Welcome to the March 18th, 2026 meeting of the Cook County Housing and Redevelopment Authority. I note the presence of a quorum here, uh, Commissioners Olsen, Hansen, O'Brien, Lamour, and Gabler. And we appreciate the presence of our county
uh, board members, uh, Commissioners Gamble, and Sullivan. Thanks for being with us and supporting us. Uh we have uh first thing is approval of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the agenda as presented?
>> So move. >> I'll second. >> Been seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. Uh approval of the February 18th minutes. Uh I only had uh I think one
important correction that Commissioner O'Brien was listed both as present and absent and he was absent and so we'll make that change. >> I was suggesting >> it might apply to me but
>> but uh there was one other uh less important correction actually under financials. The finance committee had no significant questions on finances. It says the housing trust fund from contributions from Cascade Vacation
Rentals is around $100,000. Uh but um actually we don't have a housing trust fund yet. So, a struck housing trust fund and the contributions from Cascade Vacation Rentals are actually I think around $200,000
and we're graciously acknowledge that. Uh, also Bran said he is waiting on approval of our resolution. I put in approval by the county attorney of our resolution. Sure. >> To create the housing trust fund. It's
said to access this fund and I scratch that and put create the housing trust fund. So, uh, with those corrections, uh, is there a motion to approve the minutes? >> I'll move. >> It's been moved. Is there a second?
>> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Uh, we have an opportunity for public comment. Is there anyone here who has a
public comment? Hearing none, we'll move on to the rest of the agenda. But I'm going to ask that we just uh make a qu quick modification. And uh there's under new business, there's a presentation towards 30% of
the heights. Uh 30% at the heights. I'm sure that means rent uh to to income. And we have people here to make a presentation. And so let's start with that rather than the unfinished business that would normally proceed. So, uh,
we'll greet all those who are here and if you could identify yourself for the minutes, we'd appreciate that. >> Hi, I'm Dennis Rusal. I'm a a limited partner in the real estate partnership that's developing the Heights. >> I'm Patty Byer
and I also am an investor in the Heights. I'm Gary Lads, one of the general partners of the project. >> Should they be sharing a microphone? >> We can share maybe >> unless Gary Unless Gary's not going to talk, which I highly doubt.
>> Going to slide over, Gary. We can share >> and I doubt that that's the case. >> Scoot over a little bit. >> All right. Take us take us into the subject, please. >> All right. So, I'm not going to go over much about the Heights project. I know the H's been involved in it from the
from very early on and has played a big part in making it um possible um which all of us part all of the partners appreciate. Um I'm going to ask you to turn to the second page of the little handout we gave you. Um,
I had these organized a little differently, but they were sitting in my car seat and I finished cross country skiing on the way in and I threw my fanny pack on the car seat and the water bottle leaked all over. So, Patty was nice enough to go make more copies for me and this is the way they got stapled
together. So, you know, um, what AMI is? It's area median income. And the top little um table here shows that that's for a single person 66,700
at this point in time. And then it goes it gets higher as there's more people in a household. 80% of that is 53,360. 60% is $40,20. Um so those are the income amounts that um the 60 and 80% that qualify people
for the discounted rents. The next table below that shows the rents at the heights for studios one and two bedrooms. Um the bottom line is the market rate which is only available in the one and two bedrooms. Um, and then
there's the there's a line that shows what the 80% um, rent is. So, for example, a onebedroom is 1,600 at market rate. It's 1429 if you qualify at the 80% of area median income and it's 1,71 if you
qualify at the 60%. And so forth for the two-bedroom. Um, so what we've so we these programs work really well as you can see in lowering the rent significantly for people who hit these
thresholds. But what's become clear as we start entertaining um lease applications is they don't work so well for people that are between 60 and 80 and between 80 and
100. So, for example, if I make uh $100 a year more than the limit for 60%. And I want to rent a onebedroom, my rent is going to go from um,71 to,429 a
month, but I only make $10 a month more. Um, the same holds true. If you make $100 more than the 80% threshold, you get kicked up to market rate, which again you can see is a significant amount. So, we started trying to understand this
better and go to the other page. I'm sorry about all the numbers, but I'm going to explain kind of what we're looking at to make it easy to digest. This these are the this is information on the first 16 um people who applied for and were
approved for occupancy. On the left hand uh we've eliminated the names just for confidentiality here. The left hand is the unit style for which they've applied and been approved. The next column is the income they reported
and the next column is um what is 30% of that because that's widely considered to be what makes housing affordable. Um and then the next column is the rent that's that's um quoted to each of them
based on the unit style and where they fall in the in the 60 or 80% AMI income. Then we add in estimated utilities to get to a gross rent. And then the column entitled rent as a
percent of income shows how much these people will be paying as a percent of their income for the unit for which they've um applied and been approved. So that we're going to kind of forget the top three because they're people moving
into the community that don't have significant income in their prior year, but they have um families that are co-signing the lease and guaranteeing the rent. So we don't we don't worry about them. We believe they're taken care of.
