Good evening everybody and welcome to this regular planning board meeting on May 22nd, 2025. Madame Secretary, can you please call the role? Mrs. Parker,
here. Mr. Kata here. Mr. Lily here. Mr. Heinman here. Mr. Kimoodi here.
Mr. Deal is excused. Councilman Roman excused. Uh, Township Manager O Sullivan here. Mayor Tambboro here. Face Fair Jeffrey Freshy here,
chairperson here, board attorney Mera here, and acting board secretary Kristen Spatola. And thank you very much, Kristen. We really appreciate your help. Um, also
joining us this evening is San Chan from H2N and Dan. What's happening today? How from dear? Okay, there's too many u
stuck in an acronym right now. Um, and thank you for both joining us. Can everybody please join because you can rise for To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible
with liberty and justice for all. Miss Pollah, can you please read the open public meetings act? Sure. Thank you. The notice requirements of the open public meetings act have been satisfied
with respect to this meeting of the township of Verona zoning board of adjustment which is being held in person in the ballroom of the Verona Community Center located at 880 Bloomfield Avenue,
Verona. This time and date of this meeting were included in the annual meeting notice posted in the community center and sent to the official newspapers of the township. The Verona Cedar Grove Times at least 48 hours
preceding the start time of this meeting. The agenda and instructions on how to comment will be provided at the appropriate time. All meetings are recorded. Those wishing to speak during
any public comment period should only provide their name and municipality. Street addresses are not required. Please be advised that should a member of the public choose to state their
street address, it will not be redacted from this recording. Thank you very much. Um, I would open to the public, but seeing that there are no members of the public here, I will
withhold from doing that. Um, moving on to E, approval of meeting minutes from April 24th, 2025. Has everybody received a copy and read through? Any corrections, suggestions? Nothing. Can I
get a motion then to pass the meeting minutes from April 24th, 2025? Make a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Katzaf makes the motion. Can I get a second? Second. Mr. Lily seconds.
Um, all members that vote to approve. I Does anybody abstain? Um, we have Can you just jot this down, Mr. Heindman and Vice Chair Fresky abstained. Okay.
Is there anyone who votes no? Okay. So, all other members voted to approve. Okay. And it was again it was moved by Mr. Katap and seconded by Mr. Lily. Um uh Dave, can you please take over the
resolutions section? I will be as uh recusing myself from resolution uh 20250. So, just read off the uh No, you're going to ask if everybody's received the
copy and you're going to ask for move in a second. Has everyone received a copy of resolution number 2025-09? Yep. Yes. Yes. Everybody's read. Yes. Such resolution. This is a memorialization.
I'll I'll make a motion to uh approve as drafted. I'll second. A second. I'll second it. Okay. Mr. Heman made a motion to approve. Mr. Kamoodi second. All in favor?
Okay. Roll. So, Miss Pata, can you call a voice vote? go through the roster. Sure. Okay. for resolution number 2025-09. Um, Mr. Heinman first approved. You made
the motion. Made the motion and Mr. Kamoodi second the motion. Mrs. Parker was a Mr. Katzf A. No, no, no. We have to go through it. We have Parker's notable.
Mr. Just call. Yeah, just call call their names and they'll give you a vote. Okay. Oh, Mr. Lily. Well, go back to Miss Parker. Okay. She's not eligible. No, she's not eligible. Mr. First, M. Okay.
Mr. Kat. Yes. U Miss Mr. Lily. Yes. Mr. Heinman. Oh, he's excused. Um, Mr. Heindman would be next. Yeah, he has to vote. Oh, okay. Mr. Mr. Heinman. Yes.
Okay. And Mr. Kamoodi. Yes. Um, township mayor manager Osullivan. He's not. And Roman is out. And Mayor Tambbor. Yes.
And Vice Chair Freshy. Yes. And chairperson. I rec um motion passes. The motion passes and that's it. Thank you.
Um uh just an announcement that planning board application 202502 Wedgewood Drive block 7 1712 lot 1 the hearing for tree removal. The applicant is requested to carry to the June to the regular June
26, 2025 meeting and no new noon notice is required. Um uh we'll come back to a subcommittee if if we need to, but for right now I'm going to hand this meeting over to Mr. Habin
and Ms. Shioan. Uh thank you uh Chairwoman. Um, for those of you who don't remember when I was here two years ago, uh, presenting your third round housing element and fair share plan, my name is Dan Hen and I am a, uh, planner at DMR Architects.
Um, I wrote your third round plan which was adopted in uh, I think June of 2023. Um and tonight I'm here to give you a preliminary uh presentation on the fourth round plan which we have to adopt by the end of uh June this year. Uh
before I start um I did send Kathleen um uh some uh the PowerPoint that I have up on here. Uh does anybody not have that up in front of them and would like a print out? Anybody want to print out in front of them? Okay, just uh save some
neck turning. Um, all right, buttons time to work. There we go. Uh, all right. So, just uh for those of you who don't remember my spiel from a couple years ago, uh the uh state of New Jersey has had an
affordable housing requirement since uh around 1975 when a case that's now called Mount Laurel 1 came before the New Jersey Supreme Court uh and uh uh then uh came again before the Supreme Court in 1983 uh and what's called Mount
Laurel 2. And the uh the the outcome of those two court decisions uh was what we now call the Mount Laurel doctrine, which is uh the uh idea that every municipality in the state of New Jersey is constitutionally obligated to create
an opportunity for uh affordable housing or low and moderate income housing uh and has to accommodate the growth needed to make that uh opportunity realistic. Uh in 1985, a couple of years after the Supreme Court's 1983 decision, the state
legislature adopted the New Jersey Fair Housing Act, uh which created COA, the Council on Affordable Housing. Um and uh that body's responsibility was to create rules and enforce the rules uh on uh how
uh towns have to create housing, how many affordable housing units they have to create. Um and it had a uh a uh uh consequence for those towns that didn't participate in COA's process or participated and failed to uh comp uh do
it in a compliant way. And that is what's called um exclusionary zoning uh litigation or builder's remedy. And what that is is uh that um if a town is found not to have complied with the affordable housing rules, the a developer, a builder can come to a court, sue the
town, say it's not complying with its obligation, and uh essentially override the municipality zoning powers to uh put a development um on any property in the town that, you know, as long as it
complies with state regulations uh and and as long as it provides an affordable housing uh component. So, COA has uh had created uh its first set of rules in 1987. Uh what's called its first round of rules. It created its
second round of rules in 1993. A lot of towns in the state complied with those rules. Um the second round expired in 1999. KA failed to adopt um constitutionally compliant rules from 2000 to 2014.
