2026-09-23 - Brownfield Redevelopment Authority

00:03[music]

00:11[music]

00:20[music]

00:32[music]

00:48[music]

01:17Heat. Heat.

01:22[music]

01:31[music]

01:39Heat. Heat.

01:42[music]

02:09>> [music]

03:28[music]

03:55[music]

04:31[music]

05:44>> Heat. Heat.

05:47[music]

06:07Heat. Heat.

06:24[music]

06:48>> [music]

07:04[music]

07:12[music]

07:20>> and I call this meeting to order.

07:23Uh we do have uh a handful of excused

07:26absences this morning. Uh, Director

07:28Dillard, Director Rabo, I believe that's

07:31it. Uh, do I have a motion?

07:34>> So, move

07:35>> support.

07:36>> All those in favor say I.

07:37>> I.

07:38>> Opposed?

07:39>> Motion carries.

07:42Our next item is public comment on

07:44agenda items.

07:50Okay. Hearing none. Uh, moving on to any

07:53conflicts of interest. Yeah, I just have

07:56one to at least report or ask about. Um,

08:00the organization I work for is one of

08:02the named parties on the reimbursement

08:04list that is up for discussion. Um, we

08:08are not set to receive any additional

08:10funds by that decision, but putting it

08:13out there that yeah, my employer is

08:16named. Okay.

08:22>> I would be happy to. Thank you.

08:25A client of mine is um seeking

08:27reimbursement as well.

08:29>> Okay.

08:29>> So,

08:32>> anyone else?

08:35>> All right. Moving on to approval of our

08:38minutes from our August 26, 2026

08:41meeting. Do I have a motion?

08:45>> Any questions or discussion?

08:49All those in favor say I.

08:51>> I.

08:51>> Opposed?

08:53Motion carries.

08:56Moving on to our action items. Uh the

08:58first is a resolution approving and

09:00authorizing the execution of an

09:02interlocal agreement between the city of

09:04Grand Rapids Brownfield Redevelopment

09:06Authority and the City of Grand Rapids

09:08Downtown Development Authority for the

09:11443 Sheldon Avenue Southeast

09:13redevelopment project. Do I have a

09:15motion?

09:16>> So moved.

09:17>> Support.

09:19>> Audrey. Good morning.

09:20>> Good morning everyone. This is a project

09:22you've seen before a few times. This is

09:24the 443 Sheldon redevelopment project

09:27which is not only a landbank lot but

09:29also an emerging developer project who

09:32um has already moved its way through

09:34almost all of the local approvals. This

09:36is the only kind of outstanding matter

09:38to attend to um which is again

09:41authorizing the interlocal agreement

09:43between the bar and the DDA uh to

09:45account for I believe 75% of pass

09:48through uh in alignment with the

09:50brownfield plan that was approved by

09:53this body and city commission and which

09:55has already been approved by the DDA. So

09:58um luckily this this kind of outstanding

10:00action item has not affected its state

10:02approval process. This project already

10:04has a conditional approval letter from

10:06MISTA on file. Um, this is just one more

10:09item to to clean up before and as we set

10:11it up uh for capture and reimbursement

10:14uh uh upon completion of construction.

10:16So with that, I will take questions.

10:20Just one more comment. Audrey, thank you

10:22for the overview. I just want to make um

10:23call some attention to we're doing it a

10:25little bit different on a going forward

10:26basis. And I mentioned this to the chair

10:28uh that we folded uh this item into our

10:31future uh developer and reimbursement

10:33agreements to allow for interlocal

10:35agreements to happen instead of having a

10:36separate board action. So I think

10:39hopefully this will be the last couple

10:40that we see. Um and if not we're we're

10:42trying to make it more efficient. And

10:44then also uh Doug from our office got to

10:48celebrate in the groundbreaking a couple

10:49of Saturdays ago. So thank you for

10:51representing us Doug. It was great

10:53pictures.

10:55>> Thank you. Any

10:57uh other discussion or questions on

10:59that?

11:03Okay. Hearing none, we have a motion on

11:05the table. All those in favor say I.

11:07>> I.

11:08>> Opposed.

11:10Motion carries.

11:12Our next item is a resolution approving

11:14and authorizing the execution of an

11:16interlocal agreement between the city of

11:18Grand Rapids Brownfield Redevelopment

11:20Authority and the City of Grand Rapids

11:22downtown Development Authority for the

11:24125 Ottawa redevelopment project. Do I

11:28have a motion

11:30support

11:33>> similar format of the request here for

11:35125 Ottawa? Again, this project has also

11:38already moved through all other local

11:40approvals and received its conditional

11:42um approval letter from MISTA. The

11:44interlocal percentage being requested

11:46here is 90% in alignment with the

11:48brownfield plan and also in alignment

11:50with what the DDA has already uh

11:51approved for this project. So, um other

11:54than that, I'll just take additional

11:55questions on this project.