But from there on down, you can start seeing that we have people there, and these are listed kind of in in order of income from lowest to highest. So, we have people paying 47% of their
income for rent, 43%, 39% um a little way while ways down 46% 36 36 there's one at 40%. So, and the reason is because
they don't fall right at the 60 or right at the 80. They fall somewhere in between. So, they're kicked up to a significantly higher rental amount um because their income is too high to qualify for the the next less expensive
option. So our goal with this project is to try to guarantee successful tenencies. Um we want renters who can afford to um live
at the heights and still um pay their utility bill, their car payment, buy groceries um and not be so strapped by their rent that they can't really afford the rest of life. um
that's critical for for their own good, but it's also important for the the success of the project. If we have a lot of people who um sign a lease, move in because they have no other option uh where to live in
the community, which includes a lot of people these days, and um they're really stretched to pay their rent, then something's going to going to give. um they're not going to be able to afford health insurance or their utilities may
be cut off. Their their car may sit in the parking lot not working and they can't afford to fix it and which is going to would be unhealthy for the the resident and unhealthy for the the project and the neighboring residents.
So we're trying to figure out how we can address that. So the the next columns over show so so our our concept is we're going to seek donations from private individuals and businesses to create a
fund and um that fund will be used to to provide some additional subsidies to renters um for whom the 60 and 80% program as it's structured don't doesn't really solve the affordability problem. Um,
we've talked to Boreal Waters. They've agreed to be the 5013C organization that would receive um tax deferred contributions. Um, so for example, um if someone needs to take a minimum
distribution from their um retirement account, that's taxable. Um but if it's donated to a 5013C, then it's not taxable. So the the impact of that money is is is um increased.
So, and then we have a management company that's engaged with the project that would do another piece of the work that the program would require, which is once we determine a subsidy amount for
each renter, then someone needs to um verify that yes, these are the incomes, these are the appropriate additional subsidies um so so that they can seek reimbursement of these donations that
are going to pass through boreal waters. So what we would like to ask the HA to do is to be I don't know if I'm using this term correctly but like the fiscal agent for this because boreal waters can't give money directly to tenants or
to a project but they can give it to an organization like the H. Um, so we believe we have we will come up with sources for the money that allow tax exempt contributions
and um but we need an entity to provide the the crucial function of approving what's provided by the management company and sending it on to Boreal Waters to get um the reimbursement and
then forwarding that back to to the heights organization. Uh we don't know yet what what are we love to get everyone to 30% AMI. I mean these are old. A lot of these programs
work based on numbers that are old, older, and things change in the economics of life that make them less and less um um accurate. So, is 30% really accurate for someone
earning 40,000 in Cook County that has to pay health insurance and, you know, pay local costs for groceries and everything else? I don't know. Um it these programs aren't studied at that level,
>> but we know that the higher you go above that, the the more likely it's going to be unaffordable. >> Yeah. >> So, how how much we can bring that down to dep will depend on how much we can raise and how long we feel like it's going to
be important to have a program like this in place. Um, had the heights been built 5 years ago because of increasing wages, increasing construction costs, um,
it would be it would have been built for less money. People that would have rented land would be making more than they did when they moved in. So at some point this just incre if there's are increased costs of building and rent and
income this problem kind of solves itself. But in the early years it's it doesn't. So we would want to support at least the first two years and longer if we can but that's going to be um on us
to see how much money we can raise. So whether we try to support down to 30% or 35% or 37, you can see the cost of that here. Um the numbers in each line item. Um let's let's look at the 30% number.
The 421 is the amount by which um that person's rent exceeds 30% of their income. So, if we add all those up for the first 16, it comes to 3,200 um a month or 38,000 a year. And then
there are 22 other units that weren't rented at the time these numbers were done. So, we're just guessing here that the profile of those renters will be the same as or similar to the profile of the first. So, we would need 90,000 a year. and we don't think we'll probably be
able to raise that kind of money, but it's probably quite more realistic for us to try to try to um provide support down to 35% or something close to that. That would be our goal. So, we're not asking for money. We're asking for the H
to to play a a a key necessary role in in the movement of donated money to um these renters to make it more affordable. and and and Sean um of of
the boreal waters said that if if it if you did approve this that immediately he would get into an um an agreement would be created so that the distribution to HR that all those steps would be figured
out with Jeff. Um yeah >> this is conceptual at this time there's a lot of >> yes it is >> details that need to be worked out obviously but finding the key players is the first first piece so questions
>> questions for the board >> well I would say uh we've already thought of this too obviously it's a very obvious problem and um um yeah totally supportive of your effort I think it's a great effort Well, didn't
you help make some of it uh down to 60%. I think the two bedrooms they were at 80 is already is already has skin in the game, right, Gary? >> Y'all did that for the rent subsidies, right? >> Wow. Thank you. >> Yeah. And I I think we also I correct me
if I'm wrong uh commissioners, but I think we >> allowed some flexibility in the Gunflint View project where people were right >> same thing where they were coming in $10 above >> the cutoff and we allowed them to >> because that's that's our rule, not really a that's not a law. It's just our
rule >> for the subsidy. And uh maybe we need to think about that rule a little bit. maybe make it uh mathematically a little more complex so it would >> so it wouldn't have these big jumps, you know, it's just sort of >> sort of an odd way to construct it if
you think about it. But um even then it won't that people won't be at 30%. >> But that would make it that would diminish the amount we'd have to raise and extend the time period during which we could provide the subsidy. So it would be very helpful. >> So that's something we could think
about. I think that's a question and can we structure this in a way that's works better for people. >> Um, and then obviously we're going to need to do this almost every project we do. I think that involves rentals. So as a board we need to think about that.
