Well, good morning everybody. It is 7:32 a.m. and we are going to um call to order the meeting of the Dina Housing and Redevelopment Authority on this Thursday, April 24th, 2025. Uh we are handling these meetings
in a virtual sort of manner. Uh there are no public hearing matters this morning and um just reports and recommendations portion of the uh the agenda. Nonetheless, uh we are available for community comment. So if anybody's listening in online and has a concern
they want to express to the HR or if there's somebody in the audience who wishes to address a concern they have with the H, we'll uh certainly take those comments. And uh having called the meeting to order, I'm going to ask that uh Ari Lenser, acting executive director, call
the role. Commissioner Risser here. Commissioner Jackson here. Commissioner Pierce here. Commissioner Agnu here. Chair Havlin here. Uh next is the pledge of allegiance. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. We've got a form of meeting agenda. It's been published both to the HR members and the general public. Is there anyone on the HR or from a staff level
that wishes to modify the agenda in any form or fashion? All right. Is there a motion to adopt the meeting agenda as published? So moved. Second. Commissioner Jackson moves. Commissioner Agnu seconds the adoption of the meeting agenda for this Thursday, April 24th, 2025 meeting of the H. Any further
discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the meeting agenda, say I. I. I. Opposed. Carried. Meeting agenda is adopted. Uh, next we are at community comment. We'll have the um back room folks put up the phone numbers for
calling in if anybody has anything they want to address with the H. Those numbers are now on the screen and then we'll turn to anybody in our audience who wishes to address the H on a matter of concern to them. Okay. Um nobody in the audience
coming forward and not hearing anything. I'm going to turn now Britney and see if we have anybody online. Mr. Chair, we do not currently have anyone online, but due to the the delay in the broadcast, I do recommend that we wait one minute before proceeding. All
right. All right, it's been one minute and we still don't have any callers, so I think it's safe to proceed. Okay, let's proceed on. The next uh uh part of our process is generally that we have our uh acting executive director or executive director
address any issues uh raised by residents at a prior meeting. Do we have anything to address there from a community comment standpoint? Miss Lens, we had no comment at the last meeting. All right. Thank you. Uh moving on then to the uh consent agenda. There's only one thing on the consent agenda. That's
the minutes. and we had a minutes uh suggested for publication. We also had member Risser make some modifications to those or proposed modifications to those minutes. And I think we probably better have a quick discussion about uh whether
we want to adopt the uh minutes as suggested by staff, prepared by staff, or whether we want to modify them in some form or fashion either fully as suggested uh by member Risser or some modification thereof. There's also a typographical error uh on page two that
we need to fix regardless and that was the increase in the loan period from seven period 7 years to 15 years for the chamber repayment of the spark loan. Um thoughts from colleagues. Commissioner, you had raised
the issue of um Jackson had raised the issue of you know there's a quote proposed quote in here from Commissioner Risser. We don't usually quote people either on the council level or the or the or the H level in the minutes. Correct. So I'm fine with the changes in the first paragraph and the and the
typo. Um but the other changes I think you know are just there are just more detail that um can be seen on the tape. Um and I just would say I recommend the changes to the first paragraph and the typo and and and not
the others. Member Commissioner Richer, I would like to note that we did talk about including quotes from individual council members and commissioners uh back at a work session and we agreed that we would use
the style of taking minutes that Minnetonka uses and in that style elected and appointed officials are directly quoted and then even though it was agreed at that meeting that we might start using that style, right away. That
never actually happened. And so because the written minutes according to the state auditor are the official record, I think that is something to keep in mind. And I know in Dina were saying no, it's
the video. But I I do have concerns that this is the way we're moving forward. Um, yeah, I don't recall us saying we were going to adopt the Minnotonka method, but um, I'd want to have I'd want to have a refresher from staff on
that, I think. Um, Commissioner Jackson. Well, and a work session is a work session. We don't make decisions there that um are official, and I don't remember us adopting that, but we certainly wouldn't have adopted a change in policy at a work
session. Other thoughts from other commissioners about modification of the proposed minutes for the meeting of April 10, 2025? Um I my question I guess is um how do we resolve it today? Is this something we
need to take out and discuss again or at some point in time we'd have to discuss it, you know. So, I mean, if we if we adopted member Jackson's or Commissioner Jackson's idea of eliminating everything except the
corrections in paragraph 7A, the first paragraph of 7A, uh, and corrected the typo, that's going to come back to us anyway or we could we could make that change right now and then adopt those minutes. What about um
or if we wanted to adopt member Risser's or Commissioner Risser's notions or just the original minutes as proposed by staff any of these additional uh edits or suggested changes? Yeah, I I guess I don't have an issue with
adding the the more clarity um on the page two at the top. Is that a quote as well? Is that from Miss Loberg?
Apparently. And so I I my concern on um the quotes being in there. I I I would want to validate or not validate or confirm with Miss Loberg that she's comfortable with that. That is what she said. I know we're saying it's on the
tape, but I still think if we're going to put it in there, I want to make sure um it's one thing to have my quotes in there. And if it if they were my quotes, I actually would read read through them
and validate, yep, that is what I said and it is what I meant. Um, and so I think I would would want to give the same courtesy to anyone else that we're referring to in here. Um, which I think
is why we're originally said we don't want to put quotes in there. That's one of the reasons. Um, and then the only other comment I have on quotes. I don't this is fairly benign to me and so
I am thinking more future. I don't if there's something that is more contentious or controversial like I wouldn't want there to only be quotes in here from one council member, right? I'd want everybody's opinions um um expressed if
we're going to do quotes. Um, and I haven't gone back to listen to the tape to see if there's something I would want to have quoted either. Um, and so the reason I asked the question, we could I think for this we could probably figure out a way to move
forward with it. That makes sense. But I think this will come up again. And so we have to figure out um how we can um bring it to a resolution and move on. Thank you for that, Commissioner.