12:00>> Any other questions or discussion?

12:05Okay, hearing none. All those in favor

12:08say I. I.

12:09>> I.

12:09>> Opposed.

12:11Motion carries.

12:13>> Okay.

12:15Our next item is approval of uh fiscal

12:18year 27 preliminary reimbursements.

12:22I will not be calling for a motion on

12:24this item. Um I I do want to just take a

12:28moment and

12:29um kind of set the stage for uh what

12:33direction we're heading with this. Uh

12:35the reality is that you know typically

12:37about this time of year uh we have the

12:40finalized values for dispersement of

12:43payments based on the development and

12:44reimbursement agreements that we've

12:46executed with our uh developer partners.

12:49Um the reality is that that we're behind

12:52and uh it sounds like we need a few more

12:55weeks uh to get to where we can finalize

12:58these numbers. Um our goal as an

13:01authority is to expedite and accurately

13:04make sure that these numbers reflect uh

13:07the values that will ultimately be

13:08dispersed to our uh developer partners.

13:11Uh and to that end, we want to support

13:13the city's effort uh to continue to work

13:16effectively and efficiently uh toward uh

13:19finalizing those values. So, um we do

13:23have an alternative to uh approving

13:25these preliminary rese.

13:39>> Sure. So, good morning everybody.

13:54Hello. Can you hear me? Is this is this

13:56thing on? Okay. [laughter]

13:58Um, as the chair pointed out, um,

14:00historically about this time of year,

14:02you get, um, a master spreadsheet

14:05showing all of the reimbursement amounts

14:07actually calculated based on, um, and

14:11following receipt of the city treasures

14:14finalized tax data that applies, the

14:16millages, um, the finalized taxable

14:19values and millage rates, etc. Um, so

14:22you're approving actual numbers at that

14:24point. today. Um this year we don't have

14:29those quite yet. And so rather than

14:32having you approve some numbers that are

14:34based on um appreciation or something

14:38like that, um you can approve these

14:41reimbursement payments to be made

14:43following receipt of and based upon

14:45those finalized numbers when they come

14:46in, which should be very soon is my

14:48understanding. Um, and so, uh, we have

14:52an alternative motion drafted that

14:54allows you to again approve those

14:56reimbursement payments to be made

14:59following receipt of that finalized tax

15:01data. Um, and then you're essentially

15:05delegating that implementation to your

15:07Brownfield board treasurer in

15:09conjunction with the board chair and

15:11executive director. And this way the

15:13payments go out. you're not holding

15:15anything up for developers, but you're

15:17you're also making sure that it's it's

15:19based on um and consistent with that

15:22that finalized tax data. So, it's a

15:24little bit more accurate. And also, of

15:26course, we you review and approve the

15:30terms of reimbursement every time you

15:32approve a development and reimbursement

15:34agreement. Right? So, this this process

15:36is very transparent and clean, but this

15:39year, um, we're just suggesting that you

15:42do it a little bit differently to wait

15:43for those finalized tax numbers to come

15:45in.

15:47And you do this, it's it's not that

15:49unusual for you to do this kind of thing

15:51because sometimes you approve the terms

15:54of an agreement without actually seeing

15:56the agreement and that is perfectly

15:58legal. So,

16:00>> any questions about this this approach?

16:03>> Yeah, Mr. treasurer.

16:06>> Thank you, Jessica. My uh

16:09interest, it it doesn't rise to the

16:11level of concern, but my interest as the

16:13the treasurer really had to do with uh

16:16in reading the packet last week, you

16:18know, how we came to the to the

16:20calculations, right, of of the estimate

16:23and what was the precedent, what was it,

16:25you know, based upon. Um so I um am

16:30happy to hear that there's a there's a

16:32plan to uh you know foot this to the

16:35actual numbers and u you know on on the

16:39other on the other hand uh I had a a

16:42passing thought while also reading the

16:44packet about uh you know not having seen

16:47financial statements for uh a period of

16:50time uh and certainly

16:54irrespective of you know issuing the

16:56payments

16:57on actual numbers or estimates won't

17:00affect uh this body's financial

17:02condition materially but I just you know

17:05having an estimate in this hand on this

17:07topic and you know having going from

17:10memory about where sort of where we are

17:12financially um you know just gave me a

17:15little bit of pause that um that you

17:17know that I shared with with the chair

17:19and so I appreciate uh the work that's

17:22been done here in the last you know uh

17:25since the packet went out in in this

17:27moment uh to come up with a workable

17:29solution. So, thank you.