>> It's great to do it for the Heights. were, you know, of course, 100% supportive of the heights, but um but we have to think about, you know, maybe maybe if we're going to do it, maybe we should set it up so we can do it over and over again and and cover lots of people.
>> Unfortunately, this is a problem that isn't going to get better uh as constructions go costs go up unless incomes also go up and >> that, you know, remains to be seen. But uh but I think the idea of thinking
giving some thought to how we might structure some of our policies or procedures >> to accommodate this is really a good one. >> We're already grappling with this. Um you know we're looking into a local housing trust fund but um
that it turns out is likely more operates more like an endowment. and and then we already have this wonderful generous contribution from Cascade Vacation Rental, which we're hoping to go out and get more business entities to support that. Um, and we're kind of
waiting um waiting on the legal opinion on the local trust fund to see what we can actually do. Apparently, we're the first one to set one up, first H. So, it's we're kind of breaking ground here legally. And then, unfortunately, our county attorney is super busy right now, so there's been a bit of a delay there.
Um but um but I think we also as a board need to think about the money we have from that's already donated and how that's designated and how we account for it. And then the final question I would have is just and and maybe the commissioners
know this, but because we're a county agency, county authority, there'd have to be some accountability through to the county on the, you know, I great to have the the rental agency doing the the
vetting, but that would have to follow through to the county to be able to audit that. >> Especially in this political climate, people are concerned about fraud. We want to make sure to set up a system that makes fraud impossible. >> What I think is >> but I think that can be solved. >> Yeah. What I think just is is so
wonderful is that this kind of thinking makes it very individual. So now it's, you know, it sees individual families, it sees single moms, it's it um it's it's our people. And so um I I really
you know we we know how much they make or what their need is and so we can we can help them per you know in a personal way which I think makes it very dynamic and um lifech changing for them that we care
about individuals and making things better for them and that kind of atmosphere can then create um their give them that opportunity to become better and to to
get more um you know when you feel really good about yourself and you have confidence and you're secure a lot of great things can happen in your life. Um, and correct me if again if I'm wrong, Jeff. Um,
but didn't we have an inquiry from somebody who wanted to make a fairly serious donation just for this for rent subsidies out of their IRA or their retirement account? I think it was a >> Yeah. So, I I just want to say I really
appreciate the conversation today. It's a very good conversation to have. Um, Commissioner Hansen, you've made some very good points and I'm really glad you made them. Um, those are those are things we have to be cognizant of, especially in our current political
climate. Um, that we don't want to do anything that's going to be counter to what's in the best interest of the public. Um, especially with, you know, fraud and that sort of thing. And so, it's nice that we'll have auditing throughout this process and we'll be able to understand more where the
money's going. That said, you know, um, uh, from our standpoint, you know, I think that there are some folks in the community that do want to make some sizable contributions, whether it be through their retirement account or
whatever the case may be. And you're right, the uh the local trust funds set up more for an endow like an endowment so to speak in that um you know the interest bearing off of the money that's given to us can be used for the good purposes that we've set out for and we
have identified at least in draft form in our um documents to create the local housing trust fund. Um and and you're right absolutely as well. We're the first H in the state since the state legislature passed the statute changes
in 2025 that allows us the authority to create our own uh local housing trust fund through statutes. And so um we're the first one plowing ground on this and we want to make sure we get it right. So um we do want to make sure that we do have the support of our
county commissioners and our county attorney in this process. All that said, um you know the biggest thing and when we had this conversation with Boreal Waters u a week or so ago, we weren't looking for any formal action from the
from the um the board today. Really what we're looking for is some sort of a thumbs up or thumbs down from all of you today to say thumbs up, keep up the good work and keep moving forward on this or thumbs down. We don't want Jeff to do
any of this stuff going forward. And I I'm gathering from the conversation today at least that it's not a no and there possibly are some thumbs sticking up in the air. And so I can't see that from from St. follow where I'm at today, but I can kind of get that from the
conversation today. Um, and you're right. I think in the future we need to look at this for more of our rental um conversations down the road as well. And so I hope that answered your question and I hope that gives you a little bit more context for today's conversation.
