Well, let's call this uh meeting of the
Affordable Housing Commission to order.
Can we get a roll call?
» Megan Markle
>> here.
>> Samantha Culie
>> here.
>> Randy Rickert
>> here.
>> Casey Banks
>> here.
>> Judy Brown here.
>> And that's that.
Thank you. Do we have any registered
public comments or anyone in the waiting
room?
>> We do not.
>> Okay.
>> Or both of them.
>> Still waiting for the day.
» Um, are we ready to approve minutes?
Does anyone have any items that they saw
that needed correction?
» I don't think so.
>> So, I move that we approve the minutes
of the
>> 28th
>> 26 meeting. Is it 28th? Did I get it?
I mean, as a judge here, I think it's
>> second
>> to be perfectly honest with what I saw.
I don't want to get
>> I'll second that.
>> Thanks, Samantha.
>> Uh, raise your hand if you're in favor
of approving the meeting minutes.
» I'm raising I'm raising my hand.
>> Sorry, I'm still recovering from
surgery. I am not willing to put myself
on camera.
>> That's fine. We'll just visual or audio
will work for voting. Um okay. Well,
that passes.
So, we are ready to hear a presentation
about the uh
um housing trust resolution and uh NOA
memorandum.
>> Yeah.
Um, so hopefully everyone had a minute
to look at their packet materials and
um, kind of digest
what was in there. Um, so I put together
the memorandum kind of just to go over
uh, our previous thoughts and discussion
around proposing a new NOA. and the
group, myself included, wanted to make
sure that we all had a good
understanding of following all the rules
and regs that had been established and
making sure that we were um following
procedure. Um, so I was able to find the
archive of um, previous resolutions that
took place over a series of years. Um,
pretty much I think it was 2012 to 2019
if I remember correctly.
Um, or 2021.
I think that was the latest one. And
they they basically built off of one
another. So that last one encompassed
kind of everything and each new
resolution uh replaced the previous. So
the most recent one um has everything in
there. And you'll notice that a lot of
the language I think especially from
section 8 in there um that looks like
it's where that previous group and the
previous staff worked to come up with
the NOA scoring rubric criteria.
So those two things seemed to work in
concert with one another. So I I felt
pretty good about that and that we have
an understanding now of where that came
from and you know what its intention
was. So, um it seems like the only
departure really was and there is some
language in there that allows for um
kind of the realities of any given year,
but I think what was typical previously
was that there was a yearly NOA.
So um and then the difference also
previously and this group has worked
within the parameters of like the
breakdown of each there's like half a
dozen different types of allocations
both grant and loan uh programs. So,
uh, depending on how much was in the
account and it was it looked like it
there was math involved based on a
percentage for each type of program.
So, after finding that um, you know, the
documentation, I was looking for is
there language in there that would allow
us to do um, a larger allocation perhaps
all of it. And uh after looking at that
with the director, I believe the answer
is yes. So um that's what the uh
memorandum was um aiming to convey. So
to kind of recap, our finance director
um gave us that total that's in the
account currently, which is a little
over $72,000.
Uh what I found in the research um of
those resolutions that we withhold a 5%
administration fee from that um bringing
a potential award to uh 68,568.15
um I believe I believe there's some
interest acrewing on that. So, it might
be a tiny bit more, but um that's pretty
current. And then
what we could do, the language in the
resolution supports a competitive award.
So, that was what I was talking about.
And I guess historically that could have
been a grant award or a loan award. And
I did find documentation in previous
years that that was a loan award.
Um
but uh also per our previous discussions
um just with the staffing that we have
um currently it would be easier um to
administrate a grant award but of course
we can discuss that um per the desires
of the commission.
Um
so yeah I think that's it in inside the
memorandum I included some some key
sections
um that kind of outline that com the
competitive grant award program section
seven and then section 8. Um and again
that section 8's uh really mirroring
what's in our scoring rubric on our nos
um that we post.
So with that um you know we can open it
up to discussion amongst the group uh
questions discussion
about that.
Yeah, I'd like to talk about the
resolutions themselves before we move on
to the next round NOAS.
Um,
» I want to make sure I understand which
one was the most recent resolution. I'm
looking at
the one that starts on page 11 of the
packet.
Uh, 2021 3730.
Um, was that the most recent one or is
there one further down?
>> That's the most recent one.
>> And so
section 8 is where the scoring rubric
essentially is spelled out in the
resolution. Right.
>> Correct.
So, is it true then
that these guidelines were like binding
by resolution when the rubric was kind
of set aside before because we didn't
realize that they were in the
resolution?
» Um, what do you mean set aside?
When we were talking about the Spark
program's eligibility, we were looking
at the scoring rubric and there was
debate on whether or not the scoring
rubric could be kind of set aside and not be binding. Um, but if if what
was in the scoring rubric was
essentially in the resolution, I'm just
trying to understand was
were those requirements actually binding
because they were in the resolution
itself?
Yeah, I believe council still has the
ability to make a departure from that if
I understand the nature of the
resolution and counselor uh the
council's
um
» say one more time
>> the latitude that they have
>> um we can double check that for you. Um,
>> are they able to make a departure
by revising a rapid solution or the
resolution just isn't binding from the
beginning?
>> Yeah, that's the question that I would
uh need to ask about that. Um,
I'm trying to remember if there's some
language in there around that
>> about their deliberations.
