March 27, 2024 — Housing Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

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

[0:03] I'm sorry. 1 s another extra. There you go! Great welcome to the March meeting of the Forward Housing Advisory Board. Daylight Savings Addition. I'm Michael Dasey, the chair of the board. and we'll start the meeting with roll call Tab members Bill Irwin here Aaron Oscar oops good jobs. That's good, Karen Clay here. Our newest member, will introduce formally in a moment even Tennessee. Here. Danny Theodoro. Not here yet. Julianne and Ramsey. It's spring break, so I don't. I'm guessing she's probably ready for me. We do have a quorum 5 members present.

[1:00] so we will open the event meeting officially and first order business is welcoming. Do we have members? Not a new member? But we're pretty appointed, Karen Oscan. So we're really happy that you can reply again. That's very happy to have exact, really valuable addition to head. So thank you so much for doing that, and thank you, council for reappointing and then we have a brand new member. Steven Hennessy number of copy yesterday. Got to know it's great back to condition, and maybe you should tell us a little bit about yourself for those also zooming in. Sure. So my name's Stephen Hennessy. I go by Chad I moved to boulder in 2,015 to a tech law school. and after law school I work at big law firm in Denver, doing commercial litigation work. After about 3 years of practice there, I started my own practice here in Boulder. and I do a mix of work, including insurance litigation for homeowners eviction defense work for tenants as well as you know, habitability disputes and then consumer protection type litigation.

[2:12] I applied in this position because a lot of my work over the last 3 years has touched housing issues, and I believe that when it comes to local government and specifically the city government boulder, I think housing is the number one issue. That our city has to deal with. Because it really makes a difference. And who can actually live in this community. you know, I think we have a tendency to give a lot of lip service to diversity. But if we want to be a diverse community. That means actually having places where people from different backgrounds can afford to live. And that means, you know, both low income housing and affordable housing, but also housing for middle income people who are looking to buy so you know, I'm no stranger to the fact that boulders one of the most expensive places to live in Colorado.

[3:10] And I look forward to contributing to a conversation here about how we can make it more accessible to all sorts of people. great. Well, again, welcome. And to your point about diversity of backgrounds and opinions. You you are a renter right? And you're younger than I am okay. Well, it's a double right there. That's great. did you know we have a mix of backgrounds on habits and we're happy to have yours join next? Okay, next item, agenda review. That's item 3, item 4 is we'll be approving the minutes from February. We'll have a public participation at open comment as, item 5. Item 6 manners from the board. We have one item there, and we are delighted to see Brian Casper, the Executive Director 1,000 Colorado here has been updated for what's happening at the State House.

[4:09] We have housing legislation, which I think is quite a bit we don't. By the way, I have any items that will be voting on site other than 30 min, I think, unless something changes. Item 7 matters from Staff. We'll be talking about a retreat next month, instead of a heavy meeting. We do retreat every year and try to set our agenda for the coming year. It's also good opportunity to get to know each other and new members. I've had and there'll be elections for vice chair and chair coming up in May. I remained debrief meeting and calendar check and item 9 is again German, which I generally happens no later than 9 Pm. We may also have our funny board liaison listening. And she said that she had a cough and didn't wanna burn us with that in person. But we're hoping you that Laura Kaplan has been our liaison for about a year, and I think we'll be rolling off that role.

[5:14] Hope she's listening in and can participate as well. It's the other day I told her she's a caitlin Clark of planning board liaison, so that she said she didn't know who played caitlin so if anybody has any questions about that, give them now. Otherwise we'll go on to approval of minutes. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes of February 2024. Second. Yup, that'd be another second is anyone against approving the minutes. I'm gonna abstain because I didn't. Okay, the minutes are approved. 4 0 1 public participation. Do we have? Everyone on Zoom would like to comment. Take their 3 min and share thoughts with the board.

[6:07] Yep, we have both. Zoom. No, it's Mark here. Well, oh, Mark, I'll go through the rules just for, oh, yeah, okay, go ahead, Sleeper Chips benefit. Sorry. I meant to mention we have our great staff here as well. Jason and Tiffany bowler. or thank you. So for public participation, we typically just go over the roles. So the city has engage with the city is engaged with the community members to create a Co. Vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations. So the idea is to support the physical and emotional safety of all community members Board Commission members as well as democracy people, all ages, identities, lived experiences and political perspectives.

[7:04] For more information about this. go to our website. So just to follow our examples of the rules at decorum found in the Boulder Revised Code. These will be up all during the meeting by our esteemed chair. We ask that all remarks and testimony be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats or use forms of intimidation against any person obscenity of racial advocates, and obviously speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct. The meetings are prohibited, and we request that participants sign up to speak, using their name. They're currently known or known by and display their full name before being allowed to speak. Currently, only audio testimony is permitted. so thank you. Thank you, Palmer. Thank you, Jake.

[8:01] We did have mark ready to give you 3 min. Mark. I see your hand up and take it away. Yeah, you're able to hear me. Oh, we need a little more volume. Are you. Hello! Get rid of. Still having trouble hearing me. No, I've been pretty good. Okay, alright. Well, howdy, folks? It's been a while since I have spoken to hab and things have happened between my last time, and now I am now part of the Tenant Advisory Committee. which is part of epris. the eviction, protection and rental assistance services. And I am also back on the Board of Commissioners for Boulder housing partners.

[9:02] So I'm addressing you as an individual. However, in spite of being part of those, but both of those are relevant to what I would like to address you all about, namely, of course, affordable housing and tenant issues. And I have raised this issue before about that Hab has not addressed penant issues specifically. There might have been some glancing comments about it. But and I'm glad to see Steven is here as a renter. That that helps with. And of course I believe Philip is also mentor. Not sure I can't remember. Yes, anyway. In progress. Right? Okay, great. I I really want to encourage strongly have to consider. Being more inclusive of renter issues in its deliberation and its advice to City Council.

[10:14] And I. I know you have a retreat coming up next week, and actually, so does the Wolver Housing Partner Board of Commissioners. We also have a comma retreat next month. And I would love to see some collaboration between these 3 bodies. In addition to also the Human Relations Commission. As I might have said before, 40 years ago, when I was a active tenant activist with the city. Oh. the Human Relations Commission often dealt with tenant issues because the city council did not want to deal with them. and so they they did deal with it quite a bit.

[11:00] And they haven't for quite some time. I recently addressed them and proposed also bringing them back into the world of tenant issues and collaborating. And there was some interest, I think, on their part, too. So anyway, I would like to just end by saying I would love to see collaboration between the different bodies on tenant issues especially as it relates to affordable housing, especially with the huge amount of State issues that are being. And I'll leave it there unless you have questions. Thank you. As you noticed, we we have a tennis rights attorney on App now, but I met with them yesterday, and it's promised to bring that issue up with that. But something we haven't discussed a lot, maybe not enough. So appreciate your comments. can ask the question, do do you have a A a short list of of bullet items you would have us work on if you were putting our priorities together.

[12:02] yes, I do. But here again I'm not speaking on behalf organizations, but they also would probably have some issues. We've talked well, at least that with the 10 Advisory Committee they have spoken about some of these issues, too, but they haven't been any. They have not made any formal recommendations to city Council. Tat Tac is currently trying to expand its purview beyond evictions. So the quick answer, relatively speaking, is, yes, I do. Although I wasn't prepared to deal with them at this very moment, but be happy to write them down. And again, I'd love to see some collaboration. Are are the at first meetings and the Bulgar housing partner meetings open to the public, or or do we have to have special invitation to attend. No, those meetings are open every month. and just like you all, they have public comment in the beginning.

