Housing Committee - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Welcome each and every one of you to the housing committee meeting. Madame Clerk, please call the roll.

Good afternoon, Commissioner Bermudez?

Present, and accounted for.

Commissioner McGee? Commissioner Regalado? Present. Vice Chairwoman Lopez? Here. Chairwoman Bastien? Here. Four members present, we have a quorum.

All right I'd like to ask everyone to stand up and I thank Commissioner Vicky Lopez who will lead us with a short prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you Madam Chair. Bow your heads please. Heavenly Father thank you so much for bringing us together today to do your important work. We know as public servants we serve you first to serve those constituents that you have asked us to serve and so today as we address all the housing needs One of the largest things that we know are important to our constituency. We ask for your guidance and your direction. And so we ask all of this in your name. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right. Thank you, Commissioner Lopez. All right, now I think it's time to open reasonable opportunity for the public to be heard.

Public hearing item, so not these.

So there's a non-public? This is a non-public?

No. So we don't have any. We don't have any reasonable. Okay.

All right, so I don't see anyone approaching. Reasonable opportunity is now closed. Any change in the agenda?

No, Madam Chair. A motion to set the agenda is in order.

All right. All right. All in favor? Aye. All right. So now, Mr. Attorney?

Yes, Madam Chair, you have the first public hearing which is a resolution approving after a public hearing the fiscal year 2025-2029 five-year public housing agency plan and authorizing the county mayor or the county mayor's designee to Submit the plan to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for final approval. Make any necessary revisions to the amended plan subject to the limitations of the significant amendment and substantial deviation definition. Item 1G1 is a public hearing.

Thank you. Public hearing on this item is now open. I have a list of names.

This is 1G2, so you're asking to read the title for 1G2 as well. So we don't have any 1G1? No.

All right, Mr. Attorney, it doesn't seem like we have anyone for 1G1.

This is 1G1? Yeah, this is 1G1.

Okay. All right, so we have one. So when I call your name, you'll have one card for 1G1. When I call your name, please approach. You have two minutes to make a presentation. Start with your name and address for the record. And I have Ms. Renita Holmes. Madame Holmes?

Good afternoon Madam Chair and Board Members. It's been a minute. I'm glad to be here to be able to give you my concerns about this fiscal plan for the next five years and perhaps something that we didn't discuss this year thus far. As a person with disability, a senior, a person that meet most of those priorities that are substantiated by the Americans with Disability Act of 1970, I was disappointed to see this board in its entirety and the oversight of a policy that was offered by Miami Dade Housing Agency to take what was a congressional act that put us as a priority, one which we have not met our mandates with that were given by HUD, to now put us on a preference point. Currently, you'll note on the card that it says homeless. I am homeless. I am homeless because I lived in a building that someone inspected that had 28 violations. I am homeless because people decided to port me out and I was told that the county has no services for me. I was ported out to a place I did not have any say to. But most of all, I'm here today because I am really pissed off the way that I was spoken to. Listen. Hug was there when all that money was given away. Now that his contractors are here, please don't come here and take jobs from decent people who have been here 25 years, walk them out with the police, and then come and talk to the rest of the women like we're nothing. We're better than that. I'll talk to you later, but I am going to talk, and don't tell me don't say anything. One employee has the right to do that.

Thank you, Madam Holmes. Anyone else on 1G1? Seeing no one approaching, public hearing on 1G1 is now closed. Now, colleagues, anyone has any comments on 1G1? Happy to move it. All right. Do we have a second?

Not a second, but I have some questions.

You have questions?

Second the motion, but I'll second when it comes down to questions.

Okay, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess this question is for Nathan. Director, if you can answer a few questions. I do notice on MDC 002, discuss the ideas of utilizing this newly established Miami-Dade Attainable Housing Corp Inc, the 501c3, into becoming a developer arm of Miami-Dade County Housing. My question to you is, how many meetings have you had and how many people actually turned out at these meetings to hear of the new plan?

With regards to the creation of the entity? Yeah. The creation of the entity was done through legislative process.

Okay.

So the public was never aware or notified of this outside of the legislative process?

For the creation of the entity, just through the legislative process. However, this plan was noticed. So there was one public meeting on this.

Got it. Next question is, as it relates to the five year plan. Two public meetings. Two public meetings. How many people turned out?

Not many. We offered it virtually. Let me look. Let me find that real quick.

We can provide that information.

And when you say not many, are we talking about 2, 3, 4, 100, 500?

We do include the sign-in sheets, so let me just go ahead through the item and find that for you. Got it, got it.

And it's probably your position, Mr. Director, that this item must move forward with the Miami-Dade Attainable Housing Corp Inc. language included. I'm pretty sure is that your position? yes this is in order for hud to recognize that this is one of our activities um that we'll be performing that is correct so so outside of the outside of this particular vehicle it is your position that the miami-dade attainable housing corp inc cannot move separately

At one point, we will have to update our five year plan to include the possibility of development through the attainable corp. So if it does not move through this, we would then have to bring something back.

That is correct, right? Is there a is there a reason why there is? Almost as if there's a. a time, certain date that you have to have the Miami-Dade Attainable Housing Corp Inc. created now? Is there a reason why it came now as opposed to working more with the community leaders and commissioners to see exactly

what it is they can do to make this thing better or or leave it like it is but you just give more notice and more attention to so this is a result of um following the board's action uh that created the actual um corporation so following the board's action creating the uh corporation and with the intent to utilize it at one time we have to notify hud through the five-year plan to take action on it so that's that's why it's in now this is the first possible opportunity

We're particular in this Miami-Dade attainable program that it requires you to give notice to the district commissioners about particular lots that would be developed by this newly formed corporation.

That would be solely part of the resolution that adopted it. Right. We will be coming back with, I'll get the right term with it, council, the agreement with the board on the instrumentality.

Implementation?

Our agreement with the, through the chair. Some assistance from by legal.

Who were you, Nathan? Who are you addressing to?

Through legal. All right. You are recognized, sir. Okay. Madam Chair, I believe the director is talking about a shared use agreement between the county and the corporation.

Yeah.

right so yes i apologize i forgot the name for the share use agreement which will come back toward board which will set out the rules and regulations of the of the corp which would include um recognizing the resolution as it pertains to acquiring permission from the district commissioner before utilizing the instrumentality

So correct me if I'm wrong, so am I hearing you telling me there are going to be four entities part of this shared agreement? We're talking about potentially HUD, HCD, the board, and this newly created vehicle, this 501c3?

