Affordable Housing Task Force - Regular Meeting

It's ten Thank you. Alright. So are we live? Alright. Great. Thank you all for coming. I will be serving as a chair for this meeting with Chris being out. First item on the agenda is the consent calendar. Task force is being asked to consider approval of the meeting minutes from 05/28/2025. I think you forgot roll call. Oh, sorry. Thank you. Let's go ahead and do roll call.

Alright. Member Gerard? Here. Member Kang? Here. McDermott?

Here.

Roby? Westlake? Alright.

Alright. Thank you. We'll jump back to, consent calendar. Any comments or discussion from the task force on the consent calendar?

Move to

approve. We have a motion for approval.

Well, I wasn't here, so I'm gonna stay.

Okay. I will second. We have a motion can we approve can we approve with two out of the three that are present but not a quorum of the full task force.

Yes. We'll move forward with it. And then can we please take public comment on the agenda and consent calendar?

Yes. Any public comment on the agenda and consent calendar?

Anybody on Zoom wishing to participate, please use the raise hand button. Alright. We have no public comment.

K. So we have a motion and a second, or do we need to table this item until we have a full quorum of the task force?

It's an you know, I so thank you, mister chair. Rob Peters, I don't with abstaining on the vote for the minutes from the last time, worst case scenario, I think we could continue those to the next meeting. And then we have a quorum of folks that were in the I think it wouldn't you know, she could certainly vote for it, but, yeah, it's a little awkward since she wasn't in there.

Alright. Well, I will go ahead and table the item. If we end up having another task force member here before the end of the meeting, we can circle back to it. Otherwise, we can review it at the next meeting. Alright. With that, we will move on to open forum. Do we have anybody who wishes to address the task force in open forum?

Yep. Now taking comments, for open forum from members on Zoom. Please use the raise hand button if you wish to speak.

Alright. We have no public comment.

K. None.

We'll move on to agenda items. We have an agenda item here. Would staff like to introduce this item?

Alright. Item number two is staff recommending the task force hold a phase one, which is the affordable housing ordinance overview, status, and future processing discussion with topics including, but not limited to, staffing updates, previously discussed topics, outstanding informational needs, and potential work plan development. The purpose of this discussion is to ensure that the staff preparation of upcoming agenda items and associated materials align with and support task board needs and expectations in order to deliver meaningful recommendations to the board of supervisors.

Great. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? K. Would staff like to looks like we have a presentation from staff. So go ahead, Rob.

Yeah. Thank you very much, mister chair and task force members. My name is Rob Peters. I'm with the planning division. So my role here is the deputy director of planning, and so I'm responsible for two of our units in our current planning shop, which include our permit center and our discretionary permit unit as well as our long range planning division.

So, you know, that encapsulates including the planning commission clerk who's in the audience and the tasks related to that administratively. And so, yeah, I'm gonna jump into a PowerPoint. I'm gonna first sort of apologize to the commission or the task force just because some of this is gonna be redundant and some of it is gonna be things you talked about a long time, but I'm just trying to, as a new person that is assigned to lead this task, I want to ensure that I understand, you know, the roles and responsibilities, their purpose, and then what's been discussed, what are the needs that the commissioner or the task force, and ensuring that I'm, you know, being mindful of the use of staff time and all that sort of thing. So I'm gonna jump into that. It allows me to share.

Here we go.

Some

questions. Bear with me just here for a minute, but I'll you guys have the presentation in front of you so I can kinda go until we get it up. So first, staffing update. Yeah. So you see myself and you see some members that have been here for some time of staff.

But as far as the lead goes, Kyle Zimmelman, who you saw last time, has left the organization. And so he's no longer with the organization, And the economic development manager position was a reduction in force during the current budget year. So two of the representatives that you've sort of seen over time are no longer with us. So I've been asked to kind of step into this role and and pursue the ordinance, which is the phase one task, acknowledging, you know, that Karen's last discussion with you all, I think, May identified some needs and some things to discuss, but I wanna just make sure that I wholesale understand, you know, the challenges in front of us, the needs of the group, particularly informational needs in order for you to make that recommendation to the board of supervisors. So I'll quickly go over just two slides or something related to the purpose and responsibility.

See if it there it goes. It's allowed. K. So I'll jump to this. So staffing update I just gave. Purpose and responsibility. So this is our discussion overview, An overview of the topics previously discussed. So there have been many topics that were discussed. I tried to review most of the materials. I won't say that all of the meeting have I watched, but at least the recent ones, and then the attachments and just to try to come up to speed and and understand sort of where the task force is at, identifying some outstanding informational needs.

