Housing & Redevelopment Authority - Regular Meeting

To order, roll call please. Bui? Here. Coleman? Here. Jost? Kim? Here. Naker? Here.

Yang? Here.

Chair Johnson? Here. There are six present and one absent, that being Commissioner Jost. Item number one are the minutes. MIN 20 six-eleven approval of the March 2026 HRA meeting minutes. All right, I'm trusting that everybody had

a chance to review it. I'll take a motion from Commissioner Yang to approve. All those in favor? Aye. All opposed?

Six in favor, zero opposed. The minutes are adopted. Item number two for discussion, RES 26 Dash515, authorization of CDBG loan agreement by and between the City of St. Paul and JRDM Investments LLC for 202 Cesar Chavez Street, District 3, Ward 2. Okay, the next two items,

we actually had the staff report in our previous HRA meeting, but if there are any additional questions on this item, I'll take them now. All right, seeing none, I'll take a motion from Commissioner Nieker to approve. All those in favor? Aye. All opposed?

Seven in favor, zero opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item number three for discussion is RES twenty six dash five sixteen, authorization to designate Roeder Walton Development LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company or another entity that is affiliated with and controlled by Roeder Walton Development LLC developer, tentative developer of 0 Robert Street South, Fox Lot Properties between Fairfield Avenue and Plato Boulevard, District 3, Ward 2.

If you'll recall again, we had a staff report on this last meeting, but we also had a chance to hear from the Reuter Walton team. I'll look to Commissioner Naeker if there's any questions or anything additional that you might need.

Thanks, Chair. Just again, thanks to staff for the work on this, to Reuter Walton for their interest in this property and for their commitment to develop large scale affordable housing, especially with larger units and the really exciting public space and green space. Just to note, this is something I've corresponded with staff about, but want to make sure that we also are looking closely at the Westside Platts master plan, which guides development in the area to make sure that if there's commercial space called for, for example, or whatever the uses are that that plan dictated that we're also adhering to that as the development moves forward. But I'm in strong support, so I would move approval.

Thank you, Commissioner Neeker. And I appreciate those sentiments as well and just hearing a little bit more from what the findings will be or what kind of the is that you're referring to on the Westside's flat piece to ensure that that's what happens. I know that there's been a lot of interest on this overall site coming together. And so it's a primary example of what it looks like when only an acquisition goes our way, where we can actually see what we intended to see on the space come to fruition. So Commissioner Nieker has a motion to approve. All those in favor? Aye. All opposed?

Seven in favor, zero opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item number four is staff report SR26-fifty nine, healthy homes and power of home programs update. All right.

So the next few items will be the staff report portion and genuinely really excited to hear some of these updates as well and welcome discussion from the commissioners any questions that folks have. I am really excited to hear about Healthy Owns the Power of Home program update more so because it was a huge priority for our office last year and just something that we really know that we have a lot of constituents that are interested in the program. Welcome and thank you so much for being here to provide this update. I'll hand it over to Director McBride if there's something you want to say beforehand. Otherwise, I can send it straight over.

Nope. Just excited for Dave Schroeder here to give the update on the programs.

All right. Thank you. Hi, Schroeder. Welcome.

Hi. Hi, Chair Johnson and Commissioners. I'm Dave Schroeder. I'm the housing resilience and housing program specialist for the Department of Planning and Economic Development. And I also manage the Healthy Home and Power Home program.

In the interest of time, I'll briefly go over the program overviews and then provide a program update. So for the first program, Healthy Homes is our pre weatherization, so health and safety, and weatherization program. Eligibility is one to four unit owner occupied homes in Saint Paul. The caveat with healthy homes is a home must have pre weatherization preventing weatherization from happening. To qualify for the programs, there's three different ways.

One is through income qualification methods of 80% area median income. Participation in a similar income qualified program, and the third way is the pre approved geographic map. As you can see on the slide, one thing to note is the distribution with methods have been pretty even with the three different ways. So for types of improvements

I apologize, Mr. Schroeder. Commissioner Maker.

Sorry for the early question. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just and I might have misremembered this, but is it for the qualification methods, they're all or so 80% AMI or participation in an income qualified program or being located in a spot on the map? I guess I'm just wondering if you're only located in a pre approved spot, I understand that these are income qualified areas, but you could potentially be a high income person living in one of these areas then and get this help. Is that right?

Chair Johnson, Commissioner. Yeah. Technically, if you are located in that area, you could automatically qualify. There was an instance of that, that a home was in the area. They were over the income but still qualified. They didn't have any pre weatherization present. So they were no longer able to be in healthy homes, had to have pre weatherization in order to qualify. Working with the homeowner, I was kind of able to direct them to other programs that were able to offer them assistance for for weatherization.

Thank you.

So for types of improvement with healthy homes, the pre weatherization examples, this is by no means exhaustive, but outdated and unsafe wiring. The older housing stock in St. Paul has knob and tube wiring, pretty common, vermiculite, asbestos, mold mitigation, leaks, leaking roofs, grading and foundation repair potentially as well. And then the weatherization side of things is wall and roof insulation, air sealing and weather stripping. For the goals of the program, one of the major goals of Healthy Homes is to get homes in a place where they're comfortable and healthy and safe, so they can be weatherized finally.

