Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of Santa Rosa - Regular Meeting

Oh, I'm sorry, I got the wrong ones. Sorry about that. Jack, did you give me one?

Sorry about that.

Okay. All right, let's start her all over, thank you very much. Thank you for being on top of that. I'd like to call the August 24th, 2026 Housing Authority regular meeting to order. Members of the public may view and listen to the meeting as noted on the city's website and as noted on the agenda. As a matter of housekeeping, I'd like to remind commissioners to keep their microphones muted unless they are speaking. Clerk, can you explain how public comments will be heard at today's meeting?

After each agenda item, the chair will ask for Housing Authority Commissioner comments and then will open the item for public comment. Once the chair calls for public comment, please go to the closest podium in the upper tier of chambers. The clerk will unmute your microphone and start the timer. Speakers will be allowed to speak one time per item up to three minutes. Additionally, there is one public comment period to speak on non-agenda matters, item six. To address the Housing Authority, you are requested to complete a speaker card and give it to the recording secretary. I believe that today we might not need speaker cards because we don't expect excessive public comment. Thank you.

Clerk, have we been notified of any commissioners who have requested to participate remotely under the just cause provision of the Brown Act?

We have not.

Okay, we'll move on to the next agenda item. We have no one participating remotely, right? Before I ask the clerk to do a roll call for attendance to assist with streaming the meeting and capturing commissioners as they are speaking, I want to continue to remind commissioners to please ask the chair to be recognized before asking a question or making a comment. This will allow time for the cameras to shift to a new speaker. Can you do a roll call, please?

Commissioner Owen.

Here.

Commissioner Fearon. Here. Commissioner Wimmer.

Here.

Commissioner Conte.

Here.

Vice Chair Capio.

Here.

And Chair Smith. Here. Let the record reflect that all commissioners are present with the exception of Commissioner Downey.

Item four, statements of abstention. We don't have any statements of abstention. We'll move on to the next item. Item five, study session. There are no study session items on the agenda. No need for public comment. And we'll move on to item six, public comments on non-agenda items. Comments from the public will be allowed on all agenda items at the time each item is called. This is the time when any person may address the Housing Authority on matters not listed on the agenda, but which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Housing Authority. Each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes to address the Housing Authority. You are requested to complete an orange speaker card and give it to the recording secretary.

We are now taking public comments on item six, non-agenda items. This is the time when any person may comment on matters not listed on this agenda, but which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Housing Authority. If you wish to make a comment, please go to one of the podiums in the upper tier of chambers. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert you at the end of that period. Please state your name for the record if you choose to do so.

Ready to begin the clock. That's the most important thing of all. Hello, my name is Dwayne DeWitt, I'm from Roseland. I came today to thank you all for these volunteer efforts that you make and also to give credit where credit is due because the Santa Rosa Housing Authority, which handles the entire Sonoma County HUD-VASH program, has helped two homeless veterans get into housing. One of them is the 86-year-old veteran Guido Bocca Leone, who was forced out of his house of 54 years due to reverse mortgage scam. So he was basically going to be on the street, except that the folks from Santa Rosa Housing Authority and the folks from The Veterans Affairs is what they call themselves now, Housing Urban Development, Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing. They worked to get he and another veteran into housing. He's currently at the cannery. And what's really nice, and you folks need to know this, he got to bring his four dogs with him. And the four dogs were from his wife. His wife passed away, and that's why he went into the reverse mortgage situation, which then scammed him. He has an obligation for those dogs forever until they pass or he passes. So he's happily ensconced, is the term they use, in an apartment. there at the cannery. The other gentleman was a Navy Submariner, a man who was used to tight quarters, and he had been through the nation's finest rehabilitation program there on West Hearn Avenue, which this body has helped in the past, and he got himself into a single unit living with a HUD-VASH voucher. So I'm a great proponent of these HUD-VASH vouchers and I want you to know when I come here, it's always because I'm trying for it to be more efficient program. And I do not cast aspersions on any of the staff that are here and any of you that are up there volunteering your time. We're just focused in a current Department of War choice to start a war in a foreign country, which is gonna make more veterans some who are gonna be disabled, those that survive. We've already had up to 17 who've been killed in this war. So always keep in mind that you folks could work with this federal government no matter what they call themselves, Department of War or Defense. It can be the thing where you folks are the ones that help the veterans when they get back. There's actually a new group started here locally called Keeping Veterans Local. And they're working to try to keep our veterans here in Sonoma County to be able to live here the rest of their lives in Sonoma County. Thank you for your time.

Okay, no more comments on that, okay. We'll move on to item number seven, approval of the minutes from the July 27, 2026 meeting. Any commissioners have anything they wanna add to the minutes? Nothing. The minutes will be approved as, did you want to, I'm sorry, go ahead. The minutes will be approved as presented. Any public comments on the minutes?

Seeing no public comment.

Okay, item eight, Chairman-Commissioner Reports, Megan.

Yes, thank you, Chair Smith. As you'll see on the agenda, there is an item for the HUD-VASH Ad Hoc Committee. In April, the Housing Authority had selected three members to serve on this Ad Hoc Committee. They are Vice Chair Capio, Commissioner Wimmer, and Commissioner Conte. Commissioner Conte stepped down from this committee, and so we are seeking another Housing Authority member to fill in her spot.

Any questions of the staff here? Okay, we'll open this up to public comments on 8.1.

We are now taking public comments on 8.1. If you wish to make a comment, please go to one of the podiums in the upper tier of chambers. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert you at the end of that period. Please state your name for the record if you choose to do so.

I always wait for the clock. That's the most important thing.

Hello, my name is Dwayne DeWitt. I'm from Roseland. I'm also United States Army veteran, Vietnam. It's important for us to understand that the veterans that are seeking your assistance are really good members of the community most of the time. Some fall on hard times, some have difficulties. That should not be the measure of how things go. So I'm going to advocate that any veteran that you have on this committee right now continue to be on this ad hoc committee for the HUD-VASH program. And the extra veteran that might be there could also perhaps volunteer to be on this committee. I believe it's important to have a veteran's point of view, especially in light of the fact we're going to be at war for much longer than we might expect. As a matter of fact, as somebody once mentioned to me back when I was on active duty, America is always at war. In one place or another, we're always doing war. So let's help those people who essentially put forward the policy of our nation wherever they may seek to have it enacted. So I won't use anybody's name. I'll just say any veterans you got on that housing authority now, make sure they're on the ad hoc committee for the HUD-VASH voucher. That may make it seem a little bit unbalanced, but I actually think it'll be more helpful. And you're going after federal funds, this would be a way to convince the federal government to give more funds to help us here in our community for the needs that we'll be having. I'll leave you on this one note. You may not know this, but back in the day when we started the wars in this century over in the Middle East, a kid from Santa Rosa was killed relatively quickly on the first couple days. His name is Patrick O'Day, United States Marine Corps. He gave his life for this country even though he was born in another country. His family immigrated here, and yet he stood up and took the oath to dedicate his life for us here in our country. I don't mean to belabor the point, but hey, the people that help to defend our nation should be the ones that you defend. Thank you kindly for your time.

