LHA Board of Commissioners Meeting – July 2023
Read along below:
Speaker 1 0:00
Okay, we’d like to call the Tuesday, July 18 Longmont Housing Authority Board of Commissioners to order before we move, I’d like to I’m gonna make a motion to, to suspend by reference counsel rule of procedure. 25 point 2.2 A way to to allow for permission required and participate remotely in this meeting. The second second. So it’s been moved by myself, Councillor Martin seconded it. May I have a vote? All those in favor say aye. All those posts, so that passes unanimously. And I would also like to just move forward. We need to have these motions to allow electronic participation participate. participation by Commissioner McCoy for 718 2023 Online Housing Authority Board of Commissioners meeting. Second Okay, so counselor, they don’t have a fairing and secondly, that all those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? It carries unanimously. So let’s have a roll call start. Mayor. Chair. Jim Rodriguez Commissioner Marcia Martin. Water conditioner. Harold Dominguez Aram Executive Director Daniels Canada’s advisory assistance division. Suzy Volga berry Commissioner. Growth commission. was April is definitely selling
Speaker 1 2:04
Thank you. Now we need approval of the June 13 2023 minutes.
Unknown Speaker 2:09
And I’ll move approval.
Speaker 1 2:12
Second. Moved by Councillor water seconded by Councillor Yarbro. Do we have any questions about those minutes in the discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? All those opposed? That carries unanimously, we’re not publicly invited, be heard? Is there anything public I don’t see. Let’s look close public invited to be heard. Moving on to old and new business, the sale of the 615 main street, America are two resolutions.
Speaker 2 2:46
Before we start, one of the things I want to say is I appreciate you again accommodating the schedule to slide this in between executive session and the other meeting. Based on what we were seeing in meeting the board year, timing in terms of submittal of applications for the next funding round was critical. And that’s why we asked you all to shift the schedule because it’s really dependent on the overall project and the salaries of the property. So again, thank you for accommodating us.
Speaker 3 3:19
Very brief introduction about the 615 main building. This is the small commercial building located next to what is now being called village on base on Main Street. And the Center for people with disabilities has leased that from us for since at least 2014. And they’re interested in buying and now that we are doing the village place three syndication, we are separating the two properties and all of the documentation because we really don’t need to operate that building. And so it could be a good source of revenue generation and serve the mission of the CWD to be able to stay and provide services to communities. We we did a market analysis of the property value it was $642,000. We’ve been negotiating with the CPW D a reduced purchase price in exchange for services. The price we’ve agreed to, as of tonight is $500,000. So that $140,000 differences really five years worth of services about $28,000 per year to provide enhanced outreach to FHA residents that experience different disabilities or care for someone with a disability. Really doing targeted outreach to them, increasing uptake in their services, doing training and life skills sessions, etc. So what you have here is a resolution to approve the purchase and sale agreement. And I do need to mention that we still need to work out an easement with them once we’re after the purchase and sale agreement is signed. Then we start working with title and preparing for closing and we need to work with them on easier to make sure that they still have access across the village on main property to get to their building and parking consent. So that’s something that we would follow up with. And then the second resolution is to promote to approve the memorandum of understanding that we have negotiated with them for those services. Great. Thank
Speaker 1 5:18
you for that explanation. Can I have a motion for resolution 2322?
Speaker 4 5:24
We were approval of resolution 2220 23. National into
Speaker 1 5:31
and I’ll second that. So it’s been Moved by Councillor waters seconded by myself. All those in favor? Oh, Commissioner waters. Just call me whatever. Okay to move by whatever. All those opposed? That passes unanimously, resolution 2023 23. Approved execution a memorandum of understanding with the Center for people with disabilities. And I have a motion. I move approval. Right. It’s been moved by Councillor Martin. Secretary. Nope. It’s been approved by Commissioner Martin seconded by Commissioner waters. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All those opposed that passes unanimously. We have another resolution. Is someone going to explain this one?
Speaker 3 6:22
Very briefly. This is just approval of the contract with Roseman and Associates our architect on the village on Main rehab facilitation project. We selected them from a competitive RFP late last year, and they’ve been operating on off of a letter of agreement while we got ready for tax credits, the middle we’ve been awarded tax credits, and we’re working on finalizing the agreement. As part of this, they’re also holding some of their invoices until closing so that we can just plan ahead and everything really. So I’m available for any questions.
