July 23, 2025 — Housing Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

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

[0:03] Yeah. Wake up. Hi, I'm Karen Claireman. I'm the chair of the Housing Advisory Board. Welcome to our. This is July 21st 23rd housing advisory board. We are going to do a roll call. So Karen, clerk, and I'm here, Karen. Here. Michael Chesey is absent. Chip isn't here yet, Philip. Here. Cindy, I she she said she was gonna dial in. Not yet. Okay. And Lauren here. Okay, so we have a forum So the agenda will include the approval of minutes from last month. Public participation, if there is any, and we're going to have matters from the board which will include the Housing legislative Update of 2025, the affordable home ownership, Resident Survey results.

[1:05] reflections on the Housing Equity Symposium. A review of our work plan and talk about a potential future proposal, and then we'll have matters from the staff. Final thoughts, and then we hope to adjust by 9. So does has have. Hopefully, everybody has reviewed the minutes. Does anybody have any comments or corrections? If not, I would love a motion to approve. so moved a second, all in favor. Aye, none opposed. Pass. Okay. Tiffany, do we have anyone for public participation? There's an individual on, but they have not changed their name to a name yet, so I don't know they are. But

[2:05] let's say no. So if you want to do public participation, you have to put your name on there. Where did they put it on and raise your hand, please, just to let us know. Okay, the this individual. Could you change your name, or let us know who you are? I see you raise your hand. Yes, this is Cindy. I don't know how to change my name. Oh, okay, right next to your name there's 3 little dots. and there's an option to rename, and then I'll promote you to a panelist, since you're one of our board members. Hi, Cindy, welcome. Hi! I don't have my name, isn't there? I don't have 3 little dots. Okay, I'll change it for you. That's okay. We know who you are. Technical problems, all right, are you, Brian? I am. Oh, great. So you're up. Introduce yourself, and then you get to take the floor. Awesome. Well, thank you. And I did bring a presentation. But my name is Brian Rossberg. I'm the executive director of Housing, Colorado. We're a nonprofit membership association representing the affordable housing community in the State, and we do a couple of different things we do education work on behalf of

[3:29] and for the industry. So we educate general public. We educate the industry on kind of leading edge topics in the affordable housing world. We do that through webinars and forums, and then a big conference that we host in October, and we also do advocacy work. So we are at the Capitol. Most of our advocacy is at the State level, but we do a little bit of Federal advocacy. Probably more of that coming up. And more and more. We're getting into local advocacy work, mostly in the realm of resourcing local housing advocates with the tools that they might need to to be strong advocates in their team. So I'm here to talk about the 2025

[4:15] general or regular legislative session. We may have a special session this year. That will be special indeed, but just to kind of update you all. I was here, I think, last year talking about the legislative session. I appreciate your hospitality and your willingness to have me back. So, Jay, we could go to the next slide. I'm just going to talk real quick about the Colorado context a little bit before we hop into legislative matters themselves. I always like to kind of set the groundwork ground work. So we're all on the same page. In order to set that context, we need to look a little bit back. At 2024 we could go to the next slide.

[5:02] a lot of things happened. I was able to last year kind of draw out some themes from legislative session, and these are the ones that I draw last year, I think one of these really lived again this year, and that's that there were lots of housing bills. But last year there was a lot on land use and zoning issues. You may recall there was a a suite of several bills depends on how you count them, but about 5 bills on land use and zoning and local government, which leads into the next one, which was local versus State control, and the idea that housing is a mixed state and local concern, and the way in which that played out in the land use and zoning realm was interesting. And then also tax credits were a big theme for the 2024 session which is is starting to bleed into the 2025 session, and some of what we're thinking about. In terms of kind of what's what's next, and what might even be addressed during

[6:14] the 20, the special session that may be called any time. Now, if we go to the next slide, Our wonderful governor from right here in Boulder. I'd like to put up this quote from the state of the State. Because, you know, he and the legislature continue to prioritize housing as a major issue in our State. It still rises to the top housing. Affordability still rises to the top, and a lot of statewide polls across political division. Housing affordability still rises to the top, and so I underline and bolded

[7:01] kind of one of the the central cores of of what he said in his state of the state around housing. Really, you know that that line about in Colorado? We say yes to more housing. Yes, to unlocking prosperity. Yes, opportunities for Coloradans at every budget. When we say yes to more housing. Our governor is very, very pro develop pro production and we we know that in our State we also have a preservation need to preserve the affordable housing that we have. And you know. So it's there's kind of a give and take there. But you know, being very pro production. We we had housing Colorado and others are really concerned about preservation, because if we lose more than we gain, we're still in a net deficit in terms of our housing stock. We can go to the next slide. I'm sure everybody knows this. There's a Democrat trifecta in Colorado. The margin in the house shrunk a little bit in 2024 elections, so they don't have a super majority there any longer, and the Senate is still dominated by Democrats as well.

[8:22] That lends itself to interesting political dynamics when you're leaving one party kind of all the way out of decision making it creates factions within your own party and negotiations that have to take place there. So interesting political dynamics. The last thing I'll say kind of context, wise as we go to the next one. Here's the budget. Maybe you heard the budget's not great. and it's not getting any better with decisions that are being made in Washington. DC, but this year the the joint Budget Committee, and the Legislature really worked hard to

[9:11] to not cut sort of big thing. They they cut a lot. But they tried to tried to do it in a way that wasn't going to be as impactful as what we'll see in the next year. So we're gonna see longer term cuts. We're gonna see cuts to programs and services in our state when we figure out Medicaid, and what the impacts are going to be in on the budget in Colorado. We're going to see a whole lot of work being done. So the budget continues to loom as a context issue, I will. I will say that throughout the legislative session the budget was

[10:03] kind of the I don't know the 100 and second person that you had to worry about, or you know you have a hundred legislators, the governor, and then you have the budget and that was sort of a looming specter over the whole session that had a lot of control and a lot of influence on what was happening, and decisions that were being made. If anything had a fiscal note. If any bill had a fiscal note on it was pretty much dead. It goes through the Committee of Reference, but die in the Appropriations Committee. So that is going to continue. Our budget isn't getting any better unless we magically repeal Tabor somehow. but I would prognosticate to say that that's not going to happen in tech soon. We can go, maybe through the next 2 slides. I'm gonna go through some of the bills that we follow. But 1st if you're ever interested in kind of following along with

[11:00] housing, legislation and and things that we're doing. We do have a bill tracker that we make public. So it shows a whole bunch of information kind of consolidated in one place, you don't have to go searching the Legislature's website for bill summaries or positions from other organizations. This is just on our website. If you go to housing colorado.org, and go to advocacy and the advocacy tab, and then current legislation. You can get to the bill tracker there. We like to make that a resource for everybody. But it's it's got a lot of good information there again. Kind of Consolidated. And in one place. Now, Drum, roll, please, onto the many, many bills that we follow this year. What I did here was just kind of put bills in order. Of their numbers this year. Last year I was able to sort of draw out some of those themes, and this year I really wasn't. There wasn't a whole lot of like.

[12:05] you know, we've gotten our land use bills. We've got tax credits. We didn't have a whole lot of that this year, so it's a little bit scatter shot but I'm not. I don't necessarily want to bore you with. Like every single one of these bills I might just like pull out a few, and if you have questions please stop me. Ask me them. A couple of bills on on this slide just to talk about one is you might have heard about the algorithm rent setting bill. That was 10. 0, 4. There are some programs out there that landlords use to set rents, and the algorithms they use take in a whole bunch of data which includes other other properties, rents, and what what it's done is, it's

[13:03] probably artificially increase the cost of rental housing in our State. And so this bill would have eliminated. That would have prohibited that. We are in our State is involved in a lawsuit against realpage. One of these companies right now. The bill actually passed the Legislature Bill was vetoed by the Government, so that I I don't think that that issue is going away, especially since we're still involved in the in a a legal battle on that. A couple of other bills on here. Well, one other bill I'll just pull out is 1090 which is deceptive pricing practices. this this bill was really Come on around price fixing, and wasn't specifically the Housing Bill, but had housing implications. So.

[14:06] What the housing implication here is that landlords have to disclose all of the costs of of a unit before a lessee enters into a lease. What was happening is like, you know, you'd see the rent and great, you know. $2,000 a month for whatever. And then, once you got to go sign the lease. There was, you know, common area fees and all sorts of other fees that got tacked on, and then your rent went up to something you might not have been able to afford. This ensures that that all those things have to be disclosed ahead of time. It doesn't necessarily. And and this is my understanding about it doesn't necessarily prohibit those kind of fees. So like, if you common area fee, it just needs to be disclosed. So you know. So that more information and more sunshine

[15:06] helps people make better decisions. We can go to the next one. A few here that are interesting. That we worked on throughout the session. the limitations to local anti growth land use policies was a very short bill that aimed to. Get ahead of some of some couple of years ago. I'll go back. The Legislature enacted a bill that prohibits the enforcement of anti growth initiatives. So a few communities have these on the books. Prohibits the use, the enforcement of those but there were attempts to kind of get around that in other ways. And so this bill would prohibit those other ways, you know. Interestingly,

[16:07] creates an opportunity for local governments to get a judicial opinion on ballot initiatives before they have to act on them or put them on the ballot. So it's a very short bill, but it's seeming to have some implications already. So keep an eye on 1093, 1169 was affectionately called the Yes in God's backyard plus Educational Land Bill would have allowed for a administrative review process of any development happening on faith. Owned land or education. Land this ran you know, we I worked in an organization that worked with community with communities of faith. I know Boulder. You all have a lightheck award on a faith owned property that's getting developed into affordable housing. Yeah? And yeah, that's the one I was thinking about. But this would have

[17:23] kind of gone around the the local review process. question. Go ahead. Can I ask why that? Why did that fail? Do you want the answer? Well, I want your answer. So the local government groups were opposed to it, and they were able to get enough votes in the Senate. There! The the bill as introduced didn't have any affordability requirements in it. Which is why we were in amend position. Is that we thought if you were getting the the benefit of an easier review process that there should be some sort of

[18:07] public good to that. So you weren't just developing market rate luxury? But it was local government. Yeah, yeah, I was curious. Are there any school districts in the State that are interested in building housing on there? There are. Eagle County is currently building. Their superintendent is like super enthused about building on their their land. I actually drove by yesterday. There's it's actually Cmc's land, or yeah. Colorado Mountain colleges land. They're building with fading West, some modular on their property. Right next to I don't know high school, and would it be employment based like only teachers? Or that's that's a hard thing to do with fair housing and

[19:06] the thing we don't want to get into is like another kind of company town sort of where your where your employment and your housing are inextricably linked, so that used to be school school land. Yeah, that's right. Developed into affordable housing. And then the other is Boulder Valley School district owns 10 acres up by twin lakes, and Jefferson County has been selling off a lot of their old schools that they've shut down, and they're trying to encourage affordable developers to purchase them. But you know, they want the money, too. Yeah. And and the I think, like the best case scenario is like a partnership where school district is involved. You know, they're helping guide the development same with State owned land we had identified like 5,000 acres of undeveloped State owned land.