But and what I I mean by that is there's been some topics where the task force members have said, it would be interesting to know more about that, or or we should talk about this. I And just wanna narrow it down to the things that you all see are important for your move forward and for your recommendation to the board. And then a potential work plan development, we sort of know what the out put is intended to be, but I'd like to put a little more schedule behind that and maybe discuss, you know, some milestones and some objectives and and as we move forward. So, again, the purpose is to gather data information and best practices along with input from subject matter experts, and this is basically directly out of the ordinance section. Phase one project being a recommendation on an affordable housing ordinance and the phase two project including identifying various tool strategies and policies to support and contribute to the supply of affordable housing, effectively a strategic plan.

So these responsibilities are, again, out of the ordinance o four six two zero two four, which formed the task force. And I'm not gonna read all of them, but I think that a couple important ones that I saw as we went forward was the utilization of the general plan and the housing element as a framework for our discussions. Several of the objectives within the housing element are being achieved through this task force. And so I think that's an important component to keep in mind as we move forward. Those include or are aren't limited to, but include h o 37, which is an affordable housing ordinance, h o 36, which potentially is a missing or a middle income housing strategy, h o 14, which is infill incentives, and h o eight, which is the update to the state density bonus law.

So just as an example, all of those ordinance updates and and move forward, you know, will stem from the work that we're doing here at the task force, and and so those are always good to keep in mind. And then the rest are sort of just the the guardrails, if you will, for our move forward under the board's direction. So topics previously discussed, and there were many, and I won't have captured all of them, but I tried to capture the really high level and the really what I saw as important topics that seem to be, you know, routinely discussed. So inclusionary housing policy, whether or not to have one, whether or not to make it mandatory or voluntary, and what the components of a of a policy like that might include, which includes construction of affordable units either on-site or off-site, alternatives to construction of units being land donation, deed restriction, in lieu fees, which can act independently or as part of that, CFD potential as far as utilizing CFD fees. And we've gone into a great discussion about in lieu fees and how they might be utilized in in some of the programs out there where folks are doing it in different ways.

I think one of the key components that I heard in the discussions was the potential incentives. So providing incentives for affordable housing and and that that might be one of the the key mechanisms to trying to get it developed. And so in that discussion, I heard development fee structures including wavel waivers and deferrals as being important. Process streamlining, and that's top to bottom. That's all the way from some sort of discretionary entitlement to just processing a development application all the way down to permitting.

And then the potential relaxing of development standards and and how that might alleviate some of the builders and some of the things that they have to do in order to incentivize affordable housing. Again, more topics previously discussed. So there was a a good bit of discussion on the key recommendations from the affordable housing policy update, that BAE study, and and kind of I know there were some discussions about, you know, that it has a little bit of data on it now and and whether or not all the assumptions and things are still accurate, that that it still has some value and that it'll be sort of a a framework to to consider as we move forward with developing more strategies and policies. Gap financing and leveraging funding. So I think that that was a a big part of what I heard was, you know, how you might get to instead of a target being building affordable housing in the in the in the grand scale, but how to cover gap gaps within existing projects and how to leverage fundings, including loans and other things like that.

What other jurisdictions are doing? So in the last meeting, there were some discussions about affordability requirements, development regulations, and policies related to what some of the I don't know if they're all compared to jurisdictions, but some of the jurisdictions around us were doing and and some discussions related to that. The task force looked into the affordable housing density bonus ordinance, which is an existing section of our zoning ordinance. And one of the I'll speak in just a minute to sort of one of the deliverables, but is a discussion of updating that. And, again, that is something that is identified in our housing element as a as an objective.

There was a discussion on a charitable contribution model related to some of those in lieu fees and how that might be utilized and, again, development agreement fees. So outstanding informational needs. This is one where, you know, I was trying to capture some of the bigger there was a lot of discussion and things that this would be great to have and that would be great to have, but I think kinda honed in on a couple spots of information. So one is on the success of affordable housing policies and other jurisdictions. At a recent meeting, there was some identification of a couple other jurisdictions that we might look to.

And and and full disclosure, you know, one of the sort of promised products was that type of information to this meeting. Unfortunately, with the change in in staffing, I have not been able to deliver that, but I just wanna reaffirm that, you know, those are the an outstanding need that we intend to bring forward to you all and that to in addition to the ones that we identified looking at whether or not they identified streamline processing within their structure of their affordable housing scenarios. And then, you know, with some acknowledgement that the fee burdens and things related to each jurisdiction aren't apples to apples. And so, you know, not always is it the comparator's easy to make, but just trying to bring some information on what other jurisdictions are doing. An overview of the communication engagement plan and strategic plan development.

