April 24, 2019 — Housing Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

[MM:SS] timestamps correspond to the YouTube recording.

[0:00] [Music] [Applause] [Music] there's housing Advisory Board April 24 2019 well do roll call but we have a couple new people to introduce to our team and when we all started with the housing advisory board we all kind of did a little brief introduction to so I'll have Juliette and Terry if you'd want to just say a brief hello and if there's anything you'd like the public to kind of know about you in your

[1:00] introduction and then we'll go around with the rest of the roll call okay hello I'm Juliette Boone I'm new to have lived in Boulder for 20 years I've lived in a variety of housing in Boulder including in cohousing three different neighborhoods I have children who attend Boulder Public Schools and two at CU so I'm excited to be part of this and give back to the community low Terry Puhl MOS and let's see I'm a native of Boulder I was born and raised here I've lived here all my life except for going away to school in grad school I'm a real estate guy so my experience in housing is landlord housing I rent housing I've remodeled housing I've sold housing I've done just about everything you can do with respect to housing in Boulder and I still do so I want to thank thank everybody for

[2:02] for being here and will continue its roll call microphone in green Judy knob gene catsup with comprehensive planning for the see Jeff Hagen with housing Human Services board liaison Mike McKenzie luxury I'm Adam sweat like and Mason Boyer okay did anybody everybody review the agenda any additions changes do you want to just make note of your motion that you're gonna make later in the meeting it's actually on here okay anybody else okay and a motion to accept

[3:04] the agenda second and approval of the minutes from March 20th motion second [Laughter] okay we're gonna open up for public participation do we have anybody signed up fantastic does anybody in the audience want to speak to anything I'm Dave ensign i'm from the Planning Board and Brian Bowan couldn't be here tonight so I'll just be sitting in the audience he's the backup for crystal as the ex-officio so if you have any questions I actually missed the last line balsam sub-community planning update that went to planning board so this will be really useful for me to get an update tonight so thanks for letting me attend thank

[4:01] you okay we'll close the public participation and move on for two matters from Council all right so again I'm Jean Gaston with comprehensive planning and I've seen many of you before I think on a previous update maybe even a year ago when we first we're kicking off the area planning process for Alpine boss and at the time I think we were taking you spook end along with it but we've since narrowed the scope and have been working on Alpine balsam for a while so my thoughts that I've been talking this over with Jeff and understanding agenda I was we don't have any new necessarily new information for the board or questions per se at the moment but given that you've got new members and we've been down a path since the last time we met I thought that I would talk a little bit about our process and schedule or

[5:03] sort of uncertain process and schedule at the moment and where we might have win and win and where we might have some certainty on that a little bit about area planning our direction from the compound just to ground ground you guys and why we do these plans what we're talking about doing for at Alpine balsam and then when we come back with choices for those what this boards role will be if that makes sense okay so we were anticipating bringing draft plan components and choices and all of the analysis to our planning board to City Council and late May and early June and we are still working on that that we might be doing that but our council has raised some questions about some costs related to the Alpine balsam site and the deconstruction of the hospital and some of the future options of what that

[6:00] might look like that might have an impact on what we're doing with the area plan so we have the council has a special meeting on May 16th to talk about those items and that may shift where we're going with the area plan so I'm hoping that we'll know a little bit more about dates and process next week whether that's going to be June or whether that might be later in the summer and then we'll know a little bit more after the after the special meeting on the 16th so as soon as we know more we will have information the Alpine balsam project website I'm going to pass around these cards that are specific to that and it's really easy to find on the city's Web website if you just enter balsam so with that I gave you some handouts because we always go back to our Boulder Valley comprehensive plan that was updated in

[7:02] 2000 it was we started the update in 2015 and we finished it in 2017 so we've got a couple of excerpts actually I've got lots of props tonight so I can pass these around to if folks want to browse through them there is a boulder valley comp plan net and it's available on the city website too of our plan what I've provided is both the sub community and area planning section as well as the housing policies Jeff knows well because you helped with the update so with sub community and area planning what we do the Conklin provides direction that when there's a significant change or an area of opportunity in the community it's good to do an area plan so that we reevaluate the land uses the character the urban design the access and mobility all the transportation connections improvements so that we can plan ahead and know what those uses are going to be

[8:02] how that affects our projections how we can best implement boulder valley comprehensive plan policies in that area and serve it I mean we assess all of the facilities and services transportation being a big one utilities being a big one police fire we talked to the school district all those things when we're looking at potential changes in any part of the community so you can take a look at that where this what this direction is it's really about a future vision of an area appropriate density character scale mix of uses and identifying the regulatory changes that would be needed to encourage and promote those those visions you can look through all the rest of this but that's our direction from the comp plan there's a little section on area planning and that's why we do these these plans and I

[9:03] just gave you the housing policies so that you can have these handy always for your discussions and your future work so with that so what is this area planning but you know how does this manifest one of the one of the more recent bigger ones that we did is the transit Village area plan it's a significantly larger area than what we're looking at for alpine bossom so oh and and a quite a lot more significant potential for redevelopment and so if you want to just browse like this is what this is where we're heading it's it'll be different I'll be Boston will look different but the plan will look different but it'll have most of the same components land use urban character urban design and character access and mobility connections planning and then facilities and services and and then we adopted also an implementation plan that with it and went with it that then we reevaluate very frequently that step

[10:00] steps out all of you know we got to change the zoning and here's how we're gonna do it and we've got it you know all of the regulatory pieces all of the funding pieces because those are really big - especially for a plan of that size that included so many improvements infrastructure and other improvements so question did that plan take oh that's a good question a lot of these plans there's you know like they'll there'll be some work I know that we did some work in that area and a comp plan update and then the plan itself took hold I can I don't honestly I don't remember I I think it was about a year and a half just a reminder you have to wait to be out of the chair you got it okay so um Alpine balsam so and I I'm sure this is

[11:01] harder to see but I know many of you have seen this map before well we have you know the the impetus for thank you Jeff the images for this area plan is the sale of the boulder community hospital to the city and they're vacating of that of that property and so we have a really important opportunity and investment for redevelopment right in the heart of our downtown Boulder corridor and our central Broadway corridor and as I said when we look at this we don't look at just that site you need to look at the areas all around that to ensure that we are looking at all potential impacts looking at all potential opportunities and and to really assess what this area's vision is for the future and put the right mechanisms in place to achieve that with that we this one is a little different because the city is appraised the property owner of a significant

[12:00] redevelopment of site we in 2000 so I right after the sale of the property 2015 the city embarked on the vision plan process so that was really at the what are all the big ideas how do we take all the ideas and put them into one plan to help guide the next steps for this this work in May of last year we started the area planning process and that process is to take what's on the vision plan and actually do some more feasibility testing and get more get more real about what that vision plan contained and try to really understand what does it mean for different site designs and site opportunities we developed a number of scenarios that had around a number of key questions around uses density and building Heights flood foot flood mitigation and access and

[13:00] mobility that we talked with the community about last fall we got direction from our Planning Board in our council we did some more revisions to those and check back in with our Planning Board and Council in February and also we did a series of small group small group community workshops to really focus in about the wider area and to ask questions about land uses and opportunities and thoughts we did we had a lot of good questions about access and mobility transportation at those workshops as well and we learned a lot fabulous conversations with the community members we do have an existing conditions report that we shared at those sorry Jeffrey can you move around at those meetings this is I will say this is draft or still it's it's all the right information we're just making some revisions to make it a little more readable and summarize some things in a better way so we've taken a lot of that

[14:00] feedback we are in the analysis stage we're doing a lot of analysis and anticipating having land use and urban design choices for the area as well as all of our supporting documentation connections planning potential improvements back fork community feedback and review at our next stage whenever that may be hopefully this summer see what else a few of you participated in a couple of joint board workshops both in the fall and earlier this year with several members of several other boards and they were structured similar to the community engagement that we had had some really nice discussions with us through those so moving forward as I mentioned we will

[15:00] be bringing forth the framework of the area plan with a lot of choices so pieces that might and translate into the plan and we want to get board and community feedback when we do have those for you there's this board as well as the transportation Advisory Board the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the design Advisory Board will be asked to provide recommendation to Council Planning Board and Council and who are the adopters of the plan and you know and then the staff will be taking all of that all of those recommendations and developing a draft plan so that's our process and your role coming up any questions remind everybody that at the last meeting we've voted for a very formal motion towards stronger

[16:04] Robert's Rules so if anybody during the meeting wants to bring up any questions waiting into the chair recognizes you and and again following more formal Robert's Rules so if anybody does have any questions as of right now Judi so is this the board is this the board discussion part or is this just questions and then we're going to have a board discussion about it in general it's dive right in so you know the conversation goes if you have something you'd like to discuss I do so it's probably no secret to everyone that that my interest in housing in Boulder is about finding that sweet spot between maintaining neighborhood character and

[17:01] providing as much affordability as possible and like everyone else in this room I've been studying this issue as much as possible and was confused about some things and Jean has really helped me and you know it's like keeping mailing her questions and my feeling about the Alpine balsam project at this point is that I want him make sure I know where we're starting before we as a city can decide where we want to go and the questions I had for her is what is the current zoning obviously the site that was purchased as is public but what's the current zoning around it and how many units per acre because that'll help me conceptualize if it's provide if it's approaching that sweet spot of not changing neighborhood character but also providing as much affordable housing as possible so so Jean showed me where I could find these things and I couldn't find them on Helen

[18:00] they were just hard to find so I printed out what the zoning looks like on the map and want to pass it out and I also printed out what the units per acre are per each of those zoning things in the area and and that really helped me understand I also asked Jean what she thought approximately was the amount of acreage that would be devoted towards housing and you said around five ish is that is that right would you say yep the the city on the site it's the full site is about 8.8 acres and that includes the brenton building and the parking garage and if we just are thinking about and our direction had been that we would be moving forward to at least continue exploring I'm renovating the medical pavilion for the new city service center hub so some of that would be city services and not and not housing if you leave the rest of the city on site -

[19:01] about 30 30 to 40 percent for infrastructure and open space you get somewhere between three and five acres may continue so so when I looked at all these different zoning options and how many units per acre again as I've already mentioned this to Jeanne before there is a precedent at 3303 Broadway although that hasn't been taken up by the developers yet but the land use was changed so that it could be so that it could be our mx2 which would mean that there could be 10 units per acre but if it if there was permanently affordable housing there could be 10 more units per acre so there could be 10 units that were not permanently affordable but 10 units deemed permanently affordable and that

[20:01] in the neighborhood around 3303 Broadway which is the neighborhood I live in made the neighbors feel fine that that the character had maintained the character of the neighborhood it would increase the density considerably but not outrageously and something like that if you look at the map you see that most of the area around this site our single-family homes although there are some other things right around it so to me I just wanted to put that out as a possibility for us to consider at some point because to me that seems a really good way of maintaining neighborhood character and and providing affordable housing and in us in a in a large survey that the city did a couple years ago the top two most important things to people residents in the city of Boulder were more affordability on housing and also maintaining neighborhood character so those are both real important issues in the city so I just wanted to send someone to come out and tell you I'm

[21:00] sure you know how I feel understated at a meeting that I'm for something like that that would be that ten units plus ten more for permanently affordable I think would be a nice way to go of mixed types so that there could be singles one bedroom two bedroom and three bedroom so you could get other groups of people that we that we say you know recognize need for housing in Boulder and and also have some accessibility to some of the units so people with disabilities and so I just wanted to state where my interest was and where I was about that thank you Michael thank you madam chair the question I have two questions one is because if we had it to do over again to spend it was a forty two million dollars let's add roughly the number would we in

[22:04] in and the other is is a consideration to sell Alpine balsam as it is to a commercial developer is that a possibility well okay and I'll answer this and then actually I think Jeff and I suggest and then I want to circle back about how Judy or maybe your recommendations fit into the area planning process our council will be taking the taking up those questions not something I can answer at this point there are a range of different costs for purchase interest potential for the hospital deconstruction and other infrastructure that we have different levels of potential for you know there was there's it was always the intention to sell part of the site for other

[23:01] future uses housing being one of them as the city is not a housing developer so at different at different places of readiness there are different ways to there will affect the land costs and the land prices so not something that I can speak to at this point but I would suggest the folks tune into the may 16 special meeting to learn more about those thank you mm-hmm and I'm Jeff good good point Judy um so I I think that this your suggestions make sense and as we move forward we'll be looking at the potential land uses for both options for land uses on the site as well as taking a look at the land uses in the area there are a number of different housing land uses in different areas within the area plan there's the mixed mixed of density high density and some mixed use both

[24:01] business and residential as well as other non-residential land uses in the area and so we're gonna be at least we're anticipating floating some options on those and there'll be some ranges because there are different ways to achieve different goals in gene you'll have to correct me if I speak out of turn here it's entirely possible that there would be an Alpine balsam area plan completed even if the city were to sell the property it has been suggested so they are linked but not dependent on each other I think we would probably not do any project on the site without an area plan that a fair summary I think so because the currently the land use on the site and the zoning is public it's for a public institutional use and it's very limited within our regulations as to what can happen underneath that and with it with that so you know we want the best possible outcome for the

[25:01] redevelopment of this site that serves community values and we're going to have to address land use and zoning and character and all of the other things that we typically do in an area plan before whatever future is anyone else okay if I may just note for the public that there are two members of the housing advisory board that have attended joint board and Commission work group for Alpine balsam and I assume that format will continue to be used for board and Commission input or we I think we're bad I think at this point we are - we'll be back to the full board for recommendations you know we and this may