[20:14] But it's got horizontal. It's got horizontal development. So but you know part of well, this is kind of an aside part of working with faith groups is you have to. You have to go through a grieving process with them before you get them to a developer. You know you have to grieve that the parking lot isn't full anymore, or that that was once going to be a youth center. And it's no longer. And so there's a lot of grieving and being able to see a vision for housing as a part of the addiction. so there's there's a process that that is a little bit more involved. just a couple of other ones that I'll mention here. The pet ownership bill was interesting. As originally introduced. This would have legislated what's called the qualified allocation process for

[21:10] for the tax credit program in the State. So tax credits fund most affordable housing development in the State and cafa car housing finance authority administers that program. This would have legislated been the 1st time that the legislature would have said. This is what you have to do in order to get tax credits, which is a little bit of a dangerous game to play so like. It would have supervised Jeff. So it would have said, if you get a tax. Credit award. You have to allow pets in your building. Chap is all about pet equity. Right now, pet inclusivity. They negotiated a to get the legislative part out of it, and they did what

[22:01] hey? S. Pca, y. But and then there's there's been a lot of tenant landlord bills. So those continue to play out in the Legislature you know, around security deposits. the 1240 bill is around vouchers and just ensuring that tenants with vouchers who are mostly tenants who are in kind of a private landlord relationship with their voucher that they had enough protections around issues of order, of habitability and things like that. We go to the next one. See your time? There were 2 construction defects bills this year. One that we opposed, that failed, and one that we supported that was signed if you

[23:01] know about the construction defect conversation, you know. Really, it comes down to. We're not building condos. We don't have that entry. That sort of entry level housing product. Whether it's market rate or there are some affordable condos coming online. elevation community land Trust is really kind of a pioneer and trying to figure that out. But it all comes back to insurance, and you have to get same insurance that an explosives factory gets to ensure. Because if you make a construction, if you have a default in your construction. There's a long runway for legal action, and nobody ever really is made whole. So it's a whole thing. 1272 is a step in the right direction. I know Jay and I were talking. He wasn't going to put me on record but I think it's a step in the right direction. The construction defects stuff, so will it shorten it from 7 years. Will it allow developers the right to cure like, is it?

[24:10] Do you think there'll be condos in the future? I hope so. This is an opt in program. So if you opt in as a contractor you have to do a couple of things. You have to offer a warranty. And you Oh, sorry again. Just looking at my notes warranty, and so you. You have to sort of like. provide for good construction. There was a part in there that got taken out about employing like trade unions. Things like that. when you opt in the program and offer that warranty, there's a decreased timeframe for

[25:00] for the Statute of Limitation Statute proposed. And there are increased requirements on homeowners, associations to bring A to bring in action. So it's kind of this balancing act. It didn't like straight up fix construction defects that created an opt in option for folks to utilize. the the biggest question. Still, the biggest question mark is whether or not it trains we'll come back. So what's the middle market component to that? That was the name of it? So it was originally aimed at. middle market product. So they weren't using area Median income like we typically use. They were. They had a formula based on like the Median house price. They were. They were leaning on some other data that got taken out. So it's gonna be it's gonna be any product now.

[26:08] But you can't change the title I'm like, Oh, cool. They have to provide middle market couple. Other cool things creates a regional code structure for modular. So there's been a lot of push around modular. Some financing of modular factories. You know, panelized construction. You know. You've got Boulder MoD here which just won an Eagle award this last year. So it's base. So it's the codes aren't written yet. But it's supposed to be based on climate codes. So we have 6 or 7 different climate zones in the State.

[27:01] so you know, you don't have to build to the snow load here in Boulder that you might have to build in, just, you know, for the mountains where I grew up in Great County. So Dola is gonna work on those codes, but and and if Dola will now, the department of local affairs will now be the the code people on modular you know. Part of that is, you know the throughput on modular. The you know the reason that modular is more cost, effective at times is because you can create those efficiencies of scale. But if you're having to build to every municipalities building code, it, it eliminates those efficiencies. And it create. This will create what's called address independence, so you could. As a modular factory owner, you could build units that don't have an address associated with them so you could build stock, and then

[28:08] wherever they fit. In the code, you could bring those that product. So you don't have to have the address thing going on there. When is that? Gonna get slashed out. It's gonna take a while. I can't remember the timeline on that. Yes, and Senate Bill 6 was a cool bill. that just allows the state treasurer to invest in below market rate bonds for affordable homeownership doesn't require. And there isn't a program yet. But it just was an authorization from the state treasurer to do something a lot of. There's a couple of bills I'll get to the next one on the next page that was really looking at, you know, not new money, but money that exists invested funds that we already have in the State, and leveraging those for affordable housing development. You could go to that next page. This is my last one, I promise.

[29:11] Senate Bill 20 was really a bill in response to the terrible news that was coming out of the Laura if you recall last year there was just awful habitable and uninhabitable conditions in some of these apartment complexes that people were living in. So this creates a receivership process where whereby a 3rd party can take receivership through action of the local government, and this the Attorney General to take over those properties, rehab them and and and really help the tenants out. And then Senate Bill 1, 67. Was one of those bills that would have utilized some State funds that the treasurer had control over as well as the Permanent school fund to to build for community benefits, including housing

[30:10] the State treasurer. Part of that bill was taken out which would have done a lot more, for for behind the development of the State it would have used some some funds that are under the control of the treasurer's office. But the treasurer didn't like that. So that was taken out. I know that was a lot. but we will most likely have a special session this year. To deal with budget issues and I'm very concerned about housing funds. you know, there are. you know, we have prop, 1, 23 funds that are not touchable. But there are some prop 1, 23 funds that that could be used by the State to to balance out the budget. We've got the vendor fee, which was

[31:07] It's a great resource for gap filling projects, but it's subject to a legislative doings and comings and goings so that could be something that's on the table. So we're we're gearing up for fighting for housing funds, and could use any and all support in that regard. That's it for me. But I'm happy to ask. Answer questions or 2, 1 at the very beginning you talked about local versus State control. I've been following a little bit of the lawsuits. And I'm just curious where you like from your just your personal opinion where you think those are gonna land. I think those are gonna land on State Supreme Court. It's gonna take a while to resolve that. So

[32:04] to to back up. You know, there's there's 6 communities who have sued the State on on the Trans Orient Communities Bill from last year, Senate Bill 1313 or House Bill 1313 and the are perfect, those 2. It's been a long day. But the requirements of the land use design bills and saying they violate the State Constitution and the Home Rule authority of those communities. I haven't seen anything scheduled yet. So it's gonna take a while to resolve. And I imagine this is a State Supreme Court. That's pretty fascinating. sure. And it's not I.

[33:01] It's not the only lawsuit right now that's happening. Yeah. So there's another lawsuit that's that was granted. Cert by the Supreme State Supreme Court out of Telluride. That's an interesting question or a couple of questions, and they're gonna be answering so I have attended your fall meetings. They're they're awesome. Thank you. Yeah. And usually in a beautiful place. So really good. So my understanding about the big, beautiful bill is that there's an increase to low income House tax credits. There's an increase to opportunity zones, but they're pulling away vouchers. And so is there a plan at the more local state, level to like

[34:03] provide funding for some sort of rental vouchers, because otherwise, yep. it's hard to make the numbers work if there's no income coming from the rental unit. So that's so. The big, beautiful bill had basically what was called the affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act in it. So in layman's terms it increased. High. Tech big, beautiful Bill didn't have anything around vouchers, but the the budget does. So it's kind of those 2 different processes the big, beautiful bill already passed. now, what we're in our Federal advocacy is really geared towards vouchers. So section 8. But as well as home funds and Cdg funds, we're trying to wrap our heads around like.

[35:00] what? What does all that add up to because all of those funds are used to build affordable housing. So you know, it's great, and we can like pat ourselves on the back about by tech being increased. But if you can't fill the units and can't pay for them, or make them pencil without, what good is that? And people were like very the affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act was a long time in the making bipartisan. you know. It was a really great effort, and it was hard for folks to celebrate that win, because we know what's coming down the road. So it is on your radar. It's on our radar. It's on our Federal advocacy. Okay, so thank you. And we work with some coalitions on that. We don't have Federal lobbyists in DC. But thank you. I didn't quite understand that last point, but the way it was passed is favorable. But then there's a budgeting process that's going to come along. And the the big, beautiful Bill wasn't the Federal budget. So that's a whole separate process. That's kind of happening now. So

[36:20] there are appropriations committees in both chambers that that push forward and and the the President submits a budget. And to Congress President Trump's budget was really severely cutting vouchers. It looks like those the voucher cuts might not be as drastic as the President's budget, but that's a whole process that that takes a while. You know. it's a budget for this year, but it's gonna be the appropriations are gonna happen whatever they get to it. You know. 3, rd they're out now. They're out for August recess now.