It uh it tried a couple of times and then those rules were struck down by the court substantially. 2014 it tried one last time to adopt rules and then it uh it tied three to three voting to adopt the rules and then it tied three to three voting to meet again to try again
to adopt the rules essentially uh ending the process of adopting its its third round rules. So in 2015, an organization called Fairshare Housing Centers sued KOA and uh brought uh it to the Supreme Court to say, "Hey, KOA has failed to adopt these rules. Now the court should
step in and ensure that every town is providing their affordable housing obligation." And that led to uh what's called Mount Laurel 4 decision that resulted in uh hundreds of towns around the state including Verona settling uh with uh fair share housing center to
identify what each town's municipal housing obligation was uh how to how to address it and uh forcing those towns to adopt plans. So you Verona uh settled with Fair Share Housing Center in 2021 um and uh adopted the plan that I helped
to create in 2023. Uh and uh uh last March uh the uh governor signed a law uh it's called A5S50 depending on who you ask PL 2024
C2. Uh I'll call it the fourth round rules to make things easier. Um, and those rules uh essentially um uh set the the the foundation for uh what we have to do today and what you're going to have to do every round moving forward
unless the legislature updates those uh the statute. Uh it required the Department of Community Affairs to calculate what it thinks every town has to create for affordable housing for the next 10 years. Basically, a period starting July of this year ending June
30th of 2035. Uh the DCA did that in October. Um and then Verona was required to decide whether it accepted the DCA's numbers by January 31st. Uh we actually found flaws with the DCA's numbers and
adopted a resolution uh prior to that deadline and I'll get into the outcome of that. uh and now we have to adopt a plan uh before June 30th that uh shows how we are going to meet the obligation that number that we uh we uh accepted uh
back in January. So uh the DCA the state calculated uh that um the township had to zone for or uh create projects that would allow for 173 affordable housing units um by 2035.
We found flaws with their methodology for you know calculating that number and we were able to uh through mediation process um with a signed judge bring that number down to 155 units. Uh the state also found that um Verona does not
have to uh set aside funds to create a program to rehabilitate uh deficient or substandard homes in town that are occupied by or owned by rented by uh low-income households. We did not challenge that number because that's a great deal. I think you had a a
a decent obligation last round. Uh and it was good that you didn't have one this time around. Uh fortunate for you uh you are eligible for something called a vacant land adjustment. And what that is is a process where uh we take a look at what land in town is actually vacant.
We use some strategic uh approach to a sense uh how much uh how much development could those lands realistically uh accommodate um uh regardless of what your zoning uh allows on those properties. and we determined
that the vacant land in uh Verona can only accommodate 57 affordable housing units based on uh some assumptions that I'm not going to bore you with. However, there is a uh requirement that why does this keep happening? There's a
requirement that um you uh you have to we have to plan and have projects that will have a high real realistic probability of creating 57 affordable units in the next 10 years. But we also have to uh apply what I kind of call
passive zoning uh to ensure that something called an unmet need uh can be accommodated uh for the next 10 years or beyond. And what that means is uh to have zoning that creates a realistic opportunity for some portion of the uh units that we don't actually have vacant
land uh to accommodate. Um, and so the formula for that uh is 25% of well, you know, I'm not going to do this this math, but the formula for that is on the the slideshow. Uh, and it results in an unmet need of 25 units. So, in addition to having projects that can create 57
units by 57 affordable units by 2035, we have to have zoning that creates a realistic probability for uh 25 additional affordable housing units. So, what I the way I like to think about it is that instead of planning for the 155 units that we settled with with the
courts, uh we're really looking for a plan that provides for 82 affordable housing units. So, how do you create affordable housing? Uh there's a few different ways. Um the most common way is what's called inclusionary development or inclusionary zoning. uh and that's where
you have a uh largely market rate project that uh includes a portion of its units uh that are required to be available and uh restricted to low uh income persons. So uh the standard uh is
that if you uh have a one of these projects 15 to 20% of the units in that project have to be uh affordable have to be uh restricted to um incomequalified people. Uh you can also partner with or help subsidize the creation of group
homes or supportive housing for people with disabilities uh disabled veterans and other uh similar groups. Or you can do what the township did in uh the third round which is contribute land and funding uh to create housing such as
what has been done at Verona Flats. There's something uh called bonus credits uh that used to just be applied to rental projects, but now there's a whole different there's like seven categories that you of bonuses that you can get. You can meet up to 25% of your
uh your vacant land number in this case with these bonuses. So, of the 57 units that we have to have a plan for to create by 2035, 14 of those uh are kind of uh are are bonuses. They're not real units. They're they're uh units that
count as more than one unit. So depending on the situation, one actual affordable apartment can count as one and a half or two. Um so what is required to be in a plan? Uh well, there's the obvious. We have to say here's our affordable housing number. Here's how we're going to meet
it. Then there's um some other pieces. We have to have a demographic and economic uh analysis including an analysis of the housing stock and uh projections of um how much housing and population may change over the next 10 years. We use a combination of where
we're required to use um uh information on building permits and actual construction that's taking place at town. But otherwise we use uh analyses from the US census bureau and um the northern north Jersey transportation planning association or association
authority which has projections through 2050. Uh it's pretty typical how uh planners take uh do this portion and then we have to have other uh meet other requirements like identifying what projects may have been proposed to us that we didn't include in the plan. Uh
what areas we're focused on to uh meet this housing obligation. whether we actually have sewer capacity to meet this obligation and uh how we're going to use uh affordable housing trust fund money uh to either meet certain
requirements or advance the plan. And obviously if uh if we're talking about needing zoning or redevelopment plans, we have to show that those are real, that they are either in draft form or adopted. So, um, over the last, uh, year, more
than that, um, uh, Sam, Kevin, occasionally myself, uh, have met with, uh, interested developers, um, who have come before the town saying that they want to, uh, they have a property, they're interested in developing, they want to help us with our housing plan,
as they like to say. Um and uh you know there have been negotiations to try and arrive at um uh projects and zoning uh options that uh are palatable and help us meet our plan. So you have a table
here that lists what are currently uh our PL plan is going to look like. There's going to be some changes between now and June 9th when I'm going to have the final version to you. Um these if you go through the list top to bottom, the TCMU overlay was a zone that the b the township was required to adopt in
the third round. It did not actually count to your third third round plan and I'm not really sure how it ended up uh part of your settlement, but it there was a caveat that you could use that in your fourth round. So that's that gives us 11 units right away um uh that we can
count in our plan. A couple of years ago um the township uh amended I think it was the C2 zone. the C2 zone to allow for assisted living uh on a I'm sorry, conditionally conditionally allow assisted living uh on a property on
Grove Avenue right by uh there's an office building and it's right by your uh your public works facility. Uh that would allow up to 25 assisted living affordable assisted living beds. Uh currently due to the cap on how many
senior or age restricted units you can have in your plan, we're only counting five of those and the rest you can bring into the next round, which will be lovely in 10 years when you're like, how are you going to handle the fifth round? Um there's a uh uh redevelopment plan for 320 Bloomfield Avenue that'll create
two affordable units. Uh there's a tentative uh uh plan for Hillrest Farm that includes one uh apartment for families or individuals who are income qualified and four bedrooms for individuals with special needs.