I'm seeing no more public comment.

Would any of the housing authority commissioners like to appoint a commissioner to the ad hoc committee? Commission of women?

Do we have any veterans here? How do you feel about that? Do you want to be nominated? I'd be honored to be nominated. Outstanding.

Okay, any seconds for Commissioner Ferron? I'll second.

I'm sorry? I'll second.

Okay. Is there any further discussion from the commissioners on this? Okay, can you call for a roll call?

Commissioner Owen?

Aye.

Commissioner Fearon? Aye. Commissioner Conte. Aye. Vice Chair Capio.

Aye.

And Chair Smith. Aye. Let the record reflect that the motion passes unanimously.

Thank you, Duane. I seldom have a personal advocate, but I like that. Thank you.

Okay, go on to item nine, committee reports. Are there any members of the ad hoc committees like to report? We have Vice Chair Capio.

Yes, I'd like to give a brief report on the VASH subcommittee. We're in the information gathering process and we've met with several organizations and groups of vets. We toured the South Santa Rosa facility and met with vets there as well, along with two program staff. We're in the process of researching other counties and how they administer the VASH program having heard that they are doing a good job. And then we are designing a questionnaire to gather data and gain perspective from vets directly, including the removal of barriers for housing or what they face when they go and try for a VASH voucher. I also would note that we learned during our meeting at the South Vets facility that there is a new coordinator for housing at the Veterans Administration. So we'll be contacting them as well and making sure we meet with them, thanks.

Anyone else have any reports on any of the committees? Okay, okay. Nothing else to report on. We'll move on to item 10, Executive Director Report by Megan Basinger, thank you.

Thank you, Chair Smith. Attached for your monthly review is the August pipeline. I'd like to call your attention to some of the changes in projects that are funded and under construction. You'll see that there's several that are noted as being completed in phases. These are market rate projects that do have inclusionary units. with affordability agreements and then the last line number eight ponderosa village phase one is a project that was supported by the housing authority and that has Begun construction, so we'll have 50 additional affordable units coming online in about 18 months or so So I'd be happy to answer any questions about the pipeline and then I have an update for you on the housing choice voucher shortfall So first are there any questions on the pipeline?

Commissioner Wimmer, you have a question?

There was a question on how the vouchers work and how the percentage is paid and how, I guess you would say, the amount of rent is determined.

So this is not related to the pipeline, that is correct. Are these questions about the voucher program overall?

Yeah.

Maybe we could come back and do a study session at a later time and give you an update, give everybody an update on the voucher program, because there are some nuances to that we could walk through with some slides and make that more beneficial. Okay, thank you.

Any questions on the pipeline itself? I guess. Okay.

If I can just complete my update before we go ahead. Okay, go ahead, I'm sorry. Okay, and as I noted in July, the Housing Authority is currently in shortfall due to the offset of their reserves. I'd let you know that we had reached out to HUD with a letter requesting that our offsets be restored. We did meet with HUD and they declined that request. We are now working through Congressman Thompson's office to see if we can achieve a resolution there. In the meantime, the Housing Authority staff is required to submit monthly updates to HUD on our voucher. We're not allowed to issue vouchers, so confirming that we're not doing that. We are not allowed to provide any more project-based vouchers through RFP processes. So we are reporting on our meeting all of their current requirements. The, as I noted in July, the one significant issue that does impact us as we are in shortfall is we're not allowed to absorb the emergency housing voucher clients. So we are in communication with the county and with the continuum of care to look for potential solutions as we continue discussions again with Congressman Thompson's office to see if there are any other potential remedies for this situation. And now I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Commissioner Farron. It certainly appears the federal government wants you to close shop. It has to be uncomfortable. It has to be for an activist group like you guys to be told over and over that you can't do what you're hoping you can do and could do before. So I'm hopeful that Congressman Thompson and your efforts will reverse what you're hearing now because it doesn't sound like the federal government's gonna be an active partner in our process.

Thank you, Commissioner Brown.

Commissioner, Vice Chair Conte, Capio, sorry.

I just wanted to make sure I understand. So we have a reserve, which they have taken away, which now we're in shortfall? Is that how this works?

That is correct, because they have reduced our annual funding, which does not give us enough money to operate the program with the absorption of our emergency housing vouchers in this year.

Okay, so have we been in contact with any other jurisdictions where this is happening?

We are in contact with the county. They are not currently in shortfall. They were last year, but we are not in contact presently with any jurisdictions that are in the current shortfall cohort, as they refer to it. Thank you.

Any other commissioners? Commissioner Elwin?

Yeah, what does this have to, how does this affect the current project-based vouchers that are in play and also being paid for the housing choice vouchers?

I'm sorry, could you repeat the second part of your question?

So we have project-based vouchers, we have housing choice vouchers, not talking about moving the emergency into the housing choice. So excluding that aspect, is there a funding shortfall for those two, housing choice and project-based?

Project-based vouchers, we are currently in contract, so we either have AHAPs, which is our pre-COVID, building being ready contract, those remain in place. And then we have minimum 20-year contracts with the developers that we are required to adhere to, so those stay in place for the duration of those contracts. So all of those will continue on. We are not allowed to issue any requests for proposals for new project-based vouchers, which we would not have done anyways because we did hit our statutory limit on the percentage of vouchers that could be allocated towards project-based vouchers. We are not allowed to issue any new vouchers. So we cannot bring anyone new onto the Housing Choice Voucher Program as a regular voucher holder. Part of our contracts with property owners and developers for project-based vouchers is we do have to fill the units when there is turnover. So we will be pulling households from the project-based voucher waiting lists, and those are site-specific. Any other questions?

Yeah, Commissioner Ferron.

How long is this? The reason I'm asking how long is it, I'm chair of the local Prop 1 Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act that's on the ballot. Assuming we get seven billion more dollars in the state and the likelihood that we could actually pull off some more projects, it appears, what I'm hearing you is that we're not gonna be in the business of ever until something gets changed being capable of including project-based vouchers in that formula.

