* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:02] ALL RIGHT, EVERYONE. WELCOME [Call to Order] TO OUR PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING ON THIS 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, MONDAY. UM, CAN WE PLEASE HAVE THE ROLE? MADAM CHAIR SHIRLEY GONZALEZ. ABSENT MEMBER ROBERTO TREVINO. HERE, COUNCIL MEMBER JADA ANDREW SULLIVAN. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER REBECCA VRAN. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN RIDGE PRESENT. WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, JUST FOR YOU ALL HERE AND FOR OUR, OUR VIEWING PUBLIC, UH, UNFORTUNATELY, UH, COUNT, UH, CHAIR, UH, GONZALEZ IS NOT ABLE TO BE HERE WITH US. WE HOPE THAT KEVIN IS OKAY, AND I'M SURE HE IS. BUT, UM, SHE ASKED THAT WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TODAY. SO I'LL BE, UM, SERVING AS, AS CHAIR. UM, AND WITH THAT, WE HAVE OUR [1. 20-1324 Approval of the minutes from the December 9, 2019 Planning and Community Development Committee Meeting] FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 9TH, 2019 PLANNING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING. IT WAS IN YOUR PACKETS. AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. MOTION TO APPROVE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES ON DECEMBER 9TH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. UM, NEXT WE HAVE OUR BRIEFING AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON SOME INDIVIDUAL AGENDA ITEMS. WE'LL BE TAKING ITEMS NUMBER TWO AND THREE AND NUMBER FIVE, BUT WE WILL BE MOVING, UM, ITEM FOUR OVER TO NEXT MONTH. UM, AND WE'LL SAY A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT. UH, I'LL SHARE A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT, UH, IN A LITTLE WHILE. BUT OUR FIRST ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER TWO, [2. 19-7282 Consideration of a recommendation to award up to $5,518,760 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding; up to $1,849,000 in HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funding; and up to $2,874,000 from the Affordable Housing Fund (TIF Sourced) for certain eligible activities. [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; Verónica R. Soto, Director, Neighborhood and Housing Services]] CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD UP TO 5.5 MILLION IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. BLOCK BLOCK GRANTS FUNDING UP TO 1.8 IN HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS, AND UP TO 2.8 MILLION FROM THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND WITH FOR CERTAIN ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES. AND IT LOOKS LIKE VETO WILL BE COMING UP AND DOING OUR PRESENTATION. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, VERONICA SOTO WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING. THANK YOU. SORRY. WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND, UH, VERONICA SOTO WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. I AM HERE TO PRESENT THESE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME FROM SEVERAL SOURCES. SO WE HAVE BOTH THE FEDERAL GRANTS THAT ARE REPRESENTED HERE THAT HAVE THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FOR HOME OWNERSHIP AND RENTAL HOUSING, THE HOME FUNDING, WHICH IS ALSO A FEDERAL GRANT. UH, AND THAT ALSO FUNDS OUR COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION OR CHODO FUNDING. UH, REPRESENTED HERE AS WELL IS THE TIF SOURCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND. YOU MAY RECALL THAT AS PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED BUDGET, WE DID ASK FOR SEVERAL TS TO CONTRIBUTE FUNDING FOR GAP FINANCING PURPOSES. SO THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HOUSING ARE IN HERE AS WELL. WITH REGARDS TO THE TIMELINE, WE DID DO AN R F A PROCESS FOR THE RENTAL AND HOME OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS. UH, WE WENT TO AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE FOR THAT AS WELL. WE HAD THE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND R F A ISSUANCE BACK IN SEPTEMBER, PRE-SUBMIT ALL CONFERENCES IN SEPTEMBER AS WELL WITH APPLICATIONS DURING OCTOBER TOWARD THE END OF OCTOBER. AND THE SLIDE IN FRONT OF YOU SHOWS THAT THE EVALUATION CRITERIA LOOKED AT EXPERIENCE IN CAPACITY OF THE DEVELOPERS THAT SUBMITTED APPLICATIONS, HOW READY THE PROJECTS WERE FOR DEVELOPMENT, THE PROJECT SITE AND CHARACTERISTICS THEMSELVES FOR THE HUD FUNDING. FUNDING, WE LOOKED AT COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE HUD REGULATIONS AND THE EFFICIENT USE OF FUNDS. WE ALSO, OF COURSE, LOOK AT UNDERWRITING. AND SO THOSE ARE THE CRITERIA BY WHICH WE JUDGED THE APPLICATIONS FOR RENTAL. WE HAD EIGHT APPLICATIONS AND HOME OWNERSHIP. THREE, WE ALWAYS GET REQUEST AMOUNTS THAT EXCEED WHAT IS AVAILABLE. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THIS SLIDE AS WELL, WITH THE REQUEST FOR RENTAL OVER 10 MILLION, THE REQUEST FOR HOME OWNERSHIP, OVER 3 MILLION. JUST SOME SCHEMATICS THAT SHOW A COUPLE OF THE SITES IN QUESTION. THESE ARE FOR RENTAL SITES. UM, JUST SO YOU GET A SENSE OF THE KIND OF INFORMATION OUR DEPARTMENT RECEIVES. AND WITH REGARDS TO THE FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE TOP ARE THE RENTAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS. THIS INCLUDES WHAT COUNCIL DISTRICT EACH OF THESE ARE IN, AND WHAT THE SOURCE OF FUNDING RECOMMENDED IS. SO THE FIRST ARE THE C D B G FUNDED, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ALLISON LS BY N R P. AND YOU CAN SEE THE UNIT MIX. I WON'T GO IN DETAIL BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT HERE. UH, THE NEXT ONE BY CDBG IS IN DISTRICT EIGHT, BABCOCK NORTH BY ALAMO COMMUNITY GROUP. AFTER THAT, IN DISTRICT THREE LEGACY AT PIEDMONT [00:05:01] BY ATLANTIC PACIFIC COMPANY. AND AGAIN, YOU SEE THE AWARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATION AND WHAT THE UNIT MIXES. ALL OF THESE EXCEPT EIGHT UNITS, ARE GONNA BE AFFORDABLE TO FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 80% A M I. THE MAJORITY OF THIS, YOU CAN SEE 313 UNITS THERE, UH, AVAILABLE FOR FAMILIES AT 60% AND BELOW OF A M I. THE NEXT ONE IS SOURCED OUT OF HOME FUNDS, AND THAT'S IN DISTRICT FIVE VILLAGE ATTOS. AND THE LAST ONE IS RECOMMENDED WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND THAT IS FUNDED BY THE, UH, TAX INCREMENT FINANCING FOR LUNA FLATS, WHICH IS BY THE N R P GROUP IN DISTRICT ONE. SO, SO THE RENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HOME OWNERSHIP, WE HAVE THREE. FIRST ONE IS IN DISTRICT FIVE CHIHUAHUA HOMES BY OUR CASAS, AND THAT IS THROUGH HOME FUNDING, UH, A RECOMMENDATION. THE NEXT ONE IS, UH, IN DISTRICT EIGHT, PHASE ONE OF WATSON ROAD DISTRICT FOUR, PHASE ONE. AND THAT'S SOURCED BY THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND. AND THEN THE LAST ONE IS WATSON ROAD, PHASE TWO. UM, THAT ONE IS PROPOSED FOR C D B G DISTRICT FOUR CORRECTION ON THIS ONE. CORRECTION, BOTH THE WATSON ROAD, PHASE ONE, DISTRICT FOUR, DISTRICT