[26:00] be something that we talk about mm-hmm possibility that your work is done and it's possibility that it's not I mentioned that because the board has a project liaison rule and that may be wrapping up or it may not it sounds like yeah so that begs the question do you think we'll have any input on area planning in the future well we'll definitely be bringing the choices and the potential planned components to this board for a recommendation to the Planning Board and Council I would imagine also that you would have a similar role for the east boulder sub community plan that is underway I think Kathleen was here so you had a

[27:00] introduction to sub Community Planning project and I believe it's scheduled to come back in June or the next step on that but as each plan moves forward to the extent that I think all of our sub communities have a housing component there will likely be housing issues you'll be asked to weigh in on okay great - anybody else thank you so so I can leave all the props I love all of those plans and Jeff can collect those if you want to be look at look over those through the meeting thank you so I'm curious with our board one of the reasons why we're in this format is to potentially have future issues brought up and structured this

[28:03] way so that we could have a more informal discussion around larger projects as a way to facilitate more a less adversarial and more conversational as we move through again a big project such as Alpine balsam so a part of me is just kind of curious if we want to talk about process how does this feel in this this situation do we want to discuss like if this is where do we just want to wrap it up and keep going Adam so I really like especially if we do have public participation the ability for them to sit down with us I think that just physical barriers really reduced compared to you I think several of us have testified at Council before and it's an intimidating process having to

[29:00] be up there so I like this this current format and like you said I think this is just a really good way to sort of get the feel of it and personally from the from just sitting down here I've liked the feel of it so far so if we have a really engagement heavy type item I wouldn't mind doing this in the future I would say that for kind of general process to the board if it's not public engagement heavy it seems a little bit more cumbersome in some ways but I totally agree also like you know if we're if someone from the public is coming down and it's just really nice to be able to bring them into the circle yeah originally we were hoping that Alpine Boston was gonna we were just gonna be launching this whole thing and we were gonna really have in-depth robust conversations and really invite the public to participate and then it

[30:00] kind of all felt council meeting or two ago and but that was the hope was that how do we soften the edges a little bit I would even recommend that during this time if there's a way to suspend even more of the formality of Robert's Rules while we're talking with public so that it doesn't feel as formal for them to participate finding a way that if we truly are going to have a discussion that it be a discussion anybody else want to talk about there a way of softening the position for yes I definitely agree and a temporary suspension of the rules is pretty easy thing to do so in the future I would suggest that for sure a second year sentiment exactly so forgive me if I'm if I'm speaking out of turn but this is

[31:00] being my first meeting what length of time would the public be engaging in a format like this those are just the 10 minutes the beginning of the meeting or is it the entire meeting so I think Adam can probably speak more too about this format but we're brand-new to trying something like this and the engagement committee I think weren't you guys the original ones that brought forth let's try and do a different format and and structure so maybe you want to speak to it a little bit more sure so the basis is still the public participation rules that we have with pooling and everything pulling of time so you would in most cases still only be given three minutes but we're kind of willing to ask a lot more questions than would normally happen at say a council meeting or let people go over a little bit if they're trying to you know present a really really big thing so it's just a little looser than your average council meeting

[32:00] obviously if things get a little out of hand or something we always have the rules to fall back on but we really wanted to just allow a little bit more open communication and a lot more back and forth especially Michael I'm I works either way the only thought is the two tables here if I put myself in the role of the public would be a little more engaging to not have a table between us and the audience for those two tables I'd like the formality of up there I myself I'd I never felt uncomfortable going up in front of Council and that but I respect the fact that some people may find that intimidating with respect to the rules I would my concern would be how do we create an environment that's

[33:00] fair for everyone if we're bending the rules for some people and then deciding if things get out of hand that enough is enough and we have to go back I think I think to be fair to all the other boards and commissions my recommendation would be to stick with the rules as they are and not bend them for additional public time we just stick with what what the standard is for public engagement in a process but again be new that's my initial reaction to how often do we get public comment historically it depends I think on the topic there's times where we've definitely had more people show up but I think part of the engagement committee was making sure that we'd like to see this audience packed we'd like to be able to see that everybody's coming in and talking about housing and that we become a space where people want to show up here and engage as a part of the

[34:01] process I've headed to the council but okay that sounds great but how many on average how many people are here in a meeting from the public one 510 maybe one to five and to further develop that a little bit when we've had special topics we've had as many as 40 I think and then of course answer your question with each person just getting three minutes each that's already a lot of time so the meetings last longer in those days and we've only had that happen like at our meeting about 80 use there were a lot of people there and they all got to talk I will say that the interactive nature when we ask lots of questions and let people maybe talk a little bit longer I think has really done well for us it's it seems that we've gotten some really nice notes from people who say this is you know this is

[35:00] the one place where they feel they can be heard and I think that's something we want we take seriously as that engagement aspect anybody else Jeff if I may suggest that you could establish a set of rules for a particular discussion that apply equally to everyone so if you and you would want to let the public know that but if you wanted to give people more time you would probably want to give everybody the same opportunity so you could say for this topic on our public hearing we're allowing public - five minutes per person and yeah you would probably want to decide that as a group as part of your process discussions right so that brings up a good point that maybe around as we develop our processes period maybe what we do around listening sessions or this being a roundtable that we set up what does a roundtable process look like the

[36:02] tables are set up this way engagement is this this amount of time for each person a listening session is this and it looks like that so maybe that's something to put on the whoever continues with engagement something to consider for a process Judy I also want to mention you probably already notice that I'm sorry if I'm saying something you already know but there's the open comment section at the beginning and that's not what we're talking about now I don't think we're talking about if there's a public hearing where we actually make a recommendation or the listening sessions that we're starting that we've never done before so that's that's the one we're a little more vague on Chuck yeah just a little clarification for me maybe this is directed to you Jeff mostly it appears to me to the normal process of a lauding time three minutes and then

[37:00] boards and council are welcome to ask questions above and beyond that time at least I observe that happening regularly so that seems to me that essentially I mean it seems like it serves the purpose as it works currently if you pool time it's if a number of people come in they want a pool time because they need more for a significant presentations I I mean I don't know I'm not seeing what we're trying to define otherwise yeah and I was thinking about that while you're talking about that to be clear we're talking about something different than public participation that occurs in the beginning of the meetings we're talking about what we've on the last couple of meetings and what we've talked about with the engagement committee is if they have these educational seminars which is in our packets the things we've been talking about for last two months that these would look differently so the the listening session that's why we pulled ourselves down here how do we soften the edges what is it and so that process is slightly

[38:00] different than the public participation which is the more formal piece of it that that structure and our meetings will always remain the same this is just for these different pieces does that make sense these are different sessions kind of like when the City Council does a study session it's a different type of meeting versus their formal council meeting does that make sense yeah I suppose I'm still trying to understand why the time structures couldn't still apply you know maybe we shift the the physical structure of the meeting and but that those time because I do also have concerns as Julia said that you know how do we keep a balanced condition and a set of rules that everybody understands coming in I think I think one way that would help that thank you one way that would help that really work is sure we can keep it to three minutes

[39:00] but by asking lots of questions the person then has the right to to speak some more so we can just be more interactive about asking questions I'm just wanting a more interactive exchange this was nice talking about Adam yeah it's just supposed to be more of a conversation than we are normally capable of doing in these types of meetings any other questions Jeff I'll just say I think what's important is that you have agreement amongst yourselves however you want to do that I'm how run in a particular situation and that everyone is treated given the same opportunity so whether that is this will be completely open whoever shows up we can go you know back and forth as much as we want at any point in the meeting if you guys agree to that and everyone has the same chance fine if you

[40:00] wanted to stick to I think you would probably because you're required to have public participative the public the opportunity if you start cutting back on the standard you want to do so rarely and only for really good reasons but expanding it is within your purview I would say so for that next meeting in May I guess the question out to everybody is do we feel clear and what that process is Michael for my observation and I haven't been here the whole time is we don't have an audience participation problem we don't have an audience participation we don't know what the process is because we don't haven't haven't really had enough experience to know what process would be appropriate and so why not try and drive audience participation in attendance I think one measure benchmark might be I say this humorously if we get to the point where we would consider charging and cover a lot of people that we don't

[41:05] know you can always change the process to say you know we tried this five minute thing and wanted to be equitable with people and you can say you know that didn't really work because we you know we ended up going til midnight you can you can change it and modify it as as we learn and if the board learns how to deal with that participation but it would seem like the first one is just having people here thank you anybody else Jack I mean I think kind of along those same lines I feel like for these specific engagement pieces that we're talking about coming into this type of a format that we would just stick with the time my suggestion would be we just stick with the time rules as they are we modify the physical format maintain the time format and let's see how that plays out and if we find a problem with that then we could come back to it and adjust it Adam you want to anything so uh yeah

[42:06] that's absolutely I think what we're going for I just want everyone to really get into the conversation a little bit when we're having people come to us especially when they're telling us stories that impact their personal lives like that's it's much more about the emotion to me then maybe about the specific rules it's it's how we approach it as the board and how receptive we are to hearing people come out and tell us their personal stories so that's that's sort of what the core of this is all about much less you know if someone wants to get over the extra 30 seconds because they're telling in an emotional moment I think that's pretty important that we allow that and we've seen that at council very recently too so it happens thank you Jeff I'm just

[43:00] remembering the element of the conversation that you've had before that I think you should decide about which is as I remember it you had wanted after typically if even with the questions and answers once someone's once the initial back-and-forth is done the person returns to the audience and that's that I remember someone saying expressing a desire to have the ability 20-30 minutes later to go back to that person and say well what about this what do you think about that so if you want to incorporate that element you should probably be clear about what expectations are amongst yourselves for managing that and and therefore being able to share that with the public so that might be sort of 2.0 version just because I don't think we have a solid process for that in place for the next meeting and I wouldn't want to get into that right now but that's the aspiration that we could

[44:00] do that at some point it's just the fairness of that is really really sort of a we'd have to mull over yeah I think the hope is is that we could get these to like Michael had said like we just get the the people in the seats and wanting to participate and then from there we can start to see what we need to have since it's a new process for any board to participate in something like this that's my personal thought on it and does anybody else have any before we close this discussion and move on to the next no okay so we'll go on to surveys of HOA managers good evening hello I'm gonna speak from back here because we can't quite get the diets to work so my name is jay cygnets I'm a Senior Planner with housing and Human Services I've been here with have before to talk

[45:01] about the accessory dwelling unit update but for the new folks welcome so why are we doing this survey existing or the veteran advisory board members remembers the city has heard quite a few concerns from owners of our affordable homes that HOA dues in particular and fees are causing their homes become less affordable over time so what we wanted to do is to conduct a survey actually we did - and David's going to talk about both of them to see how extensive is that issue and try to understand it a little bit better before we tried to figure out what some potential solutions are so this is sort of a sneak preview I would say for you guys David sent me an email last night after midnight so this is all sort of hot off the presses staff

[46:00] hasn't really had time to digest it so what we're trying to do is just give you a glimpse of what to expect in terms of more detailed analysis and we also didn't part of the reason was we wanted to keep it open for as many people to participate as possible so we actually got our last survey Sattar and then there may be some additional analysis that will be required to do a deeper dive we'll have to see about that but any thoughts impressions feedback that you might have would be greatly appreciated as we try to figure out some next steps does that sound good any questions about that before I turn it over to David Becker with our mercy yes Judy and happy with how it is can can we be emailed to copy of course yes and I have printed versions of the PowerPoint sherry I really have to work on that city and paper thing it's like a

[47:05] tree meeting okay well as Jay said my name is de Becker with our RC associates here and Boulder were a market research firm that has a kind of a specialization in affordable housing we do a lot of work regarding affordable housing particularly in mountain resort communities in Colorado as well as working with the city on selected projects so there were two surveys that were done the first one we'll talk about is this affordable homeowner survey and this our outline just quickly go through the methodology of respondent housing demographic characteristics satisfaction with housing home purchase decision factors financial security and housing

[48:00] costs and the summary at the end essentially we had both mail lists and an email list for all the homeowners the 727 affordable homeowners in the city so he first mailed out a survey and that happened in early March and then we followed up with two email follow-ups with a sample of that group we had emails for about I believe it's six hundred and seventy two or so homeowners so between having those two different means of outreach we were able to get a very significant response the response rate was about fifty two point eight percent or three three hundred eighty-four of 727 homeowners exceptionally strong it probably speaks mostly to respondents interest in the subject and you know having a lot of opinions that they wanted to share

[49:03] confidence plus or minus nine percentage points so important just to keep in mind kind of the general patterns and results rather than necessarily the exact precise point numbers so I'm going kind of quickly here but just quickly run through some of the housing and demographic characteristics of respondents the kind of have this kind of format where the first column shows the results and then the next three columns results by respondents overall satisfaction unit and ten percent of respondents were dissatisfied or neutral with regards to their unit satisfaction thirty four percent were somewhat satisfied and majority of 57 percent were very satisfied and for some

[50:01] of the variables you can see that there's going to be big differences between these groups but focusing primarily on the overall in this discussion you can see the unit type mix where 57% are in condos 22% in townhouses 20% and single-family homes with regards to unit size you can see the distribution in terms of number of bedrooms where most good question sure on your previous slide just so I understand correctly if we look at for example condo owners sure and we go over to the column that says very satisfied be seven percent that's overall is the 55% of can you explain what shorebirds

[51:02] are so essentially that means of that subset of people who are very satisfied with their unit 55% of them live in condos 20% live in townhomes 22% live in single-family homes and that's relatively similar to the overall average so there's I think a way to sort of kind of when you're looking at these breakouts by satisfaction its probably most useful to look at the rose and look at differences between particularly for instance looking at the single-family home those who are dissatisfied or neutral 9% of those folks are in single-family homes if we compare that to the last column its 23% are those who are very satisfied when you live in single-family homes essentially what this means is people who are living in single-family homes

