►
Description
The Housing & Community Development Committee discussed the Housing Opportunity Development Corporation (HODC) funding request, the Small Landlord definition for assistance, an overview of the Landlord Tenant Ordinance, and a discussion on CDBG loan forgiveness. More information, agenda, and packets are available on the Committee's webpage: https://www.cityofevanston.org/government/housing-community-development-committee
C
B
A
B
D
E
C
A
A
C
A
F
We
do
have
one
person
that
sign
up
for
public
comment,
but
I
do
not
see
them
in
the
attendees.
However,
somebody
just
sign
up
by
raising
their
hand.
If
anybody
in
the
audience
would
like
to
provide
public
comment,
they
can
raise
their
hand
with
the
button
at
the
bottom
of
their
screen,
and
we
will
allow
them
to
provide
comment
in
the
order
they
raised
their
hands.
So
Tina
Peyton
wishes
to
provide
public
comment.
Okay,
hi.
G
G
G
Frequently
the
landlord
gets
overlooked
and
this
rules
that
you
pass
an
ordinance
involves
us
and
you
do
things
that
ends
up
hurting.
The
landlord
I
can
speak
for
myself,
that's
not
quite
appropriate,
and
then
you
make
people
like
me
who
is
trying
to
help
affordable
housing
which
you
claim
you're
concerned
about,
then
we
feel
like
we
don't
want
to
work
with
affordable
housing
anymore,
based
on
some
of
the
laws
that
have
been
passed
in
other
states.
That
I
know
that
you
all
are
considering
so
I
hope.
There's
a
discussion.
G
G
You
have
cut
me
out
of
any
hopes
of
any
money
and
I
don't
see
anything
moving
forward.
I
will
say
again,
I
feel
very
slighted
and
upset
that
somehow
people
think
that
being
a
landlord
is
not
a
business
and
I
see
all
these
businesses
getting
a
half
a
million
dollars,
650
000,
a
million
dollars
so
which
are
you
concerned
about
the
restaurant
or
affordable
housing,
which
one
is
more
important
to
you,
because,
right
now
it
looks
like
a
restaurant
and
retail.
G
G
A
F
We
do
have
Carla
Sutton
that
signed
up
for
a
public
comment,
I,
don't
believe
he's
here,
but
he
was
and
I'm
just
going
to
double
check
to
make
sure
I'm
stating
this
correctly.
He
was
in
favor
of
the
proposed
change
to
the
threshold
of
35
for
the
small
landlords
okay
program,
and
then
we
have
another
person
that
raised
their
hand,
Jonathan
tuber,
okay,.
A
A
Great
well
then,
let's
move
on
to
our
business
items
first
for
this
evening,
so
first
just
to
get
us
started.
Could
we
have
a
motion
just
so.
We
can
begin
to
talk
about
a
motion
to
recommend
approval
of
the
four
million
dollars
as
Gap
funding
or
the
hodc
mixed
use
project
at
1805,
1815,
Church,
Street.
E
A
I
A
F
F
Yes,
so
for
the
hodc
project,
we
have
Rachel
Koenig
from
the
Housing
Opportunity
Development
Corporation.
That
is
here
to
speak
about
the
project.
We
also
have
Paul
zamazak
economic
development
manager.
That
is
present
to
answer
any
question
related
to
economic
development
for
this
project,
and
there
are
slides
that
Anna's
going
to
be
sharing
just
to
give
a
quick
visual
review
of
what
this
project
is.
Since
that
might
help
with
the
the
committee's
understanding
of
this.
F
Okay,
good
so
I'm
gonna
give
a
quick
and
if
you
want
to
move
to
the
next
slide,
I'm
just
going
to
give
a
very,
very
quick,
highlight,
I'm
sure
Richard's
going
to
be
able
to
talk
to
the
project
in
much
bigger
detail,
but
that's
just
to
provide
context
about
what
we're
talking
about.
So
this
is
the
site
that
we
are
talking
about.
F
This
project
included
a
city-owned
vehicle
plot,
as
well
as
Church
own
lot,
and
there's
essentially
been
historically
a
potential
land
swap
between
the
church
and
the
vacant
lot
and
the
project
for
hrdc,
so
that
the
church
could
be
relocated
in
a
better
location
for
them
with
a
new
building
and
the
affordable
housing
project
could
be
located
closer
to
where
the
existing
church
is
currently
so
on.
The
next
slide
you
can
see
this
is
the
urban
context
that
that
was
provided.
There
was
a
vacant
lot
from
the
city
that
was
located
at
1805.
F
This
is
a
visual
of
the
project
that
we're
going
to
be
discussing
today.
This
is
the
specific,
affordable
housing
building
that
hudc
funding
request
is
pertaining
to
there.
There
are
two
different
projects:
there's
the
church
and
then
there's
the
affordable
housing
building.
Those
are
two
completely
different
projects
differently
financed.
What
we're
talking
about
tonight
is
the
affordable
housing
building
with
the
retail
at
the
ground
floor,
as
you
can
see
on
the
picture
and
then
just
to
give
you
the
context
and
a
kind
of
broader
view
on
the
next
slide.
F
It
kind
of
shows
you
the
totality
of
the
site
with
on
the
left,
the
proposed
housing
building
and
then
on
the
right,
the
church,
building
and
then
next
slide
what
it
looks
like
in
context
of
the
actual
corner
of
the
the
intersection.
So
in
the
front
you
can
see
the
new
church
and
right
behind
that
is
the
affordable
housing
building
that
we
are
discussing
tonight
with
that
said,
Richard.
If
you
would
like
to
maybe
provide
a
little
bit
of
a
quick
introduction
to
the
project.
J
Sure
absolutely
thank
you.
Everyone
again.
My
name
is
Richard
Koenig
I'm,
the
executive
director
of
Housing
Opportunity,
Development,
Corporation,
we're
a
non-profit
organization
that
develops
affordable
housing
throughout
the
northern
suburbs.
The
organization
has
been
around
for
40
years
and
we
have
completed
about
500
units
of
affordable
housing
and
over
30
developments
and
18
different
communities.
So
we
have
quite
a
amount
of
experience.
Having
put
projects
like
this
together,
we're
excited
to
work
with
the
city
and
mount
bisco
Ministries.
J
On
this
proposal,
the
city
itself
had
done
a
request
for
proposals
back
in
January
of
2020
right
before
things
went
a
little
bit
crazy
and
we
have
been
working
with
Mount
Pisgah
to
try
and
figure
out
the
best
way
to
redevelop
that
block.
The
proposal
that
we
came
up
with
would
create
a
mixed
use
project
in
the
middle
of
the
block.
J
J
So
we
are
are
currently
a
permission
from
the
city
to
negotiate
with
the
purchase
regarding
the
acquisition
of
the
land.
We
have
applied
to
the
Illinois
Housing
Development
Authority,
for
financing
for
low-income
housing,
tax
credits
and
have
been
approved
for
those
and
so
there's
still
a
gap
on
the
financing.
And
so
what
we're
requesting
tonight
is
funding
from
the
city
to
fill
up
a
portion
of
that
Gap.