We, if there is not a change in the future to the number of vouchers that we are issued. So again, we have our budget authority and then we have a limit up to 1,925 vouchers. We can do 20% and then you can go up to 25% if it's for special populations. We are already pushing towards that 25% of our voucher allocation for special populations being homeless veterans. So if there was an increase to the cap, accompanied by budget authority, we may be able to anticipate some additional requests for proposals in the future, or if we had any projects that did not renew their contracts at the end of the terms.

So we are very limited.

I'd say it's a limited opportunity.

Commissioner Conte?

Yes, I'm wondering about, in the housing choice vouchers, In terms of port-ins, those are covered by where they're coming from, correct?

So that's another component. We are not allowed to absorb any port-ins. So individuals may move into our community with their voucher from another jurisdiction. We are required to bill that other jurisdiction. So they will remain a port-in. We do not absorb. And then the same thing, we find a lot of jurisdictions if individuals move here, those other housing authorities are not absorbing our clients as well, if that makes sense.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Any other Commissioners have any questions? I just have one question on the pipeline for the rehab. The two projects listed, they're just waiting to start construction or they're under construction? It wasn't totally clear under the status.

So the two projects we have identified are the Zane Wolf Veterans Village. That we are in the process of executing the loan documents. And I saw an email earlier today they are in the process of pulling the permits that they need in order to complete that project. So I imagine that will move into the under construction category next month. And then Apple Valley, Olive Grove, we just released for public review the NEPA environmental assessment, which is the last step in order for us to receive approval to use the CDBG from HUD and provide those loan documents. So I hope, really hope to see that one move into the under construction category next month as well.

Thank you. Any other questions from commissioners? Okay, clerk, could you ask if there's any public comments on the pipeline?

We are now taking public comments on item 10.1. If you wish to make a comment, please go to one of the podiums in the upper tier of chambers. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert you at the end of that period. Please state your name for the record if you choose to do so.

Hello, my name is Duane DeWitt. I'm from Roseland. Typically, the agenda would have a copy of the pipeline. It's not here in today's agenda. It would be nice to have that each time you do a Housing Authority meeting, a hard copy. Many people are not online. The comments that were just made were discouraging because we understand that the federal government has basically undercut some of your efforts. And the comment that was just made about permits for a veteran's village, I didn't catch the name of what the veteran's village was and where it's at, so perhaps that could be clarified. And then the whole approach of coming back on the federal government, this administration specializes in making threats and legal entities illegal. come forward, I would hope that you folks would push our elected representatives at the city council to prepare legal actions against the federal government. The only way things get done apparently with the Department of War and the, what do they call those guys, those economic development people in that clique or cartel they got running the deal, They're not gonna pay attention to us unless you have the strength of a lawsuit behind you. You can write letters all day long, I really appreciate Congressman Thompson. He's a good guy. He does a lot of good stuff. They're ignoring him up there. Okay, so we need you folks to make a recommendation, not just ask the question, recommend that our Santa Rosa City Council vigorously pursue all the funding that has been clawed back by the federal government, get every project here that's moving forward fully funded funded and the City Council of Santa Rosa indemnified from any problems that it takes to make this actually occur. It's unfortunate that we have to fight our own government to get the things that we were promised. But it's about looking at the present based on what was promised and going for what we can get as needed by our housing authority, thank you.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Fred Allbach, and I'd like to compliment the staff report for showing tremendous restraint for not laying blame where it's deserved with a malicious and capricious federal government who seems to be at war with everybody, including its own citizens. So I think the government is really despicable here, and this is going to result in more homelessness, more suffering, and... just like to go on record with that. And so I read the staff report carefully and it was very restrained, but that's the truth of the matter. As far as the pipeline, I always look at the pipeline every month. So I'm curious about it. And I live in the Northeast quadrant of the city, and I have a chance to walk through the Northeast Quadrant and make some very close observations of the housing there and the housing patterns, and also study the demographics of the area. And the Northeast Quadrant is the widest quadrant of the city. And the city's housing element does have a firmly furthering fair housing provisions, which calls for integrating areas of higher resource opportunity which the Northeast quadrant would be. So I've noticed that any sort of affordable projects that go on the Northeast Quadrant are all on busy strips. None of them penetrate into actual neighborhoods. And I was walking along Acacia today and I saw the new Acacia project. They're paving the street there and I think there's three affordable housing elements there. three affordable housing units as part of the inclusion there. So that's basically a market rate enclave there. But it's next to a mobile home park. So there is some mixed income areas there in the Northeast quadrant. But as far as new affordable housing, it seems like the lack of funds from the federal government now is basically giving us more de facto segregation. So I find that a little discouraging that Affirmatively, furthering fair housing isn't resulting in actual neighborhoods getting integrated. The high-density apartments all go on busy streets where the quality of life is lower. I don't think that's the housing authority's fault, but just something I thought I'd mentioned, because I know that that Kayser project is in the pipeline and all the affordable projects in the pipeline are waiting to be funded and the market rate ones are moving ahead full steam. So that's my comments, thanks.

Seeing no more public comment.

We'll move on to the next agenda item, consent items. There are no consent items on this agenda. And we'll go to item 12, report items 12.1 by Kelly Kuykendall, thank you.

All right, while Kelly gets the presentation up, item 12.1 is a report conditionally approving an extension for the maturing loan and regulatory agreement for KMAR Mobile Home Park at 515 West College Avenue. It's gonna be just a moment while we have a small difficulty.

Thank you for your patience. Kelly Kuykendall, Housing and Community Services Manager. The item before you is a request for an extension of the loan and regulatory agreement terms for KMAR Mobile Home Park, located at 515 West College Avenue. Sorry, again, more delays. The slide deco is delayed. KMAR Mobile Home Park is comprised of 33 individually owned homes for households 55 years and older. In 1994 and again in 1995, the Housing Authority provided the residents of the park with a loan to acquire the park. That loan is due October 18th, 2026. The balance of that loan as of maturity is approximately $327,000. That includes principal plus accrued interest. The Housing Authority also has a regulatory agreement secured against the property, which ensures affordability for households at or below 80% of area median income at the time of purchase, and that regulatory agreement expires on October 22nd, 2026. Whenever staff receives a request for a loan extension or regulatory agreement extension, we make sure that the property is in compliance with the Housing Authority's regulatory agreement. I'm happy to report that Berkeley Management, which is the agent for KMAR Inc., the owner of the property, is in compliance with the regulatory agreement. Staff also performed an onsite inspection and found the property in good condition. The property has the following existing financing. There's a State Housing and Community Development, HCD, loan that requires monthly principal and interest payments. That loan will be paid off in March of 2027. The current balance is 21,500. The Housing Authority loan, which I've already discussed, and the Summit Savings Affordable Housing Program, AHP loan, in the approximate amount of 100,000. So their existing financing on the property totals approximately $450,000. The combined loan-to-value is .543, and that's using an estimated value of 846,000. That information we pulled from the County Assessor's page. And then loan to value without the AHP loan, which I mentioned is forgivable, that is 0.41. Berkeley management is currently working with Summit Savings on the forgiveness of the AHP loan. If approved, KMR Inc. will continue to own and operate the property consistent with the Housing Authority Regulatory Agreement through October 18th, 2041. Approval of this item ensures affordability of the property for senior households. New loan documents, so in addition to the regulatory agreement, we would enter into a new promissory note that would include residual cash payments. The current note for the property does not include that provision. With that, the Housing and Community Services Department recommends that the Housing Authority by resolution conditionally approve an extension for the maturing loan and regulatory agreement for KMAR Mobile Home Park located at 515 West College Avenue to extend the term by 15 years from October 18th, 2026 to October 18th, 2041. This concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. And to the best of my knowledge, we have some representatives of Berkeley management here if you have any questions for that.