[52:01] Bayside were you then for instance condos where it's the opposite pattern where you've got I'm having trouble reading the numbers here so I'll just look at my copy yet I mean for me I'm not getting any column that's adding up and I am blonde so I don't pay with nuts okay that's a great point so each column sums 200% so if you think of if you sort of divide up the world into these three buckets of satisfaction that first bucket is people who are you know what simply dissatisfied with their home and their ten percent of the entire population who responded that next group is people are so much satisfied there are thirty four percent of the total and that calm again sums to hundred percent so and then the finally fifty seven percent in that very satisfied bucket so so this is just I think when we look at

[53:01] some other graphs first way of looking at this would be what's the satisfaction of people who live in condos it's not the data it's not formatted that way we have run that and I can get you those numbers but I primarily look at this in terms of trying to understand what are the characteristics of people who are satisfied versus dissatisfied right and I think it's it's super interesting that that you just said the people in single-family homes are more likely to be satisfied with their housing situation then people in in condos correct okay and you have more specific data around that sure actually let me just look at there okay I'll be patient and wait until care to get to that yeah no problem as long as we're on that subject I can just quickly look it up so Holmes 67% are

[54:00] very satisfied and that compares to 54 to 55 percent of those in townhouses and condos so somewhat more are very satisfied somewhat residents of single-family homes are very satisfied example of what the other is I realize it's very small but yeah good question yes and I unfortunately don't have an answer I should look it up but yes that okay could didn't carriage house but I'm not sure can you break down between condo and townhouse with the very satisfied sure together okay so actually it's further than the information we can feel

[55:00] free to skip and just okay tell us to pause and we actually haven't broken it out that way okay in this presentation but it's those in town houses and duplexes 54 percent very satisfied of those in condos 55 percent I'm very satisfied so a statistically insignificant difference essentially the same sure okay so yep with regards to units I as you can see the mix of most folks in having one two three bedrooms with a majority in two bedrooms and then with regards to bathrooms most in units of with one to two bathrooms 79% in units with one to two baths ninety-three percent in units with one to three bedrooms okay so if I could add

[56:05] just if we want to get through all this and a reasonable amount of time we're gonna have to move a lot quicker there's a lot of information and maybe it might be helpful to get through it and then go back and identify areas where you might think that we should do a little more digging and my computer's gonna restart in 27 minutes so I think a lot of this information that we're going through in terms of housing and demographic characteristics I think it's in part to sort of understand the profile of owners and part it's to understand are these characteristics associated with satisfaction with the units and that's sort of another level of analysis that we'll be getting into and kind of after this meeting primarily but with regards to location of home you can see why diversity of different complexes led by Dakota Ridge at 11% long tail of smaller

[57:01] developments with regards to age a pretty broad distribution between 25 and 74 plus so really the whole spectrum in the affordable homeowner stock also a pretty wide distribution of household incomes the overall median household income is about 56,000 average income about sixty one thousand and with regards to ethnicity 3% identified as Hispanic and roughly 10% as an ethnic or racial minority and 12% have somebody in the household with the long-term disability and also looking at the

[58:00] composition of people in the household you can see at the top the number of people in the household we've got 42% of respondents in a single person household 58 percent having two or more people so kind of a skewed towards relatively small households overall with regards to employment there were I believe it's about 87 percent of households have workers in the household 13 percent have one or more retirees in the household and then finally at the bottom thirty five percent have kids aged 17 or under in the household and then with regards to time the Boulder Valley so first we've got how long have you lived in their current residence and again a pretty broad distribution mostly between one and twenty years ninety percent of people in those three categories how

[59:00] long have you lived in the Boulder Valley typically somewhat longer than they lived in their unit let's see here seventy-three percent having lived for ten or more years and then how much longer do you plan to live in the boulder value at the bottom and most folks plan to be here for quite a while seventy-nine percent planning to be here for ten or more years so kind of a long-term commitment to the community for most folks so housing satisfaction this first graph looks at that satisfaction with the unit and again fifty-seven percent very satisfied thirty four percent it's so much satisfied so you know on its face that suggests that the program is by and large meeting a key objective insofar as most residents are you know exhibit satisfaction when we on the next slide

[60:03] when we look at satisfaction with particular attributes of the unit there's a variety of different locational aspects as well as size layout there's a high-end aspects included in this list here and you know you can probably probably - I need to go through over in detail here but generally vocational aspects have rise to the top bike paths and trail access 75% very satisfied with that 74% very satisfied with the location of the home 65% very satisfied with proximity to open space at the bottom is storage space where 34% of Faerie are somewhat dissatisfied sound levels 22% are somewhat there very dissatisfied with that so kind of another summary measure

[61:01] of satisfaction is are you glad you purchased your unit and would you do it again if you had the chance for a do-over and you can see that 89% would do it again and 11% would not so another sign that by and large you know people are appreciative and glad that they with their decision to a purchased when you look at sort of why people feel the way they do in terms of people who said they would purchase again you know a lot of the comments were just you know expressed a lot of gratefulness for the program and appreciated the ability to stay in Boulder part of ownership less stress in their lives an ability to sort of have life changes like changing a career or having a child I think wouldn't have been able to experience otherwise also happy that you know able to escape the rental market

[62:00] and rising and unpredictable rental costs and turnover of leases and so forth and that 11 percent of folks who wouldn't purchase again you know some of the themes there were the fact that depreciation was capped and that you know they were therefore not able to keep up with the rapid appreciation in the free market and therefore couldn't make a leap to the free market and they felt a little trapped so folks talked about that some folks talked about dissatisfaction with their particular unit the the size or the configuration or some other design characteristic in some instances poor construction which led to problems and then HOA costs rising costs sometimes being an issue with regards to have there been any surprises to you has a homeowner and about 50/50 split forty

[63:02] nine percent yes and probably the big issue among those you did experience surprises were high and particularly increasing HOA costs I think there was also a lot of the same themes repeated from the earlier graph so concerns about uni quality and with initial construction lack of appreciation those those kinds of concerns and both on this slide on the previous slide you can see big differences between the different satisfaction groups where in this case you know know any one percent of those who are dissatisfied we're surprised about some aspect of their purchase and it's I'm sorry yeah ninety-one percent versus only 38 percent of those who are very satisfied experience to surprised

[64:01] another measure to some degree of satisfaction is do you anticipate moving out of your unit within the next five years and most folks do not 57 percent anticipate stayin for five years thirty one percent are unsure and twelve percent do you plan to move out and if we just look at those yeses and babies and the second question what are the main reasons you plan to move you can see the biggest reason is living a larger home at 45 percent prefer a detached home 35 percent change in the family to personal situation at 35 percent went to buy a market rate unit 24 percent and so forth down the line so moving to the next sort of topic area we looked at factors driving the home purchase decision we asked this in a couple of ways first was which items were important in your

[65:01] decision to purchase and this is the same list of items where we also asked people to rate their satisfaction you can see the top item is overall cost of the home at 80 percent followed by location of the home at 76 percent size of home at 62 percent and progressively less below that and the second way we ask this question was what were the most important and second most important factors so the next graph illustrates the single most important factor in the decision to purchase overall cost of the home clearly the leader at 53 percent followed by location 20 percent size of home 11 percent and relatively smaller shares focused on less on other attributes we also asked a couple of questions with regards to the importance of being a builder and the importance of owning and your decision to purchase when you're looking for your home the top graph shows that 69 percent said

[66:04] that it was extremely important further home to be located in the city of Boulder when they were in their search process and then the bottom one shows that 81 percent said it was extremely important for them to be able to buy so it appears as if both of those characteristics are critical it's not just there in Boulder because this is the only you know they don't care about being in Boulder and this is their taking advantage of the home ownership program but they really want to be here or at least most folks do and similarly on the mine side they also want to own their own unit so there are also some questions regarding sense of financial security and how that ties in with housing costs top question was overall how do you feel about your current financial situation you can see that 17% we're not at all secure or not to secure and 83% were either somewhat secure that

[67:00] 58% are very secure at 27% so I think this is probably a sensitive issue for plenty of people and no what do you feel very secure a lot of people somebody insecure and then the second question how has your sense of financial security changed since you purchased your home sixty-eight percent or about two-thirds said your sense of financial security has improved significantly or improved slightly so that clearly seems to be a positive result of of the program conversely seventy percent say no change and 14 percent decline slightly or significantly when asked about what factors and sort of influenced whether their sense of Senate financial security has either improved or declined many people in addition deciding that there's pros and cons on the housing program side positive being you know relatively

[68:03] fixed mortgage costs and xkp in the rental market which was often much more expensive on the home they moved into when they moved into ownership as well as in the rental market ongoing increases which see at least for many folks were sort of halted when they moved into ownership at least to some degree conversely on the flip side some folks also said increasing HOA costs both in terms of assessments and dues were a factor that impacted or had negative impacts on their sense of financial security and then independent of their housing situation many also acknowledged other life's changes as affecting their housing situation either getting married having two income earners getting Social Security having a kid or the kid moving outside of the home developing a disability various factors that

[69:02] influenced that sense of financial security so we don't housing cost expectations we had a question how have your housing costs been more less or about the same as you expected before these four items and if we focus on the bottom HOA dues and assessments you can see that 32% said that HOA fees and assessments were much more than they expected and 33% said there are somewhat more so altogether 65% said HOA fees and assessments were more than they expected much less folks were had low expectations or their cost of and higher than expected for maintenance repairs that's twenty nine percent say gossip and somewhat or much more than expected for utilities twenty five percent say

[70:02] gossip and some what are much more than expected and then for the mortgage payment only seven percent say costed them more than expected so that the most predictable and anticipated the cost [Music] with regards to HOA costs in particular so first question is association 95% HOA second if you belong to an HOA what are your current monthly dues you can see most folks between the hundred and four hundred range the overall average was two hundred and forty-one dollars the median was also two hundred and forty-one dollars and then finally at the end in the time you've wondered home have there been any lump sum special assessments 52% of there had been assessments next graph looking at the

[71:08] ratio of selected monthly or no-cost to income so this isn't looking at mortgage HOA dues and utilities all together as a ratio to income you can see homeowners kind of fall across the spectrum with most and sort of the ten to nineteen and twenty to twenty nine percent of income going to those housing costs costs exceed 30 percent of income you know that is associated in terms of cost burden and thirty six percent of owners kind of experiencing those cost burdens and that's probably a little understated insofar as HOA assessments and other repairs are excluded from that

[72:04] there's various raise you know that in terms of items that might be calculated and those housing cost figure so just to sort of recap I think some of the main highlights from the survey many positive indicators of satisfaction with in terms of 57% very satisfied and 34% somewhat satisfied with their home 89% gladly purchased and would do it again 68% with improved financial security since they purchased most planning to stay for at least five years 57% and another 31% baby and then also just qualitatively in comments many you know expressing gratefulness and appreciating the ability to stay in Boulder pride of ownership less financial stress and ability to take more risks in terms of life changes and so forth so clearly

[73:00] particularly well both in comments and the qualitative quantitative questions potentially some areas for further evaluation and potential improvement in the program potentially 49% have had surprises as a homeowner most in the leading issue there and unexpected increases in HOA costs 65 percent say it's really costs have been higher than expected 29% say maintenance and repair costs have been higher than expected so developing realistic expectations for what those costs might be in in some instances the comments suggested the HOA costs were probably not officially low to begin with and so maybe you know that's part of the picture two concerns expressed in the comments regarding appreciation cap and how that limits the ability to make the leap into the inter market rate units concerns about the program rules which are probably in many cases well intentioned and necessary but the less

[74:01] frustrating there's some folks with regards to capturing the value of capital improvements the ability to rent short long term challenges and moving to a different home for instance if you have kids and need a larger home income limits might be restrictive relative to the current market conditions also concerns about maintenance and construction initial construction quality as well so that's just a very quick wrap-up I know you haven't had a chance to look at this data up until you know literally as we speak I think it's a very rich data set and you know I think there's a lot more that we can look at in terms of deeper dives on segments of people who for instance are surprised or dissatisfied or feeling more or less financial security over time so any questions at this point before we turn to the next survey yeah thank you so much appreciate that and

[75:01] yeah it just took a second to orientate orient to it and then I realized how it was flowing with the numbers so I appreciate that any questions Michael you want to go first sure thank you madam chair and did any you you conduct this routinely across you know affordable housing across Colorado pretty consistent with your expectation any nuances for Boulder you could share with us at any you know sometimes certain parts of the data did you jump out at you and go oh that's unique anything like that that you might be coming on I think maybe as compared to the ski resorts there's comments regarding appreciation cap and I think there's probably more of an expectation in places like Aspen that the free market is so out of reach that you know there's probably not a hope of using affordable housing as a stepping stone to free-market housing let's not say that's one difference I think household sizes or you know why don't

[76:01] you one-person households and two-person households that's fairly common you see an aspen for instance it's may well be an average of 2.1 people per household and the affordable ownership units in aspen - yeah those are the two that jumped to mind immediately I think I'd but I think that's an area for further exploration I think satisfaction with the unit is one thing we'll be very interested in comparing just you know is it comparable here higher or lower I think the maintenance issues maybe jumps out a bit more in terms of generally I don't think we've seen as many comments regarding construction defects then we have here and I think HOA fees and the jump rises and HOA fees hasn't been as much of a issue either so those types of those comparisons is the

[77:02] the section on financial security it struck me but this is just a guess that by its very nature someone who's trying to buy a house that doesn't have enough money to buy the house so to speak hence the program would be by their nature somewhat financially insecure because they're on this edge where a small capital piece or could be an HOA increases is absolutely devastating and you can I mean you can see that well so for instance the as we'll see in the HOA survey the median cost of an assessment was $1,500 and you know that's a big chunk of money for a lot of folks and I mean you can definitely read a lot of that sort of anxiety regarding financial security and when you look at financial security relative to the ratio of income to housing costs the people who feel me secure are paying the highest proportion of their income towards housing so on the flipside I