17:33>> Thank you, Mr. Treasure. Any other

17:36questions or discussion?

17:40>> I just want to uh chair I just want to

17:42call some attention to the work to get

17:44us to today. I think there were a lot of

17:46creative solutions being proposed to try

17:48to maintain customer expectations around

17:50your dispersement. And um while there

17:53was methodology behind those numbers,

17:55they they were estimates of course um

17:57that would allow some of the work to

17:59advance. So I think that we're I I think

18:01there's a lot of ways to get to an end

18:02here. And I um obviously we want to be

18:06as transparent as possible about the

18:07process. Um but we're also trying to

18:10maintain um expectations for our

18:12development community. So, I appreciate

18:15the the dialogue this morning.

18:18And also just the staff's work to get us

18:20here today to today.

18:25>> Okay. Thank you. I think we're good,

18:27Jessica. Thank you.

18:28>> Okay. I just want to apologize for the

18:30length of the motion.

18:31>> It's okay [laughter] to settle in

18:33everybody. Thank you. [clears throat]

18:34>> All right.

18:38Okay. So, uh, hearing no further

18:40discussion,

18:41um, I'm going to read our proposed, um,

18:44resolution.

18:46Uh it is to approve the fiscal year 2027

18:50Brownfield Authority tax increment

18:52reimbursement payments to be made

18:54following receipt of and based upon the

18:57city treasurer's finalized tax data

19:00applying finalized taxable values and

19:03millage rates to calculate tax increment

19:05revenue for each brownfield project as

19:08well as actual tax collections, state

19:11education tax withholding amounts and

19:14other project specific adjustments.

19:15ments. All needed to calculate the

19:18fiscal year 2027 tax increment revenue.

19:22Quotes the data and to authorize the

19:25authority board treasurer in conjunction

19:28with the authority board chair and

19:30executive director to implement this

19:33authority board approval and such

19:35payments in accordance with the data and

19:38the terms and conditions of existing

19:40board approved development and

19:42reimbursement agreements.

19:45Do I have a motion?

19:48>> So moved.

19:51>> All those in favor say I.

19:53>> I.

19:53>> I.

19:54>> Opposed.

19:56>> Motion carries. Thanks everyone.

20:14Thank you.

20:25Okay. Our next action item is a

20:27resolution approving and authorizing the

20:29execution of a local brownfield

20:32revolving fund grant agreement for a

20:34project to be located at 1125 Alpine

20:37Avenue Northwest. Do I have a motion?

20:45>> Audrey,

20:46>> good morning. It is my um joy and

20:48pleasure to bring you something new for

20:50this agenda item uh which is an LBRF

20:54grant request supporting a single family

20:56home development that is uh being

20:58proposed by Westtown Jubilee in

21:00accordance with its purchase agreement

21:02and it's having been awarded this

21:04property from the Grand Rapids Land

21:06Bank. Uh this is um a lot that they will

21:09create a single family home

21:10redevelopment on and it is a

21:11collaborative project. This organization

21:13has um tackled 50 or so other

21:16developments of this nature um with

21:18being supported with inind contributions

21:20of materials and labor in addition to

21:22funds being spent on construction. So

21:25ideal well not ideally they are always

21:27target um and will target this home for

21:29sale at or below 80% AMI household. uh

21:33given that they already have a buyer in

21:35mind, they have a specific price that

21:37they have landed on, which is estimated

21:38sale price of $178,000.

21:42And when we compare that to the uh cost

21:44to build factoring factoring in those

21:46inind contributions of materials and

21:48labor, they're looking at um a gap of

21:50$30,000 in order to be able to price and

21:53sell this home to an incomequalified

21:56household. So given that the LBRF's

21:59funding priority has been uh home

22:01ownership for special projects, we are

22:04presenting to you a $30,000 grant

22:06request to support this single family

22:08home development um and offset that that

22:10gap of development. So the eligible

22:13activity is considered a housing

22:15activity and development loss under act

22:17381. And so that is the um the

22:20qualifying criteria for this project. If

22:22you have questions about the project

22:24details, we do have uh the executive

22:26director here, Jeff, who can speak to it

22:28um if you have additional questions or

22:30want to hear from Westtown Jubilee.