And then also addressing homes and helping them get weatherized leads to greenhouse gas reductions and helping meet the city's climate goals. For the second program, our Power Roof Home program is our electrification and electric ready program. Similar eligibility, however, it's open for single family homes. Qualifications are slightly lower AMI. Also participation in another income qualified program and then the pre approved geographic map as well. Similar to healthy homes, pretty even distribution between the three qualification methods.

And Mr. Schroeder, just had a curiosity then with the qualification methods on both of the Power of Homes and Healthy Homes programs, are we currently tracking like which like, but the numbers of homes that we're serving, just which category people fall under. So are we currently tracking, like, how many homes from power of homes are in the 50% AMI? Or are you tracking those different methods?

Chair Johnson, yes. Am. Okay. Tracking yeah. Tracking that and household size. And as the projects begin, I'll also be tracking measures and costs and then the rebates that we'll expect back. Okay, wonderful. And Commissioner Coleman.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you for this presentation. I'm so sorry if I missed this, but the the proof of geographic maps are slightly different for both programs. Just maybe say one sentence on where that is.

Yeah. Chair Johnson, commissioner, part of the reason is because of the different AMI, the area median income. For power of home, it's a slightly less shaded map due to that reason. And then healthy home being 80% AMI area median income, slightly larger shaded area.

Thank you. Mhmm.

Then types of improvements for power of home, slightly less, but a lot of heat pumps. So cold climate air source heat pumps that would provide heating and cooling, heat pump water heaters, heat pump clothes dryers, and then electric induction stoves, and then panel expansion and junction box upgrades as necessary. The goals of Power of Home, somewhat similar to Healthy Homes focusing on both the homeowner and and savings, but also the wider city goals of of climate. Lastly, for the update, program funding, Healthy Homes is funded through this year and then don't have funding past 2026 as of right now. Power of Home has a reoccurring 300,000 each year.

Homeowners who qualify for these programs qualify for up to $50,000 in a grant for each program. That that grant funding is paid directly to the contractors, so there's not a change in income for households. Homes can be in both programs simultaneously. However, weatherization will always happen first before electrification does. And then lastly, the rebates will be reinvested in the programs depending on what rebates are associated with what measure.

Commissioner Nacre. Thank you, Chair Judson. If a household is in the Healthy Homes program and needs pre weatherization, they can get up to $50,000 for that. You said one of the goals of the program is then to make sure that those homes go on to be weatherized. I'm wondering, would they then be eligible for another 50,000 through Healthy Homes to be weatherized? Or if not, how do we make sure that the pre weatherized homes also go on to be weatherized homes?

Chair Johnson, Commissioner. So with Healthy Homes, how it's designed is it sort of from start to finish. So the goal is to weatherize the homes at the end. So we do all the pre weatherization. Once that's complete, then the the installation contractors would come in and complete it. If for some reason we needed to partner with an organization, there are weatherization organizations out there. Energy Sense Coalition provides weatherization services as well as community action partnerships of Ramsey and Washington County, who again provide those weatherization services. But due to their funding, they can't always address the costly pre weatherization issues.

Okay. But as a follow-up, generally, the 50,000 is sufficient to take a house from pre weatherization all the way through weatherization?

Chair Johnson, commissioner, yes. Okay. It is. So on to the program updates. So as of to date, we have currently 29 homes in healthy homes and 15 homes in power of home. Of those homes, we've done audits for the majority of them and scopes of work have been completed for the majority of them. There's a few more recent applicants that are getting work done, getting scheduling for the energy audit.

And Mr. Schroeder, as a follow-up, this is where I think that my previous question just of getting the who's under the 50% AMI, who's in the 80% AMI for the respective programs, that getting those or details would be really helpful in a follow-up email.

Chair Johnson, commissioners, yeah, I can certainly follow-up with that.

Thank you.

So this map is very approximate. So the, you know, individual homes aren't identifiable. It's just to give everybody a general idea of the distribution of homes. There's a few extra points since this map was was made. But like I said, just to kind of give everyone an idea of the distribution across Saint Paul of the program up to date.

So our implementation partner for both Healthy Homes and Power of Home is Center for Energy and the Environment, and we're working closely together. And then referrals are are a two way street. So for homes that have costly pre weatherization that aren't able to be addressed by either Energy Sense Coalition or CAPRW, Community Action Partnerships of Ramsey and Washington County, they are referred to the Healthy Home Program and vice versa. If a home doesn't have pre weatherization present, they're referred to either ECC or CapRW who are able to address the weatherization for that home. And then lastly, and importantly, these programs are not meant to compete with either ECC or CAPRW.

They're meant to complement those programs and assist in those homes that aren't able to be weatherized. So for energy savings, we've estimated so far for 14 homes, there is there will be more savings coming. But of those 14 homes, it's estimated savings annually of $99,700 with a greenhouse gas emission reduction equivalent of 14 cars taken off the road for a year. The power of home, the estimates are coming soon. Few extra calculations are needing to be done for for those, so I will happily update once I have those numbers.

So outreach, we haven't we haven't advertised the programs widely, but we are consistently getting interest forms and applications in. We'll speak with CEE in either May or June regarding whether or not outreach is necessary or needed and what that might look like. We're also working with the OTC media team to create kind of a short video highlighting the process, testimonials, before and after photos, kind of to give homeowners and potential participants an idea of what to expect in the program.

Wonderful. And we do have three questions. So I see Commissioner Nacre, Yang, and then Coleman.