We're just recognizing, we're just informing HUD that we are utilizing an instrumentality as part of our menu of methods of developing property within the county.

And I'm not trying to trip you up, Nathan. So I'm just trying to make sure I'm clear when I'm understanding this. The attainable, newly created vehicle, the instrumentality that you mentioned earlier, that would be one. vehicle the second vehicle will be hcd the third share part of the shared agreement would be with the commissioners and the fourth would be hud am i reading that correctly or am i misreading what i'm reading help me understand i'm not trying to trap you i'm just trying to get clarity here

i mean hud is not necessarily part of um that quad party it's really the board of county commissioners is the board of the instrumentality hcd and its staff staff it and act as its employees okay and should we enter into an agreement with a developer which is a potential as part of those activities, then a developer would be part of that process as well.

I guess you see where I'm going, right? Because you're going to get into the developing world, but then there's also a reality that you're going to bring forth other developers to develop. So am I anticipating that you're gonna tell me at some point the economy of this is where you're going to take a percentage of future developers portion of their pie in lieu of you building out these parcels that you laid out as part of this new mechanism to develop housing for Miami-Dade County?

Not necessarily. Each deal could be very, very different. There's a possibility, depending on the nature of a development, that HCD acts as the sole developer and builds a development. It's possible that there is a joint venture between a private developer. We may use the instrumentality to purchase property as well, to rehab property. So depending on the nature of the agreement and the nature of the development, there'll be a wide range of possibility. Is it fair to say that HCD and the county will retain greater benefits or financial benefits as part of a deal? Yes, that is a possibility. Um, whereas in the position that we're in now, the developer reads most of the benefits. Yes, the county could see a greater amount of the financial benefits, which we would, uh, use for additional housing.

All right. And final question, um, as it relates to this item, uh, you're not proposing that the county create a, a general contracting team. Uh, you're just saying that you want the county to, you want this vehicle to serve as the developer only, like a name and not in a process, and then not the reality of actually constructing and being part of the general contracting team.

No, that's not the intent.

So the intent is just for this vehicle to serve as a developer.

This is a standard method for large PHAs across the nation to act in this capacity to give ourselves greater opportunity to leverage funds, especially to leverage funds, and to be more creative with development. So it's another option in the methods that we currently have now.

Okay.

Anything else, Mr. Vice Chair?

No, I'll just say my comments are the same as I've said before. I'm very skeptical about government getting into the business of developing housing. And the reason why is because history has shown, especially where I grew up, that any time you have government actually building homes, normally they'll build it. Everything is great. They'll cut the ribbon. The resources really never stay there. It really never stays there to do the upkeep and the management portion of these homes, i.e., they become housing projects. And let's be absolutely clear, when it comes down to certain communities, and there's no race or class here, it's just the idea of knowing that history has shown us, Madam Chair, that the county has great ideas. But oftentimes, especially when it comes down to housing, the county will bail out. I lived in three different housing projects growing up. I live in Naranja Projects, Modela Housing Projects, and I live over there in Pine Lake and Pine Villa and Pine Island. So I know what's about to happen, right? We're going to authorize the county to go back to do what they were doing in the 70s. This is not new. This is absolutely not new. They're going to become a developer like they did back then. take the fee, put the fee into a general fund, and repurpose it to somewhere else. While at the same time, the people who are stuck in those housing facilities are going to be without the proper maintenance, the proper management company, and the proper apparatuses to help them get to the next level. And I just want to put my objection on the record. I'm not voting for this. I see where this is going. And I know what's going to happen. As a matter of fact, we're in the process now of demolishing the range of housing projects, demolishing The area in Goose, Arthur Maze, and we've already demolished Modelo Housing Project, all three of which I've had the opportunity and pleasure of residing in. But I can also tell you that with every administration comes a different priority as it relates to, quote unquote, those people. Because it's going to be, eventually, those people. And when it's those people, those people normally find themselves without the proper management that we're seeing across the board with these AMIs of certain developers who are building and giving us some great management companies. And so I'm not so great, but I just don't believe the county should get in the business of developing when they can't maintain. And if you're telling me there's a separate spot of money on the side that the county is particularly going to use to ensure that there is a quote unquote five star management company that can step in and do the work and provide quality A1 housing for those people, these people, our people. then I'll be there with you. But I didn't see it. And maybe we can come up with some language where we specify that if we do this, then you're going to give us A1A management.

That's what I was going to ask you. Do you have a specific recommendation that you can give?

And this is why, again, for the record, I love this guy. By the way, this is my guy. This is my director, right? And we go back and forth like this. But is there a world where we can ensure that If the county does get into the business of developing, that the county has an A1 management company pool that they can choose from. And that we have the notification early on as to who you're potentially going to choose and whether or not we're going to have a say in it before I put forth any language. I just want to see if you have it that you can give to us and we can work that out.

layton go ahead through the chair um i appreciate your comments and i think that that definitely can be accommodated when we come back with the agreement before the board we we do other than our public housing stock we do have other buildings that are managed by the county We don't manage it ourselves. We do have a contract with a professional managed organization, and I can say that currently now we're through the RFP process, which the board authorized us to go through this RFP process for management services of these. I would think with each deal, as part of those deals, again, because the district commissioner is consenting to moving forward with an instrumentality, and each of these, again, each of these projects are going to be vastly different, I think it's appropriate to discuss long-term management, how it will be management, the nature of construction, whether there'll be displacement. So I think that's definitely on the table as we move forward with this process. This vehicle here, I just want to be clear on this vehicle, all this vehicle does, it says the board established this instrumentality. Eventually, it will be used since the board has established it. HUD needs to have that in our five year plan, again, as one of the mechanisms that we develop. It's not necessarily designed for the specifics of it that will come between the board and HCD and administration when we present that agreement.

You'll be willing to meet with Nathan? Absolutely, Madam Chair. Absolutely. That he will present next time this comes forward. Yeah.

Happy to.

Happy to. Thank you so much, Nathan. Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized.