So that is we're working together with, of course, a nonprofit community organization to bring forward the county received the engage, empower, and implement grant, and it intends to do a public engagement plan and a strategic housing development plan that, you know, that scope of work integrates the housing task force and collaboration with the task force pretty heavily. And so, you know, trying to figure out how that might integrate and what the timing of that is against, you know, our phase one project and our phase two projects and how to integrate public comment into that. So I intend to ask the folks working on that if they can come do a presentation to you all so that you understand the scope of their work, where they're at, and and what their sort of move forward looks like, and we can consider that as we move forward with the task force work and try to make sure that we're integrating it and checking in and and and keeping those aligned. And then, again, like I mentioned, the red line version of the county's affordable housing density bonus ordinance. Now that one, I sort of, in my opinion, having done a lot of ordinance updates, I would before we start spending staff time modifying that ordinance, I would like to get a resolution of intention in place from the board of supervisors.

That's our zoning ordinance procedure for initiating and working on an amendment. Now I would argue that they've authorized the task force to look at that, so that's pretty clear. But I think what we want to do before we start redlining ordinances is bring forward the task force recommendations to the board of supervisors so they can provide guidance to us or direction on what they wanna include and not wanna include and then try to bring those ordinance revisions from from that point forward. Now we can discuss that more, but that's sort of our traditional sort of move forward for ordinance updates, and I just wanna make sure I don't get the cart before the horse. Then, you know, just try to identify a work plan and and milestones that we can set some targets for so that we we have a shared goal, and and we have some expectations about moving forward.

So, you know, the the next step in my mind would be following up on the outstanding informational needs, and I would love to get some feedback on if there's things that I'm missing, if there's things you recollect asking for that you want additional information on. And then we had a Chris Perry presented an overview or a workshop to the board of supervisors. In that discussion, we acknowledged that we would come back with a update to that presentation after a little bit more time was spent and with a little bit more defined recommendations from the task force. So that is a work product that needs to come back. Whether that aligns with our resolution of intent or if those are separate items can be determined.

But I think so we owe that report back to the board of supervisors, And then, again, bring forward a resolution based on board direction that initiates what pieces of the code and and very specifically talks about the pieces of direction that the board of supervisors is giving us to include in the ordinance, then deliver an affordable housing ordinance, which is sort of our phase one goal. You know, that is very fundamental to this scenario. And then, again, working towards the phase two goal, which will be sort of underway in the in the public engagement piece, and we'll be coming back and maybe processing sort of at the same time to some degree as the phase one project and kind of you know, we don't wanna I don't know that it has to be linear. You know, we can work on other things that there was a lot of discussions about ADUs and mobile home parks and other housing product, and I think a lot of that discussion probably includes some of those variables. And and so we can talk long term strategy.

And and, hopefully, that we get some good information that can feed into our affordable housing ordinance, but, alternatively, you know, that that is out there and being worked on at the same time. So, again, so that's sort of what I brought to the table today just as an overview of my understanding. I wanna talk about the task force objectives and and informational needs to make sure that I'm aligning with those properly and then that we can deliver those to you all so that we can bring forward the recommendation to the board. I think there's a lot of there's been a lot of good discussion on, you know, this might not work, that might not work. And I think at some point, you know, we've gotta get to the point where we're just submitting those recommendations to the board in a in a very, you know, thoughtful way.

And and so that's what I intend to do, but I wanna make sure I'm not missing any of the pieces as we move forward. So that's my presentation. Happy to have any discussion and answer any questions. And, again, I I thank you for sort of bearing with me, but I wanted to sort of set the stage at least in my move forward because it helps me understand where I'm at as part of as far as being the county project lead and what I need to do to be successful in this exercise.

Great. Thank you, Rob. Any questions for Rob before we have discussion as a task force?

I have a question. Yes, please. Have you looked at AB one thirty? That's now part of the governor's budget and the sequel exists now.

We are definitely looking at that internally. I've seen the the language, and we are yeah. I'm aware of

nicely with what the state is doing, and you should ride on their coattails and blame the governor for letting him be sick and just say you know? Because and I don't say anything about ministerial either. You know? So a lot of this now is ministerial approval, nondiscretionary. In my opinion, that's a critical piece.

That needs to be part of

this formula in order to accelerate the housing production and the alignment. And then I'm also sort of curious why, you know, given that density bonus keeps changing at the state level and there's nuances and changes, I mean, I'm sort of wondering why you want some sort of county density bonus that stands alone separate from the state and just let the state density bonus be what governs the the county. You know? To me, that that doesn't especially with staffing resources. It's sort of like, why pencil out something that, frankly, is superseded by state law?