Any commissioners? Commissioner Conte?

Yeah, I'm wondering just in general regarding the regulatory agreement. If it wasn't for the loan extension, would that not have come up? or would it not have been pursued? I mean, it's just like an opportunity to reestablish that for a longer period of time?

Yes, typically, and you've had a number of loan extensions come before you in the last several months. We're also evaluating the term of the regulatory agreement and extending that if needed. Not always do they need to extend the regulatory agreement, but in this case, with the loan extension, we're also recommending extending the regulatory agreement to match the term of the loan.

Do you think they would have pursued that regardless of not needing the loan money? I know that's trying to read somebody's mind, but you said somebody would. here that can maybe speak to that.

So if we receive a request to extend the loan from a borrower and the regulatory agreement is expiring on or about the same term, then our recommendation to the Housing Authority would be to extend the term of the regulatory agreement to match the loan extension.

I'm just wondering if they would have extended the regulatory agreement regardless of needing the loan at this time. That's just my question.

That I don't know and they can answer that question in public comment.

Commissioner Fearon.

We like to think everybody's interested in giving our residents low interest, I mean low rents and regulatory agreements are our way of keeping low rents. So I definitely approve and encourage you to continue the policy that you have. regardless of their intentions. I wanna first of all thank you for bringing this forward and I wanna thank Berkeley Management and especially Summit State Bank. Forgiving loans is not an easy thing for a bank to do and it's not easy for loan entities in any sense. So I'm glad that we're recognizing that I mean, from my point of view, the only way we're ever gonna have low income housing is to recognize that loans are there basically to wait until we end up 45 years later and then we forgive them. They should have been grants in the first place, but we had no instruments to do that and it wasn't the right atmosphere. but we're doing it by forgiving loans and by extending grants, I mean, extending loans, and I appreciate that. The mobile home parks are a particular kind of hot button in this community and the idea that we would be able to extend the loan and continue people in those housing is a great one. I wish we could do that for everybody and I wish we could find a way of making sure that The profits that are being made by mobile home park owners raising rents, whether or not they had loans from us and regulatory agreements, we've got to make sure that the people who are living in those mobile home parks aren't on the street, and they will be if we can't figure out a way of solving that problem. So thank you.

Any other commissioners, any questions? You can go on to public comments for this.

We are now taking public comments on item 12.1. If you wish to make a comment, please go to one of the podiums in the upper tier of chambers. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert you at the end of that period. Please state your name for the record if you choose to do so.

Hi, my name is Fred all about again. I would like to first ask the chair to have to ask staff to respond to my questions. Otherwise they wouldn't respond to my questions in this comment. I live in a mobile home park here in Santa Rosa, and I feel like a sitting duck for the type of takeovers that are happening in various parks in the county. And so I think anybody who lives in a mobile home park feels pretty vulnerable. And so I'm jealous of these guys that they own their own park. And so I'm curious why they couldn't make the payments on this or to pay it off on time. That doesn't make sense to me. I don't know if the loan repayment was attached to their monthly bill. so that their actual payments put them into like a market rate level of monthly payments so that it wasn't really affordable housing. Because of the loan, I just simply don't know. But what I did was I saw the assessed value of this park was 850,000 now. So I multiplied that by the number of units in my park, which is 170, and I came up with a $4.25 million. And so I was wondering if Santa Rosa could get that same type of loan if our park came for sale. that the same sort of arrangement could go in the future for my park or other parks, that they could buy their park with a COPA or a TOPA arrangement that the City Council could make as part of their mobile home park anti-displacement strategy. So I wondered about the keeping up, how they kept up with their payments and their payments, whether the... Housing Authority would make a loan for $4.25 million for basically the same assessed value just at a larger park. And how in the future if a park was, if there's any way the rule could be so the park could only be sold for the assessed value and not at a price that no one could afford. So I was curious about that. So I know that the jurisdictions need to take some actions here and So just curious what sort of actions the Housing Authority could take in conjunction with the South Santa Rosa specific plan and the anti-displacement strategy that's in place there for the multiple mobile home parks that might be annexed into the city with the Todd Creek Pipeline Project. And just wondering what could be done, because I see these guys got a deal and I'm wondering, well, maybe my park could get a deal too, thanks.

Good afternoon, my name is Josh Berkeley and I'm the president of Berkeley Management, management company in charge of K-Marway Mobile Home Park. And I'd like to answer the one question that was posed regarding whether the membership, owner membership of the K-Marway mobile home community would have chosen to otherwise seek extension to the affordability covenants provided in the regulatory agreement. And I would have to say that I'm not quite sure where that question might come from, but what I wanted to state was that the leadership of the 33 Space Mobile Home Park here at KMAR Way is very single-minded in preserving affordable housing. In fact, the charter for the corporation is to provide 33 affordable housing opportunities, ownership opportunities for senior mobile home, senior residents here in Santa Rosa. And every board meeting that I attend and report financial condition is met with the support to continue the affordability at the park. So it is part of our charter that came our way. And so in that regard, I would say that the affordability would most certainly be preserved. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Duane DeWitt, I'm from Roseland. For over 60 years, there's been a Roseland mobile home park on Sebastopol Road. It is, in a sense, a type of park that is an example of this one we see here. We need to keep these ownership opportunities for these folks. We need to keep the low income opportunities for anyone that's living in mobile home parks currently in our community. I have the distinct pleasure, if you will, as a 13 and 14 year old to be the newspaper boy for the Rosa mobile home park and knew many of those elderly residents at that time. And that's where they ended their lives. They stayed there. That's a model that works throughout our community. And I know some fellow veterans that live there now in that Roseland Park. So I'm supportive of this extension. I understand the paperwork and how things go. However, we can keep as many of these mobile home parks and the spaces in the low income affordable bracket. Please take those steps. Thank you.