If you get it, but if you don't get it,
you're good at
>> I don't want to undo what's been done. I
just want to understand like if we do
another NOA around
>> what what are we really working with? Um
what is subjective and what's binding?
>> Absolutely.
And I think that's a perfectly
logical question um given
kind of how things have gone in the
recent past with the commission's
recommendations and the departure um
from that with the council decisions.
Um,
let me let me comb back through that and
then I will add that as a discussion
question for the director
about how binding um the resolution is.
» Have questions on the resolution itself?
No, not really. I mean, my my
understanding was that um they can
override anything regardless whether
there's a resolution or not. It's the
guidelines that we have to operate
within, but not necessarily the
guidelines that they have to operate
within. Now, I don't understand why. I'd
love to understand why. Um, I'm a what
and why kind of person, but um, yeah,
just making sure that that we have a a
better understanding of what we're
working with.
be hard and tight, but it's not on. So,
it's not
>> And I guess along those lines, I would
reiterate that um
>> the commission decided to move forward
with a recommendation for
the entirety of uh what could be
allocated towards an award that's 68 and
change. They would need to approve that
request. Um, so you know, this would
have that process. Um, just like the
previous NOA, we would take it to
council to approve that and then, um, if
they voted to do that, then we would go
through that NOA process and, um, we
would bring it back to the commission
and we would have that same deliberation
on um, the scoring rubric, etc. uh in
terms of scoring applications etc.
» Is this resolution part of the like
promotional materials when we announce
that it's available? Do we give this
actual resolution language to the
applicants so they can read through it
as well? I feel like I saw some details
in here that I I wasn't previously aware
of and had gone through several noer
rounds at this point.
Yeah, and we certainly can. So, my
intention is to update a new uh landing
page for any upcoming NOAS. I know that
we've we've done excerpts from these
resolutions, but um I wasn't privy to
where all of these lived previously. So,
now I know. And I've made a a specific
folder for all of these and I have them.
So, um, I can do all of that and the
above. I can put excerpts in and then I
can add a link for folks to go through
this the latest and greatest resolution
so that everybody has the same
documentation to work from.
>> Sounds great.
One other place in here I had a question
was um not so much a question it was
clarity around the timesensitive loan or
grant program. I always thought it was
weird that people could only apply for a
time-sensitive grant once a year when we
do the NAS and um the way the
resolution's written that's that was not
the intention um that we could receive
an application at any time in the year.
Um, I don't know if we just haven't had
any applications like that or if we just
didn't
communicate that that was available at
any time of year. So, um, if you're
working on that landing page, that might
be something to
think through as well. Do we put
information on there about the
time-sensitive loan? Are we even trying
to continue that option or just do the
once a year options?
Yeah, I think that's something that I
was turning over as well and is a really
relevant question because
um previously
the way it was structured and I was kind
of instructed to do it was to post all
of them and see who wanted to apply for
what. But going back to the resolution
um that was something that I became
aware of as well um during the research
and
um we I mean since I've been here there
hasn't been that I'm aware of there
hasn't been a request for a
timesensitive loan um just someone
coming to us requesting to apply for one
outside of a NOA process. So, um,
whether that is just kind of lack of and
some of that I would say, you know,
we've had, uh, new software for, you
know, our city web pages and everything
installed, um, during this time frame
since I arrived. So, that may be some of
it, um, but
not all of it. So I don't know how much
education was done prior to my arrival
around that but we can certainly um
discuss that. I think
part of it as well something for the
commission to consider is you know we
have this sum in there and it would make
you know a nicer a slightly larger award
than what we've been able to do
previously. But um there was some
language in the resolution that I was
reflecting on about sources of revenue
for that fund and you know where it
could potentially come from and um you
know does the commission have an
interest in pursuing other types of
grants to start to replenish that fund
as well. Um, so there could be, you
know, funds available for anytime
timesensitive grant award. You know what
I mean? Like if we deplete the funds
with this um, NOA posting that we've
been talking about um, then what happens
to that time-sensitive grant if there's
no funds available any longer? So I
think that's also part of that
discussion.
I'm certainly open to the idea of um
talking about how that gets replenished
um and would also be interested in a
like a true time-sensitive option grant
or loan or either um that folks could
apply for at any time. I do remember
before you came, Leanne,
one or two organizations who checked the
box time-sensitive loan or grant,
but it wasn't truly time-sensitive.
Um, it it occurred during the like once
a year application.
Um, so the box was checked for
timesensitive, but it didn't feel
timesensitive and we didn't handle it in
that way.
>> Okay.
Yeah. And I just looking at the numbers
for the breakdowns per each program
type, it did seem like that was the
avenue for the largest kind of one-time
award. And the most straight, you know,
in terms of a grant allocation, I think
the way all of those splits worked, it
was potentially the avenue for the the
highest award amount. So um I could
understand perhaps the motivation there.
So
» other questions, comments about the
resolution?
Is this open I know we had discussed
this before. open to landlords that want
to do upgrades or things in which that
they can still provide affordable
housing without increasing the rent of
their properties.
>> Yeah. So,
let's see.
I think that language is in there. Um,
>> there is some some language about
landlords and upgrades. I just wanted to
make sure that that we're not talking
about two separate things.
>> Yeah. So, the project provides new
affordable housing or new affordability
through retention or rehabilitating
rehabilitation of existing housing
within the city. Um
the greater number of units provided the
higher the ranking the project shall be
given. So to me that speaks to like
multif family residential
um
you know whether existing or proposed.