J
As
as
you
know,
costs
are
extremely
expensive
on
doing
new
construction
right
now.
We
really
wish
that
costs
could
be
lower,
but
affordable
on
the
operating
side
does
not
mean
affordable.
On
the
development
side,
we
do
pay
Market
rates
for
construction.
We
pay
union
wages,
we
do
pay
for
quality
construction
materials,
and
so
the
cost
of
construction
is
what
it
is.
We
have
a
team
of
experienced,
it's
really
experience,
putting
these
projects
together
and
are
excited
about
the
opportunity
to
try
and
help
Revitalize
this
area
and
build
this
new
building.
J
D
I
K
D
Much
for
keeping
on
working
on
behalf
of
off
our
communities
and
I
appreciate
that
immensely
I
do
have
a
couple
of
questions
that
I
was
reading.
The
proposal,
as
staff
presented
it
to
us
and
my
questions
are
the
rents
that
are
shown
on
the
graph
of
income
and
expenses
towards
the
bottom,
and
it
was
very
small
script,
so
I
had
to
kind
of
enlarge
it.
D
Quite
a
bit
seemed
to
me
to
to
reflect
way
below
Market
rents
and
I
know
that
when
either
Cook
County
or
the
Illinois
Department
of
Housing
issues
vouchers,
they
pay
some
very
close
to
Market
rent.
So
I
I
was
wondering
why
your
estimates
are
so
low
and
I
didn't
know.
I
was
going
to
see
you
so
so.
Why
are
you
rent
so
low?
That's
one
of
my
questions
and,
and
then
my
other
part
of
the
question
has
been
answered,
though,
either
on
the
presentation
or
on
the
submission
of
staff.
D
So
I'll
leave
my
question
on
that
for
it.
But
I
have
some
other
questions
about
the
presentation
that
staff
sent
to
us
in
terms
of
where
the
funds
come
from
and
how
are
they
formatted
and
something
that
I
don't
understand
and
I
just
would
like
to
have
Clarity
before
we
come
to
pass
enough
of
this
as
a
as
a
committee
right.
D
J
D
F
J
Encounters
the
way
Ida
has
its
application.
It's
it
it's
sort
of
complicated.
Those
are
the
really
really
small
numbers
that
comes
directly
from
the
application,
so
I'm
sharing
the
same
numbers
with
everybody,
so
you're,
seeing
the
same
numbers
that
I
just
saw
but
reading
those
those
numbers,
it's
sort
of
a
complicated
chart
that
they
put
together,
but
it's
structured
so
that
no
more
than
25
percent
of
the
units
would
have
the
vouchers
and
the
rest
of
the
rents
would
be
fully
paid
by
the
tenants.
L
Sorry,
I'm
Lauren
Berlin
and
my
housing
experience
is
mostly
on
the
home
ownership
side,
not
on
rental.
So
excuse
me
if
this
is
a
a
question.
I
should
know,
but
I
I'm
just
very
curious,
based
on,
if
I'm
understanding,
what
you're
saying
correctly
I'm
curious,
given
that
vouchers
allow
you
to
potentially
have
higher
rents
and
given
that
you
want
this
to
be
long-term,
affordable,
why
is
there
Rel?
K
J
The
goal
really
is
to
be
able
to
serve
households
with
lower
incomes
without
the
vouchers.
Yes,
we
underwrite
it
so
that
it
is
Affordable
whether
the
vouchers
come
and
go,
and
we
also
don't
want
to
predominance
about
yours
in
the
building.
They're
sort
of
that's
just
a
policy
that
we
have
is,
as
people
talk
about
buildings
being
entirely
vouchered.
L
A
M
M
I
understand
that
we
can
approach
funding
this
through
Tiff
or
other
City
sources,
but
Mary
and
I'll
need
you
to
back
me
up
on
this.
When
we,
when
we
collaborated
late.
Last
week,
we
had
a
structure
where
I
believe
we
are
bringing
in
a
potential
three
million
dollars
of
Tiff.
Correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
on
that.
F
Marianne
yeah
that's
correct
for
millions
of
Tiff
and
then
1
million
from
the
affordable
housing
fund,
with
the
understanding
that
what
we're
asking
tonight
is
an
approval
on
the
toll
amount
and
that
there
could
be
some
for
their
conversation
on
actual
funding
sources,
because
there
is
a
potential
for
arpa
funding
to
replace
a
certain
amount
of
the
Tiff.
Thank.
M
You
so
I
I,
just
I
wanted
that
to
be
to
be
specified,
because
you
know
we
I
want
I
do
want
to
stress
that
we
do
have
the
Tiff
in
place
when
we
brought
this
forward
to
the
economic
development
community
in
City
Council
under
the
pro
previous
administration
and
even
under
the
current
city
council.
This
had
been
a
priority
and
it
has
been
in
the
pipeline
to
be
funded
with
some
level
of
Tiff.
It's
an
important
project.
M
It's
been
ongoing
for
months
and
months
and
Richard
I
know
Richard
Koenig
literally
takes
calls
from
Alderman
or
council
members
at
11
PM
I've
seen
it
we've
been
working
hard,
so
we
we,
as
staff,
are
really
recommending
that
we
hold
tight
and
keep
this
as
a
top
priority
so
and
I'm.
Stressing
this
for
a
reason
and
Sarah
I'll.
M
Let
you
jump
in
in
just
a
second
I
want
I
want
to
stress
that,
once
we
commit
that
that
three
million
dollars
from
the
West
Evanston
TIF
district
and
we
accommodate
some
of
the
infrastructure
planning,
that's
already
underway
in
that
TIF
district,
including
lead,
pipe
replacement,
water
main
improvements
in
the
West
End
Etc.
We
are
going
to
really
have
this
Tiff
tapped
out.
There
will
not
be
additional
funds
for
other
projects.
M
A
A
N
N
And
so,
interestingly
enough,
if
we
had
had
the
apartments
right
on
that
corner,
we
would
be
asking
for
more
variances
and
changes
from
the
West,
Evanston
master
plan
and
so
I
think
it's
a
really
creative
way
of
using
property,
but
also
having
two
organizations
that
have
done
a
great
deal
in
our
community
to
continue
to
expand
their
mission.
Because
Mount
Pisgah
had
had
its
goal
of
rebuilding
its
church.
And
this.
N
N
One
of
the
things
we
talked
about
was
how,
in
July,
Treasury
and
HUD
got
together
and
figured
out
how
to
release
new
guidance
that
made
it
much
more
possible
and
practical
to
layer,
arpa
in
with
tax
credits
and
other
traditional
sources
for
affordable
housing,
and
one
of
those
was
they
said.
Oh
you
know
that
stuff
about
how
we
said
you
couldn't
use
loans
unless
they
were
all
paid
off
in
by
2026.
They
said
the
the
reason
treasury
had
such
restrictions
is.
N
Treasury
does
not
have
a
system
for
monitoring
things
like
housing
projects
over
20
or
30
or
40
or
whatever
years,
and
so
by
working
with
HUD
and
other
providers
that
are
already
providing
the
monitoring
to
ensure
that
those
properties
are
retained
as
affordable.
