Housing and redevelopment Authority order call police. Yang here, Chair Johnson here. There are 5 person. One absent that being. Councilmember or Commissioner Joe, since she is excused. Item number one is approval of the My and 25 Dash 17 approval of the hre meeting minutes from the month of MARCH 2025. Brady, thank you and I've had a chance review the meeting minutes. If anyone has any questions or items are at its or anything that is related to the meeting minutes. Speak now. Or 80 seat of a from commissioners to approve all those in favor. Aye. All posts. Biden favors or oppose the resolution and are the minutes are adopted. Item number 2 is a staff report sr. 25 dash. 46 healthy homes hh and power homes. Peel
wage programs citywide. Okay. So this has been a long awaited time to really hear more about the healthy homes and part of home program. I personally I'm really excited to hear a little bit more about the guidelines and this really opportunity important time. I know it was a heavy conversation within our counsel as well. So something a jury last year and some really excited to see what all we put together in this time. So director new 92. Thank you. Chair Johnson commissioners of Project manager Daniel Settlers. Here to give the presentation on this new program, the program is in partnership with chief resilience, Officer Estrictas here as well. And Shultis also here from our team who works
with rest as well. So it kind partnership with Russ and in working on these kinds of initiatives and so when look at the presentation, but all 3 are here to an questions. It is a new program. So you'll be hearing this briefing today. And then next week guidelines would come for approval. So any feedback that you have questions or concerns today's the day to listen in and see if there's anything that you questions about. okay. Can hear m ok? U.S.. Thank you. Director Newton and Chair Johnson I'm excited to be here today. And Daniel a project manager on the housing team and I want to say thank you to rice and curd and then also Dave, who is the new Clean Energy Project Management Tech, who will be the day-to-day manager for these programs you know, when they launch and then also kept this will force to did a lot
early research on this. And then also, dean for Nelson help. This light is on. He just took a job outside the city, but he to say thank you for the work he did on that. So he'll be going over these 2 different programs. Just to the stage a little bit, we structured them as 2 separate programs because healthy homes got a one-time allocation of a million dollars through the arpa funding that we got at the end of 2022. And then part of home has a $300,000 allocation from the Excel Energy franchise fee that is intended to be recurring. So just for simplicity in case one of you know, where to not get funding in the future, that it would be easier to kind of. That was just But and tension is to,
you know, pair the funding with projects if their pickle for both and have a joint application to make it easier for people who are interested in both programs. So first, I wanted to have little video for us Talk of 32nd to get on the same page of energy There might be in and hear Germans have figured out a way to there, And so this is from the Minnesota Department of Commerce who is in charge of the transition assistance program for the state. And so you might hear some references to that, but it's very difficult to what we're planning to do as well. Series of systems, including the building next to your ear. The mechanical systems consisting of heating cooling and ventilation and the electrical system, which includes lights and appliances. When the systems work well together, your home is a more comfortable, healthier and efficient place
to live. And that can add up to saving money, too. Most homes even recently built can benefit from a review of their systems and equipment. Sometimes things need to be maintained repaired or replace to increase efficiency. To keep your family safe. And to prevent future problems from occurring. So when we visit your home, we take a top to bottom. Look at how the systems are operating. And where they might improvements. This is called a home performance review. It's the first step in improving how your home works. After we complete the review, we suggest things that can make your home more comfortable and saving money. These improvements could include
replacing or upgrading big-ticket items like your furnace or water heater. Where insulating attics, Pacer was. Or adding weather stripping to doors and windows. What our program is not a window replacement program. Other things we MAY do our clean or upgrade your bathroom fan to improve the airflow. Where change light bulbs thermostats to increase efficiency. All these improvements will be done at no cost to you or your family. And speaking of costs, when you weatherize your home, you reduce your energy bills and lower your energy pardon. Many families with lower household incomes often carry a larger burden of energy costs and the need to this means that those households typically spend a higher percentage of their income on
energy than other families do. Reducing your family's energy pardon means you'll have more money for other things. Weatherizing your home can also improve the health and safety of all your family members. Improving te air quality of your home, ensuring proper operation of furnaces and water heaters and reducing hazardous conditions such as an older melty. Can all help reduce the effects of asthma and other chronic diseases. Plus, the Minnesota weatherization program is good for the environment. Good for your community and good for our state and the planet. Your weatherize homes will be better able to withstand the effects of our changing climate, including protecting your family from temperature extremes. Because of weatherized home is better for everyone. There are videos if you're interested but will be linking those for applicants in case they're just curious. About the process is?
But a yeah. So the goal of these programs is to improve the homes of lower income residents of that. So it one second, let me figure So about that. And so our goal is to improve the energy efficiency of homes of people in Saint Paul who cannot afford some of these costs up front because, you know, making repairs your house can be really expensive. And there's a lot of people who just cn't front that money, even if it might save the money month to month longer term. And so as you can see here, we did a little bit of a landscape analysis just to see what how we could best use this money to compliment the other programs that are available to residents because, you know, there's already some great partners doing weatherization work in this Know the the action partnership and then also
energy since coalition, they implement the Minnesota weatherization program and then also the Excel Energy and they have some funded programs as well. But if they are smaller nonprofits and they have to prioritize lot of their regular funding. So when we initially asked if they would be interested and taking on the healthy homes, funding and fully implementing that they did not have the capacity to do so understandably because of the one-time allocation and so then that's when you start talking about what would that look like to bring that in house and whether or not we could do that? And so the money that was applied for through Arpa. It was initially supposed to support projects that might not be able to go through these normal weatherization
programs because they have too many repairs to qualify because, again, you know. Smaller nonprofits, they have a scope of tests. And so sometimes there's things like and tube wiring that is really expensive to replace and they can usually cover up to about 15 to $20,000 of those. Repairs or also there's a lot of insulation that has his best to Senate and the House can weatherized with that. And so those are the kind of things that are prohibiting projects from participating in the existing programs and causing them to get deferred you know, eventually because the cost is too high. And so we designed these both programs to be grants because also there's a lot of one programs offered through, you know, Minnesota housing and also the home rehab program here in senator for energy and environment. But there are a lot of people who MAY not
qualify for loans or something we've heard, too, is that, you know, people get older, they might not feel as comfortable taking up that addition, cultural practices like low lending might not be. You know, wind was like a typical bank and s that's why we wanted to focus on having these as grants. So that you know, more people could access them and not have to worry about the ongoing financial commitment. And it also uses some of the staff pardon as well as servicing. And then for Powers Home, which focuses more on improving bigger ticket appliances, you know, such as installing a heat pump which can replace the heating mechanism in the House and provide cooling or, you know, replacing a clothes dryer with a heat pump, clothes dryer.