>> And just just to be clear, I so the local housing trust fund which would act as an let's just call it an endowment for the sake of argument here. I'm a huge fan of endowments. I think they're they're fantastic and we definitely should have one. But the way endowments
work in my experience and I've had a lot of experience with endowments is that those are those are donations you get from people like at the time of their estate settling. Large donations where they want to do good for a hundred years
>> and that's how you raise money for it rather than raising 5,000 here, 5,000 there. At the same time, as an organization, we really need working subsidy capital. That's that's basically what we do is subsidize projects to make
them affordable for people. So, we need to be able to have capital that and be able to I guess there's a kind of a gray area about how we accept donations and sure we've ever addressed that. >> The key we can accept donations. We
cannot ask for donations. We we need to make that very clear. So, it's important that you're here today with this proposal cuz we can react to that proposal and we can go from here, but we can't be out soliciting contributions uh
even the uh work that uh Cascade Vacation Rental has done. It's a great example of what can be done, but we can't be the ones going out to other businesses. uh we can go with someone who's ask putting the ask out and
telling them well here's what we do with this but we can't be uh soliciting ourselves. So, uh, that's why it's it is important that you're here today and we appreciate that and >> but I just want to make clear from from the H's point of view that the local the
local the trust fund the endowment and then sort of a working subsidy fund would be two different things and we probably need to get legal opinion on both of those so we're really clear on how that >> how that works. >> And Sean did um express that they would
do this with no fee. Oh, that's nice. >> Nice. >> That's their way of >> Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah, thank you for letting me speak to this. Um, the county certainly does pass through for organizations and um, uh,
our fiscal responsibility, legal responsibility in that regard is simply that the organization is something that we feel is consistent with the values of the community and um, so we we would serve in in that capacity. it is a decision that comes before usually from
our county auditor treasurer in the request and then the board would simply ratify that. Uh so it is something that gets done like anything that gets done it should be done based upon a set of criteria and I would agree with the comment that that um if we do this there
can be individual things that come before the board that are asks but whatever you do in in the instance that is one time you need to look at it as though it might be multiple times and I agree with the comment that that the endowment should be there should be a
definition as to the application of endowment funds and also if there's an establishment of subsidy funds that people can contribute to that both of those are well informed and documented so that the consistent application of
that will be evident moving forward. I would say at this point with the information that's brought forward that looking at it from a legal standpoint uh looking at the opportunities that exist and as has been experienced going to the
legislature and asking that we could establish this funding that we can create new revenue streams or new opportunities through resourcefulness but it has to go through the proper channels. My recommendation would be
that the ask would be something that would be looked at in more detail. So that the legal opinion that the broader picture that includes both endowment and a subsidy fund would be more clearly defined based upon the context of this
ask and what we know to this date relative to what we've created in housing locally. >> Thanks Commissioner. Commissioner O'Brien, >> I just one one I broadly think it's a very good idea and creative. Um I I one question I'd like to better understand
is what's involved in the due diligence and and responsibilities of being a fiscal agent? Who does the auditing to to ensure the people's incomes haven't changed or and is that and is that is does that become part of Jeff's work? And if so, then we just need to think
about, yeah, if this program expands, does that become a an ownorous part of his job when instead of going out and developing new housing? >> Well, this being a new thing, we're kind of making it up as we go. Um, but our
sense of it is that we need to get verification of income every year to determine the qualification for the 60 and 80% AMI um rental discounts. So we would use the same that same information
um to determine what additional subsidy we we would provide. Um we don't know um so we we would we would have we would instruct our rental aid management
company to provide the county with a summary of that each month. And then um um the H's role would be to sign off on that and pass it on to Boreal Waters.
>> Beyond that um exactly um um you know whether that's adequate from the county's perspective I don't know that would be we'd need to understand more what your audit requirements are. I think
>> and I think when Boreal Waters and um H when they when they do make that agreement that that would be in there, right? >> Of course. Yeah. I mean, once we get this conceptually all sorted out and figured out who the players are, then we
have to start drafting a program and um you know, whatever kind of of um documents would be necessary to define everyone's role. We just want to make sure we have all the the right players in the game first and then that's the next step.
>> Well, it seems like your objective is pretty simple and that's to help affordability of people who are somewhere in between guidelines and and uh and that's clear enough. And then the question is how how much money can be put to that
>> and that's up to you to raise money. But, uh, you know, I think if our role is a pass through, we'll figure out how that should work. Commissioner Gamble's right. There's a difference between probably this proposal and what we're have envisioned for the housing trust
fund, but uh, who knows down the line, but let's I think we ought to get started down that lane. >> Anybody disagree with that at this point? Oh, we got two county commissioners who have something to say. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, one of the
things I'm thinking about before anything gets written down is to try to coordinate coordinate a meeting with our county attorney and with auditor treasurer Powers um so that you can discuss everything and then begin your
work um writing up documents. >> And if that meeting could include the issue of the housing trust fund review by the county attorney, that would be the really helpful cuz that's been a it's really holding us up, but we got to get it resolved.
>> Absolutely. >> But Commissioner Gamble, >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, if if funding is supplied by a an agency, federal agency, let's say if HUD or Minnesota Housing, that whatever
parameters they establish, there would have to be compliance with that. in the situation where you're dealing with HUD and you're dealing with subsidy that the annual reertification is an opportunity to look at the revenue and relationship to the established rent. So based upon
the criteria that is used in that evaluation, you take your income and qualifying expenses and whatever that is, then you set that rate. HUD sets the the rate at which a rent can be charged under subsidy and then income also plays
into that calculation. So what happens and the reason I'm saying this is that it if if the financing of the project is connected to a an organization that has parameters in which you need to operate you would need to comply with those. If
it's a matter of doing that without that responsibility, then I would suggest you would follow the similar model which is an an annual and set up their criteria. Anytime you do something independent, as Commissioner Sullivan has identified in their discussions that the legal aspects
need to be identified. So part of that would be are there any other HASS within can be within the state but could be without the state but it's best if within the state that have done similar things that are helping in establish a
fund if we can learn from their experience we don't have to start from scratch but I would say that that the criteria that is applied equally applied so that it's just and it's credible is something that have to be well documented before it's administered.
