* 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. 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. [00:00:07] GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. I HOPE YOU CAN HEAR ME. I HOPE EVERYBODY'S DOING WELL. UH, WELCOME TO THE MEETING OF THE AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE FOR TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20TH. AND, UH, TODAY WE HAVE A RATHER LENGTHY AGENDA. UH, WE'LL BE GOING OVER SOME, A FEW CONSENT ITEMS, BUT, UH, SEVERAL ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYBODY, THANK YOU TO ALL MY COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO ARE HERE, AND I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND DO A ROLL CALL FOR ALL THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS. CHAIRMAN RIDGE PRESENT, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER SANDOVAL PRESENT, COUNCIL MEMBER PERRY HERE, CITIZEN MEMBER PRISCILLA SOTO. PRESENT CITIZEN MEMBER JUDY TREVINO, CHAIR, YOU HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU, UH, TO BEGIN THE MEETING. I HOPE ALL OF YOU HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW EVERYTHING, [1. 20-6099 Approval of the minutes from the Audit and Accountability Committee meeting on September 15, 2020] UH, SENT TO YOU AHEAD OF TIME. WE'LL BEGIN WITH APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE FROM SEPTEMBER 15TH. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO DO SO. I MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15TH. UH, ALL IN, OH, ARE THERE ANY CHANGES? RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES TO THE MINUTES? OKAY. HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AND RAISE YOUR HAND. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. OKAY. THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE HAVE SEVERAL ITEMS [CONSENT AGENDA] ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA. UH, THE FIRST IS A PRES SOLICITATION HIGH PROFILE ITEM ON THE ADOLESCENT BEHAVIORAL AND COUNSELING SERVICES. UH, THE NEXT IS, UH, AN ITEM ON ON-CALL ENGINEERING AND LANDSCAPING SERVICES. THEN WE HAVE TWO FINAL AUDIT REPORTS ON CONSENT, UH, THE AUDITED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT LANDFILL CONTRACT, AND THE AUDIT OF THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT, MIDTOWN TAX INTER INCREMENT INVESTMENT. SO THOSE FOUR ITEMS ARE ON CONSENT AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THOSE, TAKE ANY OF THOSE ITEMS OFF CONSENT FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. OKAY. HEARING NO COMMENTS, SEEING NO HANDS GO UP, THEN UH, I WOULD WELCOME A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FOUR ITEMS ON CONSENT. SO MOVED. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. I'LL SECOND. THANK YOU. MEMBER TREVINO. OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEMS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. RAISE YOUR HAND. AYE. AYE. OKAY. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. HEARING NONE, THE CONSENT ITEMS HAVE BEEN APPROVED TODAY. WE HAVE NUMEROUS ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. [6. 20-6020 Biannual High Profile Procurement Forecast [Ben Gorzell, Chief Financial Officer; Troy Elliott, Deputy Chief Financial Officer]] UH, THE FIRST ITEM IS, UH, TO BE GIVEN BY THE STAFF ON THEIR BIANNUAL HIGH PROFILE PROCUREMENT FORECAST. AND, UH, WILL WE BE HEARING FROM TROY ON THAT OR FROM BEN OR BOTH? UH, HE'LL PRIMARILY BE HEARING FROM ME. WE'LL KIND OF TAG TEAM AS WE GO THROUGH. UH, THANK YOU. OKAY. GO AHEAD TROY. UH, THANK YOU CHAIR, AND GOOD MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. UH, MY NAME'S TROY ELLIOTT. I'M THE DEPUTY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER FOR THE CITY. UM, AND ONE OF MY CHIEF RESPONSIBILITY IS PROCUREMENT. AND TODAY I'LL BE PRESENTING THE BIANNUAL FORECAST THAT THE CHAIR JUST MENTIONED. UM, IF YOU CAN GO TO SLIDE TWO, LAUREN. UM, AS YOU KNOW, EACH, EACH YEAR WE COME TO YOU TWICE A YEAR, AND WE'RE GONNA PRESENT A FORECAST OF THE HIGH PROFILE ITEMS. AND THOSE HIGH PROFILE ITEMS, UM, WILL BE, BE PRESENTED IN A COUPLE OF CATEGORIES. STAFF WILL BE RECOMMENDING THOSE ITEMS THAT WILL BE PRESENTED AS A SELECT INDIVIDUAL TO THE B SESSION. AND I'LL BE GOING OVER THOSE CRITERIA IN A COUPLE MINUTES THAT ACTUALLY IDENTIFY WHICH ONES THOSE ARE. AND WE ALSO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO THOSE CONTRACTS OR HIGH PROFILE CONTRACTS THAT SHOULD BE RUNNING THROUGH THE AUDIT ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE, EITHER AS A INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATION OR AS A CONSENT PRESENTATION. [00:05:01] AS A REMINDER, THOSE ITEMS THAT, UM, WE ARE RECOMMENDING FOR B SESSION, THEY GO STRAIGHT TO THE B SESSION. UM, THEY DO NOT RUN THROUGH THE ACCOUNT, UH, AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE. AND ONE OF THE CHIEF RESPONSE, ONE OF THE CHIEF REASONS FOR THIS PRESENTATION TODAY IS TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK AND INPUT ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU THINK IS MISCHARACTERIZED OR LIKE RE RELOCATE FOR, UM, EITHER COUNCIL BE SESSION OR, UM, AS AN INDIVIDUAL ITEM FOR AUDIT ACCOUNTABILITY. UM, WE'D LIKE TO GET THAT FEEDBACK AND, UM, INPUT TODAY. NEXT SLIDE, LAUREN. AS A, AS A REMINDER, I THINK EVERYBODY'S FAMILIAR WITH THE HIGH PROFILE DEFINITION, BUT IT IS GOING TO BE DISCRETIONARY CONTRACT VALUED OVER 1 MILLION OR MORE. IT DOES NOT PERTAIN TO OUR LOW BID, UH, PROCUREMENTS, PARTICULARLY THOSE THAT HAVE, OR PRIMARILY THAT HAVE PRICE THAT DETERMINES, UM, THE AWARD. WE ALSO CONSIDER, UM, AS A HIGH PROFILE, THOSE ITEMS HAVE A HIGH LEVEL OF COMMUNITY INTEREST OR OTHER EXCEPTIONAL INTERESTS OR THAT ARE HIGHLY COMPLEX OR TECHNICAL IN NATURE OR CON CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS THAT ARE NON-STANDARD ARE COMPLEX. NEXT SLIDE, LAUREN. AND AS YOU RECALL, THIS IS THE CRITERIA THAT WAS ADDED, UM, TO ACTUALLY IDENTIFY THOSE HIGH PROFILE PROCUREMENTS THAT WOULD BE RECOMMENDED FOR, UM, THE B SESSION TO THE FULL COUNCIL. UH, LOOKING AT THOSE THAT HAVE A VALUE, OVER 25 MILLION THAT HAVE HIGH POLICY IMPLICATIONS, ARE PUBLIC SAFETY IMPLICATIONS, A CONTRACT TERM OF 10 YEARS OR MORE, OR THEY HAVE A HIGH COMMUNITY OR STAKEHOLDER IMPACT OR INTEREST. THEN LASTLY, PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT, EITHER BY THE STAFF OR THEY HAVE A HIGH INTEREST OF CITY COUNCIL. AND THAT MAY NOT MEET ANY OF THE OTHER CRITERIA AND THERE MAY BE SOME OF THOSE TODAY THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. NEXT SLIDE. BEFORE MOVING INTO THE FORECAST, I KIND OF WANNA GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE ARE IN THE 2020 HIGH PROFILE PROJECTS AND WHAT, UM, WHAT IS STILL IN PROGRESS. UH, WE HAVE 20 ITEMS THAT ARE IN PROGRESS, OF WHICH FOUR, UM, ARE ON TODAY'S AGENDA. YOU'LL BE HEARING, UM, YOU'LL BE HEARING SOME OF THESE TODAY. UM, ALL THESE ITEMS HAVE MOVED THROUGH THE PRES SOLICITATION PROCESS THROUGH THIS COMMITTEE, AND WE'LL BE BRINGING THESE BACK IN THE FUTURE AS A POST SOLICITATION AS THEY WRAP UP THE PROCESS. UM, YOU CAN, I WON'T GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE. UM, YOU'VE HEARD THESE, UM, KIND OF IN THE PRES HERE IS KIND OF A SNAPSHOT OF THOSE 20 ITEMS THAT ARE STILL IN PROGRESS. NEXT SLIDE, LAUREN. FOR THE NEXT FORECAST FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS, WE'VE IDENTIFIED 34 ITEMS THAT, UM, WOULD BE PRESENTED EITHER IN THE B SESSION OR THE AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE. FIVE, WE ARE RECOMMENDING FOR B SESSION PRESENTATION AND 29 THAT WOULD BE RUNNING THROUGH THE AUDIT ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE, THREE OF WHICH WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO BE INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATION AND 17 OF WHICH ARE CONSENT GENERAL. NEXT SLIDE, LAUREN. AND THESE ARE THE, THESE ARE THE ITEMS HERE IN KIND OF THE DETAILS. SOME OF THESE I KNOW THAT YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH ALREADY FROM THE PA RUNNING THROUGH THE COMMITTEE IN THE PAST, SINCE THEY'RE RECURRING. THE FIRST ITEM IS GOING TO BE THROUGH THE D H SS. UM, IT IS OUR TWO YEAR CONSOLIDATED FUNDING FOR 22 AND 23, UM, OF COURSE WITH A ONE YEAR, ONE YEAR OPTION AT 48.7 MILLION. THE NEXT ITEM THROUGH, UM, E D D IS OUR DISPARITY STUDY. UM, THIS IS REALLY THE FOUNDATION AND THE BACKBONE OF OUR SUBOR PROGRAM. UM, IT'S A TWO YEAR CONTRACT WITH A 800,000, ALTHOUGH IT DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION, UM, FROM A MONETARY VALUE AS HIGH PROFILE OR SELECT. WE FEEL THAT THERE'S A HIGH, UM, INTEREST FROM THE COUNCIL AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS HERE AND IT'S REASON WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING THIS TO GO THROUGH A B SESSION. THERE ARE TWO ITEMS THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING FOR PUBLIC WORKS, BOTH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE HEMISPHERIC CIVIC PARK AT 27 MILLION AND THE EXPANSION OF TERMINAL B AT 11.3 MILLION. AND THEN LASTLY, WE HAVE A, UH, HIGH PROFILE SOLICITATION THROUGH, UM, PD. UM, THE SAN ANTONIO POLICE DEPARTMENT IS OUR MUNICIPAL TOW MANAGER, WHICH OF COURSE PROVIDES THE TOWING SERVICES FOR THE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH A FOUR YEAR, UM, WITH ONE, TWO YEAR OPTION, ROUGHLY ABOUT 48 MILLION. SO THOSE ARE THE FIVE THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING. UM, GO TO THE FULL B SESSION AND AT THE CONCLUSION IF THERE'S ANY COMMENTS, UM, AT THE PRESENTATION, WE'D LIKE TO GET Y'ALL FEEDBACK ON THESE. LAUREN. NEXT SLIDE. THESE ARE THE ITEMS THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT AS INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATIONS FOR THE AUDIT ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE. THERE ARE, THERE ARE 12, UM, INDIVIDUAL ITEMS WHICH ARE MADE UP OF EIGHT DEPARTMENTS, UM, OF WHICH [00:10:02] THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR SERVICES AND THEN ALSO INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES. YOU'LL BE HEARING SEVERAL OF THESE TODAY, SO IT WON'T GO THROUGH THESE IN DETAIL. THE FOLLOWING THREE SLIDES, WE'LL GO INTO EACH OF THESE IN DETAIL AND WE'LL RUN THROUGH THOSE. UM, NEXT, LAUREN, FOR AVIATION FOR INDIVIDUAL, WE'LL BE RECOMMENDING TWO FOR THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT, WHICH IS THE EXECUTIVE PROGRAM ADVISORY SERVICES, UM, WHICH WILL PROVIDE ADVISORY SERVICES FOR FUTURE AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PRO PROJECTS FOR THREE YEARS WITH TWO ONE YEAR OPTIONS AT 3.75 MILLION. AND ALSO THE RECONSTRUCTION OF TAXI YH, WHICH IS AN $18 MILLION PROJECT FOR FINANCE. I WON'T GO INTO A LOT OF DETAIL HERE, BUT YOU'LL BE HEARING A DETAILED PRESENTATION FROM ME ON OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR SERVICE TODAY. ON TODAY'S AGENDA. FROM AN HR STANDPOINT, WE WILL ALSO BE BRINGING BACK THROUGH THE COMMITTEE OR RECOMMENDING TO BRING BACK THROUGH AS AN INDIVIDUAL THE TEMPORARY STAFFING SERVICES. BASED ON THE INTEREST THIS COMMITTEE HAS EXPRESSED IN THE PAST, UM, THE AMOUNT, I THINK OUR PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION WAS A ESTIMATED VALUE OF 48 FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SOLICITATION, WE'RE ESTIMATING NOW A VALUE OF 20 MILLION THE FOR THE LIBRARY. WE'RE ALSO GONNA BE LOOKING AT SOME COLLECTION SERVICES FOR THE RECOVERY OF OVERDUE BOOKS AND MATERIALS AND DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS AT A TUNE OF $1.1 MILLION. NEXT SLIDE. LAUREN. THE FIRST THREE HERE, YOU'LL BE HEARING A DETAILED PRESENTATION TODAY FROM VERO, SO I WON'T CONCENTRATE ON THESE, BUT THERE ARE THREE THAT ARE ON THE AGENDA FOR, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES. AND THEN LASTLY, WE HAVE A CONTRACT ON THE SLIDE FOR RISK MANAGEMENT, WHICH IS FOR OUR T P A OR OUR THIRD PARTY WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIM. UM, THIS IS A THREE YEAR WITH TWO ONE YEAR OPTIONS AT $5.5 MILLION. UM, ON THIS SLIDE WE ARE SHOWING AND RECOMMENDING TWO WORKS FOR TWO, UM, TWO SOLICITATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS WITH OUR JOB ORDER CONTRACTING, WHICH WILL PROVIDE ON-CALL CONTRACTS FOR BUILDING REHABILITATION, RENOVATION AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES BE USED ON AN ON-CALL OR AS NEEDED BASIS. SO ONE YEAR WITH TWO ONE YEAR OPTIONS, THAT'S $63 MILLION. THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE STAN SABA STREET AND EVA STREET TO MARTIN STREET, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE PEDESTRIAN MINISTRIES AND ENHANCEMENTS OF APPROPRIATE WITHIN AVAILABLE FUNDING ABOUT 28 MILLION. AND THEN LASTLY WITH OUR SAN ANTONIO FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE WEB-BASED UNIFORM COMMISSARY, WHICH WILL PROVIDE UNIFORMS TO OUR, UM, UNIFORM PERSONNEL IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AT $7 MILLION. FIVE, YOUR CONTRACT WITH TWO ONE YEAR OPTIONS. AND THEN THE LAST SLIDE, LAUREN, PLEASE. THEN WRAPPING UP, THIS IS A BALANCE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING. THERE'S 17 ITEMS THAT WE WOULD BE RECOMMENDING AS CONSENT, YOU KNOW, BASED ON OUR REVIEW AND WORKING WITH THE CITY DEPARTMENTS AND, UM, THE EXECUTIVE TEAM, WE FEEL THAT THESE ARE FAIRLY ROUTINE IN NATURE. UM, AND WOULD BE RECOMMENDING THE, I WON'T GO THROUGH THESE IN DETAILS, BUT WOULD BE RECOMMENDING THESE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OF WHICH ONE OF WHICH, UM, YOU HAVE PASSED ALREADY, WHICH WAS THE ADOLESCENT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH COUNSELING, UM, AND THE BULK OF WHICH WE RETAIN AND OR WHICH REMAIN IN PUBLIC WORK. THAT IS OUR PRESENTATION. WE ARE ALSO SCHEDULED, UM, AFTER TODAY'S BRIEFING TO MOVE THIS TO THE FULL COUNSEL IN A D SESSION PENDING THE INPUT AND THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GET FROM THIS COMMITTEE, UH, CHAIR. THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION AND WE'RE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. OKAY, THANK YOU, TROY. UH, AND SO WHAT YOU PROJECTED IS FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS, UH, THIS IS CHAIR, THIS IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE SEEING COMING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. OKAY. AND, UH, I KNOW THAT, UH, ALL OF THESE ITEMS WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE IN GREAT DETAILS ONLINE SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT THEM BEFORE THEY COME UP FOR ACTION, EVEN THE ITEMS THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING FOR CONSENT. SO I JUST WANNA ASSURE ANYBODY LISTENING IN THAT ALTHOUGH, UH, THERE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME FROM YOUR DEPARTMENT, UH, THAT THE COMMITTEE HAS THE FULL ABILITY TO LOOK AT THESE IN GREAT DETAIL TO, UH, ASK ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND, UH, WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING OR RECOMMENDING TO US. AND I ALWAYS ENCOURAGE, ALL FOLLOW THIS COMMITTEE, UH, THE STAFF SENDS OUT, UH, A LISTING OF WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA, UH, WITH A LINK FOR DETAILS ABOUT THESE ISSUES IN ADVANCE OF EVERY MEETING. SO ALL THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EDUCATE THEMSELVES FURTHER, [00:15:01] TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY MAY NEED TO HAVE ANSWERED. AND SO, UH, I APPRECIATE GIVING US THAT UPDATE ON WHAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING FORWARD TO OVER THE NEXT SIX MONTHS. AND LET ME ASK ANY OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, UH, IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY'D LIKE TO RAISE AT THIS TIME. COUNCILMAN SANDOVAL, I JUST A QUICK, UH, QUESTION. I MIGHT HAVE A COUPLE MORE IN A SECOND, BUT CAN YOU TELL ME WHY THE, ON SLIDE 