I I think at least from my recollection and watching the last meeting, that was the sentiment of the task force sort of wholly was we don't necessarily need this, and we can defer to the state in a lot of those regards, at least with the density bonus piece. And and so but there was also discussion about does the county want to do or allow for more density than might be the minimums allowed allowed in the state. You know? But that sentiment, I think, was discussed, and and we acknowledge that. Yeah.

I think so I went back all the way to 2007, and there was a housing task force at the time. And the outcome of that document was the state density bonus law into our zoning ordinance. So not anything creative or new, but just sort of bringing that into the zoning ordinance. And so I think we acknowledge that that that piece, at least the direction that was given, and that's where I talked about that red line. It wasn't to it was to bring it up to code, if you will, but, really, I think the idea, at least from the task force, and you guys can correct me if I'm not accurately portraying this, but was to, yeah, get rid of all that language that is the state law and and make reference to it.

That way when it's being flexible, we are too, and we're to it anyways. And so how to how to integrate that into our affordable housing ordinance as a whole without just regurgitating state law. As far as the ministerial piece, that's been a big discussion, you know, within the county recently. We are working on our objective design standards projects, which, you know, a lot of the concern from the community was related to design, and we are subject to SB 35 and other regulations because of our arena targets and our, you know, ability to achieve those. And so we we have created a ministerial process where we take the pre application that's required gets done, the tribal notification, and then it becomes effectively a building permit once it's determined to be eligible.

So we are working towards that streamlined way, but trying to make sure that we're mindful of the the community's concern about design and so trying to integrate those. So we're right now, we're working on the Shingle Springs design standards. So we have a interim objective design standard that was adopted by the board in December. So that is in in place for our community regions and rural or and, yeah, rural centers, which are sort of our commercial centers. And so we are now starting to embark on the community region component of each of those, where we're going out to those individual communities looking at what what they wanna have within that, but the ministerial process isn't is sort of all the way baked into that exercise.

Then I think I yeah. And then AB one thirty. Yeah. We're certainly aware of it. There's a lot of stuff coming at staff pretty quickly with new, you know, things from the budget bill that were updated and then things we anticipate in in January, and so we're definitely trying to keep up to date on those items.

Rob, I have a question really just kind of regarding the work plan and the timeline that is ahead of us. Obviously, we've we've departed from the original timeline, right, of six months, create an ordinance, and then move on from there. And we've gone to the board already to talk about everything that we have talked about, and the direction that we received from the board was essentially you guys got this type of thing. So, really, if we were sticking with where we were at before all the staffing changes, we'd probably be working on getting this ROI finished. Is that right?

Yeah. I think we wanna come back. The ROI and and like I said, that could be sort of integrated in a draft way with our you know, should incorporate our goals and objectives for the org. So, generally, that resolution of intent says we're gonna modify this section of the ordinance. We're gonna do it in these ways.

And we get that feedback from the board that, yes, we agree with that, or you missed something. We want something else in there or considered. And so it doesn't necessarily lock you into only those things, but, yeah, you wanna give them an idea of what we're about to spend staff time sort of achieving and and and I think at least you know, I did sit in on that meeting last time sort of as a wingman, if you wanna call it, for Chris, having not really put a lot of the materials together, but that's the sentiment I got is we talked about all the great things you guys were talking about, but we didn't deliver sort of the recommendations of the task force that should be integrated into the ordinance. And I think that, at least from my perspective, was the piece that's missing. Like, I I've heard a lot of comments about, well, maybe, you know, an inclusionary housing ordinance doesn't work here, right, based on some information we have, but we think these things might work.

And so that's the type of, I think, at least from my perspective, information that the board wants to see, and then they can decide, you know, which way to go. But that resolution of intent sort of is a requirement of the zoning ordinance. Yeah. So I agree with you. I just that's why I wanna make sure if there's any missing pieces that you all need before we get to that step, that that sort of the next step moving forward.

And so how many oh, sorry.

Go ahead.

I was just gonna add in. And correct me if I'm wrong. It's not even just going back to the board because if we amend the zoning ordinance, this actually has to come back to PC first after the board gives.

Procedurally.

Yeah. Just so I don't know if they know that.

Yeah. Procedurally, once we get the resolution of intention to to initiate the zoning ordinance amendment, the all ordinance amendments go through the planning commission on recommendation to the board of supervisors. So once we put together a draft and we get to where we're comfortable with those materials, we will bring it to the planning commission for a recommendation to the board and board.

And the planning commission can also make changes or recommendations as well, correct, for this item. So there might be so just, you know, there'll be at least probably two presentations to two different boards and then

Yeah. Sorry.

And then extra edits possibly.