I believe am I incorrect in remembering
that that we had something previously
submitted by a landlord and one of the
disqualifying pieces ended up being not
being able to prove 40 years of
affordable housing. You know what I
mean? Like I think there
I feel like that was a catch on
something, right? like
>> like an individual landlord that happens
to be doing, you know, maybe affordable
rent or something um but is not
necessarily licensed by the state or
becomes the the hold up on that. Am I
wrong?
>> That sounds right. Um
>> we definitely had a conversation about
how do we how do we guarantee it's
affordable for x number of years. We
also had the question of how do we know
the family renting it was low income
without requiring the landlord to reveal
sensitive information.
And I don't think we ever came to an
answer about that. Um
I would assume that our only way to like
guarantee that is to take whatever the
um the median area income is and
>> and you know 80% of that for um
calculating the rent and whatever that
rental unit is charging has to be that
or less. um cuz we didn't want to
require that landlords reveal, you know,
people's
tax returns or or things like that or
their pay stubs,
» right?
>> But this resolution definitely says uh
forprofit
small landlords are welcome.
um
» how you actually work that out have been
a little more challenging,
>> right? And I think that was my bigger question, you know, how do how do
we potentially
market to them and and how how do how do
we actually meet meet their needs?
Naturally,
my dog started barking. So, sorry.
» Well, I certainly have preference,
>> but my preference would be that uh for
profits are only eligible for the loans.
Um the loan terms are way more favorable
than, you know, any other kind of loan
that they could get and they're repaid
in relatively a short amount of time.
And I don't know that you would need to
worry about the long-term affordability
of it so long as it's affordable in the
immediate and they're paying back with a
little bit of interest, not a lot. Um,
to me that's a better option. But that
would changing the resolution itself,
>> right? Yeah. And and I think that that
marketing for that and and putting that
information out, changing the resolution
to where it matches that could benefit
long-term other projects
potentially.
And I'll I'll offer that that is
something that we did discuss internally
that during deliberations with the
commission if y'all did come to a
consensus around a desire to update the
resolution that we could look at
would an update need to happen before
the next NOA or these are two separate
concepts.
» Uh that would I guess be up to the
desire of the commission. Um so as it
stands as it's written currently we
could post a NOA if council you know
agrees to that um and just move forward
with that. So you could decouple it from
that and um if you did desire the
commission did desire to update you know
uh the resolution that could have its
own process as well. Um, if however the
commission desires to
incorporate the new terms into
a potential NOA, you would need to, you
know, start that resolution amendment
process and, you know, we'd need to get
schedule, you know, the scheduling going
and all of that. Um and well I guess
first we would need to you know staff
would need to draft um amendments per
recommendations from the affordable
housing commission. Um
>> and we may need to meet again to make
sure everyone approves the language and
then bring that to council
um for approval. And maybe
I mean we might be able to work on both
things concurrently where we're
recommending uh amendments to the
resolution and a NOA that uh reflects
that and take them both to council at
the same time perhaps. Um
>> yeah.
>> Oh my god.
>> And then get all that scheduled.
>> That would be great.
Yeah,
I think if we could present maybe both
simultaneously
um if that would allow
potentially desirable changes and also
you know
not waiting another 6 months before the
funds are available. I'd be interested
in that. I' This is just my personal but
I'd be curious what you all would think
on the funding application request.
What would you all think about
recommending to council that it say um
for so where it has organization name
and then to the side they check a box if
they're for profofit or nonprofit
um if we suggested putting um forprofit
seeking loan nonprofit seeking grant
um and just kind of distinguish that
those are two the two tracks available.
council would have to approve that. The
resolution might need to change to
reflect that, but um that might solve
one of the issues that we ran into a few
years ago.
>> Yeah, I I think that would be ideal if
we could present that.
» I'm in favor of that as well.
» Any thoughts on that, Randy or Judith?
I'd be in favor of it
>> and I'm open too.
» Can staff ask a clarifying question?
>> Um, would this be for a competitive
award, a a competitive grant or loan
award or would it be towards a different
funding program allocation?
Right now, all we have is the
competitive awards program NOA in front
of us. But would the same distinction
make sense for a time-sensitive one to
let a nonprofit
make a time-sensitive request for a
grant? Or maybe that doesn't make sense.
I could certainly see a small landlord
um needing a time-sensitive loan in the
middle of the year.
I don't know that a nonprofit would need
a time-sensitive grant as urgently,
» right? I would agree with that.
I'd love to see some of our
small mom and pop landlords know about
this and and have a meaningful way to
use it.
How how would they have a meaningful
That's a great question in the respect
of how would they even need that versus
just going to a bank and getting a quick
loan if they needed that to make updates
on their property versus coming to the
asking it.
>> A lot of those loans are higher
interest, higher fees, so it would cost
them a significant amount. So oftent
times that requires them to increase
their rent substantially. So it takes
them out of the affordable housing
potentially. I mean, at least that's my track. Um, looking at some of those
loans and even talking to some other
people who own rental properties,
oftentimes when they have to do those
repairs, um, they then have to increase
their rent
because those loans are
>> So, are we talking
>> Oh, I'm so sorry. Please, Judy.
>> Yeah. Are we talking five groups or one
group or a hundred
nonprofits or or for profits? Is it
worth the time for the city to be in
that business of quick loans for
forprofit small businesses?