[78:03] think the fact that they now do you have a relatively stable housing situation has definitely been positive in terms of helping increase that sense of financial security thank you first just a remark this is amazing and I would have loved the opportunity to look over it obviously and I realized that that was no fault of your own that was the last-minute thing but this is mostly for Jeff actually that if in the future we sort of realized that we're not gonna get the data ahead of time this is one of those things that I would love to be in the packet beforehand just because there's so much here and you know we could really have a really deep conversation about how much stuff is going on in here but I'll just say that as a note so I'm fine postponing things if we have that option a meeting if we don't have the data available ahead of

[79:00] time to review I want to say the thing that stands out the most to me is it's pretty obvious that for the percentage ninety five percent have an HOA that it looks like these people didn't know special assessments were a thing so whatever we have to do to you know mitigate that impact on people or at least make them aware at the beginning of the process that yeah you could be charged or expected to produce thousands of dollars pretty much within a couple months to fix something you know that's that's pretty important so a detailed list of any projects or scheduled maintenance prior to people actually signing up for you know buying a home that has an HOA I think is super important in this instance because that's that's clearly where a lot of the problems are coming from I think Jeff can comment on that but I think I asked

[80:01] Curt this question as well and and that there's a they actually sign off on with a discussion around special assessments and HOA fees correct I have to check and see what that document looks like the acknowledgement of I know we have a signed acknowledgement of the rent of the restrictions that come with the covenant whether that includes an acknowledgment by an owner potential owner that they understand what the HOA special assessment possibility is I don't know okay I'll check and I went through that and I know that when I went through it which was just a couple months ago there was training in that around the special assessment and and I remember her specifically saying and making a huge point of it that this is why you want to get on an HOA board the minute you become an owner so that you don't get hit with them so I personally

[81:01] remember that but yeah I'd be interesting to see if we could get more information about it just a quick haul but it's it's pretty clear that an individual when they are purchasing this should have some sort of list of potential special assessments or plan maintenance before they essentially sign the contract like you know it's not necessarily required I guess so maybe that's something just as a best practice that we can start doing within the program just a suggestion much that was great thank you that was really good my question is actually for you Jay so there were two parts to the final comments and besides the fact that obviously you're going to send this round to all your staff and congratulate each other for all the good achievements

[82:01] and positive feedback what are the next steps about the issues that have come to the front of concerns well that's why we're bringing it to you now because we would like your thoughts impressions on what some potential next steps could be but you know we haven't identified anyway I mean we have barely had a chance to digest it and we actually have another presentation ready for you and this was done a survey of management companies so it provides a slightly different perspective how are we doing on time so typically we take a ten-minute recess right now and then before we dive into that piece if that would be okay if we could do that but I think there's a few people that have some more questions before we move on to that next piece if we could answer those before we take a break and move into the next piece earlier somebody knew before we go back in to Michael Jack I believe

[83:05] it's not a part of what you did here necessarily and but I just want to confirm that you don't have it buried somewhere in that data was there any engagement with I suppose specifically I'm interested in finding out where these assessments came if there was any if you dived into that at all as far as what the assessments were for if there are any specific categories and that sort of thing yeah well there was a question about you know how much was the assessment what was it for and when did it occur relatively few responses for that so unfortunately probably I mean we'll take a closer look but probably a little hard to make too many generalization I guess maybe between both this survey and the HOA survey you know there were

[84:02] some comments about at least one comment regarding the hail damage and the hailstorm this past summer I think I think to some degree fixing those initial construction defects at least that that was mentioned in a few comments but yeah those are the only ones that really jump to mind so far thank you I wanted to recall when this matter of HOAs first came before the board probably five or six months ago there abouts a comment by board member nog about the the acknowledgment of an HOA when someone's buying into context and the emotional context that occurs in that people are despite the trading are very excited about buying there for many probably a first home and sort of emotionally blinded to the gravity of

[85:01] the of the undertaking of what can happen with HOAs and it just struck me as a an important emotional piece it's like if anyone's ever checked into a hospital and they say sign here you don't really read the disclaimer you know you're not really thinking about that you're thinking I just like to make it through the night and they're pretty excited so I thought that was a poignant comment by remember not earlier and would be important to remember in that acknowledgement I don't know you frame that education process but it was a dynamic Adam just a comment so we were looking for essentially this for permanently affordable rentals at one point that's kind of what we're looking for is the barrier to that just the sheer amount of surveying that would be required since this is a pretty small amount of people I realized that permanently affordable rentals are much higher

[86:01] I can't speak to the weather it's just a straight-line calculation for the cost I think what we provided to you was that I think was about two-thirds of the residents of affordable rentals are surveyed by the rental property owners and they use very different methodologies they have the primary relationship if the city we don't for example have names of anybody and in our database of who's renting properties so there'd be some practicalities to overcome it could certainly be done we have addresses that was a good reminder because um our intention was to bring like the bhp surveys that they've done right they haven't been I don't think do

[87:01] it consistently like year after year but they have done quite a few and it would be helpful context so we'll try to get that to you as well and I will piggyback on what Adams saying as well with the rental ones it'd be interesting if in our agreements with these property owners that a suggestion or a requirement of annual or biannual satisfaction reports or something along those surveys are done so that we can see how they're doing as a provider just my last little bit and those surveys that were provided were primarily from non-for-profit organizations and my biggest concern is actually with the for-profit organizations so having something along those lines with that data I'd love to see the differences between for-profit providers and not-for-profit providers if we have the ability to do so good report I think it

[88:06] had a lot of good information I know we only did it for a second but to me it's not overly surprising in general the people who have permanently affordable housing that they own are pretty happy about it and they really like it and that's really good because that means the program is working and and the consumer the end result of all the work that goes into creating permanently affordable homes the people are pretty happy to be to be owning them I think you touched on it my question is people looking to purchase market-rate that again was because that to me is important housing as a stepping stone into market rate so then they can start benefiting from the appreciation of the free market etc etc yeah and there were a number of comments that people felt

[89:03] that they couldn't because the free market is appreciated so much while affordable housing has depreciated much less sure they felt they wouldn't have the home equity to sort of transfer into a purchase of a free market home I think that was the gist of it and you know some comments regarding can the appreciation rate be calculated to up compounds and if you live in your unit long enough can you get a waiver you know there were a small number of comments regarding that but I think a lot of people did express the feeling of being somewhat trapped in their unit just because they couldn't afford a free market home sure maybe this is on point to your to another I'm saying does that happen I don't know I know that's not really the topic here but not very often not very

[90:00] often so once you were free buy and move into a market rate okay last question is I know the rental side you have to qualify your income every time you renew your lease every year or whatever that doesn't apply to the ownership sighs all right so there's no is that correct that's correct theoretically but what we find is that most people once they do start earning more sure they desire nicer finishes bigger home Church I think what we find is when people win the lottery they buy really big houses it's just thank you good job again very nice report does anybody else have any more questions for this section yes I was just curious

[91:01] because Terry brought up the the the question about reporting income it was the income self-reported in your 30 I would move for a five-minute recess second vid thank you

[98:59] move to you okay and we'll go to start

[99:04] again J or who's ever are you leading this one - okay thank you so so this was the second survey that was done simultaneously this was a ways primarily the property management firms that manage the HOAs this is a little bit short of a presentation but you can see the outline here and first we'll go into the methodology so it was a male survey mailed out to HOAs there was an ability to take the survey either on paper or or online most of the surveys were mailed to property management firms which appear to manage probably on the order of 75 percent of the HOAs oh okay and I think did you get it handed one out to everybody so I mean one of the first

[100:08] steps was to identify the property management firms in the HOAs in the city and the state does have a database that sort of tracks that to some degree although it seems very incomplete and so we've spent a fair amount of time just trying to sort of make sure we had a decent property management company and HOA lists as if there's roughly 300 HOAs in Boulder there may well be probably I'm sure we missed some but together we got responses from 86 HOA s response rate of about 29% many property management firms acknowledged receiving the survey but said they would not participate because it you know they didn't have the time or it'd take too long or they felt the information was proprietary or they needed to get

[101:01] permission from the HOA so I think or we had done somewhere away back in 2012 which garnered 43 purses so at least we got double the response count this time so I think one thing that we did this time that helped was just making repeated calls to property management firms just really encouraging them to participate he also gave all the property management firms Nathan Chili's a $2 bill for every itch away they had and that probably helped a little bit as well so in the presentation we focused primarily here on comparing the 2019 and 2012 results given that relatively small sample size at 43 and 2012 you know that requires some caution interpreting but a lot of strong parallels between the two years so first property characteristics

[102:02] this first slide looks at as the HOA professionally managed 74% yes 26% no this year and you can see that's very similar to the ratio in 2012 next graph illustrates the number of residential units in the development you can see that there was an average of 48 units per respond eh away this year as compared to 80 in 2012 so that's skew to so much smaller complexes this year then in 2012 regards to types of residential buildings in the HOA altogether 88% of HOAs had attached units and that's somewhat higher than 71% in 2012 but in both cases large majority of each always

[103:02] had attached units you can see at the bottom that 17% had detached units this year in 2012 that was a significantly higher than 37% and I think we the survey reached a lot of you know golfcourse type or you know single-family communities that had don't fit the mold of the affordable housing nature way so one of the analyses kind of deeper dives that we're going to be doing as a follow-up to this is kind of just focusing on those each of ways that have attached units insofar as that's kind of a primary comparison and standard that the affordable inventory is working with HOA services and maybe I should just effect before jumping into that I'll say one other piece of information we collected on the survey is are there any affordable units in the HOA

[104:00] and about the quarter for spine HOH have affordable units and that was very similar to the last time and we also look at segmentation of HOAs with and without affordable units overall a lot of parallels between the two so moving along to services provided by the HOA so common amenities similar mix of common amenities both years with you know common landscaping that present in the age of weighs 80 percent maybe joey's having that this year similar 84 percent last year most issue is also having common off-street parking generally similar types of different amenities obviously HOAs have to pay for these and all this fits into the Jews and assessments one thing I'll mention too is that we did get budgets for about 55

[105:04] or have reverse planning ancient ways which should break out the cost of at least some of these items to the extent that their budgets itemized that way we haven't looked at those budgets in detail yet with regards to services provided by the HOA again a lot of commonalities this year and seven years ago almost all HOA provides snow removal insurance about 8 and 10 provide exterior maintenance and trash moveable and recycling about 70% provide HOA management and water and sewer costs about half provide pest control and smaller shares provide those other services towards the bottom HOA finances first we've got what is the method for calculating HOA dues and you can see that for about half the HOAs

[106:00] this year these are the same for all the units in the complex and foremost the other HOH the dues vary by floor yeah 43% this year so that's again relatively similar results this year and seven years ago with regards to the average monthly dues for per unit and you can see looking at the bottom at the average there of the average is 308 this year as compared to 177 twelve and twenty twelve so a pretty substantial increase at 308 for those 86 a two ways it compares to the 241 that we saw for the affordable homeowner survey so dues relatively higher when you look at the broader market than for affordable owners and it could well be that those affordable owners to the extent that some of them

[107:01] are in units their their dues vary by floor area they might not pay as much on average if you isolate just those HOAs that have affordable units and that turns out to be 20 HOAs in this sample the HOA monthly HOA cost is identical to the overall or virtually identical the median actually it is identical the median HOA cost is 300 for the overall sample of 86 for this question is probably 80 or so responding HOAs maybe close to 86 there's also a median of $300 for those complexes to have affordable units I guess another comparison being for those complexes that have affordable units collectively they have about a 35% of affordable unit stock that $300 overall would compare to the 241 median monthly

[108:00] HOA cost for affordable owners so again while the owners complain or have concerns about those costs and the rising costs it's still somewhat less than the general market even within complexes that have affordable units what asterisk being that you know this isn't the entire market in this survey this is just essentially responding properties only to funding of capital reserves and major improvements does the HOA have a capital reserve account separate from the operating account and you can see that 90% - and that's common you know generally accepted best practice so encouraging to see that balance per unit you can see at the average at the bottom that the capital account balance per unit is you know two and a half times higher now than it was

[109:01] back in 2012 and if you look at the percentage distributions some of those complexes had relatively small capital reserves per unit 46% with less than a thousand dollars per unit even if you look at HOAs which have attached units only you see better funding this year then in 2012 in terms of these capital reserves so probably some of the increases that owners we're talking about in terms of twos going up the one benefit has likely been that that's resulted in healthier capital reserve balances is the capital reserve account funded by how is it funded himself you can see 95% funded by a portion of monthly dues much smaller share use ad hoc special assessments so with regards to predictability it's encouraging to see the most most to relying on Jews moving

[110:05] along to special assessments this year you can see that 34% of HOAs have had special assessments in the past six years and that's up from 10% and the 2012 survey the median cost of a special assessment was $1,500 the range was pretty wide from I think question asked people to identify the year amount and purpose of the special assessments I think the range was on the order of 250 to $18,000 so pretty significant variation there and as we were kind of talking offline it could be potentially interesting to see how many of those how

[111:01] much the building permit records might possibly show or provide a more complete record of what special assessments have been for and what those costs may have been to the extent they're identifiable in the records has the HOA completed a capital reserve study in the past six years a much lower share this year at 46 percent versus 78 percent and so potentially some concern there my understanding is that it's typically good practice to do that maybe every five years ish perhaps with regards to moving on to the next question how would you describe the HOH general financial condition you can see 36 percent excellent 36 percent good 21 percent fair and 6 percent for and these responses are very much tied to how what that Kappa Reserve balance per unit looks like so I'm just gonna look at

