approval of the minutes from the January 11, 2021 Planning and Land Development Committee Meeting.]
OKAY, THANK YOU.SO LET'S TRY AGAIN FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES CHAIR.
I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM JANUARY 11TH, 2020.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[Public Comment]
HAVE THREE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, UM, AND, UH, WE COULD GO AHEAD AND GET THOSE, UH, LINED UP.OUR FIRST SPEAKER WILL BE RICH ACOSTA.
MR. ACOSTA, CAN YOU HEAR ME? MR. ACOSTA? ANYBODY THERE? MR. ACOSTA? LET'S TRY FOR MIA LO.
HI, MR. ACOSTA, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES AND YOU'RE READY TO PROCEED.
PRESIDENT OF MY CITY IS MY HOME WHO IS HEADQUARTERED IN DISTRICT FIVE.
OUR NON-PROFIT INCLUDES, INCLUDING MYSELF, ARE LICENSED REALTORS, UH, VOLUNTEERING OUR TIME TO FREE TAXES, HELP LOW-INCOME RENTERS FIND HOMES, AND HAVE FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE OF HOW HARD IT IS TO FIND HOMES FOR HUNDREDS OF LOW-INCOME RENTERS.
I'M CONFIDENT THAT N H S D'S GOING TO DO A FANTASTIC JOB PRESENTING ABOUT THE SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION POLICY.
UM, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW THINGS, UM, THAT WE'VE, UH, PRESENTED IN PAST MEETINGS AND THAT HAS ALSO BEEN, UH, SENT TO EACH OF YOU E EACH COUNCIL MEMBER.
I'VE, UH, UH, IT HAS BEEN ASKED, UM, FROM, UH, PEOPLE TODAY THAT ARE SITTING HERE, UM, WHY THIS POLICY IS NEEDED OR ARE WE SOLVING A PROBLEM THAT'S NOT THERE? THIS IS A PUZZLING QUESTION BECAUSE EACH OF YOUR OFFICES HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT, YOU KNOW, IN THE, IN THE PAST 10 YEARS, UH, INCLUDING COUNCIL MEMBERS TODAY THAT ARE ON THIS CALL HAVE APPROVED PROJECTS THAT CURRENTLY DISCRIMINATE AGAINST SOURCE OF INCOME.
THE DATA HAS BEEN SHARED THAT, THAT THERE'S OVER 4,000 UNITS THAT CURRENTLY PRACTICE DISCRIMINATION AND ACCEPTED OUR TAX DOLLARS.
CURRENTLY, SAN ANTONIO HOUSING TRUST IS WORKING ON CHANGES FOR THEIR INVESTMENTS IN THE FUTURE, BUT THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE TS THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE $80 MILLION OF INVESTMENTS THAT TURS HAD, UH, TOOK CARE, UH, HAVE INVESTED INTO PROPERTIES AND CURRENTLY DISCRIMINATE AGAINST, UH, SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION.
THAT'S NOT GOING TO INCLUDE ALL THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF PROJECT AND PROGRAMS THAT SAN ANTONIO COMES, UH, UP WITH FOR, TO INVEST IN PROPERTIES.
UM, SO THAT PROTECTION DOES NOT EXIST FOR THE FUTURE.
SAHA HAS ALREADY INFORMED COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC THAT ABOUT 50% OF VOUCHER HOLDERS CAN'T FIND HOMES AND ARE ALTERNATELY EX THEIR VOUCHERS EXPIRED BECAUSE THEY CAN'T FIND THEM.
THANK GOODNESS AMAZON DEVELOPMENT WAS STOPPED SINCE THEY'RE EXPECTING TO GIVE HUNDREDS OF FAMILIES VOUCHERS WHO MAY, MAY HAVE BEEN HAPPILY WILLING TO ACCEPT THOSE VOUCHERS, ONLY TO FIND OUT THAT 50% OF THEM PROBABLY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FIND A HOME.
SO, THOUGH YOU MAY NOT HAVE KNOWN AT THE TIME COUNCILWOMAN GONZALEZ, COUNCIL MEMBER TREVINO, COURAGE
YOU MAY NOT HAVE KNOWN IT AT THE TIME, BUT NOW YOU DO.
SO IS THERE A PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TO BE SOLVED? WELL, NOW YOU HAVE THE POWER TO FIX IT.
THIS IS NOT ASKING FOR MONEY, BUT THIS WILL AFFECT MILLIONS, IF NOT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN THE FUTURE, BECAUSE THIS IS LASTING POLICY BEYOND YOUR TERMS THAT FOR
[00:05:01]
NOW ON, NO MATTER WHAT NEW PROJECT THE CITY DETERMINES NEEDS ARE TAX INVESTMENTS IN 2030 AND 2050, YOUR VOTES WILL BE ENSURING THAT THEY CANNOT DISCRIMINATE.THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
I LOOK FORWARD TO YOU GUYS SUPPORTING THIS SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION POLICY.
DO WE HAVE MIA LO M AND LO ARE? HELLO, MS. LO, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES IF YOU'LL BEGIN NOW, WE CAN HEAR YOU FINE.
MY NAME IS MIA AND I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT ONE, AND I'M SPEAKING TODAY TO ASK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND THE SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION POLICY.
UM, I THINK IT'S A REALLY COMMON SENSE POLICY THAT WILL GREATLY INCREASE HOUSING OPTIONS FOR FAMILIES OF VOUCHERS.
UM, I'LL ECHO A LOT OF WHAT RICH JUST SAID.
AS HE MENTIONED, SAHA HAS REPORTED AS WELL THAT ABOUT HALF 50% OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE A VOUCHER CANNOT FIND A PLACE TO LIVE.
UM, JUST TO REITERATE, THIS IS NOT 50% OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE WAIT LIST FOR A VOUCHER.
THIS IS NOT 50% OF PEOPLE WHO WOULD QUALIFY FOR A VOUCHER, WHICH OF COURSE WOULD BE MUCH, MUCH LARGER.
BUT THIS IS 50% OF SAN ANTONIO FAMILIES WHO HAVE A VOUCHER IN HAND AND THEY'RE READY TO FIND A PLACE TO LIVE AND THEY CANNOT FIND SOMEWHERE THAT WILL ACCEPT THEIR VOUCHER.
UM, AND THAT'S BECAUSE FINDING A PLACE TO LIVE WITH A VOUCHER IS VERY HARD.
I WORK WITH A LOT OF TENANTS AND FAMILIES WHO ARE SEARCHING FOR HOUSING WITH A VOUCHER, AND THEY OFTEN EQUATE IT TO SEARCHING FOR HOUSING WITH AN EVICTION, AS WE ALL KNOW, IS KIND OF THAT STAMP, THAT THING THAT TURNS SO MANY PEOPLE AWAY AND THAT MAKES IT SO MUCH HARDER FOR THESE PEOPLE TO FIND A HOME.
UM, I THINK I REALLY JUST WANNA BRING UP THE HYPOCRISY OF THIS EXISTING SITUATION AND HOW THIS POLICY IS REALLY, UM, IMPROVED THAT, I MEAN, OUR CITY, WE OFTEN REFER TO IT AS THE CITY OF COMPASSION.
YOU KNOW, SAN ANTONIO IS THERE FOR THE PEOPLE.
SO IF SAN ANTONIO IS GOING TO READILY HELP OUT THESE DEVELOPERS AND SAY, HEY, WE'LL GIVE YOU A HAND IN BUILDING YOUR PROJECT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL HELP YOU OUT HERE, THAT SAME CITY CANNOT TURN AROUND AND ALLOW THESE DEVELOPERS TO THEN TAKE THAT SAME MONEY AND DENY PEOPLE HOUSING, THAT'S JUST MASSIVE HYPOCRISY.
BUT I DON'T THINK ANY OF YOU ON THE BOARD WOULD STAND FOR, AND THAT IS NOT SOMETHING OUR CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WOULD STAND FOR.
I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE MAIN THING I'M ASKING IS THAT THIS CITY CAN SHOW UP FOR TENANTS IN THE WAY THAT THEY HAVE CONTINUOUSLY AND CONSISTENTLY AND TO THIS DAY SHOW UP FOR DEVELOPERS.
WHETHER THAT BE THROUGH INCENTIVES, WHETHER THAT BE THROUGH MONTHLY MEETINGS, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE.
THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS COME THROUGH, DEVELOP FOR DEVELOPERS TIME AND TIME AGAIN, AND PEOPLE WHO NEED HOUSING ARE SUFFERING.
UM, SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK IT'S ON THE CITY TO REALLY SPEAK TO IT, THAT THESE TAX INCENTIVES ARE NOT GRANTED TO PEOPLE WHO ARE READY TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST TENANTS.
YOU KNOW, IF SAN ANTONIO IS HELPING YOU BUILD YOUR PROJECTS, THEN YOU SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE SAN ANTONIO.
SO I STRONGLY URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS COMMON SENSE POLICY AND HOPE THAT YOU ALL ARE CLEAR ON WHY THIS IS NECESSARY AND HELPFUL AND WILL BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL FOR SAN ANTONIO FOR YEARS TO COME.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE BRAD MCMURRAY SPEAKING ON ITEM SIX.
MR. MCMURRAY, ARE YOU THERE? UH, YES, MA'AM.
YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES, MURRAY AND I'M THE VICE.
UM, YES, I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT OF PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT FOR PROSPERITY HOUSING COMMUNITY SERVICES.
WE'RE A 5 0 1 C THREE NONPROFIT THAT, UH, PROVIDES AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN SAN ANTONIO SINCE 1993.
WE OWN A PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND OWN OR MANAGE MORE THAN 1800 UNITS WITH IN THE CITY LIMITS.
AND WE'RE SERVING AS A HOUSING CONSULTANT FOR ALT AFFORDABLE HOUSING SERVICES, INC.
THAT IS REQUESTING A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR ITS 9% VILLAGE AT PARAL APPLICATION.
IT'S LOCATED IN DISTRICT 10, ALSO A 5 0 1 C THREE NONPROFIT.
IT'S BEEN SERVING SAN ANTONIO SINCE 1993, AND PROSPERA PROVIDES ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE FOR ITS DAILY OPERATIONS.
NOW, IN ADDITION TO BEING THE DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT ON, ON PAREN, VITAL PROSPERA IS ALSO PROVIDING PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND RESIDENT SERVICES FOR THE PROPERTY.
AND LAST YEAR WE APPLIED FOR 9% APPLICATION AS WELL, BUT WE LOST DUE TO TIEBREAKERS, WE WERE ONE OF THE HIGHEST SCORING APPLICATIONS, BUT WE MISSED OUT WITH THE TIEBREAKERS.
BUT WITH THE NEW CENSUS DATA THIS YEAR, THE SITE WHERE OUR, OUR, UH, PROJECT IS LOCATED HAS THE HIGHEST RENT BURDEN OF ANY CENSUS TRACKED IN BEXAR COUNTY.
THEREFORE, IT'S NOT ONLY TIES FOR THE HIGHEST SCORE, BUT IT'S RANKED FIRST IN SAN ANTONIO REGION WHEN ALL THE REQUESTED POINTS IN TIEBREAKERS ARE CONSIDERED.
AND BASED ON THE FACT THAT T D H C A HAS ALREADY REVIEWED OUR APPLICATION LAST YEAR, WE BELIEVE WE'LL GET ALL THE POINTS IF CITY COUNCIL FOLLOWS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PROJECT TO RECEIVE A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT AND BE DEEMED THE MOST SIGNIFICANT IN ITS C R P.
NOW, VILLAGE OF PARA AND VITAL ALSO SCORED THE HIGHEST OF ANY 9% APPLICATION, REQUESTING THE MOST SIGNIFICANT C R P DESIGNATION WITH A 96 OUT OF A POSSIBLE A HUNDRED POINTS IN THE CITY'S PROCESS.
AND WE'RE JUST REALLY EXCITED ABOUT PAR AND VITAL BECAUSE
[00:10:01]
IT'S AN INCREDIBLE AND UNIQUE PROJECT FOR MANY REASONS.IT'S LOCATED IN DISTRICT 10, WHICH HAS ONLY HAD TWO TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENTS OR 9% OF DEVELOPMENTS WITH THE LAST AWARDED IN 2015 AND THE ORIGINAL IN 2001.
AND THE CENSUS TRACTS WHERE WE'RE LOCATED HAS NO TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENTS, NOR DOES IT ANY OF THE SURROUNDING CENSUS TRACTS.
NOW, ORIGINALLY, UH, FOR A REASON FOR THIS IS BECAUSE MANY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS OPPOSE TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENTS AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND THIS WAS THE CASE FOR VILLAGE NOR TWO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
BUT THEY NOW SUPPORT US AFTER WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM AND INCORPORATED THEIR SUGGESTIONS IN OUR DESIGN.
WE'RE LOCATED ON 6.2 ACRES WITH LESS THAN 15 UNITS PER ACRE AND TWO PARKING SPACES PER UNIT.
THE DEVELOPMENT'S GONNA BE A MIXED INCOME COMMUNITY WITH 80 AFFORDABLE UNITS AND 12 MARKET UNITS.
40 OF THE AFFORDABLE WOULD BE SERVING INCOMES AT OR BELOW 60% A M I 32 OUT OR BELOW 50% AND EIGHT OUT OR BELOW 30%.
AND IT'S GONNA HAVE 23 BEDROOM AFFORDABLE UNITS FOR LARGER FAMILIES.
IT'S ALSO GONNA HAVE MARKET UNITS, SO THERE'S NO INCOME RESTRICTIONS AT ALL TO CREATE AN INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY AND REFUTE ARGUMENTS ATTACHED FOR DEVELOPMENTS CONCENTRATE POVERTY.
OUR LARGE SITE PROVIDES FOR AMENITIES INCLUDING A PLAYGROUND SWIMMING POOL, BUSINESS CENTER WITH COMPUTERS AND PRINTERS, FITNESS CENTER COMMUNITY ROOM, TOTALING MORE THAN 3,600 FEET OF COMMON SPACE WITH A 935 SQUARE FOOT PORCH ADJACENT WITH THE POOL AND PLAYGROUND FOR OUTDOOR EVENTS, WE'RE LOCATED ON A VIA BUS STOP WITH SEVEN DAY A WEEK SERVICE AND WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF NUMEROUS ENTRY LEVEL JOBS ONCE COVID PANDEMIC SUBSIDES.
NOW WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE PLANNED PARTNERSHIP WITH CNE ELEMENTARY AND WE PREVIOUSLY, UH, MANY OF THE TIME SIR, STUDENTS COULDN'T PARTICIPATE IN THAT THIS YEAR.
OKAY, WELL, WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR, YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE SPEAKERS.
[Consent Agenda]
WE WILL MOVE ON TO, UM, ONE ITEM ON CONSENT, UH, REGARDING, UM, THE VILLAGES AT ECHO EAST.UH, CAN I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEM ON CONSENT? MOTION TO APPROVE? CAN I GET A, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND BY VIAGRA? ARAN.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE ITEM ON CONSENT.
ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[3. 21-1343 Consideration of a recommendation to award up to $3,000,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding and up to $5,901,669 in HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funding to affordable housing development activities. [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; Verónica R. Soto, Director, Neighborhood and Housing Services]]
ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS A CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD 3 MILLION IN COMMUNITY, UH, IN C D B G FUNDING AND F TWO 5.9 0 1 6 9 9 IN HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FUNDING TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.SO, UM, LAURA, IS THIS GONNA BE LORI OR VETO COUNCILMAN? THIS WILL BE VETO SOTO ON HER DEPARTMENT DOING THIS PRESENTATION.
IF WE CAN HAVE THE, UH, PRESENTATION PLEASE.
UH, IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
THIS IS, UH, AN ITEM THAT IS PROPOSING TO UTILIZE HUD ENTITLEMENT GRANTS TO FUND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, THE MONEY FROM ENTITLEMENT GRANTS CAN BE UTILIZED TO DEVELOP AND PRESERVE EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSISTENT WITH THE FIVE YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN, WHICH DOES INDICATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY.
SINCE 2018, WE HAVE INCREASED HOW MUCH CUT FUNDING IS AVAILABLE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THIS IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE MAYOR'S HOUSING POLICY TASK FORCE, UH, HOUSING POLICY FRAMEWORK THAT CALLS FOR AN INCREASE INTO INVESTMENT IN HOUSING.
BECAUSE THIS IS FEDERAL FUNDING, WE DO FOLLOW A COMPETITIVE R S P PROCESS.
WE LOCALLY ALSO DESIGNATED AS A HIGH PROFILE PROCUREMENT.
SO WE ALSO GO TO THE AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE FOR THIS, WHAT YOU'LL BE ASKED TO, UH, DO TODAY TO APPROVE A AWARDING, UM, OVER $5.9 MILLION IN HOME FUNDING AND 3 MILLION IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK CLASS FUNDING TO EIGHT AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.
SO IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU'LL SEE A BIT OF OUR TIMELINE AND THE FUNDING AVAILABLE.
UM, SO AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE OUR FIVE YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN THAT INDICATES AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY, AND WE HAVE INCREASED THE INVESTMENT INTO AFFORDABLE HOUSING BECAUSE OF THE HOUSING POLICY FRAMEWORK.
SO WHAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE CURRENTLY IN THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN IS 3 MILLION IN C B D D, 2.5 MILLION IN THE HOME PROGRAM AND IN A RELATED ACTION
[00:15:01]
LATER IN THIS AGENDA.THE NEXT ITEM ACTUALLY, WE ARE, UM, ALSO TAPPING INTO REPROGRAMMING HOME FUNDING TOTALING OVER 3.4 MILLION SO THAT WE CAN HAVE 8.9 MILLION AVAILABLE FOR THE EIGHT ACTIVITIES.
IT HAS OUR, UM, THIS IS THE TIMELINE.
SO THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN STARTS WITH THE FISCAL YEAR AND IN OCTOBER WE ISSUED THE R S P FOR THIS COMPETITIVE PROCESS.
WE HAD A PRE-SUBMIT CONFERENCE BACK IN NOVEMBER, AND THE DEADLINE FOR PROPOSALS WAS DECEMBER 11TH.
AFTER THE PROPOSALS WERE SUBMITTED, UM, WE HAVE REMAINING FIVE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS AND THREE HOMEOWNERSHIP DEVELOPMENTS.
I SHOULD NOTE THAT THERE WERE TWO ADDITIONAL RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS THAT WITHDREW FROM CONSIDERATION.
AND SO WHEN THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE MET, WE ONLY CONSIDER WHAT WAS REMAINING, WHICH IS THE FIVE RENTAL ACTIVITIES THAT WERE REQUESTING OVER $5.1 MILLION IN ASSISTANCE.
AND THE THREE HOME OWNERSHIP, UM, PROPOSALS THAT, UH, ASK FOR OVER 3.6 MILLION.
THE CRITERIA THE EVALUATION PANEL UTILIZED FOR, UH, EVALUATION IS IN FRONT OF YOU.
UM, IT'S THE, UM, FOR THE RENTAL EXPERIENCE AND CAPACITY PROJECT READINESS, THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE.
