City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening Vacaville. This is 04/07/2026 at 6PM. This is the special meeting of the Vacaville City Council. May I have a roll call?

Councilmember Stockton? Here. Councilmember Ritchie? Councilmember Chapman? Here. Council Member Fremont? Here. Council Member Wiley? Here. Vice Mayor Silva? Here. Mayor Carley? Here.

If you're able, please stand for a moment of silence followed by the pledge. Council member Freeman, will you lead us in the pledge?

Yes. Please join me in

the pledge. Ready? I pledge allegiance to the flag of The

United States Of America, who is

the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Alright. So Alright. So with that, we've got one item tonight on business. Madam City Clerk.

Yes. Tonight we have our housing and community services director Tamara Colton here presenting foundations in housing, the spectrum of housing, understanding the types, needs and legal foundation for housing recap, how affordable housing is developed and financed and housing as an economic investment.

Good evening mayor, council members. It's not that often I'm the star of the show so forgive me if I take time enjoying it. Tonight I am presenting the Foundations and Housing entire series that was initially designed to be a three part series but I'll I'll do the entire series tonight with a recap of the first presentation that, we did in in February. In the first presentation, we focused on the housing spectrum, what affordable housing means, and the legal framework that cities operate within when planning for housing. And so tonight, I'm gonna shift from policy to definitions to implementation and talk about how housing actually gets built, how affordable housing is financed, and why it can be challenging to deliver at scale.

And then I'll also spend some time looking at how housing availability affects workforce stability, economic growth, and the overall health of a community. But before those those final topics, I wanna start with the recap of the ideas, from the first presentation and make sure that we're all starting from the same foundation. So one of the main takeaways, was that housing is not just a planning topic, It affects many aspects of community life, including workforce access, economic growth, and overall stability of neighborhoods. And another point that was covered was that cities do not operate with complete control of housing policy. Local decision making making happens within a framework established by state housing law and regional planning requirements.

The purpose of the first presentation was to establish an understanding of those issues including how housing is defined, the range of housing types that exist, and, the legal framework that shapes local housing planning. We also spent time reviewing the legal framework that going into depth on that framework and how housing decisions at the local level are influenced both by federal and state law. So at the federal level, fair housing law prohibits fair housing laws prohibit discrimination and require cities to ensure that housing policies do not create barriers for protected groups. And then California law expands on these protections through the Fair Employment and Housing Act. At the state level, cities are required to plan for housing through the housing element process, and as part of that process, each jurisdiction receives a regional housing needs allocation, or RINA, which identifies the number of housing units the city must plan for across different income levels.

State law also establish es rules that govern how housing projects are reviewed and approved, and laws such as the Housing Accountability Act, Senate Bill 35, Senate Bill three thirty limit the circumstances under which cities can deny or delay housing developments that meet adopted zoning and objective standards. In addition, laws related to land use and zoning, including ex accessory dwelling unit, legislation, density bonus law, and Senate Bill nine expand opportunities for housing development within existing neighborhoods. So together, these laws shape, that framework that I keep referring to that cities use to plan for housing and to make decisions about land use, development approvals, housing policy. A little bit further into our RINA status. So the RINA stands for regional housing needs allocation, and in simple terms, it's the number of housing units that the state assigns to each city over an eight year planning period.

Those numbers are not random and they are not negotiated project by project. So they are developed through a regional process and then broken down by income levels from very low, low, moderate and above moderate income households. So for Vacaville's current housing element period which runs from 2023 through 2031, our assigned RHNA numbers are 2,595 units across those income categories. Just like with the housing element, RHNA is about planning and zoning capacity, so it doesn't mean that the city is going to be building those units itself, and it doesn't mean that every unit will be built, but it does mean that the city is required to plan in a way that makes the level of how the level those levels of housing units possible under our zoning and policies. If we fail to do that or our housing element is found to be out of compliance, then we risk losing access to state funding, and open the door to legal actions that could further limit our local control.

We also covered the definition of affordability. So housing is considered affordable when a household spends no more than 30 percent of its gross income on housing costs, and that includes rent or mortgage payment plus utilities or any other required housing related expenses. Once that household goes above 30%, then they are considered cost burdened, and when that housing cost cost exceeds 50% of income, then that household is considered severely cost burdened. Affordable housing programs use, area median income or AMI, and it's calculated annually by the federal government through HUD or the Department of Housing and Urban Development and is reflected and reflects the median household income for a region adjusted by household size. And then housing affordability is then grouped into income categories based on a percentage of that AMI.

So you often hear terms like extremely low, very low, low or moderate income, and each of those correspond to a specific income range. So in Solano County, the 2025 AMI or area median income for a family of four is about $124,000 annually. The 2026 income levels are a bit delayed, so those have not been released yet. So that means a very low income family earns around 68,000 or less, and a moderate income family can earn up to a 149,000 per year and still qualify for homeownership affordable homeownership or other programs. I point this out just because it shows that affordable housing doesn't just serve people in poverty, it also supports working families, essential workers, young professionals, and even seniors on fixed income.

We covered who may benefit from housing at all affordability levels. So in permanent supportive housing, you might find people who've experienced serious setbacks such as health crises, trauma, or long term homelessness and are now rebuilding their lives with support. Or in senior housing developments, you'll often find long term residents on fixed income who simply just cannot keep up with the rising costs of rent. So many people who qualify for affordable housing have jobs, sometimes more than one, but the cost of market rate rent or mortgage is still out of reach. So people who are raising families, serving in our schools, caring for our loved ones, running small businesses or helping our local economy thrive can be considered in need of affordable housing.

These are examples of common jobs in Vacaville that we covered during the last presentation, and these are the kind of jobs that keep the community functioning every day. When we look at these incomes alongside housing costs, we can start to see why, affordability is not just an issue for people, at the lowest income levels. One of the most common points of confusion in housing conversations, again, is the idea that someone who's working full time should not be considered low income. But low income is not a judgment about effort or work ethic. It's It's just a technical term tied to the income relative to housing cost, as I covered in previous slides.

And then this slide shows all the different housing types and how they fit along the continuum of housing need. So starting at the left is for housing for people in immediate crisis, emergency shelters for individuals and families with nowhere else to go, transitional housing for those exiting homelessness or systems of care and working towards stability. It includes permanent supportive housing for people who need both housing and ongoing supportive services, to maintain successful, housing permanency. And in the center of the spectrum, we start to see income restricted rental housing, which is the most common form of affordable housing. This includes family apartments, senior communities, and accessible units for people with disabilities.

And these projects' rent levels are tied to income, and tenants often pay about 30% of their earnings towards rent. And then moving further right in the continuum, we see housing that's affordable but not subsidized. So in the last presentation, you might remember that's what we referred to as naturally occurring affordable housing or NOAA. And these tend to be older market rate units that are still attainable to lower income households, but they don't come with a guarantee of affordability like in the income restricted projects. And then finally, on the far right, we start reaching affordable homeownership opportunities such as below market rate units, which are often created through local policies like inclusionary housing ordinances.

And these homes are supported, often by down payment assistance programs, land trust, or shared equity models. And the important thing here is that the city really needs every piece of this spectrum. If we overinvest or underinvest in any one piece, the whole system comes out of balance and the whole system struggles. The key takeaways during the first presentation are that affordability is about the relationship between income and housing cost, and it's not a label, it's not judgment, it's just a math based standard used by state and at the state and federal level. Second is that housing exists across a wide spectrum, and it includes people on fixed income, working families, moderate income households, and people at different stages in life.

And there's no single type of housing that serves everyone. The next takeaway is that each housing type plays a different role between shelter, supportive housing, income restricted housing, workforce housing. It's all part of a system, and they all serve different needs. And finally, cities are required by state law to plan for housing across income levels, understanding that full spectrum helps cities plan for decisions and how to best support the development of housing. So now I want to move into how affordable housing is developed and financed.

This section goes deeper into the how. So like how does affordable housing get built, who builds it, what makes a project financially feasible or not, and what role the city plays in shaping successful outcomes. This part of the presentation will cover four key areas, which is the development process from land acquisition to construction and lease up, affordable housing financing, so how projects are funded through layered public and private sources, the city's role and how local policies, land and funding to make projects possible, and then I'll cover a real world case study and show how it all comes together and how it all came together for a project here in Vacaville. Overall, affordable housing is complex and it takes years to build, requires multiple partners, and depends on layered public and private funding. But when it all comes together, the result is housing that meets critical community needs while strengthening our local economy and quality of life.

So before I get into timelines, funding sources and all that, I want to acknowledge why, understanding how projects are financed is important. So affordable housing and developing affordable housing is not a fast process. From the time a developer identifies a site to the day residents move in, projects can often take three, which is a good timeline, to often six years and sometimes even longer. Delays at any stage, whether that's at the zoning or environmental review or funding, can derail a project. Financing is also highly competitive.

So affordable housing relies on multiple public funding sources that are either oversubscribed statewide or find themselves being cut back or not available. Projects are scored against each other, and even strong proposals can lose funding if the timing or local support is not right. And so this is where the city's role is important, and because while cities don't build housing themselves, local decisions can directly affect whether a project is viable. Zoning site availability, entitlement timelines, fee structures, policy alignment can all influence whether a project can compete for funding. So with that, let's take a look at how state law shapes some of the earlier stages of housing development.

So I covered some of these, laws in the first presentation and during the recap, but I just want to, revisit them from a development lens. So over the last decade, California has passed a series of laws designed to reduce local discretion, shorten approval times, and lower entitlement risk for housing projects as long as they meet objective standards. Some of these laws focus on the front end of the housing spectrum, so like that emergency shelter, transitional housing, navigation center, those type of housing. These laws ensure interim housing can move forward without unnecessary discretional delay. Other laws apply more broadly to multifamily and affordable housing development.

So as an example, SB 35 provides a ministerial approval pathway for qualifying projects, and that can significantly reduce timelines when affordability and zoning criteria are met. Density bonus law allows projects to increase unit counts and receive development concessions in exchange for providing affordable units, and that can directly affect project feasibility. And the Housing Accountability Act limits the city's ability to deny or reduce housing projects that comply with adopted plans and objective standards. So all of these laws are important from the development side, because they're designed, to create create certainty in a timeline that's tight and can be critical to financing. If a project faces unnecessary discretionary hurdles or risks or delay or there are unclear standards being being used for evaluation of the project, then that can make the project less competitive for state and federal funding.

So projects try to align themselves with these laws so that they are more likely to move forward and they're also more likely to secure the financing needed to get built. From the outside, it can feel like housing projects move slowly and they do. So as mentioned before, a typical project can take anywhere from three to six years to be built, and some can take longer, especially if land funding or entitlements are complicated. One important thing to understand is that this process isn't linear, so many steps happen at the same time. Developers are working on design, environmental review, community engagement, and funding applications all at the same time.

Unlike market rate housing, affordable housing developers usually cannot start construction until every dollar is secured. So this means that delays in one area like zoning or environmental review can stall an application for, a funding round for a potential grant or gap funding, and that can in turn install, stall the entire project. Again, while this timeline is not linear or a clean straight line, many of the steps overlap and projects can often move forward on multiple tracks, again, to try to reduce that timeline to approval. So the first thing a developer is gonna do is try, to identify a site and gain site control. Developers have to find a location that works for zoning, infrastructure, transit access, and service proximity, and then they have to demonstrate control of that site, either by purchasing it, securing an option, or partnering with a public agency that can provide the land.

