It is 7 o'clock. I will call to order the regular housing and redevelopment authority meeting of the city of Richfield. It's June 16, 2025. Um we will start with open forum. Um is there anyone here for open forum?
No, seeing no one, um, you can always refer to the H agenda and minutes web page for additional ways to submit comments. Uh, we'll start then with approval of the minutes for the housing and redevelopment authority work session of May 19th, 2025 and the regular housing and redevelopment authority
meeting of May 19th, 2025. Is there a motion to approve? I'll move to approve. Uh, second. It has been moved and seconded. Any comments, questions, or changes? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. Opposed. The minutes have been
approved. Takes us to item number one, approval of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any comments, questions, changes? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I.
Opposed. The agenda has been approved. takes us to item number two, the consent calendar. Executive Director Palman. Thank you, Chair Breeze Daniels, members of the board. The consent calendar contains several separate items which are acted upon by the HA in one motion. Once the consent calendar has been
approved, the individual items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further HR action is necessary on these items. However, any H commissioner may request that an item be removed from the consent calendar and placed on the regular agenda for HA discussion and action. All items listed
on the consent calendar are recommended for approval. Item A, acceptance of the housing program evaluation final report. And item B, consideration of the approval of program guidelines for the Woodlon Terrace Cooperative New Manufactured Home Purchase Program. And
I submit these items for your consideration. Is there a motion? Anyone would like to pull anything off? I'll move to approve both items. And I will second that. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. The consent
calendar has been approved. Item number four, public hearing. I will send it over to Executive Paleman to read. Yes. Thank you. Um, Assistant Director Julie Urban will present the report tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Um, chair of Ree Daniels,
member of the members of the HRA, back in 2024, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority approved a preliminary development agreement with Jo Companies and its affiliates for the development of of affordable housing on HA owned property located at 6501 and 6525 Penn
Avenue South. In the agreement, the HR agreed to consider financial assistance for the project in an amount up to $1.485 485 million by selling the redevelopment property to the developer at a reduced cost of $500,000 and to provide financial assistance from
the affordable housing trust fund in an amount up to $485,000. In December of 2024, the developer received an award of federal low-income housing tax credits along with other assistance to finance the development. The developer is now asking the HRA to
approve the sale of the land and financial assistance through a contract for private redevelopment with the developer's affiliate, Penn Station Apartments LLP. Staff is recommending that the HA provide that level of assistance that was contemplated in the agreement.
However, we recommend doing so solely through a reduced land price of $1. This allows the HRA to assist the property while reserving funds in the affordable housing trust fund for future programs and projects where the HA does not own the property and have the value of land
to contribute. I would also add that um the funds that were used to purchase and demolish um buildings on that property uh did come from three different tax increment financing districts, two of which have since been descertified. So if the HA were to receive any sales
proceeds um for the property, these funds would have to be returned to the TIF districts. And when there are two descertified TIF districts, that becomes not only administratively complicated, but then the money actually goes back to Henipin County to be redistributed to all taxing jurisdictions, which isn't
necessarily a bad thing, but from the HA's perspective, it's helpful to have that money to invest in our community and do the work of the HRA. So, uh, the proposed development meets several housing goals of the city and the HRA by providing a mix of bedroom
sizes at various affordability levels, including deeply affordable units, accessible units for people with disabilities, and housing with supportive services. This project also revitalizes a blighted corner of Penn Avenue. The mix of affordability includes 16 units affordable at 30% of
the area median income, 18 units affordable at 50%, eight units affordable at 60%. 13 of these units will receive rental assistance along with housing supportive services through Simpson Housing Services. Some of the units will serve people with disabilities and others formerly
homeless households. The pro project provides a mix of one, two, three, and fourbedroom units, and the affordability levels will be preserved for 40 years. The city council did approve land use approvals for the project on June 10th.