Commissioner Ago, I also want us to like finalize what our decision and our process is going to be. Um it's unfortunate that we don't have um manager Neil here because I feel like he was in some of those meetings and might
be able to um specify if there were any policy updates, but I I do tend to concur like I would have expected that to come to a council meeting if we were going to be really changing things more broadly. Um, I was absent from this particular meeting. So, I'm going to
kind of probably abstain from this particular um, minutes approval if we proceed with it today. But, I do think um, I agree with Commissioner Pierce of we need to make a decision on how we're going to do it, how it's going to change, and that
should be reflected in everything that we do moving forward. Mr. perhaps for today we table the minutes. I would like to say the original minutes there were quotes um from Shelley Loberg and one said we are not able to she was
quoted as saying we are not able to use lodging tax funding for the repayment of the loan but when you go back and you listen to it it's we are not able to directly use lodging tax funding and so I think that's a significant um detail there but for the purposes of
this meeting it sounds like we really don't uh why don't we table this and come back to it uh at a future meeting. These minutes it seems to me if we table the minutes it just get back to the we just come back full circle to the same
conversation. So it's fresh in our minds now. I I like member Jack come commissioner Jackson's idea of the changes in the first proposed changes in the first paragraph of 7A are factual. um when we start getting into quoting
anybody whether it's a commissioner, a city council member or somebody who testified regarding a matter I think that's a slippery slope and u so that and then the the typographical error is something that we needed to fix anyway.
So for getting some minutes approved uh at least theory I would adopt and join in member commissioner Jackson's idea of adopting the changes in paragraph one and and nothing else other than making the typographical correction
in the third paragraph full paragraph or I guess it's the second full paragraph of page two increases the period of time from seven years to 15 years not 25 years. So people have 100 people's
thoughts on that. Commissioner, I would also like to see the inclusion of the word directly in that first line on page two. Um, I would still not include the quotes because I think it was not meant
to be necessarily a direct quote. Um, but I do think that from what I understand of the conversation, having the phrase directly is meaningful in that context. Okay. So, I'll make that motion.
The last one change at the very end you wanted to note on the number of people that occupy the board. Right. That seemed like that would make sense. I no Oh, go ahead.
Um, Mr. Chair and me, uh, Commissioner Pierce, to me, it's really not relevant to what we were talking about. Um, it's it's an interesting fact. And when we're talking about um, Explore Dina, that'd be a good issue to raise, but um, it's
on the tape, it's there, but I don't think it's relevant to the discussion about the Spark loan. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Jackson, would you care to make a motion? Yes. So, I move that we approve the minutes of the
April 10th um HA meeting with um change with Well, not first. I move that we amend the minutes to include the suggested language in the first paragraph of section 7A and the changing
the typo and adding directly um to the comment of Shelley Loberg. Um, so it says are not able to directly use lodging tax funding. Um, first line of page two. The first line of page two in the in the proposed minutes except no
other changes. And accept no other changes. There's second to that motion. Commissioner Pierce seconds that motion as stated. Further discussion. Commissioner Risser. Um I I um think it
is really important to note that there are only there's only one member of this 12 board um because this board represents not just the chamber but it also is the explory dino board and so that's why I think it was relevant to
the discussion. I think it's actually very key. So but I'm just one vote. All right, other comments. We've got a motion and a second with respect to approval of amended minutes as recommended or moved by Commissioner Jackson, seconded by Commissioner
Pierce. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adopting the uh minutes in an amended form as suggested by Commissioner Jackson and seconded by Commissioner Pierce. Uh say I I I opposed. I carried and I abstain. Then
we have one abstension. Yeah, we got three in favor, one against, one abstension. All right. Very good. Uh thank you. Now we're going to move on in the agenda to that was the only thing on the
consent agenda incidentally. So that's the only matter we have to address there. uh reports and recommendations portion of the agenda. And this is a matter that we weren't able to hear earlier at one of our prior meetings. And now we have uh our housing uh affordable housing development manager, Stephanie Hawinson, with us this morning
to give us a affordable housing compliance report update. Welcome, Miss Hawinson. Yes. So good morning. The report that was in your packet was the carryover from March 27th and as you can see even within this report um things constantly
involved in the world of compliance from December to March and the March to April and from the time of drafting the presentation to today. So um and I think that is really indicative about the
world of compliance. It's not a snapshot in time. uh residents don't all move in on the same day. They don't all renew their leases on the same day and all the apartments and property managers don't all come online at the same time. So it
is a live evolving changing phenomenon to ground us. Why do we even do this? So the affordable house to affordable housing and the affordable housing policy were created to provide
housing in Edina that is affordable to low and moderate income households. So it's both on the rent side that the rents are affordable and it's serving the households that need the affordable apartments. So it's a two-pronged thing.
reason for compliance. It's to confirm and verify that the developments were to have affordable housing units have them and the units are serving the intended tenants and that they are adhering to our policy. So we go and we meet with
all the property managers to confirm and verify. I don't have the capacity to do that, the knowledge, the skills, the time. So we hire a third-party consultant. We have hired um affordable housing connections that has a depth and
breadth of experience in doing this compliance work. They work in multiple cities. They work with multiple different types of funding sources. They that that's kind of what they do. So we brought them on a few years back to do our compliance reviews.