so that you'd have that consistency that is audible and proves the integrity of of the process, >> right? That makes sense. Yeah. >> So, on that topic, I did um Commissioner Gavl, I did reach out to the Minnesota Association or Minnesota Association of
of HRO's uh across the state of Minnesota and I have not heard back yet, but I'm I'm trying to figure that out so I don't reinvent the wheel in this process. Um and what I would remind the board is that we we do go through a
quasi um certification process. We just finished it with the gunpoint view for their subsidy. Um they had to qualify for that subsidy that we agreed to pay for the 60 80% EMI rates. They had to provide us with documentation and since
we have onboarded with um Jason Mahale and the Northshore Development Company in his capacity, he has reviewed the documents they provided us and gave us the thumbs up and we sent them a check and so we could do something like that
again um through that process. We could do a similar process, I'm sure. >> Thanks, Jeff. Yeah, it's important to note when we got started uh we were concerned about existing developments that are here uh that are subsidized for
families and elderly mostly by HUD and uh but we did not see our role as getting involved in the documentation processing all that paper and and being the experts and so that's what the
DUTH does for us and so we're it's a little easier if it's a project that we've personally, you know, at least corporately financed and and or helped finance and and understand the the limitations and we're a able to deal
with that as we are with the Heights or the excuse me, the Gunflint View. But uh yeah, we we want to stay a little clear of doing a lot having to do a lot of documentation other than reviewing and and approving I guess is how I would see
it. But >> yeah, we would try to avoid creating any more um bureaucratic workload than we need to by using existing parameters to the extent they're available to us.
Well, the management company should be pretty familiar with that whole process that if they've had experience at all in in any rental housing almost, it's it's probably going to >> be uh to their they'll be okay. We have
discussed um the fact that assuming we get this um built out and and functioning. Um there's likely to be interest from other um building owners um developers
to set something similar up. We believe that our our target market to to seek donations is primarily the the general unlimited partnership pool of this project. Um and that those people
are more likely to donate if they're donating to a project they already have um familiarity with and an interest in. So, we see this as a a pattern that could certainly be be repeated um by other developers, but this project would
be specific to the Heights. Um it would be really useful. Jeff mentioned to us that there Hills has um um got an agreement to soften those 60
and 80% numbers a little bit. It' be really interesting to know what how much flexibility has been given because that's something if we could if we could utilize that then there's a consistency between how the H and the county are dealing with those two projects and we
don't have to start over. Is that could that information be available to us or is that confidential? >> I just don't remember. But >> I don't remember but it's in the minutes what we do you remember Jeff what we what we told them. I'm I'm sorry. I
barely heard Dennis talk and and I didn't understand what he was asking. >> He's just talking about the accommodation we made to the Gunfund view project on the on the 60 and 80% hard hard numbers and I can't remember exactly how that was rolled out. They
just asked for some latitude and we agreed. Um so yeah, maybe it would be a question for them how it's working out for them which I'm sure they'd be willing to share. Thank you, >> sir. Um, anecdotally, all I can tell you is that I haven't heard anything in my capacity as executive director where
they had complaints or any concerns about whatever we agreed to. I'd have to go back. I don't have it right in front of me here in St. Paul today, but I can go back and look at that uh in a different time um to see what we what we did. I I just know whatever's whatever
we agreed to or whatever we're doing at Johnson of View from my perspective is working to the point where I haven't heard any any negative feedback. >> While we're at it, we should just think about that issue in the abstract, too. And you know,
>> instead of solving it for each project, let's solve it once and for all. >> Yeah. You can see here how that these hard numbers really do impact anyone in between. Now, I suspect that this is a new idea that there aren't maybe a lot of HASS that are going to like what we're
proposing. So, again, this is another opportunity where maybe Cook County could take the leadership role and be unique and and make this work. But I want to go back to Commissioner Sullivan's point. I think it's really critical that we do have a meeting down
the road in the near future that involves our county auditor treasurer and our county attorney to make sure that we're dotting all of our eyes and crossing all of our tees to make sure that we're doing this correctly. And I would argue adding probably our legal
counsel to that mix as well. But I I think it's doable. I really do. >> Well, I'd like to move on a bit at this stage. So, uh, I think we've heard the proposal and and appreciate it and we'd hope you'd continue to develop it and
stay in touch with us through Jeff, >> uh, and, uh, as that all goes forward and meanwhile on our side, we'll start thinking of it a little more cosmically than we have and the past and the difference between the housing trust
fund as an endowment versus individual uh, possible, you know, work with each project. So, uh, but trying to be consistent and be, uh, visible and and, uh, transparent as
we do it. That's kind of our key. >> So, unless there >> Oops. Commissioner Sullivan, >> just one um final thought is if we're looking at um you know your partners contributing further, I understand that
there is a passion and an interest, but I I would also say given the demographics of Cook County and um the number of people that we have, you know, 74, 75 and up, consider maybe a pitch to
seniors about their required minimum distribution. Yeah, I'm at the homestead. So, yeah. >> And maybe we could get people to donate that piece to you. >> Yes. >> Um, >> in the future. >> That's wonderful.
>> You're essentially getting 30% from >> the federal government when you do that. So, it's kind of free money. It's laying out there. >> So, just a thought. >> Everybody with an IRA that has a well, anybody that has an IRA that's over 65, I think, now >> it's 73, I think.
You can donate from your IRA taxree. >> So make all your donations from your IRA for God's >> sake. So >> thank you all for your time today and thanks for the positive feedback. Um we'll work with Jeff to get this meeting
together with the county auditor and county attorney. Is that our our marching order >> and our legal counsel as well? >> And would that would so that would be before we then involve Shawn with the agreement that Sean could be part of that.