[112:03] some detailed results here so with regards to okay so those properties that the HOA has been in excellent financial condition had an average reserve balance of 7,000 per unit those who said the general financial condition was poor had an average of $1,000 1036 dollars capital reserve per unit and the good and fair kind of scale in between those so that capital reserve balance is really and how well our capital reserves funded relative to the reserve study that's really the key benchmark that it's always appear to use to evaluate the general financial condition at least shows a very strong relationship to has

[113:01] the HOA taken any of the following actions in the past 12 months to address any budgetary shortfalls or constraints if you look at the bottom and sure that say none 19 and 40 percent if you reverse that it essentially indicates that 81% of HOAs have taken steps in 2019 that's up for 60 percent from sixty percent in 2012 if you look at the top you can see that 72 percent of increased used this year for increased duties in the past twelve months as compared to forty percent back in 2012 HOA has been more likely to also levy special assessments the second category at nineteen versus five percent and conversely they've been somewhat less likely to take various cost-cutting measures such as reducing landscaping expenditures where it's ten percent this year versus 18% previously deferred maintenance nine percent this year versus 15 percent previously and

[114:01] allowing residents to perform minor tasks four percent versus 13 percent and perhaps I mean this is getting to a little speculation but certainly probably the economic circumstances back in 2012 and they're still the overhang for the recession and a lot of foreclosures a lot of delinquencies with HOA low fees and probably over that's to raise HOA fees that probably fed into some of these differences then versus now when the economy is much stronger greater employment levels you know at least for the free market stock dramatic appreciation and units so probably some those economic dynamics figuring into this to some degree moving on to the next slide and these are just a couple of interesting informational results would you be able to provide a copy of the manual budget so that about

[115:02] 55 percent we're willing to do so this year similar share previously and then finally would you like to receive a summary copy the aggregate results 82 percent yes so great that this information might hopefully be helpful to HOAs more broadly and then finally just to wrap up I think you know at the top some differences in the HOA profiles between this year and seven years ago so we have to be a little cautious and comparing the two years in particularly fewer units and the responses this year and less likely to have detached homes this year and we can control for that by just looking at segments of the data and for instance by looking at just attached units a lot of similarities and the common amenities and services provided by HOAs both years a lot of similarities in the

[116:00] finances of nature ways with similar mix of methods of counting dudes either identical for all the units or varying by floor size 90 percent roughly using capital reserve accounts and 95 percent funding capital reserves from monthly dues and then also some notable differences with monthly dues being about $100 higher now in 2012 300 versus 201 median dues cost higher instance of lump sum a special assessments in the prior six years 34 percent this year versus 10 percent 20:12 on the flip side with those higher costs also stronger capital reserve balances at a median of 2,700 per unit now versus 1200 per unit in 2012 capital reserve study less likely you've been updated recently in the past six years and then HOAs being more proactive in taking steps to address budgetary

[117:00] shortfalls we're feeling the need to address budgetary shortfalls at 81% vs. 60% particularly by increasing dues and having special assessments and being less likely to cut costs by deferring maintenance or allowing residents before minor tasks or looking at cutting other operating costs so again just a very quick overview of you know some of the key findings and I think you know again the ability to sort of drill down more deeply on the results and we'll be working with staff on looking at you know some additional breakdowns so I'm pretty sure probably everybody has at least one or two questions I'm curious did all the respondents answer all the questions and if not how did you factor that into the percentages every single question but I would say probably on the order of for any given question it was

[118:02] probably typically 90% plus answered the questions for instance I guess the question regarding have any have there been any lump sum special assessments in the past six years and if so what year and what was the amount in the cost that was one worth 76 of the e6 respondents answered so probably 85 percent in that case we just took only the respondents and we assume that you know the non respondents may well have I mean I guess you're never certain but in the results it effectively assumes that they had the same sort of distribution of patterns and certainly with the other survey not everybody answered every question so we just focused on just the response only didn't and cute any results for non-respondents so we could just go around the room if you'd like Juliet master thank you very much for that great info I had a couple

[119:02] questions I know inflation has been relatively low in the last 7 years but I was curious about if there was any adjustment made between the dollars in 2012 and the dollars in current day dollars that's a great question there was not so it's just nominal dollars I mean it would be interesting to look at inflation I'm guessing it's been 20 to 30 percent in Denver Metro since then and probably higher for housing at least for what but it would be interesting to look at that yeah it's one of the sort of the next steps that we've been thinking about and even you know comparing it to other housing costs like how much rents have gone up in the same period of time you know is it comparable is it not it'd be interesting yes definitely they'll be very interesting I was curious if you collected any information about the age of the housing developments how old they were the ones in 2012 versus 2019 we did in 2012 and this year we could look it up because we asked you know we know the name of the HOA if we didn't ask it on

[120:00] the survey we can go to assessor records and we could look it up just to see if there just might impact capital reserves and things like that it was a good point question right and then another question was what I don't know if there was any free response to any of these questions but was there any comment about the increased cost of building materials and construction as relates to labor and that being a concern of why maybe HOA dues had increased or capital reserve yeah and that's I promise you that's my last question okay you know we did so there was the main sort of question that sort of was designed to encourage that feedback was asking if people had any comments on the financial status of the HOA the excellent good fair poor and relatively few it's aways responded and it's probably 12 out of 86 12 13 or so and most of them commented on the degree to which their reserves were adequately funded and you know was it 50 percent so

[121:02] I did 80% no comments that I recall about the cost of building materials or cost of labour we didn't specifically ask about HOA costs and you know any factors that may have been driving those costs so I was just I think it's safe to assume that increasing construction costs are contributing I mean just like they are to constructing new affordable housing or any construction so I think that's just a really good observation thank you for this report I don't have any questions about this I would just like when everybody's done with their questions to discuss a little bit next steps about how we can best give you feedback thanks Dave great very insightful report two questions one do you have some color on the monthly capital contributions arranged or

[122:01] average a mediator like that and the other question is is so many chilies I you know seen in the past do this some of these are relatively small HOAs the alignment of the capital needs assessment in the monthly contribution and deferred maintenance to kind of say whether it is great questions and you know I think we don't have well we do have the budgets which we can look at and I think that will be interesting to look at thing to look at is what is that monthly contribution from the operating into reserves we haven't looked at that and we don't have the reserve studies you know in terms of what their what those numbers are looking like we can look at the budgets and see maybe some of them might possibly you know if they've budgeted the capital reserve expenditures as well as the revenues we can look at that and yeah just it's an

[123:01] eyeball in like the multifamily lending space for example typically are 250 to 300 a unit as far as reserves and so if I take that like by the $4,500 those on average and the one to kind of back in it's about an 18 month which didn't seem like a long time but then I make the observation that often times capital assessments are kind of lumpy they're not you know you do an average but then they're kind of they're sort of discontinuous if you will of you know a wolf happens once every you know 10 or 15 or 20 years depending or other things like that so the smoothing part is interesting but then you can get one big call which causes all the consternation of people that don't have the money there maybe there's no debt capacity of the HOA to borrow money great point great point yeah I mean I think the survey didn't go into as much depth and just all those financial metrics as could potentially be useful but clearly a relationship between at

[124:00] least a general impression of how the HOAs financial other statuses looking and started at Kapalua Reserve balance you know in fairness some of those may be unfair because it's just the data you have available doesn't permit that depth yeah so good you know thanks for that besides the questions that have already been asked here I got a couple others one is so if I get if I got this right it appears that HOAs that are serving affordable housing versus HOAs that are just serving only market rate affordable housing HOAs are performing as well or potentially better as far as their costs overall we just see that's just looking at cross basis okay and I don't know if there's any way to pull this out of the data if there was any data collected in

[125:02] this one or between the two I'm curious if there's a correlation between the unit size and the HOA cost as a as a as it relates to square foot based on on a square foot basis we can certainly look at that from the standpoint of the homeowner survey where we at least would have a number of bedrooms and how does that late with the HNO a cost we do I guess with regards to costs like unit type from the homeowner survey see here it's gonna quickly look up what the how the HOA cost varies by unit type so first okay so yes there's a distinct difference all right

[126:05] okay so single-family homes affordable single-family homes have an average HOA of 103 pretty cheap which compares to 254 for town homes duplexes and 271 for condos so single-family home is definitely you know obviously wouldn't have as many common elements particularly regarding the structure but it looks reasonably similar for condos townhouses duplexes and then we were just to narrow down to the sub segment look at number of bedrooms so one breakdown of the data I think would be insightful is if you broke it down based on whether or not the HOA is professionally managed just to see if what are we paying for with professional

[127:00] management and does that actually lead to a you know maybe you lower HOA fees or at least a better reserve the thing that stands out to me is the number of or the decrease in reserve study was was that what it was called yeah so if as I see here AJ's are being professionally managed at the same rate if not slightly higher than they were yet it doesn't seem like they have as good a you know impact idea of what's going on in their reserves that that kind of is concerning to me what are what are people paying for not preparation for bad things to happen so that's just the point that really stuck out to me also just to keep all this data in mind it would strike me that it's probably the best of the HOAs that are responding to this maybe not the worst of the HOAs

[128:00] so this I mean that's pretty common practice if you don't think you're doing a very good job and you have a lot of complaints you're not gonna respond to a survey so this might be a rosy set of data we're looking at well taken yeah through management companies right so correct it wouldn't necessarily decide which ones to report on correct that is correct no yeah yeah it was less of a chore a decision than a property management company decision as to who responded but could well be those property management companies you had probably medicate you ways where you know they get rid of them in other words some sent the two dollars back yeah affordable housing program started what about 25 years ago took

[129:01] force for the 20% downside and and all that kind of stuff [Music] if you're referring to the overall affordable housing efforts those go back more like 45 50 years but the ownership component started in 93 I believe there were some efforts before them but the permanently affordable you know there's 93 with the first home program I believe the reason I say that is because that's when I kind of when it started so the majority the oldest affordable housing unit in some of these HOAs is 30 25 years old and that's the oldest so the rest are newer right for the most part a large portion of them are newer for the most part most are there have been some acquisition Shen's of surest units which would be captured in some of the HOAs but if there were new construction

[130:01] mostly starting 25 years ago is because the special assessments those are what really shocked people right and special assessments come up when big things need to be fixed and usually big things need to be fixed when I get really old like roofs and siding and concrete and those types of things so what I'm seeing is there might be a lot more special assessments coming up here in the next whatever decade because a lot of these homes are gonna or these HOA buildings are gonna start getting to the point where they need these things and you're going to need more money to fix them and construction costs are crazy all-time I won't go into that right now but but there's a problem because okay two

[131:02] hundred thousand dollar unit and the market rate unit is an eight hundred thousand dollar unit so if it's three hundred bucks a month across the board the person who has the eight hundred thousand dollar unit doesn't not that the person who has a 250 thousand dollar unit is probably a really big deal so I don't know how to fix it but I know that it's there and it's probably going to get worse as time goes on because the bigger special assessments are I think are most likely coming down the pike any other questions and Judy had brought up how we would move forward with any additional questions if we started processing this and I would assume email contact to you unless there's something else anybody from the board would like to do

[132:00] korie's looking at me you're on housing Advisory Board you can send them to the group that'll take care of it all right is there anything yes Jacqueline I think maybe Judy mentioned this but did you want to follow up with us on what or how we can best give you what input specifically you might be looking for out of this not just how we get it to you but what in particular because that before sort of your thoughts impressions ideas for solutions I know I don't think this is sort of an easy problem to solve so that's what I mean that's why we have you guys right offer your expertise and identify zouri so you know it's entirely

[133:01] up to you I mean you could dedicate a future meeting to talk about it more you could do it by email it's entirely up to the group but we'd be happy to answer questions by email or come back probably won't have David to come back thank you so much David that was awesome well looks like if we did have data requests are you able to get that information back to us typically that's pretty easy to do yeah yeah perfect so anything else thank you very much thank you thank you thank you very much okay we'll move on to matters from the board and that's pretty much gonna be engagement for a little while so um we've got some reports and do you want to just take over Adam sure so the first

[134:01] item I think Cory are you gonna pull all these up for us on the computer potentially somebody would have to say here deaf you okay with that thank you so the very first one on the list here is have engagement committee purpose and goals and of the engagement committee purpose and goals so so this is just putting out there the final verb we just wanted to put that in there to make sure that that's on the record as what the goals are for this year and yeah that was the last iteration so there's no decision to be made there I'll wait until our next thing is up on the screen to talk about it Adam do you want to

[135:02] does anybody have any comments about it before we go on to the next one is sure the only two who potentially haven't seen this or are new members on the screen I believe it's in the packet as well right yes judy judy mics not on and if you could pull it towards you you got it I just wanted to mention for Carrie and Julia that these have already been voted on and approved the reason why we're putting it with the packet is we wanted to add a minimum create an official record of of this and both this and the

[136:02] next one I believe that Zack thinks he can create a link to to our website so that all board approved reports can be looked up by the public so I'm just based on what you're saying as well especially since we new members when we talk about board-approved and I are we saying and this is kind of more of a process question that once something's been approved it's never open for discussion again or if they wanted to add a comment in this section is it not okay well that's at the discretion of the entire board by vote but this is just for 2019 this isn't forever written in stone anyway okay and yes I think anything can specifically be called up if they want to make an amendment to it at any time okay great Jeff it's hard to see if the

[137:05] intent is to create a record it would probably worth including in the header or something adopted by housing Advisory Board on such-and-such a date thank you any comments okay great moving on to the next item we were asked as part of the affordable housing resident concerns committee to provide a report and we're gonna make a motion to adopt that report so that report was in the packet as well I believe and so I'm gonna go ahead and make a motion I move to adopt the 2018 ab affordable housing resident concerns committee report I second okay and we'll