That's
one
of
the
reasons
they
said:
hey,
oh
good,
existing
organizations
will
be
doing
the
heavy
lifting,
and
so
they
have
said
any
well
there.
There
are
a
number
of
enumerated
Housing
Programs,
the
low-income
housing
tax
credit
program
is
one
of
them
home
investment.
N
N
Is
why
we
were
asking
the
committee
to
consider
the
funding
request,
but
not
lock
into
sources
by
using
arpa
for
part
of
the
housing
cost
arpa
would
not
be
used,
was
not
recommended
for
the
commercial,
the
retail,
commercial
or
the
parking
it
would
be
basically
layering
arpa
with
affordable
housing
fund
on
the
actual
housing
unit.
So
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
right
why
this
is
sort
of
coming
out
of
the
blue,
where
it
may
seem
like
it's
coming
out
of
blue.
O
Yes
and
I'll
turn
my
camera
on
at
the
request.
Sorry
I'm
double
tasking
now
at
Joel,
but
so
I
am
just
for
staff
if
Paul
or
Sarah
can
give
a
bit
of
background
so
there
there
are
city-owned
properties
involved
in
this
correct
in
this
deal,
and
and
what
did
we
pay
for
those
City
owned
properties?
Do
we
have
the
price
tag
and
my
apologies,
if
that
happens,
to
be
in
the
memo
I
didn't
see
it.
No.
N
N
It
was
not
a
great
deal
of
money
because
they
were
paid
for
during
the
Great
Recession
following
the
mortgage
meltdown,
but
we
paid
only
the
a
relatively
small
amount
of
legal
fees
to
get
the
primary
lot,
which
is
the
corner
lot,
because
that
was
negotiated
as
a
fee
and
lieu
of
foreclosure,
and
we
that
through
it
wasn't,
we
didn't
get
it
as
a
through
the
no
cash
bid
process.
But
we
got
it
through
the
Cook
County
nope
cash
bid
process.
N
N
M
M
M
N
O
Yeah,
what
I'm
one?
Let
me
first
state
this
I'm
I'm.
Quite
supportive
of
this
I
think
the
need
for
affordable
housing
is
clear.
I.
Just
for
my
three
colleagues,
particularly
two
colleagues,
are
on
the
council.
What
I,
what
I
wanted
to
lay
out
is
and
we're
talking
about.
So
all
in
the
city.
You
know
if
we
were
to
Grant
the
full
amount,
that's
being
requested
here,
which
is
4.5
million
dollars.
O
F
F
O
O
I
I
I
had
a
questions.
You
know
it
says
we're
going
to
take
three
million
dollars
out
of
the
tip
and
there's
two
million
in
there.
So
the
tip
keeps
accruing
some
money
every
year,
then
that
there
would
be
the
three
million
dollars
there
to
for
them
to
receive
and
then
and
then
I
assume
on
the
affordable
housing
fund.
That
amount
goes
up
a
continual
basis.
Do
we
have
an
estimate
of
how
much
might
be
added
this
year
to
the
affordable
housing
fund?
I
M
M
N
N
The
legal
fees
that
for
when
we're
getting
properties
through
things
like
the
no
cash
bid,
those
that
are
likely
housing
location,
those
fees
are
paid
out
of
the
affordable
housing
fund,
but
that
is,
you
know,
probably
under
ten
thousand
dollars
a
year.
So
that's
not
a
ton
of
money,
but
we,
it
isn't
replenishing
right
now
very
rapidly.
So
we've
got
to
look
at
work
on
that
right.
A
F
E
Thanks
chair,
Ravel
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
understand
this
will
deplete
the
inclusionary
housing
fund,
but
to
get
44
units
of
affordable
housing
and
some
very
deeply
affordable
housing
at
30
percent
of
Ami
and
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
it
is
a
supported,
housing
or
Supportive
Housing
for
special
needs
population.
If
I'm
wrong
on
that,
let
me
know
Richard.
It's.
A
D
D
I'm
sure
that's
just
a
type
of
sort,
so
my
question
is
in
regards
to
Evanston
residence
priority
for
the
occupancy
of
these
residences.
I
happen
to
be
walking.
My
dog
last
week
and
I
ran
into
a
resident
of
another
project
in
Evanston
that,
during
the
conversation,
I
learned
that
it
was
someone
who
was
living
in
Schaumburg,
not
in
Evanston.
D
So
it
kind
of
it
kind
of
took
me
took
me
by
surprise
and
and
I
go
well
Welcome
to
our
community,
of
course,
and
and
I
was
really
glad
that
somebody
that
could
get
the
benefit
of
of
that
beautiful,
affordable
housing
on
our
street,
the
Anne
Rainey
Apartments,
but
I
it
really.
It
made
me
think
that
you
know
Evanston
is
brunt
in
the
cost
brunt
in
the
all.
D
The
implications
that
have
to
have
the
residents
in
our
community
welcome
them
to
our
community
and
make
sure
that
they
are
taking
care
at
at
the
level
that
we
would
like
to
have
them
taken
care
of.
So
I
also
would
like
to
hear
that
there
is
an
assurance
that
there
will
be
Evanston
residence
first
choice,
if
at
all
possible
and
when
possible,
foreign.
J
Yes,
so
that
is
something
that
we
have
specifically
requested
for
this
project
would
be
to
have
a
preference
for
Evanston
residents
over
others.
Current
federal,
fair
housing
laws
do
not
allow
those
types
of
preferences,
as
you
can
imagine,
there
are
some
communities
where
that
would
be
very
exclusionary,
so
federal,
fair
housing
laws
currently
specifically
prohibit
that
we
have
specifically
asked
if
we
would
be
allowed
based
on
evanston's
particular
circumstances
if
we
could
actually
use
that
preference
for
Evanston
residents
here
in
this
project.
N
I'm
out
of
the
office
and
so
I'm
I
apologize
because
I
don't
have
my
camera
on
and
I.
Also
can't
all
this
access
all
my
files,
but
we
you
know
we
we
really
did
have
a
pretty
substantial
list
for
each
of
those
properties
and
we
did
not
get
everybody
to
be
Evanston
residents,
but
we
got
a
significant
number.
I.
Also
wanna
point
out
that
one
of
the
things
we
sometimes
do
is
we
find
out.
Even
when
we
have
a
local
preference,
it
doesn't
always
take
care
of
everything
we
wish.
N
We
had
thought
of,
or
or
or
our
our
residents.
We
were
allowed
by
Hud
to
have
a
preference
for
Evanston
residents
in
the
scattered
site,
acquisition
and
Rehab
of
our
neighborhood
stabilization
program,
and
we
set
that
preference
for
people
who
lived
in
Evanston
worked
in
Evanston
or
had
there
was
some
family
relationship.
N
I
K
I
A
I
A
L
P
N
But
it
is
a
very,
very
eligible
use
since
treasury
worked
with
HUD
and
figured
out
how
to
more
effectively
use
the
arpa
funding
for
affordable
housing
by
layering
it
in
with
other
approved
programs
like
tax
credits,
that
the
long-term
compliance
and
assurance
that
the
money
stays
in
the
affordable
housing
Fund
in
in
the
affordable
housing
use.