11 UNDER PUBLIC WORKS, THE SUN SABA STREET, CAN YOU REMIND ME WHY THAT'S CONSIDERED DISCRETIONARY? I, UH, ONE SECOND AND YEAH. MM-HMM. AND GREAT PRESENTATION, TROY. THANK YOU. OH, THANK YOU. UH, THIS ONE IS BEING SOLICITED AS AN R S P S P BASED ON WORKING WITH, UM, PUBLIC WORKS. WE FEEL THAT, UM, THERE ARE OTHER FACTORS OTHER THAN PRICE THAT BE, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, UM, INSTEAD OF DOING IT AS A LOW BID. SO I DON'T KNOW IF ROZI HAS ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY HE'D LIKE TO PROVIDE, BUT BASICALLY IT GIVES THE COMMITTEE THE AVAILABLE TO CONSIDER OTHER FACTORS ABOVE AND BEYOND PRICE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE GETTING THE BEST VALUE FOR THE CITY. MAY I ADD SOMETHING? TROY KAMAN. THIS IS A THREE DOWNTOWN PROJECT. WE ARE COMBINING TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THREE DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS WORKING IN DOWNTOWN. DOWNTOWN IS VERY SENSITIVE, VERY WELL. THIS IS NOT ONE PROJECT, 28, 3 PROJECT ALTOGETHER IS IN 28 YORK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. RAZZY. UM, SORT OF LIKE, UH, SORT OF LIKE CEILING CHANNEL, VERY SPECIAL, VERY SENSITIVE, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. UM, AND THEN, UH, PLEASE DID I MISS IT, BUT THE DIGITAL DIVIDE, R F P, THAT'S OUT RIGHT NOW. WHERE DID YOU, IS THAT IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS OR, OR WHERE DOES THAT LAND IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION? I THINK, I THINK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE THE RESIDENT CONNECTIONS PLATFORM THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ON. UM, IF THAT'S, THAT WAS ACTUALLY ON SLIDE FIVE. IT'S CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS. IT HAS BEEN SOLICITED. THAT'S WONDERFUL. AND THEN THAT SHOULD BE COMING BACK IN THE FULL B SESSION, THE COUNCIL, IT HAS ALREADY BEEN ISSUED, UM, I BELIEVE RESPONSES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND IT'S CURRENTLY IN THE EVALUATION, UH, PHASE, I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT RESIDENT CONNECTIONS PLATFORM WAS THE ONE ABOUT, UM, GETTING PEOPLE TO, UH, SIGN UP TO DIFFERENT EMAILING LISTS ONLINE, UH, AND, UH, CONSTITUENT SERVICES, UH, MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS FOR DIFFERENT COUNCIL OFFICES. YOU, YOU MAY BE RIGHT, I'LL DEFER TO PROBABLY BEEN ON THIS ONE TO GO INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL. YEAH. COUNCILMAN, YOU'RE CORRECT. THAT RESIDENT CONNECTION PLATFORM, UH, WENT TO B SESSION ABOUT, UH, MAYBE TWO MONTHS AGO THAT'S SCHEDULED TO COME BACK TO YOU IN ABOUT A MONTH. AND YOU'RE CORRECT, IT'S A MORE OF A CONSTITUENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, UH, DEALING WITH BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT COMPONENTS TO THAT, RIGHT? RIGHT. MM-HMM. , I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT WAS THE SMALL SOLICITATION WE DID FOR DIGITAL DIVIDE WHERE WE ASKED SOME OF PROVIDERS TO GIVE US PRICING. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO? YEAH. I DIDN'T REALIZE IT WAS SMALL BECAUSE I'M NOT ON THE INNOVATION COMMITTEE, BUT I KNOW WE SET ASIDE $27 MILLION FOR THAT PILLAR IN THE, IN THE RECOVERY AND RESILIENCY PLAN. SO I, I HAD ASSUMED IT WAS A BIGGER, UH, SORRY, I HAD ASSUMED IT WAS A BIGGER COST AND NOW WE, WE DID NOT, UH, PUT THAT ONE ON THE HIGH PROFILE LIST. UH, WE GET THAT OUT PRETTY QUICK. AND TROY, I DON'T REMEMBER THE STATUS THAT I KNOW WE HAVE RESPONSES BACK. UM, , I'LL HAVE TO FOLLOW UP FOR YOU. COUNCILMAN ON THE SIDE. WHAT'S THE DOLLAR, WHAT'S THE DOLLAR FIGURE ON THAT R F P? I DON'T RECALL BECAUSE I THINK WHAT WE WERE DOING WAS LOOKING AT PRICING FROM THE VENDORS SO THAT WE COULD COMPARE IT TO OUR COST AND THEN MAKE A DECISION ABOUT WHETHER IT MADE SENSE FOR US TO CONTINUE TO INSTALL SOME OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT THAT PROJECT OR WHETHER WE WOULD USE THE VENDORS. SO I THINK THAT ANALYSIS IS ONGOING. I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE WERE DOING. OKAY. THANK YOU, BEN. THANK YOU, CHAIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM ANY OTHER, UH, COMMITTEE MEMBER? OKAY. HEARING NONE. THIS WAS A BRIEFING FOR US SO THAT WE KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT GOING FORWARD OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. UH, AND PARTICULARLY, UH, IN THE AREA OF, UH, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND HIGH PROFILE CONTRACTS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WE'VE ALSO ALREADY HEARD FROM OUR AUDIT COMMITTEE [00:20:01] ON THEIR PROJECTIONS. SO I THINK WE'RE, UH, KIND OF UP TO DATE ON WHAT WE SHOULD BE EXPECTING GOING FORWARD. OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM WE HAVE, THE NEXT ITEMS WE HAVE ARE PRES SOLICITATION, HIGH PROFILE BRIEFINGS AND POSTS, SOLICITATION, HIGH PROFILE BRIEFINGS. I JUST WANTED TO ASK OUR STAFF OR OUR ATTORNEY, UH, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE'VE SEEN THAT, UH, WE THINK WE NEED TO, UH, HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION OVER ANY OF THE PENDING ITEMS ON TODAY'S LIST? UH, NOT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, COUNCILMAN. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK 'CAUSE I KNOW WE ALWAYS INCLUDE EXECUTIVE SESSION IN HERE. UH, I DO ALSO WANNA MENTION, AND, UH, I HAVE TO APOLOGIZE, I DIDN'T MENTION IT EARLIER. UH, WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE CONSENT AGENDA, THERE WAS, UM, SOME INFORMATION THAT WAS SENT IN, ACTUALLY IT WAS COMMENTS AND IT WAS ON RELATED TO THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ITEM. UH, BUT ALSO IT WAS ACTUALLY COMMENTS BY MR. STAN MITCHELL, UH, EXPRESSING DISSATISFACTION THAT, UH, THIS COMMITTEE HAS NOT DONE MORE TO AUDIT SAWS. AND, UH, I'VE SPOKEN WITH THIS ABOUT TO HIM ABOUT THIS PREVIOUSLY. UM, WE'VE SUBMITTED, UH, A BRIEF REPORT THAT KEVIN DID ON AN EXAMINATION OF AN ISSUE THAT HE BROUGHT FORWARD, UH, RELATED TO THE VISTAGE PROJECT. AND, UH, IT IS NOT ON OUR AGENDA, SO IT'S NOT, UH, A COMMENT THAT WE'LL BE ADDING INTO THE BOOKS, BUT I DID WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE DID RECEIVE COMMENTS ABOUT THAT. OKAY. [7. 20-5786 Neighborhood Improvements Bond Program - S. San Pedro Affordable Housing Redevelopment Project [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; Verónica R. Soto, Director, Neighborhood and Housing Services Department]] NOW MOVING ON TO THE PRES SOLICITATION, HIGH PROFILE BRIEFINGS. WE HAVE THREE ITEMS, UH, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT BOND PROGRAM. AND LET'S GO AHEAD AND BEGIN WITH THAT. AND, UH, IS IT VERONICA VERO WHO'S GONNA GO AHEAD AND LEAD US ON THAT? YES, SIR. IF WE CAN HAVE THE PRESENTATION. UH, GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. SOTO, DIRECTOR OF NEIGHBORHOOD AND HEALTH SERVICES. THE ITEM IN FRONT OF YOU IS A PRE SOLICITATION BRIEFING FOR ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS BOND PROGRAM PROJECT. THIS IS LOCATED AT SOUTH SAN PEDRO. UM, AND WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. WE HAVE A FEW OF THE DETAILS OF THE SOLICITATION, UH, LIKE OTHER SOLICITATIONS FOR THE HOUSING BOND PROGRAM. THIS IS AN R F P A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. THE ESTIMATED VALUE IS APPROXIMATELY 2 MILLION, UH, BECAUSE OF THE LAND THAT IS PART OF THE DEAL. THE TERM WOULD BE THAT WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, WITHIN THREE YEARS. AND THIS OF COURSE WOULD BE A NEW CONTRACT. UM, AND AGAIN, THIS IS PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT BOND PROGRAM, AND THIS IS THE FOURTH PROJECT THAT WE WOULD HAVE IN THE BOOK. IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE SEE THE EVALUATION, UH, COMMITTEE MEMBERS. UM, WE ALWAYS INCLUDE REPRESENTATION FROM THE URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND SO THOSE ARE TWO COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT YOU SEE THERE. AND THIS IS PART OF WHAT WE HAVE DONE WITH ALL THE SOLICITATIONS FOR THE HOUSING BOND. THE GOAL WITH THIS PARTICULAR SITE, WHICH IS JUST, UM, UNDER ONE ACRE, IS TO HAVE, UH, AGAIN, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND APPROXIMATELY 50 UNITS, BECAUSE IT IS A, A SMALL SITE, WE ARE EMPHASIZING, UM, IN THE SOLICITATION TRYING TO GET HOUSING THAT TARGETS YOUTH AGING OUT OF FOSTER CARE. AND WE ARE REQUIRING THAT AT LEAST HALF OF THE UNITS BE 80% A M I OR LOWER WITH MORE POINTS BEING AWARDED. AND IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE HAVE THE SCORING CRITERIA, UM, MORE POINTS AWARDED IF WE HAVE DEEPER AFFORDABILITY. AND SO IF WE HAVE MORE UNITS SERVING FAMILIES AT 30% A M I OR EVEN UNITS THAT ARE AT 50% A M I, THERE ARE MORE POINTS AWARDED. SO HERE'S THE EVALUATION CRITERIA FOCUSED ON THE DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE, UM, THE REQUESTS, UM, AND WHAT THE GAP IS, UH, FINANCIAL CAPABILITY OF THE SOLICITOR. UM, THE TIMELINE MATTERS TO US AS WELL, SO THAT GET SOME POINTS. AND THEN THE AMENITIES AND AFFORDABILITY, AS I MENTIONED, THIS IS GETTING THE BETA POINTS AS YOU CAN SEE AS WELL, AND LOCAL PREFERENCE POINTS AS WELL AS VETERANS, SMALL OWNED BUSINESS PREFERENCE POINTS. YOU CAN SEE THE BETA REQUIREMENTS AS WELL. AND THAT'S THE MEMBERS OF THE GOAL SETTING COMMITTEE AS WELL. WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. UM, THIS IS THE TIMELINE. UM, SO FOR THIS ONE, JUST SO YOU ARE AWARE, WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE [00:25:01] EVALUATION COMPLETE IN TIME FOR DEVELOPERS TO CONSIDER, UM, THE 2021 LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT, WHICH IS WHY THE RELEASE ALREADY HAPPENED. UM, WE ARE WITHIN THE PERIOD WHERE WE CAN STILL MAKE EDITS, UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY FEEDBACK FOR US TO THIS SOLICITATION, UM, AS WE WOULD NOT, UH, CLOSE UNTIL NOVEMBER 12TH. BUT WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THE DEVELOPER THAT ENDS UP BEING SELECTED WANTS TO PURSUE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT, THEY HAVE THAT, UH, UM, FLEXIBILITY AND MEET THAT TIMELINE, WHICH, UM, OF COURSE STARTS IN THE NEW YEAR. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE RELEASED, UH, THE ITEM ALREADY. UM, WE DO HAVE THE PRE-SUBMIT CONFERENCE TOMORROW, UH, DEADLINE FOR QUESTIONS FOR THE END OF THE MONTH, AND THE DUE DATE IS NOT UNTIL NOVEMBER 12TH. WE DO HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO REVISE OR AMEND THE R S P. UM, AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT OF COURSE IS AVAILABLE FOR ALL THE SOLICITATIONS. THE EVALUATIONS WOULD BE COMPLETED IN DECEMBER. UM, HOPEFULLY NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT TO COME BACK TO YOU IN JANUARY. AND AGAIN, WE ARE HOPEFUL THAT THIS ALLOWS, THIS AGGRESSIVE TIMELINE ALLOWS, UM, A DEVELOPER TO PURSUE OR CONSIDER LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT FOR 2021. THIS WOULD GO TO COUNCIL IN FEBRUARY WITH THE HOPE OF STARTING THE CONTRACT IN MARCH. AND, UM, THE NEXT SLIDE IS, I THINK THAT'S THE LAST SLIDE, ACTUALLY. OKAY. VERO, ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANNA SAY ON IT? NO, SIR. SIR. UM, THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS Y'ALL MAY HAVE. OKAY. LET ME START IT OFF. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, BUT I WANT TO DO A BRIEF EXPLANATION. WE DO HAVE SOME COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO MAY NOT, UH, HAVE BEEN AWARE OF THE 20, THE 2017 BOND ISSUE AND HOW IT ACQUIRED PROPERTY, UH, BY THE CITY IN ORDER TO, UH, REHABILITATE AND THEN SELL BACK TO DEVELOPERS. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS IS. IT'S, UH, SOME PARCELS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THAT BOND PROGRAM, CORRECT? YES, SIR. AND SO WE HAVE THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED AS PART OF THIS PROGRAM. SO THAT MEANS THAT WE HAVE 12 DESIGNATED AREAS WITHIN THE CITY CALLED NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT AREAS. AND THOSE ARE THE AREAS IN WHICH WE HAVE TO PURSUE, UH, PROPERTY BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DO A SOLICITATION. THE CITY'S THE ONE THAT NEGOTIATES, ACQUIRE PROPERTY, AND THEN WE, UH, SOLICIT THROUGH AN R. UM, IT IS ONLY AFTER WE HAVE, UH, A BID FOR, UH, DEVELOPMENT THAT WE ACTUALLY FULFILL, UM, THE CONTRACT TERMS TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE, UH, IT'S A CONTRACT TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY, UM, BUT WE'RE GUIDED BY THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN THAT DESIGNATES THE 12 AREAS IN WHICH THE HOUSING BOND CAN ACQUIRE, UM, PROPERTIES TO BUILD AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCES. OKAY. I THINK THAT YOU MENTIONED THE SIZE OF THIS PROPERTY. UH, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF IT? IT IS, UM, 0.95 ACRES. SO IT'S, UH, RATHER SMALL WITHIN DISTRICT ONE. UM, AND THE ASKING PRICE IS, UM, JUST, UH, OVER 2 MILLION. UM, WE'RE OFFERING 2 MILLION FOR THE SITE. UM, AND THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE CONTRACT. UM, OKAY. THE SIDE, UM, I DON'T HAVE THE ADDRESS IN FRONT OF ME. NO, THAT'S OKAY. UM, I, I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE SIZE BECAUSE I THINK YOU SAID WE WANT TO DEVELOP 50 UNITS AND, UH, OUR MULTI-FAMILY DESIGNATION, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT GOES UP THAT HIGH FOR LESS THAN AN ACRE. WE WOULD HAVE TO BE A SPECIAL SONY THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR THE PROPERTY. THIS IS ABOUT A MILE FROM THE DOWNTOWN AREA. IT'S IN THE FIVE POINTS NEAR WEST IMPROVEMENT AREA. UM, IT IS, YOU KNOW, RIGHT ON SAN PEDRO. RIGHT? I I, I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT. IT'S JUST THAT I, LIKE I SAID, I, I DIDN'T THINK THAT WE COULD HAVE SOMEBODY BUILD LIKE 40 OR 50 UNITS ON, ON WHAT WOULD BE AN MF 33. SO WE'D HAVE TO LITERALLY CREATE OR GIVE A WAIVER TO BUILD UP TO 50 UNITS ON THAT SITE. AND WHAT WOULD WE BE LOOKING AT A SIX STORY BUILDING OR SOMETHING? IT WOULD BE, UM, MULTI-STORY. I'M NOT SURE HOW MANY STORIES IN TOTAL. UM, WE HAVE DONE THESE KIND OF DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PAST. UM, THERE'S, UM, THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS A FEW MORE THAN 50, I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT UNITS, BUT IT IS, UH, BY ALAMO, UM, COMMUNITY GROUP. IT'S A TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT, UM, NEAR THIS SITE, UM, THAT IS, IS SIMILAR AS WELL. SO WE HAVE SOME THAT, UM, AND, AND SO I MEAN, THAT ONE IS UNDER [00:30:01] CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW. UM, AND IT'S OVER, I WANNA SAY ABOUT 60 UNITS. UM, AND THE, THAT SIDE IS ACTUALLY MUCH SMALLER THAN THE 0.95. SO THIS IS DOABLE. UM, IT, IT DOES REQUIRE A LITTLE BIT MORE CREATIVITY, BUT IT'S DOABLE. AND WE CURRENTLY HAVE A DEVELOPMENT, UM, UNDER CONSTRUCTION THAT'S SIMILAR TO THIS ONE. OKAY. I GUESS I HADN'T SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT COME, COME FORWARD RECENTLY TO REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT. UH, OKAY. WELL, YOU'VE ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS. I'LL LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING WHAT COMES FORWARD. OH, ONE OTHER QUESTION THOUGH. UH, YOU SAID 50% UNDER 80% A M I AND UH, AGAIN, UH, I CERTAINLY WOULD'VE, UH, THOUGHT IF IT'S AN AFFORDABLE PROJECT WE'D BE SEEING LOWER GOALS. SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE INCENTIVES TO GET THOSE NUMBERS DOWN? YOU, YOU MENTIONED THERE ARE SOME POINTS, BUT HOW ARE THOSE POINTS GONNA BE LAID OUT TO GET, LET'S SAY, TO 50% OR 30% OR AN AVERAGE OF 60%, LET'S SAY? YES, SIR. GREAT QUESTION. UM, SO THE 50% RUBRIC IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT IS WITHIN THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED BACK IN 2017. AND SO THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT IS THAT HALF THE UNITS, UM, BE AFFORDABLE. AND SO THAT'S WHERE THAT 50% NUMBER COMES FROM. HOWEVER, IN THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE HAVE DONE, WE HAVE THOUGHT TO HAVE DEEPER AFFORDABILITY THAN THAT. SO THAT'S JUST THE MINIMUM, UH, AS REQUIRED BY THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN. IF THIS PROJECT ENDS UP BEING A HOUSING, UH, A LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT, IT IS MORE THAN LIKELY THAT, UM, 80 TO 100% OF THE UNITS WILL SERVE FAMILIES AT 60% A M I. AND SO THAT'S GONNA BE DEEPER AFFORDABILITY. THE WAY WE SCORE THIS, AND, AND AGAIN, THERE'S A RUBRIC IN THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN, UM, WE DO LOOK AT THE AFFORDABILITY LEVEL. SO THE DEEPER THE AFFORDABILITY, THE MORE POINTS, UH, THEY RECEIVE. UM, WE ARE SETTING IT UP. SO THIS WOULD BE MORE SUCCESSFUL AS THE TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT. THAT MEANS THAT WE'RE AIMING TO HAVE 80 TO 100% OF THE UNITS BE, UM, SERVING FAMILIES, UM, OR RESIDENTS AT 60% A M I AND BELOW. AND THAT ALL GOES INTO SCORING, WHICH WAS, UM, I THINK IT WAS THE FOURTH SLIDE, IF YOU WANNA GO BACK TO THE STORY, THE FOURTH SLIDE. AND, UH, COUNCILMAN, THERE'S ALSO A, UM, IN THE SOLICITATION ITSELF, THERE'S A SCORING RUBRIC THAT HAS, UM, THE UNITS AND THE POINTS THAT WE GET. UM, SO WE HAVE 15 POINTS SET ASIDE IF ALL OF THE UNITS ARE SERVING, UM, RESIDENTS AT 60% OR BELOW. UM, THAT'S PART OF, OF THE SCORING THE AFFORDABILITY POINTS YOU SEE THERE. SO THAT'S HOW WE'RE GETTING, UM, LOWER OR A DEEPER AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. AND SO I PRESUME IF THEY COME UP WITH, UH, A MIXTURE WHERE IT ADDS UP TO ABOUT 70 POINTS, THEY MIGHT GET 10 OR NINE POINTS INSTEAD OF 15, CORRECT. THE MAXIMUM 15 IN THAT, IF ALL THE UNITS ARE 60% A M I, IF THEY HAVE LESS THAN 100% AT THAT, UH, AFFORDABILITY LEVEL, THE POINTS DIMINISH. SO, YOU KNOW, YOU SCORE BETTER IF YOU HAVE, UM, 100%, YOU MISS THAT 60% A M I. OKAY, THANK YOU. I KNOW I'VE ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS. I'M SORRY IF I'VE, UH, TAKEN ANY TIME AWAY FROM ANY OF MY, UH, FELLOW COMMITTEE MEMBERS, BUT IF ANY OF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU'D LIKE TO BRING UP ABOUT THIS, I WELCOME THOSE AT THIS TIME. COUNCILMAN PERRY. OKAY, THANK YOU, SIR. UM, YEAH, SINCE WE GOT INTO A LITTLE BIT OF THE TECHNICAL DISCUSSION, UM, VERO, YOU SAID THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE CORRECT ZONING ON THIS PROJECT AT THIS POINT, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. UM, AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE A, UM, CONTRACT TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY. SO, SO WE HAVE THAT, THE CURRENT ZONING IS A COMBINATION OF C TWO AND C THREE, SO WE WOULD HAVE TO REONE THE PROPERTY, UM, ONCE IT'S ACQUIRED. UM, AND IN, UH, MORE THAN HALF OF THE HOUSING BOND PROJECT, WE HAVE HAD TO DO A REZONING ACTION, UH, TO MAKE SURE WE CAN BUILD HOUSING. SO WHAT HAPPENS IF, UH, WE GO THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS AND THERE'S A LOT OF NEGATIVE FEEDBACK ON THIS AND, AND, UH, SURROUNDING, [00:35:01] SURROUNDING FOLKS DON'T AGREE WITH THE ZONING CHANGE. WHAT HAPPENS THEN? WE, WE, WE, WE HAVE A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND WE CAN'T, UH, WE CAN'T BUILD THESE ON IT. WE'D HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE WITH THE PROPERTY. HOPEFULLY THAT DOES NOT COME TO PASS. UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID EARLY ON WITH THIS PROGRAM IS WE DID A LOT OF OUTREACH WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE NEIGHBORS OF THE SITES, UM, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT AREAS. AND IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, UM, WE DID NOT FIND THAT THERE WAS OPPOSITION TO, UM, MULTIFAMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING. UM, AND SO WE HAVE REACHED OUT, UM, AGAIN, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAT ARE NEARBY, UM, AND TALKED ABOUT WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE ON THIS SITE. THIS IS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR, UH, SOUTH, YOU KNOW, SAN SAN PEDRO, CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN IS. AND SO MOST OF THAT CORRIDOR IS, UM, MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL USES. UM, AND SO WE DO NOT EXPECT OPPOSITION, BUT WILL CONTINUE TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, UH, TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S STILL SUPPORT FOR, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA. YEAH. AND, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT HOW ZONING IS SUPPOSED TO WORK, UM, I'M HAVING, 'CAUSE I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T SEE THAT IN THIS PROCESS. SO JUST MY CONCERNS ABOUT PUTTING A, UH, HIGH CONGESTED, UH, RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS MULTI-STORY IN THE MIDDLE OF A COMMERCIAL ZONE TO ME THAT, UH, THAT'S NOT MAKING A LOT OF SENSE. BUT AGAIN, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS ON THAT, ON HOW THIS WAS PUT TOGETHER AND WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS AND WHAT THE SURROUNDING AREA LOOKS LIKE. UM, YOU KNOW, I, I CAN TELL YOU FROM DISTRICT 10, WE DO NOT DO THAT. WE DON'T PUT RESIDENTIAL IN THE MIDDLE OF A COMMERCIAL ZONE LIKE THAT, OR CLOSE TO INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL AREAS. SO I, I'M, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. AND, UM, UM, BACK TO THE, SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY BIGGEST CONCERN ON THIS ONE, VERO, AND THAT'S GETTING INTO THE TECHNICAL WEEDS ON THIS, BUT IT IS PART OF THIS, THIS PROCESS AND, UM, UH, THAT I GOT BIG CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. BUT GOING BACK TO YOUR, UH, TIMELINE, IF YOU CAN GO TO THAT CHART, PLEASE. SURE. I THINK THAT'S SLIDE, UM, THREE. SO IT'S SLIDE, UM, FIVE. THANK YOU. YEP. THERE WE GO. UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE OLD DAYS ON MY PREVIOUS, UH, TERM ON THIS COMMITTEE, WE TALKED ABOUT THE TIME THAT WE'RE ALLOWING CONTRACTORS OR DEVELOPERS TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT THESE. AND I KNOW YOU'VE HAD IT OUT THERE FOR A WHILE, BUT, YOU KNOW, AFTER, UH, AFTER THE PRE-SUBMIT CONFERENCE AND THEN THE DEADLINE FOR QUESTIONS WHICH COULD IMPACT, UH, THE TIMELINE ON, ON, UH, DEVELOPERS PUTTING TOGETHER A PROPOSAL, WE'RE WE'RE GETTING IN WAY TOO SHORT OF TIME. WE HAD, WE HAD PREVIOUSLY WE HAD BEEN GIVING 30 TO 45 DAYS FOR CONTRACTORS TO PUT THESE PROPOSALS TOGETHER, WHICH YOU AGAIN IS GOING BACK TO MY SPEECHES WAY BACK WHEN WE'RE, WE'VE GOT TOO LITTLE TIME FOR THESE DEVELOPERS TO PUT THESE PACKAGES TOGETHER TO GO OUT AND GET BIDS FROM SUBCONTRACTORS, GETTING THOSE BACK, PUTTING THEM IN THE PACKAGE. THERE'S A LONG PROCESS THAT GOES ALONG PUTTING THESE PROPOSALS TOGETHER. AND I, IT, IT JUST TO SEE THIS GO BACK TO, YOU KNOW, JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS HERE, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT IS NOT ENOUGH TIME TO PUT A QUALITY PROPOSAL TOGETHER. I'M STILL PUSHING FROM WHEN, WHEN THE FINAL PACKAGE GOES OUT TO GIVE 'EM AT LEAST 30 DAYS TO PUT THESE PACKAGES TOGETHER, IF NOT 45. AND WE HAD BEEN DOING THAT BEFORE, AND NOW WE'RE BACK TO JUST GIVING A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO PUT THESE PROPOSALS TOGETHER AND WE'RE NOT GETTING GOOD EVALUATIONS FROM SUBCONTRACTORS, NOT BY NOT GIVING 'EM ENOUGH TIME TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. SO I'D REALLY LIKE TO ADD SOME TIME IN THERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RUSH IS TO GET THIS OUT THE DOOR AND BACK TO COUNSEL, BUT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE SHOULD BE SHORTENING OUR TIMELINES ON OUR, OUR, UM, EVALUATIONS AND GETTING OUR PAPERWORK DONE IN A MUCH SHORTER TIME PERIOD TO GIVE THE CONTRACTORS AND DEVELOPERS MORE TIME ON THEIR END TO PUT A QUALITY PRODUCT TOGETHER. SO I, I, I DON'T AGREE WITH THIS TIMELINE. I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE, UH, WE NEED TO GIVE THEM MORE TIME TO PUT THESE PACKAGES TOGETHER. THAT'S ALL MY COMMENTS, SIR. I GUESS COUNCILMAN, I'LL ADD, I'LL ADD THAT I, I DO REMEMBER YOU'RE WANTING TO EXTEND THE TIMELINE AND [00:40:01] WE WENT BACK IN FOR OUR SOLICITATIONS. WE DID ADD THAT IN AS A REQUIREMENT. UM, I'LL LET VERO TALK A LITTLE BIT SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHY THIS TIMELINE WAS DIFFERENT. UM, BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME, AT LEAST IN WORKING WITH HER DEPARTMENT, THERE WAS SOME URGENCY TO ALLOW DEVELOPERS THE TIME TO, UM, I THINK TO APPLY FOR, UH, TAX CREDIT. AND, UM, AND SO THAT WAS THE REASON WHY BETWEEN THE ACTUAL CONTRACTING FOR THE PROPERTY AND GIVE THOSE DEVELOPERS ENOUGH TIME TO APPLY FOR THE FEDERAL, FOR THE TAX CREDIT, WE HAD TO SHRINK THIS TIMELINE. BUT I'LL LET BARROW TALK MORE ABOUT THAT. THANK YOU, TROY. YOU ARE CORRECT. UM, SO FIRST, THIS IS STILL A 30 DAY SOLICITATION. UM, AS I EXPLAINED THE, THE RELEASE ALREADY OCCURRED, THERE IS TIME TO AMEND, UM, THE R F P WE NEEDED BASED ON INPUT PROVIDED HERE. UM, SO THIS IS STILL A 30 DAY SOLICITATION. UH, WE ARE RUNNING AGAINST THE CLOCK WITH THE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT. UM, WE HAVE HAD SUCCESS WITH PREVIOUS BOND PROJECTS THAT ALSO UTILIZE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT. AND THAT CLOCK FOR THE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT STARTS IN THE NEW YEAR WITH THE STATE DICTATING THOSE TERMS. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO HAVE, UM, SELECTED A DEVELOPER IN TIME FOR THEM TO DO THAT. ACTUALLY MORE INTENSIVE PROCESS. UM, FOR THIS PARTICULAR ONE, SUB BIDS, UM, ARE NOT REQUIRED, UM, FROM SUBS. AND SO IT WAS A TIMELINE FOR THE 9% TAX CREDIT THAT REALLY WAS DRIVING HOW QUICKLY. UM, WE WANTED TO, TO GET RESPONSES FOR THIS ONE, WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO LEAD, UM, THOSE SPECIALIZED DEVELOPERS, UH, BOTH FOR-PROFIT AND NOT-FOR-PROFIT, WHO DO, UH, THESE KIND OF DEVELOPMENTS AND PARTICULARLY 9% TAX CREDIT, UH, KNOW THAT THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE PUTTING TOGETHER. UM, SO THE, THE TIME, YOU KNOW, LESS THAN 45 DAYS IS, IS NOT IDEAL. UH, WE HEARD YOU LAST TIME, COUNCILMAN PERRY, YOUR, WE'VE DONE THAT IN OTHER ONES, BUT BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THIS, UM, BE COMPETITIVE FOR A 9% TAX CREDIT, THAT'S WHY WE ASKED, UM, IF WE COULD DO THE 30 DAY SOLICITATION, UM, AND HAVE DONE A LOT OF LEGWORK TO LET THE, THE SPECIALIZED DEVELOPERS WHO WORK IN THIS SPACE KNOW ABOUT THIS OPPORTUNITY SO THAT THEY CAN RESPOND IF THEY DO PURSUE TAX CREDIT, THAT THERE'S STILL OPPORTUNITY FOR THE FINANCING TO COME TOGETHER. THANK YOU. TROY, YOU, YOU, YOU, UM, YOU'RE MENTIONING TO MEET THE 9% TIMELINE. WHAT, WHAT DATE IS DRIVING THIS DATE? BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT IT MARCH 4TH, 2021. WHAT, WHAT IS THE DATE THAT'S DRIVING, DRIVING THIS DATE? SO TAX CREDIT APPLICATIONS, UM, ARE AT THE STATE OPENING ON JANUARY 8TH. UM, AND SO THAT'S WHEN PRE-APPLICATION FOR THE 2021 LOW INCOME HOUSE HOUSING TAX CREDITS ARE DUE. AND THEN THE FULL APPLICATION FOR THOSE IS, UM, MARCH 31ST. AND BY THAT DATE, THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY HAVE, UH, SECURED THE SITE THAT THEY HAVE SITE CONTROL. UH, BUT JANUARY 8TH IS THAT PRE-APPLICATION, UH, PERIOD WHEN THE T D H C A, THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OPENED THE 2021 LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT APPLICATIONS FOR 9% TAX SPREAD. SO THE MARCH 30TH IS THE DRIVING DATE, AND WE'RE, WE'RE SHOWING MARCH 4TH AS AS, UM, CONTRACT START DATE. SO, UM, YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM IN THERE TO FROM MARCH 4TH TO THE MARCH 31ST, RIGHT? CORRECT. YEAH. WELL, I STILL, I WOULD LIKE TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME ON THE FRONT END ON THIS TO GET A QUALITY PROPOSAL TOGETHER ON THIS. UH, YOU STILL HAVE, YOU STILL HAVE SOME TIME THERE TO, TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN, AND I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN. I, I GUESS LOOKING AT THE WHOLE PROGRAM THOUGH, WHAT, WHAT STOPPED US FROM STARTING THIS PRES SOLICITATION BEFORE THE OC BEFORE OCTOBER 6TH? THAT SEEMS KIND OF LATE IN THE DAY TO GET STARTED WITH THIS TO BEGIN WITH. IT'S NOT LIKE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS PROGRAM IS AND WHAT THE DATES ARE REQUIRED HERE. SO THE ANSWER TO THAT IS THE NEGOTIATION WITH THE CURRENT, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS, ACTUALLY TWO OWNERS AND MAKING SURE WE HAD THE, UH, CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE WITH THEM. UM, WE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN WORKING ON THIS SITE FOR OVER A YEAR. UM, THIS IS ACTUALLY THE SECOND TIME WE BRING THIS, [00:45:01] UH, SAN PEDRO SITE TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE. UM, WE ARGUED WITH, UM, PROCUREMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE ONE WE CAME A YEAR AND SOME MONTHS AGO TO, TO BRING BEFORE YOU, UM, BECAUSE THE FACTS HAVEN'T CHANGED THAT WE SHOULD USE IT, BUT THEY THOUGHT IT WAS TOO LONG A TIME, SO THEY ASKED US TO COME BACK. BUT IT DID TAKE US, UM, OVER A YEAR, UM, TO ACQUIRE THE SITE. UM, SO IT IS BEEN THE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS THAT HAVE HELD US UP BECAUSE IT'S TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, UM, THAT WE HAD TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT. UM, AND WE WERE TRYING TO GO WITH THE, UH, PRES SOLICITATION BRIEFING WE DID OVER A YEAR AGO. UM, BUT WE WERE ASKED TO, TO COME BACK. UM, SO THAT'S WHAT HELD US UP COMPLIMENT. SO, ALL RIGHT, AGAIN, BECAUSE OF ALL THAT, IT IS PRESSING THIS TIME, COMPRESSING THIS BACKEND TIME THAT I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE SHORTCHANGING THE OVERALL CONTRACT. AND THAT'S WHAT CONCERNS ME ON THIS. AND WE TOOK A LOT OF TIME UP FRONT FOR WHATEVER REASON. AND SO THAT KEEPS PRESSING THIS TIME UP ON THE BACKEND SIDE. AND, AND AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S NO FAULT TO THE DEVELOPERS AND THE CONTRACTORS THAT WANT TO BID ON THIS THING, BUT, UM, WE'RE COMPRESSING IT WAY TOO TIGHT, IN MY VIEW, TO GET QUALITY PRODUCTS. YEAH, WE'RE GONNA GET A PRODUCT OUT THERE, BUT PROBABLY NOT SOMETHING THAT'S, UM, VERY WELL PUT TOGETHER THAT HAS GOOD BIDS OUT THERE. AND LET ME TELL YOU, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU END UP PAYING MORE FOR THESE PROJECTS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T GET GOOD PRICING UP FRONT. YOU DIDN'T WORK WITH THE SUBCONTRACTORS, SO ON AND SO FORTH. SO AGAIN, MY, MY WHOLE PROBLEM IS THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE'RE GIVING THE DEVELOPERS AND CONTRACTORS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT A GOOD, GOOD PACKAGE TOGETHER ON, ON BIDDING ON THESE THINGS. AND I SORRY THAT THAT HAPPENED, THAT, UH, THIS, YOU WANTED TO GET THIS DONE A YEAR AGO, DIDN'T HAPPEN FOR WHATEVER REASON. UM, BUT WE SHOULDN'T BE TAKING IT OUT ON THE BACK END ON, ON, UM, PUTTING THESE PACKAGES TOGETHER. SO USE SOME MORE OF THAT TIME ON THE BACK END THERE TO OPEN UP A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME FOR THE DEVELOPERS AND CONTRACTORS TO PUT A QUALITY PRODUCT TOGETHER FOR US TO EVALUATE. THAT'S MY SUGGESTION ON THIS THING. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. I THINK COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL HAD A QUESTION OR A COMMENT. MM-HMM. . YES. THANK YOU. UH, THANK YOU VERO, FOR, FOR THE PRESENTATION. UM, SO I, I SERVED ON THE BOND COMMITTEE FOR, FOR THIS ISSUE IN THE FALL OF, OF 2016. SO I'M, I'M A LITTLE BIT FAMILIAR WITH IT, BUT I'LL TELL YOU, I'VE LEARNED A LOT MORE ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING SINCE, UH, SINCE THEN. UM, I, IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, YOUR, SO I LOOKED UP THE ADDRESS. SO IT'S TWO PARCELS, RIGHT? THAT YOU'RE, THAT YOU'RE BUYING TOGETHER, AND THERE'S ACTUALLY A SUPER HIGH DENSITY, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S AN OFFICIAL ZONING TERM, BUT A HIGH DENSITY, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT, NOT TOO FAR FROM THERE. ONE THAT WAS BUILT A LONG, LONG TIME AGO, AND IT, IT MUST HAVE, I DON'T KNOW, 300 UNITS TO THE ACRE. I THINK IT'S, IT'S HUGE. IT'S ABOUT NINE OR 10 STORIES HIGH. UM, AND SO I'M, I'M NOT, I I SEE WHERE YOU'RE COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT YOU PROBABLY WON'T GET A LOT OF OPPOSITION, UH, TO THAT. UM, BUT WHEN DO YOU PLAN TO DO THE ZONING CHANGE OR TO SUBMIT THAT? SO, UM, WE HAVE TO GET THROUGH THIS PROCESS FIRST, AND IT'D BE BEFORE WE ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY, WE CAN MAKE THE, UH, REZONING CONTINGENT ON THE PURCHASE PRICE. UM, WE CAN GO BACK TO THE TWO OWNERS AND ASK THEM TO START THE REZONING PROCESS, AND WE WOULD MAKE THAT REZONING, UM, CONTINGENT. SO WE WOULDN'T BUY THE, THE PROPERTY UNTIL THEY REONE IT FOR US. UM, WE CAN ASK THEM TO SPEED UP THE TIMELINE FOR THAT. UM, SO THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO. SO IT'D BE, UM, THE GOAL WOULD BE TO TRY AND GET IT AROUND THE SPRINGTIME, UM, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY START IT SOONER. UM, AND YES, THIS IS TWO PARCELS, UH, 400 BLOCKS, UH, OF SAN PEDRO. IT'S WHERE THESE ARE LOCATED. UM, AND YOU CAN SEE FROM THAT SITE THE, THAT TALLER STRUCTURE YOU MENTIONED AS WELL. YEAH. SO CAN, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT IS THE S BEFORE SAN PEDRO STAND FOR IN A LOT OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE'RE SEEING, IT IS SOUTH SAN PEDRO. THAT'S THE OFFICIAL ADDRESS. SOUTH SAN PEDRO, THAT'S THE OH, IT IS. OKAY. IT IS SOUTH, YES. ALL RIGHT. I THOUGHT IT WAS NORTH OF DOWNTOWN, BUT, OKAY. UM, [00:50:02] SO ANOTHER QUESTION, UH, FOR YOU IS, UM, IN TERMS OF THE SCORING, 15 POINTS ARE DEDICATED TO THE AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT. UM, SO I, UM, I MEAN IT DEPENDS TO BE SEEING HOW YOUR, HOW YOUR SCORING TEAM DOES IT, BUT I COULD, I COULD SEE THINGS LANDING VERY CLOSELY IF IT'S ONLY 15 OUT OF A HUNDRED POINTS WHERE WE MIGHT NOT END UP GETTING, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I CAN MAKE IT ALL 80% A M I AND STILL SCORE AN 85. RIGHT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I I WAS JUST A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED, UH, ABOUT THAT. AND CAN YOU TELL ME THE 30 POINTS FOR, UM, IN THE SECOND CRITERIA, IT STARTS WITH GAP REQUEST. CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT THAT? SURE. UM, SO THIS IS ALL THE POINTS THAT ARE RELATED TO THE FINANCING. UM, OBVIOUSLY HOW MUCH GAP FUNDING THEY NEED FROM THE BOND PROGRAM IS, IS ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS. AND SO WE DO LOOK AT WHAT THE GAP IS. UM, BESIDES THE LAND, TYPICALLY THERE'S ADDITIONAL, UH, FUNDING REQUESTED TO MAKE THE PROJECT WORK. AND SO THE UNDERWRITING AND FINANCIAL CAPACITY, ALL OF THAT, UM, IT'S REALLY THE FINANCES THAT GOES INTO THIS. UM, WE OF COURSE WANT TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE FUNDING. SO IF SOMEONE COMES IN WITH A VERY BIG GAP, THEY WOULDN'T POUR AS WELL, UM, BECAUSE WE WANT TO, TO TRY AND HAVE A SMALLEST GAP AS POSSIBLE WHILE STILL BEING ABLE TO DEVELOP QUALITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE AREA. SO ALL OF THE FINANCING IS WHAT THOSE 30 POINTS CAPTURE. OKAY. BUT SOME OF THAT GAP MAY BE FILLED IN BY THE LITECH IF THEY END UP, UH, SECURING THAT. RIGHT. SO IT, IT JUST SEEMS HARD TO EVALUATE THAT BEFORE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S HAPPENING AT LITECH WITH, AT THE STATE LEVEL WITH THE FUNDING. CORRECT. AND SO, UM, WE WOULD LOOK AT THE FINANCING IF IT WAS A LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT. AND WHAT WE DO, WE TYPICALLY ASK IF IT WAS A 9%, WHAT THE SCORING AND GAP WOULD BE, AND IF IT WAS A 4%, WHICH DON'T HAVE THE SAME DEADLINE, WHAT IT WOULD BE. UM, WE, WE KNOW THIS SITE IS COMPETITIVE FOR A 9%, UH, APPLICATION, EVEN WITH THE CHANGES TO THE, UH, QUALIFIED ALLOCATION PLAN, THE SCORING CRITERIA AT THE STATE. UM, AND SO WE THINK THAT IF THIS SITE, UM, COMPETED FOR THE 9%, THEY WOULD HAVE A HIGH LIKELIHOOD OF ACQUIRING THAT. UM, AND SO YES, UM, THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF TIME BEFORE THE AWARD IS MADE BECAUSE THE AWARDS WERE NOT MADE UNTIL, UH, JULY. BUT WE WOULD, WE HAVE A HIGH DEGREE OF CERTAINTY THAT THIS WOULD FOR WELL, UM, FOR A 9% APPLICATION. ALL RIGHT. MY, MY NEXT QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH, UH, USING THIS HOUSING FOR, UH, INDIVIDUALS AGING OUT OF FOSTER CARE, THAT SEEMS LIKE A GREAT FUNCTION, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, CAN, CAN THE OWNER OR THE PROPERTY MANAGER, UH, PUT THOSE RESTRICTIONS ON THE TENANTS OR TWO TENANTS IN THAT WAY? OKAY, SO THAT'S ANOTHER CRITERIA WITH LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT, UM, THAT YOU CAN RESERVE SOME UNITS TO SERVE A PARTICULAR POPULATION. UM, IT, IT WOULDN'T BE 100% OF THE UNIT PER SE, UH, BUT IT WOULD SAY THAT THEY ARE SEEKING TO SERVICE FOR PARTICULAR POPULATION. AND AT THE STATE LEVEL, THERE ARE POINTS AWARDED FOR SERVING A POPULATION LIKE THIS ONE. UM, AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. IT'S IN AN AREA WHERE WE KNOW YOUNG PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE OR TO UNIVERSITY WOULD LIKE TO LIVE. UM, THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT WE FOUND OUT FROM, FROM THE AREA. UM, AND SO I THINK, UM, YOUNG PEOPLE AGING OUT OF FOSTER CARE WOULD FIND THIS AREA ATTRACTIVE IF THEY'RE, UM, WORKING AND GOING TO SCHOOL. UM, AND SO IF THERE WAS THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING SO THAT THEY COULD DO THAT, UM, FOR THE TIME THAT THEY NEEDED UNTIL THEY FINISHED SCHOOL, UM, IT, IT, IT DEFINITELY THE NEED IN THE AREA. AND YES, THE DEVELOPERS CAN SELECT THE, UM, SUBPOPULATIONS THAT THEY WANT TO SERVE. OKAY. I, I THINK THE LOCATION'S ACTUALLY, UH, IDEAL, UM, GIVEN THAT IT'S RIGHT BY SAC FOR, FOR CHILDREN AGING, AGING OUT OF FOSTER CARE. 'CAUSE IT'S RIGHT BY SAC AND IT'S BY A LOT OF BUS LINES THAT RUN VERY, VERY FREQUENTLY AND CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN WHERE YOU CAN CONNECT WITH A LOT OF OTHER LINES. SO [00:55:01] I THINK THAT'S GREAT. THAT SAID, , I WANNA KNOW WHEN THIS DOES GET, UH, REZONED. WHAT, WHAT ABOUT THE PARKING? DOES IT QUALIFY FOR WAIVERS OF ALL THOSE PARKING REQUIREMENTS? BECAUSE THAT WOULD MAKE IT MORE AFFORDABLE AND YOU DON'T WANT TO FORCE KIDS WHO ARE, YOU KNOW, 20 YEARS OLD TO GET THAT DEBT, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, PUT THEIR LIVES, UH, TOGETHER. SO I I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT KIND OF, UM, IS IT DOWNTOWN ZONING THAT? YEAH, GREAT QUESTION. UH, IT WOULD BE I D C SONY THAT WE WOULD BE SEEKING. UM, THE WAY WE THINK THIS DEVELOPMENT COULD WORK WOULD BE WITH SOME PODIUM PARKING. SO THERE WOULD STILL BE SOME PARKING REQUIRED EVEN THOUGH IT IS, UM, ON A GREAT, UM, TRANSPORTATION ROUTE. UM, BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT I B C AND, UM, I B C DOES ALLOW US TO REDUCE SOME PARKING, BUT SOME PARKING WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE PROVIDED. AND AGAIN, THE DESIGN WOULD BE THE PODIUM PARKING, WHICH MEANS THAT THE PARKING IS BELOW AND THEN THE HOUSING, THE, UM, ON TOP OF THAT PARKING, UM, ESSENTIALLY IN PROBABLY FOUR STORIES. UM, AND THAT'S HOW WE WOULD MAKE THAT WORSE. AND, UH, I SAW THAT YOU HAVE FIVE POINTS IN THE SCORING CRITERIA DEDICATED TO AMENITIES AND SUSTAINABILITY. SO WHO AT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHO'S GONNA MANAGE, UH, THIS, I MEAN, WE'RE JUST THE R P JUST TO GET IT BUILT RIGHT, BUT NOT NECESSARILY FOR IT TO ACTUALLY WORK IN THE LONG RUN. RIGHT. UM, SO PART OF THE REASON WE WANTED TO SET THIS UP TO BE MORE SUCCESSFUL IF IT'S A LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT IS BECAUSE, UM, THE MANAGEMENT IS LOOKED AT BY THE STATE AS WELL. UM, AND SO SOME DEVELOPERS WHO BILL THESE KIND OF DEVELOPMENTS ARE IN IT FOR THE LONG TERM. SO THEY ONLY, THEY NOT ONLY BUILD IT, THEY ARE THE ONES WHO MANAGE IT FOR THE LONG TERM. SO THEY'RE IN THE DEAL 15, 30 YEARS, SOMETIMES LONGER. UM, THERE ARE SOME THAT DO BUILD IT AND AFTER FIVE YEARS OR 15 YEARS, UM, THEY DO SELL IT. UM, BUT OUR, YOU KNOW, IF, IF IT IS A LOW INCOME HEALTH AND TAX CREDIT, THE, THE MANAGEMENT WOULD, WOULD HAVE TO BE STRONG AND IN PLACE TO KEEP ALL THE STANDARDS FOR THE C D H D A. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, WE HOPE THAT WE GET SOMEONE WHO PERHAPS IS IN ENOUGH FOR THE LONG TERM AS WELL. IT ALSO GETS US, UM, HIGHER QUALITY PRODUCTS SOMETIMES BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY WANNA BUILD SOMETHING THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO KEEP MAINTAINING EVERY FIVE OR OR 10 YEARS WITH A LOT OF DEEP, UM, MAINTENANCE COSTS. UM, SO THERE, THERE WOULD BE SOME SCORING THERE. AND THE SUSTAINABILITY POINTS, THAT'S SOMETHING WE WORK WITH THE OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY TO HELP US, UM, PUT INTO OUR SCORING SYSTEM. AND SO, UM, IT COULD BE BUILT BY SOMEONE ELSE OR IT COULD BE BUILT AND MANAGED BY THE SAME DEVELOPER. UM, IT VARIES, BUT I WOULD SAY 50 70% OF THE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS ARE BUILT AND MANAGED BY THE SAME, UM, DEVELOPMENT, UH, COMPANY. MM-HMM. . OKAY. WELL, UM, THANK YOU. LET, LET ME JUST WRAP UP BY SAYING THAT WHEN THIS COMES BACK TO, UH, WHETHER TO COMMITTEE OR TO, I'M SORRY, IS THIS GONNA GO TO COMMITTEE OR FULL COUNCIL THEN? UM, WELL, IT'LL ACTUALLY COME BACK TO AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY. IT WILL GO TO ONE OF THE COUNCIL COMMITTEES AND THEN IT WILL GO TO FULL COUNCIL. SO WE HAVE THOSE, UM, THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS STILL. OKAY. WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WILL BE IMPORTANT TO ME IS, UH, KNOWING WHO'S GOING TO MANAGE IT WELL, ALTHOUGH IN AUDIT WE DON'T FIND OUT ANYBODY, WE DON'T FIND OUT NAMES. UM, BUT KNOWING THAT STAFF WILL KNOW WHO'S GOING TO, TO MANAGE IT FOR THE LONG TERM, UM, AND AFFORDABILITY, UH, OF COURSE ALL THE CRITERIA YOU NAMED, BUT THE FLEXIBILITY WITH, WITH THE PARKING, IF THERE'S GOING TO BE LIMITED PARKING, THEN THERE PROB THAT WILL PROBABLY BE FACTORED INTO SOME OF THE RENTAL AMOUNTS, RIGHT. SO THAT NATURALLY WILL MAKE THE, NOT THE ONES WITHOUT PARKING SPOTS MORE AFFORDABLE. SO I, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'LL, THAT'LL BE IMPORTANT TO ME. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU CHAIR. AND, UH, WOULD ANY OF THE OTHER, UH, COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE A, A COMMENT OR A QUESTION? OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. UH, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, SAY A COUPLE MORE THINGS. I, I HAVE TO SAY, I RESPECT WHAT COUNCILMAN PERRY HAS SAID ABOUT THE TIME, BECAUSE IN LISTENING TO YOU VETO AND UNDERSTANDING THIS PROCESS, [01:00:01] THERE'S A LOT OF CONTINGENCIES IN THIS, A LOT OF 'EM ZONING BEING A MAJOR ONE, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY GO THROUGH PRETTY SIMPLY, IT'S A TIME MATTER OF BRINGING IT UP FOR ZONING AND THEN GETTING IT APPROVED. AND THEN, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE FACTOR OF GOING TO GET, UH, THE STATE TAX CREDITS AND THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT TAKES AND ARE THEY GONNA BE ELIGIBLE FOR A 9%? COULD THEY GET THAT? DO THEY HAVE TO CHANGE IT FOR A 4% LATER ON? UH, IF THEY DON'T GET 9%? AND, AND THEN OTHER FINANCING, ARE THEY GONNA GO TO THE SAN ANTONIO HOUSING TRUST FC OR P F C? ARE THEY GONNA GO TO SAHA FOR HELP WITH FUNDING? THERE'S SO MANY IFS IN THIS THAT I WISH THERE HAD BEEN MORE TIME TO BEGIN THIS PROCESS TO PUT THIS ALL TOGETHER. 'CAUSE I BELIEVE IT'S A WORTHWHILE PROJECT, BUT, UH, LIKE HE, LIKE COUNCILMAN FERRY SAID, YOU'RE REALLY COMPRESSING A LOT OF TIME IN A YEAR AND THERE'S A LOT OF IFS THAT MORE THAN LIKELY WILL ALL WORK OUT, BUT WE JUST, WE CAN'T BE ASSURED OF THAT. UH, AND UM, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE AS SIMPLE AS THERE NOT BEING ENOUGH PEOPLE SHOWING UP AT A, A MEETING, UH, OF AN ORGANIZATION THAT YOU NEED TO GO THROUGH, LIKE THE ZONING COMMISSION OR SOMETHING. AND THAT WOULD DELAY IT EVEN LONGER. SO, UH, IT'S WORRISOME TO ME ABOUT THAT. AND UH, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY GONNA BE GOING TO THE TS FOR MORE FUNDING? ARE THEY GONNA BE GOING, LIKE I SAID TO THE HOUSING TRUST THAT I SIT ON FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING? AND WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT THOSE THINGS AND, UM, AND I I'M NOT TOO WORRIED ABOUT THE QUALITY AND, AND COUNCILMAN PERRY, I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE CONCERNED, BUT THAT QUALITY IS OVERSEEN NOT JUST BY OUR DEPARTMENTS THAT THAT WATCH OVER THAT, BUT BY THE STATE BECAUSE THEIR, THEIR MONEY'S GONE INTO THIS IN THOSE TAX CREDITS AND THEY HAVE DEMANDS THAT NEED TO BE MET IN THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. BUT, UH, I JUST, I JUST WORRY THAT THERE'S NOT GONNA BE ENOUGH TIME. HOWEVER, I, I WILL SUPPORT IT MOVING FORWARD FROM HERE. UH, AND I, I HOPE THAT IT CAN BE SUCCESSFUL AND I THINK ALL OF US ARE GONNA BE LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING THE RETURN COME TO US LATER TO REASSURE US THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A GOOD, STABLE, SOLID PROJECT. SO THOSE ARE THE CLOSING COMMENTS I HAVE. SO, UH, THIS IS A BRIEFING AND UH, THEN, UH, WE, WE'LL JUST WATCH AS IT GOES FORWARD. 'CAUSE I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO VOTE ON MOVING IT FORWARD. IT'S JUST A BRIEFING FOR US. IS THAT CORRECT? IF WE WANTED TO MAKE A CHANGE, WE COULD. THAT IS CORRECT. CHAIRMAN, IT'S A BRIEFING ONLY. WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU ONCE WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE SOLICITATION AND COMPLETED IT. RIGHT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, VERONICA AND WE, WE HEAR FROM YOU AGAIN MAYBE? YES, SIR. COME NEXT. OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM IS [8. 20-5299 Affordable Rental and Homeownership Housing Development Gap Funding [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; Verónica R. Soto, FAICP, Director, Neighborhood and Housing Services Department]] THE AFFORDABLE RENTAL AND HOME OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT GAP FUNDING. THAT'S A, THAT'S A MOUTHFUL. OKAY. GO AHEAD. BETTER LUCK THIS TIME. THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. UM, FOR THE RECORD, VERONICA SOSO WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ONCE AGAIN. UH, THIS ITEM IS FOR THE GAP FUNDING THAT IS FUNDED OUT OF OUR FEDERAL ENTITLEMENT GRANT. UH, THE HOME PROGRAM, UM, IT IS LISTED, I BELIEVE, AS ONE ITEM AT THE AGENDA AGENDA, BUT THERE ARE ACTUALLY TWO SOLICITATIONS AND THE FIRST ONE IS FOR THE HOME OWNERSHIP HOUSING. UM, AND THIS IS GAP FUND FUNDING. UM, SO THIS IS ANOTHER R F P AND THIS IS WHERE WE MAKE THE 1.25 MILLION IN HOME FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR, UH, NON-PROFIT OR FOR-PROFIT DEVELOPERS THAT WISH TO, UH, UM, DEVELOP AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND THE FEDERAL FUNDING HAS TO BE USED FOR FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 80% A M I. THERE IS A RESTRICTED COVENANT IMPOSED, THIS WOULD BE A NEW CONTRACT. UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I NEED TO POINT OUT WITH THIS FEDERAL MONEY IS THAT AT THE TIME OF EVALUATION IF WE DO GET ADDITIONAL PROGRAM INCOME, UM, AND IDENTIFY ADDITIONAL FUNDING THROUGH, THROUGH THAT PROCESS, IF PEOPLE, FOR EXAMPLE, PAY OFF LOANS, UM, AND AS PAYMENTS ARE DUE TO US, THEN WE WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE ADD THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO THIS. UM, 1.25. 