That is more efficient. You know, there's not really anything besides loans right now out there to finance these things. And so wanted to you know, a free option that people could take advantage of because those items in particular really pass print. So specific to healthy homes. So as I mentioned, this one is focusing on homes that can't participate in the typical weatherization programs because of outstanding repairs. So that's the health and safety measures highlighted here. So that involves side of the hazardous payment. You know, fixing plumbing issues or, you know, a small issue with the roof or something. Our goal with this is not to necessarily. You know, go cover a ton of deferred maintenance or fully rehab the house. It's really trying to focus on those things that are prohibiting
the house from getting weatherized and then also to ensure that the property gets weatherize because that was part of what we promised with arpa funding of ensuring they did steps securing the building envelope and, you know, making sure that that part that actually will save the money gets done. Our goal is to also install that for them as well. And so that's a lot more of, you know, the ceiling of the home with stripping copying and then, you know, if a window is broken or something, we could fix that. And then also adding insulation is another really big one. And then and this is designed to to follow the best practices of other weatherization programs that focus on the most cost-effective measures for each project. And so for both programs, we intend for them to be offered homeowners and renters. So everyone can
benefit. The healthy homes program. We put it in 80%. You need income level because the initial proposal was for around 300% federal poverty level in order to align with our other programs that are rooted in, am I and then we decided to pivot to 80% which is still considered low income. And then for rentals in order for them to qualify. At least half unit have t be income-qualified. And get into that a little bit later. What that means and what that looks like. It. And so for the property itself. It cannot already be weatherized and has had the repairs. Like I mentioned. And we intend to get tougher rules from the existing weatherization partners as well kind ease that process. We intend to be 5,000 to 50,000 to kind of right-size. Those projects. And then as I mentioned, there
would be no repayment to be a free grant through be paid to a contractor. Thank you. I see Commissioner Yang's hands. I want to give her a chance to ask question. Thank Johnson. Not just a quick question here in the video and also on the slide that you're on that. It says this is not a window replacement program. So thank you for being Super Express that about it. I do want to share that this is calmly questions of our resources for a window replacement pogram I commonly what it get, though, from pesence of my ward who are interested weatherization. And so pdt or hot, all have new resources. You can share with us that way. We can pass it on to those interested residents. Yeah, yeah. I believe that a nervy have program does cover windows and so we could
definitely share information. I believe it's close right now because we have a waitlist But then also to for this program, we would consider, you know, repairing reconditioning windows and just improving the quality of the existing windows. If it were to make sense chair council. But I think you're asking if there other resources outside of the city right yet. And the city outside the city to we can put together if we know of any other resources for that as well. Thank you. And Yeah. And then also too. So of course, we want to extend these public funds as much as we can. And so we're, you know, looking at what other offerings are out there. Xcel Energy has a lot of very favorable rebates that will apply to many of these items. And then also state has rebate programs as well. And so the staff will help.
Coordinate with that looks like and the rebates would come back to the city as we would be paying the contractors behalf of property owners. And that is too similar to the emergency rental assistance program from been ago that we talked about it's to avoid conflict. That benefits Cliff concept where you're putting the tax burden on the homeowner, even though. That's not really responsibility. And so that also as we all know federal investments are a little up in the air. Thank you. But the eye or a tax rebates are still technically in place. And so we intend to, you know, provide resources to. Free tax nation services and whatnot so that people can
claim those to themselves and they would not have to be paid back to the city if in difference in time. Is he commissioned a curse him too? Thanks to Johnson and maybe skipping ahead just a little bit. But I it looks like when you say the audience is homeowners and renters, we really need homeowners and landlords, right? We're talking with the owner of rental property can apply. Yes, yet Johnson commissioners. The applicant would be the property owner. However. The tenants are part of the application process to verify their income and with programs in the past as well. You know, just trying to make sure that everyone is on board with the project before moving forward and the healthy homes in particular. We didn't require
a rental car share because it's more just basic repairs. And the benefits are more immediate, too. The renters. And then also to Eden. Build this into the explicit requirements. But some that we will be considering as well as who's responsible for the bills as well. Just to make sure that tenants costs increasing and same with homeowners as well. Our goal is to lower everyone's cost sure. And so to continue my questions. So it looks like there's both. Health ad safety measures and building envelope measures to different buckets of work that we would pay for but it strikes me that for landlords all of those. Elements that we list under health and safety measures like asbestos or loose wires or pest management, smoke alarms. Those are all we cn require those through our certificate of occupancy program. We
wouldn't need to be paying landlords who didn't have those things in place to put those in place. And I would assume we would not. Pay them to put those in place. We would use our. A safety inspection certificate of occupancy. Hammer to make sure those were in place. And we would only use are dollars to help with the actual weatherization that how you're thinking about the program. Changes and commissioners. So the current set up is so that the funding would cover all of it for rental properties as well. my understanding is that for and you know, of course, are not in the India side. And so please direct noon. Please chime in. If I something. But and are saying too, is that? Properties that were that are, you know, not being built brand new right now. They have. You know, kind of like historic conditions that cn
be waived in. And so even though we want to build summer was not into wiring right now. There are a lot of properties that have that and think it isn't necessarily something that we would require to be changed through a typical like certificate of occupancy program. But when they are looking to weatherize the property is something that they would have to opt in to doing. And maybe Maybe he's just 2 categories here because it seems like a. I mean, I moved into my has not been to wiring. Totally Different and totally recognize that that MAY need to be changed to weatherize, but that's different than past management. That's different than plumbing repairs loose or damaged wires. So I'm just I don't want to be rewarding landlords of affordable
properties for not fixing these things with public dollars. That's that's kind of what I'm getting Want to make sure we have that distinction. Plus, sure. Yeah. Tre Jones and commissioner is something to that. We built into the requirements for property. Rental property owners is that. They have to show that they spent funds on maintenance in the property within the last 12 months, at least through tax return. And then we can also review dsi permits as well to make sure that they're investing in it already on a regular basis and not aain covering deferred maintenance because that's yeah. Like you said, our goal to cover their work. Ciaran commish El Al at that. As we bring these guidelines and these are great
questions because this if this becomes too administratively burdensome, that it doesn't make sense, right? So we've got to make sure that we're covering the things that we would like to. But but there's a that there's reasonable amount of administrative burden misys it is a new program and thinking through those questions. So these are excellent questions. Keep asking. So can as a follow up and kind of along the lines, too? When we're talking about renters or homeowners and renters kind quantifies it. Are there, you know, restrictions on the renter peace. Is there a certain what is a size? Sections? Yet Johnson commissioners, we're focusing on one to 4 unit and what and walking through what happens if one qualifies and then the other 3 don't. So in that case, only if it was. You know, a single-family