WE ALSO WANNA MAKE SURE THEY MEET THE HOOD REGULATORY CONDITIONS, THAT IT'S SUFFICIENT USE OF FUNDS WE UNDERWRITE, OF COURSE, AND THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO MEET THAT CRITERIA.
AND SO WE USE THIS CRITERIA, WHICH WAS PART OF WHAT CITY COUNCIL HAD APPROVED.
SO WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED IS OVER $8.7 MILLION FOR THE EIGHTH, UM, DEVELOPMENT, THE RENTAL AND HOME OWNERSHIP.
YOU FIRST SOME RENDERINGS FOR, UH, THE DEVELOPMENTS.
AND I'M ABOUT TO SHOW YOU, UM, WE HAVE TWO RENDERINGS FOR RENT RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS HERE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE AND, UH, SCHEMATIC SHOWING, UM, HOME, UH, IN THE RANCHO SUBDIVISION WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX.
SO IN THE NEXT SLIDE WE HAVE ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO THE TOP CHARTS SHOWS THE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED, HOW MUCH IN EACH OF THE PROGRAM HOME OR C B B D IS PROPOSED.
AND THEN THE UNIT MIX FOR THE HOUSING UNITS TO BE CREATED OR PRESERVED.
WEST AVENUE IS THE ONLY ONE THAT IS A PRESERVATION PROJECT AS WELL.
IT HAS A COMBINATION OF, UM, RECONSTRUCTING AN EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLEX, BUT IT ALSO HAS, UM, NEW DEVELOPMENT AS SAFETY PROPOSED BUILD, UM, ON THIS SIDE WHERE TWO UM, STRUCTURES ARE FOR THEM.
THE RECOMMENDED AWARD IS A COMBINATION OF C B B G AND HOME WITH HALF A MILLION IN C B B G AND 700,000 IN HOME, UH, FUNDING.
THEY ARE PROPOSING TO SERVE FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 80% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME WITH MORE THAN 70% OF THE UNITS, UM, SERVING FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 60% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME WITH THE HOME FUNDING.
IN COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE, WE HAVE
THE RECOMMENDED AWARD IS 1.2 MILLION AND THEIR UNITS ARE GONNA BE 138 AND AGAIN, OVER 65 OF THEIR, UM, THE, THE UNITS IN THAT COMPLEX ARE TO SERVE FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 60% A M I.
THEY DO HAVE A FEW 80% A M I UNITS AS WELL.
IN COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT, WE HAVE HAMILTON WOLF, FLO, AND THAT ONE IS RECOMMENDED FOR 1.2 MILLION IN HOME.
THAT ONE IS ONLY SERVING FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 60% A A M I WITH SOME UNITS RESERVED FOR DEEPER AFFORDABILITY.
SO WE HAVE UNITS AT 30% A M I IN THAT DEVELOPMENT AS WELL.
TOTAL 74 UNITS AFTER THAT WITH C D B G FUNDING.
LOMA VISTA LAW IN COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE IS RECOMMENDED FOR $1 MILLION.
AGAIN, THEY HAVE A COMBINATION OF 60 AND 80% A M I UNITS, BUT OVER 90% OF THEIR UNITS ARE TO SERVE FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 60% A M I.
AND THE FINAL RENTAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED FOR FUNDING IS VISTA AT EVEREST, WHICH IS PROPOSED TO RE UM, TO RECEIVE HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IN C B D D FUNDING.
THAT ONE ALSO IS SERVING FAMILIES AT 60% A M I AND BELOW.
THIS IS THE COMBINED TOTAL OF $5.15 MILLION FOR, UH, 691 UNITS TOTAL.
AND THOSE ARE THE RENTAL AWARD RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE BOTTOM TABLE HAS THE HOME OWNERSHIP, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, AND THE LARGEST, UM, DEVELOPMENT
[00:20:01]
IS ONE PROPOSED BY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY CALLED SANCHO SUBDIVISION.THIS IS WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR FOR THAT ONE.
WE HAVE A COMBINATION OF C B B D FOR $1 MILLION IN HOME FOR $2 MILLION TO YIELD 45 HOMES THAT FAMILIES WHO MAKE LESS THAN 80% OF OUR AREA MADE IN INCOME CAN ENJOY.
AFTER THAT, WE HAVE SOME INFILL SCATTERED SITES PROPOSED BY NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF SAN ANTONIO WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO AND THREE.
AND FOR THAT AWARD WE ARE RECOMMENDING HOME FUNDING TOTALING $275,000 TO YIELD NINE HOME OWNERSHIP AND FIELD SITES.
AND FINALLY, A CAPA'S RESIDENT COUNCIL HAS A PROJECT CALLED
NOW, I MENTIONED THIS IS A COMPETITIVE R F P PROCESS, SO IF YOU HAVE NOT HEARD FROM THESE DEVELOPERS, IT'S BECAUSE WE'RE STILL UNDER THE CODE OF SILENCE.
ONCE THIS ITEM IS POSTED ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA, THEN THEY CAN REACH OUT TO YOU TO TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS.
BUT IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T HEARD FROM DEVELOPERS, IT'S BECAUSE OF THAT RESTRICTION IN COMMUNICATION IN PLACE.
ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE DOING, UM, AS WELL AND RECOMMENDING AS PART OF THIS AWARD IS THAT ALL OF THE, UH, REQUIRED COMPLIANCE ITEMS FROM HUD SUCH AS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, UNDERWRITING AND LABOR COMPLIANCE, UM, CONSULTING SERVICES TO ENSURE THEY'RE MEETING THE, UH, LABOR WAGES THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS CONSTRUCTION ARE TO BE PAID OFF FROM A SEPARATE LINE ITEM.
SO WE'RE PROPOSED $5 FOR THAT LINE ITEM SO THAT WE DO NOT TAKE IT OUT OF THE AWARD THAT IS GIVEN FOR THESE DEVELOPMENT.
WE'LL MAKE IT CLEANER AND EASIER FOR THE DEVELOPERS AND IT'LL BE EASIER FOR US TO ENSURE THAT COMPLIANCE.
AND SO A DEVELOPER DOES SEND, GET AN AWARD, AND THEN WE TAKE MONEY AWAY TO DO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
BUT RATHER THE AWARD IS EXACTLY WHAT'S AVAILABLE FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT.
SO THE TOTAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATION IS JUST OVER $8.9 MILLION WITH BOTH THE HOME AND C D B G PROGRAM.
THE NEXT SLIDE HAS, UH, A MAP THAT SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS.
IT HAS ALL EIGHT OF THEM, AND WE HAVE SOME RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS UP IN THE, UH, COUNCIL, DISTRICT EIGHT COUNCIL, DISTRICT ONE AS WELL, UH, ALL AROUND, UM, THE FOUR 10, UM, AREA IN THE NORTH, UH, AROUND DOWNTOWN.
AND IN THE WEST SIDE WE HAVE, UM, SOME OF THE HOMEOWNERSHIP WITH
AND THEN WE HAVE ADDITIONAL HOME OWNERSHIP IN DISTRICT TWO AND THREE WITH THE SCATTERED SITE.
AND THEN ADDITIONAL HOME OWNERSHIP, UM, IN DISTRICT FOUR.
YOU CAN SEE IT ON, UH, THE OTHER EDGE OF THE MAP, IF YOU WILL, ON THE BOTTOM OF THE SLIDE.
AND THAT IS THE, THE LAST SLIDE.
UM, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AGAIN IS TO AWARD 5.9 MILLION.
IT'S OVER 5.9 MILLION IN HOME PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM AND 3 MILLION IN C D B G TO ALL EIGHT AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.
THIS IS A VERY EXCITING PROJECT, UM, THAT WE HAVE, UH, UM, ALL AROUND THE CITY.
UM, AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, SORT OF IN THE URBAN, MORE URBAN AREA.
UM, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN MY DISTRICT.
UM, IN FACT, THE KETTLEMAN SQUARE PROJECT HAS BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS NOW.
SO, UM, GLAD TO SEE THAT ONE HERE AND HOPEFULLY ROUNDING THE CORNER AND, AND, UM, GETTING THAT PROJECT BUILT.
UM, AND THEN A COMBINATION OF HOME OWNERSHIP AS WELL, WHICH WE KNOW WE NEED, UM, NEW HOMEOWNERS OWN, UH, OWNERS ALL OVER THE DISTRICT.
SO LET, LEMME JUST ASK YOU VEL, UM, YOU MENTIONED THERE'S ONLY ONE THAT'S A REHAB PROJECT, THE ONE ON WEST AVENUE? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND JUST SO Y'ALL ARE AWARE IN THE CRITERIA, WE DO INCENTIVIZE RESERVATION OF EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY AWARDING MORE POINTS FOR, UH, A PROJECT THAT SEEKS TO RENOVATE, UH, AN EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
UM, BUT IT, THIS IS ELIGIBLE FOR BOTH NEW CONSTRUCTION AS WELL AS REHAB.
AND THAT THAT IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAME IN UNDER THE RENTAL CATEGORY.
THAT'S A PRESERVATION PROJECT.
THEY'RE GONNA DO A TOTAL RECONSTRUCTION.
UM, THE OTHER ONES ARE NEW CONSTRUCTION COUNCILWOMAN, THIS IS LAURIE HOUSTON.
[00:25:01]
ADD THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL REHAB PROJECTS UNDERWAY THAT DID NOT APPLY FOR THE C D B G FUNDING.AND SO THERE ARE SEVERAL 4% REHAB PROJECTS THAT COUNCIL HAS APPROVED IN THE PAST SIX MONTHS FOR REHAB.
AND THEY MAY NOT HAVE NEEDED THIS FUNDING.
AND I ALSO WANTED TO POINT TO TWO PROJECTS THAT WITHDREW FROM THE C D B G AND HOME GAP FUNDING.
IT WAS COPERNICUS AND DISTRICT TWO AND WATSON ROAD AND DISTRICT FOUR.
UM, WHAT HAD HAPPENED WAS THERE WAS A REVISED RULE ABOUT 4%, UM, TAX EQUITY THAT CLOSED THE GAP ON THOSE TWO PROJECTS.
AND SO THEY CAME BACK AND WITHDREW THOSE TWO PROJECTS BECAUSE THEY DID NOT NEED THAT GAP FUNDING ANYMORE.
SO THOSE PROJECTS WILL STILL CONTINUE.
THEY JUST NEED, DIDN'T NEED THE ADDITIONAL GAP FUNDING BECAUSE THAT NEW TAX EQUITY THEY'D BE GETTING WOULD COVER THAT GAP.
WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH LORI.
AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MY COLLEAGUES COUNCIL MEMBER
SO, UM, CAN WE PULL UP THE SCREEN WHERE YOU HAD ALL THE AMIS, 'CAUSE SOMETHING WAS JUST NOT ADDING UP AND I REALLY WANT TO FOCUS ON, UH, THE NUMBER OF 30% A M I COMPARED TO THE TOTAL.
IT, IT, IT SAID 18, BUT IT LOOKED LIKE IT ONLY ADDED UP TO 16.
EITHER ONE OF THOSE NUMBERS IS REALLY, REALLY LOW.
UM, SO 18 30% OUT OF 691 UNITS.
UM, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT? YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN VERY ADAMANT AND, AND VOCAL ABOUT, UH, GETTING, MAKING SURE THAT THAT 30% A M I MIX IS MUCH HIGHER THAN THAT.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN SEE THAT, UH, ONE OF THE DISTRICT ONE PROPERTIES DOESN'T HAVE ANY, CAN WE TALK ABOUT THAT? AND I'LL, I'LL START THE, THOSE THAT ARE HAVING THE 30% A M I, THEY, THOSE ARE THE 9% TAX CREDIT PROJECTS.
AND THAT TAX CREDIT HELPS UNDERWRITE THOSE 30% UNITS.
AND SO THAT'S WHY YOU'RE GONNA SEE THOSE 30% IN THOSE PROJECTS.
THE OTHERS, THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE BELOW 60%, WHICH WE DO HAVE A LOT OF NEED, BUT IF WE WERE TO UNDERWRITE MORE AT 30%, UM, THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A LOT MORE SUBSIDY.
UM, THERE ARE OTHER TOOLS THAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT TO HELP WITH THAT 30%.
UM, BUT THAT IS WHY, I MEAN, YOU NEED MORE SUBSIDY TO HELP SUPPORT THAT 30 PERCENTM.
I, BUT WE, WE COULDN'T, WE COULDN'T PLAY WHERE THE PROPORTION IS, UH, OF THE 80 AND 60 TO GIVE MORE, 30 MOST LIKELY NOT.
I, WE, WE CAN LOOK TO SEE IF THEY'D GO DOWN, BUT A LOT OF THAT FINANCING IS IN PLACE BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY CAN MAKE THAT PROJECT WORK.
AND LIKE I SAID, THE ONLY TOOL THAT REQUIRES YOU TO DO THE 30% IS THE 9% AND YOU NEED MORE SUBSIDY.
AND VERA, I'LL ASK YOU TO ADD MORE TO THAT.
IF, IF I COULD ADD TO WHAT LAURIE, UM, IS TALKING ABOUT.
UM, SO INCOME AVERAGING IS WHAT ALLOWS US TO GET THAT DEEPER AFFORDABILITY.
UM, I BELIEVE THEY'RE MAXIMIZING WHAT THEY CAN GET OUT OF THE 9%, UH, DEVELOPMENT WITH THAT.
AND UNTIL A FEW YEARS AGO, INCOME AVERAGING WAS NOT A TOOL THAT WE COULD UTILIZE.
SO MOST OF THE, UM, TAXING HOUSING TAX CREDIT DEMANDS, WE GOT BOTH 9% AND 4%.
WERE ALL SERVING FAMILIES THAT ARE BELOW 60% A M I AFTER INCOME AVERAGING WAS PART OF WHAT THEY COULD DO FOR 9% TAX CREDIT.
THAT'S WHEN WE STARTED TO SEE UNITS.
WE SERVED FOR THAT 30% A M I BEFORE THAT.
SO I, I KNOW IT'S NOT A LOT, UM, BUT IT'S A LOT MORE THAN, UM, WE HAD THREE YEARS AGO.
UM, 'CAUSE WE'VE ONLY HAD USED INCOME AVERAGING A FEW YEARS.
AND IT IS THE 9% THAT ALLOWS YOU TO MAXIMIZE THAT LAURIE IS CORRECT THAT YOU DO NEED, UM, DEEPER SUBSIDIES.
SO YOU CAN HAVE MORE UNITS AT 30% A M I AND IT'LL BE SOMETHING WE CONTINUE TO EXPLORE.
BUT THE 9% IS THE WAY YOU CAN GET UNITS RESERVED AT THAT INCOME LEVEL.
UM, WITHOUT INCOME AVERAGING, WE WOULD PROBABLY ONLY BE GETTING UNITS AT 60% A M I.
WELL, I MEAN, I, I I THINK IT AT, AT AT LEAST, UH, UH, ASKING IF WE CAN INCREASE THE, THE NUMBER OF, OF 30% A M I,
[00:30:01]
UH, 'CAUSE IT'S, IT'S REALLY LOW.I MEAN, MY CALCULATION HAS IT AT 2.6% OF ALL THESE PROJECTS.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I'D, I'D LIKE FOR US AT LEAST TO ASK THE QUESTION AND, AND, AND TEST THAT A LITTLE BIT.
UH, LET ME GO ON TO THE NEXT THING.
I BASICALLY, IF PASSED BY THE CITY, WILL, WILL THESE PROJECTS ABIDE BY THE SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION POLICY? YES, THEY WOULD.
UM, WE WOULD TIME IT SO THAT THE CONTRACT WOULD, UM, HAVE THAT SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION LANGUAGE INCLUDED.
UH, UNDER C D B G, THERE ARE NO INITIAL OR ONGOING PROPERTY STANDARD REQUIREMENTS.
GRANTEES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO PERIODICALLY INSPECT RENTAL UNITS DEVELOPED WITH C D B G FUNDS, ALTHOUGH THEY MAY CHOOSE TO DO SO.
IF THE GRANTEE WANTS TO IMPOSE THIS TYPE OF REQUIREMENT, IT SHOULD INCLUDE THIS IN THE FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER OR THE OWNER QUOTE.
SO DOES THIS MEAN THAT WE, THE GRANTEE CAN ADD LANGUAGE RESEMBLING THE TENANT PROTECTION POLICY, THE HOUSING TRUST JUST APPROVED? UM, SO THAT, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
FOR THE C B BT PROGRAM, WHEN WE UTILIZE IT FOR HOME OWNERSHIP OR RENTAL HOUSING, WE ACTUALLY REFER BACK TO THE HOME PROGRAM GUIDELINES.
AND SO EVEN THOUGH C B B D FUNDING IS MORE FLEXIBLE, WE CAN FUND MANY MORE THINGS WITH C B B D, UM, THAN WITH HOME.
UM, WE USE THE HOME PROVISIONS FOR SAFE HARBOR UNDER THE, THE HOME PROGRAM.
THERE ARE ANNUAL, UH, INSPECTIONS.
UM, IT'S ACTUALLY BIANNUAL INSPECTIONS THAT WE DO.
THERE'S A LOT MORE, UM, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR, UM, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
THE HOME PROGRAM IS SOLELY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO WE APPLY TO THESE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS THE SAME STANDARDS AS WE DO TO THE HOME PROGRAM WITH REGARDS TO GOING BEYOND THAT TO WHAT THE SAN ANTONIO HEALTH INTEREST IS PROPOSING.
UM, THEY, THEY, IT IS DIFFERENT.
UM, AND WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF DOING AN ANALYSIS TO SEE WHAT, IN WHAT THE SAN ANTONIO HEALTH INTEREST IS PROPOSING IS ALREADY ALREADY REQUIRED BY HUTT REGULATIONS AND WHAT IS BEYOND.
UM, SO WE DON'T FINISHED, BUT WE DO IMPOSE IN A CONTRACT THE REQUIREMENTS SIMILAR TO THE HOME PROGRAM SO THAT THE INSPECTION, UM, OUR COMPLIANCE REVIEW WOULD STILL APPLY.
WILL, WILL THE, WILL THE ANALYSIS BE DONE BEFORE IT COMES TO VOTE FOR CITY FOR CITY COUNCIL? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
UM, WE'RE TRYING TO FINISH THAT ANALYSIS THIS WEEK AND THIS IS GOING TO COUNCIL NEXT WEEK, SO I BELIEVE SO.
UM, AND WE STILL HAVE TO DO FULL UNDERWRITING FOR ALL OF THESE.
UM, AND SO THE CONTRACT ITSELF IS GONNA TAKE US, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL WILL HOPEFULLY APPROVE THIS THIS MONTH, BUT IT MIGHT TAKE US A MONTH OR TWO, UM, MAYBE EVEN LONGER TO GET THE FULL UNDERWRITING AND WRITE THE CONTRACT BY THE TIME THAT'S IN PLACE.
WE WILL HAVE THAT ANALYSIS IN, UH, COMPLETED.
AND COUNCILMAN, I'D LIKE TO JUST ADD REALLY QUICKLY, UH, SOME OF THE PROJECTS ARE TAX CREDIT PROJECTS.