[37:04] So so that that's the process we're going to be trying to influence. Is the budgeting process. The the big, beautiful bill was So it was a different think all of its own. Any other questions. Thank you for having me. Yeah. Some more food. Good luck with your advocacy for the state budget stuff. Yeah, it's hard. What kind of support are you trying to rally? Do you have? Is that kind of spelled out on your website somewhere? We're working right now to sort of figure out the best impact. You know where you know if and when the special session is called like, how

[38:00] how strong and adamant do we need to be about how protecting housing, funding? who do we need to be talking to? So we're kind of working on all that now. and some of that, like a lot of inside baseball. Some of it will be like public calls to action. But I don't envy your State legislators. It's gonna be hard. Thank you very much. Yes, you bet. Thanks, Brian, thank you. All right, Holly. Are you ready to talk about affordable home ownership. Resident survey results. I am. And for better works I'm talking more than just the survey. That's fine. Okay, that was your request, by the way. but the the bigger not just the survey. Yes, that's just what it says on the agenda. You can talk about whatever you want. Meaning of life. Yeah.

[39:25] But okay, so I'm going to talk about so I have put together an information packet from City Council that includes this broad topic of incentivizing middle income homeownership. So that's what I'll be talking about today. So the the agenda, the things I'll be talking about. So I'll be doing. I just want to do a quick overview of affordable what like affordable housing and home ownership means in boulder. Then I'll talk about the status of our middle income down payment pilot down payment assistance pilot program.

[40:00] the details of our house, home ownership, or what we call our H. 2 0. Down payment assistance program and then I'll get into the affordable homeownership program and the results from our survey. So I'm just gonna I have a few slides to talk about kind of just the context of both affordable housing, like the definitions and what we think about here in boulder affordable housing. If you've seen it before, just like start throwing the tomatoes. I'll I'll move on so first, st when we talk about affordable housing, we think about like this. What this 1 3rd rule or 30% rule. So when we're identifying affordable housing, it means that households are paying no more than 1 3rd of their income on housing. So it's like that's kind of our golden rule that we go by in the city of Boulder. When we talk about permanently affordable housing, we're specifically talking about deed, restricted units that preserve that affordability in perpetuity. So when we all have some numbers, these are specific, these deed, restricted units.

[41:10] protecting affordability and perpetuity, and then finally, our area Median income, our favorite acronym. Here, ami this is determined by HUD for the boulder metropolitan statistical area. And it just means that house. Half of the households in the area make less than this figure, less than 100% ami and half make more. So it's that midpoint, and in 2025, that area Median income for the city was about $135,000 for a household of 3. So I think this. okay, so this, I feel like this, this graph like, gets to the point of what we're trying to fix here, we get to the big problem of middle income ownership in Boulder. So this graph shows between the years of 2010 and 2024, the boulder, Median sales, price for a single family home and an attached home or a condo

[42:25] and so we can see. And then, of course, for area Median income for a 3%, 100% of area Median income. For during that same duration, so we can see that the cost of the single family home during that time has really skyrocketed this leveled off in recent years. Attached home also kind of risen but both of the both of these the sale the Median sales has, like disproportionately risen compared to the the area median income. So this is that this is like the what are we? We're trying to figure this out right. How do we? How do we? Ami hasn't gone up in 15 years. It has gone up.

[43:07] it certainly goes up every year. But the the point of this graph is it's not proportionate yet, and that's based on 30% of 100% Ami household. So this these are the Ami is just the number of the area Median income. And these are oh, it's not what they open up for. Yes, great, great. Okay, this perfect segue. So that does this number, doesn't these figures don't get to that point. So when I looked at like the purchasing power of of households earning the area Median income. So to afford a home that costs 1.3 million dollars. This Median single family home, a household has to be earning over $300,000 at 6% interest rate. So I was kind of like, generous in that sense. So it's a lot of money that's more than twice of the area Median income.

[44:02] For an attached home, or these condos the purchasing power. It's it's the household needs to be earning about $135,000. So there's some. There's some like, you know, this area meeting. If you're making 100% of the area meeting income. You may be able to afford a condo in the city medium, you know, medium sales condo. But there's a lot of factors that go into housing choice. You know. Household size. Age of condo. There's all sorts of stuff, right? So that's just to give you an idea of like, where where these 100% area Median income for a household is? 3, where what can they can actually purchase versus what's on the market? Cool. I also wanted to. I feel like this topic of middle income housing is like pretty heavy because of that graph. You know, we're looking at these huge risks, but I do think we have a lot to celebrate in Boulder in terms of what we've done for affordable housing. So this year we surpassed, or at the end of last year we surpassed this 4,000. We have more than 4,000 affordable units in the city.

[45:18] So this is halfway more than halfway to our 15% goal. So 8.7% of all housing units in boulder are permanently affordable. So we're making really good progress. And it includes rentals. You guys just like one step ahead of me. We're just knocking out of the park for rentals. So our number of rental units of that of that 4,098 units. Over 3,000 of them are rental units. So this graph shows blue is rental. Yellow is home ownership. You can see we have a lot of rental units that serve the incomes of 30, but 30 to 60% of the Ami

[46:11] and you can see the yellow for homeownership. It's kind of it's in, you know, the higher income category serving, you know, broadly 60%. And above Emi, I would say, probably more like 80% above Emi. So we're really trying to figure out this when we're talking about incentivizing middle income homeownership. It's like that side of the graph. It's like the the edges here in terms of what we're trying to fix or what we're trying to address. I shouldn't fix. Say, Fix, And I. When I look at this graph, I also think this is like this shows a lot about the challenges, and like the whole housing continuum like on these 2 extremes of this graph is where it takes a lot of city investment. There's not a lot of financing tools to finance middle income homeownership units right? There's not a lot of so so anyway, it kind of like tells the story of like there's a there's intent. There's a reason. This graph looks like this. And it's part of the thing we're we're trying to use local funds to support.

[47:14] You'd only come home ownership. So it's on that side of the ground. Do you have an inventory of naturally occurring affordable housing or middle income housing? I'm not sure we have an inventory. There's not a lot. They're not deed restricted, so there's not a covenant on them, but they may just be naturally more affordable because they're an older building or smaller unit, or things like that. Yeah, I would say, 0 like when I think about it, like the affordable houses in Newland that are like old and little, are selling for what? Like a million something, because you're just going to scrape them. Oh, well, about like rentals, older rent, and there are plenty of rent. Older rental buildings.

[48:07] affordable to middle line or definitely middle, but low and moderate. I would say the closest we have is the prop 1, 2, 3 estimates that came a couple of years ago. So it's not something that you're you're tracking in your inventory necessarily correct, because it changes every year. Right? All takes is that building to get rehabbed, and it's no longer attainable just to like, say something kind of I think it's fairly clear like from the 1st slide affordable. Just as a blanket statement means 1 3rd of your income. So if there's if the regardless of what your income is. If it's 1 3rd it's affordable to use, then it's then it's just a question of like at what ami are different units affordable to at different sorry at what different levels of ami are are different units affordable according to that definition. So that would just be like, so if they're not deed restricted. Then they're just naturally occurring affordable right? But when I think about what am I seeing in the market, I'm not seeing anything that's affordable to somebody makes $130,000, because

[49:22] there's really not any single family homes that are $500,000. There's a shortage of condos because of construction defect. And if you throw in the hoa that gets expensive, too, and new townhomes are going for like a million 5, so that naturally occurring sounds great. But I don't. I don't see. That's why she's asking. So in the rental market. And these are just the de-restricted, these data. But is there data that would include adus. because that is where the naturally occurring affordable

[50:03] rentals tend to happen is in people's backyards, you know, because they're not for profit developers. And you know we set the rent at. you know, something very, very reasonable for most people, and I'm just wondering is that captured anywhere? We did do a yeah. I was gonna say, we did do a survey of adu owners a few years ago, and in that we asked what they were charging for rent, and broadly the rents were, I think it was like 80% ami affordable. So there is like a a section relatively like more affordable rate that ads are being set at compared to the market. No, yeah. 95% of them of the units that we survey right? 80% keep running data on the contribution 80 users are making to housing in our

[51:01] keep surveying as well answer them. But I mean, that's you know, that was the whole thing with revising the adu Regs, and all that is that they, in fact, create another housing pathway for people, that it is more affordable, and it would be nice to have data that would start to support. This, because, you know, as we look at next sets of revisions. It's like, well, and look what it's done, what we did in 20. I think it was 2023, or 2022, and that was the second the second time survey was administered. I believe. So. The contribution adus make to the housing. Yeah, the latest update to the ad Regs. Every memo we write to council about adus includes, it includes that. do we do. We have updated numbers on how many adus have been built since the since the ordinances were changed.

[52:09] Remember having an argument with someone, I'm sure we all know about whether or not it would. It would have a positive effect on the number of adus getting built. And I was like, Yes, it's going to. And that's that's the answer I want to hear. In the first, st I think the statistic. I remember the 1st 4 years after we changed the rules in 2,018 we produce more videos than we did in the past 40 years. Yeah. And then well, that I remember. But I mean, since they they were updated again, I think it's been doubled again. sweet. I would love to see that Greg legislation of removing home ownership. The investors moved into that market. So there's gonna be a lot more they can use

[53:02] coming to rental properties. It'll be interesting to see the trajectory of oh. 80 users that are available in the market. Alright. So before. So I'll like I previewed. I'll talk about 3 of our city led homeownership and incentivize city led incentivize programs and incentivize. But of course, while older MoD didn't fit into kind of like the brief that I you know I was asked right about. We can't talk about ownership in the city without talking about the older MoD so the factory will be producing these home home ownership units. And I, want to point out the number here of like 50

[54:01] homeownership units per year that will be affordable to lower middle income households. The first, st you know, the 1st tranche will be going to the Ponderosa community. But after that, 50 50 homes per year is like increasing our homeownership stock by 6% per year. So it's like, it's a significant contribution to this ownership. Conundrum that we're in. So I'll say that at the top for going into these other programs alright. So the 3 city of ownership programs. This middle income down payment pilot program. A relatively new. It is a pilot program, and I'll get into that. Our house to home ownership and then our affordable home ownership program. So for our 2 down payment assistance programs, they had a few things in common that I'll just say at the top. So these are loans intended to help buyers close on the purchase of a home. They can only be used for market rate homes within the city and for both down payment assistance programs.