[13:05] So, Mark, can I suggest that you? You send your list to have because I think it would be helpful for the Retreat discussion next month. I'd be happy to do that. You know where it is on the website, you can find it. Okay. Thanks. In terms of having bodies meet jointly. You think probably best for us to get a list of items to talk about, and then maybe do that a little further down the road. Is that what you're thinking. Yeah. And you know, I wanna make sure to get the other groups on board too. Truthfully, I haven't brought this up in this particular way to boulder housing partners, even though that they're the largest landlord in town. And deal with a lot of residents. we would need to figure out how to best collaborate, to deal with these issues. Yeah, students. Thank you. Mark, anybody, have any other questions.

[14:04] Okay, do we have anyone else waiting public to comment? You're housing a lot of it. Okay, we'll go on to Item, 6 matters from the board. We're delighted to have a guest speaker this tonight, Brian Ross for the Executive director housing Colorado. We've been there at least 3 years, haven't you, Brian? 3 years in April? Yeah. Very powerful strong statewide organization advocates on behalf of affordable housing policies. We were looking up to have Brian's partner, Laura, here a few months ago. and, as you all know, there's an awful lot happening with housing, legislation State House, and that'll be resolved

[15:02] roughly in the next month or so, and bunch of girls didn't quite make it through last year, and maybe things are a little different this year. We'll find out. So thank you for being here, and we'll turn it over to you, Brian. I'm gonna share my screen. I got think I figured this out. So Bob. go to the bottom right? The little extreme. There we go. So just a little bit about how the Colorado and I really appreciate the invitation and the opportunity to to be with you all tonight. Housing, Colorado is a Membership Association of about 350 organizations around the State who are working in the affordable housing realm. So we represent everybody from frontline service providers to architects and contractors and some local governments. We work with the public housing authorities on legislative issues, and our vision is really clear. It's that every call. Rodden has safe, healthy

[16:10] quality, affordable housing and thriving communities. That's our vision. That's that's our guiding star. That's what we work for every day. And we do that in a couple of ways. We work to educate the industry on kind of leading edge topics so that they're they know what's going on at the local State and Federal level and then we do advocacy work on behalf of the industry, mostly at the State level. But we've done some. We've started to work in the local sphere as well knowing that a lot of decisions are made locally like in rooms like that. So that's that's what we do. I wanted to start just a really quickly tonight with just kind of laying the context for where we're at as a state. One measure that we can use to to think about our housing need is what does it cost to afford a modest to better rental in the State.

[17:13] This is from the national low income housing coalitions out of reach report, and, as you can see we have the how the eighth highest. What's called housing wage in the country housing wage is is what it takes what you would have to earn per hour. In a in a 80 h week. So kind of it. Well, what you'd have to earn per hour to be able to afford that to better rental, and that's anywhere in the State. So this is the average $32 and 13 cents. You're making minimum wage. Have to work 94 h per week to be able to afford a rental. So that's more than a 2 income earner household on minimum wage can really afford another way we can think about the need is to think about it in terms of supply

[18:04] so as we think about supply for our lowest income renters around the State. We have roughly 165,000 extremely low income renter households. That's folks making about 30 or less of the area of Median income. and out of each 100 units there are 27 available to those types of renters out of every 100 that need a rental of that type. 27 can actually find find the housing that they need and not be cost burden. We can talk about cost burden by income group. So this graph really shows in terms of being cost burden, meaning you're spending more than 30% of your income on housing extremely cost burden, meaning you're spending more than 50% of your income on housing. You can see on this graph. The blue is cost burden. Yellow is severely cost burden, as you'd expect. Lower income households. Are more cost burden.

[19:13] What we're finding, though, is you go further to the right on this chart. More and more folks making middle income and chip you mentioned middle income folks more and more. We're seeing them be cost burdened as well. The the numbers for this report lag a little bit. So We've anecdotally seen, and especially in some of our higher cost communities that middle income folks are are feeling the crunch of the housing crisis as well, and are more and more spending more of their income on housing. So how did we get here? 1 one way that we got here is a real severe drop in production following the great recession in 2,008 so we

[20:06] had a 40% drop in housing production. But can anybody guess what the population did in that same decade it grew the same amount as the previous decade. So we had population come in. We have housing production decrease, and we've never really caught up from that. And we're not producing, you know. And then we had the pandemic which affected production as well. So we've got this this huge gap in production that is really contributed, I think, to our our supply demand problem. You know, basic economic says as supply drops and demand goes up. Prices increase as well. So we, you know this is one explanation. There are probably other explanations. But this is this is one thing that's come from the the division of housing, and it's some numbers that they track is is this is a part of our supply and demand problem.

[21:06] So the reason you all invited me here was to talk about legislation. Over the past few years the the Legislature and the Governor's office have really prioritized housing as an issue of top concern. Starting with my first session in 2021 we had a whole bunch of Federal arpa dollars that the State government used and directed to be spent on housing and affordable housing. So we had the affordable housing transformational task force meet over the summer and fall of 2021, and they came up with some recommendations for the Legislature to spend about 550 million dollars in one time Federal funds on housing in 2022. We also saw the passage of Proposition 1 23, which in a lot of ways backfills that Federal oneetime spending. So we, the State created new programs.

[22:05] with that federal one time money. And now prop, 1, 23 is kind of coming in behind some of that and creating new programs and new opportunities for funding for affordable housing. We've seen a lot of policy bills trying to get at issues around affordable housing. Again, starting in 2,021, we had passage of Hospital 1117, which allowed local communities to initiate inclusionary housing ordinances. And and do a fix to to statute that allows for that. 2022, 2023 have all been busy years for housing legislation and 2024 is busy as well. Just quickly. Here are in Colorado, strategic or policy priorities. I won't read this to you, but you know, each year we we come up with legislative priorities. That sort of guide our work. Throughout the legislative session. You know, we

[23:11] we are working, and especially, and we try to be responsive to the political context. And and what's going on out there? So working on things like land use and zoning reform again this year. Statewide growth strategy which is something that came out of the affordable housing transformational task force that really didn't get addressed. In 2022 or 2023. But it is working its way through a process. Now. Definitely something important to to get a statewide and local glimpse of of the housing needs in our State, so that we can be responsive to those. You know, something that's really important for us. There at the bottom is increasing home ownership opportunities for low to moderate income folks. You know.

[24:02] many of those families and households are priced out of the the home ownership market, and we're looking at creative ways to to try and get at the the home ownership. Not true. can I interrupt short of a question? So that's a really key issue here in Boulder. What you just described like, what are some of the techniques that could be implemented increase opportunities for home ownership, especially for, like missing, so called missing middle. Sure. You know, one of the the hard things is, there's a lot of resources and a lot of programs out there for rental production. Right? We've got the low income housing tax credit. We've got the State credit. We've got programs to for homeownership. You know. I think that there are some property tax abatement and relief efforts that are out there. Especially for home ownership nonprofits and and community land trust that are trying to produce

[25:11] product aimed and targeted at low and moderate income folks. One thing that we're working on is construction defects. Because we've seen multi family home ownership. Basically. There's no production in the State right now. So we've been working on kind of the construction defect side of that as a as a way to to get at the issue. there was part of a bill this year, and and it got stripped out of the bill would have given a little boost to local governments their prop 1, 23 commitments. So if you remember proposition 1 23 require communities opt in and have to grow their affordable housing stock by 3% per year over a 3 year. Average.