UM, SO THEY DO HAVE THEIR OWN, UH, REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF INSPECTION, UM, AND MINIMUM STANDARDS THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET.
THAT'S MONITORED BY T D H C A.
AND THEN THE HOUSING COMMISSION IS LOOKING TO, UH, ACTUALLY HAVE A PRESENTATION BY PETE, UM, TO THE HOUSING COMMISSION REGARDING HIS TENANT'S RIGHTS PROPOSAL.
AND SO THEY'LL BE REVIEWING THAT.
I THINK IT'S GONNA BE SCHEDULED FOR LATER THIS MONTH.
UM, JUST, JUST TO GIVE YOU A, A HEADS UP ON THAT.
WELL, OKAY, THAT'S ABOUT ALL I'VE GOT.
AGAIN, I JUST WANNA IMPLORE THAT, THAT WE EXPLORE, UH, GETTING MORE 30% A M I UNITS.
UH, I WANNA MENTION THAT, UH, AS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, THE EMERGENCY HOUSING UH, ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, THE, THE AVERAGE, UH, A M I FOR A RECIPIENT WAS 29%.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW THAT THAT SHOULD BE OUR GUIDING LIGHT RIGHT THERE.
UM, SO THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT, CHAIR.
AND COUNCILMAN, I DID WANNA FOLLOW UP ON THAT ONE QUESTION.
AND SO IF YOU WERE TO GO TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE EIGHT PROJECTS WE'RE FUNDING, THERE'S A PROJECT FOR THE NAME OF, UM, ARBORS WEST.
IT'S A PROJECT IN DISTRICT ONE.
CAN SOMEONE PULL UP THAT SLIDE PLEASE? SLIDE SIX.
SO ONE OF THE WAYS THEY'RE FINANCING THIS PROJECT IS THEY'RE USING PROJECT-BASED VOUCHERS, HOUSING VOUCHERS, SO SECTION EIGHT VOUCHERS FOR THESE PROGRAMS. SO THOSE 80% UNITS, UM, THEY'RE 69, 80% UNITS, BUT 43 OF THOSE WILL BE AVAILABLE TO SECTION EIGHT VOUCHER HOLDERS.
SO EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE PRICED AT 80%, 43 OF THEM WILL GO TO THOSE AT 30% A M I AND THEY'LL ONLY
[00:35:01]
PAY WHAT THE VOUCHER PROVIDES.AND SO, AND WHEN YOU SAY THEY'RE AVAILABLE, ARE THEY PRIORITIZED OR THEY, LIKE, IN OTHER WORDS, THEY HAVE TO BE, THEY THEY ARE PRIORITIZED FOR VOUCHERS, THOSE INDIVIDUALS? YES, THE VOUCHERS ARE.
SO, UM, WE'LL GO THROUGH TO SEE WHAT OTHER PROJECTS MIGHT HAVE THAT, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO POINT OUT IN HERE AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT POINTING IT OUT.
COUNCILMAN ARAN, DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO.
I DON'T, I DON'T SEE ANY HANDS RAISED.
THAT'S WHY WHAT WE DID HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS, UH, ANDREW, UH, JADA, ANDREW SULLIVAN, AND THEN I SEE JOHN COURAGE.
UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ANDREW SULLIVAN.
UM, THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR AND, AND THANK YOU VETO.
I HAVE A QUESTION WHEN IT COMES TO THE SCATTERED INFIELD FOR DISTRICT TWO AND DISTRICT THREE AT 275,000, UM, AND IT'S ONLY A NINE UNIT MIX, SO DOES THAT MEAN IT'S ONLY NINE BETWEEN THE TWO DISTRICTS, OR IS IT GONNA BE NINE PER DISTRICT? I WANTED TO VERIFY AND MAKE SURE THE TOTAL IS GONNA BE NINE UNITS BETWEEN BOTH DISTRICTS.
UM, AND THEN WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, REDEVELOPMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I WILL NOT LET THIS CONVERSATION GO WITHOUT SPEAKING ABOUT, UM, THE EDGE APARTMENTS AND THE PLACE OF COMMERCE, UM, COUNCILMAN TREVINO IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
WE ARE LOOKING AT FAMILIES THAT ARE BEING DISPLACED, THAT ARE VOUCHER RECIPIENTS.
UM, WE ARE STILL TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT IS REALLY BEHIND THIS.
WE KNOW THAT THERE IS A NEW MANAGEMENT COMPANY, AND WE ARE NOW TALKING ABOUT A LOOPHOLE WITHIN THE EMERGENCY MORATORIUM ON EVICTIONS AND PEOPLE LOSING HOUSING.
AND WE HAVE FAMILIES BEING DISPLACED AS WE SPEAK, AND THEY'RE BEING DISPLACED UNDER THE PRETENSE OF REDEVELOPMENT OF THESE PROPERTIES.
AND SO AS WE'RE LOOKING AT PUTTING IN NEW DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, HOW ARE WE CLOSING THE LOOPHOLES SO THAT WE'RE NOT HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AGAIN, UM, WHEN THERE'S ANOTHER COMPLEX THAT'S UNDER A HUD, UH, OBLIGATION, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY'RE DECIDED THAT THEY'RE GONNA WANNA REDEVELOP AND NOW WE'RE WITHOUT HOUSING.
SO, UM, VETO OR, OR LAURIE OR ANYONE THAT CAN SPEAK TO HOW WE'RE GONNA CLOSE THIS AS WE'RE GOING FORWARD WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
AND I'D LIKE TO START OFF AND EXPLAIN THE SITUATION THAT'S OCCURRED AT THE EDGE APARTMENTS.
AND SO WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THAT THE, THE TENANTS IN THAT APARTMENTS HAVE BEEN ASKED TO LEAVE.
UM, IT'S UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT AND THEY'VE ASKED THEM TO LEAVE BASED ON THE FACT THAT THEY'RE REHABBING THE PROPERTIES.
NOW, THEY CANNOT BREAK A LEASE THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE WITH THE, WITH A TENANT.
SO IF A TENANT HAS A LEASE, THEY, THERE'S NO LOOPHOLE THAT ALLOWS 'EM TO EVICT THAT TENANT.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THE TENANT LEASE MAY BE ENDING THE TERM, AND SO THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY IS CHOOSING NOT TO RENEW IT IN THE NAME OF REHABILITATION.
AND SO THERE'S NO EXISTING LEASE, BUT IT'S COME UP FOR RENEWAL.
AND THE TENANT IS THE, THE LANDLORD'S NOW SAYING, WE HAVE NEW MANAGEMENT.
THEY WANT TO REHAB THE PROPERTY.
AND SO THEY'RE NOT RENEWING THE LEASES.
THOSE ARE NOT COVERED UNDER THE EVICTION MORATORIUM.
THE ONLY THING COVERED UNDER THE EVICTION MORATORIUM IS NON-PAYMENT OF RENT.
AND SO THAT'S THE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE.
UM, WE HAVE GONE OUT TO THE SITE.
WE HAVE, WE HAVE WALKED THE SITE WITH FLYERS ON TWO OCCASIONS ONCE IN LATE JANUARY AND THEN LAST WEEK ALONG WITH A COUNCIL WOMAN'S OFFICE TALKING TO TENANTS, MAKING SURE THEY UNDERSTAND THEIR RIGHTS AND MAKING SURE THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT RESOURCES ARE AVAILABLE.
UM, AND WE DISCOVERED THAT WE'RE STILL NOT CLEAR WHY THE TENANT IS SAYING IT'S UNDER, BECAUSE IT'S RENO, THEY'RE GONNA RENOVATE IT, BUT WE'RE HEARING DIFFERENT STORIES AS WELL.
BUT, UM, IS IT A LOOPHOLE? I DON'T THINK IT'S, IT MIGHT NOT BE A LOOPHOLE, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE FIND PROTECTIONS FOR BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE BEING ASKED TO LEAVE AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANOTHER PLACE TO GO.
AND IT'S IN THE NAME OF A NON-RENEWAL OF A LEASE.
AND VERO, I'LL LET YOU SPEAK TO WHAT WE CAN DO TO PREVENT THAT.
UM, I DO KNOW COUNCILMAN, UM, ANDREW SULLIVAN IN OUR CCHI INCENTIVES, BUT THE CIP HAS, UM, SUNSET.
SO YOU DON'T HAVE THAT ANYMORE, BUT YOU CANNOT DISPLACE RESIDENTS AND YOU CANNOT, UM, MOVE PEOPLE OUT IN THE NAME OF REHAB.
YOU HAVE TO, UM, ACTUALLY YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
UM, AND YOU HAVE TO GO TO COUNCIL TO GET PERMISSION TO DO THAT.
NOW IN C D B G FUNDING PROJECTS, YOU HAVE
[00:40:01]
TO HAVE A DISPLACEMENT PLAN TO BE ABLE TO SHOW US HOW YOU'RE GONNA RELOCATE THOSE.AND SO, VERA, I'LL LET YOU SPEAK TO HOW WE'LL HANDLE THESE.
UM, HEY, VEL, I'LL, I MEAN, IF YOU WANNA JUST ANSWER BRIEFLY, BUT THIS IS NOT AGENDAS, AND I, I DID WANT THE COUNCIL MEMBER TO GET A PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO PUBLICLY MAKE THE REQUEST, BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS ON OUR AGENDA.
WE HAVE QUITE A FEW THINGS TO COVER.
SO VEL, IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING QUICK AND THEN I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER, IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS VERY QUICKLY.
UM, OUR TEAM WAS OUT THERE LAST WEEK WITH THE COUNCILWOMAN, AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID WAS REFER TENANTS THE RIGHT TO COUNCIL PROGRAM SO THAT THEY COULD GET LEGAL REPRESENTATION IF, UM, THAT WAS WARRANTED.
WE ALSO MADE SURE THAT THEY WERE AWARE OF THAT THEIR HOUSING ISSUES AND THEIR RIGHTS ATTENDANCE.
AND SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO PUSH THOSE PROGRAMS OUT AND, UM, REFER PEOPLE TO OUR RIGHT TO COUNCIL PROGRAM BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT IS ABOUT, UM, LEGAL REPRESENTATION, BUT COUNCILMAN QUICKLY IF THEY'RE GETTING REHAB FUNDING, IF THEY'RE GETTING SOMETHING THEY CANNOT DISPLACE.
AND SO THAT, THAT IS NOT ALLOWED.
AND, UM, IN OUR CURRENT PROGRAMS AND THEN IN FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS. SO YOU CANNOT DO THAT.
AND I JUST WANTED TO ADD COUNCILWOMAN THAT WE ALSO OFFERED, UM, UH, POSSIBLE RELOCATION ASSISTANCE FOR THE RESIDENTS IF THEY WERE SEEKING IT.
SO WHEN WE WENT OUT THERE, WE PROVIDED THEM A NUMBER.
UM, AND SO AS THEY CONTACT OUR OFFICE, WE'LL BE WORKING WITH THEM TO SEE IF THEY DO NEED TO RELOCATE HOW WE CAN HELP.
AND SO THAT IS MY, MY MAJOR CONCERNS MADAM CHAIR, AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IN OVER $8 MILLION INTO AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE'RE DOING, SO WE'RE NOT GONNA SEE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN.
WE KNOW THAT WE'RE STILL IN THE MIDST OF THIS PANDEMIC, AND IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE THESE AFFORDABLE UNITS ON THE GROUND, THEY NEED TO BE WITH PARTNERS THAT ARE GONNA KEEP AFFORDABLE UNITS ON THE GROUND.
UM, AND THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO BRING THIS UP WITHIN THIS PARTICULAR CONVERSATION.
UM, AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS, WITH THIS FUNDING THAT WE ARE, ARE ALLOCATING, IS THIS PART OF THE GAP FUNDING THAT WE JUST APPROVED? YES.
UM, SO THOSE ARE REALLY ALL OF MY QUESTIONS IS HOW DO WE KEEP THIS FROM HAPPENING? WHERE ARE WE GOING FROM HERE AND MAKING SURE WE'RE STILL WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT WE'VE ALREADY VOTED ON.
BUT THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR, AND THANK YOU, LAURIE.
UH, THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, ANDREW SULLIVAN, COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE.
UH, I'VE GOT A QUESTION ABOUT THE, UH, UH, RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.
THOSE, UH, SIX PROJECTS AT THE TOP, UM, OR FIVE, UH, ARE ALL OF THOSE SEEKING, UH, STATE 4% FUNDING OR JUST THREE OF THEM? MOST OF THEM ARE SEEKING 9% AND 4%.
SO THEY'RE TRYING TO GO BOTH WAYS.
BUT YOU SAID THAT, UM, IF THEY'RE SEEKING, UH, ANY OF THAT FUNDING, AREN'T THEY SUPPOSED TO BE GIVING SOME 30% THE 9% UNITS ARE AND THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE? OH, OKAY.
SO THOSE ARE THE THREE, YOU KNOW, UM, I SHARE, UH, COUNCILMAN INTRAVENOUS CONCERN LESS THAN 3% OR 30%, AND ALMOST 20% OR 19% ARE, YOU KNOW, AT 80%.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE NOT PUTTING ENOUGH AFFORDABILITY INTO THESE.
UH, LET ME ASK YOU, ON MOST OF THOSE UNITS, ARE THEY ALSO RECEIVING, UH, OUTSIDE FUNDING, UH, PARTNERSHIPS, UH, THAT ARE DRIVING UP THE COST OF THEIR FINANCING? RIGHT.
WE'D HAVE TO INTO, INTO THAT MORE.
WHAT I MEAN, BECAUSE I KNOW A LOT OF PARTNERS.
WHAT I MEAN IS A LOT OF PARTNERS WHO PARTNER WITH THESE PROJECTS SAY, WELL, IF WE'RE GONNA PUT IN 5 MILLION OR 10 MILLION OR SOMETHING, WE WANT 17% RETURN FOR OUR INVESTMENT AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
IS THAT A SITUATION WITH MANY OF THESE? NO, THAT WOULD MEAN THERE, THERE ARE OUTSIDE PARTNERSHIPS, BUT PART OF OUR UNDERWRITING LOOKS AT THOSE THINGS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT RECEIVING A, YOU KNOW, TOO HIGH OF A DEVELOPER FEE OR TOO HIGH OF A RETURN.
AND SO WE HAVE TO HAVE AN UNDERWRITER COME IN TO LOOK AT THESE TO JUSTIFY THE FUNDING THEY'RE REQUESTING.
SOME OF THESE NAMES LOOK FAMILIAR.
HAVE THEY COME THROUGH THE HOUSING TRUST P F C OR FC? YES, ALMOST ALL OF THEM.
SO A LOT OF 'EM, I WOULD SAY ABOUT HALF TWO OR THREE OF 'EM HAVE.
YEAH, BECAUSE THEY'RE GETTING FUNDING THERE AND NOW THEY'RE GETTING FUNDING HERE, OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE BOTH WAYS.
AND I KNOW WHAT THE, UH, P F C AND FC WE'RE REALLY PUSHING LOWER RATES.
I DON'T KNOW THAT IT MEETS EITHER OF MY EXPECTATIONS SITTING ON BOTH OF THESE BOARDS.
[00:45:01]
UH, AND SO, YEAH, I, I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM, BUT I'M MAKING A COMMENT BASED ON WHAT I SEE.AND, UH, I, LIKE I SAID, I SHARE COUNCILMAN'S MM-HMM.
THERE ISN'T A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THERE.
I WANNA MOVE DOWN TO THE HOME OWNERSHIP.
I'VE GOT QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.
UH, I AM, I'M SURE MY, MY DOUBTS FALL IN LINE WITH MAYBE THE, THE TYPES AND SIZES OF THE UNITS THAT ARE GONNA BE BUILT.
BUT I, I NOTICED, YOU KNOW, WITH THE C ZS AND MORE HOUSES WE'RE GIVING $70,000 PER UNIT AND WITH, UH, THE SCATTERED SITES WE'RE GIVING $30,000 PER UNIT.
AND THEN WITH, UH, RANCHO CARLOTTA, WE'RE GIVING ABOUT $40,000 PER UNIT.
YOU KNOW, THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF DIFFERENCES.
NOW, I KNOW WITH HABITAT, THERE'S A LOT OF SWEAT EQUITY AND A LOT OF VOLUNTEER SERVICE GOES INTO DOING THAT CONSTRUCTION.
BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, OURS MORE HOUSES, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GETTING A SIGNIFICANTLY MORE PER HOUSE NOW.
ARE THEY BUILDING A SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER HOUSE? I'LL GIVE YOU THE BREAKDOWN ON THE BEDROOM SIZES.
UM, SO, SO THAT YOU CAN SEE, AND I'LL GET THE SQUARE FEET AS WELL.
I DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I'LL GET THAT PIECE.
SO YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE LARGER OR MORE BEDROOMS AS WELL.
YEAH, I MEAN, IT, IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO BE SUCH A TREMENDOUS DIFFERENCE, UH, FOR A HOUSE UNLESS SOMEBODY'S BUILDING A 2300 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE AND SOMEONE'S BUILDING A 1600 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE.
SO, UH, THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE.
I THINK THOSE WERE MY QUESTIONS, AND THEN I'M SURE I WANNA APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I WAS A LITTLE LATE TO THE MEETING.
OTHER THINGS THAT COULD CHANGE THAT ARE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT NEEDS.
SO IF THEY NEED, UM, SEWER IMPROVEMENTS, SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS, THOSE THINGS CAN COME INTO, UM, PLAY WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THESE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES HOMES.
WE'LL GET THAT INFORMATION TO YOU.
COUNCIL MEMBER GERRAN, DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH, THANK YOU.
SO SOME OF THESE, YES, WE HAVE SEEN AT THE, THE HOUSING TRUST PARTICULARLY, I KNOW CATTLE CATTLEMAN SQUARE LOSS, AND WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THAT ONE BECAUSE IT'S NEXT TO OUR TRANSPORTATION.
UM, IT'S, IT'S TRANSPORT, IT'S NEAR TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING.
UH, I, I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THERE AS WELL.
AND, UH, THE LOMA VISTA LOFT TOO.
UM, AND THAT'S NEAR, UM, ALMOST, UH, DOING SOME WORK WITH A NON-PROFIT, I BELIEVE.
UH, WELL, IT'S WORKING WITH, UM, WHO IS IT CHAIR? IT'S IT'S HOPE CENTER.
AND I KNOW THAT ONE WAS, UH, EXCITING FOR US.
'CAUSE THEY ARE, THEIR PARTNER IS THE SA HOPE CENTER AND WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE, UH, AND GENERATING THAT AREA.
THAT'S WHY I'M, I'M COMFORTABLE, UM, WITH, WITH THAT ONE AND I JUST LOST MY POWERPOINT.
UM, BUT TO THAT POINT, NOW THEY'RE COMING HERE FOR DOLLARS AS WELL, AND WE CAN'T FIND MORE THAN THREE UNITS OF 30%, OR, I MEAN, AND SO THAT'S WHAT I, I AM, I'M, IT'S CURIOUS AND I THINK, AND THIS, AND THIS IS PART OF THE GAP FUNDING, AND I KNOW THAT ONE OF THE, UM, QUESTIONS THAT MY COLLEAGUES HAD WHEN WE WERE HAVING IT IN GENERAL WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD A FOCUS AND AN EMPHASIS ON 30%.