» Yeah, I think that's a great question.
Um, so I'll direct
books. It looks like in section 7.2C
of the attachment of that latest
resolution, it it does speak to what um,
Commissioner Kulie is is referencing in
terms of more favorable
loan terms. Um to Commissioners Brown's
point, I
was, you know, we would have to have an
internal discussion, I think, amongst
staff how we would be administering a
loan and how often we would have the
capacity to do that. Um and it does look
like just looking back at that
timesensitive loan, it is a loan or a
grant. So, um I think the commission
would need to come to a consensus about
which uh if you if the commission
desired to have a potential NOFO whether um it's
now or later. um with kind of this idea
that we're talking about um which avenue
and how often um timesensitive speaks to
that the intention or the spirit of the
resolution speaks to you know
more than once a year. So
I think we need to be realistic about
how often staff could administer that.
But also back to that piece about
replenishing the funds. So that may be a
longer term project perhaps. Um
but I think a worthwhile
um investigation, you know, and
something potentially look forward to um
when the longevity of the affordable
housing commission.
>> And I have another question. Are there
other cities that are doing something
similar to what we're doing to see how
to mimic that? If that's a good practice
or not to either way, one way, a good
way, whatever, if it's so with the same
pot of money, how are other cities doing
that? And how are they using that? How
are they using their funds?
Yes, certainly we can do some some
reaching out to our neighbors and um see
how they're we have good relations with
McMinnville. Um we could ask those
relevant questions.
» I know Hillsboro has a a program as as
well.
Um, and and that's kind of where I was
thinking about that, but I don't have
all of the details what that looks like.
And and Judy brings up a fantastic
point. This isn't something where that
we can suddenly become lenders. Um, so
there there certainly has to be some
very limited and tight parameters if
it's something that we did.
>> Yeah. So, for instance, and I I think
this is um probably obvious, but uh
planning staff would have to be working
in coordination with our finance
department um to make sure that
everything runs as smoothly as possible
and um yeah, that staff can handle um
the workflow. I don't potentially see it
being an obstacle as so long as it's um
you know first I think the funds would
need to be replenished and as long as
it's not multiple times a year.
» No,
>> I have a related but but different
thought. everything that I um was kind
of imagining, small landlords, uh
smaller loans,
um
coming from the time-sensitive process,
I think could actually be accomplished
in the rehabilitation loan program.
Um, are we
in any way bound to say like all four of
these types kind of need to be available
all the time or are we able to kind of
selectively choose? We're going to do
the competitive grant program
and the rehabil rehabilitation loan
program. Um because what we've been
describing with the small landlords,
it kind of seems like that could be
accomplished with the rehabilitation
one, which is only loans. And it
explicitly says um the applicant has to
demonstrate that the rehabilitation
could not be accomplished using
conventional loan programs.
Preference given to anyone who owns 10
or fewer units. And it's about existing
units being made safer. They're not
building new stuff. There's that's not
what's going on. But existing units to
be safe and decent, whatever decent
means.
» Um
I can weigh in a little bit there. I
think yes. Um
>> let's see. There's are you speaking to
the manufactured home rehabilitation
program
>> on page 20
7.3
it just the title is just rehabilitation
loan program
» and then it just uses the phrase
dwelling. It doesn't specifically say
manufactured.
» Yeah, that's interesting. So, yes, and
we've had
>> Okay.
>> more inquiries about the manufactured
home rehabilitation program. Um,
>> that one's a grant, right?
>> Yeah. And that we worked with Yamh Hill
County. um
we've had conversations with them about
that type of program, but
>> um
» I wonder if the loan the rehab loan one
would be useful because the the only
applicant we've had since I've been on
here and I'm in year five
>> um that was a forprofit was a home
trying to repair the driveway. It was
uneven and it wasn't ADA wheelchair
safe. And so that probably would have
fallen under this rehabilitation loan
program.
» Yeah. So,
sounds like there's language in here. Uh
the city manager would designate a loan
officer
Um so we would need to get some
information internally um coordination
with the city manager or finance
department and and planning staff
» and if they don't have internal capacity
to do that could our advice just be to
update the resolution so that we're only
offering the programs we genuinely have
capacity to do?
I think that's a valid question. um and
something. So, it's my understanding um
just kind of what I've been told uh
after my arrival is that we did have um
prior a designated a designated housing
planner and that is what she did
full-time. And so, I think there was
just more staff capacity. Um and then I
guess simultaneously the funds have been
dwindling, right? um through previous
awards and then the suns setting of the
CCT.
So um yeah, I think these are all
relevant
uh timely questions for where the
commission is now and where that fund is
now and uh
ways to move forward in in a in a way
that makes sense uh for staff and uh
with the funds that we have. And then
again kind of that longer term project
about uh how do we envision uh procuring
more
uh in the way of funding pathways to to
replenish that fund.
So, it's sounding like council's going
to have a lot of conversation
topics.
Um, and just to, you know, state the
obvious, I'm happy to to work up
whatever the the commission um, you
know, desires and and um, votes to do.
I'm happy to do that.
So, are we deciding on if we want that
resolution to be modified and then what
questions we want the the council to be
going over with the staff city
as the question is it is it time do the
sta staff have time to do a loan program
like that
how much Is it worth it? You know,
balance of that.
>> I mean, that again, that's one of my
questions.