And I would also point out that we do call attention in the motion to the idea that the HA uh attorney and the executive director would approve uh any final administrative non-substantive changes to the declaration or to the
contract and the declaration that a lender or investor may require. In the case of these types of projects, there are multiple funders um involved. And while we want to be cooperative and understand that they often have needs in the documents that um are necessary to
make the project go forward, we also want to protect the HAS's interests. Um so again, anything administrative that may come up um at the last minute from lenders, we would give that we would ask that you give that authority to the executive director and H attorney, but anything substantive, we would return to
you for review. So um with that I am here to answer any questions and a representative from the development team is also here if you have any questions for them. Perfect. I will open the public hearing first and then maybe we can do the rest. So um any resident
wishing to participate in the public hearing, you can proceed to the podium one at a time and provide your name and address prior to your comment. Uh, we will hear your comment and if you would like staff to follow up, you can include your name, phone number, or email on the sign-in document located at the podium.
To ensure everyone has time to speak, each comment will be limited to three minutes in length. And as a reminder to residents, the public hearing is a time for the HA to listen, but not to respond. If questions are asked, they may be addressed as part of the council or part of the HA discussion on the issue and staff will follow up after the
meeting. Um, and again, this is the public hearing uh for the contract for private development with Penn Station Apartments LLP and sale of land for the development of 42 units of affordable housing. And it is now open.
And seeing that there's no one here for the public hearing, I would move that we close the public hearing. Second. It has been moved and seconded. Any comments, questions, or concerns? Seeing none. All those in favor to close the public hearing say I. I. I. Opposed.
The public hearing has been opened and closed. Um. All right. Is there a motion? We want to ask questions first. I've got a question. Yes. Go ahead. So, um, Assistant Director Urban, you mentioned that if we had done it the way
originally anticipated, the money would go back to the TIF districts or at least some portion of it. Was that that 900 like all of the proceeds would go back to the tip districts or a lesser portion that was related to the cleanup of the site? 6501 we used it to pay for demolition
and then we also used it to acquire 6525 and just the way it worked out it ended up being these three different districts. Okay, got it. Yes. Go ahead. So, I would move to adopt a resolution approving a contract for private redevelopment authorizing the sale
of housing and redevelopment authority owned property located at 6501 and 6525 Penn Avenue South to Penn Station Apartments LLP for the development of 42 units of affordable housing. also to authorize the executive director and HR
attorney to approve any administrative non-substantive changes to the contract and declaration of restrictive covenants and authorize the chair and executive director to execute any subordination agreements required by the principal lender or
lenders. Second. It has been moved and seconded. Any comments, questions? Yes, go ahead. If staff can just confirm it's okay for this to be one motion. We got yelled at by the city attorney in a council meeting. Yes, it is okay in this in this
instance. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. Go ahead. definition of rose place is uh is a we and I I kind of think that for me we personally kind of fits this project uh as stated in the presentation I mean it
was you know this project brings so many great attributes to our community some homes of deep affordability mult bedrooms and a multi-dwelling project accessibility and a developer who's has an impressive
developer who has uh an excellent track record of building quality homes. But the difficulty I have with the project and I know I noted this early in our discussions about this about a year ago is that it's 100% residential and the nature of residential, it's 100%
residential is it quiets the neighborhood. Um, I probably have kind of a somewhat unique perspective on this Pen Avenue corridor because I've been involved with it for many, many years. Uh, I served on visioning task forces in the past that are so long ago, they
seemed like another lifetime ago. And I remember during those public forums, it's like it was expressed that people wanted this commercial district to remain commercial. And I just um you know, we haven't had public forums in recent times, so I don't know if that sentiment still
exists or doesn't exist. Uh but generally speaking, I think people still dream of this Pen Avenue corridor as being kind of this vibrant area that people come, they come to shops, they I know that uh signs have gone up about the redevelopment of Penn Avenue, the street is going to start in 2028. And I
think people have always dreamed about this vibrant commercial corridor. And um you know if if tonight if we were looking at a mixeduse development where it was commercial on street level and residential on on the upper levels I
would be just elated tonight. And um I know that that's more challenging to finance. It's more challenging to build and to to manage. But but we know it's not impossible because we see developments like that over all over the Twin Cities.