Thanks, Madam Chair. We definitely appreciate the follow-up that, Chair, you asked for about who is receiving these dollars. I'm curious, the 20 I see 22 participants for Healthy Homes and 11 for Power of Home. You said 15. Does that just need to be updated? Yes. Okay. Does that exhaust both of the tranches of money? Or are there still dollars left?

So there are still dollars left. It will depending on the entire scope of work and what will be covered. We'll be getting close. We kind of estimated about 40 homes in healthy homes potentially with those rebates that will certainly help extend that money for healthy homes.

And healthy homes funding, just as a quick follow-up, has to be used by the end of this year?

Mhmm. Yep. So

are we on track to spending all of it by the end of this year if we potentially need to double the number of homes in it?

Chair Johnson commissioners, yeah, we're on I would say we're on track for using all the money. I would also say, you know, speaking with CEE kind of June May, June, July, and kind of seeing where we're at as far as funding and and the current projects being worked on at that time as well. And we can kind of gauge how many more participants we can potentially enroll or look to other sources of funding.

Wonderful. Commissioner Yang. Thanks Chair Johnson.

I really appreciate the update. I do want I do have a follow-up question. Was wondering, can you remind us what happens to the dollars if we have any that are unused at the end of this year for healthy homes?

If we don't Chair Johnson and Commissioners, if we don't use the healthy homes funding by the end of this year, we'll lose it.

Okay. We can't roll it over to next year then?

I don't believe so, but I'm happy to double check on that.

Yeah. That'd great. And then I know in the slide with outreach, you mentioned we're not doing any sort of robust engagement or outreach about this. So for the households that are currently in our programs, how do they hear about the programs?

Commissioner Johnson, Chair Johnson, commissioners. So there's a number of ways. It's Google has been so for the interest form, we do have a line asking how they heard about the program. So it's a lot of word-of-mouth. Some from the council, some homeowners were watching these programs pass.

And as soon as they were approved by the city council, started getting interest forms right away. And then recently, there was a newsletter that went out with just a very short kind of blurb about healthy homes and power of home. And we've had kind of an influx interest forms just from that alone. So I don't feel like the outreach, if we have to do it, will be a really heavy lift. I think it'll be relatively straightforward to get the get the word out that these programs are available and needing more participants.

Great, thank you. I appreciate knowing that. I I did want to just share that for me like knowing that in my ward we have such a heavy population of folks who are immigrants, refugees and English might not be their first language for and I would say this isn't just for like healthy homes and power homes but whenever we do launch a new program for us to make sure that like even if we didn't have a full on plan in doing outreach if we can make sure to utilize our resources and public spaces that we already have. So even thinking about our community centers, libraries, if we could have our PED staff be maybe if we have a few who can do some tabling to try and get out to our marginalized communities, that would be really great. Because I'm curious if like the households that are already receiving the services from the two programs, like how many of them are from like I saw your map of households, but how many of them are from these marginalized communities knowing that many of them are probably the ones who don't have first access to getting the information.

And so I am very invested in making sure that we can get the opportunities out to them so that they at least know it's out there and can try to take it on. And I did have a last question. Oh, okay. My last question is I believe you said the Healthy Homes program that's for pre weatherization too, right? And so you brought up an example in the beginning where there was a household who isn't within the income requirement that we have. However, they lived in the geographic area on the map there. And so they didn't have the pre weatherization done, so they didn't qualify. So can you explain that a bit? Because I heard that from you that pre weatherization is a part of what can be the work that can be done in healthy homes.

Chair Johnson, Commissioners, yes. So Healthy Homes is designed that we do the weatherization, but they have to have pre weatherization that's preventing that. In other programs such as ECC or CAPRW, they have a weatherization program where they go into a house, they give an energy audit, and then they weatherize that home. There are instances where they go into a home and there's pre weatherization and they can't. So Healthy Homes takes care of both of those aspects within one program, so the homeowner doesn't get sort of juggled around between organizations and programs.

Okay. So that household, I didn't qualify for for any of that then? Maybe I'm just not understanding it, but I can follow-up with you to try and

get Sure. Understanding more. Yeah. So so the home that didn't have pre weatherization no longer qualified for healthy homes.

Oh, gotcha. So then the healthy homes dollars, could it have covered the cost for the pre weatherization or no?

They didn't have pre weatherization.

They were already Okay. Didn't have pre weatherization needs, I think. They've already Okay.

I'll just follow-up.

So I think this is where just as a follow-up question and kind of to what Commissioner Ying is getting at. Could you give a preauthorization restriction example so that to meet the eligibility, they have to have a preauthorization that makes it not possible or that isn't allowed to be read or something like that. Looking at the eligibility slide, could you just give an example of what that is? Yes, so homes must have a pre weatherization need preventing weatherization from taking place, such as?

Yes, such as, so chair John's permission is pre weatherization would be knob and tube wiring would be a pre weatherization measure. Asbestos would be a pre weatherization measure if they had a leaky roof, fixing that leak, and then if there's any mold to go along with it, that would be pre weatherization. And then the insulation would be the weatherization.

Okay. So the home that you were the home that we were referring to in that example that you provided didn't have one of those

things? Correct.

Okay.

Yeah. They didn't they didn't have any of the pre weatherization examples.

Okay.

They only needed the weatherization the weatherization.

Okay. Wonderful. I was like, we're gonna get there. It's always really great to, you know, this is why we lean on some of our folks that are really in the weeds for things, too. So thank you for making sure that we just got that before we moved on. I think I thought it was really important to you because when you get into pre weatherization and weatherization examples with two programs, it it can be a little confusing. Commissioner Coleman.