Excuse
me
is
taken
care
of
by
by
Hud
or
other
agencies.
That
was
that
was
one
of
the
big
reasons.
Treasury
originally
did
not
have
any
traditional
loans
as
a
way
of
funding.
Housing.
P
I
N
So
we
all
know
what
we're
what
this
motion
is.
We
are
absolutely
recommending
a
million
from
the
affordable
housing
fund,
we're
absolutely
recommending
a
million
and
a
half
from
Tiff
for
the
commercial
portion
and
the
parking,
the
remaining
million
and
a
half.
We
see
one
of
two
sources,
one
is
Tiff,
but
that
would
really
strain
the
Tiff
of
money
for
other
things
and
the
other
is
arpa,
because
we
have
a
little
over
five
million
of
arpa.
That
is
unallocated
at
this
time.
Okay,.
N
I
B
E
N
A
A
A
J
Q
F
K
Good
evening,
good
evening,
first
I'm,
appalled
by
the
current
vote
that
you
just
did
knowing
that
the
majority
of
residents
in
my
community
do
not
want
this
development.
You
have
not
done
a
traffic
study.
You
have
not
done
any
kinds
of
studies
of
the
people
who
will
be
adversely
affected
by
this
development.
I'm
ashamed
of
every
one
of
you
that
voted
for
this
today,
you
have
as
a
slap
to
the
face
through
the
members
of
Fifth
Ward
who
live
within
a
one
thousand
feet
of
this
monstrosity
that
you
have
approved
for
funding.
K
Secondly,
the
other
thing
I
want
to
say
is
that
it
has
not
been
approved.
It's
still
up
to
be
discussed
in
February.
How
dare
you
approve
something
that
has
not
even
been
approved
by
the
city?
I'm,
just
very,
very
upset
at
this
discussion
that
you
are
having
today
and
secondly,
as
far
as
the
small
landlords
I
wish,
there
was
some
way
that
you
could
have
some
kinds
of
applications
that
would
benefit
us
who
have
had
a
severe
loss
through
covid-19.
K
A
Thank
you,
okay,
so
to
approach
our
next
topic,
I
propose
that
we
have
two
motions.
The
first
motion
would
be
that
we
discuss
the
maximum
number
of
rental
units
that
we
want
to
consider
to
be
eligible
for
the
small
and
medium
landlord
program,
and
then
once
we
have
that
discussion,
then
we
could
have
a
motion
for
the
actual
number
that
we
seem
to
be
agreeing
on.
So
if
I
could
have
a
motion
to
get
a
starter
discussion.
O
D
A
C
So
we
decided,
or
the
task
force
decided
that
35
kind
of
was
like
the
the
happy
medium
based
on
the
national
and
local
trends
that
we
found
and
fast
forward
to
to
that
request
to
that
meeting
in
November,
the
committee
asked
us
to
narrow
down
the
the
the
data
analysis
to
specific
census.
Tracts
were
naturally
occurring.
Affordable
housing
would
be
present
which
were
80,
92,
8102
and
8103.01.
C
D
To
be
the
first
one
all
the
time,
but
a
couple
of
points
on
this
one,
and
it
is
that
I
was
not
necessarily
agreeing
with
what
the
task
force
presented
to
the
count
to
the
committee
in
November
and
I
believe
that
I
was
not
present
at
that
meeting.
But
I
have
always
been
under
the
impression
and
of
the
opinion
that
smaller
lenders
suffer
a
greater
loss.
D
Every
time
one
of
the
units
fails
to
pay
the
rent
compared
to
somebody
who
owns
30
units
to
someone
who
owns
two
units,
if
I
miss
my
other
unit
payment,
if
I'm
a
owner
occupant
of
a
building
of
a
two
flat,
I
I
lost
50
of
the
rental
income
of
that
building
of
my
units,
but
if
I
lost
one
out
of
30
I
lost
three
percent
of
of
my
rental
income.
If
I
lost
three
of
the
units,
income
I
lost
less
than
I
lost
less
than
10
percent
of
my
rental
income.
D
So
I
do
have
a
a
real
bias
position
on
on
on
this
very
small
landlords,
and
if
there
is
enough
money
to
go
after,
we
compensate
those
landlords
that
really
had
the
greater
loss,
then
so
be
it
happy
for
everybody,
then
that
the
medium
landlords
get
some
of
the
money.
That's
absolutely
great,
but
I,
don't
think
so,
especially
even
the
overwhelming
numbers
of
mom
and
pop
as
we're
calling
them
operations
that
we
have
in
the
City
of
Evanston.
D
P
P
Really
nothing
I
I,
don't
I,
guess:
there's
no
great
conflict
if
it
was
meant
to
be
30
or
35
right
from
the
beginning,
because
I
agree
with
that.
I
think
it
should.
You
know,
remain
at
30
or
35..
I've
said
during
all
of
our
our
calls
that
I
think
that
first
instinct
or
some
of
that
initial
research
that
that
led
us
to
say
30
or
35
was
the
right
one
and
we
should
you
know
I
would
have
supported
just
continuing
to
cap
it
at
30
or
35
units.
O
I
mean
in
part
our
working
group
was
actually
are
going
to
suggest
lower
than
that
based
on
and
Anna.
You
know,
you'd
be
the
person
who
knows
this
best,
but
based
on
previous
programs
and
standards,
which
you
know
typically
a
small
landlord
I
think
from
our
early
research
from
Anna's
early
research
and
marianism
early
research,
a
small
landlord
is
typically
much
smaller
than
30
years
and
so
I
think
you
know,
I
almost
think
that
the
question
is
in
the
inverse.
How
did
we
get.
F
F
F
What
did
happen
is
that
the
suggestion
was
made
for
35
and
it
did
get
lower
during
hddc
committee.
Conversation
based
on
some
members
of
the
committee,
one
in
two
skew
smaller
I
will
say
that
one
thing
to
really
understand
is
that
we're
working
with
local
data,
that's
really
rough.
First
of
all,
and
even
on
all
the
trends
most
of
the
data
that's
kept
about
properties
and
about
landlords
is
building
based,
it's
property
based
and
it's
built
environment-based.
F
F
One
of
the
reason
why
we
suggested,
including
some
of
the
medium
landlords
in
this
program
as
well,
is
because
a
they're
still
the
same
threshold
of
fifteen
thousand
dollars.
Yes,
there
could
be
a
bigger
impact
on
some
of
the
small
landlord,
but
even
in
our
survey,
despite
the
fact
that
there
was
a
very
small
number
in
our
local
survey,
we
didn't
see
at
all
what
we
expected
to
see
there.
F
There
were
people
that
had
more
units
that
were
showing
a
higher
impact
than
there
were
people
that
had
very
small
number
of
unit
that
had
an
impact,
though
that
was
very
small
or
no
impact
at
all.
So
our
local
data
wasn't
necessarily
showing
that
owning
just
one
unit
or
two
units,
or
just
a
few,
was
a
clear
correlation
to
having
a
big
loss
or
more
impactful
loss.