Second is feasibility and early concept design. So this is where a developer tests what can realistically be built on the site, such as unit counts, building types, construction costs, and whether rents at the target affordability levels can support operations. And then is the entitlement and zoning pathway. So the project, of course, has to align with zoning and objective standards or the developer needs a clear path through discretionary approvals if variances are needed. And then state streamlining laws can change this step, but only if the project meets eligibility requirements.

So like discussed before, while state laws are designed to help streamline this process, the project still has to meet, objective standards. Projects are also required to undergo an environmental review under CEQA, and if the project is receiving any type of federal financing, then they're also required to comply with NEPA requirements. So that would be like if the project is receiving some type of home funding or if the project is awarded project based vouchers, then the project would also need to go through the federal environmental review. Fifth in this timeline is financing. So this is where affordable housing becomes different from market rate development.

Developers typically apply for multiple funding sources all at once. So that can be tax credits, state funds, local loans, subsidies for or operating subsidies, and the project will often need several awards before it can move forward. And then once financing closes, the project cannot break ground until the capital stack, and I'll get into that further in the presentation. It cannot break down until the capital stack is fully committed, legal agreements are executed, and lender and investor requirements are satisfied. So this is where timing can matter most because a developer is usually trying to align requirements from several different state and federal funding sources.

Seventh is construction. Once a project closes, it can finally move into construction phase, usually eighteen to thirty months depending on the size and the complexity of the project. And then last is lease up and long term compliance. So residents typically are income qualified, rents are regulated, and the property enters into long term compliance period with monitoring and reporting requirements, and this is what preserves affordability for decades. During the previous presentation, there was a question on how or why, the city charges monitoring fees, or how they're able to charge monitoring fees on some of our projects.

And that primarily comes from either it's a requirement from one of the funding sources that the city is a project or a partner on or usually is a requirement of the city providing funding towards the project. Then that monitoring is required to ensure that the project over the long term abides by the affordability requirements. So the city's role in all this starts with planning and policy. I know you guys are recognizing a theme, where zoning, the housing elements, specific plans, and objective design standards all shape what can be built, where it can be built, and how quickly a project can move forward. Cities also play a key role in reducing uncertainty and delay through clear entitlement pathways, consistent application standards, and coordinated interdepartmental review, and that can significantly improve a project's competitiveness for state and federal funding.

Another critical role that the city plays is in the land strategy. So when we're able to offer publicly owned land, whether that's through like a reduced sale or a long term lease, it can dramatically lower development costs for a project and help make a project more feasible, that might otherwise not pencil. You'll notice that usually tends to be the strategy in a

lot of

our development and disposition loan agreements is that usually if it's a city property, we provide it at a significantly reduced cost to ensure long term affordability for the project. Cities can also participate financially through gap financing, typically in the form of soft loans that are repaid over time, or there might be delay in repayment as long as the project, remains affordable. And while local dollars are limited, even smaller modest contributions can be really important when layered with other funding sources. And then finally, cities can support projects by helping developers compete for funding either through resolutions of support, matching commitments, data, and alignment of local plans, etcetera. So as an example, you recently approved, the city to move forward with a application for Oak Grove Senior Apartments to the home program, and so that application was submitted by the due date at the March.

So fingers crossed, be successful. And so next I wanna cover financing a little bit closer. So again, unlike market rate developments, affordable housing projects cannot rely on rent alone to pay for land construction and long term operations. Instead, they use what's called a capital stack, and that's basically just a fancy way to say a combination of different funding sources layered together to make feasible. And then each layer of the stack serves a different purpose.

So at the base, you'll usually have conventional debt, so construction or permanent loans, but because the rents are restricted, the debt has to be limited. So too much debt would require rents that low income households would not be able to afford. So the amount of debt a project might be able to secure is limited. So to reduce that, projects rely on what's referred to as equity. So most commonly, that comes through the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program, which I'll go into depth a little bit more in upcoming slides.

And so that equity fills a large portion of the cost without requiring repayment. Then you'll often see state and local gap financing, which are usually like soft loans, and fill they fill in the remaining gap, what the debt and equity, don't cover and what the project actually cost to build. And then in many projects, there's also an operating subsidy such as project based vouchers, so that's why a lot of projects will see if the housing authority has vouchers available because that helps ensure the property can cover ongoing expenses while keeping rents affordable. So while the rents are affordable to the households themselves, the housing authority through those project based vouchers can help make up that difference. That and again, that helps support operating subsidies.

If one funding source is delayed or reduced or dis or denied, the entire stack can collapse, even if everything else is in place. So that's why a lot you'll see with our projects, they try to secure either that state or federal gap financing before they move forward with a low income housing tax credit application because the tax credit application, might not that might not fill the entire gap between the permanent debt and what the entire project cost is, they so try to secure those other smaller pieces of funding before going for those tax credits. And so to focus on that, again, the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program is one of the most important financing tools for affordable housing nationwide, not just in the state. So rather than providing a grant or a loan, LITEC creates equity for the project. So at a higher level, the federal government allocates tax credits to states.

In California, those credits are administered by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee or TCAP. So developers apply for those credits, and if they're awarded, they sell those credits to investors, usually they're large banks or financial institutions in exchange for equity, and then that equity goes directly into the project and does not have to be repaid. So it significantly reduces how much debt the project can carry, and then lower debt means lower they can, have lower rents, and that can make, deeper affordability possible. There are two main types of low income housing tax credit. So 9% credits are highly competitive and typically used either for smaller projects or projects serving very low income households, and these credits can cover a large share of development costs, but only a limited number of 9% tax credits are awarded each year.

4% tax credits are usually paired with some type of tax exempt bond and are usually used for larger projects. They're technically noncompetitive but still depend on bond availability or often require additional gap funding to work. In exchange for receiving tax credits, projects must commit to long term affordability, so usually fifty five years, and they come with strict income limits, rent caps and ongoing compliance monitoring. Once tax credit equity is in place, most affordable housing projects still face significant funding gaps, so that's where state and federal funding sources come in. These funds are designed to do a couple things.

One, help pay for construction and or rehab cost. They usually fund supportive housing for special populations. They can cover infrastructure needs to support infill development and in some cases they can even be used to provide ongoing operating subsidy. On the state side, California provides its funding primarily through the Department of Housing and Community Development or HCD and is often released in competitive rounds, and these programs can support new construction, permanent supportive housing, veteran housing, farm worker housing, and the infrastructure needed to make infill sites feasible. On the federal side, some key funding streams commonly used are the home investment partnership or home funding, national housing trust fund dollars, and in some cases federal grants tied to specific populations or specific redevelopment strategies.

I will add here that the most recent presidential budget released for fiscal year 'twenty seven proposes the elimination of a lot of these federal resources. That would have a significant impact on a project's ability to find gap funding needed to make project feasible. So for example, if no more home funds are made available to states or direct entitlement communities, that's a large portion of what provides gap funding for affordable projects and that means projects would have to find or compete for other maybe state funds that are already over subscribed. In addition to direct housing funds, there are infrastructure and climate related programs at both the state and federal levels that can help pay for things like utilities, sidewalks, transit access, and sustainable features when housing is part of a broader infill or transit oriented strategy. So the key takeaway is there's no single program that makes a project work, and affordable housing developments really depend on layering multiple state and federal sources, all of which are competitive, all of which are cyclical and sensitive to broader budget conditions.

A little deeper dive on the state side. The twenty six-twenty seven governor's budget significantly constrains new state funding for affordable housing development. HCD's local assistance funding, which supports housing construction and rehab, rehabilitation, has dropped sharply compared to prior years at nearly an 80% drop from prior year peaks. So this is These programs are the single strongest indicator that new affordable housing development capacity is constrained statewide. Most major housing programs still exist, but they're largely either, approved to operate on prior year appropriations, remaining bond authority, or using funds that went unspent from prior allocations.

And there's not a large new general fund investment in these state funding programs. So while most programs continue to be available, they are either at much lower or capped levels and competition for those dollars is going to increase tenfold statewide. This funding structure creates a highly constrained environment for new affordable housing development and explains why developers are emphasizing large gap funding sources and why projects must be exceptionally well positioned to compete. I know that we've come back and kind of said this over and over again, but the competitive environment for this funding is only getting worse. It's not getting better and that's what this slide is designed to demonstrate.

Even with tax credits and state or federal funding, most affordable housing projects still don't fully pencil on public dollars alone. So this is where capital partners come in. These partners are essential because they provide flexibility, early stage funding, and risk tolerance that traditional public programs often can't. Conventional lenders provide construction and permanent loans, but those loans are are sized conservatively because rents are restricted. They're an important layer but rarely sufficient on their own.

And then as covered before, tax credit investors, typically large banks or financial institutions, purchase those low income housing tax credits and provide equity. While we discussed earlier, the LITEC program earlier, it's important to remember that investors' appetite, pricing and underwriting standards directly affect how much equity a project can raise. So what some developers have expressed is the value of tax credits has gone down in recent years, and so that has also contributed to the types of gap funding or the amount of gap funding needed for projects to move forward. Community development financial institutions or CDFIs play a critical role throughout the development process and they often provide those predevelopment loans, acquisition financing or bridge loans while waiting for while projects wait for public funds to close. Projects also seek philanthropic and or other impact investors that may provide either grants or program related investments or help provide low cost loans to projects, and some of these sources are especially important for innovative early stage work or projects serving very low income households.

There are also community land trusts that represent a different kind of partner, so rather than funding construction directly, they help preserve long term affordability by holding land in perpetuity and separating land ownership from building ownership, particularly in home ownership or mixed use models. And then there's also the Federal Home Loan Bank affordable housing program grants which provide competitive gap funding through member banks and utility or energy related funding that can offset cost that support sustainability, electrification or resilience improvements in projects. Affordable housing overall is delivered through public private partnerships and each partner plays a distinct role in making the project successful. Non profit developers are often mission driven organizations that specialize in serving low income households or specific populations such as seniors, families, veterans, or people experiencing homelessness. They typically bring deep expertise in compliance, service coordination, and long term affordability stewardship.

For profit developers are also key players, particularly in larger or mixed income projects. Many specialize in tax credit development and partner with nonprofits or cities to deliver affordable units while meeting strict regulatory requirements. Housing authorities often serve multiple roles in development. They can provide project based vouchers. They can contribute land if they own land, act as a co developer or ultimately end up owning the land or operating affordable housing community themselves.

We do not have that model here in Vacaville. For projects serving higher need populations, service providers are essential partners in permanent supportive housing projects. These organizations deliver case management, behavioural health services and other supports that help residents remain stably housed, especially in permanent supportive housing. And finally, cities remain long term partners even after construction is complete. That's usually through monitoring, compliance and continued policy support, and cities help ensure affordability is preserved for the long term.

