►
Description
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
A
C
A
A
E
A
G
Hello,
thank
you
for
having
me
again.
My
name
is
brenda
lana
wolkey,
I
am
the
executive
director.
I
did
go
back
and
look
at
what
we
could
possibly
do
on
that
site
and
our
thought
was
to
do
a
twin
home,
our
given
the
topography
and
the
site.
We
thought,
maybe
a
split
home
would
work
on
that
site,
so
it
would
be.
Each
unit
would
be
a
three-bedroom
two-bath
with
a
family
room
and
a
living
room
downstairs,
and
then
a
two-car
garage
kind
of
on
the
front
side
of
it.
G
We
don't
always
go
that
route,
but
sometimes
it's
nice
when
we
have
a
brand
new
product
because
it
brings
a
lot
of
people
to
the
program
that
otherwise
might
not
know
that
we
exist.
So
we
do
kind
of
like
to
have
that
contingency
in
there
to
be
able
to
pay
a
commission
to
a
real
estate
agent,
there's
also
some
of
the
construction
fees
that
we
would
have
associated
in
holding
costs
and
the
interim
financing
that
we'd
have
to
take
care
of.
G
I
had
included
property
taxes,
but
I'm
assuming
the
property
taxes
on
that
are
waived
as
it's
a
city-owned
plot
at
this
moment,
so
that
would
kind
of
bring
things
down.
So,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
when
we
we
looked
at
all
of
the
figures,
we
were
looking
at
roughly
695
000
to
build
the
two
units,
so
just
about
350
000
aside
those
units,
then
the
way
that
we
would
pay
for
those
would
be
with
a
first
mortgage
on
those
from
our
home.
G
G
So
that's
pretty
much
where
we're
at
I
did
send
over
a
picture
of
two
homes.
We
currently
have
four
two
units
and
four
that's
four.
I
should
say:
they're
two
home
two
buildings,
four
units
in
our
portfolio
that
are
twin
homes.
One
was
a
project
in
minnetonka
where
the
city
required
the
builder
to
build
that
for
us
through
density
requirements,
and
then
we
did
another
project
with
an
non-profit
developer
in
brooklyn
or
in
new
hope,
and
those
are
the
two
there.
G
The
the
minnetonka
one
was
a
very
unique
design
because
of
the
plot
of
land
we
had
and
it's
right
up
against
a
wetland.
You
can
see
it's
a
one
car
garage
on
this
side.
The
back
side
has
a
two-car
garage,
so
we
built
it
to
fit.
What
was
there
it's
a
two-story
on
this
side
and
kind
of
a
split
on
the
other
side,
and
then
the
next
one
this
was
developed
and
built
by
a
non-profit
that
we
partnered
with
the
unit
that
you're
looking
at
is
a
two-story
with
a
full
basement.
G
G
There
is
a
possibility
if
we
are
successful
on
our
current
grant
application
that
we
have
to
increase
the
ask
on
this
and
try
to
make
these
passive,
which
means
we
virtually
would
be
saving
our
homeowners
a
lot
of
money
in
their
utilities
by
making
them
passive.
And
if
we
were
to
you,
know
explore
that
route.
I
would
look
at
bringing
in
gimmick
and
having
them
as
the
developer,
because
that's
who
we're
partnering
with
and
the
current
pro
project
that
they're
working
on
for
us
is
a
passive
twin
home
in
st
louis
park.
F
E
G
H
G
Our
mission
is
to
to
work
with
you
to
have
us
develop
what
is
in
your
best
interest
what
you
want
so
we'd
really
look
for
you
to
say:
okay,
this
is
really
what
we'd
like
to
see.
There
come
back
with
the
pricing
and
then
the
next
steps
to
move
forward
would
be
to
have
a
mou
in
place
so
that
we
could
write
the
grants,
because
that
site
control
is
important,
but
obviously
it's
understandable
that
you
don't
want
to
just
turn
that
over
to
us
unless
we
can
do
something
with
it.
H
A
G
A
H
A
A
F
Madam
chair
commissioners,
before
you
tonight,
is
an
annual
item
that
you
see
every
september
as
part
of
the
section
8
program
as
we
administer
it.
We
are
required
to
submit
annually
an
annual
plan
for
the
forthcoming
year
and
also
an
update
to
our
administrative
plan.
We
also
have
to
this
is
a
public
hearing,
so
we
also
take
any
public
comment.
They
have.
We
have
advertised
for
45
days,
the
agency
plan
and
the
administrative
plan
for
the
program,
and
we
have
not
received
any
comments.
A
A
H
Thank
you.
So
I
am
bringing
this
back
for
discussion
as
requested
by
commissioners
and
provided
a
comparison
of
what
our
current
home
improvement.