1.25 IS WHAT IS, WHAT IS IN THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN. UM, AND IF WE DO HAVE ADDITIONAL FUNDING WITH PAYOFF, WE WOULD ADD THAT FOR GAP FUNDING AS WELL. UM, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT, THAT THERE'S A NEED FOR THIS. ALL OF THAT, OF COURSE, WOULD GO TO ONE OF OUR COUNCIL COMMITTEES, UH, AND THEN FOR FULL CITY COUNCIL AS WELL. [01:05:01] SO AGAIN, THIS IS MAKING FUNDING AVAILABLE FROM FEDERAL ENTITLEMENT GRANTS TO DEVELOP AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THIS IS PARTICULAR TO HOME OWNERSHIP, A NEW CONTRACT. WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. YOU WILL HAVE, UM, THE, THE, UH, VOTING MEMBERS FOR THE EVALUATION. UM, BECAUSE THIS IS FEDERAL FUNDING, THIS DOESN'T HAVE THE LOCAL PREFERENCE POINTS, ET CETERA. BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT WE HAVE THE, THE TEAM EVALUATING THIS AND, UM, THE NUMBER OF VENDORS WHO HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. WE, OF COURSE, ALWAYS, UM, LET THE FOLKS WHO HAVE APPLIED FOR CT BT OR HOME FUNDING IN THE PAST KNOW ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF THESE FUNDS AS WELL. UM, THEY'RE ALL AWARE BECAUSE THEY'RE ALSO AWARE OF THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN THAT SET ASIDE THIS FUNDING. IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU SEE THE SCORING AND I MENTIONED THAT, UM, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO GIVE THOSE, UM, ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS, THE, THE BETA AND LOCAL PREFERENCE BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL GUIDELINES FOR THIS. WE DO FOCUS ON THE EXPERIENCE, CAPACITY AND PROJECT READINESS, READINESS OF DEVELOPMENT. UM, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THEY MEET THE HUD REGULATORY, UM, ISSUES AS WELL. UM, BUT WE DO SPEND A LOT OF POINTS ON UNDERWRITING AS WELL. UM, UNDERWRITING IS TIED TO THOSE HUD REGULATORY CONTROLS AS WELL, AND SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE PROGRAM UTILIZES THIS FUNDING, UM, IN THE MANNER THAT HU IS INTENDING WITH REGARDS TO THE TIMELINE. THAT'S IN THE NEXT SLIDE. SO, UM, THE BRIEFING IS TODAY WE WOULD RELEASE THIS R F P, UH, AT THE END OF THE WEEK, UH, PRE-SUBMIT A CONFERENCE, UM, IN FIRST IN NOVEMBER, DEADLINE FOR QUESTIONS MID-NOVEMBER, AND THEN THIS WOULD NOT BE DUE UNTIL DECEMBER. UM, THE STAFF TEAM WOULD EVALUATE THIS IN THE NEW YEAR. UM, WE WOULD COME BACK TO THE COMMITTEE IN JANUARY AS WELL. AND THEN WE WOULD GO TO THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE IN FEBRUARY AND HOPEFULLY AS WELL TO THREE COUNCIL IN FEBRUARY SO THAT WE CAN, UH, NEGOTIATE THE, THE START DATE AFTER COUNCIL AWARD, UM, SHORTLY AFTER. AGAIN, THIS IS ALL CONTINGENT ON THE UNDERWRITING, SO THIS IS FOR HOME OWNERSHIP. UM, I HAD A, A SEPARATE PRESENTATION I THINK THAT JUST FOLLOWS THIS, THAT TALKS ABOUT THE RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. SO IF I MAY, I'LL JUST GO THROUGH THIS AS WELL. SO THIS IS THE RENTAL ONE. UM, AGAIN, 1.25 MILLION IN HOME FUNDING. UM, IT WAS AGAIN, AN R F P TWO SEPARATE SOLICITATIONS. AS I MENTIONED. THERE WILL ALSO BE A RESTRICT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT IMPOSED, AND IT'D BE A NEW CONTRACT. SAME, UH, INFORMATION. IF WE GET ADDITIONAL PROGRAM INCOME, WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT TO THE SOLICITATION BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THE NEED TO DEVELOP AFFORDABLE HOUSING RENTAL HOUSING IS ALSO GREAT. UM, AND SO IF WE DO IDENTIFY THAT ADDITIONAL FUNDING THROUGH PROGRAM INCOME, UH, PROGRAM SAVINGS, OR IF WE HAVE CANCELED PROJECTS, THEN WE WOULD PROPOSE TO ADD THAT TO THE HOME FUNDING HERE TO SEND THAT RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION. UM, THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS, UH, AGAIN, THE SCORING, UH, TEAM, UM, UM, SIMILAR TO PREVIOUS. UM, AND ONCE AGAIN, WE HAVE LED ALL THE FOLKS WHO HAVE APPLIED FOR FEDERAL ENTITLEMENT GRANT FUNDING IN THE PAST KNOW THAT THIS SOLICITATION IS COMING UP. UM, AND THEN THE LAST SLIDE HAS, OR THE NEXT SLIDE, NOT THE LAST SLIDE, HAS THE, THE POINTS. UM, VERY SIMILAR TO THE HOME OWNERSHIP. AGAIN, WITH THESE FEDERAL FUNDS, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO HAVE THE, THE BETA OR THE LOCAL PREFERENCE POINTS. UM, BUT WE DO FOCUS ON, UH, THE UNDERWRITING, THE, UH, HUD REQUIREMENTS ARE TIED TO THAT AND THE EXPERIENCE CAPACITY OF THE DEVELOPER, AS WELL AS, UH, THE PROJECT READINESS AS AS YOU CAN SEE. AND THEN THE LAST SLIDE HAS A TIMELINE, VERY SIMILAR ACTUALLY. THEY'LL BE RELEASED AT THE SAME TIME AS THE HOME OWNERSHIP. UM, SO RELEASE WILL BE END OF THIS WEEK, UM, PRE-SUBMIT ALL FIRST WEEK IN NOVEMBER. UM, THAT LINE FOR QUESTION ALSO MID-NOVEMBER AND DUE IN, UM, DECEMBER. IT'LL BE DECEMBER 11TH. WE WILL EVALUATE ALL OF THESE IN THE NEW YEAR TO COME BACK TO YOU, UM, HOPEFULLY IN JANUARY. AND THIS, EXCUSE ME, GO TO COUNCIL, UM, TO THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND TO CITY COUNCIL IN FEBRUARY SO THAT WE CAN NEGOTIATE THE START DATE SHORTLY AFTER THAT AWARD. AND AGAIN, THESE ARE TWO SOLICITATIONS. ONE IS FOR RENTAL AND ONE IS FOR HOME OWNERSHIP [01:10:01] UTILIZING HOME FUNDING. AND THAT IS THE END OF THE PRESENTATION AT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU, VERO. UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK HOW YOU, UH, DETERMINE TO DIVIDE THAT MONEY BETWEEN THE TWO PROGRAMS. SO 1.25 IS THE HOME OWNERSHIP COMPONENT. SO THAT'S ONE SOLICITATION. AND THEN FOR THE RENTAL, IT IS 1.25. SO IT'S ALREADY, UM, THAT FUNDING IS ALREADY ALLOCATED. IF WE GET ADDITIONAL PROGRAM INCOME, UH, WE WOULD LOOK AT HOW MUCH IT WAS, AND MORE THAN LIKELY WE TAKE THAT TO A COUNCIL COMMITTEE TO HELP US DETERMINE HOW WE, UM, HOW WE DIVIDE THAT. BUT FOR NOW, THE MINIMUM IS 1.25 FOR HOME OWNERSHIP AND THE SAME AMOUNT FOR RENTAL. OKAY. SO THAT'S, UH, FEDERAL REGULATION AS THEY SENT THAT MONEY TO US. YES. THAT'S, UH, THE HOME MONEY. AND THAT'S WHAT WE DELINEATED IN THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, WHICH IS, UM, THE PLAN OF ESSENTIALLY THE BUDGET AND THE PLAN FOR HOW WE UTILIZE THE FEDERAL MONEY. SO Y'ALL APPROVED THAT BACK IN AUGUST, OR ANNUAL ACTION. OKAY. UH, I WOULD HOPE WE CAN FIND INCREASED MONEY TO HELP IN THE AREA OF, UH, MULTIFAMILY, UH, APARTMENTS. UH, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU GET A LOT MORE BANG FOR YOUR BUCK BUILDING APARTMENTS THAN YOU DO INDIVIDUAL HOMES, I THINK. BUT, OKAY. UH, THAT WAS THE ONLY QUESTION THAT I HAD. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OH, YOU GOT REAL LUCKY THAT TIME. BERYL . THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL. OKAY. AGAIN, THAT WAS A BRIEFING. CLAYTON, DID I SEE YOUR HAND GO UP? YEAH. AGAIN, I, I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE TIMELINES ON THAT. VERO, PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE AT LEAST 30 DAYS, IF NOT 45 DAYS FOR, UM, FOLKS TO RESPOND ON THEIR PROPOSALS. THAT'S, UH, I'M GOING TO, I'M GONNA KEEP BRINGING THAT UP. WOULDN'T WE HAVE LESS THAN THOSE DAYS BY THE TIME IT'S RELEASED TO IT BEING DUE? SO THIS, UH, COUNCILMAN. YEAH. UH, COUNCILMAN, THIS IS BEN. JUST WANNA, UM, CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS. SO THE LAST TIME YOU WERE ON THE COMMITTEE, WE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THE LENGTH OF TIME THE SOLICITATION WAS OUT. WE DID CHANGE THAT. SO OUR PREVIOUS TIMELINE WAS 30 DAYS FROM THE TIME THE SOLICITATION WAS ISSUED TILL THE TIME IT WAS DUE, TYPICALLY. I MEAN, THOSE WOULD OBVIOUSLY VARY DEPENDING UPON THE SOLICITATION. YEAH. BASED ON YOUR FEEDBACK. WE MOVED THAT TO 45 DAYS. SO YOU'LL SEE IN THIS CASE, FROM THE TIME IT WAS ISSUED UNTIL THE TIME IS DUE, IT'S ABOUT 45 DAYS. AND THEN ON THE QUESTIONS, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, 'CAUSE WE HAVE THIS ON EVERY ONE OF THESE SLIDES, THIS IS DEADLINE FOR QUESTIONS. MM-HMM. , THAT'S THE LAST DATE THAT A POTENTIAL RESPONDENT CAN ASK QUESTIONS, RIGHT? IT'S REALLY AN ITERATIVE PROCESS. I MEAN, WE'RE GETTING QUESTIONS SOMETIMES A DAY OR TWO AFTER A SOLICITATION GOES OUT, WE DON'T HOLD THOSE. AS SOON AS WE CAN GET WITH THE DEPARTMENT AND GET THE RESPONSES, WE SEND THOSE OUT, AND THAT'S SENT OUT AS AN ADDENDUM TO THE R F P, SO EVERYBODY GETS THEM, OR WE'RE NOT HOLDING THEM. SO WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT THROUGHOUT THAT 45 DAY TIME, IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS, WE'RE TURNING THEM AROUND QUICKLY AND GETTING THEM BACK OUT TO POTENTIAL RESPONDENTS. IF WE SEE THAT IT LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND THERE'S SOME CONFUSION ABOUT SOME PART OF THE R F P, WE ALWAYS HAVE THE ABILITY TO STEP BACK, STEP BACK WITH THE DEPARTMENT, EXTEND THE TIMELINE. SO I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WE CERTAINLY TOOK YOUR FEEDBACK, WE'VE INCORPORATED CHANGES IN THAT, AND WE, WE TRY TO PAY REALLY CLOSE ATTENTION TO IT. WELL, AND I, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT, BEN, AND THAT THAT WAS THE WHOLE GIST OF THAT, NOT, AND I, I APPRECIATE THAT ABOUT GETTING THE ANSWERS OUT QUICKLY, YOU KNOW, TO THEIR QUESTIONS. BUT WHEN SOMETIMES WHEN YOU CLOSE THAT DATE, YOU KNOW, QUESTIONS COME IN ON THAT DATE, THAT COULD IMPACT THE, THE ACTUAL PROPOSAL THAT YOU HAVE TO GO BACK AND MAKE CHANGES. AND THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF MY CONCERN AS WELL. UH, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH TIME THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO FINISH THESE THINGS UP BASED ON, ON THE FINAL DATE OF QUESTIONS BEING DUE AND WHEN THEY ACTUALLY GET ANSWERED. AND I APPRECIATE, I APPRECIATE THAT, AND I, I THINK WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO WATCH THAT VERY CLOSELY ON HOW MUCH, AGAIN, HOW MUCH TIME ARE WE REALLY ALLOWING THEM TO PUT THESE PROPOSALS TOGETHER AFTER ALL THE QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED AND EVERYTHING IS CLEANED ONBOARD, AND EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT THE, WHAT DIRECTION THEY SHOULD GO ON PUTTING THESE PROPOSALS TOGETHER. BUT I APPRECIATE THAT, AND I, I'M, I'M GONNA CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THAT ON THESE CONTRACTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE, UM, ADHERING TO THAT BECAUSE, AND, AND IT WASN'T JUST BASED ON MY PRIOR EXPERIENCE, I HAD GOTTEN THOSE TYPES OF COMMENTS FROM, UM, DEVELOPERS AND CONTRACTORS THAT WERE NOT GIVING THEM ENOUGH TIME, BUT THEY'RE NOT WILLING TO COME UP AND SAY, HEY, WE NEED MORE TIME [01:15:01] ON THESE THINGS, BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANNA UPSET THE APPLE PART. I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT, UH, WHEN I START GETTING THOSE KIND OF COMMENTS, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE RESPONDING TO THAT AND GIVING THOSE, THOSE, UH, UH, FOLKS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT A QUALITY PACKAGE TOGETHER. AND THAT'S WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, BEN. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. THANK YOU, BEN. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY. HEARING NONE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [9. 20-6075 Financial Advisor Services [Ben Gorzell, Chief Financial Officer; Troy Elliott, Deputy Chief Financial Officer]] UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER NINE, FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES. AND WE'LL BE HEARING FROM BEN OR TROY ON THIS. YES, SIR. I'LL KICK IT OFF. UH, I THINK THERE'S A PRESENTATION, LAUREN, I, WHILE SHE'S BRINGING UP THE PRESENTATION, AND I ASKED THE CHAIR MENTIONED, THIS IS A PRE PRESENTATION BRIEFING FOR FINANCIAL ADVISOR SERVICES. UH, THESE FINANCIAL ADVISOR SERVICES PLAY AN INTEGRAL ROLE, UM, IN ASSISTING THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY AND DESIGNING OUR VARIETY OF OUR DEBT PROGRAMS. UM, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT OUR DEBT PROGRAMS, WE'LL TALK ABOUT, FOR EXAMPLE, OUR VALOREM DEBT THAT INCLUDE OUR GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND, CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATIONS, TAX NOTES, AND OTHER PROGRAMS SUCH AS OUR REVENUE BONDS, UM, WHICH WILL BE PRIMARILY ISSUED, FOR EXAMPLE, BY OUR AIRPORT. UM, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS IN R F P HAS AN ESTIMATED VALUE OF 2.5 MILLION. AND THIS ESTIMATED VALUE REALLY IS CONTINGENT UPON THE NUMBER OF DEALS OR DEBT ISSUANCES THAT WE DO, UM, OVER A YEAR. UM, SO THAT CAN CHANGE BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE PROGRAM AND THE, THE NUMBER OF PROGRAMS THAT OUR DEBT ISSUANCES THAT WE MAY, MAY DO IN ANY YEAR. UM, THE PROPOSED TERM IS FOR THREE YEARS, UM, WITH A ONE TWO YEAR OPTION TO RENEW, AND THIS CONTRACT WOULD EXPIRE ON MARCH 31ST, 2021. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AS PART OF THE SOLICITATION OVERVIEW, UM, WHEN WE DO OUR OUTREACH, THERE IS A SPECIFIC N I G P CODE THAT WE REFERENCE THAT, UM, OUR, ANY VENDOR THAT HAS REGISTERED IN OUR CENTRAL VENDOR REGISTRY WILL BE NOTIFIED THAT THIS SOLICITATION IS, UM, BEING ISSUED. WE ALSO LOOK WITH, WE ALSO WORK WITH THE, UM, SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, ANYTHING THAT IS OUT THERE AS A FINANCIAL ADVISOR, BUT MORE SPECIFICALLY BASED ON OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE INDUSTRY, WE DO TARGETED VENDOR OUTREACH, AND THERE'S ABOUT 48 FIRMS THAT WE KNOW SPECIFICALLY WOULD BE INTERESTED AND THAT WE HAVE WORKED WITH IN THE PAST ON THIS TYPE OF SOLICITATION WHEN WE DO OUR NORMAL ADVERTISING. AS FAR AS THE EVALUATION VOTING MEMBERS, UM, SINCE THIS IS A HIGH PROFILE, BEN WILL TAKE THE LEAD ON IT, UH, MYSELF, UH, MARGARET VIEGA, OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT OVER THIS FINANCE DIVISION, ALEX ENA. UH, WE ARE GOING TO ADD FELIX, UH, GARCIA, WHO'S THE TREASURER OF THE SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM. WE'RE ALSO STILL LOOKING FOR ONE ADDITIONAL EVALUATION MEMBER, UM, THAT WE WILL DETERMINE IN THE NEXT COUPLE DAYS. ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE ON THE SOLICITATION IS FINDING ONE WHO'S REALLY INDEPENDENT BASED ON OUR UNDERWRITING CONTRACTS, OUR BROKER DEALER CONTRACT, AND REALLY DOESN'T HAVE ANY AFFILIATION WITH SOME OF THESE PEOPLE THAT WILL BE BIDDING, BUT WE'LL TRY TO WRAP THAT UP HERE VERY QUICKLY. NEXT SLIDE. AS FAR AS THE SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS, LOOKING AT THE EVALUATION CRITERIA WHEN IT COMES TO EXPERIENCE BACKGROUND QUALIFICATION, WE'RE RECOMMENDING 30 POINTS, 40 POINTS FOR THE PROPOSED PLAN, UH, PRICING AT FIVE POINTS. AND THEN WE'LL ALSO BE WORKING WITH THE GOAL SETTING COMMITTEE ASSIGNED 10 POINTS FOR OUR PROGRAM, FIVE FOR OUR S B E PRIME AND FIVE FOR THE M W B E PRIME CONTRACT PROGRAM. WE ALSO HAVE 10 POINTS FOR THE LOCAL PREFERENCE PROGRAM AND BIND FOR FIVE POINTS FOR THE VETERAN OWNED SMALL BUSINESS PREFERENCE PROGRAM. UM, DUE TO THE AVAILABILITY, THERE ARE NO, UH, SUBCONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS FOR VEDA. WE ARE REQUIRING AUDIT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. AND BELOW YOU SEE THE GLOBAL SETTING COMMITTEE TO WHO WEIGHED IN ON THE, UM, THE POINTS FOR THE PROGRAM. THE PROJECT TIMELINE IS ON THE NEXT SLIDE. UM, HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS ON THE LAST COUPLE SLIDES. UM, OF COURSE, WE'RE TODAY AT OUR AUDIT COMMITTEE PATIENT BRIEFING. WE ARE PLANNING ON RELEASING THIS HOPEFULLY ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 26TH, AND HOLDING A PREM SUBMITTAL CONFERENCE ON NOVEMBER 4TH. AS BEN MENTIONED, WE CAN TAKE QUESTIONS ANYTIME FROM THE RELEASE DATE AND WE'LL RESPOND PROMPTLY TO THOSE. AND THE DEADLINE FOR THE QUESTIONS WOULD BE NOVEMBER 13TH. IN THE EVENT THAT WE DID HAVE SOMEONE THAT REQUESTED AN EXTENSION DUE TO THEIR INABILITY TO MEET THE DEADLINE, THEN WE WOULD WORK WITH THOSE TO ACTUALLY EXTEND THE DEADLINE. AND WE'VE DONE THAT IN THE PAST ON SEVERAL OF OUR SOLICITATIONS. WE'RE LOOKING AT A DUE DATE OF, UH, DECEMBER 14TH, WHICH WOULD PROVIDE OUR RESPONDENTS FROM NOVEMBER 13TH ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE DECEMBER 14TH TO INCORPORATE ANY OF OUR QUESTIONS INTO THEIR, UM, THEIR RESPONSES TO THE R F P. WE'LL BE COMING BACK [01:20:01] TO THIS GROUP WITH RESULTS OF OUR SOLICITATION ON FEBRUARY 16TH, AND THEN TO CITY COUNCIL IN MARCH, UM, WITH A CONTRACT START DATE OF APRIL 1ST CHAIR COMMITTEE MEMBERS, UH, SHORT AND SWEET, THAT, UM, CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM ANY COMMITTEE MEMBERS. COUNCILMAN PERRY? YEAH, UM, GOING BACK TO THAT, UH, EVALUATION, UH, UM, PERCENTAGES, IF YOU COULD PULL THAT ONE UP AGAIN, TROY, WHICH SLIDE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? THE, UM, THE POINT PRE, SIR. YEP. THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. UM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I HAVE NEVER SEEN A, A SOLICITATION COME OUT WHERE WE'VE ONLY PUT FIVE POINTS ON PRICING. TO ME, THAT SOUNDS A LITTLE BIT LOW. UM, I, I KNOW THAT WE WANNA GET TOWARDS MORE QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED, YOU KNOW, PROPOSED PLAN AND ALL THAT KIND OF THING, BUT I, I, FIVE POINTS ONLY FOR PRICING THAT I, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, THAT WE'RE NOT PUTTING A LITTLE BIT MORE EMPHASIS ON, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH IT'S GONNA COST. AND, UH, YOU KNOW, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, AGAIN, THIS IS TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND, UM, I, I WOULD, UH, I WOULD ASK THAT WE PUT A LITTLE BIT MORE EMPHASIS ON THE PRICING HERE. HAVE WE EVER HAD A, HAD SOMETHING THIS LOW ON PRICING ON ANY CONTRACT THAT WE PUT OUT FIVE POINTS WE HAVE IN THE PAST? UM, I CAN'T REMEMBER A SPECIFIC SOLICITATION, BUT IT TO THAT, TO YOUR POINT, EXACTLY THAT, WHERE WE'VE WANTED TO FOCUS MORE ON THE PROPOSED PLAN AND EXPERIENCE, BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS. WE HAVE HAD SOLICITATIONS IN THE PAST WITH, UM, FIVE POINTS FOR PRICING. THE OTHER THING THAT WE HAVE FOUND IN THIS INDUSTRY IS THE PRICING IS PRETTY MUCH, UM, UH, I GUESS EQUAL BETWEEN RESPONSES. THEY TYPICALLY HAVE A BASE FEE IN THIS TYPE OF, UM, IN THIS TYPE OF, UM, CONTRACT ENGAGEMENT WITH A PER BOND FEE. AFTER THAT, UM, THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH ALIGNED. SO THERE ISN'T A WHOLE LOT OF, UM, UM, I GUESS DIVERSIFICATION BETWEEN THE PROPOSALS WE TYPICALLY GET. AND SO FOR THOSE TWO REASONS, THAT'S PRIMARILY WHY WE KEPT THE PRICING AT FIVE POINTS. YEAH, COUNSEL, AND I'LL ADD, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF DEVIATION WHEN WE GET, THERE'S KIND OF AN INDUSTRY STANDARD OF A PRICE PER BOND. SO WE DON'T PAY, FOR EXAMPLE, A RETAINER. WE ONLY PAY IF WE GO OUT AND DO A BOND ISSUE, AND IT'S A PRICE PER BOND, AND IT'S TYPICALLY, UH, ONE LEVEL FOR LIKE A PROPERTY TAX SUPPORTED DEBT. UH, IT WOULD BE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT LEVEL FOR SOMETHING LIKE REVENUE BONDS OR SOME KIND OF SPECIAL PURPOSE DEBT, BUT WE JUST DON'T SEE A LOT OF DEVIATION WHEN WE GET PRICING BACK ON THESE, THESE, BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT'S SET FROM AN INDUSTRY STAND STANDPOINT. SO THAT'S WHY WE FOCUS MORE ON EXPERIENCE, BACKGROUND, QUALIFICATIONS, AND PROPOSED PLAN. OKAY. UH, I'M, I'M STILL A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT ONLY FIVE POINTS. WOULD LIKE FOR Y'ALL TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THAT. ANOTHER STAB AT, UM, IF, UH, UH, IF NOT, I GUESS WE'LL FIND OUT WHEN THE PROPOSALS COME BACK, WHAT KIND OF A SWING THERE IS IN, IN PRICING. BUT, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, FIVE POINTS JUST SEEMS AWFULLY LOW TO ME, AND THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S MY COMMENT ON THAT. AND AGAIN, THE TIME TIMELINES ON THESE THINGS, YOU KNOW, WORKING FOR 45 DAYS, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT QUESTIONS, THAT KIND OF THING. AND PEOPLE ASKING FOR EXTENSIONS, NORMALLY, AGAIN, CONTRACTORS ARE GONNA PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER ON, ON WHATEVER THAT TIMELINE IS REQUIRED, AND VERY, VERY FEW ARE GONNA BE ASKING FOR EXTENSIONS AND, UM, I'D RATHER GIVE 'EM THAT TIME UPFRONT ON PUTTING PROPOSALS TOGETHER AT LEAST 45 DAYS. SO THAT'S ALL MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. AND I HAVE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, I SHARE YOUR CONCERN ON THAT FIVE POINTS DOES SEEM, SEEM SMALL. YOU KNOW, YOU TALK ABOUT, UH, STANDARD PRICING IN AN INDUSTRY, AND, YOU KNOW, I WAS IN THE REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY FOR A LONG TIME AND THEY ALL CHARGE 6%. WELL, THEY DON'T ALL CHARGE 6% NOWADAYS IN THE REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY ANYMORE, ALTHOUGH THAT MIGHT BE THE STANDARD MOST PEOPLE THINK OF. AND I THINK THAT WE OUGHT TO CONSIDER GIVING A LITTLE MORE CONSIDERATION TO THOSE POINTS FOR PRICING. CAN'T WE, UH, PUT ANOTHER FIVE IN THERE AND TAKE FIVE OUT OF, UH, THE 40%? UH, THAT'S STILL A PRETTY HEFTY, UH, MARGIN FOR THEIR PLAN, BUT IT GIVES 'EM A LITTLE BIT MORE INCENTIVE TO COME UP WITH MAYBE SOME, SOME BETTER PRICING. YEAH, WE CAN, WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT AND I, WE'LL GO BACK AND I MAY [01:25:01] WANT TO RECOMMEND THAT WE TAKE IT OUT, THE EXPERIENCE BACKGROUND QUALIFICATIONS OF 30 POINTS, BECAUSE BASED ON THE REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED PLAN IS REALLY THE MEAT OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. AND SO WE MAY WANT TO RECOMMEND MOVING IT OUT OF THAT FIRST BUCKET INTO, INTO THE, UM, THAT WOULD GO OVER WITH ME. LET'S HEAR IF ANY OF THE OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS. THAT, THAT WAS MY MAIN COMMENT. NO, IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT ANY OF THE OTHERS, BUT I THINK IF, IF COUNCILMAN AND I HAVE ANY INFLUENCE ON YOU, WE'D LIKE YOU TO REVISIT THAT AND SEE ABOUT CHANGING THAT A LITTLE BIT TO 10% FOR PRICING AND, UH, YOU KNOW, 25% FOR EXPERIENCE INSTEAD OF 30. I, I'M, I'M ALL IN ON THAT. THANK YOU. I'M NOT OPPOSED. OKAY. AND SO LET'S, LET'S HAVE YOU, UH, CHEW ON THAT AND HOPEFULLY THAT'LL HELP YOU GO FORWARD WITH IT, WITH A GOOD, UH, PROPOSAL. YES, SIR. OKAY. THAT WAS JUST A BRIEFING, SO WE APPRECIATE THAT. WE'VE GONE THROUGH ALL OUR HIGH PROFILE PRES SOLICITATION BRIEFINGS. NOW WE'VE GOT, UH, THREE ITEMS THAT ARE, UH, HIGH PROFILE BRIEFINGS, POSTS, SOLICITATION. AND I WANT TO ASK, [10. 20-6119 District 9 Senior Center [Roderick Sanchez, Assistant City Manager; Razi Hosseini, Director, Public Works]] UH, THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THIS ONE. NUMBER 10 IS DISTRICT NINE SENIOR CENTER. SINCE I'M THE COUNCILMAN FOR THIS, AND I'VE BEEN PUSHING FOR THIS, SHOULD I KEEP MY MOUTH SHUT ON THIS OR, YOU KNOW, SINCE IT'S FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY, CAN I SPEAK UP? UH, UH, UNLESS YOU HAVE SOME PERSONAL INTEREST IN IT, COUNCILMAN, WHICH I DON'T THINK YOU DO. UH, NO, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT. OKAY. JUST WANNA COVER MYSELF AS THEY SHOULD BE FOR THEIR, FOR THEIR COUNCIL DISTRICT. SO, NO, THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT COUNCIL. OKAY. THANK YOU, ANDY. OKAY, WE'RE GONNA BE HEARING FROM, UH, ROD OR RAZZY ON THIS, I START THE PRESENTATION. COUNCILMAN, CAN YOU PULL UP THE PRESENTATION, PLEASE? GOOD MORNING, COUNCILMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I AM RESI HOI, DIRECTOR, CITY ENGINEER FOR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. THIS IS A 2017 BOND FUNDED PROJECT, WHICH IS LOCATED AT EIGHT 40 WEST RDY DRIVE, ONE STORY FACILITY APPROXIMATELY OVER 26,000 SQUARE FEET, SENIOR SERVICES MEETINGS, ROOMS AND CLASSROOMS, EXERCISE, DANCE GAME AND DINING FACILITIES, SATELLITES, COUNCIL'S OFFICE PARKING FOR 200, INCLUDING 38, A D A ACCESSIBLE SPACES, AND 10 ELECTRIC CAR VEHICLE CHARGING STATION. SOME STATION TYPE IS A REQUEST FOR COMPETITIVE PROPOSAL. ESTIMATED VALUE FOR CONTACT IS 9.45 MILLION. PROPOSED TERM IS ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COMPANY IN MAY OF 2022. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS THE PROJECT LOCATION. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE BOUGHT TWO PROPERTY OVERALL TOGETHER SLIGHTLY OVER FIVE ACRES PROPERTY. WE ARE GOING TO BUILD THIS CENTER. NEXT SLIDE. RECOMMENDED AWARD. AS YOU CAN SEE, SCORE OF VENDOR ONE AND VENDOR TWO. THERE IS SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENT 84 POINT 85 FOR VENDOR ONE AND 71.5 FOR VENDOR TWO, AVIDA CONTRACTING GOALS, M W B 25% A, A B E, 33% LOCAL PREFERENCE PROGRAM. NOT APPLICABLE, VETERAN OWN SMALL BUSINESSES REFERENCE PROGRAM. ALSO NOT APPLICABLE AT THIS POINT, CODE POINT. GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. I'D LIKE TO TRY TO TALK ABOUT, TO DO DILIGENT IF YOU CAN. UH, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, RAVI. UM, AS, AS YOU KNOW, ON EACH OF THE POST SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS, BOTH THE CITY TO CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE AND THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT CONDUCT DUE DILIGENCE, UM, AND REPORT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE, WE DO IT IN TWO COMPONENTS. WE DO A, A MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS REVIEW, AND WE ALSO DO A DUE DILIGENCE. AND BASED ON THE DUE DILIGENCE REVIEW, UM, NEITHER THE CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE OR THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT FOUND ANY MATERIAL FINDINGS. I WOULD MENTION, AND RAVI TALKED ABOUT THIS, A FEW, A FEW, UM, ON THE, ON THE LAST SLIDE, THAT THERE WERE SUB CONTACT REQUIREMENTS, 25% FOR AN M W B E, AND 3% FOR AN A A B E. UH, WE DID RECEIVE A NUMBER OF RESPONSES. WE HAD 10 RESPONSES. UM, OF THOSE 10 RESPONSES, THERE WERE SIX VENDORS THAT WERE DEEMED NON-RESPONSIVE, UM, FOR THEIR INABILITY OR FOR NOT MEETING [01:30:01] THE SMALL BUSINESS PERCENTAGES OF CONTRACTING GOALS THAT I JUST MENTIONED. UM, WE'LL MENTION FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT, WHEN THESE SIX VENDORS WERE DEEMED NON-RESPONSIVE, WE MEET WITH EACH OF THE COMPANIES IN THE FORM OF A REVIEW MEETING WITH THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT, UM, AND THE SMALL BUSINESS OFFICE. AND WE MEET WITH THEM ONCE, INFORM THEM THAT BASED ON THE, THE, THEIR PROPOSAL, THEY DID NOT MEET THAT REQUIREMENT, BUT ALSO PROVIDE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO, UM, YOU KNOW, DID WE AS A CITY MISS ANYTHING ON OUR REVIEW? WAS THERE ANYTHING MISSING? UM, AFTER THAT RE AFTER THOSE REVIEW MEETINGS, WE DID DEEM ALL SIX VENDORS NON-RESPONSIVE. I WILL SAY THAT WE HAD ONE VENDOR COME BACK TO US, UM, AND I'LL MENTION THE NAME OF THE VENDOR SINCE, UM, TYPICALLY YOU AS A COMMITTEE WILL ONLY SEE THE, UM, THE EVALUATION RESPONSES THAT MAKE THE CUT. AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IN THE FORM OF THE LETTER THAT COMES POST THIS MEETING. BUT G***O CONSTRUCTION CAME BACK WITH ONE OF THE SIX VENDORS, AND THEY HAD, UM, ASKED US TO APPEAL OUR DECISION AS A CITY, UM, TO REVERSE, UM, OUR DECISION TO DEEM THEM NONRESPONSIVE AFTER WE SAT DOWN AS A GROUP BEING PUBLIC WORKS, A FINANCE DEPARTMENT, UM, A SMALL BUSINESS OFFICE. AND THE MANAGER'S OFFICE REVIEWED ALL THE FACTS THAT WERE PROVIDED, AND WE AFFIRMED OUR DECISION TO DEEM G***O NONRESPONSIVE. SO I WANTED TO BRING THAT UP SPECIFICALLY TO THE COMMITTEE SINCE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY HAD APPEALED DIRECTLY TO US. UM, BUT AS I MENTIONED, AFTER WE REVIEWED ALL THE, THE FACTS, UM, WE CONT WE, UM, MAINTAINED OUR DECISION TO DEEM THEM NONRESPONSIVE. UH, THAT CONCLUDES, UH, DUE DILIGENCE AND THE PRESENTATION. UM, WE ARE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU AS COMMITTEE MAY HAVE. OKAY. RAZZIE, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU NEED TO PRESENT? NO, SIR. OKAY. UM, SINCE I DO HAVE A, AN INTEREST IN THIS, UH, WE HAVE A, WE HAD A TARGET OF NINE AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS. UH, WAS THAT TARGET MET OR ARE WE GONNA FIND OUT? IT'S GONNA COST US A LITTLE BIT MORE, OR IS IT A LITTLE BIT OF SAVINGS ON THAT? COUNCILMAN IS SLIGHTLY SAVING. OKAY. WELL THAT'S GOOD NEWS. UH, OKAY. UH, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. ANY OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS? YES, COUNCILMAN PERRY? YEAH. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SCORING MATRIX PLEASE? YEAH, I JUST DIDN'T GET A, UM, ENOUGH TIME TO REALLY TAKE A LOOK AT THIS. ON, ON, UM, IN, IN DETAIL HERE, LOOKING AT THE SPREAD OF THE NUMBERS, UM, I I, I'M LOOKING AT THE S BETA AGAIN. UM, YOU GOT 10 FOR VENDOR A, 20 FOR B, AND ZERO FOR THE LAST TWO. AND, YOU KNOW, IF ONE OF 'EM WOULD'VE GOTTEN AT LEAST HALF, UH, THAT WOULD'VE PUT THEM VERY CLOSE TO THE RUNNING OR EVEN, YOU KNOW, THE 20 WOULD'VE PUT THEM OVER THE TOP. SO GIVE ME SOME, GIMME SOME REASONS WHY THEY GOT ZERO ON S BETA. ALEX, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT? SURE. THAT CRITERIA IS BASED ON WHETHER THE BUSINESS IS CERTIFIED AS A SMALL, UM, AND THEN FURTHERMORE AS A MINORITY OR WOMAN-OWNED BUSINESS, SO THAT THAT'S VERY, IF THEY ARE, THEY, THEY GET THOSE POINTS. AND IF THEY'RE NOT CERTIFIED IN THAT WAY, THEN THEY WON'T. OKAY. HOW CAN YOU GET 10 VERSUS 20? IT DEPENDS ON IF THEY'RE SMALL. AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, MINORITY AND WOMEN OWNED. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT, LOOKING AT THE OTHER SCORING, IT'S, IT'S PRETTY, UH, PRETTY, PRETTY CLOSE. IF YOU TAKE SBE OUT OF THERE, IT IS, UM, PRETTY CLOSE ACROSS THE BOARD. AND THAT GOES BACK TO MY NEXT QUESTION. UM, GOING TO THE NEXT SLIDE, TROY. YEAH. UM, I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED HERE. AND, AND THAT GOES TO THE, THE PROTESTS THAT WE HAD ON THIS ABOUT THEM NOT AGREEING WITH, UH, THE CITY'S CALL ON THIS. WE GOT 10 RESPONSES ON THIS THING, AND THAT'S FULL LOAN PROPOSALS, I'M ASSUMING, UH, THAT THEY PUT THE TIME AND EFFORT INTO PUTTING INTO THAT, AND 60% ARE DEEMED, UM, INELIGIBLE. [01:35:02] I, I, I GOT BIG CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. DO WE NEED TO RETAKE A LOOK AT THAT ON OUR POINT DIFFERENTIAL OR, OR, YOU KNOW, THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE'RE PUTTING FORWARD ON THIS? THE REASON I'M ASKING IS THAT TO ME, THAT'S UNUSUAL TO SEE OVER HALF OF THE, OF THE RESPONDENTS DISQUALIFIED BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T MEET A PARTICULAR CRITERIA ITEM THAT WE HAD. AND THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S DISCOURAGING TO ME, AND, UM, I'M SURE TO THE CONTRACTORS AS WELL, PUTTING TOGETHER A PROPOSAL THAT THEY GET THROWN OUT BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT MEETING, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR, UM, CE BETA GOALS. SO I, I WOULD LIKE TO SIT DOWN AND SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THAT AND, UH, DISCUSS THIS ABOUT HOW THIS IS PLAYING INTO RESPONSES COMING INTO OUR DEPARTMENT AND WHAT THE COST IMPLICATIONS ARE, WHAT THE, UH, AND, AND TROY AND RAZZIE, I WANNA, I WANNA SIT DOWN AND COME UP WITH SOME METRICS, AND I THINK I ASKED THAT BEFORE ON THE CONTRACT TYPE, WHETHER IT IS, UH, LOW BID VERSUS, UM, UM, BEST VALUE VERSUS, UM, DESIGN BUILD. WE, WE DID THAT BEFORE, BUT I WANTED TO COME UP WITH SOME METRICS SHOWING, UH, YOU KNOW, SMALL BUSINESS AWARDS VERSUS, YOU KNOW, OPEN, OPEN SOLICITATIONS, UM, WHAT THE COST GROWTH IS ON THOSE, THOSE, UM, SOLICITATIONS AND LOOK AT THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE DEEPLY BECAUSE THIS REALLY BOTHERS ME THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE CUTTING OUT HALF OF THE COMPETITION BECAUSE THEY DON'T MEET ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE CRITERIA ON, ON WHAT WE'RE PUTTING OUT THERE. AND ARE WE BEING TOO TOUGH? SHOULD WE, UM, LOOSEN THAT A LITTLE BIT IN ORDER TO GET MORE IN INTEREST AND MORE BIDS ON THESE, THESE LINE ITEMS? SO YEAH, I DEFINITELY WANNA SIT DOWN AND, UH, DEVELOP SOME METRICS ON PAST PERFORMANCE ON HOW, HOW THIS PROGRAM IS WORKING AND WHAT THE IMPACTS ARE TO THE, TO THE CITY BUDGET AS WELL AS FAR AS TIME QUALITY AND, UM, COST. SO, UH, HEY, COUNCILMAN, IF I MAY, I JUST WANNA REMIND THE, UH, COMMITTEE THAT, UH, AS THE STAFF APPLIES, THE , IT'S DONE BY, THEY'RE APPLYING IT AS, AS OUTLINED IN THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. UM, SO IF THERE ARE CHANGES FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT, THEY'LL HAVE TO BE CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE. YEP. AND I, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT, ANDY, BUT LIKE I'VE ALWAYS SAID, WHEN YOU GET GOVERNMENT INVOLVED IN THINGS, UH, SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T GO ACCORDING TO PLAN. AND I, I THINK THIS IS, THIS IS A DIRECT RESULT OF THAT, AND I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE IT IS AFFECTING OUR BUSINESS BASE HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. AND, UM, I, I, I, I WANNA, I WANNA TAKE A DEEPER DIVE INTO THIS. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PERRY. YOU KNOW, AND I WOULD WELCOME, UH, YOUR RESEARCH INTO THAT WITH CITY STAFF AND COME BACK AND LET US KNOW WHAT YOUR FINDINGS ARE. THANK YOU. OKAY. NOW THIS IS, UH, AN ITEM THAT WE WOULD BE VOTING TO MOVE FORWARD TO COUNSEL FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION. SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS BY ANY OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS? OKAY, HEARING NONE, THEN I WOULD, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS, UH, POST SOLICITATION HIGH PROFILE CONTRACT ON THE DISTRICT NINE SENIOR CENTER TO BE MOVED FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION. IS THERE A MOTION? NOT EVERYBODY AT ONCE. AH, THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. THANK YOU. MEMBER TREVINO. OKAY, SO MOTION'S BEEN MADE AND SECONDED TO MOVE THIS FORWARD TO COUNSEL FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE. RAISE YOUR HAND PLEASE. AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, THANK YOU. MOTIONS PASSED. OKAY, [11. 20-6049 Police Facility at St. Mary's Street [Roderick Sanchez, Assistant City Manager; Razi Hosseini, Director, Public Works]] THE NEXT ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 11 IS POLICE FACILITY AT ST. MARY'S STREET. UH, RAZZI, WILL YOU BE DEALING WITH THIS ONE TOO? YES, SIR. OKAY. THE FLOOR IS YOURS. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. GO. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS ANOTHER, UH, 2017 BOND FUNDED PROJECT, WHICH IS LOCATED AT 2020 NORTH S STREET. TWO STORY POLICE SUBSTATION. APPROXIMATELY 24 SQUARE FEET WILL BE HOUSING SS A P T PATROL, [01:40:01] SAFE PROPERTY CRIMES, AND CHRIST RESPONSE TEAM, WHICH CURRENTLY LOCATED AT CENTRAL SUBSTATION ON THREE OH STREET, COMMUNITY, ROOM, AND NEIGHBORHOOD AND S A P T EVENTS, PARKING AVAILABLE PUBLIC SUN STATION TYPE DESIGN BUILT THREE STEP PROCESS. FIRST STEP, REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION. STEP TWO, REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL ESTIMATED THE VALUE OF THIS CONTRACT, A LITTLE OVER 10 MILLION PROPOSED TERM ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION, FEBRUARY, 2023. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AS I MENTIONED, PROJECT LOCATED IN 2020 NORTH, IT IS COMBINATION OF THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WE BOUGHT FIRST, AND THEN WE BOUGHT ADDITIONAL TWO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO MAKE SURE SITE IS BIG ENOUGH FOR OUR NEED, WHICH IS LOCATED AT COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. PHASE ONE EVALUATION. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS ONE, WE HAD THE NUMBER OF THE FORM. WE EVALUATE THEM, TWO OF THEM CAME ON TOP. VENDOR ONE AND VENDOR TWO, SAP D'S S A, AVIDA, SUBCONTRACTING GOALS M W B 27% A, A B, 3% LOCAL PREFERENCE PROGRAM, NOT APPLICABLE. VETERAN OWNED SMALL BUSINESS PREFERENCES PROGRAM. ALSO NOT APPLICABLE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. RECOMMENDED AWARD. WE ARE RECOMMENDED TO THIS CONTRACT TO AWARD WITH THE VENDOR B, WHICH AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCORE, SCORE OF VENDOR B IS 81.43. AND VENDOR 2 76 0.2 IS AVIDA SUBCONTRACTING GOALS M W B 27%. AGAIN, A A B 3% LOCAL PREFERENCE PROGRAM IS NOT APPLICABLE. AND VETERAN OWN A SMALL BUSINESS PREFERENCE PROGRAM. ALSO NOT APPLICABLE. NEXT SLIDE. DUE DILIGENT ON THIS ONE, WE ALSO HAD SENT 2,435 NOTIFICATION FOR VENDOR 75 ATTENDED PRE-SUBMIT ON MEETING, AND SIX OF THEM IS A, WE RECEIVE SIX SUBMITTAL, ONE VENDOR DEEMED NONRESPONSIVE DUE TO IN ELIGIBILITY TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR R F Q EXHIBIT C DESIGN BILL, GENERAL CONDITION, RESULT OF DUE DILIGENCE REVIEW, NO ISSUE OR FUNDING TO REPORT. THIS IS INDA MY PRESENTATION, AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION YOU MAY HAVE. OKAY, THANK YOU ZY, AND I APPRECIATE YOU SHOWING US BOTH EVALUATIONS. SO THERE WAS AN ORIGINAL EVALUATION WHERE THE TOP TWO WERE SO CLOSE, UH, THE COMMITTEE DECIDED TO HOLD INTERVIEWS AND ASK QUESTIONS AND GET AS MUCH DETAIL AS THEY COULD AND THEN REEVALUATE. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT THAT'S CORRECT. ACTUALLY, VENDOR ONE ON THE PHASE ONE WAS HIGHER THAN VENDOR TWO, BUT DURING THE INTERVIEW PROCESS, VENDOR TWO CAME ON THE TOP. OKAY. UH, WELL THAT LOOKS GOOD TO ME. UH, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. ANY OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? YES. COUNCILMAN SANDOVAL? I AM SORRY. COUNCILWOMAN, WE'RE NOT HEARING YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, UH, COUNCILMAN, COULD YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PRICE PROPOSAL, UM, UNDER THE RECOMMENDED AWARD SLIDE IN SLIDE FIVE? THERE'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE, BUT THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO COME UP AT ALL. IN THE FIRST, UH, IN THE FIRST SLIDE IN SLIDE FOUR, COUNCIL COUNCILWOMAN ON A DESIGN BILL. FIRST ONE IS BASED ON QUALIFICATION, AND WHEN IT, AFTER WE SELECT THE INTERVIEW, THEN PRICE COMES IN, WHICH IS 20%. OKAY. SO I, SO THEY WERE ABLE TO, I GUESS, PRICE OUT WHAT THEY EXPECTED? YES. CAN YOU GO SLIDE NUMBER TWO, PLEASE? ON THE FIRST, AS I SAID, IS DESIGN BUILD IS TWO STEP PROCESS. STEP ONE IS ONLY BASED ON A QUALIFICATION. WE DON'T ASK THEM PRICE. STEP TWO IS THE PRICE ONLY 20%. OKAY. THANK YOU. [01:45:04] OKAY. AND IF I MAY REITERATE, THIS IS PART OF, UH, THE CHIEF'S PLAN TO PLACE MORE POLICE OFFICERS IN THOSE HIGH ENTERTAINMENT, HIGH ACTIVITY AREAS, ISN'T THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM ANYBODY? COUNCILMAN, THIS IS MARIA VILLAGOMEZ, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER. UM, I JUST WANTED TO, UM, ADD TO WHAT, UH, RACI MENTIONED THAT THIS, UM, POLICE FACILITY AT ST. MARY'S WAS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE 2017 BOND PROGRAM WITH THE IDEA TO RELOCATE SOME OF THE, UH, UNITS THAT WE HAVE IN, UH, UH, OUR DOWNTOWN CENTRAL STATION. SO THAT IS PART OF THE PLAN. UH, WE'RE MOVING SOME OF THE UNITS THERE, AND WE'RE ALSO, UM, UM, BUILDING A, OR REMODELING AN EXISTING FACILITY AT HEMISPHERE PARK FOR OUR PARKS POLICE. SO IT'S, IT'S A LARGER PROJECT. THIS IS A PORTION OF THAT PROJECT. THANK YOU, MARIA. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM ANY OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS? OKAY. SEEING NONE AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING WE WOULD MOVE FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION. I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO DO THAT. OKAY. CA UH, MEMBER TREVINO. THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND TO HER MOTION? I ONLY NEED ONE SECOND. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN PERRY , YOU'VE NEVER BEEN SHY BEFORE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO SEND THIS FORWARD, UH, FOR APPROVAL BY COUNSEL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AND RAISE YOUR HAND. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER. OKAY. MOTIONS PASSED. OKAY. THE FINAL [12. 20-6030 Airfield Improvements Package 7 [Carlos Contreras, Assistant City Manager; Jesus Saenz, Director, Aviation]] POST SOLICITATION ITEM IS ON AIRFIELD IMPROVEMENT PACKAGE. UH, CARLOS OR JESUS, WHICH REVIEW WILL BE MAKING THIS PRESENTATION. GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL MEMBER. I'LL, I'LL TAKE IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MEMBERS. UH, THIS MORNING I'M HERE WITH THE POST SOLICITATION PRESENTATION ON OUR AIRFIELD IMPROVEMENTS PACKAGE NUMBER SEVEN. I BROUGHT THE PRES SOLICITATION ITEM TO YOU ON FEBRUARY 18TH OF THIS YEAR. TODAY'S PRESENTATION REVIEWS OF THE SOLICITATION PROCESS FOR THIS PROJECT IN JUNE, UH, 2020. THE CITY SUBMITTED THIS PROJECT AS PART OF THE F Y 2020 GRANT APPLICATIONS AS PART OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION'S AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND CORONAVIRUS AID RELIEF AND ECONOMIC SECURITY ACT FUNDS THE A I P GRANT FUNDS AT 75% OF ELIGIBLE COSTS, UH, PROJECT COST WE REQUESTED. WE ALSO REQUESTED CARES ACT FUNDS FOR THE CITY MATCH ON THIS SLIDE THAT YOU SEE HERE. UH, AND BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I WANT TO DISCUSS THE, UH, BEFORE WE GET TO, BEFORE I START ON THE DISCUSSION OF THE SOLICITATION, I WANTED TO REVIEW THE PACKAGE SEVEN PROJECT WITH YOU. AS I DESCRIBED IN FEBRUARY, THE BASE BIT OF THIS PROJECT CONCLUDES THE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING TAXIWAY R OR TAXIWAY ROMEO BRIDGE ON BETWEEN TAXIWAY R C, WHICH IS ROMEO CHARLIE IN RUNWAY 13 LEFT, AND 31. RIGHT. IT IS OUR MOST NORTHERN RUNWAY JUST FOR CONFIGURATION. AS YOU SEE ON THE, ON THE MAP, IT'S A DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING TAXIWAY R AT GRADE CONCRETE PAVEMENT, AND APPROXIMATELY 420 FEET BY FI BY 50 FEET OF THE EXISTING TEMPORARY ASPHALT TAXI AWAY R TO INCLUDE TAXI AWAY PAVEMENT REMOVAL AND REMOVAL OF EDGE LIGHTING AND TEMPORARY ASPHALT. ALSO INCLUDED IS THE REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BENEATH THE, BENEATH THE PAVEMENT AND MITIGATION OR REMOVAL OF THE METHANE GAS THAT'S ENCOUNTERED, AND PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OF CLEAN BACKFILL MATERIAL. THIS WORK IS IDENTIFIED ON THE MAP IN THE LIGHT BLUE DASH LINES AS PART OF THIS SOLICITATION. WE ALSO INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING ALTERNATIVES, THOUGH YELLOW SHOWS UTILIZ UTILIZING FULL STRENGTH CONCRETE TAXIWAY PAVEMENT. THE PURPLE HIGHLIGHT SHOWS CONSTRUCTION OF ASPHALT SHOULDERS ALONG TAXIWAY. THE RED HIGHLIGHT SHOWS DEMOLITION OF A PORTION OF THE TEMPORARY TAXIWAY BYPASS FOR CONVERSION TO A VEHICLE SERVICE ROAD. AND THEN THE BLUE HIGHLIGHT SHOWS NEW ASPHALT ROADWAY CONNECTIONS. AND THE GREEN HIGHLIGHT SHOWS MILL AND OVERLAY OF OUR NORTHERN RUNWAY, WHICH IS 13 LEFT 31. RIGHT. NEXT SLIDE, WE RELEASED THE REQUEST FOR COMPETITIVE SEAL PROPOSALS SOLICITATION ON MARCH 27TH OF, OF THIS YEAR. THIS IS THE SECOND HORIZONTAL PROJECT THAT WE SOLICITED [01:50:01] AS A R F C SS P, WHICH IS ALLOWED UNDER LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 2 2 6 9, AND ALLOWS THE CITY TO CONSIDER OTHER FACTORS BESIDES PRICE. THE TOTAL ESTIMATED VALUE OF THIS PROJECT WITH ALL ALTERNATES IS AN ESTIMATED 18 MILLION AND A BASE BID OF 10.9 MILLION. THE ENTIRE PROJECT WITH THE ALTERNATES HAS AN EXPECTED CONSTRUCTION CALENDAR OF 850 DAYS. YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. FOUR PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED ON MAY 12TH OF THIS YEAR, AND ALL WERE DEEMED RESPONSIVE AND REVIEWED BY THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE ON JUNE 9TH, 2020. THE ENTIRE PROPOSAL, INCLUDING THE ALTERNATES, WERE CONSIDERED IN THE SCORING AND EVALUATION PROCESS. THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE, WHICH INCLUDED MYSELF, CHIEF ASSET AND PLANNING OFFICER LOUIS CLARK, OUR CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER, DENNIS MEYER, AND SENIOR ENGINEER CAN SELBY, AS WELL AS JOHN BERG, A SENIOR AVIATION PROJECT MANAGER WITH ATKINS, SCORED THE FOUR PROPOSALS ON EXPERIENCE, BACKGROUND, AND QUALIFICATIONS, UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT AND THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN AND THE EVALUATION OF THE FIRM AND ITS TEAM VENDORS A AND B WERE SCORED THE HIGHEST AMONG THE FOUR, BOTH HAD EXPERIENCED TEAMS AND SCHEDULES WHEN THE SCORES FOR THE PRICING AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE POINTS WERE ADDED. THE TWO FIRMS REMAINED CLOSE IN POINTS AND WERE SELECTED FOR INTERVIEWS. NEXT SLIDE. THE SAME COMMITTEE RECONVENED ON JUNE 25TH, 2020. FOR, FOR INTERVIEWS, THE SAME EVALUATION CRITERIA WAS USED IN THE INTERVIEW PROCESS. THE, THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE SCORED VENDOR B, WHICH HAD SCORED LESS THAN ONE POINT BEHIND VENDOR A IN THE INITIAL SCORING MEETING. VENDOR B'S RESPONSES TO THE OPEN-ENDED QUESTION SHOWED A MORE EXPERIENCE AND DEVELOPED TEAM WITH PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE VENDOR A'S RESPONSES WERE MORE THEORETICAL, HOW THEY WOULD APPROACH THE SITUATION RATHER THAN THE ACTUAL EXPERIENCE THAT VENDOR A DEMONSTRATED IN REFERENCED IN THEIR RESPONSES. IN PARTICULAR, VENDOR B SHOWED A STRONG EXPERIENCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS AND EXPERIENCE WITH MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE REMEDIATION, GOOD AND STRONG SAFETY AND MANAGEMENT PLANS, AND STRONG EXPERIENCE WITH AIRFIELD PACKAGE AND EX, UH, WITH AIRFIELD PACKAGES. VENDORS, A TEAM HAD NOT WORKED TOGETHER BEFORE AND PROPOSED SOME CRITICAL WORK BEING DONE BY A SUB-CONSULTANT RATHER THAN THEIR FIRM. THESE CONCERNS WERE REFLECTED IN THE FINAL SCORING, WHICH DETERMINED VENDOR B, THE SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT. NEXT SLIDE. IN SEPTEMBER, 2020, THE F A A, THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCED THE GRANT AWARDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020, WHICH INCLUDED FUNDING FOR THE BASE BID, BUT SHIFTED FUNDING FOR THE ALTERNATIVES FOR CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE F Y 2021 A I P GRANT PROGRAM. WE ARE, WE'RE ABLE TO REPHRASE THIS, REPHRASE, REPHRASE THIS, THIS PROJECT, TO MOVE THE WORK OF THE ALTERNATIVE OF THE ALTERNATES TO LATER IN F Y 22. WE CONSULTED WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND CONFIRMED THAT WE COULD TAKE THE CONSTRUCTION AWARD WITH VENDOR B FOR THE BASE BID WORK ONLY TO CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 5TH, 2020, PROVIDING YOUR APPROVAL AS PART OF OUR FISCAL YEAR 2021 F A, A AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION, WHICH WE ANTICIPATE TAKING TO COUNCIL, CITY COUNCIL IN JUNE OF 2021. WE WILL REQUEST FUNDING FOR THE FIVE ADDITIVE ALTERNATES. ONCE THE FUNDING IS SECURED, WE WILL TAKE AN AMENDMENT TO CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE WORK OF THE ADDITIVE ALTERNATES. NEXT SLIDE. I, ON DUE DILIGENCE WAS COMPLETED BY FINANCE AND AUDIT