So, we have developments that have a variety of different rules and a lot of different um regulations on what it means to be affordable and what our ability is to
um enforce it. So, I just wanted to give a high level. So, Aurora, Arya, and Millennium were all approved and came into being prior to even having a policy. The policy was being thought of.
We were contemplating. It took a long time to get it into being. It was kind of a big step for the city. Took years to really formulate what was wanted. And so, and as these projects were coming forward, they were being negotiated and
they agreed. Yeah. Okay, we'll include affordable units, but how it was a learning process and between a handshake, yeah, we're going to include them to what that really meant. So, with these three projects, how they the
control mechanism with Aurora, it was basically a resolution, a line in the resolution saying that there will be 10 units that are affordable. Didn't define what affordable meant. didn't define who affordable was going to be for just they were going to be affordable open-ended
with Arya it was a SIPA and the SIPA is you know the land use approval but once a building is built and occupied the SIPA essentially you know it talks a lot about how road closure is going to be what's going to be built but once it's
built the SIPA really doesn't have any teeth you know it says that there's supposed to be a site improvement plan agreement. Yeah. I'm sorry. Sure. Could you define what a SIPA is, please? Uh site improvement plan agreement. So, it's the
site plan. It's the agreement for the site plan. Um in the Millennium 2, there was initially only the the site plan approval that said that there needed to be affordable units. Nothing after the building was built other than they it
was included in the site plan approval. Um, however, they had a change of ownership and when they changed ownership, we did record a declaration. We tightened it up as and they were willing they were willing to allow us to tighten up and put a declaration on saying that these are going to be
affordable into the future. So, the developments that were approved post policy were Avidor, Nolan, Maine, the Laurian, and Maison Green. And remember, this is 2023's compliance report. Other projects
have come online. We have the Finch, we have Eddie, we have um the FRED doesn't have any affordable units, but those those two at any rate, they came online post 2023, so they're not included in the 2023 compliance
report. These ones, as you can see, through time, we've become more sophisticated in how we're going to control affordability. We define it. What does it mean? who is it supposed to serve? And that is now in the redevelopment agreement where it wasn't
previously. And we're recording declarations of restricted covenants on them. So, we have more mechanisms that we can use when working with the property management and the owners to control the affordability in these units. Further with the newer units
because the economy has changed, interest rates have changed, construction costs have changed. There has been an increasing call for um gap financing for financial assistance to make these projects have the affordable units and get built. And with a TIFF
agreement, since there's two payments every year, we can look at the compliance level and hold the TIFF payment or not based on the compliance. So we have a mechanism by which we can control some of that compliance and and
enforce them and encourage them. So role of affordable housing connections is to meet with the property managers. Initially, we thought this was going to be an initial training. They would know what to do. It would be done.
Turnover in the property management field is pretty rapid. They're they train someone, they get them all on board, and then they leave and then they have to train new people in. And so sometimes the old property managers aren't great of communicating everything
to the new property managers. And so there has been this ongoing training. They answer questions throughout the year. property ma the emails I get that I'm copied on with our compliance officer there's lots and they so there's a lot of back and forth on what does it
mean what do I need to collect how do I verify what do I look at what can I include in rent um they review all the tenant files and they consult regularly with staff you know there's nuances there's little tweaks that are not universal across projects and so we
communicate and so this frequent turnover has provided complications. We're we think everything's set with a building. They have a new property manager, a new tenant moves in in that time. That tenant, not all the information's collected. So, it's been
this really ongoing process to get them all in compliance. There's documents. It's government. We want to make sure there's compliance. We're not going to just trust people say that they require an affordable unit. We collect
paperwork and in order to be fully compliant, if it's a 2023 compliance, we want to look at their 2023 social security award letter, not their 2024, not their 2022. And so making sure everyone saves
tenants save all their paperwork is a little bit of a challenge, too. But it's so they need all these forms need to be included in order to be fully compliant. All right. So in December I reported that
uh Aurora and Nolan Mains were the only ones that were fully compliant. That means 100% of their units had every piece of paperwork in and on 100% of the units we looked at their rent, the utilities, any excess fees and made sure
that they were within that cap. Their open deficiencies with Avdor, Millennium, and the Laurent and Arya and Maison Green were non-compliant. Open deficiencies mean maybe 16 out of 18 units were in compliance, but two were
not. It may mean that on some of them in the lease there was an administrative fee that bumped them above and we needed to find out what that administrative fee and have confirmation that if a refund needed to go back to a tenant that that refund was made. If it had not been made at the time the report was written it