>> Wonderful. Good. Okay. >> Excellent. >> Oh, that's lovely. Thank you. >> Okay, you've given us a lot of time and we know you have other things in your agenda. Thank you so much. We really >> How was movein weekend? >> It's this coming weekend. >> How was moving weekend, Gary? >> Coming this coming weekend.
>> Position is what just the most fun weekend I've had in >> Oh my god. Well, I I drive by it coming into town from Luden and I noticed that one of the terraces there outside one of the units
there are two lawn chairs out there now. Somebody's doing something and >> the frozen snow. >> So excited. Yeah, >> you >> Yeah. Thank you. All right. Uh let's go back. We've got some unfinished business
here, which is resolution 2610 authorizing the executive director to enter into a 50-year lease with Tafty Township for the use and access to the billboard in the Birch Grove parcel owned by our our HA. Uh I think we're
all familiar with the issue. Jeff, do you want to have a further comment at this point? >> Yeah. Uh, I did send out a redline version of the agreement that the TSI township supervisors took a look at last Thursday at their township board
meeting. Um, I've had our legal expert, our legal council, um, Chris Fryberg take a look at it or I'm sorry, Chris uh, Berta over at Fryberg. He looked at it. He saw nothing that was concerning or uh, any substance really changes. Uh
I will draw your attention on the first page. Um we did include all property south of driveway to include driveway as it relates to access. So that way they could get access to the billboard itself. So they could not only maintain
it but you know um put up the billboard itself and if the wind comes and tears it off or whatever the case is it fades they can go back onto the property um access it. put up the new um sign and that sort of thing. Um other than that,
basically what this is is a 50-year lease between us and Ty Township to operate the billboard for $1. Um which is what's what's allowed by state laws at minimum. Um and then they have access
to it and we can make the place look a little nicer than it is right now. Um, and that's basically all the changes that were made. >> Thanks, Jeeoff. Uh, any comments or thoughts? >> I just want to uh disclose that I'm
going to recuse myself from this vote. Uh, my daughter let slip that she's in the running to be a tenant on that billboard again. So, although I have no financial connection to it or anything else, I'll I'll recuse myself. >> Sounds like a good idea. Thanks. Uh, is
there a motion to approve? >> I'll move to approve it. >> 2612. >> Second. It's >> been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? >> Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. >> I. >> Nay.
>> One related note on a different billboard. Jeeoff, I I just noticed going up the Gunplint Trail that this the uh I wonder if we could just reach out to the Gunpoint View folks and just say that they should either remove or update the sign that says that it's opening summer of 2025.
>> We did have I did at my request, Jeff got them to take down the 12 units remaining because twice I overheard conversations in the cafe where people saying, "Why are we building more housing? They've got 12 units open there that have been open for a year." I was like, "Oh my god, it just
>> got rid of that. Just not not a good look." >> They are full, by the way, or they're essentially full now. They're just having >> And then they are they are there's some new releasing and that sort of thing going on that sort of thing. What I would say is that I think it's still stuck in the snowbank and and Megan does
have plans to remove that. But >> right, >> are they do you know, Jeeoff, are they planning to have a sign there or is that just a temporary? Was that just a >> That was more of a temporary thing. >> Okay. Okay, that's broadly appropriate. >> Uh, next on the agenda is resolution
2612. Uh, this is a new business and it proves approves the executive director to enter into an agreement with Nordicar uh, Nordicstar H Drive housing >> uh, to expand the infrastructure grant
with one roof community housing. Uh we've been through this issue in discussion, but uh Jeeoff, anything further to add? >> Yeah, I will add that it's on page 20 of the packet and it is um it's for
$250,000. That was the direction that you had given me back, I believe, at the January meeting. It took some time to get the legal um drafting and to make sure we got all the the things right. There was a couple of things that we tweaked here and there. Um and that's all part of the resolution itself now.
So um and then in the subsequent pages uh 21 through gosh I think it's 24. You'll also see in your packet um there's exhibit A which is on page 25. That's the letter that we received at
the beginning of the year from one roof community housing. And um that was the impetus for where we started with this. I will say that conversations have been about, you know, this $250,000 that we received
as a deferred loan at the time of closing on the virtual departments. That $250,000 we really didn't earmark too much. Um, we had some conversations and the subsidy that we have allocated for
the the heights possibly coming out of the $250,000. However, we do have we do maintain a sizable amount of money. When I say sizable, I don't mean we have a large amount of money, but we have room to
continue to subsidize the heights for two years through the Saha funds that we received from the state of Minnesota and the spark of revenue. Um, and so I don't have any concerns with that. If it comes out of the pot that they give us or if it comes out of the 250, I'd suggest
that we use the 250 to leverage up to 10 new homes in Grammaray as part of the Nordic Star phase 2 um that Wonders Community Housing is really working on. And this will help leverage some additional dollars for some other
organization to also support the the building of the homes in in Grammar. Any further thoughts on uh resolution 2612? Is there a motion to approve it? >> I'll move adoption of resolution 2612.