» I don't know where we're moving forward
as a commission.
» Would we be recommending
like multiple things at once for them to
consider or like consider this then consider this? How
does council prefer to have that
content?
>> Yeah, I would recommend that the
commission establish um some agreed upon
goals. Um and some of that can be some
of the homework that y'all have
questions around. So, um, we can have
internal conversations about staff
capacity,
um, administering grants versus loans.
Uh, I would like to know which type of
program the commission is interested in,
uh, posting a NOA for and the monetary
amounts. Uh do we want to continue
thinking about the total award um you
know that 68 and change mark or are we
thinking of smaller awards um kind of in
line with some of the other you know
rehabilitation
uh grant loan avenue um
>> kind of how would you like to to direct
my efforts to bring you the answers you
need to make a proposal for council to
consider.
» Okay.
Well, maybe let's review um some
of the possibilities that we've talked
about so far. Um so the competitive
awards program
as written is forprofit or nonprofit.
Um, I heard clarify, but I heard
consensus around suggesting this become
» forprofit grant. No, sorry, nonprofit
grants.
Unsure about forprofit loan.
Um, given the amount of money that we
have, I I would have a hard time
imagining there would be a for-profit
loan in this category that didn't make
sense in a different category. Um,
but also for this sake of simplicity, it
might
I don't know if it would be okay, I'm
going to stick with this.
Do we like the idea of uh recommending
that the competitive awards program rant
be for only nonprofits?
» Yes.
» Okay. Randy, Judy, thumbs up or not or
something?
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. So the first thing, Leanne, is
that if there's going to be a grant in
the competitive awards program, we
suggest limiting that to nonprofits
only.
Okay.
>> Do we want to recommend the competitive
awards program still be open to
forprofit but in a loan only capacity
or recommend we funnel them to one of
the other categories?
I again
the loan process of the
>> city being in the business of giving out
a $10,000 loan and then getting repaid
in a couple years. How much time does
that take versus just giving them the
grant
balance of that just seems either profit
or nonprofit. a small amount of money.
Is it the Is it not It's always a value
to give money away. It's always fun to
give money away or share money with the
right organizations,
but what's the best value we we can to
use our staff wisely? I guess that's the
big thing. Uh
>> my assumption is that when you give
money away with no repayment expectation
is that sometimes then it has the
long-term
staff obligation of checking in with
them 10 years down the road, 20 years
down the road to see if they're still in
compliance. And for the kinds of
projects that our for-profit folks would
apply for Yeah. that we have money to
help that feels like a huge burden to
me.
Um whereas nonprofits typically have
they are in their business longer their nonprofit work longer and they
typically have internal
ways of verifying eligibility long term
anyway.
>> Some organizations, some nonprofit
>> Yeah. Yeah. It varies.
So maybe we don't have a answer on that
yet, but maybe that's a question for
council is should the competitive awards
program be available as a loan to for
profits?
» And then on um 7.2 2 timesensitive loan
or grant.
Should we even continue to have that?
If we have it,
does it make sense to have the loan or
grant option both of them?
And do the staff have
capacity to even handle that on a
rolling basis or
would it make more sense at this time to
retire that particular type?
» Does anyone wanna
>> Those are questions. Does anyone want to
make a statement on those?
I think it is would be valuable to
really think about the viability of that
program going forward. um you know just
even thinking about
the fairness of it right in terms of you
know once someone knows about a program
like that who's to say you can't which I
mean obviously it exists now but you
know like it just you could apply and
apply again and like how do we
>> how do we then say no to someone right
that keeps asking
>> but before we get off the squeak
away
>> because no one else, you know, no one
else does a time sensitive. I don't know
like that my mind goes to that. I do
like our competitive sort of, you know,
application process where there's a time
frame and you can submit it,
>> you know, and then be reviewed and where
we review all of them and then make our
recommendation to council. Um,
>> I'm not sure that we should be in the
time-sensitive
>> loan or grant program
>> going forward given staff capacity and
just
>> just limited funds.
>> My thoughts.
>> Does anyone else feel strongly about
getting rid of the timesensitive option?
I I don't think that the the long-term
viability of of timesensitive for
staffing purposes is reasonable.
Um
» yeah,
>> I'm kind of kind of back in back and
forth. I can I can see the the benefit
of it, but um you know, Megan and and
Judy have have both brought up some
really really great points. Um overall
the city doesn't have the staffing to to
continuously manage these. So having
those set times and parameters I I think
is a more efficient way to to provide
these these grants and or loans. See I'm still open to the loan potential
portion of of things. Um but but I would
agree those timesensitive I think we
could probably do away with that. um
just for staffing purposes.
» We haven't used it in practice. I mean,
it's been on paper, but we haven't used
it in practice in at least 5 years. I
don't know if it's ever been utilized.
Um and again, there were some applicants
who checked the box for timesensitive,
but the way that the NOA happened, it
happened all at once on a deadline. It
wasn't rolling any time of the year.
Randy and Judy, would you be open to
recommending to council removing that
particular program, the time-sensitive
program?
» Um,
>> yeah, I don't I don't see an issue with
recommending that. I think one of the
things I'm flipping back and forth with
is is the staffing. And Megan, you
brought up a great point, but we also
have that same staffing model with the
rehab loan, too, I think, don't we? I
mean, you still have to have staffing
for for that that process as well. Um,
I'm kind of flip-flopping back and forth
here, guys. Sorry. I think
if we haven't used it in five years,
maybe we should really heavily consider
not not having it any longer. I think
that's where I'm I'm ending up at.