was an open deficiency. So it was you know there were a lot of things caused these open deficiencies. non-compliant meant that there was something more fundamental going on with making them so they're non-compliant by end of last week and
yeah not even including yesterday um compliance so this is between reports even between your written report and today now in compliant is Aurora Nolan Maine the Laurent Millennium and Maison green so Maison green and the Laurent
move from open to deficiencies to complant. They are now fully compliant. Avidor is sufficient but imperfect. They had someone come up from Chicago to really try to help. There's some forms that didn't have a signature on them. I mean, so they're really
essentially compliant. They're just tweaks that need to be made. We don't want to put them in the compliant because there are something they need to work on as a building to make sure they have systems in place. So it's not as problem that that they train their subsequent property managers so we don't
have issues like we had in the past. So we're not putting them in the compliant column. And Arya, I've talked about Arya for three or four years now. They're not going to be compliant. They're not. They are compliant with the documents that we had in place at the time they were
approved. But subsequent HA boards have said that to be compliant, the rent cap has to include all the costs that are required to live in that building. So if rent is at the rent cap, but they also have to pay utilities on top of rent,
it's really not affordable to a person at the affordable income. They said, "You didn't require that of us when we closed this deal. We're not going to do that." So, I can't we can't in good faith say this an affordable building
because it's not really. So, they are compliant with the rules that they had at the time. They are not compliant with what we expect of them. So, I'm going to take them off the list because it creates this non-compliance that will be forever more. So, this is
the last time you're going to see Arya. We're going to still check in with them every year just to let them know that we're here to make sure that the rents don't go up beyond the level, but other than that, we know that they're not going to be compliant. And three years ago, I think
it was said the only form of recourse was the bully pulpit. So, I had said that verbally, but that was something that was said to me um by the H at the time that that was our form of recourse. So I have reasons for deficiencies that I've talked and I have a picture of a
lot of paperwork because I want to emphasize that there is a lot of paperwork involved with become with these files. So some were missing source documentation on income. They may have had their 2024 social security letter but they didn't have their 2023 award
letter. if they were compliant. You know, we know from personal experience with parents that social security went up a little bit, but not a ton. If so, if the 2024 levels would make them so, they're affordable for 2023, it's very
likely that the 2023 letter would also. Um, there's some lack of clarity with some of the property managers on utilities fa paid by tenants. Some had administrative fees that bumped them over. We've talked with them. They're refunding the tenants. It bumped them
over. So there there are variety of reasons for deficiencies. I do want to emphasize that no property manager or owner were blatantly disregarding the rules. They weren't saying fine, we're not going to do it. They all were
willingly working with us and wanting to be in compliance. They just didn't know everything that was required of them. So recourse for non-compliance and I put the scale here because previously in
early years the philosophy was we want to work with them. The objective is to provide affordable apartments to people that need them. So that's work with every property manager to get to that goal. That's work with them and continue working with them to make sure that that is our ultimate objective. We could
become more punitive. We could say these are the rules. you're not following them and we're gonna somehow ding you. I think, you know, in a previous conversation with city attorney, there's limits of what we how we can ding them with regards to fines. I mean, there are
laws that restrict the level of punitive um actions. But I think previously the objective was to really try to make these affordable and to continue working collaboratively. Um but in that spirit still we have
created the program guide that have instructions of what these what defining affordability defining rent. We have strengthen our redevelopment agreements. They used to be five pages now they're 30. You know we have huge second sections on affordable housing and what
that means. We now have um recorded declarations of restricted covenants. We even have them when they don't have money. If they get a PUD, we also record even if there's no TIFF, and that's what we did with the EDI, we record and we so we've added those steps to make sure
there's affordability that we did not have. Future considerations, we could theoretically tie this into a rental licensing, you know, give a cut off date. You're not in compliance. But again, compliance is retroactive. We're
doing 2023 right now. It's 2025. So, if they're not compliant in 2023, do we cut off their rental license in 2025 when they could be compliant in 2024? So, I mean, I think there are issues with tying it to the right license. And we are working with affordable housing
connections. They're working with other cities on creating an online course. It's super timeconuming. So, having this online reference that will have chapters and they can like what documents do I need? How do I get this document? What do I need signatures on? and having an
online course. You know, I want to make a comment because I've heard it talked about why do we this policy is not working. What this policy is um not as strong as it could be. It's live
document. It's evolving. But I do want to again highlight that the difference in 10 years prior to the policy being passed and the 10 years after the policy was passed. So these are units that were delivered before and after the policy.