So, really, it's it's three public meetings. One to the board of supervisors to go over actual recommendations, then form the document, then go to the planning commission, then back to the board of supervisors for approval.

That's correct. Okay.

Four.

That is correct.

Or no. Three. Yeah. You're right.

Okay. And so And that is for it's particular to our zoning ordinance. Yep. So no other ordinances in the county that I'm aware of require the resolution intent. I think it's a historic sort of checks and balances for the board to make sure the long range planning exercises are spending, you know, monies because it it's generally unless there's some grant funding assigned, it's generally a general fund type of contribution that's paying for these exercises, so they wanna make sure that they're sort of directing staff.

And so then my next question is, timeline wise, are we looking at six months more to get to an ordinance, eight months a year?

Yeah. That's a that I mean, that's a really good question. And in fact, we're looking at that as a part of our housing element implementation pieces. We have these measures that say, you know, you need to implement these things, and we're trying to my goal is to work back from kind of getting an understanding of where we're at as a task force. What if if we're good on informational needs and we're ready to move forward, then that box is checked, and I can we can start pursuing those other pieces.

If there's pieces that are missing and there's information that you all still need us to provide to have that comfort level to go back to the board, then that's sort of my next step. So it but, yes, it will take from the time I would say from the time you have the resolution of intent, on how deep the discussions are and how complex the ordinance is, it can take anywhere from, yeah, three months to a year to get through that exercise. Would like to deliver this. I mean, this is just Rob thinking off the top of my head from I would like to deliver this within eighteen months of sitting in this chair that I'm sitting at now. You know?

That meets our housing element sort of time frame as far as, like, our eight years. It's a little later than we would have liked, quite frankly. But I think, you know, that that stuff happens, and and we've initiated the task. So we've made a lot of good progress in that direction. But I think, you know, as far as yeah.

The the sooner, the better. Because I think, you know, potentially, some folks might consider that we're missing opportunity out there on projects that are you know, that could come down the line. So the longer it takes, the, you know, the the less opportunity we have. But, yeah, that's one of those things. Once I understand sort of the workload, I'll put some, you know, some thought behind how long this is gonna take us and try to put a work plan together that's maybe a little more rigid than just conceptual, and you guys can take a look at it and see if it makes sense.

What does county staff need from the task force in order to proceed, I guess, with the first draft of the resolution of intention? Because it may have been slightly different approach that was discussed at the last meeting. I think it was more a discussion about a red line of the ordinance. But understanding that ROI needs to come first, I think what was expected as a next step on the task force side was that we would receive that red line of a draft ordinance or, in this case, you know, a draft ROI for the task force to review. I think, Rob, you've outlined pretty well, you know, just a handful of minutes, the discussions that have occurred over a number of months.

And I think, you know, what I've heard from the task force in my own, you know, perspective as a task force member is that the idea of just implementing an inclusionary housing, you know, program in El Dorado County doesn't work for El Dorado County. And so I think the effort shifted a lot to flexibility, to incentives, to encouraging the construction of affordable housing, you know, rather than trying to mandate it in a way that increases affordability on other housing types. So what what information does, you know, staff feel like we need to bring back a draft ROI maybe at the next meeting for the task force to look at and provide comment on?

I I believe at one point, I'll have to check our records, there was a draft sort of being developed in previous iterations maybe by mister Perry. I think then this it shifted to, well, before we do that, we gotta go up in front of the board and have a workshop and kinda understand what they want us to include in that. And and, you know, so I think that in my mind, you know, we could come up with a draft, but what is integral to that draft or what is the the key components is are we going to recommend, you know, inclusionary housing? If not, or is it gonna be a a voluntary you know, are we gonna do an in lieu fee? Are we gonna you know?

So some of those decision making points, and we can recommend because the board could decide to do to go with the task force recommendation, or they could decide to go the other way. And so I think we would wanna just outline a menu of options is what I heard from the board and saying these are the things we've considered. Here's the recommendation. Alternatively, you could do this and and explore that. I mean, that's what I kind of was anticipating.

But you're absolutely right. You know, Karen sort of committed to coming back with a red line version. As far as without knowing everything, then we would be putting in a bunch of stuff that might not the task force might not want in there. And so and if we're just if the exercise is just the red line out the state, you know, language, then that's a pretty we're gonna do that anyway. So I think, you know, I just wanted to, at least from my perspective, get you know, make sure that you guys had information you needed to make recommendations to the board, and then we can go through that sort of list menu of options and say yes, no, maybe here's what we if if you're going yes, this is what we think. If you're going no, you know, moving on or something like that. Does that does that make sense?