[55:13] There's all sorts of rules that a owner needs to abide by including it needs to be owner occupied. There's rental restrictions. There's an in income and asset qualification in order to qualify for the down payment assistance. You can't own another home. So it is really trying to get towards like this middle, this middle income. Hi! This middle income family that can't just can't afford a home here. So the 1st the 1st one I'll talk about here is the middle income down payment assistance pilot program. So this we launched this back in 2023, and it is a very unique and atypical structure for a down payment assistance program. It offers 2 things, or it kind of comes with 2 components. So the 1st component is down payment assistance to a middle income household. This assistance can be up to $200,000 or 30% of the home sales price.

[56:16] This is a 0 interest loan, and in exchange for that loan the household agrees to put a deed restriction that limits the appreciation and resale of that home. The appreciation limit is set. I think it's 2% higher than what is available, or that what is the normal appreciation rate for the affordable homeownership program? So it's kind of like pegged to that. And so yeah, those are the 2 components. It's very It's very typical. It was, but it hasn't been utilized by anyone so far. Okay.

[57:00] I'll leave that there unless there's questions. Why, why hasn't it been utilized? It's been in place for 2 years for 2 years now. Yeah, so what? So we have some hypotheses of? Why this is challenging. I think, one of the There. there's a lot of restrictions that a homeowner has to contemplate before going into this deal. So it's you you get this down payment, assistance loan and down payment assistance that has to. That comes with a deed restriction restricted home. So there's an appreciation cap that already limits your wealth growing your opportunity to grow wealth. Then, on top of that, you're required to pay back this loan. That's uncomfortable. That could be uncomfortable and kind of like hard to see right? And then on top of that, the way this is structured is that because there's this deed restriction on it, permanent deed restriction that we've put on all of the homes in the affordable homeownership program. The home is in our affordable homeownership program. So the seller, the 1st owner that wants to sell it has to sell it within the ownership program which

[58:15] limits the potential pool of buyers that they're able to access to purchase the home. So that's a lot of that's a lot of future casting to say, Okay, this is this, down payment assistance is worth all of those extra, and I can make sure that I'll be able to. Man, you know. That's just a lot. So that's a word we are, we've heard. Are any loan payments due at all during the 1st 15 years. Are you paying it down at all? No! Oh, that's amazing! And what Ami is this up to up to 120% ami cool. The main reason no one's using it is because the next program. actually, I just have a question, how long is the how long is the program? The pilot program

[59:03] undetermined length. Okay, yeah. And are, are you all gonna do any tweaks? Are you just putting the focus on the other programs like the next slide. I think the goal is to put the focus on the other programs. Just considering and I. And if if I may, I'll just speak about the House to home ownership program. So this is our what we call our H. 2 0 program. It's A has a typical shared appreciation structure. So and this is has been much, much more popular in the past few years. And so we're seeing kind of the increased interest in this program. And no increase, no interest in the other one. And so we're, you know. kind of taking that as a sign. So this is a typical shared appreciation loan structure. So you purchase a home with this down payment assistance program. Say that down payment assistance was 20% of the home's value at the time. So

[60:10] as your the value in your home increases. there's a shared appreciation. So we take 20% of that appreciation and you keep 80% of it. So this offers this alignment between our public investment in a home and with market growth. there's this. It's just a revolving loan fund. So it's just it's always being we're, you know, money's being put back into the coffers. And I offer this here that our initial capital invested in the program in 2,000, the year 2,000 when it started with $600,000 and to date, we've served 92 households with a total of 3.2 million dollars. So it's a lot of households that we're helping so when they sell the house at the end. Yes.

[61:03] there's no limitation to the Am. Is there a limitation to the ami of the people who buy it? No. okay. The only limitation is that. it's like going in on an investment together. We take it's a yeah. Do they have to? Is there any time? Frames like you've got to either pay back, you know, the core investment or sell the house within 20 years. 30 years. Anything like that? I believe it's 30 years that you have to pay, but there's nothing saying that you can't pay it off later, like So there's been examples of like refinance. I know it's like hard to conceptualize now refinancing, for like more favorable terms. But like refinancing a few years late, after you, they've participated in the program because they have the equity. They can buy this down. And then they're out right? Like. So it's kind of like, it helps helps that initial investment.

[62:06] How old is this program? It started in the year 2,000. Is there income qualifications or restrictions? Yes, it's 120% area Median income for this one, and I wrote it down what that means. So for a 3 person household, 120% area Median income this year is about $163,000 for a single person. It's $126,000. Is this only for someone's 1st initial home purchase. No, you just can't own a home surprise. They could resell a house. Yeah, that was in the program. Yeah. Can they utilize the program? If they're buying, I don't know something yeah, like if they own the house somewhere else and had some equity. Yes, absolutely. There are asset limitations.

[63:00] I can't believe it's like 2 times 2 and a half times your income. Yeah. seems like at some point, the math doesn't ever pencil out. If if you have asset limitations and income limitations. And you're buying a market rate house. no matter how much the loan is like. It's gonna just you're the the like. The Venn diagram of what's possible, just like gets separated. Yes, that's a really good point, and I believe to address some of that. It was a few, maybe 20 20, that the total amount a home a household can borrow was doubled from 50,000 to 100,000. To address that like this, to to try to align it with some of the market growth. But I do think this is this is still a problem like cause. You have to qualify for that 1st loan. Yeah, there's just all sorts of

[64:01] okay, so that's our host. And the large program, next up is our affordable program. So this is the program where we have homes within the city that are sold at the low market rate all of our homes, all 823 of these homes are affordable. There's an affordability covenant that re that limits the resale value of the home this covenant. And the program also restricts a lot of other things like rental. You know, various various other components. All the homes are that are for sale are listed on the city's home for sale web. Page. And I put this line in here. We we've expanded this to be a regional homeownership program. Through a regional compliance program with the regional housing partnership.

[65:00] I could literally talk about that all day, but usually compliance doesn't really give me invited to meetings. So so where are where are these? And are they? One bedroom, 2. Bedroom, 3 bedroom. Are they detached like they're they're all of the above. Yeah, so I would say, most of them are probably condos. They're not. There's not very many single family homes. Is there an average size profile like I said so. If you go there, you can play with the numbers and toggle between rental and ownership, and if you just click on ownership. It'll tell you exactly how many units have 3 bedrooms versus 2 bedrooms versus one. They'll tell you what income levels they are. So all that information, is there? I want to say the map even changes. It's not going to tell you exactly where that home is. Respect some people's privacy. But

[66:01] and this is in addition to the boulder partners. boulder housing partners. Yeah, yeah, these are the ownership boulder housing partners doesn't do any ownership. They're all renters. Hmm! So this is on a lottery system. Then it's not a lottery. A friend of mine bought a house. I thought it was to bother housing partners a townhouse. and it was a lottery. so we don't call it a lottery, because that implies there's some sort of luck involved. It's a fair selection process. So as long as you yeah, I mean the easy German spelling that lot right? But you don't, just because you want it doesn't mean you're gonna get it. and you qualify because there's all these other parameters, and it's not random. So if you are, if you meet more criteria than the other applicants, you're going to get that. Okay? So this is that program

[67:00] and boulder housing partners don't have any. I thought they did sell. What about thistle? Would thistles be included in this. We do track thistles any part, any home with a covenant in the city we track, even if it's not well, it's owned by the owner. So say that if it was built by thistle or built by habitat, they no longer have an interest. They've sold it to the next homeowner. although I thought, this will use land trusts sometimes. Yeah, I think they might still own the land. But they're still yeah, that's a good question. I don't know. Thistle does have land trusts, community land trusts. Cindy Bhp. Actually did have one property that they sold, and that was in Poplar just. And there were some home ownership up there. But that was a Land trust model as well. Right?

[68:04] How, when did this program start? We started in the late nineties so earlier than that early nineties. There were earlier iterations where we tried. We we tried different types of covenants that restricted the size of units. thinking that if they couldn't get any bigger that they would remain affordable. That was kind of a big mistake. And then so we put the Covenant has evolved through the eighties and nineties, and then it was 2,000 that our current covenant and sort of the idea of affordability and perpetuity was really crystallized in policy. So my understanding is when it started forever ago. The concept was that this will be a stepping stone for folks, but because of the appreciation cap is like this, but the market is like this. Is there any? Is there ever a consideration to adjust the appreciation cap that somehow

[69:06] parallels what the market is doing? So this is. This is tricky, because I think in order to do that, we cannot we they will not be affordable for future owners. So this appreciation cap allows affordability over time. Right? I guess I'm saying not to get rid of the appreciation cap. But let's say it's it's like 2%. But then going back to like one of your original slides where the market went. Yeah, way like this, is it possible that that appreciation cap would for that year or a couple of years go to like 7% or something like somehow be like I said, parallel to, because then it would still be affordable compared to market. I mean, I'll try. Yeah, I'll try. So I'll just bring this

[70:02] So the appreciation cap is set based on Ami and the consumer price index. And so, in order to make it affordable over time, like affordable to this area, Median income, the area Median income below 100 to make it affordable to those homeowners. It has to be capped to the ami or this consumer price index in some way. So if you price it to the market. it becomes unaffordable for any middle incomers. And can I add that to that? A little bit to the pilot program? That's 1 of the big challenges, right? So it's the baseline appreciation at plus 2%. So we did a bunch of modeling. And that extra 2% means that that home that was affordable to someone earning 120% in 5 years. They have to earn 140% in 10 years. They have to earn 160%. So the appreciation rate just basically, yes, you're right. It's more affordable.