The black bar is after the policy. The green bar is before the policy. Clearly the policy has had an impact. Has it been perfect? Is it ideal? Probably not. Can it be tweaked? Yes. Every year it can be
tweaked. This is what was approved. Now the numbers are far greater in the approved but as we know projects have not moved forward because of financing because of um other issues. So there are more projects that were approved that had affordable units that are actually
been delivered because of things outside the city's control. Also the buyin funds I want to highlight too how buyin funds have helped Dina residents. We have 54 households that have benefited from our
home rehab program. We have 19 households that have benefited from our affordable ownership preservation program in partnership with Homes Within Reach and Habitat. And that's still going. These numbers are growing. We
have 12 households that have benefited from the first generation grant to the Adina Housing Foundation from the um HA. We have um through the use of buyin 10 households that have benefited multif
family. Um buyin funds were typically not used to do this but in one project they were. We have 29 households that benefited from Noah preservation using buyin funds and we bought one house that was in disarray and a nuisance to the
city. So, the buyin funds have helped numerous Edina households. And that's the end of my presentation and I'm here for questions. And Maruka is here as well. She's our compliance officer. She This has become although I don't know how many cities
you work with and how many files you work with, this has become a part-time at least a half-time job for her working on these files. Yeah. Thanks for that thorough presentation. It was good to get that update. Uh, commissioners commissioner, thank you. so much for the overview and
walking us through it. Um, I do think that this is working right. Um, I really think that you are making a positive impact and that as a city we are making a positive impact and helping to progress this as an important cause within our city. Um, I also want to say
like great work on moving the needle. I understand that there were new mechanisms that were added that gave us a little bit more teeth, gave us more progress, but even just seeing the December to the April, like that's that's meaningful and that's really really great. So, thank you for the work
on that for both of you. Um, I do want to make sure that Arya doesn't get lost because it it sounds like there still are components that they are required to do even though the language of that contract is different than what we uh
both align to today as well as measure today. So, I don't know if there is some way that we as a council can continue to still get that visibility even if it's a different line item at the bottom or it continues to have the asterisk. I think that that would be helpful um because they do have requirements and I want to
continue to make sure we have that pulse on that those requirements are being met. Um but otherwise this is really great progress to see and I know there will be continued conversation right I know that there are still improvements that we want to make. Uh but I don't have the expectation that we get it
right out of the gate. Right. I think that that's what's really important as we look at the data and we see where do we not have as much ability to influence this or where did we potentially have gaps and over the years now we've been closing those gaps and I think that that's just really important really um
really great to call out and so let's keep thinking about how can we close those gaps I think education and all that that's going to be really important too so I love seeing potentially an online module or whatever that might look like um but I'm seeing a lot of really great progress in the right
direction. So, thank you. Commissioner rejection. Yes. So, I want to thank you too. Um, and this is a great and with a AHC affordable housing connection. So, thank you both for for working so hard on this. Um, this was a great presentation extremely a lot of
information. Um, and I want to the big picture is we want the policy to encourage the creation of affordable units so that we can serve families who need housing um, with a affordability component to it. So I think what we've
been doing is working and I wouldn't want to change it to be more punitive because you get I I think you attract more with honey than you do with stick. Um, and and I think that's also how we learned. So to Commissioner Agnu's point of continuous improvement, if we have
friendly relationships with people, they will tell us, can we change this to this that would work better? So I I really like the collaborative um and encouraging um tact that we take. And one thing that popped out at me is and I'm I'm I think excited to see that
there's going to be an online training. I think that will be useful for people. I was in a meeting earlier this week where we were talking about some training guide that was 40 pages and I'm like no one's going to read 40 pages and I know this is complicated so this is the example um but you know can we have
a summary page so when we're looking at the program guide and the training uh I want to make sure that we um stick to our plain English u model so that everything is you sit down I've never done this before I can understand what's there and then also just always an eye
to readability and usability ility. Um, and I know that you would do that anyways, but I it's a value that I want to promote. So, thank you, Risser. Excuse me, Commissioner Russer. Um, thank you. And it's good to see that we're compliant and I really appreciated
your point that um, this is an evolving phenomenon. And so, at this particular point, we have these units that are compliant. And I think what would be really helpful for me and for the public is to have a chart where it was
indicated by complex how many months they've been compliant, how many years they've been compliant. So we don't just get this little snapshot in time today, but we can look at it since the opening of Maison Green. When did they start
coming into compliance? if they slip out, you know, then they're no longer compliant. You know, you're not adding time to it. But I think the public really needs to be able to see that. The other thing is that when we talk about units, we don't know anything about
those units. And I really appreciate member Jackson's point or Commissioner Jackson's point, you know, we're trying to serve families, but um you know, thinking about the project at 7200, u there's only two twobedrooms. and I
looked at the layouts, it might be as small as 1,17 square ft. Um, we may have five units that are 543 square feet. Um, and so when we just see units, that doesn't tell us much at all. And I think
we really need to be able to see what kind of units are being provided at these loces. What are their sizes? What are, you know, are they two-bedroom? Are they threebedroom? Are they all now I guess apparently El Cove? I learned a new term. Um, is what is going in at
7200. So, just a little actually we do need more granularity on that and I think that would be super helpful. Chair commissioners, may I respond to that? Um, so the compliance officer, the compliance makes sure that the
development is adhering to the outline and the redevelopment agreement. So they they check on they look at the redevelopment agreement that's been approved and they make sure that you know if it's 15 units, if it's 12 units,
whatever. So the the confirmation they do look at whether or not the affordable units match the redevelopment agreement but um the initial review of how many are onebedroom, how many two-bedroom, how many are threebedroom, how many are el
cove is in the redevelopment agreement and is in the certificate of occupancy to make sure that what has been created and the declaration is what is in fact what's built.