NOW, UM, WHEN DOES THIS HAVE TO GO TO COUNCIL? WHAT IS YOUR TIMELINE ON THIS? I SAW THE FEBRUARY 18TH.
UM, SO THAT'S WHEN YOU WANT THIS TO GO TO COUNCIL, THAT THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE SCHEDULED FOR COUNCIL MM-HMM.
SO MY OTHER CONCERN IS IF WE GAP FINANCE OR FUND MORE 30% ON SOME OF THESE, UM, ON SOME OF THOSE 9%, I GUESS, OR, OR WOULD THAT THEN TAKE AWAY MONEY FROM, OR IT WOULD TAKE AWAY AWARD FROM THE OTHER PROJECTS, CORRECT.
AND THEN MAKE IT AND MAKE US HAVE LESS UNITS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
SO, UH, THAT'S MY CON THAT'S A CONCERN
[00:50:01]
AS WELL, BECAUSE I SEE THAT WE HAVE IT SCATTERED.WE HAVE SOME IN FIVE AND A ONE IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE MAP.
AND THEN YES, WE NEED TO HAVE HOME OWNERSHIP, UM, IN, IN OUR COMMUNITIES AS WELL.
AND I, I'M GLAD AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THOSE.
UM, I'M CONCERNED THAT WHEN WE START PUTTING MORE MONEY INTO A 30%, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE AWAY WE MONEY FROM THESE OTHER PROJECTS TOO.
SO, UM, THOSE ARE JUST MUSINGS THAT I HAVE.
I DON'T HAVE A SOLUTION RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO CUT SOME OF THESE AWARDS FOR OTHER, UM, FOR OTHER PROJECTS HERE.
AND COUNCILMAN, THIS SPEAKS TO THE NEED FOR THE HOUSING BOND.
WE NEED MORE THAN $8 MILLION A YEAR IN GAP FUNDING TO SUPPORT
YEAH, I TOLD ABSOLUTELY IT DOES.
UM, SO THAT'S MY, THOSE ARE MY OVERALL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS RIGHT NOW, AND THANK YOU.
UM, SORRY, I JUST, I THINK I JUST HAD TO VERBALIZE THAT OUT LOUD AS I WAS, I WAS SHARING THIS, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
CHAIR, DO YOU NEED A MOTION FOR THIS? UM, OR WE DO, WE DO NEED A MOTION.
I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS TO FULL COUNCIL CONSIDERATION, UM, TAKING IN ALL OF THE COMMENTS MADE HERE AT THIS COUNCIL COMMITTEE.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND MADAM CHAIR? I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN COURAGE HAD ANOTHER QUESTION.
UM, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF WE NEED TO SECOND BEFORE WE GO INTO THAT, UM, IF, IF WE COULD GET A SECOND.
NO, DO WE NOT HAVE A SECOND? BECAUSE I'LL SECOND IF WE NEED TO.
UM, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, ANDREW SULLIVAN, UM, AND, UH, COUNCILMAN, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, DID YOU WANNA ASK ANY QUESTIONS OR YOU JUST MAKING THE SECOND I DID HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION OR, OR TWO, UH, ON ALL OF THESE.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR ON ALL OF THESE PROJECTS, UH, ARE, ARE THEY, BECAUSE THEY'RE ASKING FOR FOUR OR 9% NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE ANY MARKET RATE, THEY ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE MARKET RATE, UM, THAT WOULDN'T GET THE SUPPORT.
THE C D B G AND HOME PROGRAM IS ONLY, UH, FOR FAMILIES THAT ARE BELOW 80% A M I, ALL OF THESE ARE SERVING FAMILIES THAT ARE BELOW 80% A M I.
SO THEY HAVE JUST NOT, UM, ADDED ANY MARKET, BUT THEY COULD DO MARKET RATE UNITS, THOSE UNITS WOULD JUST NOT GET HOME OR CT BT SUPPORT OR SUBSIDY.
WELL, YOU KNOW, JUST AN EXAMPLE THAT ONE UNIT AT, UH, AT LOMA LOMA VISTA LOFTS, THAT'S C D B G MONEY.
AND I'M JUST WONDERING, COULD THEY, YEAH, I, I DON'T MIND THERE BEING A BIT OF A MIX.
SO IF THEY HAD 10% AT A MARKET RATE, COULDN'T THEY OFFER A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF, OF 30% TO OFFSET THAT? IN OTHER WORDS, CAN'T WE DO SOME HORSE TRADING ON SOME OF THESE TO WHERE SURE, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF MARKET, MAYBE NO MORE THAN 10%, BUT THEN THAT MAY ALLOW US TO HAVE 5%, 30%, WHICH MEANS IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE AFFORDABLE FROM SOME OTHER PEOPLE.
SO I'M JUST WONDERING ABOUT THAT KIND OF ARRANGEMENT BEING MADE.
NOW, IF IT'S HOME MONEY, YOU CAN'T HAVE ANY MARKET, IS THAT RIGHT? BUT IF IT'S C B D G, YOU CAN, WELL, WITH BOTH YOU, YOU CAN HAVE SOME MARKET JUST THOSE UNITS WOULD NOT BE RECEIVING THE SUBSIDY AT ALL.
UM, WELL, RIGHT, BUT IF IT'S A MARKET, THEY DON'T NEED THE SUBSIDY AND, AND IF THEY'RE MAKING MORE ON A MARKET RATE, THEN MAYBE THEY COULD HAVE SOME 30% OR MAYBE EVEN SOME FIFTIES.
BUT COUNCILMAN YOU MORE AFFORDABILITY, YOU KNOW, COUNCILMAN? YES, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
AND SO GREAT EXAMPLE OF THAT IS A MUSEUM REACH LOFTS, WHERE THEY DO HAVE A FEW UNITS THAT ARE MARKET RATE, UM, THAT AREA WOULD SUPPORT MARKET RATE.
SOME OF THESE PROJECTS, THEY MAY NOT BE INCLUDING MARKET RATE BECAUSE THE AREA MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT MARKET RATE.
BUT GIVEN THAT, BUT GIVEN YOUR COMMENT AND GIVEN COUNCILMAN TNOS COMMENT, WE WILL GO BACK TO EACH OF THEM AND ASK 'EM THAT QUESTION.
UM, AND WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING ON FEBRUARY 18TH.
UM, SO THANK YOU, UH, VERY MUCH FOR THE DISCUSSION.
UM, WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE.
[00:55:01]
UH, SAY AYE.MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS
[4. 21-1608 Consideration of a recommendation to reprogram $3,401,669 in HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funding to affordable housing development activities and $1,144,002 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding to eligible activities. [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; Verónica R. Soto, Director, Neighborhood and Housing Services]]
ITEM NUMBER FOUR.UM, ITEM NUMBER FOUR, CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO REPROGRAM 3.4 MILLION IN HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FUNDING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AND 1.1 IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS.
SO, UH, THIS IS AGAIN, UH, BETO.
UM, SO THIS IS A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO OUR FISCAL YEAR 2021 ACTION PLAN AND BUDGET.
AND UM, WHAT THIS WILL ALLOW US TO DO IS TO FULLY FUND THOSE EIGHT PROJECTS, UM, IN YOUR PREVIOUS ITEM.
WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT HOW REPROGRAMMING FUNDING WORKS.
UM, SO FROM TIME TO TIME AS WE COMPLETE PROJECTS FUNDED WITH HOMEWORK C B D G, THERE COULD BE SOME PROGRAM SAVINGS.
SOMETIMES WE CANCEL PROJECTS FOR VARIOUS REASONS.
AND SO THAT FUNDING FOR THE COUNCIL PROJECT CAN BE UTILIZED FOR SOMETHING ELSE.
AND THEN FROM TIME TO TIME, WE ALSO RECEIVE WHAT IS CALLED PROGRAM INCOME.
SOMEONE PAYS OFF A LOAN THAT THEY MAY HAVE FOR A DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO THAT'S ADDITIONAL INCOME THAT IS RECEIVED THAT COULD BE USED FOR ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES.
IN ORDER TO UTILIZE THE SAVINGS FROM THOSE PROJECTS OR TO UTILIZE THE PROGRAM INCOME, WE HAVE TO AMEND OUR ANNUAL ACTION PLAN THROUGH AN AMENDMENT PROCESS.
AND SO WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DO IS SUCH AN AMENDMENT.
SO THE NEXT SLIDE HAS THE REQUESTED ACTION.
WE'RE ASKING FOR APPROVAL OF A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT.
UH, IT WOULD BE OUR THIRD AMENDMENT THIS YEAR TO BE ACTION PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED, UM, THIS YEAR.
AND THIS WOULD BE TO ADD $3.4 MILLION IN HOME FUNDING FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES TO FUND THOSE EIGHT PROJECTS IN YOUR PREVIOUS, UH, AGENDA ITEM.
AND ALSO TO PROGRAM $1.1 MILLION IN C D B G TO A COMBINATION OF ELIGIBLE PUBLIC WORKS AND PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES.
IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE WILL SEE, UM, HOW MUCH IS AVAILABLE IN EACH PROGRAM.
AGAIN, THIS IS HOME, UH, 3.4 AND C D B G 1.1.
AND IT CAME FROM PROJECT SAVINGS AS WELL AS PROGRAM INCOME.
AND THE SAVINGS ARE FROM ACTIVITIES THAT ARE COMPLETED OR CANCELED.
AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE HAS THE FUNDING RECOMMENDATION.
I'VE ALREADY MENTIONED THAT THE HOME FUNDING, ALL OF IT WILL BE UTILIZED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FOR THOSE EIGHT ACTIVITIES YOU JUST SAW.
AND FOR THE C D B G FUNDING, WHICH IS JUST OVER A MILLION DOLLARS, WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS THAT WE GO BACK AND FUND THE
AND THIS SITE IS BEING REMEDIATED AND PART OF IT WILL BE UTILIZED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS WELL.
UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN FULLY FUNDED BEFORE, BUT LAST FISCAL YEAR WE WENT BACK AND REDIRECTED SOME MONEY TO OUR EMERGENCY HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM BECAUSE WE KNEW URA WAS GONNA TAKE SOME TIME AND THAT INVOICING WAS GONNA, INVOICING WAS GONNA TAKE A WHILE.
UM, WE KNEW THE IMMEDIATE USE OF FUNDS WAS NOT REQUIRED FOR THAT PROJECT AND THAT WE COULD COME BACK AND MAKE IT WHOLE LATER IN THE YEAR BECAUSE THE NEED FOR EMERGENCY HOUSING ASSISTANCE IN THAT PROGRAM WAS SO INTENSE.
THE SAME THING HAPPENED WITH OUR PARKS AND REC SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAM.
UH, FIRST WE WERE CONCERNED LAST FISCAL YEAR ABOUT BEING ABLE TO HAVE THAT PROGRAM GIVEN THE COVID RESTRICTIONS, SOCIAL DISTANCING, ET CETERA.
SO WE TOOK THAT MONEY FROM LAST YEAR'S BUDGET AND AGAIN, THAT WAS REDIRECTED TO THE EMERGENCY HOUSING AND ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
AND THEN THIS YEAR WE WERE NOT SURE IF THAT SUMMER PROGRAM PROGRAM WAS GONNA BE ABLE TO BE RUN AGAIN BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC IMPACT.
SO WE DIDN'T FUND IT, BUT WE HAD THE, UH, AGREEMENT THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT FUNDING IT IF WE KNEW IT WAS GONNA RUN AND WE HAD ADDITIONAL OR ENOUGH FUNDING FUNDING.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING THE SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAM, UM, TO BE FUNDED AT 208,000 JUST OVER THAT.
ADDITIONALLY, WE KNOW WE HAD TO TAKE MONEY AWAY FROM THE MINOR REPAIR PROGRAM LAST FISCAL YEAR, SO WE WANNA ADD A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN C D B D.
WE HAVE UNDERWAY THE
WE NEED TO, UH, ADD IT TO THIS YEAR'S ANNUAL ACTION PLAN BECAUSE THE WORK IS ONGOING AND WE HAD AGREED TO FUND THAT LAST YEAR WITH C D B G FUNDING.
SO WE NEED TO PROGRAM THAT IN THIS FISCAL YEAR.
WE ALSO HAD TO POSTPONE OUR FIVE YEAR, UH, UPDATE
[01:00:01]
TO THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN.UM, AGAIN, THE PANDEMIC FORCED US TO, UM, STRETCH THAT, UH, ALLOWED BY HU BECAUSE WE WERE ABOUT TO BEGIN THE PUBLIC OUTREACH, UM, PORTION OF THAT WORK IN MARCH WHEN WE COULDN'T HAVE THE TRADITIONAL PUBLIC OUTREACH WE WERE USED TO LAST YEAR.
UM, WE STILL HAVE THAT CONTRACT.
WE STILL HAVE A REQUIREMENT TO UPDATE OUR FIVE YEAR PLAN.
AND SO WE WANNA PROGRAM THAT THIS FISCAL YEAR SO THAT WE CAN FINISH THAT WORK NOW THAT WE KNOW HOW TO DO PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IN A VIRTUAL WAY.
AND THEN THERE ARE TWO PROJECTS IN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO THAT ARE STREET RELATED.
AND THIS IS SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING TO FULLY, UH, ENSURE THAT THESE PROJECTS GET COMPLETED.
JAMES STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND THE OTHERS, UH, IS CANADIAN STREET RECLAMATION.
SO ONE IS JUST OVER 12,001 IS JUST OVER 18,000.
SO IN TOTAL WE HAVE 1.1 MILLION, UH, IN C B B G FOR THESE ELIGIBLE PUBLIC WORKS AND PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES.
THE PARKS AND REC, UM, IS A PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITY.
THE OTHER ONES ARE ELIGIBLE, UM, PUBLIC WORKS OR OTHER AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES.
THEN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE TO TALK ABOUT THE TIMELINE.
UM, BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC, WE HAVE A SHORTENED PUBLIC HEARING, PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
AND SO AFTER THIS COMMITTEE MEETING, WE ARE GONNA INITIATE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ON THE 12TH.
WE WILL HAVE A VIRTUAL PUBLIC HEARING SINCE THOSE ARE STILL REQUIRED BY HUD ON THE 17TH.
AND THEN THE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT ITSELF IS ALSO GOING TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE 18TH.
AND AGAIN, THE LAST SLIDE HAS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO ADD THE 3.4, UM, JUST OVER 3.4 MILLION IN HOME FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND OVER 1.1 MILLION TO THOSE ACTIVITIES ENUMERATED FOR THE C D B G FUNDING AS WELL.
AND THAT IS THE END OF THE PRESENTATION.
UM, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, THANK YOU BELL FOR THE PRESENTATION.
AND I JUST, YOU KNOW, FOR THE SAKE OF SOME OF MY NEWER COLLEAGUES, UM, WHEN YOU SEE THIS ARE SOMEWHAT A SERVICE CENTER, ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION, UM, ONLY MAYBE VIA GRAND CAN REMEMBER.
UM, WHEN I VERY FIRST RAN FOR COUNCIL, NOW EIGHT YEARS AGO, UM, THERE WAS POTENTIAL FOR A WALMART, UM, AT IT'S AROUND THE 6,500 BLOCK OF SARS SAMURA.
UM, AND IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE A FAMILY WALMART.
AND SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE COUNCIL, WE'VE SEEN AT LEAST THREE DIFFERENT POTENTIAL PROGRAMS FOR THAT SOMEWHAT OF SERVICE TREAT CENTER.
UM, IT USED TO BE, UH, THE CITY, THE CITY, UH, FIREFIGHTER SITE, AND THERE WAS HEAVY CONTAMINATION ON THAT SITE.
UH, AND SO, UM, WE FINALLY, UM, WITH, UM, LORI AND, AND SOME OF THE TEAM, UM, AGREED TO PUT FUNDING TOGETHER TO REMEDIATE THAT SITE BECAUSE OF THE HEAVY CONTAMINATION, SO WE CAN ACTUALLY USE IT FOR SOMETHING.
UH, SO WE'RE FINALLY SEEING IT HERE, UM, MANY, MANY YEARS IN THE MAKING.
UH, ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES AT, AT SOME POINT IN REFERENCE TO THE ECHO EAST PROJECT SAID, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE SEEN THIS PROJECT COME FORWARD? I THOUGHT, WELL, NOT AS MANY TIMES AS, AS WE'VE SEEN THE
UH, SO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL, UM, CLEAR THE REMEDIATION ON THAT SITE.
UM, IT IS HEAVILY CONTAMINATED AND, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THERE, UM, AND PUT IT OUT TO AN R F P AND REALLY HAVE SOME ACTIVITY ON THAT SOUTHERN SECTOR.
UM, UH, THEN LEADS INTO DISTRICT FOUR, UH, IF I'M, IF I'M RIGHT ABOUT THE, THE BOUNDARIES.
SO I WOULD JUST ASK FOR YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE REMEDIATION OF THAT SITE.
SO HOPEFULLY, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE NOT IN MY TIME, BUT IN, YOU KNOW, WITHIN SOME AMOUNT OF TIME WE'LL HAVE A PROJECT ON THAT SITE.
UM, AND SO, UH, UM, I THINK, UH, AN IMPORTANT USE OF THE REDIRECTION OF THOSE FUNDS.
WE'VE TRIED THIS BEFORE, SO HOPEFULLY IT'LL WORK THIS TIME.
SO, UM, THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH, UH, MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MY COLLEAGUES.
I DON'T SEE A HAND, SO, UM, I'M JUST GONNA TURN IT OVER TO COUNCIL MEMBER.
UH,
UM, YES, THANK YOU FOR WORKING ON ALL OF THESE.
COUNCILWOMAN, UH, CHAIR GONZALEZ.
UH, YAME, RIGHT? SO, UM, WE HAVE, THANK YOU FOR GOING THROUGH THIS.
SO THE PARKS AND REC SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAM, UM, WHAT WILL IT, WHAT WILL IT BE FUNDING? IS IT FUNDING LIKE
[01:05:01]
THE, THE FOOD? NO, IT'S THE ADDITIONAL STAFFING THAT THEY NEED FOR THE SUMMER PROGRAM.SO IT ACTUALLY GOES TO THE TEMP EMPLOYEES THAT, UM, SERVE THAT PROGRAM SO THEY CAN HAVE, UH, A WIDER REACH.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS WITH THE PANDEMIC, UM, OBVIOUSLY IN THE SUMMER THAT WE'LL STILL BE HERE, SO IN TALKING TO HOMEWORK, UM, THEY NEED A HIGHER NUMBER OF STAFF BECAUSE OF THE SOCIAL DISTANCING.
AND SO THAT IS PART OF THE REASON THAT THEY, THEY WANNA DO THE SUMMER PROGRAM, BUT THEY NEED MORE STAFF BECAUSE THEY CAN HAVE LESS KIDS AT THE FACILITIES AT ANY ONE TIME.
UM, SO THE RATIO IS, IS, UM, DIFFERENT FROM PREVIOUS YEARS.