[71:08] But what the city has the policy is that we're not going to invest significant city funds unless that we know that home is going to remain affordable in perpetuity. Got it so based on ami and consumer price index. Thank you. But I think what what card is trying to say is that people are getting trapped in these homes and they can't. Yeah, well, so this is what this is. Why we sort of survey the homeowners to kind of get a better sense. So I I'll jump into that. So I only have about 3 slides about the survey results. The whole survey is an attachment. And in your packet this this month. But broadly. So I think there's this conception of like this like idea of unable to exit or getting trapped. But when we serve surveyed folks. There's there's broad satisfaction with the program. So 84% of homeowners are very or somewhat satisfied with their home, and 85% of homeowners would repeat this purchase

[72:17] so, and I add this quote in there that that we that someone left in the survey, I wouldn't be able to purchase a home in boulder outside of this program, and rental rates in the city are very high. I work in boulder and appreciate the ability to live in the city I work in. I also love the area I live in because it's close to trails in the downtown area. So I think I wanna I wanted to lead with this, because I do think that there's this broad satisfaction in the the program. And while the satisfaction has like slightly ticked down since 2019. It's still pretty high. So I hope that answers some of that and then one thing

[73:07] in reviewing the survey results and talking talking about these survey results. I think one of the things that we are noticing is that there's like this tension in it. So there's like broad satisfaction and kind of home home owners and program participants feel more stable financially stable. But there, it's not. It's not all like it's not all good. So I offer some of these observations here so broadly, there's been fewer special assessments, so fewer of the households have experienced lump sum special assessments since 2019. However, these do keep on rising. So great news that there's not like these surprise special assessments, but the burden of those hoa, those rising hoa dues, especially for homeowners with the area median incomes below 120% ami is, there's some serious consequences to that.

[74:06] Again. So 12% of homeowners no longer have a mortgage. This is up from 7% in 2019. So kind of revealing, like, it's, it's offering this like level of stability and investment. Let's say in the in their homes, however, compared to 2019 more homeowners are experiencing homeownership surprises. So there's that stability of no longer having a mortgage. But there's still these surprises that catch catch people off guard. So jazz, what do you? What do you mean? I mean, like water heater, you know, like I'm responsible for that. And then one other thing I wanted to point out is that household incomes program participants are increasing broadly increasing. So that's great news. But so our overall housing costs. So that ratio between cost and income is kind of like relatively stable. So there's just the you know. There's there's some things. But

[75:18] between. Observe, in 2019 and 2025, the year that this survey was done. that are kind of similar like we're seeing similar trends from 2019. I can't see my notes, and I'm sure I had some something else to say and I'll just move on alright. So the last thing that I wanted to point out in our survey is that there is a trend in aging trend among homeowners in the program. So there's more retirees. There's fewer families participating in the program, and there's an increased share of homeowners that have lived in their units for more than 10 years. So the the graph here is,

[76:05] just shows the age of homeowners between 2019. That's the blue, and then 2025. That's the yellow you can see that there's kind of like it's not a huge shift, but there's certainly a demographic trend trending upward like we're we're getting older in our the homeowner program. the owners of these homes. this is not unique to this program. Obviously, like this is a trend that's happening in the city and the county, the State more generally. So it's not something that it's that's not notably unique here, but in terms of looking at the program and what we need to do and think about the program over time. Just having this in our mind thinking about you know, more retirees, living on fixed incomes. Those Hoa increases are going to be very impactful to those those folks. Potential, you know, accessibility changes that are needed in households, and in these aging families. So as a program, I think we're just having to like, keep this demographic shift in mind.

[77:15] I have a question. Yeah. Do you think that that 3rd point about the increased share of homeowners living in their unit for more than 10 years, could be somewhat attributed to what Lauren touched on is that they're stuck in the unit. And I just wonder if we have this great inventory of affordable rental units. but not nearly as many homeownership. And so is that is that something where the city should be focusing on adding more homeownership for those who want it. Sense that number is probably gonna increase. Yeah, I mean adding home ownership units that that's like the the where we're trying to crack. Of all this, I mean, the modular factory is like a big component of that strategy.

[78:12] and yeah, I think I think this idea of living people living in their units longer kind of. You can read it in all sorts of ways. Right? Can read it as like this ability to be. Offer a stable stable housing over time in a community that you want to be part of great could also read it as they can't leave because of the appreciation cap. Probably both a little bit of both. Right? yeah, there. yeah, I mean so. And that's why Holly was trying to set that context right. So that we have these great tools, and we have tax credits to build rentals. What we don't have are the tools for the very low and the middle, and the costs are significantly higher. But we still know that the the need is still the greatest.

[79:07] So it's a it's a it's an interesting policy question, right? Do we divert resources from low and moderate income renters to support ownership opportunities. Is this the conversation that's anticipated going to city council? You said you were preparing to go to city Council. I'm not preparing. It's going to be an information packet for City council. Oh, so they're not contemplating. We we've had that conversation in 2022 Council. That council was quite clear. Yes, we're not. We're not going to sacrifice or divert money from low and moderate income renters to support. And then the other thing. Sorry did I hit you that one of the things that really stood up for me and and the survey results is that.

[80:00] it's really hard to tease out like what's specific to the affordable homeowners program versus just everything in general, like a lot of the well, I think everybody's feeling sort of the economic uncertainties. So how much does that come through in in the survey results same thing with security? So people feel less safe compared to 2019. But I'm guessing that's probably the case for almost anybody in Boulder and then the other piece that that I think is better to just to maybe leave you with. Is that We try not to compare the affordable homeownership program to owning a market rate home because it just isn't right. We like to compare it to renting. But the huge advantages of owning a home in the affordable home ownership program. You have a lot more stability. You know your rent's not gonna go up. You can't be displaced. Your kids are gonna stay in the same schools.

[81:02] And you're unlike a rental, you're still building equity. Right? So it's just a different frame of mind to think about it. And so when people complain that well, we should be okay. It's not fair that we see our neighbors getting 7%. We're only getting 3 and a half. So that's what we try to emphasize. So a naturally occurring homeownership option would be to allow condoization of maybe use people to be. I mean that a lot of cities other places have done that. Which means that, you know people can buy into, say New Orleans or Mapleton for a fraction of the cost, that they would, if they were trying to buy a free standing. and that comes up as we've we've you know you're the on the staff side, and I'm on the advocate side in the conversations. But just the idea of

[82:06] you know the land, the land, the single family land uses in any given city are such a huge percent. And it's basically untouchable unless you start to do something like condo-wise. So the 80 can be sold. Don't forget to plan. It's a it's a curious thing, because people have a lot of fears, which is why I was wondering what Council you know, if you were, in fact, going to talk to city councils. It's like what other low hanging fruits out there that we're not turning over, because it's a very real, I mean, how many of us have either parents or children, or you know that they could never come and live with in the city, or you know, even you know, people who do services with us for a school. So it's it's a it's an interesting.

[83:06] It's about our beliefs. And we hold tightly to the fact that no, this is single family and cannot be doing. You know the beliefs that are driving some of this is just as powerful as you know the unspoken beliefs as powerful as the Nimby beliefs, you know. It's just like, why do we not have a more grounded and a truth based? It's just like the truth is, there's a lot of land in people's backyards. Can I just offer, I I think, particularly for ownership, middle income ownership in Boulder. I don't think there is any low hanging fruit. I think it's like it takes. It will take a lot of investment or support from the city to make it happen right? So this. I it's just like this. Not that we can't crack, and I just feel like we've taken like so many different angles. And we're trying to do so many things. So

[84:11] I don't like the local trip, I'm like, you know, affordable the people who are market rate, you know, that aren't gonna afford even the condos. Yeah. it's like this, like in that, that line chart, like, there's like this market product that doesn't exist. How do we create a market product that fill that gap. Yeah, no. My apologies for suggesting I was thinking about that naturally occurring. I love that that language. It's out there. We just haven't tapped into it, but it's it's different than what you're talking about. So I'll just end on

[85:00] So we do. We do the survey not just to collect data, but would not just like, look at. Look at some charts and talk about it. But our program manager, the program staff really does use the feedback in the survey and the feedback that as presidents provided outside of the survey to continuously improve program, and that provided some, like some offering of ways that the 2019 survey and feedback from residents kind of change change some ways. We do capital improvements in Hoa, or sorry special assessments. So we're going to use this information to to really try to improve pain points that we're hearing. We continue to monitor the the Hoa issue, the Hoa issue and special assessments. I will say it's not unique to the city's program or the city like this is a problem everywhere. So so far.

[86:01] we haven't really like, figure out a huge, huge, wonderful solution. And then to the last slide you saw, we're just gonna continue to monitor these demographic trends and figure out if they're how they potentially impact the program in the long term. So that's all I have any other. Let me just ask a question, how do you attract families into the homeownership program so that you have more people, more kids in the schools, people to work in your grocery stores and as the demographics are shifting older. Yeah, I don't know if there's only like specific tools where we're attracting families. Do try to get larger units. So our scatter site acquisition program, which we need to add, it's not your presentation, just kidding where we go out and buy units on the market, so we'll we won't do anything less than 2 bedroom ideally. We look for 3 bedroom and 2 bath

[87:09] and then the program gives preferences, not the lottery, but preferences. For if you have a 3 bedroom, the more kids you have, more likely you are to get that unit so kind of a roundabout way of doing it. And you know we do have homes with. The bulk of them are 2 and 3 bedroom, but we do have 4, 5, 6. We do have single family homes, just not very many of them. When they do come up. There's like. totally agree with you like. I think that is a huge opportunity or need for the city to focus on. But I agree I don't think there's any low hanging fruit, and I wonder whether that property type in that target market really is

[88:00] gonna get solved if and when we redevelop that airport, or if and when we redevelop area 3 or but yeah, I worry about how like, there really aren't many. The the number of families and kids enrolling in schools is going down, but I don't know that it will happen with one off. Buy a house here, buy a house there. we're trying. We have 8 plexes and 12 plexes everywhere. I bet the market would fill a niche there. It depends on if the single family homeowners would. You know, if there's political will around that sort of thing. and also the modulars we're building. They're all 3 bedroom. But where will they go like? Where's the land that they go onto under rules that potentially violate elsewhere in the county. There's a couple of sites that 5 times looking at. We're looking at a parcel

[89:02] that the city might buy. So we're trying to build that pipeline, for where all those units that are coming out of the factory go, and to be super clear, we're not at 50 yet for 24, and for a fiscal year 6, and then the 6th to the 18th month, we will do 2014. Great! How many units is ponderosa. Let me say 61, total, 3 years. Yeah, 11 or stick belt at least. But it's also depends on attrition. And who wants to move in. So if you want to stay in your bubble home in Ponderosa. you're you're welcome to do so. So it's gonna take longer. Yeah.