[26:02] there was. There's some some thought about giving a boost to local communities who donate land for home ownership opportunities and give them a little bit of an incentive in their proposition. 1 23 commitments. That idea wasn't fully baked and and a lot of us in the affordable housing world we're like, let's get prop 1, 23, a chance to kind of work. Before we start tinkering with it. So you know there's there's some strategies here and there. But there isn't. You know. We don't have a State credit for homeownership, which you know would go a long way towards, you know, subsidizing some of these projects, and I don't know if that's something that could be on the table in the future would be like encouraging public agencies. Yeah, local government school districts ask a question. The thing that pops out at me when I see this is

[27:04] Your your mission statement ends with thriving communities. And I wonder if if these are meant to just like, if if housing can become affordable and available, that driving communities will just spontaneously happen. Or if if you have policy areas that are actually about like thinking about that in a focus sort of way, like, what is it? The the structures we live in, the kinds of public spaces, the kinds of you know. A lot of lot of talk about neighborhoods built for people rather than for cars and that kind of thing. I just thought I it was when we took a look at our vision and mission statements a couple of years ago. That was definitely something we wanted to to try and encapsulate. Kind of you know everything that you're talking about, but also to avoid the the trap of locating

[28:03] affordable housing projects in places that are food deserts or transit deserts. So making sure that you know the the development that is tapping that has a portable components to it. Or you know things that we're working on, and our members are working on really are, able to be a part of the fabric of a neighborhood of a community and not be sort of set aside or set apart from you know some of all those things that you sort of mesh. Could you speak more to reforming the State's construction defect laws. I'm familiar with the statute because I've litigated under it, but more from a policy perspective. How does our current statute impair the construction of, you know, affordable entry level housing. Sure. So the the current statute? there's a number of components that that we're working on in terms of reform, but generally the insurance market has left the State because of the way our construction defects statute is

[29:07] articulated. So right now, if you're gonna build condos. You've got to have a wrap policy that is basically the same as explosives. Manufacturers has to have. So it's really expensive. And it just means that condo developments can't pencil especially condo developments for affordable so any condos that do get produced in the State are most are luxury, and even those are kind of few and far between. And so, you know, issues like the statute of proposed the way in which, contractors might have a right to remedy a a construction defect. Those are. Those are a couple of the issues that we're working on. We. We wanna make sure that we strike the right balance, though, and not

[30:02] not exclude residents from having a pathway to cure a construction defect But at the same time. Make it a little bit more attractive for the insurance market to come back so that, you know we can build for sale. Multi family. Why is it more problematic for builders who develop condos compared with family homes like what is in the statute that makes it, I guess, more expensive to ensure. I think it's it's a matter of scale. So you know, construction, defect. You have. You have more of an opportunity in a multi family property to for you know. And and this I'm not. Oh, I'm not disparaging lawyers at all, but for you know the the

[31:02] the plaintiff side to Reap the benefits of a lawsuit. just because there's there's a a bigger economy of scale there. If you're if you're talking a big multi family complex and and you find issues. And again, you know, wanting to make sure that that residents still have a right to to get something fixed. but, you know, have that opportunity for a contractor to to do that work, or or to have a mutually agreed upon fix before it goes to litigation, and and sort of what we're finding a as well as that at the end of the day. After settlements and lawyers, but the the fees that that are collected. There's not. There's usually not enough money left to actually cure the defect. And so, you know there's

[32:03] there's a lot to be said about about construction defects, but it's it's definitely a hot topic. That that folks are are working to address for both sides. Again, that leads to the scale that you mentioned as opposed to like a single family. It's it's not like the like. This is theoretical. Like, like we, we worry that this construction defects. Law is constraining condo developments like that. That whole market is collapsed. I mean, we're not. I mean, we're not building condos anywhere in the state. Basically, I mean, yeah. So that that seems like out of out of balance. So have you finished your presentation like. There are questions in your

[33:09] live at home with 3 people who love to interrupt me. So you know I I'm specifically curious about this one I live in one of the like. I'm not say one of the only, but I feel like it's one of the condo complexes in boulder, and I rent from an owner of a condo. It's probably one of the more affordable ways to rent and there's just not many condo options in boulder. You know, we have limited space to develop. And I've always thought that if there's gonna be more ownership opportunities. it's probably condensed. So that's just that's one that I'm curious about. And I've heard over and over again that construction defects. Laws are standing the way of condo developments. I'm just trying to wrap my brain around that a little better. So maybe I'll give you a so I'm a I'm a commercial real estate lender. So I have a financing perspective of this. So I have financed

[34:02] several condo construction loans, and they all tend to be buildings that are 50 units or less, because it kind of is under the radar of the ambulance chasers, right? So like, if it's a bigger building, then it was more likely that these attorneys would say, Oh, the roof leaks. And instead of letting the developer fix the roof, they do sort of a class action suit. And so a bunch of developers are basically like, I'm not gonna do a bigger project. I'm only gonna do a littler project. And you're absolutely right that the way that they mitigate that risk is with the raft policy, which is very expensive. So these condos tend to be more expensive, but they also complain that they're then on the hook for, like 7 years of of sort of attending meetings, and being part of an ho and sort of that like lingering obligation. And it's not like they're intending to build something that's shoddy. But the potential liability is getting to the point where it's if they don't want to do it anymore.

[35:16] And I think you're right. Historically, condos are an entry way for home ownership, and you can start buying a owning a unit and building your equity and establishing credit, and then, after several years, either rent it out to somebody else and buy a single family home or sell it and do it. But we've basically eliminated that stepping stone to to Homo unintended consequence. You know, when you're let's say, a hundred unit. Ho! It's a lot easier for that 108 unit h away to hire a lawyer than it is, for you know, single home because you can pull resources. So I kind of see where that concern is. I'm wondering. I'm aware that, you know, with a lot of townhouse developments

[36:07] they don't always have an hoa. It's more like a shared wall agreement which operates a little differently. And I wonder? Do you see the same problem with the development of town homes compared with like a condo complex? I I think there are some some issues with town homes. But like, Karen said, you know, they kind of fly under the radar because they're not, and they're not all sharing a roof, right, or or a similar structure, or or whatever. And so like. If there's one problem, it might be more contained. Then, if you're in a building where oh, where it's more likely to impact to the older. Well, this is important issue. So we don't mind if we keep going a little bit. Yeah, sort of related all this. If there were a legislative remedy to the construction defects issued in your opinion.

[37:04] Would that possibly open the door to a lot more rental apartments being converted to condos, provide more ownership opportunities. That's a good question. And and we haven't really worked on that quite yet, you know there there is a statute of repose for bringing a construction defect claim. So you know, I I would imagine those buildings, those developments, would probably be beyond the statue to repose when they if they converted so you might not have the construction defects issue as prominent in in a conversion, type, environment. So what? I'm sorry, what what do other states do like? It seems like Colorado, is unique in the construction, defect, issue and lack of condo. So wh? What are the other 49 States doing?

[38:01] Some have what we're trying to do, and and I'll I'll just mention it now, so send it to 106 is trying to do a few things. One is the right to remedy, so that contractors have a right to fix a problem before it goes to litigation. So there's a process that's outlined there. There's a an issue around what's called negligence per se. So basically says that if if there's like a that isn't doesn't have a health and safety implication that doesn't qualify as a construction feedback, so like you know. My wife says this all the time, like they don't design perfect buildings as as shop works and perfect buildings don't get constructed like there's always, you know, 3 screws should are by code in dry. Wall. somebody did 2. That doesn't necessarily make a a construction to get that claim.

[39:04] and one of the issues that that's been raised, as well as the pretty low threshold. It's just a majority threshold of it of owners to bring a construction defects claim. And so raising that threshold a bit is part of the legislation. So those are some things that other side was to raise it to the majority. I thought it was something like absurdly lower than the majority. It's 50 right now. Yeah. but the legislation, as it currently stands, would be 60. So a little bit, you know, a little bit higher threshold, and and that aligns with other decisions that a choice have to make as well, so those are some, some small, you know. It might. They might seem small, but together. Kind of add up to to a bigger impact in terms of other states, because I think the construction defects gets blamed on. So what's your experience with other States? Are they building ownership? Are they building a lot more condos than Colorado.