22:33>> Thank you, Audrey. Any questions or

22:35discussions for the applicant?

22:40>> My my question is is for staff.

22:42[clears throat]

22:43Um, I presume that we have reviewed the

22:47project costs in in detail. Um, and that

22:50they're, you know, they're eligible and

22:52it it uh it's appropriate. Um, I'm I'm

22:56wondering if for future requests we can

22:59maybe include just a summary of the uh

23:02line item, you know, project costs.

23:06>> Uh, noted and happy to share that with

23:08you afterwards just for your own

23:09education and awareness. um that is

23:11something that staff reviewed ahead of

23:13time. Uh and that's kind of why we add

23:15the caveat of if this sounds like it's

23:16an inexpensive build, it's because they

23:18really do leverage their um their

23:20contributions of of materials and labor

23:22and kind of their network to produce

23:24their homes. That's their their model of

23:26affordability that they use. So, but it

23:28is a good question and we can include

23:29that in future requests.

23:32>> Mr. Chair, I'm I'm just curious about

23:34this project and I mean are there

23:36requirements for the purchaser to own

23:40the property for a certain amount of

23:41time or how how how do they handle you

23:45know future sales and and you know

23:48equity generated in the home?

23:50>> This this might be a tag team question

23:52between myself and Doug. I believe from

23:54the from the BRA's perspective in the

23:56grant agreement um it's tied to

23:58demonstrating uh the household income of

24:01the purchasing entity that says hey this

24:04is we already know the price um and we

24:06want to verify that the purchaser meets

24:08this AMI threshold. I think Doug pointed

24:11out an interesting um cav or fact about

24:14this property is this is a property that

24:16started at the state land bank and we

24:18are kind of inheriting their purchase

24:20agreement so to speak. So it may lack

24:22some provisions that say the following

24:24agenda item includes um in terms of

24:26teeth. But I'll leave uh the technical

24:29questions if you have

24:31additional um additional questions

24:33there. I am going to punt to our land

24:35land bank expert beside me.

24:41>> Okay. So yes 1125 was actually the land

24:44bank's first sale. Um and it did it came

24:46over from the state land bank. Uh so

24:48they were, you know, essentially baking

24:51it there. Uh and then we received it

24:54February 1st, 2025. Um I believe

24:59>> I think there's a deed restriction.

25:00There is. So yeah, so it's a 5-year deed

25:03restriction. Um with the land bank, we

25:05receive 50% of the property taxes for

25:08the first 5 years post sale. Um so

25:10that's the length of our deed

25:11restrictions. And so yes, there is a

25:12deed restriction for 80% AMI sales u for

25:16the first 5 years.

25:19Thank you.

25:20>> Does uh Doug so at the end of that five

25:23years is there some incremental increase

25:26to get you know to a higher ami or is it

25:29just whatever the market value is or I

25:31guess how's that work

25:32>> at that point the deed restrictions

25:34removed um you know they really have the

25:37leverage to do what they want at that

25:39time um just cuz that's really the

25:42length that the of a restriction that I

25:44believe the land bank can Okay. Thank

25:47you.

25:50>> My comment is also just for staff.

25:52Excited to see this definition of the

25:54LBRRF priorities um implemented in this

25:57way um celebrating affordable home

26:01ownership, attainable home ownership for

26:02our neighbors at or below 80%. So, um I

26:06know home ownership has always been a

26:08priority. I'm excited to see you combine

26:10it with quote unquote special projects

26:12and excited to see the definition of

26:14that being used as land bank uh property

26:17sales for that home ownership piece. So

26:21um just a creative way to approach the

26:23use of LBRF grant funds and excited to

26:26support it.

26:29>> Great.

26:31>> Okay. Any other questions or discussions

26:34on this?

26:36Oh, sure. Um, would you like to maybe

26:38share a little bit of background?

26:40>> Oh, me? Yeah.

26:40>> Yeah.

26:41>> Great.

26:49>> Good morning.

26:50>> Good morning.

26:50>> My name is Jeff Ravelt. I'm executive

26:52director at Westtown Jubilee Housing.

26:54Um, a little bit of background about

26:56Westtown is we were founded about 1992.

27:00um primarily on the west side of Grand

27:02Rapids to help combat very neglected

27:05rental properties and uh vacant homes

27:09and and different things. Um and as part

27:11of that has been our home ownership

27:13program that we've been doing. Um we

27:17average probably like one home a year.

27:18We're a pretty small organization.