[90:06] I appreciate that in that your packet of information you had some like other cities, comparisons with some of their programs. Thank you. That's interesting. Yeah. And that's 1 of the data points where I think program staff will be looking at kind of absorbing some of those best practices, different models out there solution to some of these issues that we haven't. I have a suggestion. It talked about population. But it didn't talk about average home price. And I feel like, oh, yeah, I feel like the issue isn't just. Is this a population of 20,000 or 100,000? But, like, you know, boulders, housing is significantly higher than yes, I know. You mean, yeah, yeah, like, I feel like, that's a data point that would have been there. There were some other examples in there from. I think we're helpful from Los Angeles and San Francisco to offer a more. Yeah.

[91:07] but you're right. I thought that was interesting, too. Thank you so much can I make? Can I make one more comment? The very 1st thing we talked about was the the the I can't remember what the name of it is but the foundation assistant program. Pilot. Yeah. The pilot. I remember being extremely cynical of that when it came out and critical of it out loud, and I thought it was a cheap talking point that a lot of candidates running for office like to throw out because it was. It was easy. It's inexpensive. It's like, you know, it has the name middle income attached to it. And anyways, I just I just want to point out that that that thing didn't come out out of a vacuum. It it came out in the context of politicians wanting to say they were doing something and in my opinion it was just sort of a cheap talking point, and I would love to go back to some of them and say it was a cheap talking point. You knew it then. Now you know it for for good, you know. But anyways

[92:15] sorry. That was a little. That was a little snarky rant. But can I defend the the original? Yeah. So I think they just wanted to try something new. And they they wanted to throw something out there and see if it would stay. and they were perfectly willing to accept that. Yeah, if it didn't work. If no one was interested. then we've learned something. So yeah. remember thinking that was the best argument for the for the pilot was was, let's try a bunch of different things, but the test will be whether or not they'd be willing to let it die. And you know, basically go away.

[93:03] I will say, and also in defense of it. I think. This idea of like when you pilot something, you test something out you learn from a failure or something not taking. And I do think there has been like learnings that we have taken from it? so it wasn't offered for not that have dedicated funding that will be released. Or how? How did that end shift? How would how would that end work at the program? So the the the ballot measure that approved it? Did authorize the city to bond, I think, was up to 10 million dollars, but we have not exercised any of that authority. So for the pilot portion we use chose to use existing funding through the H. 2 0. Program before we took out money and incurred that expense. We wanted to make sure it was a program that people would take advantage of.

[94:10] Thank you very much. Thank you. It's very much. Thank you, Brian. You don't need to stay, either. I can't guarantee 48. So our next topic has to do with the video that we watched at our last meeting, and I realized that we ran out of time. And so we kind of cut off the discussion of that of that video. And I just want everybody to know that I really that I think collectively, the group does want to know what people thought of the video. And so we probably could spend 4 h talking about the video and what our impressions were. And so one, what we thought we would do is

[95:12] Let each of us share one thought about the video, and how it might be translatable into something that have would wanna focus on. So rather like big picture. What did we think of the video like, let's be a little bit more specific and make it ad focused. Karin, you want to go first? st Sure. So I think I think I said this after we watched the movie. But one of the things for the movie. One of the things that really struck me was the idea that boulders had some exclusivity from the very beginning, not having agriculture or heavy industry. And somebody said it feels like, maybe it's becoming more exclusive. And then it got me thinking about a point that Cindy brought up was just talking about the service industry and

[96:15] trying to figure out solutions for affordable housing for those in the service industry. I kind of totally fell down this rabbit hole, trying to find out, like well, how many people in boulder work in the service industry. And there's some. you know, gray area about, what do you consider the service industry? But if you just take, like the kind of basic what everybody seems to agree with like food service. And what's it called hotels and hospitality and emergency services and teachers, not university level, but basic primary K, through 12. Thank you. Then, then it looks like in boulder, that's about 30%, a little over 30%. And our affordable housing goal is 15%, which is great and double what it was. But like.

[97:11] I guess my, what got me thinking after that video is like, do we need to like really strive for more. Maybe when we get to 15, bump it up. I know I know it's not. And and it's it's like a budget like, just because you create a budget doesn't actually mean that your cash flow is gonna look like that. I understand that. But I just wonder if if if to learn from our history making like really conscious efforts going forward. I would offer. I think once we get to 10%, I think that'll be that desire to increase our goal from 15% to something higher.

[98:04] That's my prediction. When do you think we'll get to 10% what she say? We're at 8.7? Now, yeah, 8.7. Does that include like, rally flats and Mount Calvary? Okay, like hospitals? That's gonna be right. Is that gonna be good? So it has to have a certificate of occupancy before we'll count it. Percentage. yeah, I I don't wanna make a prediction 5 years. So it's so dependent. It's so dependent on what the market does. Right? So if the market takes a huge plunge, we're going to slow down dramatically. And if there's no vouchers. okay, I, that video. I watched that video a few years ago, too. And I, I kind of associated with reading the color of law, which a lot of people were reading at the time of that housing symposium.

[99:11] Pretty sure all the planning board read it. And so my reaction to seeing it a few years later, and and what you know, watching it again and reflecting on it is that it kind of actually in some ways pulls some punches like it, doesn't. It actually doesn't impact me the way seeing it the 1st time did, and reading the color of law did And I just like, what do I wanna say? I wanna say well, one thing I wanna comment just kind of as an aside, I just found out this morning or yesterday that there's a follow up book to the color of law called Just action. And it's a it's a response like one of the one of the things I

[100:00] that left me deflated about the color of laws the way it ends. It just sort of it just sort of trails off on a whimper of a plea of what we might do to address all the stuff that he catalogs in the 1st 3 fourths of the book, and so I was very unsatisfied with the with how it ends and what we should do about it. So there's a whole book that just sort of addresses. How should we think about addressing the structural inequality that's been baked into our housing? So I want to read it. I want to encourage other people to read it. I can't recommend it at this point, since I haven't. I just learned about it. But anyways, I'm excited about that but when I think about how housing embodies the structural racism that is our legacy as a country I think about. Sorry I'm a little emotion. I think, about the neighborhood I'm in, which is literally named after

[101:01] displaced indigenous tribes. As as a kind of oh, isn't this adorable? We're we're putting out this suburban style sprawl, and we're naming it, after all the people that we've displaced. And I think it's like we've never really had a reckoning with that like just, you know, 50 years later, after that subdivision's been built. Is there? Are there any indigenous people who feel respected or honored by the fact that we named these adorable cul-de-sacs and looping streets that go nowhere after their peoples. And I think the answer is probably not, but also just like. There's not a recognition that that single family, home style, and all the land that it consumes, and all the asphalt that surrounds all of it. It. It's just so. It's so exclusive to the Po. The other possibilities of how we can make our city prosperous and welcoming and inclusive. And when I say I sounded flippant when I said.

[102:04] 8 plexes or 12 plexes where currently a single family with, you know, one or 2 people living in it. a single family home sits. but that, you know, if we're serious about rethinking our city and making it welcoming and walkable and climate friendly, we need to figure out how to be more compact and how to be more welcoming and more affordable and single. There's just no path to affordability through single family homes. That's just like. So you know, when you when you kind of question well, where's the where are these possible missile missing middle single family? And and Holly said. You know there's no low hanging fruit when it comes, and may. Maybe maybe she may, generally speaking, but I would just kind of make it very specific to say, there's no low hanging fruit, for sure with respect to single family homes that occupy left large amounts of land. And so

[103:03] I don't know. For me, dismantling our single. Our our sacred cow of single family homes is, gets really at the core of how we could make Boulder more inclusive and more welcome, you know. more more thriving, more just lots of things. So I ranted. I'm not sorry, but I'm not sure I was perfectly coherent. But thanks for listening. I don't really have anything much better to add. I really appreciate what felt. It's not there. It it made me feel a little guilty like. We're all part of that right. The a white part of Boulder and the university was a huge part of it. That's why I came to boulder right? Like.

[104:01] yeah. But I mean, the city is very progressive, and at the cutting edge of housing policy. And so I think, continuing that and continuing to improve on lessons learned, and no dismantling. The single family homes amount. I'm kind of speechless, I mean, both of you made it poignant points. It's not as simple. It's oh, and you're right. We're all a part of it all, you know. We can't just keep and and sitting. I will say this sitting on planning board. We're not solving the problem. Yeah, we're not solving the problem. What comes before planning board again and again is luxury, student housing again and again and again the vibrant neighborhood legislature, the intent of allowing

[105:16] density along the corridors. I it'll be interesting to see where that goes or how it goes, because what happens in Boulder is as soon as we start making any kind of changes like what happened with the adus removing ownership. The investors move in. I mean, that's what's happened to our single family neighborhoods. Those little houses don't remain little houses. and people don't actually live in the houses, the big houses that get built. So we're we. And we've created investment opportunities

[106:01] that we're now, you know, we're popping our heads out looking around and going. What have we done? Because there, we haven't figured out how to d incentivize people from investing and not living in our city and that becomes, you know, the dearth all the way through, right? There's there's no people living. There's no people, you know, spending money. There's no people volunteering. There's no kids in school. There's there's no neighbors. But a radical rethinking of how we use our land. I mean, you're right sacred cows, you know, it's just making little tiny moves. And that was I was a big advocate for the 80 users. This is going to change things. But oh, you always. I mean, you know, Jay and this staff always were talking about little moves, you know, and I could see. Let's make bold moves. And and that was, you know, very it took a lot

[107:10] to get the moves that happened in our adu realm. I am so appreciative of the state, just making, saying, Hey, let's just roll out some some basic requirements around 80 use, which, of course, this is not the 1st day to do that. But we could go a lot further. And I think the idea of rethinking how we use our single family zoning I don't know what kind of a I don't know what kind of thinking will actually start to shake out some results. Oh. it's a curious, curious dilemma, one of the things I love about adus, and as it turns out, single family homes. But maybe the only thing I love about single family homes is that it's possible because of