It does. Maybe should we just talk through topics previously discussed and maybe get the feedback from the task force on where things are for the purposes of proceeding with an ROI? Yeah. First one, inclusionary housing policy mandatory or voluntary. I think I've heard very fairly clearly from the task force that, you know, mandatory inclusionary housing policy, you know, we don't think it's right for Colorado County.

It increases the cost of housing overall and decreases affordability of market rate housing. So is there any discussion on that? But from my standpoint, I would be supportive of, you know, a ROI that does not include mandatory inclusionary housing.

I would concur with that and encourage any further presentations to the board to include a statement that just strongly says that this task force has repeatedly rejected the idea of

a mandatory inclusionary housing policy. And, Rob, that's maybe one component from my standpoint that's been a little murky is I think the task force has been very clear on that and acknowledging that, ultimately, it's a board decision. But it it seems like despite that clear direction from the task force, it's it seems to continue to pop back up. And if there are reasons it needs to continue to pop back up that this task force, you know, isn't aware of or maybe doesn't understand, let's talk through those. But I think the task force has been pretty clear on that component of it.

It it seemed to me that the sentiment was more of a voluntary with incentives. Right? That you you and so in a in a way in order to integrate in in Luffy or any of those things, you have to have a program. Right? And and so if somebody wants to utilize incentives, then they can provide some of these things. That seemed to be the sort of the theme that I was getting from. So is that somewhat accurate?

I think the general mindset around an inclusionary ordinance has traditionally been not just in this county and but other jurisdictions that you create the option of an inclusionary requirement or these other ways of complying. And I don't think there's any and and someone's gonna have to correct me if I'm wrong on this one. I don't think there's any state requirement that you have to have the inclusionary or the other ways of complying. I think you can just have the other ways of complying. And

So just a program that sort of outlines potential options in the

Yeah. I don't think there's any need to put the inclusionary on the books at

all. Yeah.

And that's why I started calling it the affordable housing fee and not the in lieu fee. Right. Right.

And to add to that, you know, I think what you said about it being a voluntary issue, right, voluntary, you want to put the housing in, but it unlocks if you do density bonus and one thirty, it unlocks CEQA ministerial approval. Right? So what you're saying is you could go and take ten years and do no affordable housing and pay for all the infrastructure yourself, or you can do, you know, density bonus, do 20%. We'll help you with streamlining. The county will do all these things that they haven't done before.

Right? And what seems to be prevalent here are CFDs or Mello Roos or some kind of financing that the developer needs from the county to put in the streets and the infrastructure. Right? That seems to be a a normal practice in this jurisdiction. So if that's the case, then that vehicle, that's a vote.

That's where the county comes in and says, okay. We'll act as your agent, essentially, to collect the revenue from all these homes. With that, you can bake in fees that go into your affordable housing fund. So in other words, you're you're trying to let them say, you know, you're giving folks a choice. They could either, you know, go on a fast track and do the density bonus and take advantage of all the state stuff and do ministerial approval and move quickly as long as so then there's a trade off. Right? You know, for that, they're gonna do this. Right? They're gonna deliver this housing. They're gonna do x y z.

If they go the other route, they have to you know, I doubt that people are gonna come out of pocket millions of dollars to put in street lights and infrastructure. So if the county is supporting that, then there is a function for the county's role to then be able to have funding for the entire length of that loan or the entire length of that Mello Roos that goes into your program dollars that supports affordable housing. So either way, you're either getting affordable units, you're getting revenue for new affordable units. Does that make sense? That that's my recommendation.

K. And then let's see. Construction of affordable units on-site and off-site. I think, really, what flows from

That's just part of

the Yeah. The first category is that there may be options supported by incentives to encourage these type of things in the, you know, first bullet point under inclusionary housing policy. But then it's the potential incentives and the removal of barriers to actually constructing affordable housing that, you know, I would like to see the ROI focused on.

That's that's effectively when I hear removal of barriers, that is sort of the incentive speech. Right? Development processing. You know? Is that is that what we're talking about? Development standards?

And I would just think of it a little differently. Incentives to me is more like, you know, fee structures or relaxing development standards. Pros process streamlining to me is not necessarily incentive as much as it is the facilitation of That's fair. You know, expedited review of affordable projects in order to and I think this is a key component. It's not it's not streamlined process just for the sake of streamlined process so that it happens faster.

It's streamlined process so that it makes the cost and the risk associated with pursuing development of an affordable housing project. It helps keep those things in check, and all of those things have impacts on, you know, whether you get any type of project, whether it be market rate residential or, you know, affordable resident.