DEPARTMENTS. THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS WERE DOWNLOADED, DOWNLOADED BY 130 INDIVIDUALS, NINE FIRMS, INCLUDING KIMBERLY HORN, OUR DESIGN ENGINEER FIRM, ATTENDED THE PRE SUBMITTAL CONFERENCE FOR PROPOSALS WERE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND DUE DILIGENCE REVIEWS FOUND NO MATERIAL FINDINGS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AND I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU, JESUS. UM, I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I'LL ASK ANY OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS. COUNCILMAN PERRY. THANK YOU, SIR. UM, SO RUN THAT BY ME AGAIN ABOUT, UM, THIS IS ACTUALLY SPLITTING THE REQUIREMENTS INTO THE FUNDING PACKAGES AND, AND YOU SAID, UH, OUR LEGAL, ANDY, IS ANDY STILL ON TO TALK ABOUT THIS [01:55:01] A LITTLE BIT, BUT IT'S OKAY TO SPLIT THIS APART AND, UH, TAKE IT IN TWO DIFFERENT YEARS. SURE. IF YOU CAN GO TO SLIDE NUMBER TWO, I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A DEMONSTRATION OF WHAT WE'RE REFERENCING. SO AS YOU LOOK AT THE HIGHLIGHTED AREAS HERE ON SLIDE NUMBER TWO, COUNCIL MEMBER FOR THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING ON TAXIWAY, WHAT WE CALL ROMEO CHARLIE RC, WHICH IS ADJACENT TO THAT, UH, RUNWAY, THE MOST NORTHERN RUNWAY 13 LEFT THAT YOU SEE HERE, AND THE WORK THAT TO BE DONE ON TAXIWAY ROMEO. THE WORK THAT WE ARE DOING HERE, UH, AS WE STARTED THIS PROCESS, WE'VE DISCOVERED THAT WE COULD DO ADDITIONAL WORK ON RUNWAY 13, RIGHT? WHERE WE CAN OBTAIN ADDITIONAL GRANT FUNDING TO DO A FULL OVERLAY OF 13 LEFT. SO THIS OPPORTUNITY PRESENTED ITSELF, WE WILL COMPLETE THIS WORK THIS YEAR, AND THOSE FIVE ADDITIVES THAT WE'VE REFERENCED ARE IN THIS BID PROPOSAL AS WELL TO BE COMPLETED WHERE WE CAN CONTINUE TO OBTAIN F A A A I P FUNDING COUPLED WITH ANY ADDITIONAL CARES ACT FUNDING IS PRESENTED TO US. SO WE'VE PUT IT ALL TOGETHER TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE HAVE PRESENTED IN FRONT OF US AS WE CONTINUE TO WORK AND, UH, IMPROVE OUR OVERALL AIRFIELD PACKAGE, THE WORK THAT WE'RE COMPLETING IN THESE AREAS. YEAH, AND THAT'S, UH, I'M, I'M JUST ASKING AGAIN, IT, WE WENT OUT WITH THIS, UH, SOLICITATION AND NORMALLY YOU HAVE FUNDING AVAILABLE WHENEVER YOU GO OUT WITH A SOLICITATION, BUT IN THIS CASE, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE FUNDING AVAILABLE. WE JUST SAID, WELL, IF FUNDING IS AVAILABLE, WE'LL WE'LL DO THESE, UH, ADDITIONS. BUT, UH, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE THAT FUNDING. WE'RE WE'RE, WE'RE, WE MADE THE AWARD, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING FOR THOSE ALTERNATIVES AT THIS POINT. WHAT IF WE DON'T GET, WHAT, WHAT IF WE DON'T GET THE MONEY, UM, WITH GRANTS AND WHAT HAVE YOU. DOES THAT, DOES THAT HAVE ANY BEARING ON THE AWARD? AND, YOU KNOW, IS THE CONTRACTOR HAVE ANY EXPECTATIONS TO DO THAT WORK THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR? AND WHAT IF WE DON'T GET EVER GET THE MONEY FOR IT? WELL, I, I, I WOULD SAY, SIR, WE, WE RECEIVE 75% FUNDING IN OUR F A A A I P FUNDING AS WE GO OUT FOR WORK TO BE PERFORMED OUT ON THE AIRFIELD. ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT WE WOULD RECEIVE WOULD BE VIA CARES ACT FOR ALMOST A HUNDRED PERCENT, UH, COVERAGE ON THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING OUT HERE, UH, FROM THE STANDPOINT OF, UH, DO WE HAVE THE FUNDING AVAILABLE, THIS HAS BEEN PROGRAMMED FOR MANY YEARS ON THE WORK AS WE LOOK AT ALL THE MAINTENANCE AND OUR PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX, AS WE REVIEW WHAT WE CALL A P C I FOR WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE OUT HERE, THIS HAS BEEN PLANNED OUT. SO AS WE WOULD FUND IT THROUGH SOME OF OUR INTERIM FINANCING, WE WOULD COVER THAT 25%, BUT F A A WOULD COME IN AND, AND COVER OUR 75%. WITH THAT BEING SAID, TH TH THIS, TH THIS IS A, THIS IS AN 850 DAY, UH, PROJECT THAT'S BEING LET, AND THAT DISCRETIONARY FUNDING WILL COME AVAILABLE TO US IN FISCAL YEAR 2022 OR LATE 2021 BASED ON THE, THE LETTING OF WHAT F A A PROVIDES TO US. HEY, MAYBE, MAYBE, HEY, MAY I THINK, UH, COUNCILMAN FERRY YOU'RE REFERRING TO MAYBE SLIDE SIX? YEAH, I, I, I THINK, I THINK YOUR, I I THINK YOUR QUESTION IS THAT, THAT WHAT HAPPENS IN, IN THE EVENT WE DON'T, SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO GO FORWARD, CORRECT ME IF I'M NOT SAYING THIS JESUS CORRECTLY, BUT WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO GO FORWARD WITH THE BASE BID FOR NOW, NOT THE ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS HE TALKED ABOUT THAT'LL GO TO COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER, HIGHLY UNLIKELY, BUT IN, IN CASE IT DID HAPPEN, AND WE DIDN'T GET THE FUNDING TO COMPLETE THOSE OTHER, UM, ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVES, THEN YOU WOULDN'T SEE THAT AMENDMENT HAPPEN IN 2021 TO THE CONTRACT. WE'RE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO THE CONTRACTOR, UH, ONCE WE APPROVE THIS IN NOVEMBER, OTHER THAN THE BASE BID, THE BASE WORK. CORRECT. SO IT'S COMPLETELY UP TO THE COUNCIL IN 2021, ONCE WE GET THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FROM THE F A A, WE WOULD COME BACK AND AMEND THE CONTRACT TO PICK UP THOSE ADDITIVES. IF FOR SOME REMOTE REASON THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN, THEN WE JUST DON'T DO THE ADDITIVES. IS THAT RIGHT? JESUS. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE. I WASN'T QUITE CLEAR ON THESE ADDITIVES ON HOW THAT IMPACTED THE OVERALL CONTRACT, BUT IF, IF THEY'RE SEVERABLE AND WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THEM, UH, THE CONTRACTOR KNOWS THAT THEY, THEY'RE, THEY BID ON THIS SAYING THAT THEY MIGHT NOT EVER GET THAT WORK BECAUSE WE DON'T GET THE FUNDING OR, OR WILL, WOULD WE AT, AT THIS AMOUNT, WOULD WE GO OUT FOR OUR OWN FUNDING, THROUGH OUR OWN BONDING MECHANISMS, WHAT HAVE YOU, TO MAKE UP [02:00:01] THAT DIFFERENCE TO GET THIS WORK DONE? I'M ASSUMING THIS WORK REALLY NEEDS TO BE DONE AS WELL AS THE, THE MILL AND OVERLAY AS WELL. THAT IS CORRECT. COUNCIL MEMBER AND, UM, THE BASE BID AT, AT, AS IT IS WITH THE ADDITIVES OR CONTINGENT ON COUNCIL APPROVAL. SO WE WOULD TAKE, WE WOULD BRING THOSE BACK FOR YOUR APPROVAL ONCE WE APPROVED THE, THE FUNDING AND, AND THE APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD. YEAH. BUT WE'RE, WE'RE BETTING ON THE COME THAT WE WILL GET THAT MONEY FROM F A A OR CARES ACT OR WHATEVER. UH, WE, BUT WE MAY NOT GET THAT MONEY, UH, WITH THE BUDGETS, THE WAY THEY'RE LOOKING RIGHT NOW IN THE FUTURE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. SO, UM, OKAY. I JUST, I THINK COUNCILMAN, I THINK, I THINK COUNCILMAN IN THE EVENT, AGAIN, WE DIDN'T GET THE F A A FUNDING, UH, AND WE NEED TO DO THIS WORK, THEN OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD REGROUP WITH JESUS AND WE WOULD COME BACK AND HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE COUNCIL. OKAY. BUT I THINK JESUS FEELS FAIRLY CONFIDENT. I THINK HE'S HAD CONVERSATION WITH THE F A A THAT WE'LL GET THIS FUNDING, BUT TO YOUR POINT, THINGS COULD CHANGE. UH, WE'LL CERTAINLY MONITOR THAT. IF IT DOES, WE'LL COME BACK AND HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH THE COUNCIL. OKAY. GREAT. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, SIR. THANKS. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. THANK YOU, JESUS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY, THEN HEARING NONE, UH, AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE AN ITEM WE MOVE FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR APPROVAL. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO DO SO. O OKAY. COUNCILMAN SANDOVAL MAKES A MOTION TO MOVE THIS FORWARD TO COUNCIL. COUNCILMAN PERRY. SECONDS. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION CONCERNS? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY, AYE. RAISE YOUR HAND. OKAY. AYE. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. I MEAN, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER. OKAY. IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, WE'VE GOT, UH, UNANIMOUS VOTE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD TO COUNCIL. THERE IS [13. 20-6098 AU20-037 Audit of NHSD Risk Mitigation Fund and COVID-19 Emergency Housing Assistance Program] ONE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA, UH, ITEM NUMBER 13. AND THIS IS A FINAL INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT. AND SO, UH, IT'S ON THE, UM, THE, UH, NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT, RISK MANIC MITIGATION FUND, AND C OVID 19 EMERGENCY HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. SO I WOULD PRESUME WE'RE GONNA HEAR FROM OUR AUDITING DEPARTMENT ABOUT THIS. YES, SIR. COUNCILMAN, I WILL GO AHEAD AND, UH, WALK US THROUGH THIS AUDIT AND THE RESULTS OF THE AUDIT. AND AS YOU MENTIONED, IT WAS AN AUDIT OF THE, BASICALLY THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND THE RISK MITIGATION FUND. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS CREATED TWO YEARS, ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO BY CITY COUNCIL, UH, TO ASSIST WITH THOSE THAT WERE, UH, CLOSE TO BEING DISPLACED FROM, FROM HOMES OR FROM HOUSING AND, AND SEVERAL OTHER COMPONENTS OF IT. WELL, OBVIOUSLY EARLIER THIS YEAR WHEN THE PANDEMIC HIT HIT, UH, THAT NEED BECAME MUCH, MUCH GREATER. AND SO THIS PROGRAM, UH, GOT A HUGE INFLUX OF ADDITIONAL MONEY, UH, ALSO FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE, THE VOLUME JUST INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY. AND SO BASICALLY A WHOLE DIFFERENT PROGRAM. AND SO WE CAME IN AND TO LOOK AT THIS AUDIT, WE WANTED TO LOOK AT IT QUICKLY, UH, BECAUSE THE MONEY WAS BEING SPENT IN THIS PROCESS. AND SO THE OBJECTIVE WAS BASICALLY TO SEE THAT THE MONEY IS BEING, UH, PROCESSED SPENT, UH, PER THE FEDERAL GUIDELINES BECAUSE THERE WAS CARES ACT, UH, FUNDING INVOLVED, AND ALSO CITY GUIDELINES AND POLICIES BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF CITY, UH, DOLLARS AND NON CARES ACT FUNDING THAT WAS INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS, UH, DURING THIS PROCESS. AND AGAIN, IT WENT FROM A MANUAL PROCESS TO AN AUTOMATED PROCESS VERY QUICKLY. UH, THE STAFF HAD OVER AT NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING, THEY INCREASED STAFFING. THEY STREAMLINED THE PROCESS, AND THEY ALSO AUTOMATED IT. UH, BACK IN APRIL. THEY BROUGHT A SYSTEM IN TO AUTOMATE THE PROCESS AGAIN, TO REACT AND TO CONTINUE TO PROCESS, UH, WITH THE VOLUME, UH, THAT THEY WERE INCREASING, UH, THE RESULT OF OUR AUDIT. BASICALLY, WE FOCUSED TO LOOK AT THE DECISION PROCESSING. WERE THE APPLICANTS THAT WERE APPLYING, WERE THE DECISIONS BEING APPROPRIATE, UH, WAS THE DOCUMENTATION APPROPRIATE? AND WE, FROM AN ODD PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE JUST AS CONCERNED ABOUT THE APPROVALS AS WE ARE ABOUT THE DENIALS TO MAKE SURE THAT BOTH OF THOSE ARE WORKING, UH, PROPERLY WITH THE APPROPRIATE, UH, DOCUMENTATION. AND WE FOUND THAT YES, IN FACT, UH, THE DOCUMENTATION WAS VERY GOOD, UH, IN THAT PROCESS, UH, AND TO MAINTAIN IT JUST IN CASE IF WE GET AUDITED BY FEDERAL, UH, REGULATORS IN THE FUTURE, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S ALL IN, IN IN ORDER. AND WE FOUND THAT IT WAS, WE ALSO LOOKED AT THE ACCOUNTING SIDE OF IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, THE ACCOUNTING PROCESS, UH, FROM A PAYMENT PERSPECTIVE, FROM UH, TYING THE PAYMENTS TO THE CORRECT FUNDING SOURCE, UH, WAS, WAS ACCURATE AND TIMELY. AND WE FOUND THAT IT, IN FACT, IT WAS ALSO, Y'ALL ARE AWARE OF THE DASHBOARD THAT IS NOW UP. IT HAS BEEN UP FOR QUITE A FEW MONTHS THAT JUST MANAGES AND MONITORS THIS PROGRAM. UH, WE LOOKED AT THOSE NUMBERS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WERE ACCURATE AND TIMELY, AND IN FACT, WE FOUND THAT THEY WERE, UH, CORRECT. AND THOSE ARE BEING UPDATED, I BELIEVE, STILL ON A DAILY BASIS, BUT A LOT OF WORK GOING IN BEHIND THE SCENES ON THAT. AND IT, UH, IS BEING DONE ACCURATELY. AND THEN ANOTHER THING WE LOOKED AT, [02:05:01] AND SOMETHING EARLY ON IN THE PROGRAM, THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF THE PAYMENT TIMES HOW LONG THAT IT WAS TAKING, UH, THE STAFF TO PROCESS AND MAKE DECISIONS. AND, UH, EARLY ON, UH, AS THEY WERE GOING THROUGH SOME GROWING PAINS, THAT WAS TAKING QUITE A BIT OF TIME, BUT THEY CONSISTENTLY, WITH CHANGING RULES, WITH INCREASED VOLUMES, UH, ALL THAT WAS GOING ON, THEY CONTINUED TO DECREASE THE DECISIONING TIMES, WHICH RIGHT NOW THEY'RE AVERAGING ABOUT 10 OR 11 CALENDAR DAYS BEFORE THEY MAKE A DECISION, UH, WHICH IS, WHICH IS, UH, CERTAINLY APPROPRIATE. AND I, I BELIEVE EVERYBODY IS, IS OKAY WITH THAT DATE. BUT REALLY, WE'VE MADE NO RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS AUDIT. UH, OFTENTIMES WHEN WE HAVE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS ON THE AUDIT, IT'S BECAUSE OF FINDINGS WE MIGHT HAVE, BUT I JUST REALLY WANTED TO BRING THIS ONE BECAUSE IT IS A VERY HIGH PROFILE PROGRAM. A LOT OF MONEY, UH, OVER $50 MILLION NOW, I BELIEVE, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBERS TO DATE, BUT I KNOW IT'S, IT'S OVER $50 MILLION THAT HAS BEEN, UH, GRANTED TO OUR, OUR COMMUNITY. UH, BUT JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT, UH, A VERY GOOD AUDIT IN A, IN, IN A DIFFICULT TIME, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING, UH, DEPARTMENT SAID, AS WELL AS ASSISTANCE FROM A LOT OF OTHER DEPARTMENTS. SO THAT IS MY PRESENTATION AND FIGHTABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE. OKAY. THANK YOU, KEVIN. UM, DID YOU ACTUALLY HAVE SOME OF YOUR, YOUR PEOPLE AND YOUR STAFF MOVE OVER INTO THAT AREA TO HELP OUT AT ONE TIME, OR, I KNOW YOU REASSIGNED A FEW OF YOUR STAFF DURING COVID WHEN IT GOT, UH, DIFFICULT. UH, WE, WE DID HAVE, UH, EIGHT OF MY STAFF DEPLOYED AT VARIOUS POINTS, BUT NO, NONE OF THEM WENT TO THIS PARTICULAR, UH, DEPARTMENT. THEY WERE IN OTHER DEPARTMENTS. OKAY. AND SO THE, THE TIME YOU'RE SAYING NOW BETWEEN APPLICATION AND APPROVAL FOR PAYING BACK RENT OR HOUSE PAYMENTS OR C P S OR ANY OF THAT AVERAGES OUT TO ABOUT 10 TO 11 DAYS, IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT. AND, AND YES, AT THE TIME OF THE AUDIT, WHICH WAS END OF SEPTEMBER, SO I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE NUMBERS TODAY, BUT, UH, IT'S DOWN TO 10 TO 11 CALENDAR DAYS FOR THE DECISION TO BE MADE. OKAY. THANK YOU. I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. DO ANY OF THE OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. SEEING NONE THEN, UM, I, I THINK THIS IS JUST A REPORT BRIEFING FOR US. I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO GO TO COUNCIL. DOES IT KEVIN? NO, SIR. NO, SIR. IN FACT, THE, THE OFFICIAL REPORT HAS BEEN ISSUED TO COUNCIL ALREADY. SO THIS IS JUST A BRIEFING TO THE COMMITTEE. I, I BELIEVE WE NEED A, WE NEED TO ACCEPT THE REPORT, CORRECT, KEVIN? RIGHT? YEAH. SO AN ACCEPTANCE OF THE REPORT. YEAH. BUT IT WILL NOT GO, UH, TO COUNSEL. RIGHT. OKAY. WELL, UH, I THEN ATTEND A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE REPORT, AND I SEE MEMBER TREVINO MAKING THAT MOTION. AND A SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN PERRY. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AUDIT REPORT? SAY AYE. RAISE YOUR HAND. AYE, AYE. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MEMBER SOTO, I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN ONLINE LISTENING IN. WE APPRECIATE YOUR PARTICIPATION. OKAY. I BELIEVE THAT CONCLUDES OUR MEETING. IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS THAT ANY, UH, COMMITTEE MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP? OKAY. HEARING NONE. THEN OUR, OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING IS NOVEMBER 17TH. UNTIL THEN, WE REMAIN ADJOURNED. THANK YOU EVERYBODY. * 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.