Um, I know there's always desire to get something done because we have this empty lot, we have this dilapitated old K9 College building and yet on the kind of the balance of that is like, you know, once we have a development there, it's there for the long term. I'm I would expect this building to uh outlive
all of us in this room uh because that's of course the nature of things. So to a certain extent I this is a really difficult vote for me tonight and to a certain extent I feel that it's potentially a step in the wrong direction because unlike like the Novo
building and the Lansby building which are just at the the very edges of the commercial district, this is, you know, right in the middle of the district taking up quite a bit of land. Um, you know, not not quite a block but quite a stretch of land and uh so I I guess tonight I just want to express this is a
a difficult vote for me. Thank you. Anyone else? Go ahead. I'll just say in response to Commissioner Hansen because I appreciate you sharing those thoughts and I appreciate especially your advocacy for so long for this corridor. Um I also, you know, wish it were an even better
project. Um I wish it were mixed use. And I do think back to a work session we had several years ago. Um I think when I was on maybe planning commission still and we heard different proposals and there's still a proposal that I thought would have been a better use of the site, but that's been a long time since that proposal was on the table and there
is a lot of land out there. I'm just looking at Google Maps and seeing across the street is just like 100% like dilapidated parking lot. There's a lot of potential land here. And this site, especially without the Oliver Avenue side, it's just a very awkward site. It's even less than a standard block
depth because Penn Avenue has an extra-l large rightway. It's very sloped. The county is very stubborn about their access. It would be really hard to use this commercially, at least without also buying properties on Oliver, which as we know, we can't force. It would only be if we had a developer willing to do that
and property owners willing to sell. I think with those constraints, this is a good project, not only because it fulfills an affordable housing need that we have, but because it also is a good example of being able to fit kind of a richfieldsiz building. Novo for its many positive qualities is not really a
richfieldiz building. It took seven lots consolidating, moving streets around. This shows that you can fit a decent building that serves a decent need on a tricky site of about an acre, I believe. Um, and I think that's good precedent. It is not going to be as lively, I can certainly admit, as a proper mixeduse
development would be, but I think given the constraints of the site, given the constraints of the financing, they've been able to get a pretty active use going on on the main floor. And I think it will contribute positively to the district. Um, I obviously would not want to see a whole corridor of this and if
we get three more projects like this in a row, I might start to feel differently. But at this point, I feel like this is still a step in the right direction for this area even though it's not commercial. Thank you. Anybody else? Um
yeah, I feel like we have uh seen multiple proposals and talked about this through kind of my time on the H and the planning commission. Um, and so I appreciate comments from um, both my colleagues here and uh, as someone who lives right around the corner from this, I too would have loved mixed use, but
knowing how challenging that is and then also knowing, you know, we need more people to support the businesses that we have, I recall seeing a study that was shared probably a couple of years ago now, um, just kind of relaying that kind of more we need some more people to support those businesses. And I do think
this is an incredibly challenging site and I am impressed with what we have been able to build on this site um or will be able to build on this site. And so um I am excited for this. All right, there has been a motion and a
second. If there's no further comments and seeing none, um all those in favor for approval say I. I opposed. No. The motion passes. All right, that takes us to item number
five. Um, executive director Palman. Yes. Thank you, uh, chair, members of the board. Uh, Tulie will also present the staff report. Thank you, Chair Breeze Daniels, member of members of the HA.
Sorry, I wasn't quite ready for the the long contract in the way here. In varying sizes and my screen goes up and down. Oh, look at that. Okay, page 122. I got it. That helps. Okay.
Chair Reese Daniels, members of the HA, the Deferred Loan Program offers no interest deferred loans up to $30,000 for housing maintenance and repair projects to homeowners earning less than 80% of the area median income, prioritizing those who earn less than 50% of the area median income.