Thank you. Thank you. And thank you, Nathan. I was just going to say, and, you know, Commissioner McGee, I think we all understand the historic issues, right? And it's not just the county, it's also the federal government, which is why we had a movement towards RAD. I think when the item was presented, and Nathan is correct, this document by law must mirror everything that the Board of County Commissioners has approved, full stop. That's all it does. It mirrors everything that we've approved. The item was approved. Now, when the effectuating agreement for the item comes to the board, I think that's the opportunity to really deep dive into Into these concerns, my understanding of the item is that it was to provide tools for the department, because there are some developments that people just don't want. Right and we have to kind of grapple with that. But I think your point as to the management is an important 1. I think overall there has been a movement towards divesting from these properties. The county is, the federal government and the county are all divesting from these things. And I think post-surfside and all the requirements as to the maintenance of a building were in a different place than we were 10 years ago or 20 years ago. And when you work on that, I mean, I would suggest, I mean, I think, and one of the things we've talked about in these rat agreements is. The responsibility, not just to have a management company, but also to put aside funds to continue to maintain those properties. Right? Because if you'll remember when we did the audit for after surf side. A lot of the buildings that were tied to our buildings, right? And we were, we were aware of those situations. So I think it's a, this might. Provide another vehicle a to be more competitive when we're redoing these properties would be to provide a safeguard. Um, and I think we need to be cognizant of that because this department no longer comes out of the general fund. So 1 of the things that we're looking at is development by development. How can they be self sustaining? Right? Um, so I look forward to that. Um, and always thank you. Thank you, Nathan. I think we'll have a lot more clarity when we see the actual agreement. Um, that goes with this item.

Thank you. Commissioner. We're going to add, though, consider Bermudez you recognized.

I'll be brief, but I understand the concept of having it. Uh, in your whatever, uh, in your holster, so to speak. But I agree with, uh, you know, vice chairman McGee. Uh, this is a question of philosophy and, uh. Making sure that the supposed grand plans that we have actually work. and in the end we're going to have to look at that because I come from his perspective which is if you cannot and he's lived it himself so he just as he so mentioned if we are not going to be able to provide if this is not something that's going to turn out to be it's going to be simply another What's happened in the past and it may not be the best choice. It has to be maintained. It has to be managed correctly because. That's the that's and for me, it's more of a philosophical issue. When we go in that direction than anything else, I understand why it's needed. For this 5 year plan, and I'm okay with that. But I too want to share my concerns along with commissioner McGee. That, you know, as I said, the other evening, you know, if we are going to talk the walk, we got to walk the walk.

Thank you, Commissioner Bermudez. Commissioner Lopez, you will go next. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Yes, so just in keeping with what the Vice Chairman said, I've never been a proponent of government trying to do something that the private sector has done well and that the government has failed to do well. And so thank you for your examples, real live examples of where you lived. I think it's the role of government to provide the collaboration, the funding. but also the oversight and the carrot and the stick. I agree with you. I have buildings now that have bad actors managing the buildings. And I'm working with HCD. I'm so grateful for their leadership as well in addressing the problem in that one building That has become incredibly egregious to my residents. But it is a philosophical issue, I think. I understand and I think Commissioner Regalado is right. HUD requires that whatever we've done, and we did this in October, we have to put it in the plan. We don't have to execute it. uh and i think that clearly um i think commissioner mcgee you you will be able to lend a lot of assistance as we begin to roll that out in a way that provides the proper safeguards the proper uh you know i think really the criteria because i'm afraid when the county wants to become a developer we have some very good actors in our community that are building great affordable housing workforce housing And honestly, I don't think we need to replicate that. We do need to use whatever tools we can to access as much funding as we can. And if that's one, Nathan, that's great. But in reality, I think we certainly don't have to be something that someone already does and does well for us. I just think we have to monitor these. Wherever we make an investment, we should have a lot of uh safeguards in place to to the investment that we're making as taxpayers dollars are being used to provide that and so hcd does that well i'm also looking at how they can better some of that monitoring because honestly had i not gone into a building and understood what was going on we may none of us may have known so just just to sum it up i think that the vice chairman is correct We shouldn't get involved in things that others are doing well, and we should make sure that if we have to do something and that it is providing a proper tool, that we will do it correctly. So thank you, Vice Chairman.

Thank you, Commissioner Lopez. It seems like you might also be interested in partaking in this meeting, so maybe it has to be a sunshine meeting where other commissioners can partake and then share their information.

We look forward to it.

All right. No one else? Would someone like to move it? I had moved it and he- You did move it, second. Madame Clerk, there's someone else on 1G1?

Yeah, I believe that, Madame Chair, you closed the public hearing.

you may reopen it it's your discretion madam chair okay let's reopen it quickly second public hearing and once you want to use again open She could have stayed where she is, but yeah. Can someone help her with the mic, please?

She said thank you for the reasonable accommodation.

Thank you.

Thank you. Please state your name, address for the record.

My name is Betty Oliver. And I was living in, I became homeless, which I should never have. But unfortunately, I was standing on Camilla's for about four months. And during the time, they had opened up Section 8 and HUD. The person that was my case manager told me she signed me up for HUD as well as Section 8. I ended up going in the hospital. Before I went in the hospital, she said I had to pay to go upstairs. I was getting passes because I do have blood clot issues. The point is with that is, what happened to my Section 8? She said in , they had new places, apartments. And the thing about it was, I think she got upset with me because she wanted me to be Ms. Camilla's. I didn't want nobody to know I was staying in Camilla's house. And the thing about it was, before she became my case manager, I used to speak to everybody, and I'm very friendly. And the thing about it, she won't even speak to me. So I told the person, I said, oh, she won't even speak to me, and she's my case manager. But I'm just using it for example. So what happened to the Section 8? I was there during the time when they opened up. What happened to HUD? She told me HUD is no longer like HUD. It's like new apartments. So I end up going to the hospital. I kept in contact with her.

Oliver, your time is up.

Excuse me? I didn't hear you. I would like to speak to someone, okay, because I feel that I know that I've been treated unfairly, and then that way I can speak to where I'm living at now at the time. Thank you. Have a nice day. Thank you so much. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you all.

Thank you so much. Anyone else on 1G1? All right. Public hearing on 1G1 is closed for a second time. Second and final time. I'm clerk. Please call the roll.

Commissioner Bermudez?

Yes.

Commissioner McGee?

Yes.

Commissioner Regalado?

Yes.

Vice Chairwoman Lopez? Yes. Chairwoman Bastian? Yes. Motion passes unanimously.