Um there's a negotiations ongoing for redevelopment of the Richfield Regency site, 420 Bloomfield. Um we have shown here the kind of the minimum number of units that the site will uh uh that we can get from the site while meeting our
obligation here. Um 176 Bloomfield Avenue uh looking at four affordable units for families. uh 885 Bloomfield also negotiations ongoing, but we're looking currently at potentially three special needs bedrooms and four uh uh
apartments um for uh families or individuals that are income qualified. And finally, uh there's what uh third round we got we were able to use 59 of the 159 or so uh senior uh
affordable units at the Hill the Hillwood uh site. um uh up on Fair View. Uh we're counting in uh eight of those for this round currently. Uh again, there's a cap on how many uh senior units we can use in our plan. Um we are
eligible for 14 bonus credits as I said and we I lay out in this table how um we plan to maximize those bonuses which means that our plan uh as currently uh appears is going to include 46
affordable units 14 bonus credits and that's going to bring us uh at least 60 um affordable housing credits against the 57 unit realistic development potential or vacant land number uh that we have to worry about for in the next
10 years. Um we have also uh discussed uh removing the 50% uh uh split requirement for the TC zone for mixed use. Uh essentially you your ordinance had has it been changed? Never mind. No, it hasn't changed. The ordinance
currently says that if you want to do mixed use as a conditional use in the TC zone, 50% of the square footage has to be non-residential and the other 50% can be residential. um that is highly um uh restrictive toward actual mixeduse
development that would create affordable housing. So uh part of our plan is to uh eliminate that 50% split um so that we can meet our 25 unit unmet need in the TC zone. We have uh to as part of our
plan project how much revenue the township is going to take into its affordable housing trust fund over the next 10 years and commit to how we're going to use that funding. Uh we currently are projecting a surplus in funding which we are uh working on uh
ways to spend that money to uh toward this plan either to reduce the densities on one of the sites here or to uh to work with a developer to have a a special needs component in their in their otherwise family uh uh
development. and any excess units that end up in the plan, anything over the 57 units toward the RDP can be carried into the fifth round. Uh, which again will be great in 10 years when we're scrambling to figure that out again. So, um, again, tonight is just
preliminary presentation of the plan. I've received comment uh from uh uh Miss Pearson that um I've uh responded to her on that I've already started to incorporate into the final draft um here tonight to take any other comments you all may have if you've had the chance to
read the plan. Um we are shooting for a special meeting to adopt the plan on June 19th. Um a after that there's going to be a meeting of the council on June 23rd to endorse the plan and adopt uh some of the resolutions that they need
to do in order to make the plan official and and uh meet uh the statutory requirements. After uh if the plan is adopted, we have 48 hours to submit it to the state, including the resolution adopting it um so that we can uh be declared compliant. And then there's
going to be a period from July 1st to August 31st where um uh or entities individuals can uh challenge the plan. The statute says that uh the challenge has to be based on a a allegation that the plan actually fails to hit our
number which I don't think is going to be a problem. Uh you can't be forced it can't be a developer saying hey I wanted to have my site in your plan and you didn't give it to me. um uh it has to be uh a substantive act uh claim that we have failed to meet our obligation. If
uh such a challenge is successful, we have until December 31st to resolve it and I believe we uh will be protected and able to do that. Uh and any ordinances that are necessary to uh advance the plan uh including zoning have to be adopted by March 15th of
2026. Uh the implementation of the plan will be in the hands of your administrative agent, Laura Mongello. Um any applications for the projects that are identified in this plan are treated the same way as any other application for development, they have to come before
you for approval uh uh against the uh zoning or redevelopment plans that they are based on. Um and the township has to commit to fund uh its obligations where relevant. Uh that is a concern for the
the council who has been um apprised of their obligations with respect to that. So I know I just threw a lot at you. I promised the chairwoman that I would keep my presentation to less than 15 minutes. I'm not sure I did that, but uh here is uh the floor for all of you.
Okay. So um I'd like to go around the table. I'm sure everybody had a chance to read this. Okay. Um, maybe not the new one, but the new one only swapped out the last bit, right? And changed a couple of details on the a couple of the
housing. It was just the table. We updated. All right, we're going to I I would like to start with Miss Parker. You have any questions or any comments or any suggestions for tweaks? Okay,
Mr. have Zaf, thank you for putting this together. Um, just looking through Could you get on your mic a little better? Thank you. Sorry. So, just looking through this again um on the required or kind of the target that you're
getting to. So, what happens if these some of these properties are not developed? For example, the TCMU overlay. I mean, that's subject to people acquiring those properties and developing them. What happens if there's hold outs and they don't want to sell?
So, and then and then follow on to the other property over here across the street. I mean, that that's got issues. It's it's got essentially flooding and drainage issues. What happens if they don't get their permits from DP or whomever or they decide that, hey, I can't build all of these units on there?