property year duplex and they would need that 50% threshold in would qualify for the program. But if it were 3 to 4 unit and only had one unit that was qualified as low-income, then they would not be eligible for this program. And to be happen to know, just kind of like as well if there is I guess I'm just thinking about like delivery services fall and just really trying to get into is there room for prioritization when it comes to like maybe which areas are with homes? What rental property units that we think would be helpful for this like I'm just kind of think, you know what? I'm thinking of scope. That sounds, you know and just kind of where we would be able to invest most. And so I'm just kind of wondering like when you've been talking about the
pull of applications and capacity and Sullivan for things like what has what has those discussions look like what does at all some o the prioritization or even just focus areas of one might want to spend time related to homeowner properties are rental properties. There for friends or the county court now is like what is the school mind here? Yeah, That are Johnson commissioners. So. Right now we're planning for it to be a first come first serve process or at least that's what we've discussed this far to kind of want some of our other programs as well. And yeah, our intention is for it to be available citywide and yeah, just essentially if homeowner chooses to partake, then they can apply and rental properties as well. And yeah, so there isn't any like prioritization built in and also too, because the bucket of funds is smaller. We do anticipate that we will be
able to have many applications. And so like I mentioned, our goal is to source tougher rules from the existing weatherization providers. Ad then, of course, advertises so that people can apply as well. And yeah, essentially. We do have we built in like it and geographic qualification for the income qualifications that people wouldn't have to. Smith. Their income documents. If they're in an area that is considered like a justice, 40 census tract, which federal initiative that focuses on low income areas and they're in a section with different climate and housing and health factors. And so. Our goal has been to try and see how we can have it citywide and reduce the barriers for areas where
we think it it would be most Yeah, we are open to feedback. Of course. Yeah. I think as a follow-up to that, you know, and just say kind of from the record, but also as initial response, I see value and potentially prioritizing spaces where there's significant cost burden, especially as it relates to and Excel energy payments. And I know that they've been doing some work, especially around equity and tracking just kind of where we have some of the most cost burden families, but also where we have some of the highest utility bills where we have some of te highest energy bills. And that really just thinking about where the focus could be in, especially on a space where I think every dollar invested from this program should be truly prioritizing spaces that really need that. Especially because there's there's it's that big of a find. I'm it
would. Just simply say is of as a resident. But also as a council member who represents Ward 7 on the east at a Saint Paul, there's a lot of conversations around what what this looks like on the east side and not to necessarily to speak from East side, folks for myself and also 0.7, I think there's I think that it's really important to have everyone be able to access the opportunities. I also think there's something to be said for some prioritization when it comes to what we are related to the cst of utility bills. The amounts it's kind of skewed a little Lt of the data sets that I also focus on certain areas. Ad so just wondering if like we've taken that into consideration. And I see. Resiliency officer coming up and so Bres. I'm sure you
are looking to respond. 10 Johnson, then commissioners, thank you for the questions. Really important one. And we thought a lot about that question because of 2 factors relatively small amount of initial dollars here. And really the desire and need to get started so that we can get some experience with that program delivery. We wanted to make sure that we're getting projects in the door and done in the relatively near future. So we can gain some of that experience had a lot of conversation about if we had more resources in the future, how might we do something that was more geographically targeted to some o those areas like groups that are known highest energy burden. Potentially a very different program delivery model where it's like possible something like a
block by block approach. don't have enough resources to do that yet. And we think it's really as I said, really important to get started and gain some experience with the mechanics of how projects like these will work. Tom Johnson, I really appreciate what you're bringing up about. The question of Parrot is station on. Who we serving and how do we decide an who are serving in the first place? Want to show it off the bat. I'm very opposed to just the concept of for first come first served. I there's some many programs that I can think of right off the bat that always thought didn't know what do with that. We are. Why did the state do it that way? Or whoever was hosting whatever problem
program it is. And I have many reasons why. Mean, not during the pandemic. It was really clear that we have a lighting growing digital equity gap, especially in here is a concentrated poverty and that was a huge focus of of any of our staff and organizations and nonprofits, which we're working closing during the pandemic. And he put a lot investments into it as a city. And there's also, you know, on top of that and we can you think about language barriers to in the end, the need to do intentional outreach, especially to the household sweet who we do want to prioritize serving. Do a program like whether homes, for example, like that is really important work to be done that I really like for us to do and be really thoughtful about I would. You know, let's just bring us back to the
conversation. When we were deliberating in voting on franchise fees. I was I've very and I was very opposed to, you know, us being aggressive about the composing additional fees without considering like, how would this listen our mostly our heaviest like energy burden, families me. It's really going to be found. Who gets his head hit te hardest when we do in. Plus additional fees and I and I would want to make sure that I because now, you know, we have a plan for the program here. We've approved into an additional month of the franchise fees that we are really thoughtful about how we can ensure these funds do go back to impacting those families who are most energy burdened. And so in terms of the application process, I'm
not sure if there is going to be a collection of utility bills. You know, I know you talked about incoming all that, but if there was a way where we could, there was a way where we could evaluate what is the the energy burden that that household in consider that as a a factor and how we are prioritizing who the serve. I know it's you know, going to be a fairly small number of houses that we do serve them in the first year here. But it's going make a huge difference for those households and for the ones who are experiencing the highest equities is going to make an even more impact for them that that they get selected for the program here. And so and I wanted I'm sure
that because I do want to see prioritization. And I feel that that is rally important. If we're thinking about how we roll out equitable a program here in such a diverse committee like Saint Paul. I think Chair Johnson and commissioner, it's it's it's a really good flag and set of questions. A couple of things. One. We do think that a big source of the projects will actually come from those projects that our partners at community programs. And then just collision had to defer on because there are resources could uncover those needs. So these are already identified homes of income, qualified residents who would have qualified for those programs who haven't been able to get the improvements because the cost of their pre weatherization other improvements was too steep for
those programs t cover. So we think that's a really kind of relatively low hanging fruit way to get resources into homes that were we know there's a need. The second point I make is that to some degree the the more you try to get down to sort of the level of individual homeowner, the less information we actually have. We've got general information at the Census tract level that's based on average household income and then average eergy cost. And so that would be a basis from which to sort of say we're going to graphic area to run a program and and potentially not have to test the actual income and energy costs at that kind of fine-grained home by home level. That's like the more fine-grained you try to get the harder it will be to find the actual specific
projects to do. And so that's that's the line that we're trying to walk here again, because the programs are new. One of the things that w need to do is to gain experience and just simply program delivery and all the mechanics are going to work before we think about those opportunities to scale up. We really feel like we need to get experience of doing this before even requesting more funds to do something more like what you're talking about. Okay. Thank us. It was years of follow-up resistance. A clarification can use can use a bit more about community action, partnership like What sort of interaction or potential partnership is going that they you all for Cs having with them? Yet Johnson commissioners,