Programs
are
right
now,
but
also
our
statutory
authority
as
an
hra
and
what
we
are
here
to
do,
and
one
of
the
primary
things
is
to
serve
low
and
moderate
income
households,
and
then
I
have
put
into
a
chart
proposed.
H
I
A
A
A
I
A
H
Delay
this
thank
you
chair.
So
if
we
postponed
till
the
end
of
october,
which
would
be
that
meeting
then
we
would,
we
could
have
discussion
at
that
time.
So,
from
my
understanding,
the
board
requested
to
have
discussion
and
discussion
only
before
voting
on
it.
So
that
would
look
like
the
possibly
the
first
meeting
of
november
before
voting
on
bringing
the
program
back
up
with
any.
A
A
A
E
E
A
I
H
I
H
A
And
I
didn't-
I
didn't
even
think
about
that,
because
when
I
discussed
the
agenda
it
was
only
ever
going
to
be
a
discussion
item,
so
it
was
a
clerical
error,
but
that
was
a
good
point
taken.
Commissioner
thorson
that
yes
discussion
items
are
just
discussion
items
so
all
right.
So
now
we
still
have
not
voted
on
tabling
this
item.
I
don't
think
we've
changed
it.
I
think
we
went
to
october
27th,
correct.
H
D
B
D
A
I
All
right
lost
my
train
of
thought
now
you
know.
I
think
that
the
the
intent
of
the
motion
was
a
full
board
and
I
believe
most
of
us
are
here
are
interested
in
participating
in
this
topic
and
my
understanding
is
it's
not
entirely
time
sensitive.
So
if
it
does
get
pushed
out
a
couple
times,
I
don't
think
we
should
do
it
forever,
but
we
generally
have
full
boards
present
here.
So
I
believe
that
that
would
be
appropriate.
A
J
Microphones
turn
them
on
I'm
andrew
is
this
on
all
right,
I'm
an
applicant
to
this
program.
I've
been
approved.
I
think
some
somebody
was
helping
me
with
it.
I
can't
remember
whom,
but
I
would
argue
that
it
is
kind
of
time
sensitive,
because
you
know,
depending
on
what
happens
with
this
program,
is
kind
of
contingent
on
when
I
can
set
up
this
project
to
do
these
kind
of
remodeling,
I'm
sure
other
people
that
have
been
approved
for
this
year
are
in
the
same
boat.
J
A
I
A
J
Right
now
I
have
submitted
my
application.
I
think
I've
submitted
my
finance
stuff.
So,
like
my
taxes,
my
income
statements,
I
have
not
had
a
site
visit,
so
I
haven't
had
a
project
approval.
Yet
so
that's
kind
of
you
know
now,
if
we're
going
to
get
into
the
end
of
october.
This
is
an
exterior
project
not
going
to
be
able
to
do
a
roof
this
year,
and
so
I
don't
know
how
that
timing
will
work
out
with
the
new
program
parameters
if
part
of
the
project
now
has
to
be
done
in
the
spring.
H
Well,
no,
so
excuse
me
he
so
his
application
and
his
financing
was
approved
as
eligibility
for
the
program
right.
He
would
have
a
site
visit
from
staff
to
write
up
the
scope
of
work.
Then
he
would
have
to
put
out
for
bids
and
have
the
bids
come
back
and
then
have
the
amounts
approved
and
then
work
could
start
right.
I
H
Are
there
there
are
no
new
applications
being
accepted?
There
were
applications
that
were
submitted
with
financials
and
they
were
they
were
approved
based
on
the
initial
eligibility
of
the
program,
but
they
hadn't
gone
out
for
bid
or
had
a
scope
of
work
yet,
and
then
there
were
others
that
did
go
out
for
bid
and
had
the
bids
already.
So
the
contractors
were
already
contacted
that
work
moved
forward
because
those
contractors
were
already
contacted
and
that
was
fully
approved
so
he's
at
the
process
of
he
when
he
completed
his
application.
H
I
I
do
I
mean
I'm
not
suggesting
there's
not
an
urgency
here,
but
I
think
again.
This
is
an
important
project.
There
are
many
many
people
who
will
be
ineligible
for
these
loans
if
we
move
forward
with
the
proposal,
and
so
I
am
interested
in
moving
it
along.
I
am
interested
in
seeing
full
board
discussion.
I
I
did
not
understand
that
anybody
who
was
already
in
the
loop
at
any
stage
was
put
on
hold
and
one
question
for
staff
I
would
have,
which
is
unfortunate,
but
I
want
to
do
this
right
next
time
and,
unfortunately
that
it
has
created
a
bit
of
a
delay.
I'm
curious
how
many
people
are
in
the
same
position,
how
many
loans
were
approved
or
people
who
had
their
paperwork
in
when
we
put
this
on
hold.