Can I also ask we we talked about, you know, accounting is one piece of the puzzle? Right? When it comes to needs and approvals, you also have your, you know, your utility districts and your water districts, etcetera, etcetera. And that I think the challenge also is on one side, if you do all these things and relax it and streamline it, reduce the fees, and then everybody else on other side is saying, no. We're not doing that. Like, I think there was also this idea too that you set the pace, you know, that that there is a leadership, that there is a goal. Because, you know, ironically, if you do all this and then the water company says, sorry. We just increased all of our fee rates to now $50,000 a tap. So sorry. You know, like, then you're dead.

So it does there needs to be some a little bit of coordination. So I don't know how many different boards there are, but if that could trickle down, if there are county agencies, I don't know how you do your sewer and water, but, like, that kind of stuff, I think, matters.

Yeah. I think for most of the urbanized area, EID where, you know, you would see these types of projects, EID is the service provider for water and sewer, and I and we're certainly I've heard discussion about their fees related to providing that service. Unfortunately, yeah, we're not in the the county is not the public works in the sense of we don't deliver those types of so we would have to absolutely have discussions with the ID related to development standard relief with the fire districts and the other, you know, organizations that are gonna review those projects for consistency and performance. So I do I agree with you that there is a as we develop an ordinance, we're not gonna do it in a bubble. You know, I think we have to have some integration.

We have to have some discussions with our partner jurisdictions. And whether or not they're and I heard some of the sentiment in a recent meeting. Whether or not they're willing to do that or not, you know, is one thing, but we can certainly we should be we should challenge ourselves to try to have those discussions.

In my opinion, that should be part of your communication engagement strategy. It isn't just your residents that are gonna that you're gonna be listening to. It's really working with your other utility companies because I cannot tell you how many times development gets stopped, not by the building department, but by all the other jurisdictions, by all the other sort of, you know, related parties that get a yes or a no.

And maybe it is also a good component for focus as it relates to streamlining. Obviously, the county can't mandate those things for outside agencies, but creating a process that helps facilitate that coordination through process streamlining, You you know, they can decide whether to participate or not, but I think to the extent that the county has a robust program that encourages that, I think the county is more likely to get buy in than from from outside agencies. For them to help us. Yep. And and even just one of the things we've seen, whether it be any type of project is part of process streamlining that can be very effective is identifying, like, a cross functional, you know, project lead that coordinates with other county agencies because that type of a position or a structure can help facilitate somebody whose main job is to find find potential roadblocks, identify them in advance, help facilitate solutions, you know, cross functionally, and outside agencies could be a stakeholder as part of that discussion.

And so there's I see some opportunity potentially there.

And let me put on the table fire, wildfire. Sure. So you're in a jurisdiction that's high fire. And one of the biggest NIMBY issues is fire and escaping, etcetera, etcetera. I would like to say that the county should lead on if you have chapter seven or whatever the building code, the WUI building code, that you work that out with fire because what happens at the end is it's very reactive. So a developer comes in. They're like, here's my proposal. It's a 100 units. It's here. Everything else fits the various development standards.

But, oh, now you're in a WUI. And, oh, fire says, oh, no. Now to be extra cautious, let's make you do 10 times the work of what anyone else needs to do because we're so worried that you're gonna cause calamity or whatever. Right? So what happens, the gut reaction like, right now, we're looking at, at at the state level, reduction of some of the fire life safety issues, like the two stairs, you know, doing the single stair, for example. And there are a lot of debates, and fire is one of those that absolutely will stop the belt, period. Dead tracks. Like, you you must buy us a $3,000,000 fire truck. That happened to me in Tahoe. You know, everything else was approved, but, you know, you don't anticipate you need to buy someone a fire truck.

Right? So to me, those are the kinds of things that if this is to be effective and you're gonna roll this out, you've ironed out some of that stuff. You know? Like, you've double checked with fire to make sure they've got the ladder trucks appropriate for a four story building are gonna be coming into maybe some of your infill areas that because this cannot be done just in a bubble, just with the county and just with your building department and so on. Because development affects every one of these different agencies, and they're the ones that don't listen to what the board of supervisors might have to say.

Yeah. So I that is certainly something that's on the top of mind for for me as particularly in some of my other roles within the county. We attend the fire preventions officers meeting monthly. And so we one of my staff members, the planning manager, attends that for the reasons you're talking about. I know there's gonna be a new consolidation of the WUI code.

We have the luxury of having multiple fire jurisdictions within our boundary. Right? So it's not one fire organization, but they generally then will sort of work together to get a local ordinance in place to the degree they all agree on it and and try to find some consistency between those, but I certainly acknowledge what you're saying. Yeah. We because each district does it a little bit differently, you've got a and that's where some of those getting them involved in our even our community design standards.