[108:15] there's less. Hoa and there's a lot more individuality that the structures can reflect. The interesting inhabitants that live inside them. You know, adus can be very unique, very lovely and I think one of the main challenges to bring people on board with with higher density is to figure out how to have beautiful structures that sort of reflect, the creativity of the and the quirkiness of you know the whole. Keep both. The weird kind of thing is like I would love to see some density that really was beautiful, you know, and we have. We get a lot of density that's not so beautiful. People are like, well, we don't want that, you know. So adus adus are just so. They're so lovely, you know, and they're just, I don't know. So we need to figure out how to have 6 plexes that are beautiful. But you know the point you're making, and think about it. If it's beautiful, we love it, you know we're not going to be saying, don't put that in my backyard. We're going to be saying, can we get more? And we're not getting that even with the luxury projects that we see coming through planning board. There is no beauty. I spoke to that last

[109:24] not last night, but the week before. I know at the end. It's just like, you know what I'm gonna use a word we never use, because there's no way to codify it. There's no way to create criteria around beauty. But right, who doesn't want that? And who wouldn't support that? But we don't have. There are, you know, a lot of people in my profession. There are people in my profession who are making significant moves to talk about. let's make it 1st about how do we feel when we're in the space, you know, and it's

[110:02] it's not new thinking. It's in all of us right. We all we all know that we like to go to places that we feel good in. but for some reason we don't use that as the banner. When you, I think you're absolutely spot on, you, start putting awesome little OP opportunities and options out there. I think people will kind of forget why they didn't want this. And instead, they'll say, Oh, wow! That's kinda cool. I'd like to live there. Which is why I love the airport ideas because it gives you a chance to like instead of evolving something that's existing kind of calcified you could you could really build something creative and new. Excellent point. You guys are just brilliant. Just little board here. I'm so glad I'm back. Do you have some comments about the video?

[111:07] Yeah, it was. It was actually Can you hear me? Okay. Yeah, perfect. Okay, it was quite impactful. And I've been thinking about it a lot. And you know, I was thinking about you know, folks who got moved out, and everything and folks in the service industry and stuff and and low income folks and how easy it was to move people around. And I I thought, well. you know I I don't believe that being low income has to mean being vulnerable. I think people can live modest lives, you know, like, like here in Mapleton, I've interviewed, you know, several folks, you know, with pride, with dignity and security. A lot of people here have been here 30, 40 years. But I think what makes poverty dangerous is instability and housing. Instability is where that danger starts.

[112:03] I think when someone doesn't know if their rent is going to spike, or if their park is going to be sold, or if their home is going to be condemned for things they can't afford to fix that. That's not just a personal hardship. I really think it's the institutional creation of vulnerability. And when these conditions kind of fall on the hardest in our community, like immigrants, people of color, disabled folks or single mothers. Then we're not just talking about affordability anymore. We're talking about that structural racism and bias baked right into our housing system. And I think if we don't make space for low income people to live stably through policies that actually fit their lives. With housing that's safe and protected. We're not just failing them. you know, failing Pope, you know, like folks in my neighborhood or in other, you know mobile home parks, or you know

[113:01] places, you know where they're always, you know, looking, you know, from one lease to the next. Then we're recreating those same exclusions over and over again. And I I it was. It was a really interesting presentation. Earlier, you know about, you know, deed, restricted properties and and everything. And I and I and I worry that because some of these institutional factors have made things exceptionally unstable for folks. You know we have, you know, people who don't have perfect credit or strong banking history. We have inconsistent incomes, which you know, happens with hourly or tip workers. We have, you know, residency or citizenship challenges. We have thousands. you know, of upfront cost or long app applications processes. And we have the kind of paperwork that requires. You know, either you know, high literacy, high literacy

[114:11] levels digital access issues, you know, or you know competencies or even trust in the system, you know, if there's a lot of you know, institutional, you know, biases baked into our system already. You know, there's there's a lot of distrust in the systems, and that's why I guess I'm kind of you know where manufactured homes kind of come into play here, you know where they are, you know. for folks who have been hit by institutionalized you know things that have made people's lives unstable. But it it really that that video had a quite a big impact on on my thinking. And

[115:01] yeah, it was. It was very. It was very emotional. But anyway, that's it. Thank you. So here's my comment. I agree that I kind of felt shame and embarrassment about the history of Boulder. and I realized that there's there's been like a history of discrimination where we kinda push out those people that we don't want. And so when I think about like have. And what could we do? One of the things that I really like to focus on is, how do we provide housing specifically for our service? People like. Let's create housing for our teachers and our policemen, and our firemen, and and whatever. But when you do that. you run the risk of violating fair housing laws. And so like, it's okay to like explicitly discriminate and say, you can't be those people and buy a house here and push them out. But when we try and like.

[116:07] correct those mistakes by creating specific housing for the employment base that we have here, then you violate a different law. So platinum. Yeah, if you do non latex housing, you can provide preferences for Lisa geographic preferences. People who work within a geographic location. But you can't do that with a litech program. Yeah. not yet. So the rents are not low enough to serve that population that you want to be serving right? So so one of the topics that you know ultimately, I hope will be on our work plan is that

[117:00] employer created housing. But we'll get to that another time. So anybody else have a comment about that video. If not, we'll we'll move on to the next topic. Thank you for that time. I agree we could talk about it for hours and hours. But you want to bring it back next month. We feel like there's UN. Address it in something else. Yeah, okay, so let's talk about the have work, plan, review, and one of the new topics is actually a proposal that cindy had prepared that was in the packet. So let's say so for August we're thinking about doing impact fees for Demos and additions.

[118:05] Have Member Quarterly Update Council. See? You master plan And I'm actually not gonna be here in August. So car and you get to, I, you get to leave. Oh, I think I will. So when you look at the plan, is there anything you want to add or change, or move around? Or do we want to just talk about cindy's proposed proposal plan just on other items to explore. Last time I had actually added something about affordable homeownership. But I think we got a really amazing primer today. So I don't know that it necessarily needs to be on there anymore. Okay, so you want to take that off. Sure.

[119:01] we already addressed. So it's all good. What were you thinking about when you had the Cu master plan on the agenda? What was that? What's it gonna be Laurie call is gonna come in August to talk about their most recently adopted housing master plan, which significant investment in housing for Cu. So we just reviewed the neurobocyte which backs up to that. So we got a chance to see the Ce Master plan. If those of us that took a deep dive into our practice and then went and did outside research like, what is this planet? Significant? Amount 7, 11. Story buildings? No, no, the height of the building just like, and it's because it seems like they're going to change the landscape of that strip. So see, you is kind of up on this hill, and the Boulder Creek is right here, that land like where Athens and Marine corridor. Yeah.

[120:13] they own a lot significant. And the buildings they're going to see superior high density. It'll be interesting to see if that has an impact to the luxury student housing being built by private developers. because that's going gangbusters, too, with you kicked me out. But that's private so fascinating. So the idea that somebody's going to come in and and present on it. So you're coming to that, you know it's interesting. You were talking about architecturally interesting. So my my son's in Singapore, and he knows I love architecture, and he sent me a whole bunch of these like really cool, like 30 story high, rise condo buildings that that like have plants in them like like they're beautiful. And they're so cool, and it would never happen, because they're way above 4 feet like 4 stories. But there is something to be said about when you look around and you go cool, interesting, fascinating, you know, like, and I can show you pictures when whenever you want like.

[121:16] It would be. I think people would feel differently about density if if it looked interesting. So we don't have that. I don't know. I don't know who, under whose purview that would fall to inspire the citizens. because there are incredible projects. We don't have to go to Singapore. Yeah, right? There are incredibly beautiful. And they don't have to be 30 stories people. Centric. Yeah, you know, and they can be, you know, dense and and tall, and and they're wonderful wonderful places. But I don't. We don't see them on a regular basis, and they have a little. I always thought I should bring point planning board. Let's go meet and see some cool stuff. Yeah, like the populous hotel. It's really cool. I have a question. Do you want to add an adu update to a other items to explore like, would you want to show adus, or there's our adu, master, right there. It's Jay.

[122:15] Not anymore. Weren't you involved in the last updates? Who was Lisa Hood? That's something we may want to explore like maybe 2026. How many do we have? Where are they? Who are they rent like? Are they affordable or market rate? Maybe. No, I'd be interested in learning more where they're where we're at. It'd be nice to get an update. You guys probably have that information to someone. Yeah, but it would take some effort to. And staff time. I mean, it doesn't hurt to ask

[123:02] is it on City Council? The city council, looking at Adus again, because when they did the last one it was like, and we'll be revisiting this soon. because if we could piggyback with something, we made the changes to be compliant with all the State laws. But that's it. And that was pretty abbreviated process. right? So so there's nothing under, maybe to pair it with city council is I have a thing, but it might. I don't know if it falls under the Boulder Valley Comp plan, but might be interested to learn more about area 3, and like, really, specifically focused on area 3, and what the possibilities are. And the challenge kind of like, when had somebody come in and talk about airport stuff, whether it's area 3 is happening or not. Did we?

[124:01] Can that be September? Yeah, I mean, those are the people that know the most about it, because we did. Didn't. Were you on the board when we reviewed the urban services? Expansion study? I don't know, but I do know that we've like in some other presentations, that there's been some touches on Area 3, but not really kind of like a focus. Thank you. I would ask about, because in September and see if that satisfies your itch. But if it doesn't, then we can see if somebody could come back. Well, I thought we had a tour of it just a year ago. That was part of the urban services study. Okay? But I don't think there's a problem with asking about it on the 24, th and then we can figure out if you want to follow up. Wasn't there the the 1st part, the study part was done. We saw the presentation

[125:04] sometime. It was last fall. I want to say, yeah, right? Okay. So you guys saw that Steve. Yeah, that's the last thing we've seen. But it's something ongoing, isn't there? Well, the comprehensive plan needs to be updated to amend our policies to say, yes, we will. So we're at the point where any separate study is not really moving forward. Yes, correct. All it was was, can we provide urban services to this area. and it just had different assumptions as to what levels of development. But it didn't look at. You know, what could the land uses look like, you know, it's not going to get to that level of detail until the decision is made to move it from area 3 to area 2, which makes it eligible for annexation. And then, once even once, it's eligible per moved area 2, then we would have to do an area plan, and that would be 3, 4, 5 year process

[126:09] to determine what it would look like. So we're still annexation. And then annexation, which will take another 3, 4, 5 years, and I think the study showed that we don't really have the water to support development of. So we might not have an area 3 option at all, anyway. Alright. Any other comments on the work plan? I mean, this is very fluid. So like, if you come up with a great idea like, Shoot us an email, art and I and Jay meet once a month before this meeting, and we talk through ideas and work plan so that these are topics that. we're very open to ideas, and that's a good segue into Cindy. Do you want to talk about your proposal?