I'm seeing no more public comment.

Would any of the Housing Authority Commissioners like to motion regarding the resolution for item 12.1? And I have the wording to state. Commissioner Farah? Yeah, I'd love to.

Okay, I would like to move the resolution to approve the extension for the maturing loan and regulatory agreement for KMAR Mobile Home Park, 515 West College Avenue, and waive the reading of the text.

Second.

I second the motion.

Okay. Could you do a roll call, please?

Commissioner Owen?

Aye.

Commissioner Fearon? Aye. Commissioner Wimmer? Aye. Commissioner Conte?

Aye.

Vice Chair Capio?

Aye.

Chair Smith? Aye. Let the record reflect that the motion passes unanimously.

Thank you to you all. We'll move on to the next agenda item, 12.2 by Kelly Kuykendall.

All right, well, Kelly's getting that up. 12.2 is a report approving a conditional commitment of rehabilitation funds for Stony Point Commons, located at 2643 Stony Point Road.

Success. OK, Megan already informed you of what the item was, so I'll just move on to the next slide. And there is a bit of a delay, so give me a minute or a second. Stony Point Commons is a 16-unit, single-room occupancy facility serving very low-income households with behavioural health needs. The facility is owned and operated by Community Support Network. The Housing Authority has existing loans on the property in the principal amount of $329,000. They're due March 28, 2032. The Housing Authority also has a regulatory agreement securing affordability to households at or below 50% of area median income to January 2059. In August, which just this month, Community Support Network reached out requesting funds to address urgent repairs of the property. These repairs include to the fire sprinkler system and three of the restrooms at the facility. The request is for $177,000. That includes $154,000 in estimated repairs. And staff is recommending an additional $23,000 in contingency funds in the event that they identify additional repairs that are needed during the course of the work. The Housing Authority loan is the only existing debt on the property, plus the current request before you would bring the total principal loan to 506,000. There's accrued interest as of August 24th, 2026 of approximately $233,000. The assessed value of the project is 1.1 million per the Sonoma County Assessor's information. As part of the loan request, staff is also recommending a 10-year extension to the loan to March 28th, 2042. With that, the Housing and Community Services Department recommends that the Housing Authority, by resolution, approve a conditional commitment of rehabilitation funds for emergency fire sprinkler and restroom repairs in amount up to $177,000 to Community Support Network for Stony Point Commons, a 16-unit SRO facility for individuals with behavioral health needs. located at 2643 Stony Point Road, and extend the term of the Housing Authority's loan by 10 years from March 28, 2032 to March 28, 2042. That concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have. We also have a representative of CSN here if you have any questions for them. Thank you.

Vice Chair Capio.

I just wanted to be sure that the work to be accomplished was based on real specific bids.

There were estimates provided with this and some bids and they're working on getting additional bids.

Thank you.

Yeah, and we will be looking at that as if the Housing Authority approves that today, we'll be looking more closely at that moving up to the construction and the rehab. Thanks.

Any other commissioners? I just have one question. Where does this money come from in the budget? Is there a specific line item that we have money allocated for these emergencies?

We don't have a specific emergency allocation, but we are proposing to fund this out of CDBG because it is allowed for rehab work and would allow us to move some of our CDBG funding, which would be beneficial to our budget.

Thank you. If there's no other commissioners, we'll take a public comment on this item.

We are now taking public comments on item 12.2. If you wish to make a comment, please go to one of the podiums in the upper tier of chambers. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert you at the end of that period. Please state your name for the record if you choose to do so.

Hi, my name is Fred Olabok and I don't have a comment on this, but I do have a procedural comment that it might be acceptable if staff would prompt the chair to answer questions from the public if they asked to have them answered in our item.

Hello, my name is Dwayne DeWitt. I'm from Roseland. I support this matter being funded. And I do this because 23 full years ago, I was a volunteer for Burbank Housing when they first got the property. And they worked with a woman named Margo Merck. And the approach is we don't have enough single resident only opportunities for people who have difficulties, if you will. So please support this, help it to stay in operation, and basically keep doing the good work you do with what little we have. CDBG funds can be used for this, so go for it, thank you.

Would any of the Housing Authority Commissioners like to motion regarding the resolution for item 12.2, and I have the language to do that, Commissioner Farrell?

Yeah, I'd be pleased to do this. This actually was initiated after I left CSN, so I had nothing to do with it, but I'm pleased to be able to help it extend. I'd like to move the resolution to approve the extension for the maturing loan and regulatory agreement for Community Support Networks Stony Point Commons and waive the reading of the text.

Anyone second the motion?

I'll second.

Okay. Can you do a roll call please?

Commissioner Owen? Aye. Commissioner Fearon? Aye. Commissioner Wimmer? Aye. Commissioner Conte.

Aye.

Vice Chair Capio.

Aye.

And Chair Smith. Aye. Let the record reflect that the motion passes unanimously.

We'll go on to item 12.3 by Kelly Kuykendall.

All right, while we get this presentation up, Rebecca Lane will actually be giving this next presentation. It's a report on the fiscal year 26-27 notice of funding availability.

Okay. Good afternoon, commissioners. And my name is Rebecca Lane. I'm a program specialist with the Department of Housing and Community Services. I'm happy to be here this afternoon to present our fiscal year 2026-2027 Notice of Funding Availability funding recommendations. This is the third time that I've gone through this process as a program specialist with this department, and each time it's been a little bit different. So this time we did receive two applications, and that means that we were able to fund both of the applications. So take a little suspense right from the get-go, we will be able to fund both the projects, and I wanna just go through everything about the projects as well. So here we go.

That.