Um, what happens then? Right. So, um, that's a really good question. Um, so there's a couple of things. So uh first thing is for every town there's something called a midpoint review and basically by July 2025 if we look back
and not 205 2030 uh if if any component of this this plan is not substantially moving along if TCMU as you said doesn't seem like it's attracting any development then um the town would have
to look at uh whether it needs to increase the density or replace that uh zone with um another option of hitting making those 11 units. Um or explaining why we think that it continues to be
viable if you know maybe some things had started to take place and then a developer backed out for completely unrelated reasons to issues with the zone or the site. Uh and the same goes for 885 Bloomfield if uh um if or or any
of these projects. If they find that they can't produce a number of units that are in the plan or can't do anything period um we either have to uh update the plan once and and replace those projects with something something
more viable when we find out about it or uh do an update in at the midpoint. Um we've already in in in respect to the the site that you you asked about um we had already been kind of clear in our discussions and and Sam can uh can
expand on that if necessary uh that um the you know the storm water and and other site constraints were a concern and and they've been responsive to that. So I'd like to add more. Um so the plan
that was is prepared by um DMR is as per the statutes you you're required to have a plan in place and it's very common it's not typical to Verona that maybe along the uh you you know somewhere down
the line some projects fall they don't come to fruition. It's perfectly normal. Um it's it happens all the time. But I think what's important at this point is do we have a plan that can provide
realistic development opportunity and um what Dan is presented is these are the various options. So just because we have an RDP of 57 doesn't mean all of those need to be developed in the next 5 years but we
need to have a solid plan in place. Thank you. No that's fine. It just the plan doesn't address risks and generally I know I'm in the business where you have to address risks also. So that's why my genesis of my question. No, no, absolutely. And that uh and your question uh Jeremy was a very good
question because obviously what happens if things fail, right? So, thank you. I had no other comments. Good. Yep. Thank you, Mr. Lily. Yes. Thank you for putting this together. Um,
regarding the uh the due dates um specifically with the land at the end of uh Commerce Court that's being submitted for Green Acres. It's my understanding maybe uh Mr. O'Sullivan can weigh in on
this um that that hasn't gone through yet. How would that impact this application? Uh it it won't. Um, we've already uh actually brought this up before uh the
judge uh in in the discussion about the um uh the one bringing your number down to 155. It's it's substantially along the way to being restricted. I think there is a deed restriction already in place even if Green Acres hasn't done uh
finalized their process. Um so it won't be a factor. Uh we're we're already past uh the the point of that being an issue. Um I I don't foresee that coming coming back to us. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. I just had a couple of questions
if you know on the process and what the thought or J. Sorry. Sorry. Yeah. Uh just what the thought in terms of timing on some of these draft especially redevelopment plans. Um because we have a couple of sites where
we're anticipating a redevelopment plan, but they're still in the draft phase. We haven't seen them yet. Yeah. Um I assume the plan is to just introduce and have the council endorse draft plans to submit on the
30th. Is that correct? Uh I I'll let um Sam speak to the timelines of the specific uh the draft redevelopment plans, but uh uh yes, essentially the um whatever draft redevelopment plans, ordinances that we have ready uh uh
prior to the adoption uh is going to be included as an evidence to the affordable housing uh dispute resolution program. Basically showing these are real. um for projects that are designated uh and don't have redevelopment plans. Um you know, I've
been in touch with the uh Beth McManis who is the once formerly known as your court master, now your special adjudicator uh and uh in these affordable housing litigation matters. And she understands that most towns might not have everything uh like these
redevelopment plans fully in place. And uh we just need to document as much as possible that these are real uh and then when and then uh try to provide the the redevelopment plans when they are further along. Um so uh I don't think I
think everybody's in the same situation that I think am I answering your question? Yeah. No no I understand what what the process is in general but just where are where are we on some of these draft plans? I can elaborate on, you know, like 885 is not something we
really discussed at our meetings. It's kind of been something where it's like, all right, well, this is a piece of land that we need to address for RDP, but we've never really committed to including it in the plan. So, I'm just kind of curious where we stand on that
and if we have a draft redevelopment plan because I haven't seen it. No. Uh, absolutely. So, um, uh, 420 and 8.85, 85. Uh the reason why no one has seen anything is because we're still in the
negotiation phase. No, and we've seen Richfield. I I understand your question. It's because on the chart it says redevelopment plan, right? It says redevelopment plan and we've never ever addressed that. I want to I want to that that should not say uh that that that's that's confusing because um uh
originally my anticipation was that this project was just going to be uh that we would that we were just going to have the zoning for this. We didn't really know what the deal was going to be with the negotiation was with the developer. But I would call this a development. It's I would say that this is in the
same uh stage as any other site that's been designated as a redevelopment area that doesn't have a redevelopment plan. there's no redevelopment plan in in in in place or written that. So I I understand that that was confusing how it's in there. So just you can you can ignore that. Uh and the only thing that
we we will be able to include is the 320 Bloomfield because we were supposed to hear that in December of last year. So that's in a draft format that was it's public. The rest are still in a negotiation but we have time until
March, right, to do all of this. So yeah, we intend to continue and expedite it, but it's somehow, as you are well aware, it takes its own trouble. Yeah. No, I I understand. But if if we've got two sites that are up in the air and
we're we're relying on, you know, 18 credits, you know, that kind of brings you back to Jeremy's point about risk mitigation and having a bit more redundancy in the plan in case uh some of these drop out,
they're not feasible, they're not palatable. Yeah. So it's like and I mean that's the whole if one of them drops out we've got to increase somewhere else right but you know as as you know at this point we're we we have to look at what's
what's realistic today. Mhm. So you know so there is also and I'm not trying to scare anyone but you're in this business Jason so you know even if there's a plan in place right even if it's adopted um doesn't necessarily mean it will get
developed but the fact that there is something in place there is we have a rehab um we have a rehab designation for the entirety of the corridor which enables us to adopt redevelopment plans for sites as they open. Um we have a
redevelopment investigation which is a whole uh you know process for three sites at least at this point. So you know it's I think the goal over here is to tell the courts or whoever that um
these are these are viable projects. They there these present a realistic opportunity. That's all we're doing right now. By March, of course, we need to have plans in place. Yeah. At this stage, the the main thing that we need
to focus on because the time time limit that the state gave us is absurdly short is just showing that these are real. There's developers who are interested. Uh and uh you know, if they fall out of place, we we resolve that with an update
in the months or years that that that happens. Mr. Mr. Um, all right. First question. What is a special needs bedroom? Okay. So, yeah. So, that's if you have a
um uh group home for adults with disabilities, for example. Um uh it's usually a house that's been converted for uh their purposes with ADA, etc. Uh and um for affordable housing purposes, each bedroom in that group home that's
occupied by someone who is income qualified and disabled counts as an affordable housing uh credit. It counts toward our plan. So rather than being like, you know, an apartment for with the whole family, uh it's each bedroom in a group home. So
Okay. But that would mean the house is set up to be a, you know, DVD house or something like that. Exactly. Yes. That in in its entirety. It's not like, you know, I don't know, a bedroom in a rental or