Speaker 1 6:58
So I move resolution 2023 24, which is the approval of the execution of a contract with Roseman associates. Can I have a second? Second? Is there any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed? That passes unanimously, we’re now at resolution 2023 25, the dedication of the project based vouchers.
Speaker 3 7:24
Okay, so we’re gonna be a good amount of discussion on this one trick, we tried to focus our time tonight on Item CMD was from the staff side. So we, the lhsaa, has authority to issue 26 project based vouchers at this time. You might recall, recall that in earlier in the spring, we did one round of competitive awards for project based vouchers that were awarded to village on Maine. And this is our second round that we were putting out to really focus on family properties. And so we did a competitive RFP process, which is required by the HUD rules, we’re putting these out out of our 26 that we have authority to issue back in 2020, late 2021, early 2022, when we were negotiating the Chrisman to deal, we agreed with mgL and put it in our development agreement that at some point in time, if eight project based vouchers were available, then we would dedicate them to Christmas to that is going to come back into play for a moment. So it’d be considered the 26th. And then the potential eight for Christmas too. And that means 18. So when we put out our request for proposals for projects that we use about your we use it, we put out 18 for competitive, we ended up receiving two proposals. One is for the ascension over project, and then one is four that’s been requested the full 18 And then the Atwood comments MODOK requested it. So basically, we do not have enough vouchers to issue to commit to all of them now, as we work on our to your tool over the next few years. So it’s always assuming we get extra funding and do our performance measures, we should be able to increase our doctor authority over time. But at this time, we don’t have enough vouchers to issue all of that. So I really kind of laid out in your counsel in your memo to the Housing Authority Board, what we have to think about here. So for the Chrisman project, that project is already in construction. They have fun, they have filled their gap to the point that they made it to a deal and they’re constructing. So really at this point, adding project based vouchers depending on which units they put them on could make some of those units more affordable to lower income families, but also So on the financing side, what it would really do is allow mgL to make their feet quicker, because the funds will perform better, they wouldn’t make more because we haven’t agreed to developer fees, etc. But they would make that quicker and Lhh would come in quicker. They also didn’t need to respond to the proposal because it’s very interesting rules. But if you are able to fund your project, without the vouchers, you don’t have to compete for them. So they didn’t have to respond. So they can just kind of be considered on the on the side. I should also say that for Christmann, we can apply those vouchers at any time, all what they’re looking for is performance improvement, not necessarily getting a deal differently. So that is something to consider. On hoever, and Atwood, those two, we did perform the evaluations on separate to do criteria that we put an RFP. And so those scoring sheets are in your file coverted score higher, because it hits some of the key parameters here going forward based on our community needs for family units and, and you know, special, extraordinary benefits to the community. But they’re both eligible. And they both had really good good points about them, they just kind of apply them in a different way. I would say that the likelihood of Champa awarding both peover and Atwood is extremely low, extremely low, we’re more likely to get neither of them funded than most of them funded in the same in a single year. And so what we thought of as an option that is out late in your mouth, is that because CHAFA will ultimately be making this decision at least for 2023 that we could wait and see which projects get selected, if that gives us some flexibility to say, you know, if if one moves forward faster than the other, then we can go with that one and then look long term. If that project stays on the radar and keeps trying, then we can see how our voucher authority increases work, or availabilities out there. To do that, we would have to put a hold on considering the Christmas vouchers. And so if if if we waited for CHAFA to decide on an awarded project between the two we would know in about November. And at that time, if both weren’t awarded, which again, the the chances are very, very low, then we could pick that Chrisman decision backup as well. So that is the recommendation of staff is to put conditional awards out for Boeotia left over and what projects, see which one is successful in tax credits, and then recycle back in November to see if Christmas needs to be considered. Or if we need to. If none are awarded, do we just consider what happens in 2020? For
Speaker 5 13:12
developers where if they’re in competition? You going out of business because of us?
Speaker 3 13:22
No, I mean, these projects, the project based vouchers are so valuable. And both projects are are seeking outside funding for various places. But this is just about boundaries are really critical to these projects being feasible. And so that’s why if you conditionally award both, then we can see what happens and then really make the call and hopefully, eventually all of them could get what they need. But it might just have to be singled out.