F
I
do
not
disagree
with
Hugo
that,
of
course,
if
you
only
have
one
unit
and
somebody
didn't
pay
for
a
year
or
something
like
that,
that
would
be
a
much
bigger
impact.
But
there
was
also
some
notion
of
potentially
the
fact
that
in
our
survey
we
included
The
Mention
Of
rental,
having
received
rental
assistance
and
a
lot
of
some
of
the
people
that
responded
had
received
rental
assistance
to
cover
some
of
those
loss.
P
P
F
P
F
So
we
ended
up
with
us,
focusing
on
census,
track
on
the
census
tract
that
we
we're
looking
at
right
now,
which
are
showing
a
very
high
impact
for
covid-19,
are
showing
a
higher
level
of
affordable
housing,
and
so
that
was
kind
of
why
we
ended
up
with
that
process,
because
it's
very
difficult.
There
is
also
the
fact
that
to
be
eligible
at
all
for
the
program,
the
landlord
has
to
show
a
loss
of
income.
F
P
P
C
Wanted
to
to
just
highlight
that
there
are
contingencies
for
those
medium
landlords
to
make
sure
that
we
are
Distributing
the
the
funding
equally
or
equitably
to
those
medium
landlords
and
to
the
small
and
very
small
landlords.
So
that's
why
the
funding
cap
is
there
and
that's
why
we're
requiring
them
to
document
their
losses.
E
P
That
there
were
less
Property
Owners
with
between
whatever
the
I
don't
know
what
the
threshold
was
20
to
30
or
whatever
it
is
I
think
we
it.
We
determined
that
it
was
more.
But
again
we
didn't
determine
the
need
between
the
two
and
that's
that's
been
my
concern.
The
whole
time
that
to
me
that
just
says
yes,
there's
more
of
this
kind
of
landlord,
but
it
doesn't
say
that
the
need
is
greater.
You
know,
among
these
landlords
and
other
landlords
and
I
think
anecdotally.
P
What
what
not
only
we've
heard
on
this
call
from
from
the
speakers,
landlords
that
have
come
to
speak,
but
also
just
anecdotally.
What
I've
heard
in
the
community
from
having
different
discussions
with
landlords
is
that
I
do
think
the
need
has
and
and
the
difficulty
that
kovic
created
has
been
shared
across
all
levels
of
of
property,
ownership
and
units,
especially
in
the
areas.
H
P
O
O
Then
I
don't
want
to
get
off
topic
here,
but
separate
I'll
just
mention
this
quickly
is
I.
Would
love
for
us
to
maybe
separately
make
a
motion
to
name
this,
the
residential
rental
providers?
You
know
Assistance
or
whatever,
instead
of
I,
think
we
should
move
away
from
the
very
Antiquated
term
landlord?
L
We
do
know
that
that
is
probably
their
income
and
we
don't
know
what
that
looks
like
that's
not
necessary.
So
I
just
want
to
say
I
think
we
should
be
careful
on
both
sides
about
making
assumptions
about
what
the
unit
count
says
about
the
property
owner's
need
for
the
income.
I
think
you
know
another
point
I
want
to
make
is
and
just
in
case
I
think
we
should
also
be
careful.
As
a
group
like
you
know,
it
may
be
that
someone
owns
well
that
doesn't
matter
the
other
point.
L
L
I
think
that
we
are
equally
indebted
to
them,
making
sure
that
we
have
affordable
rental
housing
as
we
are
to
a
smaller
residential
owner
or
whatever
it
is
that
council
member
Reed
is
using
I'm
with
you
in
spirit
on
this
Council
memory.
I
just
can't
remember
the
terminology
so
and
I
think
calling
it
small
and
medium
is
important.
Maybe
if
we
want
to
use
that
to
signify
that
this
is
not
just
micro
or
small
landlords,.
D
D
L
D
There's
certain
thing:
numbers
also
Lauren
in
that
sense
that
somebody
who
has
twenty
seven
thousand
dollars
has
a
lot
more
free
income
from
that
from
that
income.
But
if
we
go
to
also
math
on
the
number
of
units
that
are
owned
by
owners
who
have
one
to
four
units
in
their
portfolio,
it's
540
and
I.
Think
Anna
or
Mario
mentioned
that
this
is
pretty
rough
data
where
we
are
presented
here
with.
So
let's
give
a
margin
of
ten
percent
of
error
to
that.
D
So
we're
talking
about
let
53
units
less
so
we're
now
at
489
units
for
one
one
unit
and
because
I'm
deducting
that,
so
10
of
5
will
be
half
a
unit
so
we're
at
four
and
a
half
on
the
medium.
So
let's
do
the
proportionate
and
let's
give
the
proportionate
amount
to
the
500
or
480
or
540,
whatever
units
we
decide
to,
but
do
it
mathematically
and
we
will
give
the
bulk
of
the
funds
that
we
have
in
proportion
to
the
owners
of
the
one
to
four
units.
D
So
if
we
see
it
as
debt
and
math
is
very
simple,
then
we
have
to
give
it
to
the
majority
of
owners,
which
are
very
small
owners,
and
if
there
are
no
claimers
to
that
money,
then
let's
move
up.
Let's
move
up
to
more
units
and
more
units
and
more
units,
whatever
money
we
have
left
but
I
think
that
that
will
be
more
of
a
social
justice
if
you
will
also,
along
with
aid
for
the
loss
of
income
due
to
covet.
So
that
is
my
comment.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
your
patience
with
me.
E
Q
E
To
there
there
isn't
usually
a
real
big
profit
margin
there,
the
expenses
to
maintain
and
operate
those
units
is
a
big
chunk
of
that
income.
So
you
can
really
I
mean
I.
Think
Lauren
has
a
good
point
in
saying
that
somebody
it's
possible
that
somebody
who
owns
a
four
unit
building
that
that
is
their
entire
income,
it's
possible,
but
it's
also
possible
that
some
of
you
who
owns
a
tooth
flat
may
have
a
day
job,
so
there's
so
many
nuances
to
this
and
eat
like.
Even
though
there's
more
that's
just
our
housing
stock.
E
E
That's
that's,
probably
their
primary
source
of
income,
so
the
nuances
are
all
over
the
place
and
I
know
we're
all
talking
about
them,
but
I
really
advise
against
having
reduction
or
a
preference
for
smaller
landlords,
because
it
really,
as
councilman
Byrne
said
and
others
have
said,
it's
a
needs
test.
Somebody
who
has
all
their
Inc
exactly
and
and
residential
property
ownership.
Q
P
That
that
you
purchase,
if
it
was
priced,
you
know
below
a
market
value
and
or
market
price
and
and
and
you
can
increase
the
rents
I
see
it
all
the
time
there
was
a
property
on
Jackson
not
too
long
ago,
where
the
owners
came
in
and
immediately
increased
the
rent
by
three
hundred
dollars
and
and
they
were
still
under
like
what
they
could
get
for
it.
That's
that's
not
even
all
they
can
raise
it
for
and.
H
O
F
No,
that
was
that
was
discussed
quite
a
lot,
because
there
was
a
desire
to
try
to
find
a
way
to
include
that.