something. Well, occasionally you have like a a group Sorry. No, I'm listening. I'm talking to myself out loud. Okay. Yeah. Occasionally you have um providers who don't have a house uh for example or building and they will rent out a few one-bedroom or studio apartments in an
apartment building uh and those would be the bedrooms in that case. So, uh, not that that's that that's a sort of extra information. Would things like that apply? Like again, if they come up, if that's, uh, you know, if we're looking for those those bedrooms or seats or
houses or whatever, is that, um, you know, if that special need is, somebody figures that out, does that, say, in 2030, you know, hit our numbers even if it's not in the plan right now? Um yeah, if something comes along and
somebody wants to uh build it and it and uh they are subject to the the state's income requirements for those kind of uh facilities, then yeah, we can update our plan or we just put in our back pocket for the fifth round, which will start in
2035. That's probably more likely how you're going to use it. And and just to add to Dan's point, Tim, um these special needs housing, the the uh statutes are very specific as to what
would qualify. So uh what Dan has been doing um too is ensuring that is as per whatever the state requirements are like you know with your conversations with uh these certain Yeah. I mean they're they're they're they're credable
agencies so I trust them. They know what they're doing. Yeah. Good. Um second thing is just on on um all of these these numbers are about future development and and areas that would invite these. But what about is there
any clause in in the either the litigation or how you work on this for let's say uh you know is it a apartment building and they want to you know they're doing market rate but they want to just put you know I don't know we could have a tax incentive
program that says if you do affordable housing on some units you'll get you know x y or z. Uh yeah, if there was a situation where uh a develop a property owner developer wanted to do that with an existing building and they were willing to comply with all the various
state requirements and yeah uh how often do people want to do that? Usually they're trying not to do affordable housing. So it's not likely unless the town uh offers or somebody offers them money. Um and uh you know we I mentioned that uh we have a a projected surplus of
affordable housing trust funds that have to be spent on affordable housing purposes, but it's not nearly enough to make a a huge difference direction. And and the where I'm going with this is like let's say you know we're we're in um you know you're working in the
corridor here for these new developments but you know we want to preserve the character of the the single family or multif family homes but say you own one your mortgage is paid I don't know you move into Florida and you know you can you can afford an affordable rate to
rent it out like that seems like a space where you know we could extend into single family homes, meet those uh uh meet our obligations but not change the character of of Yeah, it in theory,
yeah, that's those are ways to do it. Uh the reality in reality the you know it it requires that usually requires a town to outlay a lot of money and the amount of money that you'd have to lay out to make a dent um I don't think would be a
good idea. So, so it yeah, somebody could do it, but I don't think in our case it makes sense. I'm just seeing for other ways. So, last thing I'll ask on that then is um I have a notion of why this, which is what I believe if we're voting on anything is, you know, matches
our master plan. Can you tell me how this matches our master? Um, so, uh, I'm going to let S weigh in on the specifics of that, but I'll I'll I'll tell you that, um, well, you know what? Why don't you start, S? I'm going to let you start. Yeah. Um, so, uh, as for the
municipal land use law, we have written a master plan. Our master plan, a master plan also made a reference to affordable housing. affordable housing um is a whole different although the planning board is adopting it it's a whole
different animal if you will so what um Dan is doing is the fair share plan which is a whole different statutes than what governs a master plan it is very consistent with what we have recommended in the master plan and frankly as per
the fair housing act of 1985 every municipality has a constitutional obligation to provide affordable housing. So what happens is what we will be adopting next month will be in tandem
uh with our master plan. So our zoning ordinance um for has a policy framework from the master plan right the land use plan element and any other affordable housing um will uh what the plan
prepared by Dan will provide a policy framework. So both of them are in tandem with each other. Yeah. Um I I would just add that um uh the housing plan is essentially an
element of your master plan. Um but uh uh the the uh the hard thing to say is that um you know the affordable housing rules and statute trump whatever your master plan says uh in a lot of ways. So, uh, you know, I think a lot of this
is consistent, uh, with the plan in that most of this, uh, is taking place in the, uh, along Bloomfield Avenue and it's, uh, you know, we're we're keeping out of your single family neighborhoods. Uh, which is, you know, the first thing that you see in every master plan keeper, single family neighborhoods,
preserve, etc. Um, but that's the caveat. Well, that you just matched my thinking on this. So, there you I asked that question just to hear that back. Thank you. I'm vegetable. Thank you, Mayor. No, thank you.
So, unless otherwise agreed to it, am I correct in assuming that these all of these developments would be subject to the relevant ordinances and zoning restrictions that we have? Um, they are all, as far as I know, uh, I could tell you there,
they're all going to have their own redevelopment plans or zoning. TCMU is an existing zone. Grove Avenue is already got a zone. I think the rest of these are all going to be redevelopment plans. Uh, so they're all going to be different from separate from your regular zoning except for the re where the redevelopment plans defer to your
current zoning. Okay. And this is this probably a dumb question, but AHUS, they always have to be rentals. No, they don't. They don't. Then how come we really don't see ones
that you only I've only seen rentals? Yeah, the the the the uh force sales are are I don't know if it's that they are less profitable or if it's that they are just um you know more out of reach for a
lot of uh low-inccome folks because you still need a down payment and security or not the security deposit down payment uh closing costs etc. So, it's just not super common. Uh, and especially in a in a in a a community like uh Verona where you're trying to do these in your mix in
your core, your your downtown and you know, you're doing apartments, you just don't see a lot of developers wanting to do condos. And I I can actually elaborate because uh of the so the town I the town I used to work for before I came to H2M um my
department did administration and one of the things um I'm sorry no no I know you remember that right um so one of the things our experience has been with owner occupied right is um as the value
of housing and especially Verona which is in a more expensive area of the state as the value of the housing increases it becomes very difficult for um anybody who wants to it it's easier for them to
rent than actually buy. So what we faced over there was and I'm talking about I've been with H2M for four years. So I'm talking about the time in like you know from 2015 to 20 be before the pandemic. So really 10 years ago um
where the property values in suburban communities was not as inflated as it is today and yet if somebody uh sold their house it would be very difficult to resale it to somebody else. So that was
one a huge struggle. So for anyone who's trying to create these kind of for ownership, it's the cost is prohibitive and then for a town you just have this housing and nobody's using it. So uh rentals are preferred for what that's
one of the many reasons why rentals are preferred. I guess it's a catch 22 though because you're not putting inventory like this low entrylevel inventory into the market for people to buy and it's just leasing opportunities and then it doesn't create any inventory
for people to um yeah I guess it's a you you're you're 100% correct. It's a it's it's a self perpetuating problem. It it it is and unfortunately you you know we have to every mechanism that Dan's
talking about we have to follow exactly what the state tells us but then you know in terms of in terms of how they get built it's the market that decides it yeah thank you
um I mean that and a discussion that um Mr. Mr. Msar and I had a couple of years ago about the expiration of these units in their after their 30-year, you
know, restriction. Um, is there any way that we could write into the developers agreement of some of these that they have to renew once, so that would give us 60 years, you know, um, you know, on some of these units. I
because then I I know that rehab will happen and but would there be a willingness do you think for the some sort of developers agreement to require at least one renewal?