I
I
know
we
didn't
vote
on
it
and
I
missed
some
of
the
background
because
I
remember
distinctly
that
meeting
where
I
had
some
technology
issues,
and
so
I
missed
that.
I
think
I
probably
I'm
not
even
sure
I
got
on
in
time
to
to
to
adjourn,
but
I
I
know
I
miss
that
and
it's
always
been
in
the
back
of
my
mind.
I
wonder
what
happened,
but
we
weren't
voting
on
anything.
So
I
didn't
have
a
great
concern.
I
I
would
suggest
that
in
the
future
for
something
of
this
type
that
to
pause
a
program-
and
I
think
I
made
that
comment
at
the
past
meeting-
to
to
to
pause
a
program
of
this-
of
this
importance
to
the
city-
should
have
been
a
board
decision
anyway.
But
that's
just
my
thought
now
and
that's
in
retrospect.
H
Thank
you,
commissioner,
thorson,
to
answer
your
question:
there's
about
18
to
20
applications
that
were
in
varying
stages
of
the
process
that
had
not
gone
out
for
bid
yet
but
had
submitted
applications
and,
lastly,
due
to
our
statutory
authority
and
as
an
hra
and
the
advisement
of
our
general
counsel.
That
is
why
the
program
was
paused
so
abruptly
it
was.
We
were
not
supposed
to
be
serving
up
to
100
area
median
income.
H
H
However,
the
applications
that
came
into
the
neighborhood
program
that
would
go
up
to
100
percent
ami
might
possibly
not
be
approved,
which
is
why,
in
the
proposed
changes,
one
of
the
things
to
be
able
to
still
serve
people
over
80
ami
is
to
request
a
denial
letter
from
a
minnesota
housing
network
lender.
Therefore,
under
our
statutory
authority,
we're
showing
how
we're
serving
people
that
have
that
are
not
able
to
be
served
by
other
markets.
I
I
A
E
Chair,
I
I
have
to
stand
behind
my
feelings
of.
I
think
that
the
motion
needs.
I
personally
feel
that
we
need
to
move
this
forward.
We
obviously
have
people
that
are
waiting,
we're
talking,
roofs,
we're
talking
things
that
are
important,
and
so
I
cannot
support
the
full
board.
I
support
making
it
clear
that
we're
going
to
have
this
discussion
on
a
specific
date,
all
those
that
need
want
to
attend
need
to
attend,
and
so
that
is
where
I'm
standing
right
now.
So
I
just
want
to
make
that
clear.
Thank.
A
A
A
For
me,
I
would
want
to
act
on
the
26th,
whether
hopefully
we'd
be
close
to
a
full
board,
but
if
we
don't
have
it
we'll
go
with
the
people
that
are
here,
and
perhaps
anyone
who
couldn't
be
here
could
either
contact
me
contact
one
of
the
other
commissioners
contact
commissioner
coleman
with
any
specific
comments.
If
there
was
something
that
they
felt
that
they
wanted
to
bring
forward
and
just
could
not
be
at
that
meeting
so
that
I
would
be
open
to
that
to
commissioner
administrator
coleman.
H
A
H
A
A
I
D
D
I
B
D
B
I
A
D
A
A
H
To
answer
your
question,
commissioner
olson,
maybe
the
format
is
a
little
off,
but
what
is
provided
as
an
attachment
for
for
viewing
and
review
is
the
current
program
and
it's
broken
down.
Loan
limit
interest
rate
loan
term
income
limits,
equity,
limit
asset
limit
equity
match
exclusions,
value
limit
application.
D
D
I
A
I
A
I
So
louis
I
I
assume
that
there
are
some
that,
under
the
statutory
limitations
we
have
obligations,
there
are
some
that
may
not
be
able
to
continue
because
they
were
inappropriate
in
the
first
place,
but
it
sounds
like
there
may
be
a
subset.
I
don't
know
how
large
that
are
not
affected
by
that
issue
and
perhaps
should
proceed.
I
I
believe,
that's
almost
a
contract
we
have
with
them
in
the
sense
that
we
advertise
the
program
we
advertise
guidelines,
people
applied
people
made
decisions
about
their
homes
and
their
investment
in
their
homes
and
proceeded
beyond
just
thinking
about
these
are
accepted
applications
and,
aside
from
the
statutory
issues,
I'm
wondering
if
we
can
allow
by
administrative
or
by
board
decision
the
loans
that
aren't
in
conflict
with
the
statutes
that
we
allow
them
to
proceed
under
the
old
program
guidelines
that
they
applied
under.
I.
I
A
H
This
program
is
also
paused
for
the
help
loan
and
there
are
at
least
four
properties
that
are
cited
with
environmental
health
that
could
use
the
help
loan.