» I would be in favor of recommending we
remove that program. Um, if nothing
else, it's one less NOA that the staff
have to put out there.
Um,
» when was the last time somebody you said
five years, Randy, or somebody said five
years was the last time?
>> We haven't used it in at least five
years because that's how long I've been
on this group and I don't know the
history before that.
>> Yeah,
» speak a little bit to that. So, we did
have an allocation um but it was at the
same time that we posted all of the
others. So, it's to my knowledge um and
I didn't see anything in the files
either where someone had come to the
city and requested a timesensitive award
outside of a NOA posting. Um,
so
that's my understanding.
>> So it's been used, it just wasn't used
the way it's truly written.
>> The spirit of it, I think you're you're
accurate. Yeah.
>> Okay.
» So take that recommendation to council
that it doesn't seem to be a super
useful
piece of the overall program at this
time.
Um and then we have two rehabilitation
programs. One is a loan,
one is a grant specifically for
manufactured homes.
So the way this is written
and the loans
seem to be available for any kind of
housing, not just manufactured homes.
» I think that's accurate.
Okay.
But would this be
would the grant one uh 7.4 would the
grant one be available to forprofit or
only nonprofit?
Is that a question for staff?
» How is it written now? And then what
would we suggest?
>> As it's written now in 7.4A,
it says the money's to individuals or
local nonprofit organizations.
>> Oh, it could go to the homeowner.
>> Okay.
>> That's how it's currently written. It
looks like
» that's not forprofit or nonprofit,
right?
>> Correct. It says individuals. Yeah. I
didn't realize that.
>> Okay.
Have we do we know if we've ever had an
individual apply to repair their own
mobile home?
>> Um there was discussion around that. um
not long after I arrived. So this was
about 3 years ago. Um I don't think
anything ever came from it. Um
yeah, and then we did give an award to
the Yamh Hill County Housing Authority
and they were so they have that program
where they're um
administering repairs to, you know,
various dwellings and they have that um
structure in there where they're vetting
everyone and um so they did receive an
award for their program, but um it I
don't think it was strictly under the
manufactured
housing umbrella.
I do believe that some of the homes that
they were repairing uh were
well they received um
trying to remember if they received CCT.
I think the Newberg affordable house uh
the Yhill County received CCT funds
and then um h the Newberg area Habitat
for Humanity uh I hope I don't have that
backwards um received
funds from the trust fund
but they both have that internal vetting
process were um and they were readily
able to prove financials and and all of
that.
» So, a question that I have about these
two um is about their funding sources.
Um,
you had said there's x number of dollars
available for the competitive loan
project program, but is that actually
the amount that's available for all four
of these programs or do they all have
their own
dollar amounts that could be available?
>> Yes. So um
that is so it's my understanding that
it's only under the competitive award
that we could um post a NOVA for that
total amount. Um the other funding
pathways
it's a percentage of what is in that
account. Um, and it's
>> I believe it's explicitly stated um in a
section of the resolution.
» Loan terms are spelled out per C per
area. And then
let's see.
» I don't see the P percentage right here.
Just that loans could be between five
and 15,000.
Yeah, it it may be in for each uh
pathway
but for instance in section five under
funded fund administration
um
5.5 as a target in any given year up to
60% of the uh trust fund will be
available for project loans and up to
25% will be available uh for project
grants. The remaining 15% of the trust
fund will be available for project
contingencies through grants and or
loans.
» And then in any given year, at least 50%
of the 5.6 50% of the available funds
within the trust fund shall be available
for use through the competitive awards
program. And then that that key um it's
just one sentence in there, but in any
given year, the c the city council may
make an exception to the standard to
take advantage of affordable housing
opportunities.
>> So that's the way to to make a larger
fund available. Would
anyone else have interest in
recommending that all three of these
be made available um
and have the different amounts available
for each or
staff time-wise is it better to do one
at a time
because I can imagine if someone's
looking for information about affordable
housing housing assistance. It might be
helpful to see, oh, there's three
different kinds. I need to pick which
one makes most sense for my project and
apply for that one,
but still do it once a year rather than
three different times a year.
>> Yes. And so I think that's in line with
previous practice is
>> um having multiple and they choose which
one makes the most sense. Um,
now
not
>> making all of I guess the question I
would have for the director would
be as the resolution stands now, would
we be obligated to make all of the
funding pathways available within ANOA?
Um,
or do we have that leeway to pick and
choose which ones?
Um, and maybe we do. I mean, there is
it's just in there a couple of times,
but it there's
>> like a sentence or two within the
resolution that says
>> those funds are available. Like
basically intimating at any given time
you may only have this much money and so
it only may make sense to do this type
of an award. So, um, and that's kind of
I think where our discussion was last
time when we were thinking about there's
not a whole lot of money in that, uh,
account. Do we want to try to do this
NOA for that full amount and get
somebody a little bit further down the
road? Um, so
yeah, there's that language in there
about the competitive um, award. Um, and
yeah,
I can certainly ask.
I'd be happy to see either option, just
the competitive award or all three of
them. I just don't want to do three
rounds in one year.
at different times that feels like
spreading out the work.
we'd kind of lose track of which one
we're in at the moment. And
but that's just
>> so we're talking about um the three that we're sort of hovering on right now
is the competitive,
the rehabilitation loan,
and the manufactured rehabilitation
grant.