Um, so some of that information is done initially with a compliance office and we can definitely add that, but a lot of that happens in in a different format like defining which units are affordable happen at the time of negotiating the
redevelopment agreement um, and not at the time of ongoing compliance. And what about I saw I I heard two questions in there. One was um when did they come into compliance? And I heard you say that it's a little bit
nuanced that that there may be some confusion about what exactly has to be done and and it takes some back and forth between staff and and I'll use Maison Green for an example uh until they're doing all the reporting that they're required to do. And it seems to
me that if you just look at a sort of a barebones report of when they came into compliance, it it it doesn't take into account that nuance, the back and forth that you had to engage in. And so somebody who read reads a report like that might think that well for that period of time they just were not in
compliance. And shame on them, you know, when it was something, it was a period of time that represented uh a span of time where you were trying to work together to make sure that they knew what they were doing and were doing it properly and were were getting in compliance. But nonetheless, they they
had those affordable units in place and people were living in there. So I I'd be a little bit cautious about that suggestion. Yeah, thank you chair. Um when I was listening to that it is challenging because in an ideal world how it is designed to be every
July um affordable housing connections would get a box electronically or physically of files that of all the affordable units for the previous year. But that's assuming that people aren't moving in and moving out during that
year. Um and that's also assuming there's no change in management. But let's assume that there's no change in management. People move in and out of apartments throughout the year. And so a new resident can move in March and a new resident another new resident can move
in in September. And so in July or June and are are all the documents in place for the resident that moved in in June for the July compliance review? So there there is there isn't having a line in the sand is really really really
challenging. Um it is a process and it is an ongoing annual process. And so like ma's on green they're in compliance now someone could move out someone could move in in June. We look at the file in
July they may have missed a document. So they need to scurry till August to get that document. So, do I all of a sudden say then that Maison Green is no longer in compliance because this new tenant that moved in in June didn't sign all the necessary paperwork and I'm
reporting that that on that June date that that building is now no longer in compliance. No, because we're giving them till August to get that paperwork and then maybe it takes, you know, there's hundreds of files that she's looking at. Maybe she can't get to it till September.
So, I I have um I'm challenged internally thinking on the spot of how we would do a line in the sand. Yeah, understood. Uh Commissioner Pierce. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Um so, I I agree that
we've made progress, but like we wouldn't run a business that way. And so, we we still have accountabilities that are placed on these establishments. We have to find a way to make sure that
we're holding them accountable to whatever the standard was. Uh but we can't and we we can't operate in a way where we're coming up with where we're accepting reasons upon reasons upon
reasons for not being compliant. Right? That's just not healthy for us to do that. Um, and so I think as you continue your work, we have to figure out a way that we're going to be clear about what you're accountable for and based on
whatever standard, right? So, I'm not even challenging that, but we have to be clear about that. And then we have to hold establishments to those that accountability. That's all I want to see us do. And if we can do that and be clear about, nope, this is the standard
and here's why I think we'll be fine as we go forward and it evolves. I think we try to do that. But thank you. Yes. I mean, we we do train them and we tell them what is needed in the beginning file and we tell them what is needed. It
just You're right. I mean, and that's the intent. That is definitely the intent. Your was next. I think um I would hope and maybe this could be more nuanced where it didn't have to be
so rigid and overbearing, but um it just seems like and you wouldn't need to say, you know, you could have a chart somewhere where you had the type of units, the size of units, and somebody moves out, okay, it turns yellow, and
then it turns green again, you know, or something like that. but a way to track where we are and how our investment, you know, because we are putting millions of dollars into these affordable units in multi-family buildings. And so, you
know, we can come up, we can say, well, that's not something that is negotiated at the time, but we still need to be able to see what those units are. And I think that really helps us understand how are we moving toward um being a city where we are affordable for families if
that is the goal. And so if what we're getting are units that are primarily one-bedroom units, that's something that needs to be visualized in a table. And so I just I think we can come up with a lot of reasons why it's really um
challenging, but I do think that's a data point that needs to be visualized and needs to be very accessible, especially, you know, for the public and for us as we are making decisions about does it make sense to invest nearly $5 million in tiff um you know and what are
what is the data that supports how viable this affordable housing investment is. So I don't Anyhow, thank you, Commissioner Jackson. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, what I'm thinking of uh is when uh Commissioner Pierce spoke,
I thought about um quality assurance in manufacturing and um so as policy makers, could we make a scale of compliance and then have a point at which it becomes material? Um so if it's an immaterial non-compliance, it's an
immaterial non that one paper wasn't signed. So they're technically not compliant but they're within the scale of acceptability and then there's a tipping point where it becomes material whether it's 20% non-compliance or 40% non-compliance just I don't know if
there's anything in the industry that has something like that but as policy makers then we have this snapshot it looks bad three units you know three buildings are missing one paper each but they're non-compliant right instead we
can have a scale Is it material? No, it's not material. It when it reaches materiality, then we pull funds, right? Because clear clearly non-compliant. So, that's an idea. I don't know if it's in the industry out there, but um but that would be as a policy maker useful for
me. Thank you. Yeah, that's a good thought. I was thinking as we were talking about some grace period that you had. you know, here's our here's our list, things that you have to do, checklist, and and uh people sometimes get everything done on time and sometimes they don't and
you've got a grace period in which you get those things done and then to member or commissioner Pierce's point, at some point in time you come out of compliance, but you know, you can think about these ideas. We've kind of advanced this morning on on the unit count. you know, you've got them in the in the development agreement. And I
think that's a little bit tricky uh too because uh developers are building what they think the market wants and what they can fill. And so they we're ending up in a situation where we're we're kind of adapting to
the market ourselves to create affordability. So if if somebody's building a building full of studio apartments or onebedrooms and studios or you know just a limited number of two bedrooms, they're doing that for a reason because they know what they can rent the quickest and uh and uh and get
a full rent roll. So, um, knowing I guess maybe there's some value in knowing what we have in total inventory, uh, one studios, one bedrooms, two bedrooms, three bedrooms, but there's a story underneath all of that sort of raw data, too. That's important to be
thinking about and and not make a not reach a conclusion or jump to a conclusion. We're not doing enough of a certain thing because we we couldn't do it anyway because that's not what the market's delivering. So, anyway, another cautionary note. chair, commissioners. Um I noticed we
have a dashboard now of our affordability. Um what we do not have on there is bedroom count, but I have seen I think St. Louis Park and Minnetonka both have on their dashboard number the bedroom mix and I believe that is something that we could definitely add
to our dashboard. Yeah. Okay. Remember commissioner versus point. Yeah, that would be fantastic. And also adding square footage I think is really important to commissioner the chairs. I'm trying to get people's roles right today. Um point yes there will be
buildings that will focus on smaller units and then there will be buildings that will have more units. And it would it would be very easy just to have you know an asterisk and say like I know that there are two bedrooms in 7200 but
just to to say what the makeup or the kind of building it is like this is primarily studio or something like that if it is all um like that I think it would be very easy to bring that data point um forward. And then finally, this is just
a little exclamation point. I had a meeting uh early in the week with some folks at um where you know the primary developers down at the Pentagon Park neighborhood. They said the the Finch just opened. And you may know this, the affordable units are full. Everything's
filled up immediately. The the minute they opened, all those filled, including the I think the units on the first floor for the folks with the young folks with disabilities. remember they were going to dedicate a certain number of units to that. They're all full. So, let's let's
be mindful of the most important thing is that we got people in those affordable units even if the reporting on them isn't isn't always aligned. So, that's the most important thing that they got an affordable place to live. I'm a little bit concerned about the ARA. You know, we say they're out of compliance.