I don't know is this ever done? Um so you know this is more debacles agreement is more a legal question but has it ever uh has it been done? Yes, it's been done. So there were I the there so we
have first the core regulations then after that once the housing gets built we have what they call the UAC regulations and there were many in the past and this has been my experience in um in in my prior position and uh one of
my towns where um you know there were all these second round second round housing which is now expiring ing because it's you been um uh it's been many years. What you cannot mandate them
to renew it but you can definitely there is an option of extension of expiring controls that you can definitely do. It has been done uh in uh we're currently working for in one of my towns with uh
with those affordable housing that were a part of the second round. Um can you write that in a in a development agreement? Um, I am not an attorney, but based on just my experience, um, it's
not I've never I've not seen it, but I will defer to Jamie, who's our affordable housing, or, uh, Greg and, uh, Brian, is it done? Have you ever seen it done? No. No. Because generally speaking, what Dave also said was, it's
a self-perpetuating problem. We know this, but in 30 years they're going to condoise and sell those units at market rate. And so the people that were renting them at a whatever ridiculous rate is considered reasonable in 30
years, um they're they're not going to have that option ever. No, I I want to talk about that too that there is something called as a 955 rule where like um the U-Hack regulation
regulations from 2006 say um have that and I've seen that in deed restrictions in my prior job and the one that I'm working on right now where it says that if you're when your controls expire you have to reach out to the town first. So
you can put that kind of language in the in in the deed restriction or development uh agreements and then there is that percentage. So say for example a unit was sold at 100,000. I'm just putting a number out there now. It's it's a million doesn't mean that the guy
gets 900,000. He gets he gets whatever his share is for that affordable housing and the remainder goes back to the municipality. Um, Greg, if I'm wrong, correct me, but that's my understanding. Yeah, that's correct. That's for for sale, though. But correct. I think Jess,
you were talking about just the the ones that we're doing now. She's talking about any really. Yeah. I mean, for renting. Well, you can we can only put stuff in the re in a developers agreement that we're negotiating now. Well, that's my point. So, I suggest I mean, you can if you get a developer who
would agree, but the developers have electric. Yeah. I mean sorry developer is not not going to agree to well maybe I I can answer the rental portion. Um so with the rental portion what happens is
um what we we've tried to do with um in the past is reach out to so the town that I used to uh do this they had an accessory apartment program which was the model after which like uh KA started
adopting that uh in their regulations. So, uh, those accessory apartment units, um, they have a minimum 10 year. Uh, but if you have enough money in your affordable housing fund, you could reach out to those owners well in advance
saying, can you then expand for like I'm talking about my experience has been with the accessory ones, but but that but the same rule applies. So, if you have enough monies in the trust fund, you can
help them subsidize that. So um it it has been done but you do not plan this. It's it's you cannot uh it's I it's unheard of. Let me rephrase put my uh put the right language. Unheard of doing
that at the development agreement stage. Yes. But there is that that I guess you call it a first right of refusal. Correct. uh in the in the lease where they you know we the the developer or owner prior to the expiration could bring it up to the town and the town can intervene in some kind of way but yeah
it involves money usually and usually if it's subsidized and you continue to subsidize um okay um I want to just quickly f well first going back to a game plan but then I want to address a couple of things in
the plan Um because there are things that are not completed in this and they need to be completed by the 9th, I would like to request a final subcommittee meeting to ensure
that everything is the way that we think it should be during the week of the second. Um okay. I I don't know if that fits in with the I mean we're almost that's not this Monday which is late uh
Memorial Day but the following Monday is the second. So, I mean, I I don't know what Jason your availability might be in the afternoons, but I don't The bottom line is right now 380 uh
383 Bloomfield Avenue, which is Hillrest, is not in the body copy of this. There are some erroneous figures and and statements in there that I know that you're going to address. and the map
which um I located more problems with that map where I I identified the one that was blurry. No, map number two, but I sent you a bunch of labels. Oh, that one. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I
mean, I don't know where you why did you think that those properties were tax exempt? I didn't. They are. They come from the those maps, the land use maps are based on the tax assessors data. So that's public uh Clarage House better be
paying taxes and and Wedgewood Drive and Yeah. So if it's if it's an HOA, it's it's treated it's usually classified as tax exempt. We have to reclassify every single one of those as uh multif family. You also have black for no data on
annin. Yeah. on single family use homes up on Derell where single family homes were uh done and Verona Flats right here is no information. Yeah. Um I can go through and make those those tweaks. So,
what I'm going to request, I I would like to set a meeting up for I, you know, I guess as late in the week as possible that could accommodate you, Sam,
Mr. O'Sullivan, the mayor, if he can please make it, obviously our attorney, and Mr. Heman. Um, for the final once, you know, just any com any final comments. When do you think you could get it back to us
by barring a couple of, you know, hard figures? We We understand there might be a couple of numbers that may not be firmed up yet. Is is June is th is the 29th. Okay. Thursday.
Sorry. Say that again, hun. The Thursday the 29th. Is that okay? Oh, I was saying like the week of the 5th, like the week of June 1st. Oh, that week. Um, uh Oh, you're saying when you could get Well, because I I think just just to be clear, we're talking about we were talking about having the the
subcommittee meeting on the second. So, but you're asking about maybe doing that the week after, correct? I would say get us the plan um maybe by the 30th. Okay.
Where are we? That that's a that's a week in a day. That's eight days. Yeah. And then we set up the meeting. Um I don't Is there any day in particular during that first week of June that is
terrible for anybody? Okay. Friday night. Okay. I'm out too at a bar. Let's all meet at the bar. We do it at the beginning of the week. It gives if there's any final comments.