AND FOR THE MINOR REPAIR PROGRAM, SO TELL ME, HOW MANY DO YOU, DO WE ANTICIPATE TO REACH WITH THIS A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS? OR I SHOULD SAY, WHAT DOES IT ADD? WHAT DO WE ADD? WHAT ARE WE ADDING ON TO THE, THE AMOUNT IT ADDS AT LEAST FOUR MORE UNITS TO THE PROGRAM.
UH, THE CAP FOR MINOR REPAIR IS NO MORE THAN $25,000 IN REPAIR.
UM, SO DEPENDING ON WHAT THE SCOPE OF WORK COME IN, UH, BUT MINIMUM FOUR UNITS, IT COULD BE FIVE IF, IF SOME OF THE WORK IS, YOU KNOW, 10,000, 12,000, BUT AT LEAST FOR ADDITIONAL HOMES.
AND THIS IS HOMEOWNER, HOME OWNERSHIP, UM, REHAB THAT GETS DONE.
WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR WORK.
UM, I'M, UH, YOU NEED A MOTION FOR, UH, TO, UH, MOVE THIS FORWARD? SO CHAIR, I MOVE TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON SUBSTANTIAL THE NUMBER THREE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT.
CAN WE GET A SECOND, UM, COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE? IS THAT A SECOND? OR YOU WANNA SAY? YEAH, THAT'S A SECOND.
UH, WELL, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
UM, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE IS, UM, WE HAVE A, A PERIOD OF TIME WE'RE SAYING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT TO BE INITIATED.
WHAT IS THAT PROCESS GONNA LOOK LIKE? THANK YOU, UH, FOR THAT QUESTION, COUNCILMAN.
SO NORMALLY WE WOULD HAVE A 30 DAY PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, AND THAT MEANS WE ADVERTISE IN THE NEWSPAPER, UM, PEOPLE SUBMIT COMMENTS TO THE CITY, AND WE HAVE TO RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS.
AND THEN WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC, WE ONLY HAVE FIVE DAYS, UM, AS A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.
AND SO IT MEANS WE PUT THE INFORMATION ON OUR WEBPAGE, WE ADVERTISE IT IN THE NEWSPAPER, SO THE ADVERTISEMENT WOULD RUN THOSE FIVE DAYS.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE, THE VIRTUAL PUBLIC HEARING AND THE VIRTUAL PUBLIC HEARING OF COURSES, UH, IN FRESNO CITY COUNCIL.
AND WE GET FEEDBACK AT THAT TIME.
AND SO THAT'S THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
UM, ALL OF THE COMMENTS ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, AND IT'S SOMETHING WE SUBMIT TO THAT AS WELL AS SAYING, HERE'S THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED, HERE'S THE, THE RESPONSES AS WELL.
UM, YOU KNOW, I HEAR THAT, BUT I KNOW RIGHT NOW WE'VE GOT, UM, ABOUT NINE DAYS BEFORE THAT CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND EIGHT DAYS BEFORE THAT VIRTUAL PUBLIC HEARING.
AND I'M SORRY, BUT MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN, AND HARDLY ANYBODY SHOWS UP FOR THOSE VIRTUAL PUBLIC HEARINGS OR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS IN GENERAL, OR ONE OR TWO PEOPLE AND PUTTING A NOTICE IN THE PAPER AND ET CETERA.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S ADEQUATE.
I I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH FREE PRESENTATION REACH OUT YOU DID TO THE COMMUNITY TO TALK, TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU WERE PLANNING ON PRESENTING TO US.
BUT I, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE BETTER OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
AND I, I JUST SPOKE ABOUT THIS A WHILE AGO IN ANOTHER MEETING I HAD, UH, WHY DON'T WE HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING AND, YOU KNOW, HAVE ONE IN THE MORNING OR ONE IN THE AFTERNOON, ONE IN THE EVENING, HAVE ONE IN SPANISH, ONE IN ENGLISH.
AND, UH, YEAH, YOU'VE GOTTA ADVERTISE IT AND YOU'VE GOTTA INVITE PEOPLE.
BUT I THINK IN NINE DAYS, WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT SO THAT PEOPLE CAN TRULY HAVE SOME INPUT INTO THESE THINGS.
UH, AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY LACKING.
AND I RECOGNIZE WE HAVE SOME HANDICAP BECAUSE OF THE, THE VIRUS AND, AND HOW IT IS INTERFERING WITH MAYBE THE NORMAL ORDER OF THINGS.
BUT I STILL THINK THAT WE OUGHT TO BE GIVING THE PUBLIC, UH, A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY OF PROVIDING INPUT INTO THESE DECISIONS WE'RE MAKING NOW.
[01:10:01]
I JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS THAT CONCERN.UM, AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, OUR DEPARTMENT THIS WEEK IS HOLDING THREE COMMUNITY INPUT SESSIONS, UM, TWO RE REGARDING NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT AND ONE REGARDING THE EMERGENCY HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
ALL OF THEM, UH, STARTING AT 6:00 PM TODAY, TOMORROW, AND WEDNESDAY.
UH, AND ALTHOUGH I SUPPORT THE INDIVIDUAL INITIATIVES, UH, STAFF LISTED, I, I DID NOT SUPPORT PULLING THIS MONEY OUT OF EAP, SO I FEEL I MUST ABSTAIN.
UH, BUT I KNOW THESE PROJECTS AND INITIATIVES HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE SUCCESSFUL.
UH, IT'S, IT'S JUST ONES LIKE YOUTH PROGRAMS, UH, THAT ARE PREDICTED ON PEOPLE HAVING STABLE HOUSING.
SO, UH, AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN THAT I WILL BE ABSTAINING FROM THIS ITEM.
COUNCIL MEMBER ANDREW SULLIVAN.
UM, UM, THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
AND THEN I KNOW YOU SAID THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES WILL BE HAVING THREE COMMUNITY INPUT SESSIONS.
NOT ON THIS ITEM, THEY'RE JUST, UH, ANOTHER ITEM.
UM, BUT THIS WEEK WE ARE HAVING TWO, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT ISSUES, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRY, AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SESSION ON SOMETHING, UM, ON THE EMERGENCY HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, UM, AFTER BRIEFING THE HOUSING COMMISSION ON THAT.
DID YOU HAVE ANY MARKETING MATERIALS THAT YOU CAN SEND TO THE COUNCIL OFFICES SO THAT WE CAN, UM, HELP YOU WITH THIS? UM, I, I'LL SET THAT UP TO, YOU SEEN IT, SO I APOLOGIZE IF, IF I OVERLOOKED IT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT SO WE CAN START HELPING PUSH THAT INFORMATION OUT TO THE COMMUNITY, UM, AS WELL.
AND MAYBE EVEN WORKING WITH OUR LOCAL, UM, AND OUR AREA, UH, MEDIA SOURCES, IF WE HAVE THOSE SMALLER, UH, COMMUNICATION AIRWAYS AND PUBLICATIONS THAT WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION OUT TO HELP YOU, UM, PUSH OUT THE PUBLIC INPUT SESSIONS, I THINK THAT'LL BE GREAT, BECAUSE A LOT OF OUR PEOPLE JUST DON'T HAVE THAT, THAT DIGITAL ACCESS.
AND SO, UM, WE HAVE TO USE THOSE, UH, FEET ON THE GROUND KIND OF CONCEPTS, AND SO WE WANNA HELP YOU GET THAT OUT.
UM, AND THEN, UM, ALONG WITH COUNCILMAN TREVINOS POINT, UM, WHAT'S GONNA BE MY NEXT QUESTION ON, UM, ARE THESE FUNDS THAT WE ARE NOW NEEDING TO VOTE ON, THIS ISN'T THE SAME AS THE AMENDMENT THAT WE VOTED ON PREVIOUSLY.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S NEW, CORRECT? IT'S NEW, YES, MA'AM.
UM, AND SO I, I DO HAVE, UH, KIND OF SOME CONCERNS THAT GO ALONG WITH MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE FULLY COVERED IN OUR REHAB TO ASSIST THOSE FAMILIES THAT ARE GONNA BE NEEDING THE, THE ASSISTANCE TO STAY WITHIN THEIR HOMES.
UM, AND SO IF WE CAN JUST GET AN UPDATE ON WHAT THE EAB PROGRAM LOOKS LIKE, WHERE WE'RE IN THE TIMELINE, AND HOW FAR WE CAN CONTINUE TO ASSIST FAMILIES AS WE'RE GOING FORWARD, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT MADAM CHAIR, UM, IF WE CAN GET THAT ON THE, THE AGENDA.
BUT THOSE ARE ALL THE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS I HAVE.
UM, SO WE DO HAVE A MOTION, UH, AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF, UH, THIS ITEM.
SO I THINK, I THINK THE REST OF US WERE IN SUPPORT, SO, OKAY.
[5. 21-1246 Briefing and possible action on the creation of a Source of Income Discrimination (SOID) ordinance. [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; Verónica R. Soto, FAICP, Director, Neighborhood and Housing Services]]
FIVE, UM, IT'S A BRIEFING AND, UH, POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE CREATION OF A SOURCE OF INCOME AND DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE.I'M NOT SURE WHO'S GONNA DO THAT, IF IT'S LORI OR BE, LEMME ACTUALLY INTRODUCE SARAH
SARAH, OUR, UM, INTERIM AFFORDABLE HEALTH AND ADMINISTRATOR.
UM, BEFORE WE BEGIN, I JUST WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I'M JOINED IN THIS PRESENTATION TODAY, UH, BY RICHARD MILK, THE DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PLANNING FOR SAHA AND BRANDI PEREZ OF SAHA, WHO, UH, WILL BE AVAILABLE, UH, IF YOU HAVE TO THE VOUCHER PROGRAM AFTER I AM FINISHED.
SO, WE KNOW THAT, UM, YOU ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION, BUT FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT BE LISTENING FOR THE FIRST TIME AND ARE NOT, UM, WE JUST WANNA REVIEW QUICKLY WHAT IT IS.
UH, AND THAT IS REFUSING TO RENT OR SELL A HOUSING UNIT TO AN APPLICANT, OR ENDING A TENDENCY BASED ON THE APPLICANT'S LAWFUL FORM OF INCOME, UM, IN THIS CASE, A VOUCHER.
WE WANNA EMPHASIZE THAT SOURCE OF INCOME, INCOME DISCRIMINATION IS NOT, UM, DISCRIM OR EXCUSE ME, DENYING AN APPLICATION BASED ON THE APPLICANT'S INABILITY TO PAY THE ADVERTISED RENT.
[01:15:01]
OTHER WORDS, IF A VOUCHER HOLDER APPROACHES A RENTAL UNIT, UM, BUT THE VALUE OF THEIR VOUCHER AND THEIR INCOME ARE NOT SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE RENT, IT IS NOT CONSIDERED DIS DISCRIMINATORY TO TURN THAT TENANT AWAY.SO YOU'RE HEARING ABOUT THIS, UM, ITEM TODAY, UH, EVEN THOUGH IT IS PART OF BOTH THE FOR EVERYONE HOME INITIATIVE AND OUR STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, UM, WE'VE HEARD OF IT IN BOTH OF THESE SPACES, UM, BUT WE TOOK THIS ITEM A LITTLE BIT AHEAD OF THOSE INITIATIVES.
UM, DUE IN LARGE PART TO A LOT OF COMMUNITY ADVOCACY, UH, BY MY CITY IS MY HOME RICH COSTA, WHO YOU HEARD SPEAKING IN PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, WE KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF, UH, COMMUNITY VOICE AROUND THIS ITEM.
UM, WE TOOK IT TO YOU A LITTLE BIT EARLIER.
SO, UH, SOURCE OF INCOME IN THE UNITED STATES, UH, SAN ANTONIO WOULD NOT BE THE FIRST CITY TO CONSIDER SOME KIND OF RESTRICTION.
UM, AND ACTUALLY THERE ARE FEDERAL PROGRAMS THAT ALREADY HAVE SOME RESTRICTIONS, INCLUDING LITECH HOME AND C D B G 17 STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HAVE A STATEWIDE STATUTE.
AND WE WILL NOTE THAT A NATIONAL STUDY CONDUCTED BY THE FOUR BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES, UM, CONCLUDED THAT, UH, VOUCHER ACCEPTANCE INCREASES IN AREAS WITH ORDINANCES.
AND THAT DID INCLUDE, UH, ONE OF OUR NEIGHBORS, THE DALLAS-FORT WORTH AREA.
SO HERE IN TEXAS, THERE ARE TWO CITIES WHO CURRENTLY HAVE SOY ORDINANCES.
THEY ADOPTED A CITYWIDE ORDINANCE IN 2014, UM, WHICH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY STRUCK DOWN BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE IN 2015.
AND NOW CITIES ARE PREEMPTED FROM ADOPTING A SIMILAR ORDINANCE.
HOWEVER, WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO, UH, WHAT DALLAS DID, WHICH WAS IN 2016, UM, APPLY TO CITY SUPPORTED PROPERTIES.
SO, HERE IN SAN ANTONIO, UH, THIS IS JUST SORT OF A, A PICTURE OF WHAT, UH, THE VOUCHER LANDSCAPE LOOKS LIKE.
THE PRIMARY HOLDER AND ADMINISTRATOR OF VOUCHERS IS THE SAN ANTONIO HOUSING AUTHORITY.
THEY'VE GOT, UH, JUST OVER 20,000 HOUSEHOLDS, INCLUDING 13, UM, WHO ACTIVELY HAVE VOUCHERS AND ANOTHER 7 7600 THAT ARE ON THE WAIT LIST.
BAR COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY HAS 1800 ACTIVE HOUSEHOLDS AND 7,000 ON THE WAIT LIST.
SO IN TOTAL, UM, 14,800 OF OUR NEIGHBORS USED VOUCHERS AND ANOTHER 14,600 ARE ON THE WAIT LIST FOR VOUCHERS.
UM, SAHA WAS ALSO ABLE TO SHARE WITH US THAT AT LEAST AS OF NOVEMBER, 2020, THERE WERE JUST SHY OF 2300 CONTRACTED OWNERS WHO WERE RENTING TO AT LEAST ONE VOUCHER HOLDER.
WE'LL NOTE THAT THIS ISN'T THE SAME AS THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
MANY OF THOSE CONTRACTED OWNERS HAD MORE THAN ONE UNIT, AND IN MANY CASES, UH, A FEW HUNDRED UNITS.
SO WHAT WE'RE BRINGING TO YOU TODAY IS A PROPOSED ORDINANCE, UH, A NEW ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION IN CITY SUPPORTED PROPERTIES.
UM, IT WOULD DIRECT DEPARTMENTS TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE IN THEIR AWARD CONTRACTS, UM, AND IT WOULD APPLY TO, UH, SEVERAL OF OUR FUNDING MECHANISMS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS, BOND FEE WAIVERS, LOANS, AND TAX ABATEMENTS THAT THE CENTER CITY, EXCUSE ME, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT OVERSEAS, AS WELL AS THE GRANT FUNDING THAT N H SS C AWARDS, WE WOULD NOTE THESE WOULD APPLY TO AWARDS ISSUED POST ORDINANCE.
I THINK IT WAS COUNCILMAN TRUO THAT ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT THAT EARLIER.
UM, SO IN OTHER WORDS, THIS IS NOT A, A RETROACTIVE ORDINANCE.
UH, CONSISTENCY WAS IMPORTANT TO US.
SO, UM, WE ARE APPLYING THIS ORDINANCE TO FUNDING OF ALL SIZES GOING FORWARD, HOWEVER, WE WOULD RIGHTSIZE COMPLIANCE.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, UM, AWARD PERIODS THAT HAVE, UM, SHORTER COMPLIANCE PERIODS LIKE FIVE YEARS, UM, WOULD ONLY BE SUBJECT TO THIS ORDINANCE FOR THAT SAME TIME AS OPPOSED TO A FLAT 15 YEAR PERIOD, FOR INSTANCE.
UM, AND LASTLY, UH, WE WANT NOTE THAT THIS IS, UH, IN ALIGNMENT WITH ACTIONS BEING TAKEN BY THE SAN ANTONIO HOUSING TRUST.
SO, A COUPLE OF POSSIBLE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS FOR US.
UM, YOU, SOME OF YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH THE CITY'S EXISTING NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE.
THIS WILL BE A SEPARATE ORDINANCE FROM THE N D O.
UM, WE HEARD LAST TIME WE SHARED WITH THE USE THIS ORDINANCE, UH, FROM COUNCILMAN TREVINO AND COUNCILMAN
UM, HOWEVER, WE ARE GOING TO USE SIMILAR MECHANISMS, UM, FOR ENFORCEMENT AS ARE USED BY THE N D O.
SO CURRENTLY, UH, RESIDENTS CAN FILE A COMPLAINT AT 3 3 1 1,
[01:20:01]
OR THROUGH THE OFFICE OF EQUITY, UM, WHO WILL TAKE THAT COMPLAINT AND WORK WITH C I O TO INVESTIGATE IT.UM, AND OFTENTIMES IF IT'S RELATED TO HOUSING THAT INVOLVES OUR OWN FAIR HOUSING TEAM HERE IN N H S B, WE PROPOSE AN ADDITIONAL NEW ELEMENT, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE PROACTIVE TESTING.
AND WHAT THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE IS WE WOULD CONTRACT WITH AN AGENCY, UM, WHO CAN CONDUCT TESTING OR BASICALLY, UM, HIRING FOLKS, DEPOSES TENANTS WITH VOUCHERS, UM, AND TRY TO APPLY IT PROPERTIES.
UH, WE PROPOSE NOT LESS THAN ANNUALLY, CONSEQUENCES WOULD BE PROGRESSIVE IN NATURE.
SO WE CAN START WITH WARNINGS, UM, AND ESCALATE UP TO RECOVERING THE AWARD, UM, AND DE BARRING THAT VENDOR FROM THE CITY IF THERE ARE VIOLATIONS TO BE FOUND.
SO, OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, UH, WE'VE BEEN ROAD SHOWING THIS PRESENTATION, UH, TO THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION AND THE BOARD OF REALTORS, THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF SAN ANTONIO, UM, AS WELL AS OUR HOUSING COMMISSION.
AND SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE'VE HEARD, UM, AS WELL AS THROUGH THE SHIP AND FOR EVERYONE HOME INITIATIVE IS WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN.
SO, UH, FOLKS REALLY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS WOULD, UH, INCREASE THE AVAILABILITY OF UNITS FOR THOSE WHO NEED THEM.
UH, THERE WAS A NOTE THAT BROADER VOUCHER ACCEPTANCE MEANS MORE EQUITABLE HOUSING OUTCOMES.
WHEN WE NOTE THAT VOUCHER HOLDERS TEND TO BE, UM, OLDER, THEY TEND TO HAVE LOWER INCOMES AND ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE HEADED BY A HOUSEHOLD HEAD OF COLOR OR SOMEONE WITH A DISABILITY.
OTHER CONCERNS WERE THAT, UH, PERHAPS THIS IS MAYBE MORE OF A PERCEIVED VERSUS AN ACTUAL PROBLEM IN COMMUNITY.