27:21Um

27:23uh a lot of it is volunteer help. Uh

27:26lately it's been me like I'm basically

27:28building this house uh framing it in

27:31right now.

27:32Um we're excited about the homeowner

27:35that we've selected. Uh she's a single

27:37mom that uh fits at the 65% AMI.

27:42Um so this, you know, the price even at

27:45178 is very challenging for her to to

27:48make it, but she can make it. Um, so

27:51yeah, this would be huge for her to be

27:52able to get this for for that for her.

27:55So,

27:57does anybody have any questions

27:59specifically?

28:01>> Okay.

28:02>> Thanks. Appreciate it.

28:04>> Thank you.

28:08>> Okay. Uh, we have a motion on the table.

28:11All those in favor say I.

28:12>> I. I.

28:13>> Opposed.

28:14>> Motion carries.

28:16>> Thank you.

28:18>> You're welcome. Good luck. Uh the next

28:20item is a resolution approving and

28:23authorizing the execution of a local

28:25brownfield revolving fund grant

28:26agreement for a project to be located at

28:29720 Crosby. Do I have a motion?

28:32>> So moved.

28:35Done.

28:35>> All right. Good morning board. Me again.

28:37Um so uh we have another Land Bank

28:40property uh 720 Crosby Northwest. Um I

28:44believe this is our last buildable lot

28:46on the west side for now.

28:49Don't quote me on that. Um, but David

28:53Built uh is the developer here and he is

28:57developing a single family home with an

29:00attached ADU. Um, this was a vacant lot.

29:03Uh and because of um it being a land

29:07bank lot, there were some unforeseen um

29:12development challenges uh within this

29:14when they were doing some of the soil

29:16removal and um things such as that which

29:20is why uh we are bringing this up. you

29:22know, within this one, it is going to be

29:26three twotory, threebedroom, one and a

29:28half bath. Um, plus the studio ADU. Um,

29:35with this, we are not necessarily

29:37attaching an AMI band to this sale. Um,

29:41the deed has not been transferred yet,

29:43but we are going to restrict the sale up

29:46to $395,000.

29:48Um the estimated or the development

29:52costs have been around $385,000

29:55and he is anticipating selling it for

29:57$360,000.

29:59Um we're requesting a $20,000 LBRF grant

30:02uh to really help with some of those

30:05unforeseen development

30:07uh activities. Um, additionally, you

30:10know, within Act 381, uh, being a

30:13landbank lot, but also a home ownership

30:16property, uh, is really where we are,

30:19um, coming from. Uh, so, you know, David

30:24is here, so I can invite him up to share

30:27a little bit more about the project. I'm

30:28excited to see this one come to life. uh

30:31you know, we're also seeing this as a

30:33potential uh income generating

30:35opportunity for the owner uh with that

30:38attached ADU and creating that rental

30:40opportunity. So, um David, if you want

30:43to Doug,

30:44>> can I just ask before you finish then?

30:46So, uh there's about a $5,000 gap

30:49between um cost and sale price, $20,000

30:54grant, I guess. how how uh how's the

30:575,000, you know, being sourced or

31:00>> So, within this, it's personal equity.

31:03Um he also has a construction loan. Um

31:06so, you know, within this, this is uh

31:10still what we're able to do to allow it

31:12to still be able to sell at that 360.

31:16>> So, so they're not taking a loss?

31:18>> No, I don't.

31:19>> Okay.

31:22>> Okay. [laughter]

31:23It's like,

31:24>> yeah, feel free.

31:30>> Good morning, everybody.

31:31>> Good morning.

31:31>> My name is David Bolt. Um, I've known

31:34some of you, I believe, from my work

31:35over at Nextup West Michigan. I used to

31:37be the executive director there. So, we

31:38did uh Hope Village, which I'm sure

31:40you're aware of, and then some single

31:41family homes. So got to know Doug and

31:44the staff through that land bank process

31:46where we purchased a number of land bank

31:48lots where we did single family homes

31:50and then also the 16 unit uh hope

31:52village. Um, so for this project, one of

31:55the things when I was director and also

31:57on staff at NextStep, there's a huge

31:59need, we did workforce training, but

32:01there's also this need for housing.