Sorry about that, we are having a little trouble with the slides today. So by way of background, our fiscal year NOFA for 2026-2027 was released on May 1st of this year, and applications were due on June 5th of 2026. The funding that's available was made up of approximately $1,399,000 in local funds, $1,187,500 in a new funding source for our department, which is called the Pro Housing Incentive Program. HCD fund that is awarded to the city based on local policies through our Department of Planning and Economic Development to create and incentivize housing that are in the local jurisdiction. And we also have $1,056,071 approximately in CDBG funds this year for projects. The Housing Authority held a study session on April 27th to review the information that we had at that time on the funding that would be available, and we also requested direction on funding priorities this year. The Housing Authority provided direction to continue having a preference in the applications for rehabilitation projects. And we also, in that meeting, established the ad hoc committee to review the applications. Two applications, as I mentioned, were received this year, and both were for new construction. We did not receive any applications for rehabilitation projects. The total dollar amount does exceed the amount, the total dollar amount that the projects requested does exceed the amount that we had available, but as I mentioned in the beginning, we are able to fund both projects. One project will not receive the full amount of the ask. So we'll go over both of the projects now, starting with our top ranking project, which is Ponderosa Village phase two. So Ponderosa Village Phase 2 is brought to us by Danco Communities. Ponderosa Village Phase 1, as Megan mentioned in her executive director's update, did break ground recently and is under construction. This is on the same parcel. The Ponderosa Village Phase 2 will be co-locating intergenerational housing by having designated senior units along with the family units, and all the senior designated units will be one bedroom. The application ranked highly for access to schools, parks, transit, and other amenities. And the onsite services that will be provided are going to be provided by Thrive Services, which has worked with Danko Communities and several other projects. And the services will be tailored to the residents' requests and needs. We are recommending $2 million for this project, which is the full amount of the request. And that can be deployed quickly, which is favorable to the Housing Authority because of the timeliness requirements of our funding sources. An overview here on this slide is of the unit mix of the project. So we have 30 units in Ponderosa Village Phase 2, which will all be affordable units. There's a manager's unit in Ponderosa Village Phase 1, which we'll share with Ponderosa Village Phase 2. So all 30 of the units are going to be targeted affordable units. There will be four units at 30% of AMI. eight units at 40% of AMI, 12 units at 50% of AMI, and six units at 60% of AMI. Of those, there will be seven one-bedroom units, 16 two-bedroom units, and seven three-bedroom units. The second project that we are recommending for funding is Caritas Homes Phase 2. This is developed by Burbank Housing. Caritas Phase 1 is open and in development, or under operation, rather, as well as Caritas Centre. Caritas Homes Phase 2 is the final stage in the Caritas Village development. Phase 2 is an almost exact replica of Phase 1 in terms of the building site and the unit mix and has been part of the plan for Caritas Village since the beginning of that redevelopment project. The City of Santa Rosa is also supporting Caritas Homes Phase 2 right now with a Home Key Plus application to the City of Santa Rosa. will be the primary applicant along with the co-applicant Burbank Housing to bring in some additional HCD funds to our area to create this housing that is going to be dedicated to serving people experiencing homelessness. The Housing Authority has previously provided to Caritas Homes Phase II IIG funds, which is another HCD funding source, as well as local funds. And again, the unit mix breakdown here for Caritas Homes Phase 2, we have 32 units at 20% of AMI and 31 units at 30% of AMI. So it's very deeply affordable. There are 63 total affordable units in this project with one unrestricted manager's unit. And those bedroom sizes are broken down into 29 studio units and 27 one-bedroom units. with eight two-bedroom units for 64 total units. So with that, the Housing and Community Services recommends that the Housing Authority, by two resolutions, approve conditional commitments of loan funds to one, Community Revitalization and Development Corporation, which is Danco Communities, in the amount of $2 million for acquisition costs for Ponderosa Village Phase 2, located at 250 Roseland Avenue, and two, Caritas Homes Phase 2 LP in the amount of $1,642,571 for construction costs for Caritas Homes Phase 2, located at 367th Street. And before I conclude for questions, I just want to thank Commissioners Conte and Farron, who served on as our ad hoc review committee, and also let you all know that both projects do have representatives here in the audience if you have any questions directly for them. Thank you.

I just have one question. Why do you call a studio a zero bedroom? Why don't you just call it a studio?

That's a good question and I actually don't really know the answer to that but those are interchangeable terms. It's easier on the slide to just call it a zero bedroom but that is weird to say out loud.

Any question, Vice Chair Capio?

When I was reviewing the capital stack that would finance this project, they're only at 26% at this point, I think, is that right? Which project are you referring to?

Caritas. Yes, so the home key is going to be a big component of the.

So that would make up the difference.

As well as tax credits, yes.

Tax credits were listed actually, but.

Oh, okay, sorry, yes.

That's okay, but they're depending on the home key for the remainder. Correct. Okay, thanks.

Any other Commissioners? Commissioner Owen.

I just want to check in on what's the status for the 9% tax credit you're looking at April next year? Is that the funding round? Have they had applications in? Do we know?

Oh, both projects are anticipating applying next year, not this year.

And then these are conditional commitments. What are the conditions to these commitments?

Staying on the projected timeline of the project, the executive director does have authority to extend the timeline if that becomes necessary. Those are some of the conditions that would apply to both projects. Ponderosa Phase 2 will need to complete a NEPA. Caritas Homes Phase 2 will need to update the NEPA. So there are various conditions in the resolutions for both projects.

And then last question, just confirming that none of these funds are dispersed until the full capital stack is committed?

Not in the case of Ponderosa. If Ponderosa is approved by the Housing Authority following completion of the NEPA, we would be providing funding for site acquisition, which is an eligible CDBG use. So that funding would go hard.

Any other questions by commissioners? Okay. Okay.

Yeah, I just wanted to thank both of the applicants because this is significant subsidy. Getting down to 20 and 30% is something that I love because it means we can have poor residents. and that's who we ought to be serving. We haven't got a stellar reputation as much as we hope we do, but I'm hoping that the pro-housing designation that we've gotten will help us get more state funds in to recognize that we're really trying to do our best. Thank you.

Public comments on this? We are now taking public comments on item 12.3. If you wish to make a comment, please go to one of the podiums in the upper tier of chambers. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert you at the end of that period. Please state your name for the record if you choose to do so.

Good afternoon again, Fred Ahlebach. I lived in Sonoma Valley for 18 years. And in those 18 years, the city managed to deliver 48 units of affordable housing total in 18 years. So I'm really glad to be living in Santa Rosa where these kind of numbers of affordable projects are really more a matter of money than a matter of will. So it's really nice to live in Santa Rosa. I also wanted to say that in 1957, my parents worked for the Philadelphia Housing Authority and I was born in 1957 in Philadelphia. So I grew up around city planners and housing authorities and stuff. So I know I've said that already, but it's kind of fun for me to come here because my parents have passed on and the apple didn't fall that far from the tree. and I can be involved in these sort of public policy things just like around the dinner table when I grew up. Thank you.

It shows, Fred, and thank you.

Whenever you're ready.

Hello everyone, my name is JP Juarez, and I'm a assistant project manager with Burbank Housing Development Corporation. I just wanted to briefly thank the Housing Authority and the City of Santa Rosa for the partnership and your continued support in providing affordable housing. So yeah, just wanted to comment that and thank you.