[40:11] Not not like an exponential number. There has been a trend in the market towards apartment construction and even, you know, building single family homes for rent. Like built to rent products. but there are, you know, other states are still building building these opportunities. And and they're not just a stepping stone to home ownership. They're also a step down for older folk who might be in a a large home that that they no longer need that space and it, and it's an opportunity for folks to step down and and and remain owners as well. I mean, I guess that's my point. I mean what I like when you started the affordable homework program

[41:01] back in the night at 2,000. Most of the market was building a leadership. And then so so it's like, it's cyclical, right? So I remember reading council memos where council was complaining that there were too many home ownership units being built and not enough rentals, and then it switches, and the same lament comes. Look, we don't have enough home ownership. So a lot of it has to do with larger market forces and less to do with what's happening in Colorado with construction. 2 things well, I feel like in boulder in particular. Every unit I've ever rented in Boulder was owned by someone not like a commercial landlord, but by someone who owned a condo, and they're releasing it out, and it usually was something along the lines of, Oh, I bought this unit for my kid when they went to see you 10 years ago, and we decided to hold on to it. That might be unique to Bold. But I think you know, having affordable condos to own, also result in more rental units on the market, I think, especially Boulder. I've seen that

[42:06] interestingly, one of the places that's experienced a lot of construction defects, losses since Vancouver, BC. And they actually had a period of about 10 years that they called the leaky condo crisis. There were like 1,000 buildings that were had to be you know, they were sued, and they had to prepare the building. So I think that was sort of people in the United States got the idea. Yeah. definitely. Let me. You probably all know this. But part of the political context for legislative session is we've got a Democratic Governor. We've got a super majority of Democrats in the State House and close to that in the State Senate. So A lot of the legislation, you know, Democrats kind of can have their way.

[43:01] as as long as they can agree as a caucus on on things. So just. I always like to put that slide in there also. Like to to highlight this. That this is from the Governor. State of the State speech this year. We were hoping he wouldn't do another Yoda impression, but he did but one of the things he talked about housing for for a long time in the speech. One of the things he said is that housing is a matter of state wide concern, which is really, that's the context for some of the legislation that he's that he and his allies are pushing this year. He said, this last year in a state of the State, and you know, we ended up with a very large land use and zoning Bill sent Bill 2, 13 which would have preempted a lot of local control. That bill failed. At the very end of session. It died on the calendar.

[44:00] and so, you know, they've kind of rethought that, and I'll I'll get into some of those bills here in a second, for right now. So I I highlighted about 12 bills And and I don't. I don't know if I need to run like. get into the details of all these. But several of these bills, House Bill 10071313. Sorry, and the bottom one should be 1304, dot 1313, 13. Again, parking minimums and 1152 are all smaller bytes of this puzzle, or smaller bytes of the apple. They all come out of 2, 13 from last year, but have taken different forms, so it's not like straight preemption of local control. There's incentives that come along with this. But there is some preemption in in these as well. The occupancy limits Bill would

[45:03] prevent local governments from enforcing occupancy limits that they might have in the books unless there's a safe and health safety and health and safety. Reason behind them. I'll get into 13 or 13, cause that's the big one in a second. 1304 which is there at the bottom, as 1,313 would eliminate parking minimums statewide. So local governments could no longer have parking minimums on the books. 1152. I'm just kind of jumping around here a little bit. Is a bill around accessory dwelling units. So in communities within metropolitan planning organizations. folks with single family property would have a right to build an accessory dwelling unit. There's some incentives for their construction and incentives for local governments to to be able to to implement those

[46:08] and then 1313, the Transit Oriented Communities Bill is kind of the big shining star of the Governor's proposals this year. So this this bill would within about 31 communities, I think, is the number now within the metropolitan planning organizations within the State local communities would have to basically up zone property up zone. Land, to make more dense development of the possible near transit, so they would have to have an average zoning density of 40 units per acre. And what are defined as transit oriented communities. It's about a quarter mile from transit. Stop exempts things like parks, cemeteries, airports. You know.

[47:03] places that places that you wouldn't want to build would you? Wouldn't want to build on which I don't know how many airports are close, close to transit, except for maybe Dia talk about our older airport, but we're not gonna bring it up. that in House Bill 1313 would also create a new state affordable housing credit for those developments near transit. It would be a 30 million dollar credit spread out over 5 years. That would help incentivize the the development of rent related red regulated, affordable housing. Get to send me deed restricted, de restricted. I can't help thinking about the the north end of the B line in Westminster cause. When it opened I went down there just to ride it into downtown and it's like

[48:11] a rail station with a big park and ride garage, surrounded by single family homes, you know. And I thought, man, this seems like right for some kind of reform our fair amount of multi family development. Also very nice park there. And in the the thing to remember about 1313 is that nothing has to get built. It's just the zoning capacity has to be there for so Dod, how is the bill defining that? Could it be a stay? Stop? So it's It's complicated, but mostly like service every 30 min

[49:04] or less out of either bus, rapid transit or train or bus service. That's that. That's that quick. So it it's really like they've narrowed it down to about 31 communities, mostly in the metro area. That that would be affected by this bill. So I'd have to look at the complete details on what's defined as transit oriented community. But it's along those lines some other bills that we're following. So Santa Bill 1, 74 is that strategic growth Bill? I talked about it's an interest. It's in an interesting place right now, because they're using a lot of the terminology that we'd like to think about in terms of like strategic growth, like anti displacement. You know, considerations for water affordability strategies. Just the way that they're using. The words aren't

[50:08] the same as I don't know if you've ever talked to somebody who uses the English language, and you know the words, but they don't work in the the order, the the way that they're doing it. It's sort of that kind of conundrum. So we're working to to help amend that bill. It's supposed to be up in committee next week. The Senate Bill 64 is an interesting one. That would aggregate eviction court filing data so that we'd have a better sense of be able to respond better to the eviction issues. The eviction crisis that's going on with kind of more real time data. Where evictions happening, you know, be able to overlay some census data, you know, to to see what kind of communities are affected? And be able to be responsive with

[51:04] interventions. How's Bill? 1175. It would be a first right of refusal for expiring for local governments to be able to make a first off version. Basically first write, have a first, write a refusal to match an offer on an expiring property, or to to make an offer on another multi family property that I built actually in in a different form past the Legislature last year, and was vetoed by trouble. My understanding with that was that the timeline, for when, like a housing authority would need to make a decision, and close was like 6 months or a year, and and and I love that idea. But I thought the issue as if you could shorten the timeline and say something like 90 days. Then, in theory, the seller should be agnostic as to who buys it if somebody's gonna pay more. But they may not wanna wait 6 months for for the housing authority to come up with their bid.

[52:14] That's that was definitely one of the issues with last year's bill. And and that's the timelines have been shortened dramatically. The one thing that they've added in is kind of a a early alert system. So it it's not a hey. We're selling our property. But within 2 years of a property expiring that the owner would would notify the local government. That that this property is gonna expire in 2 years, so that you know the local government, if they wanted to, could get their act together, get the resources together to be able to make a make an offer. If if that went up for sale, if it didn't go for re syndication, or or another kind of avenue to keep it affordable.

[53:04] Sometimes I get actually no. So when affordable housing gets built with tax credits, there is a term in which it has to remain affordable. And at the end of that term it can convert to market. I see. So when that's what it's called when it expires, and and that that term is It somewhat depends on the the financing sources. But with Federal live tech, it's 15 and 15. So you start with 15 re syndicate, get more tax credits at 15 years to revamp the property and then extend to 30. But some some communities that have their own funding sources might have a longer repeat restriction requirement. These are usually multi family, like apartment, pretty much all multifamily.