We've routed it to those jurisdictions are working with the local fire jurisdiction because there is requirements that we wanna integrate and and ensure. And so they did provide good feedback on material use for some of those and some of the things they didn't want necessarily in our design standards that might be prohibitive to, you know, the the release situation. So but, yeah, thank you very much for the comment. I I I I agree we have to and that's where some of the six months, you know, I would love to get something done in in that amount of time. But if you're really thoughtful and you're communicating out, it takes a little bit of time to bring all those people to the table. You know?

Any additional questions from staff to kinda take us to the next step of trying to get a No.

Think I I I'll certainly confer with sort of Karen on, my approach and my understanding and, you know, ultimately because I think, you know, like I said, I I I'm not coming in trying to derail, but I wanted to make sure that I you know, procedurally that I'm checking all the boxes and then understanding the move forward. I think a lot of the second page is sort of, you know, related to just the things discussed, but aren't necessarily things that are gonna integrate themselves into an ROI. But there are considerations that we, I think, you know, are important. And I guess the one piece I would ask is just do you all feel like you need us to come back with more information on the, you know, other jurisdictions and what they're doing, or do you you had a pretty deep conversation on last time. But, okay, just wanted to because we did agree to sort of come back with additional, you know, cities that we might look at and and this other factor, but we can certainly talk about those in this meeting sort of as we go forward.

And that's that's helpful context, but until we're looking at something that is crafted for the purposes of El Dorado County, it's conceptual in nature. And so I really do think just starting to outline the ROI, having that structure specifically as it relates to what would be recommended to the board of supervisors gives the task force really concrete items to respond to and say, hey. I, you know, recommend you change this, or what about adding that? And I think we're, you know, we're at that point. And and

I think Jen and I, in advance of this meeting, were trying to put something like that together with the red line version, but we were sort of trying to do it with some haste because I was a little bit behind, and so we didn't wanna bring something that maybe caused more confusion or something. So we're we already sort of are integrating those pieces that we think, and then and then it'll be kind of where does it belong and how is it organized and all that stuff when we get past the ROIs piece. So in my mind, the ROI pieces, yeah, we wanna recommend that it include this, that, and what have you, and doesn't include this, that, and then we start crafting language. Great. Any

additional, discussion from the task force on this item?

I would just like to encourage, you know, point without encourage all the state laws, you know, flexibility, really just pointing to those without necessarily articulating them. You know? I mean, that's really in my mind, so much of what you're doing is what's is what's present now in state law and that you're basically just saying we're gonna we're just we're gonna prioritize these things, and we're gonna use these things without justifying it or articulating it.

Yeah. I think that's fair, and that could be done in a section of it. You know, we're gonna do all those things, and we're gonna I mean, we're subject to them anyways, but we can acknowledge that our intent is to, you know, make sure we're utilizing those tools that are already, you know, in the in the state law. Right. Like I said, in the o seven exercise, that it was the outcome.

It was it if I took that staff report and provided it to you, it was the same things we're sort of talking about now. Right? 20 down the road, some of the circumstances are different. But, you know, the outcome of that exercise was just putting basically the state law into the ordinance. So I'd like to do something more meaningful, you know, than that and really come with something that provides a better road map, if you will, for developers and and initiate some appropriate, you know, housing.

Sure. Alright. Any questions from staff on this item? No. I just wanted to say thank you again for your time today and and sort of, you know, dealing with my coming up to speed, but I do intend to, you know, in this in the short term, particularly try to focus in on bringing, you know, the things that we are aligned, the the recommendations to the board and getting this thing really kicked off and getting some some movement on the ordinance itself.

Great. Alright. Let's take public comment on this item. I don't see anybody here in person. Is there anybody online who wishes to provide a public comment on agenda item number two?

If you are a Zoom participant and wish to comment on item number two, please use the raise hand button. Looks like we have no public comment.

Alright. With that, moving on to next meeting. So his let's talk about the next meeting date. Has that been set yet, or has there been

Grab my microphone. So it's usually the third Wednesday of every month, so that would be August 20. And I think we were trying to stick to 10AM unless anybody

And it looks like it's already on the calendar. It's been sent out. Was that sent out as a recurring

It was. Meeting invite. Okay. Obviously, there's always flexibility during these meetings that we

could Really appreciate having that on the calendar. So when the calendar fills up, we have that slot reserved. So we are currently scheduled for our next meeting to be August 20 at 10AM. Any issues with that time from any task force members? Alright. Hearing none, we'll confirm next meeting date for August 20 at 10AM. And with that, I will adjourn the meeting. Thank you all.

Okay. Pass this meeting over.