>> It's been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. That motion passes. Uh, we're on to your
report there, Jeff, I think. Yes. >> Yep. Good. Um, so I'll I'll make it brief, but there are some points that I really wanted to point out today. Not only just so you are aware, but also I want to make the public aware of what's going on in some of the different projects that we're working on. Um,
first I'll start with Cedar Grove Business Park. um you know back in 2024 and it came up during the auditing process this year and back in uh or last year rather for 2024 fiscal year that we as the inter approved an agreement with
the EDA to acquire two lots at the Business Grove business park for housing. Uh but we didn't quite get that to closing. And so I've been working with Peter uh Clisso, the president of the EDA, and I have been working on
getting that through the title team and getting a closing. Right now we tentatively have a scheduled closing at 3:00 on the 24th of March, which is this next week. And um hopefully we'll be in possession of those two lots by the end of the week. Um, and then also I'm
working with Hamilton Habitat to close on that Cerechville property that we have obtained from the county. And we'll get that off to the title team as well. And so that's my report for number I or
number one. Um, number two, the second home funding for workforce housing. Um, you know, I'm here at the legislature and I had a a chance to talk with Grant Hoschild's legislative assistant. Um, we're still working on what we can and can't do and trying to figure out a way
to make a tax um policy that's fair for everyone in the state because of course it can't just be fair for one county. Inevitably, it has to be fair for everybody um across the board. So, we're working on
ways to process that. Um, because it in in, you know, the northeastern part of Minnesota, and we're not unique in Cook County this way, but we are unique as a region. There's just a lot of second homes and a lot of uh seasonal cabins.
And if it's Itasca County or Aka County or or Cuchaching County, we're all kind of in the same boat here. Um, and so from our standpoint, it's a matter of having a conversation about fairness and how we can maybe capture some of these dollars to help work towards workforce
housing. We have a unique geographic challenge because of all the public land in Cook County. And so, you know, what's been built was the easiest stuff to be built and now what's left is more costly. It's more difficult terrain and
so it's going to cost a little bit more. So, whatever we can do to help kind of figure out that math problem and solve it to where it's still going to be affordable, that's something that I I've heard from all of you is really important. And so I'm going to continue
to work with um Grant's research folks and um Senator Host Child's research folks and I hope that we have something that we can at least get to introductions this year for you know possible conversation and then of course
for next year as well on the Duval project update. That's number three. That's the area that the city owns. That used to be the Tabota Motel. It's right across the street from the Aspen in as you come into town right
kind of close proximity to WTIP uh community radio. Um, I've just received a word from Alex Duval today that they are um they have all of the capital sources lined up. Um, and they
are going to evaluate the progress of um optimizing their start. Um, in the past I've had some feedback from the city uh that owns the property and and having a conversation last night with Mayor
Benson. Uh, she's down here as well for the Cook County portion of the of the St. Louis County days. And um, I'll be honest with you, they have expressed some sort of frustrations that in the past the developer really hasn't updated
them on the progress of this uh, development. But I do have an update. I was able to get that to her. Um, and you know, I think the general public really wants to know what's going on in this parcel. Um, and so at least that's what I can inform everybody about at once is
that they do have all the capital sources lined up. So I'm glad to hear that. Um, next I just wanted again for awareness sake to point out WTIP did a great job of covering Birchwood Apartments and the the acquisition of
them from a one roof community housing was a great story about the next phase of redevelopment of that property and um remodeling of that property I should say. And so that gives good information to people in the community and I really
appreciate that. And with that, I just also um and I know it's not on the list, but I'm down here in St. Paul today. I was down here yesterday in St. Paul as well. Um for again, St. Louis County has their days at the capital. Cook County
and Lake County are also here as well. There were 16 of us from Cook County and I was one of them. And I was really happy to have some time with both Representative Scraba and Senator Hostchild last night. And I had a real good opportunity to visit with some
folks um in housing here at the legislature, at least in the House and Senate. And I look forward to having some more conversations tonight. They have a um a reception for all legislators. And I'm really looking forward to visiting with some of my former colleagues about housing in
particular, but also some of the real investments that we're looking for in the capital investment committee this year. You know, some some $25,5 million for wastewater treatment in Grand Marray, for instance. The GitHami trail is looking for some funding to extend
the trail. And then also the last 10 miles of the gunflick trail need to be um um resurfaced. And so that's going to take some federal and state resources as well. And so all of those things are kind of asks that the the the group of
16 is here in St. Paul to talk about and I'm really excited to um have those conversations today and yesterday and tonight as well. >> Well, thanks for that update, Jeeoff. That's interesting. And keep plugging.
Uh, Commissioner Hansen. >> Uh, Jeff, can I ask a question on the Hamilton Habitat uh property? That's um what you referred to as a Crereville property. Uh that's the one on Fourth Avenue West, correct? >> Yes, that's right. >> Has there been any discussion with the
city on that about um 4th Avenue West? That stretch of it between Fifth Street and the Gunflint Trail is unpaved or mostly unpaved. I guess it was paved and then it wasn't paved and but most of it's not paved now. Uh is there any are we going to run into the same problem
there we ran into at the business park where the city's >> going to require that to be upgraded at a at a cost that makes the project unfeasible. >> Um you know I've had conversations with um Anna Hamilton about this this sort of
uh conversation itself. There will be some more conversations that take place between the city and of course the Hamilton Habitat developers. Um right now I haven't heard anything specific about whether or not this needs to be a paved road or not. Um, right in front of
me right now, I did I was handed a concept sketch by uh Anna and Northshore Land Surveying at least they're looking at providing up to 1, three, four, five, six, seven, eight lots on that property for housing. Um, and
that's a size that maybe is a little bit larger of a footprint per lot. And so there could be potential to build more than eight, but also there's some some question about some of the wetlands in the area and how much of that wetland
area is developable. So um stay tuned on that conversation. There will be some uh public hearings because for this particular issue um Anna is well aware of the fact and talking with Mike Roth that there will be some public hearings about this specific development as it
makes its way through. Um I don't have an answer for you on the road itself but if I had to suggest it it's going to be part of the conversations that the public hearings are going to be a part of. Okay. Thank you. >> Yes. You're welcome.