Good afternoon, I'm Chris Dart, President of Danco Communities, representing the Ponderosa Phase 2 project. Also wanted to express my thanks to the Commission and Housing Authority, City of Santa Rosa, and Rebecca Lane and staff for all their work in preparing this. These funds are essential to leverage the additional tax credits needed for the project. And this really puts the project in a strong position to be able to compete for tax credits and beginning in 2027 and appreciate the commitment and the partnership, the city of Santa Rosa and the housing authority. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Duane DeWitt, I'm from Roseland. No one has solicited me to be here today to support any of these projects in any way, shape or form. I support both of these projects in all ways, shapes and forms. I have no financial interest in any of the situations. I'm a person that believes if we continue to be helpful to those who are trying to provide the affordable housing, remove the roadblocks, do it in such a way that they'll come back and do even more. of these types of projects. It's especially important for the Caritas project in downtown Santa Rosa. This may be a harsh winter and we need to get as much housing as possible as soon as possible This project obviously won't help with this winter's problems, but we could perhaps talk to the people at Caritas and Burbank and say, you know, that vacant lot back there that you're scheduled to develop, how about you put some warming tents on it this year? How about you get it set up for this harsh winter so that those homeless people that congregate out under the overpasses on Sixth Street and Ninth Street would be better protected from the weather and the elements that are going to come our way from what they're saying is a strong El Nino. With that in mind, thank you again to everybody involved and let us be as helpful as we can to the Community Revitalization and Development Corporation because in a sense, they're new players on the block around here. Burbank has been taking us to the bank for decades. and other organizations going with us to the bank. But now this group is doing well, so let's be supportive of their efforts also. And I've met the gentleman who's involved. I promise I will not bother him, but I gotta learn from him. This is the key. He put together a project that happened on Boyd Street in Southwest Santa Rosa, which is actually Roseland. And do you know that that portion of Roseland Dutton Avenue to the east along Sebastopol Road is in the downtown Santa Rosa specific area plan. So you might wanna start looking at some of those areas too. The old Downey Tire up there off of Olive Street, these different spots where we could be getting housing in and Roberts Avenue. This is where we could be looking for some positive stuff and getting it done, thank you.

Seeing no more public comment.

Commissioner Ferron, you have something to say?

Yeah, since I've gone on record as criticizing at least one of these two projects for something totally unrelated to what we're talking about here, but I wanted to just reiterate that both projects are gonna have folks who significantly need mental health and substance use services. Yes, this will help you get tax credits. Our actions here will be in sync with that. But we'll also hopefully be able to use the pro-housing designation that the city has gained to lobby the state for Homekey Plus money, because you want that money to be able to provide operating to be able to deal with the issues that the clients have. And I'm hoping that we are successful in getting those funds. Without the services of mental health and substance use, you're gonna have problems. Thank you.

Would any of the Housing Authority Commissioners like to motion regarding the resolution for 12.3? Vice Chair Capio?

I would like to move the resolutions to approve the conditional commitments of loan funds and waive the readings of the text.

Any Commissioners like to second the motion to waive the reading of the text and approve the resolution? I'll second it. Could you do a roll call, please?

Commissioner Owen?

Aye.

Commissioner Fearon?

Yes.

Commissioner Wimmer?

Aye.

Commissioner Conte?

Aye.

Vice Chair Capio?

Aye.

And Chair Smith? Aye. Let the record reflect that the motion passes unanimously.

Okay, let's go on to the next item, 12.4, by Annette Anthony, Program Manager.

All right, item 12.4 is revisions to Housing Choice Voucher Program Administrative Plan to update policies that can achieve cost-saving measures to help address funding shortfall. And we are getting that presentation up for Annette, and Annette Anthony, Program Manager, will be giving the presentation.

Good afternoon, Chair Smith, Vice Chair Capio, and tenant commissioners and commissioners. Thank you for having me. As Megan's announced, my name's Annette Anthony, and I'm the program manager overseeing the Rental Assistance Department. She's indicated the title in which I'm here before you, and my main focus is to essentially lay the groundwork for what we've been doing. We were trying to mitigate this, but as Megan stated, the offset kind of sent us in a shortfall. So we were on the path of doing all the right things up until then. So this background, as many of you already know, the admin plan is, well, excuse me, our background, oh.

Who's doing that?

I am hands off. Okay, let's try again. I don't know what happened there. Okay, so. The background is, as you folks know, we've been working with technical assistance. I was before you in October of 2025, speaking about the transition of EHV vouchers, emergency housing vouchers, into our Housing Choice Voucher Program. To do that, to make sure that as we had, spoken in that October meeting, our plan was to leave no money on the table. So we were moving in a way that we were looking to transition those EHV families into our HCV program at the end of the year, because the moment you did transition them, that EHV money went away. So we were trying to maximize and utilize all that money before transitioning. However, in our preparation, For this activity, our technical assistance individual representative informed us in June that, oh, lookie, you're going in a shortfall. It hit us all by surprise. So here we are. Uh-oh. Bear with me. Thank you for your patience. So what has been done? In March of 23 is the last time we pulled from our wait list. June to July 2023 was the last time we opened our waiting list. In January of 25, we actually rolled back our issuance voucher term for the voucher. We had extended it a little bit due to COVID waivers, and we were issuing vouchers beginning with 120 days and extending through a year with a reasonable accommodation. We're now rolled back to our policy, which is 60 days and no more than 120 max term, and that includes a 30-day reasonable accommodation extension. In September of 2025, we stopped absorbing families into our jurisdiction. As previously, I think, Megan mentioned about the portability. are only, we're billing, we're not absorbing any because that moves them onto our books and obligates us with our funding dollars. October of 2025, we set our payment standards within HUD allowable percentages, ranging from 90 to 110%.

Let me see, let's make sure I don't hit a button.

Okay, in July of 2026, we reinforced our permissive moves. Again, that was another policy that we somewhat laxed during COVID in order to allow families to move and feel safe where they felt that to be necessary. We've now rolled back into our policy, which permits one move within a 12-month period. All letters were mailed to all participants in July of this year as a gentle reminder to that. We've also moved forward and have already submitted set asides in three different categories, which is additional funding money to help in particular specific areas. So category one being termination due to insufficient funding. Category four is our project-based vouchers. and category six, HUD-VASH. Before I get this question, I'm just gonna lay this on the table. Per PIH notice 2025-28, EHV is not eligible for set aside money. The ongoing meetings with HUD technical assistance continues and we continue to give them the required reporting every month by I believe the 15th of the month. As you know, the admin plan has a major policy document guiding our program along with the code of federal regulations. The last adoption of the policy was done in March 23 of 2026. and it now needs to be updated to include the implementation of cost savings policies to reduce our HAP expenditures and strengthen program controls associated with program abuse to help address the Housing Authority's current HAP funding shortfall. With that, it is recommended that the Department of Housing and Community Services at the Housing Authority by resolution adopt the revisions to the Housing Choice Voucher Program administrative plan to update policies to reflect additional cost-saving measures to help address the current HAP funding shortfall. That concludes my presentation. I am here, happy to answer questions.