Speaker 1 13:57
So I do have questions, but let’s make the motion first. For discussion. So do I have a motion to move resolution? 2023 24? No, I’m sorry. 2023 definitely
Unknown Speaker 14:17
isn’t still down or do you need just to decide whether
Speaker 3 14:19
a dedication, it is spelled out in the resolution? Where it conditionally dedicates 18 to be offensive however, a to at would subject to a word of my text in 2023. We don’t get specific on Christmas because we kind of just pushed that decision to the cover in this recommendation.
Speaker 1 14:42
Second, all right, it’s been moved and seconded to move resolution 2020 predestine 25. Is there any discussion? And I have a question. So how often can you apply for these project based officers? For example, if you don’t get any of them? Is it open begin next year. To move six months is, at what point is this going to be on hold?
Speaker 3 15:05
It is open as long as we have the authority to issue it. And that we can work it into our voucher network with how all the factors piece together. So I would say just for some precedent, the last time la che put out project based vouchers was in advance of the 2018 Salt River Project. So it’s been several years. But also we’re making big changes in our voucher program and strides and trying to grow it. And so I wouldn’t expect that we would have to wait that long. Again to get one. It’s pretty important.
Speaker 1 15:43
All right, so that has been motions been made. Let’s vote. All those in favor? Opposed. So that passes unanimously, we’re now at resolution 2023 26 approving of certain matters in connection with the ACIP a CIP
Speaker 3 16:02
and our development partnership is coming in and they’re going to be showing the presentation for us. Yes, okay. So I mentioned Okay.
Unknown Speaker 16:40
can’t quit your job with this?
Speaker 1 16:53
concept plans looking better than for at least the better ones?
Unknown Speaker 17:00
Where the boss wants to join. We can just kind of cluster.
Speaker 1 17:20
Some real cop heroes. Introductions.
Speaker 6 17:28
I’ll go first. I met you all before I was here at Shinnecock staker. Regional Vice President for the
Speaker 7 17:39
Good evening, everyone. I’m Brad wining and new members of the Penrose team. Joining me here I live in Denver, and most recently for the last two and a half plus years working in the city and county of Denver in the housing department. I’m Tom Anderson. I’m a Senior Vice President with Penrose. I oversee the western states from Chicago to Texas and not here to Colorado. I’m actually based in Kansas City. area. So
Speaker 3 18:06
do you want to lead this discussion? Sure, I was gonna let them kind of present the concept of the project first, as we prepare for tax credit applications. I’m driving, okay,
Unknown Speaker 18:17
are we behind, we can make this as quick.
Speaker 6 18:23
We just have a handful of slides just wanted to kind of I think when I was here a couple of months ago was still very conceptual, we hadn’t really, totally dial in exactly what we were doing. So the first few slides is just really to bring me up to speed on where we are. And then we have some features. So So we’ve officially named the project the ascent overcrossing, which I think is a really great name. And it’s reflected a bit in the architecture as well and sort of a nod to the mountain in the state. So just to kind of catch you up on the work we’ve done since we were selected as intelligence development partner, which obviously that’s the persona that RFQ process concluded in December of last year. And so that really was when we kicked off in earnest with our visioning for the project and putting all the parts and pieces together. And since that time, we’ve been able to bring in with the city in LA to support the ARPA funds for the project. We’ve been developing a concept in addition to the housing around an Early Childhood Education Center on the property which could have three to four classrooms with a lot of really fun conversations as well some about being the operator for that PCE lot of really thoughtful dialogue around what that would look like and how we would fund that there’s a huge need for more Headstart, early childhood. Do classes and this is a great site for it. So we’re, we can give you a little bit more detail on that, but really looking to knit that into the, to the overall development. And then I think it was just last month, we were also conditionally awarded one can easily from the city in stock funds for the project. And we’ve also secured a funding award from soft funding awarded soft funding commitment from the Colorado Division and housing so and then, obviously, with the conditional PVD award. So all of that is to say we’re perfectly on track for our August 1, low income housing tax credit application submission. So just shy of two weeks to get that submitted, the total capital stack of the project is about 35 37 million. And so we’re fully fully source we should say, for being able to fund the construction of the housing. And so the financing for the Early Childhood Education pieces, we’re running on track, and we’ve been having lots of really good conversations with foundations. And with the seat, obviously, we’re aware of Boulder County where the college applications are coming to so we’re really trying to figure out how we can piecemeal together funding to pay for that piece too. And we’ll jump right into the financing. We’ll talk a little bit more about the programming and the unit mix and Ami mix. But just in terms of schedule, you know, again, textured applications to August first awards will be announced in mid November. And if we kind of, if we get an award and we keep running in our current schedule, we would be looking at closing on the financing and breaking ground about this time next year. So that would be that would be a good we’re hoping to see was very touching. Yeah.