So success of affordable housing development and financing definitely depends on aligning the right partners early with clear roles and shared expectations. So I do have an example of what that looks like and how that was successful here in Vacaville. Up to this point I've talked about affordable housing in terms of process funding funding sources and roles and this slide just kind of brings all that together and practice and sets us up for our local example. So Pony Express Apartments is a 60 unit affordable rental housing development completed in 2023. It is located on what was city owned property.

It's a rental only project and affordability is preserved long term through regulatory agreements with the city. The project was developed by Pony Express Senior Housing, which is a nonprofit developer and represents a typical structure for how deeply affordable senior housing is developed in California. So of the 60 units in total, 59 are income restricted affordable units and affordability is spread across different income levels. There's one manager's unit, so those are usually not included in these mix. This mix allows the project to serve seniors with very different financial circumstances while maintaining overall financial stability.

13 of the units serve extremely low, 14 serve very low and as a reminder, extremely low is 30% AMI or less. Very low is 50% and low is 80% AMI. And in addition, 15 of the units are permanent supportive housing units that receive referrals through the coordinated entry system. So those permanent supportive housing units are designed for seniors who were previously experiencing homelessness and need more than just housing, they also need ongoing support services. A key component of this project is that it was awarded 59 project based vouchers.

So if you remember, those provide an operating subsidy that allows the project to maintain those deep affordability levels while still covering their operating cost. And then from a development perspective, project based vouchers are often what makes projects serving extremely low income households financially viable. And then from a policy perspective, the city and housing authority work together to ensure that housing resources are targeted to residents with the greatest need. So affordability alone is not enough, however, and for senior projects like this to succeed long term, services and amenities are just as important. Pony Express had a total development cost of approximately or a little over $28,000,000 and like most affordable housing projects, there was no single funding source that covered the cost of that project.

So the backbone of the financing was low income housing tax credits and that provided the largest share of the capital stack and that equity again comes from private investors and then make it possible to keep permanent debt at a manageable level for the project and then also included conventional permanent loans from the federal housing loan bank, affordable housing program funds and then the city of Vacaville also was included in making the funding of this project successful. So first the city contributed land through a seller held loan and that allows the project to defer the land cost over a fifty five year term and that's at a 0% interest rate. So that significantly reduced the upfront cost of the project. And then the city provided a $500,000 predevelopment loan and that's structured as long term low interest loan to the project and that helped the project move through early design, entitlement and financing stages. Usually that's when the risk is highest and it's before the project has access to other private capital.

So while the city did not fund the majority of the project, its contributions helped unlock state, federal and private investments that otherwise might not have been accessible, and the result is a fully occupied senior community with deep affordability levels, supportive housing services and long term stability. So key takeaways from the financing part of this presentation is that first affordable housing development is long term. Projects can take years to complete not because of any inefficiency but because they require site control, environmental clearance, entitlements, and multiple funding commitments to align before projects can even break ground. Second is that affordable housing is not funded by any one single program or level of government. It definitely depends on layered financing, that structure layered financing structure that blends private investment with federal, state and local resources.

Third is that the current funding environment is constrained and highly competitive. Many programs can continue through prior year funding or bond authority which makes project readiness and timing more important. And then cities play a role even when they aren't the developer through zoning, land strategies, entitlement clarity and targeted financial participation that can help determine whether a project succeeds or fails. And finally, Pony Express is a good example that shows how local involvement can help unlock significant outside investment and deliver long term community benefits without the city carrying the full financial burden. Now I want to move into considering how housing can be considered an economic investment for the city.

This section answers the question why does housing matter from an economic perspective? So I want to start by looking at how housing availability and affordability directly support the local work force including essential workers, service employees and seniors. From there, look at public fiscal impacts, so how stable housing can reduce costs related to emergency services, health care and crisis response and why prevention is often more cost effective than reaction, and then connect housing to land use and economic productivity, focusing on how infill development and housing near services can make for better use of existing public investment. Then after that, we'll take a look at a regional example of a housing development that has worked well not just socially but economically and identify some common factors behind that success. So generally when we think about economic development, we often focus on jobs, business attraction and infrastructure like roads, utilities that come to the forefront of our mind.

And housing is sometimes treated as a separate issue, but housing is and can be or should be considered economic infrastructure as well. So at its most basic level, housing determines whether people can live near where they work, and if workers can't find housing that they can afford, employers face higher turnover, longer vacancies and increased wage pressures just to keep positions filled. Housing also affects local spending. So when households are not overburdened by housing costs, they have more disposable income to spend at local businesses such as grocery stores, restaurants, pay for services such as child care and other service related costs. And then from a fiscal perspective, housing stability helps reduce public cost.

So communities with adequate housing see lower strain on emergency services, health care systems, and crisis response programs. Numerous studies, including research from HUD and the Urban Institute, show that stable housing reduces downstream public expenditures while supporting labor force participation and economic productivity. So how housing supports workforce and local employers. From the worker perspective, housing stability and affordability directly affect worker's health. So when housing costs are manageable, households have more income available for food, transportation, health care, child care and savings, all of which support long term economic security for those households.

And then again, housing location also matters. So when workers live closer to their jobs, they spend less time commuting and more time with their families and participating in community events. Shorter commutes are associated with lower stress, better health outcomes, and higher job satisfaction. Outcomes Stable housing supports job stability and upward mobility, and workers who are not constantly worrying about rent increases or displacement are better positioned to maintain employment, pursue training or advance in their careers. And again, there's also a clear health and productivity benefit.

So again, research from HUD and the Urban Institute consistently shows that housing stability is linked to improved physical and mental health with fewer missed workdays and greater overall workforce participation. For seniors or workers on fixed or modest incomes, housing stability allows people to age in place and remain connected to their support networks rather than being forced out to relocate out of the community. And from an economic standpoint, these individual benefits add up. So a stable work force is more reliable, more productive, and better able to contribute to the local economy. From the employer side of the equation, when housing is scarce or unaffordable, employers don't just lose workers, they absorb real measurable costs.

So that includes higher turnover rates, increased spending on recruitment, onboarding, training, and for a smaller midsize business, those costs can be especially destabilizing. Employers also see impacts in attendance and reliability. Long commutes can increase the likelihood of late arrivals, missed shifts, and burnout, and particularly in service or shift based jobs. And over time, housing availability becomes a location factor, and employers considering expansion or relocation look at whether their workforce can realistically live nearby. Research from the Federal Reserve and regional economic development agencies show that housing constraints can limit business growth even in areas with strong job demand.

So this is why housing policy increasingly shows up in economic developments conversations and not just as a social issue but as a workforce and competitiveness issue. And again, the housing doesn't just affect individuals or families, it also has an impact on public cost and fiscal health. Multiple studies including work by HUD in the urban institute again show that housing stability reduces the frequency and cost of emergency response and the strain on emergency response systems. Overall, when households are stably housed, cities spend less time and funding on reactive services and can plan more effectively for infrastructure, services, and capital needs. Housing decisions are also land use decisions, and land use has direct economic consequences.

So housing located close to employment centers, and services reduces the need for long car commutes. That translates into lower transportation costs for households and less wear on regional infrastructure. Compact, well located housing also supports local commercial activity, so residents are more likely to shop locally, use neighbourhood services and contribute to a steady customer base for small businesses and so this is why housing policy, land use policy and economic development are increasingly intertwined. And then one additional point one additional point that's important to make here is how housing acts as a multiplier of existing public investment. So cities already invest heavily in infrastructure such as roads, utilities, parks, transit and public facilities.

Those investments are more cost effective when they're fully utilized and so housing placed near existing infrastructure increases the return on those investment dollars. So more residents mean better use of transit systems, public facilities, local roads, utilities and parks and community spaces. So from an economic productivity standpoint, this matters because it lowers the per capita cost of public services over time. And housing doesn't just affect individual cities, it can also impact or shape regional competitiveness. So again, people make decisions about where to live based on whether they can find housing that fits their income.

Lifestyle that fits their income, lifestyle or family needs. So when housing options are limited or unaffordable, workers are forced to look elsewhere if jobs exist locally. So employers tend to follow the workforce and regions that can offer stable available labor pool are often more attractive for expansion while regions with severe housing shortages struggle to retain talent. And over time, housing constraints can act as a drag on economic growth. Jobs may remain unfilled, businesses may delay expansion, and local economies may lose competitiveness compared to regions with a more balanced housing supply.

So from a city's perspective, housing availability becomes part of a broader economic positioning strategy, and communities that plan for a range of housing types at a range of price points are better equipped to adapt to those changing economic conditions. So next I want to take a look at a regional example and how it has been successful. To bring these concepts to life, I want to showcase an example at a mid sized city sort of like Vacaville. So under a development agreement with the city of Chico, Merriam Park was envisioned to be a full build out to include over 1,600 residential units, roughly 200,000 square feet of retail and approximately 700,000 square feet of commercial and civic space, along with parks and public gathering areas. So Chico, like Vacaville, is a regional employment center with health care, education, retail and service sector jobs and faces similar workforce housing

pressures.

What makes Merriam Park notable is that, housing was planned as part of an economic district and not as a separate land use. So residential development was intentionally integrated alongside offices, health care facilities, restaurants and neighborhood services. The housing component includes multifamily residential units that serve a range of incomes including workforce housing and was delivered in phases between 2018 and 2021. Housing is co located with employment, health care and services, which reduces commute distances and supports workforce participation. Residents support on-site restaurants, retail and services increasing economic activity throughout the day and evening rather than concentrating it in one part of the city.

And from a land use perspective, this development makes efficient use of infrastructure by concentrating housing and jobs in the same area rather than spreading them across disconnected sites. So as you'll see in the photos, there's a variety of housing types throughout this community. Importantly, this project demonstrates a different model of public private partnership so the city of Chico's role was not to directly subsidize housing at scale but to establish a clear land use vision and provide zoning, consistency and coordinate infrastructure and approvals, and then that predictability allowed private investment to move forward and deliver housing as part of a broader economic strategy. Merriam Park helps reinforce several of the key points from this presentation. So it shows how housing supports workforce stability by allowing people to live closer where they work and reducing transportation costs and improving quality of life.

It also demonstrates that housing can strengthen economic productivity when it's integrated into employment centers and commercial districts rather than isolated to the edge of a city, and the project also illustrates how land use decisions affect fiscal outcomes. Concentrated mixed use development makes better use of existing infrastructure and services and improving the return on public investment. And finally, Merriam Park reinforces a central theme in the foundation of housing series which is local decisions matter. So clear planning, consistent zoning, alignment between housing and economic goals can turn housing into an asset that supports long term community resilience. So why housing decisions are economic decisions.

Housing underproduction impacts the economy as well. As mentioned previously, it leads to labor shortages, pushes workers further away and increases businesses' operating cost. Housing instability increases demand for emergency services, code enforcement, temporary shelter, and crisis response, all of which are more expensive than stable planned housing solutions. Housing underproduction acts as a drag on long term economic growth, and regions with persistent housing shortages tend to see slower job growth, reduced labor mobility, and less economic resilience during downturns. So choosing not to build housing has economic consequences that are not just spread across workers, businesses, and public systems, but they appear, and do not appear as a single line item that cities can necessarily necessarily point to.