32:03Obviously, we know it. And so creating

32:05housing where the twostory could be the

32:08primary residence for the homeowner and

32:11then having rental income anywhere from,

32:13$1,100, $1,200 for that ADU. Or they

32:16could swap. the owner could live in the

32:17ADU and rent that front portion out for

32:20maybe 2,000 2200 somewhere in that

32:22range. So it really it's like buying two

32:25houses instead of one. You're buying a

32:28$260,000ish

32:29dollar two-story residence and you're

32:31buying a $100,000 ADU is if you want to

32:34look at it that way. So that's that's

32:35why the build is a little bit more

32:37expensive. Uh that gap is me personally

32:39as a new um I got my Michigan

32:42residential builder's license recently

32:44and as the developer I think I wrote in

32:465% mo most times right as the GC most

32:51times those GC fees are anywhere from 10

32:52to 25%. I put five I'd be I'd be happy

32:55if I got five on this one. So there's a

32:58little bit less for me personally as a

33:00general contractor. Another thing on

33:01this project I want to point out is that

33:03we're going to utilize as much as

33:05possible the construction allies and

33:06action network. If you know them,

33:08minority womenowned micro business

33:11enterprises and uh so hopefully

33:14launching that. My son is here in the

33:15room as well and he's hoping to be a

33:16microenterprise. I'm trying to get him

33:18trained up in carpentry. So that's

33:20that's the goal. Thank you.

33:23>> Thank you.

33:26>> I just had one uh logistical question.

33:28And so we talked about how in the last

33:31deal the signal of the award or the

33:34signal of like the job completed to be

33:37reimbursed was the 80% AMI home buyer

33:41income verification. That isn't a part

33:44of this which um I think is the right

33:46decision for this type of home. Um, I

33:50think if someone wants to live

33:51intergenerationally, that could mean

33:53that their household could exceed 80%

33:57even though the reality is we might be

33:59serving two families at 80%. So, I I

34:02agree with that decision. Um, I will say

34:06your deed restriction referenced 395,

34:10but then your sales price, which is how

34:13you're justifying the grant amount, is

34:15360.

34:17What will be your trigger to be like,

34:18"Yep, you you did what you promised.

34:22Here's the grant."

34:26>> Um, I mean, with this one, the deed has

34:29not been transferred. So, we are going

34:31to attach that deed restriction. Um, you

34:34know, within this, I stay in contact

34:37with land banks through out build. Um,

34:40mainly for selfish reasons to pay

34:43attention and get pictures. But um yeah,

34:46I mean with this we don't necessarily

34:49have um the capacity per se for the

34:55compliance checking that I think you're

34:58asking about at this time.

35:00>> I think I'm curious. Can we make the

35:02deed restriction for the initial sale at

35:04360 justifying this application and then

35:08you can have an incremental increase

35:10over the 5year deed restriction time?

35:13I would so so if I may um I I I think

35:18another way another way to consider this

35:20is um you know there are some factors

35:23out there with inflation materials

35:25interest rates it's quite possible that

35:26today we're suggesting it's 360 but by

35:29the time this thing

35:31>> or even the the cost at 385 by the time

35:33this thing's built stabilized and

35:35occupied that cost could be much higher.

35:37So, I I would just offer that we

35:40maintain some flexibility wi-i, you

35:42know, with this current gap. Um, and and

35:46sure, I mean, I I think we should stay

35:48engaged to check on progress and and

35:50where you're ending up with these

35:51things, but that that would that would

35:53be my

35:53>> So, just more of like proof that a gap

35:56existed at the time of sale is what

35:58we're looking for. That makes sense.

36:00>> Okay.

36:01>> Okay. Any other questions or discussion?

36:07Okay. Uh, we have a motion on the table.

36:09All those in favor say I. I.

36:11>> I.

36:11>> Opposed. Motion carries.

36:15All right. Our last action item is an

36:17activity report uh for our brownfield

36:20authorities environmental site

36:22assessment program for September 2026.

36:25Do I have a motion?

36:26>> So move.

36:27>> Support.

36:29Audrey.

36:30>> Good morning. Once again, the final item

36:32for today is the ESA grant report for

36:34September. This month we have a single

36:36request to act act on which is a phase

36:38one environmental site assessment uh for

36:41a team that is uh assessing the

36:43feasibility of at least 11 units at 217

36:46Fox Street Southwest. Uh the cost in the

36:49request is $3,000 a tied tied to that

36:52phase one. Uh this um is eligible based

36:55on its potential to create housing units

36:57and the anticipated private investment

36:59that would occur if it is found

37:01feasible. So, if this is approved today,

37:04um the board will have earmarked

37:06approximately really close to a third of

37:08the total allowable program funding for

37:11the fiscal year. And that puts us about

37:13a quarter of the way through the fiscal

37:14year. So, we are pacing uh fairly well.