[54:01] because we require permanent affordability, right? Because we have local funding put into a project. Could you speak more to the eviction legislation? Sure. what would you like to know? Well, it sounds like you said, just tracking data like, what? What are they trying to change about the eviction laws to accomplish that so it would require the State State judicial branch to collect this information, create a dashboard from State courts and from Denver. We understand that Denver operates their own eviction. So all of. So there's kind of a list of non identifying information that can be taken out of eviction court filings. And the hope is to take that information like Zip code level data, put it in a dashboard. So it's publicly available. Perhaps even have some deeper data that can get used by

[55:10] research organizations. And just be able to, you know, really understand the the full picture, the full scope of eviction prices that we've got going on is it's interesting. Recent legislation in Colorado made it so that eviction filings remain suppressed meaning. It's not. Most core records are typically available to the public evictions not available to the public unless the tenant actually gets evicted. And there's a judgment entered against them. And the idea is that if people find, you know, get hit with an eviction notice, or what have you? And then they figure out a way to resolve with their land work before they go in front of the judge. They don't have a public eviction, and that's been a very helpful tool for many tenants who are sort of that grey zone they haven't have to judge.

[56:01] Come down, and you know, say, you gotta get out. But they're in the process. It helps sort of maintain their rental records, they can find a good place to live. So then, being legally ofape is an amount to have a conviction on your record. I don't. I don't know if it's the same. I would probably advise having a criminal convictions worse than an eviction. But and the landlords more risk adverse, they might say, I don't want to take this. They've had a prior eviction. It could in theory, and the idea is these suppressed court records, the public doesn't have access on your job application or flying to school or something. It all depends. Like, if you know, you're applying for a place your new landlord calls up the old one, they might still say, oh, they were a bad tenant, or something like that, but it's one way to just keep the record. Suppress the idea being just because you've been accused of unlawful detainer doesn't mean you actually did it. So you shouldn't have this public record unless you know the judge finds you unlawful detainer.

[57:10] So no, I just I find that interesting. But I guess it's just data points. Human policy makers can. That's good. Follow up. That's kind of adjacent to this. The the 213 bill, if I remember, had a kind of more comprehensive data collection. Provision in that, for, like all you know, like housing needs assessments and whatnot, is there anything comparable to that? So 174 is trying to accomplish that. And I kind of skimmed over it with the issues that we're having with it. It would require communities with a population of a thousand or more to complete a housing needs assessment. Before 2020 7, and the State would do a State wide housing assessment, so the local could could do their needs assessment as a part of a regional assessment as well. So the hope, I think you know what we're trying to to communicate to the bill sponsors is like the data that the State collects needs to be the same data that the local communities

[58:13] click. So that you know the information. We're comparing apples to apples the whole time. So that local communities then can develop housing action plans that are responsive to the needs in their community with particular, and I think we we are advocating for a particular attention, for low and moderate income households. In those housing action plans, you know, because you could have a housing needs assessment. That says what we need to build more housing for people making 200 a year in income. There's but there's also that might be one data point in the housing needs assessment. But you know, there's still a need for like below 60, and their Housing action plan could be like, Oh, we're gonna go address the 200, because, like, that's what's politically expedient. And that's, you know, puffable. So

[59:08] yeah. So that Bill attempts to do that, and then incorporate. Some of these ideas into community master planning and and has a water element as well to to do some water studies to make sure that housing action plans are also responsive to the water usage and availability in those communities is that coming from Colorado, municipal league yeah. so i'm not a big fan, we're, we're working, I mean, they're trying to protect their their interest. which is, you know, they don't want. They don't want to print their summer. but they're trying to. I don't know. It feels more to me more like sub subterfuge of, you know. Well, let's study the problem to death, and then maybe

[60:07] they'll go back somehow, because there are no targets you have to do in housing needs assessment, but doesn't say you have to build any certain number of unions. So I mean, I don't. I don't see the value. Recognize that there's an issue and what the need is. And we're just getting direct resources to studying the problem. Again. I have a big picture question. Older has a goal of 15% affordable units. And we're like at 8 or something, 8 and a half. Yay could there be some sort of statewide legislation that says, every community needs to have either a certain amount of affordable housing within their community or contribute money to other communities, because housing affordability is a statewide issue, not just a local issue, and yet

[61:06] doesn't seem like every municipality is willing to commit to goals of affordability. I would love it if we could do that. I don't know how politically feasible it, you know, if if everybody was doing their fair share, or contributing to. they're for sure, like you know Cherry Hills village is never gonna fill as affordable housing. but they have the money to subsidize somebody else to build affordable housing right? But then we get into like transportation greenhouse climate issues. Right? Like is all connected. But yeah, it'd be really interesting to to think about, you know, in prop 1 23 in some ways is trying to get at this like you opt in to get money. And you're incentivized to build affordable housing in your community. Because of the money that's behind. Prop, one toll free. Right? You make a commitment to Bill 3 over

[62:09] per year over a 3 year average like I should have it, I should have pulled it up. I don't know what bothers goal was in terms of units. but I can't remember it was a lot we'll meet it, but as long as it don't change the definition anyway. but you missed last meeting with David Driscoll, so I would. And what California is doing, basically mandating that each individual community has to reach certain target for roles, or else they're going to lose their ability to regulate land use the States going to take over. So is that on the website. And I can listen to last month. Sorry about that. I'm gonna switch to the next page, because there's a few more

[63:01] house, Bill 1308, was the bill I mentioned that had the incentive in it for land donations. It was basically a 2 part bill. The. So the prop, 1 23 part got taken out. But what ex what remains is some one codifying the Governor's executive order from August around timelines that the division of housing has in order to contract. So they they were taking like 240 days to ex on average, to execute contracts. Which meant with 8 projects that we studied in the Denver area. it was like 9 years worth of delays and 8 million dollars, and carrying extra carrying costs in the form of like bridge loans that projects were having to take on more debt because they're waiting on a contract, execute with the State. So the Governor push those timelines and this will codify that as well as change, make a change to the charter for the division of housing. This is like super geeky, but right now the division of Housing charter says that

[64:11] part of their mandate is to have a return on investment to maximize the return on investment to the State. which means a lot of the money that's going out the door, that a lot of taxpayer money that's going out the door is going out in the form of loans. We would prefer to see that money go out the form of grants, because that helps capital stacks. You know, and it's kind of a philosophical issue of whether the the State should be a lender in that way. So there's a change to that language that would encourage them to sort of see their mission differently. And hopefully get kind of creative. And and they're thinking about how money goes out. The door. House full 1107 is an interesting bill as well.

[65:04] I don't know how many land use decisions here have been challenged in court. But right now there is like there's no disincentive. For really for community members to challenge local governments, land use decision. Which can delay projects. It can add project costs. It can make projects go away. This would add a disincentive in the form of, if a if judicial ruling is in favor of the local government. those who brought the suit have to pay the local governments, attorneys, fees. So it just ups the ante a little bit for opposition to to those land use decisions. Because when a local government make some of these decisions, it's not a legis. This is something I've been learning. It's not actually a legislative process like passing a a resolution or passing an ordinance is a legislative process. It's actually a judicial process. So it

[66:16] it's rule 106 is is kind of the Avenue into into the courts. And you know we've seen projects die because of this. So this would disincentivize that. And you know. Interesting. Would that have applied in something like the lawsuit against the factory? That would have been great flip side I could I could offer is often when there's a fee shifting provision like that, and you lose, and you face fees that encourages you to appeal because you don't want to pay the fees, so it can also have the effect of dragging the process out because it's like, well, now, we have to pay the $500 appeal fee, because we don't want to pay 5,000 an attorney fees. So it does. You know, whenever someone face a fee shifting provision, I do think that could deter.