Cities can play a central role in determining whether housing functions as an economic asset or a constraint. Land use and zoning decisions set the foundation where housing is allowed, at what density, and under what standards directly affect whether housing can be delivered near jobs, services, and infrastructure. Infrastructure and capital planning also matter and when housing planning is aligned with transportation, utilities, parks and public facilities, cities get a greater economic return on their investment. Finally, housing works best as an economic strategy when it is aligned with broader goals. So workforce stability, downtown viality, aging in place, long term fiscal health.

The key point is that housing policy is economic policy, and so decisions about housing shape who can live and work in the community, how businesses operate and how public dollars are spent over time. The key takeaway is that housing is not separate from the economy, it is foundational economic infrastructure. Where people live affects workforce participation, business stability and how effectively public investments are used. Stable and affordable housing benefits workers directly and supports financial stability, reduces commute times and improves health outcomes and allows people to remain connected to jobs and community, And housing decisions are also land use and productivity decisions. Infill housing and housing near jobs and services maximize return on existing infrastructure and reduce long term service cost.

Housing stability helps reduce public cost as well, and communities with adequate housing rely less on emergency services and crisis response, which supports more predictable sustainable public budgeting. And finally, local decisions matter. I know that this has been reinforced throughout the entire presentation, but zoning, land use policies, infrastructure planning, and strategic investment all shape whether housing functions as an economic asset or constraint, and taken together, these points help reinforce the idea that housing policy is economic policy. So as I wrap up tonight's presentation, I just want to leave with a few takeaways from the entire presentation. In the first presentation and recap tonight, we focused on building a shared understanding of types of housing that exist, who it serves, the state and federal laws that require cities to plan for housing across all income levels, and tonight we walked through how housing actually gets built, the development process, the financing layers, and the role cities play in enabling projects through land use decisions, policy alignment, and strategic investment.

And then we looked at housing through an economic lens. As infrastructure that supports the workforce, local businesses, fiscal health and long term community resilience. So taken together, the presentation is meant to provide a common foundation to support informed decision making. And it was designed to move the conversation away from assumptions about affordable housing, who needs affordable housing and the types of affordable housing towards a shared community goal and understanding that as future housing policies, funding decisions and development proposals come forward, this foundation will help ensure that discussions are grounded in legal and planning realities, development and financing constraints and long term economic impacts that might impact the decision making around projects and housing choices made today will shape Vacaville's economy, neighborhoods and quality of life for decades to come. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions or take in any comments that the council or public might have regarding the foundations and housing.

Thank you for the presentation. I'm glad we're actually having this study session with it all put together because separated sometimes it gets difficult to truly understand and remember what we said and it's been a couple of years. I'm going lead off with a few questions and hopefully collectively what we can do is get to both a better understanding and also maybe some input based upon some of the things that we've experienced over the last few years. Number one, what steps are we taking to improve or incentivize housing here in Vacaville? So that would be my first question.

And some of this so what steps are we taking to improve or incentivize housing? Great presentation but as a body of being able to provide direction and policy. The incentive side is where I want to start.

Thank you for the question. So a lot of the steps are identified in our current housing element. Currently, what the city has in its pocket are city owned sites that they can that can be provided to potential developers at a reduced cost to help support the development of affordable housing. But currently, the city does not have reoccurring or a funding pot, a housing trust fund, inclusionary housing ordinance that would create, a fund, a revolving fund to provide financial support, to projects. But the Community and Economic Development Department has done a lot of work towards streamlining approval processes, have completed zoning changes in applicable zoning areas to encourage either high density projects or to align with state laws requiring the city to allow for streamlined applications or review or approvals at the ministerial level as opposed to the council level.

So there are some steps that the city has taken that are within our purview to help support and encourage development, but some of the resources the city has available are limited.

So with that, if we had another Pony Express example today, what's our capacity to embrace someone coming through city hall and saying, we have a project and it requires that financing and that funding, what's the capacity to be able to address those? Because I know sometimes what we've had is projects that stall. They look good and then they stall. So sometimes the finger pointing is, well, who's to blame when we're trying to make things work? And so this is a piece of what is our capacity to be able to help that?

And then that's the reason why I asked the first question is how to incentivize it. Because the third question that you can just, you can dovetail this in is, what are the, whether it's a single most or the top risks or obstacles to actually getting those across the finish line. Three to six years is a long time, right? The patience to try and work on something that stalls, we can be back here and it can be an entirely new council at times to say, Remember that project. So those are my leading questions.

Yeah. So for your second question regarding projects that we have in the works in our capacity to support those projects, that will be the priority of the housing and community services department moving forward into the upcoming fiscal year. So as an example, there's Oak Grove Senior Apartments that has been an approved project for quite a few years but is really hitting a roadblock in being awarded that gap financing that would help push that project over the edge. Most recently, we, partnered with them on a home application, that hopefully would help fill that gap so that the project can move forward. If awarded, the home funding, that project would move forward with a low income housing tax credit application in the fall.

You might remember that the project that was previously approved at the Allison site, the Allison Transportation oriented development that was approved, the developer essentially ended up deciding not to move forward because of the funding challenges that they were experiencing. So I will say at this time, it is more really a constraint on the funding available to fill those gaps than it is a capacity or desire of the city to help support those projects move forward. And then for your third question, again, getting those projects to the finish line is really, a matter of the funding that's available. And as I mentioned during the presentation, at the federal level, there has been a there is a push to eliminate some of those critical funding programs that help bridge that gap. And at the state level, the upcoming state budget, while it doesn't eliminate programs, it does not provide new a significant investment in new funding.

So that competitive

It seems to be decreasing.

Yeah, so that pressure on those programs from these projects, not just in our community but statewide, is only going to get worse.

Yeah. And then I'll just leave it with my comment. And to our city manager, did you have a comment?

Yeah, I just wanted to add, you know, we are working with the community development and economic development department to improve our development process. Timelines we're trying to process the applications more efficiently. We have also moved certain affordable housing projects like the one for the veterans, I'm forgetting the name of that project, Big Street You know we moved that very quickly through our process but the challenge we face is on the financing side and that's where most of our projects are getting stalled. And

a comment that I'll leave and then I'll open up to my colleagues is it's really easy when you see something and you go, Oh, I like that. So in Chico to see a Miriam Park. So the question that I would have is, are our policies, obviously because the policies seem to be very intricately aligned like objectives and you'll do this and we shall this. But ultimately, collectively, do our policies align so that we can have that? Because that looks nice and as we're looking to an East Of Leisure Town growth area, specific plan, and there's all these developers working together, part of what I know that I would want is when you see something like that, you say, I can live there.

That could be very beneficial for a community. And so for me, it's a trusting of staff to say, do our policies align with this and is there something that we would need to adapt so that we could actually achieve what they're achieving? So I'll open that up to the council for any of the questions before I open

it up to the public.

Councillor Member Stockton.

Yes, thank

you for

the presentation. I'm glad we had time to get it all done. So I guess my question is about when you brought up the Pony Express, you said that there's 15 permanent supportive housing units there for seniors And I know with the work on Capsulano that's going on, it seems like the only funding that's available is for permanent supportive housing projects. I know that the council has made a lot of comments about trying to find a way to create some temporary supportive housing with wraparound services. I'm going to go into a little of that in my next question but I guess my question is if permanent supportive housing is being provided for seniors, what is happening to them when they require full time care?

How is that working out? And what is how often do people go through, I guess, those occupancies of the permanent supportive units?

Yeah, that's a good question. So with permanent supportive housing, if you're a senior, that's not designed to provide like medical support or any intense, I guess, like if you had to be at a, senior facility, it is not designed to provide that level of support. So the seniors in a permanent supportive housing setting would be it would be the intention that they can live independently. So those supports might look like, connection to food resources, connection to, resources for, maybe health care, challenges that they might be experiencing or or maybe they need transportation to and from doctor's appointments. Maybe they might need, like, limited live in care assistance, they might connect them to resources with the county.

But it definitely would not rise to the level of like assisted living or anything like that.

Okay. And then I guess my question is what what can we do to encourage the type of housing that we're looking for with the temporary supportive, with the wraparound services when there doesn't even before these federal funds were taken, there doesn't seem to be funding for that. So is there anything that you have on that front? Because I I think that's what we have figured out that we really need or want to pursue, but there's nothing in here about that.

Yeah. So with temporary housing or transitional housing, those resources, you're right, tend to be a little bit more limited because most of the larger state or federal sources of funding tend to gear more towards permanent supportive housing. And so what the city would really be looking at is are there local funds or a way to start obtaining local funds where we have more control over how those funds are used and we can, create the requirements around those funds, that's what the city would be looking at. So whether that's some type of housing trust fund or, an inclusionary housing ordinance which, defines how those funds could be used, it really would be local funds that the city would have most control over. I will say that some of the changes being presented in the federal budget related to continuum of care funding or COC funding is trying to move towards a transitional housing focus, but then that would take away funding that's currently available for permanent supportive housing.

So it's more of a trade off, which then might result in more people losing access to housing, which might put more of a strain on emergency housing services. So it's more of a trade off than it is of additional support.

So does this do we as a city still have the same ability to work within the constraints of some of the properties that we own, would they still qualify for the temporary supportive housing or do they only like as far as like when we work with a developer and we put forth the land, are we still able to do that with temporary supportive housing projects or is it only work with permanent supportive housing?

Yeah. So the city could look at if the city wanted some type of transitional or temporary housing model on a city owned property, that would be at the discretion of the city, and they could put out an RFP or put out a call. But I would suspect that it wouldn't just take the land investment. They would probably take some financial investment. And while on the federal level they're trying to move towards that, that has not yet been done. So there's not a lot of options currently to help support that temporary housing model.

Okay. And with that, I'm just gonna ask our city manager, could you maybe explain the potential for the future a broader RFP so that we can actually activate some of our other properties and just individually provide more of an advantage. Could you explain that?

Yeah, would actually have Tamara explain it. We have few properties where we can, do such an RFP.

Yeah, so, recently, earlier this year, we completed an update to the citywide property management plan, and we established a process, a more defined process in how the city could look at and evaluate vacant surplus land that's available. It is the intention of my department to work on a comprehensive RFP of, available vacant city sites, mostly those that are addressed as well in the housing element, and work with the community and economic department to determine, one, how many affordable units and at what affordable levels we still need. Two, how many of those units are what's reasonable, to request or require at each one of those sites, and then put together a comprehensive RFP and release it to our affordable housing development community and really kinda design and drive what the city is looking for and what the city wants on each one of those sites. So it might look like, oh, there's a vacant property on Depot. There's a vacant property on Quinn Road.

There's a vacant property on Orange. Between those three sites, we would like x amount of units at 30%, x amount of units across the sites at 60%, and we can provide the land at a reduced rate. Development community, you tell us how you can deliver those units, the number, the affordability levels we need. And while we have not taken such approach in the past, I feel like, or I'm confident that that might be a successful approach for Vacaville. That will just take time to move forward with developing and then releasing that RFP.

Well, sounds like it's a good and logical plan to create a volume and a scale so there's opportunity for a developer to do that. When I heard that, thought, okay, this sounds like a from a staff perspective, it sounds like a great idea. So I'm looking forward to seeing what that looks like. Councilmember Wiley?