UM, AND THAT VOUCHER, THE PRO VOUCHER PROGRAM ITSELF MIGHT NEED SOME WORK OR IS BURDENSOME TO ACCEPT, UM, OR THAT DI DISCRIMINATION MIGHT NOT ACCURATELY BE THE WORD TO USE.
HOWEVER, UM, WE HEARD FROM OUR HOUSING COMMISSION WHO UNANIMOUSLY FORWARDED THIS ORDINANCE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, UM, THAT THE ORDINANCE SHOULD ALSO JUST BE A STARTING POINT.
UM, WE HAVE DEVELOPED OUR DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
UM, ASSUMING, UH, IF YOU, IF YOU DO PASS IT TODAY, IT WILL GO TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FULL CONSIDERATION IN EITHER FEBRUARY OR MARCH.
UM, AND AFTER THAT, UM, OUR TEAM WILL GET TO WORK ON A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT CAN, EXCUSE ME, CAMPAIGN, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT FOLKS WHO APPLY FOR OUR INCENTIVES AND AWARDS, UM, ARE AWARE OF THIS NEW REQUIREMENT AND THAT RESIDENTS KNOW, UH, HOW TO REPORT IT IF THEY, UH, ENCOUNTER A FUTURE VIOLATION.
AND THAT CONCLUDES THIS PRESENTATION.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THIS DURING THE HOUSING TRUST, SO I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, I DON'T SEE ANYBODY WITH A HAND RAISED, UH, COUNCILWOMAN
UM, THANK YOU, SARAH, FOR THE PRESENTATION AND FOR ALL YOUR WORK.
UH, WHAT ABOUT THE FEEDBACK? SO THE FEEDBACK THAT YOU GOT FROM THE COMMUNITY, UM, HOW DID YOU INCORPORATE IT? OR THAT WAS JUST FEEDBACK YOU, YOU RECEIVED? WE RECEIVED, UM, THE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK GENERALLY INCLUDED, YOU SHOULD DO THIS ORDINANCE OR YOU SHOULD NOT.
SO, UM, WE'VE BROUGHT TO YOU THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU'VE REQUESTED, UM, AND HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, AS WE, AS WE MOVE THROUGH IT, UH, WE GET YOU THE ORDINANCE YOU DESIRE.
UM, QUICKLY, SO THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT REAL VERSUS PERCEIVED, AND, AND I KNOW THAT THEY, THEY'RE REACHING OUT TO ME, THE CENTEN APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, TALKING ABOUT REAL AND PERCEIVED.
SO HOW DID YOU ALL GET, UM, THE DATA POINTS TO SAY THAT THIS IS NOT JUST A PERCEPTION IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING THROUGH? I THINK THERE'S TWO WAYS TO ADDRESS THAT COUNCILWOMAN.
UM, THE FIRST IS A POINT, AS SAHA HAS SHARED BEFORE, AND PERHAPS THEY HAVE INFORMATION THEY'D LIKE TO ADD ON THIS, THAT, UM, OVER HALF OF THEIR VOUCHER HOLDERS, OR EXCUSE ME, JUST UNDER HALF OF THEIR VOUCHER HOLDERS, ARE NOT ABLE TO FIND A PROPERTY, UM, WHO WILL ACCEPT THEM WITH THEIR VOUCHER AND SOMETIMES HAVE TO GIVE IT UP OR REQUEST AN EXTENSION.
UM, IT'S REALLY VALUABLE TIME, ESPECIALLY AFTER YOU'VE BEEN ON A WAIT LIST FOR MANY CASES, A NUMBER OF YEARS.
THE SECOND IS THAT, UM, THIS IS ALSO A VALUE STATEMENT, FIRST AND FOREMOST FOR THE CITY, UM, AND HOW WE SEEK TO USE OUR PUBLIC DOLLARS.
SO, UM, THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE DO HAVE DATA FROM SAHA TO SPEAK TO KIND OF THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM.
UM, IT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT, YOU
[01:25:01]
KNOW, MAYBE THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD DESIRE TO TAKE A POSITION ON.AND CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY REACHED, UM, THEY SHARED WITH ME WAS THE VOUCHER PROGRAM IS VOLUNTARY, AND IT IS NOT JUST AN ACCEPTANCE OF A RENT MONEY, IT IS AN ACCEPTANCE OF AN ENTIRE PROGRAM.
IS THAT, IS THAT TRUE? IS THAT THE CASE THAT IF WHEN WE'RE PUTTING THIS WITH OUR TOURS OR WITH ALL THE OTHER, UM, PROGRAMS THAT YOU CITED, THAT ALL OF THEM WILL HAVE TO JOIN THIS VOLUNTARY PROGRAM? SO IT IS TRUE THAT IF THEY HAD, UH, AN APPLICANT COME TO THEM WHO WAS OTHERWISE QUALIFIED, AND THEY USED A VOUCHER, UM, THAT THE BASIS FOR DENYING THAT TENANT COULD NOT BE ON THE VOUCHER.
SO IN THAT SENSE, UH, WE WOULD ASK, UH, OUR PROPERTIES THAT RECEIVE PUBLIC SUPPORT TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROGRAM.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD REALLY QUICKLY THOUGH, UM, IF THE RESIDENT DOESN'T QUALIFY FOR THE UNIT FOR VARIOUS REASONS, UM, THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE VOUCHER PROGRAM AND HOW IT'S RUN, THIS WOULDN'T REQUIRE THEM TO ACCEPT 'EM.
UM, SO IF THEY HAD, UH, SOME OTHER BARRIER, OR IF THE VOUCHER DIDN'T COVER THE RENT, IT'S NOT TELLING 'EM THAT THEY HAVE TO ACCEPT THE VOUCHER HOLDER.
IT'S SAYING IF THAT VOUCHER HOLDER OTHERWISE QUALIFIES, UM, YOU CANNOT, UM, TELL THEM THAT THEY CANNOT RENT THERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE, THEY'RE A VOUCHER HOLDER.
UM, SO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY FORCE THEM TO ACCEPT THEM, UM, UNLESS, UNLESS THEY QUALIFY UNDER, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE RULES OF THE, UH, THE VOUCHER PROGRAM ITSELF.
UM, THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE FOR NOW.
AND, UM, AND ALSO I'LL JUST CHIME IN HERE TOO, BECAUSE THAT'S ALSO WHAT I'VE HEARD, UM, FROM, UM, FROM SECTION EIGHT VOUCHER HOLDERS WAS THAT, THAT THE VOUCHER AMOUNT WAS TOO LOW.
AND SO I, I DON'T, I MEAN, THAT'S WHY I WORRY THAT WE'RE NOT REALLY ADDRESSING THE ISSUE HERE, BUT I MEAN, I, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE ORDINANCE, BUT DID YOU GET THAT FEEDBACK, UM, SARAH, THAT IT'S JUST THAT THE VOUCHER WAS NOT ENOUGH? WE HAVE FROM THAT, BOTH FROM VOUCHER HOLDERS AND FROM PROPERTY MANAGERS.
UM, HOWEVER, WE'VE KIND OF STEERED AWAY FROM FOCUSING ON THE INS AND OUTS OF THE VOUCHER PROGRAM ITSELF AND FOCUSING ON WHAT THE CITY CAN DO WITH ITS TOOLBOX.
SO I, I GUESS THAT'S WHY I'M WORRIED THAT WE'RE NOT REALLY ADDRESSING THE ISSUE.
SO, UM, RIGHT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT, AND I, I, I FELT LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCILMAN'S QUESTION AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SUBSEQUENT ANSWER WAS ALSO, UM, WHY I, I DON'T KNOW.
I MEAN, AND WE HAVE NO WAY TO INFLUENCE, UM, THE AMOUNT OF THAT VOUCHER BECAUSE WE DON'T PROVIDE SUBSIDIES FOR SECTION EIGHT VOUCHERS.
SORRY, COUNCILWOMAN, I, I THINK, UH, SAHA WOULD PROBABLY BE THE BEST TO CHIME IN ON, ON THE AMOUNTS, BUT I THINK THERE, THERE ARE TWO ISSUES.
I THINK IT IS THE VOUCHER PROGRAM, UH, MAYBE SOME, UM, REGULATORY ISSUES WITH HOW IT OPERATES AND THAT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, UH, AND THE LANDLORDS, HOW MUCH A VOUCHER IS WORTH.
UM, I THINK THAT THOSE ARE ALL VERY IMPORTANT CRITICAL QUESTIONS.
AND THEN THERE IS THE SEPARATE QUESTION, WHICH I THINK THE SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE SEEK TO ADDRESS, WHICH IS, IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY THAT OTHERWISE WOULD QUALIFY FOR A UNIT, YOU CANNOT USE THEIR VOUCHER AS A REASON NOT TO RENT TO THEM.
UH, AND SO I THINK YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
I THINK THERE IS A CRITICAL ISSUE, UM, AND I SEE BRANDY'S, BRANDY'S HERE TO MAYBE CHIME IN A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UM, BUT I DO THINK THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE, ALTHOUGH INTERRELATED ISSUES.
LET, LET ME TURN IT BACK OVER TO COUNCIL MEMBER.
UH, I'D LIKE TO TAKE UP IAN, IAN ON, ON WHAT HE JUST SUGGESTED THAT WE HEAR FROM BRANDY.
'CAUSE PART OF MY QUESTION WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE VOUCHER, SO IF SHE CAN ELABORATE TO HELP US UNDERSTAND, UH, THE LIMITATIONS OR THE SIZE OF THE VOUCHERS AND HOW THAT, THAT WORKS, BECAUSE I KNOW, YOU KNOW, YOU SHOULDN'T SPEND MORE THAN 30% OF YOUR INCOME ON, ON RENT.
AND SO IF SOMEBODY HAS A JOB AND THAT ONLY COVERS PART OF THE RENT, DOES THE VOUCHER COVER THE REST? AND IS THAT DEPENDENT ON THE SIZE OF THE RENT? SO BRANDI, CAN YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON THAT? SURE.
UM, JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT I HEARD.
SO, UM, COUNCILWOMAN GONZALEZ, I KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONVERSATIONS REGARDING THE VOUCHER SIZE.
AND SO IT REALLY HAS, UM, IMPACTED OVER THE YEARS, UH, WHERE A LOT OF OUR VOUCHER MEMBERS COULD LEASE UP IN, UH, COUPLE YEARS DUE BASE OUR VOUCHERS OFF OF ZIP CODES, AND WE HAVE TO UTILIZE
[01:30:01]
HUDS, UM, PUBLISHED SMALL AREA FMRS, UH, FOR THAT.AND SO NOW MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS WILL SEE IN CERTAIN AREAS OF TOWN, THOSE VOUCHER AMOUNTS ARE DIFFERENT THAN IN SAY, THE NORTH SIDE.
WE DO KNOW THAT OUR NORTH SIDE OF, OF SAN ANTONIO, THOSE VOUCHER AMOUNTS ARE GONNA BE A LOT LARGER AS OPPOSED TO SOMETHING ON THE, MAYBE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OR EAST SIDE OR WEST SIDE OF TOWN.
UM, THAT IS JUST SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO ADHERE BY BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS.
WE ALSO, AS A HOUSING AUTHORITY, ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN SAY, BEAR COUNTY.
AND YOU WILL SEE THAT THEY HAVE DIFFERENT, UM, VOUCHER AMOUNTS.
AND THAT'S JUST BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SET FUNDING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BECAUSE WE'RE MOVING TO WORK AGENCY.
AND UNLIKE OTHER HOUSING AUTHORITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, THEY, THEY RECEIVE AN INCREASE IN SUBSIDY FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IF THEY'RE HA IF THOSE HAVE PAYMENTS ARE.
UM, SO THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE DO AS A HOUSING AUTHORITY, HAVE WE HAVE TO BALANCE THOSE CHALLENGES.
UM, WHEN IT COMES TO THE VOUCHER AMOUNTS, WE DO LOOK AT, UM, ANY INCOME THAT THE FAMILY BRINGS INTO, UH, INTO THEIR PROGRAM.
WE ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT FAMILY SIZE, AND THEN WE HAVE TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S GONNA BE AN ALL BILLS PAID UNIT OR A, OR THE, UH, THE FAMILY'S RESPONSIBLE, UH, FOR THAT.
SO ALL OF OUR FAMILIES WILL HAVE DIFFERENT, UM, VOUCHER AMOUNTS BECAUSE THEY ALL BRING IN DIFFERENT INCOMES, OR THEY MAY HAVE DIFFERENT FAMILY SIZE.
SO YOU WILL, YOU WILL SEE THOSE DIFFERENCES ON THOSE VOUCHER AMOUNTS.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION? UM, BRANDY, YOU SAY DIFFERENT VOUCHER AMOUNTS RELATIVE TO THE COMMUNITY, THE PART OF THE COMMUNITY SOMEBODY IS GOING TO MOVE INTO.
SO IF SOMEBODY WAS LIVING ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND THEY HAD A, A MODEST VOUCHER AND THEY WANTED TO MOVE IN, HAD A PARTNER, WOULD THEY INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE VOUCHER? OR ARE YOU STUCK WITH THE SIZE THAT YOU HAD WHEN YOU LIVING IN A MORE MODEST PART OF THE CITY? SO THOSE VOUCHERS EVERY TIME, VOUCHERS, EVERY TIME A FAMILY IS EITHER PULLED FROM THE WAIT LIST OR ASK, UH, OR TELLS THE HOUSE AND AUTHORITY, IF THEY WANNA MOVE, WE RE UH, WE REDO THE VOUCHER AMOUNTS BASED OFF OF THEIR CURRENT SITUATION.
AND SO, UM, IF THEY DECIDE AT THAT TIME, UM, THEY WOULD LIKE TO MOVE, AND WHEN THEY COME INTO, WELL, NOT, NOT RIGHT NOW, BUT, UH, THEY, THEY HAVE THEIR VIRTUAL APPOINTMENT OR LOAN APPOINTMENT, THEY'RE GIVEN THAT.
AND SO THEY WILL SEE THAT AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
AND SO THEY WILL SEE THAT THE NORTH SIDE AT THIS, AT THIS TIME WILL HAVE A HIGHER VOUCHER AMOUNT THAN SAY, ON THE SOUTH OR EAST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO.
AND I, I PRESUME THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE, THE INCOME FOR THE, THE RESIDENT, AND YOU'RE SAYING IT SHOULDN'T EXCEED 30% OF YOUR HOUSING COSTS.
AND IF THEIR INCOME IS FAIRLY LOW, THEN THE VOUCHER IS SUPPOSED TO HELP BALANCE THEM TO GET TO THAT 30% FIGURE.
IS THAT RIGHT? THE, THE VOUCHER IS SUPPOSED TO HELP GET THEM INTO THOSE UNITS IN THE AREA OF THEIR CHOICE, DEPENDING ON WHERE, UH, THAT VOUCHER, THAT SHOPPING LIMIT IS.
SO THEY'RE STILL BASED OFF A 30% INCOME, WHETHER THEY'RE MAKING 20,000 OR WHETHER THEY'RE MAKING 9,000, THEY SHOULDN'T BE PAYING MORE THAN THAT 30%.
OFTENTIMES IT'S, UM, LESS THAN THE 30% ONCE WE GET WHAT THE RENT THAT THE LANDLORD IS REQUESTING AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR UTILITIES.
AND SO IF, IF SOMEBODY GOES TO A LAND, TO A PROPERTY OWNER AND THEY SAY, WE WANNA MOVE HERE, AND A PROPERTY OWNER SAYS, WELL, YOU, YOU EARN X AND YOUR VOUCHER IS ONLY FOR Y AND THAT DOESN'T HAVE EQUAL Z THE COST OF RENT, CAN THAT TENANT GO BACK TO YOU AND EXPLAIN THAT? AND YOU WORK WITH THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNER TO TRY AND COME TO A RESOLUTION? SO, UM, OFTENTIMES WE CAN, DEPENDING ON THE, UH, AMOUNT THAT THE LANDLORD IS REQUESTING, IF IT'S WELL ABOVE THEIR SHOPPING ALLOWANCE, WE CAN'T, UM, WE DO TRY TO SEE IF IT'S WITHIN A COUPLE OF DOLLARS.
WE ASK THEM TO MOVE DOWN, UH, YOU KNOW, GO DOWN.
WE ALSO ARE REQUIRED TO LOOK AT COMPARABLE RENTS FOR THE AREA.
SO IF, IF WE SAY THAT A LANDLORD IS SAYING THAT THEY WANT A THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR A UNIT, BUT IN THE AREA IN THE HOMES ARE ONLY GOING FOR 800 AND WE CANNOT PAY MORE THAN WHAT THOSE COUNTS ARE, SO THEN THAT'S ANOTHER WAY THAT, THAT'S ANOTHER TOOLBOX, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER TOOL IN OUR TOOLBOX THAT WE CAN USE.
AND THE LAST, UH, QUESTION I HAVE REGARDS, UH, HUD HOUSING REQUIREMENTS, OR IF THEY, IF THEY USE OTHER SOURCES OF INCOME FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THERE ARE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS THAT PROPERTY OWNERS ARE REQUIRED TO MEET IF THEY'RE GOING TO ACCEPT THOSE VOUCHERS, RIGHT? HOW, HOW RESTRICTIVE OR WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS, UH, THAT CREATE, UH, DOUBT IN THE MINDS OF SOME OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS? I'M SURE YOU'VE HEARD THESE BEFORE.
I THINK A LOT OF WHAT HAS CAUSED SOME, UM, SOME DOUBTS IS THE, YOU KNOW, WE ALL, WE ALL HAVE TO GO THROUGH INSPECTIONS.
[01:35:01]
THEIR CONCERNS ARE MAYBE THEIR UNITS DON'T PASS INSPECTION.THERE IS A, YOU KNOW, UM, UPFRONT THERE IS A LOT MORE PAPERWORK THAN THEY HAVE TO IF IT WAS A REGULAR, I GUESS, MARKET OR NON-SUBSIDIZED, UM, FAMILY MEMBER.
BUT ONCE THEY'RE ON THE PROGRAM AND THEY'VE GONE THROUGH THAT FIRST, UM, PROCESS OF LEARNING WHAT THE PAPERWORK IS, WE USUALLY KEEP A LANDLORD, UM, ON OUR PROGRAM FOR MANY YEARS.
UM, THERE HAS BEEN, UM, SOME CHANGES.
AND AGAIN, SOMETIMES WHEN THERE'S NEW MANAGEMENT, I DID HEAR EARLIER, SOMETIMES THEY ELECT NOT TO, AND THAT'S JUST BY CHOICE.
AND SOMETIMES IT'S SOMETHING IF WE, IF WE COULD TALK TO 'EM AND TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHY, WE COULD EXPLAIN WHERE WE, WHERE WE'VE IMPROVED OUR PROGRAMS OVER THE YEARS AND BECOME A LITTLE BIT MORE EFFICIENT, UM, UH, TO, YOU KNOW, TO KEEP LANDLORDS ON IT.
BUT A LOT, OFTENTIMES, SOMETIMES WE HEAR JUST, THEY DON'T WANNA DEAL WITH THE PAPERWORK.