Speaker 6 21:57
Oh, okay. Maybe come back to this one. Yeah, okay. Okay. So this isn’t, this is super fun to look at, we’ll get to the pages in a minute. But it’s we’re talking about a total of 75 apartments. And you can see here, if you follow the column down 21, bedrooms, 22, bedrooms, 21, threes, and six, four bedrooms. So again, the original vision for the project was to really serve as many large families as possible. And so we think we’re at with 27, total, three and four bedroom units is going to make a big dent, I think. Ours are housing units. And then if you follow across this way, and I know this is small font, but the income mix is here. So in fact, 18 units at 30%, ami, nine and 40% 40% Ami combined is about 40 to 43% of the whole 75 units would be 50%, ami and below. And then the balance of that are 70 and 80% ami. So the average income for the whole project is about 57% ami. And we can talk a little bit more about what that means. But income income averaging is a new way to finance these types of projects. And so does require one of the very low income runs in very high income runs. But they have to average six years left. So we again, income averaging really the there’s a couple of reasons why it’s important to do that. One of the key ones is it allows us to serve a really wide band of households, right anywhere from really 30% Ami to 80% Ami, which is a nice mix across the spectrum also allows personal cross subsidy. So this higher income units can help us provide more lower and you know, again, sort of pass subsidize with higher and lower rents. And then three and four bedroom units are more expensive to build. So again, that’s all of these parts and pieces sort of fit together. We don’t have any 60% Ami units at least targeted to that, because that’s there’s a lot of that in Walmart. So we’re really trying to serve on the lower and the higher. So just to point this out here, this is sort of the this the floorplan as you can see, there’s really two buildings there kind of bifurcated by a walkway here that connects to your senior properties up here.
Unknown Speaker 24:46
Sorry, Hearthstone and lodge.
Speaker 6 24:47
Yeah, so that would cross the street there and it’s just a nice visual connection to those properties. But they really the connection here is to the community building and so that community building playground, there would be endorsed A score could be game nights or just indoor play area for residents may always be their property management with opposite. They’re the leasing officer and maintenance. So what’s up? And business owner? Yes. And then in blue here is where we’re targeting the early childhood education. So it’s a nice anchor on the corners, two storey building. And again, whether or not the financing comes together for that the housing stands on its own. So we’re moving ahead
Speaker 8 25:34
with the package. Okay.
Speaker 7 25:43
Yes, yeah. Jumping, touching this a little bit, but the kind of the income average and thing as a new addition to the IRS astronaut program here is that you really until this past year, didn’t take off, because there lots of questions around how it worked. But on paper, the idea is exactly what Shannon said right that within the same level of revenue production for the property, you can serve a much wider swath of residents, including those who are in far less and get out of the kind of box that everybody was in before which making as many units as possible at 6% Ami, because that used to be the upper cabinets, and you get a whole bunch of properties and had all of the units restricted at 6%. Ami was certainly there was a great need for but you started to see like we did in our market set here where there’s a there’s a bit of a saturation at that level. And so being able to diversify what the offer is one great reason to do it. Another way is to get out of that kind of concentration and 60% ami. And then just from a market perspective, this side is something that I put together and and apply to life. But it kind of shows based on data and analytics across the metro kind of area in Denver that when comparing it to a new bill, multifamily and decent quality products, right that there is a gap at the 80% level. Currently, even what’s more important is if you’d like to know 15 years out, if the trend continues where rents grow, housing costs grow at a clip faster than incomes, you’ll see a much wider swath and a definite gap where there will be an imminent need. And so while we’re not underwriting and expecting to maximize the absolute maximum rents on those units, it allows the property to be able to continue to operate and provide a service that is important now that will be even increasingly more important than 10 or 15 years in the life of this project. And we’ve liked that’s an important component, and perhaps an underappreciated aspect of the economics program. So it looks complicated on paper, but we feel like it’s a ultimately a better outcome because of the diversity and because of the kind of the the, the mix of interests and backgrounds and it comes together in one place and share the same