Thank you for the information and you mentioned being at the first of the program and you were at six instead of at 10 so that was also a big plus so we could digest it a little bit better. And I have kind of a variety of questions. So you've talked a lot or one part about the long term lease and a low cost. Now are some of the long term leases like a dollar a year or something, are they really that low or how what's a low cost lease?

Yeah, so typically Vacaville's strategy is to just allow the developer to purchase the property at a dollar. And typically that's what we consider donating the property to the project so there's no cost to developer for land acquisition. And even that alone, we would require an affordability restriction dictate the affordability levels, how many units as a compensation for donating that land. So typically in Vacaville, don't do a long term lease model.

That's what I thought. So essentially we're giving them the property and then that's allowing them to build what they need to build with other funding and then it serves the city, both the people and the economic interests. Correct. Okay. And then number two, the project based vouchers because you were saying that's one thing about Pony Express because we had 59 vouchers for that. I'm worried about what happens when funds are cut next year. Would we still be able to honor those for their fifty five years or what happens with that?

So for project based vouchers, the contract between the housing authority and the owner is a twenty year contract with the ability to renew for another twenty years. The housing authority has to do a couple things when they evaluate whether or not they can provide project based vouchers. So the first thing is the housing authority can only allocate a certain number of their their contract authority, their ACC, or the number of units. We we have two project project based vouchers. So once we hit that limit, we cannot project base any more vouchers.

So it is kinda competitive among projects. The housing authority has to be able to ensure, and we review this monthly for our our our financial standing. So the housing authority has two things that it has to look at annually with its funding. One, how many units we have because we can't lease more than units than we have, but also our budget authority. We only get a certain amount of dollars, and so that that amount of, funding doesn't always equate to being able to lease up all the unit or all the vouchers that the fact that the housing authority has under its, authority.

So we're always looking to make sure that if funding is cut, if we see a reduction, if rents rise, that we can continue to support the number of vouchers that we have leased up. Because under our contract, once we execute that HAP contract with the owner, we have to, or it's our priority to make sure that those units stay filled through the term, of that contract. In the event that a housing authority, I don't know, lost so much funding that they wouldn't even be able to keep their HAP contracts going, that's a significant cut. There's a lot more happening before that before we start canceling, HAP contracts. But the housing authority monitors its financials monthly and takes into account the cost of all of those project based vouchers.

And I imagine that there's some accountability between the landlords that you're working with and the people that are getting the vouchers so that is it an annual basis or how often do you look to make sure that they're following the regulations for being in the program?

Yeah. So the housing authority has to recertify the participants at least annually. If there's any changes in the household in between what we call an annual recertification, then it's the the participant's responsibility to report those changes to housing authority. So if the household changes, if income changes, anything like that. That can be on top of what the resident is required to do at, on the site.

So for instance, if the project is also a low income housing tax credit project, there are requirements that the site has to follow to, meet compliance or regulatory compliance with the state under housing tax credit. So not only is the site reviewing eligibility at least annually for the resident, but as a as a housing authority participant, they're recertifying eligibility with the housing authority. And then in addition to that, they still follow, other housing authority requirements, meaning we do inspections on all the units at least biannually and more often if the housing authority might identify an issue I don't want to say issue, but that it might be more helpful to inspect on an annual basis to ensure compliance. And then the owner works with a housing authority just overall on a regular basis if we start seeing concerns or issues that impact a lot of residents or tend to be a pattern, then the housing authority has that direct contact with the owner and usually the property manager on a more property right or project wide level if we start to see concerns there.

So is the city needing any more landlords to participate or do you have quite a few apartments available?

Yeah. As far as the project based voucher program, what has to happen is the housing authority releases an RFP if there are project based vouchers available. And so right now, the housing authority is not seeking any landlords or projects to work with to, allocate project based vouchers. If that does happen, then we're required to post a notice. And usually what we'll do is we will reach out to projects in the city to see if they're interested in executing any type of project based voucher contract. All right.

Well, was timely but last week I got to take a field trip to the navigation center in Vallejo and also to the Home Keep project just a couple blocks down. And so it was really interesting to see how the program was run and the navigation center had beds for both men and women and it was a community, there were people involved and they were doing some programs. The services weren't always right there like I thought they might be but they were involved with programs. The frustration was that they might have met the criteria for being ready for their own transitional housing but there was none available. So that's another thing that we just have to always you have to have all stages of the housing thing like you said.

So that was kind of frustrating with the navigation center. I think something had been there six months and would have moved on had there been apartments available at the lower rate. And then the other home key project was three or four triplexes and they were all new. I think they just opened last year and there were about 40 apartments and they were fully furnished and it was for the people that were very low and they were only paying like 30% of the rate. And everyone was very happy to be there, you know, it just makes sense and it was a really wonderful program through the Homekey Project which we had looked at, you know, here in Vacaville as well.

And then I wanted to see were there any problems or issues with that Chico Merriam Park or whatever the name of that was. Do you know were there problems or issues there?

Yeah, the thing that I saw in researching the project the most, and I realized I didn't do a good job making clear, it's not like that project happened overnight.

Right.

That is a decades long project that took time. If at one point, they had to go and do some revisions to their development and disposition loan agreement when either funding was challenging or when a new partner had to be identified. So it was not a seamless project overall. I think the point of presenting it is what the end product could look like with work and investment into planning for jobs, services, restaurants, housing, all located in the same area.

And then just my final comment is how hard it is to let people know that it would be okay to have a project near your home in most instances because that Victory Garden is in District 6 and I've had quite a few people, they object to it because they're going to be renters or they object to it because it's going to be three stores high or they object to it for a lot of reasons and we've had people in here talk about well I don't want renters, you know, I don't want renters, you know what happens with renters and I just wanted to say for the record that on the day that they were opening the Pony Express one of the renters opened her apartment so that we could see her apartment and I walked in and talked with her and she's about my age, she's a retired nurse and so it's not just a oh, it's a low income renter, it's a nurse that has worked her years serving the people and she was very happy that she had a place to be because I don't know if there was a divorce or whatever but, you know, she didn't have a place and through this program she has an apartment that she can live in on her own and not have to worry about being a burden to her children or having a place to live.

So she was grateful, she was relieved and it was just a wonderful it made me feel good to be happy and part of that project and that's what we need to do for people is help them find housing that works for them and help other people not worry if there's a nurse in a low income apartment. So that was my comment.

Yeah, thank you. Vice Mayor Silva. So can

you switch to slide 41, please? And then I'll get to a couple questions on that slide. But going back to council member Stockton's comments about our particular aging population. So kind of along these lines, at one point, local twenty four hour care facilities or assisted care facilities would allow a certain percentage of Medi Cal patients, but the last few years that hasn't been the case. So it's all whatever the market rate is.

So that in itself has been displacing families who need twenty four hour care for their parents or their whomever it might be or they themselves. So within these, when we're talking about affordable housing, is there any policies that you're aware of that can be implemented locally to require or to require a certain percentage of units that can that would be able to go towards individuals who are on Medi Cal or some type of subsidy?

I think the answer to that question is the source of income is not, when it comes to affordable housing or income restricted, the source of income isn't deter is not dictated. So whether it comes from, Social Security or medical disability, that is not a concern or an issue with income restricted affordable housing units. But if the question is whether or not we can require projects to provide a level of care that someone would need, like twenty four hour medical care or maybe a medical assistant or a nurse or something like like that. I think we're getting into a different type of housing, not necessarily affordable housing.

And I think So I'll keep it within scope, but I think like when we talk about affordable housing here, we're talking about rental. And as our age as our population continues to age and we're gonna see aging related quote unquote diseases or disorders have a higher impact within our population, particularly when we're talking about economic development or the ability for families to prosper. It'd be nice to see what models are out there to ensure that some of our own locals still have access to or have the ability to afford to keep their elders more closer. So that way they can continue to manage their family, continue to contribute to our community and move forward. So going to So shifting gears and talking about slide 41.

I love concept that's laid out here, and we can see different diverse housing options in there. Now, what I'm constantly hearing from developers and what we're seeing from developer proposals, particularly like in the South Town one, is something like this design in itself is not feasible. And it's often attributed towards our diffies or our CFDs or whatever it might be. So looking at this, is this something that that are these designs something that in itself could be feasible or we can be competitive of creating some type of design like this to allow for affordable housing?

That's a great question and that's probably geared more towards my counterpart, Aaron Morris, with community and economic development. So I will definitely take that comment down to see either what we are already doing or what we can work towards to make smaller infill developments more feasible for developers or even homeowners who might be looking to expand.

And then in what ways does the market determine the housing cost as far as anything that in itself is subsidized? Are those things So if the median income increases, the cost of that rent will increase as well. So if something you know, we've seen so many times in, you know, last couple of deck few decades where the housing market goes down, will we see a decline? Is that something that would off kinda put that that cost?

Exactly. Okay. So with income restricted units, the affordable rent levels are tied to the AMI. So essentially, what it says is 30% of the income that somebody earning 60% or 80% or 30% of area median income would be able to afford. So as those income levels increase, then the rent that a project is able to charge at that affordability level may also increase.

And if it decreases, then the max rents that a project might be able to charge would decrease. It would not impact, well, it depends on the funding source, but typically, there are safeguards built in so that if a family is eligible at the time they lease up, if they then increase income or their income falls outside of the revised income levels, they, there might be a part in the agreement that says, okay, well, that family could remain there, but they're gonna pay market rate rents. They're not gonna continue to have subsidized rents, or that family may get get be given notice and have to move within a hundred and twenty days. So it really just depends on what the funding source says. But, yes, essentially, if, area median income levels decrease, then the rent max rents tied to those AMIs would decrease as well.

And and so along those lines, just wanna thank you and your team personally because when I've gotten calls from residents who all of a sudden, you know, their rates are being asked to increase $5.06, $800,000 within a month, you know, in month in a shorter amount of period, and you guys have always you've all been very responsive to that and helping assist that. I appreciate that. Is there an ideal ratio of housing supply for those income levels that are based on that microeconomy of those given cities per se or those regions?

I think that's what the regional housing needs assessment tries to outline and and determine for each city. That determines the projected need at each income level based on projected growth for the city. So I would say what we want to shoot for are those RENA numbers outlined in our housing element.

But that's a statewide model that's implemented across the board. Thank you. Then I'll do last question will be centered on how can we support more sweat equity projects such as Habitat for Humanity?

That is a great question. I think that if we continue to consider proposals on city owned property, that we can help contribute to make those projects unsuccessful, like we would do with any other project. If there's a funding opportunity that requires the city to be a sponsor, such as like the federal CPF funding through representative Mike Thompson or if there are funding sources like HOME that require the city to be a sponsor just continuing to partner with those organizations and apply for that funding to help support the project, that's kind of the best strategy.

Thank you so much. City manager.