Is that
button.
>> That was the three I had in mind that we
were talking about if we're recommending
getting rid of the timesensitive one.
>> Okay.
>> And we did give a large chunk recently
to manufactured home rehabilitation. So,
you know, there's
I think a good argument to say like
we've done some good work on that one
and it wouldn't be
terrible if we didn't offer that one
right now. But um
one or three but but not one right now,
second one in 3 months, and the third
one in six months.
>> Casey, as I review the the
qualifications, it looks like it in
terms of the statute here or the
resolution points that those other three
programs outside of the competitive one
do not require having an RFP. It does
not even mention doing an RFP. Is that
correct, Lean? There's nothing that
actually goes out regarding those
programs. It just sits on the website.
>> Yeah. I mean, I'll go back and and tease
through it. I I can speak to the
what I observed as the tradition and
that they are posted at the same time
and folks can choose
uh in any yearly NOA what makes sense
for their project or program
» but it's not like a time frame is put on
those those programs in terms of an
application deadline. Is that correct?
>> No,
>> practice there was
>> Yeah,
we we typically handled it in the same
time frame.
>> Okay.
>> A posting uh is up for however long
folks need to submit their complete
application materials by this date. Um
and then we close that and we start our
review process.
>> Right. And then I would I would
recommend if we're going to change some
of this resolution language or recommend
that to the council, um I think the
language should be identical across all whatever programs we're doing in
terms of how the process works to be
very clear.
So that the RFP is for, you know, all of
the programs that we're recommending and
it's a time frame and you must apply
sort of thing because that's not clear
when in as each of the program
breakdowns for the rehabilitation loan
program as well as the manufactured
um program
and the other one
timesensitive. Yeah.
I mean obviously timesensitive would not
have I guess an RFP per se.
» Okay.
Um so this is would fall under
amendments to the resolution. Okay.
>> Yes.
It would basically be adding the 7.1
um point. A language to any of the
additional programs outside of the
competitive awards program.
I
>> was just noticing that the manufactured
home rehab grant
um says they only have to guarantee that
the home will be occupied by low-inccome
family for five years. Um, did the
loan have a similar timeline?
The rehab loan.
» Um, oh, it just says for the loan term,
the applicant shall enter into an
agreement guaranteeing the dwellings
will only be occupied by families or
individuals meeting the income
guidelines for the loan term. And the
loan term standard is 5 years. So that's
just up to five years.
Neither of those have the um ongoing
affordability requirements that the
competitive one has.
>> Which that makes that makes more sense
given that the difference in
amounts that you're kind of talking
about.
Any
other things we wanted to ask council or
recommend council about this?
I would like us to consider getting a
little more specific about a nonprofit
given our discussions over the last year
of what defines a nonprofit and that
it'd be a 501c3
licensed nonprofit at time of
application for the competitive program.
>> Where would be the right spot in this
resolution to
>> That's a good question.
>> Clarify that.
Uh
would it be in the competitive section
in the sevens 7.1 section?
>> I I would
>> Yeah, that might be the best part.
>> Or was it back in the fives where we had
the rubric?
No, five wasn't the rubric. Where was
the rubric,
>> Alian? Eight. Section eight.
>> Eight.
» Okay. And that and this rubric only
applies to the competitive grant or
loan.
>> Doesn't apply to the other two.
>> I think that's correct. Yes, that's
correct.
>> Okay.
Well, if we're recommending that the
council
limits
the competitive one to grants for
nonprofits, then I guess with that is to
clarify that nonprofits need to be
>> the definition of a nonprofit.
>> Yeah. To have a definition in there.
>> We can add a definition. Okay.
to avoid the problem that obviously
happened earlier with Spark.
Yeah,
I think it would be a lot cleaner if we
could get the resolution
um revised and approved by council
before we post a NOA. I don't quite
understand how we would do it any other
way, Lean. Um, is there
a way or is that just going to be too
messy?
Um,
you're asking for my recommendation. Um,
>> I recommend that y'all all, you know,
>> and I'll read this back out and I think
y'all have to like, you know, agree or
make a motion for these revisions. And
then I'll come back with a draft for
y'all to uh look at and approve and or
make edits to. And then um you'll send
me off with that uh either for another
round or to council. And then um I think
my experience is the more
things to review and that uh sort of
promotes talking points perhaps the the
more deliberation can can happen and
sometimes it's easier to move forward
with something keeping it simpler
initially.
Um,
so we can also after,
you know, I bring back the revision
revisit that and see if we would like to
just go to council with an updated
resolution that fits
>> the current.
>> So then they're not words smithing it in
their own meetings.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. and you know that way you know and
I think I think it's a good time to look
at it to look at it in terms of staffing
and the funds that we have available and
um that's the reason for the updates and
overall I still think they're pretty
minor. There's not we're not talking
about a major overhaul really. Um just
some tweaks to make things more
practical. So, um,
>> do you want us to give a major overhaul?
» Uh, staff will do their best to
facilitate that if that's the desire of
the commission. Um, but yeah, I think I
mean that's kind of my personal
philosophy to try to keep things as
clear and objective as possible and um,
>> do what makes practical sense. That's
>> so then we would review the changed
draft the the revised version and then
recommend that whole revision to
council.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> Um are we allowed to review that and
give our feedback via email or could we
schedule another meeting so that we're
not waiting four months to review that?