[67:11] We're we're frequently reminded that planning board is quasi judicial. As they're making all these land use decisions. So we're about to do like a big boulder Valley comp plan it would this impact that at all? I don't know the answer to that question, but I don't. I don't think so, because the Con, the plan would be at the framework for making some of these decisions right? Like. we want to do these things. That's kind of the plan. And then the actual doing of them is the the decision making is that judicial process. There's a bill to create a middle income housing tax credit that mirrors the affordable housing credit. So this would still be rental but it would be a pilot program or a tax credit like our for, like our State tax credit but for a little bit higher income.

[68:12] And then Senate Bill 146, is an interesting bill that would offer a tax credit for renters. So you would. It's a let's forget to explain a little bit about that middle income housing work. Sure. It would work almost exactly like the State affordable housing credit. It would be administered by Chafa. It would be for incomes of a hundred of 80 to 120 of the area Median income, or up to 140 in the resort communities. But same sort of principle, private investment into the development of housing. So you know. okay, so Thanksgiving for the developer. Now for the homework. Okay, got it.

[69:01] So I have a question. seems to me there are a lot of developers who want 9% tax credits, but there aren't enough of them. And so, in addition to all of these new ideas, is there anything in there to get more? 9% money so that great projects don't have to maybe wait several rounds before they give the. That's an issue for Congress. And there there is in the tax bill that passed the House. There. It are some measures that will help with with the tax credit program. Mostly the 4% side of things lowers the bond cap which you know right now, you have to have the you have to have 50% of the project has to have taxes has to have bond large from the state or from the yeah from the State, and lowers that threshold so that it frees up more tax credit. But basically

[70:08] and it does some other really technical things. But yeah, with the way Congress works. And the the Federal tax credit is a bipartisan thing, you know, in 86. I guess it's got bipartisan support because it's on the one hand, developing affordable housing. And on the other side, like it's got private investment doing the work right? It's not direct subsidy. It's it's private capital. That's that's making the investment. So there is, and it hasn't been introduced. But I heard from Chafa today that it will be introduced as an expansion of our State credit which will stand alone. The expansion will stand alone, so it doesn't have to be paired with the 4% credit you know, here. And I know I'm probably talking nonsense to some people, but

[71:00] That that'll help to kind of you know, cause the the State credit in the last 8 years has helped create about 11,000 units of affordable housing. So expanding that will, you know, just kind of continue that the trajectory of that. Okay? Another question about the middle income housing tax credit is this, something that any other States are doing? I think we're one of the first to do this. There is a Federal, my tech bill that Senator Whiton is sponsoring but probably not gonna end the dysfunction in Congress. Probably great New world. Hmm. and I think I was in Colorado supporting that one. There we are. Yeah. So I I'm I've had our time with it, just because it's a taxpayer subsidy to property owners who want to rent to middle income that are already affordable to middle income earners, at least in boulder. So it feels like

[72:07] I don't know from from Boulder's perspective. I'm not sure there's a strong need for it. So this is for new construction. So it's new construction of drestricted properties for 80 to 120. Yeah. But then you can't use any Federal sources. The phones that we have the 60% name of it. Right? So this would have to. You know you'd have to do your capital stack with this alone, and not the Federal credit. Is it going to be enough? That's why it's a pilot program. See how it works out. I'm just cautiously optimistic. Are there more pages of of notes coming

[73:02] got glossed over was the 1304 parking minimum. And you kind of just said it was just gonna eliminate them. Is it really that simple. It's just it's just gonna eliminate parking minimums. And can I jump up on the table and dance around the hard thing that this bill is gonna have is it's also got a track parking study in there, conducted by c.so it's got appropriation. It's got a fiscal note on it. But the way that it is written. and we had a little. So we had a little consternation about this, because in some communities like Denver they've knocked out parking minimums for affordable. And that's been that's an incentive, you know, so you can compete for dirt market rate because you don't have to park it the same as a market rate. but you know, kind of on the other side of things is like, you know.

[74:02] Let the market determine what parking needs to be there. so it's yeah, it would. But it's only in the metropolitan planning organizations. I should have mentioned that. So it's not statewide, but Boulder would. There's a minute in an Mpo, so yeah, interesting parking parking requirements would go away. There's a lot of a lot of work happening locally on on this issue that you know, folks could pivot to something else that needs to get done. Couple of questions about the politics of all this stuff really ambitious? Was was all this really included in the Omnibus bill? Not all of it was so. This is more so. This is more so. Edus transit, oriented communities, statewide housing needs assessment. occupancy, limits, and to some extent parking was a part of last year's bill. So all those are kind of

[75:04] what's been broken out. The strategic growth Bill. There were kind of behind the scenes 2 competing measures moving forward. senators, then Zinger and Kirk Meyer kind of you know. I talk about the politics of it like they are. 2 very powerful senators, because they sit on the Jb, they sit on the joint budget commit. and on their bill they also have Senator or Representative bird who's on to the Jbc. As well as Senator Bridges. So they've got 4 out of the 6 members of the Joint Budget Committee on their Strategic Growth bill. So you know, Budget year where each chamber has, I think I heard 12.5 million dollars to be able to

[76:02] spend you know, the Jbc always is a powerful space, but in in budget years like the one we have now because of Tabor. they're even more powerful. So so that that's the one that's kind of outside of the kind of the governor's push for some of these things. But the the other 4 are really priority bills for for the administration, for the leadership. And is it fair to say that the opposition at the end of us will last year stands, or has there been any movement? And still. yeah, you know, local control issues local control like the transit Orient communities. Bill does like it has the incentives that I mentioned. Right? It's got an infrastructure. or, you know, developing near transit, but it also has a pretty big stick. So it's got those carrots. But it's got. If you don't do the up zoning.

[77:09] Your transportation dollars get without which you know. local government is not a fan of that. it wouldn't just be for running the buses. Yeah, right? So we got about a month change. What's gonna happen? That's a good question. So everything is stuck in appropriations right now. They're working on the budget. This weekend next weird. Once appropriation starts moving things. And we'll kind of see how what the politics are on some of these bills a a little bit more deeply as they get to the the full chambers. like I mentioned. You know, parking has a study, has a physical node on it.

[78:01] Transorient communities has a fiscal note. The occupancy limits Bill. I need to check where that is, but it doesn't have a fiscal note, and I think it's passed through this. It's passed through the House. I don't know where it's at the Senate right now. ed use has a fiscal note, so they all because there's incentives. Right? Involved it has to have well has. If it has a fiscal note, it means that State money general fund money will have to be spent. which again, there's 12.5 million dollars in each chamber. So oh, darn near next to what? What's your crystal ball tonight, I think. I think some of these are gonna get across the finish line. you know. last year the opposition that was mounted to 2 13 that that kills it in the Senate, you know. Nothing's changed.