so our plan would be to, you know, to share the iformation about the program with them and let them know that they can for projects to us. If it would be a good fit. And, you know, a lot of times people put together a very similar application package. And so our goal would be to make that transition as easy as possible. But at that point, we would essentially take over the project because they don't have the resources to finish it due to the high p weatherization costs. I would love dig deeper into the Flight 8. Do want to share Have a resident has been really interested in this and they met with him the other day. They mentioned they did mention the Community Action Partnership and was asking how
can we form a partnership with them to not duplicate work? And it sounds like there is already a lot of data being collected through that organization that could be used verification of eligibility ad so on. And so maybe that's something that you all are indeed taking a bit into. And so would like to have more discussions about. And if you all. Yeah, one thing before rescue jumped churches and commissioners. So our goal with the income qualification was dfinitely to try and reduce the burden on that because, you know, and people have to submit a ton of different documents. It's hard to find everything and it just can you know, be a people actually applying in. So we have a few different ways that people could income qualify where they can either share
about like Cher. Proof of enrollment from another program that they're enrolled in similar to how we have in the emergency rental assistance program and then also the income qualified census tracts that I mentions that overlap with the different climate housing health factors and and so our goal would be to minimize the stuff that they have to Smith. And then also to when we first received the Healthy Hmes funds back in NOVEMBER 2022, the goal was to outsource because we acknowledge there are any great weatherization partners in the city. However, because it is just a one-time allocation of million dollars and it was not. You know, the the groups have to prioritize their recurring funding and making sure they deliver on those programs first and they did not have the capacity to take
on one-time funding this small, too, expand their services significantly and have to hire more staff. And so we would love to work with more. But this is essentially the the more that we could find. We've had a lot of conversations with energy sense leading up to this as well. The U.S. Figure out like how can we work together most efficiently to make it easier for homeowners and, you know, captions people who are not being served by them right And so, pressing thing to add. Chair commissioners, I'll just add that we've hd have had those conversations with both organizations and both report, but they do keep lists of these projects that they essentially just weren't able to fulfill because of the limitations of of their funding amounts and the needs of those homes. And so we suspect that those projects
are going to be again, the lowest hanging fruit to identify places where there are needs for the combination of these 2 programs to serve. Initially and from from those conversations with the 2 organizations they run into this all the time. This is not like it uncommon occurrence where income-qualified home. It needs weatherization. There are too many other associated kind of pre weatherization needs for their funds to cover the cost. And so they just move on to the next project where they have enough funding to do the work. And so we're very hopeful that that will make it relatively easy for us to identify these early projects, get projects out the door, get the game. That experience from the program show. Show the results, right. And so and so yesterday or 2 earlier question, we're going to need
to know the current energy, both when we actually get into a specific project so that we can you know, estimate of that energy savings that can be realized from these investments. And ideally they would sign off t access to that energy data for a few more years so they track the actual impact because the overall goal here is to lower energy costs for households need Thank you both. Commissioner can, but you still have a question. Thank So just a few clarifying questions. One is bend just regurgitate that it sounds like than what we're hoping t use is sort of like we are filling gap funding in some ways. I don't want to call it that. But it's like there's a gap resources that kind helps them even become eligible to be even to like reach
weatherization. He said even like a fish and rate. So there's is it that we are filling a gap between assistance amounts to kind of like fully fund that one project project in MAY. Catching that correctly. And I don't think get funding is like maybe a fair assessment. The like we're putting in a share to ensure that the project is is not only done to completion, but done to kind of like. The measure which would want it to be done powerful than poor other is a shunt projects. Is that, sir, to share my off track? Ciaran commissioner especially with a camper derby of projects commonly happens is that they can only spend a certain proportion of their
overall funding on the pre weatherization measures measures and pure weatherization measures can end up being quite expensive. And so those projects just don't happen at all. And so potentially we will go with both projects are both programs, healthy homes and powerful. Powerful needs and actually just fully cover that project. The coordination that would be required for us to potentially Dupree weatherization and then go back to the other organizations to see if they could them if their funding with the eligible is is a sort potential next step but will require there's some city there. Yah, And so. Deeper you and the subject, more kind of layers of complexity there are that this is exactly what we're trying to get into and I
keep saying that. Bt we really need to get the experience of these programs told to better learn the ins and outs. We're not going to get this perfect from the job. We shouldn't expect we hope to come with improvements after we've learned from the experience. I really appreciate right there. Sort of like the stance around like really eligible lakes at the highest the season. These dollars go like, where are plugging in? Sort of like the necessity and the need is the portion of the funds coming from the other funding. It looks like it's a state of Minnesota application. Is the funds coming from the state of Minnesota. The captain's facilitating to you by chance. Know. But I looked at the cap sorry, just I just really quickly the application
because we were talking languages and how accessible as it is. And it looks like it's a Minnesota energy program. So is there there that sort of requirement is coming from the state and I'm sorry, ask you question that MAY be. It's a state run program, but it's actually took that the federal weatherization federal requirements flowing through to this to the state run program. Okay. I really appreciate that. And then lastly, just like as we think about as you said, like. You know, again, we have to try our best and see what we find and make him for process as we go because we don't. I think reflection is sort of an unfair standard. One for thought and maybe this already exists. But we saw that happen with the
coordinated entry program for Ramsey County. They did like a one note location that rules them all and that person could cook. I had qualify for all the different programs and they're doing it right now for immigration services. Like you can apply for one MR. Public centralizing that. But then everything had share. But then easy. They can take a copy, bring it to someone else. And I'm just sort of thinking further down the road as we think about. And, you potential lot of our climate resiliency sort of falling it. State, local municipalities to to lead the charge, just sort of thinking around like, what are those future alignment pieces that are really going to help consumers navigate programs like this. So just for says you are talking to the judging. I was like, I want be times apply for different things on. So that down the road. But we'll reiterate it. I'm sure Thank
you. Thank you. Yes, thank yu for for that. I think one of the things that I'm still working rep around, I'm going back to some of the healthy home I know we have a few more sides to get there, too. So I want from a facilitation standpoint to have us do that. But I think it will head into the some of the next. And the next sides are such with the eligibility. But when I'm looking at healthy homes and I look at the different. Health and safety measures piece and then I look at the building envelope measures, peace. I see a pretty big distinction, unlike what would be eligible and what individuals can apply for, you know, like, for example, most of my application is for just pest management. Old and Grey. Medication that's it. Could you talk a little bit about you and me say first clip first come first serve, but that actually entails because