Well, under five financials, uh, >> the well, the financials were included in the board of pack. Uh, nothing too, uh, mostly pretty straightforward. Jeeoff, I did have one question. The only significant transaction over since our
last meeting was the 40,000 payment to Gunflint View. Can you just remind me what what that was for? That was on March 5th. Um yes, that was the um the SAHA funding being transferred SA funding from the state government from the department of
revenue um to Gunflint view as part of our agreement for those subsidized rents at 60 to 80%. Um they had to provide the documentation that that money was subsidized, who's getting that rent and that sort of thing and not by name but how it worked out in terms of the need
and the necessity. And so we've got all that documentation that we can go back to for our auditing purposes. And um and since again we were able to contract last month with Jason over at the Northshore Development Company, he was able to take a look at all that stuff on
my behalf and was able to review it and give it a good thumbs up. So that's that money's for >> Thank you, >> Jeff. Have we did I think we also made a cont commitment to the heights for Saha money if it's available. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. I thought so that come up >> and we doizable amount left. I want to say it's it's over 100,000 and probably closer to $200,000 that we have. Um and so we might be having some conversations in the near future um about maybe doing
something as t in terms of a program down the road for you know there's a lot of things we could do with that money whether it be for first-time home buyers or some additional rent assistance or or whatever the case may be. But um definitely as we look to 2027 with the
um with that Birch Grove community school neighborhood projects that we're working on and development there might be some additional resources that can be made available as well. >> Okay. Uh anything else there Jeff from you?
Otherwise we'll continue on and uh for the personnel committee I will >> Yep. Go ahead. I I'll give a brief report. Uh we had our annual review with Jeff after thanks to all the commissioners. Uh everybody completed
their reviews and got them in in a timely fashion. Uh and generally with Jeff as we put it overall was a good year. He's got an overall rating of four on a scale of one to five. uh
importantly I guess he had no twos from anybody but uh his threes area which is literally meeting expectations in a first year where there's a lot of other stuff going on was uh overseeing programs uh overseeing operations and
budget kind of the administrative side and uh he was above expectations in uh working with the board with strategic planning and with communicating with the public and so Those were u real pluses with Jeff and uh the year was
complicated by additional work needed to document audit needs and we hope that uh we can save some funds this year and expect to on our audit because now Jeff's familiar with what was spent because he did it and u we we did ask
him to pay attention to timely communications with partners particularly with developers but including with the city and county staff and uh that's an important part of the job. uh and he his
own self uh review was he set some very aggressive goals for uh 2026 and so the challenges for Jeff to meet those and and we'd certainly uh appreciate his willingness to get out some ideas and
and u and the one other thing uh Commissioner O'Brien mentioned was syncing the projects that he's listed in uh 2026 to the strategic plan objectives. We set five specific
strategic plan objectives and so when we're reporting on individual projects, we'd like to have them put those into the buckets that correspond with our strategic p plan. Uh basically we uh have uh we recommend the personnel
committee recommends a salary raise of 5% uh from 90,000 to 90,400 94,500 and a bonus of 2500 net after taxes. Uh
the the salary is totally in keeping with our budget. the bonus would be coming from contingencies uh and we have uh sufficient funds to do that. Uh so that's uh the summary of
what we did with Jeff. Uh we really appreciate the fact Jeff came to us and he the job he's done uh stepping into a new situation for him and for us uh was really excellent. Uh well done. And uh
so I'd uh think I'd like a motion from someone to approve the uh recommendations of the personnel committee here for Jeff's uh compensation. Any questions? First of all, I shouldn't just ask for a resolution. Any thoughts
or comments about it? >> I certainly think it's fair. I move. >> I'll second. >> Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> Thank you, Commissioner. I appreciate I
just I just want to commend uh the board and the personnel committee. uh this is something as a county that uh the importance of this in how we come alongside those that we entrust with leadership and uh you've done a a very good job in that regard and that
discipline is very important. It's important both for the community and accountability as well as coming alongside those that we put in those leadership positions to know where they're at so they know expectations. So commend those or I commend you on it. Well, it's our goal to be, you know,
objective and also transparent. Yeah. And uh you know, this these things while the personnel committee, some of the actions beforehand were not necessarily in the public, nor was our review with Jeff, but the fact is that the salary
and and bonus requirements are public need to be public. >> Just the discipline of the process though publicly letting know that that is something that's been done. >> Yeah. Well, and again, thanks to all the commissioners, including the county commissioners, for putting up with the 10point form and getting it all in. So,
thanks. Uh, hearing any further discussion? I don't. So, all those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Anyone care to move for adjournment? >> I will move. >> Okay. Move. >> Second.
>> Seconded. Any discussion? All those in favor say I and move it off. Thank you. >> Thanks for everybody here. >> Thank you. >> And Maggie, thank you. As I say, you're an upgrade in our minutes,
which is great and great to see. >> Thanks, Jeff. That's the