Thank you. My question was actually similarly about how people are finding out about the program. But since that's been answered, I will ask a second question, which is I know that both programs are for homeowners, not for renters. Do we know if all of the participants thus far are owner occupied, or are any of these renter occupied, but the homeowner applied for the program?

Chair Johnson, Commissioners, yes. So in healthy homes, it's permitted one to four units. It does have to be owner occupied, but the other, you know, up to three units can be renters. We to date have not had any properties above a duplex, but in those cases, the homeowner lives in one unit and then a renter lives in the second.

Thank you. And just a quick follow-up for the for any single family residences, those fall then owner occupied in those instances?

Chair Johnson Commissioners, yes. For for power of home, it's a requirement, that it's, owner occupied single family home.

Cool. Thank you. Mhmm.

Okay. I'm gonna I I saw commissioner Buizhan as well. I'm gonna have you I think you only have the conclusion slide that was left, and then there was Q and A. So I just wanted you to be able to finish your last slide, and then we'll do the last few questions.

Okay. So to conclude, a couple of key points, key takeaways. These programs serve an unmet need, especially with healthy homes with homes being deferred long term and that work never being able to be completed because of the high cost. Lower income homeowners also have difficulty electrifying their homes because of, again, the high upfront costs. So with power of home, it sort of allows and gives a possibility and a chance to to electrify their home and and have high efficient equipment, ideally lowering that energy burden.

And both programs invest in the housing stock of Saint Paul while helping meet city climate goals. And then lastly, I'd like to thank everyone for your continued support and your guidance for these programs. And I will pass it back to Chair Jensen.

Thank you so much for just being able to also give this update. As I shared earlier, this was a priority for sure for our office, and I know for many of my colleagues here. I'm glad to see that we are getting to some of our homes here in the city. I'm really excited about the map with the multiple dots because it shows just the distribution. And to do that work in the midst of a transition and also just the uncertainty within the federal government and federal guidelines, I just want to commend you and the team for continuing to work on this.

Because I know sometimes in transition, of these things can get lost. And so I do appreciate just all the work that has went into ensuring this program got up and running and continue to be able to be a resource for community members. I think one of the things that will be really helpful and why I ask for the breakdown and the income and just the areas is if we are noticing maybe a lag in one area. I think we I think it's fair to say that maybe if you are considering outreach and future endeavors when it comes to where to post things or how to do outreach that you consider trying to do outreach amongst those populations as well. And so if we're noticing a, you know, a smaller amount of 50% AMI level homes, Maybe that means that there needs to be some more intentional outreach to homes where that might be the case.

If there's if we're noticing that maybe in the area that's highlighted in the geographic area that we're looking at that not all of the applicants or a small portion of the applicants are in those areas. Looking at the map, I don't think that's necessarily the case, but just thinking that it might be also just a level of understanding for what it means to electrify your home. And for folks that are ready to go and maybe have been considering it, it's it's not that big of a leap. But for some folks who maybe have solar panels on their home and have never really thought about it, which I've had a couple of residents, know, in mine in my neck of the woods when I've been out door knocking. I'm like, you have solar panels in your home.

Like, I just bought it that way. Didn't know anything about it. And I'm like, how do we tap into it? How do we actually utilize it? I just think that resource is really important to Commissioner Ying's point as well. Commissioner Bowie, saw your hand out. Do you still have a question?

Yes. Question is a follow-up. I'm sorry. I know we're short on time here, but thank you so much, Chair Johnson, for having this come back to the Commission for an update. I'm really excited to hear about this program.

I know there was a lot of interest in my ward about it. I actually came across a couple Facebook ads, so the outreach was pretty well spread. I just have a question particularly around the size of scope and impact understanding when this program first was launched or in its creation, we knew we would not be able to meet the entire need of the footprint of the need here in St. Paul. But I am curious, particularly just thinking through the longevity of this program and like the lifetime of this program, like maybe ten to twenty, thirty years from now, like what is the scale or scope of how many homes we would be able to serve over, you know, a decade or longevity.

And then my second follow-up and maybe this is better suited for OFS, but when I first heard about this program, I thought it was a permanent source of funding was through the franchise fees. And I'm just curious to know, and again this, you you don't have to answer this, but it could be a follow-up with OFS. If there's any like financial policies that the council can adopt so we can ensure that that money isn't lost, right, or we don't, you know, lose aspect of that those funds and we can roll over some of that unspent dollars into the next year just because this program is so important and I just wouldn't want us to be in a crunch last year excuse me, later into the year and not be able to insure and we could secure those dollars for the budget.

Chair Johnson, Commissioners, great questions. The first question, the number of homes in ten years would depend a lot about funding. The more funding we have, the more homes we can address. It would be nice to sort of see 50 to 100 homes a year, but that's a lot of uncertainty. For the franchise fee, you are correct.

For Power of Home, that's the continued funding. And then Power of Home is sort of the stand alone program can certainly discuss as the year goes on whether or not to sort of make them one program and have a healthy home and power of home just as one or or what that might look like. But I I agree with you. I would like to see Healthy Home continue after this year as well. Certainly, we're seeing the need that's already out there early on in the program launch as well.