to me that looks a little bit different than the eu weatherization process and some. So I'm not understanding the Why if as homeowner are one to 4 unit property owner. If most of my intent is to do health and safety measures. How that relates to the overall goals and like what I'm not under saying that high there and I'm not understand what would make me have to also then apply for some of the other. I would see long-term visionary things that really would just job back council commissioner Knickers earlier point of just like if a property owner and I have issues with. I and I'm playing to this program and are healthy homes that could you share a little bit about a competitor to us that that to me is what's concerning around the first come first serve peace because I know I've been a part of different conversations over the last
year and some change. Bt what was it relates to just kind of what the focus of this program isn't even just setting up the weatherization process. And I really want to prioritize projects that healthy homes and power homes can support. And and to me, that's if some ones coming in for just the eligible expenses under health and safety measures. I don't see the link. And so I'm trying to find the link here between those projects. Yeah, thank you. To Johnson commissioned so. totally agree with you. And the thing is people would have to participate in both like they'd have to get some from both buckets in order to do this program. If they just needed health and safety repairs. But we're not interested in weatherization. Then, you know, you direct
them to the you know, to the like saying up for the e-mail list for have been other resources that we have in the area that are just focused on that. It's yeah. We the goal is to get people weatherized and not just the health and safety stuff and as well. Also the first step for everyone as well would be getting a home energy audit through the home Energy squad, which is run by center for Energy and Environment and they would able to flag things for us and, you know, identify what the missing pieces are. So are intention would necessarily to be. People apply for specific things. And that's it. Rather we would kind of walk through the process with them work
together to figure out what are all of the different things they need in order to get the home ready to be weatherized and whether as and then also and electrification upgrades as well they qualify for power from 2. Okay. Thank you so much for that because, yeah, that's where my brain was. I was show with a link. So I thought that was really helpful. Clarified appreciate that. Yeah. And then also one more note on that as well. So the minimum order amount would be $5,000. And so typically from what we've heard from the existing watherization programs is that it costs about on average 15,000 or so to weatherize a home so and then so someone was just applying for something like just why repair like pest management, something it even meet that minimum. I'm also back to your question as well about the first come first
serve. So the way that we've set up is having, you know, all of these different eligibility items that people need to meet in order to qualify for the first come first serve. So we've tried to kind of build in the prioritization in that way, I suppose. And then because if you know where to just like except applications and then prioritize leader than you'd have to have like a locacion window and whatnot and you know, of course, can talk to those logistics and again, like director noon. So today is the day to share feedback and we want to hear it. So but our goal is you know, help people as soon as we can, assuming that they do meet the affordability requirement and whatnot and something to that we've seen with energy burden is that a lot of it relies more on, you
know, the denominator of your income and so you see the proxy of lower income households as pretty aligned with energy burden as well. And I think that just kind one thing that I would note as from previous a first come first-served type of programs here at the city. We get to a place where we have a wait list that's longer than what was ever intended. And so I do hope that at some point we will have a cutoff point as well for applications as it relates to what team can actually process. Think it'll be extremely unfortunate to have folks and not being able to know kind of like whats what's going on with the status of their application. And so I'm sure that you guys are all thinking about that. But the sake of being able to say, and I think it's really important, you know, what I would hate to see is next year. We have a long list like we have seen through the down
payment assistance program, the homeowner rehab program and that there actually is like a point in which you and share alike were at capacity to review applications and maybe there is like still ability for people to gauge interest, but people aren't waiting and we aren't having situation where we have maybe a year and a half a backlog to process. So that's just one flag that I have just from what I think even heard from our from pd, seen 2 of other first-come, first-serve based programs that we've watched them. We had more interest and we had Folks who are looking to participate. That MAY be anticipated. And so I think it's really important to note that. Chair Johnson definitely yeah. Our goal is never to. MISS Lee people and think
that they could access something when all the funds already spoken for and our goal at that point would just be to try and find other resources would be available to them. And just, you know, take a few minutes to figure out where they could go. Instead, even if we can't immediately support them with these programs and we always encourage people as well to sign up for the e-mail us that they're notified in the future when programs become available. Okay. Thank you. covid Vo yeah, I guess quickly before we head to income eligibility, just part of the highlights the differences here. So the main difference is that. The income qualification is lower at 50% area median income. Because our goal is to teach the most energy burden household sense. This is more of the, you know, heavy duty equipment that can really change some of the
efficiency of the home and yes. And so it would be at 50%, am I and then same situation where any rental properties, at last half would need to qualify. And then for this one, though, we would require pa share from rental property owners at the time of signing an application or an areement before construction were to start at all to ensure that they're sharing and that cost because it is more of an upgrade to the property. Yet there are this like 2 buckets here. We wouldn't necessarily need people to tke part in the electrification readiness because they might already have an electric panel that. You know is big enough to handle more electric You have that safety upgrades. And so, you know, our goal here really
to be to leave people with at least like one piece of meaningful equipment and, you know, we would really be exploring like cold climate. He pumps, which can provide heating and cooling. So and a lot of the homes here don't have air-conditioning your central air conditioning and, you know, window units can be a huge source energy costs as well. So and we see that is a really huge benefit. And then also too, we built and the potential to have. Dual fuel systems basically have a backup furnace or house. It has a furnace. He can retrofit that typically. So that has a furnace and a heat pump and then that kind of can help people ease into electric
heating you know, to make sure that we're not increasing anyone's costs. And so like said, we would have every ideally sign a release that we can access their existing excel energy data. It would have to collect all the bills and send them to us and then we have the technical calculators that the existing weatherization programs used and we can project out what the anticipate people's costs to be. We can see what type of system would work best given home. Commissioner Ticker. I'm so sorry It's like but sort of keeping with your theme of flight high level since about these programs. I guess I'm just I might be this remembering. So so correct me if I'm But I remember we were first talking
about these 2 programs, I believe healthy homes, which was a million dollar arpa allocation was for pre weatherization. And power home was for weatherization. And when they're talking the budget last year, we talked about, you know, let's maybe consider combining those because obviously, if you need. Weatherization before weatherization, then it would be helpful to just apply once it seems like now things have shifted a bit. So healthy homes seems like it's now both tree weatherization and weatherization. Power. A home is now. Electrification and upgrading equipment, appliances. He pumps. Keep them close, drier induction, stove it center. Guess I'm just wondering why the shift in focus at sea curious both from a cost perspective, too. 2 residents as well as an environmental perspective, the