That
is
an
emergency
situation,
and
this
is
also
paused.
So
what
I'm
saying
is,
if
we
start
to
say
okay,
we
will
move
forward
with
the
ones
in
q.
Mind
you.
I
understand
they
were
in
queue,
but
then
how
do
we
tell
the
other
ones?
No,
that
are
emergency
situations
that
are
waiting.
H
I
I
I'm
suggesting
that
we
make
that
we
allow
people
to
proceed
with
those
loans
unless
it's
in
violation
of
of
the
statute
you're
talking
about
I'm
not
talking
about
whether
or
not
they
meet
our
future
guidelines
that
we
may
as
a
board
choose
to
set
in
place.
I'm
just
saying
allow
the
loans
that
have
been
approved
that
have
been
submitted
that
meet
the
guidelines
and
aren't
in
conflict
with
statute.
Let
them
proceed
as
if
this
administrative
decision
had
not
been
made.
I
Where
there
are
citations,
we
should
be
able
to
continue
with
the
applicants
who
were
approved
and
who
are
in
various
stages
of
the
process.
As
long
as
it
doesn't
violate
the
statutes
that
brought
this
up
in
the
first
place
period,
then
we
discuss
future
guidelines,
income
limitations,
all
those
kinds
of
things
as
a
board
and
make
a
decision
on
those
changes.
H
I
A
H
One
last
thing:
anybody
over
80
ami
legal
would
advise
that
they
do
not
move
forward,
and
one
of
the
proposed
changes
is
to
get
a
denial
letter
from
a
minnesota
housing
network.
Lender
that
way
we
would
be
able
to
serve
people
81
to
100
percent.
So
we
run
at
this
point
from
what
I'm
understanding
we
run
the
risk
of
denying
people
between
81
and
100
ami
and
possibly
when
we
bring
the
program
back
up,
they
would
be
eligible
at
that
point.
H
I
H
I
H
Thank
you.
The
question
was:
what
statute
am
I
referring
to?
It
is
statute,
chapter
469,
and
that
is
the
chapter
minnesota
statutes
under
which
the
authority
is
organized
and
existing.
It's
called
the
housing
authority
act
and
it's
chapter
469.001
to
469.047,
and
we
also
have
in
the
previous
items.
We
have
a
resolution
that
created
the
hra
by
the
city
of
bloomington
that
was
passed
in
1971.
A
H
I
can
compile
the
information.
I
probably
would
have
the
information
before
that
meeting,
because
we
would
need
to
without
making
people's
information
public,
at
least
be
able
to
say
how
many
applications
there
are,
how
many
would
qualify
in
terms
of
the
income,
because
that's
really
where
they're
at
in
terms
of
just
the
paperwork,
it's
nobody
that's
gone
out
for
bid.
Yet,
okay,.
A
H
I
A
I
I
would
just
also
like
to
add
that
I'm
generally
quite
supportive
of
making
changes
to
the
program
so
we're
our
best
serving
those
in
who
most
need
the
program,
and
I
think
it's
something
I
brought
up
in
past
meetings
when
we've
talked
about
it.
I've
always
felt
a
little
bit
like
when
we
as
a
board
increased
income,
and
so
on
that
there's
a
little
part
of
me
that
you
know
has
been
nagging
me
about
that.
I
So
I'm
generally,
I
know
we
had
some
big
issues
that
came
up
and
I
I'm
pretty
confident
we're
going
to
be
able
to
revise
the
program
largely
along
staff
recommendations,
and
I
think
that
it
is
appropriate
for
us
to
make
sure
that
our
limited
budget
is
is
used
to
support
our
mission.
So
I'm
I'm
not
opposed
to
the
changes.
I
think
many
of
those
changes
were
quite
good.
A
A
H
H
H
Okay,
before
the
meeting
thank
you
myra
appreciate
you,
okay,
so
thursday,
the
28th.
So
it's
that
same
week
and
it
is
in
person,
but
it
would
be
a
joint
meeting
and
I
can
bring
the
information
back.
I
just
wanted
to
make
you
aware
of
it
as
soon
as
possible,
because
it's
in
discussion
it's
not
something
that
we've
solidified,
where
you
have
agreed
and
said:
yes,
we'll
have
a
joint
meeting,
but
the
topics
already
going
forward
at
the
planning
commission.
H
That
meeting
is
around
single-family
and
two-family
zoning,
as
well
as
discussions
around
adus,
and
so
the
conversation
from
planning
staff
was
oh.
We
could
bring
that
to
the
hra
and
I
said
well,
it'd
be
nice
if
we
could
just
all
gather
so
we
can
hear
what
each
other
have
to
say
and
participate
that
way.