Well, thank you so much for just being here to be able to provide this update. It was really important. It was something that commissioners have requested. So really just being able to hear from you, I think gives folks some ease and reassurance that this program is alive and well and actually continuing forward and seems to be on track for expending its dollars for this year. And also, on the flip side, potentially being able to use what you learn from this program when it comes to future investments and in future investment conversations, which we will be transitioning into shortly. So I appreciate that. I'm sure folks have questions and some follow-up that beyond what we talked about today, we'll be able to reach out to you and to director of Vann with those questions. Thank you so much. Item

number five is staff report SR twenty six-sixty HRA owned land disposition or development plan for 2026. All right. We see Ms. Lorenz coming up to the podium here. This

is really just something that we've had other conversations about, but as you know, we have several HRA owned properties that we are looking to continue to develop on and or do something with that exist in our wards. So really just hearing from them about their strategies as it relates to that. So I'll let Ms. Lorenz get her presentation and Director McMahon, if there's anything further that you wanted to say about those two or to preface or differentiate between this one and the next one.

Yeah, I'm just noting that Danielle Lorenz will be giving the next two presentations, so she'll be up for both. For HRA property, you've received past ones and so this is more of an update building off of those past presentations that you've received. And then the one after that I think dovetails nicely into it with the small scale development update.

Ms. Lorenz, they should be on the desktop.

Oh, she didn't see it. It. Thank you, Kelly.

I should have

known Kelly

would have my back.

All right. Good afternoon, everybody. Danielle Lorenz. I'm a supervisor on the economic development team, and this is the first of two presentations today, as Director McMahon said, both closely related. The first one here is about our HRA owned property and some of the things we've been up to since you last heard from us this last fall. So I want to give a little bit of background or a reminder about what the HRA owns. We currently own about 200 parcels of property across six of the seven wards. There are no HRA owned properties in Ward 3. Every other ward does have at least one piece of property. And for the past several months of those 200 parcels of property, staff has been pretty laser focused on two kind of tranche areas of the property that we own.

First would be our neighborhood stabilization or NSP properties, as I will call them going forward, which you will hear a lot more of in my next presentation, but quick overview of what we're doing with those. We've got about 40 remaining NSP parcels that can be either developed or sold per those NSP guidelines. NSP is a federal program through the Housing and Urban Development Department or HUD. So there's pretty specific guidelines and outcomes that we need to meet for those properties. Though I will say most NSP properties do become affordable homeownership opportunities for us or that has been the way that we have approached taking those properties back into their useful life in PED.

The other piece of properties that we've been focused a lot on last several months will be parcels that can be transferred to the city for city use. So currently we've got about 30 properties identified that could be transferred to the city to be used in multiple ways. Generally, these are really small pieces of property, remnant properties, or pieces of property that are already actually being used as either public works right of way or city parks property. So it just makes sense for the city to take them over because in a lot of ways they're already maintaining them, they're already looking after them, but they are still in the HRA's books and we've got some financial obligations as it relates. So a few of the benefits of transferring properties to the city is it becomes city infrastructure for operations, whether that's in our parks, sidewalks, pieces of roadways, or just generally part of needed infrastructure to make the city work.

The city is often already performing maintenance. Contract with them through the HRA so it makes sense to roll it right into their budget. Are already accounting for this. It also reduces our need of the HRA to pay assessments or to actually actively manage the properties if they are just back to the city and it's a lot more streamlined. And then just generally, I think the difference between how the city handles property and how the HRA handles property, this is not an absolute rule, but generally the HRA holds property to be developed at some point. Transfer properties generally cannot be developed. Like I said, they're turning into pieces of city infrastructure necessary for ongoing use by the city. So quick overview, I won't

go through all of this,

but just a reminder of all the different ways that we can sell property or we get property back into useful life in the city. So we've got requests for proposals. This is probably what we've used the most when selling property. Unsolicited proposals or direct asks. We have quite a few sites that are used as garden or community garden sites.

Also have the ability to sell certain sites that are certain sizes at side lot sales or splinter parcels transferred to the city, as we said, and then of course the HRA owns several parking ramps. So some of the things that we've been up to on the real estate side that have not resulted necessarily in development but just getting rid of some of these properties that are not considered NSP or developable properties would be first. Seventy seven Congress, you guys you all saw this last fall. We sold a piece of property to an adjacent church. That's what's in the photo there for their own programming space.

Chestnut Park parcels, Ames Lake property parcels are both in process of being transferred to the city parks department to be used as part of the park system. Chestnut Park parcels should be done probably early summer. Just finishing up what we need to with city real estate there. And then Ames Lake property transfer is probably looking closer to the end of the year because of some of that watershed work, if you'll remember, that has to take place to use part of the property as stormwater control and then transitioning into park space in the area. And then we do have additional plans to work with city real estate team to transfer most of those 30 remaining parcels to the city by the end of the year or early twenty twenty seven.

Transfers generally take about three months just from getting through all of the different sort of legal things that we need to talk about even though HRA and city are very linked. We've got different legal considerations that we need to think about here. But the way staff does tend to transfer properties, we group them or batch them based on similar geography, end use, meaning like who is it going to, public works, etcetera, and or the department that receives the property. And again, we're looking at this kind of quarter by quarter to get through those 30 properties by the end of this year or into early next.

And Ms. Lorenz, before you move on, we do have a question from Commissioner Nacre and then I have a question for you. Commissioner Nacre.