advantage of weatherization, I think is a no-brainer, right? Like you're wasting money, you're wasting energy. Sort of a base level. But a lt of these equipment upgrades seemed like things that I mean, many, many homes don't have. I don't have any things. I think maybe we have a smart thermostat so why sort of this this really next level as opposed to just keeping to what we originally talking about? Ciaran great question. You all remember original intent with healthy homes was We did an rfp. We're expecting over the providers to actually implement the program. Heard from them at the time the pre weatherization was the gap. When when that didn't work out and we trust and we realized that we were going to have to be project implementar ourselves. Made sense to pair pretty weatherization weatherization together and healthy homes rather than to try to do that handoff thing
that I was describing before we do some of the working and maybe some of the work super complicated power of was meant to sort of fill that additional cap of where there are projects where there's an opportunity to switch over to electric equipment. There's a real benefit to that, especially over a longer period of time as we expect that better resourced households are going to more and more switch to electric equipment. It's going to fewer and fewer folks on the natural gas system and we're all going to be paying for the upkeep of the infrastructure for the natural gas system. And so there's this kind of long-term concern that its lower icome households stay on the gas system. Will higher income households are switching to electric equipment, their costs or start start going up even faster. And so part the idea with power of home is to try to get ahead of that long-term challenge that we
see coming even though most of us don't have this type equipment yet it's going to become more and more available and more more cost effective, particularly with the federal rebates that are still coming through the state later this year. So much thank you, chair. So fair, Fair points. I don't remember that being part of what we talked about our home originally. So maybe. We talked about electrification as the purpose, not weatherization. We talk about the combination. I think that the original idea power o home which started in here good Was was to try to do the package. Of weatherization weatherization electrification, understanding that we had this one time
funds for healthy homes check out in the future. I see probably squishing these programs down to one. But for the time being because we had this one time, healthy homes allocation, that was going to meet a particular need. The gap. It's more on the electrification side for powerful. And so we figured let's let's implement both. It can't really in the future to kind of squeeze it into one program instead of 2 with the for the funding through one program. go ahead. Try to Was there any because we can do anything we want with a pair of homes, money. Actually do anything about either the buckets of money, right? But is there it was there any discussion or is there any consideration about because I get that all of these are needs, but given that weatherization and pretty weatherization and like
Massless pyramid to near sort of the base level. And it seems like what we're doing is giving some folks weatherization and advancing other folks significantly above that to a level that as you mentioned, very few households or even at right now. Would it be better to have all of these dollars going to pre weatherization weatherization rather than leaving some households, not even weatherized. While some are, again, several steps above that and just wondering. Like from an equity standpoint, as we're kind of kind of lift all boats, it seems like summer getting really, really, really lifted. And I recognize that eventually that's going to make a lot of sense. But is that the best use now? Chair commissioner, it's a great question. We're we're trying to figure out what that what what the best way to approach this overall set of needs is. The part of the uncertainty comes from the
status of the federal programs. We were really anticipating really robust federal partner in this with the rebates. Our study from the state is that those are still moving ahead as they were funded, which is about 150 million dollars statewide. Sounds like a big number, but think about statewide doesn't go very far we were thinking that those would be, you know. Built upon. And expanded at some point. And so we were really hopeful about being able to take advantage of those at some local resource and really kind of. Do a lot at one time. The downside of potentially kind of weatherizing a home and then coming back, say several years later and doing the additional education work is that you its 2 projects, right? And if if we know that we're gonna need to do both, there's some benefit to sort of doing as much as we can
when we can. And not every project will be a power of home eligible project. We're all make sense to that full package. But for some particularly old and inefficient furnace, for example, and the and and a home that doesn't have a source of cooling. We're where we can sort of bring them like lower energy bills, get the gas out of their house, potentially and cooling all in one package. Maybe we should do that because we while we're there. Well, what have a relationship with a particular order. So that's I don't know what the right answer But that's that's the answer that come All right. I would also just say, I think. From what I'm gathering to and just kind of walking in the process. I I still feel like there's a need
to just make sure that we folks more like the community actually knows if I'm wanting enter into the premeditation or the weatherization process or if I want to jus, if I have done that and now I'm getting into the equipment upgrades like. What quarter in which one should do that, I think for the average consumer. So I kind of basic level, I think as we're heading into the eligibility fights now, I think really helpful. Just like from a base level. Can you walk us through the each step process? I feel like there's like a multi pronged approach here. But right as a homeowner, if I wanted to enter into weatherization and weatherization process, it sounds like healthy homes will be more likely for me at this
time of what you've written here is to where I would go. But should I go there first, instead of going to power homes. If I'm looking to like upgrade my equipment, but I might actually have a lot of work to do. So could you just like? And short and very simplistic terms for folks that are watching really trying to gauge it. My understanding at one point was the pre weatherization and the weatherization process. So for me, the electrification and equipment upgrades, especially because it's focused primarily 50% and Meyer below also is like how likely are But at what point would someone apply for that? And as their work they're gonna have to do on their actual home. A rental property prior to even being able to. To apply to this program. And knowing that the smaller focus, right ahead and I see your income areas, but also like the the scope geographically a smaller and part homes. And it is for the
healthy homes program of eligibility. And so like, yeah, and simplistic from Pew just like walk us through, like, how are envisioning the step process opens up. Where should someone go or is it that they could go to both like help me understand that? Chad Johnson, a great question. As as all these questions have been because the amounts of money involved here, we don't anticipate doing a lot of Mark heavy marketing of these because we don't want to again advertisement. That's not going to be available by the time people are seeking it. We we think there's a queue of projects that are already pretty known and eligible to start with. But answer your question more broadly non weatherized home isn't even ready for electrification. So weatherization is the precursor to to education all
cases and so we also know that this program, these 2 programs are going to be pretty high touch programs in terms of like our staff are really going to be walking people through this process. This is not going to be just some like general thing that's out there and you find it and you apply. This is going to be a pretty high touch. Process to walk people through and we're prepared for that right now. It's a relatively small number of projects that will actually be doing we'll see what that takes, you know, from because staff capacity perspective and make sure we are communicating accurately right to the customers of these programs, how to access them and how they can be packaged together. We're not going to say we're not going leave it to people to apply for one or maybe the
other. It's going to be a more high touch Okay. Commissioner thank you, chair. Just I know we short on time, but I tell you, we MAY have to we MAY have Yeah, I think the time. But the question quantity question because I talked a lot about process promotions and eligibility, but I'm really curious, particularly around like just the back and even Commissioner Negus plan around just like last year in the beginning when we were talking about this and approve this knowing that was a pilot, know, I was still going to be designed. Curious around, how like can you quantify? How many projects are we expecting to actually fund? Because i think that just kinda helped. Pups help set up expectations in to ensure that there's not tedious process. And then my other question is good more.