It
creates
a
lot
of
complexity
because
it
requires
getting
all
the
leases
and
checking
them
and
making
sure
that
we
have
the
size
of
the
units
and
deciding
what
is
an
affordable
rent
for
those
areas.
F
So
that's
the
reason
why
we
chose
the
census
track,
we're
choosing
because
they
are
the
most
affordable
match.
They
have
the
most
naturally
affordable
housing
in
the
area
amongst
the
fat
outside
of
the
fact
that
they've,
also
on
top
of
that,
are
the
one
that
are
the
most
impacted
by
a
lot
of
factors,
including
covid,
which
does
make
sense.
But
yeah.
O
Okay,
I
just
want
to
be
sure
of
that,
because
I
I
do
want
to
highlight
that
just
the
existence
of
residential
property
providers
or
landlords
necessarily
increases
the
cost
of
housing
and
necessarily
those
folks,
you
know
yeah
their
profit
may
not
be
their.
You
know,
month-to-month
profit
may
not
be
wonderful,
but
essentially
they're
getting
an
asset
that
other
people
are
paying
for
that
they
get
to
cash
out
on.
O
You
know
in
15
20
30
years,
and
they
have
you
know:
Million
Dollar,
Plus
property
at
the
end
of
it
that's
been
paid
for
by
other
people,
and
they
get
to
to
to
to
enjoy
that,
and
so
I
just
want
to.
You
know
make
sure
that
we're
you
know
really
honing
in
on
those
folks
who
are
not
these
huge
landlords
who
are
essentially
driving
up
the
cost
of
housing
and
in
many
in
in
almost
every
case,
just
by
the
nature
of
what
it
means
to
be
a
landlord.
So
that's
it.
Okay.
A
O
I
move
that
we
increase
the
threshold
for
the
residential
rental
provider
for
the
media
for
the
small
and
medium
residential
rental
provider
funds.
They
increase
the
threshold
to
35
units
for
the
maximum
number
of
units
to
to
qualify.
Okay.
That
was
not
a
clear
motion,
but
I
think
everything
was
captured
there
right.
A
E
O
F
Yes,
so
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
this
is
going
to
be
just
a
quick
kind
of
catch
up
on
what
has
happened
in
previous
episodes.
We'll
say
the
meat
of
the
this
is
meant
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
context
so
that
when
we
come
back
in
Future
meetings,
you
understand
what
has
happened
in
the
past
and
we
can
have
some
some
conversation.
F
So
what
we're
going
to
be
considering,
amongst
other
things,
is
going
to
be
the
Crook
County
lender
attendant
ordinance
that
was
effective
in
June,
2021
and
LCP.
Patient
has
had
a
role
within
the
update
of
this
ordinance
and
had
provided
to
us
and
presented
to
the
housing
and
homelessness
commission
back
in
2021
kind
of
the
difference
between
where
Evanston
was
and
where
Cook
County,
Cook
County's
ordinance
was
going
to.
D
O
I
I
do
want
to
flag,
as
account
as
the
council
member,
who
have
made
the
referral
regarding
just
cause
eviction,
and
you
know
some
of
that
was
highlighted
recently
in
the
media,
with
there's
an
Evanston
now
blog
story
about
some
folks
who
were
forced
out
of
who
feel
forced
out
of
their
housing
because
of
increased
rate
now.
Just
cause
may
not
fully
have
covered
this
incident,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that's
not
falling
off
of
the
radar,
because.
F
Okay,
so
the
suggestion
that
we're
initially
brought
to
hhc
so
the
housing
and
homelessness
Commission
in
2021
are
there's
a
summary
here
on
your
screen,
but
essentially
it
included
the
prohibition
of
existence,
move-in
fee
kind
of
limits
on
late
fees
and
looking
at
how
security
deposits
are
taken
and
how
they're
kept
interest
on
them.
Whether
there's
new
practices
that
kind
of
rename
them
in
place
of
security,
deposit
to
kind
of
go
around
any
kind
of
legislation
addressing
foreclosure
and
utility
disclosure.
F
F
It's
very
verbose
and
a
lot
of
Legally
so
trying
to
make
this
information
very
easy
to
access
and
very
clear,
would
probably
help
in
the
success
of
any
of
those
changes
and
then,
of
course,
updating
the
model
lease
and
addendum
and
any
kind
of
any
kind
of
documentation.
That's
supporting
all
those
changes
to
make
sure
that
we're
completely
aligned
throughout
all
our
different
ordinances
and
it's
clear
and
easy
to
understand
for
everybody,
landlord
and
tenants
and
including
the
just
housing
Amendment
protections.
F
So
there
was
quite
a
lot
of
items
that
could
be
reviewed
as
part
of
this
conversation.
This
is
not
necessarily
a
quick
one
meeting
conversation.
It
requires
some
discussion
to
make
sure
that
we're
really
including
everything
that
we
would
want
to,
but
back
then
this
is
the
key
points
that
were
brought
as
suggestion
to
review
for
any
kind
of
updates
to
the
ordinance
on
the
next
slide.
Since
then,
we've
had
several
referrals
and
there's
additional
things
to
consider.
That
would
be
part
of
the
conversation
and
I.
F
Okay,
so
one
other
thing
that
is
important
to
consider
is,
of
course,
balancing
the
needs
of
landlords
with
the
needs
of
the
tenants,
but
also
a
few
other
things
that
have
been
topic
of
conversation
since
2021.
That
should
also
be
considered.
One
is
the
referral
for
from
council
member,
read
Around
Just
Cause
eviction
and
limiting
no
fault
depictions.
N
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
one
of
the
things
that
we
really
want
to
make
sure
of
is
that
we
get
all
of
these
there's
there's
so
many
different
things,
but
to
get
really
a
comprehensive
update
to
our
landlord-10
ordinance,
because
one
of
the
really
not
good
things
would
be.
If
we
made
a
lot
of
successive
changes
to
the
same
ordinance,
it
would
be
frustrating
for
our
landlords.
N
A
F
D
Thank
you
again
for
the
Indulgence
to
be.
First
Marion
responded
to
one
of
my
questions,
which
was
going
to
be
to
have
the
documentation
that
they're
talking
about
here
being
the
landlord
tenant
ordinance
the
the
current
model,
lease
which
I
still
don't
understand
what
is
called
Model
lease.
It
feels
like
every
time
we
give
it
to
a
tenant,
we're
giving
them
something
that
is
just
a
model
to
follow
instead
of
a
an
actual
lease.
D
So
perhaps
one
of
the
changes
could
be
the
name
of
it,
and
my
second
question,
then,
is:
what
is
the
time
frame
for
us
to
approve
all
these,
because
it?
It
is
a
lot
of
information.
It
is
a
lot
of
information
not
only
from
what
we
already
have,
but
what
we're
going
to
be
getting
from
other
entities
like
the
Cook
County
organizations
about
landlord
and
tenants
and
as
well
as
the
Chicago,
landlord
and
tenant
ordinance,
which
is
one
that
we
tend
to
mirror
quite
a
bit.