Yeah I would like to just add a couple more comments. The things that Tamara mentioned earlier regarding the policy so we can also adopt inclusionary housing ordinance as well as you know the housing trust fund so the way that works is for example if there's a developer that's building the home and they're not interested in building the affordable housing we can charge them a fee based on number of units, the size, square footage and all of that and it can go into an housing trust fund so the city over time is now collecting funds for a future project which we could apply for example you know the combined RFP that we're planning to do for the developers then we can say we have 500,000 or 1,000,000 available in our housing trust fund and that trust then builds over time as the developers are building. And the question regarding this particular design or a housing market type, the design of the home are dependent on the market so we really can't say like if this picture shows this design and if it will work in Vacaville or not and that's totally dependent on the market, the demand in the community and what kind of home designs would the developer propose.

So those would be my couple of comments.

Just to clarify,

when you say inclusionary housing, is that inclusionary zoning or is that something separate?

No, that's separate as I understand but we'll have to confirm with our Erin Morris, community and economic development director but the inclusionary housing ordinance the way I understand it works is when you have an ordinance in place then you can define for a residential unit for 2,500 square feet home for every home that the developer would build they would set aside you know 50¢ per square foot or something and those numbers are based on a study, you can also do the same square footed charge for commercial properties and then those are then going into a housing trust fund where then you're securing that funding to be applied towards future but we'll have to do a commercial linkage and an inclusionary housing study to get those numbers for our particular situation.

And then the second clarifying question, so that sounds like that would be in addition to other fees such as DIP fees and CFDs, is

that Yes.

Thank you.

I'm going to see if council member Chapman, I know you're on the line. Do you have any questions or comments?

I had one. However, the questions that have already been asked by the council members are pretty much covered what I wanted to ask. I do want to inquire on slide 26. It was, I think, a development partners. Can to that?

Can you see it? We're on slide 26.

No I can't. Is that the slide that lists type of partnership? Is that what that slide is? It's not. Don't worry about the slide.

I'll ask this question. There are specific or there are particular developers that specialize in affordable housing development. And we've had for over the past year, we've had our developers, I say our developers, those who have who are very popular in backfield and built many projects here around the table. Of of those individuals, are any of them known to specialize in building affordable housing?

So did you understand the question? Are any of the developers known to specialize in affordable housing?

So we do have affordable housing developers here in Vacaville. So as an example, like Eden Housing, they're the developer on the Oak Grove project.

Habitat?

Habitat. They specialize in self help homeownership models. And then Mutual Housing, which is the developer of the Victory Gardens Project, they are a nonprofit that specializes in affordable housing developments.

Okay. And so East Of Leisure Town, the only reason I was asking, East Of Leisure Town, if that's an area that there is the possibility of having affordable housing built, we have some developers have already been communicating. They have they've already submitted documentation for permits and just been working on on the the requirements to get their project up and going. If we wanted if the council decided, you know, that's an ideal location area for us to address our our requirement for a mandate for affordable housing. What what impact would that be on those developers at this time?

Would there be room for us to offer incentives? And are they the type and I think it's a difficult question to ask because I learned from your presentation. First of all, let me back up and say thank you very much for Housing one hundred one. It was great destination to be dating the nine hopes and community will chime in. Those that are not watching that they will go back at the hearing that of this presentation.

It would really benefit many individuals. And even the questions from some of the council members tonight, we're speaking of three three types of housing or the questions of those are three types of housing. We're talking about affordable housing based upon the medium income. We're talking about housing needed for the unhoused, home team and then Vice Mayor Silva inquired about really medical assisted living type of health. If I may share the question from Vice Mayor Silva, many of those type of properties are built or come about from nonprofit organization that specialize in assisted living.

And I don't think that type of housing is something that we will be focusing on as the city. And then with Habitat for Humanities was mentioned. And yes, they feel that the property that we have, would we be looking for a more higher density than one or two homes that habitat for humanity usually goes within a community. So with that, I'm just very thankful for the additional information. I am concerned I was able to attend the warehousing virtual webinar conference last week.

That was very insightful. There was much mentioned about the vouchers, the block grant and the cuts that are taking place. And I'm sure you're staying on top of that, but it doesn't look good. It doesn't look good. It looks like you're gonna take a great fit in in the housing department.

So and I know you keep us updated there. It's there and I know that we have improved our process and getting when an application comes in and those community development is doing a great job in streamlining the process. And I'm just thinking that with we have until 2031, I think you said, to get our affordable housing built. And it takes anywhere from three to six years for that to happen. So it seems like this is the time right now that we're gonna have to be making serious decisions or giving direction to the city manager for us to move forward.

So I guess that instead of questions, I'm just making comments, observations. But thank you very much for the information. I gained a lot from it.

Thank you. Councilmember Freeman and before that if our city manager Chaudhry.

Yeah the concept of the East Of Leisure Town have come up a few times in the conversation so I was just getting information from Aaron Morris. So we have the developers that have been pushing back hard on building the affordable housing but we do have a guiding principle that was adopted as part of the East Of Leisure Town process that you know they can partner with somebody to build affordable housing so this is something we can evaluate with the developers if they would be willing to partner with a nonprofit to do so as we develop the East Of Leisure Town specific plan but at this time the plans that they have proposed they have really pushed back hard on not building the affordable housing because it doesn't pencil out for them financially at this time.

Councilmember Freeman?

Yes. Thank you Director Coleman for your presentation and I know one of the difficulties infill housing is our existing community, right? We all experience it. Councilmember Wiley just said District 6 people complain because they don't want a three storey. I've got the same thing going on in District 5 where every time one of these projects comes up for a possible infill, they just come after all the council members and the mayors and the city managers and everybody's in a big uproar because, and I get it, somebody doesn't want a, that's lived in the same place for thirty or forty, they don't want a monstrosity of a building looking down into their backyard blocking their morning sunrises, all of the things that happen when something new comes along.

So what do you say to the current homeowners that have to put up with this? And I'm not asking for an answer from you. Wouldn't do that. But I mean, these are the things that we all have to consider, right? And it's really difficult at times trying to come up with the answers.

As Vice Mayor Sub was talking about slide 41 of 54, that infill housing, that just looks ideal. I mean, that that looks like something that we can all live with. But this is the thing that I hear in talking to people and talking to developers and talk something that it's a it's a terminology at every single one of us council members and the city managers and every it doesn't pencil out. We always hear that terminology. It doesn't pencil out.

You know? So even if we give the land away, you know, and and what we're doing, we're essentially giving our fellow taxpayers of the city of Vacaville, we're giving their land away to try to create affordable housing that still doesn't pencil out. So I wanted to just go back to one thing and that is the city's role in for men's to support local employers. So our city's the city's role for future policies and project decisions to come up with the right mixture of housing and affordable housing and serving all the community, not just the ones that can afford it, but the ones that can't also. How do we integrate all this?

And so one of the things would you agree that one of the city's primary roles is for the economic engine and the vitality of our city is to have, through your presentation that you just showed, to have a really good housing program, right? I mean, you already said it, so I won't make you repeat it again. But wouldn't the same apply then to our surrounding we have seven cities in our county, right? And then we have our county, right? So wouldn't the same apply to our county that as it's one of the most vital roles that the city plays to create affordable housing, wouldn't we also support the county in trying to do that?

I mean, you know, not trying to stir something up with California forever and all the implications of that housing development that's proposed out there. There's a lot of people that are against it, a lot of people that want to see it. But it seems like when you're building an infrastructure from the ground up and you're putting three, four, five, six storey buildings, whatever it is that they're going to propose to do, that's when the water hookup go in, the sewer hookups go in, that's where you get a lot more bang for your dollars. So it seems to me like, you know, somebody's on the right path with some of their thinking about that because as our developers are already telling us for infilling into our own communities, it doesn't pencil out. Right?

So all I'm saying is I think it's just as equally important that we try to promote, not just from our city, but the county and the state, whatever we can do to get the ball rolling on providing more housing, which ultimately is going to provide more affordable housing. So again, I'm kind of going off the cuff here like my fellow council members just throwing their opinions and thoughts about this stuff out. But I think that that is the foundation to future policy and project decisions based should be about how do we make not just affordable housing, but housing for all. You know what I mean? So anyways, but just as equally important, and I'm sorry, I'm just rambling on, is how do we create really good jobs?

Right? How do we do that as a city? How do we do that as a community? Nobody's doing it. I mean, really, look at look at what's going on in our county with Anheuser Busch and, you know, schools getting closed down and Valero getting closed down and now jobs getting cut from Jelly Belly and now the city of Fairfield suffering with all of the income that they're losing and Valero said, we have to do something.

We have to do something a community, not just a city, but as a community. We have to we have to figure out a way to create jobs, and there's just so much bureaucracy and red tape. It's sometimes just sickens me to think about how hard it is to get anything done in this state, So anyways, that's the end of my ramble and sorry it went so long. No question. Great presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If you

want to comment, you can.

I do. I do have. Just a couple of comments. No. So I did wanna bring back up slide 43 that touches on exactly part of what you mentioned is that housing at all affordability levels is not just an individual city problem but a regional issue.

And that on a regional level, it's important for all cities to work together to make sure there's the right mix of housing at all affordability levels. And that that, while it's not the only thing that creates economic investment, it's a piece of what can help build the desire of companies or organizations to to locate here. I also wanted to add that staff in my department and community development are very aware of the challenges, and trying to commit, create community awareness and understanding, again, of the need for housing at all affordability levels. You might remember that the city, applied for a Bloomberg fellow, to come and spend a couple years here, with our community, and part of the proposal that was submitted includes just that, some steps taken to get out into the community, conduct some community outreach, get some feedback from the community, and really understand concerns, fears, misunderstandings around the need for housing at all affordability levels, including affordable housing, and how and bring that back to the council, hopefully if we're, fortunate enough to get a fellow, and bring that back to the council and help create some strategies over the two years on on how to possibly build momentum and support around that.

Yeah. And I don't see how we can do it. I mean, we're running a $9,000,000 deficit right now in our city and this year is not looking too much better. So where does the help come from? And so that's why I say when people say no to possibilities of other places in the community that could maybe be the economic engine for our community and people are just flat out saying no to it, I just it just boggles my mind.

I mean, you're not even open to it. You're not even looking at it. You're not even hopeful for it as an economic engine for our entire region. And you're just no you're just saying no to it. It just seems like it lacks real investigation. So that's all I have to say. Thank you.

Thank you. And I think I know where you're going with this. City Manager Chaudhry?

Yeah, I need a direction. Is that something based on the comments we have heard the inclusionary housing ordinance or the housing trust fund, is that something council will like us to do some more research and come back with some options? Is that a desire or I mean we will continue to look at the combined RFP which will take us a few months to put together and then we'll be releasing that RFP hopefully in next three to four months. I just committed Tamara's time but you know those are the kind of things we just need direction on from counsel's perspective. What are the kind of things you want us to focus our energy on?

Mr. Can

we sleep on that one?

Which one? Mr.

Well I mean what you're talking about. I mean because right now I'm sorry, I talking out of

turn here? No, you're still.

Okay. I'm just, the reason I'm asking that is because I know that the kind of financial shape that we're in right now to spend resources on something if we don't have the engine behind it to make it go forward past that and we're just turning Tamara's wheels and turning your wheels just so that we can get an answer. It seems like we need to work more on getting our budget in order and having the money to move forward. And then asking for responsible feedback from you guys with something to back it up. Because right now, you're just gonna come to us and say, this is what it could be, but if we don't have any money and I'm not I'm not trying to poo poo on it.