So as follow-up meeting because I know is probably not going to be process here, but I'm really cares around the contractor process. And I'm really like will house the city's approach and ensuring that we have the capacity of contractors to actually, you do this work. Those 2 questions. Yeah, thank you, commissioner. Be. I'm sorry, my mind. Just approximately between both programs and like we said, we anticipate that. Some will be able to share between both programs. And even though both have the maximum of $50,000, we don't expect that all of that will
be spent on. Each project and then for the contractors piece, that's also been a very big conversation for us because, you know, we want to make sure that we're being, you know. Least intrusive as we can in these homes and just get stuff as quickly as possible and get it done. Well for some of the more technical and more new services that are focused on weatherization and electric Haitian equipment. There are a lot of already established contractor and that works through. There's like an electric everything coalition with see in many other cities in the area. And then also Excel Energy has a trade partners list as well. And those are all folks that they know they can do the work. Due to the standards that they would be eligible
for the excel rebates. And so our goal is to tap into those existing. The sources were still navigating. What the contractor peace would look like. So again, welcome your feedback on that as well. And we intend to work with the center of energy and environment too again, do those home energy audits and also double check all the work at the end, that quality assurance and and they currently work with the city of Minneapolis on a very similar program where they also source bids for projects and you know, have a list of folks that they have worked with very cosely, of course, would so make sure that they abide by o the procurement rules. And we've been in touch with the hero office and Queenie over there the past number of months. Make sure we're just covering all the bases. So Tiffany feedback on
one think I'm going to do a time check for everyone. It's 3 of 6. We have some time still, but I'm going to ask that we wait and we get through the eligibility of peace here. Some let you go through the eligibility slides. And then we have a question slide towards the end and council members have Commissioners have questions to weaken pause during But I'm gonna of facilitation standpoint to get us through the ability slides. Sure. Thank Thank you. And and so, yeah, as we mentioned, our goal is to have a combined application form for both programs. So we can just ask people, are you interested in these things? Again, they would have to argue weatherize to get the electrocution. And then it's when the 4 units. And that's because a lot of the programs and the
space once he hit 5 units or higher, that's considered multi-family and the just like the mechanics of how that all works, really changes in the cost as well. So and there's also some pretty established programs already for multifamily that rely more on ranch. Property resources. And then as well, we have this season, Paul Anderson Inglis it's standard for folks to be on that. If we are, and then also for scope of work items are goals to make sure they haven't gotten insurance payouts for it. Just, you know, because then they would be getting double money on. And then, of course, property insurance and current property taxes. For homeowners. We would have a $25,000 asset limit, which is the same tat Sunday want to have been dumped in the systems programs. And does not include retirement or like here. Current like your main residence, home equity or
anything like that. It's really, you know, bank accounts and you see how much. Kind of like cash on hand. And again, the focus is to prioritize the families that don't have that upfront money too. Install these iems and then for rentals we would require that again. They haven't current Dsi cfo and at least a great air b and and no pending court cases or judgments related to poor management of rental properties you know, I think just gets back to the question of what we're talking about of want to make sure that we're, you know, supporting rental be able to carry on the work, the items that were installing and, you know, just make sure that that's equitable review, making sure we were see there and then also know late
mortgage payments to ensure that the rental owners not putting the home in the state of potential for foreclosure. Nuts. Very rare to see. Commissioner can did you have a question on these peace to science or can we cue Yeah. Go ahead. I think just like respectful many years ago. I used to do a lot mayor education and financial fitness hundreds of families that are qualified for Habitat for Humanity. And the only offering offer here. So I get that you're not including retirement home, home equity, you know, things like that. But sometimes if they don't even have a retirement, that savings account is their retirement. And so it he to see the asset limit because
it's only including making house if they don't actually have retirement accounts, just sort of reconsider that qualification. And maybe just that one offering its if no retirement account is is present and they have the exceed the asset limit. I think there's something to be said there for for qualifying and for a lot of different reasons. No access a job that even offers one year financial. Adjust your financial education and sort of like your financial fitness and your household understand that. But just a small offering that if they don't have retirement and exceed the asset limit, I would encourage us to reconsider how that's where did greater eligibility moving forward again, recognizing that we're working on for pre precept potentially, but just offering, as we think about continue to expand the program. Yes, the I that and then the one question I have
for you is since we're doing asset limit for homeowners. Is there a reason we're not doing one per rental property owners? For rental property owners and restaurant invite to come up heras well. So typically because the rental property is another, you know, home under their name. Then that equity would be considered income. And so just under the way that we've settlements before we did consider that yeah, this but you to speak. Chair commissioner certainly interested in your guidance on this question that our general assumption was that most rental property owners would eceed ad that's that women anything close to this. And given that the goal of the program is to benefit
their tenants and not them. We're trying which identified properties that qualify so that the homes can be more affordable from energy perspective. My my thought process and not just initially, it's just I really hope that rental property owners are that are able to access these resources in these findings are not doing that in lieu of making the choices to weather wise or other rights, their buildings on their own. I see some I some hesitancy just simply based of just like where some of the eigibility spaces are that like if you were, if it was for like a big entity that owns a small units property, but it's c like national mission wide, developer property owner, property owner, company that has multiple properties that they
own in that same community. It could be a small wonder for unit, but it's like a multi-million dollar property owner management space that has acquired several properties that that to me is not as high as a priority for, you know, necessarily when it comes to where to best use the 30 $30 lost or significant cost burdens to like our energy burden also than those spaces. And so I would just, you know, caution you that just because I am looking at your income area slides and where they are. But there are times where those wonder for you at homes. Buildings are owned by major, like I'm a big asset holding entities, especially on the east side. And so that's just something that I would bring us into the fruition of that conversation.