amenities and hopefully, Early Childhood Education Center. And speaking of just, again, you know, this isn’t kind of wouldn’t it be cool to get as we put some rigor behind we’ve had our architect team kind of designer, they they’re familiar with state requirements, we’ve talked a lot about it, they’ve helped put together kind of what this looks like. But effectively, we’ve got what we believe can be three classrooms plus all of the requisite kind of family reception areas, you know, playgrounds square footage for every kid indoor and outdoor, in a very safe and secure and easy to access environments. So just for fun, we kind of just show you guys, this is kind of what we’re thinking it would, it would look like it could fit it onto the site. And, you know, with Wild Plum as a as a kind of partner in this whole thing, we think we can hopefully pull together, right, this added component, which would make a great project even that much greater. And then the rest, I think are just images from from our architect team, you want to just flip through them. Molly, you know, quickly or slowly. But that’s just kind of images of what it would what it would look like you can see in the lower left corner, kind of the aspect you’re looking at, I believe this is the southeast corner look in Northwest opposite corner. That’s the that would be the Early Childhood Education Center, you can kind of see the exterior, the signage, and there’ll be a protected stairwell from upstairs to downstairs to get to the playground without having to go through the parking lot or anything like that. And then a bird’s eye view property was one or two more, but just to see you and that’s kind of looking directly at the WEC building on the left for the kind of zone, playground community center. Kind of on your, on your right as you look through it from the from the north, so
Unknown Speaker 29:38
maybe you can go back to the resolution slide.
Unknown Speaker 29:43
Hit the highlights and yeah.
Speaker 6 29:46
So this this is I think what’s before you this evening, is to approve the resolution to essentially authorize lhsaa to negotiate and enter into the developer. I MOU with Tedros, and the purchase and sale agreement. And then upon in the world of tax credits, it would be the next step, which is negotiating the code general partner development agreement, especially limited partner agreement, the property management agreement, and then subsequently out the loan agreements that would come into the deal with 1.8 million and our funds in the solid period, which is how the land will get transferred into the project. And then, lastly, just to execute and deliver any, and all other documents related to closing on the financing for the tax credit. So that’s it for our presentation, we’re happy to answer any questions you have.
Speaker 4 30:52
The agreements, or details here will to which you refer would all be seriously negotiated subsequent to your wedding tech rights.
Speaker 6 31:03
There’s there’s two that we need in order to apply for the tax credits, the purchase and sale agreement. And we’re just conditioned on an award of tax credit amongst several other things. And then we’re really felt like it’s good practice to, you know, at least put on paper and agree to the business terms of the code developer agreement. So that’s what that MOU is. And that’s really more of a good faith agreement that will then be replaced after a tax credit who are with that legally binding developer agreement? Yeah.
Speaker 5 31:41
There are a lot of solar panels of the juice is of this energy resource for the city. All the details are flushed out yet or is that a separate agreement from District?
Speaker 6 31:57
We are we have a minimum requirement through the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority. So to apply for tax credits, we have to hit a what is a pretty high benchmark for green building and sustainability features. So we’re definitely doing that. But we’ve been having we’ve had one kickoff design meeting with our, our Sustainability Consultants with folks from Longmont power to really talk about like, how do we how do we integrate this with some of the bigger goals and visions that the city has, in terms of, you know, energy conservation and renewable generation. And so we’re sort of at the early stages of that.
Unknown Speaker 32:38
This is 100%. Electric building, which works out.
Speaker 2 32:45
We’ve also had conversations with hyper power, mental collaborators blink being in the in the discussion of all of this and probably thought batteries and some other components. But there’s a chance it’s going to connect to a larger distributed energy system in that area. But we’re still trying to
Speaker 1 33:09
see no more discussion. Can we have a motion to motion for revelation 2023 Dash 26 approve certain areas in connection with the ascent at overcrossing? All of resolution 20. Oh, thank you. Permission required by Commissioner Hidalgo. ferrying seconded by Commissioner McCoy, let’s vote. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All those opposed? That passes unanimously, thank you very much.