You know what I mean? I'm just is it really realistic that we spend money right now to investigate something that we can't do anything about under their current Yeah. Fiscal circumstances.

No, I totally understand that. So we can discuss internally and get back to you if that is something we can pull together internally or we'll have to hire a consultant. If we have to hire a consultant, we will wait.

Yeah. Councilmember Richie.

Thank you so much. My conversation is kind of dovetailed on Fremont statement regarding just looking at some of the slides talking about just the economic benefit when it comes to the city of Echo and the region and how important it is. If you build housing but you have no jobs, it won't work. If you provide employment opportunities but no employers, it won't work. The system can't we can't just focus just on helping elderly or helping low income, middle income.

We need if we don't address the whole thing at once by sort of the big picture and see how we can't have this conversation without looking at the economic division. The ability for us to create revenue and get out of this hole that we're in as a city and a county is so paramount. We have to find a way to attract and put so much effort in our development to attract businesses that come here. So therefore, we can have business come here, we can do workforce development and have the current staff and current people fill those positions, fill the housing at all different levels. I agree with Ted Freeman, his conversations 100%.

As a region, we better start working together so we're all going fall. We need to find ways to incentivize and really put way more investment in Vacaville into getting large employers or any employers in here that can facilitate and build the house because in order to have workforce housing, have to have jobs. We can't just build houses and inspect it. It's not a field of dreams, they're not going to come. We have to work together to find out what they need.

Just emphasis on how important it is to work the city of Actonville to really put a lot of investment in getting employers here, figuring out what they want. I think two years ago I did a presentation for the Delta team and on the housing fund and I gave a whole presentation on how it would work. I laid it out for free and how essentially it works when you have investors develop and they put a lot of money aside to put money into DPA programs. It's not hard. We should not have to spend a lot of money to figure out what already works.

I gave you guys the blueprint for free. It's already in effect. We've got to do it. We've to invest a lot of time and energy to making sure we don't miss opportunities from the region, county. Like I say, yes, California forever or other employers that can come here and bring impact that would facilitate every level of employment and their jobs. It's just unless we address the whole thing, we're going to fail. We can't just focus on housing abuse group being blind eye the fact there's no jobs here. Housing has to be a walking step with employment at this point. I really agree with councilor Fremont's conversation. If we just build housing without placing it in the work, we're going to fail.

It's pretty dire.

Councilmember Stockton?

Yes. Know that the city manager asked a question about inclusionary housing and inclusionary zoning. I just want to make it clear that I do not support that. I've heard several council members here today talk about incentivizing people to build what we want. We're in this situation because we continue to try to force people to do what we want them to do and we're not thinking about ways that we can incentivise them, whether it's with our land or whether it's with permitting fee waivers and things like that.

We have not done it. And I've been on council for six years and we have the same conversations over and over again. Yes, there are a lot of frustrations revolving around, you know, businesses leaving and people not being able to afford to live in the community that they were raised in. We have issues with the county with tax sharing agreements. We have businesses that are leaving that Vacaville families have now lost those jobs and aren't sure how they're going to pay bills.

So I also know that we have a biotech initiative that has been going on for at least six years and we've had some ups and downs, right? We've seen Valera leave and that's impacted Vacaville families. We've seen Budweiser leave, that's impacted Vacaville families. But and then Jelly Belly as well. But I also want to remind Vacaville that we lost Genentech and we were fortunate that the council and staff specifically got on top of that to facilitate Lonza coming here.

But make no mistake, we just broke even. We didn't gain anything. We were fortunate. And so I think this is a very complex issue. Yes, it does involve regional outlook, but I don't think that we can force make it harder for first time homebuyers to purchase properties by making them more expensive so that someone else is paying less.

I think we need to find ways to get what we want built by incentivizing the developers to build what we want without passing on those costs to make it harder for Vacaville families that are already struggling. I think it can be done, but we keep trying to do the same things that we've been doing and expecting a different result. I hear comments about like housing for all. Like when I and I know that there are politics involved around that, but I wanna make sure is I want a diversity of housing to be built in Vacaville that meets different income levels. I don't think anybody is entitled to live anywhere, let alone Vacaville, but anywhere for free.

And when I hear some of the stuff about inclusionary housing and I hear things about permanent supportive housing where folks can live for free forever and not have to take advantage of opportunities to better themselves, I have a problem with that. I don't have a problem helping people who need help with an expectation that they're gonna take advantage of the services that are going to help them. So I just wanna be clear because the city manager asked. I'm grateful to hear my my colleagues on council say incentivize, incentivize, incentivize. I think the mayor started out there.

But housing for all, I wanna be very clear what I mean. I want diverse housing options that we incentivize developers to build in a way that it does pencil for them. Because extorting them or constantly like forcing them to pay more, it's just getting passed on to Vacaville families. And I want to try something different. So, and yes, I agree.

I've heard about regionalised efforts and working with I want to be clear, like we've talked about one opportunity or one thing that's popular right now in the media. But make no mistake, I think we owe it as a council to look at any and every opportunity that we can to bring jobs to Vacaville families. Any of those opportunities because the reality is that the base is one of our largest providers opportunities to bring industry that are gonna support them, great. But there are also a variety of different folks that, you know, or different businesses that may wanna come here or to Benicia or to Fairfield. All of that is gonna help everybody.

So I think that we owe it to look at all options. I don't think we should throw all of our eggs in one basket, whether it's biotech or something else. We need to start thinking about how we are going to incentivise things to help people because what we're doing, it's just the same thing that we've been doing over and over again. So I just wanted to make sure that that was clear.

::I

I also just wanted to address the question that you made, was there an interest in inclusionary housing? And as you asked the question I thought well I do know that there is some interest in inclusionary housing but we did take a vote six months ago and it wasn't the majority but I will go on record saying there is an interest in inclusionary housing, one of two models, either asking them to build inclusionary housing as part of their project or to do the fund so that there would be money paid into a housing fund that we could use for other things. So I don't think based on comments so far that probably is the majority but I do know that I myself am interested in continuing to look at those options.

Vice Maricela?

Thank you. To answer the question, I think the question is, number one, for staff and all of us to be cautious of certain terms and look at and and how that triggers us, particularly when things have been very politicized. And the fact of the matter is what is feasible and what is not. What is sustainable and what is not. What is best for our community and what is not.

And so with that said, like when I hear developers say it doesn't pencil out, I've never seen one piece of data that shows what, how, or why that doesn't pencil out. I think a lot of times that's what we're told and it concerns me as a citizen, concerns me as an elected member, that we take what's being said to us without any data to support that. So for me, if we're gonna be a data informed if we're gonna make data informed decisions, we need the data to make those informed decisions and not just taking one person's word over it for another. That said, to me, it sounds like it's just a matter of whether we call it requiring a certain fee or imposing a certain fee or incentivizing, that's still gonna be a reduction of revenue to the cost of the services that our staff provide. And that has to be offset in some way or another.

So either we're incentivizing or reducing or subsidizing a developer that may or may not pass it on to the homeowner or to the renter, or we're doing that across the board to us as citizens. And someone can correct me if I'm wrong, if it's necessary. The bigger question is, I don't agree fundamentally with the concept that we need jobs first and then we'll build the housing. They have to go hand in hand. And I think is what was laid out that right now, other than one possible additional project, we're not gonna see anything for years or three, four years.

And again, correct correct me if I'm wrong there because there's less funding avail the competitiveness for the limited funding that's even being likely reduced even more. That situation is not going away. So how Vacaville can be more competitive for that to make sure whether they're seniors or young folks that we are losing, we are losing generations of folks who are trying to find a way to stay within our community, to find a way to support those different jobs. That workforce in itself is there. There's a plethora of different challenges for businesses in California, in The United States, in the global economy right now.

And I think over time, what I think we would need to be mindful of, or what I would like to be mindful of, is how do we prepare when those opportunities arise? Cause we know things typically work in some type of cyclical fashion. So while there may not be funding now, but at some point, at some point, those needs are too far great to ignore and something has to give. Otherwise, we see history repeat itself in some of the ugliest times in our nation. And I think it's imperative of us to be mindful of that and how we find that balance to both support housing that all income levels that are able to work up, that are working up because we still have this perception that people are sitting there and asking for 100% of free stuff for the rest of their life.

And what has been established time and time and time and time again, from anybody you talk to or from staff that they present, is that you have working professionals that cannot afford. We have staff members who could barely afford to work in the city that they support. And so I think for me, whatever we can call it, whatever we want, whether it's incentive, the question is how do we find ways, whatever that is that makes sense, us as an elected representative body of the people to support ways to truly make things pencil out, where it makes sense. And maybe it requires us to look at completely different models that haven't been explored. Because I think a lot of what we're doing is just based on outdated, non sustainable funding models and mechanisms.

So know, obviously to me, we gotta do something, whatever that is. It sounds like there's maybe enough support to entertain something of what that is. Maybe it's not inclusionary housing or a housing trust fund. And I think we've all heard from developers adding on additional fees is only going to be an additional barrier for their ability to make things pencil out. So,

yeah.

Thank you for that. I think you've heard a lot from us tonight. Before we conclude, you can leave the slide up but I'm going to open it up to the public for any comment.

We heard a lot tonight. Three minutes isn't gonna do it for me. So I would like

Just so you know, you're entitled to write lengthy and submit. Anyone who wants to submit at length can always submit comments to any of our staff meetings. To, I'm sorry? To any staff item at a council meeting, just so you know.

And where do we submit that?

You do it to the city clerk at any time for any pending council meeting. So those who have lengthy information or study it or analyze are always able to submit to the city clerk to become part of a permanent record.

Okay, great. I just think it would be good to involve the public more. I mean, there aren't a lot of people coming. I'm sure a lot of people are watching or more people are watching than come. But I think we need to look at it in a more progressive way. There are different things that can be done. Obviously funding is huge. And I completely understand after listening to what you have to say. But I think there are good minds out here that our town has. And I think housing is one of the things that is most important.

It's an ecosystem because everything depends on housing. If we don't have housing, we have nothing. We don't have jobs here, we have nothing. Housing brings jobs. People that live here, they go out, drive out of town. I worked at UC Davis for years. I drove out of town. But I was able to afford the place that I bought here at the time. And yes, it was 30% of my income or of my family's income, but people can't afford it anymore. So we need to kind of figure out something different and it needs to be in a timely fashion.

So and also saying that people just want handouts, I don't really think that's so, Councilman Stockton. I think people people work hard and they don't want handouts but they want affordability. And that's something that we really need to work on as a town, as a city. And I know there are a lot of people out there, I've talked before, their kids can't live here. They're all getting older.

We'd love to have our kids here to take care of us so that we don't have to call 911 or what have you. It's imperative that we all stick our heads together and come up with a solution that works for this town. We all love this town. And we're here to make it work. And I really think that people need to go ahead and just reach out to the public and see what we can come

up with. That's all I have to say. Thank you.

Now, like, you don't know a thing or two about this.

Mayor, council members, the issue of habitat for humanity has been brought up a couple of times tonight. Could we get an update? I may have missed it. I don't attend all your council meetings. But where's the Skoggins project? And was there financing involved in that or city property? Through the mayor.