>> Yes. Um, we can schedule another meeting
and I want FA to weigh in here about um
process.
» Sorry about that. Um, yes. So,
if you give me a few um dates that
everybody is available, then I just need
to confirm that with our city recorder
and then I can send everybody a uh
confirmed invite for an additional
meeting. So, um we we I just need to do
that extra step. So, what dates works
for everybody for the additional
meeting? Like, do we want to do it
within the next couple weeks or just the
next month?
>> Well, how long does Lean need to get the
draft prepped?
>> Um, I'd say couple of weeks to make sure
that all my other workflows stay um
moving and we get internal review. We
may need to, as Scott and I are, the
director and I are looking at this, we
may need to um check in with the city
manager as well as finance staff and
just um
>> kind of go over the practicalities of
what the commission is deliberating and
proposing.
>> So, exactly two weeks from today is
August 18.
Um, does anyone have a conflict in that
4:00 window August 18?
>> Let me check.
>> Unfortunately, I do.
>> Samantha does. Okay. Um, I have a
conflict on the 25th.
>> We don't have to keep it on a Tuesday
either.
>> Okay.
That might make it more complicated to
schedule.
>> Okay. I don't know, but
>> we could do um
» like the September 1st.
>> Does anyone have a conflict? September
1st.
» I'm available September 1st and
September 8th.
>> Okay.
I will account, but I might be able to
get I might be able to get internet
>> for the first.
>> Yeah, that's okay. Put it put it down if
most people can be there.
>> Okay.
>> And is um we're just holding this right
now, right? It's not confirmed yet.
>> No, it's not confirmed. I have to I'll
we'll hold it and then I have to confirm
it with our uh city recorder.
>> Okay.
And then the second option, um, did
anyone have a conflict with September
8th?
» Okay. So, that's our second hold.
» Okay. And then,
>> did you need a third?
>> Um,
» yeah. How about we just do
How about the September 15th? We'll just
go through in a row. How's everybody
looking for the 15th?
>> I'm available.
» Yep,
>> I'm available.
>> Samantha's good. Randy,
» he's checking.
» I'm ready to go out of town, so I might
be uh not available, but I'm available
right now.
>> Okay.
>> All right. So September 15 also a hold.
>> All right. So I will go ahead and
confirm a date with RC recorder and
email everybody with an uh invite for
the actual date.
>> Sounds good.
>> Great.
» Okay. Are we ready for staff updates?
>> Sure. Uh
so um good news and this uh I wouldn't
have been able to give the good news
last Tuesday. So um we have the
intergovernmental agreement draft for
the housing capacity analysis work. So
yay. Um so we're doing our internal
review of that document. It looks pretty
close to um that last kind of draft
between us and our consultant partner,
Cascadia partners um and DLCD. So, they
just, you know, their legal team took it
through the washer and did their
structure for that legal document. So,
um we're looking at that. It looks um
like the contents all still there.
they've added their legal stuff and then
we will bring that to council for their
approval and then we'll launch that
work. Um
so just kind of as a reminder the
planning commission is going to sort of
serve as that uh municipal review body
and the affordable housing commission is
welcome to attend those meetings. Not
every meeting of the planning commission
will be having content from that work,
but we will make the commission aware of
the meetings where we will be um using
that body to discuss the housing
capacity analysis work and y'all can
join at your discretion. Um and we would
you know love to have you and um yeah
>> is that also by Zoom?
>> Um we're going to try to make it
available um as a hybrid. So um yeah, so
folks can um attend in person or um
online to those meetings. That's
correct, right, FA? We're going to keep
that a hybrid platform.
>> Yes. All planning commission meetings
are hybrid. So there's Zoom and in
person.
>> Great.
» Yeah. So, um we're we're glad we've kind
of been in this holding pattern for a
few months uh while they're legal. And I
know that the state had a lot of those
grant agreements to administer. So,
Newberg wasn't the only one um kind of
hanging out and waiting for their uh
final draft document to come through.
So, that's good. That means, you know,
we'll have more data um to look at and understand our our housing situation
and all the facets uh therein and uh we
can learn more about our community. So,
happy
>> good news. I like it.
Is there a staff update on any other
thing that we just had one on the
agenda, right?
>> Yeah, I think that's it for now. Um,
>> yeah.
>> Okay. Anything that any commissioners
want to share?
>> I was curious if you have an update,
Leon, on where things stand with Spark
in terms of um the money being released
to them, if that has happened or not.
Yeah, I do not. So, there was um I did
see an email and this was a while back
like
maybe as much as two months ago. Um and
it was an inquiry from the director to
our legal team and uh as of that email,
you know, they're not out of I guess the
legal process and no monies have been
dispersed.
So,
Okay, we appreci I appreciate you
keeping us updated on where that stands
since that's such a signific significant
amount of money for affordable housing
in our community.
» Anything else from commissioners?
» All righty. Does everyone have on their
calendars our next meeting October 27?
That's not actually our next meeting,
but that is one of our next meetings.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
We still have those uh hold date
meetings that we're squeezing in, but at
least October 27th happening.
Okay,
y'all want to sign off? You ready for
that?
>> Have a great August.
>> All right. 523, we're adjourned. Thank
you.
>> Thank you. See you. Thank
>> you all.