So, you know, Monday the Monday the 2nd is fine. Yeah. Jay, does that work for you? That's fine. As long as it's not So, do you want to do a 3:30 in and out? 3:30. You said
3 3:30 or 4 3:30 2 3:30. Let's hold for three. I got a I'm putting in a hold on 3:30. So, um, whatever time works for everybody else. Um, and I'll, um, ask Kathleen to set that up, um, on Zoom.
Okay. Um, yeah, cuz there were some number changes in that chart from what we had been looking at that I had never seen before. And um one question I will ask right now
is how did we end up with a reduction of units at Grove Avenue? Um so Oh, you I heard you address it really quickly before. Okay. Right. So the the reduction on Grove Avenue is because
there's we there's a cap on how many senior units that you can include in the plan and that's 13 units. Mhm. Uh based on the we're saying that we're going to have a minimum of 46 affordable units in the plan. So 30% of 46 rounding is 13.
Um, so, uh, what I what I wanted to do was maximize I wanted to have a balance between maximizing what we claim from Hillwood and, uh, make taking making use of Grove Avenue because Hillwood I I don't we
nobody knows if uh, well, I don't know personally if it's going to continue to be uh, have affordability controls on it in 2035. And I would like to for us to take advantage of how many uh senior units are in there um currently. Currently.
Yeah. So rather than you switched it over. I switched it over basically. I I I that that's basically it. I I didn't want to go zero on Grove Avenue because we we took the time to to zone it. Yeah. Um so uh yeah, that that's the answer. Okay. And um
the the the 8.85 85 is definitely um it feels very big. I understand the acreage involved there, but um uh the concern of mine was the concern
I had publicly when this property was discussed as to whether it qualified as an area need. And I believe two people on this day voted no and we're still here. Um, and because we found the property from
my humble perspective, um, to be unfit for development, steeply sloped and basically has a water way running through it that used to be a railroad lines. So, um, I I am a little
concerned seeing those numbers in in there, and that's the first I've seen those. Okay. Um I don't think that that was included in our um in the last spreadsheet that we had. It was but it was uh um kind of it was a lower number
based on the analysis that Sam had done a while back based on the I think we we had applied it from the master plan. Yeah. 19 units. Yeah. That that looks a little lofty if if you ask me also the
property is very narrow. So ju just uh expressing a little concern there. Understood. They're still they're still we're still uh Kevin, myself and Dan, we're still in negotiation with them. um
what they had originally presented uh was at least uh two uh I would say more than it was one and a half times one and a half or two times what what they no what they originally presented
uh was at least two twice what we brought them down to um and um another thing is that we've asked them to provide us with How are you um a fitting all the units? Uh number two, how are
you going to provide all the parking? How are you going to keep the character of the neighborhood? How are you going to buffer from um everything around you? So those are the few uh points that we raised and you know once we get those uh
uh numbers uh or their concept plans we'll be sitting down with them and discussing but for our purposes uh we do need to provide these number of units and it just makes sense having this then
along the corridor then tapping into other areas right. No, I I hear you. I mean, and I guess the last question is what's your schedule in so far as getting firming any of these numbers up with Kevin and getting them over to Dan?
We we keep we um my my schedule is dependent on when uh we get those concept plans right from the developer. But the one do they do they know that we're dealing with a very serious deadline? Okay. Everybody's aware of
that. And just so that you understand, we have an internal uh communication. So when Kevin and I meet with people um we whatever is discussed is sent in an email. Dan's aware. So we keep each other in in the loop. Um so you know
it's so that there's no communication gap and he doesn't have erroneous information. And one of the reasons why Dan also uh uh wanted me to be part of all this discussion is so that you know
it's all out there in the open every you know we all discussed this there's no miscommunication. Okay. Yeah. And and just in terms of the firming of the final numbers, um uh again uh something that I discussed with your uh your
special master Beth McManis um is is that you know when we have these these um these pending uh kind of deliberative concepts um what we're going to show in the plan is not what the final numbers
are but that any one of these every one of these projects will have the minimum number of of units that we need to comply. So, okay. Uh and we're going to be clear uh that um with with you know 885 and and Richfield and whoever else
that there's still negotiations concepts that we have may have to include in the evidence uh to show that these are things that are actually in process are going to be clear that they're deliberative. Uh they aren't the final product. Um so we're not held to
anything uh other than saying that these are the projects in our plan and you know and as we said if we have things if any of them fall out we'll update them the plan as needed. Okay. So just to follow along with that. So if 885 for for whatever reason wasn't
able to contribute anything would we still be okay with our other numbers? Um, if 885 didn't contribute anything, we would have to replace it at least in part. We would have to replace the
project at least in part. Like we may not have to get every single affordable unit that is currently being claimed there, but we'd have if if we lost it, uh, the plan would have to be revisited. That somewhat contradicts though what you said when I asked the same question. What was it? What was that? You said
that, you know, projects don't always come to fruition and that you can re-evaluate the plan. Yeah. And I thought this this sounds like the same question though, isn't it? That that in if it were to to if if like what you said, if they weren't to come to fruition, I think my answer to you was that we'd have to re-evaluate the plan
at that stage, which was right. But you But now you're saying you have to replace them outright. That contradicts what you said. No, he's saying if we take it out of the plan, take it out of the plan. Okay. like if we preemptively Yeah. I mean I mean it's in both cases
if if if in if if uh June 2026 885 uh says uh we're not we're pulling our application or whatever we have to rewrite we have to rewrite write our plan. If if they if we
uh negotiations fall apart uh before June 30th we have to figure out how to re replace them. So no matter what, anything that doesn't that is clearly not going to pan out has to be replaced and get the call. Okay. I misunderstood them, but I'm still I
still have the same concern around the lack of kind of risk mitigation highlighted in the What was that? I still have a concern around the lack of risk mitigate risk risk mitigation highlighted in the plan. Yeah. Uh uh understood. You mean in terms of having a buffer uh or a buffer or contingency
plans? What if this doesn't happen? Yeah. What are the responsibilities? Who's responsible? I mean, there are contingencies to an extent, but you don't want to we you don't lay everything out into the plan because once it's in your plan, it has to be done. So, the plan is shows what you
have to do right now or what we're saying we we need to do to to hit the number and if anything falls out, um you know, whatever alternative options we've discussed, we we we revisit. Okay. He gave it
back. You could go back um you could go back and add some to Grove. Is that correct? Add more units into um not more units, but you you had said that you you allocated
um so uh yes and no. Um if if we were to uh let me So if if if we currently have uh based on 46 affordable units in our plan, the we're we're allowed to make 13
of those seniors. So if we lose the six uh or seven affordable units that are shown in 885, we can only do 30% of 39. So it's it's not so much that we can add units. It's actually okay. It's going to end up less. It's kind of a domino effect. Once one unit goes out, the
senior units go away. Yes. Had you ever considered some of the family units to occur within that same development, special needs
uh in Grove A. Correct. Um well, the issue is Grove A already has zoning for Yeah. Right. for seniors about amending the zoning. So, you'd have to amend the zoning. Um, Hillwood's already built. That's senior. That's maxing out our
senior credits. We're proposing we're proposing Richfield to be that's senior as well, but that's not that's family. But I hear what what what Jess is saying is is to expand our her ability on that.