Attorney? Yes, Madam Chair. Your next public hearing item is resolution of 1G2, sorry. Resolution approving after a public hearing the amendment of local housing assistance plan as required by the State Housing Initiative Partnership Program Act subsections 420.907 through 420. point nine oh seven nine Florida statutes and rule chapter sixty seven thirty seven of the Florida administrative code item one g two is a public hearing. All right thank you madam chair I believe the administration wanted to request an amendment to the item.

Yes. Can you go ahead and read that? Do you have the access to that right now, Mr. Attorney? Yes. Please go ahead and read it.

Yes, Madam Chair. The amendment is as follows on page MDC 028 under section PC, add under the income categories to be served extremely low. On page MDC034 under section QB1, change B to A. And then for relocation assistance for owners, tenants who have been deprived of affordable housing, remove eviction, evicted due to closure of mobile home parks in accordance with 723.003FS. And under section QC on page MDC034, add extremely low to the income categories to be served. That's the amendment to 1G2.

Thank you so much. Now, public hearing on 1G2 is open. I have a few cards. I'm going to call a few names. Please come and line up. You will have two minutes. State your name and your address for the record. We're going to start with Ms. Oliver. She left? Did she leave? She also signed for 1G2. Well, she's still here. She can come back if she wishes to present on it.

Two.

Did I say one? Two minutes. You have two minutes. Mr. Alex Jean-Joseph. Please approach. Paul Christian . Alza Vignale, I hope I'm pronouncing your name correctly.

Yes.

Kerry Feet. And Ahmed Morey, forgive me if I butchered your name. You can line arms on both mics. Mr. Alex, you can start.

Yes, my name is Alex Eugene Joseph and I live at 80202 Northwest, Miami Court, Miami, Florida 33150. I'm a resident of Soul Park Mobile Home and But when I take a look at the Miami Days hearings, Miami Days housing meeting, I see the proposed compensation for the owners of the house over there. It's very far from reaching the means of the people over there because of the cost of life. Because $10,000 and some added... I don't think it's not enough because the medium price in the area is around $40,000, $50,000. This is the price that people pay for their houses. And I'm not going to say much because I've already participated in much of this meeting over here. And I think that the best thing to do is to reach a fair agreement way before we get evicted. Because if you wait at the last minute, At the last minute, I don't think it's going to be a rush. I don't think they're going to reach a fair decision. I think this is something that should be concluded way before that. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, my name is Ahmed Mori, 880 Northwest 131st Avenue, Miami, Florida. So several housing and community organizations have also submitted, we've submitted a joint written comment with our concerns and suggestions in greater detail. In general, we support the county's efforts to implement SB 594, but request you consider several changes to make the strategy work a little more effectively for families that are facing park closure. First, really appreciate the amendment that was proposed minutes ago. That covers a pretty substantial part of my own public comment. But second, reconsidering perhaps the $10,000 cap for households facing park closure. That amount is tantamount to a county policy choice, not necessarily a limit that's strictly imposed by SB 594. And the statute, what it does is require a strategy addressing people deprived of affordable housing by park closure and leaves local governments to establish award amounts. So for a homeowner who may need to move, who may need to replace or abandon their homes, 10,000 may bear perhaps little relationship to the actual loss. And then third, to the extent that it's possible, create a mechanism so that residents inside municipalities are not left behind, particularly municipalities that are not eligible for SHIP funds. And finally, if there is an opening, we request that you explore the use of SHIP funds to support the preservation and acquisition of relocation housing. So organized residents and nonprofit partners can pursue collective solutions when facing park closures. Thank you.

Distinguished Commissioners of the Housing Committee, , Family Action Network Movement, we're at 100 Northeast 84th Street. And again, we'll be speaking about the considered change to the county's housing assistance plan, SHIP. Local housing assistance plan so we understand the merits of 594 but as Speakers before me both in the advocacy realm and impacted parties have mentioned There is the possibility here really of Increasing options particularly for mobile homeowners who you know may be facing evictions and we understand that right now whether we're talking about amounts eligibility funding start dates you know those aren't guaranteed those aren't locked in and they should not basically be left fluid until basically when mobile homeowners are facing eviction and they have less leverage to really drive those outcomes. So we're asking for fair compensation. We've been really connected with the Soar Park residents and other mobile homes for quite a few years now. We've seen the ups, we've seen the downs, and we want to really reach out to CJP and other organizations that have been part of that process in terms of the advocacy. So we believe that $10,000 does not suffice really for the types of relocations and the property loss that many of the people would be facing. It's important that the conversation with impacted parties happen early in the process so that solutions can be defined that are fair to them and not when they're already facing eviction. And finally, as you've heard the testimonies from SOAR Park members both last Thursday and it's very important to show every discretion to ensure that they are considered fairly and that they're treated with dignity and fairness. Some of them are in their 80s and cannot really restart from scratch. So thank you very much and please keep an open mind on this issue. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, good afternoon. My name is Carrie Fight. I'm a housing attorney with Community Justice Project. Our address is 3000 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida 33137. Our organization is engaged with no less than four mobile home park communities. that are facing park closure, some in litigation and some in the earlier notice stage. And so we've helped residents navigate all aspects of the park closure process. We were pleased to see SB 594 pass during this trend of park closures. mobile homeowners facing closure have been relying and counting on the support to provide some relief during an extremely stressful time. Our organization along with some other orgs and housing advocates flagged that the Florida Housing Finance Corporation template amendment and consequently the county's proposed amendment language fell quite short of what SB 59 suggesting assistance only after displacement, which would not be productive for obvious reasons. And I understand now that Florida Housing Finance Corporation has corrected that language to address mobile homeowners who are facing park closure to match the text of SB 594, which has been acknowledged by the county and your amendment. And we would, of course, like to see that correction made today. Based on our familiarity with park closure experience, we of course recommend the most robust and comprehensive support for mobile home communities in this trend of park closures and displacement. We are in agreement with the previous comments that the current cap should be raised. And we do think that the most sustainable solution for mobile homeowners is one that includes land acquisition as is referenced in other parts of the LHAP plan for other types of residents. Last, we do caution this committee to think through in the implementation phase how relocation assistance support is not relied upon by the park owner in avoidance of offering reasonable compensation to homeowners who must vacate their homes in excess of the minimum state statutory amounts, which are far from adequate to transition to new housing. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Good afternoon, chair and members of the committee. My name is Alisa Vignale, 9241 Collins Avenue, Apartment 1A, Surfside, Florida. I am a licensed realtor here in Miami-Dade, and for the past several months, I've been building a housing pilot called Raiz Homes, not from theory, but from pulling out actual MLS records, closed sales, and condo assessment notices across this county. The idea is simple. a small community of new permanent factory-built homes on public or otherwise low-cost land under a long-term ground lease. The residents buy the home, not the land, because most of these buyers can't pay cash for the sale of the distressed condo. They walk away with no new mortgages and a dramatically lower monthly cost. a few hundred dollars in ground lease instead of over $1,000 or $2,000 or $3,000 in HOA and assessment payments. I want to be precise about what this is and it isn't. This is a for-profit development, not a donation asked or not a charity. A private development team mine, designs, builds, and sells the homes and earns a legitimate transparent developer return for doing it. The same way that Miami-Dade Owns Certus and Ship Ownership Development Program already invites for-profit developers to do. The public sector's role is narrower than people assume, making land available through a lease and with appropriate supporting infrastructure, not funding the homes outright, and not donating land with no return to the taxpayer. I am also here not today asking for a specific parcel. I know how that request looks on day one, and I'd rather earn it. What I am asking for The east is a smaller and I think easier way to say yes to. Point me to the right staff to evaluate this as a pilot. Someone who can tell me- Can you please conclude?