[138:02] open it up for discussion any comments Judy I just want to make one comment again for for Terry and Julia this was a temporary committee and this is the last thing that that committee will do after this report is adopted and put into the website if I can do that for us then that committee disbands so the only comment that I have is towards the very end on the last three paragraphs and I brought this up I when you had sent it out in the packet requesting any comments on it was in the essentially this third small paragraph where it says have decided to forego a public hearing on affordable housing and then it skips to the next sentence of however have instead decided to provide an educational session on the affordable

[139:01] housing experience and then in the next paragraph it says housing staff and general public will be invited to attend and participate in a more interactive manner so to me if we're having an educational session educational to me means that you're calling in people to educate them and then in the next paragraph you're saying an interactive manner so it seems like you're having both and I'm I was I pointed out just it seemed in congruent that was an oversight on my part that should read instead of educational it should read learning so we can change that learning or listening listening yep listen any other comments or okay so we'll move

[140:00] to a vote all in favor where there's more to count now so we have five of us saying yes six of us saying yes seven unanimous it was a slow roll all right next series of items are essentially different mediums that we're going to be approaching for the educational section next month and they all have a similar sort of amount of information as to what's going to happen but we want to make sure everyone looked at them before we sent them out so we'll just go down the down the list real quick so Adam I think a little bit more framework for this because it took me a minute while I was reading all this to understand so maybe just a little bit more foreign worker context as you're explaining what

[141:01] everybody's reviewing here gotcha I see here that the educational sessions poll outline is in front and sorry I just skipped ahead of what I thought I thought that one was going to be at the end of all this so talk about this right now that's fine this this makes sense so over the year while we had been trying to get more public feedback and get people in to talk to us the the biggest thing that stood out was the affordable housing resident concerns because we had multiple people at multiple occasions come and talk to us about it because it was a major issue with them especially the rising rents and amenities costs increases so we decided through overtime and a few you

[142:02] know interesting on the board that may be the best way to engage what the community is to try something a little bit different and that is these listening sessions it says educational here that should say listening and it will in the future going forward so feel free to cross that out and sort of the goal of this is to interact with segments of the community that are usually under heard or underserved in some way so just for an example people we don't often hear from we're permanently affordable housing residents so we thought that was a great place to start and this topic is about finding two more of those that we could hopefully invite and listen to this year and maybe make this a continuous program so that's the goal of this outline is to adopt two more topics for 2019 and just

[143:06] a couple examples of things or other groups that we might be interested in hearing from people with disabilities seniors people of color students all you know sort of minority groups in the community who generally we don't get hear from very often so that's sort of the goals of these sessions okay and so before we move on I just want to do you guys clearly understand what we're talking about with these listening sessions any questions about that you're shaking your head no you don't understand okay so this goes back to the just that process we were just talking about earlier is the goal is to soften and do outreach in a different manner so using this format that we have set up right now and do specific targeted outreach to particular groups that may

[144:00] feel marginalized or not or disenfranchised in some manner by the city so we would specifically ask them to come in and we would have a listening session around say if it was seniors what are the issues you're really facing how can we take your cause towards the City Council and that would be a topic so what what engagement put together was this list of a process of how we could decide on who we want to reach out to and then ask them through advertising and trying to pull them into a session does that make sense and you're talking about asking them very specifically with respect to housing issues and the reason why it's important that you guys are clear is because we're adopting this process and so it's important that you feel included in in that decision-making

[145:00] process so feel free at this point well we're well we've got it on the table to ask any questions so I guess Michael I'd like I noticed in the last survey like if they're like special interest groups I'd appreciate your your summary of that because I didn't understand that yeah I noticed like in the last survey there were no respondents that were were Native American or Eskimos and so we'd be excluding them well and what's interesting that we don't often talk about is that actually Boulder County's most recent numbers put people of color in a total at 22% so a lot more than what we're talking about so it's to me that could be a topic of discussion it up to what are we not hearing what are we not asking so and yeah like the

[146:03] example yeah example of seniors is like before Arthur came and spoke to us I wasn't really thinking about accessibility on all of the units and so it was informative incredibly informative to have him come and talk about it so these sessions would be more open to kind of topic specific and allowing us to engage and outreach specifically so like if it was mobile home parks we'd one as many people as possible mobile home parks and to come in and talk to us about the issues and situations that they have coming up Judy so I just want to add so this is just the process by how we pick the additional two topics without having to spend a whole lot of time discussing it at the meeting you know so we can just send send our ideas Coryell send it out to everyone will vote at the meeting in the top two will be two so part of what

[147:01] makes our process a little bit longer and harder in all of these is that we're trying to agree to process and also do what we need to do to move a situation forward so when you get these what we did to early on for have was that we would start these meetings and we'd have so much of this deep dive into the reason it goes into the packet and we spend time with it before we get to these meetings is that we can ask each other or be prepared for questions or anything like that so you can when you get these packets feel free to if you have any questions put it back up to the group none of us can respond to you but we were then prepared as you get here to answer any questions that it may have come up for you does that make sense so let me just make sure I understand the purpose of this I did I did read all this and I appreciate it getting sent out a week in advance so there was some time to process but it's already been decided by this board that these listening sessions

[148:02] we've adopted the name listening right two to three of them are going to take place within calendar year 2019 right okay so we know that and that one of those topics has been decided upon already which is the affordable housing experience that has been adopted so the the question really is how is this board going to go about adopting additional topics that they want to include in 2019 and as part of these listening experiences and so this is the structure by which we the method that we the group would use your proposed method of selection right okay so I process okay just want to make sure that's exactly it so what we're we're choosing to the motion is right now is this the the process we want to adopt on this first one and again it's not set in stone because we may try this out and try something out and it doesn't work and that's the beauty of us being a

[149:00] brand-new board is we get to try things out and and then and then talk about whether or not it worked and back up a little bit and try again Adam you had more I just need to make the motion and just so you know it's like he'll make the motion somebody seconds it and then it need to open it for discussion and then you can ask questions about it exactly so whenever we do so whenever anybody brings something for us they bring it forth as a motion first and then somebody else second it and then it's open for discussion and we can make any friendly amendments or pet and then it'll go to a vote so go ahead Anna great I make the motion to adopt the listening sessions poll outline my second okay now it's open for discussion so if you want to amend anything or if you want to ask a question or bring up so I don't know if Terry you feel this way because we're both new or anyone

[150:03] else has a question but one of the things that would be helpful to me is to understand the rationale behind each of these points and why for example narrow the housing topics number one that are not on current council work plan just to AC you have a sentence sort of an explanatory sense but what is the rationale behind that and and you know obviously some of these are self explanatory but it would be helpful to go through and understand the the reasoning behind each of these so do either one of you just want to go briefly why did you make the decision on each one of these so the first one is anything that's on the council work plan about housing comes to us anyway so we we will have a public hearing on anything that we have to give a recommendation for so we'd be repeating something we'll be doing anyway in a public hearing so that's why we don't need to do any council things does that answer

[151:01] that part is is a public hearing just that 10-minute session at the beginning no that's the open comment section so the open comment session anyone can come to talk about anything about housing that they want the public hearing is it's posted ahead of time as a public hearing and it's usually a little later in the meeting and and and people come and talk about it and that's when we will give our input to staff to pass on to City Council it's usually about a specific yes issue something bigger like Alpine balsam or something along those lines and then the narrowed the 2019 topics to those that are not particularly controversial I'll just say I think we tried to raise an issue that we wanted to investigate that was fairly controversial and council flat-out was not interested in that so we're trying to look at things that aren't especially controversial that that was our sense and that was something I think the board had discussed somebody jump in if that's

[152:01] not correct but and those are the only ones probably that need explanation maybe let me know as it relates to selecting topics that are not particularly controversial is there anything in here that would mandate of maybe running running the topic by people who have been in this part of our you know housing area for a very long time and maybe have the institutional knowledge of an issue that was brought up and what the outcome was of that issue and perhaps why it should or should not be brought up again is that part of the process Jeff do you want to answer that do you have a mic over there I mean if if asked I can

[153:00] certainly share my opinion there's always going to be a gray area some things if they have come up in the community discussions before and there's been a lot of conflict over it then we could identify that as probably controversial if if it hasn't been brought up before or if it is a topic that on the surface does not appear to have any significant trade-offs you know hearing from seniors for example about their housing challenges is informative and could eventually turn into actions that may be controversial but just hearing that is not necessarily controversial I would say that's how I would reply whereas if we bring up occupational occupancy limits as a listening that's controversial because the city doesn't want to have that conversation around policy on that so

[154:00] then I would move to make a friendly amendment to elaborate on that point a little bit that the the team the staff will be solicited for their institutional knowledge around a particular subject so that we are well informed about what what the history is on that particular subject in making into a selection so the fun part about friendly amendments is you get to say what it is that you're thinking I'm just confused about something do you mean that anyone who wants to submit a topic needs to talk to staff person to find out the history or do you mean they can if they want to or or I'm just not understanding I mean I think it's important to understand yeah so if you're gonna submit a topic I think whatever the process is for soliciting staff to get

[155:01] the institutional to tap into their institutional knowledge before the I guess before the board adopts it the board should have the awareness of institutional knowledge that exists about a particular topic before everyone agrees to it then are you making the friendly amendment that anyone who submits a topic will have checked it out with staff to get the institutional to get the background so let's use an example because that will probably be a little bit easier if you're interested in meeting and have a topic of senior citizens and you want to have a listening session we your amendment would say that if I'm moving towards that I would request like a check-in with staff that this is along the lines of something that they could provide information on the topic or a background

[156:02] on the topic and that it's within councils purview and our purview to work on like just if I senior citizens is a great one if that was something that I wanted to explore I I think it would be incumbent on me to ask staff what knowledge they had about this subject and and as it relates to housing has it been brought up before in the city and in any kind of meaning so that we were informed about any issues that might come up and it may influence whether or not the board wanted to adopt that particular subject so I know that this and I'm so glad you raised your finger cuz I was just gonna say I love just because he's the all-wise one and he will bring this together in a really nice tight way for us I've drafted a potential amendment to try and capture that in yellow there

[157:01] perfect mmm so then that friendly amendment goes to Adam and he can choose to accept it or not accepted okay is there any other discussion points or topics I just have another question so that doesn't slow down this process in any way it just means that any of us who want a topic we'll check in with Jeff staff and find out if it's viable or not and then they can put it on the list - Corey correct that feel complete - I I would hope it would expedite the process because we'd have more information sooner and could decide whether but not waste a lot of time debating something that is not worth the meeting Michael I know I'm number one I'm still stuck at number one well you say narrow the housing topics could you be more specific on narrow the house these are the ones what are they that are not on the council work plan and then in the last

[158:02] part of the sentence which says on all those topics is there some way we could be more specific on what that is what the council has a work plan you know the printed 2018-2019 work plan and so we were talking about not having a topic on anything for that because it's going to be coming to us like alpha and Austin's going to be coming to us I think large lots going to be coming to us those are all important topics that we all really care about but we don't need to have a separate meeting on that because we will be having a public hearing on any of those so that's all we meant us to not duplicate things not have a listing session about things are going to be doing anyway I just I find when I read that words like those are not very specific so I struggle when I read that for what that for what the meaning is and whether it could be clear so Jeff could we maybe redress that sentence

[159:01] that just says nothing on councils work plan something along those lines any topic outside of councils work plan so it's this entire process to address topics not on councils work plan is that the is at the point and why can't we just say that the point of this is to address topics outside of councils work plan wouldn't that be I mean wouldn't it just be can we say it easier because it just seems awkward to me so when I read it I don't I don't know what you want to do and I want to help you I just don't know what you want to do so as a point of process in this when we get these in the packet so that we don't spend 45 minutes on just wordsmithing the reason we do this in advance is so that everybody can

[160:00] read through these and make these suggestions before we get here let me explain why that doesn't work for exactly the reason that we're having this discussion now I don't know how to do that in what constructively would be like a sequential me a serial meeting to it to accomplish that because I in the readability until I had the context of this discussion I don't know how I would have made that comment at all absent that discussion because I read this I read the materials I didn't understand it did you watch less meaning did it watch the entire lesson or listened to our meeting okay cuz that would have given you context and and I'm not gonna sit through three hours to figure out what a one-page memo the memo the document should speak for itself I should be able to pick up this within the four corners of the page and I would expect that to be able to read that so I'm being asked to read a document I read it and I can't come to any conclusion meaningful to what that really means even to comment on it so I appreciate your comment about getting the materials early but they need to be some with

[161:02] sufficient background and context it didn't say this won't make sense unless you watch the last the last meeting okay would in those situations where you didnt you know in those and you missed the last meeting and didn't have the context in it and and granted I'm hearing you about picking up the document would it have helped to just send them a message back it's not cereal to respond back to this and have because we had set it up so that you could send something to Cory and just say sure I don't understand this letter so that we're prepared then for that I need more context or this doesn't explain to me something go ahead Jeff so any individual board member can talk to any other individual board member without triggering the public meeting requirements particularly for

[162:01] something that is I would say in this kind of situation you know talk to the draft or you can do that directly I think even though it may not it would get a little touchy if you were starting to try and develop content and say you know I talked to Adam and then say why don't you check with Judy that's that then triggers a serial meeting but for context explanation I don't think you would run afoul of it if you just asked one person we can check with Aaron if that's a concern and again the the point is so that we don't have this tension when we get here and everybody's like I don't get it and we've got two people that worked hard on it and they want out they're prepared because we've asked them three meetings now in a row to come back with clearer and clearer documents and I know they want to move forward and we have a meeting coming up in May so