Speaker 6 33:42
Thank you. Yeah, November Have you looked into heat pumps as he comes? Like a ground source equilibrium? We have not done with it that I think it’s a bit cost prohibitive on the project at this scale, but and I’m not an engineer, but I think the mechanical systems do also operate on heat pumps and are pretty efficient packaging.
Unknown Speaker 34:19
But I like the answer. Yeah.
Speaker 2 34:22
I think the answer is yes. But are the individual units for the entire product? Because of because it is 100%
Unknown Speaker 34:29
You have to have
Speaker 1 34:32
these are rentals, correct? Yes. So we wouldn’t be responsible for the individual units putting them in? Who is that cost prohibitive as well? Okay. I didn’t understand that. Thank you. Right.
Speaker 2 34:56
If I can say to the one thing I want to say is So one of the things related to project based vouchers and this project, if one of them gets selected by Chapo for tax credits, we will be a property for six property will do it will be five return, that’s obviously not as critical work we’re doing investing. So our progress
Speaker 1 35:32
Exactly. So we’re at the last resolution, 2023 days 27 approval of accounts receivable write offs.
Speaker 8 35:41
So we have started the collection process, we have sent therapeutics over to collections, with a total of $25,000. Most of that is attributed to three units, which are about 2000. of the restaurants small in Norway hurl themselves. But since we’re doing this big chunk in such a large amount, we just said, Let’s have the board go ahead and approve, we have three that are not going to corrections to those who are deceased tenants, you want to get a police report, the guy ended up moving out, and he passed away at another hotel or apartment complex, and then one actually passed away. And so those will go ahead and write off and then they have a lot more. So it was under $500. That’s just all the administrative rights to
Unknown Speaker 36:40
people selling the units other than to the
Speaker 8 36:44
these are all passed over all patlak tenants. So these are all the ones that we did our due diligence to try to get a payment plan with them, a lot of them don’t give us morning addresses. So this is a it’s hard to connect with anybody. But my understanding is it goes to collections. And we have up to six years to try to. But the right office to read off the books. Because we don’t want our property managers as well into the collections was this was exactly what they were all communication to the collection agency and they work from here.
Unknown Speaker 37:23
Because the private clears up with that new software system
Unknown Speaker 37:31
open ended Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 37:40
You’re doing you’re trying to do this ahead of budget?
Speaker 8 37:43
Well, we will start doing this. So what we want to start doing is actually coming to the board. At the point we’re sending these to collection specialists, we have to have it written off by you. So the majority, we’d like to get written off as much as we can by the end of the year. So this is written off. And we’re not putting this huge allowance for doubtful accounts. So we’ll do that as we go. Harold can approve anything 5000 or less. And if that’s the case, he’ll approve. You just keep listing out there to say, here’s what I imagined for we’re going in less than two, usually the next units are the higher damaged units that we’ll have to bring to you guys.
Speaker 1 38:27
All right. Thank you for that. Can I have a motion for 2023 and 27? Seven, approval of credit accounts receivable layoffs. So moved by Commissioner won’t send you by Commissioner. So that passes unanimously, we have any comments from
Speaker 4 38:50
commissioners, just just just on this last set of tables
Speaker 9 38:56
would be helpful to me. If we could have a table that would be a little more easily read
Speaker 8 39:04
specifically from the services, so it’s important
Unknown Speaker 39:11
that whoever generates it’s gonna show up in our packet with what
Speaker 8 39:17
what data was in the general because I might just have to tell what fields I know I just haven’t seen
Speaker 5 39:31
Yeah, yes. I mean, I just I just enlarged it. And I read it online, so I can see it. So it’s in there. Yeah.
Speaker 3 39:40
We’ll try and flag it if we have a document that needs to be printed in our format
Unknown Speaker 39:48
No, but I didn’t have to come online.
Unknown Speaker 39:52
So can I have a motion to adjourn? So moved.
Speaker 1 39:56
Second. Okay. Moved by Commissioner waters things conditioning and double hearing
Unknown Speaker 40:00
all those in favor of learning
Unknown Speaker 40:03
All those opposed Behringer type
Transcribed by https://otter.ai