The loan is repaid upon the sale of the home or forgiven after 30 years. The program in its current form began in 1984 and was administered in-house until 2004 when it was transferred to Henipin County. At the conclusion of the 30-year
term, the loan is forgiven. Historically, funding for this program came from federal dollars passed through Henipin County to local governments that if repaid would be returned to the city and used to meet other housing needs. Henipin County has decided to move to an
all suburban county program model where the program operates at the county rather than the local level. As part of these changes, any repayments to loans would be returned to the county for use at their discretion and not necessarily recirculated to benefit city residents.
Richville is the only city in Henipin County that maintains a 30-year repayment period for these loan funds. Adjusting to a 15-year repayment period and forgiving the loans of homeowners who have made it past 15 years into their 30-year term will bring the city
into simil similarity with neighbors and reduce staff time spent on servicing subordination and forgiveness requests. staff recommends that the housing and redevelopment authority allow the forgiveness of the 57 loans that are currently older than 15 years in order
to keep the benefit of these f funds with local residents. And I would point out and remind you that this is something that we discussed last month at the work session on the housing program evaluation. It was something that came out of that and that um folks expressed support for at that time. I'm
happy to answer any questions you may have. Anyone have any questions or is there a motion? Uh I move that we adopt a resolution authorizing the executive director to change the term for deferred loans to 15 years and forgive all loans older than
15 years. A second. It has been moved and seconded. Any comments or questions? Yes. Go ahead. I think this is a a good move to have. I think it's fair to the Richville residents if the rest of the county's on that 15 year to put us on an
even par with that. And if somebody has stayed there for 15 years, they have pretty much fulfilled the spirit of the loan. So I think that this is a good policy change. Anyone else? All right. There's been a
motion. It's been seconded. Uh seeing no further comments, uh all those in favor say I. I. Opposed? The motion passes. All right. Item number six, H discussion items. Are there any HA discussion
items? Yes. Go ahead. Well, I guess I would just say I I really appreciated the state of the community event that we had last week. Um, uh, Commissioner Supple as in her role as mayor gave a a speech and, uh, many information tables throughout the, uh, the city hall. And
the thing that really impressed me is the citizenry that would come here. Uh, I think it really demonstrates we have a very engaged citizenry that's they're interested in the future of their city, how their city is being run. Um, and I was that night I was staffing the Friends of Wood Lake booth. But, uh, all
positive comments about, uh, people very optimistic and uplifting about how our our city is headed. Excellent. Anyone else? All right. Uh, item number seven, executive director's report. Yes. Thank you. I have a couple
of announcements today. First, some good news with some funding updates. Um the city was successful in its request for a trust fund match from Minnesota Housing. We were awarded $150,000. Um so that is exciting and we'll plan
for that in our upcoming budget. And then also um the Penn uh station project that you just approved a contract with was awarded um $33,000 in TBR funds uh from the Met Council. So exciting news
uh there as well. Couple other announcements. Um the HA and EDA will have training on our new agenda management system coming up in July and August. So um watch for an email on that. uh council members will have
already gone through that training. Um but those of you uh who are solely on the HR um will get that training in July and August. We're excited about that new system. And then a reminder that on the 24th uh you're invited to a joint work
session with the council to talk about uh the remaining parcel at the Lindell Gardens Center, former Lindell Gardens Center site. And that's all I've got for tonight. Is that 24th of June or July? The 24th
of June. Okay. Thank you. Tuesday, chair. Yes. Um, if I could just ask is that to hear a proposal by a developer or is that other discussion about the site? That's discussion uh with the property owner. So, the property owner is going to present on their efforts thus far um and talk to the council and
HA um about whether or not we want to open up some other options, explore other uh ways to move it forward. Okay. Thank you. Uh all right. Item number eight, claims. Is there a motion to approve claims? I'll move to approve claims.
Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any comments, questions, concerns? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Claims have been approved. That takes us to adjournment. Just as the rain is starting.