[163:00] how we work together and trying to disband some of the tension and so that we're as productive as possible in these meetings that are both process and content related so whatever you need I'm willing to help try and facilitate that we just need to try and put something in place and we build on that every meeting which is first we asked for motions then we asked for these documents beforehand and so again whatever we can do to get to a point where we're making decisions in the meetings and not just trying to wordsmith every draft would be helpful Judy no point of information there's the friendly amendment is on the table so you I would just like to suggest you may want to consider that since it's now already up there and since what you said the changes to the wording is now up there that you modify your friendly amendment to say to adopt the changes

[164:01] that are up there because that meets your doesn't meet what Michael wants though so I thought it did we changed the wording yes so I'm asking Michael look I don't want to try and be the arbiter I'm just my sense I don't know you know it clearly you've worked very hard on this and I and I understand that what strikes me is would you consider giving it to someone in reading the document called and saying what's your takeaway from this of what we're doing it's a I find it's not uncommon when a group will work together of two or three people they'll come up with something that's really great but didn't show it to someone in to say just this when you read this what what do you come away with because I had a tough time reading it mm-hmm and I and I and I don't know how to I mean I could pick up the phone and do it but at some point it's like you wanted to write it

[165:00] I'm I'd like to imagine I could pick it up and read it and understand what you want to do so I can do that with this job well I guess I just wanted to ask Michael here we have made an adjustment to it now number one now says select housing topics that are not in the current council work plan is does that works for all of you then I don't want to stand in the way of that moving forward well I can speak personally that I and Adam can attest to it I redrafted all of these because they were so convoluted for me personally I picked him up and couldn't understand them and then and Adam can also attest that I got pissed because I sent all these read drafts and then they got redrafted and redrafted again and still work on the convoluted to me so the struggle I have

[166:03] is that when people do put these out and there's only one of us responding or and they don't get feedback and then we get to this spot that I that it's it's a it's a juggernaut does that make sense it's a so how do we move forward as a board in a constructive way where people feel like the work that they're doing is honored and I get you because you know brevity is my thing I'm like let's do one paragraph call it a day and so how do we get to a point where we can have good process and move forward with a May 24th meeting that we have coming up Jeff do you have any insight you want to add at this point I think there is a bigger discussion to have about meeting preparation material preparation what formats will work better that's been identified if you want to I would

[167:02] recommend maybe is this you know close enough to capture enough of the ideas to move forward one way of doing that is to I think as Michael just did to say if this works for everyone else I can move forward with it I know there would be just put it to a vote see if it's close enough for the majority there's other ways that could be approached but if you want to be most expeditious I think you would go straight to an up or down vote on each one without accepting any amendments and just see if there's enough enough common understanding our willingness to proceed as written okay I do believe procedurally Judy's correct there was one phenyl friendly amendment made and accepted this accepted so yeah I can track back if that's not going to happen on procedurally then with the friendly amendment that's out here and then Michaels adjustment would we would

[168:04] Adam have to accept both and we just vote on it the first was already accepted this one has not been so I'll just go back and or unless it will be accepted and then you can have a vote I think you need to resolve the amendment first okay so do you want to resign I accept it okay so we'll accept it as this and take a vote on it and go from there on up down if those so these are all up down for the remaining ducks mm-hmm okay so I'll call for the vote all in favor with pulling four topics for Habs listening session say aye aye so we have a unanimous Corey I moved to accept the affordable housing experience letter for

[169:00] the daily camera second oh I did it for you second question mark okay open for discussion or do we just want to go right into vote I think I'd like to yes I just like to say one thing we initially started out with a 750 word opinion piece and we're you're restricted in the daily camera by the number of words and we just couldn't do it so we went for a 300 letter just turned things around took the two people much of the advice from two people who gave advice and just shortened it down and that's why it's now 300 words and and a lot shorter hopefully tighter moving towards a vote all in favor aye aye unanimous I move to accept the email to providers

[170:03] for the affordable housing experience second all in favor aye nays we just don't have we've seen it for a year and a half now I'm gonna have to update Jeff's picture all in favor of updating Jeff's favorite picture you can probably get one for my raft ride a rafting trip Hey ready for vote all in favor aye

[171:05] unanimous I move to accept the Affordable has an experienced flyer for May 22nd I second all in favor aye unanimous I move to accept the affordable housing experience for the week ahead in the daily camera a second all in favor unanimous unanimous for the eyes thank you everybody thank you we have some process issues on how we want to move forward on this so I think in their retreat we're gonna be talking about

[172:01] process and we're there's a few things on that agenda that we should all take some time and really think about how do we want to see this board operate and function and we have a lot of information in front of us how do we want to move forward with it how do we want to prepare for it what do we ask of each other so when we come to these meetings we're actually making decisions and it's one of the things that we did on the agenda is whether if it's informational no decision has to be made we're just here to listen we're gonna do there's comments for motions that will be put out there if a decision is necessary and I can spend time with either one of you or both of you if you'd like to understand how we got to where we're at and potentially any of the historical of for context if you want some of that as well yes so with these documents I I read through everything and I probably spent about two hours editing things and track

[173:01] changes and I sent sent it back to Cori what happened what happens then who sees that where who does it go to who adopts the changes or decides not to include them I could have spent more time but I didn't have any more time that was about all the time I could give but I would have I do a lot of editing in my work so so what we had agreed to was that we agreed to a process where it was going to go back to Cory and Adam and they were going to converge the documents as best they could from any edits that any of us had sent in so I had also sent in a ton of edits and Adam had done them and I think you came in right after me with doing some edits as well yes Jeff I will add that that works when they're non-substantive edits so if it's copy editing if the meaning stays and the intent of the board doesn't appear to

[174:01] change that works if it does not then it would have to come back to the whole board for it because you cannot make substantive decisions without a proper notice to the public so in this case the edits hopefully were I assume were considered to be copy edits which if you've done much editing you know multiple editors have different ideas it's a challenge no question and I think we've found that - as a board in general when we're drafting a lot of things that each of us has a different style about us so it's hard to figure out how to honor styles that are very different with each other Judy I think also in the minutes of the last meeting I'm pretty sure that's when we voted at the last meeting on the procedure we wanted to

[175:00] follow for getting the having the board approve things publicity and so that's how so so we that process was followed and again of course the board can change that process that's up to the discretion of the board but but the process was followed Adam Jeff do you mind sending the board that process I am trying to get it right here if he could send that process that we just decided on the my last meeting to reward so they're aware of how the publicity publicity pieces actually are supposed to be wordsmith and everything okay I can you want me to send that an email to everyone yes please and it honestly I don't feel like we had an issue with the process today as much as we did how

[176:03] they were drafted that makes sense so you guys adhered to the process that we outside of the the edits just got so big because the drafting didn't fit does that make sense go ahead Anna my inclination is if you are very interested in how things are said that you would get on the engagement committee and be the drafter because me personally I don't mind so much how the words come out so long as they do so I'm probably very amenable to whatever anyone would come up with if they were on the engagement committee mm-hmm did you have something Michael I found sometimes in communication in groups in writing a document if you can make a key relatively few words make a bullet point key outline and then people agree on what those key points are and it becomes

[177:01] clear even though there might be a little you know obtuse or maybe a little excessively direct then you can write a narrative around that once you agree on those key points it typically makes it easier and the the writing style becomes it's really less of an issue because the key points remain in a document and you tend to have that that brevity and clarity when you when you're right from that rather than trying to write freehand when it comes to process and I do think it's interesting feedback that we have three at least three people that were confused by the document so that says a lot to it like if we're writing putting stuff into place that historically will be adopted by our board and say we have two more new people next year if they pick up that document and don't understand it and we have to go back and explain context that says a lot I think and it's it's not easy to set the context in the you know part of a preamble to a document it's not a it's not a trivial thing to to

[178:00] pull off it's not easy okay anything else to wrap that piece up okay so yes Jeff if I may do you have an an agreed-upon plan for how the listening session will go has the group delegated that to the agenda committee I don't recall if there was a proposal and that you all agreed to do you remember the previous meeting an agreement that was one of the things we submitted at the previous meeting okay no it starts with the staff you know a brief staff presentation then a provider of services than a resident and then we'd open it up and I thought we had it

[179:00] didn't we I don't see it in here but approve the plan for educational format sessions that follows I think that covers it right there that's not a it's from last month's minutes I'm holding up another moment thank you Judy yesterday are we actually on the unfinished business about the rescheduled retreat I was letting a pregnant pause happen so if anybody had anything else they needed to feel through before we moved forward okay so we'll move on to unfinished business the rescheduled retreat I know

[180:01] there were a couple of questions about the location so I'm going to hand off to Corey for that and then I wondered if you wanted to we assumed that you were sticking to the agenda but last chance to change it basically if there's anything that came since since you had a chance to talk with the facilitator this would be your chance to change it so the location me pull up the address Jeff was she's pulling up the address can you just are you do you have it accessible the agenda for the retreat I do thank you so it's at the diagonal Court community room the address is 30 to 65 30th Street number seven it's inside of the parking lot where the old Walmart used to be over on you already

[181:01] through the Walmart you can drive in off of 28th Street if you pull in do you know where the just the farm is the door yeah it's in that big parking lot that's called the diagonal Plaza and so if you go in there do you know where the DMV is in that little plaza it's in one of the Suites in that hallway it's number seven so you there should be plenty of parking she gave me these instructions for parking because I don't know if the parking is limited it's in other areas so as long I just recommend getting there a little bit early to find your way find a parking spot and then we can get settled in since it's a new space for us all just no overnight parking Lane great and vans busses okay we good okay so we've got the agenda up this is the agenda for the retreat get to know each other our mission our interactions so just those

[182:10] three yukine guidelines ground rose how does so the hab charter I've heard to refer to quite a bit and is that just the verbiage that's on the housing advisory board a whole landing page on the website is there any formal document somewhere I looked for it and I couldn't find it I assume this is a reference to the ordinance that Council passed establishing the housing Advisory Board the purpose and functions are word-for-word into the but the ordinance is a little broader than that but that's the the core of it I think the October discussion that

[183:03] council had about ABS roll is although not part of that document also a valuable way to understand what councils desires are for your work and I can send you a link to that it was about 30 minute discussion if I remember right so so the ordinance is it says charter up there and you're saying that refers to the ordinance I did not draft this agenda I'm not sure if there's anything anyone else had in mind that's the only thing I can think of that's the document that created you so where would I find that we'll provide it yeah I think it was

[184:14] at one point there had been discussion of you having a bunch of procedural discussions and the retreat I believe the facilitators judgment was having talked to folks that there was plenty of other easier to deal with topics or harder is the wrong word more meaty topics and kind of sausage making so I think that's what what the judgment was around proposing this agenda yes Chuck just a quick question did the agenda the agenda the community didn't put this together clearly there's two facilitators and we specifically have two facilitators in case going forward

[185:02] in the future if one is unavailable and we want them the other one so that we're doing foundational work with two of them at the same time so that they could trade off for any events we may have in the future and then they had come up with kind of a list of things but then they talked with everybody and this is what they came up with quick another question Terry and Julia did you have a chance to talk to them also you did the facilitator [Laughter] Jack are we being asked for any input for this agenda and how it was put together or suggested changes you mean

[186:01] right now is there anything you felt like you expressed to her that you are now wanting to change no it's more just structurally how these things are organized as I'm looking at that some of them seem to be Jeff I only put this on because of the rescheduling yeah my assumption was that it was fine I would suggest that unless somebody has had has some serious reservations that given especially that the facilitator isn't here to explain the rationale you know if there were some this is the last chance to do anything about it essentially and with two new members joining and it being a public meeting wouldn't the agenda otherwise wouldn't be in front of the public maybe I made the maybe we should have just run with it but yeah and I guess my only request

[187:00] in this because we only have three three hours three and a half hours with them over there that it also be something that every like I sat down with it and literally wrote stuff under each one of them so that I was prepared and to contribute so I would just request that you really think it through so that we can have some good strong meaty discussions if if so desired anybody else okay new business and I'm assuming this is from you guys Adam engagement proposed topics do you want to explain so I think this might just be a duplication because we just laid out the entire process for you there and it doesn't involve talking about them tonight so so we're just passing on this one okay the next one is a biannual

[188:00] letter and a decision and I'm making a motion to adopt a biannual letter seconded and we'll open it for discussion I'll give a little context of what we were talking about here we discussed around we do an annual letter right now to City Council and within it we've agreed to put two topics that we feel like are something that we are they're requesting a nod from City Council to work on it and put on our work plan or requesting them to consider for their work plan and since so many things are moving quickly within the housing realm for City Council we thought that it would be something we could consider doing by annually so June would be when we would do a second letter to them of any things that we've sussed out in the first six months of the year that again would either we'd want a nod to on the second half of the work plan or we would want them to

[189:01] consider as something they could address because we're seeing how fast things flip like without pine balsam and other things so that's the framework behind a second biannual letter Jeff did you have something is that why your hand was halfway up I would just share that the October discussion with council explicitly talked about this most boards and commissions do not provide their they're provided the opportunity in December to provide an annual letter to Council at that October discussion there was a definite openness by Council to receive a second letter from the housing advisory board mid-year in large part as I remember that discussion it was to basically what ideas on the table to say this okay council we're interested in exploring this as a way of trying to touch base on the acceptability of some

[190:03] ideas for work that you might do as a board and I'm bringing this now because if we if we do adopt this then we're gonna want to get rolling on a discussion in May for whatever we'd want to put out in June so that's no yes Michael um I just operate I think by when you say biannual what we really mean is semi annual biannual meeting every other year like every two years I was my ethics I looked it up there's biennial bi annual and semiannual bi annual and semiannual are the same thing twice a year by anyone with an e is every two years Oh interesting sorry it's just my brain work so I just need to be semi annual or biannual if you