RIGHT NOW, WE'VE HEARD THAT, UH, FROM ONE OF OUR OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT THIS IS A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM MOVING FORWARD IF THEY CHOOSE TO ACCEPT CITY FUNDING TO ASSIST IN A DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT OF THEIR APARTMENT PROJECT.
SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT GOING BACK TO ANYTHING THAT EXISTS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST MOVING FORWARD ON THIS.
PEOPLE DECIDE THEY WANT THE MONEY, THEY'VE GOTTA UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S GONNA BE ADDITIONAL PAPERWORK INVOLVED IN THAT.
SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK IT AFFECTS THE SOURCE OF INCOME AS MUCH AS IT DOES, UH, THE SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENT FROM CITY SERVICES TO SUPPORT THAT PROJECT.
SO ANYWAY, I, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU, BRANDY, FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
UH, THANK YOU BRANDY COUNCIL MEMBER VINNO.
UM, AND THANK YOU STAFF FOR, UH, THE PRESENTATION.
I ALSO WANT TO THANK HOUSING ADVOCATES LIKE, UH, LIKE, UH, RICH ACOSTA FOR WORKING TO BRING THIS POLICY TO FRUITION.
UH, I UNDERSTAND IT WAS PART OF THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND THE COMMUNITY HAS REALLY ACCELERATED THE PROCESS OVER THE LAST SIX MONTHS.
KUDOS TO STAFF, UH, AGAIN, ESPECIALLY, UH, EDWARD, AND I APPRECIATE YOU BEING ACCESSIBLE AND RESPONSIVE WHEN MY OFFICE OR THE COMMUNITY HAD QUESTIONS ON THIS.
BUT I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.
UH, DOES STAFF HAVE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE PREPARED? YES, WE DO HAVE DROP LIKE LANGUAGE AT THIS TIME.
IS THIS, IS THIS, UH, AN EXISTING LANG? ARE WE USING EXISTING ORDINANCES FROM OTHER TEXAS CITIES AS A FRAMEWORK? JAMINE, I THINK MAYBE YOU CAN CHIME IN ON THIS WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
UM, BUT YES, COUNCILMAN, WE DID, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION DIRECTLY, WE DID LOOK AT OTHER TEXAS CITIES, UH, AND WHAT THEIR, WHAT THEIR ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IS.
UM, SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THESE PROTECTIONS COULD ALSO BE ADDED TO EXISTING TO THE EXISTING N D O POLICY, BUT A SEPARATE POLICY WOULD NEED TO BE CREATED TO PROTECT VETERAN RENTERS, IS STAFF EXPLORING A STANDALONE SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION POLICY THAT'S ALL INCLUSIVE.
UM, JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND, COUNCILMAN, UH, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS GONNA BE SEPARATE THAN THE N D O, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, JERMAINE.
UH, SO THIS WILL BE ITS OWN SECTION.
UM, AND THEN YOU'RE ASKING IF WE'RE GONNA POSSIBLY DO ANOTHER OR, UM, ORDINANCE TO ADDRESS VETERANS.
SO, YEAH, SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE PAUSED
ARE WE GONNA, ARE WE GONNA DO, UH, WE EXPLORING THE POSSIBILITY OF DOING A POLICY TO CREATE, UH, PROTECTIONS FOR VETERAN RENTERS? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
UH, I THINK SARAH MENTIONED EARLIER, UH, THROUGH OUR FOR EVERYONE HOME AND STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, THOSE ARE BOTH, UM, DESIRES OF THE, THE COMMUNITY AND OUR STAKEHOLDERS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP MM-HMM.
UM, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, LINED UP FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION.
AND, AND THEN AGAIN, BACK TO EXPLORING, WE ARE EXPLORING A STANDALONE SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION POLICY THAT'S ALL INCLUSIVE.
UH, SO THE BACK OF LANGUAGE STATED VIOLATIONS COULD LEAD TO FINANCIAL PENALTIES.
HOW EXACTLY DOES THAT WORK? AND WHO WOULD ENFORCE? SO THE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM WOULD BE SIMILAR TO HOW THE CURRENT N D O IS ENFORCED.
UM, AND IT IS, AND I MEAN, AGAIN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, UM, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY C A O THAT ONCE WE'VE RECEIVED A COMPLAINT, UM, THAT THE OFFICE OF EQUITY GENERALLY ACCEPTS, UM, IT GOES TO C A O, UM, WHO WILL INVESTIGATE AND, UH, POTENTIALLY, UM, LEVERAGE, UM, J MEAN
YES, THAT'S, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S GENERALLY CORRECT.
UM, AS SARAH MENTIONED, THERE'S AN EXTENSIVE, UM, ENFORCEMENT, UH, PROCESS
[01:40:01]
THAT'S LAID OUT IN THE NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE.AND THE IDEA OF STAFF WAS TO MODEL THIS ENFORCEMENT OF THIS.
'CAUSE IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE, EVEN IF IT'S A STANDALONE.
AND SO THE IDEA IS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH HOW, UH, OTHER DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES ARE HANDLED UNDER THE N D O.
AND SO IT'S DRIVEN BY A COMPLAINT, BY AN EFFECTIVE, UH, AFFECTED TENANT.
THAT COMPLAINT IS THEN, UM, PROCESSED THROUGH EITHER 3 1 1 OR THE DEPARTMENT OF EQUITY LIKE SARAH SAID.
AND THEN FROM THERE, ONCE AN INVESTIGATION HAS TAKEN PLACE THROUGH THE FAIR HOUSING STAFF OR WHOEVER IT IS THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, UH, TO INVESTIGATE THOSE CLAIMS NOW, LIKE WE DO FOR RACIAL OR GENDER DISCRIMINATION PRACTICES, THEY WOULD CONDUCT THAT PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION.
AND IF A FINDING IS MADE FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT THAT WE HAVE A VIABLE CLAIM OR A VIABLE COMPLAINT, THEN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WILL GET INVOLVED TO ACTUALLY HANDLE EITHER THE PROSECUTION OF THE FINE OF A CASE IN MUNICIPAL COURT.
AND, UM, UM, AND THAT WOULD BE THE EXTENT OF CAO'S INVOLVEMENT BECAUSE THE OTHER REMEDY THAT IS PROPOSED UNDER THE, UNDER THE ORDINANCE THAT WE'RE GONNA BE PRESENTING TO YOU IS THAT EVERYTHING ELSE WILL BE HANDLED ON A CONTRACTUAL BASIS.
MEANING THAT IN ALL OF OUR CONTRACTS THAT WE DO NOW FOR DEVELOPMENT, WE INCLUDE LANGUAGE IN THERE GENERALLY THAT PROHIBITS THE DEVELOPERS FROM DISCRIMINATING AGAINST SECTION EIGHT HOUSING VOUCHER HOLDERS.
UM, AND SO WHEN THEY VIOLATE THAT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT, WE TERMINATE THE CONTRACT AND WE IMPOSE THE, THE, UH, REMEDIES THAT ARE UNDER THE CONTRACTS, SUCH AS REFUNDING OR, UM, YOU KNOW, RE REFUNDING OR PAYING BACK FUNDS ASSOCIATED WITH A WAIVER THAT THEY RECEIVED OR A LOAN OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
AND THEN POSSIBLE DEBARMENT OR, UM, INABILITY TO CONTRACT WITH THE CITY GOING FORWARD.
WE WOULD HAVE THE CRIMINAL VIOLATION, WHICH WOULD GO THROUGH THE REGULAR ENFORCEMENT PROCESS AND POTENTIAL PROSECUTION AND FINE THROUGH THE MUNICIPAL COURT.
AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE THE CONTRACTUAL VIOLATION, WHICH WOULD FOLLOW A REGULAR CONTRACT BREACH PROCESS.
WE, I'VE BEEN VERY SUPPORTIVE OF, OF THIS POLICY BECAUSE IT ENSURES HOUSING INCENTIVES HELP THE CITY ACHIEVE ITS AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS BY MAKING MORE RENTAL HOUSING ACCESSIBLE TO HOUSEHOLDS WITH EXTREME EXTREMELY LOW INCOMES.
SO I WAS GLAD TO HEAR THAT HOUSING COMMISSION PROVIDED THEIR SUPPORT FOR THESE PROTECTIONS AS WELL.
UH, IF STAFF IS ASKING FOR ACTION ON THIS ITEM, THEN I MOVE TO APPROVE THE PRO, THE PROPOSED, OR MAYBE SOMEBODY ALREADY MOTIONED, UH, PROPOSED SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE AND PLACE IT ON THE CITY COUNCIL'S AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION.
UM, OH, I, I DID, I I DID FOR, UH, FORGET ONE LAST, UM, BIT.
I DID WANNA MENTION THAT, UH, UH, MR. OSA FROM SAHA, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST WANT TO REACH OUT AND SAY IF YOU'D BE WILLING TO, TO HAVE A LARGER CONVERSATION ABOUT SAHA ADOPTING THE TENANT PROTECTION POLICY.
UM, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THEY MUST BE ABIDE BY FEDERAL GUIDELINES, BUT, BUT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE, UH, THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR TENANTS IN BOTH SAHA AND SAHA SAHA VOUCHER PROPERTIES.
SO I WOULD LOVE TO MEET WITH SAHA LEADERSHIP, UH, TO DISCUSS THIS POSSIBILITY.
I, I REALLY APPRECIATE SAS'S INVOLVEMENT IN THIS AND, AND, UH, THEIR SUPPORT FOR SOURCE SOURCE OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION PROTECTION POLICY.
SO I JUST, I, UM, I KNOW MOST OF US HAVE HEARD THIS BEFORE, BUT WE WERE ALL IN THE HOUSING TRUST, UM, AND, UM, I I JUST, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT WE DON'T HAVE A, A HARD TIMELINE SO THAT WE CAN PERHAPS TAKE THIS TO A B SESSION.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION, UH, PERHAPS BEFORE IT GOES TO AN A SESSION, IF WE COULD HAVE IT DISCUSSED AT A B SESSION, I THINK IT WOULD HELP SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES.
I KNOW I'VE HEARD THIS TWICE NOW, UM, BUT, UH, I, I, OTHERS HAVE, I DON'T THINK HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR IT UNLESS THEY'VE HEARD IT IN ANOTHER COMMITTEE AND PERHAPS I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT COULD YOU, UM, IS THERE A, IS THERE A HARD DEADLINE FOR THIS ITEM? THERE IS NOT A HARD DEADLINE OTHER THAN A, A SENSE OF URGENCY TO GET AN ORDINANCE ADOPTED.
AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S HOW STAFF WAS PROCEEDING.
BUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE THIS TO GO TO A B SESSION, UM, AND THE COMMITTEE DIRECTS US TO DO THAT, WE COULD LOOK AT A FUTURE DATE.
UM, SO COUNCIL MEMBER, YOU, YOU, I, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A MOTION BEFORE YOURS.
WOULD YOU BE AMENABLE TO TAKING THAT TO A B SESSION INSTEAD
[01:45:01]
OF AN A SESSION? YEAH, I THINK THAT'S GREAT.LET'S, LET'S, LET'S, UH, SO, UH, I, I AGREE TO THAT, UH, AMENDING MY MOTION TO, TO MOVE TO B SESSION.
COUNCIL MEMBER VRAN, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? NO, THANK YOU.
SO, UH, JADA, OH, UM, COUNCIL MEMBER ANDREW SULLIVAN, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? UM, THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION ALONG THE LINES OF COUNCILWOMAN
AND SO ONCE AGAIN, UM, WE HAVE, UM, SOME PROPERTIES THAT HAVE DISCONTINUED RECEIVING, UM, ARE ACCEPTING THE VOUCHERS.
AND AS WE'RE GOING FORWARD, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE DO NOT SEE HAPPEN THAT ONCE, UH, UH, MANAGEMENT COMPANY OR UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT IS UP THAT IN THE MIDDLE OF US TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THEY DON'T SELL OFF AND THEN THEY STOP RECEIVING, UH, OR STOP ACCEPTING THE VOUCHERS.
AND SO, UM, SARAH OR IAN OR SOMEONE, IF YOU CAN SPEAK TO HOW WE'LL BE PUTTING THIS OFF INTO, UM, MAYBE THE CONTRACTUAL, UM, IDENTITY OF NEW DEVELOPMENT, AND SO IF THEY DECIDE TO SELL IN THE LONG RUN THAT THEY WON'T DISPLACE THESE PARTICULAR VOUCHER RECIPIENTS.
YEAH, I CAN SPEAK TO THAT COUNCILWOMAN.
UM, IN A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION, IF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT RECEIVED SOME KIND OF GAP FUNDING THAT WASN'T ALREADY COVERED OR ALREADY PROVIDING THESE PROTECTIONS, UM, THEY WOULD LIKELY HAVE A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, LET'S SAY JUST ON AVERAGE 30 YEARS.
UH, DURING THAT 30 YEAR PERIOD, IF THAT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT IS STILL IN PLACE AND THEY'VE ACCEPTED THOSE FUNDS, UH, THEN THEY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THIS ORDINANCE.
UM, SO THEY WOULD NEED TO ACCEPT ANY QUALIFIED VOUCHER HOLDER, UM, THAT OTHERWISE WOULD BE ABLE TO, UH, TO RENT THEIR UNIT.
UM, SO YOU WOULDN'T SEE, UH, THIS PARTICULAR SCENARIO THAT'S PLAYING OUT IN YOUR COUNCIL DISTRICT HAPPEN, UM, AFTER THIS ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED.
UM, IF THEY WERE TO DO SOME KIND OF REHAB, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH RELOCATION ORDINANCES OR RELOCATION POLICIES.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS DO ROLLING REHABS WHERE THEY, YOU KNOW, MOVE, UH, RESIDENTS TO VACANT UNITS WHILE THEY REHAB SOME.
SO WE HAVE A LOT MORE LEEWAY, UH, IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION IN YOUR DISTRICT.
UM, AND BECAUSE THE VOUCHER PROGRAM IS VOLUNTARY, UH, THEY CAN CHOOSE NOT TO, UH, RENEW THOSE LEASES.
AND THEN IAN, CAN YOU, CAN YOU TELL ME HOW DOES THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE RELATE TO THE, UM, UNIFORM, UH, RELOCATION ACT? UM, FOR THOSE WHO ARE UNDER HUD PROPERTIES AND UNDER VOUCHER PROGRAMS AND UNDER FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS PROGRAM, UM, THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO EACH OTHER.
UM, ONE IS SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT, UM, SOURCE OF INCOME, SO THE, SO THE SOURCE OF INCOME THAT YOU USE TO RENT A UNIT.
UH, AND THE OTHER ONE APPLIES TO, AGAIN, DEVELOPMENTS WHO HAVE RECEIVED SOME KIND OF FEDERAL SUBSIDY, UH, USUALLY FROM HUD, SO C D B G, UH, HOME OR EVEN LITECH, THAT THEY MUST COMPLY WITH THAT RELOCATION ACT, UH, WHEN THEY ARE DOING RENOVATIONS.
SO, UM, SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, UH, APPLICABILITY.
SO, UM, I'M JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PUTTING IN THE PROPER ORDINANCES TO KEEP FAMILIES FROM HAVING TO, TO GO THROUGH WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW, ESPECIALLY NOW THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY SPEAKING ABOUT VOUCHERS AND WE KNOW MANY OF THOSE RESIDENTS WERE DISPLACED, WERE VOUCHER, UH, RESIDENTS.
AND SO, UM, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT, NOT, UM, CAUSING ANY ADDITIONAL HEADACHES, UM, FOR OUR CITY AND, AND OUR RESIDENTS.
UM, THE NEXT QUESTION I HAVE, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE WHO ARE VOUCHER RECIPIENTS AND DURING COVID, DO WE KNOW HOW MANY OF OUR VOUCHER RECIPIENTS HAVE BEEN, UM, DISPLACED DUE TO, UM, MAYBE A, A COMPLEX A MANAGEMENT COMPANY NOW SAYING THEY'RE NO LONGER GONNA BE RECEIVING OR ACCEPTING VOUCHERS? I WOULD DEFER TO SAHA ON THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF BRANDY IS STILL HERE.
UM, I, WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY NUMBERS ON THAT.
UM, I'LL TAKE THAT QUESTION AS OF RIGHT NOW.
UM, COUNCILWOMAN, WE REALLY HAVE NOT SEEN, UM, MANY LANDLORDS OPTING OUT DURING THIS TIME.
I THINK A LOT OF THAT WAS MEASURES THAT WE PUT IN PLACE TO KEEP OUR FAMILIES IN THE UNITS DURING COVID, UM, TIMES.
SO EVEN WITH US, WE'VE MADE A LOT OF PROGRAM CHANGES TO ALLOW, UM, VOUCHER, UH, TO ALLOW THE VOUCHER HOLDERS TO STAY IN THE UNITS.
TRADITIONALLY IN THE PAST, A LOT OF WHAT TRIGGERED,
[01:50:01]
UM, MOVEMENT WAS WHEN THOSE UNITS DIDN'T PASS HOUSING QUALITY STANDARDS.AND SO DURING THIS PAST YEAR IN 2020, WE, WE OPTED TO PUSH THOSE INSPECTIONS TILL THIS YEAR 2021, UNLESS THE RESIDENTS THEMSELVES INITIATED THOSE CALLS.
UM, AND THEN WE'VE JUST, YOU KNOW, REALLY BEEN TRYING TO WORK WITH LANDLORDS TO KEEP 'EM IN THE UNIT AND ALSO REMINDED 'EM ABOUT THE DIFFERENT MORATORIUMS THAT WERE OUT THERE.
AND THEN ONE LAST QUESTION THAT I HAVE, I WAS LOOKING AT THE WAITING LIST WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, THE CITY AND THE COUNTY.
UM, AND AS WE'RE GOING FORWARD, ARE WE MAKING SURE THAT WITHIN OUR AFFORDABLE UNITS THAT THERE ARE UNITS, UM, BASED FOR VOUCHER REQUIREMENTS? OR IS IT JUST BASED ON, UM, WHENEVER WE CAN GET A VOUCHER IN, UM, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? BECAUSE WE KNOW A LOT OF THE AFFORDABLE UNITS, UM, ARE BASED ON INCOME, BUT NOT REALLY BASED ON VOUCHERS.
SO I WANTED TO SEE WHERE WE ARE AS FAR AS GETTING THIS ALMOST 7,600 OUT OF THE WAITING LIST AND, AND THEN WHERE WE ARE WITH BEING ABLE TO PLACE THEM INTO UNITS.
SO I'LL, I'LL SPEAK A LITTLE BIT, UM, TO PROPERTIES THAT NEED TO, UH, YOU KNOW, COMPLY WITH THIS AND, AND HAVE VOUCHER ACCEPTANCE POLICIES.
UM, AND THOSE ARE USUALLY DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE RECEIVING, AGAIN, THOSE FEDERAL FUNDS OR NOW FUNDS FROM THE CITY.
UM, SO THAT'S MOST BIG AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE FUNDED THROUGH THE 4% OR 9% HOUSING TAX CREDIT.
UM, OR RECEIVE ANY, UM, FEDERAL FUNDING IN TERMS OF GAP FUNDING LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER TODAY.
UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE NUMBER OF VOUCHERS AND THE WAIT LIST, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY ALSO A SAHA QUESTION.
I KNOW THAT'S A QUESTION THAT WE GET OFTEN IN TERMS OF, UH, YOU KNOW, WE NEED MORE VOUCHERS.
I THINK THERE'S LOTS OF CITIES IN A SIMILAR POSITION, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE, UH, NEW ADMINISTRATION PLANS, UH, ARE GOING FORWARD.
UM, BUT, BUT THAT'S GENUINELY, UM, WHAT WE SEE WHEN WE DO HOW AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY THEY NEED TO ACCEPT HOUSING VOUCHERS.
SO I'LL JUST TALK TOUCH A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE, THE WAIT LIST AND THAT NUMBER HAS GONE DOWN A LITTLE BIT MORE SINCE, UM, WE PROVIDED THOSE NUMBERS TO THE CITY.
AND, UM, I, I WOULD SAY I THINK, UM, WE ARE PLANNING ON OPENING UP THAT WAIT LIST, SO THAT IS GOING TO JUMP.
AND I THINK, UM, PART OF THE NEED, AND I KNOW, UM, SA HAS BEEN COMMUNICATING WITH THE CITY IS WHILE INDIVIDUALS ARE ON THE WAIT LIST, BECAUSE IT COULD BE ANYWHERE BETWEEN, UH, THREE TO FIVE YEARS, IN SOME CASES IT HAD GOTTEN UP TO FOUR TO SEVEN YEARS JUST WAITING FOR IT.
IT'S, IT'S THE NEED OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND SO, UH, WHILE THEY'RE ON A WAIT LIST, IF THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET INTO A UNIT THAT'S AFFORDABLE, IT MAKES IT EASIER AND THEN IT JUST MAKES IT EVEN EASIER ONCE THEY HAVE THAT VOUCHER TO KIND OF HELP SUBSIDIZE THAT RENT.
SO, UM, WE WILL SEE THOSE NUMBERS INCREASE, UM, PROBABLY WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS BECAUSE WE ARE PLANNING ON OPENING OUR WAIT LIST, UM, AT AROUND MARCH AT THE, THE HIGHEST AMOUNT THAT WE HAD GOT RECEIVED ON THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER WAS AT ONE POINT WAS 50,000 INDIVIDUALS.
UM, AND SO WE HAVE CYCLED THROUGH A LOT OF THOSE NUMBERS, BUT UM, WE KNOW THAT THE NEED IS DESPERATE IN SAN ANTONIO.
RANDY, SO MUCH FOR THAT INFORMATION.
UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO TAKE THIS ITEM TO A B SESSION.
UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, UM, SAY AYE.
WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO THAT AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE B SESSION.
[6. 21-1242 Resolutions of Support for multifamily rental housing development projects seeking 2021 Competitive 9% Housing Tax Credits from the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; Verónica R. Soto, FAICP, Director, Neighborhood and Housing Services]]
ITEM IS, UH, ITEM NUMBER SIX, A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR MULTIFAMILY RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.UM, SO I'LL BE DOING THIS PRESENTATION IF WE CAN HAVE THE PRESENTATION PLEASE.
SO THIS IS THE 9% COMPETITIVE HOUSING TAX CREDIT.
AND IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, THIS, THIS IS THE COMPETITIVE 9% ALLOCATION FOR HOUSING TAX CREDIT, THE FEDERAL PROGRAM ADMINISTERED BY THE STATE.
SO IT'S ACTUALLY THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS THAT ENDS UP GIVING THE AWARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL RE UM, DEVELOPMENT THAT, UM, HOUSE QUALIFIED RESIDENTS.
AND IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE DO, UM, HAVE A ROLE AS THE CITY ON, UM, THE SCORING THAT T D H C A USES WHEN, WHEN CONSIDERING AWARD, THE, THE MOST POINTS THAT THE CITY INFLUENCES HAVE TO DO WITH THE RESOLUTION.
THESE RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT OR NO OBJECTIONS CARRY BETWEEN 17 AND 14 POINTS.
AS YOU SEE, THERE ARE OTHER, UM, ITEMS THAT CAN BE
[01:55:01]
THE RESOLUTION THAT ALSO HELP WITH POINTS.FOR EXAMPLE, IF A PROJECT IS WITHIN A CONCERTED REVITALIZATION PLAN, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A COUPLE POINTS.
AND THE CITY ALSO HAS A ROLE WITH REGARDS TO SOME WAIVERS.
UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, TDA C A IS CONCERNED ABOUT CONCENTRATING MANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS TOGETHER.
SO THEY HAVE A GOAL THAT IF, UM, IN THE PAST THREE YEARS THERE, THERE HAS BEEN AT LEAST ONE DEVELOPMENT, A NEW DEVELOPMENT CAN BE AWARDED IF IT'S WITHIN A MILE, UNLESS THE CITY OFFERS A WAIVER.
AND SIMILARLY, UM, WITH A CONCERN ON CONCENTRATIONS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IF THERE ARE IN A, A GIVEN CENSUS TRACT, MORE THAN 20% OF THE UNITS IN THAT CENSUS TRACT THAT ARE SUPPORTED WITH HOUSING TAX CREDIT, THERE'S A WAIVER THAT ALSO CAN BE GRANTED.
AND IF A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS PROPOSED TO BE IN AN AREA IN A CENSUS TRACT WITH OVER 40% OF POVERTY, THEN UM, THE CITY CAN ALSO ISSUE A WAIVER.
THESE ARE ALL THESE SIGN UP TO CONCENTRATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS OR CONCENTRATE THEM INTO AREAS WITH HIGH LEVEL LEVELS OF POVERTY.
IN ADDITION, THERE ARE THAT THE CITY CAN SUBMIT.
SO THAT'S HOW THE CITY INFLUENCES SOME OF THE POINTS AWARDED, BUT ULTIMATELY IT'S THE STATE STATE THAT MAKES THE AWARD.
AND SO IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU CAN SEE THE TIMELINE BETWEEN WHAT THE CITY PROCESSES FOR THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT AND NO OBJECTION AS WELL AS WHAT THE TIMELINE ITSELF IS FOR.
SO, UM, WE USE A TIMELINE THAT SIT WITHIN THE WHOLE T B H C A ABOUT SIX MONTHS TIMELINE.
AND SO ONCE T B HCA A APPROVES THE SCORING, THAT'S WHEN WE ISSUE OUR REQUEST FOR APPLICATION.
UM, WE COLLECT INFORMATION, WE MAKE THE, UM, APPLICATION AVAILABLE AND PEOPLE CAN START, DEVELOPERS CAN START SUBMITTING, UM, INFORMATION TO US.
WE, UM, BREAK THIS FORWARD AROUND THE SAME TIME THAT THE PRE-APPLICATION IS DUE AT THE STATE, SO THAT WE CAN HAVE IT IN FRONT OF YOU IN FEBRUARY BECAUSE THE FULL APPLICATION ITSELF IS DUE MARCH ONE PRE-APPLICATION ARE DEGENERATE, THE FULL APPLICATIONS ARE DUE MARCH ONE.
AND AT THAT FULL APPLICATION STAGE IS WHEN THE DEVELOPERS HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY HAVE THE NECESSARY SOLUTION FROM THE CITY.
THEN T D H C A EVALUATES AND REVIEWS, THEY LOOK AT THE PRECOR.
AND THEN THE AWARDS ARE ACTUALLY MADE IN JULY, BUT THE CITY DOES HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY.
AND WITH REGARDS TO THIS YEAR, IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, LET ME DO A SUMMARY OF HOW MANY APPLICATIONS CAME IN.
UM, WE ALWAYS GET A FEW APPLICATIONS AT WITHDRAWAL.
SO THIS YEAR AFTER WE CLOSED OUR R F A, WE HAD 15 APPLICATIONS THAT SUBMITTED.
WE HAD FOUR THAT HAVE WITHDRAWN.
IT'S NOT UNUSUAL TO HAVE WITHDRAWALS, UH, OF APPLICANTS AS THEY SEE THIS PRE SCORING.
AND GIVEN THAT THIS IS VERY COMPETITIVE, SOMETIMES IT'S BETTER FOR THEM TO GO ANOTHER YEAR OR TWO, RECONSIDER THEIR FINANCING AND PERHAPS TURN THEIR DEVELOPMENT INTO A 4% APPLICATION.
SO WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU ARE 11 RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT REMAIN.
AND WE HAVE THEM IN EIGHT COUNCIL DISTRICTS.
SO WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY IN DISTRICT FOUR AND NINE IN THIS YEAR.
THE NEXT SLIDE HAS A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION.
SO, UM, THIS IS SHOWING ALL 15 THAT CAME IN, AND I THINK, UH, YOU'LL SEE THE, THE, THE FEW THAT DROPPED OFF IF WE HIT THE NEXT ON THIS ONE SHOULD HAVE A LITTLE, LITTLE BIT OF STRIKEOUT, BUT YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE LOCATED IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY.
SO IF WE HIT, UM, NEXT SLIDE ON THIS ONE, IT SHOWS THE ONES THAT DROPPED OFF.
UM, SO YOU CAN SEE THAT AGAIN, WE HAVE 11 REMAINING AND IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE HAVE THE ACTUAL, UM, APPLICATIONS.
AND OF COURSE THERE ARE OVER TWO SLIDES.
THE ONE IN RED IN, IN THESE SLIDES ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE DROPPED OUT.
UM, AND SO YOU CAN SEE HOW MANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE, UH, PROPOSED AND WHAT THEY SCORED UNDER THE CITY'S RUBRIC.
NOW THE CITY HAS A POLICY ADOPTED, UM, ADOPTED A, A YEAR AND A HALF AGO.
AND SO EVERY TWO YEARS WE COME BACK AND, AND REVISIT THAT POLICY.
SO WE'RE STILL WITHIN THAT TIMEFRAME.
SO WE USE THAT CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED POLICY FOR THE SCORING.
AND SO, UM, ALL 11, IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU'LL SEE THE REST, UM, ARE WITHIN THE POINTS WHERE WE CAN AWARD THEM A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT.
AND SO THE 11 REMAINING ARE THE ONES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED FOR THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT.
AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE HAVE A SUMMARY ABOUT THE PROJECT TYPES.
UH, YOU SAW THE LIST OF PROJECTS, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
THERE'S 14 THAT ARE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
THERE'S, UH, A FEW THAT ARE, UM,
[02:00:01]
SENIOR HOUSING AS WELL.UM, AND THERE ARE FIVE THAT HAVE DONE, UH, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SINCE WE HAVE SOME POINTS FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH AS WELL.
UM, SO 11 OF OF THE APPLICATIONS FROM THE ORIGINAL DID NOT SEEK THOSE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT POINTS.
AND THEN IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS HAS, UH, A TABLE THAT SHOWS, UM, WHAT IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR EACH ONE.
AND SO THERE ARE TWO THAT REQUIRE A WAIVER FOR THAT ONE MILE, THREE YEAR RULE BECAUSE THEY ARE CLOSE ENOUGH TO, UH, PREVIOUSLY AWARDED HOUSING TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT.
ONE OF THEM IS THE 4 25 SAN PEDRO IN DISTRICT ONE.
SECOND ONE IS VILLAGE AT BOYER.
UM, YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE CHECK MARKS FOR THE ONES THAT ARE REQUESTING THE, UM, CONCERTED REVITALIZATION PLAN, UM, DESIGNATION AS WELL.
AND SO THOSE DEVELOPMENTS ARE THE ONES THAT WOULD ALSO GET THAT.
AND THEN THERE IS ONE THAT IS WITHIN A CENSUS STRIKE THAT HAS, UH, MORE THAN 40% OF THE RESIDENTS, UM, DESIGNATED AS LIVING IN POVERTY.
AND SO THEY ARE REQUESTING THE WAIVER FOR THAT FISH POND AT PROSPECT HILL WITHIN DISTRICT FIVE.
SO ALL OF THESE ELEMENTS WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE INDIVIDUAL RESOLUTIONS THAT ARE PART OF THIS.
AGAIN, UM, WE HAVE A VERY QUICK TURNAROUND ON THIS SO THAT WE CAN, UM, FIT IN OUR REVIEW AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE TIME THE FULL APPLICATIONS ARE DUE.
AND SO THAT'S WHY, UM, WE HAVE OUR R F A THAT CLOSES IN JANUARY.
WE HAVE TO BRING THIS TO COUNCIL AND THE COMMITTEE IN FEBRUARY SO THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, CAN HAVE A FULL APPLICATION MARCH ONE AND THEN CAN BE COMPETITIVE IN OUR REGION FOR THE TAX AWARDS.
AND JUST TO NOTE THAT THIS, THIS IS THE LAST SLIDE, SO, UH, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ASK YOUR QUESTIONS.
BUT ALL OF THE HOUSING TAX CREDIT, UM, DEVELOPMENTS HAVE TO SERVE FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 60% A M I UNLESS THEY USE INCOME AVERAGING.
THAT'S WHEN THEY MIGHT HAVE A FEW UNITS THAT ARE OVER, UH, 60% A M I, BUT ON, ON AVERAGE, UH, THE INCOME OF FAMILIES SERVE HAS TO BE 60% A M I.
THAT'S THE END OF THE PRESENTATION.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
AND SO JUST EXPLAIN TO ME THE, UM, THE, UH, CENSUS TRACK GREATER THAN 40% POVERTY REQUIRES AN ADDITIONAL WAIVER.
WHAT, WHY IS THAT? YES, IT DOES.
UM, SO THIS IS ONE OF THE RULES C B H C A HAS BECAUSE THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR LOW INCOME, UH, FAMILIES BE IN A CENSUS TRACT THAT ALREADY HAS A LOT OF LOW INCOME FAMILIES.
SO IF THE CENSUS TRACT IN WHICH A DEVELOPMENT IS, UM, LOCATED ALREADY HAS OVER 40% OF THE FAMILIES WITHIN THAT CENSUS TRACT DESIGNATED AS BEING UNDER THE POVERTY LINE, THE CONCERN IS, ARE WE CONCENTRATING POVERTY? AND SO THAT'S WHY THERE'S A WAIVER THAT IS REQUESTED OF CITY COUNCIL SO THAT THEY CAN CONSIDER AN AWARD IN THAT AREA.
UM, THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UH, T D H C A DOESN'T WANT TO PROMOTE.
THEY DON'T WANNA JUST CONCENTRATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AREAS THAT ARE CONSIDERED POVERTY AREAS.
SO THAT'S WHY THE, THE REQUIREMENT IS THERE FOR A WAIVER.
UM, AND IN THIS INSTANCE, IT IS IN AN AREA THAT DOES NEED HIGHER QUALITY, AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND SO THAT'S WHY THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO, UM, GRANT THE WAIVER AND COUNCILWOMAN.
I'LL ALSO SAY THAT, UH, THIS IS A NEW, NEW WAIVER, UM, THAT THEY'VE ADDED, UH, RECENTLY, YOU CAN PROBABLY RECALL HAVING TO GO UP TO T D H C A TO, UH, CHALLENGE SOME OF THESE THINGS.
SO THIS IS A NEW WAIVER THAT THEY'VE ALLOWED MUNICIPALITIES TO MAKE, UH, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.
AND THAT FISH POND AT, AT PROSPECT HILL IS IN DISTRICT FIVE.
IT'S A, UM, SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND I GUESS THE ONE REHAB PROJECT.
I KNOW THAT'S A REHAB PROJECT, SO, UM, THAT'S THE, THE, THE ONLY ONE.
WELL, THE, UH, UM, ANY, UH, COMMENTS FROM MY COLLEAGUES? UM, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO WAVE.
DO THEY HAVE ANY I DO HAVE A QUESTION, MADAM CHAIR.
NOW USUALLY THERE ARE WHAT, MAYBE THREE OF THESE PROJECTS THAT GET APPROVED FOR STATE FUNDING EVERY YEAR.
IS THAT ABOUT THE AVERAGE OR WHAT WE MIGHT EXPECT? THREE TO FOUR FOR SURE.
BECAUSE I, AND, AND HOW ACCURATE HAS YOUR STAFF SCORING BEEN WHEN, UH, THE FINAL APPROVALS HAVE COME IN? ARE YOU HITTING, YOU KNOW, THREE OUT OF FOUR RIGHT, YOURSELVES? WELL, THE, THE SCORING I SHOWED YOU IS JUST TO GET THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT.
IT'S NOT ACTUALLY THE SCALE OF
[02:05:01]
C D H C A USES C D H C A, YOU CAN GET 170 SOMETHING POINTS.UM, BUT WE DO LOOK AT THE PRE SCORING, UM, AND IT'S VERY COMPETITIVE.
LAST YEAR, UM, WE HAD LIKE A THREE OR FOUR WAY TIE FOR THE MOST POINTS.
AND SO THE DEALS WERE AWARDED BASED ON TIEBREAKER, UM, AND THE TIEBREAKER C V H C A GOES INTO.
UM, BUT ONCE WE SEE A PRETORIAN, WE CAN TELL YOU WHO WE THINK WILL GET AN AWARD.
UM, BUT IT'S THE TIEBREAKERS THAT DETERMINE WHO ENDS UP GETTING, UH, AWARDED.
AND COUNCILMAN, WE CAN, UH, PROVIDE YOUR OFFICE WITH WHAT THE, UH, PRE-APPLICATION SCORING IS RIGHT NOW AT THE STATE.
UM, P D H C HASN'T DONE THEIR REVIEW YET, SO THAT'S, AGAIN, SELF SCORING, BUT WE CAN PROVIDE THAT TO YOUR OFFICE.
IT MAY GIVE YOU A GOOD SNAPSHOT.
WELL, YOU KNOW, I, I WAS REALLY JUST LOOKING AT THE N H S D SCORE AND YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT FOUR IN THE NINETIES AND A COUPLE IN THE RELATIVELY MIDDLE EIGHTIES, AND I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOUR HISTORY TURNS OUT TO BE PRETTY CLOSE TO WHAT FINALLY GETS APPROVED, BUT IF THERE'S OTHER FACTORS THAT COME IN AND YOU JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT THOSE, I'M, YOU KNOW, I WAS JUST CURIOUS.
I DON'T NEED THE INFORMATION THOUGH.
I DON'T THINK, UH, I SEE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM MY COLLEAGUES.
SO LOOKING FORWARD TO AN UPDATE ON THAT AS IT MOVE ALONG.
SO, UH, I THINK THAT, UM, IS ALL THAT WE HAVE.
THANK YOU, UM, MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES FOR HANGING IN THERE.
SARAH, DO WE NEED A MOTION FOR THAT THOUGH? DO WE, COUNCILMAN, DO WE NEED A MOTION TO FORWARD CITY COUNCIL? YEAH, WE NEED A MOTION TO MOVE THE, OH, NO, THAT ONE'S URGENT, RIGHT? SO WE DID NEED THAT.
WELL, I JUST ALMOST CLOSED OUT.
I'LL, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE THESE FORWARD.
UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, UM, TO APPROVE THIS ITEM TO FULL COUNSEL.
UM, ANY, UH, OKAY, I GOT IT RIGHT.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS? OKAY, WE GOT IT.