D
F
F
So
the
ideal
goal
is
the
next
six
months,
but
I
also
want
to
be
realistic
as
far
as
what
we're
asking
from
the
committee
and
how
long
our
meetings
have
been
right
in
the
recent
times,
but
that's
a
goal
so
I
would
expect
that
we
would
have
several
a
couple
meetings,
at
least
with
time
for
discussion.
This
isn't
something
that
I
would
want
to
throw
out
for
a
single
discussion
and
vote
yeah.
A
O
I
just
want
to
you
know:
I
I
I
think
that
maybe
councilman
had
a
Titus
and
I
can
get
together.
I
think
the
just
cause
eviction
ordinance
captures
a
lot
of
at
least
one
of
the
two
referrals
that
he
made,
and
so
maybe
it
can
be
wrapped
in
all
of
it.
Maybe
can
be
wrapped
into
one
ordinance
and
just
view
it
as
a
package.
I
really
appreciate
the
idea
of
trying
to
move
this.
O
So
yeah
I
just
want
to
note
that,
and
so
maybe
we
can
help
condense,
that
down
to
one
ordinance
and
I
do
think.
Typically,
while
just
cause
eviction,
ordinances
or
the
no-fault
to
fiction
ordinances
are
fairly
new,
you
know
I
think
there's
some
really
good
examples
of
ordinances
that
include
all
of
that
and
then
lastly,.
F
To
respond
to
that,
actually
one
thing
that
staff
would
find
really
helpful
is,
if
there's
a
desire
to
make
a
shared
referral
from
the
various
council
member
on
on
this
committee,
so
that
staff
is
clear
direction,
that
this
is
a
project
that
we
can
work
on
and
put
time
on.
That
would
be
really
helpful.
Yeah.
O
P
Yeah
I
guess
I'm
trying
to
it.
Maybe
it's
for
this
committee
to
determine
but
get
a
better
sense
of
a
timeline
as
well.
I
I
know
one
of
this.
What
was
just
I
think
suggested
as
a
possibility
is
that
we
will
move
them
separately,
I
think
or
we
would
do
one
at
a
time.
You
know
discuss
one
at
each
meeting.
I
guess
I
am
trying
to
get
a
better
sense
of
how
we're
going
to
prioritize
these
three
or
four.
F
Think
that
the
way
we
piece
it
out
in
our
conversation
doesn't
necessarily
need
to
mirror
the
way
it's
going
to
be
enacted
and
how
it's
going
to
going
to
be
organized
in
the
ordinance
I.
Think
I
I
would
want
to
understand
a
legal's
perspective
on
this,
but
I
would
suggest
that
we
combine
specific
topics
together.
E
N
I,
do
also
just
want
to
raise
the
point
that
we
do
have.
You
know
open
communities,
MTO
lawyers
committee
for
better
housing.
These
organizations
are
all
very
anxious
to
work
with
us
on
this
too,
and
they
have
a
lot
of
experience,
trying
to
pull
it
together
in
a
reasonable
way
and
I
think
that
what
we
can
maybe
do
is
sort
of
outline
what
seems
to
be,
as
Marion
was
just
talking,
maybe
grouping
certain
types
of
things
and
then
providing
them
to
the
committee
in
the
in
in
those
groupings.
N
D
N
It's
a
lot
of
different
things,
and-
and
there
is
a
possibility,
I
mean
because
even
you
know,
when
we
put
the
just
how
the
just
housing
is
in
the
human
is
in
the
in
the
excuse
me
in
our
fair
housing
ordinance
in
Cook
County
it's
in
their
human
rights
ordinance,
so
some
of
these
things
can
be
put
in
different
places.
I
think
we
just
have
to
figure
out
what
makes
the
most
sense
to
you
know:
I
I,
don't
think,
there's
a
absolute
right
or
wrong.
N
L
For
me,
that
would
be
a
very
helpful
way
to
organize
it
and,
of
course
there
might
be
some
subjects
that
overlap
like
deposit
security
deposit
would
show
up
at
the
beginning
and
also
at
the
end,
but
I
mean
in
home
ownership.
We
talk
a
lot
about
the
life
cycle
of
the
homeowner
and
home
ownership
as
a
life
cycle
and
so
I'm.
Imagining
that
a
tenant,
it
has
a
similar
life
cycle,
so
that
would
help
me
to
keep
it
very
linear,
just
just
a
thought.
Okay,.
B
B
It
is,
but
it
does
make
sense.
Like
conversation
wise
to
maybe
group,
the
group
The
similar
subjects
together,
so
we
can
kind
of
land
either
on,
like
you
know,
agreed
like
time
frame
because
it
you
know
it's
you
know
about
comparing
what
you
know
Chicago,
where
it's
like.
You
know
how
much
notice
and
if
we
want
to
be
increase
those
numbers
or
decrease
it's
all.
B
D
D
Incredibly
and
all
of
that
that
comes
with
that
relationship,
but
it's
one
relationship,
so
I
would
like
to
suggest
that
we
keep
it
as
one
as
a
common
that
council
member
Reed
made
about
trying
to
accelerate
our
analyzes
of
just
cause
because
evanstonians
are
being
displaced.
As
we
are
talking
about
these
issues.
So
maybe
we
can
have
some.
D
A
A
F
A
F
I
had
mentioned
that
they
were
potentially
going
to
be
able
to
apply
for
additional
Grants
New
grants
that
I'd
have
been
putting
together,
and
that
led
us
to.
Maybe
consider
whether
this
could
be
an
option
to
finally
be
able
to
put
a
pilot
together
that,
with
this
new
source
of
funding,
we
could
try
for
a
year
or
two
to
see
how
forgivable
loans
were
working
and
what
kind
of
impact
that
could
have.
F
F
So
what
that
essentially
means
is
that
for
the
existing
grant
that
cepas
been
having,
we
used
to
have
a
valuation,
the
maximum
the
property
could
be
valued
at
was
330-ish
thousand
dollars
in
early
2022..
They
dropped
it
to
276.,
meanwhile,
properties
in
Evanston,
as
have
been
surging
their
valuation.
F
So
that
is
something
that
is
unfortunate
and
we
do
have
some
funding
available
currently
and
we're
going
to
continue
to
keep
getting
funds
coming
in
from
older
loans
that
are
coming
back
with
repayment.
But
if
we
go
to
forgivable
loans
right
now,
with
a
pilot,
we
do
run
a
certain
risk
of
depleting
the
funds.
F
F
I've
been
asking
that
question
multiple
ways
to
our
partners
at
cipa
and
in
other
ways
it
it
is
hard
to
understand,
especially
because,
in
a
lot
of
their
other
programs,
they've
raised
caps
to
follow
the
market.
So
this
is
something
we're
going
to
continue
to
ask,
but
at
this
time
I
have
not
gotten
a
clear
answer:
okay,
okay,
thank.
Q
I
was
going
to
say:
does
this
only
affect
the
money
that
we
were
thinking?
We
could
use
for
the
for
a
forgivable
program,
or
does
it
affect
some
of
the
other
programs?
We
talked
about
that
that
super
could
provide
Evanston
residents,
some
of
the
newer
ones
that
that
they
were
thinking
they
could
provide
evidence
to
residents.
F
So
the
new
one
in
question
is
the
one
that
they
are
not
100
sure.