But appreciate just changed the incoming that history is. So this is the latest for moving for the next year. And then, as I mentioned, as well, our goal is to streamline the income qualification. a property is located in one of the shaded areas respective to the program. Then again, is using that Justice, 40 criteria that analyzes. The federal percentile of low-income households in that area and also overlapped wth various health and housing and climate factors. So, you know, number of people who are told that they have asthma, for example, or number of people that are unemployed and so that our goal there is, you know, again, just like how many times people have to apply for stuff Let's let's make it much as we can. and then. For this is, well, we would have them still homeowners
Smith, the asset limit information. Yes, very good point on well. And then smaller to mention central assistance also accept any proof of enrollment in another income-qualified program. And then we can also do the typical tax return and other documents as well as people want to go that route or don't have one of the other options. Here's just a brief overview of what the timeline would look like for and applicant and again, our goal is to do as much of a project at once as we can. And I'm kind of back to the electrification equipment as well. You know, when someone's Furness goes out in the middle of the winter, they're just going do what they can to get get it fixed as soon as possible. In that moment, they're not thinking how can I save the world? My home and could you know, or how can I help the
climate? And so part of the Kozak Haitians for part of home is that we have these life expectancy thresholds for the equipment. So it's under a certain age that it would not be eligible for placement. But if it's nearing that point where they need to start considering repairs so that they're not getting to that emergency situation, then we would help cover that. And so that's kind of another layer to make sure that we're not just. You know, because it is the most able to use what you have already as long as you can. And so we don't want to just like owner about brand new furnace for the sake of replacing something. So that's aspect as well. Then, yeah, as
we've mentioned outreach plan, intend to prioritize. So seeing referrals from the programs that cannot serve them. You know, but of course, still share with city's social media and what not. And then if we are having trouble spending the funds and we have additional opportunities as well. And then yes of Costco, clear because again, we want to save people money not add to Ferdinand. So w have the energy calculators built our we can model different systems and talk through that with the homeowner and figure out what works best for them make sure that we're not just putting stuff there that will. Increase their costs. And then we also and tend to have are we have, sir, working on a welcome packet that would, you know, have a road map and people know that we're, you know, to kind of figure this
out together because it really is a case by case basis and that I all very technical. So. Yet, as rest mentioned to we intend to, you know, obviously he check of our successes figure out where we can grow the program in the future and make it more efficient. And so, you know, intend feedback forms and of course, track all the expenses for sources You know, where we get the projects for women. With so much for that and I see Commissioner Kim has a question. Yeah, question in the comment was not just thank you so much for the information. Earlier today we had a said 70% of us are visual learners that I really do appreciate the visuals there. Kind of drying out meeting in a different way like I don't think I've ever
looked at the air source. Heat pump before snow some able be able recognize But thank you for the robust information and fielding all of the questions. It means a lot. I think if it's not an indicator climate. Addressing climate at the local levels really important. And so we're asking questions to be like, you know, how far does this go? And, you know, how are we taking a crack at it together and with certainly finite resources, I just really appreciate the referral there for a mdel and the intentionality of kind of like looking at, you know, both impacts and successes and then like we have to we are what's happening at the federal level. But still with an eye on making sure that, you know, these programs get implemented. And at with fidelity, so on that one question. And then another
especially submitted one what's this of the timeline for the project? I appreciate that. What's the timeline for the program like when are you hoping to, you know, reach out to cap and say, hey, we've got this program, we want to go on it. But what does that timeline look like for us? And then like when might we hear that the first project was was completed? Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner Kim, great So our goal at this point is to hopefully launch around mid-MAY but end of as I mentioned, we are still navigating the contractor piece. Course, make sure we have that ready to go before we promise anything to people. So but as I mentioned, we've been working with cleaning in procurement to navigate that and have various different options to consider. And then. Since we are trying to hope to
do everything in one instead of having kind stage model, then we anticipate, though, take about like. 4 ish months for a project to finish, including like from one, they apply to all the way being done. And so, you know, our our goal is to it started as soon as we can. All Tour mountain get to people before it gets to next winter even though you have Smyrna. Yeah, that's are a ton time that sounds great. And my wrist mother especially submitted. And I just really appreciate entertain them so early in this process. But as I look at the healthy homes, income-qualified map and the power of home income-qualified areas. I really just want to lift up that the North community center is like so close to
that. But there it is a g o. Thermally solar powered community center that we're about to cut the ribbon on. And as we think about block by block approaches. And I look at the neighborhood around which of course represent. But thinking about, you know, I - love just start now think about like, you energy storage and thank you. Apply by block approaches and how this can kind of help the larger system as we start to think about, you know, what is the next phase look like? So respectfully submitted, but thinking about the ways we can sort of tap into the city infrastructure, you know the heights, I think about the heights to the case could be coming up online. And so just things like that as a look at the impacted areas about how how are utilizing our own city infrastructure to help support kind of like this network and
and initiatives. So especially especially submitted. And thank you so much for presenting. Yeah, thank you, Commissioner Tim. Definitely agree. We know the community based energy sources are another thing that help lower costs and, you know, even like onsite storage for individual homes as well. So that's something that we've been kind of researching as we go on with the and will continue to do said as we consider the future of these programs, we can build that stuff. Yeah. Thank you all for your feedback and beautifully considered on have more coverage. Yes, I appreciate that a lot. And I know that we have a couple items that I think what between up with this week want to give us some time between now and our council meeting. But I do want to say thank you for bringing this forward to I was just say for myself, Imay have some follow-up questions. And so I probably will be and
communication with you all just as I continue to just this program is really important to me and several and many of my constituents as well. But I think that it's really important that we just have a pretty clear understand what it's going to like. And I would like to just have some part discussions with the prior to the approval. If commissioners have questions that they want to get some further clarity on, please do reach out to me, reach to Daniel Reach out to address order afternoon as well. And I'm sure we can get those to you. I personally would probably just say like it might be helpful to have up how those questions and answers go. I know that this is slated to be approved next week. We might want to consider for the 16th instead I think that's right. I think I have the APRIL dates. Let's
start in my head at this point. The 9th would be next week and the weeks after that. But just throwing that out there said it there's an option for that. If people keep our additional time and I don't I think it still coincides with some of the timeline you're looking at. But thank you guys so much for taking the time present about this. It's really important and I see members of needles, Minnesota here to thank you for being here and thank you for your work to all the staff that has been working on a lot of our programs thus this year and into and I'm sure for a long time. But thank you for for particularly looking at what is possible and being futuristic envisioning a foot. We continue to need to have significant investment at this time in climate. And I'm glad that we're getting to do that at the local level. And so I just want to say it works for the importance for parity to many of us and all of us on
this body. And so we're looking forward hearing from you and continuing that discussion. If there's no other further comments, we stand adjourned. Thank