Your time is up. Please conclude.

Okay, thank you. Someone who can tell me whether there is publicly controlled land and could support a project like this. And what a ground lease and ship pathway would actually look like in practice. I already lined up a couple of manufactured home vendors. I am tracking real construction costs against the target price, and I'll be back in front of the committee and at the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee later this month. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, ma'am.

You're welcome. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Jeffrey Hearn from Legal Services of Greater Miami, 4343 West Flagler, Miami, Florida, 33134. Our office regularly represents mobile homeowners who are facing displacement. As you know, mobile homes are different. They aren't the same as tenants. These are individuals who own their homes. Many people have invested in them over decades. And when these parks close, they're losing really what is the most significant asset that they have. And mobile homes really are the last form of unsubsidized affordable housing in the county. So it is really critical that we do have a program like this. We support the changes that are being made, the motion today to amend the plan. Getting the funds to people at the earliest possible stage is incredibly important. The other thing that we think is really important, as Ms. Fite said earlier, the implementation of this will be critical. We do not want this to be a movement from the park, the developer, the owner who is making millions and millions of dollars through the sale to no longer provide relocation because they believe that the county will be doing that. This should be a supplement on top of what the developer should be providing to the residents. So as this plan is implemented, I think that really needs to be top of mind with the county as they move forward. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, my name is Mariana Ochoa and I live at 3601 Southwest 11th Street, apartment 2B. I'm a neighbor of the residents of Silver Court Mobile Home Park at 3170 Southwest 8th Street. Our commissioner is Raquel Regalado. Back in March, my neighbors at Silver Court received an eviction notice for September 30th. Since then, they've been fighting displacement while continuing to work multiple jobs and taking care of their families. I'm here representing my neighbors who are elderly or currently at work and care taking. I've spent a lot of time getting to know them and And I know that they've spent their life savings on their homes, which are cemented to the ground. I feel strongly that you all should get to know their stories and share my concern and support for my neighbors and their fight. Silver Court residents live in Miami-Dade County. They are facing the same displacement as a family living a few blocks away in uncorporated Miami-Dade. Please do not create a program that leaves their families without assistance simply because their park happens to be inside the city of Miami. If the county needs an agreement with the city or another funding mechanism, please create that mechanism. A municipal boundary should not determine whether a family facing displacement gets help. Thank you.

When I started.

Good afternoon.

My name is Christina Rodriguez, and I reside at Silver Court Mobile Home Park, 3170 Southwest 8th Street. I live with my son.

Continue.

I've been living there for 15 years, and on March 11th, we received an eviction notice.

That day, I felt I was about to die. I was very sad.

I know we stay there for a short period of time, myself and my friends. Venimos nuestra comisionada, la señora Regalado, la cual estamos agradecida el día que fuimos y nos reunimos.

Our commissioner is Commissioner Regalado. We are appreciative of her, the day that we met with her and that we had conversations about this. A la cual nos recibieron muy bien. Muchas gracias. They received us very well. We really thank her for that. But we're still pending the meeting that we were promised. We need assistance on the eviction process, during the eviction process.

Not once we've been displaced.

This is the moment where we need money. To find another place. To pay deposits.

Move our belongings.

Or to find out if we are able to move our homes.

Please ensure the assistance is available as soon as the family receives the eviction notice.

or because due to a change of use.

Thank you.

Please assist us before we lose our homes, not afterwards. Thank you very much for your time.

We hope we touched. We talked to you very hard.

to solve our issues. We really appreciate your help. Please do not leave us by ourselves alone. Muchas gracias. Dios los bendiga.

Thank you. Muchas gracias.

My name is Louis Joseph.

I have been living here since 2016.

Address . My address is 8050 Northwest Miami Court, Miami, Florida 33150. G218. Lot G313. Okay, but since 2016, I've been here, but I've kept my... My salary is $10,000. I've been living at this place since 2007. And we received notice that there will be assistance in the amount of about $10,000. And this is frankly not enough for us because life is very expensive now.

Continued.

I'm asking you to please reconsider the amount because it's not enough due to

Cost of living, that's very expensive. Please reconsider it so we can be able to afford relocate.

I thank you very much, and I hope that everything will come out well.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, my name is Victoria Diaz. I reside at Silver Coat Trailer Park, 3170 South West 8th Street. And I'm here and I agree that this amendment for More than $10,000 to assist anybody facing an eviction should be considered. Right now, since March 11th, we are facing with the same situation. Some of the residents that have already left with that amount of money are already facing economic hardship. So I request or strongly suggest that that amount should be increased and trailer parks should always be included. That has been the livelihood of many people. I've been living there for 25 years. I've seen families grow into great professionals and great human beings. We should not be excluded. And it looks like that's what has been done to us, to trailer park homeowners. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Thank you for allowing me to be here.

I'm representing Sower Park Mobile Home, 8050 Northwest Miami Court.

I'm representing Sower Park Mobile Home, address is 8050 Northwest Miami Court.

My name is Jose Rene Martinez. I will be very specific and brief. We are threatened and condemned to be displaced because we are poor The proposed strategy or plan proposed by Miami-Dade, it's not enough.