Yes. to have an have a an option on Grove Avenue of of you know an alternative to assisted living doing family or not even an alternative in addition to okay I don't know what kind of room is available but I guess my
question was it's going to be a you know a living situation development where whereby there could be special needs living um arrangements I'm sorry. In separate housing. Yeah. Like
on the same site. So I'm I'm just suggesting that maybe that I call it a mixed use. I don't know. Yeah. Yeah. Sure. Uh uh inter multigenerational housing to to Jeremy's point that would certainly expand the ability if there
was room on the site to um not only score credits but also score units. Um, so yeah, that's that's a that's an interesting thought. You know, I think that's something for uh uh you know, we
we can uh Alexand um the uh one thing that I would make note of with something like that is when you know Grove Avenue and TCMU overlay are the two zones that don't actually have a
developer and when there's not actually a developer for for it, you don't get the benefit of bonuses. So, we would be Wow, we could get I think I'm showing five bonus credits from Bloomfield right now. Uh we'd have we'd lose that benefit. Um we'd have to make up for it
with more units on Grove Avenue. So, the answer is yes, but you but you have to use more real units instead of bonuses. Correct. And my and the other thought I have that you know also multi-generational households are something the multi-generational
households are what the new legislation is encouraging. I think it is also um it it makes sense to think about okay we have a zoning in place that would permit assisted living but if they if we were
to change it I'm not sure if it would provide a realistic opportunity for um the special needs unless we do a combination we'll have to think about it you know because at the end of the day
we want to uh get credits that then our quote master would also recommend. So that's something I would be careful about you know because our goal is to tell that this is our realistic development potential and here's how
we're trying to satisfy it. Okay. I was just exploring. No, no, of course. No, no, please don't uh uh misunderstand me. Yeah, I'm not trying back. Jess, just ask. Uhhuh. Don't hold back. Nobody should hold back. That's why we're both
here. Yeah, cuz that that that's an interesting um that's an interesting alternative to consider if if we have to fall back on it. But you're right. But that that's something we should just have it in our back pocket. Exactly.
Because right now we need um like realistic projects. Is there a developer for 885? Well, there's an owner. There's an
owner, right? But is there realistic development? There is a owner. Uh he has a developer, right? So there are each of these projects have come with the owner and the developer. So I mean, you know,
you brought it up. That's that's that is a a a risky concern that could be litigated. I know there'd be a crown here that could be going on for a long time. There would be a chance we'd be hitting our uh you know fifth round before that goes around. And no, and I
mean that as funny as it is because it's true. So, and and knowing that the shape of Atlanta, I you know Yeah. Well, well, obviously, and like I said, any any any project in this plan has to come before you. Uh, and I think we all know that
when uh a uh developer is before a planning board and there's an army of uh neighbors behind them who who are complaining, they they often will give concessions. Whether or not they're satisfactory is a whole other Dan, I don't agree with you because once they
get a redevelopment plan from our town council, that's a fair point. Yes. And they, you know, that then they come in and they go, "Yeah." And there's very little wiggle room away from that. So, it kind of the
negotiations sort of have to happen prior to the council's understood. Strong negotiations that aren't going to like send ripple effects through the town. So another thing I also want to add to this is um I I hear
you and I understand exactly what um and I would like to keep it very general cuz this it's you know right now um but one of the things I want to also point out that if your redevelopment plan says um
these many units this that and the other whatever it is that it will be saying u just know that D trumps that so for uh DP regulations trumpet um you know when
you reference that okay you can put all of this as long as you're compliant with whatever the the regulations are whatever the town's storm water management regulations are and when they actually do write the plan because the
redment plan works as a works as a ordinance. So when we put density, we put uh you know setbacks this that and the other um in an ordinance but they also have to uh fulfill the storm water
management regulations. They also have to fulfill if there are any wetlands or or steep slopes are of course local not at the DP level but if they're wetlands or if there anything else that are constraints they have to satisfy all of
that. So just because um and I've actually seen this in an affordable housing um you know plan that that we had written uh for the first iter uh second iteration of the third round in
2008 which u put in a density of 12 dwelling units per acre uh for a particular site and by the time it came before the planning board in 2016 which or 17 uh much later it had actually reduced to around six or seven dwelling
units per acre because there were other constraints. They couldn't provide adequate parking. They couldn't provide uh enough you know storm water management. So at the site plan level they you know that's when they need to provide actual engineer drawings but you
know so that could change you're just saying that could change. Yes. Because just because there's a redevelopment plan in place doesn't mean the uh you don't comply with the DP regulations and DP regulations as time is passing by getting more and more stringent. Right.
Right. So there are other checks and balances in place but at this point what we are trying to tell uh DCA and the state is look this is our obligation. We don't have vacant land. This is our RDP.
This is what uh on June 30th, 2025 we think is a realistic opportunity. Right. Are there any further questions or comments? If not, um we will I just want to
confirm. Has everybody replied to Kathleen about their availability on the 19th for the special meeting? Okay. And and just the 20
I know you can't make it the 26. You don't have to come either because it's Wedgewood, right? I'm just keeping you posted. Um but pretty much everybody else can be here for the adoption. That's it's
really important that we have a quorum. So um great and we'll talk. I'm getting your cell number. Okay, great. Um, motion to adjurnn. Motion to
adjurnn. All right. Thank you everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [Music] No. Mhm. How do you feel? How are you feeling?
I'm about the same. Did you guys crash? That was Friday.