[79:01] So a lot of these bills started in the house, and I I don't have a great read on the ethics in the Senate. Whether some of those moderate it's, you know, moderate Democrats are are the ones who we're able to to joined with the Republicans in the Senate, to to first strip everything out of 2 13. When I passed Chamber, the house added, but everything back in and more, and then to to kill it on the calendar in the center. So I think that's that's probably the one that's got the hardest. you know. Road ahead of it. so construction defects. you know. In the past. you know, Democrats have been not in favor of reform there, because they see this compromise out consumer protection in a certain age moving up. So yeah, it passed through the Senate Committee on

[80:03] Cheers. I think on Monday. with Senator Exom and the Republicans voting for it. So the chair of the Committee voted for it, and then the the remaining Democrats voted against it. Vote count has, I think, 6 Democrats in the in the Senate on board, so it's got a chance of passing the Senate. There's a competing bill starting in the house. That I didn't mention that would do things like extend the statute of propose instead of like so extended from 6 to 10 years with would do something as they would. You know it. It's kind of just the polar opposite of. I'll send No. 106. so that's that's moving through the house. So you know it, it'll be an interesting buy. I I think

[81:01] the work on construction defects is gonna take a couple of years if it so not for a long time. That's okay. So there is significant concern about the future of office and empty office buildings, and what it's doing to the vitality of various downtowns and most developers claim that the you'll need a lot of subsidies in order to convert them from office into residential. But in theory that could be a a home ownership or a rental. Maybe not, for you know, luxury renters. But It's certainly better than sleeping in a tent. So is there anything in this legislation that addresses office conversion? There is a bill, and I didn't I. There's we're tracking 21 different bills. So I didn't put them all in this presentation. And forgive me. I'm not. The number is not sticking with me. But there's a second really small tax credit for office conversions.

[82:17] like, really small, like 5 million dollars or something which probably isn't enough for a single project. so that there is. There is some conversation around that, you know. I I live with somebody who works in a design studio, an architecture firm, and those they're really hard to do. Cause the the apron isn't right. The windows aren't right. There's a lot that has to has to go on. But you're right. It takes a lot of subsidy. Smaller buildings, but a smaller building produce as much housing, and that converge zoom for public plaza public.com.

[83:03] But the city of Denver has. They've done a study. Of what could, what? Trying to identify some properties that could be converted. But again, it's just gonna take a lot to make that happen. Yeah, yeah, perfect. Thank you. My other questions. My last slide is my contact information. I'm pretty easy to get a hold of But yeah, if you ever have questions or concerns, or you know, something comes up feel free to reach out. We're happy to be a resource conference. We can evolve right with other housing advocates, so keep an eye out for that with 1,000 of your friends? Well, there's no other questions. Let's have a hand for Brian.

[84:03] Appreciate you coming down this invite to happy to yeah. And it's exciting. Yeah, see, some things get through would be a big improvement or no things for sure. Boom free to hang out. Need more. Or let's do us. Deb. Or I might head it on to my head on my my kids before they go to bed. If that's okay, or you can hang up that. Well, I really appreciate the invitation and the generators. They wanna get up and take a quick break or get more food before we go, and they send away another bunch that ends. Item, 6 matters in the board matters staff at least. and suggested that we. or go, or a meeting in April and have a little treat

[85:04] if you want to talk about what that might look like. Yeah. So well, you described it well, earlier. So it's an annual thing. It's really more about you guys getting to know each other. How do you function as a group? And it's an opportunity to set priorities for the next year. So and so typically Staff does not attend. And part of the reason I suggested April is because I'm going to be on vacation again. And then that way we'll provide a meeting space for you guys. But it's whatever the format is. We can also provide a facilitator. But I think last year Danny facilitated really good job, but I would recommend if there's someone who wanted to help organize it. Along with Michael. particularly if you're interested in potentially becoming chair or vice chair

[86:00] to go to the transition. So we do like reelect chair and vice chair once a year, and that'll be coming up anybody. How does that actually work? Do they? Can you self nominate? Yeah. Good. How long is your term? Is there any limit to you doing it again if we wanted to volunteer. I'm kind of like a Supreme Court justice at this point. I think this is my third year as chair. You know, hour is going to my head. So maybe it's time for somebody to lock that note off. I think if someone else wanted to step up. But there's no prohibition of you serving longer. If you're so not needed. No, no term limits. He needs to be able to have member. That's it. Yeah. The retreat really useful. But actually, it leads me to ask

[87:06] Mary Hall. Last last meeting we approved our letter to counsel and advance to their retreat, which starts like tomorrow, I think. Have you gotten any feedback on that jay since it was submitted? I'm not sure it's even gone to council yet. Did you send it separately? I didn't send it. I thought it was supposed to send it it, so I submitted it to the Council. Assistant. and she is going to bundle them all and send them to council as part of the retreat packet. Okay, last Friday was a deadline to submit to council. He think it's the deliberates. I I'll find out, but I assume so. Your other options send it. You send it directly, as just so that you could do it that way, because it goes to more than just council. That's good way to highlight it. I actually have the final version with a proper date. Would you mind?

[88:03] I can send it to you. That'd be great. I'd like to see the final version, too. I send it to the whole group at all I can reset. The only difference is, the date on the previous version was incorrect by year. Just a year. and yeah, manages part of the public record. The the counsel retreat starts when I say it's the third through third, fourth, I'm sorry. But third and fourth of April. So next Friday. Is that okay? Wednesday, Thursday? Oh, Wednesday, Thursday. Thank you. Well, I will probably ask Danny. There's been a retreat topic facilitate such a nice job. Was anybody else want to be involved in planning? We need to talk about a date. Should we just do it on our meeting date, for example. that'd be the easiest I would recommend if possible, if you could start earlier.

[89:03] Can people start at 5? Or that would be April 20. Fourth. is that our recommendation? And I won't be here to let you in. Okay, well, I can not do it here. It's okay. So if you want to do it someplace else that's also an option. It's kind of nice to go someplace, else you should do it during work. No, no, I mean I I don't quite understand why we should change the time at all. But Tiffany can come and let you in. It was just so that Tiffany didn't have to come here to let you in the building. That's the other thing. So yeah, it's not a regular meeting.

[90:14] We notice it as a retreat. But it's there's no public comment. There's no agenda. I'm fine with it earlier. I do. Let's just review this quickly. I think there might have been some. It was something last year. I need to check with them on how we notice it. We still notice it. But there's no over that last year. How we characterized it, or did it were worth what's gonna retrieve your caller check? Yeah, there was something that there was like it was. and noticed it as a retreat which is supposed to be open to the public. Per the rules. So I need to talk to Alicia in the clerk's office, how to notice it. It depends on what you will be discussing

[91:03] if you're discussing future business. I believe it has to be noticed, and public has to be able to view, not necessarily participate. If you're just doing team building and not working on like your scheduled work for the year, then it doesn't. It's not technically a retreat. It's a team building exercise. And then it is not viewable by the public. So, depending on what you decide to work on on that day will depend on how I notice it. If it were a solely team building exercise, would we not call it a retreat? We have to say. Come on, come on. Moop. no matter what you call it. It depends on what your agenda is. Gonna be sort of whether you call it a tree, and you

[92:01] do you call it a retreat and do team building stuff because it's a retreat. I have to notice it. But if you call it a team building. And then you talk about policy. Then we're in and alright. Well, let me say I I can't remember. We talked about policy quite a bit it wasn't. And so to me, it seems weird to to try to do a non public meeting that's called something else unless unless we're gonna actually do team building stuff. But we haven't done that before. I remember right, we did some of that last time, and I think how much policy we discussed. But I will note that we just ed several public discussions about policy priorities that went for a letter. So the question is. I'm open any answer. This could be a team building exercise.

[93:02] since we've already had the policy discussion. Or maybe we need to have more policy discussions and all those retreats. please board members comment on those thoughts. But but the go ahead. The original proposal was doing something yet. That was just team building, because you will not be available as part of it if we did it at that time. But in the past, even if we have had retreats when you have talked about policy staff has not been there. Yeah, thank you, Tiffany, for reminding me. We we did get in Noble last year. I remember talking about yeah, after we had our whatever it was last year. Some people said this should have been posted. So really, what I need from you guys is, decide what your agenda is going to be. I'll make sure it's posted right, and I'll make sure that it's done correctly. So you guys decide your agenda.