Yet
what
cap
is
going
to
be
for
that
program
and
we're
waiting
to
hear
on
that?
The
existing
program,
such
as
the
hap
funds
and
the
other
one
that
used
to
be
the
I,
believe
it's
a
Safar,
but
it's
been
renamed
so
I'm
blanking
on
the
name,
those
existing
program
they're
both
affected
by
that
cap.
Yes,.
F
F
F
P
N
Then
we
we
use
some
entitlement
money,
but
we've
used
that
for
the
for
the
program
management
and
that
pays
for
the
construction
component.
I
mean
the
construction
management
by
sipa
and
our
Staffing
like
that.
Handles
intake
and
also
does
the
compliance,
because
we
have
to
keep
track
of
all
those
loans
and.
N
This
is
the
world
of
Hud,
it's
a
form
of
program
income,
but
normally,
when
you
get
program
income
in
on
cwg,
whatever
generates
the
income,
you
spend
it
on
the
next
eligible
activity,
whatever
it
is,
because
you
have
to
use
money
that
you
have
sitting
in
your
bank
account
before
you
draw
more
funds
from
the
federal
government,
but
with
a
revolving,
Loan
Fund.
You
in
essence
have
identified
that
for
a
specific
program
which
is
for
making
these
loans
for
housing
rehab.
And
that
means
you
don't
have
to
spend
it
first
on
anything
else.
P
N
I
N
It's
usually
paid
when
the
house
is
sold
or
when
the
in
some
cases,
that
is
when
the
owner
passes
away,
because
we
do
not
have.
We
have
very
few
amortizing
loans,
because
the
people
we're
helping
basically
can't
handle
Debt
Service.
That's
one
of
the
reasons
we
can
help
them.
I
mean
they.
They
just
won't
even
qualify
for
loans
for
what
they
need
to
do.
In
many
cases,
the
we
get
a
fair
number
of
the
total
loans
paid
back.
I
can't
give
I
honestly
don't
have
an
absolute.
We.
N
N
But
we
do
I
would
say
we
probably
get
at
least
80
percent
of
the
loans
repaid
over
time,
but
it
takes
it
can
be
very,
very
different
periods
of
times.
We
still
have
some
loans
that
were
written
in
the
1980s
because
they're
titled,
you
know
they're
deferred
they're,
title
transfer.
So
so
it
it's
that's
what
when
Marion
said?
We
don't?
We
can't
predict
when
we're
going
to
get
paid.
That
is
true.
D
You
left
me
last
this
time
yeah
a
couple
of
questions.
My
my
first
one
is
and
and
I'll
make
my
questions
a
lot
once,
if
you
don't
mind,
whoever
is
going
to
try
to
answer
me
if
the.
If
there
are
answers
at
this
time,
staff
is
unable
to
recommend
moving
to
forgivable
loans,
what
are
the
chances
of
that
change
say
from
high
to
medium?
If
that
is
the
case,
could
we
get
some
of
the
literature
for
us
to
get
familiar
with
conditions
for
those
loans
to
be
forgivable?
D
What
are
the
current
conditions
for
the
repayment
of
the
loans
and
I?
Would
then,
if
we're
moving
to
forgivable
loans,
I
would
move
that
those
loans
may
be
made
in
the
1980s
1990s
and
maybe
even
up
to
2010
to
be
automatically
forgiven.
If,
if
that
is
the
case,
that
we
come
to
that,
if
possible,
if
doable,
given
that
I
think
that
somebody
who
lives
in
the
property
for
10
years
deserves
to
have
those
loans
forgivable
if
we
are
entering
into
that
phase
in
our
community.
D
N
It's
really,
it
really
depends
on
finding
there
are.
We
want
to
look
to
see
if
there
are
other
sources
that
may
become
possible
for
us
to
use
through
our
rehab
program
and
the
Ida
funds
you
know
were
we
were
hoping
they
would
be
kind
of
the
big
promise
because
they
are
the
same
income
restrictions
and
that
sort
of
stuff,
but
but
this
this
cap
on
the
value
of
the
property
is
making
it
difficult
because
it
rules
out
a
lot
of
people.
N
We
need
to
help,
so
we
are
actually
currently
looking
at
what
we
think
we
should
use
as
the
as
the
asset
cap
or
the
value
cap
of
the
house
for
the
cdbg
program.
Historically,
before
we
had
started
using
the
same
one
as
the
idle
loans,
which
was
what
we
did
when
we
started
working
with
cipa
we
we
said
the
value
of
the
home
could
not
exceed
95
of
the
median
value
home
in
Evanston
and
thought
that
was
great.
N
N
If
we
wanted
to
make
a
radical
change
in
our
use
of
cdbg,
for
example,
maybe
we
would
say
I'm,
exaggerating,
probably
a
bit.
The
most
important
thing
is
to
put
this
money
into
housing.
You
know
the
the
committee
and
the
city
could
look
and
make
that
recommendation
and
change
our
really
just
the
way
we
structure
our
use
of
cdbg
funding.
There's
nothing
that
says
you
have
to
fund
any
or
all
of
the
categories.
N
That's
the
whole
point
of
cdbg
you're
supposed
to
have
the
flexibility
to
use
the
funds
for
what
you
think
is
most
important,
but
then
we
have
to
look
to
see
if
we
have
sources
for
some
of
the
other
things
that
we've
been
funding
like
we,
we
have
done
a
lot
of
I,
think
very
meaningful
infrastructure
improvements
in
our
lowest
income
areas
with
alley,
Paving
and
sidewalks,
and
we've
been
doing
Park
improvements
and
things
like
that,
and
we
do
help
our
non-profits
maintain
their
facilities.
And
so
you
know
it's
it's
always
a.
N
What
are
the
priorities
and
I
think
we
would
have
to
really
put
some
hard
thinking
into
that,
because
we
could
put
much
much
more
of
our
money
into
a
rehab
program,
but
as
I
say,
then
it
would.
What
are
we
giving
up
and
where
would
we
fund
that
from
so
it's?
It
may
be
also
even
a
recommendation
that
this
committee
could
make,
but
of
course,
city
council
would
have
to
approve
it.
So
it's
one
of
those
bigger
financing
things.
Oh.
O
O
You
know
that
we
that
potentially
we
would
use
the
Assessor's
assessed
value
and
I'm,
not
an
expert
on
this
by
any
means,
but
I
I
often
spend
my
weekend
sometimes
looking
at
the
assessed
values
of
properties
in
my
award
and
comparing
that
and
I've
noticed
that
it,
it
seems
as
though
at
least
what's
listed
on
the
Assessor's
website.
When
you
use
the
about
my
place
app
on
the
city's
website
that
the
assessed
value
seems
way
lower.
N
I
A
No
problem
unfinished
business
so
we'll
bring
it
back
anyway,
so
we
are
scheduled
to
reconvene
on
February,
21st
and
so
I
look
forward
to
seeing
everybody
then
and
I'm
sure
we'll
have
another
giant
packet
of
good
material,
our
staff
and
lots
of
good
topics
to
discuss.
So
thank
you
very
much.
Everyone
good
night,
certainly.