FOUR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT CORRECTION. SO THESE ARE THE HOME OWNERSHIP. UH, ALL OF THESE ARE TO HELP FAMILIES BECOME HOMEOWNERS AT, AND THE FAMILY'S INCOME IS SUPPOSED TO BE AT OR BELOW 80% A M I. THIS IS A MAP THAT SHOWS THAT WE HAVE DEVELOPMENTS, UM, THROUGHOUT THE CITY FROM THE SOUTH SIDE TO THE NORTH SIDE, UH, AGAIN, RENTAL AND HOME OWNERSHIP MIX HERE FOR THE CHOTO OPERATING. THIS IS A SET ASIDE OR A REQUIREMENT WE HAVE FROM HUD THAT WE HELP NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT SPECIFICALLY DO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, RECEIVE ASSISTANCE FOR OPERATING TO HELP THEIR CAPACITY. SO THESE ARE THE AWARDS. AGAIN, WE HAD AN R F E BACK IN AUGUST, PRE-SUBMIT SUBMITTALS IN AUGUST, APPLICATIONS DURING SEPTEMBER. AND THERE ARE THREE, UH, CHO FOR COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED TO BE FUNDED. EACH OF THEM RECEIVING 50,000 WITH HOME FUNDS. THAT'S HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, PROSPERA, H C S, AND NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF SAN ANTONIO. SO THOSE ORGANIZATIONS ARE THE ONES THAT WOULD BE DESIGNATED AS CHOROS AND RECEIVE THE FUNDING. IN ADDITION TO THIS, THERE IS AN ACTION THAT REQUIRES A, WHAT IS CALLED A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT OR ACTION PLAN. AND FOR THAT, WE'RE GONNA TAKE SEVERAL PROJECTS FORWARD. SOME OF THIS ARE INTERNAL DISCUSSIONS THAT THE STAFF HAS HAD ABOUT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE USE OF OUR EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT FUNDS. UH, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, FOR EXAMPLE. AND IT HAS BECOME CLEAR THAT STREET OUTREACH IS GREAT, IS OF GREATER NEED THAN THE PREVIOUS USE, WHICH WAS OUTREACH, BUT IT WASN'T CALLED STREET OUTREACH. SO WE'RE CHANGING THAT, UH, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE E S G FUNDS ARE USED FOR THIS INSTEAD OF THE, UM, OUTREACH, NOT FOR THE, UH, PREVIOUS MORE COUNSELING RELATED SERVICES. UM, WE ARE PROPOSING TO SWITCH OUT A FUNDING SOURCE FOR, UH, GRANT T FROM LAST YEAR TO U C D B G, WHICH HAS DIFFERENT REGULATIONS THAN HOME FUNDS. THERE IS A FACILITY DEVELOPMENT CALLED PROJECT MEND THAT WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO BE FUNDED, SIMILAR TO HOW WE DID HOUSE OF NEIGHBORLY SERVICES LAST YEAR. AND OF COURSE, THERE WAS A COMMITMENT BY, UH, CITY COUNCIL TO HAVE MASTER PLAN OF ANITA GUADALUPE DISTRICT FIVE BE PART OF THIS BUDGET. THIS JUST CODIFIES IT ON THE HUD SIDE. THAT DOES INCLUDE A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS. SO WE'LL HAVE THAT PUBLIC HEARING THIS WEEK. UM, ON THE WEDNESDAY THE 15TH, UH, WE WILL BE GOING WITH AN ITEM TO AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY AS WELL. WE'LL HAVE, UM, CITIZENS TO BE HEARD AS PART OF THE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT. AND THEN ALL OF THESE ITEMS ARE GONNA BE IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL FOR FULL CONSIDERATION ON THE 30TH OF JANUARY. AND THAT REALLY IS THE LAST OF THE PRESENTATION, UNLESS YOU'LL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, VERO, FOR THE PRESENTATIONS AND FOR THE CLARIFICATION, IF YOU COULD CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT MORE, GO INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL. AND JUST TO REFRESH MY MEMORY ABOUT, UM, SLIDE NUMBER EIGHT, IF YOU CAN. ONE, GO OVER RASCO GARDENS AND THEN ALSO EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS, GRANT STREET OUTRAGE. DIVE INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR ME. SURE. WHAT THE FUNCTIONALITY OF IT TOO. SO, SO FOR THE E S G GRANT, WHEN WE SUBMITTED AN ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, WE HAD FAIR HOUSING SERVICES AND COUNSELING FOR E SS G I GOT IT. E SG IS USED, UH, FOR THOSE SERVICES. IN TALKING WITH D H SS, THE NEED TO HAVE A POSITION SPECIFIC TO DO STREET OUTREACH WAS CLEAR, AS OPPOSED TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES SPECIALIST POSITION [00:10:01] THAT DOES MORE OF THE COUNSELING SIDE OF THE HOUSE. RIGHT? SO THEY ACTUALLY NEED SOMEONE OUT IN THE FIELD. AND, AND I SEE STAFF FROM D H S HERE MM-HMM. . UM, THIS IS IN LINE WITH THE FOCUS WITH THE HOMELESS EFFORTS, THE HOMELESS STRATEGIC PLAN, AND WHAT WE HAVE HEARD. AND SO BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT POSITION, THE COMMUNITY SERVICES SPECIALIST POSITION VACANT, WE CAN CHANGE IT TO STREET OUTREACH AS AN ALLOWABLE USE BY E S G AND THEN CHANGE THAT POSITION TO BE A STREET OUTREACH. UM, SO THE JOB FUNCTION ITSELF IS DIFFERENT, AND THIS FUNDING HELPS SUPPORT THEM BEING OUT IN THE FIELD AS OPPOSED TO AN OFFICE SETTING WHERE PEOPLE COME TO THEM, UM, WHO NEED SERVICES TO STAY IN THEIR HOUSING. FOR EXAMPLE, THIS ONE IS ENVISIONED AS SOMEONE OUT THERE ACTUALLY DEALING WITH POPULATIONS THAT ARE NOT HOUSED. UM, SO IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT JOB DESCRIPTION. UM, STILL AN ALLOWABLE USE FOR E S G IN ITS CONVERSATIONS. THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND OUR DEPARTMENT HAVE HAD, UH, ABOUT HOW TO BEST UTILIZE E S G FUNDING. SO THAT WAS ONE CHANGE FROM THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN BACK IN AUGUST WAS BUDGETED. AND, AND YES, THAT'S, IT'S STILL THE SAME AMOUNT, IT'S JUST THE CATEGORY. OKAY. FOR HUD PURPOSES, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS BECAUSE WE'RE SWITCHING FROM ONE ALLOWABLE USE TO A DIFFERENT ALLOWABLE USE. SO THE AMENDMENT PROCESS. OKAY. WITH REGARDS TO TARSCO GARDENS, THEY HAD RECEIVED AN ALLOCATION OF HOME FUNDING AND WE'RE SWITCHING IT OUT TO MAKE IT C D B G. THERE'S DIFFERENT REGULATIONS UNDER THE FEDERAL PROGRAMS. SO THIS IS A SWITCH IN THE REGULATIONS. SO IT'S JUST STILL GRANTING THEM THE SAME AMOUNT. BUT THE FUNDING SOURCE IS NOW GONNA BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE HAD AWARDED THEM PREVIOUSLY LAST YEAR. UH, A HOME GRANT, WE HAVE TO AGAIN, AMEND THAT AWARD, CHANGE IT TO C D B G, BUT IT'S STILL THE SAME AMOUNT OF SUPPORT FOR THAT THORACO GARDENS PROJECT. AND WHAT IS THAT? UM, WHAT, IT'S A DEVELOPMENT, AND I KNOW ALAMO COMMUNITY GROUPS IS HERE, BUT IT WAS A HOME OWNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT, 60 UNITS, 30 OF WHICH WERE SUPPORTED WITH HOME FUNDS. OKAY. C D BG IS A LOT MORE FLEXIBLE THAN THE HOME GRANT. AND SO THEY ARE OPTING FOR THE FLEXIBILITY THAT C D B G ALLOWS. SO IT'S HOME OWNERSHIP, HOME OWNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT. IT'S A NEW SUBDIVISION OF 60 HOUSES. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THEN, UM, SLIDE NUMBER, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS JUST MENTIONED 60, UM, HOMES. AND THEN ON SLIDE NUMBER FIVE TOO, UM, I GUESS IT GOES TO A LITTLE BIT, LORI, OF WHAT YOU PRESENTED, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE TOTALS OF THE RENTING HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. SO THAT IS THE TOTAL UNITS THAT ARE IN EACH OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS? YES. OKAY. AND YOU CAN SEE THE, THE SUM, RIGHT. SO WHEN IT COMES BACK ON SLIDE FIVE, THE TOTAL UNITS, IT'S 423 MM-HMM. , EIGHT OF THOSE ARE MARKET RATE. RIGHT. EVERYTHING ELSE IS GONNA BE FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 80%. RIGHT. AND, AND ONLY ONE HAS THE 80%, UH, OF UNITS OF 68. AND SO MY ONLY THOUGHT OF OF STOPPING HERE FOR A LITTLE WHILE IS IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THESE, UM, PROJECTS ARE REALLY EVEN THAT BIG THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE PROJECTS AREN'T THAT BIG, 49 78, BUT I KNOW, LORI, YOU GAVE US A PRESENTATION THAT WE'RE STILL ON THE RIGHT PATH WITH OUR PIPELINE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND WE'RE PLANNING IT FORWARD. YES. AND MOST OF THE LARGER PROJECTS ARE TYPICALLY IN THAT 4% SURE. TAX CREDIT PROGRAM, WHICH WE'RE GONNA BE PRESENTING THE 9% NEXT TO YOU, BUT YOU SEE A LOT OF 4% RIGHT. THAT PROVIDE THAT 200 PLUS UNIT COUNT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. AND THE SMALLER, UM, UNIT SIZE ALSO HAS THE SMALLEST AWARD. IF YOU NOTICE, EVERYTHING ELSE IS OVER A MILLION. THAT ONE IS, UM, 650,000. MM-HMM. FOR OKAY. THE SMALLEST DEVELOPMENT. ALRIGHT. WELL, THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AT THIS MOMENT. WE WILL, I WILL YIELD THE FLOOR AND GIVE IT TO MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES, COUNCIL MEMBER ANDREW SULLIVAN. THANK YOU. UM, SO I JUST HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. WHEN IT COMES TO, I'D LIKE TO SEE A COMPLETE BREAKDOWN FOR DISTRICT TWO OF WHEN WE WERE LAST AWARDED ANY PROJECTS, UM, WHAT PROJECTS THEY WERE, WHERE THEY WERE LOCATED, UM, JUST TO BE CO COMPLETELY UP TO DATE WITH WHERE DISTRICT TWO STANDS WITHIN THE FUNDING SOURCES AND, AND HOW WE'RE LOOKING WHEN IT COMES TO THE RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS AND THE HOME OWNERSHIP, ESPECIALLY HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS. UM, IF I COULD GET THAT COMPLETE BREAKDOWN FOR DISTRICT TWO, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT. THANK YOU. SURE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MY COLLEAGUES? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER KIRCH. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. UH, I WAS LOOKING AT THE OVERALL TOTAL AND UH, IT SEEMS TO INDICATE WE HAD 13.8 13 850,000 TOTAL. 13,000,008, BUT YOU'RE ONLY GIVING OUT, UH, ABOUT 11 AND A HALF OF THAT. WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 2 MILLION? SO WE WENT THROUGH THE R F A PROCESS FOR C D B G AND HOME TO LOOK AT WHAT WAS ELIGIBLE. WE, UH, HAD [00:15:01] THE R F A WHERE WE COULD ASK THE DEVELOPERS WHICH FUNDING SOURCE THEY PREFERRED TO MAKE SURE THE PROJECTS WERE READY. THERE WERE OTHER PROJECTS THAT CAME IN THAT WERE NOT AS READY. WE DO HAVE A TIMELINESS TEST FOR THESE. AND SO PART OF THAT IS THAT THE OTHER, UH, THING IS THAT FOR THE TIF SOURCE, THERE WAS ONLY LIMITED AMOUNT OF GAP FINANCING IDENTIFIED. UM, AND SO THE TTT SOURCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND ONLY SET ASIDE SO MUCH FOR HOME OWNERSHIP AND RENTAL. AND THIS IS AT THAT MAX. UM, BUT THE REMAINING WE ARE GOING TO DO, UM, A DIFFERENT R F A PROCESS TO SEE IF OTHER PROJECTS COME IN. BUT THIS WAS, WERE THE ONES THAT WERE MOST READY. RIGHT. THAT MET THE FEDERAL CRITERIA THAT COULD SPEND QUICKLY AS WELL. UM, OKAY. YES. LORI, LET ME, UM, YOUR, YOUR QUESTION WAS, WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO WITH THE REMAINING 2 MILLION? WE ARE GONNA BE ISSUING ANOTHER R F A AND WE'D LIKE TO CATER THAT TO SMALLER PROJECTS TO REALLY HELP WITH THAT INFILL. SO WE ARE WORKING ON THAT R F A AND WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS COMMITTEE BEFORE WE SEND IT OUT. GOOD. THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS, YOU'RE, YOU'RE SUBSTITUTING ANOTHER POSITION. UH, COULD YOU SEND US A JOB DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THAT NEW, UH, SURE. PERSON HAD TO DO AT STREET WORK STREET OUTREACH? YES. THAT'S GONNA OUTREACH COME. YEAH. COULD YOU SEND US COPY OF THAT? SURE. JOB DESCRIPTION. OKAY. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. SURE. OKAY. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. I THINK, UM, DO WE HAVE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION HERE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD? YES. TO MOVE THIS FORWARD? YES, MA'AM. TO FULL COUNSEL. CORRECT. SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO MOVE THIS, UM, FORWARD TO FULL COUNSEL CONSIDERATION MOTION, MOVE FORWARD. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO MOVE THIS ITEM TO CONSIDERATION AT FULL, UH, TO FULL COUNSEL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. UM, NEXT [3. 19-9052 Briefing and staff recommendations on City Council Resolutions related to the 2020 Competitive 9% Housing Tax Credit projects submitted in response to the City’s Request for Application. [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; Verónica R. Soto, Director, Neighborhood and Housing Services]] ITEM IS A BRIEFING AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS RELATED TO 2020 COMPETITIVE 9% HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROJECTS. WELCOME BACK. WELCOME BACK. WE HAVE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGENDA FOR YOU. UM, SO I'LL WALK YOU QUICKLY THROUGH THE PROCESS BY WHICH WE ARE IN FRONT OF YOU WITH REGARDS TO 9% COMPETITIVE HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROCESS. SO FIRST, UM, THIS IS AN I R S FUNDED PROGRAM THAT THE STATE ACTUALLY CONTROLS, BUT THE CITY HAS A ROLE WITH REGARDS TO ONE PORTION OF THE SCORING. UM, AND SO AGAIN, FEDERAL PROGRAM ADMINISTERED BY THE STATE CITY HAS A ROLE WITH WHAT ARE CALLED THE RESOLUTIONS, UH, OF SUPPORT. THERE'S A COMPETITIVE AND NON-COMPETITIVE, WE TALK TYPICALLY TALK ABOUT THE 4%, 9%, THE 9% THAT ARE IN FRONT OF YOU HAD A VERY, HAVE A VERY SET TIMELINE. UM, AND SO WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE STATE TIMELINE FOR THIS. THE FULL PRE-OPS ARE DUE AT THE STATE TODAY. UH, WE HAD TO GET OUR REQUEST FOR A RESOLUTION, UM, LAST WEEK SO WE COULD HAVE ENOUGH TIME. FULL APPLICATIONS TO THE STATE ARE DUE MARCH THIS YEAR, FEBRUARY 28TH. SO WE HAVE TO FIT IN THAT TIMELINE. THE CITY'S ROLE IS ONLY THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT, WHICH CARRIES POINTS AT THE STATE LEVEL. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO SUBMIT THE RESOLUTIONS SO THEY CAN BE SUBMITTED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AT THE STATE LEVEL FOR A FULL APPLICATION. AND THE STATE REQUIRES THOSE RESOLUTIONS. IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE, UH, APPLICATION COMPLETE, WE WENT THROUGH A PROCESS WHEREBY THE POLICY BY WHICH THE CITY WOULD GRANT THESE RESOLUTIONS WAS UPDATED. WE HAD FOCUS GROUP MEETINGS OVER THE SUMMER AND LAST YEAR. AND SO CITY COUNCIL DID ADOPT ON OCTOBER 31ST OF LAST YEAR. THE POLICY WE WOULD UTILIZE TO SCORE AND GRANT THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT RESOLUTIONS OF NO OBJECTION. THAT CRITERIA IS IN FRONT OF YOU. AGAIN, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED IT AFTER HAVING, UM, VERY GOOD CONVERSATIONS, UM, THROUGH OUR FOCUS GROUPS. AND SO OUR PROCESS WAS THAT ON DECEMBER 2ND, WE OPENED THE REQUEST FOR THE CITY RESOLUTIONS. WE CLOSED IT JANUARY 3RD. WE SCORED THE APPLICATIONS IN ONE WEEK'S TIME, AND WE'RE HERE AT THIS COMMITTEE WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPLICATIONS. WE'RE GONNA TAKE THESE HOPEFULLY, UH, FEBRUARY 13TH, AGAIN, TRYING TO MEET THAT STATE DEADLINE OF FEBRUARY 28TH. THIS IS THE TIMELINE AGAIN, AT THE STATE. WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE OUR LOCAL APPLICANTS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF SAN ANTONIO SUBMIT THEIR FULL 9% BY THE FEBRUARY 28TH. SO OUR TIMELINE IS MIXED IN HERE AS WELL. SO THIS IS JUST SHOWING THE LEVEL OF INTEREST. UM, THESE ARE VERY COMPETITIVE. SO EVERY YEAR WE GET OVER 20 APPLICATIONS, UM, THAT COME IN, MANY DROP OFF AFTER THEY SEE THE SCORING. BUT THIS SHOWS THE APPLICATIONS THAT END [00:20:01] UP BEING ALLOCATED FOR A REGION. THE AWARDS THREE TO FOUR EVERY YEAR. SO THIS YEAR WE HAVE 24 APPLICATIONS THAT WERE RECEIVED. ONE HAS ALREADY WITHDRAWN, SO NOW WE HAVE 23 THAT ARE BEING RECOMMENDED FOR THE RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT. THAT RECOMMENDATION IS SOLELY BASED ON THE FACT THAT THEY MET THE SCORING CRITERIA WHERE WE SAID, IF YOU RECEIVE SO MANY POINTS, YOU RECEIVE THE RESOLUTION. AGAIN, BACK TO THE ADOPTED, UM, COUNCIL POLICY. THESE ARE ALL OVER, UM, NINE COUNCIL DISTRICTS EXCEPT DISTRICT FOUR GOT APPLICATIONS. THIS IS A MAP THAT SHOWS THE LOCATION. AGAIN, UH, THEY'RE LOCATED IN RESPONSE TO THE SCORING AT THE STATE LEVEL. WE HAVE A VERY SIMPLE A HUNDRED, A HUNDRED POINT SCALE AT THE STATE. YOU GET IN THEIR SCORING 174 POINTS. UM, AND THEY LOOK AT DIFFERENT THINGS INCLUDING THOSE RESOLUTIONS. SO THESE ARE THE APPLICATIONS THAT WERE RECEIVED. AND EARLIER LAST, UM, EARLIER THIS YEAR, LAST WEEK, WE SENT A MEMO TO ALL COUNCIL DISTRICT OFFICES, ALERTING THEM AS TO WHAT HAD COME IN, UM, THE LIST, WHAT DISTRICT THEY WERE IN, UM, IF THEY WERE HAVING A PUBLIC MEETING AS WELL, AND A MAP. AND SO THIS IS THE FIRST SLIDE THAT SHOWS EIGHT OF THE APPLICATIONS HERE. THIS SHOWS, UM, SECOND SET OF THEM. SO YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE THE DIFFERENT DISTRICTS REPRESENTED HERE, THE UNITS BEING PROPOSED, WHAT OUR STAFF SCORE WAS, WHY IT'S BEING RECOMMENDED FOR RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT. THE ONE IN RED IS THE ONE THAT WAS WITHDRAWN. AND I KNOW THERE WAS SOME COPIES HANDED OUT THAT FOR SOME FORMATTING ISSUES, JUST BE AWARE IT, THE ONLY ONE WITHDRAWN IS THE ONE IN RED IN THIS PARTICULAR SLIDE. UM, EXCUSE ME, I'VE GOT A BUNCH OF BLACK AND RED ON MY SCREEN BLOCKING. OH, BOY. CAN'T. UM, SO THAT'S THE, I AM SO SORRY ABOUT THAT. UM, THAT'S A FORMATTING ERROR THAT WE SHOW SHOWED. UM, ARE ALL OF YOU HAVING THAT IN YOUR SCREEN? YEAH. OH MY GOD. YEAH. DO YOU HAVE, I PROMISE POINT. I'M SO SORRY. I, AN APPLICANT HAD TOLD US THEIR COPIES WERE NOT, UM, WE'RE SHOWING TOO MANY MARKS. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. BUT IT IS, UM, THE INFORMATION IN THE MEMO, I'M SORRY ABOUT . IT LOOKS GREAT ON THE SCREEN HERE. YEAH. YEAH. , UM, THAT'S NERVOUS GIGGLES RIGHT THERE. UM, SO I'LL, SO YOU CAN READ 'EM. WHY DON'T I PUT THE FIRST SLIDE. DO YOU WANT ME TO READ 'EM TO YOU? IF THEY'RE ALL BLACK? OH MY. OKAY. UM, SO I'LL START WITH THE FIRST SET. THESE ARE IN DISTRICT ONE. PROJECT NAME IS AVANTI RICH BY MUD HOUSE DEVELOPMENT. THEY'RE PROPOSING 62 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE SECOND PROJECT IS GA LANE APARTMENTS BY GRAY STREET PARTNERS, 60 UNITS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE LAST ONE IN DISTRICT ONE IS VISTA AT EVEREST BY ATLANTIC PACIFIC COMPANIES, 64 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN DISTRICT TWO. WE HAVE VILLAGE AT BOYER BY PROSPERA, PROPOSING 86 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE HAVE, UH, HAY STREET LTS BY WILL HOYT, HOPE I PRONOUNCE THAT RIGHT. PROPERTIES. THEY'RE PROPOSING 119 AFFORDABLE UNITS, BUT THE TOTAL UNIT MIXED. THERE'S 132 UNITS PROPOSED IN DISTRICT THREE. WE HAVE VALIENTE APARTMENTS BY VERSA DEVELOPMENT PROPOSING 120 AFFORDABLE UNITS. MS NUMBER FIVE, UH, I READ THE HAY STREET LOFTS. YES, BUT IT'S, UM, THAT SHOULD NOT BE STRUCK OUT. MAYBE I HAVE A FORMATTING ERROR. THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS WITHDRAWN IS THE ONE IN RED, SO I'M READING IT, SO IT'S CORRECT. UM, SO I WAS READING, UH, NUMBER SIX, VALIENTE APARTMENTS IN DISTRICT THREE, VIBRA DEVELOPMENT 120 GOING TO DISTRICT FIVE. WE HAVE CATTLEMEN SQUARE LOFTS BY ALAMO COMMUNITY GROUP AND BECO HOUSING LAB PROPOSING 139 AFFORDABLE UNITS. TOTAL UNITS IN THAT BUILDING ARE 154. THEN WE HAVE, UH, IN DISTRICT FIVE, STILL FISH POND AT PROSPECT HILL BY BECO HOUSING LAB PROPOSING 55 AFFORDABLE UNITS. DID WE FIND A, A COPIER IAN? YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. I, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. GOING ON TO DISTRICT SIX RA PLACE APARTMENTS BY THE CHAVEZ FOUNDATION, PROPOSING 135 AFFORDABLE UNITS IN DISTRICT SEVEN. WE HAVE AVANTI LEGACY MIDWEST BY MADHOUSE DEVELOPMENT. THEY'RE PROPOSING 80 AFFORDABLE UNITS. THE TOTAL UNITS IN THAT DEVELOPMENT [00:25:01] WOULD BE 90 UNITS. THEN WE MOVE ON TO DISTRICT EIGHT, WHICH HAPPENS TO HAVE THE MOST APPLICATIONS. FIRST ONE IN DISTRICT EIGHT IS CINNAMON CREEK FLATS BY N R P GROUP. THEY'RE PROPOSING 85 AFFORDABLE UNITS. THEN WE HAVE HAMILTON WOLF LOTS, AGAIN, BY N R P GROUP, PROPOSING 74 UNITS. WE HAVE FIESTA TRAILS. IT MIGHT BE STRUCK OUT IN YOUR COPY, BUT IT IS NOT WITHDRAWN. FIESTA TRAILS BY THE N R P GROUP PROPOSING 85 AFFORDABLE UNITS. RO WE ALL HAVE COPIES NOW. YOU GOT IT? SO YOU CAN, YOU CAN JUST GO, KEEP GOING THROUGH THE SLIDES. THANK YOU. I, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. NO, DON'T WORRY. UM, SO AGAIN, THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS WITHDRAWN IS THE VISTA AT HAMILTON WOLF BY ATLANTIC PACIFIC COMPANIES IN DISTRICT EIGHT. UM, AND AGAIN, BASED ON THE STAFF SCORING OF THESE, UM, WE ARE PROPOSING THAT THEY MOVE FORWARD TO GET RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT. BY THE TIME WE GO TO COUNCIL IN FEBRUARY, WE DO EXPECT A FEW MORE OF THESE TO DROP OFF AFTER THEY SEE WHAT ELSE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AT THE STATE. UM, THIS MIGHT BE THE FIRST TIME MANY APPLICANTS SEE WHO ELSE IS SUBMITTING AS WELL. UH, OVERALL THERE'S 23 NEW, 23 NEW CONSTRUCTION TYPES PROPOSED. UM, ONE REHAB IS PROPOSED. THERE'S 17 GENERAL MULTI-FAMILY AND SIX SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS. UM, WE DID DO PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AROUND THIS. UH, AND IN THE POLICY WE ASKED PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT BE PART OF, UM, THE CONSIDERATION DEVELOPERS HAVE. SO ONLY 15 APPLICANTS SUBMITTED THE PUBLIC INFORMATION PACKETS. NOT EVERYONE IS HOSTING A COMMUNITY MEETING AS THEY, UH, GO FORWARD, THEY CAN GET POINTS THROUGH THE CITY FOR THAT. UH, SO