They argued for years that they're in legal compliance. And so to call them out as being non-compliant when they're probably legally compliant because we didn't know enough then when we were just starting out because it was one of the first buildings built after we had a
policy that to say they're non-compliant with what we would like to see as opposed to what was legally required is I I I think that's a little bit unfair to to them. I think parking was we assumed parking was going to be included too underground
parking in addition to utilities and and they say no this was a deal we struck and I will take direction from you a previous board um wanted said that directed me to call them non-compliant
because the rents when you added all the extra costs made them not affordable but that was the direction I was given at that time if the direction has changed I will do what you want me to do. Yeah. Well, I mean I mean the truth of it is they've got units in there that are they
they are renting it. They they are think of are affordable. They're more affordable than market rate, but they're not affordable by definition. Correct. Yeah. So there's a there's a group of people in that rental class too that are taking advantage of that. All right. So now we've got a hard stop at quarter two
for one of our colleagues here. So we got to keep moving as everybody's comfortable. Thanks for that report. All right. And uh I don't know, Bill, what round we're on here with uh public works in terms of RFPs, but
uh you've got the latest round of folks that have come in by the deadline. I think you didn't have that in the report, but you're going to you're going to give us a quick update today. Yes, exactly. Um, so this is regarding the uh property
that we own at 5146 Eden Avenue, the city's old public works site. Um, as a recall, we issued a request for proposal back in early March. Uh, we talked about that for several months and kind of over a year here. Um, as we had hoped, I
would say that we were successful. Uh, we received 11 proposals from a wide variety of developers. I just wanted to go over um the range of the proposals. There's a lot of similarities. They definitely read the
RFP that we issued. Um we were hoping to get some creative responses and we did. Every proposal is different. Um sometimes are apples and oranges different. So um I'll walk through these just a little bit. Um, no action is
necessary today, but I also wanted to get your cur curiosity going because in May we're planning on having uh uh a session to discuss each of these and and then narrow the field and then eventually select one later this
summer. So 11 different uh proposals. Uh the similarities is that is that they're all submitted by experienced developers or teams of developers. Um some are are submitted by for-profit businesses and some from
nonprofit businesses. Um some of the developers you'll recognize, they've done business in Adina for a long time. Others you'll recognize but they've not done business here before but but elsewhere in the metro. So we we have a really good mix. All the proposals are responsive to our
request to focus on on lowrise and mid-rise and not high-rise. So that was um one thing to note. One one challenge that we're going to have to um work with is the amount of time it's going to take to implement any
of these plans. I know as as the city council has had conversations about about budget, raising revenue, if we actually want to sell the land for a reasonable price, we'll need to be patient um because to actually develop any of these plans could take
from one year to three years depending on on the developer and the project that you select. So, there's many different types of housing and commercial spaces that are proposed in these 11 um options. They include senior cooperatives, town
houses, both rental and ownership town homes, row houses, condominiums, senior apartments, family apartments, general purpose all ages apartments,
um, uh, professional office space and commercial space like retail, restaurant, events, or general services. and they're every combination of that you could imagine. So, um uh regarding the housing, um many of
the proposals are responsive to our request to include uh low to moderate income household units, uh meeting the definition, our definition of a of affordable. Uh they also include moderate income units that would meet
our definition of what we're calling attainable. And then there's also units that would be uh targeted towards higher or very high income uh households at a market rate. So quite a variety. Regarding the land prices, we asked each of the uh uh
folks to submit their estimate of land purchase price based on their specific deal. Um again, all subject to negotiation, but there's quite a range. Uh uh on the low end, the proposal uh
was still over a million dollars for the land and on the high end there's proposals nearly $6 million in land pricing. As you would imagine, the pro proposals that are lower density have a lower land price. The ones that are
higher density, higher income have the higher price. So, we'll have to choose what's the priority there. Regarding financing of each of the proposals, some are privately financed, some could only move forward with TIFF, some could only move forward
with funding from the US um HUD. Um some would require uh uh tax credit grants from Minnesota Housing. So, the again a wide variety of funding sources. Um, so if that isn't confusing enough, um, what we're going to try to do in the
next couple weeks is take all the different, uh, proposals and, uh, boil it, boil them down. I'm going to try to get it with Stephanie's help to two pages, just the highlights, so that it can be more of an apples to apples comparison when you sit down.