Our community is not asking for money or anything for free. We are asking for a dignified place to live with a moderate rent. After 25 years, I was under the impression that I was going to be able to leave the trailer home to my kids, to my children. And I think I'll have to forget about it. Although it's not my decision.

It's somebody else's decision.

And I think Miami-Dade can do a lot for us. And to obtain something that would allow us to live under a roof, not for free. I think this is enough for me. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Jose Mortimer. or Martinez, is this? All right, I think you probably signed two cards. All right, okay. Anyone else? There's someone else coming? Oh, two different people, okay, all right. So Jose F. Martinez.

Su nombre y dirección, por favor.

Muy buenas tardes.

Good afternoon.

Mi nombre es Jose Martinez.

My name is Jose Martinez.

Resido in Miami Soar Park.

And I reside at Miami Soar Park.

8050 Northwest Miami Core, lot E12333150. El lot, por favor.

El numero del lot es E. E123. Okay, and I reside at 8050 Northwest Court, lot E123.

I'm here petitioning as a South American citizen. I am 81 years old. I am already retired. And I've reside for 41 years of Soar Park.

Which will be closed by a company. What we need, myself and all our families.

Is to be listened. In a park.

To prevent ourselves to be outsized.

With a considerable amount of money.

Thank you, commissioners. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you.

Thank you.

I do not have any more cards. However, if there's anyone, anyone. um who wishes to speak on 1g2 it is your time make sure you come you fill out a card madame someone could also bring her card to her

Go ahead. Actually, I think it's on that card, 1G1 and 1G2. I just asked the clerk to do it for me because last minute I had to do something very important. Okay. Other than that, I just wanted to add on 1G2, just in plain English. When we think about, when I share my experience, I tell you it comes in cost. Relocation was always there as a protection for those who were losing their housing due to development. I don't know how the language has changed or how the current county attorney for Section 8 and the rest interprets it. I question a lot of that interpretation of that policy. I've seen no actual official change. But let's think about it. I've been a place where it's been a three bedroom place for my children, a room for this one. Maybe small, but still different rooms. I now am moving into storage, which is the biggest industry next to development and housing. 400 bucks for one bedroom. Then you're paying to eat out because you don't have a place to cook. Then you have to think about a place to eat, because if you're under that eviction, you're not necessarily ready to take on a hotel or an Airbnb. And there are 31,000 evictions where that was last two months ago, and now it's more than that. Now, I want you to think about that cost, what happens to that family or that individual. You can't afford it. So I'm hoping that we actually take the situation serious, not just saying this relocation is another phase. These are people we do when we relocate. The money is spent. It's given to industry. That's not fair. That's not what the regulations wrote. Please consider the actual amounts and the actual cost of being relocated versus giving other land. and consult with your attorney. Sometimes I think he has too much to interpret.

Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing no one coming, public hearing on 1G2 is now closed. And I know my colleagues probably have comments or questions. I'm going to start with Commissioner Lopez. You are recognized.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So I have a couple of questions. So the first question I have is, I don't know if this amendment does it, but Nathan, it appeared from the public input that Florida Housing Finance Corporation made several revisions to align it and match it to Senate Bill 594. What we have before us, is it aligned exactly like that?

Through the Chair? You are recognized. Yes, Commissioner.

Okay, good. So there's no misalignment. With respect to the $10,000 of relocation assistance, how did we come up with that amount?

So we received some general guidance from Florida Housing, which was the $10,000 plus the $5,000 for rental assistance. So that was generally how we came up with those dollars. We're also starting to look at the entire program, and I think it's important for the board to understand. We get about $7 million to $8 million in SHIP every year. But 65% of it must go to home ownership activities. And the statute specifically says for the purpose of this new activity for mobile home rental assistance, it doesn't constitute as part of that 65%. Additionally, 75% of the total amount for ship needs to be for the rehabilitation, construction and repair of affordable housing. And again, this new allocation for mobile homes does not constitute the 75%. So we have a limited amount of money. Now, that's not to say that this amount cannot be adjusted. But as we get through implementation and understanding the need for the community, that can be adjusted. Again, this was a first snap to get this in front of the board quickly in order to get this policy moving along because of the legislation. The other thing I'd like to point out, there are several other municipalities, such as Miami, Miami Beach, uh... highly uh... north miami miami gardens the larger municipalities they receive ship as well they're also required to amend their plan so there's some coordination that we'd like to do as well with these jurisdictions to look at the whole package

So how much, if we didn't adjust it, given the restrictions of 65% and 75%, what is the pot that we're talking about? 1.5 to 2. 1.5 to 2 million.

Again, and we're still competing against other programs, but these are theoretical. Again, not to say that that total amount is appropriate, but again, when you're left over with that remaining amount, you're looking at 1.5 to 2.

Correct, so I guess this is a question I'll have for Florida Housing Finance Corporation. When they give their guidance, and I've worked with them a great deal, the question always is, is it commensurate to Miami Dade County versus Liberty County, for instance? And where housing costs are much greater, where relocation costs are much greater. And so I don't know if they took that into account. That's something I'll take up with them, because it sounds like they're giving you guidance. But I'm not certain that they said, well, in Miami-Dade County, it's going to cost a whole lot more, potentially 25% more to relocate and to find a new place. Because they've only given you 5,000 for lot rental assistance. I can assure you, and these were conversations, Madam Chair, that we had when I was in the legislature. Mobile homes were a very important part of the discussion of affordable housing and had often been excluded, ignored. And as a result of Senate Bill 594, they became, I think, very visible. But I'm not certain that this amount will get anybody anything. And if you know anything about relocating, I think that that's part of the problem, the guidance that you were given. But then again, you're telling me that the pot of money is very small compared to the number of people. We heard Legal Services has at least four mobile home parks. And I don't know how many people that represents, but it's becoming more of a trend for owners of mobile parks to sell their property. uh and and as we heard we've got a lot of people that have been displaced who have lived in mobile home parks 20 30 40 years and need some assistance now when housing costs are so high the other question i had what are the other larger counties doing like broward orange hillsborough have we seen what they're doing because they're going to face the very same things us worse than anyone but they too as large counties have we looked at what they're what they're doing

We haven't as of yet, but we're happy to reach out to see.