37:22>> Okay, thank you. Any questions on this

37:24one?

37:28>> Okay.

37:30All right. noted.

37:32Uh then all those in favor say I.

37:34>> I

37:35>> I

37:35>> opposed. Motion carries. Thank you,

37:38Audrey.

37:40>> All right, moving on to other business.

37:44>> I have some things chair.

37:47>> Um so I wanted to just update you guys

37:49on a few different things. First, I

37:51mentioned at the last meeting that we

37:53have posted some positions and um we

37:58made offers on those positions. So just

38:00as a reminder in the last year we added

38:02capacity um to the post approval part of

38:07the process right so to support uh

38:09Margaret's work um which is formerly

38:11Christian's work right so we've added a

38:13person there uh we made an offer on that

38:15position and expect that uh person to

38:18start in October and then similarly um

38:21to support the front end um and the work

38:24that Audrey's doing on intake we um

38:26posted a position there with Mackenzie's

38:29departure Sure. Right. Just making sure.

38:30Okay. Um and so we expect a we expect a

38:34position or a person to be starting in

38:35October for that position as well. And

38:38um just to say that we're um trying to

38:43again um think differently of how we're

38:46doing things in the office and um

38:49leverage expertise where we where we

38:51need to. Um, in the meantime, because of

38:53some of the gaps that we've had with

38:55just staff changes, we've done a couple

38:58of things that I just want to make sure

39:00the board is uh aware of um to make sure

39:04that we're advancing the work. And so,

39:06one of the things that we've been doing

39:07is we've been leveraging outside

39:08expertise to do initial plan reviews. So

39:11when we get brownfield plan reviews um

39:14in uh as part of intake to help

39:16streamline uh some of the work for the

39:18intake side and keep those customers um

39:21you know keep the responsiveness to the

39:23customers and uh projects moving. Uh

39:25we've been doing that. Um and then the

39:28other thing that we've been working for

39:29the last six plus months on um is

39:32working alongside our community

39:33development department um because this

39:36is the first year that we've anticip or

39:38we've had housing projects coming

39:40online. Right. So um from a compliance

39:43and monitoring perspective, we are we

39:45are not compliance and h housing

39:46monitoring uh staff members. And so

39:49we've been leveraging the expertise in

39:50the community development department uh

39:52to bring online

39:54uh um more specific knowledge around how

39:58we're going to be maintaining those

40:00projects going forward. So um feeling

40:02good about the the cadence there and

40:04happy to give as there's more finality

40:07with that um

40:09process an update more specifically to

40:12the board um of all the nooks and

40:15crannies there. Um and then separately

40:18of of staff um we've been uh we've been

40:24working um

40:27or we've been I shouldn't say excuse me

40:30I just need to just I sound like a frog.

40:33Yeah.

40:36Um,

40:38we've been having a lot of inquiries

40:40around our emerging developer grants or

40:42the the programming there. And I just

40:44want to remind the board that last week

40:47there was an affordable housing fund

40:48board workshop where I was invited to

40:51present an update on that um programming

40:54and ultimately uh asked for partnership

40:57from that board on some of their

40:59funding. um both to um help us fund the

41:05five applications that we were not able

41:07to fund at the time we closed the

41:08applications uh to consider future

41:11funding for projects to just say hey to

41:14the community this is an important part

41:15of the ecosystem and then also to

41:18provide a focus on technical assistance

41:21because I've been really reluctant to

41:22bring um activate that um back up

41:27obviously with revisions from the

41:30engagement of the subcommittee um

41:34without more uh folks around the table,

41:36right? More folks around the table and

41:38more money around the table. Um and so

41:40we expect the affordable housing fund to

41:43make a decision in December around those

41:45dollars. And I I think that it's uh

41:48probably good timing to to have a more

41:52regular cadence with the subcommittee.

41:54and we've had a few new members of the

41:55board. So, um possibly adding a couple

41:58of folks to that subcommittee um and

42:01talking more specifically about how and

42:03what the future really looks like for

42:04the emerging developer grant uh dollars.

42:07And then similarly, and we had a little

42:09bit of dialogue on this on the last uh

42:11board meeting, it was around the

42:12economic development corporation's

42:14revolving loan fund. Um and between the

42:18last board meeting and and today, um

42:22there's been a there's been advocacy to

42:26take the dollars that Representative

42:28Grant was successful at advocating for.