[127:10] Yes, let me pull it up here. Well, What I was thinking of was going on a going on a tour. Going on a field trip. Just to look at mobile homes or manufactured home communities. And really look at how they're providing homes for low income the lowest income, and I think the most vulnerable people in our community. I think a lot of the service industries making right around what you know. $2325 an hour, you know, like in the 40, you know, 40, 42,000 $48,000 a year. And it's really tough to get into a home and find something that's stable and manufactured homes according to zillow are selling between, you know. You know, 60 and a hundred $5,000

[128:17] here in Boulder and I think that they're they're really serving a purpose, and I think that they're worth investing in and I think it's really important to see the manufactured home, the Mobile Home Park, or Trailer Park. I I use all 3 of the names to see what they're actually what they're actually doing and how they're doing it. I think one of the biggest issues. That was, you know, spoken about earlier, where hoa fees. And I think it's really important to understand where the ho fees. Hoa fees are going like in Mapleton. You know. May you know our Hoa fees.

[129:09] We're we're in charge of of everything from basic infrastructure like water supply lines, sewer storm gas lines, electrical street lighting to roads and surfaces like our curbs and our gutters, our sidewalks and everything. All of our energy systems like, you know, even, you know, all the way up to the mobile home itself that all has to be insulated, and and, you know, kept up our common areas like our clubhouse, you know, or a wash house shared laundry playgrounds, parks, open space landscaping maintenance. All of our waste, sanitation, safety and access, our emergency vehicle, access roads, fire hydrants. signage, communication, infrastructure, like our cable and Internet service mail delivery.

[130:07] All of our mailboxes, our foundations and lot conditions, all the concrete pads retaining walls, grading and sloping for drainage control, all of that is is covered in our with our hoa fees and we and I think that with the cost of supplies and everything going up it's really tough to keep our hoa fees manageable, and we are a nonprofit. So we qualify for for grants. We qualify for the, you know, a grant from the the city of boulder sugar, sugar tax you know, to do a lot of our infrastructure upgrades. But you know some of the other, you know, privately owned don't have access to those particular grants because they're they're public. They're privately owned. They're not nonprofits. And so, you know, they have much higher hoa fees. And I think that if we

[131:07] did a a walkthrough we could see the different kinds of communities and what they're funding and how they're maintaining and and why they're important for different kinds of communities and the costs that go into preserving and maintaining manufactured home communities. I also. Cindy, if we were going to do a tour and a panel, how long do you think that would take like? Would that go beyond 6 to 9. I think. Maybe the panel is is reasonable. You know. In that 6 to 9 time. I think maybe a walkthrough. It might be a separate maybe a separate, a separate time. I don't know if that's feasible, or if it's

[132:04] you know, it's gonna be start getting night out. You know, our day we're losing daylight. And so I'm not sure if that's a possibility. I wrote it. If we were to do, would you think we should do the tour before the panel or after the panel? And if we were to do the tour before the panel. If we were to meet at like 4 to 6, like 2 h for the people who were available, and then 6 to 9 would be the panel. Is that is that what you're thinking? Are we allowed to do that? That's a long day. I'm just trying to like you. There's a lot of stuff to to talk about, and I agree that I think visual is really helpful. I just just feel like that. It's a lot. It is a lot. Does anybody have suggestions? I'm just curious. When have we done tours in the past? When when do those usually happen?

[133:02] I've I've always enjoyed the tours I love to. I love this idea often it takes the place of a meeting. When when were the bike tours with this like on a Saturday or a Monday afternoon or something, or. yeah, we stopped for lunch. Yeah, they were during the day. They were during the day, maybe on a Sunday or something. Must have been a yeah. I think it was a Saturday. Okay. But I wonder if maybe instead of 4 to 6, 69, maybe 5 to 7, 7 to 9, something like that half and half 4 h. It's kind of still long time that might be more doable than 5 h. I'm open to suggestion, especially if it's the only agenda item. I mean, I wouldn't schedule anything else. Yeah, so would that in theory potentially be October, although if we biked from?

[134:09] If we did? 5 to 7, is it dark? In october yeah, time change happens at the end of October, the time, change wouldn't have happened. If it's broken up, if it's before October, like around the Boulder Valley to October or no. they're doing sort of a road. Show the ball boards and commissions be open to doing the tour another day to find out. I think it would be really valuable. Okay. like a second meeting, or on a weekend either, like as a kind of optional weekend thing. My, my sensibility. Okay.

[135:02] I would like that. I have weekends off. Alright. So if let's say we schedule the this discussion for October. Do you feel comfortable getting speakers and panelists. a pan or a moderator and panelist. Yeah, I I could reach out to It'd be interesting to I I really wanted to know, like what you all wanted to know about manufactured homes. I you know I had thought about some folks you know, and also have somebody from who's knowledgeable about the modular factory, and jay your name came up and so Yeah.

[136:04] but yeah, I I'd be open to suggestions about, you know what kind of information you'd like to know, you know, or, you know, would like to hear on the panel, and then I can look for those folks. Well, when I look at your goals, event goals like, I think, I think talking about the various ownership structures is really interesting, right, and then and then I also wonder about is there? What do you have to do to make the the home real estate as opposed to chattel and so those are 2 topics that I, I think are interesting. I think you've also identified some on the key learning focus. Yeah.

[137:00] The you know I the the proposal was just a a kind of a starting point, and so if you all are interested, I it. It was open to, you know. yeah. I think it's great. I think what you're proposing is great, and we're all very interested. And and maybe we just work collaboratively to help sort of turn this into reality that makes sense. I yes, I would love that. Okay, great. Then we'll we'll follow up with you. Okay. Awesome. Erin and I, and Jay and anybody else who wants help. Thanks, Cindy, for spearheading this. Oh, yeah, thank you for for entertaining it. Yes. Yeah, I think it'll be great alright. Anything else on this matters from staff. I had a long mental list, and I can only think of one right now. They will come to me and say, Thomas.

[138:02] August 7, th the Council item, we're taking the doctor cog from the Regional Council. Government regional housing needs assessment to for a public meeting. So you guys heard it in the spring number right to get the popcorn out. Yeah, watch council like killer me because I don't have answers to all my questions. You want us there in person to cheer you on, only if you make sense. Oh, sorry. Thursday night. Molly is gonna be a council talking about the manufactured Housing Strategy Review tomorrow.

[139:01] So that'll be interesting to see, you know, because that was one of their council priorities to specifically look at whether or not all the hallmark owners would be hoping to considering some sort of rent restriction program in exchange for investments in infrastructure, as we recall, their answer was pretty much no way so she might be a good person to have on that panel. She is on the list. Yeah, she should be on the list so we could do the same thing she could moderate. I mean. just like what Polly did for the the last panel. So anything else I was. Oh, did you seen Alpine balsam recently? The bridge is in 11th Street Bridge? It's pretty exciting. Where's the bridge? Is it available? Is it public? Open to the public? You can look at it through a fence or something? You can look at it through the fence. Okay, but all it is is just an arch bridge over the the Greenway.

[140:07] It's not paved or anything like that. I haven't seen it. They're digging out the Greenway. Do you notice there's a big excavation on the North End daylight in the creek? Exactly. What did you say they're daylighting the creek, daylighting the creek. Yeah, right. This creek has been underground for however long, and it's gonna see a bit of light. And now there's a little foot bridge I've been watching more focused on deconstruction. It's like, I thought we were keeping the building. Why are they still a lot more than I thought. We got an answer at planning board. They're just taking out a bit more pieces, but really they're keeping the part they said they were keeping. Let's keep an eye on it.

[141:01] Yeah. Well, they took out the tower, you know the elevator and steer tower, and then they started to take out some of the floor area, but I think it was just moving around and things that were not stable or whatever. Hopefully they're done constructing this structure is any of that gonna be for sale? Yes, 2 parcels will be sold to help pay for the affordable persons to market rate developers. But how about the any of the affordable. Is it only rental the older housing partners is building rentals only, and one of the parcels that we would sell we're looking at is there a way to have affordable home ownership? So basically, you know, the ones along 9th will be sold as market rate townhouse, the one on Broadway potentially. That's what we're do. We know who the developers will be for the market rate cool.

[142:04] Yeah, we'll go through a request for proposals process basically and then talk to, we'll basically negotiate a development agreement with the developer. Same same model we use for 34 designed all the sites. So basically they might who knows but so they they took it through the entitlement process through form based code. So basically that adds to the value theoretically of the parcels. So that it's basically fully entitled, Fully Designed project. So the person that takes over will just literally be doing the building interesting. Do you have an update about all the solutions. I do.

[143:01] 2 things when you were done with your staff update right? Oh, sorry. I apologize. So the housing solutions for the Homelessness Subcommittee. So the 2 things City Council received our letter saying, Hey, we're here. This is what we're doing. They received it so we know and then also, Council has a study session on August. I think it's the 14.th Tiffany's nodding specific focus about homelessness, and there they will be presented with the clutch consulting group report findings. Okay, that's the 14, th the 14.th We'll have our platform will be what to know. Great. That's it. Well. we may end it half an hour early. If we kill 5 min. Does anybody else have anything they want to talk about?

[144:12] All right, motion to adjourn? So rude. Okay, thank you. Everybody. All in favor. Any opposed. Thank you, Cindy. Thank you. Thank you all.