Thanks, Chair Johnson. Maybe it will be the same question as often happens. I'm just curious, Ms. Lorenz, if you can speak to why the HRA I know we have given direction as a body that we want to focus on disposing of as many of these parcels as we possibly can because it does us no good to continue to hold on to them. I'm just curious why transfers have been such a priority. It seems like of all the different ways of disposing of property, that's the one that is the least economically beneficial, lucrative, comes back to the city. The city has to continue to maintain it. We don't sell it. So why has that been a priority over, say, for example, trying to get more of our developable parcels off of our books?

Chair Johnson, Commissioner Nacre, I would say they are both priorities here. Transfer properties, and I'll talk about it in our next presentation as well. Transfer properties are very much like real estate heavy because we're not dealing with development. Those are developable properties. They take a lot longer. So we're trying to just get these transfer properties off of our books so then we can really start to focus in jet like broadly on the parts of our portfolio that can be developed. But we are doing both of them simultaneously.

And quick follow-up, of the 200 parcels that we have, how many of those are are those all developable or do those include some of those splinter sites and transfer parcels?

Chair Johnson, Commissioner Nacre, good question. I would say about 150 of them would be actually developable at different scales.

150. Okay, thank you.

And then I guess as a follow-up and it's not the same question, but I think it's along the same similar vein. Right? So when I look at these properties and I see what the HRA has spent to acquire the land, the transfer piece is like a net zero. It doesn't necessarily provide any revenue back to the HRA for their initial purchase. Essentially, we're giving so if we did pay for the land that we owned, technically speaking, the HRA is giving is transferring to the city land that they purchased, that spotty purchased.

And so we're actually losing resources and revenue in that case. So I am just curious from a lens of prioritization in comparison to the transactions, and I think we'll get to it possibly in the next presentation. But instead of maybe potentially prioritizing the 30 pieces or 50 pieces of property, transferring it over to the city, not necessarily regaining any of that revenue back, I think there is something to be said for possibly thinking about ways to continue to basically earn back what we've invested. Because not only do we purchase property for the purpose of development, but we rarely get it for free. And so the land that we do own, even though the city has maybe been maintaining it or we have ways to operate it, it's still a free transfer in a way that we're not able to get it if we were to do something else with it.

And so that is something that I am just in the back of my mind noticing, think it's worth kind of naming because it's not getting back to the tax base and it's not going into a revenue generating space. It's just pieces of land that we're essentially giving to the city. But it's not necessarily accomplishing some of the goals of this body when it comes to economic development or regenerating our tax base or catering to our housing capacity needs. And so yeah, probably more of a statement, but also just in that sense, know, I think it'll be really helpful to understand what the next few months look like, especially for 2026. I'd hate to be at the end of 2026 and we've transferred all this lovely property but haven't actually invested in some of our development projects.

Yeah. Chair Johnson, I think that is all fair questions. Again, I will reiterate these transfer properties, they do cost us money now. So to get them into the city's books, while it looks like a net zero, it does end up saving us some kind of maintenance and ongoing dollars there. And these properties are so small that it's almost like prioritizing them now to just get them off of our books so we can really go all in on those developable properties that really meet the goals of the body is sort of our thinking there, but always open to to how we prioritize these things.

Okay. We'll continue because I just want to I do want to hold us to three, and so I'd like to maybe spend maybe two more minutes on this presentation and then heading over to the next slide. So if you could talk about the also important website mapping. Yes.

You, Chair Johnson. So yes, as you said, we are now also in the process of updating our website in our mapping. We do currently map all of our property on our website, but now we have, and I'm nerdy, so I think it's really fun, a clickable map where people can go in and if they are interested in learning more about the types of property we have, property that is available, and how we are intending to dispose of it going forward or sell it going forward, they can do that now. So we'll continue to iterate on this. I eventually would like for it to be fully clickable that people can even be applying to purchase land directly in the map.

Takes a little bit of time and tech to get there, but we're working on that. But this is a big step forward to just be a lot more transparent in how we're talking to developers and talking to the community generally about what we've got available and just having a consolidated source and space for all of our land in the city. So again, I'm just reiterating what I just said, but the benefits of these mapping and updated communications, one, is just we should always be iterating and updating these as we go. It had been a while since we really updated our map. It's more transparent for the development community and the broader community if they are just interested in learning more or they want to learn how they can work with us.

That is this is the mechanism by which we can do that centralized source of information in a consolidated place for information which is helpful to you all and it's helpful to us as well as with the rest of the community. And then some additional upcoming communication materials, updated development, HRA owned property applications. Again, we currently don't have those available online. We're going to get them online as a way to just make sure we are actively working with our developers who are interested in investing in St. Paul.

And then we're iterating on the idea right now of a development newsletter to highlight resources and development opportunities and more sort of similar to our small business newsletter probably wouldn't be quite at that same frequency. But we think this is an important place to one, just make sure people who are interested investing in St. Paul know where to go, know how to get a hold of us, know about resources coming up, and it's a great opportunity for us to just market opportunities that we have once they come online. Any other questions about this slide? Yes.

Commissioner Baker. Thanks, Chair. Super quickly. Really grateful that this is online. I know this has been a huge lift and I think it's exciting. If you could send us the link in some language to talk about it, I think it's important for us to mention it. And then this is just a thought back from when I volunteered at the Animal Humane Society a million years ago. But it occurs to me that often with some of our harder to adopt pets at the time, just sort of having them at the Humane Society wasn't enough. We needed to really highlight them and make it give them a little bit more publicity love. And I think something similar might be the case for some of our properties here.