[94:04] I'll figure out the details. You don't have to worry about it. And I'm saying we need to decide that now, because it's next our next meeting. Okay, pinging by Karen. So I love the way this board interacts. And I've been on boards where I've been bullied and intimidated and like it wasn't fun. And so I feel like. I may not know people as well as I'd like, but I feel like it's very welcoming and accepting of people's questions and comments. So so do we need team building? Certainly a lot less than other boards have been run with regards to policy. I do feel like that. The letter that we did talked about what several of our agendas are. But like as the speaker today identified, there's a whole bunch of topics. There's a whole bunch of things that that we may want to revisit, especially since we have you or the

[95:05] public participant who said, I think you should add more tenant rep kinds of issues. So I I don't. I think we like talking policy. Hmm, and we'll have a new planning board liaison. Want to get to know they have ideas about policy agenda items. So seems like we should talk about policy. I I didn't mean to say I'm against team building stuff, either. Kind of to your point is like, we have seen each other every week for a long, every month for a long time, but I still feel like, I don't. Yeah know what your backgrounds are. Very well, I don't know. But I think we could do that element of it and then go around. Yeah. okay, so I don't know. This is a just come to consensus. Shall we call it a retreat

[96:05] and include policy discussion as well as you have to know you better. That would be my note, which means we need to reschedule. Nope, tiffany will be here. I'll I'll discuss with the clerk. Figure out what the rules all are. That's true. That you? Oh, good! If yeah, Tiffany can take care of you. I think I motioned over it. Laura! Speak! Oh, where's that? Hi! Laura! Hey, everybody! Can you hear me? Yeah. Go ahead. Excellent. I have been here the whole time. It's been a great meeting I just wanted to note. I don't know if you'll have a new planning board liaison by April. I don't see on our calendar selection of a new liaison, and our meetings are kind of busy in April, so I don't know if we will get to it.

[97:03] Just wanted to note in case that impacts your timing. I don't think so. We'd be happy to have you 2, or whatever you wanna call it. I just meant, if you wanted to include a new person cause you will get a new person shortly. It just might not be in April. Yeah, I I don't think we should. I don't think to waive it. It equals a good time to have a retreat, and then things might heat up and policy discussions again. It should be. you know, have the retreat behind us and ready to go forward. Okay, so nothing changes. same time. whenever you want to be, unless you want to start earlier, which we can. But no reason to change. It makes this better for me. Yeah, my day job

[98:03] and Tiffany will notice. Michael and Danny will work on an agenda. Right? That'll be a mix of team building, and we considering. And but we'll open the floor to policy discussions after we do. and my recommendation is just to think about. and I'll I'll give you the work plan that I share with the chairs before our meetings, our usual meetings. Just what do you want to talk about on each meeting for the next year? Right now it's it's a bit thin. Oh, like, who is the one is just speakers. That sounds great. Okay, I think that covers the management staff. We into, item 3. Candidate forthcoming elections. So we're comfortable with moving on to Item 8 debrief meeting and calendar check. I have. I have one small thing I would like to say one thing that this meeting with Brian Bret brings up for me is

[99:11] I I wonder if part of Hab's role ought to be anticipating. Leaning on our State senators and reps and anticipating what's they're gonna be facing and having letters of support for different kinds of bills ready future sessions. Is that if we think that might be effective use of time, and you're not allowed to do that. Okay, okay, Lisa. So it has to be city that has to be city council. Thank you. Sorry. And you sent me an email earlier saying you wanted to add something else. Well, it was. It's it. Interestingly enough, it was to invite Mark, who was her public speaker tonight to come in, and he and I were unity neighbors for years, and we reconnected a couple of weeks ago. And we went and had coffee, and he's like we're just catching up, he said. So we all doing about renters like.

[100:18] what do you want us to do about renters? So a lot of the points that he brought up in his brief 3 min tonight, but I think it would. That would be one that I would recommend that sometime in the next year we have he or somebody else. Come in and just talk to us about the Tenant Advisory Council. Okay. I came tonight with question, perhaps for Jay Staff, but also an idea. So I I have a contract with a private, a nonprofit in boulder, with contract, with the city that does the eviction defense work. There's about 5 lawyers who were there most Fridays. The way the eviction process works is

[101:07] you know. First, someone gets either noticed to quit or demand to pay and move out, and if they don't comply with it, then they usually get a summons that says you have to come to court, and in Boulder County. That means you have to come to court at 9 Am. On a Friday, and that's your initial appearance. And there's attorneys there that tenants who are facing eviction to meet with. There's also city staff there. That provides mediation services. They connect people with rental assistance. If they're eligible. There's also someone there who tracks data to this point. I don't know if that's happening on state wide level. It certainly happens in boulder and then depending on the outcome. Sometimes tenants reach resolution with their landlord, or they decide they want to fight the eviction, in which case you get set for a trial, usually 7 to 10 days out. A lot of the times people do enter some sort of stipulation on that first hearing some sort of agreement with their landlord, saying, I'll pay or move out by a certain date, and if I don't, then I agree the sheriff can come, or something along those lines. Every case is different.

[102:15] I'm curious. I've always thought, you know, we do probably evictions better than probably anywhere else in Colorado and Boulder. I just feel like we're more resource than a lot of other jurisdictions. One thing I thought perhaps we could add, I'm curious. Is there anyone in city government whose job it is to like help connect low income people with job resources. You know, job applications, job openings, things along those lines. And if so, and I imagine there is. And if so, that person should be at court on Fridays, because the most common reason why someone's being evicted is I can't afford my rent, and usually the story has something. Do it. I lost my job or something along those lines, and we do a great job connecting people with lawyers to help navigate the legal process

[103:05] staff with the city, connect them with potential rental assistance funds. But I think the third step is, you know, eventually rental assistance runs out. People lose eligibility. Some tenants are there, and they've been evicted before. They're not eligible for rental assistance. Step 3 is. Here's someone you could talk to about employment, and many evictions happen, I mean for a whole host of reasons. But one of them is. I'm unemployed, and I just think, having that resource available at court on Fridays from 9 to noon could probably make a big difference in people's lives, and I'm sure if it's available, it's probably available to them through some other channel. But I think if they were actually at the justice center that could make a huge difference. So I don't know if there's a person who does that? I assume there is. Yeah, I think I I'm not aware of anyone in the city, but I'm pretty sure there should be someone at the county. Yeah, just they could provide that service job resources. I mean, it's not like free jobs. But you know, someone who can help with connecting people to job boards resume and that sort of thing. And if that exists, so there's also financial assistance, like helping someone figure out how to manage their finances.

[104:19] So I just thought, that's sort of a good place. And I feel like people who are in those positions. They're like looking for people to help it. Maybe a courthouse isn't where they normally go. But this is a really good opportunity to connect people who are in need with, you know, a social service. So that's just an idea I had as a lawyer. I don't do the employment work, but I just see that as an opportunity. So I don't know. should we make city council, or what? But let me raise it. Yeah, that's a good one. And anybody else.

[105:02] Okay, we're going to item 8, we had an official have meeting today with 5 members present. That's a form approved our minutes from last month we had one public participant talking about those very issues that even just raised it and affordable rentals and trying to prevent evictions. We had an excellent housing, legislative up update, and God. It must have been practically a dozen bills reviewed by Brian Rasper, Executive Director of Housing, Colorado Statewide group that advocates for for we discuss the April retreat. We very now at the same time. Same place next month. and we announced the chair and vice chair elections in May. Calendar check. We've already decided that April 20. Fourth will be the day that retreat at the regular meeting time. 6 pm.

[106:04] And the main meeting. I believe we decided would be moved till May pretty quickly after the retreat. Anybody have anything to add to any of those you know that summary? Okay. Could I get a motion to adjourn? I'll make a motion to adjourn. I have a second 1 s, all my favor further agenda than usual. There. He wasn't here.