Yeah. So I'll make sure you can continue on, then I'll make sure the question's answered.

If you

have any other

Okay. The other comment I have is to Councilmember Fearmau. Infill projects are a pretty good deal because there's infrastructure is already there. You don't have that additional cost. And it reminds me of the early 90s when we had our land wars and as a result, the citizens voted to say, hey, if we're going to develop, let's develop in the cities, Keep growth combined into the city limits.

And it was, you know, it was very expensive for the county because it took away any ability for the county to develop. But I think over the last thirty years or so, I think it's we've seen a great benefit to our citizens that development occurred within the cities where the services can be provided. And agriculture is a pretty big thing in Solano County. So we'd like to keep it like that. So just a comment to your comments, council member. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. All right, I'm going go ahead and close the public comment and I'm going to ask Director Colton if you could answer that question. I do know that project's moving forward. I had gone and attended their event and I don't remember the exact number but it was pretty exciting that they were able to direct for what's coming for Vacaville. Do you have an update on that?

Yeah, sure. So the Habitat Project Harmony Village is 10 units of home ownership housing and that is on city owned piece of property. So the city contributed the property towards that project. In addition, the city contributed $300,000 in ARPA funding towards predevelopment cost for the project, and approximately like around $3.50, nearly $400,000 in permanent local housing allocation towards the project, because under that program at least 40% of the allocation after a certain date was required to go towards home ownership. So those are the investments that the city has made directly to that project.

And then also most recently, we were awarded $250,000 through CPF funding towards the project, and we recently submitted another CPF application for the remaining approximately 1,000,000 point dollars that would help complete the loop on that project to get that project started.

Yeah.

Thank

you that update. Council member Stockton, do you have another comment?

Yeah. Just wanted to clarify the lady that made the comments and called me out by name. I I just want to reiterate, I don't think anyone deserves to live for free forever without taking advantage of opportunities to better their situation. What I do believe is that we should work to provide opportunities where people can live somewhere and take advantage of opportunities to help themself. So I just want to be very clear with what I said and, you know, we can go back and watch it because these things are memorialized on television.

Not everybody is going to agree with me or what I think or what everybody else on this council thinks. I think we all want to get to a place where we improve the quality of life for people and recognise that there are some folks that do need help. But again, I think part of that is they have to meet us part way. If there are folks that need help, we want to have a way to help them and encourage them to take advantage of those opportunities. But again, I don't think anyone just flat out deserves to live for free for ever without taking advantage of those opportunities and meeting us halfway.

That's it. Council Member Richey?

I'll be very brief. A comment made a little bit ago in regards, one thing is the simultaneous of work and jobs housing. Two things came to mind. One thing is to address it. There is the inclusion in housing this conversation, but the importance for us to do diverse housing Mhmm. Simultaneously with density, I I hate it's in my I see them every single day in my LinkedIn feed. I absolutely love them. I hate to throw them out by name, but, like, I don't know this company is located, but it's called cul de sac. I love following. Have some it's a great example, almost like we have Portofino.

Having a density and a diverse density allows for the development of every tier of housing. We can't redo Orsia area where I grew up in. We can't redo Browns Valley. Has to be diverse or it's not going to pencil out. We have to allow them to build executive housing so the owner of a major corporation will come here with every level of the housing.

So therefore, they can charge a premium for an estate that would offset the cost to build a workforce housing. But we have to break it down into two subgroups. If we don't build a diverse portfolio of rental, like high end executive rental, that will offset low income rental and high income purchase to offset the lower cottage style property, it won't pencil out. We're very ready for density and allowing them to truly get diverse housing or else it will not pencil out. If we force them to do the same thing block to block, it won't pencil out.

So we have a lot of problems with density, size, but we need to break our molds to allow for housing on both rental and ownership to come to fruition in our city, and we can't be scared to have executive housing at the same time, allow it to be profitable building a low income rent or purchase product. Same developer can build it 900 square feet and at 5,000 square feet, and we should should we should employ them to do this. Like, that's the goal. Build a 6,000 square foot house and a 900 square foot traditional craftsman home. That's that's the way they're gonna pencil out, but we can't hamstring them.

We do have a lot of fees. We do have CFDs, but I think people really understand the benefit of taking prop 13 is a blessing. We have so many houses that are at $200,000 tax rate. If you build 900 homes and their initial tax rate is at 800,000 or 600,000, our 1 tenth of $1 coming to the city is greater than 500 homes at a lower tax rate. So we could incentivize them to build by lowering the fees and barriers to get in, knowing we're gonna get revenue for property taxes per per duty.

So there's we we we have to think differently. We can't stop them for going forward by being so kind of just tunnel visioned and say, hey, you pay this fee or else you can't do it. But we're missing the fact that 3,000 homes and average of $500,000 per home at the property tax rate of 1% is gonna create a lot of revenue. And so density, diversity, and looking at the big picture of we give some, we'll get later. And that's it.

Yeah, thank you. This is a good discussion. So I really want to say thank you for this. Clearly staff's always going want direction on how this moves forward and it is true, sometimes I just want to make a few comments and then I'll end on this slide here, just my comments. Prop 13 is a blessing and a curse because one of the things that we're not talking about here is what are the things that are interdependent on the impacts of local housing?

Well, one of them is high interest rates right now. To council member Ritchie's point, if we were turning homes like we would normally turn in a year, there's something that we sometimes also don't talk about. So that's something that we have to say, well, there's an indicator of how things could be different because that could also change the affordability because people can't afford what it is or they try to over afford but they really can't yet. And that comes into a window of most of us, right? Most of us in our lives, to your point, we're either in a, let's just call it a climbing workforce, or what we could say a stable or unstable workforce.

So there are those who just can't afford it. The incomes aren't there, the cost of living, I mean, when your median home prices are what they are, there's a certain point where we all go, I know why my kids don't live here. They just can't afford it. Okay, let's add another thing to the whiteboard in this conversation. Not for discussion tonight, but how many homes are built in Vacaville or Solano County and it becomes a dispersed transplant because somebody in the Bay Area goes, I could pay cash for that because I can't afford here.

We live in an ecosystem in the Bay Area that we are have a benefit of we can drive for an hour or two, but then we can't afford where we're at and then we create this ecosystem of affordability. It is, again, these are those buzz words that you're talking about, what is affordability? I do want to make a comment on infill. I started with a basic question and that is how can we incentivize? And I don't think we've actually gotten there yet.

Infill is a good way to incentivize, but part of the problem is when a project all of a sudden goes, well, that lots been empty and the next thing you know, it's gonna be 60 feet tall. And you go, well, why would you do that? And so it is a reality in communities, we're saying, Not in my backyard. And so where do we go with this? It is true and I will, and again, I'm a huge supporter of making sure that we have good data.

I do believe we are getting that fellow from Bloomberg for this reason, so that we can look at data and we can study this. But I've leaned into the developers when they say it doesn't pencil out and I say show me and they print it out and say this is a project that I've been working on for two years and this is the numbers so we're cancelling it. So sometimes we don't have the data because we don't ask for the right data or we're maybe not looking at the data. But there is a lot of data to suggest it. I just don't believe that what we can do is call upon staff to go study it at an expense.

I think it's real. And there is anecdotal examples of, like you showed, here's a good project, let's see if we have the capacity to do that. Here's how we can incentivize. But a climbing workforce to council member Stockton's point also is, is there are those that can attain that higher level of a home who will achieve it. They will have a family that grows.

And then there's a some point where they will downsize and we are not in a downsize market, nobody's gonna sell their home right now. So there's all these factors that I think that when we talk about housing for what we can create policies for, we can't be in a vacuum and say, this can be done without the construct of the entire picture. I like the idea of the RFP to look at the broader sense of how do we incentivize a developer. I like the idea of working with a growth area and say, have you thought about talking to them and communicating in a collaborative way that doesn't require an absolute policy to start with because again, haven't seen the incentive side but I hear what you're saying that that is a way we can do that. Whether they do it or not is a different story.

The Bay Area affordability is a real issue. So for me, we will get to the point at some point when we talk about this housing study in the future and that is what are the incentives versus what are the requirements? And I won't focus on a requirement without knowing that there's clear incentives and they're either working or they're not, Because otherwise, that kind of decision is in a vacuum when it comes to policy. So I agree, we are losing folks. I've lost my adult kids from here.

But this is real. If I'm taking notes, cause this wasn't housing 101 tonight, I think we got to Housing 201 And 301. So thank you, you did a fantastic job. My takeaway from you is housing influences local spending and workforce stability. Absolute takeaway of your presentation. The thing is, is what comes first? Housing or a job? And you could argue which comes first but any boom town that's ever occurred is because there's a reason to be there. There's always that reason. But you gotta have both at some point.

And so I do agree the jobs do have to come and there are real opportunities within the last twenty four hours, it was in the news. There is a company looking to bring potentially 10,000 jobs to Salon County and just like Anheuser Busk closes, those are back of the residents. It isn't just down in Fairfield, there's a tax base there but there's a dual income home here that no longer has two incomes. And now all of a sudden they're at risk. So this is a broad issue. We need to make sure that we're putting forth good policies but not done in a vacuum. But I really appreciate your presentation tonight. Council member Sill?

I just want to clarify, city manager, with the data that I recall, I don't have it in front of me, but for our diff fees, when we're talking about that, isn't our diff fees already lower than many of those in our region? And number one and number two, our diff fees aren't increasing. So in many ways, the incentive for developers is to not build until at some point, the diff fees in themselves are even lower than the region to where now it's something that's more financially beneficial. So correct me if I'm

So we are at the fees level of diff from the 2022 so we have decided at the last meeting or a couple meetings ago that we would be doing the new study so staff is meeting this Friday to identify that path for the future diff fee increases which would be few years away but since we did not adopt the new fees that does incentivize developers to continue with their building for the projects that are already in motion.

So just to clarify are those diff fee or are diff fees where they're at lower than where the other neighboring cities?

Yes, they are in comparison to the neighboring cities, they are lower.

And if I understand some of the argument of my peers is we want to look at additional incentives in addition to our DIF fees that being lowered compared to our neighbors.

Thank you. I would also add that we also charge the CFD in some cases with infill, but we have incentivized ways to sometimes reduce those or eliminate those. Those are kinds of incentives that maybe other cities is not always an apples to apples consideration.

We have direction from the council based on the DIFFE process. There are certain items that the council authorized us to look into into further detail for example you know waiving of the fees until the certificate of occupancy and some other details that were part of that so staff is considering all of those changes and we also have more leverage on doing more incentives on the commercial side compared to the residential so those are also the things we're looking at.

And I think for the future, without having to create staff time, is as if there was the ability to come together and present to the council the collection of the incentives. So it's clear, not to us but not just us but to the public, to developers and how we're getting ready to advance East Of Leisure Town. So there's clarity in where we stand right now so that there really is a pathway forward. All right, well this is a great evening. Thank you so much for your time and it was definitely your show tonight but you did fantastic. So appreciate it. And so with that, it's 08:33. We're going to conclude this meeting and stand in adjournment. Good night, Vacaville.