I think that would be helpful. And then to answer the questions about whether they get the funds early versus after they've been evicted, because I have to tell you, once I'm in the street, we're placing people on the street before they get the benefit of assistance. Does this plan allow us, or does Senate Bill 594 have any restrictions on when we offer it to the mobile home park owner that is leaving?

so we will we will work through that through the implementation but we've changed the language from eviction to deprived of housing so i think we can interpret that that is if they're in the process and they've got or the the mobile home uh has approval by the state and local jurisdiction already, and we know that there's that timeline, so they will be displaced, I believe that is an indication that we could start that program. So I think by changing this language closer to the state gives us that leeway not to be reactive at that last point, but to be slightly more proactive.

Certainly, as soon as they know that they're being evicted or that the land is being sold, it gives people proper notice. I mean, I don't know that anyone can find a place and uproot their whole families in a matter of seconds. I mean, they need to know, am I going to have 10,000? Am I going to have 5,000? And then they can go out and look. for proper housing. And lastly, I guess, I don't know, a lot of people have talked about the responsibility of the landowner to give money so that this isn't in lieu of, but complementing. Is there anything that requires a landowner of a mobile home park to do right?

I'll give a partial answer because I'm not fully versed in the state statute, but there's three prongs to it and you're correct. And through, I can tell you through zoning and through our comprehensive plan, there are requirements that developer must provide some assistance. State law mandates that there be a certain amount of assistance, whether it's enough that I think could be debated, but that is part of the process. When there's a land use or zoning application that's a redevelopment of a mobile home park, usually that's the first step of a redevelopment. Part of that, there should be some plans. That's going to be with RER and probably a discussion with them, but that's one problem. So yes, we're looking at funding. We're not solving the entire problem. That's not the goal of this legislation. It is a prong and one of the tools in solving it. But, yes, there are state requirements, and this is in addition to any state requirement for funding.

Okay. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Commissioner. Anyone else? Commissioner Regarado, you're recognized.

Thank you, and I just wanted to make a few points. And thank you for everyone who came out. First of all, the City of Miami does have SHIP funding, so I'm glad, Nathan, that you qualified that. And just so that you know, the City of Miami actually prioritizes their SHIP money into three buckets, different from the county, housing retention and repairs, emergency home repairs, and housing rehabilitation. Um, down payment and closing cost assistance and affordable housing production. So I would tell you 1st, and foremost to go to the city of Miami and have them change their rules to comply with this because historically, um, this has not been a priority for them. So, and I say that as a resident of the city of Miami, um. Also, I think it's important to note that. There is, as Nathan mentioned, there's a piece of this that the developer participates in. This is a zoning item that goes before the City of Miami. It is the City of Miami that negotiates this. So the City of Miami is gonna be in charge of those community benefits and those negotiations and the effectuation of the statute. And I have been very clear with the residents of the mobile home park about that. The county is not involved in that process. The county does pay for an eviction program that you all remember we started during the pandemic. And as a result of that eviction program, we do work with everyone with legal aid. We fund legal aid, you know, and we provide caseworkers. Commissioner Lopez, you brought up like what. Why they get the money so late? The issue is the trigger. So this change is one of the things that we've been asking for because technically under the state law, we cannot access all of this money until they are legally unhoused. They can hold over. So it's, you know, the eviction process is the eviction process. So there has to be a point where the homeowner says, okay, I'm going to leave, right? They don't necessarily have to be out in the street. They don't have to be in the eviction process, but there is a gray area there between a holdover and okay, I'm going to leave. And now I'm negotiating what that price is. And that's always been kind of the murky part for us to figure out. I agree that at the state level, there should be some flexibility given as to what happens when home values are greater. I will say that Broward and Orlando have a benefit to us because they have over 55 housing. Over 55 housing provides a price point that is much lower than housing that is available to everyone. We don't have that in Miami-Dade County. So in many cases, we saw this when we had another mobile home. issue in Miami-Dade County, a lot of folks leave the county. They go to other counties where they can get something at a better price. And a lot of the folks are over 55, so it's very common for them to choose that housing. Now, as to the price point, I think as Nathan mentioned, when we look at the effectuation, it's a case by case, right? But it's going to be very hard because we don't we have to have enough money in the fund to be able to help people. And we don't know how many of these are going to happen. So at some point, we might want to look at the comp plan and when these things get triggered and how many of these applications we can take, because there is a world. Right. in which all of a sudden you have two or three of these come up at the same time and to nathan's point if you have 1.2 1.3 right and you you use all your money at the beginning then what do you do you don't have access to the to the ship money um beyond that so i know that the residents um back to this particular Park asked me for a meeting with the developers. I am not in the position to negotiate that. I've been very clear in that. We're doing everything that we can to provide support, but really the city of Miami is the 1 that's dealing with this development and they need to facilitate that because they're the ones that are going to be negotiating this deal. The county is not involved in that. So it puts us in a very difficult situation and obviously we represent areas of an incorporated that also have. mobile home park so we have to prioritize the unincorporated areas we're happy to help in the incorporated but when the municipality receives ship money then it's a conversation with us and them but they are getting that funding so we are the municipality in our unincorporated areas And that has to be our priority to kind of double down on a municipality that receives ship, I think, is a very different thing. But I think that's something that, as Nathan works on the effectuation, I think we can provide some, like, air support, you know, if needed. But I think the real priority for our programming has to be the unincorporated areas and the municipalities that do not get shipped. because that means that under the statute, they get zero. So we all agree that 10,000 is not enough, but if you're getting zero, that's a very different conversation. So I want to thank you, Madam Chair, for working on the item. I think it's very important. I would love to co-sponsor it and work on the effectuation with Nathan.

happy to move it thank you um thank you mr vice chair uh thank you thank you madam chair i do have a few questions and i would love to also be considered uh co-sponsor the item this is a really good item um so my question is to mr director nathan so the mobile home preservation program is that what we're talking about do we have one that's already etched out because from my understanding senate bill 594 did two things right it removed the 20 cap and also delegated the responsibility of creating protection for mobile home tenants and land owners it gave us the opportunity to create a mechanism to help fund them in the event of facing issues that we're facing today. Is that pretty much accurate?

That is correct.

All right. And if that is accurate, then is there a world where if our mobile home preservation program isn't, as we heard from Commissioner Regalado, the City of Miami has one on deck, is there a world where we can mirror that but at the same time analyze the number of mobile homes that are inside of the unincorporated area and use that number and have it as a basis for the amount of money that you have left over in this this stash this pot this one to two million dollars and make a calculation as to how much of the county can afford for the unincorporated area

Yes, we can do an inventory analysis with our we are for for all mobile home parks. I think I think it would be good to look at it even for for incorporated areas that receive. Ship just to get the full universe. Um, we could also see which ones are currently subject to. Uh, potential zoning action over the next couple of years, right?