Uh, and so just to let you know, as we start to make this evaluation, we'll be looking at the the responsiveness to our RFP, what you said your preferences are for the site. We'll look at the proposed purchase price. We'll also look at the city's budget values and budget pillars,
um, the stewardship, the equity, the sustainability, sustainability, all those factors I think should be part of this of this evaluation. So, at the May 15th HR meeting, our intention is to start that as an open meeting, but then quickly go into a
close session to discuss real estate. Uh, the potential sale of real estate is one of those few exceptions where we can meet in close session. It's to this group's advantage to do that in close session. So, we don't give away our purchase, our our our price, right? We
want to hold that close to our vest. um because ultimately we want to uh sell the land to derive the highest value for the community and the best project. So in order to have the discussion, we'll have that in a closed session. We're recommending that uh uh
the next step would be to invite a few of the of the developers to come in and make a pitch to you, explain what their proposal is uh and really feel it out a little bit better. Um, uh, likely we'd invite three, four people, uh, to, uh,
to make their pitch to us. Again, this group would then discuss what you heard and then come back at a future meeting, most likely in late June, and make your selection and formally announce uh, which development team or developer you'd like to work with and then get the
contract running and get them get them working on their entitlements and all the financing and all those types of things. So, um, that's that's a forecast of what to expect, but I'm very pleased with the responses. Um, uh, I was I was
hoping to get 10 to 15. 11's right in the spot. Uh, and always remember, just like selling your house or selling your used car, you just need one. You just need one good one. So, we've got 11 good options. You can decide which are the better options for for this community.
Um but uh we look forward to talking about that more in May. Uh and I'll strive we normally issue the packets just you know a few days ahead of the meeting. We'll try to get this information to you well in advance so that you've got time to peruse it uh at
your leisure. So um and that that's my update for good great update. Yeah. Questions or I just I just I just thought it was funny you said there were 11 and we had 10 different types in here. So there
might be two. But this is good work. That's a good update. Thanks. One more thing on the agenda this morning. U I think we're going to make it out of here by the drop dead date. Uh and um that is report out from
Ari on the preparation for a future discussion about tax increment financing and maybe Bill's going to handle that too. I don't know. Yes, I'll I'll take this one as well. So um again briefly, but wanted to set the stage for another future meeting uh last year as we were
uh uh having conversation conversations about providing uh financing using tax increment uh for various projects. you all had a lot of questions about is this the best way to do it? Is there a better process? Is there a different process? Um so we'd like to schedule a work
session most likely in late May or June. Kind of see where it lands with the schedule. Um but as we prepare for that, I want to make sure that we're responsive to some of your uh most pressing requests. So what I heard you ask last year were four key things that
I'll plan to address. uh and that is whether or not our city policies are driving the need for tiff more frequently. Um whether there is a preferred order or timing when this board considers the use of
tiff. Um there was an inquiry about whether tiff should be used only for specific types of costs. For one of the projects I remember some voices said we should definitely use it for affordability. Some people said we should definitely use it for parking. Others said we should never use it for
parking. Um we can have that conversation. Uh and then finally the last question I heard was the strategy of using tiff. Right now we are more performanceoriented outcome oriented. Uh it is possible to shift that into more
of a programmatic format where if they meet the meet the require requirements of the program they get the funding. It could be more it could be easier to implement. um harder to develop the program that actually meets our needs. Um but those
are the four topics that I've heard so far and I just request if there's other things that are of press topics of pressing interest that you want to talk about just get that back to myself or Ari or Scott Neil and we'll make sure that we address that and have that on the agenda. So again, we're looking to
schedule that in either late May or June depending on on workload. Okay, very good. Any questions on that topic? All right. Uh, anything from the for the good of the order, Miss Linds? Anything for us from a staff standpoint we need
to know about? I don't have anything. All right. And, uh, commissioners, anything for the good of the order? Commissioner Jackson, just briefly, the bridge is now under construction. I want to encourage people to continue to shop at 50th in France. We can you can still get there. Take Eden Avenue instead of
50th and or Vernon and and you can get there. They're still open for business. and um don't forget them. I'm hearing comments from people already that it's more well managed than the last summer and they feel like they can get on and off Highway 100, which is important. Um
and then don't forget folks, this afternoon is the clothing swap out at the backyard at Braar Ice Arena and I think maybe starts around 2:00 or so. You no charge for anything. You bring clothes if you want. Just come and find free clothes. Uh, but it's a place to
bring some things that you maybe think that uh are good to be sharing with others and uh or to look for some things for for yourself or or family members. So, that's one good thing that's going on this week along with some Earth Day activities. And Commissioner, I pulled it up because I was going to mention
that one, too. I'm excited about the clothing swap. It's 4 to 7. 4 to 7. Okay. Thanks for that. That's that's important to know. Uh, anything else on the calendar there you want to mention? No. Okay. All right. Is there a motion to adjurnn? So moved. Second. Mr. Jackson moves. Commissioner Pierce
seconds the motion to adjourn the meeting of the H this Thursday, April 24th, 2025. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adjournment say I. I. I. Opposed. Carried. We stand adjourned. Thanks.