AGAIN, 15 APPLICANTS HOLDING PUBLIC MEETINGS, ALL OF THEM ARE HAPPENING IN JANUARY. UH, AND SEVEN APPLICANTS DID NOT, UM, DID NOT INDICATE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT RELATED TO THIS. THERE'S SOME, UM, DEVELOPMENTS THAT WOULD NEED ADDITIONAL BESIDES THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT, ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION IN AN ORDINANCE OR A RESOLUTION TO GET A, UH, WAIVER FOR THE ONE MILE, UH, THREE YEAR RULE. THERE'S A RULE AT T D H C A THAT SAYS THAT IF, UM, A DEVELOPMENT IS WITHIN ONE MILE OF A PREVIOUSLY AWARDED DEVELOPMENT, UH, IN THE LAST THREE YEARS, THEY NEED COUNSEL TO SAY, OKAY, UM, IN A RESOLUTION. THERE'S ANOTHER RULE THAT INDICATES THAT IF MORE THAN 20% OF THE HOUSING UNITS, UM, IN A CERTAIN CENSUS TRACT ARE SUPPORTED BY HOUSING TAX CREDITS, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH A RESOLUTION HAS TO ISSUE A WAIVER. AND SO THERE'S SOME IMPACTED BY THAT. UM, IF DEVELOPMENTS ARE PROPOSED TO BE IN A CENSUS TRACT THAT HAS, UH, MORE THAN 40% OF POVERTY AS DESCRIBED BY HUD, THEY ALSO NEED A WAIVER. UM, THIS IS TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S NOT A CONCENTRATION OF POOR PEOPLE IN A CERTAIN CENSUS TRACT. IT'S ALLOWED, BUT AGAIN, COUNCIL HAS TO ADD THAT IN THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT. AND THERE ARE RESOLUTIONS BEING LOOKED AT FOR, UM, PLANS THAT CONTRIBUTE THE MOST FOR THE REVITALIZATION OF AN AREA. AND SO THERE'LL BE SEVERAL THAT HAVE INDICATED THEY ARE WITHIN A CITY ADOPTED, UH, PLAN AND WOULD LIKE THE RESOLUTION. WE DO HAVE TIEBREAKER CRITERIA WHEN MORE THAN ONE DEVELOPMENT HAS INDICATED THEY WANNA USE ONE PLAN. AND SO WE'LL BE REVIEWING THAT AS THE SCORING FROM T D H C A COMES OUT. AGAIN, APPLICATIONS AT T D H C A ARE DUE TODAY, AND THE SCORING MORE THAN LIKELY WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR US THIS FRIDAY. SO WE CAN MAKE THE TIEBREAKER DETERMINATIONS FOR THE CONTRIBUTING MOST, UM, CRITERIA FOR REVITALIZATION PLANS. SO THOSE ACTIONS WE HAVE TO MOVE RATHER QUICKLY TO GET THIS IN FRONT OF COUNCIL. UH, AND THOSE ARE THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM OUR STAFF TEAM. UM, I KNOW THIS TABLE IS HARD TO SEE, BUT IT SHOWS FOR EACH DEVELOPMENT, WHICH, UM, IN ADDITION TO THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT, WHICH OF THE RULES THEY WOULD NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN THEIR RESOLUTION. AND AGAIN, THE CRITERIA FOR CONTRIBUTING MOST WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE TIE TIEBREAKER PROCESS. UM, THIS WAS A QUICK WAY TO SHOW YOU, UM, THAT THE RESOLUTIONS WILL, WILL NOT ALL LOOK THE SAME. AND THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION, UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AND MANY OF THE DEVELOPERS ARE IN THE ROOM, AND IF I CAN'T ANSWER A QUESTION, I'M SURE THEY'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS AS WELL. HMM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, I DO HAVE QUESTIONS. SO, UM, I THINK FIRST CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE IN SLIDE NUMBER, UH, LEMME SEE. IN SLIDE NUMBER [00:30:01] EIGHT, I THINK IT WAS, IT SAYS, UM, TOTAL APPLICANT 131 AND THEN 20 20, 24 APPLICATIONS RECEIVED MM-HMM. . SO THIS ARE APPLICATIONS THAT ENDED UP BEING SUBMITTED TO T D H C A, BUT LAST YEAR, FOR EXAMPLE, WE GOT 22 OR 23 THAT STARTED THE PROCESS. SOME DROPPED OFF. SO THIS IS THE SUBMITTALS TO T D H C A, IS THAT THE QUESTION YOU'RE LOOKING AT? OR WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS THERE'S 131, UM, SUBMITTED TO THE STATE FROM ALL REGIONS. OH, OKAY. 24 OR AT THAT TIME, 10 WERE FROM REGION NINE. OKAY. AND FOUR WERE AWARDED. OKAY. AND SO WE HAD 24 THIS YEAR THAT WERE SUBMITTED FROM SAN ANTONIO. OKAY. WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE STATE UNTIL TODAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, THANK YOU. YES. THAT WAS MY QUESTION FOR CLARIFICATION. UM, AND THEN I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THIS, UM, YOU RECOMMEND 23 RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT. SO TELL ME WHAT THESE RESOLUTIONS WILL OF SUPPORT WILL SAY. UM, AND I THINK I JUST NEED CLARIFICATION BECAUSE I HAD PEOPLE EMAILING ME SAYING THAT THEY NEEDED A LETTER FROM THE COUNCILWOMAN SAYING THAT SHE RECEIVED AN EMAIL AND IT COULDN'T BEFORE A CERTAIN TIME. SO I NEED TO BE SURE OF WHAT I SAID, THAT THIS DOES NOT SAY THAT I'M GIVING A RESOLUTION OF, UH, NO OBJECTION OR OF SUPPORT. THIS JUST MEANS THAT I RECEIVED AN EMAIL. RIGHT. AND, UM, CORRECT. I DON'T KNOW. SO WE'RE GIVING THEM POINTS, THE FIVE POINTS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, BECAUSE THEY SAY THEY'RE GONNA DO A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. OR WHAT DOES PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, HOW IS THAT DEFINED IN OUR POLICY? SURE. UM, SO LAST YEAR IN THE POLICY, AND IAN IS HERE TO, TO HELP CLARIFY IF I DON'T DO THIS JUSTICE, WE DID CLARIFY, UM, THAT THEY HAD TO INFORM THE COUNCIL DISTRICT OFFICE THAT THEY WERE SUBMITTING THE R F A ITSELF. AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT NOTIFICATION, IF YOU WOULD, WAS NOT GONNA BE SEEN AS AN ENDORSEMENT OF THEIR APPLICATION. SO THAT'S WHY IT WAS, UH, AN EMAIL, YOU KNOW, LETTING, LETTING US AND STAFF KNOW THAT THE COUNCIL OFFICE WAS MADE AWARE BY THE DEVELOPER THAT THEY WERE SUBMITTING AN R F A. UM, AND SO IT, IT WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE AN ENDORSEMENT, IT'S JUST SUPPOSED TO BE THAT WE DID INFORM THE COUNCIL OFFICE, UM, THAT WE DID THIS. SO HERE'S MY SUBMITTAL FOR THE R F A WITH REGARDS TO PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. THESE ARE NOT REQUIRED POINTS. THEY'RE ONE WAY IN WHICH THEY CAN GET POINTS. BUT FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, IT'S AN INFORMATION PACKET, UH, A POTENTIAL COMMUNITY MEETING. SO IF THEY, WHAT IS AN INFORMATION PACKET? IAN, DO YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT THAT? SURE. THE INFORMATION AND THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. YEAH. SO REALLY QUICK, UM, COUNCILWOMAN, OH, SORRY. IAN VAN. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I MENTIONED, YOU HAVE TO BE REALLY QUICK. WE JUST WANNA BE THOROUGH ABOUT THIS. GO AHEAD. YEAH. SO THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE PROCESSES. THERE IS THE, UM, CITY PROCESS BY WHICH DEVELOPERS APPLY FOR THE HOUSING TAX CREDITS. AND THAT'S THE POLICY THAT YOU MOST RECENTLY APPROVED. AND THAT IS OUR A HUNDRED POINT SCORING SYSTEM. AND THAT INCLUDES IN INCENTIVIZING DEEPER AFFORDABILITY, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, THINGS LIKE THAT. SURE. SO AS THEY SUBMIT TO US, FOR US TO REVIEW, WE ASK THEM TO REACH OUT TO THE COUNCIL OFFICE SO THAT YOU ARE ALL AWARE THAT A DEVELOPER SUBMITTING WITHIN YOUR COUNCIL DISTRICT. AND WE ALSO ASK THEM ON THEIR SCORING CRITERIA IF THEY WILL BE DOING PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, BECAUSE THAT IS A COUNCIL PRIORITY. THERE ARE, UM, POINTS FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, TWO WAYS YOU CAN GET IT. UM, YOU CAN SUBMIT A PUBLIC INFORMATION PACKET, WHICH INCLUDES INFORMATION ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT, HOW MANY UNITS, WHERE IT'S GONNA BE, UM, TIMELINE, THINGS LIKE THAT. AND THEN THERE IS THE ACTUAL PUBLIC MEETING. AND WHEN WE HOLD THAT, WE ASK THEM TO REACH OUT TO YOU AND TO CITY STAFF TO LET US KNOW WHEN IT'S HAPPENING SO THAT THEY CAN NOTIFY, UM, SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND RESIDENTS. UM, WHO GETS THIS PUBLIC INFORMATION PACKET. WE HAVE THEM SEND IT WITHIN 200 FEET TO PROPERTY OWNERS AS WELL AS TO PLANNING AREAS AND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND CITY STAFF. OKAY. YEAH. UM, DO WE HAVE, UH, DO YOU HAVE A SAMPLE OF WHAT ONE LOOKS LIKE? RIGHT? I DON'T HAVE ONE RIGHT NOW, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY SEND ONE TO YOU. OKAY. UM, AND SO, BUT AGAIN, THEY GET THIS FIVE POINTS BECAUSE THEY SAY THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. AND SO THERE'S TOTAL OF 10 POINTS YOU CAN DO A PUBLIC MEETING. UM, AND YOU CAN ALSO DO, UM, THE PUBLIC INFORMATION PACKET AND WE VERIFY BOTH. UM, AND THE PUBLIC MEETING WE ATTEND, STAFF ATTENDS ALL OF THOSE MEETINGS AND WE MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE HELD. AND WE ALSO REQUIRE THEM TO POST THE INFORMATION ON THEIR SITE SO IT'S PUBLICLY AVAILABLE AND IN THEIR LETTERS. DO THEY SAY THAT, UM, IN THEIR PUBLIC INFORMATION, DO THEY SAY [00:35:01] THAT THIS IS JUST PUBLIC INFORMATION? NOTHING HAS BEEN CONFIRMED. NOTHING HAS, THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. THE, IT JUST SAYS THAT THEY ARE SUBMITTING FOR 9% HOUSING TAX CREDITS AND THAT THEY'RE HOLDING A MEETING FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS THE COMMUNITY MAY HAVE. AND THEY'RE THERE TO ANSWER THEM IF THEY ARE. OKAY. UM, AND I THINK PART OF THE, THE SHOCK IS THAT THIS IS SUCH A FAST PROCESS TOO, BECAUSE IT OPENS IN DECEMBER EVERY, ALL THE DEVELOPERS HAVE TO GET EVERYTHING TOGETHER IN ORDER TO PUT THEIR APPLICATION TOGETHER. AND THEN WE GET EMAILS THAT SAY, WE NEED THE, WE'RE LETTING YOU KNOW THAT THIS IS HAPPENING MM-HMM. . AND, UM, THEN WE POSSIBLY GET PHONE CALLS OR EMAILS FROM OUR CONSTITUENTS SAYING, WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT HERE? OR CALLS FROM THE MEDIA ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT HERE WHEN WE HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN BRIEFED ABOUT WHAT THE PROJECTS ARE. BUT WE JUST HAVE AN EMAIL THAT PEOPLE ARE CONSIDERING DOING THESE THINGS. UM, SO THAT'S WHY I'VE ALWAYS BEEN A LITTLE BIT VOCAL ABOUT THIS PROCESS. MM-HMM. AND I'LL CONTINUE TO BE, UM, ALWAYS SEEING WHERE WE CAN DO BETTER. ALWAYS TRYING TO DO BETTER HERE, UM, WITH THAT. SO WHAT WILL THESE RESOLUTIONS, YOU KEEP SAYING RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT, YOU'RE RECOMMENDING RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT. SO THAT'S, UH, THAT'S RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT, NOT JUST RESOLUTIONS OF NO OBJECTION. YEAH. CORRECT. AND IT'S JUST DIFFERENT WORDING. AND WE CAN SEND YOU A SAMPLE OF THOSE AS WELL, SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT I MEAN, I'VE SEEN THEM BEFORE, BUT YOU'RE SAYING DIFFERENT WORDING. SO WHEN CONSTITUENTS SEE IT, IT SAYS THE CITY COUNCIL'S ALREADY APPROVING THIS PACKAGE, THIS, THIS PROJECT, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVEN'T BEEN BRIEFED ON IT YET, WE DON'T BRING THEM FOR RESOLUTIONS UNTIL AFTER. SO AFTER CITY COUNCIL HAS APPROVED THE RESOLUTIONS. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THE PUBLIC MEETING IS JUST SAYING THAT THEY'RE APPLYING FOR, UM, 9% HOUSING TAX CREDIT. IT'S NOT THAT THEY'VE BEEN AWARDED A RESOLUTION. MM-HMM. . OKAY. UM, I'M GOING TO YIELD THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW. DO MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ANDREW SULLIVAN. THANK YOU. SO I HAVE A QUESTION. WHEN IT COMES TO THE SEVEN APPLICANTS THAT, UM, DID NOT DO PUBLIC ENGAGEMENTS, CAN WE AS COUNCIL MEMBERS RECEIVE, WHICH APPLICANTS DECIDED NOT TO? AND, UM, WE, WE SENT THAT INFORMATION IN THE, UM, MEMO WE SENT OUT THAT HAD THE LIST OF EVERYONE WHO CAME IN. SO ESSENTIALLY EVERYONE HOLDING A PUBLIC MEETING, WE LISTED THE PUBLIC MEETINGS, BUT WHAT SENT IT? DO YOU HAVE THEM NOW? UM, I DID NOT BRING THE MEMO, BUT WE DO HAVE THE LIST, SO YEAH, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH THEM. OKAY. BUT HERE'S THE ONE WHERE IT SAYS PUBLIC MEETING. OKAY. THE ONES THAT DO NOT ARE, SO I'LL GO THROUGH THE SEVEN. UH, BUT THIS WAS PERFECT IN AN YOUR EMAIL THAN WHAT I'M READING RIGHT NOW. RIGHT. WE RECEIVE IT, BUT OUR CONSTITUENTS DON'T KNOW. SO WHEN THEY ASK US WHY IS IT NOT PART OF THE PRESENTATION OR, YOU KNOW, THEY JUST SEE THE NUMBER UP THERE, THAT DOESN'T GIVE THEM THE INSIGHT OF, OF WHO THE, THE PROCESS. SURE. SO THE, UH, DEVELOPERS OR DEVELOPMENT NAMES THAT ARE NOT HAVING A PUBLIC MEETING ARE VISTA AT EVEREST IN COUNCIL ONE, UH, LENTE APARTMENTS IN COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE FISH POND, THAT PROSPECT HILL IN DISTRICT FIVE CULEBRA PLACE APARTMENTS IN DISTRICT SIX, FIESTA TRAILS IN DISTRICT EIGHT, WOODSTONE RESERVE IN DISTRICT EIGHT. UH, THE ONE THAT WITHDREW VISTA AT HAMILTON WOLF IN DISTRICT EIGHT. AVANTI NORTH LOOP IN DISTRICT NINE VISTA AT INTER PARK IN DISTRICT NINE. SO THAT, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SEVEN. THOSE, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE NOT HOLDING A PUBLIC MEETING, BUT EVERYONE ELSE IS HOLDING A PUBLIC MEETING OR HAS HOSTED A PUBLIC MEETING. AND THEN WE AS COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THOSE PARTICULAR DEVELOPERS TO GO BACK OUT AND DO PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. CORRECT. THAT'S YOUR PREROGATIVE. IF, IF YOU WISH TO DO ADDITIONAL, UM, OR ASK 'EM TO DO ADDITIONAL PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. RIGHT. FOR OUR PURPOSE, PURPOSE, 'CAUSE THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HEAR MOST, IS THAT THE TRANSPARENCY THAT WE HAVE AMONGST THE CITY TO OUR CONSTITUENTS, IT'S NOT THERE WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY FOR PROJECTS SUCH AS THIS. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS KNOW THAT WE'RE DOING WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO TO MAKE SURE THEY GET THE INFORMATION. OKAY. AND AGAIN, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IS PART OF THE SCORING. IT'S NOT REQUIRED, BUT IT DOES RECEIVE POINTS IF THEY DO IT. SO IT'S ENCOURAGED IN THAT WAY BECAUSE THESE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THE PAST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE. THANK YOU. MADAM CHAIR. UH, [00:40:01] THE SEVEN THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT MAY NOT HAVE HAD PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, DOES THAT MEAN NO PUBLIC MEETING OR THAT THEY DIDN'T EVEN PUT THE PACKET TOGETHER? HMM, EITHER. THEY DIDN'T DO EITHER. OKAY. CORRECT. UM, I NOTICED ON, UM, LET'S SEE WHAT PAGE IT IS. IT'S THE ONE THAT HAS STAFF RECOMMENDATION. IT SHOWS ALL 23 AND ALL THE CHECK MARKS ON IT, THE LAST ONE. OKAY. UH, THERE'S SOME ASTERISKS AND SOME MINUSES AND PLUSES, AND THEN THERE'S A LITTLE BOX DOWN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER THAT KIND OF EXPLAINS THAT. AND I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN ASTERISK AND A, AND, UH, A DASH A DASH. BUT THE, UH, EXPLANATION IS EXACTLY THE SAME FOR EITHER ONE. HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO TELL THOSE APART? SO THIS IS WHERE THE TIE BREAKER, WHY IS THE YEAH. YES. THIS IS THE TIE BREAKER THAT'S PART IN THE POLICY. UM, WE CAN'T DETERMINE WHEN THERE'S TWO, UM, DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE ASKING TO BE RECOGNIZED AS THE ONE CONTRIBUTING THE MOST TO A PLAN, WHICH ONE WILL GET IT. RIGHT NOW, THE TIEBREAKERS THAT WE GO WITH THE HIGHEST SCORING, THERE'S A SERIES OF TIEBREAKERS ADOPTED IN YOUR POLICY. SO THE FIRST THING WE LOOK AT IS WHO IS THE HIGHEST SCORING, UH, PER T D H C A THAT WE CAN, UH, SELECT. SO THAT'S THE, SO AS THE ASTERISK GETS HIGHER SCORING THAN IF IT HAS A, A CHECK NEXT TO IT, SAME POINTS. IF THEY HAVE THE SAME NO, THEY'RE, THEY'RE APPLYING FOR THE SAME POINTS. UM, BUT WE, WE DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE OF THEM WILL COME IN. SO THE SYMBOL IS THAT THEY'RE APPLYING FOR THE SAME POINTS. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE A A, B B C C LAWYER. I, OH, I'LL EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU. UM, SO FOR YOU TO GET THESE POINTS, YOU HAVE TO BE IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ZONE THAT WAS DESIGNATED BY COUNCIL. RIGHT? SO TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONES, THOSE COUNT FOR THOSE. UM, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT AREAS COUNT FOR THOSE. AND SO IN, IN A CASE WHERE YOU HAVE TWO OF THESE PROJECTS THAT ARE WITHIN ONE OF THOSE ZONES, SO LET'S SAY TWO PROJECTS ARE WITHIN THE HOUSTON STREET TOURS, RIGHT? THE ONE THAT SCORES THE HIGHEST DURING THE T D H C PROCESS WILL GET THESE POINTS. WE'LL GET THIS POINT. SO THEY'LL DO THE PRO, THEY'LL DO THE SCORING, AND THEN IF ONE PROJECT SCORE IS 81 AND ONE PROJECT SCORE IS 75, THE ONE THAT SCORED 81 IS GOING TO GET THE POINTS FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THAT AREA. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND I DON'T WANNA BELABOR NO, THIS IS A VERY CONFUSING MY POINT. YEAH. IT'S, IT'S KIND OF CONFUSING. YES. OKAY. LET ME MOVE ON TO SOMETHING, ANOTHER QUESTION I HAD MORE DIRECT, UH, WE NOTICED IN AN EARLIER PAGE THAT YOU ACTUALLY SHOWED THE SCORES THAT A LOT OF THESE HAVE, UH, AND SOME 198, MID NINETIES, LOW NINETIES AND BELOW. UH, AND THEN AT THE SAME TIME ON THIS PAGE, WE SHOW THOSE THAT NEED A WAIVER THAT DON'T QUITE MEET THE STANDARD THE WAY IT'S SET BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING INTO AN AREA THAT HAS ONE ALREADY, OR WHEN IT WAS DONE RECENTLY IN THAT AREA. SO MY, MY POINT IS, WHY DO WE GIVE EVERYBODY THE SAME RATING THAT WE SEND TO THE STATE? WHY DON'T WE, UH, JUST TRY AND NOT NECESSARILY PLAY WINNERS AND LOSERS, BUT NARROW IT DOWN SO THAT THE ONES THAT ABSOLUTELY MEET THE CRITERIA AND DON'T NEED A WAIVER, AND THE ONES THAT HAVE THE HIGHEST POINTS, WHY DON'T WE GIVE THEM THE, THE HIGHER OF THE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS TO KIND OF ELIMINATE, OR, OR MAYBE IT IS EVEN TO HELP, YOU KNOW, ENSURE THAT WE GET THE VERY BEST PROJECTS WE CAN. SO WHY, WHY DON'T WE CONSIDER THAT WHEN WE GIVE THESE NOMINATIONS FORWARD? SO FIRST I WANNA EXPLAIN FOR YOU TO GET A RESOLUTION, A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT, YOU HAVE TO SCORE 75 POINTS OR HIGHER THROUGH A HUNDRED POINT SCORING PROCESS. AND SO FOR THOSE THAT DIDN'T PROVIDE THAT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OR INFORMATION PACKET, THEY PROVIDED DEEPER AFFORDABILITY OR SOMETHING ELSE, AND THAT'S WHY THEY SCORED HIGHER. AND THEN YOU CAN GET A RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION. IF YOU SCORE BETWEEN 60 AND 74 POINTS ON OUR CRITERIA, THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT COMES, IT HAS 17 POINTS APPLIED TO IT AT THE STATE LEVEL. RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION IS 14 POINTS. AND SO THAT IS A POLICY THAT WAS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL AS WE REVIEWED THESE 9% TAX CREDITS. SO THIS SCORING IS DONE IN LINE WITH THAT POLICY. NOW, THERE MIGHT BE PROJECTS THAT RECEIVED, UM, A WAIVER OR NOT A WAIVER THAT RECEIVED THE, HIS THE TAX CREDITS LAST YEAR. AND THERE'S ANOTHER PROJECT WITHIN A MILE, BUT MAYBE THAT AREA NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND SO WE, IT'S NOT SAYING THAT WE'RE PROVIDING A WAIVER TO THE, UM, TO THE SCORING PROCESS. WHAT THE STATE IS SAYING IS WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOU KNOW THAT THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN ONE MILE OF A PROJECT THAT RECEIVED THE [00:45:01] APPLICATION, THE, THE CREDITS LAST YEAR. WE WANT YOU TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU IN, IN DISTRICT TWO, YOU MIGHT HAVE SEVERAL PROJECTS THAT, YOU KNOW, RECEIVED THE TAX CREDITS LAST YEAR, DISTRICT FIVE, DISTRICT THREE, AND WE WANNA CONTINUE THOSE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS. SO WE DON'T WANNA HINDER THEM BY NOT PROVIDING THE WAIVER. AND SO THE ACTUAL STATE APPLICATION PROVIDES FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. IT, IT DOESN'T KNOCK POINTS OFF, IT JUST SAYS, WE WANT THE CITY TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS PROJECT WAS WITHIN ONE MILE. AND THEY'RE OKAY WITH THAT. BUT I KNOW THAT LAST YEAR WE ACTUALLY DID SAY WE WANTED TO HAVE A PARTICULAR PROJECT, GET THOSE EXTRA POINTS MM-HMM. . SO WE SAID WE SUPPORT THIS ONE. WE ALSO DON'T HAVE OBJECTIONS TO ALL THE REST OF THEM. SO WE'VE, WE'VE MADE THAT DESIGNATION IN CERTAIN AREAS BEFORE. AND I'M NOT, LIKE I SAY, I'M NOT TRYING TO PLAY FAVORITES AT ALL. I'M JUST SAYING THAT WHY DON'T WE HELP THOSE THAT MEET ALL THE CRITERIA AND GET THE HIGHEST POINTS A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WE HELP EVERYBODY ELSE. SO, AND WHAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR WAS WHY WE WENT FORWARD AND DID THE 9% AND 4% TAX CREDIT POLICY. UM, AND WE WENT THROUGH THAT. WE DID A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS AND WE CAME BACK TO THIS COMMITTEE AS WELL AS CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT THE POLICY. AND SO THAT POLICY WAS UPDATED AS A RESULT OF WHAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR. OKAY. ALRIGHT. FAIR ENOUGH. THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, THANK YOU. I, I DO HAVE, UH, ONE MORE QUESTION AT, UM, THE PROJECT TYPE SUMMARY HERE. THE, UM, WHICH ONES ON SLIDE NUMBER 14, WHICH ONES ARE REHAB AND WHICH ONES ARE SENIOR HOUSING? I HAVE A, A SPREADSHEET THAT HAS THAT INFORMATION. CAN I FOLLOW UP OR DO YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH? CAN YOU GO THROUGH THEM? OKAY. SO YOU, SO