And instead of bill 594, actually. In a sense, it gives you a wide latitude to come up with a game plan that would be beneficial and advantageous to the current mobile homeowners and renters who are actually experiencing the setbacks that they're experiencing today due to owners selling properties for a higher rate. Is there something that we can find, and I think Commissioner Lopez said it earlier, maybe we go towards the best practice and look at other counties and cities and find out what can we borrow from them so that we can speed this up so that they don't have to find themselves in limbo while we're going through this.

I completely, Commissioner, agree with that position as well as Commissioner Lopez and Regalado. Yeah, absolutely, we'll take a look at some of the larger counties as well as the cities and see what we can line up. I think a combination of that and inventory and which mobile homes may be going through a redevelopment, I think that will give us some good data and analysis.

I think west of us there are, we have like the St. Pete area, the Tampa area, they have a lot of mobile homes. Jefferson County, and I think we can look at those areas And see what they're talking about over there, and I think that would give us a nice guidance. Because if I'm looking at this correctly, they're equally situated as far as opportunities for hurricanes, the amount of hurricanes, the fact that the market is actually changing as it relates to real estate value. And I think they'll give us a great indicator of what we can do and what we can't do.

Happy to look at that.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, thank you so much. Anyone else? You have something else, Commissioner Regalado?

Yes, since Commissioner McGee mentioned that, I would just say there is a Florida mobile home relocation trust fund. So, Nathan, while we're looking, if we're going to do an audit, right? I mean, we're asking for an audit. I think it's a great idea so we can evaluate the risk, right? So we're looking at a particular pot of money. We're going to do an audit to evaluate the risk. Look at the trust fund also because that's another state vehicle that we should add when we look at that. And there is a radius associated to that trust fund. So maybe that's a path forward also to establish a radius and a price point based on that radius. Thank you.

Madam Chair.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Madam Chair, to respond. Also, in agreement with Commissioner Regalado, I do believe Senate Bill 594 actually provides for that six month window, that 180 day window. Right, so is there a world, and again, I'm talking out loud before I'm actually thinking about the answer. And I know as a lawyer, we should never ask the question we don't know the answer to, but I'm thinking out loud here. Is there a world, since we have broader control, since the state gave it to us, is there a world where everything can literally start at the 181st day as it relates to support of those who are impacted?

Think to exceed the 180?

Yeah, yeah. Is there a world where we can do that? Maybe that's a question to the attorney. Is there a world where we can do that? If it starts at 181, let's start at 181. If we only have 180, let's look and see if we can somehow expand so that we can benefit them more.

I would say, and I'll defer to legal, but there's some very specific language in there that caps it at the six months under this program.

But we can combine programs. So when it stops at 180, we can pick up another one.

Again, under your legislative body, yes, but under this program, it's limited.

Anything else? Vice Chair? Thank you so much. Does legal have anything?

We can certainly get back with Commissioner McGee on his issue. We'll do some research and circle back with you if that's okay, Vice Chairman.

Thank you. That would be helpful. So thank you so much. All the residents who came here to speak, I really appreciate that. I want to let you know that I encourage you to come back, and back again, because your voices matter. To Nathan, you do have a wealth of resources with us today, and I'd like to start by thanking Community Justice Project, And also, Eagle Services of Buddha Miami, Jeffrey, thank you so much. But you also have them. I'd like you to really reach out to them to look into other alternatives. You also have the residents that you can engage. So to the residents, I heard you very clearly about the amount. This is one proposal, and we're going to take all your feedback into consideration. And then to see what is possible, Nathan. Is it possible to increase it? If it is, then to how much? But in order to really make the right decision, it is important to meet with the community, to meet with the residents, and meet with some of the resources that are in the room because they are they they are in the community they know the the residents i know they work very closely with the mobile home residents so they will be able to bring the feedback that you you could also use uh in that process and then i also would uh recommend uh my my colleagues um idea to um look into other other counties to find best practices Because, obviously, there is a housing crisis. Obviously, $10,000 is not going to get them far, but I understand that you have a limited pot. It's limited. I think you said one point something. How much again is it? The amount that you have, you're dealing with right now?

After we knock out 75% of that $8 million, it's roughly $1.5 to $2 million potentially. Again, that's still competing against other programs that this board directs us to implement. So we've got to look at the whole thing collectively. But it's limited. That's correct.

It is limited. So look into best practices and engage, meet with the community to see how best you can help them. And I don't know if my colleagues remember, we called that last year. I did make an urging for... the Florida legislature to increase the assistance to the Florida mobile home you know board so hopefully this is something that we can follow up on it was made last year so there is clearly a need for it so my advice is to schedule a time meet with the with the with the community organizations and meet with the residents And I want to tell you, those of you who came to speak, it is a process. The 10,000 is one aspect that we are looking at. There might be other ideas, other things that we can work on. So hopefully together we'll find better solutions for you. But I want you to understand that we value your voices, we value you coming, and we value your feedback. all right nathan so you will reach out uh to the residents and also reach out to community justice project and legal services of greater miami and let's start a conversation to see how we can improve uh this because obviously um it is a crisis and we need to make the best decisions for our residents because these are people who've been invested A lot. I have a lot of experience working with mobile homeowners. Remember that this was my job before I became a commissioner. So I know the challenges and I understand the challenges. And I can tell you that the concerns are real. $10,000 will not take them far. So let us continue the process to make sure that we find the best solutions to help them. Because they are. all residents and then we need to provide the assistance that is needed so that they can live in in dignity and respecting the indignities just like every other homeowner in miami-dade county all right anything else for my colleagues um thank you for your feedback um move the item madam yep move it second Yes, Commissioner Regalado already, did we have a second? Yep. Okay, all right. Madam Clerk, call the roll.

Commissioner McGee? Yes. Commissioner Regalado? Yes. Commissioner Bermudez? Vice Chairwoman Lopez? Yes. Chairwoman Bastian? Yes. Motion passes unanimously.

That is as amended, Madam Chair. As amended, yes. Yes, Madam Chair, you still have item 2A and also the minutes, which is 6A.

I move the remainder of the agenda. Hi.

No, I think just a motion to adjourn is in order.

Thank you, Madam Chair.