I think the list is great and then maybe a next step is every so often to be showcasing sort of a property or parcel of the week. I know it's a weird analogy, But just because sometimes the list itself kind of becomes stale and the opportunity to really highlight like this is, you know, this is an exciting development opportunity from the list is the extra push that's needed.

You've been reading my to do list, I think.

Yeah. So I think that's really great. And I echo those sentiments as well, just creative ways to continue to get I think about the Ready Cohort with ULI and how there are so many eager developers that come out of the emergency developer programs that we have across the the metro. And I think that folks are always looking for an opportunity to get their foot in the door on a piece of land when partnering with the city and so and with the HOA too. So I think just being able to have that map available, that link available, I know I will share it out if I if it's sent over, so please do.

We'll elevate it, and we can be creative. And knowing commissioner Nacre lately, she's been exploring so many different ways to be communicative online. And so I'm sure we'll find some way to have a nice little jacket video. Shout out to her LA. But thank you so much for that as well. Then Commissioner Kim, did you have two seconds? Go ahead.

I'd really like to help advertise the topographical challenged bots in my ward. So, long time stare, But they're charming and have strong personality.

Thank you, Commissioner Kidd.

Item number six is staff report 26Dash61. Update on the HRA small scale development goals and 2026 Plan.

Right, me again.

Yeah. This is

the Small Scale Development update. So this is the developable side of the HRA owned land portfolio. So again, wanted to give just a quick history, being mindful of time, but I would be remiss to not identify and recognize all of the significant work that has happened in our small scale development team. So since 2013, PEDs operated what you all know as the Inspiring Communities Program. This was the mechanism that we used to sell, rehab, and redevelop properties acquired by the HRA with the goal specifically through that program to provide small scale affordable housing options, particularly homeownership options.

Through that work, two forty parcels were designated as inspiring communities properties. So that would be to get to those small scale affordable housing options. And the way that we primarily were selling those properties to date have been through facilitated RFPs, as you would call them the inspiring communities RFPs as processes to attract developers to those specific Atrium properties. Again, most of these properties were acquired with those NSP dollars, meaning they have very specific federal tied with them, is why an RFP is often the best way to just be very explicit about the kinds of outcomes that we need to make to make sure that we're attracting developers that can do this kind of work. The impact of small scale development work, so of those two forty properties designated as the Inspiring Community properties, 195 have been rehabbed or developed into either homes.

This is a majority of what have happened to be purchased by income qualified buyers. I did the math today. Since 2013, we've produced two fifty units of housing through this program that are available to houses between 120% AMI and 30% AMI. Most of that is falling more into like the 60% to 80%. So that's a really big deal that a very small but mighty team has been able to do this since 2013 to really get like bread and butter economic development, community development projects done in the city.

Some of these properties do become garden lots that could eventually be developed, but in the meantime, they're being used as community gardens which provide a benefit, and then there are some that are sold if they qualify on the side side for a splinter parcel or side yards to adjacent homeowners. I also want to highlight the fact that the Inspiring Communities program also has a really strong history and is really where we work the most closely with our diverse and emerging development communities, which means we're not only getting these affordable homeownership opportunities into the community for interested buyers, we're stabilizing neighborhoods, but we're also starting to build wealth in our bench of developers in the community who tend to be hyper local, who also tend to be the most committed to the community, and giving them an opportunity to wealth build over time as well, which is something we're really proud of with this small scale development work we've done. Current small scale development work. So as I said, we own about 200 pieces of developable property at the city. About 40 of those at this point would be considered, quote unquote, inspiring communities properties, but we also will develop other properties through our small scale work.

As you'll recall, in 2025, we moved small scale development from the housing team into the economic development team, is the team I'm lucky enough to get to work with every day to allow for like a multidisciplinary team to work with our developers, to really put our arms around these developers to make sure that they can get their projects across the line. Development is really hard. Small scale development is even harder. And particularly, you're working with new developers, tend to be a little bit undercapitalized. They need extra help.

So, being able to really wrap our arms around them to get them across the finish line is another big goal of this program and we've been pretty successful. Traditionally, HRA land has been sold primarily via RFP as we talked about before. The small scale team is exploring other ways that we can be a little more dynamic and aggressive, quite frankly, with how we're selling lands. RFP still matter and they work. However, we do get kind of one off proposals as we go through and we just don't want to lose the opportunity to be able to sell property to people who are interested in making an investment in Saint Paul outside of that process.

Recently completed small scale projects really quickly, nine thirty York, seven twenty nine Burr, six fifty nine Cook. These were all sold to income qualified buyers. These went through the Inspiring Communities RFP process in the past. 695 Cook is a twin home and then 930 York and 729 for both single family homes. Some in progress small scale projects, 560 Branson, which is a four unit townhome project, will be under construction yet this summer. I almost said fall and skipping with the season, I guess. 1195 Burr should be coming on soon. Were finalizing some construction work there. 810 Atlantic, same story. And Then we have 47 Douglas, which is a little bit different because it's a historic St.

Paul reuse of a home project as well.

I see a question from Commissioner Yang.

Thank you, Chair Johnson. I was wondering if you can remind us if the small scale project homes can be sold to anybody or are there usually requirements?

Chair Johnson, Commissioner Yang, great question. If they've run through the inspiring communities program, which most of these have, they have to go to income qualified buyers underneath that 120% AMI.

Okay, thank you.