Any commissioners have any questions? Commissioner McAnte?

On the emergency housing voucher transition, do we have any idea how many people were able to transition through after you sent out the messages to focus on that?

Well, at this point, thank you, Commissioner Conte. At this point, we have not transitioned anyone. When we're in shortfall, as Megan, the executive director, spoke to earlier, we're not allowed to transition anyone. In preparation, we had sent out letters to 99 families, EHV families, requesting them to respond. At that point, it hadn't been confirmed that we were in shortfall, so I was gearing up to see how many are gonna respond so that I can transfer them over. At that point, at the deadline point, we had received 78 responses back, so. If, had we not gone into Shore Fall and had the money, the set aside money that was snatched away, had that available, we would have been able to transition our, we would have been able to keep our HCV program sound, but that would not have saved our EHV families. We tried. We were on our way to, but. Unfortunately, we don't have the funding to do that at this point. As Megan stated, we are looking at other alternatives, that being these families came out of the Continuum of Care program, so we're trying to work directly with Sonoma County and Home First and Continuum of Care to see what kind of assistance they can now offer these families before just to prevent them from being homeless.

Thank you for trying. I had a question about the... PHA on 16.4 here, B, repayment policy.

Yes, ma'am.

Am I ahead of you guys?

I can get it right here.

No offer of repayment agreement. Why was that? And you're on which page? Page three of four. Chapter 16, program administration.

Yes, actually part of that PIH notice I referenced earlier, 2025-28, it allows a housing authority in shortfall to totally move away from repayment agreements, essentially terminating them the first time around. So in my opinion, I believe, and we all deserve a chance, so to leave it at one is good. And my policy, as it currently reads, say we may terminate. There's not a definite. It's not a must. So there is some room in there, but where we sit right now, there's a lot of money. In fact, last year, I just got the invoice from CBA. I sent almost $80,000 to collections, unpaid repayment agreements. from families who have left the program. Typically, that's the activity I'm seeing. They leave us and they're like, oh, thank you, and then stop paying. So that's my only course of action is to send those to collections.

And at this point, we're really looking for places that we can sort of squeeze back

We're trying. Manage things. We're trying. All right, thank you. If I could jump on that too, not just squeeze back, but also stress to the households that participate in our program that there are rules and regulations they need to adhere to. So we're willing to work with them once for a repayment agreement. And if there is what staff perceives to be a violation of income disclosure a second time, then there will be dire consequences.

Okay, great, great. Good to hear that. Thank you.

Any other commissioners? Vice Chair Capio?

So can we somehow reflect that the funding shortfall was created by HUD, either even in the preamble of the resolution or by separate motion? I just think this is crazy. Or are we gonna get in trouble because

I don't think we're gonna get in trouble. Let me pull up the resolution and give me a minute to think of some language to incorporate.

Okay. Any other commissioners wanna speak? Okay, no other comments?

I actually don't mind being in trouble. Good trouble is what you need to do in times like this. It's getting pretty draconian.

Would you like to go to public comment? I'll draft some language, and then when you come back, I can read my proposed language. I appreciate that. Thanks. Thank you.

Any public comments? We are now taking public comments on item 12.4. If you wish to make a comment, please go to one of the podiums in the upper tier of chambers. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert you at the end of that period. Please state your name for the record if you choose to do so.

Hello, Fred Ollebach again. I wasn't gonna say anything on this one, but Vice Chair Capio prompted me to do it. I saw that the last phrase there was funding shortfall. And so it reminded me of when people talk about climate change, but they never say human caused climate change. So the funding shortfall should be specified in a way that like human-caused climate change, like malicious HUD-caused funding shortfall would maybe be a wording, and pick up on Vice Chair Cabello's impulse there, but some way to attribute the responsibility here to a malicious federal government.

What are we supposed to do now?

Hello. My name is Dwayne DeWitt. I'm from Roseland. This is one of those times in which you have to engage in what's known as polite understatement while you put this together. You can't use an adjective such as malicious. You can't use terms that are going to be seen as colored. This has to be a situation where you specifically, factually state, due to the Department of Housing and Urban Development at the federal level making changes within their program, certain changes now have to occur here. And then you work up what you're going to approve. While you're doing this, please think about the possibility of someone from our local government putting forward letters to the editor, close to home pieces into our local newspaper, into the bigger newspapers at San Francisco, at the state level, Sacramento, Los Angeles. It needs to be gotten out there that the taxpayers of our state actually support being helpful to those members of our community who may be disadvantaged. We need to have it out there so that people understand our local government is trying to help. And if we could get perhaps the current chair of this body, perhaps the current mayor of the city, perhaps the executive director of this department, the city manager and others to get a statement out there and get it into the public domain so people see what the policies at certain levels of government are doing to the good efforts that are undertaken here and are being hobbled by what some might consider to be malicious others might consider to be outright hurtful so you got it thank you i'm seeing no more public comment

All right, Chair Smith, at the request of Vice Chair Capio, I am suggesting that we add a new fourth whereas to the resolution that would read as follows. Whereas as a result of the 2026 HUD action to offset the Housing Choice Voucher Budget Authority, pushing it into shortfall. And then the remainder of the resolution would follow as presented. If you're agreeable to that language, any motion would incorporate that and I would provide it to the clerk to amend the resolution as presented.

So would any of the commissioners like to motion regarding the resolution for item 12.4 and upgraded by Megan, is that correct?

You can simply say as amended.

I'm sorry?

You can simply say as amended. As amended. Move the resolution recommended by staff as amended.

Okay, anybody like to motion regarding the resolution as amended?

Commissioner Capio.

I would like to move the resolution to approve the revisions to the Housing Choice Voucher Program as amended and waive the reading of the text.

Any seconds? Second.

Commissioner Owen?

Aye.

Commissioner Fearon? Aye. Commissioner Wimmer? Aye. Commissioner Conte?

Aye.

Vice Chair Capio?

Aye.

And Chair Smith? Aye. Let the record reflect that the motion passes unanimously.

Okay, we will adjourn the meeting. Thank you.