42:30So that million dollars from Lancing and

42:32couple that with the work that we were

42:34pursuing with the $425,000

42:38um from fiscal year 25 third word equity

42:40fund money. And so to pair those dollars

42:43instead of um looking at it more from a

42:46small business standpoint

42:48um with Rep. Grant's uh focus more um

42:52more holistically on real estate as

42:54well. And so I think that um activating

42:57the subcommittee and and just trying to

42:59finalize again how we can roll that best

43:03out. Um I think some of the foundation

43:05that we've already engaged on with

43:08regard to the memorandum understanding

43:10between the city and the economic

43:12development corporation still would

43:13maintain uh valuable um but we would

43:17want to polish the request for proposals

43:19that would ultimately go out to help us

43:22um possibly administer uh that RLF. Um

43:26so that is what I know. Um, and I'm

43:29happy to take questions or have more

43:32dialogue.

43:34Thanks.

43:37>> Thank you. I I just going back to your

43:39initial uh comment there. You mentioned

43:41uh outside expertise to do plan reviews.

43:44I guess who who is that? Um

43:47>> we've been using fishback.

43:48>> Fishbach.

43:51>> I I guess I wasn't aware that we had

43:52actually executed a contract with them.

43:56We um so I was uh working under the

43:59office of the authority that the board

44:01granted up to the 15,000 um is for

44:04service agreements, Jeff. Okay. Um

44:06>> and so um the the the

44:10previous request for proposals where we

44:13interviewed for underwriting um as

44:16separate um but engage them on plan

44:19reviews.

44:21>> Yeah.

44:21>> Okay. So they're doing all that within

44:24the 15K. Yeah.

44:26>> Reauthorization. Okay. Thank you.

44:30>> Any other questions? Uh responses to our

44:33director.

44:35>> Um is the subcommittee for the emerging

44:38developers is that an existing

44:41subcommittee or is that need to be do we

44:43need to make a motion to form it and

44:45then take volunteers?

44:46>> Yeah. No, the the subcommittee had been

44:48talking both about um the housing tiff

44:50guidelines uh and also the emerging

44:53developer work. Um, I think it last

44:55convened early summer. It was supposed

44:57to convene again in August, but there

44:59was a cancellation of that one. And so I

45:01think that there's opportunity to polish

45:03uh what that group looks like.

45:07[snorts]

45:09Thank you. Um, I appreciate the comments

45:12about the um the subcommittee and what

45:16work can be done. I think another thing

45:18on the horizon is we're 40 days away

45:22from the election and so I think there

45:23will be a lot of you know we've heard

45:25reports about changes at MEEDC there's

45:28obviously going to be you know a new

45:30governor a new senator and so just

45:32trying to understand what those entities

45:35priorities are and how do we fit into

45:37that um Miss Reneo and I talked

45:40yesterday just about you know as we look

45:42at trying to say okay you have emerging

45:44developers and we have the environmental

45:45assessment grant and then we have this

45:46other money from rep grant and we have

45:48this revolving fund. How do we continue

45:50to identify how do we braid this money

45:52and are there is there other money in

45:55other spaces for things like uh

45:57environmental assessments grants and

45:59then how do you make up more money over

46:01here? We've heard so much probably most

46:03commission meetings people are coming

46:04and asking about the emerging developer

46:06grants and and those projects. So just

46:09that continued focus on how do we uh

46:11make sure we're in front of whatever

46:13might be the priorities at the state

46:15level. be prepared for that and then um

46:18you know again just say these are not

46:21yes they are sole pots of money but how

46:23do we maximize their impact so thank you

46:27>> thank you that's good council appreciate

46:29that

46:31any other questions

46:34>> just one um

46:37and it was sparked by uh just the

46:39commissioner Sassy's comment about

46:41community members coming uh and asking

46:44about the emerging developer program.

46:45I'm sensitive to those uh developers in

46:48the so-called Q and whether they've been

46:52sort of uh touched along the way.

46:56>> Yes, thank you for the question. So, um

46:58we last touched base in June with those

47:00folks um wanting to ensure that there

47:04was still a project, there was still a

47:05request um and the scope was the same so

47:08that we could use those numbers to make

47:10an ask to the affordable housing fund

47:12board. Um, so, uh, we could we could

47:14probably, uh, round that, uh, gate again

47:17and and make sure that they know what's

47:19going on, um, with the more recent

47:20information that the board anticipates

47:22making a decision in December.

47:24>> Thank you.

47:24>> Yeah.

47:28>> All right. Good discussion.

47:30Uh, moving on to public comment.

47:38Okay. Hearing none, uh, the meeting's

47:40journ. Thank you so much.

```*