Some upcoming projects, you all have not seen these quite yet, but get excited. We will be bringing to the board in the next couple of weeks, tentative developer status designation for properties we own on Wheelock Parkway in Jackson, to consider whether or not we want to enter into a tentative developer agreement with that developer to eventually actually won't be a small scale project, but because it's a land, the small scale team is running with it right now. They're looking at a larger multifamily project, and then consideration of sale at 1087 Ross, which would be a twin home project, is what they're proposing now. So again, you should probably see these back in front of the board in May, depending on some of the things that we need from the developers still. But it's exciting.

We are publicly advertising both of these through our early notification system. So if you do end up seeing them anywhere and you have questions about them, let me know. And I do want to also preview, we will be coming back to the board probably end of this month, early next month for some discussion about our next RFP for our inspiring communities. So we've identified three properties that have those NSP requirements that we will be bringing forward through RFP number eight, running that similar to how we've run past inspiring communities properties. The reason we decided an RFP for these properties, again, because they have such specific and unique funding requirements, we really want to work hard on the front end to be able to get developers who know how to deal with those requirements, can work through those requirements, and then they're also ready to create homeownership opportunities for income qualified buyers, which is what we would require through our Inspiring Communities program as part of those federal guidelines.

Happy to answer any questions.

Wonderful. I will just simply ask for my own understanding as well. Just can you differentiate the difference between the 1.75 that we put into small scale development for HRA properties and inspiring communities funding?

Chair Johnson, there is not a difference. We I use those interchangeably. So that 1.75 would be used for these properties that are coming up that would need a subsidy.

So just the presentation that we're having, just so we're understanding too as well, that dollar amount that the HRA put towards the funding for that that's coming out of the housing trust fund, think. This is going towards funding some of this work. Correct. Wonderful. Thank you. Commissioner Bui.

Thank you, Chair Johnson. I know we're right on time here, but thank you so much, Daniella. I actually am going to reference some questions for the last slide or excuse me, the last presentation as well as this one. One of the things I would say I really appreciate about your presentation was the emphasis on hyper local developers and how St. Paul has been really intentional with designing programs that helps bridge the gap between our hyper local developers and really those who like carry on the St.

Paul pride when it comes to investing in our city. From the last presentation, I wanted to ask a question particularly around with the purchase of property. I understand with HRA, we're transferring property to the city of St. Paul, But I'm curious to know if we ever been in the business of purchasing or having a transaction with the Minnesota Department of Transportation, MnDOT. Particularly, there is a lot of MnDOT property especially alongside I-ninety 4 that could make great park space.

And I know this conversation came up in our Snelling University Alliance planning group. So I'm just curious around if we had in the past any transactions between counties but most importantly MnDOT. But I'll just wait for that answer.

Yeah. Chair Johnson, Commissioner Bui, I would have to look into our notes to see if we've done that. I'm gonna look at Sarah really quickly in case she knows whether or not we've purchased anything directly from Mindota or the county in the past. But it is possible. If opportunities we strategically acquired things in the past, if it makes sense. Whether that is for you know the HRA again would probably be strategically acquiring to eventually develop and I know the city has done similar things as it makes sense.

Perfect, thank you so much. And then my follow-up question for the slide you just got done with was particularly two questions. So or excuse me three questions if you don't mind but they're really short.

You're gonna have a minute. Okay okay

one last one. Well I guess the most pressing question in you know I have some district councils that are very aggressive and really intentional around being part of the RFP process and in scoping and writing of that process. Has the city, like understanding the inspiring communities is all about like getting you know emerging new developers, but have the city historically ever had like a community driven RFP to where the RFP is also inclusive of what that district council's like small area plan? I'm just asking because like for example like Frogtown Neighborhood Association very you know very intentional. We'd love to be a part of the table but as a council member, as a commissioner you know we're looking at the future of our piece like where have you seen district councils as a stakeholder what their role is when it comes to drafting these RFPs.

Chair Johnson, Commissioner Bui, we have worked with district councils in the past on various things related to this. I don't know if we have, I'm going look at Joe now. Have we worked with district councils in the past to create the inspiring community? I'm getting an affirmative head shake. So yes, we have done that. We can probably get more information about that and what vets look like.

Thank you. I'll follow-up on the rest.

Wonderful. I love that. Thank you, Commissioner Bouie. I appreciate your questions as well. But I think, you know, to echo the area of importance, each commissioner, except for the exception of our vice chair, who has HRA land in their wards, take a look at the land that you own and really, you know, communicate to the small scale team. They've been really receptive to times where we've been able to go through the Ward 7 properties and just the plans that we have for it. So as it relates to your award, know, feel free to have that communication. I know that's something that Vice Chair Joe's predecessor did effectively, and that's why they don't have any land in Ward 3. It was not by not by no hard work, but definitely by actually the opposite, hard work and intentionality. I will just share with you all thank you, Ms.

Lorenz. Today, as a reminder, the Emergency Rental Assistance Program did open today, and it's open and accepting applications today and tomorrow. The team did let me know that they have done some outreach efforts, and already the day they had 56 applications. So we're on trajectory, you know, for about 200 probably before the close of of business tomorrow. It's something to think about as you're just continuing to hear from folks. But just in case you're wondering if it was a need, it is. And in case you're wondering if the guidelines are in place and the applications are open, it also is. So huge shout out to the PED housing team as well for that work that they've been able to do in a short period of time to turn that around. And with that, we are adjourned.