WHICH ONES ARE SENIOR HOUSING? SO THE SENIOR HOUSING, THE FIRST ONE IS AVANTI AVANTI LEGACY MIDWEST BY MAD HOUSE IN DISTRICT SEVEN. THERE'S ONE IN DISTRICT FIVE PROPOSED. IT'S THE FISH POND THAT PROSPECT HILL HMM. IN DISTRICT EIGHT CAME PLACE. OKAY. ALSO IN DISTRICT PLACE, AVANTI LEGACY AT FREDERICKSBURG BY MADHOUSE. AND THEN, UH, ALSO IN DISTRICT EIGHT, ABINGTON GREENWAY BY R E A VENTURES GROUP. AND THE LAST ONE IS TRAILSIDE CREEK BY J E S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. IN DISTRICT 10. HMM. THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SEVEN. OKAY. AND THE REHAB, DID I MISS ONE FISH POND? THE REHAB, UH, PROJECT. OH, THE REHAB PROJECT. UHHUH . UM, THE REHAB IS THE FISH POND THAT PROSPECT HILL IN DISTRICT FIVE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. OKAY. AND COUNSEL, WE'LL SEND UP THIS UPDATE UPDATED LIST TO YOU AFTER TODAY'S MEETING YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR THIS TO THIS PRESENTATION. I THINK THIS ALSO GIVES, YOU KNOW, MY, MY, UH, CRITICISM OF IT BEING SO FAST. AND, UH, IT'S, IT'S GOOD THOUGH TO HAVE THIS RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR SO WE KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT. WE KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE HAPPENING. UM, AND WE KNOW WHAT TO BE LOOKING FOR IN OUR RESIDENTS AND IN OUR, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. WHEN IT ALL COMES, I DO APPRECIATE YOU SHARING IT WITH US WHO ARE PLANNING ON DOING PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND WHO ARE NOT. 'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF US AT THE CITY COUNCIL TO, UM, TO KNOW ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OUR DISTRICTS. AND WE KNOW THAT THIS IS A HIGHLY COMPETITIVE, UH, PROGRAM, NOT JUST WITHIN SAN ANTONIO, BUT STATEWIDE. UM, AND WE ALSO WANT TO REITERATE THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHO GETS THESE 9% UNTIL JULY. CORRECT. UM, SO WE'RE DOING ALL OF THIS WORK OF REALLY HEAVY THIS BEGINNING OF THE YEAR FOR SOMETHING THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA KNOW UNTIL THE END OF, WELL, UNTIL JULY. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO, TO CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES. AND COUNCILMAN, YOU KNOW THIS, BUT FOR, FOR SOME WHO DON'T, IT TAKES A LONG TIME TO PUT A PROJECT TOGETHER. AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO CONDENSE A TIMELINE SO PEOPLE HAVE MORE TIME TO PUT THEIR PROJECTS TOGETHER. BECAUSE AS SOME OF YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF STOPS AND STARTS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE STARTED THIS PROCESS IN DECEMBER, GOT THE APPLICATIONS IN DECEMBER, AND THEN WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, PROVIDE THE RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT IN FEBRUARY, THEY SUBMIT THEIR APPLICATION AND THAT, AND THEN THEY FIND OUT IN JULY. SO THAT REALLY GIVES PEOPLE ABOUT SIX [00:50:01] MONTHS TO PUT A PROJECT TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE IT SCORES ENOUGH. AND SO IT, WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN DO THAT NOTIFICATION PROCESS BETTER TO YOU ALL, BUT STILL ALLOW A DEVELOPER ENOUGH TIME TO PUT TOGETHER A VERY COMPREHENSIVE APPLICATION. I AGREE. AND THIS IS ALSO SOMETHING ABOUT FLEXIBILITY AND BEING NIMBLE ON THE CITY'S PART. I KNOW THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS MAYBE AN OUTSIDE OF OUR, UH, FRAME OF DOING THINGS, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DO. 'CAUSE WE NEED TO STAY COMPETITIVE SIT, UH, STATEWIDE AS WELL. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DO AND, UM, APPRECIATE IT. SO WITH THAT, YOU NEED A MOTION, UH, TO MOVE FORWARD? YES, MA'AM. TO FULL COUNSEL CONSIDERATION? MM-HMM. . OKAY. SO I'LL, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO MOVE THIS TO FULL COUNSEL CONSIDERATION. SO MOVED. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO MOVE THIS TO FULL COUNSEL CONSIDERATION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. UM, NEXT, IT'S A, [Consent Agenda] UH, CONSENT ITEM AND IT'S ITEM NUMBER FIVE, AMENDED RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION FOR TICO APARTMENTS LPS APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. UH, 4% HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF TOMICO APARTMENTS 200 UNIT AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 200 TAMPICO IN DISTRICT FIVE. IT WAS PART OF OUR AGENDA PACKETS. I WILL MOVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR CONSENT AGENDA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. AND AGAIN, UM, I GET, I GUESS FOR BRIDGET, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE. BRIDGETT WHITE, APPRECIATE THAT. AND FOR OUR BRIEFING ON THE GROWTH AND ANNEXATION POLICY UPDATE, I THINK THIS IS AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ITEM THAT I KNOW THAT WE NEED SOME CLARIFICATION ON. AND I KNOW THIS IS PHASE TWO THAT WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT AND PHASE ONE AND THEN WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT PHASE TWO MOVING FORWARD. I DON'T WANNA BE BRIEFED RIGHT NOW, BUT YOU CAN JUST CLARIFY SO WE'LL KNOW WHAT WE'RE EXPECTING. YEAH. SO THE PRESENTATION WAS ON PHASE ONE, THE FINDINGS RELATED TO WHAT IS ANNEXATION AND GROWTH. OKAY. THEN LATER ON IT'LL BE PHASE TWO, THE ACTUAL POLICY. OKAY. AND SO I GUESS LORI OR BRIDGETTE, SO IS IN THIS CONVERSATION, ARE WE GONNA BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT THE MORATORIUM ABOUT THE PIS AND EVERYTHING AND HOW, WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE NEEDING TO DO WITH THAT? SO THAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE, ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE COMPONENTS OF TODAY'S PRESENTATION TO TALK ABOUT THAT. WE DO HAVE TWO PIDS THAT HAD ALREADY GONE FORWARD TO PLANNING COMMISSION UHHUH AND THEY WERE ON HOLD. UM, WE, WE ARE, WE ARE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION ON HOW TO PROCEED WITH THOSE. AS OF RIGHT NOW. STAFF COULD PROCEED TO COUNCIL ON JANUARY 30TH MM-HMM. WITH THOSE, OR WE COULD WAIT UNTIL THE ANNEXATION AND GROWTH POLICY IS COMPLETE, WHICH WOULD BE LATE SPRING. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, WELL WE NEED TIMELINE. THERE IS A, A TIMELINE FOR ONE OF THEM BECAUSE THEY'D HAVE TO SET UP THEIR, UM, SO ELECTION SO WE CAN DO INDIVIDUAL BRIEFINGS YEAH. WITH THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND TALK ABOUT THE IMPACTS AND THE PROS AND CONS OF EACH OF THOSE. SO LET'S HAVE THOSE INDIVIDUAL BRIEFINGS AND I KNOW WE WANNA DO THE GROUP BRIEFING AND HAVE IT ALL SO WE CAN BE, UH, THOROUGHLY PREPARED AS WE, UH, ADDRESS THIS ITEM AND GET BRIEFED AT THE COMMITTEE ME MEETING NEXT MONTH WITH OUR CHAIR HERE PRESENT TOO. SO THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH AND WE STAND ADJOURNED UNLESS ANYBODY HAS ANOTHER BURNING QUESTION. OKAY. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. GOOD JOB. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.