[191:00] want it twice a year or you could just say twice 8 twice for just the brevity of communication and the focus on that this evening why don't we just say twice a year great I adopt or I accept that friendly amendment anybody else yes Judy so so now we're discussing the motion right I I'm definitely in favor of doing two a year and doing one June July whenever that works out and I recall there was full board enthusiasm for doing that I don't recall that the format Abbott of it was decided in stone or that we've decided to do to talk about two topics we cared about that's what we did last letter and I think that's still open we might just put three or four topics of things we've

[192:00] heard from the public and that's I mean I I don't think that part is set yet so right now we're just voting on doing it and that's fine but I don't want to feel that we've already pre agreed to what it's the contents can be about Chuck thank you I suppose if we do and that maybe this is evidence but if we do adopt the twice the two letters a year I'm avoiding my annual that it's I almost feel like we may want to make it an optional condition in other words I don't want us to force ourselves into putting a letter out if we don't feel it's necessary right so just however structured I can see some years we feel like it's valuable to do that and maybe other years we'd think it's not valuable to do

[193:01] it so I don't know maybe that just is in the nature of this but that'll be something that we would address every year and just at some point probably around this time of the year we'd say do we want to do this letter this year do we feel like there are topics or items that we want to bring the council's attention to mid-year so I don't know how that works and I mean well the motion that's on the table is a by Armina twice a year so I hear you on that and we'll just vote accordingly but like anything I think we've already agreed as a board that if it doesn't work or if we need to do something then we'd vote on it at that time Michael do you feel like you need to say some anybody else want to comment the only comment I would add as if if we're

[194:01] voting on or voting on whether or not the second letter happens and we have to vote on that if the content is undecided then when it comes time to write a second letter if that were approved and we would say we have no addition we have nothing to report at this time work is in progress just Cory do you have a motion language yes this motion would be adopting twice annual letter so what I have is more motion to adopt by annual letter sweat looks seconded McKenzie proposed amendment to clarify by annual to mean twice a year more accepted that's where we are yep everybody ready for a vote and to be clear it isn't about con content or process of selecting topics which I don't mind putting something together for our next meeting to help decide on how we'll go

[195:02] about selecting topics and potential topics does that make sense collecting to potential topics yes is there any rationale to add a specific date to this just as anybody thinks about it hmm in other words we don't have a definite I mean we I think are all making an assumption that this is in June right and should we just add that date to this to say that it would be a June letter or should we leave that open so that we can decide to make it at any point in the year any thoughts on that Jeff going that formal I believe it open if it takes you four months to to land on it and you haven't submitted you don't have to change it I don't see a need we could push it off but yeah we don't need to stick to G okay that was just it was make we say June then

[196:00] just as a point of clarification any communications to counsel have to be approved by a majority vote of the board so that would be a separate vote than what you're doing right now the actual communication itself awesome okay all in favor aye aye unanimous thank you so then everybody received a copy that would have been on our desk because it came out later today about officer election procedure and this is something that we had a basic draft from Jeff and then Adam and I gave our opinions on it with the agenda committee Jeff do you just want to walk through a quick sure again at my apologies we failed to get this in the packet and we should have so what I've done the first part is just quotations from your bylaws which were

[197:01] adopted last year saying what's the chairs responsibility what's the Vice Chair and together they comprise the agenda committee who set meeting agendas then the bylaws also talked this is the language exact language from the bylaws about how you elect your officers you'll you'll see it doesn't have a direct you know procedural approach it just says majority of the board go ahead and do it so what we drafted was to for your consideration was first a supermajority must be present so that if it's just a quorum of four you're on electing your officers that there'd be a determination of who's interested with the requirement for a second so at least two people have to be in support of a nomination for it

[198:00] to be considered some brief communications rationales supports or other comments followed by an election procedure number four with requirement that for votes are necessary to be elected to an officer position so a majority of the board and then a variety of ways of if if the initial election doesn't do the job how to get to a final decision you'll see in this highlighted portions on the screen and in brackets a choice you know I don't know if you want to give preference we didn't know if you wanted to give preference to people who have already served who haven't and if they've been on longer or more recently so that would be something to clarify before you adopt this procedure yeah so that's essentially what we tried to put together and a little context on that

[199:00] the reason why that gets a little lengthy towards the end is that we don't end up with just a flipping of the coin which is possible I can't remember what it was it counsel that finished the flipping with the board or with the coins yes yes your reason why we kind of funneled down on this is so that that we can avoid a flip of the coin there it is I moved to adopt the officer election procedure a second any discussion all in favor yeah there at the moment the way it's written there's conflicting

[200:00] highlighted areas are conflicting so they should be resolved before it's adopted if nominees have served the same time a nominee who essentially if you if you haven't through a sequence of votes been able to decide the tiebreaking procedure first if you've been on the board longer you go ahead you know there's 2/3 vote recipients whoever's been on the board longer becomes the officer if they've served the same amount of time where this is something that we did not resolve was you got a pick there's a person who is served before preferential or the person who hasn't that's essentially what that is and then if they have both served as officers then it goes into more specificity the officer position that's being elected let's do all the way up for has served longer and so in in other

[201:05] words just one vote for we're gonna go with longer on those and one vote if we're gonna go with a shorter term does that make sense for all three because they're all about who's been on the board and who hasn't well the first one unless you want to change it just says if you're on the board longer you get the but you you win the election that's the tiebreaker if two people have each served for three years and they're tied in votes do you want to become the officer the person who has never served as an officer or the person who has served as an officer what I'm saying you're three highlighted ones are served or not served has not ever has has not or has longest if someone had been the vice chair and now they're running further tied in to vote for the chair do you want them to be you want the

[202:00] tiebreaker to be you already served as vice chair therefore we want you to be chair or you already had your chance we want to get somebody Adam not that this matters now because we have a most almost entire half new board but originally the intent was that people who hadn't served would be serving sort of as an overruling of someone who previously served just so people get the experience that serving as an officer on the board that's what we first established when the board was start from former term limits yes perhaps to resolve this you could make a motion and if that carries then it's done okay I'll make a motion that for all of these that are undecided we go

[203:00] with the has rather than has not I'm just saying that to get a position going if you have people up for election highlight then the in parentheses that we go with what's in parentheses and all three of those the more experienced person gets it they serve more yes yeah yeah because it's either one or the other those three go together and the others don't so we'll see how the vote goes I mean someone cannot second it and it can go the other way I don't care what she said is the opposite of that's why yeah so we could not second it right and then make rate into the next motion

[204:00] right which would be I just wanted to get it moving he'll well he just seconded it so oh you second did it all in favor three yay yeas Juliet Judy job oh I'll put that okay so you need to complete the vote I believe all the nays for Michael Adam carry myself so it doesn't pass better make the other motion sure I moved to accept the non bracketed versions of the tiebreaker all in favor

[205:07] so we have five this time Juliet Terry Mason Michael Adam and the nays jock and Judy so the yes is heaven and the motion that has been adopted and now do we need to vote on the original motion or yes yes and did you present the original motion or today I'd presented it and it was seconded and then there was discussion so we can go to a vote now can you restate it sure I move to accept the officer election procedure as amended as amended all in favor

[206:00] unanimous okay that was fun and the next decision is elect chair and vice-chair I'd like to make a motion to postpone that vote until the next meeting since we haven't had our retreat and we haven't had a chance to all get to know each other I'll second yep Michael second it there's three seconds on that so all in favor we've got I can't count six procedural point the discuss yes what do you need to discuss Judy no okay so six it's everybody but Judy and the name would be Judy can I

[207:01] get a point of clarification would that be new business or would that go under unfinished I would say it'd be unfinished because we touched it this time so it would be unfinished business may 24th and just quick I should have made this point earlier your next meeting actually is your retreat I believe the intent was your next business meeting for may 22nd 22nd it was okay May 22nd all righty okay anything from the staff yes just awaiting me on my return among the hundreds of emails was a request to check in with you on the interest in participating in some way in the transportation master plan update so the transportation the city has several master plans that are typically run for

[208:03] five years or so the two direct try and establish the priorities for in this case resource allocation and they go through extensive public process and as a new board you will likely be get multiple requests for things that may or may not be directly related to housing but certainly have an indirect current connection transportation is certainly one of them environmental might be another you know there could be a variety of others but in this case one of the things that's an extra believe linked with transportation is where people live the transportation strategy's goals and programs could be something that you would want to consider and provide input on or not so I'm in said that we had the opportunity

[209:00] to check in on it the timeline is the next four months so it would be adding if you wanted to either have a presentation on it we would have to get it in fairly soon that particularly if that meant you would want to have some influence there are a couple of paths that were possibilities there's consideration of having a joint board meeting like Alpine balsam like some of the other projects that you've heard about so that's a possibility but not a guarantee the staff the other option would be to schedule some time at one of your meetings either for just an overview or potentially going straight to reacting and providing input to to the master plan as it will be going to council later this year or you could say you know at this point our hands are full or we don't see the linkages as

[210:01] being that important thanks but no thanks so why don't we wanted to put it on the table and see what your thoughts were initially we have a little bit of time to sort it out but if there's a clear clear interest or non interest that would help the planners on the transportation master plan plan their outreach and engagement okay so might I suggest just for expediency that we take two minutes go around you can say whether or not you're interested in yes or no you're interested in it and then whether or not you would like to be on a committee or have it be presented to the board as a whole say you were saying a brief and then that way we could offer feedback based on a board does that make sense I'm gonna start at him sure I mean yes I'm interested in contributing in some way and I think probably the easiest way would be for some of us so if not

[211:01] however many can go to go to a transportation advisory board meeting and have a joint session at that meeting definitely interested I think that I would be interested in having an informational or somehow having transportation board provide us with an overview or an informational kind of fill in first of where they stand what they're looking at particularly and look for some of those linkages and then beyond that I think what Adam is suggesting would be a good way to engage with it Michael I'm interested I'm also interested and one of the things that popped in my mind from our presentation tonight is that the

[212:01] statistic that a lot of people want to felt it was important to live in Boulder and we don't know why they feel that it's important is it because they have poor transportation options or traffic is really bad commuting in and would with the better transportation options would their problems ease up a little bit and that datum that number shifting and I would say yes I'm interested I would love some form of an informational meeting here and then potentially across board like we did with Alpine balsam yes interesting does that feel clear enough for you Jeff moving forward or would you like more of a yes no that's that was clear interest and as soon as they decide well the agenda committee will have to whoever ends up on the agenda committee will have to decide where to program it based on the constraints of the project thank you anything else from them stuff okay so we always spend the

[213:05] last like ten minutes just debriefing if there's any it's a great time to clear the air if you're frustrated about anything or if you would like something just to voice anything so just opening up for debrief or like shock you could just sigh and that says it all you know yeah well I think it's great having a larger board and it's interesting integrating especially since we're also so new and figuring out the process so we always get slightly tense around this process thing and it's it's an interesting thing especially chairing it to try and find a way where the people that are moving something through are honored and those of us that are just feeling frustrated about how it's formed but it's I think we get better at it but it's

[214:02] also knowing that we're still in process and learning I'm hoping that someone would be interested in maybe be Nam and on a committee just because I I think it's worth seeing what the other side is like having a you know present this stuff to the board and I'm Val you everyone's opinion I think that's pretty obvious at this point but it's hard like it's hard to get it to where everyone can agree and I hope we can continue working towards that cuz I like it when people like the things we do and I appreciate that if you take the ticket when I'm cursing Jeff you want to debrief with us the second part of this calendar check and we already know there are a couple absences for some of the summer meetings so given the need to

[215:00] schedule a larger group if you could please take a look at your calendars and email Cory if you know already that you can't make any meetings or if you are tentative for any of them if if you have a quorum problem obviously you won't be meeting if you have two or three people gone that's something you would probably want to know and decide whether to continue with that meeting or rescheduling and I also think not that any of us have exercised it but I think to be aware of the fact isn't it three or missing three or four meetings before you can be called to be replaced if I have to look I think it's unexplained unexcused not just you know when you were sick once you had to take care of a kid another one and you had to work and the only reason I looked at this is because you know I wanted to hike the PCT and I'm on this for five years so I don't think it's unexplained and and I think even legitimately like because I

[216:00] remember I was trying to add up how many I'd be gone for but it's it's unexplained or unexcused I believe it's three piece in the event that a regular member is unable to attend a meeting or meetings no substitute regular member shall be appointed injured in the event the chair or vice chair has knowledge that a regular member will be temporarily unable to act for three or more consecutive meetings owing to absence from the city illness interest or their cause the chair may appoint a replacement yes the absent members placed during the temporary absence that's not removal though so there's a mechanism for the PCT that's pretty

[217:00] clear looks like it you can get it maybe in the in the overall ordinance a couple weeks ago I was in Jackson Hole met with the member from the housing advisory board there it's a three member board and the head of their Housing Authority the reason I bring it up is unprompted April Norton is the woman that runs us said gee you know we really have a great respect here for a boulder and we borrowed some of your best practices specifically the livability standards that they borrowed and I bring it up because we oftentimes hear you know expressions of frustration of getting things done here and things but I understand from a brief conversation I had with Curt fern hopper that he said you know stuff like that comes up a lot that people borrow what we do in Boulder other communities and I thought you know it's really great to hear that I just wanted to share that piece of uplifting at least for me it was uplifting news no pressure that is great I would love to invite

[218:01] other housing boards in if they're ever around or somebody's you know as like a guest to do if they're ever ever around when we're doing something be awesome okay and motion to adjourn fantastic all in favor aye [Music]